DOCSLIB.ORG

Nuisance Wildlife in Florida

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nuisance Wildlife in Florida Wildlife in Florida Angeline Scotten Senior Wildlife Assistance Biologist Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Agenda . Agency Overview . Captive wildlife . Identification . Non-native species in Polk County . Nuisance wildlife . Feeding rule . Contact information . Questions Crested caracara, photo curtsey of Ron Bielefeld FWC overview . State Wildlife Regulatory Agency – Protects and manages: . More than 575 species of wildlife . More than 200 native species of freshwater fish . More than 500 species of saltwater fish FWC overview . Mission: managing fish and wildlife resources for their long-term well-being and the benefit of the people. Public responsibilities: – Law enforcement – Research – Management – Outreach Captive Wildlife Captive Wildlife . FWC enforces the statutes and regulations governing Florida’s wildlife industry . FWC officers routinely conduct inspections to ensure compliance . Additional information: – http://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/captive- wildlife/ – 850-488-6253 – [email protected] Captive Wildlife . FAC 68A-6 covers possession of wildlife in captivity and permit requirements – Categories – Possession/ transfer – Sales – General regulations – Public contact – Caging requirements – Etc. Captive Wildlife . Florida requires permits for wildlife possession, exhibition and sale . Commercial and private facilities must have permits for many types of native & nonnative animals – Includes zoos, circuses, alligator farms, pet shops, tropical fish farms, rehabilitators – Anyone who owns a Class I,II or III animal Captive Wildlife- Class I . Class I Wildlife- Those that pose a significant danger to people . Substantial experience and specific caging requirements must be met . Permits are required for public exhibition . Prohibited from personal possession* *Unless the animal was possessed before August 1, 1980 or on or before August 27, 2009 for cougars, panthers or cheetahs Captive Wildlife- Class I . Baboons . Gavials . Gibbons and siamangs . Bears . Gorillas . Black caimans . Hippos . Cape buffalo . Hyenas and aardwolf . Cheetahs . Jaguars . Chimpanzees . Komodo dragons . Leopards . Cougars, panthers . Lions . Crocodiles . Orangutans . Drills & mandrills . Rhinos . Elephants . Snow leopards . Tigers Captive Wildlife- Class II . Class II Wildlife- can also pose a danger to people . Substantial experience and specific caging requirements must be met . Permits are required for public exhibition, sale or personal possession Captive Wildlife- Class II . African golden cats . Guereza monkeys . Vervet, grivet or green . African hunting dogs . Honey badgers monkeys Howler monkeys Wild cattle; forest, . Alligators, caimans . Idris woodland and aridland American badgers . Indian dholes antelope & similar . Binturongs . Langurs *non-native hoofstock . Bobcats . Macaques & Celebes . Wolverines . Caracals black apes . Wolves, coyotes & Managabeys jackals . Cassowary . Ocelots Clouded leopards . Old world badgers . Douc langurs . Ostrich . Dwarf crocodiles . Patas monkeys . European and Canadian lynx . Sakis Servals . Fishing cats . Snub-nosed langurs Giraffe & okapi . Tapir . Guenons . Temminck’s golden cats . Uakarus Captive Wildlife- Class III . Permit required for personal possession, exhibition or sale . Any non-domesticated wildlife species that’s not Class I or II . Includes but not limited to: parrots, finches, skunks, foxes, geckos, snakes and frogs . No formal list but… Captive Wildlife- Class III The following species do not require a permit for personal possession as long as no other rule or statute applies . Hamsters . Button quail . Honey possums, sugar gliders . Canaries . Lovebirds . Chinchillas . Moles; shrews . Cockatiels . Myna birds . Doves: ringed, ruddy and . Parrots diamond . Prairie dogs . Rabbits . Ferrets (domestic; European) . Rats and mice . Finches . Reptiles or amphibians . Gerbils, hedgehogs (nonvenomous, unprotected species . Guinea pigs that are NOT listed as endangered, conditional, etc) . Shell parakeets . Squirrels; chipmunks . Toucans Captive Wildlife- Conditional reptiles & lizards . Not allowed to be acquired . Indian or Burmese python for personal possession . Reticulated python . Dealers, exhibitors, . Northern African python researchers and trappers . Southern African python may apply for a permit to . Amethystine python import or possess conditional snakes and . Scrub python lizards . Green anaconda . Nile monitor Captive Wildlife- Conditional nonnative wildlife . FAC 68-5 . Conditional reptiles . Dangerous to the ecology . Red-eared sliders and/or health and welfare of . Nutria the people of Florida . Some freshwater fish & crayfish Captive Wildlife- Venomous reptiles . FAC 68A-1.004 (87) . A license is required to capture, keep, possess or exhibit any venomous reptile . All venomous reptiles in . All reptiles in the genus class Reptilia belonging Heloderma to families: . All reptiles in the family – Elapidae Colubridae belonging to the – Crotolidae genera: – Viperidae . Rhabdophis . Boiga – Hyprophiidae . Dispholidus . Thelatornis . Atractapsis Captive Wildlife- Protected species . No person shall take, possess, or sell and of the endangered or threatened species and there parts thereof…. 68A-27, Threatened & endangered species http://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/imp eriled/profiles/ . Migratory Bird Treaty Act – Prohibits killing, capturing, possession, sale, transportation and exportations of birds, feathers, eggs and nests – Nearly every native bird species in the US is covered Captive Wildlife- Protected species Painted bunting Indigo bunting Identification Nonnative snakes African rock python- conditional Burmese python- conditional African Rock (left); Burmese (right)- both conditional Nonnative snakes Green anaconda- conditional Reticulated python- conditional Nonnative snakes Ball python Common boa/ red-tail boa Nonnative lizards Argentine black & white tegu Nile monitor- conditional Savannah monitor Nonnative amphibians Cane toad Cuban tree frog Nonnative species in Polk County . Argentine black & white tegu . Savannah monitor . Brahminy blind snake . Cuban treefrog . Panther chameleon . Cane toad . Veiled chameleon . Rock pigeon . African spurred tortoise . European starling . White-nosed coati . Nile monitor . Muscovy duck . Burmese python . Green iguana . ….. Tokay gecko . Mediterranean gecko . Ball python . Common boa . Domestic ferret . House sparrow . Monk parakeet Native snakes Eastern hognose Florida pine snake Eastern coachwhip Black racers Native snakes Eastern indigo snake Yellow rat snake Corn snake Native venomous snakes Cottonmouths Eastern diamondback rattlesnake Native venomous snakes Dusky pygmy rattlesnake Coral snake Canebrake rattlesnake Copperhead Nuisance/ conflict wildlife Nuisance Wildlife Definition . FWC definition 68A-1.004 F.A.C.- – Causes or about to cause property damage – Presents a threat to public safety – An annoyance within, under or upon a building Bobcat, photo curtsey of Laura Bender- Jupiter Some people define ‘nuisance’ as presence of an unwanted animal. Nuisance wildlife rule: 68A-9.010 F.A.C . Allows the ‘take’ of nuisance wildlife by means other than gun and light*, steel traps*, or poison. – *Gun and light permit not required for take of non-protected mammals – *Steel traps can be used with a permit for otter, beaver, bobcat, coyote and fox . Nuisance wildlife can be taken on another’s property only with the landowner’s prior approval. Gray fox & river otters Nuisance wildlife rule: 68A-9.010 F.A.C . CANNOT be taken: – Any ‘listed’ species – Black bear – White-tailed deer – Bats* – Bobcat* – Any bird protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act Burrowing owl photo curtsey of Ron Bielefeld; bobcat photo curtesy of Laura Bender; pine snake, deer, bear and bonneted bat FWC photos Types of traps . Live/Cage Trap – Any box style trap where the animal is completely contained within the trap . Snare – A trapping device consisting of a noose designed to capture wildlife. Steel trap – Any mechanical device* designed and used to capture wildlife by seizing and holding a part of the body. Captured wildlife . Due to relocation laws, most wildlife are euthanized once captured . State law require humane euthanasia . Some species (hogs, alligators) are harvested . Important to note that relocated wildlife often does not survive – Stress of capture & transport – Introduction into new environment – Member of own species likely already established – Most wildlife have established territories and will leave new area – Relocation facilitates the transfer of disease Nuisance wildlife rule: 68A-9.010- Relocation 1. The animal is a native species and 2. The property where the nuisance animal is to be released is located within the county of capture and is a minimum of 40 contiguous acres; and 3. The person releasing the nuisance wildlife is in Argentine black & white tegu, FWC Photo possession, at time of release, of written permission from the property owner. Feeding Rule- Coyote, Fox, Raccoon 68A-1.004 General Prohibitions. (3) Intentionally placing food or garbage, allowing the placement of food or garbage, or offering food or garbage in such a manner that it attracts coyotes, foxes, or raccoons and in a manner that is likely to create or creates a public nuisance is prohibited. Quick Rite LLC Alaska-in-pictures.com Boomsbeat.com Feeding rule- bears (4)(a) Intentionally feeding bears is prohibited. (b) Placing food or garbage, allowing the placement of food or garbage, or offering food or garbage that attracts bears and is
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Check List Lists of Species Check List 12(1): 1833, 24 January 2016 Doi: ISSN 1809-127X © 2016 Check List and Authors
    12 1 1833 the journal of biodiversity data 24 January 2016 Check List LISTS OF SPECIES Check List 12(1): 1833, 24 January 2016 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.15560/12.1.1833 ISSN 1809-127X © 2016 Check List and Authors Carnivores (Mammalia) from areas of Nearctic–Neotropical transition in Puebla, central Mexico: presence, distribution, and conservation Osvaldo Eric Ramírez-Bravo1, 2* and Lorna Hernandez-Santin3 1 Durrell Institute for Conservation Ecology, Marlowe Building, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, CT2 7NR, England 2 Departamento de Ciencias Químico-Biológicas, Universidad de las Américas, Puebla, Santa Catarina Mártir, Sin Número, Cholula, Puebla. CP. 72820, México 3 School of Biological Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia * Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: The Nearctic and Neotropical realms converge and Neotropical realms meet. Thus, Puebla contains in central Mexico, where many areas have not been a wide variety of habitats that range from semi-arid adequately characterized. Our objective was to revise to tropical rain forest, including cloud forests, oak the distribution and conservation status of carnivores in forests, pine forests, tropical dry forests, and xeric scrub the state of Puebla, central Mexico. Between September (Ramírez-Pulido et al. 2005). Elevation in the region 2008 and January 2011, we conducted interviews varies widely ranging from a minimum of 200 m on the and fieldwork on seven previously selected areas. We coastal plains of the Gulf of Mexico up to a maximum of complemented our data with bibliographical research. 5,700 m at the Pico de Orizaba, with abrupt variations We obtained 733 records for 21 species, representing on its four different mountain ranges (Ramírez-Pulido 63% of the carnivores reported for Mexico.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogeographic and Diversification Patterns of the White-Nosed Coati
    Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 131 (2019) 149–163 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ympev Phylogeographic and diversification patterns of the white-nosed coati (Nasua narica): Evidence for south-to-north colonization of North America T ⁎ Sergio F. Nigenda-Moralesa, , Matthew E. Gompperb, David Valenzuela-Galvánc, Anna R. Layd, Karen M. Kapheime, Christine Hassf, Susan D. Booth-Binczikg, Gerald A. Binczikh, Ben T. Hirschi, Maureen McColginj, John L. Koprowskik, Katherine McFaddenl,1, Robert K. Waynea, ⁎ Klaus-Peter Koepflim,n, a Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA b School of Natural Resources, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211, USA c Departamento de Ecología Evolutiva, Centro de Investigación en Biodiversidad y Conservación, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Morelos, Cuernavaca, Morelos 62209, Mexico d Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA e Department of Biology, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322, USA f Wild Mountain Echoes, Vail, AZ 85641, USA g New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, NY 12233, USA h Amsterdam, New York 12010, USA i Zoology and Ecology, College of Science and Engineering, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD 4811, Australia j Department of Biological Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA k School of Natural Resources and the Environment, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA l College of Agriculture, Forestry and Life Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA m Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, National Zoological Park, Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Coati, White-Nosed - Nasua Narica Page 1 of 19
    BISON-M - Coati, White-nosed - Nasua narica Page 1 of 19 Home Disclaimer Policy Close Window Booklet data last updated on 9/11/2009 Back Print Page Coati, White-nosed Note: If you have any questions, concerns or updates for this species, please click HERE and let us know. Tip: Use Ctrl-F on your keyboard to search for text in this Jump to Section: == Please Select == booklet. Taxonomy Back to top Species IDa 050165 Name Coati, White-nosed Other Common Coatimundi;Coati (Indian Names name);Pizote;El gato solo (Los gatos en familia);Chula;Chulo Category 05 Mammals Elcode AMAJE03010 BLM Code NANA Phylum Chordata Subphylum Vertebrata Class Mammalia Subclass Theria Click here to search Google for images of this species. Order Carnivora SubOrder Fissipedia Predicted Habitat Family Procyonidae Genus Nasua Species narica Subspecies No Data Submitted Authority (Merriam) Scientific Name Nasua narica Account Type This account represents the entire species, including any and all subspecies recognized in http://bison-m.org/booklet.aspx?id=050165 4/11/2011 BISON-M - Coati, White-nosed - Nasua narica Page 2 of 19 the Southwest. There are no separate subspecies accounts relating to this species. Taxonomic 01, 02, 06, 16, 24, 26, References 33 Click here to explore the map further. Comments on Taxonomy The common Mexican coatimundi --Nasua nasua-- barely enters New Mexico, where it is rare and represented by but a single record *01*. This species is also known as Coati (Indian name), Pizote, El gato solo (Los gatos en familia), Chula, and Chulo (Hass, 1997) *33*. 9/23/93 -- Species name changed to N.
    [Show full text]
  • Causes and Consequences of Coati Sociality
    chapter 28 Causes and consequences of coati sociality Ben T. Hirsch and Matthew E. Gompper Ring-tailed coatis (Nasua nasua) © B. Hirsch Introduction of Kaufmann’s work, and similar studies on pri- mates and other carnivores, have greatly enhanced Over fifty years ago John Kaufmann conducted a our understanding of how and why animals live in two-year study on the white-nosed coati (Nasua groups. Such issues frame the core of the modern narica) on Barro Colorado Island, Panama. The field of behavioural ecology. resulting monograph (Kaufmann 1962) is a solid Animals live in groups when the benefits (e.g. examination of the natural history of the species, a greater ability to survive threats from predators with an emphasis on understanding its social struc- and pathogens) are greater than the costs (e.g. in- ture. Although many such studies now exist, Kauf- creased competition for resources such as food or mann’s study bordered on revolutionary at the time mates) (Krause and Ruxton 2002). Overlaying such because this was one of the first studies to gather cost–benefit ratios are the genetic relatedness of in- detailed ethological data of wild vertebrates via dividuals and the willingness of animals to coop- habituation of free-living social animals. The idea erate in a manner that increases the benefits and of following animals from a distance of just a few decreases the costs of sociality. Among the mus- metres, and observing the nuances of their behav- teloid carnivores, studies of coatis have contrib- iour, was relatively novel at the time. The results uted more to our understanding of the causes and Hirsch, B.
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution of American Black Bear Occurrences and Human–Bear Incidents in Missouri
    Distribution of American black bear occurrences and human–bear incidents in Missouri Clay M. Wilton1,3, Jerrold L. Belant1,4, and Jeff Beringer2 1Carnivore Ecology Laboratory, Forest and Wildlife Research Center, Mississippi State University, Box 9690, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA 2Missouri Department of Conservation, 3500 E Gans Rd., Columbia, MO 65202, USA Abstract: American black bears (Ursus americanus) were nearly extirpated from Missouri (USA) by the early 1900s and began re-colonizing apparent suitable habitat in southern Missouri following reintroduction efforts in Arkansas (USA) during the 1960s. We used anecdotal occurrence data from 1989 to 2010 and forest cover to describe broad patterns of black bear re-colonization, human–bear incidents, and bear mortality reports in Missouri. Overall, 1,114 black bear occurrences (including 118 with dependent young) were reported, with 95% occurring within the Ozark Highlands ecological region. We created evidentiary standards to increase reliability of reports, resulting in exclusion of 21% of all occurrences and 13% of dependent young. Human–bear incidents comprised 5% of total occurrences, with 86% involving bears eating anthropogenic foods. We found support for a northward trend in latitudinal extent of total occurrences over time, but not for reported incidents. We found a positive correlation between the distribution of bear occurrences and incidents. Twenty bear mortalities were reported, with 60% caused by vehicle collisions. Black bear occurrences have been reported throughout most of Missouri’s forested areas, although most reports of reproduction occur in the southern and eastern Ozark Highlands. Though occurrence data are often suspect, the distribution of reliable reports supports our understanding of black bear ecology in Missouri and reveals basic, but important, large-scale patterns important for establishing management and research plans.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxonomic Boundaries and Geographic Distributions Revealed by an Integrative Systematic Overview of the Mountain Coatis, Nasuella (Carnivora: Procyonidae)
    Taxonomic boundaries and geographic distributions revealed by an integrative systematic overview of the mountain coatis, Nasuella (Carnivora: Procyonidae) Kristofer M. HELGEN1, Roland Kays2,3, Lauren E. HELGEN1, Mirian T. N. Tsuchiya-JEREP4,5, C. Miguel Pinto6,7, Klaus-Peter KOEPFLI8, Eduardo EIZIRIK4 and Jesús E. MALDONADO5 Abstract The procyonid taxon Nasuella Hollister, 1915, is currently recognized as a monotypic genus comprising the single species N. olivacea (Gray, 1865), the Mountain Coati, found in montane habitats (circa 1300-4250 m) in the Andes of Venezuela, Colombia, and Ecuador. In this study we utilize museum specimens to examine the phylogenetic relationships, taxonomy and geographic distribution of Nasuella populations with an integrative systematic approach. Drawing on morphological comparisons of pelage, cranial, and dental characters, and molecular comparisons of the mitochondrial gene cytochrome b (from recent and historical samples), we confirm that Nasuella is closely related to other coatis (Nasua) and show that there are two deeply divergent lineages represented within the taxonomic bounds of Nasuella. We recognize and diagnose these taxa as two distinctive mountain coati species, corresponding to the Eastern Mountain Coati Nasuella meridensis (Thomas, 1901), endemic to the Venezuelan Andes, and the Western Mountain Coati N. olivacea, distributed in the Andes of Colombia and Ecuador. We use locality and habitat data associated with museum specimens to model the global geographic range of both species. From this we predict areas of undocumented (i.e., currently unvouchered) occurrence, areas of habitat loss as- sociated with land use changes, and the geographic barrier separating the distributions of N. meridensis and N. olivacea. This newfound understanding of taxonomy and distribution should allow for a revised conservation assessment for mountain coatis.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Inspected at Last Inspection
    United States Department of Agriculture Customer: 3432 Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Inspection Date: 10-AUG-16 Animal Inspected at Last Inspection Cust No Cert No Site Site Name Inspection 3432 86-C-0001 001 ARIZONA CENTER FOR NATURE 10-AUG-16 CONSERVATION Count Species 000003 Cheetah 000005 Cattle/cow/ox/watusi 000003 Mandrill *Male 000006 Hamadryas baboon 000004 Grevys zebra 000008 Thomsons gazelle 000002 Cape Porcupine 000002 Lion 000002 African hunting dog 000002 Tiger 000008 Common eland 000002 Spotted hyena 000001 White rhinoceros 000007 Spekes gazelle 000005 Giraffe 000004 Kirks dik-dik 000002 Fennec fox 000003 Ring-tailed lemur 000069 Total ARHYNER United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 2016082567967934 Insp_id Inspection Report Arizona Center For Nature Conservation Customer ID: 3432 455 N. Galvin Parkway Certificate: 86-C-0001 Phoenix, AZ 85008 Site: 001 ARIZONA CENTER FOR NATURE CONSERVATION Type: ROUTINE INSPECTION Date: 19-OCT-2016 No non-compliant items identified during this inspection. This inspection and exit interview were conducted with the primate manager. Additional Inspectors Gwendalyn Maginnis, Veterinary Medical Officer AARON RHYNER, D V M Prepared By: Date: AARON RHYNER USDA, APHIS, Animal Care 19-OCT-2016 Title: VETERINARY MEDICAL OFFICER 6077 Received By: (b)(6), (b)(7)(c) Date: Title: FACILITY REPRESENTATIVE 19-OCT-2016 Page 1 of 1 United States Department of Agriculture Customer: 3432 Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Inspection Date: 19-OCT-16
    [Show full text]
  • Black Bear/Cougar Enrichment List
    Black Bear/Cougar Enrichment List Tire Feeder | Wildlife Toy Box Price: $245.68+ tax and shipping Kegco 15.5 Gallon (1/2 Barrel) Commercial Keg Price:$166.64 Weeble Feeder Price:$475+shipping Bobcat Enrichment List Essential Oils Scent enrichment $10-$50 Tire Feeders $244.00 + shipping Otto Environmental Amazing Graze $46.75+Shipping Ring-tail Lemur Enrichment List Snack Shack | Wildlife Toy Box Price:$217.44 + tax and shipping Lemur and coati enrichment Rocky Lou | Wildlife Toy Box Price: $191.86 + tax and shipping Double Ball - 10 inch 1 hole Price: $29.00 Small and Large animal enrichment Blank CDs Price:$5-$20 Use to make nature CDs for Auditory enrichment Akro-Mils 10144 D 20-Inch by 16-Inch by 6- 1/2-Inch Hardware and Craft Cabinet, Black Amazon $37.64 Raccoon, Coati, Badger and Fox Enrichment Kong's Black Extreme (S, M, L, or XL) $5-$15 Small animal enrichment KONG Large Traxx Tire Price:$7-$15 Small carnivore enrichment Boomer Ball - 10 inch - Boomer Ball Price: $20.00 Small and large animal enrichment Sargent Art Tempera Paint Price:$2-$20 Must be Non-toxic Colors: Blue, Green, Yellow, Orange, and purple Stump Feeder From Otto environmental $65.00+ shipping Wolf and Coyote Enrichment List Bubbletastic Bacon Dog Bubbles Price:$12-$55 Must be this brand, it is non-toxic to the animals. Small and Large carnivore enrichment Ball 12 inch Thickness: .500 wall Price: $127.00 Home Alone Medium, 22-66 Lbs. Otto Environmental Price: $97.00+shipping Hoof stock– Longhorn, Pony, Donkey, Muntjac, Bison, Llama, Mule deer, Goats, Pronghorn and
    [Show full text]
  • Procyonid (Procyonidae) Care Manual
    PROCYONID (Procyonidae) CARE MANUAL CREATED BY THE AZA Small Carnivore Taxon Advisory Group IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE AZA Animal Welfare Committee Procyonid (Procyonidae) Care Manual Procyonid (Procyonidae) Care Manual Published by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums in association with the AZA Animal Welfare Committee Formal Citation: AZA Small Carnivore TAG 2010. Procyonid (Procyonidae) Care Manual. Association of Zoos and Aquariums, Silver Spring, MD. p.114. Original Completion Date: 13 August 2008, 1st revision June 2009, 2nd revision May 2010 Authors and Significant contributors: Jan Reed-Smith, M.A., Columbus Zoo and Aquarium Celeste (Dusty) Lombardi, Columbus Zoo and Aquarium, AZA Small Carnivore TAG (SCTAG) Chair Mike Maslanka, M.S., Smithsonian‟s National Zoo, AZA Nutrition SAG Barbara Henry, M.S., Cincinnati Zoo and Botanical Garden, AZA Nutrition SAG Chair Miles Roberts, Smithsonian‟s National Zoo Kim Schilling, Animals for Awareness Anneke Moresco, D.V.M., Ph.D., UC Davis, University of California See Appendix L for additional contributors to the Procyonid Care Manual. AZA Staff Editors: Lacey Byrnes, B.S. ACM Intern Candice Dorsey, Ph.D., Director of Animal Conservation Cover Photo Credits: Liz Toth Debbie Thompson Cindy Colling Reviewers: Sue Booth-Binczik, Ph.D., Dallas Zoo Denise Bressler, Logan & Abby‟s Fund Kristofer Helgen, Smithsonian Institution Kim Schilling, Animals for Awareness Mindy Stinner, Conservators‟ Center, Inc. Debbie Thompson, Little Rock Zoo Rhonda Votino Debborah Colbert Ph.D., AZA, Vice President of Animal Conservation Paul Boyle Ph.D., AZA, Senior Vice President of Conservation and Education Disclaimer: This manual presents a compilation of knowledge provided by recognized animal experts based on the current science, practice, and technology of animal management.
    [Show full text]
  • LISTED CATS of TEXAS and ARIZONA RECOVERY PLAN (With Emphasis on the Ocelot)
    LISTED CATS OF TEXAS AND ARIZONA RECOVERY PLAN (With Emphasis On The Ocelot) U.S. Fish and \Mldlife Service Albuquerque, New Mexico 1990 Cover illustration by Sandy Truett. Used with the permission of Dr. Joe C. Truett LISTED CATS OF TEXAS AND ARIZONA RECOVERY PLAN (With Emphasis On The Ocelot) Prepared by Gary Harwell, D.V.M. D. Peter Siminski, M.S. Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum Tucson, Arizona For U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 2 Albuquerque, New Mexico Edited by Alisa 11. Shull, Steve Van Riper, Steven P. Thompson, Sonja E. Jahrs oe r Approved: _______________________________ e iona tOr, Region 2 Date: _____________________ — DfSCLAIMER This is the completed Listed Cats of Texas and Arizona Recovery Plan (With Emphasis on the Ocelot). It has been approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. It does not necessarily represent official positions or approvals of cooperating agencies and does not necessarily represent the view of all individuals who played a role in preparing this plan. This plan is subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and completion of tasks described in the plan. Goals and objectives will be attained and funds expended contingent upon appropriations, priorities, and other constraints. Literature Citations should read as follows: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1990. Listed Cats of Texas and Arizona Recovery Plan (With Emphasis on the Ocelot). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 131 pp. Additional copies may be purchased from: Fish and Wildlife Reference Service 6011 Executive Blvd. Rockville, Maryland 20852 301/770—3000 or Toll Free 1/800—582—3421 The fee for the plan varies depending on the number of pages of the plan.
    [Show full text]
  • 509309, Fixadas Anatômica Com O Subsequente Registro Fotográfico
    Biotemas, 30 (2): 43-50, junho de 2017 http://dx.doi.org/10.5007/2175-7925.2017v30n2p4343 ISSNe 2175-7925 Macroscopic description of thoracic member musculature in Cuniculus paca (Linnaeus, 1766) (Rodentia, Cuniculidae) Rodrigo Gomes de Souza 1 Joelma de Faria Santos 1 Ana Paula de Aguiar Pires 1 Luciana dos Santos Medeiros 2 Vânia Maria França Ribeiro 2 Yuri Karaccas de Carvalho 2* Universidade Federal do Acre 1 Curso de Graduação em Medicina Veterinária 2 Centro de Ciências Biológicas e da Natureza BR 364, Km 04, Distrito Industrial, CEP 69.920-900, Rio Branco – AC, Brasil * Autor para correspondência [email protected] Submetido em 12/11/2016 Aceito para publicação em 17/04/2017 Resumo Descrição macroscópica da musculatura do membro torácico de paca (Cuniculus paca) (Linnaeus, 1766). A paca (Cuniculus paca) é um animal que pertence ao Filo Chordata, Classe Mammalia e Família Cuniculidae. A grande demanda pela carne desse animal levou à sua domesticação e ao desenvolvimento de criatórios na região Amazônica e em outros estados do país. Apesar do crescente consumo da carne de paca, o conhecimento sobre a musculatura ainda é escasso. A descrição anatômica dos membros torácicos da paca dará subsidio para futuros estudos zootécnicos e veterinários, possibilitando o desenvolvimento amazônico concomitante à preservação da espécie. Para o presente estudo, foram utilizadas quatro pacas adultas, provenientes do Projeto Caboclinho da Fazenda Experimental Catuaba/UFAC, sob a autorização IBAMA no 509309, ixadas em solução de formol a 10%. Após dissecação do membro torácico dos animais, foi realizada a descrição anatômica com o subsequente registro fotográico.
    [Show full text]
  • EA LCNWR Hunt Plan
    Environmental Assessment Leslie Canyon National Wildlife Refuge Hunt Plan January 2020 Prepared By: Tasha Harden U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Leslie Canyon National Wildlife Refuge Table of Contents Proposed Action .......................................................................................................................... 4 Background ................................................................................................................................. 4 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action ................................................................................ 6 Alternatives ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Alternatives Considered .............................................................................................................. 6 Alternative A – Continue Current Management Strategies (No Action Alternative) ............. 7 Alternative B – Proposed Action Alternative – Opening Hunting on LCNWR ..................... 7 Alternative(s) Considered, But Dismissed from Further Consideration ................................... 10 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ........................................................... 10 Affected Environment ............................................................................................................... 10 Environmental Consequences of the Action ............................................................................
    [Show full text]