DOCSLIB.ORG

Eradication of Invasive Alien Vertebrates in the UK Overseas Territories

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Eradication of Invasive Alien Vertebrates in the UK Overseas Territories 1 Eradication of invasive alien vertebrates in the UK Overseas Territories A prioritised framework for island restoration to enable the UK Overseas Territories' Biodiversity Strategy June 2014 The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) Funded by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) 1 2 Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................. 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................................. 7 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 9 Aims ........................................................................................................................................................ 10 Scope ...................................................................................................................................................... 11 Limitations ............................................................................................................................................... 12 METHODS .................................................................................................................................................. 14 Data collection ......................................................................................................................................... 14 Island Prioritisation .................................................................................................................................. 16 RESULTS .................................................................................................................................................... 21 Islands in the OTs ................................................................................................................................... 21 Beneficiary species in the OTs................................................................................................................ 21 Invasive Species in the OTs.................................................................................................................... 23 Priority Islands ......................................................................................................................................... 25 TERRITORY-SPECIFIC ACCOUNTS ........................................................................................................ 29 ANGUILLA................................................................................................................................................... 30 BERMUDA .................................................................................................................................................. 32 BRITISH INDIAN OCEAN TERRITORY ..................................................................................................... 33 BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS ........................................................................................................................ 35 CAYMAN ISLANDS .................................................................................................................................... 37 FALKLAND ISLANDS ................................................................................................................................. 39 MONTSERRAT ........................................................................................................................................... 41 PITCAIRN ISLANDS ................................................................................................................................... 42 SAINT HELENA, ASCENSION AND TRISTAN DA CUNHA ...................................................................... 43 SOUTH GEORGIA AND THE SOUTH SANDWICH ISLANDS .................................................................. 45 TURKS AND CAICOS ISLANDS ................................................................................................................ 46 NEXT STEPS .............................................................................................................................................. 48 ANNEX 1 – Present and Historical Breeding Status full definitions ............................................................ 50 ANNEX 2 – Full List of Beneficiary Species................................................................................................ 52 ANNEX 3 – Full List of Invasive Alien Vertebrates ..................................................................................... 58 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................ 61 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The UK Overseas Territories (OTs) are of considerable importance for biodiversity, holding an estimated 90% of the UKs total biodiversity and over 300 globally threatened species (IUCN 2013). One of the most serious threats identified to this biodiversity is the presence of invasive alien species, in particular invasive mammals and other vertebrates (Hilton and Cuthbert 2010). Invasive vertebrates have been responsible, wholly or partially, for the extinction of eight endemic bird species and for population declines of numerous other native bird and reptile species on OTs (BirdLife 2009; Cuthbert and Hilton 2004; Mitchell et al. 2004). As such, the control, eradication and prevention of establishment of invasive alien species is a key strategic priority in the current OTs Biodiversity Strategy (Defra 2009). Due to the detrimental impact of Invasive Alien Vertebrates on many native island species, eradicating invasive alien vertebrates from islands has become an important management tool to preserve endemic island biodiversity. As eradication techniques have been developed and refined, the number of islands where eradication is possible and would provide a biological conservation benefit is increasing (Brooke et al. 2007). The OTs include a wide range of islands, hosting numerous invasive alien vertebrates as well as native threatened and endemic species. Until now islands selected for eradication and restoration have generally been identified opportunistically, without comparative assessment between islands to weigh the biological benefit of eradicating invasive species, the feasibility and sustainability of restoration. This study provides a strategic assessment to rank all of the OTs’ islands according to the greatest biodiversity benefit resulting from technically feasible invasive vertebrate eradications. This island priority list can then be used to direct actions and make best use of limited resources to support the strategic priorities of the UK Overseas Territories Biodiversity Strategy. Scope and Limitations The study focussed on the 11 island OTs: Anguilla; Bermuda; British Indian Ocean Territory; British Virgin Islands; Cayman Islands; Falkland Islands; Montserrat; Pitcairn Islands; Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha; South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and Turks and Caicos Islands. The Cyprus SBAs, Gibraltar and British Antarctic Territory were not included. The potential biodiversity gains of an invasive vertebrate eradication were calculated against a subset of native fauna: all Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable and Near Threatened terrestrial vertebrates; marine turtles; restricted-range bird species and colonial seabird species. Other taxonomic groups were not included as information on their occurrence, distribution and vulnerability to invasive alien vertebrates is not currently available in sufficient detail for all of the OTs. All terrestrial invasive alien vertebrates were included and the logistical feasibility of eradicating them was assessed for each island and incorporated along with the natural reinvasion risk for rodents. Social feasibility, socio-economic impacts and the anthropogenic reinvasion risk of invasive alien vertebrates were not considered in the study as data was not available in sufficient detail for all islands across the OTs. Island area was not incorporated into the prioritisation, because it mostly affects the cost rather than the feasibility of an eradication, with costs factoring into the planning stage of an eradication rather than the strategic assessment. Prioritisation Method Calculating the priority islands was a multi-step process. First, Potential Conservation Value scores were calculated for each island. This is the maximum conservation value achievable if all invasive alien vertebrates present could be successfully eradicated. The Potential Conservation Value incorporates the threat status, irreplaceability and vulnerability to present invasive vertebrates for all native species on an island. 4 Secondly, invasive alien vertebrate species that could technically be eradicated from each island were identified, using human population size as a criterion for technical feasibility, as well as natural re-invasion risk as guidance for which eradications would yield lasting benefits (eradications where natural re-invasion was considered very likely were excluded). The identified species were then theoretically removed from each island, and a Post- eradication Conservation Value was calculated for each island using the same approach as above with a reduced subset of invasive vertebrates
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Final Report
    Overseas Countries and Territories: Environmental Profiles FINAL REPORT PART 2 – DETAILED REPORT SECTION E – SOUTH ATLANTIC REGION Consortium January 201 5 EuropeAid/127054/C/SER/multi Request n° 2013/325768 DISCLAIMER This report has been prepared with the financial assistance of the European Commission. The views expressed herein are those of the consultants and therefore in no way reflect the official opinion of the European Commission Authors of the Report Contractor’s name and address José de Bettencourt Safège Consortium Helena Imminga-Berends Gulledelle 92 B-1200 Brussels - BELGIUM Project manager Camille Vassart on behalf of Prospect C&S Please consider the environment before printing this document Page 2 / 115 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ACAP Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels ACOR Association Française pour les Récifs Coralliens ACP Africa Caribbean and the Pacific ACS Association of Caribbean States AEPS Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy AFD French Development Agency AMAP Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme AMOC Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation AOSIS Alliance of Small Island States APEC Asia–Pacific Economic Cooperation BAS British Antarctic Survey BEST EU Voluntary Scheme for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in Territories of European Overseas BRGM Bureau de Recherches Géologiques et Minières CAFF Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna CANARI Caribbean Natural Resources Institute CARICOM Caribbean Community CARIFORUM Caribbean Forum CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CCAMLR
    [Show full text]
  • Crop Diversification Leads to Diverse Bird Problems in Hawaiian Agriculture
    Human–Wildlife Confl icts 1(2):235–243, Fall 2007 Crop diversifi cation leads to diverse bird problems in Hawaiian agriculture MARNI E. KOOPMAN1, Hawaii Field Station, USDA/APHIS/Wildlife Services’ National Wildlife Re- search Center, P.O. Box 10880, Hilo, Hawaii 96721, USA [email protected] WILLIAM C. PITT, Hawaii Field Station, USDA/APHIS/Wildlife Services’ National Wildlife Research Center, P.O. Box 10880, Hilo, Hawaii 96721, USA Abstract: Over the last 20 years, Hawaii’s agriculture has shifted from a focus on sugar cane (Saccharum offi cinarum) and pineapples (Ananas comosus) produced on large farms to a diverse array of products produced on a multitude of smaller farms. This dramatic shift in production, in addition to the introduction of many new avian species, has resulted in a concomitant change in the problems faced by agriculture. We surveyed farmers to determine the extent of bird damage to crops, the species responsible, the crops most vulnerable, and control methods employed. Bird problems varied by island, but cardinals (Cardinalis cardinalis, Paroaria coronata, and P. capitata) and pheasants (Phasianus colchicus and Lophura leucomelanos) were signifi cant problems on all islands. Seed corn (Zea mays), fruit, vegetables, rice (Oryza sativa), and orchids (Orchidaceae) all sustained notable damage to their crops by birds, and growers expressed much interest in gaining information on control measures. Most farmers incurred little damage, while a few reported losing 80 to 100% of their crops at certain times of the year. We recommend a multidimensional approach to control invasive bird species, including habitat alterations, scare tactics, cessation of game bird releases, prevention of the spread of known pests among islands, and the development of chemical repellents for use when other methods are not suffi cient.
    [Show full text]
  • Iucn Summary Gough Island (United Kingdom) 2
    WORLD HERITAGE NOMINATION - IUCN SUMMARY GOUGH ISLAND (UNITED KINGDOM) Summary prepared by IUCN/WCMC (March 1995) based on the original nomination supplied by the Government of the United Kingdom. This original and all documents in support of this nomination will be available for consultation at the meetings of the Bureau and the Committee. 1. LOCATION Located southeast of Tristan da Cunha Island in the south Atlantic Ocean, midway between Africa and South America. 2. JURIDICAL DATA The island and surrounding territorial waters were designated a wildlife area in 1976 under the Tristan da Cunha Conservation Ordinance. 3. IDENTIFICATION The island of Gough (6500ha) represents the eroded core of a Late Tertiary volcano. The east side of the island is dissected by a series of deep steep-sided valleys, which are separated by narrow serrated ridges. Along the west side of the island, rounded slopes extend from the central plateau to the western sea cliffs. Many offshore stacks and rocks are present, mostly within 100m of the main island. Vegetation comprises tussock grass around the coast and wet heath with moss and feldmark, and bog and swamp communities at higher elevations. Knowledge of the flora is incomplete but consists of some 35 native flowering plant and 28 native fern species. Over 30 of Gough's vascular plant taxa are endemic to the Tristan de Cunha islands. A total of 146 bryophytes have been recorded, eight of which are endemic, together with 20 fungi and 24 lichens. Invertebrate fauna also remains poorly known, but comprises 100 species, eight of which are endemic.
    [Show full text]
  • Prioritizing Islands for the Eradication of Invasive Vertebrates in the United Kingdom Overseas Territories
    Contributed Paper Prioritizing Islands for the Eradication of Invasive Vertebrates in the United Kingdom Overseas Territories JEFFREY DAWSON,∗ STEFFEN OPPEL,∗∗∗ RICHARD J. CUTHBERT,∗ NICK HOLMES,† JEREMY P. BIRD,‡ STUART H. M. BUTCHART,‡ DENA R. SPATZ,§ AND BERNIE TERSHY§ ∗RSPB Centre for Conservation Science, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, The Lodge, Sandy, Bedfordshire, SG19 2DL, United Kingdom †Island Conservation, 2161 Delaware Avenue, Suite A, Santa Cruz, CA 95060, U.S.A. ‡BirdLife International, Wellbrook Court, Girton Road, Cambridge, CB3 0NA, United Kingdom §University of California Santa Cruz, 1156 High Street, Santa Cruz, CA 95064, U.S.A. Abstract: Invasive alien species are one of the primary threats to native biodiversity on islands worldwide. Consequently, eradicating invasive species from islands has become a mainstream conservation practice. Deciding which islands have the highest priority for eradication is of strategic importance to allocate limited resources to achieve maximum conservation benefit. Previous island prioritizations focused either on a narrow set of native species or on a small geographic area. We devised a prioritization approach that incorporates all threatened native terrestrial vertebrates and all invasive terrestrial vertebrates occurring on 11 U.K. overseas territories, which comprise over 2000 islands ranging from the sub-Antarctic to the tropics. Our approach includes eradication feasibility and distinguishes between the potential and realistic conservation value of an eradication, which reflects the benefit that would accrue following eradication of either all invasive species or only those species for which eradication techniques currently exist. We identified the top 25 priority islands for invasive species eradication that together would benefit extant populations of 155 native species including 45 globally threatened species.
    [Show full text]
  • TCI: Facts, Details and More Reasons to Visit
    TURKS and CAICOS ISLANDS Parrot Cay Atlantic Ocean Pine Cay Caicos Little Water Cay Passage NORTH CAICOS PROVIDENCIALES MIDDLE West Caicos CAICOS EAST CAICOS Turks CAICOS ISLANDS Island Passage FRENCH SOUTH CAY CAICOS GRAND TURK Long Cay East Cay Cotton Cay SALT CAY Ambegris Cay TURKS ISLANDS The Turks and Caicos Islands. Facts, details and more reasons to visit Geography Where are we, exactly? And why is our name plural? Nine islands are inhabited and separated into two The Turks and Caicos Islands is a British Overseas island groups: Territory, that’s located in the Atlantic Ocean and considered a part of the Caribbean region. The Turks Islands of Grand Turk and Salt The Head of State is the Queen of the UK and we Cay, that are to the east benefit from their military and economic support. The Caicos Islands Ambergris Cay, South Our more than 40 small islands and cays are Caicos, Middle Caicos, North Caicos, encircled and protected by a barrier reef who’s Pine Cay, Parrot Cay and of course, wall drops dramatically, from 40 to 8,000 feet, Providenciales, to the west. making it like an underwater fortress protecting the islands from the powerful Atlantic Ocean waves. The islands are home to over 34,000 full time This unique geography is directly responsible for residents of which 75% live on Providenciales. TCI’s beautiful beaches and calm, warm water. This brings us to the next question: Why is Providenciales so popular and why was it chosen the best vacation island in the world? www.whitevillas.net 3 649 345-3179 | 514 574-5272 The Turks and Caicos Islands.
    [Show full text]
  • Beetles of the Tristan Da Cunha Islands
    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: Koleopterologische Rundschau Jahr/Year: 2013 Band/Volume: 83_2013 Autor(en)/Author(s): Hänel Christine, Jäch Manfred A. Artikel/Article: Beetles of the Tristan da Cunha Islands: Poignant new findings, and checklist of the archipelagos species, mapping an exponential increase in alien composition (Coleoptera). 257-282 ©Wiener Coleopterologenverein (WCV), download unter www.biologiezentrum.at Koleopterologische Rundschau 83 257–282 Wien, September 2013 Beetles of the Tristan da Cunha Islands: Dr. Hildegard Winkler Poignant new findings, and checklist of the archipelagos species, mapping an exponential Fachgeschäft & Buchhandlung für Entomologie increase in alien composition (Coleoptera) C. HÄNEL & M.A. JÄCH Abstract Results of a Coleoptera collection from the Tristan da Cunha Islands (Tristan and Nightingale) made in 2005 are presented, revealing 16 new records: Eleven species from eight families are new records for Tristan Island, and five species from four families are new records for Nightingale Island. Two families (Anthribidae, Corylophidae), five genera (Bisnius STEPHENS, Bledius LEACH, Homoe- odera WOLLASTON, Micrambe THOMSON, Sericoderus STEPHENS) and seven species Homoeodera pumilio WOLLASTON, 1877 (Anthribidae), Sericoderus sp. (Corylophidae), Micrambe gracilipes WOLLASTON, 1871 (Cryptophagidae), Cryptolestes ferrugineus (STEPHENS, 1831) (Laemophloeidae), Cartodere ? constricta (GYLLENHAL,
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity: the UK Overseas Territories. Peterborough, Joint Nature Conservation Committee
    Biodiversity: the UK Overseas Territories Compiled by S. Oldfield Edited by D. Procter and L.V. Fleming ISBN: 1 86107 502 2 © Copyright Joint Nature Conservation Committee 1999 Illustrations and layout by Barry Larking Cover design Tracey Weeks Printed by CLE Citation. Procter, D., & Fleming, L.V., eds. 1999. Biodiversity: the UK Overseas Territories. Peterborough, Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Disclaimer: reference to legislation and convention texts in this document are correct to the best of our knowledge but must not be taken to infer definitive legal obligation. Cover photographs Front cover: Top right: Southern rockhopper penguin Eudyptes chrysocome chrysocome (Richard White/JNCC). The world’s largest concentrations of southern rockhopper penguin are found on the Falkland Islands. Centre left: Down Rope, Pitcairn Island, South Pacific (Deborah Procter/JNCC). The introduced rat population of Pitcairn Island has successfully been eradicated in a programme funded by the UK Government. Centre right: Male Anegada rock iguana Cyclura pinguis (Glen Gerber/FFI). The Anegada rock iguana has been the subject of a successful breeding and re-introduction programme funded by FCO and FFI in collaboration with the National Parks Trust of the British Virgin Islands. Back cover: Black-browed albatross Diomedea melanophris (Richard White/JNCC). Of the global breeding population of black-browed albatross, 80 % is found on the Falkland Islands and 10% on South Georgia. Background image on front and back cover: Shoal of fish (Charles Sheppard/Warwick
    [Show full text]
  • UK Overseas Territories
    INFORMATION PAPER United Kingdom Overseas Territories - Toponymic Information United Kingdom Overseas Territories (UKOTs), also known as British Overseas Territories (BOTs), have constitutional and historical links with the United Kingdom, but do not form part of the United Kingdom itself. The Queen is the Head of State of all the UKOTs, and she is represented by a Governor or Commissioner (apart from the UK Sovereign Base Areas that are administered by MOD). Each Territory has its own Constitution, its own Government and its own local laws. The 14 territories are: Anguilla; Bermuda; British Antarctic Territory (BAT); British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT); British Virgin Islands; Cayman Islands; Falkland Islands; Gibraltar; Montserrat; Pitcairn, Henderson, Ducie and Oeno Islands; Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha; South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands; Turks and Caicos Islands; UK Sovereign Base Areas. PCGN recommend the term ‘British Overseas Territory Capital’ for the administrative centres of UKOTs. Production of mapping over the UKOTs does not take place systematically in the UK. Maps produced by the relevant territory, preferably by official bodies such as the local government or tourism authority, should be used for current geographical names. National government websites could also be used as an additional reference. Additionally, FCDO and MOD briefing maps may be used as a source for names in UKOTs. See the FCDO White Paper for more information about the UKOTs. ANGUILLA The territory, situated in the Caribbean, consists of the main island of Anguilla plus some smaller, mostly uninhabited islands. It is separated from the island of Saint Martin (split between Saint-Martin (France) and Sint Maarten (Netherlands)), 17km to the south, by the Anguilla Channel.
    [Show full text]
  • ATOLL RESEARCH BULLETIN NO. 251 BIOGEOGRAPHY of the PUERTO RICAN BANK by Harold Heatwole, Richard Levins and Michael D. Byer
    ATOLL RESEARCH BULLETIN NO. 251 BIOGEOGRAPHY OF THE PUERTO RICAN BANK by Harold Heatwole, Richard Levins and Michael D. Byer Issued by THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION Washington, D. C., U.S.A. July 1981 VIRGIN ISLANDS CULEBRA PUERTO RlCO Fig. 1. Map of the Puerto Rican Island Shelf. Rectangles A - E indicate boundaries of maps presented in more detail in Appendix I. 1. Cayo Santiago, 2. Cayo Batata, 3. Cayo de Afuera, 4. Cayo de Tierra, 5. Cardona Key, 6. Protestant Key, 7. Green Key (st. ~roix), 8. Caiia Azul ATOLL RESEARCH BULLETIN 251 ERRATUM The following caption should be inserted for figure 7: Fig. 7. Temperature in and near a small clump of vegetation on Cayo Ahogado. Dots: 5 cm deep in soil under clump. Circles: 1 cm deep in soil under clump. Triangles: Soil surface under clump. Squares: Surface of vegetation. X's: Air at center of clump. Broken line indicates intervals of more than one hour between measurements. BIOGEOGRAPHY OF THE PUERTO RICAN BANK by Harold Heatwolel, Richard Levins2 and Michael D. Byer3 INTRODUCTION There has been a recent surge of interest in the biogeography of archipelagoes owing to a reinterpretation of classical concepts of evolution of insular populations, factors controlling numbers of species on islands, and the dynamics of inter-island dispersal. The literature on these subjects is rapidly accumulating; general reviews are presented by Mayr (1963) , and Baker and Stebbins (1965) . Carlquist (1965, 1974), Preston (1962 a, b), ~ac~rthurand Wilson (1963, 1967) , MacArthur et al. (1973) , Hamilton and Rubinoff (1963, 1967), Hamilton et al. (1963) , Crowell (19641, Johnson (1975) , Whitehead and Jones (1969), Simberloff (1969, 19701, Simberloff and Wilson (1969), Wilson and Taylor (19671, Carson (1970), Heatwole and Levins (1973) , Abbott (1974) , Johnson and Raven (1973) and Lynch and Johnson (1974), have provided major impetuses through theoretical and/ or general papers on numbers of species on islands and the dynamics of insular biogeography and evolution.
    [Show full text]
  • British Virgin Islands
    THE NATIONAL REPORT EL REPORTE NACIONAL FOR THE COUNTRY OF POR EL PAIS DE BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS NATIONAL REPRESENTATIVE / REPRESENTANTE NACIONAL LOUIS WALTERS Western Atlantic Turtle Symposium Simposio de Tortugas del Atlantico Occidental 17-22 July / Julio 1983 San José, Costa Rica BVI National Report, WATS I Vol 3, pages 70-117 WESTERN ATLANTIC TURTLE SYMPOSIUM San José, Costa Rica, July 1983 NATIONAL REPORT FOR THE COUNTRY OF BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS NATIONAL REPORT PRESENTED BY Louis Walters The National Representative Address: Permanent Secretary, Ministry of National Resources and Environment Tortola, British Virgin Islands NATIONAL REPORT PREPARED BY John Fletemeyer DATE SUBMITTED: 2 June 1983 Please submit this NATIONAL REPORT no later than 1 December 1982 to: IOC Assistant Secretary for IOCARIBE ℅ UNDP, Apartado 4540 San José, Costa Rica BVI National Report, WATS I Vol 3, pages 70-117 With a grant from the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service, WIDECAST has digitized the data- bases and proceedings of the Western Atlantic Turtle Symposium (WATS) with the hope that the revitalized documents might provide a useful historical context for contemporary sea turtle management and conservation efforts in the Western Atlantic Region. With the stated objective of serving “as a starting point for the identification of critical areas where it will be necessary to concentrate all efforts in the future”, the first Western Atlantic Turtle Sym- posium convened in Costa Rica (17-22 July 1983), and the second in Puerto Rico four years later (12-16 October 1987). WATS I featured National Reports from 43 political jurisdictions; 37 pre- sented at WATS II.
    [Show full text]
  • Reducing Bird Damage in the State of Vermont
    ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REDUCING BIRD DAMAGE IN THE STATE OF VERMONT In cooperation with: United States Department of Interior United States Fish and Wildlife Service Migratory Bird Program Region 5 The Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department Prepared by: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE WILDLIFE SERVICES November 2015 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................................... 3 CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION 1.1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 PURPOSE ....................................................................................................................................... 5 1.3 NEED FOR ACTION ...................................................................................................................... 5 1.4 DECISIONS TO BE MADE ......................................................................................................... 21 1.5 SCOPE OF THIS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ............................................................. 21 1.6 RELATIONSHIP OF THIS DOCUMENT TO OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS . 24 1.7 AUTHORITY OF FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCIES ........................................................... 25 1.8 COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS AND STATUTES ....................................................................... 28 CHAPTER 2:
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 New York Bird Damage Management EA
    ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REDUCING BIRD DAMAGE IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK In cooperation with: United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Bureau of Wildlife New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation City of New York, Department of Environmental Protection Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Prepared by: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE WILDLIFE SERVICES November 2019 Executive summary Page i Executive Summary The United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services (WS) prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to facilitate planning, interagency coordination and the streamlining of program management, and to clearly communicate with the public the analysis of individual and cumulative impacts in managing bird damage across the State of New York. The EA describes the need for bird damage management to reduce and prevent damage associated with birds in New York, including damage to property, agriculture, and natural resources, and risks to human health and safety. The proposed bird damage management activities could be conducted on public and private property when the property owner or manager requests assistance and/or when assistance is requested by an appropriate state, federal, tribal or local government agency. This EA analyzes the potential environmental impacts of three alternatives for WS’ response to bird damage. Actions proposed in the EA could be conducted on public and private property when the resource owner (property owner) or manager requests assistance, a need for action is confirmed, and agreements specifying the nature and duration of the bird damage management activities to be conducted are completed.
    [Show full text]