DOCSLIB.ORG

Avian Monitoring on Wetland Reserve Program Easements in Northeastern California: a Report of the 2010 Field Season

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Avian Monitoring on Wetland Reserve Program Easements in Northeastern California: a Report of the 2010 Field Season Avian Monitoring on Wetland Reserve Program Easements in Northeastern California: A report of the 2010 field season January 2011 Ryan DiGaudio and Alicia Young PRBO Conservation Science 3820 Cypress Dr. #11 Petaluma, CA 94954 PRBO Contribution #1792 Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 2 METHODS ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Wetland Habitat ........................................................................................................................... 4 Upland Habitat ............................................................................................................................ 5 Breeding Status ............................................................................................................................ 6 STATISICAL ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................. 6 Wetland Habitat ........................................................................................................................... 6 Assessing Grazing in Wetland Habitat ........................................................................................ 7 Upland Habitat ............................................................................................................................ 7 Bird Community Composition Similarity Analysis .................................................................... 8 RESULTS ........................................................................................................................................ 9 Summary (All Habitats Combined) ............................................................................................. 9 Wetland Habitat ........................................................................................................................... 9 Management intensity ............................................................................................................. 12 Grazing intensity ..................................................................................................................... 12 Upland Habitat .......................................................................................................................... 12 Ecological Similarity Analysis .................................................................................................. 14 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................................... 14 Wetland Habitat ......................................................................................................................... 14 Upland Habitat .......................................................................................................................... 16 Ecological Similarity ................................................................................................................. 20 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................... 21 AKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................................ 22 LITERATURE CITED .................................................................................................................. 23 TABLES ........................................................................................................................................ 26 FIGURES ...................................................................................................................................... 34 APPENDICES. .............................................................................................................................. 42 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Northeast California, which consists largely of the Modoc Plateau ecoregion, supports a diverse and exemplary avifauna. The region has the highest diversity of breeding waterfowl in the state, and overall supports over 235 bird species, including many species of conservation concern. Although the majority of the region’s natural wetlands have been converted to agricultural lands, the region still hosts about 80% of the Pacific Flyway population of waterfowl during migration and large numbers of other wetland- dependent species during the breeding season and migration. Despite its importance to waterfowl and other wildlife, only 2% of the Modoc Plateau is protected and managed for wildlife benefits. Thirty- seven percent of the region is privately owned, and much of this land is managed for livestock production and other agricultural uses. However, the U.S.D.A. – Natural Resources Conservation Service’s Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP), a voluntary habitat easement and restoration program, provides landowners with an opportunity to protect, restore, and enhance wetlands on their property. In order to evaluate the conservation benefits of the program and provide land management feedback, PRBO Conservation Science conducted avian monitoring WRP easements throughout northeastern California from May through September in 2009 and 2010. In 2010, a total of 142 bird species were found on the WRP easements, which included 22 special status species (species of conservation concern based on various state, regional, continental, and global assessments). Grouped by foraging guild, the list of species detected included 9 dabbling duck species, 2 geese / swans, 13 shorebirds, 6 large waders, 10 surface divers, 4 plunge divers, 1 gull, 8 marsh birds, 17 aerial feeders, 9 aerial predators, and 63 upland bird species. Thirty-seven species were confirmed as breeding on WRP sites, including 5 special status species, and an additional 20 species were suspected of breeding, including 3 special status species. Habitat conditions, bird species richness and bird density varied considerably between wetland sites, though it appears that more intensively managed wetlands supported significantly more species than unmanaged sites. Furthermore, each WRP site supported a unique species assemblage, as indicated by a low mean Sørensen similarity index of 0.49 between sites (0 = no species overlap, 1 = 100% species overlap). Given a low ecological similarity between sites, we recommend careful consideration be given to which management practices are implemented on a site- specific bases to account for the needs of the species at each particular site. We examined the effects of grazing on the avian community at a subset of wetland sites where grazing history data were available. At these sites, grazing intensity did not appear to influence species richness or the abundance among most foraging guilds, however there were weak positive correlations between grazing intensity and the density of two foraging guilds: gulls and upland birds. These relationships are difficult to interpret due to the confounding effect of water availability and also by a small sample size. In future studies, we recommend comparing grazed sites with ecologically similar ungrazed reference sites. We also recommend using alternative metrics for measuring grazing intensity, such as stubble height or residual dry matter. Overall, effectively managed WRP easements in northeast California can provide quality habitat for many resident and migratory birds, including special status species. General management recommendations include assisting landowners with securing a reliable water sources for wetlands, controlling invasive plant species, and restricting grazing in sensitive riparian zones. More research is needed, however, to determine appropriate grazing regimes that would be compatible with WRP conservation objectives. Ultimately, however, adaptive management that includes an information feedback loop such as this monitoring program is crucial for achieving NRCS’s goal of providing the greatest wetland functions and values, along with optimum wildlife habitat, on every acre enrolled in WRP. 1 INTRODUCTION The Modoc Plateau and Southern Cascade ecoregions of northeast California contain a broad range of habitat types, including sagebrush, mixed coniferous forests (ponderosa pine and western juniper), and large mountain valleys containing grasslands, wet meadows, riparian corridors, and palustrine wetlands. Given this varied landscape, the region supports a diverse and exemplary avifauna. The Modoc Plateau, which comprises the majority of northeast California, supports the highest diversity of breeding waterfowl in the state and overall supports up to 235 bird species, including many species of conservation concern based on various state, regional, continental, and global assessments (Appendix A; Shuford and Gardali 2008, Bunn et al. 2007). Much of northeastern California is in the rain shadow of the Siskiyou and southern Cascade mountain ranges and receives relatively little precipitation, ranging from 10.87 inches / year in Tulelake to 27.14 inches / year in Burney (Western Regional Climate Center 2009). Despite the relatively dry climate, northeastern California is particularly important for supporting wetland-dependent bird populations. According to the Intermountain West Joint Venture (IWJV), the southern Oregon / northeast
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Florida State University Libraries
    )ORULGD6WDWH8QLYHUVLW\/LEUDULHV 2018 Using a Call-Response Occupancy Survey with Brown-headed Nuthatches (Sitta pusilla) to Evaluate the Biological Species Concept Heather Levy Follow this and additional works at DigiNole: FSU's Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected] THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS & SCIENCES USING A CALL-REPONSE OCCUPANCY SURVEY WITH BROWN-HEADED NUTHATCHES (SITTA PUSILLA) TO EVALUATE THE BIOLOGICAL SPECIES CONCEPT By HEATHER LEVY A Thesis submitted to the Department of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation with Honors in the Major Degree Awarded: Spring 2018 ! Heather Levy FSU EAOS Honors Thesis Using a Call-Response Occupancy Survey with Brown-headed Nuthatches (Sitta pusilla) to Evaluate the Biological Species Concept Abstract The status of the endangered Bahama Nuthatch (Sitta insularis) as an independent species is being debated. The Bahama Nuthatch currently is listed as a subspecies of the Brown-headed Nuthatch (Sitta pusilla), even though the two differ in morphology, song, genetic characteristics, and range. According to the biological species concept, if two populations of the same species are unable to vocally recognize one another, then the two populations would not be able to interbreed, inferring two distinct species. Birds generally react more aggressively to vocalizations of conspecifics, or of the same species, than those of non-predatory heterospecifics, or of a different species, because two members of one species are in closer competition for mates, resources, and territories. In this study, I used a call-response occupancy survey at St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge to determine if using playback increased detection probabilities of Brown-headed Nuthatches.
    [Show full text]
  • PPCO Twist System
    A Brown-headed Nuthatch brings food to the nest. Color-coded leg bands enable the authors and their colleagues to discern the curious and potentially complex relationships among the various individuals at Tall Timbers Research Station on the Florida–Georgia line. Photo by © Tara Tanaka. photos by Tara Tanaka Tallahassee, Florida [email protected] 46 BIRDING • FEBRUARY 2016 arblers are gorgeous, jays boisterous, and sparrows elusive, Wbut words like “cute” and “adorable” come to mind when the conversation shifts to Brown-headed Nuthatches. The word “cute” doesn’t appear in the scientifc literature regularly, but science may help to explain its frequent association with nuthatch- es. The large heads and small bodies nuthatches possess have propor- tions similar to those found on young children. Psychologists have found that these proportions conjure up “innate attractive” respons- es among adult humans even when the proportions fall on strange objects (Little 2012). This range-restricted nuthatch associated with southeastern pine- woods has undergone steep declines in recent decades and is listed as a species of special concern in most states in which it breeds (Cox and Widener 2008). The population restricted to Grand Bahama Island appears to be critically endangered (Hayes et al. 2004). Add to these concerns some intriguing biology that includes helpers at the nest, communal winter roosts, seed caching, social grooming, and the use of tools, and you have some scintillating science all bound up in one “cute” and “adorable” package. James
    [Show full text]
  • Foraging Behavior of the Pygmy Nuthatch in Colorado Ponderosa Pine Forests
    FORAGING BEHAVIOR OF THE PYGMY NUTHATCH IN COLORADO PONDEROSA PINE FORESTS HEATHER EWELL and ALEXANDER CRUZ, Environmental,Population, and Organ- ismic Biology Department, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0334 The Pygmy Nuthatch (Sitta pygrnaea) is a permanent resident of mon- tane habitats in the Rocky Mountain region, occurring most commonlyin forests of PonderosaPine (Pinus ponderosa). In Colorado, the center of its distributionis in the lower montane region (1660 to 2425 m) (Bailey and Niedrach 1965, Andrews and Righter 1992). The breeding season (egg laying through fledglingstage) in Colorado lasts from early May to August (Bent 1964, Bailey and Niedrach 1965). The diet of the Pygmy Nuthatch consistsof both insect and vegetable matter. In Monterey County, California, Beal (1907) found that during late spring and early summer the diet consistedof 83% animal matter and 17% conifer seeds.Beal found that the insect diet is dominatedby Hymenoptera (38%), Homoptera (23%) and Coleoptera(12%). Norris (1958) found that in Marin County, California,in winter nuthatchesate an averageof 85 to 95% vegetable matter (pine seeds) while from April-September, they ate an average of 40 to 60% vegetable matter. In Larimer County, Colorado, McEllin (1979) noted that the nuthatches'diet shifted from primarilyinsects in the summerto primarilypine seedsin the winter. We observed the foraging behavior of Pygmy Nuthatches during the breeding (10 June-31 August 1995 and 15 June-31 August 1996) and non-breedingseason (1 March-30 April, 1995, 15 January-30 April 1996, and 1 September 1996-1 March 1997) in the PonderosaPine foothills of Colorado, focusing on foraging technique, position during foraging, and foraginglocation.
    [Show full text]
  • Cavity-Nesting Bird Habitat and Populations in Ponderosa Pine
    Land Managers’ Guide to Cavity-Nesting Bird Habitat and Populations in Ponderosa Pine Forests of the Pacific Northwest This open ponderosa pine slope with snags and grassland elements is Flammulated Owl habitat. Photo: Dan Casey, ABC Authors: Dan Casey, Bob Altman, Darin Stringer, Craig Thomas Cover photos courtesy of Dan Casey and Bob Altman, ABC Funding for this document was provided by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service through the National Conservation Innovation Grant program, as part of a grant entitled “Integrating Management for Forest Health and Cavity-Nesting Bird Conservation in Ponderosa Pine Forests”. Additional funding partners include the Sustainable Forestry Initiative, through its Conservation & Community Partnerships Grant Program; the Biophilia Foundation, and ABC donor Joan Hero. Reviews of earlier drafts were provided by Gavin Shire. Layout and design by Gemma Radko. 2 Ponderosa Pine Cavity-Nesting Bird Guide Land Managers’ Guide to Cavity-Nesting Bird Habitat and Populations in Ponderosa Pine Forests of the Pacific Northwest Low older snag with multiple cavities, shrub understory. Photo: Dan Casey, ABC TOP OF PAGE Mountain Bluebirds: Greg Homel, Natural Elements Productions Ponderosa Pine Cavity-Nesting Bird Guide 3 Purpose of the Ponderosa Pine Cavity-Nesting Bird Guide This Ponderosa Pine Cavity-Nesting Bird Guide is intended to provide land man- agers in ponderosa pine habitats with information on bird species’ status, distri- bution, density, habitat relationships, and potential responses to habitat manage- ment or restoration activities. This information can be used to facilitate sound decisions to support bird conservation in the context of protection and manage- ment of the threatened ponderosa pine ecosystems of the Pacific Northwest.
    [Show full text]
  • A Conservation Blueprint for Neotropical Migratory Birds in Western Colorado
    A Conservation Blueprint for Neotropical Migratory Birds in Western Colorado Michelle Fink, David Hanni, David Klute, John Sovell, and Renée Rondeau December 2007 Photo by Dave Menke, Photo Courtesy of U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Final report submitted to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (Neotropical Migratory Bird Act). Executive Summary The purpose of this project was to incorporate land use, policy, and biological inputs to define areas representing the most important opportunities for conservation of Neotropical migratory birds in coniferous and aspen forest habitats in Western Colorado and to understand the current status and requirements for maintaining viable populations of these migratory birds within the project area. To that end, we used NatureServe Vista, a decision-support software, and SPOT, a conservation portfolio optimization software, to analyze information about bird distribution, abundance, conservation priorities, quantitative conservation goals, threats to ecosystem stability, and current landscape integrity in order to identify conservation needs and opportunities for birds in aspen and conifer forests in western Colorado. Twenty-two forest-based bird species were used as conservation targets. Multi-year survey data from the Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory was combined with data from the Colorado Natural Heritage Program’s Biodiversity Tracking and Conservation System (BIOTICS) database in addition to modified Southwest Regional GAP vertebrate models for the target species. We used available statewide spatial data to determine general landscape integrity for these species, current and future predicted land use, and policy mandated protection status. This information was then input in NatureServe Vista and SPOT projects and evaluated against varying conservation goal sets for the target species.
    [Show full text]
  • Pygmy Nuthatch in Mountain Region
    United States Department of Agriculture Conservation Assessment Forest Service Rocky of the Pygmy Nuthatch in Mountain Region Black Hills the Black Hills National National Forest Custer, Forest, South Dakota and South Dakota May 2003 Wyoming Cameron Ghalambor Conservation Assessment of the Pygmy Nuthatch in the Black Hills National Forest, South Dakota and Wyoming Cameron Ghalambor Department of Biology University of California – Riverside Riverside, CA 92521 Under a personal services contract with: USDA Forest Service Black Hills National Forest Cameron Ghalambor is currently a postdoctoral research biologist at the University of California at Riverside. He received his B. A. from University of California at Los Angeles and his Ph.D. from the University of Montana at Missoula. His Ph.D. and subsequent research has focused in part on the comparative reproductive biology of Pygmy, Red-breasted, and White-breasted Nuthatches. His work on nuthatches and related species has investigated such questions as 1) the ecological and evolutionary determinants that shape different incubation strategies, 2) the role of life histories in determining parental investment strategies, and 3) the adaptive significance of conifer resin use at Red-breasted Nuthatch nests. His current address is: Department of Biology, University of California - Riverside, Riverside, CA 92521. Table of Contents INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................... 1 CURRENT MANAGEMENT
    [Show full text]
  • Prescribed Fire Effects on Wintering, Bark-Foraging Birds in Northern Arizona
    Management and Conservation Article Prescribed Fire Effects on Wintering, Bark-Foraging Birds in Northern Arizona THERESA L. POPE,1,2 United States Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station, 2500 S Pine Knoll Drive, Flagstaff, AZ 86001, USA WILLIAM M. BLOCK, United States Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station, 2500 S Pine Knoll Drive, Flagstaff, AZ 86001, USA PAUL BEIER, School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University, P.O. Box 15018, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, USA ABSTRACT We examined effects of prescribed fire on 3 wintering, bark-foraging birds, hairy woodpeckers (Picoides villosus), pygmy nuthatches (Sitta pygmaea), and white-breasted nuthatches (S. carolinensis), in ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) forests of northern Arizona, USA. During winters of 2004–2006, we compared bird density, foraging behavior, and bark beetle activity among burned treatment and unburned control units. Hairy woodpecker density was 5 times greater in burn units, whereas white-breasted nuthatches and pygmy nuthatches had similar densities between treatments. Compared to available trees, trees used by foraging hairy woodpeckers had 9 times greater odds of having bark beetles in control units and 12 times greater odds in burn units. Tree diameter appeared to be the main factor bark-foraging birds used in selecting winter foraging trees. Our results suggest that forest managers can use prescribed fire treatments without detrimental effects to wintering nuthatches, while providing additional food to hairy woodpeckers. (JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT 73(5):695– 700; 2009) DOI: 10.2193/2007-537 KEY WORDS Arizona, bark-foraging birds, hairy woodpecker, Picoides villosus, prescribed fire, pygmy nuthatch, Sitta carolinensis, Sitta pygmaea, white-breasted nuthatch, winter.
    [Show full text]
  • Nest Characteristics of the Eastern Rock Nuthatch (Sitta Tephronota) in Southwestern Iran
    Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 66(1), pp. 85–98, 2020 DOI: 10.17109/AZH.66.1.85.2020 NEST CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EASTERN ROCK NUTHATCH (SITTA TEPHRONOTA) IN SOUTHWESTERN IRAN Arya Shafaeipour1*, Behzad Fathinia1 and Jerzy Michalczuk2 1Department of Biology, University of Yasouj, Yasouj, Iran E-mails: [email protected], https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4267-536X [email protected], https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5752-9288 2Department of Nature Protection and Landscape Ecology, University of Rzeszów Zelwerowicza 4, 35-601 Rzeszów, Poland E-mail: [email protected], https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9311-7731 In the springs of 2015–2017, the population size and nest characteristics of the Eastern Rock Nuthatch (Sitta tephronota) were investigated. The study was conducted in a 400 hectare area of the mountainous region of southwestern Iran. In 2016, the population of the Eastern Rock Nuthatch was estimated at 33 pairs and its density was 8.25 breeding pairs per 100 ha of the study area. During the study, 45 nuthatch nests were investigated, of which 15 (33%) were found in cliffs and 28 (62%) were located in tree holes; 2% were built in house and bridge walls. The height of the nest was 214.3±112.3 cm above ground level. The mean of the horizontal and vertical depths of the nest chambers in trees was 17.8±3.7 and 12.6±3.2 cm respectively, and statistically differed from those in rocky nests (respectively 23.9±5.5 and 10.8±4.6 cm). However, chamber volumes did not statistically differ between these two nest type categories.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat Selection by Selected Breeding Passerine Birds in Pine-Oak Forests of Northern Arizona
    HABITAT SELECTION BY SELECTED BREEDING PASSERINE BIRDS IN PINE-OAK FORESTS OF NORTHERN ARIZONA By Tamara D. Lesh A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Forestry Northern Arizona University August. 1999 1Beier, Ph.D., Chair M(,~~- Ste n Rosenstock, ~tS. ABSTRACT HABITAT SELECTION BY SELECTED BREEDING PASSERINE BIRDS IN PINE-OAK FORESTS OF NORTHERN ARIZONA TAMARA D. LESH Forest treatments proposed to restore pre-settlement conditions for northern Arizona ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) forests will dramatically alter forest structure by reducing densities of smaller diameter trees. Baseline information on habitat selection is needed to understand responses of passerine birds to these treatments. During the 1997 and 1998 breeding seasons, I examined foraging-habitat selection by 5 permanent resident species ~ hairy woodpeckers (Picoides villosus), mountain chickadees (Poecile gambeli), white-breasted nuthatches (SUra carolinensis), pygmy nuthatches (S. pygmaea), and dark­ eyed juncos (Junco hyemalis) - and 3 neotropical migrants, Virginia's warblers (Vennivora virginiaey, p1umbeus vireos (Vireo plumbeus), and western tanagers (Piranga ludoviciana}, I measured and analyzed habitat selection at 2 scales, the foraging tree (third-order selection sensu Johnson 1980) and within a 0.04-ha plot centered on each foraging location (Johnson's second-order selection). I analyzed microhabitat selection for all species with> 41 observations. I detected third-order selection by pygmy nuthatches and Virginia's warblers at Camp Navajo and by white-breasted nuthatches, dark-eyed juncos, and hairy woodpeckers at Mt. Trumbull. CART models indicated second-order selection by white-breasted nuthatches, pygmy nuthatches, Virginia's warblers, plumbeus vireos, and western tanagers at Camp Navajo 11 and by pygmy nuthatches, dark-eyed juncos, and plumbeus vireos at Mt.
    [Show full text]
  • Critter Class Nuthatches
    Critter Class Nuthatches White breasted Nuthatch December 1, 2011 MVK: Some were asking where the nuthatch got the name - They get their common name from their habit of jamming large nuts and acorns into tree bark, then whacking them with their sharp bill to “hatch” out the seed from the inside. White- breasted Nuthatches may be small but their voices are loud, and often their insistent nasal yammering will lead you right to them. Per Allaboutbirds.com MVK: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHlTrWQbnms MVK: White-breasted nuthatch by E. George Strasser There is a little bird, who lives in my hometown. he is the strangest bird, as he's mostly upside down. He may come to your feeder, for a seed or two to take. he really does like best, to peck a suet cake. He searches bark for insects, and his wings may start to flutter. when he finds somebody's feeder, is filled with peanut butter. The constant nasal chatter, whenever he's around. you'll know exactly who it is, when you just hear the sound. How they named this bird, I really do not know. he's surely not a nut, and hatched a while ago. Through snow or heat of summer, at any time of year. he migrates not at all, so always will be here. As you watch this small bird's antics, you'll never have a frown. because this little bird, is mostly upside down Critter Class – Nuthatches 1 12/1/2011 Comment: I love to watch Snitch walking straight down that concrete wall in the bear pen.
    [Show full text]
  • Learn About Texas Birds Activity Book
    Learn about . A Learning and Activity Book Color your own guide to the birds that wing their way across the plains, hills, forests, deserts and mountains of Texas. Text Mark W. Lockwood Conservation Biologist, Natural Resource Program Editorial Direction Georg Zappler Art Director Elena T. Ivy Educational Consultants Juliann Pool Beverly Morrell © 1997 Texas Parks and Wildlife 4200 Smith School Road Austin, Texas 78744 PWD BK P4000-038 10/97 All rights reserved. No part of this work covered by the copyright hereon may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means – graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping, or information storage and retrieval systems – without written permission of the publisher. Another "Learn about Texas" publication from TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE PRESS ISBN- 1-885696-17-5 Key to the Cover 4 8 1 2 5 9 3 6 7 14 16 10 13 20 19 15 11 12 17 18 19 21 24 23 20 22 26 28 31 25 29 27 30 ©TPWPress 1997 1 Great Kiskadee 16 Blue Jay 2 Carolina Wren 17 Pyrrhuloxia 3 Carolina Chickadee 18 Pyrrhuloxia 4 Altamira Oriole 19 Northern Cardinal 5 Black-capped Vireo 20 Ovenbird 6 Black-capped Vireo 21 Brown Thrasher 7Tufted Titmouse 22 Belted Kingfisher 8 Painted Bunting 23 Belted Kingfisher 9 Indigo Bunting 24 Scissor-tailed Flycatcher 10 Green Jay 25 Wood Thrush 11 Green Kingfisher 26 Ruddy Turnstone 12 Green Kingfisher 27 Long-billed Thrasher 13 Vermillion Flycatcher 28 Killdeer 14 Vermillion Flycatcher 29 Olive Sparrow 15 Blue Jay 30 Olive Sparrow 31 Great Horned Owl =female =male Texas Birds More kinds of birds have been found in Texas than any other state in the United States: just over 600 species.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Risk Assessment
    Ecological Sustainability Analysis of the Kaibab National Forest: Species Diversity Report Ver. 1.2 Prepared by: Mikele Painter and Valerie Stein Foster Kaibab National Forest For: Kaibab National Forest Plan Revision Analysis 22 December 2008 SpeciesDiversity-Report-ver-1.2.doc 22 December 2008 Table of Contents Table of Contents............................................................................................................................. i Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 1 PART I: Species Diversity.............................................................................................................. 1 Species List ................................................................................................................................. 1 Criteria .................................................................................................................................... 2 Assessment Sources................................................................................................................ 3 Screening Results.................................................................................................................... 4 Habitat Associations and Initial Species Groups........................................................................ 8 Species associated with ecosystem diversity characteristics of terrestrial vegetation or aquatic systems ......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]