DOCSLIB.ORG

Eleventh Report of the California Bird Records Committee

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Eleventh Report of the California Bird Records Committee WESTERN BIRDS Volume 21, Number 4, 1990 ELEVENTH REPORT OF THE CALIFORNIA BIRD RECORDS COMMITTEE LOUIS R. BEVIER, P.O. Box 665, Storrs, Connecticut 06268 This reportcontains 257 recordsreviewed by the CaliforniaBird Records Committee(hereafter the Committee)and is the largestof the eleven reportscompiled thus far. A total of 81 speciesis coveredas follows:234 recordsof 73 speciesaccepted and 23 recordsof 20 speciesnot accepted. Thus, 91% of the reportsare accepted.The rate of acceptancein the last four Committeereports has varied from 88% to 92%, whereasin previous reportsthe rate has been as low as 74% and as high as 97%. The records dealt with here span 90 yearsfrom 1896 to 1986 and includereports for almostevery year from 1960 onward.Over half of the records,however, are from the lasttwo yearsof that period(99 for 1985 and 40 for 1986). Half of the countiesin Californiaare representedin thisreport, including all but two of the coastalcounties. Of these,San Diego and San Francisco countieshave 40 and 37 acceptedrecords, respectively; these numbers are slightlyover twice the next highesttotals of 17 and 16 for Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispocounties, respectively. The largestnumber of rarities per land area goes to SoutheastFarallon Island, which has 15% of the acceptedrecords (a total of 35) and only one ten-thousandthof one percent of California'stotal land area. The qualityand consistencyof the reports from there has recentlybeen among the highestthat the Committee reviews.Special recognition for thisgoes to Peter Pyle, Dave DeSante,and the Point ReyesBird Observatory. Three speciesare added to the state list in this report: Wedge-tailed Shearwater,Ruddy Ground-Dove,and Three-toed Woodpecker.T•hese decisionsand other recent decisions(Roberson 1990) place the total number of bird speciesrecorded in California at 572. In addition, the earliest records for the state are accepted for four species:Anhinga, Common Black-headedGull, Yellow-throatedVireo, and Pine Warbler. Western Birds 21:145-176, 1990 145 CALIFORNIA BIRD RECORDS PROCEDURES In evaluatinga submittedreport, membersof the Committeeassess the adequacyof the evidencesupplied--written, photographic, and otherwise. The Committeecan neitherverify nor invalidaterecords, but can providea judgmenton the acceptabilityof the report for the permanenthistorical recordthat is maintained.Observers whose reports are not acceptedby the Committee should not take this to mean that the bird or birds were misidentifiedor that the observer'sabilities are questioned.Cases in which the Committee is convincedof an error are rare, and the majority of unacceptedreports involve a lack of adequatedocumentation. It is the accuracyand completenessof the fieldreport and the rigor and objectivity of the review procedurethat distinguishesan acceptedrecord from an uncorroboratedreport. One of the major aims underlyingthe establishmentof the Committee was to fosteran awarenessin California'sfield ornithologistsof the impor- tanceof providingcorroboration for reportsof rarities.Careful field notes, sketches,photographs, and soundrecordings are essentialto establishinga record of lastingornithological value. In most casesthe best evidencefor the occurrenceof a bird speciesin the state is a specimen,but current constraintsagainst collecting, coupled with the improvementof photo- graphicand recordingequipment and the sharpeningof field skillshave given rise to the need for proceduresfor evaluatingand preservingthis evidence,in muchthe way museumcollections allow for the evaluationand preservationof specimens.This meansthat carefulattention must be paid to acquiringall the necessarydetails for identificationat the time of the observationand that a cautiousapproach must be usedfor evaluatingthe evidence. When reviewingthe documentationof a rarity, the Committee attempts to eliminateall other possiblespecies from consideration.Therefore, it is important for the observerto documentthe presenceof charactersthat excludeother similar species. In fact,a thoroughdescription may sometimes include critical field marks that distinguishthe speciesfrom others not consideredat the time of the observation.By relyingonly on charactersthat supportan identificationand that fail to rejectother species, including those sometimesignored, one risksmaking a misidentification.Two examplesof thistype of error involvedsome extraordinary rarities, the circumstancesof whichare wellworth reviewing--seeMorlan and Erickson(1983) regarding a EurasianSkylark (Alauda arvensis)that was identifiedby many as a Smith's Longspur(Calcarius pictus) and Abbott and Finch (1978) regard- ing a VariegatedFlycatcher (Empidonomus varius) that many labeledas a Sulphur-belliedFlycatcher (klyiodynastes luteiventris). To personsusing these recordsin their research, it shouldbe said that the Committee strives to evaluatereports in thisfashion but is not infallible.In addition,questions involvingthe naturaloccurrence of a bird cannotbe assessedby a similar methodwhereby all possibleexplanations are eliminated.It is extraordinarily difficult,if not impossible,to provethat a birddid not escapefrom a cageor was not purposelytransported into the state. To help document such rarities,the reportershould supply the Committeewith informationon the 146 CALIFORNIA BIRD RECORDS captivestatus and likelihoodof vagrancyfor the speciesas well as justifying its identification.In such cases,the Committee'sdecisions represent a collectiveopinion based on the informationavailable. (See Anhinga, Ruddy Ground-Dove, and Barnacle Goose in this report.) The purposesand proceduresof the Committeehave been published in its bylaws(Western Birds8:161-165, 1977) and updatedperiodically in someof its reports(Binford 1983, 1985). The currentmembership of the Committee,recent changes in policyand practices,and the listof reviewed specieswere publishedmost recently by Roberson(1990). Pleasenote the removalfrom the reviewlist of Cook'sPetrel, Pterodroma petrels identified only as the subgenusCookilaria, Wilson'sStorm-Petrel, Barred Owl, and ProthonotaryWarbler. Also, the Committeeis now solicitingreports of TricoloredHeron occurringafter 1 January 1990. Send all raritiesreports directlyto the secretary,Michael A. Patten, P.O. Box 8612, Riverside,CA 92515. The WesternFoundation of VertebrateZoology (1100 Glendon Avenue,Los Angeles,CA 90024) continuesto maintainthe archiveof all publishedrecords. All voicerecordings are housedat the CaliforniaAcad- emy of Sciences,Department of Ornithologyand Mammalogy, Golden Gate Park, San Francisco,CA 94118. FORMAT The organizationand styleof this report are similarto thoseused in the tenthreport (Dunn 1988). The systematiclists for acceptedand unaccepted recordsfollow the AOU Check-list(1983) and its supplements(AOU 1985, 1987, 1989). The numberafter each species'name representsthe total acceptedrecords for California.Two asterisksfollowing this numbermean that the total reportedcovers only the periodof yearsfor whichthe species is reviewedor that reportsnot formallyaccepted are addedto the total (see Roberson1986). Speciesmarked with a singleasterisk are no longer reviewedby the Committee. Withineach species account, records are listedchronologically according to the first known date of occurrence.Each record presentsin order as much of the followinginformation as possible:number of birds,age, sex, locality,county, date or completedate span, and, in parentheses,initials of contributingobservers, repository of specimens,and the official record number.The diagnosisof ageand sex is my ownopinion based on evidence in the files and commentsby other Committeemembers; annotations on subspecificidentification are handledin the sameway. Designationsfor eithercategory are made only when supportedby the evidenceavailable. The initialsof the contributingobservers are listedin alphabeticalsequence by name;if the observeror observersfirst finding or identifyingthe bird submitteddocumentation, then their initialsare placedfirst and separated from the othersby a semicolon.Observers who submitteda photograph havea dagger(t) followingtheir initials.Photographs greatly assist in the reviewprocedure, and their submissionwith the writtenreport is strongly encouraged.As in previousreports, I have attemptedto providethe full date span for records.The seasonalreports of American Birds and its predecessorAudubon Field Notes are the primarysource for thesedates, 147 CALIFORNIA BIRD RECORDS but where I have givena reviseddate, it is italicized.These reviseddates are consideredcorrect by the Committee. Decisionsregarding the numberof individualsinvolved, especially when the speciesreturns to the samelocality annually, are made by a consensus of the Committee.An individualjudged as the sameor probablythe sameas a previousbird is not countedin the total of acceptedrecords, whereas an individualconsidered not the same or possiblythe same is addedto the total. Thesedecisions are rarelybased on firm evidence,such as a uniquely bandedbird, but are the consideredopinions of the Committee members basedon their experienceand the evidenceavailable. ABBREVIATIONS The Committeehas adoptedthe followingabbreviations for counties citedin this report:ALA, Alameda;BUT, Butte; CC, Contra Costa;COL, Colusa;DN, Del Norte; GLE, Glenn;HUM, Humboldt;IMP, Imperial;INY, Inyo; KER, Kern; LA, Los Angeles; MER, Merced; MNO, Mono; MOD, Modoc; MRN, Marin; MTY, Monterey;ORA, Orange; RIV, Riverside;SBA, Santa Barbara; SBE, San Bernardino;SD, San Diego; SF, San Francisco; SHA, Shasta;SIS, Siskiyou;SJ, San
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Discover California State Parks in the Monterey Area
    Crashing waves, redwoods and historic sites Discover California State Parks in the Monterey Area Some of the most beautiful sights in California can be found in Monterey area California State Parks. Rocky cliffs, crashing waves, redwood trees, and historic sites are within an easy drive of each other. "When you look at the diversity of state parks within the Monterey District area, you begin to realize that there is something for everyone - recreational activities, scenic beauty, natural and cultural history sites, and educational programs,” said Dave Schaechtele, State Parks Monterey District Public Information Officer. “There are great places to have fun with families and friends, and peaceful and inspirational settings that are sure to bring out the poet, writer, photographer, or artist in you. Some people return to their favorite state parks, year-after-year, while others venture out and discover some new and wonderful places that are then added to their 'favorites' list." State Parks in the area include: Limekiln State Park, 54 miles south of Carmel off Highway One and two miles south of the town of Lucia, features vistas of the Big Sur coast, redwoods, and the remains of historic limekilns. The Rockland Lime and Lumber Company built these rock and steel furnaces in 1887 to cook the limestone mined from the canyon walls. The 711-acre park allows visitors an opportunity to enjoy the atmosphere of Big Sur’s southern coast. The park has the only safe access to the shoreline along this section of cast. For reservations at the park’s 36 campsites, call ReserveAmerica at (800) 444- PARK (7275).
    [Show full text]
  • References and Appendices
    References Ainley, D.G., S.G. Allen, and L.B. Spear. 1995. Off- Arnold, R.A. 1983. Ecological studies on six endan- shore occurrence patterns of marbled murrelets gered butterflies (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae): in central California. In: C.J. Ralph, G.L. Hunt island biogeography, patch dynamics, and the Jr., M.G. Raphael, and J.F. Piatt, technical edi- design of habitat preserves. University of Cali- tors. Ecology and Conservation of the Marbled fornia Publications in Entomology 99: 1–161. Murrelet. USDA Forest Service, General Techni- Atwood, J.L. 1993. California gnatcatchers and coastal cal Report PSW-152; 361–369. sage scrub: the biological basis for endangered Allen, C.R., R.S. Lutz, S. Demairais. 1995. Red im- species listing. In: J.E. Keeley, editor. Interface ported fire ant impacts on Northern Bobwhite between ecology and land development in Cali- populations. Ecological Applications 5: 632-638. fornia. Southern California Academy of Sciences, Allen, E.B., P.E. Padgett, A. Bytnerowicz, and R.A. Los Angeles; 149–169. Minnich. 1999. Nitrogen deposition effects on Atwood, J.L., P. Bloom, D. Murphy, R. Fisher, T. Scott, coastal sage vegetation of southern California. In T. Smith, R. Wills, P. Zedler. 1996. Principles of A. Bytnerowicz, M.J. Arbaugh, and S. Schilling, reserve design and species conservation for the tech. coords. Proceedings of the international sym- southern Orange County NCCP (Draft of Oc- posium on air pollution and climate change effects tober 21, 1996). Unpublished manuscript. on forest ecosystems, February 5–9, 1996, River- Austin, M. 1903. The Land of Little Rain. University side, CA.
    [Show full text]
  • Biography of a "Feathered Pig": the California Condor Conservation
    Journal of the History of Biology 37: 557–583, 2004. 557 Ó 2004 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands. Biography of a ‘‘Feathered Pig’’: The California Condor Conservation Controversy PETER S. ALAGONA Department of History Institute of the Environment University of California, Los Angeles USA E-mail: [email protected] Abstract. In the early 20th century, after hundreds of years of gradual decline, the California condor emerged as an object of intensive scientific study, an important conservation target, and a cultural icon of the American wilderness preservation movement. Early condor researchers generally believed that the species’ survival de- pended upon the preservation of its wilderness habitat. However, beginning in the 1970s, a new generation of scientists argued that no amount of wilderness could prevent the condor’s decline and that only intensive scientific management - including captive breeding - could save the species from certain extinction. A bitter and highly politicized battle soon developed over how to best preserve the condor. For 5 years the condor was extinct in the wild; however, by the time that officials released the first captive-bred birds the condor recovery program had garnered widespread public support, even among its former critics. Today, condor advocates from the scientific and activist communities work together to manage the species and protect its habitat. The condor’s story illus- trates some of the tensions, problems, and successes that have accompanied the rise of conservation biology as a scientific field and environmental movement in the United States. Keywords: California condor, conservation biology, endangered species, wildlife man- agement Introduction On Easter Sunday 1987, a team of scientists, conservationists, and government officials finally caught up with Adult Condor-9, a 7-year old male California condor (Gymnogyps californianus) that had previously demonstrated an uncanny ability to evade his would-be captors (Fig- ure 1).
    [Show full text]
  • California Condor (Gymnogyps Californianus) 5-Year Review
    California Condor (Gymnogyps californianus) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Pacific Southwest Region June 2013 Acknowledgement: The Service gratefully acknowledges the commitment and efforts of the California Condor Recovery Program partners for their many on-going contributions towards condor recovery. Our partners were instrumental both in ensuring that we used the best available science to craft our analyses and recommendations in this 5-year review and in providing individual feedback that was used to refine this document. Photo Credit: Unless otherwise indicated, all photos, charts, and graphs are products of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Page | 2 5-YEAR REVIEW California condor (Gymnogyps californianus) I. GENERAL INFORMATION Purpose of 5-Year Reviews: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is required by section 4(c)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) to conduct a status review of each listed species at least once every 5 years. The purpose of a 5-year review is to evaluate whether or not the species’ status has changed since it was listed (or since the most recent 5-year review). Based on the 5- year review, we recommend whether the species should be removed from the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife, changed in status from endangered to threatened, or changed in status from threatened to endangered. Our original listing as endangered or threatened is based on the species’ status considering the five threat factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act. These same five factors are considered in any subsequent reclassification or delisting decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • Leptosomiformes ~ Trogoniformes ~ Bucerotiformes ~ Piciformes
    Birds of the World part 6 Afroaves The core landbirds originating in Africa TELLURAVES: AFROAVES – core landbirds originating in Africa (8 orders) • ORDER ACCIPITRIFORMES – hawks and allies (4 families, 265 species) – Family Cathartidae – New World vultures (7 species) – Family Sagittariidae – secretarybird (1 species) – Family Pandionidae – ospreys (2 species) – Family Accipitridae – kites, hawks, and eagles (255 species) • ORDER STRIGIFORMES – owls (2 families, 241 species) – Family Tytonidae – barn owls (19 species) – Family Strigidae – owls (222 species) • ORDER COLIIFORMES (1 family, 6 species) – Family Coliidae – mousebirds (6 species) • ORDER LEPTOSOMIFORMES (1 family, 1 species) – Family Leptosomidae – cuckoo-roller (1 species) • ORDER TROGONIFORMES (1 family, 43 species) – Family Trogonidae – trogons (43 species) • ORDER BUCEROTIFORMES – hornbills and hoopoes (4 families, 74 species) – Family Upupidae – hoopoes (4 species) – Family Phoeniculidae – wood hoopoes (9 species) – Family Bucorvidae – ground hornbills (2 species) – Family Bucerotidae – hornbills (59 species) • ORDER PICIFORMES – woodpeckers and allies (9 families, 443 species) – Family Galbulidae – jacamars (18 species) – Family Bucconidae – puffbirds (37 species) – Family Capitonidae – New World barbets (15 species) – Family Semnornithidae – toucan barbets (2 species) – Family Ramphastidae – toucans (46 species) – Family Megalaimidae – Asian barbets (32 species) – Family Lybiidae – African barbets (42 species) – Family Indicatoridae – honeyguides (17 species) – Family
    [Show full text]
  • Julia Pfeiffer Burns
    Our Mission The mission of California State Parks is Julia Pfeiffer to provide for the health, inspiration and education of the people of California by helping to preserve the state’s extraordinary biological Visitors from around the Burns diversity, protecting its most valued natural and cultural resources, and creating opportunities world revere the natural for high-quality outdoor recreation. State Park beauty of the park’s rugged coastline, panoramic views, California State Parks supports equal access. crashing surf and Prior to arrival, visitors with disabilities who need assistance should contact the Big Sur sparkling waters. Station at (831) 649-2836. This publication is available in alternate formats by contacting: CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS P.O. Box 942896 Sacramento, CA 94296-0001 For information call: (800) 777-0369. (916) 653-6995, outside the U.S. 711, TTY relay service www.parks.ca.gov Discover the many states of California.™ SaveTheRedwoods.org/csp Julia Pfeiffer Burns State Park 11 miles south of Big Sur on Highway 1 Big Sur, CA 93920 (831) 649-2836 www.parks.ca.gov/jpb Julia Pfeiffer Burns photo courtesy of Big Sur Historical Society © 2011 California State Parks J ulia Pfeiffer Burns State Park including the McWay and Partington dropping nearly vertically to shore offers a dramatic meeting families. Homesteaders were provide habitat for many sensitive aquatic of land and sea—attracting largely self-suffcient—making and terrestrial species. visitors, writers, artists and a living as loggers, tanoak Three perennial creeks fow through the photographers from around harvesters or ranchers by using park; Anderson, Partington and McWay the world.
    [Show full text]
  • California Partners in Flight the USDA Forest Service Klamath Bird Observatory and PRBO Conservation Science
    The Coniferous Forest Bird Conservation Plan A Strategy for Protecting and Managing Coniferous Forest Habitats and Associated Birds in California Version 1.1 March 2002 A project of California Partners in Flight The USDA Forest Service Klamath Bird Observatory and PRBO Conservation Science Conservation Plan Lead Authors: John C. Robinson, USDA Forest Service John Alexander, Klamath Bird Observatory Conservation Plan Supporting Authors, PRBO Conservation Science: Sue Abbott Diana Humple Grant Ballard Melissa Pitkin Dan Barton Sandy Scoggin Gregg Elliott Diana Stralberg Sacha Heath Focal Species Account Authors: Black-backed Woodpecker – Kerry Farris Black-throated Gray Warbler – Tina Mark, USDA Forest Service Brown Creeper – Danielle LeFer, San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory Dark-eyed Junco – Jim DeStaebler, PRBO Conservation Science Flammulated Owl – Susan Yasuda, USDA Forest Service Fox Sparrow – Anne King, EDAW, Inc. Golden-crowned Kinglet – John C. Robinson, USDA Forest Service MacGillivray's Warbler – Chris Otahal, USDA Forest Service Olive-sided Flycatcher – Paul Brandy, Endangered Species Recovery Program Pileated Woodpecker – John C. Robinson, USDA Forest Service Red-breasted Nuthatch – Tina Mark and John C. Robinson, USDA Forest Service Vaux's Swift – John Sterling, Jones and Stokes Associates Western Tanager – Cory Davis, USDA Forest Service Financial Contributors: USDA Forest Service Packard Foundation National Fish and Wildlife Foundation PRBO Conservation Science Klamath Bird Observatory Acknowledgements: California Partners in Flight wishes to thank everyone who helped write, promote, and produce this document. Special thanks to Laurie Fenwood, Geoffrey Geupel, Aaron Holmes, Genny Wilson, Ryan Burnett, and Doug Wallace, and to Sophie Webb for her cover illustration. Recommended Citation: CalPIF (California Partners in Flight). 2002.
    [Show full text]
  • Sierra Nevada Bighorns Vs. Mountain Lions
    Sierra Nevada Bighorns vs. Mountain Lions Adapted from: “Counting Sheep: Bighorn NGSS Standards: Sheep and Mountain Lions in the • 5-ESS3-1 Obtain and combine American West” by Elizabeth Clark information about ways individual Department of Biology, Washington communities use science ideas to University in St. Louis protect Earth’s resources (bighorn or mountain lions in this case) and environment Objectives: • MS-LS2-1 Analyze and interpret Students analyze a less traditional data to provide evidence for the endangered species conflict: a legally effects of resource availability on protected but common predator, the organisms and populations of mountain lion, is preying on and driving organisms in an ecosystem. towards extinction an endangered • HS-LS2-1 Use mathematical and/or herbivore, the Sierra Nevada bighorn computational representations to sheep. Biologists concerned with the support explanations of factors preservation of bighorn sheep want to that affect carrying capacity of reduce the lions (cull) to prevent further ecosystems at different scales. harm to the sheep, while mountain lion activists oppose killing of lions for any Common Core State Standards: reason. Students examine the two A variety of Speaking & Listening standards perspectives, debate, and finally vote as a would fit in here, for example: mock California State Senate on whether • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.11-12.1.B to allow culling of lions that kill bighorns. Work with peers to promote civil, democratic discussions and Grade level: Suggested 5th-12th decision-making,
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 National Bird List
    2020 NATIONAL BIRD LIST See General Rules, Eye Protection & other Policies on www.soinc.org as they apply to every event. Kingdom – ANIMALIA Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias ORDER: Charadriiformes Phylum – CHORDATA Snowy Egret Egretta thula Lapwings and Plovers (Charadriidae) Green Heron American Golden-Plover Subphylum – VERTEBRATA Black-crowned Night-heron Killdeer Charadrius vociferus Class - AVES Ibises and Spoonbills Oystercatchers (Haematopodidae) Family Group (Family Name) (Threskiornithidae) American Oystercatcher Common Name [Scientifc name Roseate Spoonbill Platalea ajaja Stilts and Avocets (Recurvirostridae) is in italics] Black-necked Stilt ORDER: Anseriformes ORDER: Suliformes American Avocet Recurvirostra Ducks, Geese, and Swans (Anatidae) Cormorants (Phalacrocoracidae) americana Black-bellied Whistling-duck Double-crested Cormorant Sandpipers, Phalaropes, and Allies Snow Goose Phalacrocorax auritus (Scolopacidae) Canada Goose Branta canadensis Darters (Anhingidae) Spotted Sandpiper Trumpeter Swan Anhinga Anhinga anhinga Ruddy Turnstone Wood Duck Aix sponsa Frigatebirds (Fregatidae) Dunlin Calidris alpina Mallard Anas platyrhynchos Magnifcent Frigatebird Wilson’s Snipe Northern Shoveler American Woodcock Scolopax minor Green-winged Teal ORDER: Ciconiiformes Gulls, Terns, and Skimmers (Laridae) Canvasback Deep-water Waders (Ciconiidae) Laughing Gull Hooded Merganser Wood Stork Ring-billed Gull Herring Gull Larus argentatus ORDER: Galliformes ORDER: Falconiformes Least Tern Sternula antillarum Partridges, Grouse, Turkeys, and
    [Show full text]
  • AOU and Audubon Report: Status of the California Condor and Efforts To
    Status of the California Condor and Efforts to Achieve its Recovery Prepared by the AOU Committee on Conservation, California Condor Blue Ribbon Panel, A Joint Initiative of The American Ornithologists’ Union and Audubon California Jeffrey R. Walters, Scott R. Derrickson, D. Michael Fry, Susan M. Haig, John M. Marzluff, Joseph M. Wunderle, Jr. August 2008 Status of the California Condor and Efforts to Achieve its Recovery August 2008 Prepared by the AOU Committee on Conservation, California Condor Blue Ribbon Panel, A Joint Initiative of The American Ornithologists’ Union and Audubon California Panel Members: Jeffrey R. Walters (chairman), Virginia Tech University Scott R. Derrickson, Smithsonian Institution, National Zoological Park D. Michael Fry, American Bird Conservancy Susan M. Haig, USGS Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center John M. Marzluff, University of Washington Joseph M. Wunderle, Jr., International Institute of Tropical Forestry, USDA Forest Service Assisted by: Brock B. Bernstein Karen L. Velas, Audubon California This report was supported with funding from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, the Morgan Family Foundation, and other private donors. © Copyright 2008 The American Ornithologists’ Union and Audubon California INTRODUCTION The California Condor (Gymnogyps californianus) has long been symbolic of avian conservation in the United States. Its large size, inquisitiveness and association with remote places make it highly charismatic, and its decline to the brink of extinction has aroused a continuing public interest in its plight. By 1982 only 22 condors remained, and the last wild bird was trapped and brought into captivity in 1987, rendering the species extinct in the wild (Snyder and Snyder 2000). At that time, some questioned whether viable populations could ever exist again in the natural environment, and whether limited conservation funds should be expended on what they viewed as a hopeless cause (Pitelka 1981).
    [Show full text]
  • Supplemental Resources
    Supplemental Resources By Beverly R. Ortiz, Ph.D. © 2015 East Bay Regional Park District • www.ebparks.org Supported in part by a grant from The Vinapa Foundation for Cross-Cultural Studies Ohlone Curriculum with Bay Miwok Content and Introduction to Delta Yokuts Supplemental Resources Table of Contents Teacher Resources Native American Versus American Indian ..................................................................... 1 Ohlone Curriculum American Indian Stereotypes .......................................................................................... 3 Miner’s Lettuce and Red Ants: The Evolution of a Story .............................................. 7 A Land of Many Villages and Tribes ............................................................................. 10 Other North American Indian Groups ............................................................................ 11 A Land of Many Languages ........................................................................................... 15 Sacred Places and Narratives .......................................................................................... 18 Generations of Knowledge: Sources ............................................................................... 22 Euro-American Interactions with Plants and Animals (1800s) .......................................... 23 Staple Foods: Acorns ........................................................................................................... 28 Other Plant Foods: Cultural Context ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Part 2 Los Padres National R5-MB-078 Forest Strategy September 2005
    United States Department of Agriculture Land Management Plan Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region Part 2 Los Padres National R5-MB-078 Forest Strategy September 2005 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, Write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Land Management Plan Part 2 Los Padres National Forest Strategy R5-MB-078 September 2005 Table of Contents Tables ....................................................................................................................................................v Document Format Protocols................................................................................................................ vi LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN STRATEGY..................................................................................1
    [Show full text]