Geology ReportsSearch

Geology topics

J. M. Ruth

Publications and source records attributed to J. M. Ruth.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

Making connections for bird conservation: linking states, provinces & territories to important wintering and breeding grounds

To effectively conserve migratory landbirds, we need to be involved in conservation beyond our political borders. This has been a central tenet of Partners in Flight (PIF) since the initiative began in 1990 with a focus on Nearctic-Neotropical migrants. Implementation of this concept has also been fundamental to the success of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (e.g., NAWMP 2004). Actions by individual states, provinces and territories are key to the success of PIF efforts at the continental scale, and great progress has been made in recent years though various initiatives. Currently, U.S. state Wildlife Action Plans are outlining a vast array of actions to benefit priority species. However, it is also very important to take action in regions that support these same species at the other end of their migratory movements, to ensure effective protection year-round (Rappole et al. 1983, Webster and Marra 2005, Elliott et al. 2005). For instance, conservation action is needed on the wintering grounds for many birds that breed in Canada and the U.S. but spend a large portion of their annual cycle in Mexico, the West Indies, Central and/or South America. In this document we use maps to summarize migratory connections between individual U.S. states, Canadian provinces & territories and the regions that support the same birds at the other end of migration. The maps give a general picture of where birds go, providing a starting point for targeting action. With this information in hand, decision-makers can explore partnerships and mechanism that would help further conservation action outside their bordersa?|

Partners in Flight Technical Series

Using radar to advance migratory bird management: An interagency collaboration

Migratory birds face many changes to the landscapes they traverse and the habitats they use. Wind turbines and communications towers, which pose hazards to birds and bats in flight, are being erected across the United States and offshore. Human activities can also destroy or threaten habitats critical to birds during migratory passage, and climate change appears to be altering migratory patterns. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and other agencies are under increasing pressure to identify and evaluate movement patterns and habitats used during migration and other times.

Fact Sheet

The five elements process: Designing optimal landscapes to meet bird conservation objectives

In February 2004 at Port Aransas, Texas, Partners in Flight (PIF) and representatives from the other NABCI bird initiative met to discuss the process of stepping down PIF continental population objectives (Rich et al. 2004) to regional and local scales. Participants also discussed rolling up local population estimates and targets to assess the feasibility of the landscape changes necessary to meet continental objectives. Since the process of stepping-down/rolling-up population objectives shifts focus from identifying priority species to formulating quantitative estimates of how much habitat was needed, where, and by when the Port Aransas group called the stepping-down/rolling-up process a??stepping forward.a?? Participants agreed that stepping forward objectives was the beginning of an inevitably iterative dialog necessary to evaluate the assumptions of PIF population estimates and objectives as well as the methods used to monitor local implementation. To facilitate the translation of continental population objectives into biologically sound, measurable regional and local population-based habitat targets the Port Aransas group recommended a process no commonly referred to as the Five Elements Processa?|

Partners in Flight Technical Series

High priority needs for range-wide monitoring of North American landbirds

This document is an extension of work done for the Partners in Flight North American Landbird Conservation Plan (Rich et al. 2004). The Continental Plan reviewed conservation status of the 448 native landbird species that regularly breed in the United States and Canada. Two groups of species were identified as having high conservation importance: the PIF Watch List, made up of species for which there is conservation concern, and Stewardship Spices that are particularly characteristic of regional avifaunas. In addition, continental scale monitoring needs were identified for all species. Here we extend the monitoring needs aspect of the Plan, providing additional detail and suggesting the best means of filling the gaps in broad-scale, long-term trend monitoring. This analysis and report was compiled by the Partners in Flight (PIF) Science Committee as a contribution to current work by the North American Bird Conservation Initiative to assess the status of bird population monitoring in North America and to make recommendations for improvements.

Partners in Flight Technical Series

Science for avian conservation: Priorities for the new millennium

Over the past decade, bird conservation activities have become the preeminent natural resource conservation effort in North America. Maturation of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP), establishment of Partners in Flight (PIF), and creation of comprehensive colonial waterbird and shorebird conservation plans have stimulated unprecedented interest in, and funding for, bird conservation in the United States, Canada, Mexico, and other countries in the western hemisphere. Key to that success in the United States has been active collaboration among federal, state and local governments, conservation organizations, academia, and industry. The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), which has primary statutory responsibility for migratory bird conservation and management, has been a key partner. Despite the great strides that have been made in bird conservation science, historical approaches to research and monitoring have often failed to provide sufficient information and understanding to effectively manage bird populations at large spatial scales. That shortcoming, and the lack of an integrated strategy and comprehensive set of research priorities, is more evident in light of the goals established by the North American Bird Conservation Initiative (NABCI). The NABCI is a trinational, coalition-driven effort to provide an organizational umbrella for existing conservation initiatives. The expanded focus of NABCI and individual bird conservation initiatives is to work together in an integrated, holistic fashion to keep common birds common and to increase populations of declining, threatened, and endangered species. To assist bird conservation initiatives in defining goals and developing new approaches to effective research, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the research agency of DOI, convened a workshop, “Science for Avian Conservation: Understanding, Modeling, and Applying Ecological Relationships,” on 31 October–2 November 2000, which brought together 51 scientists from USGS, as well as scientists and conservationists from other agencies and organizations actively participating in NABCI. As the lead federal agency involved in bird conservation research, USGS has a clear legislative mandate to provide scientific information upon which future management plans and actions will be built. This article summarizes key issues and recommendations that arose from that workshop. The principal goal of the workshop was to guide USGS in defining its role, assessing capabilities, and directing future agency planning in support of bird conservation. A major component was to identify key areas of research needed in this new era of bird conservation science. Although tailored to the mission of USGS, workshop recommendations visualize a bold direction for future avian conservation science in which research and monitoring work in tandem with management to increase our understanding of avian populations and the processes that affect them. The USGS is a science agency whose role is to provide objective scientific information to management agencies and therefore is not directly involved in high-level resource policy-making or on-the-ground management decision making. Nevertheless, it is important to note that effective policy decision making must integrate the best available science with political and economic realities to achieve successful avian conservation—an important subject acknowledged in the workshop, but largely beyond its scope of discussion. Williams (2003) questions regarding how scientific information can be effectively communicated to decision makers and incorporated into natural resource policy. Without an aggressive vision and the willingness of researchers, managers, and policy makers to implement it, conservation of North American birds is likely to proceed without the full benefit of scientific investigation. These recommendations represent the principal conclusions drawn by workshop participants and do not necessarily reflect official USGS policy.

The Auk

Breeding habitat use by sympatric and allopatric populations of Wilson's Warblers and Yellow Warblers

We studied Wilson's Warbler ( Wilsonia pusilla ) and Yellow Warbler ( Dendroica petechia ) habitat use in allopatric and sympatric populations in the Rocky Mountains of northern Colorado and southeastern Wyoming in order to better understand the different habitat needs and interactions of these two species. Foraging Wilson's Warblers and Yellow Warblers used very similar habitat, both selecting larger, more open shrubs. In spite of similar foraging habitat, comparisons of habitat use by the two species at the sympatric sites yielded no evidence of foraging habitat partitioning or exclusion. There was evidence of nesting habitat partitioning. Wilson's Warblers nested on the ground, with some evidence that they used smaller, more densely stemmed shrubs under which to nest. Yellow Warblers are shrub nesters and selected larger, more open shrubs in which to nest. Results provide no evidence that Yellow Warblers can be blamed for population declines in Wilson's Warblers.

Colorado, Wyoming