Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Transactions of the North American Wildlife Conference”

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 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources
USGS2006

Coherence between harvest and habitat management -- Joint venture perspectives

Introduction: In recent months, an ad hoc group of waterfowl scientists, representing the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (IAFWA) Adaptive Harvest Management (ARM) Task Force and the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) Committee, have collaborated as a Joint Task Group (JTG) to assess options for unifying the population goals guiding waterfowl harvest management and habitat management. The JTG has been charged with bringing coherence to the population goals of the two programs. Characterizing the problem as one of coherence indicates value judgments exist regarding its significance or perhaps existence. For purposes of this paper, we characterize the lack of coherence as the absence of consistent population goals in the two related components of waterfowl conservation habitat and harvest management. Our purpose is to support continued dialogue on the respective goals of these programs and the possible implications of discordant goals to habitat joint ventures. Our objectives are two-fold: (1) illustrate how NAWMP habitat management goals and strategies have been interpreted and pursued in both breeding and wintering areas, and (2) provide perspectives on the linkages between regional habitat management programs and harvest management. The Lower Mississippi Valley and the Prairie Pothole joint ventures (LMVJV and PPJV, respectively) will be used as examples.

Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Na↗
USGS1982

HEP as a planning tool: an application to waterfowl enhancement

To many, the principal role of wildlife agencies in public and private resource development has been that of impact mitigation. With known or pending habitat damage, biologists have to develop mitigation or compensation plans. Unfortunately, once in a mitigation framework, they are in a no-win situation, seeking remedial action at best. Yet, the potential exists for cooperative project planning, thereby facilitating mitigation of impacts before they occur, and enhancement of environmental amenities through project development. In fact, such planning is mandated by federal legislation (e.g., National Environmental Policy Act, Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, Outdoor Recreation Act, etc.).

Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Na↗
USGS1982

Development and use of a habitat gradient model to evaluate wildlife habitat

Ecologists and wildlife managers are increasingly confronted with the problems of predicting the value of surface cover as wildlife habitat and developing management alternatives to offset wildlife values lost because of land-use change. These problems have become urgent and more acute because of increased demand for products from the land and diminished fiscal and manpower resources for obtaining meaningful environmental information for the decision maker. This paper describes a relatively rapid, simple, and quantitative process for evaluating the quality of an area as wildlife habitat.

Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Na↗
USGS1986

Alaska goose populations: Past, present and future

Many people think Alaska remains a pristine wilderness and that wildlife populations are still at prehistoric levels. This very likely is not true for the 11 species and subspecies of geese that nest in Alaska. Large, widely dispersed populations of geese were observed near the turn of the century. Even in the early 1970s, it was estimated that Alaskan habitats were used by 915,000 nesting and 100,000 additional migrating geese each year (King and Lensink 1971). Since then the Alaskan populations of most of these species have declined, some to dramatically low levels (Raveling 1984), even though habitats within the state have remained largely unaltered by man. The U.S. has treaties with Canada, Mexico, Japan and the Soviet Union to protect geese and other shared migratory birds, confirming international concern for the welfare of this resource. Cooperative research on Alaskan geese during the past several decades has given understanding of their migration corridors, staging and wintering habitats, and the principle places where they are hunted, thereby providing information needed to develop effective management plans. The only attempt to re-introduce geese in Alaska has been in the Aleutian Islands. Other opportunities exist. It is our intent here to: (1) review the historic and current status and important habitats of geese that occur in Alaska; (2) identify existing and potential threats to these populations; and (3) offer alternative management approaches for geese in Alaska.

Alaska↗
USGS1994

Genetic diversity in Arctic-nesting geese: Implications for management and conservation

The North Pacific Rim harbors breeding populations of many unique wildlife resources, of which waterfowl are among the most abundant and taxonomically diverse. Arctic nesting geese in particular are wide-spread in distribution (Figure 1), and though only seasons residents, they have evolved many unique adaptations for breeding in northern latitudes. This diversity has been recognized and managed at many taxonomic and geographic levels (Figure 2). Populations are spatially structured on macro- and micro-geographic scales reflecting taxon-specific migratory tendencies, and breeding and winter site fidelity.

Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Na↗