USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 2001091

Miscellaneous chemical toxins

Abstract

The previous chapters provide information about some of the chemical toxins that have lethal effects on wild birds. The material presented in Section 7, Chemical Toxins, is far from comprehensive because wild birds are poisoned by a wide variety of toxic substances. Also, monitoring of wild bird mortality is not yet organized so that diagnostic findings can be extended to reflect the relative impacts among the types of toxins, within populations, or among species, geographic areas, and time. The data that are available are not collectively based on random sampling, nor do specimen collection and submission follow methodical assessment methods. Instead, most data simply document individual bird poisoning events. The inherent biases in this information include the species of birds observed dead (large birds in open areas are more likely to be observed dead than small forest birds); the species of birds likely to be submitted for analysis (bald eagles are more likely to be submitted than house sparrows); collection sites (agricultural fields are more likely to be observed than urban environments); geographic area of the country; season; reasons for submissions; and other variables. Nevertheless, findings from individual events reflect the causes of mortality associated with those events and collectively identify chemical toxins that repeatedly cause bird mortalities which result in carcass collection and sub

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M. Friend. 1999. Miscellaneous chemical toxins. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/2001091

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Mute swans and their Chesapeake Bay habitats: proceedings of a symposium

The symposium 'Mute Swans and their Chesapeake Bay Habitats,' held on June 7, 2001, provided a forum for biologists and managers to share research findings and management ideas concerning the exotic and invasive mute swan (Cygnus olar). This species has been increasing in population size and is considered by many to be a problem in regard to natural food resources in the Bay that are used by native waterfowl during the winter months. Other persons, however, feel that resource managers are attempting to create a problem to justify more killing of waterfowl by hunters. Some persons also believe that managers should focus on the larger issues causing the decline of native food resources, such as the unabated human population increase in the Bay watershed and in the immediate coastal areas of the Bay. The symposium, sponsored by the Wildfowl Trust of North America and the U.S. Geological Survey, provided the atmosphere for presentation of mute swan data and opinions in a collegial setting where discussion was welcomed and was often informative and enthusiastic. An interesting historic review of the swan in regard to the history of mankind was presented, followed by a discussion on the positive and negative effects of invasive species. Biologists from different parts of the continent discussed the population status of the species in several states in the east and in the Great Lakes area. Data on the food habits of this species were presented in regard to submerged aquatic vegetation, and an interesting discussion on the role that the food habits of Canada geese in regard to native vegetation was presented. Findings and recommendations of the Mute Swan Task Force were presented. Finally, a representative of the Friends of Animals gave a thought-provoking presentation in defense of the mute swan. The presentations, in general, provided the necessary information and recommendations to allow managers to proceed with management of this controversial species with new and valuable perspectives.

Maryland, Virginia↗

Aquatic synthesis for Voyageurs National Park

Voyageurs National Park (VOYA), which was established in 1975, contains significant aquatic resources with about 50% of its total area of 883 km 2 (341 mi 2 ) consisting of aquatic habitats. In addition to the Park's 30 named lakes, there are numerous wetlands including hundreds of beaver ponds. Due to the Park's size and location in the drainage basin, aquatic resources within the Park are particularly susceptible to activities and developments that occur outside its' boundary. This is particularly true in regard to the water quality and aquatic communities in the four large lakes that comprise 96% of the Park's total lake area of 34,400 ha (133 mi 2 ). Because most Park activities center on the lakes, particularly the large lakes, resource managers need to have knowledge and understanding of VOYA's aquatic resources to effectively preserve, in an unimpaired condition, the ecological processed, biological and cultural diversity, and history of the northwoods, lakecountry border shared with Canada.

Minnesota, Ontario↗

Evaluating sources of job satisfaction: A survey of U.S. Fish and Wildlife refuge managers and biologists

The following summary consists of revised excerpts from the thesis study that was conducted in 2000-2002 by Ayeisha Brinson, Colorado State University (Brinson, 2002). The purpose of this report is to provide the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) with additional finding related to sources of job satisfaction. Because this is a report of additional findings from a length study, the information in this report is condensed and represented without references from the original research. The literature review, methodology, and discussion from the original thesis are not presented in this report. Any questions concerning the thesis should be directed to Ayeisha Brinson, who may be reached by e-mail. The purpose of the report is to examine differences and similarities between National Wildlife Refuge managers and biologists on a selection of independent variable related to job satisfaction occupation status (being either a manager or a biologist): are managers more satisfied with their jobs than biologist? If so, what are the components of that satisfaction? What are the sources of dissatisfaction? a?|

Information and Technology Report↗