DOCSLIB.ORG

A Plan to Keep Rats out of Alaska

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Plan to Keep Rats out of Alaska Wildlife and People at Risk: A Plan to Keep Rats Out of Alaska Ellen I. Fritts Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Wildlife Conservation October 2007 STATE OF ALASKA Sarah Palin, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME Denby Lloyd, Commissioner DIVISION OF WILDLIFE CONSERVATION Doug Larsen, Director For information about formats that may be available, contact our publications specialist: Publications Specialist ADF&G, Wildlife Conservation P.O. Box 115526 Juneau, AK 99811-5526 (907) 465-4176 Email: [email protected] © 2007 Alaska Department of Fish and Game This document should be cited as: Fritts, E. I. 2007. Wildlife and People at Risk: A Plan to Keep Rats Out of Alaska. Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Juneau Alaska. 190 pp. This version, updated 10/23/07, should replace all prior web versions. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) administers all programs and activities free from discrimination based on race, color, national origin, age, sex, religion, marital status, pregnancy, parenthood, or disability. The department administers all programs and activities in compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility please write: ♦ ADF&G ADA Coordinator, PO Box 115526, Juneau, AK 99811-5526. The department’s ADA Coordinator can be reached via phone at the following numbers: (VOICE) 907-465-6077, (Statewide Telecommunication Device for the Deaf) 1-800-478-3648, (Juneau TDD) 907-465-3646, or (FAX) 907- 465-6078. ♦ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4040 N Fairfax Drive, Suite 300 Webb, Arlington, VA 22203, or; ♦ Office of Equal Opportunity, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington DC 20240 For information on alternative formats and questions on this publication, please contact the following: ♦ Publications Specialist, ADF&G/Division of Wildlife Conservation, PO Box 115526, Juneau, AK 99811- 5526, or call 907-465-4176. Cover graphic by Katherine Hocker, ADF&G. Wildlife and People at Risk: A Plan to Keep Rats Out of Alaska Ellen I. Fritts Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Wildlife Conservation October 2007 Table of Contents Abstract......................................................................................................................................... iv Executive Summary: Keeping Rats Out of Alaska.................................................................... v Findings ...................................................................................................................................................vi Conclusion..............................................................................................................................................vii Recommendations ..................................................................................................................................vii 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1 1.1 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE OF THIS PLAN.......................................................................................1 1.2 THE PROBLEM WITH NONNATIVE AND INVASIVE SPECIES.................................................................2 1.3 VULNERABILITY OF ISLAND SPECIES AND ECOSYSTEMS ...................................................................3 1.3.1 Islands Hard Hit by Extinctions.............................................................................................................4 1.3.2 Biodiversity and Abundance Decrease ..................................................................................................4 1.3.3 Devastation can be Rapid and Complete...............................................................................................5 2.0 INVASIVE RODENTS OF CONCERN......................................................................... 7 2.1 NONNATIVE RODENTS IN ALASKA .....................................................................................................7 2.1.1 The Norway Rat .....................................................................................................................................7 2.1.2 The Roof Rat ..........................................................................................................................................9 2.1.3 Rat Behavior is Predictable.................................................................................................................10 2.1.4 The House Mouse ................................................................................................................................10 2.2 A HISTORY OF DAMAGE TO HUMAN INTERESTS...............................................................................11 2.2.1 Food and Agricultural Impacts............................................................................................................11 2.2.2 Human Health and Sanitation Effects..................................................................................................12 2.2.3 Damage to Property, Goods and Equipment.......................................................................................12 2.2.4 Ecological Effects ................................................................................................................................13 2.2.5 Known Risk to Seabirds .......................................................................................................................13 2.2.6 Ecosystems Unravel.............................................................................................................................14 3.0 RATS IN ALASKA: WHY BE CONCERNED? ......................................................... 15 3.1 WORLD-CLASS WILDLIFE RESOURCES AT RISK ...............................................................................15 3.2 ALASKA’S BIRDS ON THE FRONT LINES ...........................................................................................16 3.3 POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE .....................................................................................18 3.4 ENDANGERED SPECIES AND OTHER CONCERNS...............................................................................19 3.5 ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, AND SAFETY CONCERNS .................................................................................20 3.5.1 Wildlife Harvest and Tourism Concerns..............................................................................................20 3.5.2 Threats to Public Health and Safety ....................................................................................................22 4.0 INVASIVE RODENTS IN ALASKA: CURRENT STATUS.................................... 25 4.1 EXTENT OF WILD RAT POPULATIONS...............................................................................................25 4.2 RODENTS AS PETS AND LABORATORY SUBJECTS.............................................................................27 4.3 INVASIVE RODENT ACCESS TO ALASKA...........................................................................................28 5.0 INVASIVE RODENT MANAGEMENT...................................................................... 33 5.1 APPROACHES: PREVENTION VERSUS ERADICATION AND CONTROL ................................................33 5.2 PAST RAT REMOVAL EFFORTS IN OTHER AREAS.............................................................................33 5.3 RAT PLANNING, PREVENTION AND CONTROL EFFORTS IN ALASKA ................................................35 5.3.1 Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge ..........................................................................................35 5.3.2 Rat Spill Prevention and Response......................................................................................................36 5.3.3 Community and Commercial Efforts ...................................................................................................38 i 5.3.4 Education and Outreach Efforts ..........................................................................................................39 5.3.5 Recent Legal and Regulatory Efforts...................................................................................................41 5.3.6 Alaska’s Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy....................................................................41 6.0 RESEARCH, RESTORATION AND MONITORING............................................... 43 6.1 CONDUCTING AND REPORTING ON RESEARCH.................................................................................43 6.2 NEED FOR PRE-INVASION BASELINE SURVEY DATA........................................................................43 6.3 ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION .............................................................................................................44 6.3.1 Natural Versus Assisted Restoration ...................................................................................................44 6.3.2 Recommendations Related to Restoration ...........................................................................................46 6.4 ECOSYSTEM MONITORING ................................................................................................................47 7.0 A PLAN FOR
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mammal Species Native to the USA and Canada for Which the MIL Has an Image (296) 31 July 2021
    Mammal species native to the USA and Canada for which the MIL has an image (296) 31 July 2021 ARTIODACTYLA (includes CETACEA) (38) ANTILOCAPRIDAE - pronghorns Antilocapra americana - Pronghorn BALAENIDAE - bowheads and right whales 1. Balaena mysticetus – Bowhead Whale BALAENOPTERIDAE -rorqual whales 1. Balaenoptera acutorostrata – Common Minke Whale 2. Balaenoptera borealis - Sei Whale 3. Balaenoptera brydei - Bryde’s Whale 4. Balaenoptera musculus - Blue Whale 5. Balaenoptera physalus - Fin Whale 6. Eschrichtius robustus - Gray Whale 7. Megaptera novaeangliae - Humpback Whale BOVIDAE - cattle, sheep, goats, and antelopes 1. Bos bison - American Bison 2. Oreamnos americanus - Mountain Goat 3. Ovibos moschatus - Muskox 4. Ovis canadensis - Bighorn Sheep 5. Ovis dalli - Thinhorn Sheep CERVIDAE - deer 1. Alces alces - Moose 2. Cervus canadensis - Wapiti (Elk) 3. Odocoileus hemionus - Mule Deer 4. Odocoileus virginianus - White-tailed Deer 5. Rangifer tarandus -Caribou DELPHINIDAE - ocean dolphins 1. Delphinus delphis - Common Dolphin 2. Globicephala macrorhynchus - Short-finned Pilot Whale 3. Grampus griseus - Risso's Dolphin 4. Lagenorhynchus albirostris - White-beaked Dolphin 5. Lissodelphis borealis - Northern Right-whale Dolphin 6. Orcinus orca - Killer Whale 7. Peponocephala electra - Melon-headed Whale 8. Pseudorca crassidens - False Killer Whale 9. Sagmatias obliquidens - Pacific White-sided Dolphin 10. Stenella coeruleoalba - Striped Dolphin 11. Stenella frontalis – Atlantic Spotted Dolphin 12. Steno bredanensis - Rough-toothed Dolphin 13. Tursiops truncatus - Common Bottlenose Dolphin MONODONTIDAE - narwhals, belugas 1. Delphinapterus leucas - Beluga 2. Monodon monoceros - Narwhal PHOCOENIDAE - porpoises 1. Phocoena phocoena - Harbor Porpoise 2. Phocoenoides dalli - Dall’s Porpoise PHYSETERIDAE - sperm whales Physeter macrocephalus – Sperm Whale TAYASSUIDAE - peccaries Dicotyles tajacu - Collared Peccary CARNIVORA (48) CANIDAE - dogs 1. Canis latrans - Coyote 2.
    [Show full text]
  • North American Game Birds Or Animals
    North American Game Birds & Game Animals LARGE GAME Bear: Black Bear, Brown Bear, Grizzly Bear, Polar Bear Goat: bezoar goat, ibex, mountain goat, Rocky Mountain goat Bison, Wood Bison Moose, including Shiras Moose Caribou: Barren Ground Caribou, Dolphin Caribou, Union Caribou, Muskox Woodland Caribou Pronghorn Mountain Lion Sheep: Barbary Sheep, Bighorn Deer: Axis Deer, Black-tailed Deer, Sheep, California Bighorn Sheep, Chital, Columbian Black-tailed Deer, Dall’s Sheep, Desert Bighorn Mule Deer, White-tailed Deer Sheep, Lanai Mouflon Sheep, Nelson Bighorn Sheep, Rocky Elk: Rocky Mountain Elk, Tule Elk Mountain Bighorn Sheep, Stone Sheep, Thinhorn Mountain Sheep Gemsbok SMALL GAME Armadillo Marmot, including Alaska marmot, groundhog, hoary marmot, Badger woodchuck Beaver Marten, including American marten and pine marten Bobcat Mink North American Civet Cat/Ring- tailed Cat, Spotted Skunk Mole Coyote Mouse Ferret, feral ferret Muskrat Fisher Nutria Fox: arctic fox, gray fox, red fox, swift Opossum fox Pig: feral swine, javelina, wild boar, Lynx wild hogs, wild pigs Pika Skunk, including Striped Skunk Porcupine and Spotted Skunk Prairie Dog: Black-tailed Prairie Squirrel: Abert’s Squirrel, Black Dogs, Gunnison’s Prairie Dogs, Squirrel, Columbian Ground White-tailed Prairie Dogs Squirrel, Gray Squirrel, Flying Squirrel, Fox Squirrel, Ground Rabbit & Hare: Arctic Hare, Black- Squirrel, Pine Squirrel, Red Squirrel, tailed Jackrabbit, Cottontail Rabbit, Richardson’s Ground Squirrel, Tree Belgian Hare, European
    [Show full text]
  • Pacific Seabird Program Business Plan (Dawson Et Al
    National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Business Plan for Pacific Seabirds (Update) September 2016 Pacific Seabirds | 1 Purpose of a Business Plan The purpose of a NFWF business plan is to provide a detailed blueprint of the strategies and resources required to achieve the desired conservation outcomes. The strategies discussed in this plan do not represent solely the Foundation’s view of the actions necessary to achieve the identified conservation goals, but instead reflect the majority view of the many federal, state, academic, and organizational experts that were consulted during plan development. This plan is not meant to duplicate ongoing work but rather to invest in areas where gaps might exist so as to support the efforts of the larger conservation community. Acknowledgements We thank everyone who contributed to this business plan. We are especially grateful to the seabird experts, funding partners, and working group teams who took the time to develop, contribute, and review material. We acknowledge the contributions of Dantzker Consulting, Advanced Conservation Strategies, and Clarus Research for their evaluation of the Pacific Seabird Program and recommendations for continued implementation of this program. We also wish to acknowledge the valuable input resulting from discussions and written material provided by implementation and funding partners including (but not limited to): The American Bird Conservancy, BirdLife International, The David and Lucille Packard Foundation, The Farallon Institute, Island Conservation, the National Audubon Society, National Park Service, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, Oikonos, University of California Santa Cruz Coastal Conservation Action Lab, The University of Washington, The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, The U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Database Support for the Alaska Comprehensive Conservation Strategy Planning Effort
    DATABASE SUPPORT FOR THE ALASKA COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION STRATEGY PLANNING EFFORT By Tracey Gotthardt, Tamara Fields, Kelly Walton, Keith Boggs and Santosh KC Alaska Natural Heritage Program College of Arts and Sciences University of Alaska Anchorage 707 A Street Anchorage, AK 99501 June 2010 Partnership in Nongame Wildlife Research - AKNHP ii Partnership in Nongame Wildlife Research - AKNHP iii Partnership in Nongame Wildlife Research - AKNHP ABSTRACT The Alaska Natural Heritage Program (AKNHP) entered into a partnership with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game’s (ADF&G) Wildlife Diversity Program to summarize biological, ecological, and distribution information on a number of species featured in their Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy (CWCS) to aid with informed decision-making regarding the conservation status of these animals. The products resulting from this partnership, which occurred between 2004 and 2007, included summarizing ecological and biological data for 92 “featured species” to assess their conservation status rank. Additionally, range and element occurrence distribution maps were created for a subset of these species (56 of the 92), and the associated spatial information was entered into AKNHP’s Biotics database. The purpose of this project was to provide ongoing database support for the CWCS featured species dataset and to enhance its utility through the creation of integrated output products to ADF&G and its partner agencies via a web-based interface. During the course of this project AKNHP staff quality
    [Show full text]
  • Threats to Seabirds: a Global Assessment 2 3 4 Authors: Maria P
    1 Threats to seabirds: a global assessment 2 3 4 Authors: Maria P. Dias1*, Rob Martin1, Elizabeth J. Pearmain1, Ian J. Burfield1, Cleo Small2, Richard A. 5 Phillips3, Oliver Yates4, Ben Lascelles1, Pablo Garcia Borboroglu5, John P. Croxall1 6 7 8 Affiliations: 9 1 - BirdLife International. The David Attenborough Building, Pembroke Street Cambridge CB2 3QZ UK 10 2 - BirdLife International Marine Programme, RSPB, The Lodge, Sandy, SG19 2DL 11 3 – British Antarctic Survey. Natural Environment Research Council, High Cross, Madingley Road, 12 Cambridge CB3 0ET, UK 13 4 – Centre for the Environment, Fishery and Aquaculture Science, Pakefield Road, Lowestoft, NR33, UK 14 5 - Global Penguin Society, University of Washington and CONICET Argentina. Puerto Madryn U9120, 15 Chubut, Argentina 16 * Corresponding author: Maria Dias, [email protected]. BirdLife International. The David 17 Attenborough Building, Pembroke Street Cambridge CB2 3QZ UK. Phone: +44 (0)1223 747540 18 19 20 Acknowledgements 21 We are very grateful to Bartek Arendarczyk, Sophie Bennett, Ricky Hibble, Eleanor Miller and Amy 22 Palmer-Newton for assisting with the bibliographic review. We thank Rachael Alderman, Pep Arcos, 23 Jonathon Barrington, Igor Debski, Peter Hodum, Gustavo Jimenez, Jeff Mangel, Ken Morgan, Paul Sagar, 24 Peter Ryan, and other members of the ACAP PaCSWG, and the members of IUCN SSC Penguin Specialist 25 Group (Alejandro Simeone, Andre Chiaradia, Barbara Wienecke, Charles-André Bost, Lauren Waller, Phil 26 Trathan, Philip Seddon, Susie Ellis, Tom Schneider and Dee Boersma) for reviewing threats to selected 27 species. We thank also Andy Symes, Rocio Moreno, Stuart Butchart, Paul Donald, Rory Crawford, 28 Tammy Davies, Ana Carneiro and Tris Allinson for fruitful discussions and helpful comments on earlier 29 versions of the manuscript.
    [Show full text]
  • Hoary Marmot
    Alaska Species Ranking System - Hoary marmot Hoary marmot Class: Mammalia Order: Rodentia Marmota caligata Review Status: Peer-reviewed Version Date: 17 December 2018 Conservation Status NatureServe: Agency: G Rank:G5 ADF&G: IUCN:Least Concern Audubon AK: S Rank: S4 USFWS: BLM: Final Rank Conservation category: V. Orange unknown status and either high biological vulnerability or high action need Category Range Score Status -20 to 20 0 Biological -50 to 50 -32 Action -40 to 40 4 Higher numerical scores denote greater concern Status - variables measure the trend in a taxon’s population status or distribution. Higher status scores denote taxa with known declining trends. Status scores range from -20 (increasing) to 20 (decreasing). Score Population Trend in Alaska (-10 to 10) 0 Unknown. Distribution Trend in Alaska (-10 to 10) 0 Unknown. Status Total: 0 Biological - variables measure aspects of a taxon’s distribution, abundance and life history. Higher biological scores suggest greater vulnerability to extirpation. Biological scores range from -50 (least vulnerable) to 50 (most vulnerable). Score Population Size in Alaska (-10 to 10) -6 Unknown, but suspected large. This species is common in suitable habitat (MacDonald and Cook 2009) and has a relatively large range in Alaska. Range Size in Alaska (-10 to 10) -10 Occurs from southeast Alaska north to the Yukon River and from Canada west to Bethel and the eastern Alaska Peninsula (Gunderson et al. 2009; MacDonald and Cook 2009). Absent from nearly all islands in southeast Alaska (MacDonald and Cook 2009), but distribution on islands in southcentral Alaska is unclear (Lance 2002b; L.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020-2022 Federal Wildlife Subsistence Regulations
    Federal Subsistence Management Regulations for the HARVESTHARVEST ofof WILDLIFEWILDLIFE on Federal Public Lands in Alaska Genevieve Muldoon, 10, Eagle, 2020-21 Student Art Contest Winner Ilene Fernandez, 9, Sitka 2014 Student Art Contest Winner Effective 1 July 2020 - 30 June 2022 Subsistence management regulations are available online at www.doi.gov/subsistence/wildlife Reporting Violations To report violations of the regulations in this book or other regulations on Federal public lands and waters in Alaska, please contact: National Parks and Preserves National Park Service ............................. (907) 644-3880 or (800) 478-2724 National Wildlife Refuges U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service .............. (907) 786-3311 or (800) 858-7621 National Forests U.S. Forest Service ............................... (907) 586-8820 Bureau of Land Management areas Bureau of Land Management ................ (907) 271-6623 For Federal permit information, refer to the Directory of Federal Land Management Offices at the back of this book. About this book This book is published by the Federal Subsistence Management Program as an informative summary and guide to annual Federal subsistence hunting regulations contained in the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR Part 242 and 50 CFR Part 100) and the Federal Register. There may be errors or omissions not identified at press time, or changes made to the regulations after the book is printed. To be certain of current regulations, refer to the official Code of Federal Regulations and the Federal Register publications or contact the Office of Subsistence Management. The regulations may change at any time by special actions of the Federal Subsistence Board. Changes are published in the Federal Register and Board actions or major corrections to this book are posted on the Office of Subsistence Management website, www.doi.gov/subsistence.
    [Show full text]
  • Status Assessment and Conservation Recommendations for the Caspian Tern in North America August 2002 Recommended Citation
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Status Assessment and Conservation Recommendations for the Caspian Tern in North America August 2002 Recommended Citation: Shuford, W. D., and D. P. Craig. 2002. Status Assessment and Conservation Recommendations for the Caspian Tern (Sterna Caspia) in North America. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, OR. Status Assessment and Conservation Recommendations for the Caspian Tern (Sterna Caspia) in North America W. David Shuford PRBO Conservation Science 4990 Shoreline Highway Stinson Beach, CA 94970 email: [email protected] and David P. Craig Department of Biology Willamette University 900 State Street Salem, OR 97301 email: [email protected] August 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................. viii Summary............................................................................................................................................... 1 Taxonomy ............................................................................................................................................. 2 Legal and Conservation Status ............................................................................................................. 2 United States .......................................................................................................................... 2 Canada .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogenetic Diversity of Arctic Vertebrate Herbivores
    Phylogenetic Diversity of Arctic Vertebrate Herbivores Ina Åsnes Skjelbred Master of Science Submission date: June 2017 Supervisor: James Speed, IBI Co-supervisor: Michael David Martin, IBI Norwegian University of Science and Technology Department of Biology ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This master thesis was written at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) University Museum. First of all, I would like to express my full gratitude to my excellent team of supervisors, James David M. Speed and Michael David Martin. Thank you both for the motivating discussions, support throughout the process, and always being available to answer all my questions. Specifically, I would like to make a special thank you to Michael for gathering the sequence data and performing the phylogenetic analyses used in this study, and Andrew H. Thornhill assisting him in this process. And a special thanks to James for gathering the distribution data used in this study, all help with R, and giving me the possibility to present my project at both the Herbivory Network Conference and the Norwegian Ecological Society Conference along the way. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to work with such an interesting project - it has truly been a wonderful experience! In the end, I would like to thank all my friends and fellow LUR-students in Trondheim who has supported me through the time working with this project. I would especially like to thank Jonas for always standing by my side supporting and motivating me, and to Kristian for the good discussions and input along the way. Ina Åsnes Skjelbred June 2017, Trondheim i ii ABSTRACT Understanding spatial diversity patterns, and factors shaping these patterns, is crucial for conservation planning, and is particularly important in areas undergoing severe climatic change.
    [Show full text]
  • A Global-Scale Evaluation of Mammalian Exposure and Vulnerability to Anthropogenic Climate Change
    A Global-Scale Evaluation of Mammalian Exposure and Vulnerability to Anthropogenic Climate Change Tanya L. Graham A Thesis in The Department of Geography, Planning and Environment Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science (Geography, Urban and Environmental Studies) at Concordia University Montreal, Quebec, Canada March 2018 © Tanya L. Graham, 2018 Abstract A Global-Scale Evaluation of Mammalian Exposure and Vulnerability to Anthropogenic Climate Change Tanya L. Graham There is considerable evidence demonstrating that anthropogenic climate change is impacting species living in the wild. The vulnerability of a given species to such change may be understood as a combination of the magnitude of climate change to which the species is exposed, the sensitivity of the species to changes in climate, and the capacity of the species to adapt to climatic change. I used species distributions and estimates of expected changes in local temperatures per teratonne of carbon emissions to assess the exposure of terrestrial mammal species to human-induced climate change. I evaluated species vulnerability to climate change by combining expected local temperature changes with species conservation status, using the latter as a proxy for species sensitivity and adaptive capacity to climate change. I also performed a global-scale analysis to identify hotspots of mammalian vulnerability to climate change using expected temperature changes, species richness and average species threat level for each km2 across the globe. The average expected change in local annual average temperature for terrestrial mammal species is 1.85 oC/TtC. Highest temperature changes are expected for species living in high northern latitudes, while smaller changes are expected for species living in tropical locations.
    [Show full text]
  • See Extension.Missouri.Edu
    Archive Rabbits and Rodents as Pets Bannard Mose/ey* extension.missouri.eduDepartment o/Veterinary Medicine College a/Veterinary Medicine Rabbits, guinea pigs. hamsters. gerbils and even rats and mice make excellent pets if properly handled. fed and caged. They require fiule space and food and will become tame if handled gently. However. these pets require conscientious and continuing care if they are to remain healthy and active. This guide describes the more important aspects of small animal care. version Sources of Information Books and pamphlets on the care and raising of small pets are readily available in pet stores, libraries and from feed companies (Ralston-Purina, Carnation-Albers and the Mis­ souri Farmers Association, for example). Most of these short and practical publications are either free or low cosL and contain fairly complete information about raising rabbits and " rodents. f<'igure I. Wire rabbit cage is equipped with water boUle and hopper Markets for Small Animals feeder. While peL sLores, meat outlets and research facilities do occasionally purchase rabbits or rodents from small system. Bonles with sippel' tubes can be purchased from pel suppliers. most animals sold ill retail outlets' or used in or farm su pply stores. Ani mals should be fed a fresh, research come from large distributors or companies. No one Wholesome. pelleted-- or seed combination feed specifically should invest large sums of money in a breeding or commer­ recom mended for the species of the pet involved. cial operation until a market has been determined and Feeding the proper feed is important for rabbits and partially established.
    [Show full text]
  • Pets, Wheezing, and Allergy Symptoms Research Issue 1, Vol
    Southern Online Examination of the NHANES Data Set: Journal of Nursing Pets, Wheezing, and Allergy Symptoms Research Issue 1, Vol. 2, 2001 www.snrs.org Jena Barrett, RN, DSN; Jeri W. Dunkin, RN, PhD; M. Mitchell Shelton, RN, PhD Abstract Jena Barrett, RN, DSN, Assistant Professor; Pender’s health Promotion Model provided the Jeri W. Dunkin, RN, PhD, Martha framework for examining relationships between pets Saxon Endowed Chair of Rural Nursing; and asthma-related symptoms, such as itchy eyes, M. Mitchell Shelton, RN, PhD, rhinitis, and wheezing using NHANES III data (n=5408). Assistant Professor; all with Capstone College of Even though cats and dogs are commonly thought to Nursing, The University of Alabama, Box 870358 Russell Hall, contribute to asthma symptoms, this study found Tuscaloosa, AL 35487 rodents and rabbits to be culpable. Results indicate that persons reporting having a rodent were four times more likely to have more than four episodes of wheezing within the last year than those reporting no pet. Children having a dog were 1.89 times more likely to report more than four episodes of itchy eyes and rhinitis than those with no pet; those with a cat, 1.74 times more likely to report 1 to 4 episodes and 1.68 times more likely to report more than four episodes. The facilitation of positive health promotion practices in relation to control of the home environment necessitates healthcare providers be aware that individuals are more inclined to begin or continue health-promoting behaviors if there is perceived value to that behavior. Competing preferences become a critical factor in patient education when the family is faced with the choice between the child wheezing or removing the family pet from the home.
    [Show full text]