Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Wildlifer”

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 307 records · Page 17Linked to original sources
USGS2022

Leveraging rangeland monitoring data for wildlife: From concept to practice

Available rangeland data, from field-measured plots to remotely sensed landscapes, provide much needed information for mapping and modeling wildlife habitats. Better integration of wildlife habitat characteristics into rangeland monitoring schemes is needed for most rangeland wildlife species at varying spatial and temporal scales. Here, we aim to stimulate use of and inspire ideas about rangeland monitoring data in the context of wildlife habitat modeling and species conservation.

Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, N↗
USGS2021

Integrating wildlife habitat models with state-and-transitions models to enhance the management of rangelands for multiple objectives

State-and-transition models (STMs) are tools used in rangeland management to describe linear and nonlinear vegetation dynamics as conceptual models. STMs can be improved by including additional ecosystem services, such as wildlife habitat, so that managers can predict how local populations might respond to state changes and to illustrate the tradeoffs in managing for different ecosystem services. Our objective was to incorporate songbird density into an STM developed for sagebrush rangelands in northwest Colorado to guide local management of sagebrush birds. The STM included two shrub-dominated community phases, a native grassland state, and a shrubland and grassland phase within an exotic-dominated state. We surveyed plots for songbirds, collected a suite of vegetation indicators at each plot, and quantified songbird habitat relationships with count-based regression models. We then used the estimated models to predict songbird density based on average vegetation conditions per state or community phase. Moderate or increasing shrub cover were important predictors for shrubland-associated species, and responses to understory components varied by species. In the STM, we predicted higher densities of shrubland-associated bird species in the shrub-dominated phases and higher densities of grassland-associated bird species in the state and phase lacking shrub cover. No single state or phase captured the highest density for all songbirds, illustrating the value of alternative states. Our results also demonstrate the utility of displaying traditional wildlife count models against the range of vegetation conditions associated with each state or phase to understand how wildlife density can vary within states and phases. Our approach can assist land managers to gauge the potential impacts of land-use decisions and natural vegetation variability on wildlife, especially for species of conservation concern.

Rangeland Ecology and Management↗
USGS2025

Learning complex spatial dynamics of wildlife diseases with machine learning-guided partial differential equations

Emerging wildlife pathogens often display geographic variability due to landscape heterogeneity. Modeling approaches capable of learning complex, non-linear spatial dynamics of diseases are needed to rigorously assess and mitigate the effects of pathogens on wildlife health and biodiversity. We propose a novel machine learning (ML)-guided approach that leverages prior physical knowledge of ecological systems, using partial differential equations. We present our approach, taking advantage of the universal function approximation property of neural networks for flexible representation of the underlying dynamics of the geographic spread and growth of wildlife diseases. We demonstrate the benefits of our approach by comparing its forecasting power with commonly used methods and highlighting the obtained insights on disease dynamics. Additionally, we show the theoretical guarantees for the approximation error of our model. We illustrate the implementation of our ML-guided approach using data from white-nose syndrome (WNS) outbreaks in bat populations across the US. WNS is an infectious fungal disease responsible for significant declines in bat populations. Our results on WNS are useful for disease surveillance and bat conservation efforts. Our methods can be broadly used to assess the effects of environmental and anthropogenic drivers impacting wildlife health and biodiversity.

Environmental Data Science↗
USGS2020

Community attachment and stewardship identity influence responsibility to manage wildlife

Managing wildlife in landscapes under private ownership requires partnership between landowners, resource users, and governing agencies. Agencies often call on landowners to voluntarily change their practices to achieve collective goals. Landowner support for management action is partially a function of normative beliefs about managing wildlife. Understanding factors that support development of normative beliefs is important for program design, with implications beyond deer. Drawing on norm activation theory, identity theory, and community attachment, we hypothesized that landowners’ ascription of responsibility to manage deer were a function of their identity as a wildlife steward and attachment to their community. We tested our hypotheses using structural equation modeling with data from a survey of southeast Minnesota landowners. Results revealed ascribed responsibility to be a function of identity. In turn, identity was predicted by affect toward the community. Findings suggest community-based approaches to wildlife management could improve goal achievement.

Minnesota↗
USGS2024

Early detection of wildlife disease pathogens using CRISPR-Cas system methods

Wildlife diseases are a considerable threat to human health, conservation, and the economy. Surveillance is a critical component to mitigate the impact of animal diseases in these sectors. To monitor human diseases, CRISPR-Cas (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats-CRISPR-associated protein) biosensors have proven instrumental as diagnostic tools capable of detecting unique DNA and RNA sequences related to their associated pathogens. However, despite the significant advances in the general development of CRISPR-Cas biosensors, their use to support wildlife disease management is lagging. In some cases, wildlife diseases of concern could be rapidly surveyed using these tools with minimal technical, operational, or cost requirements to end users. This review explores the potential to further leverage this technology to advance wildlife disease monitoring and highlights how concerted standardization of protocols can help to ensure data reliability.

The CRISPR Journal↗
USGS1959

Effects on fish and wildlife of chemical treatments of large areas

Summary: The history of field investigations of the effects of DDT on wildlife is reviewed briefly, from the initial studies in 1945 through the more recent studies of the effects of the large-scale programs for spruce-budworm control and gypsy-moth eradication. DDT dosages and procedures that are recommended for protection of wildlife are reviewed. Effects of aldrin, heptachlor, and toxaphene are discussed in connection with the grasshopper and Mormon cricket control programs. Delayed and indirect effects of chemical treatments are emphasized as an important current problem. Cited in this connection are fish losses in the Yellowstone and Miramichi rivers and losses of wildlife from eating earthworms a year after treatment of the area with DDT. Currently recommended procedures to safeguard wildlife in pesticidal programs are listed.

Journal of Forestry↗
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↗
USGS2016

Projected gains and losses of wildlife habitat from bioenergy-induced landscape change

Domestic and foreign renewable energy targets and financial incentives have increased demand for woody biomass and bioenergy in the southeastern United States. This demand is expected to be met through purpose-grown agricultural bioenergy crops, short-rotation tree plantations, thinning and harvest of planted and natural forests, and forest harvest residues. With results from a forest economics model, spatially explicit state-and-transition simulation models, and species–habitat models, we projected change in habitat amount for 16 wildlife species caused by meeting a renewable fuel target and expected demand for wood pellets in North Carolina, USA. We projected changes over 40 years under a baseline ‘business-as-usual’ scenario without bioenergy production and five scenarios with unique feedstock portfolios. Bioenergy demand had potential to influence trends in habitat availability for some species in our study area. We found variation in impacts among species, and no scenario was the ‘best’ or ‘worst’ across all species. Our models projected that shrub-associated species would gain habitat under some scenarios because of increases in the amount of regenerating forests on the landscape, while species restricted to mature forests would lose habitat. Some forest species could also lose habitat from the conversion of forests on marginal soils to purpose-grown feedstocks. The conversion of agricultural lands on marginal soils to purpose-grown feedstocks increased habitat losses for one species with strong associations with pasture, which is being lost to urbanization in our study region. Our results indicate that landscape-scale impacts on wildlife habitat will vary among species and depend upon the bioenergy feedstock portfolio. Therefore, decisions about bioenergy and wildlife will likely involve trade-offs among wildlife species, and the choice of focal species is likely to affect the results of landscape-scale assessments. We offer general principals to consider when crafting lists of focal species for bioenergy impact assessments at the landscape scale.

GCB Bioenergy↗
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↗
USGS2012

Emerging prion disease drives host selection in a wildlife population

Infectious diseases are increasingly recognized as an important force driving population dynamics, conservation biology, and natural selection in wildlife populations. Infectious agents have been implicated in the decline of small or endangered populations and may act to constrain population size, distribution, growth rates, or migration patterns. Further, diseases may provide selective pressures that shape the genetic diversity of populations or species. Thus, understanding disease dynamics and selective pressures from pathogens is crucial to understanding population processes, managing wildlife diseases, and conserving biological diversity. There is ample evidence that variation in the prion protein gene (PRNP) impacts host susceptibility to prion diseases. Still, little is known about how genetic differences might influence natural selection within wildlife populations. Here we link genetic variation with differential susceptibility of white-tailed deer to chronic wasting disease (CWD), with implications for fitness and disease-driven genetic selection. We developed a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) assay to efficiently genotype deer at the locus of interest (in the 96th codon of the PRNP gene). Then, using a Bayesian modeling approach, we found that the more susceptible genotype had over four times greater risk of CWD infection; and, once infected, deer with the resistant genotype survived 49% longer (8.25 more months). We used these epidemiological parameters in a multi-stage population matrix model to evaluate relative fitness based on genotype-specific population growth rates. The differences in disease infection and mortality rates allowed genetically resistant deer to achieve higher population growth and obtain a long-term fitness advantage, which translated into a selection coefficient of over 1% favoring the CWD-resistant genotype. This selective pressure suggests that the resistant allele could become dominant in the population within an evolutionarily short time frame. Our work provides a rare example of a quantifiable disease-driven selection process in a wildlife population, demonstrating the potential for infectious diseases to alter host populations. This will have direct bearing on the epidemiology, dynamics, and future trends in CWD transmission and spread. Understanding genotype-specific epidemiology will improve predictive models and inform management strategies for CWD-affected cervid populations.

Ecological Applications↗
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↗
USGS2022

Integrating climate-informed planning into State Wildlife Action Plans in the north central United States

State fish and wildlife agencies are required to submit a State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP) every 10 years to be eligible for grants through the State Wildlife Grant Program. With the next round of revisions due in 2025, the U.S. Geological Survey North Central Climate Adaptation Science Center is evaluating how to best support states with further integrating climate-informed planning in their SWAPs. Here, we summarize how states in the North Central region, which includes Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming, addressed adaptation planning in their 2015 SWAPs. We review climate adaptation considerations in required SWAP elements one through five, including species, habitats, threats, conservation actions, and conservation monitoring, respectively. We also include a list of potential strategies that the North Central Climate Adaptation Science Center could use to support states in the North Central region with further advancing the integration of climate informed planning in ongoing and future SWAP revisions. These strategies were primarily identified during meetings in 2021 with six of seven state fish and wildlife agencies in the North Central region where we discussed their priority needs relating to climate-informed planning. Our hope is that these strategies will enhance existing efforts in the region to advance the integration of climate change in conservation planning.

Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota,↗
USGS1987

Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge land cover mapping project users guide

Title III of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (ANILCA, 1980) established the Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge (TNWR). Section 304 of the Act requires the Secretary of Interior to "prepare, and from time to time revise, a comprehensive conservation plan" for the refuge. Before developing a plan for the refuge, the Secretary shall identify and describe--a) the populations and habitats of the fish and wildlife resources of the refuge; b) the special values of the refuge as well as any other archeological, cultural, ecological, geological, historical, palentological, scenic, or wilderness value of the refuge; c) areas within the refuge that are suitable for use as administrative sites or visitor facilities… ; d) present the potential requirements for access with respect to the refuge… ; and e) significant problems which may adversely affect the populations and habitats of fish and wildlife identified and described... (ANILCA, 1980). Vegetation, water, and terrain (elevation, slope, and aspect) are the components of habitat and can be used in the determination of the above requirements. The U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) has the responsibility for collecting the resource information to address the research, management, development and planning requirements identified in Section 304. Because of the brief period provided by the Act for data collection, habitat mapping, and habitat assessment, the USFWS in cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey's EROS Field Office, used digital Landsat multispectral scanner data (MSS) and digital terrain data to produce land cover and terrain maps. A computer assisted digital analysis of Landsat MSS data was used because coverage by aerial photographs was incomplete for much of the refuge and because the level of detail, obtained from the analysis of Landsat data, is adequate to meet most USFWS research, management and planning needs. Relative cost and time requirements were also factors in the decision to use the digital analysis approach.

Alaska↗
USGS1988

Selawik National Wildlife Refuge land cover mapping project users guide

Title III of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA, 1980) established the Selawik National Wildlife Refuge (SNWR). Section 304 of the Act requires the Secretary of Interior to "prepare, and from time to time revise, a comprehensive conservation plan" for the refuge. Before developing a plan for the refuge, the Secretary shall "identify and describe--a) the populations and habitats of the fish and wildlife resources of the refuge; b) the special values of the refuge as well as any other archeological, cultural, ecological, geological, historical, palentological, scenic, or wilderness value of the refuge; c) areas within the refuge that are suitable for use as administrative sites or visitor facilities...; d) present the potential requirements for access with respect to the refuge...; and e) significant problems which may adversely affect the populations and habitats of fish and wildlife identified and described..." (ANILCA, 1980). Vegetation, water, and terrain (elevation, slope, and aspect) are the components of habitat and can be used in the determination of the above requirements. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) has the responsibility for collecting the resource information to address the research, management, development and planning requirements identified in Section 304. Because of the brief period provided by the Act for data collection, habitat mapping, and habitat assessment, the USFWS in cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey's EROS Field Office, used digital Landsat multispectral scanner (MSS) data and digital terrain data to produce land cover and terrain maps. A computer assisted digital analysis of Landsat MSS data was used because coverage by aerial photographs was incomplete for the refuge and because the level of detail obtained from Landsat data was adequate to meet most USFWS research, management and planning needs. Relative cost and time requirements were also factors in the decision to use the digital analysis approach.

Alaska↗
USGS2016

Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program—2015 Year In Review

Summary The Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit (CRU) Program had its 80th anniversary in 2015. We did not have a party, but those of us who work directly for the Unit program on a daily basis celebrate the privilege we feel in being part of one of the greatest conservation institutions in history. Our mission is our hallmark: meeting the actionable science needs of our cooperators, providing them technical guidance and assistance in interpreting and applying new advances in science, and developing the future workforce through graduate education and mentoring. Our success in accomplishing our mission is due principally to the caliber of the scientists and students they recruit, and the tremendous support from our cooperators. The National Cooperators Coalition has been active in fostering support and I am very excited about their energy. A Special Session at the 2015 North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference was dedicated to the Unit program, and a vision for our future was presented at this most prestigious conservation policy forum. We compiled a directory of expertise within the Unit program organized within thematic science areas as identified by our cooperators. We intend for this directory to facilitate our transboundary initiatives where two or more Units in collaboration will be the catalyst that binds agencies and organizations together on landscape scale conservation science. We are co-sponsoring a workshop at the 2016 North American conference, along with the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, the American Fisheries Society, and The Wildlife Society to jump-start a dialogue on and identify issues associated with the widening gap between science and management. The CRU is viewed by our cooperators as being the standard for delivering actionable science in conservation, and the exception to the emerging trend. This is testament to the legacy of the Unit Program and the foundation it is built upon. In this Year in Review report, you will find details on staffing, vacancies, research funding, and other pertinent information. You will also see snapshots of Unit projects with information on how results have been or are being applied by cooperators. That is the essence of what we do: science that matter.

Circular↗
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↗
USGS2021

Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units program—2020 research abstracts

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) serves as the research arm of the U.S. Department of the Interior and has established a series of strategic goals that focus its efforts on serving the American people. Within the USGS, the Ecosystems Mission Area is responsible for conducting and sponsoring research that addresses the following thematic objectives under the overarching strategic goal of “Science that Supports Our Resources in Wild and Urban Spaces, and the Landscapes In-Between”: Science supporting a legacy of sustainable fish and wildlife, Social science and human components in land, water, and wildlife conservation, Trusted science supporting hard decisions on at-risk species, Science to battle costly biological threats, Providing science for managing risks and responding to extreme events, Science for preservation and restoration of iconic landscapes, and Science to support adaptation and address impacts of climate and land change. This report provides abstracts of most of the ongoing and recently completed research investigations of the USGS Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units program. 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 Energy Fish and Wildlife Health and Disease Human Dimensions Invasive Species Landscape Ecology Species and Habitat Management Species of Greatest Conservation Need Threatened and Endangered Species

Circular↗
USGS2016

Assessing wildlife benefits and carbon storage from restored and natural coastal marshes in the Nisqually River Delta: Determining marsh net ecosystem carbon balance

Working in partnership since 1996, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Nisqually Indian Tribe have restored 902 acres of tidally influenced coastal marsh in the Nisqually River Delta (NRD), making it the largest estuary-restoration project in the Pacific Northwest to date. Marsh restoration increases the capacity of the estuary to support a diversity of wildlife species. Restoration also increases carbon (C) production of marsh plant communities that support food webs for wildlife and can help mitigate climate change through long-term C storage in marsh soils. In 2015, an interdisciplinary team of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) researchers began to study the benefits of carbon for wetland wildlife and storage in the NRD. Our primary goals are (1) to identify the relative importance of the different carbon sources that support juvenile chinook ( Oncorhynchus tshawytscha ) food webs and contribute to current and historic peat formation, (2) to determine the net ecosystem carbon balance (NECB) in a reference marsh and a restoration marsh site, and (3) to model the sustainability of the reference and restoration marshes under projected sea-level rise conditions along with historical vegetation change. In this fact sheet, we focus on the main C sources and exchanges to determine NECB, including carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) uptake through plant photosynthesis, the loss of CO 2 through plant and soil respiration, emissions of methane (CH 4 ), and the lateral movement or leaching loss of C in tidal waters.

Washington↗