Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Wildlife Review”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 145 records · Page 8Linked to original sources
USGS2019

Proposed attributes of national wildlife health programmes

Wildlife health is important for conservation, healthy ecosystems, sustainable development, and biosecurity. It presents unique challenges for national programme governance and delivery because wildlife health crosses not only jurisdictional responsibilities and authorities but also inherently spans multiple sectors of expertise. The World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) encourages its Members to have wildlife disease monitoring and notification systems. Where national wildlife health surveillance programmes do exist, they vary in scope and size. Evidence-based guidance is lacking on the critical functions and roles needed to meet the OIE’s recommendations and other expectations of a national programme. A literature review and consultation with national wildlife health programme leaders identified five key attributes of national programmes including: (1) being knowledge and science based; (2) fostering cross-nation equivalence and harmonisation; (3) developing partnerships and national coordination; (4) providing leadership and administration of national efforts and (5) capacity development. Proposed core purposes include: (1) establishing and communication of the national wildlife health status; (2) leading national planning; (3) centralising information and expertise; (4) developing national networks leading to harmonisation and collaborations; (5) developing wildlife health workforces and (6) centralising administration and management of national programmes. A national wildlife health programme should aim to identify, effectively communicate, and manage the risk to or from a country’s wildlife populations. It should generate the appropriate knowledge required to improve the effectiveness of wildlife policies and systems, including identifyinhttp://www.oie.int/en/publications-and-documentation/scientific-and-technical-review-free-access/peer-reviewed-papers-for-the-plurithematic-review-2018/g and assessing emerging priorities, thus increasing warning for preparedness and preventive actions.

Scientific and Technical Review↗
USGS2025

Chapter 6: Climate change, wildlife, and wildlife habitats in the Oregon Coast Range

Climate change is likely to have profound effects on wildlife species within the Oregon Coast Adaptation Partnership (OCAP) assessment area, although the direction and magnitude of effects are likely to vary across species. Increased mean and extreme temperatures, especially during summer, may cause shifts in plant and animal species ranges, reduce habitat for some temperature-sensitive wildlife, alter plant phenology and the timing of available food resources, and affect species interactions (e.g., predation, competition). Altered timing of precipitation, summer drought, loss of fog, increased flooding events, earlier snowmelt, and rising sea level may reduce plant productivity, increase tree mortality, shift plant species composition, and lead to reduced wildlife habitat and habitat quality for some forests, riparian areas, wetlands, meadows, estuaries, and beaches. In addition, increasing frequency and extent of wildfire and insect outbreaks may reduce the extent of late-successional forest, reduce habitat connectivity, and increase the spread of invasive species. The biggest change expected for the assessment area is an increase in area where climatic conditions favor coastal mixed forest and a large reduction in area favoring montane conifer forest. Although actual changes in forest types may not necessarily occur by the end of the 21st century, climate change may add physiological and behavioral stress to wildlife. Some wildlife species will be able to persist in place and adapt to new conditions; some may be able to migrate to find suitable habitat; and some may be greatly reduced or extirpated from the assessment area or even go extinct. Shifts in major tree and shrub species will play a major role in food, den, and cover availability for wildlife. Rising sea level will reduce low-elevation habitats along the coast. An increase in the frequency of high-severity weather events will increase frequency and magnitude of flooding, including debris flow events. Coupled with increased temperatures during summer, this may reduce or fragment important ecosystems for aquatic and semi-aquatic species. Evaluation of the vulnerabilities of nine wildlife species based on literature reviews suggests that each species has life-history attributes that can lead to resilience or vulnerability to climate change effects. Depending on long-term objectives, several broad adaptation strategies focus on protecting refugia, establishing redundant wildlife strongholds with large-scale connectivity, and promoting structural and biological complexity.

Oregon↗
USGS2024

Lead poisoning of raptors: State of the science and cross-discipline mitigation options for a global problem

Lead poisoning is an important global conservation problem for many species of wildlife, especially raptors. Despite the increasing number of individual studies and regional reviews of lead poisoning of raptors, it has been over a decade since this information has been compiled into a comprehensive global review. Here, we summarize the state of knowledge of lead poisoning of raptors, we review developments in manufacturing of non-lead ammunition, the use of which can reduce the most pervasive source of lead these birds encounter, and we compile data on voluntary and regulatory mitigation options and their associated sociological context. We support our literature review with case studies of mitigation actions, largely provided by the conservation practitioners who study or manage these efforts. Our review illustrates the growing awareness and understanding of lead exposure of raptors, and it shows that the science underpinning this understanding has expanded considerably in recent years. We also show that the political and social appetite for managing lead ammunition appears to vary substantially across administrative regions, countries, and continents. Improved understanding of the drivers of this variation could support more effective mitigation of lead exposure of wildlife. This review also shows that mitigation strategies are likely to be most effective when they are outcome driven, consider behavioural theory, local cultures, and environmental conditions, effectively monitor participation, compliance, and levels of raptor exposure, and support both environmental and human health.

Biological Reviews↗
USGS2016

Fire effects on wildlife in Central Hardwoods and Appalachian regions

Fire is being prescribed and used increasingly to promote ecosystem restoration (e.g., oak woodlands and savannas) and to manage wildlife habitat in the Central Hardwoods and Appalachian regions, USA. However, questions persist as to how fire affects hardwood forest communities and associated wildlife, and how fire should be used to achieve management goals. We provide an up-to-date review of fire effects on various wildlife species and their habitat in the Central Hardwoods and Appalachians. Documented direct effects (i.e., mortality) on wildlife are rare. Indirect effects (i.e., changes in habitat quality) are influenced greatly by light availability, fire frequency, and fire intensity. Unless fire intensity is great enough to kill a portion of the overstory, burning in closed-canopy forests has provided little benefit for most wildlife species in the region because it doesn’t result in enough sunlight penetration to elicit understory response. Canopy reduction through silvicultural treatment has enabled managers to use fire more effectively. Fire intensity must be kept low in hardwoods to limit damage to many species of overstory trees. However, wounding or killing trees with fire benefits many wildlife species by allowing increased sunlight to stimulate understory response, snag and subsequent cavity creation, and additions of large coarse woody debris. In general, a fire-return interval of 2 yr to 7 yr benefits a wide variety of wildlife species by providing a diverse structure in the understory; increasing browse, forage, and soft mast; and creating snags and cavities. Historically, dormant-season fire was most prevalent in these regions, and it still is when most prescribed fire is implemented in hardwood systems as burn-days are relatively few in the growing season of May through August because of shading from leaf cover and high fuel moisture. Late growing-season burning increases the window for burning, and better control on woody composition is possible. Early growing-season fire may pose increased risk for some species, especially herpetofauna recently emerged from winter hibernacula (April) or forest songbirds that nest in the understory (May to June). However, negative population-level effects are unlikely unless the burned area is relatively large and early growing-season fire is used continually. We did not find evidence that fire is leading to population declines for any species, including Endangered Species Act (ESA)-listed species (e.g., Indiana bat [ Myotis sodalis Mill. Allen] or northern long-eared bat [ M. septentrionalis Trouess.]). Instead, data indicate that fire can enhance habitat for bats by increasing suitability of foraging and day-roost sites. Similarly, concern over burning and displacement of woodland salamanders (Plethodontidae), another taxa of heightened conservation concern, is alleviated when fire is prescribed along ecologically appropriate aspect and slope gradients and not forced into mesic, high site index environments where salamanders are most common. Because topography across the Central Hardwoods and Appalachians is diverse, we contend that applying fire on positions best suited for burning is an effective approach to increase regional landscape heterogeneity and biological diversity. Herein, we offer prescriptive concepts for burning for various wildlife species and guilds in the Central Hardwoods and Appalachians.

Appalachian region, Central Hardwoods region↗
USGS2019

The ecology of chronic wasting disease in wildlife

Prions are misfolded infectious proteins responsible for a group of fatal neurodegenerative diseases termed transmissible spongiform encephalopathy or prion diseases. Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) is the prion disease with the highest spillover potential, affecting at least seven Cervidae (deer) species. The zoonotic potential of CWD is inconclusive and cannot be ruled out. A risk of infection for other domestic and wildlife species is also plausible. Here, we review the current status of the knowledge with respect to CWD ecology in wildlife. Our current understanding of the geographic distribution of CWD lacks spatial and temporal detail, does not consider the biogeography of infectious diseases, and is largely biased by sampling based on hunters' cooperation and funding available for each region. Limitations of the methods used for data collection suggest that the extent and prevalence of CWD in wildlife is underestimated. If the zoonotic potential of CWD is confirmed in the short term, as suggested by recent results obtained in experimental animal models, there will be limited accurate epidemiological data to inform public health. Research gaps in CWD prion ecology include the need to identify specific biological characteristics of potential CWD reservoir species that better explain susceptibility to spillover, landscape and climate configurations that are suitable for CWD transmission, and the magnitude of sampling bias in our current understanding of CWD distribution and risk. Addressing these research gaps will help anticipate novel areas and species where CWD spillover is expected, which will inform control strategies. From an ecological perspective, control strategies could include assessing restoration of natural predators of CWD reservoirs, ultrasensitive CWD detection in biotic and abiotic reservoirs, and deer density and landscape modification to reduce CWD spread and prevalence.

Biological Reviews↗
USGS2018

Artelle et al. (2018) miss the science underlying North American wildlife management

Artelle et al . (2018) conclude that “hallmarks of science” are largely missing from North American wildlife management based on a desk review of selected hunting management plans and related documents found through Internet searches and email requests to state and provincial wildlife agencies. We highlight three fundamental problems that compromise the validity of the conclusions posited: missing information to support selection of “hallmarks of science,” confusion about the roles and nature of science and management, and failure to engage effectively with the scientists and managers actively managing wildlife populations in North America.

Science Advances↗
USGS2008

Sources and implications of lead ammunition and fishing tackle on natural resources

A technical review of lead sources that originate from hunting, shooting sports, and fishing activities was undertaken by the American Fisheries Society and The Wildlife Society. The report addresses (1) sources of lead that originate from hunting, shooting sports, and fishing activities, (2) the hazard and risk that lead from these activities pose to natural resources, and (3) the management implications for fish and wildlife professionals and policy makers.

Wildlife Society Technical Review↗
USGS1988

Air pollution and wildlife toxicology: An overlooked problem

Since the 1880s, there have been repeated reports worldwide of toxic effects to wildlife from air pollution . Incidents in North America were recorded as early as the 1920s and as recently as last year. The effects have ranged from death and injury to increased incidence of infectious diseases, and they are the result of exposure to both gaseous and particulate emissions. Compared with other threats to wildlife , for instance, pesticides, the toxicological relationship between air pollution and effects in wildlife is not well understood. Our limited understanding is based primarily on reports of symptoms observed in the field and on information extrapolated from studies in livestock and laboratory animals. Few controlled wildlife studies, such as those that have evaluated pesticide effects, have been conducted. Current air quality standards cannot be assumed to protect wildlife from the effects of air pollution . This article reviews the current state of knowledge of air pollution and wildlife toxicology and the continuing threat air pollution presents to wildlife . The available information on reported effects of gaseous and particulate pollutants (i.e., sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, oxidants, arsenic, cadmium, fluoride, lead and selenium) on terrestrial wildlife , along with similar toxicological data for domestic animals, is summarized. Information on the toxic effects, tolerance levels, pathways of contamination, and risks to wildlife from air pollution is given, and gaps in knowledge are pointed out. Areas where research is needed are identified. Copyright © 1988 SETAC

Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry↗
USGS2011

Wildlife conservation and solar energy development in the Desert Southwest, United States

Large areas of public land are currently being permitted or evaluated for utility-scale solar energy development (USSED) in the southwestern United States, including areas with high biodiversity and protected species. However, peer-reviewed studies of the effects of USSED on wildlife are lacking. The potential effects of the construction and the eventual decommissioning of solar energy facilities include the direct mortality of wildlife; environmental impacts of fugitive dust and dust suppressants; destruction and modification of habitat, including the impacts of roads; and off-site impacts related to construction material acquisition, processing, and transportation. The potential effects of the operation and maintenance of the facilities include habitat fragmentation and barriers to gene flow, increased noise, electromagnetic field generation, microclimate alteration, pollution, water consumption, and fire. Facility design effects, the efficacy of site-selection criteria, and the cumulative effects of USSED on regional wildlife populations are unknown. Currently available peer-reviewed data are insufficient to allow a rigorous assessment of the impact of USSED on wildlife.

BioScience↗
USGS2016

Model description and evaluation of the mark-recapture survival model used to parameterize the 2012 status and threats analysis for the Florida manatee ( Trichechus manatus latirostris )

This report provides supporting details and evidence for the rationale, validity and efficacy of a new mark-recapture model, the Barker Robust Design, to estimate regional manatee survival rates used to parameterize several components of the 2012 version of the Manatee Core Biological Model (CBM) and Threats Analysis (TA). The CBM and TA provide scientific analyses on population viability of the Florida manatee subspecies ( Trichechus manatus latirostris ) for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s 5-year reviews of the status of the species as listed under the Endangered Species Act. The model evaluation is presented in a standardized reporting framework, modified from the TRACE (TRAnsparent and Comprehensive model Evaluation) protocol first introduced for environmental threat analyses. We identify this new protocol as TRACE-MANATEE SURVIVAL and this model evaluation specifically as TRACE-MANATEE SURVIVAL, Barker RD version 1. The longer-term objectives of the manatee standard reporting format are to (1) communicate to resource managers consistent evaluation information over sequential modeling efforts; (2) build understanding and expertise on the structure and function of the models; (3) document changes in model structures and applications in response to evolving management objectives, new biological and ecological knowledge, and new statistical advances; and (4) provide greater transparency for management and research review.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2025

A review of standardization in Mississippi’s multidecadal inland fisheries monitoring program

Standardizing data collection, management, and analysis processes can improve the reliability and efficiency of fisheries monitoring programs, yet few studies have examined the operationalization of these tasks within agency settings. We reviewed the Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks, Fisheries Bureau’s inland recreational fisheries monitoring program—a 30+-year effort to standardize field protocols, data handling procedures, and automated analyses through a custom-built computer application, the Fisheries Resources Analysis System (FRAS). Drawing on quantitative summaries of sampling trends and qualitative interviews with fisheries managers, we identified key benefits, challenges, and opportunities associated with the Bureau’s standardization efforts. Standardized procedures improved sampling consistency, data reliability, and operational efficiency, enabling the long-term tracking of fish population and angler metrics across more than 270 managed waterbodies. However, challenges related to analytical transparency and spatiotemporal comparisons persist. Simulations indicated that under current conditions, 5.8, 22.9, and 37.1 years would be required to sample (boat electrofishing) 50%, 75%, and 95% of the Bureau’s waterbodies at least once, respectively; these figures should translate to other agencies, assuming similar resource availability per waterbody. The monitoring program has reduced manual processing effort and enhanced staff capacity for waterbody-specific management, yet several opportunities remain to improve efficiency and utility. These include expanding FRAS functionalities for trend visualization, integrating mobile field data entry to reduce transcription errors, linking monitoring results with management objectives, and enhancing automated report generation for management support. Strengthening these elements could not only streamline workflows but better position agencies to apply standardized data in adaptive management embedded into the monitoring program.

Mississippi↗
USGS2001

Whooping cranes breeding at White Lake, Louisiana, 1939: observations by John J. Lynch, U.S. Bureau of Biological Survey

On 15 May 1939, John J. Lynch of the U.S. Bureau of Biological Survey located 13 whooping cranes (Grus americana), including 2 prefledged young, during an aerial survey near White Lake in southwestern Louisiana. His observation was the last historic record of whooping cranes breeding in the wild in the United States, and it confirmed the presence of a nonmigratory breeding population along the Gulf Coast. While reviewing old U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service files at the National Archives in 1999, we located Lynch's original 1939 field note, 2 letters, 5 photographs, and a draft manuscript describing the discovery; 4 other related letters also were found. Because of their biological and historical interest, we have reproduced the documents in this paper. A thorough assessment of the White Lake marshes as a potential site for returning nonmigratory whooping cranes to southwestern Louisiana should be conducted.

Book chapter↗
USGS1971

Monitoring pesticides in wildlife

Early in the development of the wildlife monitoring program, certain criteria were recognized as being important in the selection of species of wild animals suitable for pesticide monitoring purposes. Ideally, the forms selected should be geographically well distributed, and they should be reasonably abundant and readily available for sampling. In addition, animals occurring near the top of food chains have the capacity to reflect residues in organisms occurring at lower levels in the same food chains. Based on these criteria, species chosen for monitoring include the starling (Sturnus vulgaris), mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) and black ducks (Anas rubripes), and the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). The black duck is substituted for the mallard in States where suitable numbers of mallards cannot be obtained. The Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife is held responsible for the execution of the wildlife portion of the National Pesticide Monitoring Program. The primary objective is to ascertain on a nationwide basis and independent of specific treatments the levels and trends of certain pesticidal chemicals and other pollutants in the bodies of selected forms of wildlife. The program was first described by Johnson et al. (4) in 1967. The purpose of this report is to update and redescribe the wildlife monitoring program and briefly review accomplishments.

Pesticides Monitoring Journal↗
USGS2010

Effects of current-use pesticides on amphibians

For many years, amphibians were understudied in the ecotoxicological literature. In 1989, the Canadian Wildlife Service published a comprehensive review of studies examining the effects of contaminants on amphibians (Power et al. 1989). Just 10 years later, the same organization published an updated review that included twice the number of studies (Pauli et al. 2000), indicating rapid growth in the field of amphibian ecotoxicology. However, Sparling et al. (2000) point out that the number of amphibian ecotoxicological studies remains modest relative to research utilizing other taxa. Relyea and Hoverman (2006) also report that amphibian data appear to be lagging behind other taxa, despite an increasing number of ecotoxicological studies involving freshwater ecosystems in general.

Book chapter↗
USGS2018

Development of the Wildlife Adaptation Menu for Resource Managers

The Climate Change Response Framework is an example of a collaborative, cross-boundary approach to create a set of tools, partnerships, and actions to support climate-informed conservation and land management. Historically, this effort has focused on the needs of forest managers and forestry professionals. In recent years, however, there has been increasing demand for science and tools to address climate change adaptation in wildlife management and conservation. Not only do wildlife and resource managers need the best available science, it must also be presented in a usable format with feasible options within the purview of an individual manager. The research team is first completing a comprehensive review of peer-reviewed studies to summarize what wildlife-related management actions currently exist in climate change adaptation. They will then develop and test a “menu” of climate change adaptation actions that are suitable for wildlife management in terrestrial ecosystems. This Wildlife Adaptation Menu will be modeled off existing adaptation menus for Forestry and Urban Forestry, and it will be designed to be used in conjunction with the Adaptation Workbook . In addition to a menu of adaption strategies and approaches, the scientists will also identify site-level tactics and develop case studies demonstrating the use and implementation of the menu. To ensure that information and tools meet the needs of managers, the team is involving and integrating input from wildlife managers at every step of the process. Managers will be involved in scoping the project, testing the menu, and implementing the menu.

Final Report↗
USGS1987

Field methods to evaluate effects of pesticides on wildlife of the northwestern United States

Field .methods used to evaluate the impact of organochlorine and organophosphate pesticides on wildlife populations in the Pacific Northwest are reviewed. Five field studies, presented in a CASE HISTORY format, illustrate study designs .and thetypes of information collected. The pesticides investigated included DDT, heptachlor, endr1n, and famphur, and the species studied included the American kestrel (Falco sparverius), Canada goose (Branta canadensis}, black--crowned night-heron (Nycticorax nycticorac), and black-billed magpie (Pica pica). Wildlife biologists conducting field studies of pesticides encounter a variety of design and logistics problems. However, a number of procedures are now available to the researcher for field evaluations. The three principa1 types of insecticides (organochlorines (OC's), organophosphates (OP's) and carbamates (CB's) require different field approaches. In this paper, five field studies, conducted by my colleagues and me between 1974 and 1982, in the northwestern portion of the United States (Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and northern Nevada), are reviewed to illustrate procedures for evaluating the effects of these insecticides.on wildlife populations. Althought most OC pesticides were banned in the United States during the 1970's (.for review, see F1eming et al. 1983), we studied several OC applications, including the last major DDT spray project in 1974. Use of OP's and CB's increased during the 1970's and 1980s as the OC's were phased out.

Book chapter↗
USGS2014

Wildlife health in a rapidly changing North: focus on avian disease

Climate-related environmental changes have increasingly been linked to emerging infectious diseases in wildlife. The Arctic is facing a major ecological transition that is expected to substantially affect animal and human health. Changes in phenology or environmental conditions that result from climate warming may promote novel species assemblages as host and pathogen ranges expand to previously unoccupied areas. Recent evidence from the Arctic and subarctic suggests an increase in the spread and prevalence of some wildlife diseases, but baseline data necessary to detect and verify such changes are still lacking. Wild birds are undergoing rapid shifts in distribution and have been implicated in the spread of wildlife and zoonotic diseases. Here, we review evidence of current and projected changes in the abundance and distribution of avian diseases and outline strategies for future research. We discuss relevant climatic and environmental factors, emerging host–pathogen contact zones, the relationship between host condition and immune function, and potential wildlife and human health outcomes in northern regions.

Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment↗