Invasive Species

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Invasive Species Amy Dewees ENVS 685 August 19, 2006 Invasive Species This paper will describe what invasive species are, how they spread to new habitats, and show why they are detrimental to these invaded habitats. The impact two invasive species, kudzu and English starlings, have on ecosystems in North America will also be explained in more detail. Introduced species are species that are not native to an area, but have been transported into a habitat that is not natural to them. Other terms for introduced species are exotics, non-native, and - if they take over an area- invasive species. Not every species that is introduced becomes invasive. According to the “Tens Rule” only one out of every ten imported species escapes into the wild and only one out of every ten of those species becomes established. Once established, these non-natives spread naturally on their own, often reduce the biodiversity of their new habitats because they are able to out compete native species for resources. Non-native species are a large threat to biodiversity. There are various ways that invasive species can be introduced to an area. Some of these species are deliberately introduced. Examples of these species are European starlings, kudzu, African honeybees, and the mongoose in Hawaii. Some species arrive to new habitats in the ballast of ships. Zebra mussels were introduced into the Great Lakes and subsequently spread through the river systems of the central United States, where they have greatly reduced populations of phytoplankton and zooplankton. Some species are pets that have been released by their owners or have escaped from captivity. The gypsy moth escaped from a Boston laboratory and has devastated forests in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. The nutria was brought into North America from South America to be used in fur trade, but the efforts were unsuccessful and the nutria were released. Since their release in 1899, they have spread into 22 states. Various species can be spread into new habitats by being carried with cargo. Norway rats, native to Asia, can now be found throughout the world. Loss of biodiversity is the largest ecological threat associated with introduced species. Introduced species can carry new diseases to which native species have no immunity. An example is the chestnut blight, a fungus that decimated the American chestnut. Chestnut blight is believed to have been carried by Chestnut trees imported from Asia. Introduced species may also prey upon native species, reducing their numbers. An example of this can be found on Guam, where the brown tree snake has devastated the native bird species which evolved without the influence of snakes and, as a result, had no defenses against snakes. Five of the eight native species have become extinct because of these (accidentally) introduced snakes. Introduced species may simply out-compete native species because the factors that control their populations in their native habitats, such as predators, parasites or other pathogens, climate conditions or geologic formations, are not present. Kudzu ( Pueraria Montana ) is sometimes called the “vine that ate the south,” “mile-a-minute vine,” and “foot-a-night vine.” It is a semi-woody, climbing, perennial vine that is in the pea family. It is a deciduous plant with broad leaves that can measure up to four inches across. It produces purple flowers and seeds in pods. It is indigenous to Southern and Eastern Asia. In its natural habitat, numerous natural enemies, including species of insect and fungus, keep the population in check. Kudzu was introduced to the United States at the Philadelphia Centennial Exposition in 1876 and was promoted as an ornamental plant and forage crop. In 1935 the Soil Conservation Service began promoting its use to stop soil erosion along irrigation ditches, farmland, and railroad beds. In 1953, the United States Department of Agriculture recognized it as a pest weed because of its prolific spread. It can be found in much of the Southeastern United States, with severe infestations in Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia, where it can grow almost anywhere over almost anything; along road banks, fields, forests, over buildings, roads, and telephone poles. Under the best conditions, it can grow as much as a foot a day. Its success in the United States can be attributed to various factors, including a lack of natural enemies. In its natural habitat in China, at least 25 species of insects have been found to feed on kudzu as well as six fungal pathogens that attack it. No such enemies are known to exist in the United States but studies are being conducted to determine if some of these insects or fungi from China could be introduced to help control the spread of kudzu in the United States. People in China also use it as a source of medicine and food. It produces large tubers, similar to potatoes that have various uses. Another reason for its success is its ability to reproduce. In the United States, kudzu produces seeds that are usually not viable because there are no insects that pollinate the flowers, but it is very effective at using vegetative means for reproduction. It puts out runners that root and grow. It produces large tubers that can survive repeated applications of herbicides and frost. Because of its quick growth, it can take over areas, killing off other vegetation because it blocks the light needed for photosynthesis and greatly reducing the biodiversity of the area. The English starling ( Sturnus vulgaris ) is also known as the European starling and the common starling. It is about the size of a robin, but the tail is smaller. They are iridescent black with hints of green and purple. English starlings develop white spots on their plumage in the fall, which fades by during the winter. In March, their bills change from black to yellow (Stevens, 1997). The English starling is native to Europe, Asia, and North Africa, but has spread throughout the world, becoming established in New Zealand, Australia, South Africa and North America. The North American starling population originated from approximately 100 birds that were released in Central Park in the early 1890’s in an attempt to introduce all the birds mentioned in Shakespeare’s works to North America. The introduction of the starlings was very successful; the current population is estimated to be 150-200 million birds. One reason for the success of the English starlings is that they are habitat generalists: they are prolific in their natural habitat and tend to form large flocks that can number over 1,000. In their natural and introduced habitats, they are able to exploit a variety of food sources, including invertebrates, fruits, and seeds; they are successful in many different habitats including fields, marshes, agricultural fields, garbage dumps, sewage treatment plants, and cities. Because of their numbers, they can be extremely destructive and will compete with livestock for their feed and strip a field of any seeds that have been sown. They also destroy berry and fruit crops. Starlings are very aggressive and will drive birds (including native species) out of their nests so they can occupy the nesting site. Their nests of choice are in hollows of trees, such as those carved out by woodpeckers, but they will roost in buildings, in bird houses, under shingles, on cliff faces or in cracks in buildings. The aggressive nature of the starlings for nesting space has had a great impact on many bird species that are native to North America, including the eastern bluebird, tree swallows, woodpeckers, and flickers. The introduction of non-native species into new habitats is a global concern. Introduced species are affecting native ecosystems, causing native species to become endangered or extinct. The disappearance of the native species may have severe consequences for other organisms that rely on them. Works Cited Anderson, S., Beiswenger, R., & Purdom, P. (1993). Environmental science fourth edition . New York: Macmillan Publishing Company. Britton, Kerry (1999, September). International program news- the search for natural enemies for kudzu. Retrieved August 19, 2006, from USDA Forest Service Web site: http://www.fs.fed.us/global/news/oldnewsletters/september99/nlbody1099.htm Bryant, Peter J. (2004). Exotic Species. Retrieved August 20, 2006, from Biodiversity and Conservation Web site: http://darwin.bio.uci.edu/~sustain/bio65/lec14/b65lec14.htm#_EXOTIC_SPECIES Jones, Abb (1997, November 9). Stowaway snakes deplete bird population on Guam. Retrieved August 19, 2006, from CNNinteractive Web site: http://www.cnn.com/EARTH/9611/09/guam.snakes/index.html Stevens, Clarence (1997). European starling. Retrieved August 19, 2006, from Backyard Birds of Winter of Nova Scotia Web site: http://museum.gov.ns.ca/mnh/nature/winbirds/colour/c36.htm Van Driesche, R. (2002). Kudzu. Retrieved August 18, 2006, from Invasive and exotic species Web site: http://www.invasive.org/eastern/biocontrol/25Kudzu.html Westbrooks, Randy Forests. Retrieved August 11, 2006, from Invasive Plant Fact Bood Web site: https://www.denix.osd.mil/denix/Public/ES-Programs/Conservation/Invasive/forests.html#kudzu (2006, March 3). Introduced Species. Retrieved August 11, 2006, from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Web site: http://www.epa.gov/maia/html/intro-species.html (2006, July 6). Invasive species: animals- european strarling. Retrieved August 19, 2006, from United States Department of Agriculture Web site: http://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/animals/eurostarling.shtml .
Recommended publications
  • 1 ID Euring Latin Binomial English Name Phenology Galliformes
    BIRDS OF METAURO RIVER: A GREAT ORNITHOLOGICAL DIVERSITY IN A SMALL ITALIAN URBANIZING BIOTOPE, REQUIRING GREATER PROTECTION 1 SUPPORTING INFORMATION / APPENDICE Check list of the birds of Metauro river (mouth and lower course / Fano, PU), up to September 2020. Lista completa delle specie ornitiche del fiume Metauro (foce e basso corso /Fano, PU), aggiornata ad Settembre 2020. (*) In the study area 1 breeding attempt know in 1985, but in particolar conditions (Pandolfi & Giacchini, 1985; Poggiani & Dionisi, 1988a, 1988b, 2019). ID Euring Latin binomial English name Phenology GALLIFORMES Phasianidae 1 03700 Coturnix coturnix Common Quail Mr, B 2 03940 Phasianus colchicus Common Pheasant SB (R) ANSERIFORMES Anatidae 3 01690 Branta ruficollis The Red-breasted Goose A-1 (2012) 4 01610 Anser anser Greylag Goose Mi, Wi 5 01570 Anser fabalis Tundra/Taiga Bean Goose Mi, Wi 6 01590 Anser albifrons Greater White-fronted Goose A – 4 (1986, february and march 2012, 2017) 7 01520 Cygnus olor Mute Swan Mi 8 01540 Cygnus cygnus Whooper Swan A-1 (1984) 9 01730 Tadorna tadorna Common Shelduck Mr, Wi 10 01910 Spatula querquedula Garganey Mr (*) 11 01940 Spatula clypeata Northern Shoveler Mr, Wi 12 01820 Mareca strepera Gadwall Mr, Wi 13 01790 Mareca penelope Eurasian Wigeon Mr, Wi 14 01860 Anas platyrhynchos Mallard SB, Mr, W (R) 15 01890 Anas acuta Northern Pintail Mi, Wi 16 01840 Anas crecca Eurasian Teal Mr, W 17 01960 Netta rufina Red-crested Pochard A-4 (1977, 1994, 1996, 1997) 18 01980 Aythya ferina Common Pochard Mr, W 19 02020 Aythya nyroca Ferruginous
    [Show full text]
  • Best of the Baltic - Bird List - July 2019 Note: *Species Are Listed in Order of First Seeing Them ** H = Heard Only
    Best of the Baltic - Bird List - July 2019 Note: *Species are listed in order of first seeing them ** H = Heard Only July 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th 13th 14th 15th 16th 17th Mute Swan Cygnus olor X X X X X X X X Whopper Swan Cygnus cygnus X X X X Greylag Goose Anser anser X X X X X Barnacle Goose Branta leucopsis X X X Tufted Duck Aythya fuligula X X X X Common Eider Somateria mollissima X X X X X X X X Common Goldeneye Bucephala clangula X X X X X X Red-breasted Merganser Mergus serrator X X X X X Great Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo X X X X X X X X X X Grey Heron Ardea cinerea X X X X X X X X X Western Marsh Harrier Circus aeruginosus X X X X White-tailed Eagle Haliaeetus albicilla X X X X Eurasian Coot Fulica atra X X X X X X X X Eurasian Oystercatcher Haematopus ostralegus X X X X X X X Black-headed Gull Chroicocephalus ridibundus X X X X X X X X X X X X European Herring Gull Larus argentatus X X X X X X X X X X X X Lesser Black-backed Gull Larus fuscus X X X X X X X X X X X X Great Black-backed Gull Larus marinus X X X X X X X X X X X X Common/Mew Gull Larus canus X X X X X X X X X X X X Common Tern Sterna hirundo X X X X X X X X X X X X Arctic Tern Sterna paradisaea X X X X X X X Feral Pigeon ( Rock) Columba livia X X X X X X X X X X X X Common Wood Pigeon Columba palumbus X X X X X X X X X X X Eurasian Collared Dove Streptopelia decaocto X X X Common Swift Apus apus X X X X X X X X X X X X Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica X X X X X X X X X X X Common House Martin Delichon urbicum X X X X X X X X White Wagtail Motacilla alba X X
    [Show full text]
  • Birdwatching Bingo Identification Sheet Hey Everyone! I Hope You Have Fun Playing Birdwatching Bingo with Your Family
    Birdwatching Bingo Identification Sheet Hey Everyone! I hope you have fun playing Birdwatching Bingo with your family. You can even share it with friends and do it over social media. To help you on your adventure, here is an identification sheet with all the different birds listed on your bingo card. With the help of this sheet and some binoculars, you will be on your way to becoming a fantastic birdwatcher. Most of these birds you can see visiting a birdfeeder, but some you might have to go on a walk and look for with a parent. To play, download and print the bingo cards for each player. Using pennies, pieces of paper, or even a pencil, mark the card when you see and identify the different birds. Don’t be frustrated if you don’t finish the game in one sitting, this game might be completed over a couple days. A great tool to help with IDing birds is the app MERLIN. This is a free bird ID app for your phone from the Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology. The website, www.allaboutbirds.org, is a great source too. Blue Jay - Scientific Name: Cyanocitta cristata - Identifiable Markings: o Blue above, light grey below. Black and white markings on wings and tail. Larger than a robin, smaller than a crow. Crest and long tail. - Photo: Females/Males Look Similar Brown-headed Cowbird - Scientific Name: Molothrus ater - Identifiable Markings: o Stout bill. Short tail and stocky body. Males are glossy black with chocolate brown head. Females are grey-brown overall, without bold streaks, but slightly paler throat.
    [Show full text]
  • Are European Starlings Breeding in the Azores Archipelago Genetically Distinct from Birds Breeding in Mainland Europe? Verónica C
    Are European starlings breeding in the Azores archipelago genetically distinct from birds breeding in mainland Europe? Verónica C. Neves, Kate Griffiths, Fiona R. Savory, Robert W. Furness, Barbara K. Mable To cite this version: Verónica C. Neves, Kate Griffiths, Fiona R. Savory, Robert W. Furness, Barbara K. Mable. Are European starlings breeding in the Azores archipelago genetically distinct from birds breeding in mainland Europe?. European Journal of Wildlife Research, Springer Verlag, 2009, 56 (1), pp.95-100. 10.1007/s10344-009-0316-x. hal-00535248 HAL Id: hal-00535248 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00535248 Submitted on 11 Nov 2010 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Eur J Wildl Res (2010) 56:95–100 DOI 10.1007/s10344-009-0316-x SHORT COMMUNICATION Are European starlings breeding in the Azores archipelago genetically distinct from birds breeding in mainland Europe? Verónica C. Neves & Kate Griffiths & Fiona R. Savory & Robert W. Furness & Barbara K. Mable Received: 6 May 2009 /Revised: 5 August 2009 /Accepted: 11 August 2009 /Published online: 29 August 2009 # Springer-Verlag 2009 Abstract The European starling (Sturnus vulgaris) has Keywords Azores .
    [Show full text]
  • Niche Analysis and Conservation of Bird Species Using Urban Core Areas
    sustainability Article Niche Analysis and Conservation of Bird Species Using Urban Core Areas Vasilios Liordos 1,* , Jukka Jokimäki 2 , Marja-Liisa Kaisanlahti-Jokimäki 2, Evangelos Valsamidis 1 and Vasileios J. Kontsiotis 1 1 Department of Forest and Natural Environment Sciences, International Hellenic University, 66100 Drama, Greece; [email protected] (E.V.); [email protected] (V.J.K.) 2 Arctic Centre, University of Lapland, 96101 Rovaniemi, Finland; jukka.jokimaki@ulapland.fi (J.J.); marja-liisa.kaisanlahti@ulapland.fi (M.-L.K.-J.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: Knowing the ecological requirements of bird species is essential for their successful con- servation. We studied the niche characteristics of birds in managed small-sized green spaces in the urban core areas of southern (Kavala, Greece) and northern Europe (Rovaniemi, Finland), during the breeding season, based on a set of 16 environmental variables and using Outlying Mean Index, a multivariate ordination technique. Overall, 26 bird species in Kavala and 15 in Rovaniemi were recorded in more than 5% of the green spaces and were used in detailed analyses. In both areas, bird species occupied different niches of varying marginality and breadth, indicating varying responses to urban environmental conditions. Birds showed high specialization in niche position, with 12 species in Kavala (46.2%) and six species in Rovaniemi (40.0%) having marginal niches. Niche breadth was narrower in Rovaniemi than in Kavala. Species in both communities were more strongly associated either with large green spaces located further away from the city center and having a high vegetation cover (urban adapters; e.g., Common Chaffinch (Fringilla coelebs), European Greenfinch (Chloris Citation: Liordos, V.; Jokimäki, J.; chloris Cyanistes caeruleus Kaisanlahti-Jokimäki, M.-L.; ), Eurasian Blue Tit ( )) or with green spaces located closer to the city center Valsamidis, E.; Kontsiotis, V.J.
    [Show full text]
  • Science for Saving Species Research Findings Factsheet Project 4.2
    Science for Saving Species Research findings factsheet Project 4.2 Assessing the impacts of invasive species: Hollow-nesting birds in Tasmania In brief Background Predicting the impacts of invasive Invasive alien birds are found explore the known and theoretical species is difficult at large spatial across many areas of Australia. interaction network between the scales. This is because the interactions Many of these introduced birds cavity breeding birds in Tasmania, between invasive species and native use cavities, an important breeding and to identify which native species species vary across different species, resource for cavity nesting species. are likely impacted by the addition between different locations, over In Tasmania alone there are 27 of non-native species. time and in relation to other pressures species of hollow-nesting birds, We discovered that, overall, such as habitat loss, extensive fires, including three threatened species native hollow-nesting species climatic events and drought. and seven invasive hollow-nesting are likely facing increased levels bird species. The logging of big old Given that conservation and of competition for nesting sites trees with cavities and the addition management work is almost always as a result of non-native species of invasive species has likely led conducted under limited budgets and introductions. Such competition to increased competition over time, being able to quantify where is likely to decrease breeding the limited resource. However, and when invasive species are having opportunities for native species, the impact of most of these a significant impact on local species including some of Tasmania’s invasive species has not been is vital for effectively managing and threatened and endemic species.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Preservation of the Beak in Confuciusornis (Aves: Pygostylia)
    diversity Article On the Preservation of the Beak in Confuciusornis (Aves: Pygostylia) Amanda Falk 1, Jingmai O’Connor 2,3,* , Min Wang 2,3 and Zhonghe Zhou 2,3,* 1 Biology Department, Centre College, 600 W. Walnut St. Danville, KY 40422, USA; [email protected] 2 Key Laboratory of Vertebrate Evolution and Human Origins of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Beijing 100044, China; [email protected] 3 CAS Center for Excellence in Life and Paleoenvironment, Beijing 10010, China * Correspondence: [email protected] (J.O.); [email protected] (Z.Z.) Received: 27 October 2019; Accepted: 10 November 2019; Published: 11 November 2019 Abstract: The Confuciusornithiformes represent the most stem-ward avian occurrence of an edentulous rostrum. Although a keratinous beak is widely considered to have covered the rostrum in confuciusornithiforms, this feature is almost never preserved, having been previously reported only in the holotype of Confuciusornis dui and the holotype of Eoconfuciusornis zhengi. This strongly contrasts with the widespread preservation of the keratinous sheaths that cover the manual and pedal ungual phalanges. Here, we report on a third occurrence of a preserved rhamphotheca in a specimen of Confuciusornis sanctus. We illuminated the preserved traces using laser-stimulated fluorescence. Similarly to E. zhengi, the rhamphotheca has been preserved only as a two-dimensional trace, whereas ungual sheaths are preserved in three dimensions. In contrast to the traces preserved in C. dui, the rhamphotheca in the discussed specimen of C. sanctus is straight rather than upturned. This hints towards hidden morphological diversity within the thousands of Confuciusornis specimens, in which species may be further differentiated by soft tissue features or behaviors, much like many living birds, that cannot be detected in fossils, even with exceptional preservation.
    [Show full text]
  • 416 Common Starling Put Your Logo Here
    Javier Blasco-Zumeta & Gerd-Michael Heinze Sponsor is needed. Write your name here 416 Common Starling Put your logo here Common Starling. Spring. Adult. Male (23-V). COMMON STARLING (Sturnus vulga- ris ) IDENTIFICATION Common Starling. 20-22 cm. Black plumage, with purple, green Spring. Adult. Pattern of and blue gloss in breeding plumage; strongly wing, breast and upper- spotted pale in winter; yellow bill in breeders, parts. dark in winter; short tail. Wing formula : the 9th primary is the longest (sometimes 8th and 9th similar). Juveniles are grey brown; pale superci- lium poorly pronounced; cheek mottled dark. 9ª 8ª 9ª 8ª 7ª 7ª Common Starling. Juvenile. Wing formula and head pattern. Common Starling. Win- ter. Wing formula and pattern of breast and upperparts. http://blascozumeta.com Write your website here Page 1 Javier Blasco-Zumeta & Gerd-Michael Heinze Sponsor is needed. Write your name here 416 Common Starling Put your logo here SIMILAR SPECIES Recalls that of a male Blackbird which has lon- ger tail and lacks glossy plumage or white spots. Spotless Starling is very similar but lacks green and purple gloss in breeding plumage and wing feathers lacks buff edges. Juvenile of Spotless Starling is almost indistinguishable by plumage but with pale supercilium quite pro- nounced and cheek poorly mottled dark; wing formula is different being the 8th primary the Spotless Starling. 9ª Blackbird. Male 8 7 Spotless Starling. Winter. Spotless Starling. Juvenile.Wing formula and head pattern. 9ª 8ª SEXING In breeding season, base of the lower mandible is 7ª grey-blue in males and white-pinkish in females .
    [Show full text]
  • Common Urban Birds
    Common Urban Birds Crested Pigeon Spotted Turtle Dove* Feral Pigeon* Noisy Miner New Holland Eastern Spinebill White-plumed Honeyeater Honeyeater JS SW SW SW SW JS JS (Crest on head) (White spots on neck) (Dark grey feathers usually with a (Black head, yellow around eyes) (Black and yellow wings, Black and (Black, white and reddish-brown (White lines on neck) shiny green neck) white striped chest) feathers) Nectarivore & Granivore Granivore Granivore Nectarivore & Insectivore Nectarivore & Insectivore Nectarivore & Insectivore q q q q Insectivore,Omnivore q q q X Ground X Trees,Shrubs,Ground X Ground X Trees,Shrubs,Ground,Air X Trees,Shrubs,Air X Shrubs,Air X Trees,Shrubs,Ground,Air Red Wattlebird Little Wattlebird Striated Pardalote Welcome Swallow House Sparrow* Silvereye Willie Wagtail JS SW JH SW JMG JT JS (Yellow-orange belly, red wattles) (No orange on belly, no wattles) (Yellow face, black & white (Flies around ovals and other (Very small) (Silver ring around eye) (Black and white, tail wags from streaked crown, white wing streaks grassed areas, forked tail) side to side) with red spot) Nectarivore & Nectarivore & Insectivore Nectarivore & Insectivore Insectivore Granivore Omnivore Insectivore q q q Insectivore,Insectivore q q q q X Trees,Shrubs,Air X Trees,Shrubs,Air X Trees,Shrubs X Air X Ground X Trees,Shrubs X Ground,Air Common Blackbird* Common Starling* Australian Magpie Magpie-lark Little Raven Laughing Nankeen Kestrel Kookaburra JS JS JG JS JS JG JS (Smaller beak and body than (Breeding male black with bright yellow (Dark
    [Show full text]
  • Contrasting Population Trends of Common Starlings (Sturnus Vulgaris) Across Europe
    Ornis Fennica 96: 153–168. 2019 Contrasting population trends of Common Starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) across Europe Henning Heldbjerg*, Anthony D. Fox, Aleksi Lehikoinen, Peter Sunde, Ainars Aunins, Dawn E. Balmer, Gianpiero Calvi, Tomasz Chodkiewicz, Przemek Chylarecki, Virginia Escandell, Ruud Foppen, Anna Gamero, Iordan Hristov, Magne Husby, Frederic Jiguet, Primo Kmecl, John A. Kålås, Lesley J. Lewis, Åke Lindström, Charlotte Moshøj, Renno Nellis, Jean-Y. Paquet, Danae Portolou, Jozef Ridzoò, Hans Schmid, Jana Skorpilová, Zoltán D. Szabó, Tibor Szép, Norbert Teufelbauer, Sven Trautmann, Chris van Turnhout, Zdenìk Vermouzek, Petr Voøíšek & Anne Weiserbs H. Heldbjerg, A.D. Fox & P. Sunde, Department for Bioscience, Aarhus University, Grenåvej 14, 8410 Rønde, Denmark. * Corresponding author’s e-mail: [email protected] H. Heldbjerg & Charlotte Moshøj, DOF BirdLife Denmark, Vesterbrogade 140, 1620 Copenhagen, Denmark A. Aunins, Department of Zoology and Animal Ecology, Faculty of Biology, University of Latvia; Jelgavas Street 1, Riga, LV-1004, Latvia and Latvian Ornithological Society, Skolas iela 3, Riga, LV-1010, Latvia D.E. Balmer, British Trust for Ornithology, The Nunnery, Thetford, Norfolk, IP24 2PU, UK G. Calvi, Italian Common Breeding Bird Monitoring Programme, Studio Pteryx, Via Risorgimento 9, 20060 Basiano, Italy T. Chodkiewicz, Museum & Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Wilcza 64, 00-679 Warszawa, Poland and Polish Society for the Protection of Birds (OTOP), ul. Odrowaza 24, 05-270 Marki, Poland P. Chylarecki, Museum
    [Show full text]
  • Ecology and Management of the Common Starling (Sturnus Vulgaris) in the Mclaren Vale Region
    Ecology and Management of the Common Starling (Sturnus vulgaris) in the McLaren Vale Region FINAL REPORT to GRAPE AND WINE RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Project Number: UA 01/05 Principal Investigator(s): David C Paton, Ronald G Sinclair & Christina M Bentz Research Organisation: University of Adelaide Date: August 19, 2005 PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com Title page PRIMARY SUPERVISOR: DR DAVID C. PATON Environmental Biology, Benham Bldg DP312 School of Earth & Environmental Sciences University of Adelaide Adelaide, SA 5005 Ph (08) 8303 4742 Fax (08) 8303 6222 Email [email protected] CO-SUPERVISOR: DR RONALD G. SINCLAIR Senior Research Officer Animal & Plant Control Group Department of Water, Land & Biodiversity Conservation GPO BOX 2834 Adelaide, South Australia 5001 Ph (08) 8303 9506 Fax (08) 8303 9555 Email [email protected] CHIEF INVESTIGATOR: CHRISTINA BENTZ, M.SC. PhD Candidate Environmental Biology, Benham Bldg DP312 School of Earth & Environmental Sciences University of Adelaide Adelaide, SA 5005 Ph (08) 8303 3998 Mob (04) 2215 0586 Fax (08) 8303 6222 Email [email protected] 2 PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com Table of Contents 1. Abstract.......................................................................................................................5 2. Executive summary.....................................................................................................6 2.1. Practical implications....................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • COR 089-2015, Starling Trapping Program
    Se '~A COUNCIL REPORT ABBOTSFORD Report No. COR 089-2015 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Date: December 10, 2015 File No: 3900-20 To: Mayor and Council From: Bill Flitton, Director, Legislative Services/City Clerk Subject: Starling Trapping Program RECOMMENDATIONS 1. THAT the City of Abbotsford contribute $30,000 for a pilot Starling Management Program, operated by the local berry farming industry; 2. THAT staff be directed to engage the BC Blueberry Council, the BC Blueberry Growers Association, and other relevant agencies, to implement an industry operated Starling Management Program; and 3. THAT the operators of the program be requested to report back to Council in the Fall of 2016 regarding the effectiveness of the program. SUMMARY OF THE ISSUE Council, in March 2015, adopted an Audible Bird Scare Device Bylaw to deter Starlings from damaging crops; however, audible bird scare devices have limited effect on Starlings. Other options to deter Starlings include other bird scare devices or trapping of live birds. In February 2015, when considering further amendments and Three Readings of the Audible Bird Scare Device Bylaw, Council directed staff to report back to Council on a strategy on trapping juvenile Starlings. Staff waited until the end of the season and confirmation of trapping results before bringing forward a Starling trapping update to Council. BACKGROUND Starlings were originally a non-native species of bird to North America until in the late 1800s when some were released in Central Park in New York as part of the promotion of a William Shakespeare play. Eventually Starlings migrated to the west. Starlings began to re-emerge, after a brief absence, in the Pacific Northwest in the 1940s and now number in the millions.
    [Show full text]