DOCSLIB.ORG

Attachment 82.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Attachment 82.Pdf Biological Conservation 84 (1998) 35--45 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd Printed in Great Britain PII: S0006-3207(97)00077-3 0006-3207/98 $19.00+0.00 !IELSEVIER LIFE-HISTORY AND VIABILITY ANALYSIS OF THE ENDANGERED HAWAIIAN STILT J. Michael Reed,a* Chris S. Elphickb & Lewis W. OringC °Biological Resources Research Center, University of Nevada, Reno, 1000 Valley Rd, Reno, NV 89512 USA bEcology, Evolution, and Conservation Biology Program, University of Nevada, Reno, 1000 Valley Rd, Reno, NV 89512 USA C Ecology, Evolution, and Conservation Biology Program, and Department ofEnvironmental and Resource Sciences, University ofNevada, Reno, 1000 Valley Rd, Reno, NV 89512 USA (Received 15 July 1996; revised version received 24 May 1997; accepted 29 May 1997) [Hawaiian] stilt, ... .A very fine endemic bird which INTRODUCTION should not be allowed to become extinct or even rare. (Munro, (1946; p.46» Two primary problems in conservation biology are identifying species at risk of extinction and determining what can be done to reduce that risk. Population viabi­ Abstract lity analysis (PVA) is a tool that can be used to address The Hawaiian stilt Himantopus mexicanus knudseni is both problems. Using life-history data and their rela­ an endangered, endemic subspecies of black-necked stilt. tionships with environmental factors, PVA is used to We present life-history data required to perform popula­ estimate persistence probabilities of populations under tion viability analysis (PVA), and the results of a series different conditions (Shaffer, 1981; Salwasser et al., 1984; of PVAs under two scenarios, treating (a) the subspecies Gilpin and Soule, 1986; Marcot et al., 1986; Reed et al., as a single population, and (b) six subpopulations as a 1988; Woodruff, 1989; see Boyce, 1992 for a review). metapopulation. We performed sensitivity analyses on Data inadequacies and simplifying assumptions can model parameters and used results to address various limit confidence in the specific predictions of viability management options. Both basic models predicted that models (Caughley, 1994; Harcourt, 1995; Taylor, 1995). stilts would increase to fill available habitat with no By varying parameter conditions, however, PYA can be chance of a significant decline. Catastrophe, maximum used to explore the consequences of different manage­ age, and density-dependent reproduction had little effect ment schemes on model popUlation dynamics (Walsh, on population projections. Rapid declines in the probabil­ 1995), thereby providing insight useful to managers. In ity of stilt populations persisting occurred when clutch this paper, we use PYA to estimate extinction risk and to failure rate or first-year mortality rate increased above evaluate management options for an endangered shore­ 70%, or when adult mortality rate increased above 30%. bird, the Hawaiian stilt Himantopus mexicanus knudseni. Model predictions of mean population size at 200 years Hawaiian stilts are a subspecies of the black-necked tracked changes in carrying capacity. If current conditions stilt endemic to the Hawaiian islands. They are signifi­ change such that rates of clutch failure or stilt mortality cantly larger than their North American counterpart increase, population declines and eventual extinction (Coleman, 1981), and differ somewhat in plumage becomes more likely. Managers, therefore, should main­ characteristics (Wilson and Evans, 1893). Hawaiian tain predator control, limit water level fluctuations, and stilts are found on all five major islands (Hawai'i, maintain current habitat area. Downlisting is not war­ Kaua'i, Maui, Moloka'i, O'ahu) although their presence ranted because wetland management and predator control on the island of Hawai'i might be due to recent recolo­ are necessary for Hawaiian stilts to persist. Published by nization after several decades of absence (paton et al., Elsevier Science Ltd 1985; Banko, 1988). Stilts also are found in abundance on Ni'ihau, which shares birds seasonally with Kaua'i, Keywords: Hawaiian stilt, Himantopus, shorebird, and since 1989 on Lana'i at a newly available water extinction, PVA, demographic model. source (Engilis and Pratt, 1993). Hawaiian stilts forage in shallow water and nest on adjacent embankments (Coleman, 1981; Engilis and Reid, 1994). Historic and current population sizes have *To whom correspondence should be addressed at: Depart­ depended partly on certain agricultural practices that ment of Biology, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155, USA, provide breeding and foraging grounds (e.g. taro, sugar Fax: 702-784-4583. cane runoff) (Griffin et al., 1989). Dependence on 35 36 J. M. Reed, C. S. Elphick, L. W.Oring agricultural habitats and practices, coupled with habitat conservation efforts to be focused appropriately. For conversion for housing and business, has resulted in a example, Crouse et at. (1987) found juvenile survival fragmented and reduced wetland landscape, particularly limited adult numbers in loggerhead sea turtles Caretta in coastal wetlands where stilts are confined (Handy and caretta, indicating conservation efforts should focus on Handy, 1972; Shallenberger, 1977; Coleman, 1981; juvenile survival rather than on egg production or hatch Griffin et aI., 1989). success. Because the most sensitive variables require the There are almost no published data on Hawaiian stilt most accurate data, sensitivity analyses also can be used ecology or population biology and only qualitative esti­ to focus researchers' energies on improving estimates of mates of population size before the 1940s. Henshaw, the most important variables (Reed et aI, 1993). We (1902) reported that stilts were common on the island of used results of this analysis to address particular O'ahu in the late 18oos, but by 1900 were very scarce. He management options. attributed the severe decline to overhunting. Although Our final goal (4) was to assess population growth Hawaiian stilt flesh was viewed as being of little value potential. State-wide population size in 1947 was esti­ for food, stilts were hunted even before white settlement mated to be 1000 (Schwartz and Schwartz, 1949). Only (Henshaw, 1902; Handy and Handy, 1972). Hunting six years earlier Munro, (1944) estimated it to be only continued to be legal until 1941 (Schwartz and Schwartz, 200. It has been supposed that Munro's estimate was 1949), and was probably a major factor in keeping low because this rate of growth was viewed as unlikely population sizes low during the late 1930s (Munro, 1938; (e.g., Schwartz and Schwartz, 1949; Fisher, 1951). We Shallenberger, 1977). Munro, (1944) estimated that used our population model to determine whether or not there were approximately 200 individuals in the early growth of this magnitude could have occurred. 1940s. Following cessation of hunting, numbers rose rapidly, and by 1947 there were 1000 individuals (Schwartz and Schwartz, 1949). Since then, Hawaiian METHODS stilt numbers have increased to their current value of approximately 1200 birds (Reed and Oring, 1993). Viability criteria and population structures Little is known of the population structures of We defined a popUlation as safe from extinction if there Hawaiian waterbirds, but evidence suggests that local was less than a 5% probability of its declining signifi­ stilt populations are connected through dispersal (Tel­ cantly in 200 years. Philosophically, we would have fer, 1971, 1972; Pyle, 1978; Telfer and Burr, 1978; preferred having no biologically significant decline as Engilis and Pratt, 1993; Reed et at., 1994). The Hawai­ our criterion, but we believe this cannot be determined a ian stilt population might exist as a metapopulation priori (Reed and Blaustein, 1997). In order to assess (Reed et at., 1994), which adds complexity to popula­ significance of an observed decline, we used a one­ tion processes (e.g. Murphy et at., 1990). Movement tailed, one-sample t-test. Our null hypothesis was that among populations affects demographics, population the population size at the end of 200 years (T = 200) dynamics, and genetics, and is the driving parameter in would be equal to, or greater than, the popUlation size metapopulation models (e.g. Hastings and Wolin, 1989; at the start (T = 0); our alternative hypothesis was that Hansson, 1991; Wu et at., 1993). Little is known about the population size at T = 200 would be significantly Hawaiian stilt dispersal patterns, except that they do less than that at T = O. Target times in population move among wetlands and islands (Munro, 1944; Engi­ projections are arbitrary (cf. Shaffer, 1981), and 200 lis and Pratt, 1993; Reed et al., 1994). years was chosen as a reasonable management time We have several goals in this manuscript: (1) we pre­ frame. Each iteration of a model was treated as a single sent life-history data required for performing popUla­ replicate and 140 iterations were used for each model. tion viability analyses, summarizing data from This sample size gives a statistical test with a power of unpublished studies and supplementing these data with I - {J = 0·80, when a = 0·05 and the desired effect size is our own research; (2) we used VORTEX (Lacy et at., assumed to be small (0·2) (calculated using correction 1995), a stochastic simulation model, to perform popu­ from a two-tailed test; Cohen, 1988 providing a strong, lation viability analyses for the endangered Hawaiian conservative test capable of detecting significant stilt. These analyses were done under two population declines. We ran two basic models using VORTEX structure
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 'Alae 'Ula (Hawaiian Moorhen)
    NATIVE WATERBIRDS AVIAN NEWCOMERS These newly-created wetlands have been rapidly colonized by native waterbirds, Many non-native birds are attracted to the wetland restoration as well. The including four species that are highly endangered and found only in the Hawaiian long-necked white waders are Cattle Egrets, native to the Old World. Non-native Islands. The ‘Alae ‘Ula, or Hawaiian Moorhen (Gallinula chloropus sandvicensis), songbirds include the Common Myna, White-rumped Shama, two unrelated kinds of and Koloa Maoli, or Koloa Duck (Anas wyvilliana), have by now raised many broods cardinals, and three kinds of doves. Many of these exotic species probably became here, nesting among the native sedges. The Ae‘o, or Hawaiian Stilt (Himantopus established in recent decades as escaped cage birds. Before the accidental mexicanus knudseni), and the Nēnē, or Hawaiian Goose (Branta sandvicensis), stop introduction of mosquitoes in the 19th century and bird diseases they carry, by almost daily to rest and feed. In the morning and evening, watch for the ‘Auku‘u these coastal lowlands were home to native honeycreepers and other native or Black-crowned Night Heron (Nycticorax nycticorax). Long-distance migrants such songbirds, preserved abundantly in the fossil record of Makauwahi Cave. as the Kōlea or Pacific Golden Plover Pluvialis( fulva) stop to rest and often winter here, as part of their annual 10,000-mile migration from breeding grounds in the Arctic to wintering sites in the tropics. Bones of all these bird species occur as fossils in the sediment of adjacent Makauwahi Cave, showing that they have thrived here for thousands of years.
    [Show full text]
  • Growth Patterns of Hawaiian Stilt Chicks
    Wilson Bull., 11 l(4), 1999, pp. 478487 GROWTH PATTERNS OF HAWAIIAN STILT CHICKS J. MICHAEL REED,,2,8‘ ELIZABETH M. GRAY,334 DIANNE LEWIS3 LEWIS W. ORING,3 RICHARD COLEMAN,5 TIMOTHY BURR,6 AND PETER LUSCOMB7 ABSTRACT-We studied chick growth and plumage patterns in the endangered Hawaiian Stilt (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni). Body mass of captive chicks closely fit a Gompertz growth curve, revealing a growth coefficient (K) of 0.065 day- ’ and point of inflection (T) of 17 days. When chicks fledged about 28 days after hatching, they weighed only 60% of adult body mass; at 42 d, birds still were only 75% of adult mass; culmen, tarsus, and wing chord at fledging also were less than adult size. This trend of continued growth to adult size after fledging is typical for most shorebirds. After hatching, captive chicks grew more rapidly than wild chicks, probably because of an unlimited food supply. We found no evidence for adverse effects of weather on the growth of wild chicks. As with other shorebirds, the tarsus started relatively long, with culmen and then wing chord growing more rapidly in later development. Tarsal and wing chord growth were sigmoidal, whereas culmen growth was linear. We describe plumage characteristics of weekly age classes of chicks to help researchers age birds in the wild. Received 28 Dec. 1998, accepted 20 April 1999. Avian growth patterns have been studied (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni), a precocial primarily because of their relationships to the bird that is an endangered subspecies of the ecology and evolutionary history of different Black-necked Stilt.
    [Show full text]
  • National Wildlife Refuges Changed2.Pub
    TAKE REFUGE Celebrating 100 Years of Threatened and Endangered Species Protection Through the National Wildlife Refuge System TAKE REFUGE Celebrating 100 Years of Threatened and Endangered Species Protection Through the National Wildlife Refuge System The State Public Interest Research Groups U.S. PIRG Education Fund March 2003 Written and designed by: Shannon Ryan, U.S. PIRG Education Fund For more information: Shannon Ryan U.S. Public Interest Research Group Education Fund 218 D Street, SE, Washington, DC 20003 Copies of this report may be ordered by sending a check or money order for $35.00 to: U.S. PIRG, 218 D Street, SE, Washington, DC 20003 The author would like to thank the following people: Alison Cassady and Tiernan Sittenfeld for research and writing assistance; Alicia Supernavage for production assistance; and refuge staff at Sauta Cave NWR, Buenos Aires NWR, Don Edwards San Francisco Bay NWR, Archie Carr NWR, Ash Meadows NWR, Nestucca Bay NWR, Attwater Prairie Chicken NWR, and James River NWR for their time and expertise. Production of this report would not have been possible without funding from: Center for Biological Diversity Defenders of Wildlife National Wildlife Federation Sierra Club PHOTOGRAPHY CREDITS: Pages 11 & 12: Turtle tracks, Archie Carr NWR (background), Friends of the Carr Refuge. Cover & Back Cover: Lange’s metalmark butterfly, USFWS/David Wright; salt marsh bird’s beak, ©Thomas Oberbauer; sandhill crane, USFWS/D.D. Iwurst; Pages 13 & 14: Crystal Spring, Ash Meadows NWR (background), The Mason Neck NWR (background), Mason Neck Canoe and Kayak. American Southwest. Acknowledgements & Table of Contents: Balcones Canyonlands NWR Pages 15 & 16: Nestucca Bay NWR (background), USFWS/David Pitkin.
    [Show full text]
  • A Habitat Conservation Plan for Hawaiian Stilt at Cyanotech Corporation
    A Habitat Conservation Plan for Hawaiian Stilt at Cyanotech Corporation. Keahole Point, Hawaii. March 2006 through March 2016 April 2006 Prepared by Cyanotech Corporation Kailua-Kona, Hawaii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Cyanotech Corporation (Cyanotech) has applied for a permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) pursuant to section 10(a)(l)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544), as amended, and has applied for a license from the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (HDLNR) in accordance with the HRS (Hawaii Revised Statutes) section 195D-4(g) to incidentally take endangered Hawaiian Stilt (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni). The incidental take is anticipated to occur as a result of ongoing operations and maintenance activities at Cyanotech’s aquaculture facility within the Natural Energy Laboratory of Hawaii (NELHA) along the Kona Coast of the island of Hawaii (Big Island). No other listed, proposed, or candidate species are found in the project area. In support of the permit application, Cyanotech proposes to implement a Conservation Plan as required by section 10(a)(2)(A) of the ESA and the HRS section 195D-21. The proposed permit period is ten years. The primary goal of the Conservation Plan for Hawaiian Stilt at Cyanotech is to eliminate the incidental take of Hawaiian Stilt by eliminating the “attractive nuisance” problem created by the expanse of open-water ponds, invertebrate food resources, and remote nesting areas, which inadvertently attract Hawaiian Stilt to the Cyanotech facility. The purpose of the Conservation Plan is to actively pursue non-lethal bird deterrent measures to reduce and eliminate stilt foraging and nesting at the facility.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Shorebird Profiles
    List of Shorebird Profiles Pacific Central Atlantic Species Page Flyway Flyway Flyway American Oystercatcher (Haematopus palliatus) •513 American Avocet (Recurvirostra americana) •••499 Black-bellied Plover (Pluvialis squatarola) •488 Black-necked Stilt (Himantopus mexicanus) •••501 Black Oystercatcher (Haematopus bachmani)•490 Buff-breasted Sandpiper (Tryngites subruficollis) •511 Dowitcher (Limnodromus spp.)•••485 Dunlin (Calidris alpina)•••483 Hudsonian Godwit (Limosa haemestica)••475 Killdeer (Charadrius vociferus)•••492 Long-billed Curlew (Numenius americanus) ••503 Marbled Godwit (Limosa fedoa)••505 Pacific Golden-Plover (Pluvialis fulva) •497 Red Knot (Calidris canutus rufa)••473 Ruddy Turnstone (Arenaria interpres)•••479 Sanderling (Calidris alba)•••477 Snowy Plover (Charadrius alexandrinus)••494 Spotted Sandpiper (Actitis macularia)•••507 Upland Sandpiper (Bartramia longicauda)•509 Western Sandpiper (Calidris mauri) •••481 Wilson’s Phalarope (Phalaropus tricolor) ••515 All illustrations in these profiles are copyrighted © George C. West, and used with permission. To view his work go to http://www.birchwoodstudio.com. S H O R E B I R D S M 472 I Explore the World with Shorebirds! S A T R ER G S RO CHOOLS P Red Knot (Calidris canutus) Description The Red Knot is a chunky, medium sized shorebird that measures about 10 inches from bill to tail. When in its breeding plumage, the edges of its head and the underside of its neck and belly are orangish. The bird’s upper body is streaked a dark brown. It has a brownish gray tail and yellow green legs and feet. In the winter, the Red Knot carries a plain, grayish plumage that has very few distinctive features. Call Its call is a low, two-note whistle that sometimes includes a churring “knot” sound that is what inspired its name.
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species Permit: Te-25955C-1 January 01, 2019
    REPORT TO THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE FOR HAWAIIAN STILT ENDANGERED SPECIES PERMIT: TE-25955C-1 REPORTING PERIOD JANUARY 01, 2019 – DECEMBER 31, 2019 SUBMITTED BY: Melissa R. Price Assistant Professor University of Hawaii-Manoa 1910 East-West Road Sherman Hall Rm 118 Honolulu, HI 96822 Phone: 808-956-7774 Email: [email protected] January 31, 2020 1 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 The Hawaiian Stilt (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni) is an endangered subspecies of the 4 Black-necked stilt (Himantopus mexicanus) that inhabits wetlands throughout the Hawaiian 5 Islands. Depredation of eggs and chicks by introduced predators is a major threat to Hawaiian 6 Stilt populations. Where and when a bird decides to nest may impact the likelihood of egg or 7 chick depredation. Nesting in close proximity to water may decrease depredation rates by 8 mammals, as water can act as a barrier to mammalian predators, does not hold scent, and 9 provides an obstacle-free escape route for chicks. Alternatively, some mammalian predators may 10 be attracted to water, and a number of aquatic species have been identified as predators of 11 Hawaiian Stilt chicks, including the American Bullfrog (Lithobates catesbeianus). Vegetation 12 height is also an important factor for egg and chick survival, as taller vegetation may help 13 conceal nests and chicks from predators, particularly aerial species. Additionally, depredation is 14 often not constant across the breeding season due to changes in parental activity, nest and chick 15 abundance, or habitat characteristics. The Hawaiian Stilt nests from February to September 16 across the Hawaiian Islands.
    [Show full text]
  • 25 Using Community Group Monitoring Data to Measure The
    25 Using Community Group Monitoring Data To Measure The Effectiveness Of Restoration Actions For Australia's Woodland Birds Michelle Gibson1, Jessica Walsh1,2, Nicki Taws5, Martine Maron1 1Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Brisbane, 4072, Queensland, Australia, 2School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Melbourne, 3800, Victoria, Australia, 3Greening Australia, Aranda, Canberra, 2614 Australian Capital Territory, Australia, 4BirdLife Australia, Carlton, Melbourne, 3053, Victoria, Australia, 5Greening Australia, PO Box 538 Jamison Centre, Macquarie, Australian Capital Territory 2614, Australia Before conservation actions are implemented, they should be evaluated for their effectiveness to ensure the best possible outcomes. However, many conservation actions are not implemented under an experimental framework, making it difficult to measure their effectiveness. Ecological monitoring datasets provide useful opportunities for measuring the effect of conservation actions and a baseline upon which adaptive management can be built. We measure the effect of conservation actions on Australian woodland ecosystems using two community group-led bird monitoring datasets. Australia’s temperate woodlands have been largely cleared for agricultural production and their bird communities are in decline. To reverse these declines, a suite of conservation actions has been implemented by government and non- government agencies, and private landholders. We analysed the response of total woodland bird abundance, species richness, and community condition, to two widely-used actions — grazing exclusion and replanting. We recorded 139 species from 134 sites and 1,389 surveys over a 20-year period. Grazing exclusion and replanting combined had strong positive effects on all three bird community metrics over time relative to control sites, where no actions had occurred.
    [Show full text]
  • National Shorebird Plan (NSP)
    Revised January 29, 2013 U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan Intermountain West Regional Shorebird Plan Version 1.0 by: Lewis W. Oring Larry Neel Kay E. Oring 1 Table of Contents Executive Summary ……………………………………………………………………………...3 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………….4 1. Description of Intermountain West…………………………………………………….….….4 A. Shorebird habitat types within the region………………………………….……….……..4 B. Bird Conservation Regions (BCR)…...……………………………………….……..…....6 C. Major shorebird issues in the Intermountain West region…………………….….…...…10 2. Shorebird species occurrence in the Intermountain West……………………………….…..12 A. Regional shorebird list………………………………………………………….…..…....12 B. Bird Conservation Region lists to describe different parts of the region………………...12 C. Priority shorebirds…………………………………………………………………….…13 D. Shorebird guilds…………………………………………………………………..……...13 3. Intermountain West regional goals…………………………………………………...……...13 4. Habitat report………………………………………………………………………………...20 5. Intermountain West research and monitoring needs……………..……………………….….20 6. Funding needs to meet regional goals……………………………………………………..…20 7. Management coordination issues and needs…………………………………………………20 8. Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………….…….21 Appendix I. Key shorebird areas of the Intermountain West: Great Salt Lake…………….…..22 Appendix II. Key shorebird areas of the Intermountain West: Salton Sea………………..…….25 Appendix III. Key shorebird areas of the Intermountain West: Lake Abert………………..……27 Appendix IV. Key shorebird areas of the Intermountain
    [Show full text]
  • Alpha Codes for 2168 Bird Species (And 113 Non-Species Taxa) in Accordance with the 62Nd AOU Supplement (2021), Sorted Taxonomically
    Four-letter (English Name) and Six-letter (Scientific Name) Alpha Codes for 2168 Bird Species (and 113 Non-Species Taxa) in accordance with the 62nd AOU Supplement (2021), sorted taxonomically Prepared by Peter Pyle and David F. DeSante The Institute for Bird Populations www.birdpop.org ENGLISH NAME 4-LETTER CODE SCIENTIFIC NAME 6-LETTER CODE Highland Tinamou HITI Nothocercus bonapartei NOTBON Great Tinamou GRTI Tinamus major TINMAJ Little Tinamou LITI Crypturellus soui CRYSOU Thicket Tinamou THTI Crypturellus cinnamomeus CRYCIN Slaty-breasted Tinamou SBTI Crypturellus boucardi CRYBOU Choco Tinamou CHTI Crypturellus kerriae CRYKER White-faced Whistling-Duck WFWD Dendrocygna viduata DENVID Black-bellied Whistling-Duck BBWD Dendrocygna autumnalis DENAUT West Indian Whistling-Duck WIWD Dendrocygna arborea DENARB Fulvous Whistling-Duck FUWD Dendrocygna bicolor DENBIC Emperor Goose EMGO Anser canagicus ANSCAN Snow Goose SNGO Anser caerulescens ANSCAE + Lesser Snow Goose White-morph LSGW Anser caerulescens caerulescens ANSCCA + Lesser Snow Goose Intermediate-morph LSGI Anser caerulescens caerulescens ANSCCA + Lesser Snow Goose Blue-morph LSGB Anser caerulescens caerulescens ANSCCA + Greater Snow Goose White-morph GSGW Anser caerulescens atlantica ANSCAT + Greater Snow Goose Intermediate-morph GSGI Anser caerulescens atlantica ANSCAT + Greater Snow Goose Blue-morph GSGB Anser caerulescens atlantica ANSCAT + Snow X Ross's Goose Hybrid SRGH Anser caerulescens x rossii ANSCAR + Snow/Ross's Goose SRGO Anser caerulescens/rossii ANSCRO Ross's Goose
    [Show full text]
  • Cooperative Breeding Behaviors in the Hawaiian Stilt (Himantopus Mexicanus Knudseni)
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350494977 Cooperative breeding behaviors in the Hawaiian Stilt ( Himantopus mexicanus knudseni ) Article in Ecology and Evolution · March 2021 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.7509 CITATIONS READS 0 19 6 authors, including: Kristen Harmon Melissa Renae Price University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa 5 PUBLICATIONS 3 CITATIONS 32 PUBLICATIONS 122 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Status of the Endangered Band-rumped Storm Petrel in the Main Hawaiian Islands View project Equity and reciprocity in researcher-community partnerships View project All content following this page was uploaded by Melissa Renae Price on 30 March 2021. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Received: 25 November 2020 | Revised: 5 March 2021 | Accepted: 10 March 2021 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.7509 NATURE NOTES Cooperative breeding behaviors in the Hawaiian Stilt (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni) Arleone Dibben- Young1 | Kristen C. Harmon2 | Arianna Lunow- Luke3 | Jessica L. Idle2 | Dain L. Christensen2 | Melissa R. Price2 1Ahupua‘a Natives LLC, Kaunakakai, HI, USA Abstract 2Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Management, University of Cooperative breeding, which is commonly characterized by nonbreeding individu- Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Honolulu, HI, USA als that assist others with reproduction, is common in avian species. However, few 3Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Brown University, Providence, RI, accounts have been reported in Charadriiformes, particularly island- nesting spe- USA cies. We present incidental observations of cooperative breeding behaviors in the Correspondence Hawaiian Stilt (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni), an endangered subspecies of the Kristen C.
    [Show full text]
  • Biology and Impacts of Pacific Island Invasive Species. 1. a Worldwide
    Biology and Impacts of Pacific Island Invasive Species. 1. A Worldwide Review of Effects of the Small Indian Mongoose, Herpestes javanicus (Carnivora: Herpestidae)1 Warren S. T. Hays2 and Sheila Conant3 Abstract: The small Indian mongoose, Herpestes javanicus (E. Geoffroy Saint- Hilaire, 1818), was intentionally introduced to at least 45 islands (including 8 in the Pacific) and one continental mainland between 1872 and 1979. This small carnivore is now found on the mainland or islands of Asia, Africa, Europe, North America, South America, and Oceania. In this review we document the impact of this species on native birds, mammals, and herpetofauna in these areas of introduction. The small Indian mongoose has been 1), typically has an adult body mass in the introduced to numerous islands, including range of 300 to 900 g and a body length eight in the Pacific. Beyond its native range from 500 to 650 mm (Nellis 1989). It has in southern Asia, this species now occurs on the slender body shape typical of the herpes- islands or mainlands elsewhere in Asia, Africa, tid family, with short legs, short brown fur, Europe, North America, South America, and and a tail that makes up roughly 40% of the Oceania. Its negative effects on native biota animal’s total length. Dentition is 3:1:4:2, of these areas are a concern to natural-area with a wide carnassial shear region. Females managers. have 36 chromosomes and males have 35, because the Y chromosome has translocated name onto an autosome (Fredga 1965). A more complete species description may Herpestes javanicus (E.
    [Show full text]
  • Pan-American Shorebird Program Shorebird Marking Protocol
    Shorebird Marking Protocol – April 2016 Pan American Shorebird Program Shorebird Marking Protocol - April 2016 - Endorsed by: Shorebird Marking Protocol – April 2016 Lesley-Anne Howes, Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), Ottawa, ON, Canada, Sophie Béraud, Canadian Wildlife Service, ECCC, Ottawa, ON, Canada, and Véronique Drolet-Gratton, Canadian Wildlife Service, ECCC, Ottawa, ON, Canada. In consultation with: (In alphabetical order) Brad Andres, US Shorebird Conservation Plan, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Lakewood CO USA Yves Aubry, Canadian Wildlife Service, ECCC, Quebec QC, Canada Rúben Dellacasa, Aves Argentinas, BirdLife International en Argentina, Buenos Aires, Argentina Christian Friis, Canadian Wildlife Service, ECCC, Toronto ON, Canada Nyls de Pracontal, Groupe d’Étude et de Protection des Oiseaux en Guyane (GEPOG), Cayennne, Guyane Cheri Gratto-Trevor, Prairie and Northern Wildlife Research Centre, ECCC, Saskatoon SK, Canada Richard Johnston, Asociación Calidris, Cali, Colombia and CWE, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver BC, Canada Kevin S. Kalasz, Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife, DNREC, Smyrna DE, USA Richard Lanctot, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Migratory Bird Management, Anchorage AK, USA Sophie Maille, Groupe d’Étude et de Protection des Oiseaux en Guyane (GEPOG), Cayennne, Guyane David Mizrahi, New Jersey Audubon Society, Cape May Court House NJ, USA Bruce Peterjohn, USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel MD, USA Eveling Tavera Fernandez, Centro de Ornitología y Biodiversidad
    [Show full text]