DOCSLIB.ORG

Wildlife Conservation in the Willamette Valley's

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wildlife Conservation in the Willamette Valley's Wildlife Conservation in the Willamette Valley’s Remnant Prairies and Oak Habitats: A Research Synthesis David G. Vesely and Daniel K. Rosenberg Oregon Wildlife Institute Corvallis, Oregon Submitted to: Interagency Special Status Sensitive Species Program U.S. Forest Service / Bureau of Land Management Portland, Oregon Final Report January 2010 Cover photo credits: lone oak, ©Craig DeMars; Fender’s blue butterfly, ©Melissa York; chipping sparrow, ©Nick Saunders Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................5 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................6 Habitat Loss............................................................................................................................................... 7 Future Threats............................................................................................................................................ 8 Wildlife Species Associated with Prairie, Savanna, and Oak Woodlands in the Willamette Valley......... 9 Spatial Scale – Landscape Considerations................................................................................................. 9 Conservation Actions............................................................................................................................... 10 The Synthesis........................................................................................................................................... 10 CHAPTER 2 VEGETATION TRENDS AND DISTRIBUTION IN THE WILLAMETTE VALLEY .....................................................................................11 Grassland Composition and Structure ..................................................................................................... 11 Oak Woodland Plant Communities ......................................................................................................... 12 CHAPTER 3 WILDLIFE COMMUNITIES .........................................................14 Mammals ................................................................................................................................................. 14 Birds ........................................................................................................................................................ 17 Amphibians and Reptiles......................................................................................................................... 18 Invertebrates ............................................................................................................................................ 18 CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH CONDUCTED ON OAK AND PRAIRIE ASSOCIATED WILDLIFE ..................................................................................20 Biodiversity Studies................................................................................................................................. 20 Avian Studies........................................................................................................................................... 22 Mammalian Studies ................................................................................................................................. 36 Reptile and Amphibian Studies ............................................................................................................... 38 Invertebrates ............................................................................................................................................ 41 Research Outside Willamette Valley....................................................................................................... 50 Response to Restoration .......................................................................................................................... 54 CHAPTER 5 FUTURE DIRECTIONS ................................................................60 Research Method ..................................................................................................................................... 61 Selection of Indicator Variables .............................................................................................................. 62 Future Research Directions to Help Guide Habitat Restoration .............................................................. 62 2 CHAPTER 6 SPECIES ACCOUNTS................................................................66 Northern Pacific Rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis oreganus)........................................................................67 Western Pond Turtle (Actinemys marmorata) ......................................................................................... 71 Western Painted Turtle (Chrysemys picta bellii)..................................................................................... 75 Western Gray Squirrel (Sciurus griseus) ................................................................................................. 78 Acorn Woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus) ...................................................................................... 82 Streaked Horned Lark (Eremophila alpestris strigata) ........................................................................... 85 Slender-Billed Nuthatch (Sitta carolinenses aculeata)............................................................................ 87 Western Bluebird (Sialia mexicana)........................................................................................................ 90 Chipping Sparrow (Spizella passerina) ................................................................................................... 93 Oregon Vesper Sparrow (Pooecetes gramineus affinins) ........................................................................ 95 Western Meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta) .............................................................................................. 98 Fender’s Blue Butterfly (Icaricia icarioides fenderi) ............................................................................ 100 LITERATURE CITED .......................................................................................102 APPENDIX: WILDLIFE ASSOCIATED WITH GRASSLAND AND WOODLAND HABITAT TYPES IN THE WILLAMETTE VALLEY .........................................122 3 Executive Summary Oregon white oak (Quercus garryanna) and prairie plant communities of Oregon’s Willamette Valley are one of the most imperiled vegetation communities in North America, yet few studies have been conducted on wildlife in these plant communities. The primary goal of our synthesis is to help guide future conservation and restoration efforts of these important wildlife habitats in the Willamette Valley. We synthesize relevant research, and discuss future research and monitoring challenges and needs. We identify several species that are strongly associated with these habitat types in the Willamette Valley, and highlight their ecology and conservation. Our synthesis is intended for managers and researchers working to improve oak and prairie habitats for wildlife in the Willamette Valley. The project was sponsored by the Interagency Special Status Sensitive Species Program (ISSSSP) of the Pacific Northwest Regional Office of the U.S. Forest Service and Oregon/Washington State Office of the Bureau of Land Management. Oak and prairie habitats are managed as wildlife habitat by the Eugene and Salem Districts of the Bureau of Land Management in Oregon and this synthesis is intended to help guide their efforts as well as other efforts to restore oak and prairie vegetation communities for wildlife habitat in the Willamette Valley. Despite the large loss of oak and prairie plant communities in the Willamette Valley, there have been surprisingly little research conducted on the ecology of wildlife in these habitats. What was most striking to us in our review was the large number of in-depth studies of butterfly response to restoration and the paucity of studies of vertebrates that went beyond distributional surveys. Almost all of the vertebrate studies remained descriptive, without understanding potential consequences under different management scenarios. Several studies on Fender’s blue butterfly seemed particularly valuable as a model for linking field studies with management. Developing management-oriented models can provide useful heuristic tools for identifying research needs. The lack of experimentation and formal sampling designs in most of the studies on vertebrates that we reviewed highlights the differences with studies conducted on butterflies and restoration in the Willamette Valley. The majority of studies on vertebrates have used informal sampling approaches to investigate habitat associations at relatively small spatial scales. Understanding habitat relationships to guide restoration is difficult and traditional approaches may not be as useful as other approaches that may involve case studies, adaptive management, and indicator variables that respond to smaller-scale changes from restoration. Research on how vertebrate wildlife responds to restoration in the Willamette Valley is challenging for four primary reasons: (1) disconnect of spatial scale of restoration and animal use patterns, (2) the high variability of each restoration unit and the typical lack of control (non-treated) areas, (3) the extremely high variability
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Purple Martin Monitoring After a Wildfire in the Lincoln
    PURPLE MARTIN MONITORING AFTER A WILDFIRE IN THE LINCOLN NATIONAL FOREST, NEW MEXICO – 2007 RESULTS Submitted To: Prepared By: USDA Forest Service Hawks Aloft, Inc. Danney Salas P.O. Box 10028 Sacramento Ranger District Albuquerque, New Mexico 87184 1101 New York Avenue (505) 828-9455 Alamogordo, New Mexico 87571 Website: www.hawksaloft.org E-mail Contact: [email protected] Purple Martin Conservation Association John Tautin 301 Peninsula Dr., Suite 6 Erie, Pennsylvania 16505 15 February 2008 Purple Martins in the Lincoln National Forest TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................2 STUDY AREA ....................................................................................................................3 METHODS ..........................................................................................................................4 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................7 DISCUSSION......................................................................................................................9 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................13 LITERATURE CITED ......................................................................................................13
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. EPA, Pesticide Product Label, 0.5% STRYCHNINE MILO for HAND
    Jl.l!l€' 23, 1997 Dr. Alan V. Tasker Acting Leader, rata Support Teaill Tec.'mical and Sciemtific Services USDA/AHflS/BBEP Unit ISO ) 4700 River Foad Rivcreale, ND 20737 Dear Dr. Tasker, Subject: 0.5% Str.fclmine Mlo rex Ha.'ld Baiting fucket C,ophers EPA Registratirn No. 56228-19 Your Slil;;nissions of Septemb€r 23, 19%, and June 2, 1997 ~Je nave reviewed ,YOUr sl.ibmi~sicn of Sept€T."'~r 19, 1996:. ThE' cnongp--s in tl"le inert ingredients a'ld t..'1e revised basic and alte..."7late Confidential StatC1"~nts of Forl'1Ula (CSFs) ;;.r8 acceptable. He 1=1<: fort-l;;.rd to receiving the product chemistry data on the nc-w formulation. Your letter of SepteJl'J::>er 23, 19%, imicates thClt some of these studies ~Jere underway at that tire. The proposed revis20 label stibIcJ tted 00 June 2, 1997, is J:-.asically ) acceptC!ble, but the change identified l.-elow must be made. 1. In the "NOI'E TO PHYSICIAN", change "CI\UrION," to "NOrrcp.:" so as not to conflict with the label's required signal Nord "I'i"lNGFR". 8u.1:'mit one r:::q:y of the fin.-J.l printed label before releasing this prcrluct for shipment. :;;~x¥~~ COP~ E William H. JacObs BEST AVA'LAB\.. i\cting Product 1<1a.'l8.ger 14 Insecticide-Rodenticide Branch Reo.istration Division (7505C) :::::, ~.. ..w·-1······ _.. ._-j.. ......w. ··1· "~'~"·Tm--I··· ·1· ............ ·····1· _............. DATE ~ •......••.•....... .........•..••.• ....... ~ ..•....... ..........................................................................................- ....... EPA Form 1320-102-70) OFFICIAL FILE COpy r.. PRECAUTIONARY STATEMENTS 0.5% STRYCHNINE r~1.0 HAZARDS TO HUMANS AND FOR HAND BAITING STORAGE AND DISPOSAL I -, DOMESTIC ANIMALS Do not contaminate water, food, or POCKET GOPHERS feed by storage or disposal.
    [Show full text]
  • Producción De Forraje Y Competencia Interespecífica Del Cultivo Asociado De Avena (Avena Sativa) Con Vicia (Vicia Sativa) En Condiciones De Secano Y Gran Altitud
    Rev Inv Vet Perú 2018; 29(4): 1237-1248 http://dx.doi.org/10.15381/rivep.v29i4.15202 Producción de forraje y competencia interespecífica del cultivo asociado de avena (Avena sativa) con vicia (Vicia sativa) en condiciones de secano y gran altitud Forage production and interspecific competition of oats (Avena sativa) and common vetch (Vicia sativa) association under dry land and high-altitude conditions Francisco Espinoza-Montes1,2,4, Wilfredo Nuñez-Rojas1, Iraida Ortiz-Guizado3, David Choque-Quispe2 RESUMEN Se experimentó el cultivo asociado de avena (Avena sativa) y vicia común (Vicia sativa) en condiciones de secano, a 4035 m sobre el nivel del mar, para conocer su comportamiento y efectos en el rendimiento, calidad de forraje y competencia interespecífica. En promedio, el rendimiento de forraje verde, materia seca y calidad de forraje fueron superiores al del monocultivo de avena (p<0.05). El porcentaje de proteína cruda se incrementó en la medida que creció la proporción de vicia común en la asocia- ción, acompañado de una disminución del contenido de fibra. En cuanto a los índices de competencia, el cultivo asociado de avena con vicia favorece el rendimiento relativo total de forraje (LERtotal>1). Ninguna de las especies manifestó comportamiento agresivo (A=0). Se observó mayor capacidad competitiva de la vicia común (CR>1) comparado con la capacidad competitiva de la avena. Palabras clave: cultivo asociado; rendimiento; calidad de forraje; competencia interespecífica ABSTRACT The oats (Avena sativa) and common vetch (Vicia sativa) cultivated in association was evaluated under dry land conditions at 4035 m above sea level to determine its performance and effects on yield, forage quality and interspecific competition.
    [Show full text]
  • Violet-Green Swallow
    Breeding Habitat Use Profile Habitats Used in Arizona Primary: Montane Riparian Secondary: Montane Forests, locally Upper Sonoran Desert Key Habitat Parameters Plant Composition Most montane forest types, often with some element of riparian, wetland, open water or 8 other moist habitat types Plant Density and Unknown Size Violet-green Swallow, photo by ©George Andrejko Microhabitat Snags, live trees, or cliffs for nesting, mesic Features areas with high insect productivity for forag- Conservation Profile ing 8; in wooded landscapes, often noted foraging and nesting near forest clearings Species Concerns and edges. Climate Change (Droughts) Increasing Fire Frequency Landscape Largely unknown, but must include some Timber Harvesting Practices old-growth forests or cliffs Conservation Status Lists Elevation Range in Arizona USFWS 1 No 3,200 – 10,500 feet, locally to 1,200 feet 9 AZGFD 2 No Density Estimate DoD 3 No Territory Size: Unknown BLM 4 No Density: Unknown, sometimes occurs in loose colonies 8 PIF Watch List 5b No PIF Regional Concern 5a No Migratory Bird Treaty Act Natural History Profile Covered Seasonal Distribution in Arizona PIF Breeding Population Size Estimates 6 Breeding April – early August, desert nesting may Arizona 710,000 ◑ begin in March 9 Global 7,200,000 ◑ Migration February – April; August – mid-October 9 9.93% Percent in Arizona Winter Rare, very small numbers 5b PIF Population Goal Nest and Nesting Habits Maintain 8 Type of Nest Cavity or crevice Trends in Arizona Nest Substrate Tree, rock, or cliff; also artificial
    [Show full text]
  • Davis Expedition Fund Report on Expedition / Project
    DAVIS EXPEDITION FUND REPORT ON EXPEDITION / PROJECT Expedition/Project Title: Biogeography and Systematics of South American Vicia (Leguminosae) Travel Dates: 28/09/2010 – 12/11/2010 Location: Northern Chile and northern Argentina Group Members: Paulina Hechenleitner Collection of research material of Vicia in the form of Aims: herbarium specimens, habitat data, digital images, silica- dried leaf samples, and base-line data on the IUCN conservation status of Vicia. Outcome (not less than 300 words):- See attached report. Report for the Davis Expedition Fund Biogeography and Systematics of South American Vicia (Leguminosae) Botanical fieldwork to northern Chile and northern Argentina 28th of Sep to 12th of November 2010 Paulina Hechenleitner January 2011 Introduction Vicia is one of five genera in tribe Fabeae, and contains some of humanity's oldest crop plants, and is thus of great economic importance. The genus contains around 160 spp. (Lewis et al. 2005) distributed throughout temperate regions of the northern hemisphere and in temperate S America. Its main centre of diversity is the Mediterranean with smaller centres in North and South America (Kupicha, 1976). The South American species are least known taxonomically. Vicia, together with Lathyrus and a number of other temperate plant genera share an anti- tropical disjunct distribution. This biogeographical pattern is intriguing (Raven, 1963): were the tropics bridged by long distance dispersal between the temperate regions of the hemispheres, or were once continuous distributions through the tropics severed in a vicariance event? Do the similar patterns seen in other genera reflect similar scenarios or does the anti-tropical distribution arise in many different ways? The parallels in distribution, species numbers and ecology between Lathyrus and Vicia are particularly striking.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Cover Change Along the Willamette River, Oregon
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Doug R. Oetter for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Geography presented on August 16, 2002. Title: Land CoverChange along the Willamette River, Oregon. Abstract approved: A. Jon Kimerling The Willamette River and its floodplain in northwest Oregon have changed dramatically since European settlement. At one time, the river was a vast complex system of braided channels with a broad floodplain forest; it has now been simplified by channelization and dams, and the forest has been removed to support agricultural and urban expansion. This thesis presents three research manuscripts, each of which uses remote sensing and Geographical Information System methods to capture the dynamic nature of land along the Willamette River. In the first article, the river and its floodplain were mapped at four time periods, ranging from pre-settlement to modern day. The paper reports that the river system has been greatly simplified, and the floodplain has lost much of its original forest. An overlay technique was used to identify potential floodplain restoration sites. The second paper details the creation of a landcover map for the Willamette Valley, which shows that the largest portion of the floodplain is now in agriculture, with a significant amount in a built condition. The third manuscript outlines a methodology for detecting land cover change along the river during a twenty-year period that coincides with the implementation of the Willamette River Greenway, a land use designation designed to restrict riparian land conversion. It shows that regressive change is still occuring along the river, although not at thesame rate asoutside the greenway.
    [Show full text]
  • Mammals of Jordan
    © Biologiezentrum Linz/Austria; download unter www.biologiezentrum.at Mammals of Jordan Z. AMR, M. ABU BAKER & L. RIFAI Abstract: A total of 78 species of mammals belonging to seven orders (Insectivora, Chiroptera, Carni- vora, Hyracoidea, Artiodactyla, Lagomorpha and Rodentia) have been recorded from Jordan. Bats and rodents represent the highest diversity of recorded species. Notes on systematics and ecology for the re- corded species were given. Key words: Mammals, Jordan, ecology, systematics, zoogeography, arid environment. Introduction In this account we list the surviving mammals of Jordan, including some reintro- The mammalian diversity of Jordan is duced species. remarkable considering its location at the meeting point of three different faunal ele- Table 1: Summary to the mammalian taxa occurring ments; the African, Oriental and Palaearc- in Jordan tic. This diversity is a combination of these Order No. of Families No. of Species elements in addition to the occurrence of Insectivora 2 5 few endemic forms. Jordan's location result- Chiroptera 8 24 ed in a huge faunal diversity compared to Carnivora 5 16 the surrounding countries. It shelters a huge Hyracoidea >1 1 assembly of mammals of different zoogeo- Artiodactyla 2 5 graphical affinities. Most remarkably, Jordan Lagomorpha 1 1 represents biogeographic boundaries for the Rodentia 7 26 extreme distribution limit of several African Total 26 78 (e.g. Procavia capensis and Rousettus aegypti- acus) and Palaearctic mammals (e. g. Eri- Order Insectivora naceus concolor, Sciurus anomalus, Apodemus Order Insectivora contains the most mystacinus, Lutra lutra and Meles meles). primitive placental mammals. A pointed snout and a small brain case characterises Our knowledge on the diversity and members of this order.
    [Show full text]
  • Birds of the East Texas Baptist University Campus with Birds Observed Off-Campus During BIOL3400 Field Course
    Birds of the East Texas Baptist University Campus with birds observed off-campus during BIOL3400 Field course Photo Credit: Talton Cooper Species Descriptions and Photos by students of BIOL3400 Edited by Troy A. Ladine Photo Credit: Kenneth Anding Links to Tables, Figures, and Species accounts for birds observed during May-term course or winter bird counts. Figure 1. Location of Environmental Studies Area Table. 1. Number of species and number of days observing birds during the field course from 2005 to 2016 and annual statistics. Table 2. Compilation of species observed during May 2005 - 2016 on campus and off-campus. Table 3. Number of days, by year, species have been observed on the campus of ETBU. Table 4. Number of days, by year, species have been observed during the off-campus trips. Table 5. Number of days, by year, species have been observed during a winter count of birds on the Environmental Studies Area of ETBU. Table 6. Species observed from 1 September to 1 October 2009 on the Environmental Studies Area of ETBU. Alphabetical Listing of Birds with authors of accounts and photographers . A Acadian Flycatcher B Anhinga B Belted Kingfisher Alder Flycatcher Bald Eagle Travis W. Sammons American Bittern Shane Kelehan Bewick's Wren Lynlea Hansen Rusty Collier Black Phoebe American Coot Leslie Fletcher Black-throated Blue Warbler Jordan Bartlett Jovana Nieto Jacob Stone American Crow Baltimore Oriole Black Vulture Zane Gruznina Pete Fitzsimmons Jeremy Alexander Darius Roberts George Plumlee Blair Brown Rachel Hastie Janae Wineland Brent Lewis American Goldfinch Barn Swallow Keely Schlabs Kathleen Santanello Katy Gifford Black-and-white Warbler Matthew Armendarez Jordan Brewer Sheridan A.
    [Show full text]
  • L O U I S I a N A
    L O U I S I A N A SPARROWS L O U I S I A N A SPARROWS Written by Bill Fontenot and Richard DeMay Photography by Greg Lavaty and Richard DeMay Designed and Illustrated by Diane K. Baker What is a Sparrow? Generally, sparrows are characterized as New World sparrows belong to the bird small, gray or brown-streaked, conical-billed family Emberizidae. Here in North America, birds that live on or near the ground. The sparrows are divided into 13 genera, which also cryptic blend of gray, white, black, and brown includes the towhees (genus Pipilo), longspurs hues which comprise a typical sparrow’s color (genus Calcarius), juncos (genus Junco), and pattern is the result of tens of thousands of Lark Bunting (genus Calamospiza) – all of sparrow generations living in grassland and which are technically sparrows. Emberizidae is brushland habitats. The triangular or cone- a large family, containing well over 300 species shaped bills inherent to most all sparrow species are perfectly adapted for a life of granivory – of crushing and husking seeds. “Of Louisiana’s 33 recorded sparrows, Sparrows possess well-developed claws on their toes, the evolutionary result of so much time spent on the ground, scratching for seeds only seven species breed here...” through leaf litter and other duff. Additionally, worldwide, 50 of which occur in the United most species incorporate a substantial amount States on a regular basis, and 33 of which have of insect, spider, snail, and other invertebrate been recorded for Louisiana. food items into their diets, especially during Of Louisiana’s 33 recorded sparrows, Opposite page: Bachman Sparrow the spring and summer months.
    [Show full text]
  • Controlling Pocket Gopher Damage to Conifer Seedlings D.S
    FOREST PROTECTION EC 1255 • Revised May 2003 $2.50 Controlling Pocket Gopher Damage to Conifer Seedlings D.S. deCalesta, K. Asman, and N. Allen Contents ocket gophers (or just plain Gopher habits and habitat.............. 1 P “gophers”) damage conifer seed- Control program ........................... 2 lings on thousands of Identifying the pest ......................2 acres in Washington, Assessing the need for treatment ...3 Idaho, and Oregon Damage control techniques ...........3 annually. They invade clearcuts and Applying controls .......................... 7 clip (cut off) roots or Figure 1.—Typical Oregon pocket gopher. Christmas tree plantations .............7 girdle (remove bark from) the bases of conifer seedlings and saplings, causing significant economic losses. Forest plantations ........................ 7 This publication will help you design a program to reduce or eliminate Summary .................................... 8 gopher damage to seedlings and saplings in your forest plantation or Christmas tree farm. Sources of supply ......................... 8 First, we describe pocket gophers, their habits, and habitats. Then we For further information .................. 8 discuss procedures for controlling pocket gopher damages—control techniques, their effectiveness and hazard(s) to the environment, and their use under a variety of tree-growing situations. Gopher habits and habitat Three species of pocket gopher can damage conifer seedlings. The two smaller ones, the northern pocket gopher and the Mazama pocket gopher, are 5 to 9 inches long and brown with some white beneath the chin and belly. The northern gopher is found east of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon and Washington and in Idaho; the Mazama lives in Oregon and Washington west of the Cascades. David S. deCalesta, former Exten- The Camas pocket gopher is similar looking, but larger (10 to 12 inches) sion wildlife specialist, and Kim than the two others.
    [Show full text]
  • Albatross 60-4
    Santa Cruz Bird Club Newsletter Volume 60 Number 4: Mar/Apr 2016 PHOEBASTRIA NIGRIPES My Name Is Niji By Susan Schalbe : "My name is Niji. My eyes shine. My beads INSIDE are becoming to me and my coat is very black. I Calendar raise my children in a hole in a tree. My young like to live there. They feed upon grasshoppers of Events and flies. I live with my children. My red breast is becoming to me. I shout every summer and the people like to hear me. They all know my voice. I do not eat much pitch but I like acorns." So goes the description of Lewis’s woodpeckers as described in an old Apache folk tale. The Anglo-Saxon world first learned about these interesting woodpeckers from a report The Bird School sent back from the Lewis and Clark Expedition. Project Merriweather Lewis first described them in May 1806 when he found them what is now the vicinity Seabirding Trips of Kamiah, Idaho on the Clearwater River. His discovery led to the bird being named for him. More recently, scientists discovered fossil Santa Cruz evidence of Lewis’s woodpeckers in the La Brea Tar Pits, dating their presence in the area back to Birds at least the Pleistocene Era and showing that these birds were once resident in Southern California. It is believed that their habitat at that time was coastal live oak. Lewis’s Woodpeckers are the fourth largest North American woodpecker and are closely related to the more familiar Acorn Woodpecker. A beautiful bird, the Lewis’s is on a list of concern Birder's by the International Union for the Conservation Notebook of Nature (IUCN) as their numbers seem to be declining.
    [Show full text]
  • Plum Tree Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment January 2017 Front Cover: Salt Marsh Jeff Brewer/USACE
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Plum Tree Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment January 2017 Front cover: Salt marsh Jeff Brewer/USACE This blue goose, designed by J.N. “Ding” Darling, has become the symbol of the National Wildlife Refuge System. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is the principal Federal agency responsible for conserving, protecting, and enhancing fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. The Service manages the National Wildlife Refuge System comprised of over 150 million acres including over 560 national wildlife refuges and thousands of waterfowl production areas. The Service also operates 70 national fish hatcheries and over 80 ecological services field stations. The agency enforces Federal wildlife laws, manages migratory bird populations, restores nationally significant fisheries, conserves and restores wildlife habitat such as wetlands, administers the Endangered Species Act, and helps foreign governments with their conservation efforts. It also oversees the Federal Assistance Program which distributes hundreds of millions of dollars in excise taxes on fishing and hunting equipment to state wildlife agencies. Comprehensive Conservation Plans (CCPs) provide long-term guidance for management decisions on a refuge and set forth goals, objectives, and strategies needed to accomplish refuge purposes. CCPs also identify the Service’s best estimate of future needs. These plans detail program levels that are sometimes substantially above current budget allocations and, as such, are primarily for Service strategic planning and program prioritization purposes. CCPs do not constitute a commitment for staffing increases, operational and maintenance increases, or funding for future land acquisition.
    [Show full text]