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 361 records · Page 20Linked to original sources
USGS1985

Wildlife health implications of sewage disposal in wetlands

Wildlife health concerns associated with disposal of sewage effluent in wetlands are of three primary types: (1) introduction of pathogens, (2) introduction of pollutants that adversely impact on host body defense mechanisms, and (3) changes in the physical and chemical properties of wetlands that favor the development and maintenance of disease problems. Unlike the situation with human health concerns, introduction of pathogens is not the major concern regarding wildlife health. Instead, the focus of attention needs to be directed at environmental changes likely to take place as a result of effluent discharges into different types of wetlands. Unless these changes are adequately addressed from a disease perspective, marshes utilized for sewage disposal could become disease incubators and wildlife death traps. This result would be unfortunate because the backlash would likely negate the potentially beneficial aspects of the use of sewage wastewater for the creation of new wetlands and have a severe impact on progress being made towards evaluation of the compatibility of wildlife and sewage effluents.

Book chapter↗
USGS2025

An approach to modeling abundance of marine wildlife over space and time using unstructured aerial surveys

Estimating spatial and temporal patterns in abundance is often a goal of ecological studies and can be useful for informing management decisions, such as determining the optimal placement of wildlife protection zones. However, estimating abundance can be difficult in practice, especially over large areas, because of imperfect detection, where individuals are present but not detected because of either availability or observer error. Several methods for estimating abundance that account for imperfect detection exist but can be logistically challenging to implement. We present a simpler approach to some of the more commonly used techniques for estimating the abundance of marine wildlife over space and time from unstructured aerial surveys. This approach combines a spatial model for count data with auxiliary information on detection probability obtained from small-scale or previous studies. We employ generalized linear models and generalized additive models with spatial habitat covariates to illustrate this approach using maximum-likelihood with free, open-source statistical software. This framework is intended to be accessible and flexible, requiring lower survey costs and less computation time than other alternatives for estimating abundance. Indeed, our simulation results show that this approach can reduce computation times, while appropriately characterizing uncertainty, compared to a Bayesian approach. We also present R code for our approach using an example of estimating Florida manatee ( Trichechus manatus latirostris ) abundance in Indian River County in Florida, USA. This approach could be applied to other study systems and marine wildlife species using unstructured aerial surveys.

Florida↗
USGS2014

Causes of mortality in eagles submitted to the National Wildlife Health Center 1975-2013

We summarized the cause of death for 2,980 bald eagles ( Haliaeetus leucocephalus ) and 1,427 golden eagles ( Aquila chrysaetos ) submitted to the National Wildlife Health Center in Madison, Wisconsin, USA, for diagnosis between 1975 and the beginning of 2013. We compared the proportion of eagles with a primary diagnosis as electrocuted, emaciated, traumatized, shot or trapped, diseased, poisoned, other, and undetermined among the 4 migratory bird flyways of the United States (Atlantic, Mississippi, Central, and Pacific). Additionally, we compared the proportion of lead-poisoned bald eagles submitted before and after the autumn 1991 ban on lead shot for waterfowl hunting. Trauma and poisonings (including lead poisoning) were the leading causes of death for bald eagles throughout the study period, and a greater proportion of bald eagles versus golden eagles were diagnosed as poisoned. For golden eagles, the major causes of mortality were trauma and electrocution. The proportion of lead poisoning diagnoses for bald eagles submitted to the National Wildlife Health Center displayed a statistically significant increase in all flyways after the autumn 1991 ban on the use of lead shot for waterfowl hunting. Thus, lead poisoning was a significant cause of mortality in our necropsied eagles, suggesting a continued need to evaluate the trade-offs of lead ammunition for use on game other than waterfowl versus the impacts of lead on wildlife populations. Published 2014. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Wildlife Society Bulletin↗
USGS2019

Communication strategies for reducing lead poisoning in wildlife and human health risks

Although lead poisoning in North American waterfowl has been reduced, it persists among other wildlife. To address this issue, we review lead poisoning in wildlife and threats to human health, describe the recent socio-political landscape, and develop a framework for reducing lead exposure related to hunting ammunition and fishing tackle. Despite substantial information about lead poisoning in wildlife, an explicit and strategic plan for using existing information to develop an effective communication program is lacking. Local and regional efforts encouraging hunters and anglers to voluntarily use nonlead alternatives could benefit from a nationally coordinated and strategic focus. We propose that the diffusion of innovation theory provides a useful framework for developing and implementing voluntary nonlead hunting ammunition and fishing tackle programs. Further, it can help communicators refine messages, increase efficiencies in developing communication materials, and monitor adoption of nonlead alternatives. The initial step in this process, however, is to engage stakeholders about the importance of the issue and leverage that concern as a catalyst for positive change. Published 2019. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Wildlife Society Bulletin↗
USGS2019

Wildlife value orientation of landowners from five states in the upper midwest, USA

Five Upper Midwest states (Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa) participated in a Plains and Prairie Landscape Conservation Cooperative (PPP-LCC) funded survey of landowners. All five surveys included a 13-item wildlife value orientation (WVO) scale to provide insight into how landowners in this region make land use decisions that affect wildlife habitat. Most landowners were utilitarian (59%), 11% were identified as mutualists, and pluralists and distanced landowners were 15% each. Pluralist and mutualist landowners placed more importance on wildlife considerations when making land use decisions compared to utilitarian and distanced landowners. However, landowners’ WVO was not related to their participation in United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Farm Bill conservation programs. The proportion of WVO types among landowners varied considerably by age cohort. The proportion of utilitarians was highest for landowners born during the 1970s age cohorts and has since declined.

Iowa, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, South Dako↗
USGS2021

The precarious position of wildlife conservation funding in the United States

The Pittman-Robertson Act was established in 1937 to fund state-based wildlife conservation through an existing excise tax on sporting arms and ammunition. Because these items were purchased mostly by hunters at the time, they were the user group primarily funding wildlife conservation. Subsequent amendments to Pittman-Robertson expanded the taxable items to include pistols, revolvers, and archery equipment, effectively broadening the pool of conservation funding contributors to include non-hunters. The continuing trends of declining hunting participation, increasing handgun sales for non-hunting purposes, and increasing sport shooting and target archery independent of hunting, mean that non-hunters are contributing a disproportionately greater amount to Pittman-Robertson funding than hunters, and therefore contributing more to wildlife conservation. The evolving sources of revenue to Pittman-Robertson pose several threats to this historically important source of conservation funding. Addressing them may require new funding coalitions and outreach describing the conservation benefits and outcomes of Pittman-Robertson funding.

Human Dimensions of Wildlife↗
USGS2010

Sampling considerations for disease surveillance in wildlife populations

Disease surveillance in wildlife populations involves detecting the presence of a disease, characterizing its prevalence and spread, and subsequent monitoring. A probability sample of animals selected from the population and corresponding estimators of disease prevalence and detection provide estimates with quantifiable statistical properties, but this approach is rarely used. Although wildlife scientists often assume probability sampling and random disease distributions to calculate sample sizes, convenience samples (i.e., samples of readily available animals) are typically used, and disease distributions are rarely random. We demonstrate how landscape-based simulation can be used to explore properties of estimators from convenience samples in relation to probability samples. We used simulation methods to model what is known about the habitat preferences of the wildlife population, the disease distribution, and the potential biases of the convenience-sample approach. Using chronic wasting disease in free-ranging deer (Odocoileus virginianus) as a simple illustration, we show that using probability sample designs with appropriate estimators provides unbiased surveillance parameter estimates but that the selection bias and coverage errors associated with convenience samples can lead to biased and misleading results. We also suggest practical alternatives to convenience samples that mix probability and convenience sampling. For example, a sample of land areas can be selected using a probability design that oversamples areas with larger animal populations, followed by harvesting of individual animals within sampled areas using a convenience sampling method.

Journal of Wildlife Management↗
USGS2018

Nonbreeding duck use at Central Flyway National Wildlife Refuges

Within the U.S. portion of the Central Flyway, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manages waterfowl on numerous individual units (i.e., Refuges) within the National Wildlife Refuge System. Presently, the extent of waterfowl use that Refuges receive and the contribution of Refuges to waterfowl populations (i.e., the proportion of the Central Flyway population registered at each Refuge) remain unassessed. Such an evaluation would help determine to what extent Refuges support waterfowl relative to stated targets, aid in identifying species requiring management attention, inform management targets, and improve fiscal efficiencies. Using historic monitoring data (1954–2008), we performed this assessment for 23 Refuges in Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska during migration and wintering months (October–March). We examined six dabbling ducks and two diving ducks, plus all dabbling ducks and all diving ducks across two periods (long-term [all data] and short-term [last 10 October–March periods]). Individual Refuge use was represented by the sum of monthly duck count averages for October–March. We used two indices of Refuge contribution: peak contribution and January contribution. Peak contribution was the highest monthly count average for each October–March period divided by the indexed population total for the Central Flyway in the corresponding year; January contribution used the January count average divided by the corresponding population index. Generally, Refuges in Kansas, Nebraska, and New Mexico recorded most use and contribution for mallards Anas platyrhynchos . Refuges along the Texas Gulf Coast recorded most use and contribution for other dabbling ducks, with Laguna Atascosa and Aransas (including Matagorda Island) recording most use for diving ducks. The long-term total January contribution of the assessed Refuges to ducks wintering in the Central Flyway was greatest for green-winged teal Anas crecca with 35%; 12–15% for American wigeon Mareca americana , gadwall Mareca strepera , and northern pintail Anas acuta ; and 7–8% for mallard and mottled duck Anas fulvigula . Results indicated that the reliance on the National Wildlife Refuge System decreased for these ducks, with evidence suggesting that, for several species, the assessed Refuges may be operating at carrying capacity. Future analyses could be more detailed and informative were Refuges to implement a single consistent survey methodology that incorporated estimations of detection bias in the survey process, while concomitantly recording habitat metrics on and neighboring each Refuge.

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management↗
USGS2019

Aquatic vegetation and invertebrate communities of Big Stone National Wildlife Refuge

Observed degradation of aquatic systems at Big Stone National Wildlife Refuge, located in west-central Minnesota, have been associated with sediment-laden inflows from riverine systems. To support management, a study was conducted during 2013–2014 with overall goals of characterizing the aquatic invertebrate and vegetation communities of the Big Stone National Wildlife Refuge and exploring relations between these communities and various water-quality parameters. Sample sites were located along an observed vegetation gradient and assigned to three predetermined habitat zones for comparison purposes: upstream, transition, and downstream. Of the 12 species of aquatic vegetation that were identified, invasive narrowleaf cattail Typha angustifolia dominated the upstream zone (observed at .90% of sample locations), coontail Ceratophyllum demersum and narrowleaf cattail were most common in the transition zone (collected or observed at 100 and 83% of sample locations, respectively), and coontail and narrowleaf pondweed Potamogeton strictifolius were most common in the downstream zone collected at 100 and 64% of sample locations, respectively). Measured values for the water-quality parameters varied among dates, reflecting the continually fluctuating nature of riverine systems. Based on general observations across sample dates, turbidity and dissolved oxygen concentrations were greatest in the upstream zone sample sites, while oxidation-reduction potential was greatest in the downstream zone sites. There were 115 unique aquatic invertebrate taxa identified to varying levels of taxonomic resolution. Results suggested that there were overall differences in invertebrate biomass among the sample dates, but that there were no strong trends among the sample zones. Aquatic invertebrates and vegetation communities, along with the water-quality parameters, varied temporally and showed irregular relations among the sample zones. These general observations emphasize the importance of temporally and spatially intensive sampling to account for natural variation. Moreover, short- and long-term streamflow and water-level information obtained for this study demonstrated substantial variability that must be considered when conducting biotic inventories and monitoring water quality, as well as when using such data to assess management options. Periodic monitoring of wetlands and associated streamflows, along with sediment loads and water quality of inflows, should allow Big Stone National Wildlife Refuge staff to identify habitat degradation and potential contributing factors, and to develop strategies to achieve specific management objectives and goals.

Minnesota↗
USGS1994

Carbofuran affects wildlife on Virginia corn fields

Forty-four Virginia corn fields on 11 farms were searched for evidence of dead or debilitated wildlife following in-furrow application of granular carbofuran (Furadan 15G) during April and May 1991. Evidence of pesticide poisoned wildlife, including dead animals, debilitated animals, feather spots, and fur spots was found on 33 fields on 10 farms. Carcasses of 61 birds, 4 mammals, and 1 reptile were recovered. Anticholinesterase poisoning was confirmed or suspected as the cause of most wildlife deaths based on the circumstances surrounding kills, necropsies of Carcasses, residue analyses, and brain ChE assays.

Wildlife Society Bulletin↗
USGS1999

Public acceptance of wildlife trapping in Colorado

In November 1994, the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) initiated a stakeholder process to develop trapping regulations that would seek to achieve compromise among divergent interests. A telephone survey was conducted to provide stakeholders with information about the Colorado public's acceptance of trapping. A random sample of 900 residents, stratified by geographic region, indicated that the public would vote to ban trapping and that they believed the ban would eliminate a cruel activity and help to preserve endangered wildlife. Most, however, agreed that trapping was acceptable to prevent spread of disease and to protect livestock, but unacceptable on the basis of providing recreation or making money. Beliefs about trapping were found to be rooted in a protection versus use value orientation about wildlife. The regulations subsequently adopted by the CDOW were consistent with survey findings; however, the regulatory process was bypassed by legislative action, giving trapping authority to the Colorado Department of Agriculture. In response, citizen activists succeeded in placing a ballot initiative before voters. In 1996, the ballot initiative passed, banning trapping in Colorado.

Wildlife Society Bulletin↗
USGS1987

Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska, Coastal Plain Resource Assessment: Report and recommendation to the Congress of the United States and final legislative environmental impact statement

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, in the northeastern corner of Alaska, was first established as the Arctic National Wildlife Range by Public Land Order 2214 in 1960, for the purpose of preserving unique wildlife, wilderness, and recreational values. The original 8.9-millionacre Range was withdrawn from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws, including mining laws but not including mineral leasing laws. This order culminated extensive efforts begun more than a decade earlier to preserve this unique part of Alaska. The following report analyzes the potential environmental consequences of five management alternatives for the coastal plain, ranging from opening for lease of the entire area for oil and gas development, to wilderness designation. A legislative environmental impact statement has been integrated into the report.

Alaska↗
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↗
USGS2022

Wildlife associates of nine-banded armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus) burrows in Arkansas

The Nine-banded Armadillo ( Dasypus novemcinctus ) is a widespread burrowing species with an expanding geographic range across the southeastern and midwestern United States. Armadillos dig numerous, large burrows within their home ranges and these burrows are likely used by a diverse suite of wildlife species as has been reported for other burrowing ecosystem engineers such as Gopher Tortoises ( Gopherus polyphemus ), Desert Tortoises ( Gopherus agassizi ), and Black-tailed Prairie Dogs ( Cynomys ludovicianus ). We used motion-triggered game cameras at 35 armadillo burrows in 4 ecoregions of Arkansas and documented 19 species of mammals, 4 species of reptile, 1 species of amphibian, and 40 species of bird interacting with burrows. Bobcat ( Lynx rufus ), Coyote ( Canis latrans ), Eastern Cottontail ( Sylvilagus floridanus ), Gray Fox ( Urocyon cinereoargenteus ), Gray Squirrel ( Sciurus carolinensis ), Northern Raccoon ( Procyon lotor ), Virginia Opossum ( Didelphis virginiana ), and unidentified rodents (mice and rats) were documented using burrows in all four ecoregions. We documented wildlife hunting, seeking shelter, rearing young in, and taking over and modifying armadillo burrows. The rate of use was highest in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley, a landscape dominated by agriculture, where natural refugia may be limited and rodents are abundant. Armadillo burrows are clearly visited and used by numerous wildlife species to fulfill various life stage requirements, and this list will likely expand if more attention is devoted to understanding the role of armadillos burrows. Armadillos are important ecosystem engineers, and their ecological role warrants more investigation and attention as opposed to only being viewed and managed as agricultural and garden pests.

Arkansas↗
USGS2022

Do pharmaceuticals in the environment pose a risk to wildlife?

The vast majority of knowledge related to the question of, “To what extent do pharmaceuticals in the environment pose a risk to wildlife?”, stems from the Asian vulture crisis (>99% decline of some species of old-world vultures on the Indian subcontinent related to the veterinary use of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) diclofenac). The hazard of diclofenac and other NSAIDs (carprofen, flunixin, ketoprofen, nimesulide, phenylbutazone) to vultures and other avian species has since been demonstrated; indeed only meloxicam and tolfenamic acid have been found to be vulture-safe. Since diclofenac was approved for veterinary use in Spain and Italy in 2013 (home to ~95% of vultures in Europe), the risk of NSAIDs to vultures in these countries has become one of the principal concerns related to pharmaceuticals and wildlife. Many of the other bodies of work on pharmaceutical exposure, hazard and risk to wildlife also relate to adverse effects in birds, (e.g., poisoning of scavenging birds in North America and Europe from animal carcasses containing pentobarbital; secondary and even tertiary poisoning of birds exposed to pesticides used in veterinary medicine as cattle dips; migratory birds as a vector for the transfer of antimicrobial and antifungal resistance). While there is some research related to endocrine disruption in reptiles and potential exposure of aerial insectivores, there remain numerous knowledge gaps for risk posed by pharmaceuticals to amphibians, reptiles and mammals. Developing non-invasive sampling techniques and new approach methodologies (e.g., genomic, in vitro , in silico , in ovo ) are important if we are to bridge the current knowledge gaps without extensive vertebrate testing.

Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry↗
USGS2020

Terrestrial wildlife in the post-mined Appalachian landscape: Status and opportunities

Coal mining is an anthropogenic stressor that has impacted terrestrial and semi-aquatic wildlife in the Appalachian Plateau since European settlement. Creation of grassland and early-successional habitats resulting from mining in a forested landscape has resulted in novel, non-analog habitat conditions. Depending on the taxa, the extent of mining on the landscape, and reclamation practices, effects have ranged across a gradient of negative to positive. Forest-obligate species such as woodland salamanders and forest-interior birds or those that depend on aquatic systems in their life cycle have been most impacted. Others, such as grassland and early-successional bird species have responded favorably. Some bat species, as an unintended consequence, use legacy deep mines as winter hibernacula in a region with limited karst geology. Recolonization of impacted wildlife often depends on life strategies and species’ vagility, but also on altered or arrested successional processes on the post-surface mine landscape. Many wildlife species will benefit from Forest Reclamation Approach practices going forward. In the future, managers will be faced with decisions about reforestation versus maintaining open habitats depending on the conservation need of species. Lastly, the post-mined landscape currently is the focal point for a regional effort to restore elk ( Cervus canadensis ) in the Appalachians.

Appalachian Plateau↗
USGS2022

Pollution and wildlife health

Pollution is a pervasive and growing threat to wildlife health. This chapter discusses two broad groups of pollution, those whose abatement could have immediate beneficial effects including light, air, and noise pollution, and those that will take relatively longer to address due to their environmental persistence or their continuing discharge. Whilst we are very good at detecting the presence of pollutants in tissues or the environment, making a convincing link between the presence of these compounds and mortality events in the field or population effects will remain a challenge for the foreseeable future. Creative new approaches are also being considered to mitigate the effects of pollution on wildlife and ecosystems. Depending on the source of pollution, the beneficial outcomes of mitigation measures, if properly implemented, could have immediate effects. Given the plethora of potential adverse pollution effects, frameworks to prioritize which threats are most likely to cause adverse effects and develop means to address or manage them are an imperative. In the interim, focusing on preserving existing habitats and reducing our footprint by adjusting human activities to minimize the release of pollutants into the environment will go a long way toward promoting healthy wildlife and ecosystems.

Book chapter↗
USGS2017

Anticoagulant rodenticides and wildlife: Concluding remarks

Rodents are known to affect human society globally in various adverse ways, resulting in a widespread demand for their continuous control. Anticoagulant rodenticides (ARs) have been, and currently remain, the cornerstone of rodent control throughout the world. Although alternative control methods exist, they are generally less effective. ARs work by affecting vitamin K metabolism, thereby preventing the activation of blood clotting factors and eventual coagulopathy. Since ARs are non-selective, their undoubted benefits for rodent control have to be balanced against the environmental risks that these compounds pose. Although they have been used for decades, pharmacokinetic and toxicokinetic data are mainly available for laboratory mammals and have concentrated on acute effects. Limited information is available on chronic exposure scenarios and for wildlife species. Important gaps exist in our understanding of the large inter- and intra-species differences in sensitivity to ARs, especially for non-target species, and in our knowledge about the occurrence and importance of sub-lethal effects in wildlife. It is clear that mere presence of AR residues in the body tissues may not indicate the occurrence of effects, although unequivocal assessment of effects under field conditions is difficult. Ante-mortem symptoms, like lethargy, subdued behaviour and unresponsiveness are generally not very specific as is true for more generic post-mortem observations (e.g. pallor of the mucous membranes or occurrence of haemorrhages). It is only by combining ante or post-mortem data with information on exposure that effects in the field may be confirmed. We do know however that a wide variety of non-target species are directly exposed to ARs. Secondary exposure in predators is also widespread although there is limited information on whether this exposure causes actual effects. Exposure is driven by ecological factors and is context specific with respect to spatial habitat configuration and bait placement. Another key factor that affects the interaction between ARs and wildlife is the development of resistance in target species. The development of resistance has resulted in higher use of SGARs, thereby increasing the potential of non-target and secondary exposure. AR use has increasingly become more strictly regulated, increasing the need for alternatives. Alternatives are available, including non-anticoagulant rodenticides, but these may also pose significant risk to environmental organisms, humans and pets. There are also various mitigation measures that can be implemented when using ARs, including bait protection, pulsed baiting at the onset of infestation, restricting use by non-professionals, and avoiding use in areas of high non-target density. Reduction in secondary exposure may result from e.g. non-chemical control, habitat management, and, in agricultural habitats, the use of lure crops and supplemental feeding. Such Integrated Pest Management (IPM) may not only reduce non-target exposure but also benefit resistance management. Barriers to adopt IPM approaches however, include the perception that they do not work or too slowly and are more laborious, expensive and time consuming. It is therefore important that the expectations of stakeholders are considered and managed. Nevertheless, further development of alternatives and IPM measures is essential, so the key research priority related to rodent control may ultimately be to address the lack of scientific assessment of the effectiveness of both specific AR mitigation measures and of IPM approaches to rodent control.

Book chapter↗