Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Wildlife Views”

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
USGS2004

Density estimation in wildlife surveys

Several authors have recently discussed the problems with using index methods to estimate trends in population size. Some have expressed the view that index methods should virtually never be used. Others have responded by defending index methods and questioning whether better alternatives exist. We suggest that index methods are often a cost-effective component of valid wildlife monitoring but that double-sampling or another procedure that corrects for bias or establishes bounds on bias is essential. The common assertion that index methods require constant detection rates for trend estimation is mathematically incorrect; the requirement is no long-term trend in detection "ratios" (index result/parameter of interest), a requirement that is probably approximately met by many well-designed index surveys. We urge that more attention be given to defining bird density rigorously and in ways useful to managers. Once this is done, 4 sources of bias in density estimates may be distinguished: coverage, closure, surplus birds, and detection rates. Distance, double-observer, and removal methods do not reduce bias due to coverage, closure, or surplus birds. These methods may yield unbiased estimates of the number of birds present at the time of the survey, but only if their required assumptions are met, which we doubt occurs very often in practice. Double-sampling, in contrast, produces unbiased density estimates if the plots are randomly selected and estimates on the intensive surveys are unbiased. More work is needed, however, to determine the feasibility of double-sampling in different populations and habitats. We believe the tension that has developed over appropriate survey methods can best be resolved through increased appreciation of the mathematical aspects of indices, especially the effects of bias, and through studies in which candidate methods are evaluated against known numbers determined through intensive surveys.

Wildlife Society Bulletin↗
USGS2014

Demography and behavior of polar bears summering on land in Alaska

Polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in the southern Beaufort Sea population (SB) are spending increased time on the coastal North Slope of Alaska between July and October (Gleason and Rode 2010). The duration spent on land by polar bears, satellite collared on the sea-ice in the spring, during the summer and fall has also increased (USGS, unpublished data; Figure 1). This change in polar bear ecology has relevance for human-bear interactions, subsistence harvest, prevalence of defense kills, and disturbance associated with existing land-based development [e.g., National Petroleum Reserve of Alaska (NPRA), Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR)], Native Alaskan communities, recreation (ANWR) and tourism (e.g., bear viewing in Kaktovik, AK). These activities have the potential to impact, in new ways, the status of the entire SB population. Concomitantly, the change in polar bear ecology will impact these human activities, and a base-line characterization of this phenomenon can better inform mitigation (e.g., industry permitting under the Endangered Species Act and Marine Mammal Protection Act). In this study we aim to characterize the demography, habitat-use, and aspects of foraging ecology and health of polar bears spending fall on land. The SB population is characterized by a divergent-sea ice ecology, where polar bears typically spend most of the year on the sea-ice, even as the pack ice retreats northward, away from the coast, to its minimal extent in September (Amstrup et al. 2008; Durner et al. 2009). From 2000 – 2005, using coastal aerial surveys, Schliebe et al. (2008) observed between 3.7 and 8% of polar bears from SB (~ 60 – 120 of 1526, Regher et al. 2006) on land during the autumn. Sighting probability was not estimated in these surveys, and therefore the numbers represent minimum numbers of bears on land. Our analysis of USGS data suggest an annual average of 15% (± 3%, SE) of polar bears satellite-tagged on the spring-time sea ice (total n = 18 of 124 satellite tags, 2003 – 2009) come to land during July – October. Based on these data, and an assumption that bears satellite-tagged on the spring time sea ice are representative of the entire SB population of independent bears, there would be an average of 230 bears on land each fall. In contrast to the SB population, in five of the world’s 19 polar bear populations (Obbard et al. 2010), polar bears spend significant periods of time on land (1 – 5 months) when ice completely melts. In these seasonal-ice populations (Amstrup et al. 2008), polar bears are largely in a hypophagic condition (e.g., Hobson et al. 2009), relying on fat stores from the spring hyperphagic season, when ringed seals (Phoca hispida) pup. In general, these seasonal-ice populations are demographically productive (Taylor et al. 2005), although recently an increase in the ice-free season has resulted in a population decline in western Hudson Bay (Stirling et al. 1999; Regehr et al. 2007). There have been measured declines in the body condition and productivity of polar bears in SB, and changes in these parameters have been linked to declining optimal ice habitat (e.g., Durner et al. 2009; Regehr et al. 2010). We do not understand the relationship between land-use and the overall status of the population. Individual polar bears that use land may have increased or decreased fitness, in comparison to polar bears that remain on ice in the autumn. This project, which focuses on the biology of animals that spend time on-shore, will help address this question. This project is funded by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) under Agreement No. M09PG00025 and the USGS Outer Continental Shelf Program (OCS) for FY 2009-2014. Parts of this study are also funded by US Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Marine Mammals Management; the Bureau of Land Management; and the North Slope Borough, Department of Wildlife Management. This report is comprehensive, describing results for achieving the overlap

Beaufort Sea, Chukchi Sea↗
USGS2004

Estimating functional connectivity of wildlife habitat and its relevance to ecological risk assessment

Habitat fragmentation is a major threat to the viability of wildlife populations and the maintenance of biodiversity. Fragmentation relates to the sub-division of habitat into disjunct patches. Usually coincident with fragmentation per se is loss of habitat, a reduction in the size of the remnant patches, and increasing distance between patches. Natural and anthropogenic processes leading to habitat fragmentation occur at many spatial scales, and their impacts on wildlife depend on the scales at which species interact with the landscape. The concept of functional connectivity captures this organism-based view of the relative ease of movement or degree of exchange between physically disjunct habitat patches. Functional connectivity of a given habitat arrangement for a given wildlife species depends on details of the organism's life history and behavioral ecology, but, for broad categories of species, quantities such as home range size and dispersal distance scale allometrically with body mass. These relationships can be incorporated into spatial analyses of functional connectivity, which can be quantified by indices or displayed graphically in maps. We review indices and GIS-based approaches to estimating functional connectivity, presenting examples from the literature and our own work on mammalian distributions. Such analyses can be readily incorporated within an ecological risk framework. Estimates of functional connectivity may be useful in a screening-level assessment of the impact of habitat fragmentation relative to other stressors, and may be crucial in detailed population modeling and viability analysis.

ASTM Selected Technical Papers↗
USGS2025

SiMPL wildlife magnets: A camera trap tool for detecting all creatures great and small

We created the SiMPL wildlife magnet—a baited camera trap design that allows passive monitoring of wildlife, particularly small- to medium-sized mammals. The SiMPL wildlife magnet is inexpensive and easy to construct. To evaluate its effectiveness, we conducted a two-year case study using 9 camera stations along an elevation gradient in the White Mountains of the northeastern United States. We examined how the detection probability of mammal species changed with the inclusion of a SiMPL wildlife magnet using data from pre-and post-establishment. We found a significant increase in community-level detection probability with the use of SiMPL wildlife magnets and for individual species, including red squirrels ( Tamiasciurus hudsonicus ), American marten ( Martes americana ), and fisher ( Pekania pennanti ). Moreover, we were able to capture more species with SiMPL wildlife magnets than without, including flying squirrels ( Glaucomys spp.), various rodents ( Cricetidae spp.), black bears ( Ursus americanus ), moose ( Alces alces ), owls, and other birds. The SiMPL wildlife magnet is an effective, low-cost method for surveying wildlife communities, especially rodents and mesocarnivores. It addresses the limited field of view presented by other techniques for capturing small mammals on camera traps and enables efficient collection of phenology data, including vegetation and snowpack. This tool has several applications, including monitoring species' responses to management practices and global change.

Ecology and Evolution↗
USGS2020

Responding to ecosystem transformation: Resist, accept, or direct?

Ecosystem transformation can be defined as the emergence of a self‐organizing, self‐sustaining, ecological or social–ecological system that deviates from prior ecosystem structure and function. These transformations are occurring across the globe; consequently, a static view of ecosystem processes is likely no longer sufficient for managing fish, wildlife, and other species. We present a framework that encompasses three strategies for fish and wildlife managers dealing with ecosystems vulnerable to transformation. Specifically, managers can resist change and strive to maintain existing ecosystem composition, structure, and function; accept transformation when it is not feasible to resist change or when changes are deemed socially acceptable; or direct change to a future ecosystem configuration that would yield desirable outcomes. Choice of a particular option likely hinges on anticipating future change, while also acknowledging that temporal and spatial scales, recent history and current state of the system, and magnitude of change can factor into the decision. This suite of management strategies can be implemented using a structured approach of learning and adapting as ecosystems change.

Fisheries↗
USGS2014

Climate-smart conservation: putting adaption principles into practice

Climate change already is having significant impacts on the nation’s species and ecosystems, and these effects are projected to increase considerably over time. As a result, climate change is now a primary lens through which conservation and natural resource management must be viewed. How should we prepare for and respond to the impacts of climate change on wildlife and their habitats? What should we be doing differently in light of these climatic shifts, and what actions continue to make sense? Climate-Smart Conservation: Putting Adaptation Principles into Practice offers guidance for designing and carrying out conservation in the face of a rapidly changing climate. Addressing the growing threats brought about or accentuated by rapid climate change requires a fundamental shift in the practice of natural resource management and conservation. Traditionally, conservationists have focused their efforts on protecting and managing systems to maintain their current state, or to restore degraded systems back to a historical state regarded as more desirable. Conservation planners and practitioners will need to adopt forward-looking goals and implement strategies specifically designed to prepare for and adjust to current and future climatic changes, and the associated impacts on natural systems and human communities—an emerging discipline known as climate change adaptation. The field of climate change adaptation is still in its infancy. Although there is increasing attention focused on the subject, much of the guidance developed to date has been general in nature, concentrating on high-level principles rather than specific actions. It is against this backdrop that this guide was prepared as a means for helping put adaptation principles into practice, and for moving adaptation from planning to action.

Report↗
USGS2021

Managing for RADical ecosystem change: Applying the Resist-Accept-Direct (RAD) framework

Ecosystem transformation involves the emergence of persistent ecological or social–ecological systems that diverge, dramatically and irreversibly, from prior ecosystem structure and function. Such transformations are occurring at increasing rates across the planet in response to changes in climate, land use, and other factors. Consequently, a dynamic view of ecosystem processes that accommodates rapid, irreversible change will be critical for effectively conserving fish, wildlife, and other natural resources, and maintaining ecosystem services. However, managing ecosystems toward states with novel structure and function is an inherently unpredictable and difficult task. Managers navigating ecosystem transformation can benefit from considering broader objectives, beyond a traditional focus on resisting ecosystem change, by also considering whether accepting inevitable change or directing it along some desirable pathway is more feasible (that is, practical and appropriate) under some circumstances (the RAD framework). By explicitly acknowledging transformation and implementing an iterative RAD approach, natural resource managers can be deliberate and strategic in addressing profound ecosystem change.

Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment↗
USGS2008

Experience preferences as mediators of the wildlife related recreation participation: Place attachment relationship

The human dimensions literature challenges the notion that settings are simply features and attributes that can be manipulated to satisfy public demand; instead, people view specific recreation settings as unique kinds of places. Land managers provide recreation experience opportunities, but most conventional management frameworks do not allow managers to address the personal attachment of people to places. This study examined the relationships among activity participation, recreation experience preferences (REP), and setting and place attachment. Study data was obtained from a visitor study conducted in 2000-2001 at U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Waterfowl Production Areas in Minnesota. We used structural equation modeling to explore whether recreation experience preferences mediate the relationship between types and frequencies of recreation participation and place attachment at Minnesota's Waterfowl Production Areas. Results offer empirical evidence that recreational experience preferences associated with activity participation may be instrumental to one's development of place attachment to a recreation site. Thus, research in these two areas may be more complementary than has been apparent in the literature. Copyright ?? Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

Human Dimensions of Wildlife↗
USGS2002

Wildlife association with human‐altered water sources in semiarid vegetation communities

Based on common use in wildlife management, we hypothesized that human‐constructed water sources influence faunal communities detectably compared to similar habitats that lack water. We examined 20 wildlife water units and 20 paired comparison sites without water from April to August 1992 in semiarid southern New Mexico to assess animal species associations. We sampled sites by using small‐mammal live traps, herpetofaunal and invertebrate pitfall arrays, and 30‐minute time‐area counts. We compared animal species richness and species concordance among water units (rain catchments, earthen tanks, and windmills) and comparison sites in three vegetation communities (mixed scrub, grassland, and pinyon‐juniper). We detected 134 animal taxa during field sampling. Animal species richness did not differ between water units and comparison sites among vegetation communities. Amphibians were found only at water units but occur far from units during seasonal wet periods. Greater numbers of individual small mammals and herpetofauna at water units versus comparison sites likely related to debris and disturbed soil present near water units. Taxa detected at water units and comparison sites were 65% concordant overall; discordant taxa were those rarely detected. Our data implied that definitive effects of artificial water sources on native wildlife species were not detectable. Providing water sources may be a strategic management tool but must be viewed critically regarding effect on distribution of native, feral, and exotic animals. Water units should be developed only when and where clear objectives have been stated, natural water sources have been quantified, commitment exists to ensure continued function, and feral and exotic animals will not benefit to the detriment of native species.

New Mexico↗
USGS2025

Stakeholders' priorities for management of a restored elk (Cervus canadensis) population in northeast Minnesota

Wildlife reintroduction projects are an important tool for restoring traditional wildlife heritage, increasing species diversity, providing subsistence and sport hunting and other recreational opportunities, and assisting ecosystem adaption to future climate change. In Minnesota, the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa and some conservationists advocate for the expansion of existing elk range to other parts of the state. For reintroduction projects to be successful, it is helpful if managers understand stakeholders' preferences for management objectives. We used best-worst scaling (BWS) to assess residents' preferences for management objective alternatives. The University of Minnesota, in collaboration with the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa and the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, conducted a mail-back questionnaire of landowners ( n = 4500) and the general public ( n = 4000) in northeastern Minnesota to determine their attitudes toward elk reintroduction. Results suggest that the most preferred objectives were minimizing negative impacts on existing wildlife populations and reintroducing native species. In contrast, the least important objectives were related to providing elk viewing opportunities or maximizing economic opportunities through elk-related tourism. These findings help inform management objectives related to the reintroduction proposal, provide insight to minimize potential conflict and help develop future communication material related to elk reintroduction.

Minnesota↗
USGS2010

Mercury in Indiana watersheds: Retrospective for 2001–2006

Information about total mercury and methylmercury concentrations in water samples and mercury concentrations in fish-tissue samples was summarized for 26 watersheds in Indiana that drain most of the land area of the State. Mercury levels were interpreted with information on streamflow, atmospheric mercury deposition, mercury emissions to the atmosphere, mercury in wastewater, and landscape characteristics. Unfiltered total mercury concentrations in 411 water samples from streams in the 26 watersheds had a median of 2.32 nanograms per liter (ng/L) and a maximum of 28.2 ng/L. When these concentrations were compared to Indiana water-quality criteria for mercury, 5.4 percent exceeded the 12-ng/L chronic-aquatic criterion, 59 percent exceeded the 1.8-ng/L Great Lakes human-health criterion, and 72.5 percent exceeded the 1.3-ng/L Great Lakes wildlife criterion. Mercury concentrations in water were related to streamflow, and the highest mercury concentrations were associated with the highest streamflows. On average, 67 percent of total mercury in streams was in a particulate form, and particulate mercury concentrations were significantly lower downstream from dams than at monitoring stations not affected by dams. Methylmercury is the organic fraction of total mercury and is the form of mercury that accumulates and magnifies in food chains. It is made from inorganic mercury by natural processes under specific conditions. Unfiltered methylmercury concentrations in 411 water samples had a median of 0.10 ng/L and a maximum of 0.66 ng/L. Methylmercury was a median 3.7 percent and maximum 64.8 percent of the total mercury in 252 samples for which methylmercury was reported. The percentages of methylmercury in water samples were significantly higher downstream from dams than at other monitoring stations. Nearly all of the total mercury detected in fish tissue was assumed to be methylmercury. Fish-tissue samples from the 26 watersheds had wet-weight mercury concentrations that exceeded the 0.3 milligram per kilogram (mg/kg) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) methylmercury criterion in 12.4 percent of the 1,731 samples. The median wet-weight concentration in the fish-tissue samples was 0.13 mg/kg, and the maximum was 1.07 mg/kg. A coarse-scale analysis of all fish-tissue data in each watershed and a fine-scale analysis of data within 5 kilometers (km) of the downstream end of each watershed showed similar results overall. Mercury concentrations in fish-tissue samples were highest in the White River watershed in southern Indiana and the Fall Creek watershed in central Indiana. In fish-tissue samples within 5 km of the downstream end of a watershed, the USEPA methylmercury criterion was exceeded by 45 percent of mercury concentrations from the White River watershed and 40 percent of the mercury concentration from the Fall Creek watershed. A clear relation between mercury concentrations in fish-tissue samples and methylmercury concentrations in water was not observed in the data from watersheds in Indiana. Average annual atmospheric mercury wet-deposition rates were mapped with data at 156 locations in Indiana and four surrounding states for 2001–2006. These maps revealed an area in southeastern Indiana with high mercury wet-deposition rates—from 15 to 19 micrograms per square meter per year (µg/m 2 /yr). Annual atmospheric mercury dry-deposition rates were estimated with an inferential method by using concentrations of mercury species in air samples at three locations in Indiana. Mercury dry deposition-rates were 5.6 to 13.6 µg/m 2 /yr and were 0.49 to 1.4 times mercury wet-deposition rates. Total mercury concentrations were detected in 96 percent of 402 samples of wastewater effluent from 50 publicly owned treatment works in the watersheds; the median concentration was 3.0 ng/L, and the maximum was 88 ng/L. When these concentrations were compared to Indiana water-quality criteria for mercury, 12 percent exceeded the 12-ng/L chronic-aquatic criterion, 68 percent exceeded the 1.8-ng/L Great Lakes human-health criterion, and 81 percent exceeded the 1.3-ng/L Great Lakes wildlife criterion. Annual stream mercury yields were calculated with a model by using the mercury concentrations in water samples and daily average streamflows for 2002–2006, normalized to the watershed drainage areas. The average annual total mercury stream yields ranged from 0.73 to 45.2 µg/m 2 /yr and were highest in two White River watersheds in central Indiana. Median methylmercury stream yield was 1.9 percent of the median total mercury stream yield. In most watersheds, average annual stream yields of total mercury were a fraction of the combined average annual atmospheric mercury wet-deposition and estimated annual dry-deposition loading rates, indicating that much of the stream mercury was attributable to atmospheric deposition. In two watersheds, average annual stream yields of total mercury were approximately twice the atmospheric mercury loading, indicating that some of the stream mercury apparently was not attributable to atmospheric deposition. Rather, some of the stream mercury yield potentially was contributed by mercury in wastewater discharges. Land-cover type corresponded with the mercury levels in three watersheds: (1) A watershed of the White River in central Indiana with a high percentage of urban land cover had some of the highest total mercury concentrations and stream mercury yields. The urban land cover and numerous permitted wastewater outfalls with mercury in treated effluent potentially contributed mercury to this watershed. (2) A monitoring station on the Maumee River in northeastern Indiana, downstream from a large area of urban land cover, recorded the highest stream mercury concentrations. The urban land cover and mercury detected in treated effluent potentially contributed to the high mercury concentrations at this station. (3) A watershed of the Patoka River in southern Indiana with a high percentage of forest land cover had the highest atmospheric mercury dry-deposition rate. The high dry-deposition rate from the forest land cover potentially contributed to the high mercury concentrations in this watershed. From a retrospective view, mercury concentrations in Indiana watersheds routinely exceeded criteria protective of humans and commonly exceeded criteria protective of wildlife. Atmospheric mercury wet deposition was a predominant factor, but not the single factor, affecting mercury in Indiana watersheds. Mercury in wastewater discharges and atmospheric mercury dry deposition apparently contributed a substantial part of the mercury yield from some watersheds. Dams and impoundments increased the percentage of methylmercury in downstream waters. Long-term monitoring of mercury in wet and dry atmospheric deposition, and in streams and reservoirs, coordinated with monitoring of mercury in fish, will be needed to detect whether mercury levels in Indiana watersheds change in the future.

Indiana↗
USGS2013

Effect of long-term understory prescribed burning on standing and down dead woody material in dry upland oak forests

Dead woody material, long ignored or viewed as a nuisance for forest management, has gained appreciation for its many roles in the forest including wildlife habitat, nutrient storage and cycling, energy for trophic webs, protection of soil, fuel for fire and carbon storage. The growing interest in managing dead woody material has created strong demand for greater understanding of factors controlling amounts and turnover. Prescribed burning, an important management tool, may have strong effects of dead woody material given fire&rsquo;s capacity to create and consume dead woody material. We determined effects of long-term understory prescribed burning on standing and down woody material in upland oak forests in south-central North America. We hypothesized that as frequency of fire increased in these stands the amount of deadwood would decrease and the fine woody material would decrease more rapidly than coarse woody material. The study was conducted in forests dominated by post oak ( Quercus stellata ) and blackjack oak ( Quercus marilandica ) in wildlife management areas where understory prescribed burning had been practiced for over 20 years and the range of burn frequencies was 0 (unburned) fires per decade (FPD) to 4.6 FPD. The amount of deadwood was low compared with more productive forests in southeastern North America. The biomass (24.7 Mg ha -1 ) and carbon stocks (11.7 Mg ha -1 ) were distributed among standing dead (22%), coarse woody debris (CWD, dia. > 7.5 cm., 12%), fine woody debris (FWD, dia. < 7.5 cm., 23%), and forest floor (43%). There was no evidence that understory prescribed burning influenced the amount and size distribution of standing and down dead woody material. There were two explanations for the lack of a detectable effect. First, a high incidence of severe weather including ice storms and strong winds that produce large amounts of deadwood intermittently in an irregular pattern across the landscape may preclude detecting a strong effect of understory prescribed burning. Second, fire suppression during the first one-half of the 20th Century may have led to encroachment of woody plants into forest gaps and savannas creating a patchwork of young and old stands that produced deadwood of different sizes and at different rates.

Forest Ecology and Management↗
USGS2021

Integrating socioecological suitability with human-wildlife conflict risk: Case study for translocation of a large ungulate

Translocations are essential for re-establishing wildlife populations. As they sometimes fail, it is critical to assess factors that influence their success pre-translocation. Socioecological suitability models (SESMs) integrate social acceptance and ecological suitability to enable identification of areas where wildlife populations will expand, which makes it likely that SESMs will also be useful for predicting translocation success. To inform site selection for potential elk Cervus canadensis reintroduction to north-eastern Minnesota, United States, we developed broadscale maps of social acceptance from surveys of local residents and landowners, animal use equivalence (AUE) from forage measured in the field and empirical conflict risk from geospatial data. Resulting SESMs integrated social acceptance favourability scores, AUE and conflict risk, and weighted SESMs showed the relative influences of acceptance and conflict. Social acceptance was positive for local residents and landowners (mean ≥ 5.4; scale of 1–7). AUE (scaled to an elk home range) ranged between 1 and 9 elk/16 km 2 during winter, and from 14 to 83 elk/16 km 2 during summer. Human–elk conflict risk was low (mean ≤ 0.10; scaled 0–1), increasing from north to south. Geographical distributions differed for social acceptance, AUE and conflict risk, and weighted SESMs revealed unsuitable areas that were otherwise obscured. Synthesis and applications . Integrating human–wildlife conflict risk into SESMs shows where social acceptance of translocated species is likely to erode, even where viewed favourably pre-translocation, to inform translocation planning by highlighting interactions between key factors. Such integrated models supplement existing reintroduction biology frameworks by supporting decision-making and knowledge development. In north-eastern Minnesota, natural resource managers who are considering elk reintroductions are using SESMs reported here to identify where human–elk conflict is unlikely to result in an isolated elk population and where addressing concerns for area residents about conflict risk is essential.

Minnesota↗
USGS1988

Book review of Wildlife 2000: Modeling relationships of terrestrial vertebrates, edited by J. Verner, M.L. Morrison, and C.J. Ralph

"Wildlife 2000" is the proceedings of a conference held 7-11 October 1984, near Lake Tahoe, California, the objective of which was to present an up-to-date synthesis of models that predict the responses of wildlife to habitat change. This extremely attractive, well-produced volume has been well received by the wildlife management profession; the editors received an outstanding publication award from The Wildlife Society for this publication. The accolades are deserved. The symposium was purposely integrated in terms of research and management perspectives. Each of the six sections is summarized by both research and management points of view. A majority of the 60 papers presented deal with birds. Although many chapters require a strong quantitative background, especially in multivariate statistics, many others do not. When one compares this publication with previous habitat-modeling symposia proceedings, one realizes what a superior contribution "Wildlife 2000" is, and how incredible far wildlife-habitat modelers have come in a short time. There are very few redundant papers of "nonpapers" in this volume. The wide array of modeling procedures, statistical methods, and computer software developed and used by the authors is impressive; we have indeed learned how to build models. Whether or not we have learned how to build good models is another question.

The Wilson Bulletin↗
USGS2026

How hunters and non-hunters view barriers to allowing hunting access in an urban county

Barriers to allowing hunting of white-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ) on private land shape hunter recruitment, retention, and reactivation efficacy as well as the ability of wildlife management agencies to use hunting as a management tool. Understanding perceptions of these barriers is crucial in urbanizing landscapes where there are increased challenges to allowing hunting access, and deer may persist in relatively high numbers. We compared barriers to allowing hunting access on one’s property among hunters (n = 281) and non-hunters (n = 874) who did not have hunting occur on their property across urban, suburban, and rural groups in Durham County, North Carolina. (i.e., six groups). Rural landowners tended to perceive geographic barriers (e.g., property size) as less problematic than suburban and urban landowners, irrespective of personal participation in hunting, but landowners who hunted tended to view all barriers as less problematic than those who did not. Small property size, human population density, and housing density were viewed as important barriers to allowing hunting access for all groups, but suburban and urban non-hunters perceived the challenges as greater barriers compared to other groups. Conversely, the complexity of hunting regulations was viewed as a minor barrier to allowing hunting among all landowners. Safety concerns, not knowing other hunters, and disagreement with hunting as a practice showed the greatest contrasts between landowners who hunted and those who did not, with the latter group reporting the barriers as more important. Barriers to hunting identified in this study aligned with variables that predicted whether land is huntable (e.g., property size, housing density) in prior research. Our results indicate that developing public outreach highlighting hunting safety and creating landowner-hunter partnership programs may help facilitate hunting access in urbanizing areas.

North Carolina↗
USGS2010

Climate change and wildlife health: direct and indirect effects

Climate change will have significant effects on the health of wildlife, domestic animals, and humans, according to scientists. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projects that unprecedented rates of climate change will result in increasing average global temperatures; rising sea levels; changing global precipitation patterns, including increasing amounts and variability; and increasing midcontinental summer drought (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007). Increasing temperatures, combined with changes in rainfall and humidity, may have significant impacts on wildlife, domestic animal, and human health and diseases. When combined with expanding human populations, these changes could increase demand on limited water resources, lead to more habitat destruction, and provide yet more opportunities for infectious diseases to cross from one species to another. Awareness has been growing in recent years about zoonotic diseases&mdash; that is, diseases that are transmissible between animals and humans, such as Lyme disease and West Nile virus. The rise of such diseases results from closer relationships among wildlife, domestic animals, and people, allowing more contact with diseased animals, organisms that carry and transmit a disease from one animal to another (vectors), and people. Disease vectors include insects, such as mosquitoes, and arachnids, such as ticks. Thus, it is impossible to separate the effects of global warming on wildlife from its effects on the health of domestic animals or people. Climate change, habitat destruction and urbanization, the introduction of exotic and invasive species, and pollution&mdash;all affect ecosystem and human health. Climate change can also be viewed within the context of other physical and climate cycles, such as the El Ni&ntilde;o Southern Oscillation (El Ni&ntilde;o), the North Atlantic Oscillation, and cycles in solar radiation that have profound effects on the Earth&rsquo;s climate. The effects of climate change on wildlife disease are summarized in several areas of scientific study discussed briefly below: geographic range and distribution of wildlife diseases, plant and animal phenology (Walther and others, 2002), and patterns of wildlife disease, community and ecosystem composition, and habitat degradation.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS1999

Herpetology in the federal government: a personal view

In late 1976, I received a phone call from an ichthyological colleague who asked if I would be willing to take a temporary position in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS) Office of Endangered Species (OES) in Washington. They had a backlog of proposed and final rules that needed to be finished, and they thought that a 30-day stint by a temporary herpetologist would clear the slate. Thus began a 23-year odyssey through the sometimes bizarre, sometimes rewarding, sometimes discouraging, but always different federal government. Fortunately, I have been able to stay involved with herpetology, both as a science and in terms of conservation policy. In my career, I have worked both in an administrative and in a research capacity. Many individuals with an interest in herpetology enter the federal government as field biologists and drift into administration as they become older and removed from the dynamically changing nature of their science. I moved in the other direction.

Herpetologists' League Communications↗