Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Resource Publication”

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 163 records · Page 9Linked to original sources
USGS1977

Population ecology of the mallard: IV. A review of duck hunting regulations, activity, and success, with special reference to the mallard

This, the fourth in a series of reports on the mallard, ( Anas platyrhynchos ), deals at length with the harvest of mallards by waterfowl hunters. Long-term summaries of duck hunting regulations (1948- 1974), Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp sales (1934-1974), Hunter Questionnaire (1952-1974), Duck Wing Collection (1960-1974), and Hunter Performance (1965-1972) Survey data for the United States are presented and discussed. Similar data from Canada are also summarized. Mallard harvest figures for 1961-1974 are presented by Mallard Harvest Area, of which 100 are defined for the United States and 14 for Canada, as well as by State or Province and flyway. During the 23-year period beginning in 1952, an average of 1.6 million adult and 0.2 million junior waterfowl hunters accumulated almost 12.3 million hunter-days of recreation and a harvest of 11.2 million ducks each year. Hunter reports indicate that mallards made up about 43% (5.5 million annually) of the ducks taken before 1960, when mallard regulations were less restrictive; the Duck Wing Survey indicates that mallards have made up 33% of the harvest (3.6 million annually) since 1960. The age and sex compositions and the chronological distribution of the mallard harvest are examined in detail. Among the patterns noted are peak harvests during the first few days of the season in many States, alternately increasing and decreasing annual age ratios, and sex ratios that suggest differential migration of adult drakes and hunter selectivity for males. It is estimated that almost 19% of the ducks shot down are not retrieved. Relationships between duck hunting regulations and hunter behavior are examined briefly. Hunter compliance with mallard bag limits, hunter selectivity of mallards by sex, and, to a lesser extent, the size of the unretrieved kill are all sensitive to the particular bag limit regulations in effect. Survey data are also examined for relationships between harvest and various hunting regulations: starting time and day of the week for opening day, opening date, season length, split seasons, daily shooting hours, and daily bag limits. Tables are presented relating changes in duck and mallard harvests to season length and bag limit, and examples of what effects changes in other regulations have on harvest are also given. The evaluation of bag limit regulations, one of the most important tools used in managing harvest, is carried a step further with the development of a procedure for calculating expected hunter success under a wide variety of bag limit regulations. This method appears promising for evaluating point-limit as well as fixed-limit regulations. In addition, it may provide useful measurements of the degree of hunter selectivity induced by various types of bag limit regulations, an increasingly important aspect of harvest management. Finally, this study clearly demonstrates that the effects of a particular regulation can differ dramatically from area to area, so it is usually necessary to evaluate each proposal on a State-by-State basis.

Resource Publication↗
USGS1981

Waterfowl and their wintering grounds in Mexico, 1937-64

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been interested in migratory birds, especially waterfowl, in Mexico for many years, An early period of cooperation in waterfowl administration was culminated in 1937 with the final ratification of the Convention Between the United States and the United Mexican States for the Protection of Migratory Birds and Game Mammals, usually referred to as the Migratory Bird Treat. Management of waterfowl on this continent is primarily carried out by hunting regulations. Current information on the status of each species must be obtained each year to serve as a basis for any needed modifications in the regulations. In the United States and Canada, wildlife biologists of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Canadian Wildlife Service annually make the surveys to obtain this basic information. But the Government of Mexico has made no comparable surveys. Mexicans are not interested in hunting waterfowl to the extent that citizens of the United States and Canada are. As a consequence, Mexico's Department of Game emphasizes activities other than waterfowl management. Waterfowl, especially ducks, winter in or migrate through Mexico in large numbers, so it is obvious that and continental surveys of the winter population should include Mexico. Some general investigations of waterfowl distribution there were made in 1926 and earlier by E. A. Goldman. He was familiar with much of Mexico because he and E. W. Nelson studied mammals and biota there for many years. In the 1930's, because of the greater emphasis on waterfowl conservation and management, more detailed surveys were made of the continental breeding and wintering populations. One of these activities was designated as the midwinter, or January, inventory. In the early 1940's the senior author, who had been the Central Flyaway Biologist since 1937, recommended that the waterfowl wintering grounds in Mexico be included in the coverage of the midwinter waterfowl inventory. This was arranged in 1947, and the first aerial coverage, which only included coastal localities, was made in January-February of that year. The information obtained confirmed the value and advisability of including the Mexican wintering grounds in the annual survey; beginning in 1951 the wintering grounds in the Mexican highlands also were included. The surveys of Mexico were continued, except in 1957, through 1965; after 1965 they were greatly reduced. Ground reconnaissance and surveys had begun in Mexico with the preliminary work of Goldman in 1926, but quantitative studies were not started until 1937. The ground surveys continued at intervals in various parts of the Republic until 1960. Ground surveys are invaluable for such purposes as securing ecological information, specimens of birds and plants, and historical data about the areas from local residents, but the only satisfactory method of obtaining accurate quantitative information on waterfowl populations and their distribution is by airplane. Consequently, the major emphasis since 1947 has been on the annual aerial surveys. Ground studies were made much less frequently and were carried out mainly to obtain correlative information on the waterfowl foods available, the ecology of habitats, and for liaison with wildlife officials and biologists in Mexico. An important reason for the surveys of the waterfowl wintering grounds in Mexico was to determine their adequacy for the population of birds using them, and their potential to accommodate additional waterfowl if the wintering grounds in the United States became inadequate and larger flights entered Mexico. Other advantages included providing accurate information to hunters and other interested persons in the United States regarding the waterfowl shooting in Mexico, and determining the current status of these birds and their habitats in that country. Some of these findings were previously summarized by us (Saunders and Saunders 1949; Saunders 1964).

Resource Publication↗
USGS1981

Procedures for the use of aircraft in wildlife biotelemetry studies

This is a report on the state of the art methodology and on questions that arise while one is preparing to use aircraft in a biotelemetry study. In general the first step in preparing to mount an antenna on an aircraft is to consult with a certified aircraft mechanic. Aircraft certification is discussed to provide background information concerning the role of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in regulating the use of biotelemetry antennas on aircraft. However, approval of any specific design of antenna mount rests with local FAA authority. Airplane and helicopter antenna attachments are described. Performance of the receiving antenna system is discussed with emphasis on how variables as aircraft type and antenna configuration may influence reception. The side-looking vs. front-looking antenna configuration and the VHF vs. HF frequency band are generally recommended for most aerial tracking studies. Characteristics of receivers, transmitters, and antennas that might influence tracking are discussed. Specific topics such as calibration of receivers and transmitter quality control are considered. Suggestions in preparing for and conducting tracking flights that will improve overall efficiency and safety are presented. Search techniques, including procedures for conducting large and specific area surveys as well as methods to improve and evaluate search efficiency, are discussed. A concluding section considers special topics such as low-level operations and the use of helicopters. Diagrams of antenna mounts, equipment check-off lists, and antenna test procedures are included as appendices.

Resource Publication↗
USGS1982

Mitigation and enhancement techniques for the Upper Mississippi River system and other large river systems

Extensive information is provided on techniques that can reduce or eliminate the negative impact of man's activities (particularly those related to navigation) on large river systems, with special reference to the Upper Mississippi River. These techniques should help resource managers who are concerned with such river systems to establish sound environmental programs. Discussion of each technique or group of techniques include (1) situation to be mitigated or enhanced; (2) description of technique; (3) impacts on the environment; (4) costs; and (5) evaluation for use on the Upper Mississippi River Systems. The techniques are divided into four primary categories: Bank Stabilization Techniques, Dredging and Disposal of Dredged Material, Fishery Management Techniques, and Wildlife Management Techniques. Because techniques have been grouped by function, rather than by structure, some structures are discussed in several contexts. For example, gabions are discussed for use in revetments, river training structures, and breakwaters. The measures covered under Bank Stabilization Techniques include the use of riprap revetments, other revetments, bulkheads, river training structures, breakwater structures, chemical soil stabilizers, erosion-control mattings, and filter fabrics; the planting of vegetation; the creation of islands; the creation of berms or enrichment of beaches; and the control of water level and boat traffic. The discussions of Dredging and the Disposal of Dredged Material consider dredges, dredging methods, and disposal of dredged material. The following subjects are considered under Fishery Management Techniques: fish attractors; spawning structures; nursery ponds, coves, and marshes; fish screens and barriers; fish passage; water control structures; management of water levels and flows; wing dam modification; side channel modification; aeration techniques; control of nuisance aquatic plants; and manipulated of fish populations. Wildlife Management Techniques include treatments of artificial nest structures, island creation or development, marsh creation or development, greentree reservoirs and mast management, vegetation control, water level control, and revegetation.

Upper Mississippi River↗
USGS1983

Avian use of forest habitats in the Pembina Hills of northeastern North Dakota

North Dakota has the least extensive total area of forested habitats of any of the 50 United States. Although occurring in limited area, forest communities add considerably to the total ecological diversity of the State. The forests of the Pembina Hills region in northeastern North Dakota are one of only three areas large enough to be considered of commercial value. During 1981 we studied the avifauna of the upper valley of the Pembina River in the Pembina Hills. Field work extended from 20 April to 23 July; breeding bird censuses were conducted 7 June to 2 July. Of the 120 bird species recorded during the study period, 79 species were recorded during the breeding season. The total breeding population was estimated at nearly 76,000 breeding pairs. The wood warblers (Parulidae) were the most numerous family, accounting for about 28,000 breeding pairs. The yellow warbler (Dendroica petechia) was the most abundant breeding species, making up 19.4% of the population. American redstart (Setophaga ruticilla) was second in abundance, accounting for 10.5% of the breeding population. Largest breeding densities occurred in the willow (Salix sp.) shrub community. Although supporting the lowest mean breeding density, quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) forests supported the highest species diversity. First State breeding records were recorded for alder flycatcher (Empidonax alnorum) and golden-winged warbler (Vermivora chrysoptera). Records were obtained for 12 species considered rare or unusual in North Dakota during the breeding season. The status of all species known to have occurred in the study area is described in an annotated species list.

Resource Publication↗