Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Wildlife Review”

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

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

At least 73 records · Page 4Linked to original sources
USGS2023

Toxicological effects assessment for wildlife in the 21st Century: Review of current methods and recommendations for a path forward

Model species (e.g., granivorous gamebirds, waterfowl, passerines, domesticated rodents) have been used for decades in guideline laboratory tests to generate survival, growth and reproductive data for prospective Ecological Risk Assessments (ERAs) for birds and mammals, while officially adopted risk assessment schemes for amphibians and reptiles do not exist. There are recognized shortcomings of current in vivo methods as well as uncertainty around the extent to which species with different life histories (e.g., terrestrial amphibians, reptiles, bats) than these commonly used models are protected by existing ERA frameworks. Approaches other than validating additional animal models for testing are being developed, but incorporation of such new approach methodologies (NAMs) into risk assessment frameworks will require robust validations against in vivo responses. This takes time, and the ability to extrapolate findings from non-animal studies to organism- and population-level effects in terrestrial wildlife remains weak. Failure to adequately anticipate and predict hazards could have economic and potentially even legal consequences for regulators and product registrants. In order to be able to use fewer animals or replace them altogether in the long-term, vertebrate use and whole organism data will be needed to provide data for NAMs validation in the short term. Therefore, it is worth investing resources for potential updates to existing standard test guidelines used in the laboratory as well as addressing the need for clear guidance on conduct of field studies. Herein we review the potential for improving standard in vivo test methods and for advancing the use of field studies in wildlife risk assessment, as these tools will be needed into the foreseeable future.

Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management↗
USGS1995

[Book review] The Eastern Screech Owl: Life History, Ecology and Behavior in the Suburbs and Countryside, by Frederick Gehlback

Review of: Eastern Screech Owl: Life History, Ecology, and Behavior in the Suburbs and Countryside. Frederick R. Gehlbach. Issue 16; Issue 2008 of W. L. Moody Jr. Natural History Series. Texas A&M University Press; 1st edition (November 1994). ISBN: 0890966095. For ornithologists and ecologists alike, Fred Gehlbach's book promises to hold both interest and information value as a comprehensive study of the eastern screech owl (Otus asio hasbroucki). Gehlbach was intrigued with screech owls as a boy and encouraged as an undergraduate by William Hamilton, who underscored that in-depth studies of familiar backyard species can be as fascinating as those in exotic sites. Correspondence with another owl-aficionado, the late H. N. Southern, inspired the author's long-term study of screech owls in a woodland landscape in central Texas and led him to provide nest boxes to enhance his access and sample size. This book is based on observations over a 25-year period-beginning in 1967, with intensive study during an 11-year period (1976-1987) in Texas south of Waco, where Gehlbach teaches at Baylor University. The study represents observations on 659 screech owls, covering several generations of birds and entire lives of many individuals. Gehlbach compares screech owl nesting behavior in a rural versus suburban setting and includes chapters on food supplies and predation tactics; egg-laying, incubation, and parental behavior; vocalizations; and population structure and flux. He discusses why screech owls are widespread across the eastern half of North America and why they succeed among people in suburban environments, where they adapt as easily to mailboxes and porch columns as to natural tree cavities. The book mixes two approaches: on the one hand the dense style of a technical book in which the professional biologist can find information on many aspects of screech owl behavior, life history, and population, including tables, figures, summary statistics, results of statistical comparisons, and experimental tests of hypotheses. On the other hand, each chapter begins with and includes vivid visual images, personal experiences, and thoughtful reflections to draw in the general reader, bridging the interesting topic to the technical details and making the information accessible to a wider audience. The reader is impressed with Dr. Gehlbach's love of his subject, his devotion to long-term study, and his care in presenting the work to his fellow ornithologists, ecologists, and all those interested in wildlife and conservation. It will be a useful reference because of its wealth of information on all aspects of screech owl life history. It is well documented and, in addition to its 10 chapters, includes 10 appendices with information on types of food supplies, bird species that mob screech owls, a daily chronology of nestling development, and a selection of edited field notes to provide background for each chapter. The book is thoroughly referenced and indexed. The Eastern Screech Owl will be read with interest by those with an interest in long-term, in-depth studies and those who love charming stories about remarkable birds with strong personalities and interesting behavior.

Wildlife Review↗
USGS2020

Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units program—2019 year in review

Acting Chief’s Message Dear Cooperators: Members of the Cooperative Research Units are pleased to provide you with the “2019 Year in Review” report for the Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units (CRUs). You will first note that this report looks a little different than those published in the past few years, as we opted for a shorter, more concise format this year. Inside you will find brief descriptions of just a few highlighted activities of unit scientists, students, and cooperators in support of our joint mission. Because of the shorter format, we are not able to include activities from every unit or State, but rest assured that we continue to value the great work that all of you do across the country and around the world. In fiscal year 2019, the CRU program was very productive despite challenging conditions, including budget uncertainty, a month-long furlough, and hiring delays. John Organ, Chief of the CRU program, retired in January 2019. The process to replace John was delayed several times, but as I write this, the position has been announced on the Federal Government recruitment site. I am hopeful that by the time you read this, we will have a new permanent chief. Congress provided an increase of $1 million in our allocation for the express purpose of filling some of the vacancies in our scientific workforce. Since receiving that increase, the management team has been working to fill vacancies. The program is fortunate to have excellent research scientists, dedicated leadership, and an outstanding administrative staff. However, our accomplishments depend on the tremendous support from all of you. We look forward to a productive 2020. John D. Thompson

Circular↗