WDFW Final Sandhill Crane Recovery Plan

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

STATE OF WASHINGTON June 2002 SandhillSandhill CraneCrane RecoveryRecovery PlanPlan by Carroll D. Littlefield and Gary L. Ivey Washington Department of FISH AND WILDLIFE Wildlife Program Wildlife Diversity Division WDFW 735 Washington State Recovery Plan for the Sandhill Crane Prepared by: Carroll D. Littlefield, P.O. Box 44, Rodeo, NM 88056 Gary L. Ivey, P.O. Box 6953, Bend, OR 97708 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife Program 600 Capitol Way N. Olympia, WA 98501-1091 June 2002 Approved: __________________________________________________ __________________________ Director, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Date In 1990, the Washington Wildlife Commission adopted procedures for listing and de-listing species as endangered, threatened, or sensitive and for writing recovery and management plans for listed species (WAC 232-12-297, Appendix A). The procedures, developed by a group of citizens, interest groups, and state and federal agencies, require preparation of recovery plans for species listed as threatened or endangered. Recovery, as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is “the process by which the decline of an endangered or threatened species is arrested or reversed, and threats to its survival are neutralized, so that its long-term survival in nature can be ensured.” This document summarizes the historic and current distribution and abundance of sandhill cranes in Washington and describes factors affecting the population and its habitat. It prescribes strategies to recover the species, such as protecting the population, evaluating and managing habitat, and initiating research and education programs. Target population objectives and other criteria for reclassification are identified and an implementation schedule is presented. The draft state recovery plan for the sandhill crane was reviewed by researchers and state and federal agencies. This review was followed by a 90-day public comment period. All comments received were considered in preparation of this the final recovery plan. For additional information about sandhill cranes or other state listed species, contact: Endangered Species Section Manager Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 600 Capitol Way North Olympia, WA 98501-1091 This report should be cited as: Littlefield, C. D., and G. L. Ivey. 2002. Washington State Recovery Plan for the Sandhill Crane. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. 71 pages. Cover design and illustration by Darrell Pruett. Crane photo courtesy of Northwest Trek TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES .............................................. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................... vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................... vii PART ONE: BACKGROUND ..................................................1 TAXONOMY ................................................................1 DESCRIPTION...............................................................1 GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION..............................................2 North America..........................................................2 Washington ............................................................4 NATURAL HISTORY .........................................................6 Reproduction ...........................................................6 Chronology .......................................................6 Pair bonding ......................................................6 Territories........................................................6 Nest building, eggs, and incubation....................................6 Brood rearing and fledging ..........................................7 Nesting success and recruitment ......................................7 Longevity and Mortality ...................................................7 Chick mortality ...................................................7 Adult predation ...................................................8 Powerline collisions ................................................8 Fences ..........................................................9 Disease..........................................................9 Illegal shooting....................................................9 Other factors......................................................9 Migration and Dispersal...................................................9 Spring migration ..................................................9 Autumn migration ................................................10 Winter .........................................................10 Foraging and Food......................................................12 HABITAT REQUIREMENTS ..................................................13 Breeding..............................................................13 Territories.......................................................13 Nesting habitat...................................................13 June 2002ii Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Nest vegetation...................................................14 Water depths at nest sites...........................................14 Roost sites ......................................................14 Wintering and Staging Areas..............................................14 Foraging habitats.................................................14 Night roosts and loafing areas.......................................15 POPULATION STATUS ......................................................15 Past..................................................................15 North America...................................................15 Washington .....................................................16 Other Central Valley Population range ................................17 Present...............................................................18 North America...................................................18 Washington .....................................................18 Other Central Valley Population range ................................20 HABITAT STATUS ..........................................................20 Breeding Habitat .......................................................20 Staging and Wintering Habitat.............................................21 Lower Columbia bottomlands.......................................21 Eastern Washington...............................................22 Other Central Valley Population Range ......................................22 Breeding habitat..................................................22 Staging and wintering habitat .......................................22 CONSERVATION STATUS ...................................................22 Washington ...........................................................22 Other Central Valley Population Range ......................................23 Oregon.........................................................23 California.......................................................23 Nevada.........................................................23 British Columbia .................................................23 FACTORS AFFECTING CONTINUED EXISTENCE ...............................23 Breeding Areas.........................................................23 Predation .......................................................23 Grazing and haying ...............................................24 Water availability .................................................24 Habitat loss......................................................24 Staging and Wintering Areas..............................................24 Habitat loss......................................................24 Changes in farming practices........................................25 Waterfowl enhancement and mitigation practices ........................25 June 2002iii Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Human disturbance ...............................................25 CONCLUSION ..............................................................25 PART TWO: RECOVERY ....................................................27 RECOVERY GOAL ..........................................................27 RECOVERY OBJECTIVES....................................................27 Rationale .............................................................28 RECOVERY STRATEGIES AND TASKS ........................................29 REFERENCES CITED........................................................42 IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE ..............................................48 Appendix A. Washington Administration Code 232-12-297 ...........................52 Appendix B. Migrant sandhill cranes counted in the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge and Sauvie Island area, 1991-2001 .............................................56 Appendix C. Sandhill cranes counted during aerial surveys on lower Columbia bottomlands, 1994-2000. ............................................................57 Appendix D. Sandhill crane records for eastern Washington in migration, 1955-2001 .......58 Appendix E. Sandhill crane records for western Washington ...........................66 Appendix F. Responses to written public comments received on the Draft Recovery Plan ....69 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1. Anatomical dimensions (mm) of greater, Canadian, and lesser sandhill crane subspecies ......................................................................3 Table 2. Recent breeding-season sightings of greater sandhill cranes in Washington
Recommended publications
  • CATALINA CALIFORNIA QUAIL (Callipepla Californica Catalinensis) Paul W

    CATALINA CALIFORNIA QUAIL (Callipepla Californica Catalinensis) Paul W

    II SPECIES ACCOUNTS Andy Birch PDF of Catalina California Quail account from: Shuford, W. D., and Gardali, T., editors. 2008. California Bird Species of Special Concern: A ranked assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of immediate conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds 1. Western Field Ornithologists, Camarillo, California, and California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento. California Bird Species of Special Concern CATALINA CALIFORNIA QUAIL (Callipepla californica catalinensis) Paul W. Collins Criteria Scores Population Trend 0 Santa Range Trend 0 Barbara County Population Size 7.5 Range Size 10 Ventura Endemism 10 County Population Concentration 10 Threats 0 Los San Miguel Is. Santa Cruz Is. Angeles County Anacapa Is. Santa Rosa Is. Santa Barbara Is. Santa Catalina Is. San Nicolas Is. San Clemente Is. Current Year-round Range Historic Year-round Range County Boundaries Kilometers 20 10 0 20 Current and historic (ca. 1944) year-round range of the Catalina California Quail. Birds from Santa Catalina Island (perhaps brought by Native Americans) later introduced successfully to Santa Rosa (1935–1940) and Santa Cruz (late 1940s) islands, but unsuccessfully to San Nicolas Island (1962); quail from mainland populations of C. c. californica introduced unsuccessfully to Santa Cruz (prior to 1875) and San Clemente (late 19th century, 1913) islands. Catalina California Quail Studies of Western Birds 1:107–111, 2008 107 Studies of Western Birds No. 1 SPECIAL CONCERN PRIORITY HISTORIC RANGE AND ABUNDANCE Currently considered a Bird Species of Special IN CALIFORNIA Concern (year round), priority 3. This subspecies Grinnell and Miller (1944) described the Catalina was not included on prior special concern lists California Quail as a “common to abundant” (Remsen 1978, CDFG 1992).
  • Birds of the Mendocino National Forest Compiled by Chuck Vaughn, Jerry White, and David Woodward Updated June 2007

    Birds of the Mendocino National Forest Compiled by Chuck Vaughn, Jerry White, and David Woodward Updated June 2007

    Birds of the Mendocino National Forest compiled by Chuck Vaughn, Jerry White, and David Woodward updated June 2007 (R) Resident; (SV) Summer Visitor; (WV) Winter Visitor; (T) Transient, (M) Migrant Common Name Scientific Name Snow Goose Chen caerulescens (M) Mallard Anas platyrhynchos (R) Wood Duck Aix sponsa (R) Common Merganser Mergus merganser (R) Sooty Grouse Dendragapus fuliginosus (R) Wild Turkey Meleagris gallopavo (R and SV) Mountain Quail Oreortyx pictus (R) California Quail Callipepla californica (R) Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura (R and SV) Osprey Pandion haliaetus (SV) Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus (WV) Northern Harrier Circus cyaneus (SV and WV) Sharp-shinned Hawk Accipiter striatus (R and WV) Cooper's Hawk Accipiter cooperii (R and WV) Northern Goshawk Accipiter gentilis (R) Swainson's Hawk Buteo swainsoni (T) Red-tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis (R) Rough-legged Hawk Buteo lagopus (WV) Golden Eagle Aguila chrysaetos (R) American Kestrel Falco sparverius (R) Merlin Falco columbarius (WV) Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus (R) Prairie Falcon Falco mexicanus (WV) Killdeer Charadrius vociferous (R) Spotted Sandpiper Actitis macularia (R and SV) Band-tailed Pigeon Columba fasciata (R and WV) Mourning Dove Zenaida macroura (R and SV) Greater Roadrunner Geococcyx californianus (R) Barn Owl Tyto alba (R) Flammulated Owl Otus flammeolus (SV) Western Screech-Owl Otus kennicottii (R) Great Horned Owl Bubo virginianus (R) Northern Pygmy-Owl Glaucidium gnoma (R) Spotted Owl Strix occidentalis (R) Long-eared Owl Asio otus (SV) Northern
  • Tinamiformes – Falconiformes

    Tinamiformes – Falconiformes

    LIST OF THE 2,008 BIRD SPECIES (WITH SCIENTIFIC AND ENGLISH NAMES) KNOWN FROM THE A.O.U. CHECK-LIST AREA. Notes: "(A)" = accidental/casualin A.O.U. area; "(H)" -- recordedin A.O.U. area only from Hawaii; "(I)" = introducedinto A.O.U. area; "(N)" = has not bred in A.O.U. area but occursregularly as nonbreedingvisitor; "?" precedingname = extinct. TINAMIFORMES TINAMIDAE Tinamus major Great Tinamou. Nothocercusbonapartei Highland Tinamou. Crypturellus soui Little Tinamou. Crypturelluscinnamomeus Thicket Tinamou. Crypturellusboucardi Slaty-breastedTinamou. Crypturellus kerriae Choco Tinamou. GAVIIFORMES GAVIIDAE Gavia stellata Red-throated Loon. Gavia arctica Arctic Loon. Gavia pacifica Pacific Loon. Gavia immer Common Loon. Gavia adamsii Yellow-billed Loon. PODICIPEDIFORMES PODICIPEDIDAE Tachybaptusdominicus Least Grebe. Podilymbuspodiceps Pied-billed Grebe. ?Podilymbusgigas Atitlan Grebe. Podicepsauritus Horned Grebe. Podicepsgrisegena Red-neckedGrebe. Podicepsnigricollis Eared Grebe. Aechmophorusoccidentalis Western Grebe. Aechmophorusclarkii Clark's Grebe. PROCELLARIIFORMES DIOMEDEIDAE Thalassarchechlororhynchos Yellow-nosed Albatross. (A) Thalassarchecauta Shy Albatross.(A) Thalassarchemelanophris Black-browed Albatross. (A) Phoebetriapalpebrata Light-mantled Albatross. (A) Diomedea exulans WanderingAlbatross. (A) Phoebastriaimmutabilis Laysan Albatross. Phoebastrianigripes Black-lootedAlbatross. Phoebastriaalbatrus Short-tailedAlbatross. (N) PROCELLARIIDAE Fulmarus glacialis Northern Fulmar. Pterodroma neglecta KermadecPetrel. (A) Pterodroma
  • Common Birds of the Estero Bay Area

    Common Birds of the Estero Bay Area

    Common Birds of the Estero Bay Area Jeremy Beaulieu Lisa Andreano Michael Walgren Introduction The following is a guide to the common birds of the Estero Bay Area. Brief descriptions are provided as well as active months and status listings. Photos are primarily courtesy of Greg Smith. Species are arranged by family according to the Sibley Guide to Birds (2000). Gaviidae Red-throated Loon Gavia stellata Occurrence: Common Active Months: November-April Federal Status: None State/Audubon Status: None Description: A small loon seldom seen far from salt water. In the non-breeding season they have a grey face and red throat. They have a long slender dark bill and white speckling on their dark back. Information: These birds are winter residents to the Central Coast. Wintering Red- throated Loons can gather in large numbers in Morro Bay if food is abundant. They are common on salt water of all depths but frequently forage in shallow bays and estuaries rather than far out at sea. Because their legs are located so far back, loons have difficulty walking on land and are rarely found far from water. Most loons must paddle furiously across the surface of the water before becoming airborne, but these small loons can practically spring directly into the air from land, a useful ability on its artic tundra breeding grounds. Pacific Loon Gavia pacifica Occurrence: Common Active Months: November-April Federal Status: None State/Audubon Status: None Description: The Pacific Loon has a shorter neck than the Red-throated Loon. The bill is very straight and the head is very smoothly rounded.
  • Alpha Codes for 2168 Bird Species (And 113 Non-Species Taxa) in Accordance with the 62Nd AOU Supplement (2021), Sorted Taxonomically

    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
  • Taxonomic List of the Birds of Utah (Jan 2021 - 467 Species)

    Taxonomic List of the Birds of Utah (Jan 2021 - 467 Species)

    Taxonomic List of the Birds of Utah (Jan 2021 - 467 species) Names and order according to the 58th supplement to the American Outline Structure: Ornithologists’ Union Check-list of North American Birds ORDER (-FORMES) FAMILY (-DAE) (I) = introduced species “Utah Bird Records Committee” Subfamily (-nae) www.utahbirds.org/RecCom Genus species Common Name ANSERIFORMES Mergus serrator Red-breasted Merganser ANATIDAE Oxyura jamaicensis Ruddy Duck Dendrocygninae GALLIFORMES Dendrocygna bicolor Fulvous Whistling-Duck ODONTOPHORIDAE Anserinae Callipepla squamata Scaled Quail Anser caerulescens Snow Goose Callipepla californica California Quail Anser rossii Ross's Goose Callipepla gambelii Gambel's Quail Anser albifrons Greater White-fronted Goose PHASIANIDAE Branta bernicla Brant Phasianinae Branta hutchinsii Cackling Goose Alectoris chukar Chukar (I) Branta canadensis Canada Goose Perdix perdix Gray Partridge (I) Cygnus buccinator Trumpeter Swan Phasianus colchicus Ring-necked Pheasant (I) Cygnus columbianus Tundra Swan Tetraoninae Anatinae Bonasa umbellus Ruffed Grouse Aix sponsa Wood Duck Centrocercus urophasianus Greater Sage-Grouse Spatula querquedula Garganey Centrocercus minimus Gunnison Sage- Grouse Spatula discors Blue-winged Teal Lagopus leucura White-tailed Ptarmigan Spatula cyanoptera Cinnamon Teal Dendragapus obscurus Dusky Grouse Spatula clypeata Northern Shoveler Tympanuchus phasianellus Sharp-tailed Grouse Mareca strepera Gadwall Meleagridinae Mareca penelope Eurasian Wigeon Meleagris gallopavo Wild Turkey Mareca americana American
  • Evaluating and Treating the Kidneys

    Evaluating and Treating the Kidneys

    16_Nephrology.qxd 8/23/2005 10:41 AM Page 451 CHAPTER 16 Evaluating and Treating the Kidneys M. SCOTT ECHOLS, DVM, D ipl ABVP-A vian Renal diseases and their various classifications are well documented in the avian literature. The precise patho- genesis of avian renal disease, however, is not nearly as well described as it is in mammals. Renal disease has been shown to be fairly common in avian species. In studied poultry, as much as 29.6% of all disease condi- tions had abnormal pathology associated with or attrib- utable to renal disorders.20,214,251 Amyloidosis, urate nephrosis and gout were the most common diseases associated with mortality in a 4-year retrospective study conducted at a waterfowl park in Ontario, Canada.210 Thirty-seven percent of all avian cases presenting with renal tissue for histopathological examination, included over a 15-month period at the Schubot Exotic Bird Health Center, had one or more histologically identified kidney lesions.187 Nine of 75 pheasants (Phasianus colchicus) died with nephritis, one or both ureters impacted, and visceral gout in another comprehensive study on avian mortality.186 These case reports and retro- spective studies support the conclusion that renal dis- eases are relatively common and are clinically significant in multiple avian species. When compared to mammalian counterparts, the avian urogenital system has many structural and functional differences, which have been described previously.77,90,118,181,187,227 Differences including gross anatomy, renal portal blood flow and protein waste elimination should be considered when reviewing this chapter, as findings obtained from mammalian studies may not necessarily be applicable to birds.
  • Experimental Infections of Wild Birds with West Nile Virus

    Experimental Infections of Wild Birds with West Nile Virus

    Viruses 2014, 6, 752-781; doi:10.3390/v6020752 OPEN ACCESS viruses ISSN 1999-4915 www.mdpi.com/journal/viruses Review Experimental Infections of Wild Birds with West Nile Virus Elisa Pérez-Ramírez *, Francisco Llorente and Miguel Ángel Jiménez-Clavero Centro de Investigación en Sanidad Animal (CISA), Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnología Agraria y Alimentaria (INIA), Valdeolmos (Madrid), 28130, Spain; E-Mails: [email protected] (F.L.); [email protected] (M.A.J.-C.) * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +34-91-6202300; Fax: +34-91-6202247. Received: 2 December 2013; in revised form: 4 February 2014 / Accepted: 4 February 2014 / Published: 13 February 2014 Abstract: Avian models of West Nile virus (WNV) disease have become pivotal in the study of infection pathogenesis and transmission, despite the intrinsic constraints that represents this type of experimental research that needs to be conducted in biosecurity level 3 (BSL3) facilities. This review summarizes the main achievements of WNV experimental research carried out in wild birds, highlighting advantages and limitations of this model. Viral and host factors that determine the infection outcome are analyzed in detail, as well as recent discoveries about avian immunity, viral transmission, and persistence achieved through experimental research. Studies of laboratory infections in the natural host will help to understand variations in susceptibility and reservoir competence among bird species, as well as in the epidemiological patterns found in different affected areas. Keywords: West Nile virus; wild birds; experimental infection; pathogenesis; transmission; immunity; host competence 1. Introduction West Nile virus (WNV, Flaviviridae, Flavivirus) is an emerging zoonotic arbovirus (arthropod- borne virus) widely distributed throughout the world and with considerable impact both on public health and on animal health [1].
  • Notes and News

    Notes and News

    24 PAGEET AL. [Auk, Vol. 100 Bird Observatory. Ralph Widrig, Steven Cellman, tain Plover social systems.Living Bird 12: 69- Barbara Swarth, Susan Peaslee, Erica Buhrman, Don- 94. na Vaiano, Paul Neal, Sharon Goldwasser, Dennis HAYS, H., & M. LECI•o¾. 1971. Field criteria for Parker, John Harris, David Shuford, Stuart Johnson, determining incubation stage of the Common John and Ricky Warriner, Stephanie Zeiler, Elliot Tern. Wilson Bull. 83: 425-429. Burch, Brett Engstrom,Leslie Smith, BernadetteAl- HOLMES,R.T. 1966. Breeding ecologyand annual len, Greg Calllet, Tom Pogson,Tom Cassidy, Geoff cycle adaptationsof the Red-backedSandpiper Geupel, Doug Burgess,Judy Wagner, Kim Sullivan, (Calidrisalpina) in northern Alaska. Condor 68: JanetKjelmyr, and Tad Theimerhelped with the field 3-46. work and Philip Henderson, Carolyn Frederiksen, 1972. Ecologicalfactors influencing the and Frances Bidstrup provided valuable observa- breeding season schedule of Western Sandpi- tions. John and Ricky Warriner generouslyshared pers (Calidrisrnauri) in subarcticAlaska. Amer. with us their knowledge of Snowy Plovers at Mon- Midi. Natur. 87: 472-491. terey Bay, and CharlesSimis provided weather data. MAYFIELr•,H. F. 1961. Nesting successcalculated Jan Simis allowed us to camp on her land and ex- from exposure.Wilson Bull. 73: 255-261. tended to us very warm hospitality while we were --. 1975. Suggestionsfor calculatingnest suc- there. David Ainley, Peter Connors,David DeSante, cess. Wilson Bull. 87: 456-466. Marshall Howe, Harriet Huber, Frank Pitelka, and OI•INO, L. W., & M. L. KNOrrSON. 1972. Monogamy Chris Ribic provided helpful comments on the and polyandry in the SpottedSandpiper. Living manuscript.We thank theseorganizations and peo- Bird 11: 59-72.
  • Wild Game Bird Capture, Mark, and Release Methods

    Wild Game Bird Capture, Mark, and Release Methods

    SOP Number: SOP028 Title: Wild Game Bird Capture, Mark, and Release Methods Revision No: Replaces: Date in effect: Page: 04 03 9/19/2018 1 of 6 Author: Dr. Mark Wallace Responsible faculty: Revisions: Blake Grisham (Signature/Date) Brad Dabbert Ron Kendall 9/19/2018 Kerry Griffis-Kyle Phil Smith Clint Boal The following protocols will be used when capturing any species or subspecies of wild game birds in the order Galliformes (turkeys, pheasant, or quail). We provide specific protocols for wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo), northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) and scaled quail (Callipepla squamata), and lesser prairie-chickens (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus) which should serve as guidelines for most other Galliformes though special additional considerations may be required for some Threatened and Endangered species. For any animal that is to be released to the wild, the prime consideration shall be that the procedure will have minimal effect on the animal’s subsequent survival and reproductive potential. All protocols described here are current accepted practices established under the American Ornithologists Union Ad Hoc Committee on the Use of Wild Birds in Research Guidelines (1988) (AOU Guidelines) or recommended by the American Veterinary Medical Association Panel on Euthanasia (AVMA 2013). 1) Capture a. Capture with walk-in traps – Gallinaceous birds can be live-trapped at baited sites in box or cage traps (Baldwin 1947). i. Wild Turkeys – Turkeys will be passively captured in walk-in traps. Live traps used for capturing wild turkey are a funnel type trap (approx. 6’ wide x 8’ long x 4’ tall) constructed with livestock fence panels placed around the bait-site (Davis 1994).
  • Bird Checklist (2015)

    Bird Checklist (2015)

    Redwood National and State Park. Bird checklist (2015). Order Anseriformes (Swans, Geese, and Ducks) Greater White-fronted Goose Anser albifrons Rare Snow Goose Chen caerulescens Rare Black Brant Branta b. nigricans Rare Aleutian Cackling Goose Branta hutchinsii leucopareia Uncommon Canada Goose Branta canadensis Common Tundra Swan Cygnus columbianus Rare Wood Duck Aix sponsa Uncommon Gadwall Anas strepera Rare Eurasian Wigeon Anas penelope V. Rare American Wigeon Anas americana Uncommon Mallard Anas platyrhynchos Common Blue-winged Teal Anas discors V. Rare Cinnamon Teal Anas cyanoptera Rare Northern Shoveler Anas clypeata Rare Northern Pintail Anas acuta Rare Green-winged Teal Anas crecca Uncommon Canvasback Aythya valisineria V. Rare Redhead Aythya americana V. Rare Ring-necked Duck Aythya collaris Uncommon Greater Scaup Aythya marila Rare Lesser Scaup Aythya affinis Rare Harlequin Duck Histrionicus histrionicus V. Rare Surf Scoter Melanitta perspicillata Abundant White-winged Scoter Melanitta fusca Uncommon Black Scoter Melanitta americana Rare Long-tailed Duck Clangula hyemalis V. Rare Bufflehead Bucephala albeola Common Common Goldeneye Bucephala clangula V. Rare Hooded Merganser Lophodytes cucullatus Rare Common Merganser Mergus merganser Common Red-breasted Merganser Mergus serrator Rare Ruddy Duck Oxyura jamaicensis Rare Order Galliformes (Quail, Grouse, and Turkeys) Mountain Quail Oreortyx pictus Rare California Quail Callipepla californica Common Ring-necked Pheasant Phasianus colchicus V. Rare Ruffed Grouse Bonasa umbellus
  • Fire and Animal Behavior

    Fire and Animal Behavior

    Proceedings: 9th Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference 1969 Komarek, E.v. 1969. Fire and animal behavior. Pages 160-207 in E.V. Komarek (conference chariman). Proceedings Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference: No.9. Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference. 9. Tall Timbers Research Station, Tallahassee, FL. Fire and Animal Behavior E. V. KOMAREK, SR. Tall Ti'mbers Researcb Station Tallabassee, Florida , THE REACTIONS and relationships of animals to fire, the charcoal black burn, the straw-colored and later the green vegetation certainly attracted the attention of primitive man and his ancestors. In "Fire-and the Ecology of iV'lan" I proposed that man himself is the product of a fire environment-"pre-'man prirrtates as well as early Ulan inhabited fire environrnents and had to be 'fire­ selected' ... to live in such environments." (Komarek, 1967). Therefore, man's ultimate survival, as had been true with other ani­ mals that live in fire environments, depends upon a proper under­ standing of fire and the relationships of animals and plants to this element. 1V10dern literature, particularly in the United States, has been so saturated with the reputed dangers of forest fires to animals that he has developed a deep seated fear of all fires in nature. In this nation, the average individual is only beginning to realize the proper place of fire and fire control in forest, grassland and field. Unfortunately, much knowledge on fire and animal behavior that was common in­ formation to the American Indian, pioneers, and early farm and ranch people has been lost though in some parts of the ·world a large body of this knowledge still exists.