SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Wildlife Research Report”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 469 records · Page 26Linked to original sources

USGS2009

Geography of Alaska lake districts: Identification, description, and analysis of lake-rich regions of a diverse and dynamic state

Lakes are abundant landforms and important ecosystems in Alaska, but are unevenly distributed on the landscape with expansive lake-poor regions and several lake-rich regions. Such lake-rich areas are termed lake districts and have landscape characteristics that can be considered distinctive in similar respects to mountain ranges. In this report, we explore the nature of lake-rich areas by quantitatively identifying Alaska’s lake districts, describing and comparing their physical characteristics, and analyzing how Alaska lake districts are naturally organized and correspond to climatic and geophysical characteristics, as well as studied and managed by people. We use a digital dataset (National Hydrography Dataset) of lakes greater than 1 hectare, which includes 409,040 individual lakes and represents 3.3 percent of the land-surface area of Alaska. The selection criteria we used to identify lake districts were (1) a lake area (termed limnetic ratio, in percent) greater than the mean for the State, and (2) a lake density (number of lakes per unit area) greater than the mean for the State using a pixel size scaled to the area of interest and number of lakes in the census. Pixels meeting these criteria were grouped and delineated and all groups greater than 1,000 square kilometers were identified as Alaska’s lake districts. These lake districts were described according to lake size-frequency metrics, elevation distributions, geology, climate, and ecoregions to better understand their similarities and differences. We also looked at where lake research and relevant ecological monitoring has occurred in Alaska relative to lake districts and how lake district lands and waters are currently managed. We identified and delineated 20 lake districts in Alaska representing 16 percent of the State, but including 65 percent of lakes and 75 percent of lake area. The largest lake districts identified are the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, Arctic Coastal Plain, and Iliamna lake districts with high limnetic ratios of 19, 17, and 21 percent, respectively. The three smallest districts we considered were Tetlin in the eastern interior, Menhiskof on the Alaska Peninsula, and Matanuska–Susitna at the head of Cook Inlet with limnetic ratios of 14, 9, and 9 percent, respectively. Lake density and limnetic ratio were poorly related among lake districts, such that some districts had a few large lakes like Iliamna with Lakes Iliamna and Becharof—the two largest in the State, compared to other districts with many very small lakes like Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta with 111,130 lakes and 63 percent of these less than 10 hectares. Most lake districts are in regions with relatively low precipitation, but temperature regimes varied widely among lake districts. Approximately one-half of lake districts were glaciated during the Pleistocene and similar numbers occur in regions classified as having continuous, discontinuous, and sporadic permafrost, or perennially unfrozen soils. Most districts are at low elevations (less than 250 meters) with two important exceptions being Tetlin with a mean elevation of 530 meters and Ahtna with a mean elevation of 760 meters. These higher elevation districts, particularly Ahtna, had distinct characteristics from other lake districts such as continuous permafrost and Pleistocene glaciation. Several lake districts share similar boundaries to defined ecoregions with lake districts occurring in less than one-half of these 32 ecoregions of Alaska. Most lake districts are lands fully or partly managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Park Service, with other land management by the Bureau of Land Management and State and borough government. Much of the U.S. Geological Survey’s lake water-quality sampling efforts has been done in the Arctic Coastal Plain, Matanuska-Susitna, and Iliamna districts but no recorded collections in nine lake districts. Similarly, most lake limnological studies in Alaska were site-specific and represent only a small portion of Alaska’s lake districts. This identification, characterization, and analysis of lake-rich regions may help provide a template to guide future limnological and other scientific research for Alaska.

Alaska↗

USGS2012

Digenean metacercariae of ﬁshes from the lagoon ﬂats of Palmyra Atoll, Eastern Indo-Paciﬁc

Although many studies on the taxonomy of digenean trematodes of marine fishes have been completed in the Eastern Indo-Pacific (EIP) marine ecoregion, only a few have considered metacercarial stages. Here, the results are presented of a taxonomic survey of the digenean metacercariae of fishes from Palmyra Atoll, a remote and relatively pristine US National Wildlife Refuge located 1680 km SSW of Hawaii. Up to 425 individual fish were collected, comprising 42 fish species, from the sand flats bordering the lagoon of the atoll. Quantitative parasitological examinations of each fish were performed. Morphological descriptions of the encountered digenean metacercariae are provided, together with their prevalence, mean intensities, host and tissue-use. Up to 33,964 individuals were recovered representing 19 digenean metacercaria species from eight families. The species composition of digeneans in lagoon fishes at Palmyra Atoll is a subset of what has previously been reported for the EIP. Further, the large diversity and abundance of metacercariae reported in this study highlight the utility of including this group in future ecological research in the EIP marine ecoregion.

Journal of Helminthology↗

USGS2024

Annotated bibliography of scientific research relevant to oil and gas reclamation best management practices in the western United States, published from 1969 through 2020

Integrating recent scientific knowledge into management decisions supports effective natural resource management and can lead to better resource outcomes. However, finding and accessing scientific knowledge can be time consuming and costly. To assist in this process, the U.S. Geological Survey has created a series of annotated bibliographies on topics of management concern for lands in the western United States (U.S.). Oil and gas development on public lands is a long-standing and substantial component of local and regional economies and has expanded in recent decades, particularly on public lands in the western U.S. This development is associated with extensive networks of pipelines, roads, and processing facilities, across which reclamation is Federally mandated following initial well pad development (“interim” reclamation) and once resource extraction is complete (“final” reclamation). Reclamation is critical for recovering ecological services to energy-affected lands, including vegetation productivity, wildlife habitat, water and air quality, and soil stability (for example, resistance to wind and water erosion). However, reclamation of oil and gas affected lands in the western U.S. has proved challenging due to an array of regulatory and environmental factors, such as minimally developed soils, short growing seasons, herbivory, high winds, invasive species, rugged terrain, and in particular, arid climates associated with low total precipitation, high evapotranspiration rates, and highly variable precipitation patterns. We compiled and summarized journal articles, government reports, technical reports, proceedings, and theses and dissertations relevant to oil and gas reclamation. We constrained our search to products published on or before December 31, 2020 but did not limit our search by a starting date; the earliest product resulting from this effort was published in March 1969. Second, we manually scanned the last 15 years (2005-2020) of tables of contents in journals, bibliographies, and proceedings of which we were aware would contain articles highly relevant to this bibliography. We carried out the search for these products through multiple means: (1) performing a structured search of two reference databases, (2) examining articles published since 2005 in highly relevant scientific journals and conference proceedings, and (3) reviewing additional material suggested by authors of products identified in steps 1 and 2. Our search was intentionally broad in order to identify as much relevant work as possible, much of which is professionally applied and tested within the industry of oil and gas reclamation, but which remains unpublished in scientific journals. We refined the initial list of products by removing: (1) duplicates, (2) products not written in English, (3) products that were not relevant to the arid ecosystems of western North America, (4) products that were not released as research, data products, or review articles in journals or as formal scientific reports, and (5) products with data which were not relevant to reclamation of oil and gas-affected lands, or for which the study did not present new data, findings, or syntheses relevant to reclamation of oil and gas-affected lands. We summarized each product using a consistent structure (background, objectives, methods, location, findings, and implications) and assigned standardized management topics to each. Management topics are intended to aid online searching within the bibliography and are described in more detail in the Methods Section of this report; they include what type of disturbance the product addresses (well pads, mining, pipelines), what aspect of oil and gas reclamation they pertain to (practices, standards, monitoring), what type of data are present in the product (for instance soil or vegetation recovery data), and an indication if the product were from a source other than a published, peer-reviewed outlet (such as dissertations or unpublished professional reports – these are identified as grey literature). The review process for this annotated bibliography included an initial internal colleague review of each summary, requesting input on each summary from an author of the original product, and a formal peer-review. Our initial searches resulted in 3,197 total products, of which 290 met our criteria for inclusion. “Reclamation Practices” is by far the management topic most addressed, followed by “Reclamation Monitoring,” for example, products assessing what and how monitoring methods are used to track and measure reclamation outcome. This document may be accessed at https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20231068 or from the U.S. Geological Survey Publication Warehouse ( https://pubs.usgs.gov/ ). The 1-page product summaries herein will also be used to create a bibliography at https://apps.usgs.gov/science-for-resource-managers that includes links to each original product, where available, and in which subject matter will be searchable by topic, location, and year. The studies compiled and summarized here may inform planning and management actions that seek to reclaim landscapes across the western U.S. which have been affected by oil and gas development.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2012

Selecting sagebrush seed sources for restoration in a variable climate: ecophysiological variation among genotypes

Big sagebrush ( Artemisia tridentata ) communities dominate a large fraction of the United States and provide critical habitat for a number of wildlife species of concern. Loss of big sagebrush due to fire followed by poor restoration success continues to reduce ecological potential of this ecosystem type, particularly in the Great Basin. Choice of appropriate seed sources for restoration efforts is currently unguided due to knowledge gaps on genetic variation and local adaptation as they relate to a changing landscape. We are assessing ecophysiological responses of big sagebrush to climate variation, comparing plants that germinated from ~20 geographically distinct populations of each of the three subspecies of big sagebrush. Seedlings were previously planted into common gardens by US Forest Service collaborators Drs. B. Richardson and N. Shaw, (USFS Rocky Mountain Research Station, Provo, Utah and Boise, Idaho) as part of the Great Basin Native Plant Selection and Increase Project. Seed sources spanned all states in the conterminous Western United States. Germination, establishment, growth and ecophysiological responses are being linked to genomics and foliar palatability. New information is being produced to aid choice of appropriate seed sources by Bureau of Land Management and USFS field offices when they are planning seed acquisitions for emergency post-fire rehabilitation projects while considering climate variability and wildlife needs.

Report↗

USGS2022

Ungulate migration in a changing climate—An initial assessment of climate impacts, management priorities, and science needs

Executive Summary Migratory behavior among ungulates in the Western United States occurs in response to changing forage quality and quantity, weather patterns, and predation risk. As snow melts and vegetation green-up begins in late spring and early summer, many migratory ungulates leave their winter range and move to higher elevation summer ranges to access high-quality forage and areas with vegetative cover for protection during fawning. Ungulates remain on these ranges until the fall when increasing snowfall and decreasing temperatures trigger them to migrate back to their lower elevation winter ranges. While researchers have begun to assess the effects of physical barriers such as roads and energy infrastructure on migration, less attention has been paid to understanding how changing climate conditions might affect ungulate movements and range habitats. Does earlier spring green-up make ungulates leave their winter ranges sooner? Do persistent drought conditions reduce the carrying capacity of seasonal range habitats or lead to shifts in migration pathways? These and other questions remain largely unanswered but could have cascading effects on ungulate population dynamics and migratory behavior. In February 2018, the Secretary of the Interior signed Department of the Interior Secretarial Order 3362 (SO3362), “Improving Habitat Quality in Western Big-Game Winter Range and Migration Corridors.” The order, which focuses on elk, mule deer, and pronghorn in 11 Western States, directs the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the National Park Service (NPS), and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to partner with State wildlife agencies on their priorities and objectives for identifying and conserving ungulate migration corridors and winter-range habitat. The USGS Climate Adaptation Science Centers (CASCs) were established to help managers of the Nation’s fish, wildlife, waters, and lands understand the effects of climate change and adapt to changing conditions. To support the recent Department of the Interior (DOI) emphasis on ungulate migration corridors and winter-range habitat, this report assesses current information on how climate change could affect elk, mule deer, and pronghorn migration. The report synthesizes the drivers of migration, outlines what is known about how climate change might affect these drivers, and summarizes management priorities and science needs related to ungulate migration corridors and range habitat. A review of the literature on ungulate migration shows that the core drivers of spring migration are the timing of spring green-up and snowmelt, and the core driver of fall migration is winter severity. After exploring what is known about how these drivers affect or could be affected by climate change, several pathways through which ungulate migration could be altered were identified: (1) ungulates alter migration timing to better track plant phenology or in response to changes in winter conditions; (2) ungulates change their migration route or distance traveled during migration to accommodate changes in environmental conditions; and (3) ungulate populations that are currently migratory may begin to demonstrate interannual variability in whether they migrate, depending on environmental conditions and density-dependence, and may remain resident for sets of consecutive years. Through discussions with managers, physical barriers to movement such as roads and fences were identified as a core concern. In addition, the primary research needs of States are the acquisition and analysis of data on ungulate movements, to refine delineation of winter range, summer range, and corridors, and to support a better understanding of how ungulates use these habitats. When it comes to understanding climate effects, managers were more concerned with understanding the vulnerability of winter- and summer-range habitats than the vulnerability of migration corridors because of the influence of summer and winter forage on ungulate condition and reproductive success. Managers were also concerned about how forage quality and quantity might change because of stressors such as drought, wildfire, and invasive species and how they might need to alter habitat-treatment strategies as a result. More baseline data are needed before effective projections of ungulate migration, at a West-wide scale under climate change, can be made. These data needs include (1) more clearly defined corridors and seasonal range habitats; (2) a comprehensive understanding of the ecological drivers of migration across ungulate species and populations; and (3) the identification of environmental thresholds for key variables that influence migration, above which ungulates alter migratory behavior. The CASCs have several opportunities to play a role in addressing these needs. The CASCs could initiate projects to identify past and potential future changes and trends in key variables known to affect ungulate migration, such as plant phenology, forage quality, or winter severity. However, it would be difficult to use this information to determine what those trends mean for ungulate migration due to the lack of knowledge about environmental thresholds for ungulates. Additional projects would be required to compare multiple years of movement data with key variables to define thresholds. Once available, information on environmental thresholds could be integrated with projections of key variables to forecast the likelihood that the migration routes or the distance traveled could change—another area in which the CASCs could contribute. A more immediate role for the CASCs would be to carry out synthesis projects. One such project could summarize the “state of the science” on the drivers of ungulate migration. Although there are dozens of population- and location-specific studies on this topic, collating this information could help highlight trends in migration drivers that span species and geographies: a necessary first step toward determining the extent to which migration drivers could be affected by climate change. A second project could focus on what is known about how climate variability and change affect ungulate life-histories, population dynamics, and migration in the Western United States. The goal of this effort could be to identify knowledge clusters and information gaps that require further investigation. Together, these synthesized products could focus future scientific activities on the most pressing issues of ungulate migration and climate change in the Western United States.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New↗

USGS2014

The role of genetics in chronic wasting disease of North American cervids

Chronic wasting disease (CWD) is a major concern for the management of North American cervid populations. This fatal prion disease has led to declines in populations which have high CWD prevalence and areas with both high and low infection rates have experienced economic losses in wildlife recreation and fears of potential spill-over into livestock or humans. Research from human and veterinary medicine has established that the prion protein gene ( Prnp ) encodes the protein responsible for transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs). Polymorphisms in the Prnp gene can lead to different prion forms that moderate individual susceptibility to and progression of TSE infection. Prnp genes have been sequenced in a number of cervid species including those currently infected by CWD (elk, mule deer, white-tailed deer, moose) and those for which susceptibility is not yet determined (caribou, fallow deer, sika deer). Over thousands of sequences examined, the Prnp gene is remarkably conserved within the family Cervidae; only 16 amino acid polymorphisms have been reported within the 256 amino acid open reading frame in the third exon of the Prnp gene. Some of these polymorphisms have been associated with lower rates of CWD infection and slower progression of clinical CWD. Here we review the body of research on Prnp genetics of North American cervids. Specifically, we focus on known polymorphisms in the Prnp gene, observed genotypic differences in CWD infection rates and clinical progression, mechanisms for genetic TSE resistance related to both the cervid host and the prion agent and potential for natural selection for CWD-resistance. We also identify gaps in our knowledge that require future research.

Prion↗

USGS2014

Delivering climate science about the Nation's fish, wildlife, and ecosystems: the U.S. Geological Survey National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center

Changes to the Earth’s climate—temperature, precipitation, and other climate variables—pose significant challenges to our Nation’s natural resources. Managers of land, water, and living resources require an understanding of the impacts of climate change—which exacerbate ongoing stresses such as habitat alteration and invasive species—in order to design effective response strategies. In 2008, Congress created the National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center (NCCWSC) within the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The center was formed to address environmental challenges resulting from climate and land-use change and to provide natural resource managers with rigorous scientific information and effective tools for decision making. Located at the USGS National Headquarters in Reston, Virginia, the NCCWSC has established eight regional Department of the Interior (DOI) Climate Science Centers (CSCs) and has invested over $93 million (through fiscal year 2013) in cutting-edge climate change research.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2009

Proceedings of the Second All-USGS Modeling Conference, February 11-14, 2008: Painting the Big Picture

The Second USGS Modeling Conference was held February 11-14, 2008, in Orange Beach, Ala. Participants at the conference came from all U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) regions and represented all four science discipline - Biology, Geography, Geology, and Water. Representatives from other Department of the Interior (DOI) agencies and partners from the academic community also participated. The conference, which was focused on 'painting the big picture', emphasized the following themes: Integrated Landscape Monitoring, Global Climate Change, Ecosystem Modeling, and Hazards and Risks. The conference centered on providing a forum for modelers to meet, exchange information on current approaches, identify specific opportunities to share existing models and develop more linked and integrated models to address complex science questions, and increase collaboration across disciplines and with other organizations. Abstracts for the 31 oral presentations and more than 60 posters presented at the conference are included here. The conference also featured a field trip to review scientific modeling issues along the Gulf of Mexico. The field trip included visits to Mississippi Sandhill Crane National Wildlife Refuge, Grand Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, the 5 Rivers Delta Resource Center, and Bon Secour National Wildlife Refuge. On behalf of all the participants of the Second All-USGS Modeling Conference, the conference organizing committee expresses our sincere appreciation for the support of field trip oganizers and leaders, including the managers from the various Reserves and Refuges. The organizing committee for the conference included Jenifer Bracewell, Sally Brady, Jacoby Carter, Thomas Casadevall, Linda Gundersen, Tom Gunther, Heather Henkel, Lauren Hay, Pat Jellison, K. Bruce Jones, Kenneth Odom, and Mark Wildhaber.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS1975

Wildlife and oil shale: a problem analysis and research program: volume 2, appendix and bibliography

This appendix is designed to apply to the program of studies recommended in the problem analysis and research program Volume I. It has two purposes: (1) to provide reference that may be used in the preparation of requests for proposals or for studies, and (2) to suggest a core group of references for a reference library for research. The references that follow are listed taxonomically as follows: A. Aquatic Ecosystems B. Water Quality C. Terrestrial Ecosystems D. Industrial Impacts on Wildlife E. Reptiles and Amphibians F. Blood-sucking Arthropods and Disease Vectors This bibliography is not integrated because it was believed that it would be more useful with the sources separate. It also does not attempt to cover the entire field. It is, however, a listing that will be most useful in the description of the region and its environmental processes.

FWS/OBS↗

USGS2026

Avoiding common pitfalls in the implementation of adaptive forest wildlife management

Forest management planning requires the evaluation of tradeoffs in proposed management actions to meet multiple objectives, including providing the habitat required to sustain wildlife populations. However, various species-specific life history strategies and ecological uncertainties complicate our understanding of the responses of wildlife to disturbances, such as wildfires and forest management. We believe that adaptive management processes, applied through the close collaboration of researchers and managers (e.g., coproduction), will be valuable in this effort. Although adaptive management programs have been touted in the past, we stress that many of these programs have fallen short of the requisite steps to complete the learning cycles of this process (i.e., single- and double-loop learning). Thus, we provide guidance on what we believe to be the missing components of these efforts in hopes to guide future coordination of local and regional adaptive management programs for forest wildlife.

General Technical Report↗

USGS2014

Site-characteristic and hydrologic data for selected wells and springs on Federal land in Clark County, Nevada

Site-characteristic and hydrologic data for selected wells and springs on U.S. Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Forest Service land in Clark County, Nevada, were updated in the U.S. Geological Survey’s National Water Information System (NWIS) to facilitate multi-agency research. Data were researched and reviewed, sites were visited, and NWIS data were updated for 231 wells and 198 springs, including 36 wells and 67 springs that were added to NWIS and 44 duplicate sites that were deleted. The site-characteristic and hydrologic data collected, reviewed, edited, and added to NWIS include locations, well water levels, spring discharges, and water chemistry. Site-characteristic and hydrologic data can be accessed from links to the NWIS web interface; data not available through the web interface are presented in appendixes to this report.

Nevada↗

USGS2011

Understanding the influence of predation by introduced fishes on juvenile salmonids in the Columbia River Basin: Closing some knowledge gaps. Interim Report of Research 2010

Project overview Predation on juvenile salmonids by fish in the Columbia River Basin (CRB) has impacted salmon survival and is a topic that has received considerable attention over the last three decades. Some of the earliest and most detailed research focused on the food habits, consumption rates, abundance, and distribution of predaceous northern pikeminnow Ptychocheilus oregonensis , smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu , walleye Sander vitreus , and channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus in John Day Reservoir (Beamesderfer and Rieman 1991; Poe et al. 1991; Vigg et al. 1991). This group of researchers also estimated the loss of juvenile salmonids to predation by some of these predators (Rieman et al. 1991). Since this pioneering effort, others have evaluated various aspects of predation-related mortality on juvenile salmonids in the CRB, focusing mostly on northern pikeminnow and smallmouth bass (e.g., Tabor et al. 1993; Zimmerman 1999; Naughton et al. 2004). Perhaps the most significant finding coming from this body of research was that the native northern pikeminnow was the dominant predator of juvenile salmonids in the CRB. Indeed, Beamesderfer et al. (1996) estimated that northern pikeminnow consumed about 16 million (8%) of the estimated 200 million juvenile salmonids emigrating annually in the CRB, far surpassing the consumption of smallmouth bass, walleye, and channel catfish combined. Because of this, large-scale management fisheries (i.e., the northern pikeminnow management program, or NPMP; see Rieman and Beamesderfer 1990; Beamesderfer et al. 1996) have been implemented in the CRB since 1990 to achieve a 10%–20% exploitation rate on northern pikeminnow and reduce predation on juvenile salmonids. The NPMP has been a success, resulting in up to 38% potential reductions in predation (Friesen and Ward 1999; Knutsen and Ward 1999; Ward and Zimmerman 1999;). In contrast to the NPMP, Oregon and Washington state fish and wildlife agencies manage and enhance recreational fisheries for smallmouth bass and walleye by implementing size and harvest limit regulations. Recently, many biologists and fish managers have become concerned about the impact of non-native predaceous fishes on juvenile salmonid survival. For example, Poe et al. (1994) warned that smallmouth bass, walleye, and channel catfish were expanding their populations in some areas, that these fish could be significant predators on juvenile salmonids, and that they may compete with northern pikeminnow for common prey items, resulting in higher consumption rates of salmonids by the native predator. Sanderson et al. (2009) reported that the impact of non-indigenous species (including piscivorous fishes) on salmon survival within the CRB can be severe and suggested that managing nonindigenous species may be imperative for salmon recovery. Assessing the current ecological impacts of introduced fishes throughout the CRB will fill information gaps associated with their impact on salmonid survival and contribute to the description of CRB food webs. In response to these recent concerns about the potential predatory impact of non-native piscivores on salmon survival, the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority (CBFWA) co-hosted a workshop to address predation on juvenile salmonids in the CRB by non-native fish (Halton 2008). The purpose of the workshop was to review, evaluate, and develop strategies to reduce predation by non-native fishes on juvenile salmonids. In the end, discussion at the workshop and at subsequent meetings considered two potential ideas to reduce predation by non-native fish on juvenile salmonids; (1) understanding the role of juvenile American shad Alosa sapidissima in the diet of non-native predators in the fall; and (2) the effects of localized, intense reductions of smallmouth bass in areas of particularly high salmonid predation. In this report, we describe initial efforts to understand the influence of juvenile American shad as a prey item for introduced predators in the middle Columbia River. Our first objective, addressed in Chapter 1, was to evaluate the efficacy of nonlethal methods to describe the physiological condition of smallmouth bass, walleye, and channel catfish from late summer through late fall. Such information will be used to understand the contribution of juvenile American shad to the energy reserves of predaceous fish prior to winter. In Chapter 2, we describe the results of some limited sampling to document the food habits of smallmouth bass, walleye, and channel catfish in three reservoirs of the middle Columbia River during late fall. Collectively, we hope to increase our understanding of the contribution of juvenile American shad to the diets of introduced predators and the contribution of this diet to their energy reserves, growth, and perhaps over-winter survival. Managers should be able to use this information for deciding whether to control the population of American shad in the CRB or for managing introduced predaceous fish in the CRB.

Oregon, Washington↗

USGS2022

Round Goby captured in a North American estuary: Status and implications in the Hudson River, New York

Round Goby Neogobius melanostomus , a nonnative fish species to North America, has been rapidly expanding through the connected waterways of the Laurentian Great Lakes. Herein, we document the eastward and southern expansion of Round Goby into the Hudson River, New York, an iconic coastal estuary that drains to Long Island Sound and the Atlantic seaboard. In summer and early fall 2021, routine fish monitoring conducted by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation documented a population of Round Goby in the tidal portion of the Hudson River. Over the course of monitoring in 2021, personnel collected 112 Round Goby between Albany, New York, and Poughkeepsie, New York, with the southernmost collection occurring approximately 140 km downstream of invasion front as reported in 2020 within the New York State Canal System. Although Round Goby previously colonized large rivers and streams in the Great Lakes watershed, there is little information about the invasion success and ecological impacts of Round Goby in estuarine environments in North America. We discuss the distribution and biological characteristics of the Hudson River Round Goby population as well as the potential ecological implications and areas of future research and monitoring for this range expansion.

New York↗

USGS2008

Impacts of Low-Flow and Stream-Temperature Changes on Endangered Atlantic Salmon - Current Research

Recent climate studies in New England and the northeastern United States have shown evidence of physical changes over time, including trends toward earlier snowmelt runoff, decreasing river ice, and increasing spring water temperatures. A U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) study funded by the National Global Warming and Wildlife Science Center will be investigating changes in summer low streamflows and stream temperatures and the potential effects of those changes on endangered Atlantic salmon populations. The study also will evaluate management options that would be most likely to mitigate the effects of any changes in streamflow and temperature.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2015

Rangewide climate vulnerability assessment for threatened Bull Trout

The bull trout, listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, is well adapted to the cold waters of the Northwest. Recent changes in climate have caused winter flooding and warmer summer water temperatures in the region, reducing the cold-water habitats that bull trout depend on. The southernmost bull trout populations, found in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and Nevada, are currently restricted to small reserves where the coldest waters still exist. These shrinking habitats have created a severed environment being further split by dams, poor water quality, and invasive species. The goal of this project was to determine how these factors threaten the species regionally by using predictions of stream temperature to map habitat areas that support juvenile bull trout. Results show that maintaining larger areas of cold water habitat had the greatest, positive impact on bull trout habitat conservation. Other conditions that support bull trout include very cold summer water temperatures, fewer winter floods, and fewer human disturbances (such as the building of dams). Based on these results, specific climate adaptation actions that local managers might consider include prioritizing land and water use to foster colder summer water temperatures, controlling invasive species, increasing connectivity between Bull Trout habitats, and continuing monitoring efforts. To ensure that these results and habitat maps could be incorporated into management actions, researchers met with stakeholders including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the U.S. Forest Service, and the Burns Paiute Tribe. As a result, the maps were used in forest planning for the Lolo National Forest in Montana, the Wenatchee River basin, and in the lower Pend Oreille River during the relicensing process for local dam operations. In addition, the recovery plan proposed by the USFWS incorporated these models into detailed analyses of bull trout habitat loss, which managers can use to prioritize actions in their Recovery Unit Implementation Plans.

Report↗

USGS2023

Assessment of potential recovery viability for Colorado Pikeminnow Ptychocheilus lucius in the Colorado River in Grand Canyon

Colorado Pikeminnow Ptychocheilus lucius, the Colorado River’s top native predatory fish, was historically distributed from the Gulf of California delta to the upper reaches of the Green, Colorado, and San Juan rivers in the Colorado River basin in the Southwestern US. In recent decades Colorado Pikeminnow population abundance has declined, primarily due to predation by warmwater nonnative fish and habitat modification following dam construction. Small, reproducing populations remain in the Green and upper Colorado rivers, but their current population trajectory is declining and the San Juan River population is maintained primarily through stocking. As such, establishment of an additional population could aid recovery efforts and increase the species’ resilience and population redundancy. The Colorado River in Grand Canyon once supported Colorado Pikeminnow, but until recently habitat suitability in this altered reach was considered low due to a depressed thermal regime and abundant nonnative predators. Climate change and ongoing drought has presented an opportunity to evaluate the feasibility of native fish restoration in a system where declining reservoir storage has led to warmer releases and re-emergence of riverine habitat. These changes in the physical attributes of the river have occurred in concert with a system-wide decline in nonnative predators. Conditions ten years ago were not compatible with reintroduction feasibility in Grand Canyon; however, due to rapidly changing conditions an expert Science Panel was convened to evaluate whether the physical and biological attributes of this reach could now support various life stages of Colorado Pikeminnow. Here, we report on the evaluation process and outcome from the Science Panel, which developed a science-based recommendation to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on reintroduction feasibility. The Science Panel concluded that current habitat attributes in Grand Canyon could satisfy some, but perhaps not all, Colorado Pikeminnow life history requirements. This reach has the potential to support adult and sub-adult growth, foraging, migrations, and spawning, but low juvenile survival may limit recruitment. However, populations of other native species are successfully reproducing and increasing in western Grand Canyon, even in areas once considered suboptimal habitat. Should managers decide to move to the next phase of this process, actions such as experimental stocking and monitoring, telemetry studies, bioenergetics modeling, and laboratory-based research may provide additional information to further evaluate a potential reintroduction effort in this rapidly changing but highly altered system.

Arizona↗

USGS2020

Managing state lands for wildlife

State-owned lands are a vital component of state fish and wildlife management programs because they contain valuable habitats for a diversity of wild species and often provide important public access. The Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA 2017) reported state agencies manage or administer approximately 188 million hectares of land, including 10 million hectares under fee title ownership with the remainder of those lands leased or licensed in conservation agreements, grazing allotments, or rights-of-ways. State agencies commonly strive to enhance wildlife habitats within their purview, but have also improved areas not directly owned by them. In total, an estimated 22,953,364 additional hectares have been improved by state fish and wildlife agencies through private landowner agreements (AFWA 2017). States also own 192,000 individual water rights and have developed at least 53,000 formal partnership agreements to conserve wildlife. Today, there are a plethora of state land categories including wildlife refuges, wildlife management areas, state forests, parks and trails, state trust lands, research and natural areas, and public fishing areas. Acquisition and/or leasing of properties to provide access for fishing and hunting are often vitally important in meeting local constituents’ desires for consumptive uses of their natural resources. However, state agencies also provide areas for forest conservation, boating, camping, hiking, rock hounding, skiing, wildlife viewing, and other nonconsumptive recreational pursuits. Lastly, states often acquire properties primarily for wildlife habitat management/conservation or to preserve areas of cultural and historic value to their citizens.

Book chapter↗

USGS1998

Geospatial Technology Applications and Infrastructure in the Biological Resources Division

Executive Summary -- Automated spatial processing technology such as geographic information systems (GIS), telemetry, and satellite-based remote sensing are some of the more recent developments in the long history of geographic inquiry. For millennia, humankind has endeavored to map the Earth's surface and identify spatial relationships. But the precision with which we can locate geographic features has increased exponentially with satellite positioning systems. Remote sensing, GIS, thematic mapping, telemetry, and satellite positioning systems such as the Global Positioning System (GPS) are tools that greatly enhance the quality and rapidity of analysis of biological resources. These technologies allow researchers, planners, and managers to more quickly and accurately determine appropriate strategies and actions. Researchers and managers can view information from new and varying perspectives using GIS and remote sensing, and GPS receivers allow the researcher or manager to identify the exact location of interest. These geospatial technologies support the mission of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Biological Resources Division (BRD) and the Strategic Science Plan (BRD 1996) by providing a cost-effective and efficient method for collection, analysis, and display of information. The BRD mission is 'to work with others to provide the scientific understanding and technologies needed to support the sound management and conservation of our Nation's biological resources.' A major responsibility of the BRD is to develop and employ advanced technologies needed to synthesize, analyze, and disseminate biological and ecological information. As the Strategic Science Plan (BRD 1996) states, 'fulfilling this mission depends on effectively balancing the immediate need for information to guide management of biological resources with the need for technical assistance and long-range, strategic information to understand and predict emerging patterns and trends in ecological systems.' Information sharing plays a key role in nearly everything BRD does. The Strategic Science Plan discusses the need to (1) develop tools and standards for information transfer, (2) disseminate information, and (3) facilitate effective use of information. This effort centers around the National Biological Information Infrastructure (NBII) and the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI), components of the National Information Infrastructure. The NBII and NSDI are distributed electronic networks of biological and geographical data and information, as well as tools to help users around the world easily find and retrieve the biological and geographical data and information they need. The BRD is responsible for developing scientifically and statistically reliable methods and protocols to assess the status and trends of the Nation's biological resources. Scientists also conduct important inventory and monitoring studies to maintain baseline information on these same resources. Research on those species for which the Department of the Interior (DOI) has trust responsibilities (including endangered species and migratory species) involves laboratory and field studies of individual animals and the environments in which they live. Researchboth tactical and strategicis conducted at the BRD's 17 science centers and 81 field stations, 54 Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units in 40 states, and at 11 former Cooperative Park Study Units. Studies encompass fish, birds, mammals, and plants, as well as their ecosystems and the surrounding landscape. Biological Resources Division researchers use a variety of scientific tools in their endeavors to understand the causes of biological and ecological trends. Research results are used by managers to predict environmental changes and to help them take appropriate measures to manage resources effectively. The BRD Geospatial Technology Program facilitates the collection, analysis, and dissemination of data and informat

Information and Technology Report↗