USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Wildlife Research Report”

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 19 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2019

U.S. Geological Survey energy and wildlife research annual report for 2019 postcard

This postcard provides details about the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Energy and Wildlife Research Annual Report for 2019, which highlights new research on the interactions of energy development with wildlife. Encompassing investigations of conventional and renewable energy development across the United States, from the Arctic Coastal Plain of Alaska to the balmy waters of Florida, the report features progress made by USGS scientists and partners in developing methods to minimize the impacts of energy infrastructure on wildlife. The report is available at https://doi.org/10.3133/cir1458 .

General Information Product↗
USGS2019

U.S. Geological Survey energy and wildlife research annual report for 2019

Access to affordable and reliable energy remains a critical need for people and the economy. To satisfy society’s demand for energy, the United States is expanding access to vast natural resources to produce electricity as well as petroleum and natural gas products. Development of our Nation’s energy resources, however, often conflicts directly with the equally vast fish and wildlife resources, which contribute billions of dollars to the economy through harvest, recreation, and services to humans and agriculture. The effects of energy development on living resources include fragmentation of populations, degradation or loss of habitat, and mortality of birds, bats, fish, and other wildlife interacting with energy generation facilities. Thus, an expanding energy infrastructure results in new requirements for land and ocean conversion for project siting and operational decisions to minimize risk to fish and wildlife resources. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists partner with more than 150 Federal, State, and local government agencies; Tribal nations; academic institutions; and nongovernmental organizations to deliver timely and relevant information on pressing resource management issues. This report summarizes ongoing USGS research projects and publications related to the impacts of energy development on fish and wildlife resources, tools to assess those impacts, and solutions to avoid or minimize risk. This information helps decision makers balance development with stewardship of the Nation’s fish and wildlife heritage.

Circular↗
USGS2016

U.S. Geological Survey—Energy and Wildlife Research Annual Report for 2016

Recent growth and development of renewable energy and unconventional oil and gas extraction are rapidly diversifying the energy supply of the United States. Yet, as our Nation works to advance energy security and conserve wildlife, some conflicts have surfaced. To address these challenges, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is conducting innovative research and developing workable solutions to reduce the impacts of energy production on wildlife. USGS scientists collaborate on many studies with scientists from other Federal, State, and local government agencies; Tribal nations; academic research institutions; and nongovernmental and private organizations. The mix of fuels used for electricity generation is evolving. Solar, natural gas, and wind energy made up most electricity generation additions in 2015 and 2016. The United States now leads the world in natural gas production, with new record highs for each year from 2011 through 2015. More than 48,000 wind turbines now contribute to power grids in most States, providing about 5 percent of U.S. end-use electricity demand in an average year. The number of utility-scale solar-energy projects is growing rapidly with solar energy projected to contribute to the largest electricity generation addition in 2016. A substantial number of large energy projects have been constructed on undeveloped public lands, and more are anticipated at an increasing rate, creating new stress to wildlife. Direct impacts include collisions with wind turbines and structures at solar facilities and loss of habitat which may negatively affect sensitive species. Recent estimates suggest 250,000 to 500,000 birds die each year at wind turbine facilities. Bat fatality rates at wind turbine facilities are less certain, but may average several hundred thousand per year throughout North America. Because new projects may be located in or near sensitive wildlife habitats, ecological science plays a key role in helping to guide project siting and operational decisions.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2017

U.S. Geological Survey—Energy and wildlife research annual report for 2017

Introduction Terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems provide valuable services to humans and are a source of clean water, energy, raw materials, and productive soils. The Nation’s food supply is more secure because of wildlife. For example, native pollinators enhance agricultural crops, and insect-eating bats provide pest control services worth billions of dollars to farmers annually. Fish and wildlife are also vital to a vibrant outdoor recreation and tourism industry. Recreational activities, such as hunting, shooting, boating, and angling, generated \$1.1 billion in excise taxes paid to State wildlife agencies in 2017. National parks, wildlife refuges, and monuments accounted for $35 billion in economic output and 318,000 jobs nationwide in 2016. Additional economic benefits are generated from the use and enjoyment of wildlife in State-owned lands and waters. Although the United States is rich in natural resources, human activity continues to place new pressures on fish and wildlife and the habitats they rely on. The United States became the world’s top producer of petroleum and natural gas products in 2012, surpassing Russia’s natural gas production levels in 2009 and Saudi Arabia’s petroleum production in 2013. The U.S. Energy Information Administration projects that the demand for liquid fuel, natural gas, and renewable energy will show strong growth in the next 20 years. Wind energy has demonstrated consistent growth since 2007 with now more than 53,000 wind turbines contributing to power grids in 41 States, Guam, and Puerto Rico. Solar energy has seen rapid growth since 2013 and made up nearly one-third of the total electricity generation additions in 2016. Yet as our Nation works to advance energy security and sustain wildlife, some conflicts have surfaced. Impacts of an expanding energy infrastructure include fragmentation and loss of habitat as well as mortality of birds, bats, fish, and other animals from interactions with energy generation facilities. Because energy development can often occur in wildlife habitats, ecological science can help guide project siting and operational decisions to areas that present the lowest risk to wildlife and energy developers. To address these challenges and make the most of new opportunities, the U.S. Geological Survey is producing innovative science to develop workable solutions that can help sustain wildlife and the habitat they rely upon, while allowing informed development.

Circular↗
USGS2018

U.S. Geological Survey energy and wildlife research annual report for 2018

USGS scientists provide scientific information and options that land and resource managers and private industries can use to make decisions regarding the development of energy resources while protecting the health of ecosystems. Studies focus on delivering information to avoid, minimize, or mitigate the impacts of energy infrastructure on fish and wildlife. USGS scientists are currently developing mapping tools and models that identify areas of biological strengths and weaknesses or high- and low-quality habitat and can identify opportunities for conservation—areas of high-quality habitat where energy-generating potential is low—and areas of potential risk—areas of high-quality habitat where energy-generating potential is high. These tools can assist resource managers and the industry concerning siting of energy development and selection of off-site mitigation areas. Scientific efforts, such as these, further the understanding of impacts related to energy development and create workable solutions. The three goals guiding USGS activities related to the interactions between wildlife and energy development are to understand risks by identifying when, where, and how fish and wildlife share space with energy facilities, measure direct and indirect impacts to species, and inform feasible and cost-effective solutions to minimize impacts through technological fixes, management, and mitigation.

Circular↗
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

U.S. Geological Survey—Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center 2018 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 2018 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↗
USGS2021

U.S. Geological Survey—Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center 2019–20 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 years 2019–20 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.

North Dakota↗
USGS2024

U.S. Geological Survey—Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center 2021–23 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 years 2021–23 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↗
USGS2017

The history of Patuxent: America’s wildlife research story

This report, based on a symposium held on October 13, 2011, at the National Wildlife Visitor Center at the Patuxent Research Refuge in Laurel, MD, documents the history of the Patuxent Research Refuge and the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, collectively known as Patuxent. The symposium was one of the many activities occurring at that time to celebrate the 75th anniversary of the creation of the Patuxent Research Refuge in 1936. The Patuxent Wildlife Research Center is located at the refuge, and the research center director, Dr. Gregory J. Smith, with great enthusiasm, personally supervised all aspects of the celebration. The symposium was coordinated by Dr. Matthew C. Perry, the editor of this report, with Dr. Smith’s strong support. The refuge and the research center have been essentially synonymous for the almost 80 years of their history.

Circular↗
USGS1972

An Analysis of the Population Dynamics of Selected Avian Species--With Special References to Changes During the Modern Pesticide Era

The impact of pesticides on the mortality rates and recruitment rates of nongame birds during the last 25 years was evaluated by studying the population dynamics of 16 species. A mathematical model showing the relations between population parameters that yielded stable populations was developed. The information needed for the model included (1) mortality rate schedule (obtained from recoveries of banded birds), (2) recruitment rates, and (3) the age of sexual maturity. The rate of recruitment necessary for a stable population and/or the annual rate of change (increase or decrease) in population levels were estimated. Population parameters were compared to determine whether changes had occurred between time periods (i.e., 1925-45 vs. 1946-65). The great horned owl, red-shouldered hawk, sparrow hawk, osprey, barn owl, Cooper's hawk, red-tailed hawk, great blue heron, blackcrowned night heron, brown pelican, barn swallow, chimney swift, blue jay, blackcapped chickadee, cardinal, and robin were subjected to this analysis. No increase in postfledging mortality rates in any of the species was detected during the last 25 years (since 1945). Since there was no evidence of increased mortality rates it was concluded that accelerated declines in several of the species studied resulted from lowered reproductive success. Mortality rates were found to have decreased in the Cooper's hawk, sparrow hawk, great blue heron, and brown pelican and this was associated with a decrease in shooting pressure. Evidence of lower recruitment rates was found in the brown pelican, osprey, Cooper's hawk, red-shouldered hawk, and sparrow hawk. No changes in recruitment rates were noted in the red-tailed hawk, great horned owl, great blue heron, or barn owl. Information on recruitment rates was not available for comparison with the other species although rates of recruitment essential for a stable population were estimated. This work will provide the basis for making comparisons in future studies. No change in recruitment rates was apparent among species feeding primarily on mammals. Species exhibiting a lowered reproductive success since 1945 were those whose major food items consisted of fish, reptiles, amphibians, or birds. Lowered reproductive success was accompanied by a decrease in eggshell thickness. Other investigators have reported that sparrow hawks and mallard ducks fed a diet of DDE and dieldrin have produced thin eggshells under laboratory conditions, and exhibited a lower, reproductive success. Many of the bird species that have declined are those that consume food in which chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides have been concentrated through a series of transfers along food chains. The chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides are believed responsible.

Wildlife Research Report↗
USGS1991

Use of Wetland Habitats by Selected Nongame Water Birds in Maine

We examined the use of 87 palustrine and lacustrine wetlands by nongame water birds in central and eastern Maine using 3,527 h of observation (1,501 visits) made during April-August, 1977-85. Wetlands used by 15 species of water birds were distinguished from those not used, according to 20 habitat features. The species were the common loon (Gavia immer) , pied-billed grebe (Podilymbus podiceps), double-crested cormorant (Phalacrocorax auritus), American bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), green-backed heron (Butorides striatus), osprey (Pandion haliaetus), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), Virgima rail (Rallus limicola), sora (Porzana carolina), spotted sandpiper (Actitis macularia), common snipe (Gallinago gallinago), herring gull (Larus argentatus), and belted kingfisher (Ceryle alcyon). Predictive models of habitat use were developed for each species. Water birds were classified by similarity of habitats used, and species use was contrasted by wetland type. Smaller, isolated wetlands were used by fewer (P < 0.05) species than larger wetlands in complexes; many species had large area-requirements (pied-billed grebe, common loon, herring gull, double-crested cormorant, bald eagle) or preferred to use wetlands near other wetlands (common loon, herring gull, great blue heron, spotted sandpiper, osprey, bald eagle). Wetland area contributed more to overall variation in species richness on wetlands than wetland isolation, although on small wetlands (<3.6 ha) isolation was a better predictor of species richness than wetland area. Wetlands with intermediate amounts (33-66%) of emergent vegetation supported more species (P< 0.05) than closed (>66%) or open (<33%) wetlands. Low pH typified wetlands used by large-bodied piscivores (common loon, cormorant, osprey). Other water birds were associated with more densely vegetated, chemically buffered wetlands. Habitat features associated with wetland use by each waterbird species are reported, as are numerical responses of waterbird populations to wetland features and estimates of annual variation in habitat occupancy. Lacustrine wetlands supported a distinct, low diversity community of water birds, including most fish-eating species. Waterbird diversity at forested palustrine wetlands was intermediate between lacustrine communities and more species-rich assemblages at palustrine emergent and scrub-shrub wetlands. Regional variation in wetland characteristics and water bird use was associated with surficial geology, soils, and management practices. Management for nongame water birds in Maine should consider providing emergent and aquatic-bed vegetation with variable cover-to-water ratios, accommodating species-specific habitat needs, focusing on species of restricted distribution and low abundance, and maintaining wetland complexes. Bird use and habitat information from 87 wetlands and models of habitat selection for each species are provided in appendixes.

Fish and Wildlife Research↗
USGS1978

Atlantic walrus (Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus): A literature survey and status report

It is generally agreed that the genus Odobenus includes only one species, O. rosmarus . At least two subspecies are widely recognized: O. r. rosmarus , the Atlantic walrus, and O. r. divergens , the Pacific walrus. A third nominal subspecies, O. r. laptevi , the Laptev walrus, is designated by some Soviet researchers; and the taxonomic status of the Kara Sea walrus is undetermined. The range and abundance of nearly all walrus stocks have been seriously reduced by intensive human exploitation. The Atlantic walrus, the principal subject of this study, remains plentiful in only three known areas of concentration: northern Hudson Bay and northern Foxe Basin in the eastern Canadian Arctic, and the Thule district of northwest Greenland. This animal is no longer the object of large-scale commercial hunting, but is still subject to heavy subsistence hunting by native groups in some areas. The status of the walrus population in Canada was investigated in the 1950's and is believed to have changed little since that time. There are probably no more than about 10,000 walruses in Canadian waters, virtually all of them in the eastern arctic. The biology, ecology, and exploitation of walruses in the Thule district were studied during the 1940's, and some information is available concerning recent catch levels and hunting practices. The Polar Eskimos of north Greenland continue to organize much of their cultural and economic life around the hunting of walruses, and the species remains abundant in their area, numbering at least a few thousand. The walrus stocks off west Greenland and in the Greenland, Barents, and Kara seas are the most critically depleted. No systematic field investigations of walruses east of Greenland have been made since the Kara Sea and Franz Josef Land populations were studied in the mid-1930's. Opportunistic sighting records and compilations of historical catch information indicate that the herds of many tens of thousands that once inhabited Svalbard, Bear Island, Franz Josef Land, Novaya Zemlya, and other parts of the Eurasian Arctic have been very nearly extirpated. Measures to curb the international trade in walrus ivory and skins may benefit the Atlantic subspecies in Canada and north Greenland. Enforcement of existing regulations pertaining to hunting by aborigines, and perhaps the imposition of further restrictions on such activities, are necessary if the subspecies is to approach full recovery. Field studies in the northeast Atlantic and off west Greenland would help determine the current status of walruses and provide a better understanding of the requirements for their recovery in these areas. The Laptev walrus seems to have been reduced by overexploitation, but available information, most of it translated from Russian, is inconclusive. This subspecies was thought to number around 4,000 to 5,000 in 1975, and Soviet scientists have remarked on the need for a reduction in hunting pressure and protection of its habitat.

Wildlife Research Report↗
USGS1991

Wigeongrass ( Ruppia maritima ): a literature review

Wigeongrass (Ruppia maritima L.) is a submersed macrophyte of nearly cosmopolitan distribution and worldwide importance as a waterfowl food. Unfortunately, the plant no longer inhabits vast areas disturbed by human activities. Taxonomic status of the plant is uncertain, especially in North America. In mild climates, in habitats subject to environmental extremes, the plant behaves as an annual (vegetation perishes), or as a perennial in deeper, more stable habitats (some vegetative parts grow year round). Drupelets (seeds) provide a mechanism for wigeongrass to survive periods of drought and excessive water salinity. These sexual propagules can be washed ashore or carried by birds or fish for long distances.Wigeongrass mostly occurs in temporarily to permanently flooded mesohaline-hyperhaline estuarine wetlands, but it also occurs inland in fresh to hypersaline palustrine and lacustrine wetlands. Most populations inhabit warm, relatively unpolluted, and well lit waters <2.0 m deep where fetches and wave action are not great. The species is probably best adapted to stable water levels but can tolerate significant water level fluctuations, including periodic exposure in tidal areas. Robust growth occurs in areas of slow current. Wigeongrass is alone among the submersed North American angiosperms in tolerance to high salinity, but it is likely at a competitive disadvantage among specialist taxa in soft or acidic waters. The species grows in nearly all common bottom substrates, but growth is favored by aerobic and low H 2 S conditions. Turbidity frequently limits wigeongrass growth in waters overlying easily suspendible bottom substrates.Wigeongrass often occurs in monotypic stands, yet grows with many other submersed and emergent macrophytes. Dominance in certain wetlands sometimes alternates with dominance by other submersed macrophytes as salinities, seasonal temperature cycles, or other environmental factors change. The shading effect of metaphytic, planktonic, or epiphytic algae often reduces production.Wigeongrass and its detritus provide food and cover for a large invertebrate biota, although direct consumption of the living plants is minimal. Wigeongrass beds in coastal wetlands are heavily used by fish. The plant is recognized worldwide as an important food of migrant and wintering waterfowl, wading birds, and shorebirds. In subtropical climates, wintering waterfowl can quickly consume entire stands.Propagation and management of wigeongrass has occurred for nearly 60 years in the southern and eastern United States. During the seventies and eighties, sophisticated water level and salinity management techniques have been developed to encourage growth of the plant.Future research should concentrate on determining the means to reduce light-limiting turbidity in many wetland types; understanding the ways in which human activities on and near wetlands affect wigeongrass production; and developing reliable and predictable techniques to stimulate wigeongrass production by water level manipulations and other means in different environmental settings. Trophic interactions and the effects of biomanipulation of fish populations in managed wigeongrass habitat--now little understood--also require more study.

Fish and Wildlife Research↗