DOCSLIB.ORG

Pacific Walrus (Odobenus Rosmaurs Divergens) As a Threatened Or Endangered Species Under the Endangered Species Act

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Pacific Walrus (Odobenus Rosmaurs Divergens) As a Threatened Or Endangered Species Under the Endangered Species Act BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR PETITION TO LIST THE PACIFIC WALRUS (ODOBENUS ROSMAURS DIVERGENS) AS A THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT © BILL HICKEY, USFWS CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY FEBRUARY 7, 2008 Notice of Petition____________________________________________________ Dirk Kempthorne, Secretary Department of the Interior 1849 C Street, N.W. Washington. D.C. 20240 Tom Melius, Regional Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska Regional Office 1011 East Tudor Road Anchorage, Alaska 99503 PETITIONER The Center for Biological Diversity 1095 Market Street, Suite 511 San Francisco, CA 94103 ph: (415) 436-9682 ext 301 fax: (415) 436-9683 __________________________ Date: this 7th day of February, 2008 Shaye Wolf, Ph.D. Kassie Siegel Brendan Cummings Center for Biological Diversity Pursuant to Section 4(b) of the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. §1533(b), Section 553(3) of the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. § 553(e), and 50 C.F.R. § 424.14(a), the Center for Biological Diversity hereby petitions the Secretary of the Interior, through the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (“USFWS”), to list the Pacific walrus (Odobenus rosmarus divergens) as a threatened or endangered species and to designate critical habitat to ensure its survival and recovery. The Center for Biological Diversity works through science, law, and policy to secure a future for all species, great or small, hovering on the brink of extinction. The Center has over 40,000 members throughout Alaska and the United States. The Center and its members are concerned with the conservation of endangered species, including the Pacific walrus, and the effective implementation of the ESA. USFWS has jurisdiction over this petition. This petition sets in motion a specific process, placing definite response requirements on USFWS. Specifically, USFWS must issue an initial finding as Page ii - Petition to List the Pacific Walrus as a Threatened or Endangered Species to whether the petition “presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted.” 16 U.S.C. §1533(b)(3)(A). USFWS must make this initial finding “[t]o the maximum extent practicable, within 90 days after receiving the petition.” Id. Petitioners need not demonstrate that listing is warranted, rather, Petitioners must only present information demonstrating that such listing may be warranted. While Petitioner believes that the best available science demonstrates that listing the Pacific walrus as endangered is in fact warranted, there can be no reasonable dispute that the available information indicates that listing the species as either threatened or endangered may be warranted. As such, USFWS must promptly make a positive initial finding on the petition an commence a status review as required by 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(3)(B). The term “species” is defined broadly under the ESA to include “any subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants and any distinct population segment of any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife which interbreeds when mature.” 16 U.S.C. § 1532 (16). A Distinct Population Segment (“DPS”) of a vertebrate species can be protected as a “species” under the ESA even though it has not formally been described as a separate “species” or “subspecies” in the scientific literature. A species may be composed of several DPSs, some or all of which warrant listing under the ESA. As described in this petition, the Pacific walrus (Odobenus rosmarus divergens) is a currently recognized subspecies of the walrus (Odobenus rosmarus) and therefore meets the definition of a “species” eligible for listing under the ESA. In the event USFWS does not recognize the taxonomic validity of the Pacific walrus as described in this petition, we request that USFWS evaluate whether the walrus of the Bering and Chukchi Sea that are the subject of this petition constitute a DPS of the full walrus species and/or represent a significant portion of the range of the full walrus species and are therefore eligible for listing on such basis. Page iii - Petition to List the Pacific Walrus as a Threatened or Endangered Species Table of Contents Natural History and Biology of the Pacific Walrus...................................................5 I. SPECIES DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................5 II. TAXONOMY ................................................................................................................6 III. DISTRIBUTION AND MIGRATION...............................................................................7 IV. HABITAT REQUIREMENTS .......................................................................................10 V. REPRODUCTION AND REPRODUCTIVE BEHAVIOR ...................................................13 VI. DIET AND FORAGING BEHAVIOR............................................................................14 VII. ECOLOGICAL ROLE OF THE PACIFIC WALRUS ......................................................17 VIII. SOCIAL BEHAVIOR................................................................................................18 IX. SOURCES OF NATURAL MORTALITY ......................................................................18 X. DEMOGRAPHIC RATES .............................................................................................19 Abundance and Population Trends of the Pacific Walrus.......................................20 The Pacific Walrus Warrants Listing Under the ESA.............................................25 I. CRITERIA FOR LISTING SPECIES AS ENDANGERED OR THREATENED........................25 II. THE PACIFIC WALRUS QUALIFIES FOR LISTING UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT...............................................................................................................................26 A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of Habitat or...... 26 Range .................................................................................................................................... 26 1. Global Climate Change................................................................................................ 26 a. The Climate System, Greenhouse Gas Concentrations, the Greenhouse Effect, and Global Warming........................................................................................................ 27 b. The Arctic is Warming Much Faster than Other Regions ........................................ 31 c. Climate and Environmental Changes Observed to Date........................................... 33 d. Observed Impacts to the Pacific Walrus from Global Warming .............................. 48 e. Projected Climate and Environmental Changes........................................................ 50 f. Future Threats to the Pacific Walrus from Global Warming .................................... 58 B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or Educational Purposes....... 63 C. Disease or Predation......................................................................................................... 64 D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms............................................................. 64 1. Regulatory Mechanisms Addressing Greenhouse Gas Pollution and Global Warming Are Inadequate.............................................................................................................. 64 a. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change ............................ 65 b. The Kyoto Protocol................................................................................................... 65 c. United States Climate Initiatives are Ineffective ...................................................... 67 2. Regulatory Mechanisms Addressing Other Threats to the Pacific Walrus Are Inadequate..................................................................................................................... 70 E. Other Natural and Anthropogenic Factors ....................................................................... 72 1. Ocean Acidification ...................................................................................................... 72 2. Oil and Gas Exploration and Development .................................................................. 73 a. Existing and Projected Oil and Gas Exploration and Development ......................... 73 Page iv - Petition to List the Pacific Walrus as a Threatened or Endangered Species b. Impacts of Oil Pollution on Pacific Walruses........................................................... 78 c. Impacts of Noise Pollution on the Pacific walrus ..................................................... 80 3. Contaminants ............................................................................................................... 81 4. Commercial fisheries ................................................................................................... 82 Critical Habitat.........................................................................................................83 Conclusion ...............................................................................................................83 Literature Cited ........................................................................................................84 Page v - Petition to List the Pacific Walrus as a Threatened or Endangered Species Introduction The Pacific walrus (Odobenus rosmarus divergens)
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Marine Mammals of Hudson Strait the Following Marine Mammals Are Common to Hudson Strait, However, Other Species May Also Be Seen
    Marine Mammals of Hudson Strait The following marine mammals are common to Hudson Strait, however, other species may also be seen. It’s possible for marine mammals to venture outside of their common habitats and may be seen elsewhere. Bowhead Whale Length: 13-19 m Appearance: Stocky, with large head. Blue-black body with white markings on the chin, belly and just forward of the tail. No dorsal fin or ridge. Two blow holes, no teeth, has baleen. Behaviour: Blow is V-shaped and bushy, reaching 6 m in height. Often alone but sometimes in groups of 2-10. Habitat: Leads and cracks in pack ice during winter and in open water during summer. Status: Special concern Beluga Whale Length: 4-5 m Appearance: Adults are almost entirely white with a tough dorsal ridge and no dorsal fin. Young are grey. Behaviour: Blow is low and hardly visible. Not much of the body is visible out of the water. Found in small groups, but sometimes hundreds to thousands during annual migrations. Habitat: Found in open water year-round. Prefer shallow coastal water during summer and water near pack ice in winter. Killer Whale Status: Endangered Length: 8-9 m Appearance: Black body with white throat, belly and underside and white spot behind eye. Triangular dorsal fin in the middle of the back. Male dorsal fin can be up to 2 m in high. Behaviour: Blow is tall and column shaped; approximately 4 m in height. Narwhal Typically form groups of 2-25. Length: 4-5 m Habitat: Coastal water and open seas, often in water less than 200 m depth.
    [Show full text]
  • Walrus: Wildlife Notebook Series
    Walrus Pacific walruses (Odobenus rosmarus divergens) belong to a group of marine mammals known as pinnipeds (pinna, a wing or fin; and pedis, a foot), this group also includes the seals and sea lions. Walruses are most commonly found in relatively shallow water areas, close to ice or land. In Alaska, their geographic range includes the Bering and Chukchi Seas. General description: Walruses are the largest pinnipeds in arctic and subarctic seas. The genus name Odobenus means “tooth-walker.” Walrus tusks are elongated upper canine teeth both males and females have tusks. Walruses and sea lions can rotate their hind flippers forward to ‘walk’ on them but seals cannot and drag their hind limbs when moving on land or ice. Walruses are large pinnipeds and adult males (bulls) may weigh 2 tons and the females (cows) may exceed 1 ton. Bulls can be identified by their larger size, broad muzzle, heavy tusks, and the presence of numerous large bumps, called bosses, on the neck and shoulders. Food habits: Walruses feed mainly on invertebrates such as clams and snails found on the bottom of the relatively shallow and rich Bering and Chukchi Seas. Walruses find food by brushing the sea-bottom with their broad, flat muzzles using their sensitive whiskers to locate food items. Tusks are not used for finding food. Walruses feed using suction formed by pulling back a thick piston-like tongue inside their narrow mouth. Walruses are able to suck the soft parts out of the shells; few hard parts are ingested. The rejected shells of clams and snails can be found on the sea floor near the furrows made during feeding.
    [Show full text]
  • 56. Otariidae and Phocidae
    FAUNA of AUSTRALIA 56. OTARIIDAE AND PHOCIDAE JUDITH E. KING 1 Australian Sea-lion–Neophoca cinerea [G. Ross] Southern Elephant Seal–Mirounga leonina [G. Ross] Ross Seal, with pup–Ommatophoca rossii [J. Libke] Australian Sea-lion–Neophoca cinerea [G. Ross] Weddell Seal–Leptonychotes weddellii [P. Shaughnessy] New Zealand Fur-seal–Arctocephalus forsteri [G. Ross] Crab-eater Seal–Lobodon carcinophagus [P. Shaughnessy] 56. OTARIIDAE AND PHOCIDAE DEFINITION AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION Pinnipeds are aquatic carnivores. They differ from other mammals in their streamlined shape, reduction of pinnae and adaptation of both fore and hind feet to form flippers. In the skull, the orbits are enlarged, the lacrimal bones are absent or indistinct and there are never more than three upper and two lower incisors. The cheek teeth are nearly homodont and some conditions of the ear that are very distinctive (Repenning 1972). Both superfamilies of pinnipeds, Phocoidea and Otarioidea, are represented in Australian waters by a number of species (Table 56.1). The various superfamilies and families may be distinguished by important and/or easily observed characters (Table 56.2). King (1983b) provided more detailed lists and references. These and other differences between the above two groups are not regarded as being of great significance, especially as an undoubted fur seal (Australian Fur-seal Arctocephalus pusillus) is as big as some of the sea lions and has some characters of the skull, teeth and behaviour which are rather more like sea lions (Repenning, Peterson & Hubbs 1971; Warneke & Shaughnessy 1985). The Phocoidea includes the single Family Phocidae – the ‘true seals’, distinguished from the Otariidae by the absence of a pinna and by the position of the hind flippers (Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • A Preliminary Baseline Study of Subsistence Resource Utilization in the Pribilof Islands
    A PRELIMINARY BASELINE STUDY OF SUBSISTENCE RESOURCE UTILIZATION IN THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS Douglas W. Veltre Ph.D Mary J. Veltre, B.A. Technical Paper Number 57 Prepared for Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence Contract 81-119 October 15, 1981 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . The authors would like to thank those numerous mem- bers of St. George and St. Paul who gave generously of their time and knowledge to help with this project. The Tanaq Corporation of St. George and the Tanadgusix Corporation of St. Paul, as well as the village councils of both communities, also deserve thanks for their cooperation. In addition, per- sonnel of the National Marine Fisheries Service in the Pribi- lofs provided insight into the fur seal operations. Finally, Linda Ellanna and Alice Stickney of the Department of Fish and Game gave valuable assistance and guidance, especially through their participation in field research. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . ii Chapter I INTRODUCTION . 1 Purpose . 1 Research objectives . : . 4 Research methods . 6 Discussion of research methodology . 8 Organization of the report . 11 II BACKGROUND ON ALEUT SUBSISTENCE . 13 Introduction . 13 Precontact subsistence patterns . 15 The early postcontact period . 22 Conclusions . 23 III HISTORICAL BACXGROUND . 27 Introduction . 27 Russian period . 27 American period ........... 35 History of Pribilof Island settlements ... 37 St. George community profile ........ 39 St. Paul community profile ......... 45 Conclusions ......... ; ........ 48 IV THE NATURAL SETTING .............. 50 Introduction ................ 50 Location, geography, and geology ...... 50 Climate ................... 55 Fauna and flora ............... 61 Aleutian-Pribilof Islands comparison .... 72 V SUBSISTENCE RESOURCES AND UTILIZATION IN THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS ............ 74 Introduction ................ 74 Inventory of subsistence resources .
    [Show full text]
  • THE SUBSISTENCE HARVEST and USE of STELLER SEA LIONS in ALASKA by Terry L Haynes and Craig Mishler Technical Paper No
    THE SUBSISTENCE HARVEST AND USE OF STELLER SEA LIONS IN ALASKA by Terry L Haynes and Craig Mishler Technical Paper No. 198 This research was partially supported by ANILCA Federal Aid funds administered through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska, SG-1-9 Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence Juneau, Alaska July 1991 EEO STATEMENT The Alaska Department of Fish and Game operates all of its public programs and activities free from discrimination on the basis of race, igion, color, national origin, age, sex, or handicap Because the de partment receives federal funding, any person who believes he or she has been discriminated against should write to: O.E.O. U.S. Department of the Interior Washington, D.C. 20240 i ABSTRACT Subsequent to the classification of the Steller sea lion as a threatened species in 1990, a Sea Lion Recovery Team was created and charged with preparing a population recovery plan. This report examines the historical literature on subsistence uses, reviews Native oral traditions, and summarizes the limited amount of available information on contemporary harvests and uses of sea lions over a wide range of 25 coastal Alaskan communities. The report is designed to assist in creation of a recovery plan sensitive to subsistence uses. Further research and data needs are identified for consideration in the development of a long-range sea lion management plan. Various strategies of hunting sea lions are described, along with hunting technologies, methods of butchering sea lions, and traditional ways of cooking and serving them. Evidence gathered from prehistoric sites is summarized, and the pervasive symbolic role of Steller sea lions in Koniag and Aleut folktales, folk songs, and folk beliefs is examined in some detail.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Patterns in Marine Mammal Distributions
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION I. TAXONOMIC DECISIONS In this work we followed Wilson and Reeder (2005) and Reeves, Stewart, and Clapham’s (2002) taxonomy. In the last 20 years several new species have been described such as Mesoplodon perrini (Dalebout 2002), Orcaella heinsohni (Beasley 2005), and the recognition of several species have been proposed for orcas (Perrin 1982, Pitman et al. 2007), Bryde's whales (Kanda et al. 2007), Blue whales (Garrigue et al. 2003, Ichihara 1996), Tucuxi dolphin (Cunha et al. 2005, Caballero et al. 2008), and other marine mammals. Since we used the conservation status of all species following IUCN (2011), this work is based on species recognized by this IUCN to keep a standardized baseline. II. SPECIES LIST List of the species included in this paper, indicating their conservation status according to IUCN (2010.4) and its range area. Order Family Species IUCN 2010 Freshwater Range area km2 Enhydra lutris EN A2abe 1,084,750,000,000 Mustelidae Lontra felina EN A3cd 996,197,000,000 Odobenidae Odobenus rosmarus DD 5,367,060,000,000 Arctocephalus australis LC 1,674,290,000,000 Arctocephalus forsteri LC 1,823,240,000,000 Arctocephalus galapagoensis EN A2a 167,512,000,000 Arctocephalus gazella LC 39,155,300,000,000 Arctocephalus philippii NT 163,932,000,000 Arctocephalus pusillus LC 1,705,430,000,000 Arctocephalus townsendi NT 1,045,950,000,000 Carnivora Otariidae Arctocephalus tropicalis LC 39,249,100,000,000 Callorhinus ursinus VU A2b 12,935,900,000,000 Eumetopias jubatus EN A2a 3,051,310,000,000 Neophoca cinerea
    [Show full text]
  • Novel Terrestrial Haul-Out Behaviour by Ringed Seals
    POLAR RESEARCH, 2017 VOL. 36, 1374124 https://doi.org/10.1080/17518369.2017.1374124 RESEARCH ARTCLE Novel terrestrial haul-out behaviour by ringed seals (Pusa hispida)in Svalbard, in association with harbour seals (Phoca vitulina) Christian Lydersena, Jade Vaquie-Garciaa, Espen Lydersenb, Guttorm N. Christensenc & Kit M. Kovacsa aNorwegian Polar Institute, Tromsø, Norway; bUniversity College of Southeast Norway, Campus Bø, Norway; cAkvaplan-Niva, Tromsø, Norway ABSTRACT KEYWORDS Ringed seals (Pusa hispida) are the most ice-associated of all Arctic pinnipeds. In the Svalbard Arctic; behavioural plasticity; area, this species has always given birth, moulted and rested on sea ice. In addition, much of climate change; glacier their food has been comprised of ice-associated prey. Recently, ringed seals have been fronts; lagoons; sea ice reported to be using terrestrial substrates as a haul-out platform in some fjords on the west coast of Spitsbergen. In many cases the seals involved are harbour seals (Phoca vitulina), which are extending their distribution into new areas within the Svalbard Archipelago and which are being misclassified as ringed seals. However, this study reports that terrestrial haul- out by ringed seals is also now taking place on rocks exposed at low tide as well as on the coastline. Recent intrusions of warm Atlantic Water (with associated prey) have extended deep into the fjords of western Spitsbergen, resulting in deteriorated ice conditions for ringed seals and expanded habitat for harbour seals. Over the last decade, ringed seals have become more and more confined in coastal areas to narrow bands in front of tidal glacier fronts where Arctic conditions still prevail.
    [Show full text]
  • THE PACIFIC WALRUS by KARL W
    332 Oryx THE PACIFIC WALRUS By KARL W. KENYON During recent years there have been repeated reports of extravagant exploitation of the walrus by Eskimos and these have been strengthened by aerial observation of many headless carcasses on beaches of the Bering Sea. So in 1958 the United States Fish and Wildlife Service decided upon an inquiry into the Pacific Walrus, and its hunting and utilization by Eskimo in the Bering Sea region. Biologists from the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game co- operated in the work. Studies were conducted on St. Lawrence Island by Dr. Francis H. Fay and Mr. Averill Thayer, on Little Diomede Island by the late Mr. Stanley S. Fredericksen and the author, and on Round Island of the Walrus Islands in Bristol Bay, by Dr. Fay, Mr. James W. Brooks and the author. Dr. John L. Buckley of the Fish and Wildlife Service counted walruses on the ice of the northern Bering Sea from the air. The Eskimo hunters freely gave us their co-operation and good will, and this alone made the study possible. The economic incentive to exploit pinnipeds for oil and hides decreased after the chaotic slaughter of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries when many species were seriously depleted. During the present century those which have continued to yield valuable products, such as elephant seals (Mirounga) and fur seals (Callorhinus and Arctocephalus), have been conserved. The Pacific walrus occupies a unique position in that the demand for its ivory, both carved and unworked, or raw, has increased in recent years, whereas measures introduced for conservation of the walrus have not yet been effective.
    [Show full text]
  • Toponymy Final Report.Pdf
    Toponymic and Cartographic Research Conducted for the Labrador Métis Nation Under the Direction of Dr. Lisa Rankin, Memorial University. Contributors (in alphabetical order): Gordon Handcock Ph.D. Peter Ramsden Ph.D. Lisa Rankin Ph.D. Hans Rollmann Ph.D. Douglas Wharram Ph.D. September 2008 FRONTISPIECE THE CURTIS 1773 MAP TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 1 A Review of Inuit Toponymy on some 18th-century charts and maps of southern Labrador (G. Handcock) ................................................................................. 7 A Review of the 1773 Curtis Map (G. Handcock) ........................................................................ 21 Commentary on Curtis article in Royal Society Proceedings (G. Handcock) ........................... 33 Review of Scholarly Articles Containing Inuit Place Names (G. Handcock) ............................. 43 Review of Hawkes 1916 ........................................................................................................ 45 Review of Martijn 1980a and 1980b ...................................................................................... 47 Review of Stopp 2002 ............................................................................................................ 54 Review of Martijn and Dorais 2001 ....................................................................................... 58 Review of the Term ‘Karalit’ (H. Rollmann)
    [Show full text]
  • Archeology, National Natural Landmarks, and State Game Sanctuaries: Combining Efforts for Science and Management
    Archeology, National Natural Landmarks, and State Game Sanctuaries: Combining Efforts for Science and Management Jeanne Schaaf, Judy Alderson, Joe Meehan, and Joel Cusick The sanctuary and the National Natural Landmarks program THE WALRUS ISLANDS STATE GAME SANCTUARY AND NATIONAL NATURAL LANDMARK (NNL) in Bristol Bay, Alaska, comprises a group of seven small islands about 63 miles southwest of Dillingham. During the 1950s, declining population numbers of the Pacific walrus (Odo- benus rosmarus) caused a great deal of concern about the future of the species. As a result, the state game sanctuary was established in 1960 “to protect the walruses and other game on the Walrus Islands”; it is managed by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G). Eight years later, the Walrus Islands National Natural Landmark was established to add nationwide recognition of the importance of this area for its concentration of Pacific walrus, with Round Island in particular serving as a summer haul-out for male walruses (see cover photo, this issue). It is one of the most southern of the walrus haul-outs and, at the time of establishment of the sanctuary and the NNL, it was one of the few remaining annual haul- outs in Alaska (and perhaps the only one consistently in use). The Walrus Islands are open to public access, but visitors to Round Island must obtain an access permit prior to arriving. The National Natural Landmarks Pro- lic’s appreciation of America’s natural her- gram recognizes and encourages the con- itage. The National Park Service adminis- servation of outstanding examples of our ters the NNL program, and, if requested, country’s natural history.It is the only natu- assists NNL owners and managers with the ral areas program of national scope that conservation of these important sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 40, Number 2 Fall 2013
    PACIFIC SEABIRDS A Publication of the Pacific Seabird Group Volume 40, Number 2 Fall 2013 PACIFIC SEABIRD GROUP Dedicated to the Study and Conservation of Pacific Seabirds and Their Environment The Pacific Seabird Group (PSG) was formed in 1972 due to the need for better communication among Pacific seabird researchers. PSG provides a forum for the research activities of its members, promotes the conservation of seabirds, and informs members and the public of issues relating to Pacific Ocean seabirds and their environment. PSG members include research scientists, conservation professionals, and members of the public from all parts of the Pacific Ocean. The group also welcomes seabird professionals and enthusiasts in other parts of the world. PSG holds annual meetings at which scientific papers and symposia are presented; abstracts for meetings are published on our web site. The group is active in promoting conservation of seabirds, including seabird/fisheries interactions, monitoring of seabird populations, seabird restoration following oil spills, establishment of seabird sanctuaries, and endangered species. Policy statements are issued on conservation issues of critical importance. PSG’s journals are Pacific Seabirds (formerly the PSG Bulletin) and Marine Ornithology. Other publications include symposium volumes and technical reports; these are listed near the back of this issue. PSG is a member of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the Ornithological Council, and the American Bird Conservancy. Annual dues for membership are $30 (individual and family); $24 (student, undergraduate and graduate); and $900 (Life Membership, payable in five $180 installments). Dues are payable to the Treasurer; see the PSG web site, or the Membership Order Form next to inside back cover.
    [Show full text]
  • Monitoring of Populations and Productivity of Seabirds at St
    OCS Study MMS 90-0049 Monitoring Seabird Populations in Areas of Oil and Gas Development on the Alaskan Continental ShelE MONITORING OF POPULATIONS AND PRODUCTIVITY OF SEABIRDS AT ST. GEORGE ISLAND, CAPE PEIRCE, AND BLUFF, ALASKA, 1989 Final Report Edited by Vivian M. Mendenhall U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service Migratory Bird Management Marine and Coastal Bird Project Anchorage, Alaska OCS Study MMS 90-0049 MONITORING OF POPULATIONS AND PRODUCTIVITY OF SEABIRDS AT ST. GEORGE ISLAND, CAPE PIERCE, AND BLUFF, ALASKA, 1989 Edited by Vivian M. Mendenhall U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Migratory Bud Management Marine and Coastal Birds Project 101 1 East Tudor Rd. Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Submitted to: Minds Management Service Environment Studies Unit 949 East 36th Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 995 10 April 1991 The opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Minerals Management Service, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the Federal Government of the United States. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................... v LIST OF RGURES ........................................................................................................... ix ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................... xi 1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................
    [Show full text]