DOCSLIB.ORG

Kansas 2 0 Shorebird 0 Survey 2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Kansas 2 0 Shorebird 0 Survey 2 Kansas 2 0 Shorebird 0 Survey 2 KANSAS FEBRUARY 2003 HELEN HANDS, KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE & PARKS 2002 KANSAS SHOREBIRD SURVEY PRELIMINARY RESULTS Currently, we have received data for 39 sites (78%) surveyed in During summer-fall, 75,393 shorebirds were reported. spring and 34 sites (68%) surveyed in summer-fall (Fig. 1). Most Shorebird numbers were again highest at CBWA (74%) and volunteers conducted one survey per survey period, 5 in spring QNWR (16%), followed by FNWR (2%) and Fort Riley (2%) and 8 in summer-fall. However, up to 54 surveys were conducted (Fig. 2). Because the number of shorebirds at CBWA and QNWR per site. To minimize bias due to differences in number of sur- comprised such a high proportion of shorebirds reported in this veys, when analyzing data for statewide comparisons the survey survey during spring and summer-fall, species composition and site with the highest number of shorebirds was selected per sur- migration chronology for 3 groups of sites were analyzed: vey period. In the rare case of a tie, the survey with the most vari- CBWA, QNWR, and the rest of the sites. ety was selected (i.e., species diversity, fewest killdeer). During both spring and summer-fall, 30 species of shorebirds In spring, 97,342 shorebirds were reported. Not surprisingly, were recorded. Statewide, unidentified shorebirds comprised Cheyenne Bottoms Wildlife Area (CBWA, 73% of statewide 44% of shorebirds recorded; however, most of these were from total), Quivira National Wildlife Area (QNWR, 14%), and The CBWA (Fig. 3). Of those shorebirds identified to at least a group, Nature Conservancy Preserve at Cheyenne Bottoms (4.8%) species composition varied between the 3 groups of sites during accounted for the highest proportions of the shorebirds (Fig. 2). spring and summer-fall. After these traditional hotspots came Marais des Cygnes Wildlife Area (1.5%), Flint Hills National Wildlife Refuge (FNWR, 1.5%), and Kirwin National Wildlife Refuge (1.2%). Kansas Shorebird Survey Site Locations CHEYENNE DONIPHAN RAWLINS DECATUR NORTON PHILLIPS SMITH JEWELL REPUBLIC WASHINGTON MARSHALL NEMAHA BROWN Lovewell RES Kirwin NWR Jamestown WA CLOUD ATCHISON SHERMAN THOMAS SHERIDAN JACKSON GRAHAM ROOKS OSBORNE CLAY RILEY POTTAWATOMIE Benedictine Bottoms MITCHELL Grant School (Airport) School JEFFERSON Kaw Valley Fish Farm Fort Riley OTTAWA Perry RES WYANDOTTE LINCOLN SHAWNEE WALLACE LOGAN GOVE Lawrence Sod Farms, TREGO ELLIS RUSSELL DICKINSON Oxbow on LEAVEN- Sandpit Marsh GEARY Soldier Creek WORTH Clinton RES Baker Wetlands SALINE JOHNSON Wilson RES WABAUNSEE ELLSWORTH MORRIS OSAGE DOUGLAS KCPL Prairie (Gardner) Wetlands GREELEY WICHITA LYON FRANKLIN MIAMI SCOTT LANE NESS RUSH BARTON Kanopolis RES Council Grove RES Melvern RES Hillsdale RES McPHERSON MARION Cheyenne RICE CHASE Bottoms WA &TNC COFFEY ANDERSON LINN Marias Des Cygnes WA PAWNEE McPerson Marion RES HAMILTON KEARNY FINNEY Wetlands Flint Hills NWR HODGEMAN STAFFORD Ackley Lake Marias Des Cygnes NWR RENO HARVEY John Redmond RES Quivera NWR BUTLER GREENWOOD WOODSON ALLEN BOURBON GRAY EDWARDS Bruno Sandpit Ford SFL (Finney Co.) FORD SEDGWICK El Dorado RES PRATT STANTON GRANT HASKELL KIOWA WILSON NEOSHO Dodge City KINGMAN CRAWFORD Sandpit Texas Butler SFL ELK Lake WA Isabel MEADE Wetlands Elk City WA MORTON CLARK BARBER SUMNER COWLEY STEVENS SEWARD COMANCHE HARPER MONT- LABETTE CHEROKEE CHAUTAUQUA GOMERY Elkhart Sewer Pnds Seasons Site Has Been Surveyed 1 Season 2 Seasons 3 Seasons 4 or more Seasons FIGURE 1 SURVEY FINDINGS At CBWA in spring, dowitchers and “peeps” (both 29%), were below average to non-existent. Below-average precipitation prob- the most common shorebirds reported followed by stilt sand- ably increased habitat availability for shorebirds at large reser- pipers (25%) and Wilson’s phalaropes (13%). Of the small voirs. However, reservoirs are difficult to survey because of the calidrids (i.e., peeps) identified, white-rumped and Baird’s sand- large area of shoreline; much of which is not accessible by roads. pipers were recorded most often. Wilson’s phalaropes (49%) and It is premature to conclude that Cheyenne Bottoms and QNWR peeps (28%) were the most common species at QNWR. Baird’s are the only important shorebird areas in the state. Surveys need (5%), semipalmated (5%), and stilt sandpipers (3%) were the pre- to continue for a few more years (at least 4) to adequately assess dominant calidrids reported. Throughout the rest of the state, the value of other shorebird areas in the state. Surveys conducted peeps (28%) were the most common species reported, followed during different weather patterns are necessary to make this by Baird’s sandpipers (11%), killdeer (10%), lesser yellowlegs assessment. (8%), and semipalmated sandpipers (8%). The size of Cheyenne Bottoms and QNWR is one reason that it During summer-fall, dowitchers (51%) were the predominant these areas attract large numbers of shorebirds. To adequately species at CBWA. Stilt sandpipers (13%) also were common. At compare shorebird use among all the sites in this survey, the den- QNWR, peeps (50%) were the most common species, distantly sity of shorebird use will be calculated in addition to the number followed by least sandpipers (14%). Killdeer (31%) were the of shorebirds. This will require maps of all surveyed sites. most commonly reported species throughout the rest of the state, Currently, maps of the survey area are available for 26 of the followed by peeps (18%) and least sandpipers (13%). 51 sites. The survey area is the portion of the site where search- Statewide, shorebird numbers in spring peaked during the first es for shorebirds actually occurred. Estimates of “percent of site and second weeks of May (62% of shorebirds), followed by the suitable for shorebirds today” will be used to further refine den- third and fourth weeks of April (16%) and the first and second sity estimates and to track habitat availability at each site. weeks of April (13%). Migration timing was similar among the 3 However, these density estimates can only be calculated if sur- groups of sites, however, the peaks were more pronounced at vey area maps are available and there are enough estimates of CBWA and QNWR than throughout the rest of the state (Fig. 4). habitat availability. The peak for the rest of the state occurred during both the last half of April and the first half of May. During summer-fall, statewide shorebird numbers were highest during September (24%), but the peak was much less dramatic than in spring. Shorebird numbers peaked during September at CBWA (Fig. 4). At QNWR, there was no pattern in shorebird numbers. Throughout the rest of the state, shorebird numbers peaked during the last 2 weeks of August and the first 2 weeks of September. These results are very preliminary and it is too early to reach conclusions. Patterns in shorebird migration such as site use, species composition, and timing vary annually in response to many factors, including weather and habitat conditions. Rainfall was below average throughout most of the state before and dur- ing the survey periods. Thus, water levels in most marshes were relatively low and shorebird habitat at such sites was probably FIGURE 2 FIGURE 3 Kansas Shorebird Survey Migration Chronology 2002 80 SPRING LEGEND 70 Cheyenne Bottoms Wildlife Area 60 Quivira National Wildlife Refuge 50 Remainder of State 40 30 Surveys conducted at Cheyenne Bottoms WA, 20 Quivira NWR and 35 sites throughout the rest of the state during 10 spring and summer-fall. Percent of Shorebirds Percent 0 MAR 16-31 APR 1-15 APR 16-30 MAY 1-15 MAY 16-31 Dates of Survey 30 SUMMER-FALL 25 20 15 10 5 Percent of Shorebirds Percent 0 JUL 1-15 JUL 16-31 AUG 1-15 AUG 16-31 SEP 1-15 SEP 16-30 OCT 1-15 OCT 16-31 Dates of Survey FIGURE 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report would not have been possible without the help and data received from the following volunteers: Mark Land, Doris and Wakefield Dort, James and Jen Malcom, Tim Menard, Ken Brunson, Shannon Rothchild and Kirwin NWR staff, Kerrie Kirkpatrick, Nada Voth, Rob Penner, Roxanna Tosterud, Mike Rader, Lawrence and Ruth Smith, Mark Corder, Mick McHugh, Ralph Pike, Art Swalwell, Lee and Jane Queal, Jimmy Fallon, Kylee and Scott Sharp, Alexis Powell, Dan LaShelle, Jeff Keating, Bryan Reinert, Roger Boyd, Peg and Don Althoff, Brett Whitenack, Ed Miller, Olin and Donna Allen, Dan Larson, Barbara Campbell, Harold McFadden, Joyce Davis, Marvin Kuehn, Paul McKnab, Aaron Pendergraft, Rob Unruh, Republican Valley Bird Watchers, Tom Shane, and Chet Gresham. Equal opportunity to participate in and benefit from programs described herein is available to all individuals without regard to race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age or handicap. Complaints of discrimination should be sent to Office of the Secretary, Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks, 1020 S Kansas Ave. Suite 200, Topeka, KS 66612-1327 3/05 Kansas 2 0 Shorebird 0 Survey 3 KANSAS FEBRUARY 2004 HELEN HANDS, KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE & PARKS 2003 KANSAS SHOREBIRD SURVEY PRELIMINARY RESULTS Currently, we have received data for 39 sites (78%) surveyed in less than half of the summer-fall 2002 total (Fig. 2). Shorebird spring 2002, 33 sites (70%) surveyed in summer-fall 2002, 33 numbers were again highest at QNWR (38%) and CBWA (34%), surveyed in spring 2003 (68%), and 30 surveyed in summer-fall followed by the Flint Hills National Wildlife Refuge (9%) and 2003 (62%) (Fig. 1). Most volunteers conducted one survey per Marais des Cygnes Area (4%). Because the number of shorebirds survey period, 5 in spring and 8 in summer-fall. However, up to at CBWA and QNWR comprised such a large proportion of 54 surveys were conducted per site. To minimize bias due to dif- shorebirds reported in this survey during spring and summer-fall, ferences in number of surveys, when analyzing data for statewide species composition and migration chronology for 3 groups of comparisons the maximum count for each species per site per 2- sites were analyzed: CBWA, QNWR, and the rest of the sites.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • KDWPT Kiosk Part 1
    Wetlands and Wildlife National Scenic Byway There are over 800 bird Welcome to the Wetlands and Wildlife National The Wetlands and Wildlife National Scenic egrets, great blue herons, whooping cranes, and species in the United States Byway is one of a select group designated bald eagles. Cheyenne Bottoms and Quivira are Scenic Byway, showcasing the life of two of with over 450 found in by the Secretary of the U.S. Department home to nearly half of America’s bird species, of Transportation as “America’s Byways,” 19 reptile species, nine amphibian species, and the world’s most important natural habitats. Kansas and over 350 in offering special experiences of national and a variety of mammals. At the superb Kansas Cheyenne Bottoms and international significance. The byway connects Wetlands Education Center, along the byway two distinctly diverse types of wetlands that and adjacent to Cheyenne Bottoms, state-of-the- Quivira. Besides birds, attract a worldwide audience of birdwatchers, art exhibits and expert naturalists will introduce there are 23 species of lovers of wildlife, photographers, naturalists, the subtle wonders of the area. mammals, 19 species of and visitors in search of the quiet beauty of nature undisturbed. On the southern end of the byway, the 22,000- reptiles, and nine species of acre Quivira National Wildlife Refuge offers Cheyenne Bottoms is America’s largest inland a contrasting wetlands experience – a rare amphibians. freshwater marsh and hosts a staggering inland saltwater marsh. The refuge’s marshes, variety of wildlife. It is considered one of the sand dunes, prairies, and timber support most important stopping points for shorebird such endangered species as the least tern and migration in the Western Hemisphere, snowy plover and provide habitats for quail, hosting tens of thousands of North America’s meadowlarks, raptors, and upland mammals.
    [Show full text]
  • Jan Garton and the Campaign to Save Cheyenne Bottoms
    POOL 2 –CHEYENNE BOTTOMS, 1984 “Now don’t you ladies worry your pretty little heads. There’s $2,000 in our Article by Seliesa Pembleton budget to take care of the Bottoms this summer.” With those words we were Photos by Ed Pembleton ushered from the office of an indifferent agent of the Kansas Fish and Game Commission (now Kansas Department of Wildlife Parks, and Tourism). Little did he know those were fighting words! snewofficersoftheNorthernFlint Jan Garton came forward to volunteer endangered, too. Water rights for the Hills Audubon Chapter in as conservation committee chair, and with Bottoms were being ignored; stretches of AManhattan, Jan Garton and I had some urging, also agreed to be chapter the Arkansas River were dry; and flows travelled to Pratt seeking a copy of a secretary. We set about finding other from Walnut Creek, the immediate water Cheyenne Bottoms restoration plan community leaders to fill the slate of source, were diminished. prepared years before by a former officers and pull the organization out of Bottoms manager. We were dismissively its lethargy. We recognized the need for a Like a Watershed: Gathering told, “It’s around here somewhere.” compelling cause to rally around and Jan Information & Seeking Advice Managing to keep her cool, Jan informed immediately identified Cheyenne Bottoms Our first actions were to seek advice the agent he needed to find it because we as the issue that inspired her to volunteer. from long-time Audubon members and would be back! On the drive home from By the end of the first year, chapter others who shared concern about the that first infuriating meeting we had time membership had almost doubled in part Bottoms.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat Model for Species
    Habitat Model for Species: Yellow Mud Turtle Distribution Map Kinosternon flavescens flavescens Habitat Map Landcover Category 0 - Comments Habitat Restrictions Comments Collins, 1993 Although presence of aquatic vegetation is preferred (within aquatic habitats), it is not necessary. May forage on land and is frequently found crawling from one body of water to another, Webb, 1970 Study in OK. Described as a grassland species. Royal, 1982 Study in KS. Two individuals found on unpaved road between the floodplain and dune sands in Finney Co. Kangas, 1986 Study in Missouri. Abundance of three populations could be accounted for by amount of very course sand in their Webster, 1986 Study Kansas. Species prefers a tan-colored loess "mud" to a dark-brown sandy loam bottom. Addition of aquatic plants to sandy loam caused a shift to vegetated [#KS GAP] All habitat selections were bases on listed criteria (in comment section) and the presence of the selected habitat in the species known range in Kansas. [#Reviewer] Platt: Most observations on upland are within 20-30 feet of an aquatic habitat. But it is sometimes found much farther from water, probably migrating grom one pond to [#Reviewer2] Distler: On the Field Station, observed once in 17 years along abandoned road though cottonwood floodplain woodland, which is adjacent to CRP. 15 - Buttonbush (Swamp) Shrubland Collins, 1993 26 - Grass Playa Lake Kangas, 1986 Study in Missouri. Selected based on "marsh" in Habitat section and species range. 27 - Salt Marsh/Prairie Kangas, 1986 Study in Missouri. Selected based on "marsh" in Habitat section and species range. 28 - Spikerush Playa Lake Kangas, 1986 Study in Missouri.
    [Show full text]
  • Ramsar COP8 DOC. 29 Regional Overview of the Implementation Of
    “Wetlands: water, life, and culture” 8th Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties to the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971) Valencia, Spain, 18-26 November 2002 Ramsar COP8 DOC. 29 Information Paper English and Spanish only Regional overview of the implementation of the Convention and its Strategic Plan 1997-2002: North America The National Reports upon which this overview is based can be consulted on the Ramsar Web site, on http://ramsar.org/cop8_nr_natl_rpt_index.htm Contracting Parties in North America: Canada, Mexico, and United States of America (3). Contracting Parties whose National Reports are included in this analysis: Canada, Mexico, United States of America (3). 1. Main achievements since COP7 and priorities for 2003-2005 1.1 Main achievements since COP7 1. There are 3 countries in the North America region; all are already Contracting Parties. 2. To 31 August 2002 the region has 61 Ramsar sites, covering an area of almost 15.4 million hectares. This represents approximately 15% of the world’s Wetlands of International Importance. 3. In COP7 Resolution VII.12, Canada committed itself to designating three new sites and carrying out two site expansions. Since COP7 only two new Ramsar sites were designated in North America: Dzilam (reserva estatal) in Mexico, and Quivira National Wildlife Refuge in the United States of America (USA), covering 61,707 and 8,958 ha. respectively. Additionally, two sites were expanded in the same period: Cheyenne Bottoms State Game Area in the USA – extension of 2,942 ha; total site area of 10,978 ha – and Mer Bleue Conservation Area in Canada – extension of 243 ha; total site area of 3,343 ha.
    [Show full text]
  • Cheyenne Bottoms, Barton County
    Cheyenne Bottoms, Barton County. 2KANSAS HISTORY CREATING A “SEA OF GALILEE” The Rescue of Cheyenne Bottoms Wildlife Area, 1927–1930 by Douglas S. Harvey ot long ago, Cheyenne Bottoms, located in Barton County, Kansas, was the only lake of any size in the state of Kansas. After a big rainstorm, it was the largest body of water within hundreds of miles. But when the rains failed to come, which was more often than not, the Bottoms would be invisible to the untrained eye— just another trough in a sea of grass. Before settlement, when the Indian and bison still dominated the region, Nephemeral wetlands and springs such as these meant the difference between life and death for many inhabitants of the Central Plains. Eastward-flowing streams briefly interrupted the sea of grass and also provided wood, water, and shelter to the multitude of inhabitants, both two- and four-legged. Flocks of migratory birds filled the air in spring and fall, most migrating between nesting grounds in southern Canada and the arctic and wintering grounds near the Gulf of Mexico and the tropics. These migrants rejuvenated themselves on their long treks at these rivers, but especially they relied on the ephemeral wetlands that dotted the Plains when the rains came.1 Douglas S. Harvey is an assistant instructor of history and Ph.D. student at the University of Kansas. He received his master’s degree in history from Wichita State University. Research interests include wetlands of the Great Plains, ecological remnants of the Great Plains, and bison restoration projects. The author would like to thank Marvin Schwilling of Emporia, the Barton County Title Company, Helen Hands and Karl Grover at Cheyenne Bot- toms, and everyone else who assisted in researching this article.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands
    NATIONAL WETLANDS NEWSLETTER, vol. 29, no. 2. Copyright © 2007 Environmental Law Institute.® Washington D.C., USA.Reprinted by permission of the National Wetlands Newsletter. To subscribe, call 800-433-5120, write [email protected], or visit http://www.eli.org/nww. The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands: Assessment of International Designations Within the United States The Ramsar Convention is an international framework used to protect wetlands. At this time, the United States has 22 designated sites listed as wetlands of international importance. In this Article, the authors analyze survey data collected from each of these 22 sites to determine whether and how Ramsar designation benefits these wetland areas. BY ROYAL C. GARDNER AND KIM DIANA CONNOLLY ssues related to wetlands and wetland protection often involve engage in international cooperation.6 Its nonregulatory approach boundaries. Sometimes the lines are drawn on the ground, has led some to ask what benefits are associated with Ramsar des- delineating between so-called “jurisdictional” wetlands and ignation. For example, the United States has a maze of federal, uplands. Sometimes the boundaries are conceptual: trying state, and local laws that protect wetlands, so does the international Ito determine the proper relationship between the federal and state recognition of a site provide any additional returns? To answer governments with respect to wetland permits, or trying to balance this question, we surveyed all 22 U.S. Ramsar sites.7 Although the the need to protect the aquatic environment without inappropri- results varied from site to site, we found that Ramsar designation ately limiting activities on private property. Other times interna- adds some value to all sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance
    The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Ramsar Convention What Ramsar Is: Who can nominate a site stakeholders associated with the proposed site greatly contribute to • In 1971, an international convention • Any local government, group, the nomination process; and was held in Ramsar, Iran and community, private organization, participants signed a treaty entitled, or landowner can nominate a A completed Ramsar Information “The Convention on Wetlands of site for inclusion on the Ramsar Sheet, is available online at http://bit. International Importance, Especially List of Wetlands of International ly/1HIU7PR as Waterfowl Habitat.” Importance. The Federal government can also nominate sites, such as Nine Criteria for “Wetlands • The Ramsar Convention provides a National Parks, National Forests, or of International Importance” framework for voluntary international National Wildlife Refuges. Designation: cooperation for wetland conservation. A wetland should be considered • A written agreement is required internationally important if it meets • The U.S. acceded to the Ramsar from all landowners and a Member Convention April 18, 1987. any one of the following criteria. The of Congress representing the site: geographic area. What Ramsar Does: 1. contains a representative, rare, • Recognizes wetlands’ importance to Nomination package or unique example of a natural communities, cultures, governments, The petitioner must submit a complete or near-natural wetland type and businesses and encourages nomination package to the Director, found within the appropriate wetland conservation and wise use of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), biogeographic region; or wetlands. 1849 C Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20006, with a copy to the Global 2. supports vulnerable, endangered, • Establishes criteria for designating Program, Division of International or critically endangered species rivers, marshes, coral reefs and other Conservation, FWS.
    [Show full text]
  • Caddo Lake Watershed and Environmental Flows
    Caddo Lake Watershed And Environmental Flows Red River Valley Association Meeting June 1, 2016 Richard Lowerre Caddo Lake Institute Focus on Talk Why and How of Restoring and Protecting Instream Flows For Environmental Purposes Caddo Lake Watershed Natural History of Caddo Lake The Great Raft on the Red River About 100 Miles Long, Moving 1 Mile/Year CADDO LAKE INSTITUTE Founded in 1992 by Don Henley A nonprofit corporation for scientific and educational purposes To assist the communities of Caddo Lake to protect the Lake, wetlands and watershed. Ramsar designation Caddo Lake National Wildlife Refuge Protection of Instream or Environmental Flows www.caddolake.us What We Try to Do Assist the local communities with protection of Caddo Lake and thus, its watershed. Obtain Ramsar designation. Convert the Army ammunition plant to a wildlife refuge. Protect the water quality Address the problems of invasive species Assure adequate flows - amount and timing - to Caddo The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands Signed in Ramsar, Iran in 1971 Over 160 Countries Have Joined Over 2000 wetland designated “Wetlands of International Importance,” with 160 million hectares Caddo Lake designated in 1993 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, International Affairs 1. Izembek National Wildlife Refuge(NWR) 2. Forsythe NWR 3. Okefenokee NWR 4. Ash Meadows NWR 5. Everglades National Park 6. Chesapeake Bay Estuarine Complex 7. Cheyenne Bottoms 8. Cache-Lower White Rivers 9. Horicon Marsh 10. Catahoula Lake 11. Delaware Bay Estuary 12. Pelican Island NWR 13. Caddo Lake 14. Connecticut River Estuary 15. Cache River-Cypress Creek Wetlands 16. Sand Lake NWR 17. Bolinas Lagoon 18.
    [Show full text]
  • Ramsar Site Wetlands of International Importance
    Ramsar Site Wetlands of International Importance awainui and Hämäkua @Marsh Complex in Kailua, O‘ahu was designated a Ramsar site in February 2005. Sacred to Hawaiians, Kawainui Marsh is the largest remaining emergent wetland in Hawai‘i and the state’s largest ancient freshwater fishpond. Located in the center of the caldera of the Ko‘olau shield volcano, the marsh today provides primary habitat for four of Hawai‘i’s endemic and endangered waterbirds. The marsh stores surface water and provides flood protection for Kailua town. Ramsar Hämäkua Marsh is a smaller wetland that is historically connected to the adjacent Kawainui Marsh. It also provides significant habitat for Hawai‘i’s endangered waterbirds. ostering worldwide wetland conservation is ;the primary goal of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. First signed in 1971, this international treaty promotes conservation activities that also incorporate human use. Participation in the Convention brings nations together to improve wetland management for the benefit of people and wildlife and promote biological diversity. www.ramsar.org www.ramsarcommittee.us he Ramsar designation for the IKawainui and Hämäkua Marsh Complex was accomplished through the efforts of many community groups, especially Hawaii’s Thousand Friends, and government agencies, such as U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. • Kawainui-Hämäkua Marsh is the largest existing wetland in Hawai‘i, encompassing 850 acres from Maunawili Valley toward Kailua Bay. • Kawainui was developed as a 450- he Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International acre fishpond by the Hawaiians Importance promotes wetland conservation throughout the who settled the Kailua ahupua‘a. T world. There are more than 1,600 Ramsar sites in over 150 • The Kawainui-Hämäkua Marsh countries, including 22 sites in the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Cheyenne Bottoms Wildlife Area Location
    OTHER ACTIVITIES Fishing at Cheyenne Bottoms is limited mainly to carp and bullheads. Occasionally channel cat, crappie and largemouth bass are found if several years of water is maintained. heyenne Trapping is permitted on the wildlife area. Special permit CC heyenne Bottoms Wildlife Kansas acquired the land, and dikes ovation effort also provided increased are required and available at the area office free of charge. Area lies two miles east of were constructed to impound water in water conservation to better meet Trapping is not permitted at any time in the refuge area nor CU.S. Highway 281, midway five pools. Canals and dams were built wildlife needs during dry periods. during waterfowl seasons. between Great Bend and Hoisington. to divert water from the nearby Manipulation of water levels in the ottoms Access is also available from K-156, Arkansas River and Wet Walnut Creek pools is a major tool in managing the GENERAL REGULATIONS BB or by turning off K-4 Highway at to supplement water provided by two marsh for water birds. Each year, one Vehicles are permitted only on established roads and parking Redwing. It is owned by the people of intermittent streams, Blood and or more of the pools is drained as areas. Kansas and managed by the Deception creeks. deemed necessary. Often these areas Camping is permitted only in the primitive campground Wildlife Area Department of Wildlife and Parks. During the 1990s, extensive renova- are seeded to millet and/or wheat and located 1 mile west of the area office. The 19,857-acre area is part of a tion divided some of the pools.
    [Show full text]
  • Cheyenne Bottoms Wildlife Area
    CHEYENNE BOTTOMS WILDLIFE AREA 2010-2014 MANAGEMENT PLAN 1 INTRODUCTION Cheyenne Bottoms is a natural land sink located in Barton County, Kansas (Fig. 1). The entire basin is approximately 41,000 acres in size. A detailed description of the soils and geology can be found in Dodge et al. (1981) and Vogler et al. (1987). About 20,000 acres of this basin is deeded to the state and managed by the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks (KDWP) as Cheyenne Bottoms Wildlife Area (CHBW). An additional 7,000 acres is owned and managed by The Nature Conservancy. The Bottoms is home to numerous species of birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, fish, invertebrates and plants. Habitats found there include farm land, creek beds, shelter belts and marsh. Of the 417 species of birds documented in Kansas, a minimum of 328 have been observed at the Bottoms. Among these are threatened or endangered species such as the piping plover, least tern, whooping crane, bald eagle and peregrine falcon. The International Shorebird Survey (Manomet Bird Observatory) estimates that approximately 45% of North America's shorebird population stops at Cheyenne Bottoms when migrating north in spring. Waterfowl numbers can approach several hundred thousand. Cheyenne Bottoms, like all wetlands, has direct economic value to society. Visitors to Cheyenne Bottoms make significant contributions to the economic health of surrounding communities, Barton County, and the State of Kansas. According to Sicilian and Coleman (1987) total economic impact of Cheyenne Bottoms on the State's economy is over $2.8 million annually. The impact on Barton County alone is in excess of $1.8 million.
    [Show full text]
  • Cheyenne Bottoms Reptiles and Amphibians
    Amphibians FROGS & TOADS Great Plains Toad CHEYENNE Cheyenne Bottoms Wildlife Area is Anaxyrus cognatus home to at least nine species of Woodhouse’s Toad BOTTOMS amphibians. Additional species may Anaxyrus woodhousii occur at the Bottoms but have not yet Blanchard’s Cricket Frog been observed. Acris blanchardi The name "amphibian" comes from the Greek root words "amphi" meaning Boreal Chorus Frog "both" and "bios" meaning "life", which Pseudacris maculata refers to all amphibians' lifestyles of living Western Narrow-mouthed Toad Gastrophryne olivacea both in water and on land. While some WESTERN TIGER SALAMANDER amphibians can live away from water Plains Leopard Frog (terrestrial), they require water (aquatic) Lithobates blairi for at least part of their life cycle. American Bullfrog All Kansas amphibians deposit eggs Lithobates catesbeianus Reptiles,TurtlesReptiles,Turtles in water, which hatch into aquatic larvae. Plains Spadefoot && Toad and frog larvae are called tadpoles, Spea bombifrons salamanders are referred to as larva. Some salamander larvae can remain in AmphibiansAmphibians that stage for their entire lives, but most SALAMANDERS larvae (including tadpoles) eventually Western Tiger Salamander metamorphose (change) into adults. Ambystoma mavortium Adult frogs and salamanders tend to stay near water and have very thin, moist Thanks to Curtis Schmidt at the skin, while toads, with thicker, dry skin, Sternberg Museum of Natural History and can venture further from water. Frogs and Curtis Wolf at Kansas Wetland Education Center toads can be distinguished by their calls, for expertise in updating this list. and can be heard in the wetlands, PLAINS LEOPARD FROG Funded in part by your especially immediately after spring and hunting license dollars and Cheyenne Bottoms summer rains.
    [Show full text]