Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

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 253 records · Page 14Linked to original sources
USGS2020

Illegal killing of nongame wildlife and recreational shooting in conservation areas

Illegal killing of nongame wildlife is a global yet poorly documented problem. The prevalence and ecological consequences of illegal killing are often underestimated or completely unknown. We review the practice of legal recreational shooting and present data gathered from telemetry, surveys, and observations on its association with illegal killing of wildlife (birds and snakes) within conservation areas in Idaho, USA. In total, 33% of telemetered long‐billed curlews ( Numenius americanus ) and 59% of other bird carcasses found with known cause of death (or 32% of total) were illegally shot. Analysis of spatial distributions of illegal and legal shooting is consistent with birds being shot illegally in the course of otherwise legal recreational shooting, but snakes being intentionally sought out and targeted elsewhere, in locations where they congregate. Preliminary public surveys indicate that most recreational shooters find abhorrent the practice of illegal killing of wildlife. Viewed through this lens, our data may imply only a small fraction of recreational shooters is responsible for this activity. This study highlights a poorly known conservation problem that could have broad implications for some species and populations of wildlife.

Idaho↗
USGS1994

Piezometer performance at Wildlife liquefaction site, California

In response to an urgent need for field data from instrumented liquefaction sites, the U.S. Geological Survey in 1982 selected and instrumented a site in southern California called the Wildlife site. Two accelerometers (one at ground surface and one at a depth of 7.5 m) and six electrical pore‐pressure transducers (five in a liquefiable silty sand layer) were placed at the site. The November 1987 Superstition Hills earthquake triggered sand boils and the desired instrumental response by generating excess pore‐water pressure that approximately equaled the initial effective overburden pressure. These records are the first from a field site to trace ground motions and pore pressures through the entire liquefaction process. Because pore pressure continued to rise after most of the seismic energy had propagated through the site, questions about the fidelity of the pore‐pressure records have been raised. Because of the importance of the Wildlife records, we reexamine pertinent aspects of the instruments and their placement, review their 1987 response, evaluate and respond to criticisms by Hushmand et al. (1992a, 1992b), and examine analyses of the records by other investigators that are pertinent to an evaluation of the fidelity of the piezometer records. This review concludes that no data or analyses have been developed that convincingly demonstrate that the pore‐pressure piezometers responded incorrectly. Conversely, an analysis by Zeghal and Elgamal (1994) provides strong evidence that the piezometers responded with a high degree of fidelity.

California↗
USGS1986

[Book review] Fish immunology, edited by M. J. Manning and M. F. Tatner

Review of: Fish Immunology. Edited by M. J. Manning and M. F. Tatner. Academic Press, London. 1985. 374 pages. $32.50. Reviewed by B. R. Griffin, Fish Farming Experimental Station, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Stuttgart, Arkansas 72160, USA.

Transactions of the American Fisheries Society↗
USGS2017

A synthesis of thresholds for focal species along the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf Coasts: A review of research and applications

The impacts from climate change are increasing the possibility of vulnerable coastal species and habitats crossing critical thresholds that could spur rapid and possibly irreversible changes. For species of high conservation concern, improved knowledge of quantitative thresholds could greatly improve management. To meet this need, we synthesized information pertaining to biological responses as tipping points to sea level rise (SLR) and coastal storms for 45 fish, wildlife, and plant species along the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf Coasts and Caribbean through a literature review and expert elicitation. Although these species were selected based on their ecological, economic, and cultural importance, just over half (56%, n = 25) have quantitative threshold data currently available that can be used to assess the effects of SLR and storms during some aspect of their life history. Birds, reptiles, and plants represent the best studied coastal species. Thirteen of the species (29%) are projected to lose at least 50% of their population or habitat (e.g., foraging, nesting, spawning, or resting habitat) in some areas with a 0.5 m or greater rise in sea levels by 2100. Two species (a bird and reptile) may gain habitat from projected SLR and be resilient to future impacts. Numeric thresholds were not available for the remaining 20 species we searched for. Coastal fishes, mammals, and amphibians were among the groups representing a major information gap in this field of research. In addition, quantitative threshold responses to coastal storms were scarce for all taxa. While vulnerability assessments and qualitative research related to the impacts of SLR and storms on coastal species and habitats are increasing, work that incorporates quantitative thresholds as response and impact metrics remains limited. Additional monitoring, modeling, and research that provides multiple quantitative thresholds across species' life stages and/or latitudinal gradients is ideal to support robust coastal management and decision-making across spatio-temporal scales in the face of climate change.

Ocean and Coastal Management↗
USGS2012

Ills in the pipeline: Emerging infectious diseases and wildlife

In the recent film Contagion, a medical thriller released in fall 2011, the fictitious MEV-1 virus—passed from bat to pig to humans—spreads across the globe as easily as the common cold, killing millions of humans and causing mass hysteria as medical researchers race to find a cure. Though it's Hollywood hyperbole, the film holds a kernel of truth: Researchers believe that the close proximity of Malaysian hog farms to forested areas—the natural habitat for fruit bats—allowed the previously unknown Nipah virus to spill from bats into pigs and subsequently into people, resulting in more than 100 human deaths (Epstein et al. 2006). There is no doubt that in recent times we have seen an unprecedented number of emerging infectious diseases, defined by the Institute for Medicine as new, reemerging, or drug-resistant infections whose incidence has increased or whose incidence threatens to increase in the near future. Many of these have a wildlife origin (Taylor et al. 2001). While this jump may be due, in part, to increased vigilance and reporting, there is a general consensus that current global conditions are creating a situation that is very favorable to the transmission of microbes that cause diseases. (For reviews, see Daszak et al. 2001 and Keesing et al. 2010). Likewise, it's increasingly important that wildlife professionals become aware of how and why new infectious diseases spread and what, if anything, can be done to minimize impacts on wildlife.

The Wildlife Professional↗
USGS2017

Vectors, hosts, and control measures for Zika virus in the Americas

We examine Zika virus (ZIKV) from an ecological perspective and with a focus on the Americas. We assess (1) the role of wildlife in ZIKV disease ecology, (2) how mosquito behavior and biology influence disease dynamics, and (3) how nontarget species and ecosystems may be impacted by vector control programs. Our review suggests that free-ranging, non-human primates may be involved in ZIKV transmission in the Old World; however, other wildlife species likely play a limited role in maintaining or transmitting ZIKV. In the Americas, a zoonotic cycle has not yet been definitively established. Understanding behaviors and habitat tolerances of Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus , two ZIKV competent vectors in the Americas, will allow more accurate modeling of disease spread and facilitate targeted and effective control efforts. Vector control efforts may have direct and indirect impacts to wildlife, particularly invertebrate feeding species; however, strategies could be implemented to limit detrimental ecological effects.

EcoHealth↗
USGS2011

Recommended methods for range-wide monitoring of prairie dogs in the United States

One of the greatest challenges for conserving grassland, prairie scrub, and shrub-steppe ecosystems is maintaining prairie dog populations across the landscape. Of the four species of prairie dogs found in the United States, the Utah prairie dog (Cynomys parvidens) is listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) as threatened, the Gunnison's prairie dog (C. gunnisoni) is a candidate for listing in a portion of its range, and the black-tailed prairie dog (C. ludovicianus) and white-tailed prairie dog (C. leucurus) have each been petitioned for listing at least once in recent history. Although the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) determined listing is not warranted for either the black-tailed prairie dog or white-tailed prairie dog, the petitions and associated reviews demonstrated the need for the States to monitor and manage for self-sustaining populations. In response to these findings, a multi-State conservation effort was initiated for the nonlisted species which included the following proposed actions: (1) completing an assessment of each prairie dog species in each State, (2) developing a range-wide monitoring protocol for each species using a statistically valid sampling procedure that would allow comparable analyses across States, and (3) monitoring prairie dog status every 3-5 years depending upon the species. To date, each State has completed an assessment and currently is monitoring prairie dog status; however, for some species, the inconsistency in survey methodology has made it difficult to compare data year-to-year or State-to-State. At the Prairie Dog Conservation Team meeting held in November 2008, there was discussion regarding the use of different methods to survey prairie dogs. A recommendation from this meeting was to convene a panel in a workshop-type forum and have the panel review the different methods being used and provide recommendations for range-wide monitoring protocols for each species of prairie dog. Consequently, the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA), in coordination with USFWS and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), hosted a prairie dog species survey methodology workshop January 25-28, 2010 in Fort Collins, Colorado. The workshop provided all WAFWA partners and interested parties the opportunity to present their survey methodology to a review panel made up of experts in the fields of quantitative biology, population biology, species biology, and biostatistics. This report presents the panel's survey methodology recommendations for each of the four species of prairie dogs found in the United States and, for the black-tailed prairie dog, a list of action items to facilitate implementation of the recommended methodology.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2018

Winter feeding of elk in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem and its effects on disease dynamics

Providing food to wildlife during periods when natural food is limited results in aggregations that may facilitate disease transmission. This is exemplified in western Wyoming where institutional feeding over the past century has aimed to mitigate wildlife–livestock conflict and minimize winter mortality of elk ( Cervus canadensis ). Here we review research across 23 winter feedgrounds where the most studied disease is brucellosis, caused by the bacterium Brucella abortus . Traditional veterinary practices (vaccination, test-and-slaughter) have thus far been unable to control this disease in elk, which can spill over to cattle. Current disease-reduction efforts are being guided by ecological research on elk movement and density, reproduction, stress, co-infections and scavengers. Given the right tools, feedgrounds could provide opportunities for adaptive management of brucellosis through regular animal testing and population-level manipulations. Our analyses of several such manipulations highlight the value of a research–management partnership guided by hypothesis testing, despite the constraints of the sociopolitical environment. However, brucellosis is now spreading in unfed elk herds, while other diseases (e.g. chronic wasting disease) are of increasing concern at feedgrounds. Therefore experimental closures of feedgrounds, reduced feeding and lower elk populations merit consideration.

Wyoming↗
USGS2017

U.S. Geological Survey Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program—2016–2017 Research Abstracts

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has several strategic goals that focus its efforts on serving the American people. The USGS Ecosystems Mission Area has responsibility for the following objectives under the strategic goal of “Science to Manage and Sustain Resources for Thriving Economies and Healthy Ecosystems”: Understand, model, and predict change in natural systems Conserve and protect wildlife and fish species and their habitats Reduce or eliminate the threat of invasive species and wildlife disease This report provides abstracts of the majority of ongoing research investigations of the USGS Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units program and is intended to complement the 2016 Cooperative Research Units Program Year in Review Circular 1424 ( https://doi.org/10.3133/cir1424 ). The report is organized by the following major science themes that contribute to the objectives of the USGS: Advanced Technologies Climate Science Decision Science Ecological Flows Ecosystem Services Endangered Species Conservation, Recovery, and Proactive Strategies Energy Human Dimensions Invasive Species Landscape Ecology Species of Greatest Conservation Need Species Population, Habitat, and Harvest Management Wildlife Health and Disease

Circular↗
USGS2017

Five-year external reviews of the eight Department of Interior Climate Science Centers: Southeast Climate Science Center

In 2008, the U.S. Congress authorized the establishment of the National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center (NCCWSC) within the U.S. Department of Interior (DOI). Housed administratively within the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), NCCWSC is part of the DOI’s ongoing mission to meet the challenges of climate change and its effects on wildlife and aquatic resources. From 2010 through 2012, NCCWSC established eight regional DOI Climate Science Centers (CSCs). Each of these regional CSCs operated with the mission to “synthesize and integrate climate change impact data and develop tools that the Department’s managers and partners can use when managing the Department’s land, water, fish and wildlife, and cultural heritage resources” (Salazar 2009). The model developed by NCCWSC for the regional CSCs employed a dual approach of a federal USGS-staffed component and a parallel host-university component established competitively through a 5-year cooperative agreement with NCCWSC. At the conclusion of this 5-year agreement, a review of each CSC was undertaken, with the Southeast Climate Science Center (SE CSC) review in February 2016. The SE CSC is hosted by North Carolina State University (NCSU) in Raleigh, North Carolina, and is physically housed within the NCSU Department of Applied Ecology along with the Center for Applied Aquatic Ecology, the North Carolina Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit (CFWRU), and the North Carolina Agromedicine Institute. The U.S. Department of Agriculture Southeast Regional Climate Hub is based at NCSU as is the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Southeast Regional Climate Center, the North Carolina Institute for Climate Studies, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, the NOAA National Weather Service, the State Climate Office of North Carolina, and the U.S. Forest Service Eastern Forest Environmental Threat Assessment Center. This creates a strong core of organizations operating in close proximity focused on climate issues. The geographic area covered by the SE CSC represents all or part of 16 states and the Caribbean Islands and has overlapping boundaries with seven Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs): Appalachian LCC, Eastern Tallgrass Prairie and Big Rivers LCC, Gulf Coast Prairie LCC, Gulf Coastal Plains and Ozarks LCC, Peninsular Florida LCC, South Atlantic LCC, and Caribbean LCC. The SE CSC region also encompasses 134 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service refuges and 89 National Park Service (NPS) units and is home to 11 federally recognized and 54 state recognized tribes.

Report↗
USGS2021

A systematic review of potential habitat suitability for the jaguar Panthera onca in central Arizona and New Mexico, USA

In April 2019, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) released its recovery plan for the jaguar Panthera onca after several decades of discussion, litigation and controversy about the status of the species in the USA. The USFWS estimated that potential habitat, south of the Interstate-10 highway in Arizona and New Mexico, had a carrying capacity of c. six jaguars, and so focused its recovery programme on areas south of the USA–Mexico border. Here we present a systematic review of the modelling and assessment efforts over the last 25 years, with a focus on areas north of Interstate-10 in Arizona and New Mexico, outside the recovery unit considered by the USFWS. Despite differences in data inputs, methods, and analytical extent, the nine previous studies found support for potential suitable jaguar habitat in the central mountain ranges of Arizona and New Mexico. Applying slightly modified versions of the USFWS model and recalculating an Arizona-focused model over both states provided additional confirmation. Extending the area of consideration also substantially raised the carrying capacity of habitats in Arizona and New Mexico, from six to 90 or 151 adult jaguars, using the modified USFWS models. This review demonstrates the crucial ways in which choosing the extent of analysis influences the conclusions of a conservation plan. More importantly, it opens a new opportunity for jaguar conservation in North America that could help address threats from habitat losses, climate change and border infrastructure.

Arizona, New Mexico↗
USGS2001

Managing birds and controlling aircraft in the Kennedy Airport-Jamaica Bay Wildlife Refuge complex: The need for hard data and soft opinions

During the 1980s, the exponential growth of laughing gull ( Larus atricilla ) colonies, from 15 to about 7600 nests in 1990, in the Jamaica Bay Wildlife Refuge and a correlated increase in the bird-strike rate at nearby John F. Kennedy International Airport (New York City) led to a controversy between wildlife and airport managers over the elimination of the colonies. In this paper, we review data to evaluate if: (1) the colonies have increased the level of risk to the flying public; (2) on-colony population control would reduce the presence of gulls, and subsequently bird strikes, at the airport; and (3) all on-airport management alternatives have been adequately implemented. Since 1979, most (2987, 87%) of the 3444 bird strikes (number of aircraft struck) were actually bird carcasses found near runways (cause of death unknown but assumed to be bird strikes by definition). Of the 457 pilot-reported strikes (mean = 23 ± 6 aircraft/yr, N = 20 years), 78 (17%) involved laughing gulls. Since a gull-shooting program was initiated on airport property in 1991, over 50,000 adult laughing gulls have been killed and the number of reported bird strikes involving laughing gulls has declined from 6.9 ± 2.9 (1983–1990) to 2.6 ± 1.3 (1991–1998) aircraft/yr; nongull reported bird strikes, however, have more than doubled (6.4 ± 2.6, 1983–1990; 14.9 ± 5.1, 1991–1998). We found no evidence to indicate that on-colony management would yield a reduction of bird strikes at Kennedy Airport. Dietary and mark–recapture studies suggest that 60%–90% of the laughing gulls collected on-airport were either failed breeders and/or nonbreeding birds. We argue that the Jamaica Bay laughing gull colonies, the only ones in New York State, should not be managed at least until all on-airport management alternatives have been properly implemented and demonstrated to be ineffective at reducing bird strikes, including habitat alterations and increasing the capability of the bird control unit to eliminate bird flocks on-airport using nonlethal bird dispersal techniques. Because the gull-shooting program may be resulting in a nonsustainable regional population of laughing gulls (>30% decline), we also recommend that attempts be made to initiate an experimental colony elsewhere on Long Island to determine if colony relocation is a feasible management option.

New York↗
USGS2011

Environmental contaminants in biota: Interpreting tissue concentrations

Discussing the interpretation of tissue concentrations of contaminants in wildlife, this updated edition of a bestseller draws on current scientific research and includes new chapters and greater emphasis on aquatic organisms. Each chapter provides a summary and review of a specific chemical along with direction on research methods and the interpretation of conflicting or insufficient data. Chapters include a comprehensive history of contaminant interpretation in wildlife and fish, the use of tissue residues in ecological risk assessment, and detailed coverage of all bioaccumulative contaminants and their physiologic affects.

Book↗
USGS2012

USGS Environmental health science strategy: providing environmental health science for a changing world: Public review release

America has an abundance of natural resources. We have bountiful clean water, fertile soil, and unrivaled national parks, wildlife refuges, and public lands. These resources enrich our lives and preserve our health and wellbeing. These resources have been maintained because of our history of respect for their value and an enduring commitment to their vigilant protection. Awareness of the social, economic, and personal value of the health of our environment is increasing. The emergence of environmentally driven diseases caused by environmental exposure to contaminants and pathogens is a growing concern worldwide. New health threats and patterns of established threats are affected by both natural and anthropogenic changes to the environment. Human activities are key drivers of emerging (new and re-emerging) health threats. Societal demands for land and natural resources, a better quality of life, improved economic prosperity, and the environmental impacts associated with these demands will continue to increase. Natural earth processes, climate trends, and related climatic events will add to the environmental impact of human activities. These environmental drivers will influence exposure to disease agents, including viral, bacterial, prion, and fungal pathogens, parasites, natural earth materials, toxins and other biogenic compounds, and synthetic chemicals and substances. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) defines environmental health science broadly as the interdisciplinary study of relations among the quality of the physical environment, the health of the living environment, and human health. The interactions among these three spheres are driven by human activities, ecological processes, and natural earth processes; the interactions affect exposure to contaminants and pathogens and the severity of environmentally driven diseases in animals and people. This definition provides USGS with a framework for synthesizing natural science information from across the Bureau and providing it to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and public-health managers. The USGS is a Federal science agency with a broad range of natural science expertise relevant to environmental health. USGS provides scientific information and tools as a scientific basis for management and policy decision making. USGS specializes in science at the environment-health interface, by characterizing the processes that affect the interaction among the physical environment, the living environment, and people, and the resulting factors that affect ecological and human exposure to disease agents. This report describes a 10-year strategy that encompasses the portfolio of USGS environmental health science. It summarizes national environmental health priorities that USGS is best suited to address, and will serve as a strategic framework for USGS environmental health science goals, actions, and outcomes for the next decade. Implementation of this strategy is intended to aid coordination of USGS environmental health activities and to provide a focal point for disseminating information to stakeholders. The "One Health" paradigm advocated by the World Health Organization (WHO, 2011), and the American Veterinary Medicine Association (AVMA, 2008), among others, is based on a general recognition that the health of humans, animals, and the environment are inextricably linked. Thus, successful efforts to protect that health will require increased interdisciplinary research and increased communication and collaboration among the broader scientific and health community. This strategy is built upon that paradigm. The vision, mission, and five cornerstone goals of the USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy were developed with significant input from a wide range of stakeholders. Vision - The USGS is a premier source of the environmental health science needed to safeguard the health of the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. Mission - The mission of USGS in environmental health science is to contribute scientific information to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and public-health managers, who use that science to support sound decision making. USGS provides the science to: - Goal 1: Identify, prioritize, and detect contaminants and pathogens of emerging environmental concern. - Goal 2: Reduce the impact of contaminants on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Goal 3: Reduce the impact of pathogens on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Goal 4: Discover the complex interactions and combined effects of exposure to contaminants and pathogens. - Goal 5: Prepare for and respond to environmental impacts and related health threats of natural and anthropogenic disasters. Goals 1 through 4 are intended to provide science to address environmental health threats in a logical order, from informing prevention and preparedness, to supporting systematic management response to environmental health issues. Goal 4 addresses the interaction among contaminants and pathogens, an issue of emerging concern in environmental health science. Goal 5 acknowledges the fact that natural and anthropogenic disasters can cause immediate and prolonged adverse environmental health threats. This strategy proposes that USGS take the following strategic science actions to achieve each of the five goals of this strategy: Goal 1: Identify, prioritize, and detect contaminants and pathogens of emerging environmental concern. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Prioritize contaminants and pathogens of emerging concern to guide research, detection, and management activities. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Conduct surveillance and monitoring to provide early warning of emerging health threats. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Develop approaches and tools that identify vulnerable environmental settings, ecosystems, and species. Goal 2: Reduce the impact of contaminants on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Systematically characterize the sources, occurrence, transport and fate of environmental contaminants to guide efforts to manage and mitigate contamination. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Evaluate the threats of contamination on the health of the environment, fish, wildlife, and people, and inform the associated management and protection efforts. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Characterize potential human exposure to support establishment of health-based standards or guidelines and contamination-reduction efforts. Goal 3: Reduce the impact of pathogens on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Determine the biotic and abiotic factors that control the ecology of infectious diseases affecting natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and potential transmission to other animals and humans. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Establish how natural and anthropogenic environmental changes affect the distribution and severity of infectious diseases in natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and potential transmission to other animals and humans. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Develop surveillance systems to identify changing patterns of disease activity in priority geographic areas. Goal 4: Discover the complex interactions and combined effects of exposure to contaminants and pathogens. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Identify how exposure to one class of disease agents (contaminants or pathogens) can make an organism more susceptible to effects from exposure to the other class of disease agents. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Implement interdisciplinary studies that characterize the effects of combined exposure to pathogens and contaminants. Goal 5: Prepare for and respond to the environmental impacts and related health threats of natural and anthropogenic disasters. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Establish a formal interdisciplinary science capability to rapidly assess the environmental health risks associated with disasters. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Enhance methods to anticipate, prepare for, and identify environmental, ecological, and related health impacts of future disasters. This strategy is one of seven USGS science strategies developed concurrently: - Climate and Land Use Change - Core Science Systems - Ecosystems - Energy and Mineral Resources - Environmental Health - Natural Hazards - Water. This strategy describes how USGS will address the highest priority environmental health issues facing the Nation. The ultimate intended outcome of this science strategy is prevention and reduction of adverse impacts to the quality of the environment, the health of our living resources, and human health. Communication with, and receiving input from, partners and stakeholders regarding their science needs is essential for successful implementation of this strategy. It is incumbent on USGS to reach out to all stakeholders to ensure that USGS efforts are focused on the highest priority environmental health issues and that products are provided in the most timely and usable form to all those who can use them. USGS must reach out to the scientific community, internally and externally, to ensure that our efforts are integrated with and take full advantage of the activities of others.

Open-File Report↗