SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Wildlifer”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 793 records · Page 44Linked to original sources

USGS2017

A survey of the amphibians of Savannah National Wildlife Refuge, South Carolina and Georgia

From 2004 to 2006, we used a variety of sampling techniques to survey the amphibians of Savannah National Wildlife Refuge (SNWR), a large protected area straddling the lower portions of the Savannah River on the border between South Carolina and Georgia. We documented 22 amphibian species—15 frogs and 7 salamanders—with a possible 23rd species present. Species richness was lower than what might be expected from amphibian field guides of species inhabiting the adjacent Coastal Plain, likely due to a lack of specialized habitats, such as temporary ponds and upland pine forest. Amphibians occupied a variety of habitats and appeared tolerant of the mildly acidic and low-oxygen conditions of many of the wetlands. Although additional species may be found at SNWR, this initial survey provides a historic baseline for monitoring amphibian populations as areas adjacent to the refuge are disturbed, the climate changes, and multi-use management objectives are implemented within refuge boundaries.

Georgia, South Carolina↗

USGS2000

Patterns of change in tree islands in Arthur R. Marshall Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge from 1950 to 1991

Size, shape, orientation, and distribution of tree islands in a remnant of northern Everglades wetland were examined from 1950 and 1991 aerial photography. The objectives were to quantify the patterns of tree islands in Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge, to determine if the patterns of tree islands had changed between the two dates, and to relate the tree island patterns to modeled pre- and post-drainage hydrologic patterns. There was considerable variation in the patterns of tree islands spatially and temporally. Changes in the size and shape of tree islands from 1950 to 1991 are consistent with changes in the modeled pre- and post-drainage hydrologic patterns. Photo plots along the edges of the refuge, where hydroperiods are longer and depths deeper than they were historically, show a decrease in tree island size and in overall area of tree islands in the plots. Photo plots in the interior, where hydroperiods are shorter than they were pre-drainage, show an increase in tree island area. Overall, there is a tendency for more tree islands to be irregularly shaped in the 1991 photo plots than in the 1950 plots, a reflection of the loss of water flow, reduction of pulse magnitude, and the ponding of water along the perimeter dikes. This study illustrates the importance of considering long-term changes in hydroperiod, depths, and water flows in the restoration of this area.

Florida↗

USGS2006

Detection probabilities and site occupancy estimates for amphibians at Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge

We conducted an amphibian inventory at Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge from August 2000 to June 2002 as part of the U.S. Department of the Interior's national Amphibian Research and Monitoring Initiative. Nineteen species of amphibians (15 anurans and 4 caudates) were documented within the Refuge, including one protected species, the Gopher Frog Rana capito. We also collected 1 y of monitoring data for amphibian populations and incorporated the results into the inventory. Detection probabilities and site occupancy estimates for four species, the Pinewoods Treefrog (Hyla femoralis), Pig Frog (Rana grylio), Southern Leopard Frog (R. sphenocephala) and Carpenter Frog (R. virgatipes) are presented here. Detection probabilities observed in this study indicate that spring and summer surveys offer the best opportunity to detect these species in the Refuge. Results of the inventory suggest that substantial changes may have occurred in the amphibian fauna within and adjacent to the swamp. However, monitoring the amphibian community of Okefenokee Swamp will prove difficult because of the logistical challenges associated with a rigorous statistical assessment of status and trends.

American Midland Naturalist↗

USGS2004

Comparison of detection rates of breeding marsh birds in passive and playback surveys at Lacreek National Wildlife Refuge, South Dakota

We compared detection rates of passive and playback breeding bird survey techniques on elusive marsh birds - Pied-billed Grebe (Podilymbus podiceps), American Bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus), Least Bittern (Ixobrychus exilis), Virginia Rail (Rallus limicola), and Sora (Porzana carolina) - during a two-year study at Lacreek National Wildlife Refuge, in southwestern South Dakota. We conducted 151 passive point counts followed by playback-response surveys at the same points in marsh-bird habitat on the refuge. Playback surveys detected secretive water birds more frequently than our passive surveys, increasing rates for each species by factors of 2.4 to 7.0. The distance a bird was detected from a point varied with the species and the survey technique.

South Dakota↗

USGS2007

Liquefaction, ground oscillation, and soil deformation at the Wildlife Array, California

Excess pore-water pressure and liquefaction at the Wildlife Liquefaction Array in 1987 were caused by deformation associated with both high-frequency strong ground motion and 5.5-second-period Love waves. The Love waves produced large (∼1.5%) cyclic shear strains well after the stronger high-frequency ground motion abated. These cyclic strains generated approximately from 13 to 35% of the excess pore-water pressure in the liquefied layer and caused excess pore-water pressures ultimately to reach effective overburden stress. The deformation associated with the Love waves explains the “postearthquake” increase of pore-water pressure that was recorded at the array. This explanation suggests that conventional methods for predicting liquefaction based on peak ground acceleration are incomplete and may need to consider cyclic strains associated with long-period surface waves. A postearthquake survey of an inclinometer casing indicated permanent shear strain associated with lateral spreading primarily occurred in the upper part of the liquefied layer. Comparison of cone penetration test soundings conducted after the earthquake with pre-earthquake soundings suggests sleeve friction increased. Natural lateral variability of the liquefied layer obscured changes in tip resistance despite a ∼1% reduction in volume. The large oscillatory motion associated with surface waves explains ground oscillation that has been reported at some liquefaction sites during earthquakes.

California↗

USGS2019

One Health: A perspective from wildlife and environmental health sectors

Loss of biodiversity, habitat fragmentation and pollution, and subsequent degradation of natural environments threaten the range of ecosystem services that support all life on this planet. These changes, among others, are also driving the emergence of infectious diseases, with negative health outcomes for humans, animals, and our shared environment. Historically, interventions aimed at human and agricultural health issues did not always integrate wildlife or environmental health as part of the solution, which has resulted in unintended consequences. One Health recognises the interdependence of humans, animals and their shared environment, and provides a conceptual framework for developing interventions that optimise outcomes for human, animal and environmental health. However, there is a need to clearly articulate the core values, goals, and objectives of One Health for all relevant sectors in order to maximise synergies for communication, coordination, collaboration, and, ultimately, for joint actions on disease control and prevention. Application of systems and harm reduction approaches, focusing on the socio-economic and environmental determinants of health, and ensuring good governance and effective leadership will also maximise the opportunities to develop ‘win-win-win’ solutions to global health and environmental challenges. These solutions would help propel One Health forward to reach its full potential and truly optimise health outcomes for all.

Scientific and Technical Review↗

USGS1953

Biologists in the field of wildlife conservation

We often hear comments such as "people are funny" and "one meets the strangest people!" Such sage remarks are not infrequently directed towards biologists, particularly those engaged in one of the many phases of wildlife conservation work. Bulletins of the "love life" of the raccoon or frog, and biologists who, for one reason or another, count the "whiskers" on a fox squirrel are held up for ridicule or dismissed with a shake of the head or a shrug of the shoulder and termed "batty."

AIBS Bulletin↗

USGS1954

Marsh and aquatic weed problems in wildlife habitat

To most people, the word weeds signifies pest plants of the farm, roadside, or other upland areas. However, weeds also occur on, under, or near water. Fifteen million dollars have been spent on a single aquatic nuisance in the South—the prolific water-hyacinth which clogs navigable streams and lakes with its growth. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have also been expended on control of the waterchestnut or water caltrop in the Potomac River. In addition, smaller-scale local campaigns are continuing against cattails, reeds, giant cutgrass, maidencane, alligatorweed, needlerush, lotus, rose-mallows, willows, alders, buttonbush, and similar weeds that interfere with land use for recreation, irrigation, or other purposes. Since control of marsh and aquatic plants in wildlife habitat is an unfamiliar activity to most weed workers, broad aspects of its what, why , and how will be explained briefly.

Weeds↗

USGS1966

Nesting of hooded mergansers of the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, Maryland

The first known record of Hooded Mergansers ( Lophodytes cucullatus ) nesting on the coastal plain of Maryland was in 1961, when Mr. Francis Uhler (pers. comm) found two clutches in Wood Duck nest boxes in impoundments at the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, about five miles southeast of Laurel, Maryland. R.E. Stewart and C.S. Robbins (“Birds of Maryland and the District of Columbia,” N. Amer. Fauna no. 62, 1958; see p. 102) reported two records of broods for Maryland, one for the Piedmont and one for the mountains.

Maryland↗

USGS2006

Vascular flora of Izembek National Wildlife Refuge, westernmost Alaska Peninsula, Alaska

The vascular flora of Izembek National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), where few previous collections had been reported, was collected and recorded at sites selected to represent the totality of environmental variation. A total of 349 species (339 native and 10 introduced) was identified. To provide a comparative phytogeographic framework, we analyzed data from published reports that categorized vascular plant distribution patterns from a circumpolar, North American, and Alaskan perspective. The native flora of the Izembek NWR primarily includes species of circumpolar (38%), eastern Asian (23%), Eurasian (18%), and North American (13%) distribution. The most important longitudinal distributional classes in North America consist of transcontinental (62%) and extreme western species (31%). The annotated list of species in Izembek NWR expands the range of many species, filling a distributional gap in Hulte??n's Western Pacific Coast district. Forty notable range extensions are reported. The flora of Izembek NWR is primarily made up of boreal species and lacks many of the species considered to be Arctic. Comparison with the Raunkiaer life-form spectrum similarly points to the boreal.

Rhodora↗

USGS2001

Wildlife research

Wildlife research conducted by scientists at the Leetown Science Center helps client bureaus to better manage federal lands and trust species by making objective, science-based decisions.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS1996

Wetlands: water, wildlife, plants, & people

Wetlands are part of all our lives. They can generally be described as transitional areas between land and deepwater habitats. There are many different kinds of wetlands, and they can be found in many different habitat types, from forests to deserts; some are maintained by saltwater, others by freshwater. This poster shows general types of diverse wetlands and demonstrates how people and wetlands can benefit by living together. The diversity of plants and animals is shown in cartooned pictures. As with plants and animals, there are many different common names for the various wetland types. The common names used on this poster were used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in the publication "Wetlands-Status and Trends in the Conterminous United States, Mid-1970's to Mid-1980's." Estuarine wetland types--salt marshes and mangrove swamps--are labeled in red letters. The estuary is where ocean saltwater and river freshwater mix. The estuary is labeled in orange letters. The inland wetland types-inland marshes and wet meadows, forested wetlands, and shrub wetlands-are labeled in yellow. Other wetlands are present in rivers, lakes, and reservoirs. The water bodies associated with these wetlands are labeled in black. The poster is folded into 8.5" x 11" panels; front and back panels can easily be photocopied.

General Information Product↗

USGS1988

Nowitna National Wildlife Refuge land cover mapping project user's guide

Title III of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (ANILCA 1980) established the Nowitna National Wildlife Refuge (NNWR). Section 304 of the Act requires the Secretary of Interior to "prepare, and from time to time revise, a comprehensive conservation plan" for the refuge.

Alaska↗

USGS1999

Carboniferous and older carbonate rocks: Lithofacies, extent, and reservoir quality: Chapter CC in The oil and gas resource potential of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge 1002 area, Alaska

Carboniferous and older carbonate rocks are potential hydrocarbon reservoir facies for four plays in the 1002 area of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. These rocks include several units in the pre-Carboniferous basement and the Carboniferous Lisburne Group. Data from exploratory wells west of the 1002 area, outcrops south of the 1002 area, seismic lines, and well logs are synthesized herein to infer carbonate lithofacies, extent, and reservoir character beneath the northeastern Arctic coastal plain. A chiefly shallow-water basement carbonate succession of Late Proterozoic through Early Devonian age (Katakturuk Dolomite, Nanook Limestone, and Mount Copleston Limestone) is interpreted to be present beneath much of the south-central 1002 area; it reaches 3,700 m thick in outcrop and is the primary reservoir for the Deformed Franklinian Play. A more heterogeneous lithologic assemblage of uncertain age forms basement in the northwestern part of the 1002 area; well data define three subunits that contain carbonate intervals 5- 50 m thick. These strata are prospective reservoirs for the Undeformed Franklinian Play and could also be reservoirs for the Niguanak- Aurora Play. Regional lithologic correlations suggest a Cambrian-Late Proterozoic(?) age for subunits one and two, and a slightly younger, later Cambrian-Silurian age for subunit three. Seismic and well data indicate that subunit one overlies subunit two and is overlain by subunit three. The Mississippian and Pennsylvanian Lisburne Group, a predominantly carbonate platform succession as much as 1 km thick, is projected beneath the southernmost part of the 1002 area and is a potential reservoir for the Ellesmerian Thrust-belt and Niguanak-Aurora Plays. Carbonate rocks in the 1002 area probably retain little primary porosity but may have locally well developed secondary porosity. Measured reservoir parameters in basement carbonate strata are low (porosity generally ≤ 5%; permeability ≤ 0.2 md) but drill-stem tests found locally reasonable flow rates (4,220-4,800 bpd) and, in the Flaxman Island area, recovered gas and condensate from these rocks. The Lisburne Group has produced up to 50,000 bbl of oil/ day from the Lisburne field at Prudhoe Bay. Reservoir parameters of the Lisburne in northeastern Alaska range from low (porosities ≤ 5% in most limestones) to good (porosities average 6.5-10% in some dolostones). Reservoir quality in Carboniferous and older carbonate strata in the 1002 area should be greatest where these rocks are highly fractured and (or) truncated by the Lower Cretaceous Unconformity.

Alaska↗

USGS2012

Wildlife and biological resources: Chapter 5 in A synthesis of aquatic science for management of Lakes Mead and Mohave

The creation of Lakes Mead and Mohave drastically changed habitats originally found along their region of the historical Colorado River. While still continuing to provide habitat conditions that support a rich diversity of species within the water, along shorelines, and in adjacent drainage areas, the reservoirs contain organisms that are both native and non-native to the Colorado River drainage (fig. 5-1). The diversity of species within these lakes continues to change with time due to changing habitat conditions, the invasion of non-native species, and extirpations of native species. From the bottom of the food web to the top predators, all organisms within the ecosystem are interconnected in food webs or food-chain networks. As non-native invasive species continue to be introduced into the lakes, alterations to the food web, species competition, and species predation likely will continue to change the ecosystem and populations of native organisms. Following an overview of the food web, this chapter summarizes information on aquatic and aquatic-dependent wildlife at Lakes Mead and Mohave and their relationships within the food web from members of lower trophic levels to the highest: phytoplankton, invertebrates, including zooplankton, and macroinvertebrates; fishes; and birds. The following sections describe the biological diversity, limiting factors, and ecological functions of these groups in Lake Mead, and to a lesser extent, in Lake Mohave.

Circular↗

USGS2015

The National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center and Department of the Interior Climate Science Centers annual report for 2014

Introduction The National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center (NCCWSC) and the Department of the Interior (DOI) Climate Science Centers (CSCs) had another exciting year in 2014. The NCCWSC moved toward focusing their science funding on several high priority areas and, along with the CSCs, gained new agency partners; contributed to various workshops, meetings, publications, student activities, and Tribal/indigenous activities; increased outreach; and more.

Pacific Islands, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands,↗

USGS2019

U.S. Geological Survey—Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center 2017 research activity report

The mission of Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center is to provide scientific information needed to conserve and manage the Nation’s natural capital for current and future generations, with an emphasis on migratory birds, Department of the Interior trust resources, and ecosystems of the Nation’s interior. This report provides an overview of the studies conducted at Northern Prairie during fiscal year 2017 in pursuit of this mission. Studies are organized under a framework developed by the U.S. Geological Survey Ecosystems Mission Area, identifying primary and secondary alignment with focal areas of research, and summarizing recent scientific products resulting from these studies. Partnerships with Federal, State, and non-Governmental organizations are essential to a robust program of applied ecological research, and we thank our many collaborators and colleagues whose contributions made this work possible.

Circular↗

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↗