Sample records for wildlife program project

  1. 76 FR 793 - Multistate Conservation Grant Program; Priority List for Conservation Projects

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-01-06

    ...; 91400-9410-0000-7B] Multistate Conservation Grant Program; Priority List for Conservation Projects... 2011 priority list of wildlife and sport fish conservation projects from the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA). As required by the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Programs Improvement Act...

  2. Status Review of Wildlife Mitigation at 14 of 27 Major Hydroelectric Projects in Idaho, 1983-1984 Final Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Martin, Robert C.; Mehrhoff, L.A.

    1985-01-01

    The Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act and wildlife and their habitats in the Columbia River Basin and to compliance with the Program, the wildlife mitigation status reports coordination with resource agencies and Indian Tribes. developed the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program development, operation, and maintenance of hydroelectric projects on existing agreements; and past, current, and proposed wildlife factual review and documentation of existing information on wildlife meet the requirements of Measure 1004(b)(l) of the Program. The mitigation, enhancement, and protection activities were considered. In mitigate for the losses to those resources resulting from the purposemore » of these wildlife mitigation status reports is to provide a resources at some of the Columbia River Basin hydroelectric projects the river and its tributaries. To accomplish this goal, the Council were written with the cooperation of project operators, and in within Idaho.« less

  3. 50 CFR 81.11 - Divergent opinions over project merits.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Divergent opinions over project merits. 81.11 Section 81.11 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF...

  4. Malheur River Wildlife Mitigation Project, Annual Report 2003.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Ashley, Paul

    Hydropower development within the Columbia and Snake River Basins has significantly affected riparian, riverine, and adjacent upland habitats and the fish and wildlife species dependent upon them. Hydroelectric dams played a major role in the extinction or major loss of both anadromous and resident salmonid populations and altered instream and adjacent upland habitats, water quality, and riparian/riverine function. Hydroelectric facility construction and inundation directly affected fish and wildlife species and habitats. Secondary and tertiary impacts including road construction, urban development, irrigation, and conversion of native habitats to agriculture, due in part to the availability of irrigation water, continue to affectmore » wildlife and fish populations throughout the Columbia and Snake River Basins. Fluctuating water levels resulting from facility operations have created exposed sand, cobble, and/or rock zones. These zones are generally devoid of vegetation with little opportunity to re-establish riparian plant communities. To address the habitat and wildlife losses, the United States Congress in 1980 passed the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act (Act) (P.L. 96-501), which authorized the states of Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington to create the Northwest Power Planning Council (Council). The Act directed the Council to prepare a program in conjunction with federal, state, and tribal wildlife resource authorities to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife species affected by the construction, inundation and operation of hydroelectric dams in the Columbia River Basin (NPPC 2000). Under the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (Program), the region's fish and wildlife agencies, tribes, non-government organizations (NGOs), and the public propose fish and wildlife projects that address wildlife and fish losses resulting from dam construction and subsequent inundation. As directed by the Council, project proposals are subjected to a rigorous review process prior to receiving final approval. An eleven-member panel of scientists referred to as the Independent Scientific Review Panel (ISRP) examines project proposals. The ISRP recommends project approval based on scientific merit. The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority (CBFWA), Council staff, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and subbasin groups also review project proposals to ensure each project meets regional and subbasin goals and objectives. The Program also includes a public involvement component that gives the public an opportunity to provide meaningful input on management proposals. After a thorough review, the Burns Paiute Tribe (BPT) acquired the Malheur River Mitigation Project (Project) with BPA funds to compensate, in part, for the loss of fish and wildlife resources in the Columbia and Snake River Basins and to address a portion of the mitigation goals identified in the Council's Program (NPPC 2000).« less

  5. 75 FR 1651 - Multistate Conservation Grant Program; Priority List for Conservation Projects

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-01-12

    ...-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 777 et seq.) and established the Multistate Conservation...; 91400-9410-0000-7B] Multistate Conservation Grant Program; Priority List for Conservation Projects... of wildlife and sport fish conservation projects from the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies...

  6. Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority Project Abstracts; May 25-27, Portland, Oregon, 1997 Annual Review.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Allee, Brian J.

    1997-06-26

    Abstracts are presented from the 1997 Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Review of Projects. The purpose was to provide information and education on the approximate 127 million dollars in Northwest electric ratepayer fish and wildlife mitigation projects funded annually.

  7. Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigation : Annual Report 2002.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Terra-Berns, Mary

    The Albeni Falls Interagency Work Group continued to actively engage in implementing wildlife mitigation actions in 2002. Regular Work Group meetings were held to discuss budget concerns affecting the Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigation Program, to present potential acquisition projects, and to discuss and evaluate other issues affecting the Work Group and Project. Work Group members protected 1,386.29 acres of wildlife habitat in 2002. To date, the Albeni Falls project has protected approximately 5,914.31 acres of wildlife habitat. About 21% of the total wildlife habitat lost has been mitigated. Administrative activities have increased as more properties are purchased and continue tomore » center on restoration, operation and maintenance, and monitoring. In 2001, Work Group members focused on development of a monitoring and evaluation program as well as completion of site-specific management plans. This year the Work Group began implementation of the monitoring and evaluation program performing population and plant surveys, data evaluation and storage, and map development as well as developing management plans. Assuming that the current BPA budget restrictions will be lifted in the near future, the Work Group expects to increase mitigation properties this coming year with several potential projects.« less

  8. 50 CFR 86.62 - What must I do after my project has been selected?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What must I do after my project has been selected? 86.62 Section 86.62 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF... INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM How the Service Selects Projects To Receive Grants § 86.62 What must I do...

  9. 50 CFR 86.63 - May I appeal if my project is not selected?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false May I appeal if my project is not selected? 86.63 Section 86.63 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE... GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM How the Service Selects Projects To Receive Grants § 86.63 May I appeal if my...

  10. Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP) Report : Malheur River Wildlife Mitigation, 2000-2002 Technical Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Gonzalez, Daniel; Wenick, Jess

    The development of hydropower systems within the Columbia and Snake River basins has affected a tremendous amount of fish and wildlife species. The dams have played a major role in the rapid extinction of anadromous runs of salmon and steelhead as well as other native salmonids. Inundation of these dams and the construction of reservoirs for irrigation have also severely impacted wildlife species. In some cases, fluctuating water levels caused by dam and reservoir operations have created barren vegetation zones that expose wildlife to predation and a reduction in recruitment. In association with hydropower activities, secondary impacts have also challengedmore » and highly impacted a majority of wildlife species. The construction of roads, facilities, urban development, channelization, and diversions of streams and rivers often have negative long-term effects on fish, wildlife, and vegetation. In response to these concerns, the United States Congress passed the Pacific Electric Power Planning Conservation Act (Act) in 1980. The Act authorized four states (Idaho, Montana, Oregon and Washington) and 13 Indian Tribes (including the Burns Paiute Tribe) to create the Northwest Power Planning Council (Council). The role of the Council is to prepare a program in conjunction with several participants that protects, mitigates and enhances affected species within the Columbia River Basin and its tributaries. The Council's program, known as the Columbia River Basin's Fish and Wildlife Program (Program), has evolved over the years into a basin-wide approach that incorporates management plans for 52 subbasins. The Program includes a public involvement component that requires Program participants to provide the public with meaningful opportunities to comment on specific management proposals. Participants in this Program include the region's fish and wildlife agencies, Indian tribes, the public and an 11-member panel of scientists referred to as the Independent Scientific Review Panel (ISRP). Program participants are responsible for creating management plans for each of the 52 subbasins. Upon approval by the Council, the management plan is then incorporated into the Program. In 1998, the Tribe submitted two land acquisition proposals for funding through Bonneville's Wildlife Mitigation Program, the Logan Valley and Malheur River Wildlife Mitigation Projects. After several months of rigorous scrutiny and defense of its project presentations, the Tribe was awarded both acquisitions. In February of 2000, the Tribe and BPA entered into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to fund the acquisition and management of Logan Valley and the Malheur River Projects. In April and November of 2000, the Tribe acquired the Logan Valley property (Project) and the Malheur River Wildlife Mitigation Project, respectively. The MOA requires the Tribe to dedicate the Project to wildlife habitat protection. Project management must be consistent with the term and conditions of the MOA and a site-specific management plan (Plan) that is to be prepared by the Tribe. The Malheur River Wildlife Mitigation Project (Denny Jones Ranch) allows the Tribe to manage 6,385 acres of meadow, wetland, and sagebrush steppe habitats along the Malheur River. The deeded property includes seven miles of the Malheur River, the largest private landholding along this waterway between Riverside and Harper. The property came with approximately 938 acres of senior water rights and 38,377 acres of federal and state grazing allotments. The project will benefit a diverse population of fish, wildlife, and plant species. Objectives include reviving and improving critical habitat for fish and wildlife populations, controlling/ eradicating weed populations, improving water quality, maintaining Bureau of Land Management (BLM) allotments, and preserving cultural resources. Before the Tribe acquired the project site, a combination of high levels of cattle stocking rates, management strategy, and a disruption of natural disturbance regimes compromised the property's ability to provide quality habitat to wildlife species found in the area. As a result, rangeland condition was depleted, exotic annual grasses and other noxious weeds began to invade native plant communities and many riparian areas were generally degraded. Native meadow communities were also leveled and planted with introduced species shortly after settlement and wildlife use and historic home ranges for migratory species have been severely altered. Current management is actively seeking to enhance the ability of the site's plant communities to support resident fauna that are known to have thrived in the area prior to settlement. The Tribe is utilizing a baseline approach to its overall land management by recognizing the importance of plant succession in achieving wildlife goal.« less

  11. Developing statistical wildlife habitat relationships for assessing cumulative effects of fuels treatments: Final Report for Joint Fire Science Program Project

    Treesearch

    Samuel A. Cushman; Kevin S. McKelvey

    2006-01-01

    The primary weakness in our current ability to evaluate future landscapes in terms of wildlife lies in the lack of quantitative models linking wildlife to forest stand conditions, including fuels treatments. This project focuses on 1) developing statistical wildlife habitat relationships models (WHR) utilizing Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) and National Vegetation...

  12. Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Annual Implementation Work Plan for Fiscal Year 1993.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration; Northwest Power Planning Council; Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority

    1992-09-01

    The Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (Program) was developed by the Northwest Power Planning Council (Council) in accordance with Public Law 96-501, the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act (Act). The purpose of the Program is to guide the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and other Federal agencies in carrying out their responsibilities to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife of the Columbia River Basin. The Annual Implementation World Plan (AIWP) presents BPA`s plans for implementing the Program during fiscal year (FY) 1993. The FY 1993 AIWP emphasizes continuation of 143 ongoing or projecting ongoing Programmore » projects, tasks, or task orders, most of which involve protection, mitigation, or enhancement of anadromous fishery resources. The FY 1993 AIWP also contains three new Program projects or tasks that are planned to start in FY 1993.« less

  13. Capacity building efforts and perceptions for wildlife surveillance to detect zoonotic pathogens: comparing stakeholder perspectives.

    PubMed

    Schwind, Jessica S; Goldstein, Tracey; Thomas, Kate; Mazet, Jonna A K; Smith, Woutrina A

    2014-07-04

    The capacity to conduct zoonotic pathogen surveillance in wildlife is critical for the recognition and identification of emerging health threats. The PREDICT project, a component of United States Agency for International Development's Emerging Pandemic Threats program, has introduced capacity building efforts to increase zoonotic pathogen surveillance in wildlife in global 'hot spot' regions where zoonotic disease emergence is likely to occur. Understanding priorities, challenges, and opportunities from the perspectives of the stakeholders is a key component of any successful capacity building program. A survey was administered to wildlife officials and to PREDICT-implementing in-country project scientists in 16 participating countries in order to identify similarities and differences in perspectives between the groups regarding capacity needs for zoonotic pathogen surveillance in wildlife. Both stakeholder groups identified some human-animal interfaces (i.e. areas of high contact between wildlife and humans with the potential risk for disease transmission), such as hunting and markets, as important for ongoing targeting of wildlife surveillance. Similarly, findings regarding challenges across stakeholder groups showed some agreement in that a lack of sustainable funding across regions was the greatest challenge for conducting wildlife surveillance for zoonotic pathogens (wildlife officials: 96% and project scientists: 81%). However, the opportunity for improving zoonotic pathogen surveillance capacity identified most frequently by wildlife officials as important was increasing communication or coordination among agencies, sectors, or regions (100% of wildlife officials), whereas the most frequent opportunities identified as important by project scientists were increasing human capacity, increasing laboratory capacity, and the growing interest or awareness regarding wildlife disease or surveillance programs (all identified by 69% of project scientists). A One Health approach to capacity building applied at local and global scales will have the greatest impact on improving zoonotic pathogen surveillance in wildlife. This approach will involve increasing communication and cooperation across ministries and sectors so that experts and stakeholders work together to identify and mitigate surveillance gaps. Over time, this transdisciplinary approach to capacity building will help overcome existing challenges and promote efficient targeting of high risk interfaces for zoonotic pathogen transmission.

  14. Project WILD: Aquatic Education Activity Guide.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Memphis State Univ., TN. Tennessee Administrative Software Clearinghouse.

    Project WILD is an interdisciplinary, supplementary environmental and conservation education program which emphasizes wildlife. This document is one guide developed by Project WILD with the specific purpose of focusing on aquatic wildlife, or any wild animals that depend upon aquatic environments for survival. The book contains instructional…

  15. 75 FR 42117 - Information Collection Sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Approval; OMB...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-07-20

    ...-0144; Wildlife Without Borders--Amphibians in Decline Grant Program AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service.... SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB Control Number: 1018-0144. Title: Wildlife Without Borders--Amphibians in Decline... Without Borders-- Amphibians in Decline grant program to fund projects that conserve the world's rapidly...

  16. Wildlife Habitat Impact Assessment, Chief Joseph Dam Project, Washington : Project Report 1992.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Kuehn, Douglas; Berger, Matthew

    1992-01-01

    Under the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act of 1980, and the subsequent Northwest Power Planning Council`s Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program, a wildlife habitat impact assessment and identification of mitigation objectives have been developed for the US Army Corps of Engineer`s Chief Joseph Dam Project in north-central Washington. This study will form the basis for future mitigation planning and implementation.

  17. Monitoring habitat restoration projects: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Pacific Region Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program and Coastal Program Protocol

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Woodward, Andrea; Hollar, Kathy

    2011-01-01

    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS) Pacific Region (Region 1) includes more than 158 million acres (almost 247,000 square miles) of land base in Idaho, Oregon, Washington, Hawai`i, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Guam, the Republic of Palau, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands. Region 1 is ecologically diverse with landscapes that range from coral reefs, broadleaf tropical forests, and tropical savannahs in the Pacific Islands, to glacial streams and lakes, lush old-growth rainforests, inland fjords, and coastal shoreline in the Pacific Northwest, to the forested mountains, shrub-steppe desert, and native grasslands in the Inland Northwest. Similarly, the people of the different landscapes perceive, value, and manage their natural resources in ways unique to their respective regions and cultures. The Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program (Partners Program) and Coastal Program work with a variety of partners in Region 1 including individual landowners, watershed councils, land trusts, Soil and Water Conservation Districts, non-governmental organizations, Tribal governments, Native Hawaiian organizations, and local, State, and Federal agencies. The Partners Program is the FWS's vanguard for working with private landowners to voluntarily restore and conserve fish and wildlife habitat. Using non-regulatory incentives, the Partners Program engages willing partners to conserve and protect valuable fish and wildlife habitat on their property and in their communities. This is accomplished by providing the funding support and technical and planning tools needed to make on-the-ground conservation affordable, feasible, and effective. The primary goals of the Pacific Region Partners Program are to: Promote citizen and community-based stewardship efforts for fish and wildlife conservation Contribute to the recovery of at-risk species, Protect the environmental integrity of the National Wildlife Refuges, Contribute to the implementation of the State Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategies, and Help achieve the objectives of the National Fish Habitat Partnerships and regionally based bird conservation plans (for example, North American Waterfowl Management Plan, U.S. Pacific Island Shorebird Conservation Plans, Intermountain West Regional Shorebird Plan, etc.). The Partners Program accomplishes these priorities by: Developing and maintaining strong partnerships, and delivering on-the-ground habitat restoration projects designed to reestablish habitat function and restore natural processes; Addressing key habitat limiting factors for declining species; Providing corridors for wildlife and decrease impediments to native fish and wildlife migration; and Enhancing native plant communities by reducing invasive species and improving native species composition. The Coastal Program is a voluntary fish and wildlife conservation program that focuses on watershed-scale, long-term collaborative resource planning and on-the-ground restoration projects in high-priority coastal areas. The Coastal Program conducts planning and restoration work on private, State, and Federal lands, and partnerships with other agencies-Native American Tribes, citizens, and organizations are emphasized. Coastal Program goals include restoring and protecting coastal habitat, providing technical and cost-sharing assistance where appropriate, supporting community-based restoration, collecting and developing information on the status of and threats to fish and wildlife, and using outreach to promote stewardship of coastal resources. The diversity of habitats and partners in Region 1 present many opportunities for conducting restoration projects. Faced with this abundance of opportunity, the Partners Program and Coastal Program must ensure that limited staffing and project dollars are allocated to benefit the highest priority resources and achieve the highest quality results for Federal trust species. In 2007, the Partners Program and Coastal Program developed a Strategic Plan to guide program operations and more efficiently conserve habitat by focusing partnership building and habitat improvement actions within 35 Partners Program Focus Areas and 9 Coastal Program Focus Areas (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010). The Strategic Plan also contains four other goals: broaden and strengthen partnerships; improve information sharing and communications; enhance workforce; and increase accountability to ensure that program resources are used efficiently and effectively. This protocol will help achieve all goals of the Strategic Plan.

  18. Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigation Project, 2008 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Soults, Scott

    The Albeni Falls Interagency Work Group (AFIWG) was actively involved in implementing wildlife mitigation activities in late 2007, but due to internal conflicts, the AFIWG members has fractionated into a smaller group. Implementation of the monitoring and evaluation program continued across protected lands. As of 2008, The Albeni Falls Interagency Work Group (Work Group) is a coalition comprised of wildlife managers from three tribal entities (Kalispel Tribe, Kootenai Tribe, Coeur d Alene Tribe) and the US Army Corps of Engineers. The Work Group directs where wildlife mitigation implementation occurs in the Kootenai, Pend Oreille and Coeur d Alene subbasins. Themore » Work Group is unique in the Columbia Basin. The Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority (CBFWA) wildlife managers in 1995, approved what was one of the first two project proposals to implement mitigation on a programmatic basis. The maintenance of this kind of approach through time has allowed the Work Group to implement an effective and responsive habitat protection program by reducing administrative costs associated with site-specific project proposals. The core mitigation entities maintain approximately 9,335 acres of wetland/riparian habitats in 2008.« less

  19. 50 CFR 80.23 - Allocation of funds between marine and freshwater fishery projects.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH... apportionment of the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration funds, between projects having recreational benefits...

  20. 75 FR 19420 - Proposed Information Collection; OMB Control Number 1018-0144; Wildlife Without Borders...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-04-14

    ... Without Borders-Amphibians in Decline grant program to fund projects that conserve the world's rapidly declining amphibian species. This program will support activities that address threats to frogs, toads... Control Number: 1018-0144. Title: Wildlife Without Borders--Amphibians in Decline Grant Program. Service...

  1. Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Annual Implementation Work Plan for Fiscal Year 1992.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration; Northwest Power Planning Council; Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority

    1991-09-01

    The Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (Program) was developed by the Northwest Power Planning Council (Council) in accordance with Public Law 96-501, the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act (Act). The purpose of the Program is to guide the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and other Federal agencies in carrying out their responsibilities to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife of the Columbia River Basin. The Act explicitly gives BPA the authority and responsibility to use the BPA fund for these ends, to the extent that fish and wildlife are affected by the development and operationmore » of hydroelectric generation in the Columbia River Basin. The Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Annual Implementation Work Plan (AIWP) presents BPA's plans for implementing the Program during Fiscal Year (FY) 1992. The AIWP reflects the primary goals of the Council's Action Plan (Section 1400 of the Program): to provide a solid, timely, and focused basis for budgeting and planning. In addition, the AIWP provides a means to judge the progress and the success of Program implementation. The AIWP is based on the outline developed by the Policy Review Group (PRG) during Step 1 of the annual cycle of the Implementation Planning Process (IPP), which is described in Section III. This AIWP has been organized and written to meet the specific needs of Program Action Items 10.1-10.3. The AIWP includes schedules with key milestones for FY 1992 and beyond, and addresses the Action Items assigned to BPA in Section 1400 of the 1987 Program and in subsequent amendments. All Program projects discussed in the AIWP are listed in Tables 1 and 2 according to their status as of May 21, 1991. Table 1 (pp. 3-14) lists completed, ongoing, and deferred projects. Table 2 (pp. 15-16) lists FY 1992 new-start projects. ''Ongoing'' status indicates that the project started in FY 1991 or before and that it is expected to continue through part or all of FY 1992. ''Deferred'' means that BPA implementation has been postponed to FY 1993 or later. ''Completed'' indicates completion during FY 1991. ''New'' denotes projects planned for BPA implementation in FY 1992. A number of projects are expected to begin in late FY 1991 and have been listed in Table 1 of the AIWP as ''Projected FY '91 Starts,'' based on their projected start dates. Several other projects are expected to end in late FY 1991. These projects have been listed in Table 1 as ''Projected FY '91 Completions,'' based on their projected completion dates.« less

  2. 50 CFR 80.1 - Definitions.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.1 Definitions. As used in this... administration and execution of the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Acts. Project. One or more related...

  3. 50 CFR 600.1003 - Content of a request for a financed program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 12 2013-10-01 2013-10-01 false Content of a request for a financed program. 600.1003 Section 600.1003 Wildlife and Fisheries FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT, NATIONAL... financed program shall: (a) Specify the reduction fishery. (b) Project the amount of the reduction and...

  4. 50 CFR 600.1005 - Content of a request for a subsidized program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 12 2012-10-01 2012-10-01 false Content of a request for a subsidized program. 600.1005 Section 600.1005 Wildlife and Fisheries FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT, NATIONAL... subsidized program shall: (a) Specify the reduction fishery. (b) Project the amount of the reduction and...

  5. 50 CFR 600.1005 - Content of a request for a subsidized program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 12 2014-10-01 2014-10-01 false Content of a request for a subsidized program. 600.1005 Section 600.1005 Wildlife and Fisheries FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT, NATIONAL... subsidized program shall: (a) Specify the reduction fishery. (b) Project the amount of the reduction and...

  6. 50 CFR 600.1005 - Content of a request for a subsidized program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 12 2013-10-01 2013-10-01 false Content of a request for a subsidized program. 600.1005 Section 600.1005 Wildlife and Fisheries FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT, NATIONAL... subsidized program shall: (a) Specify the reduction fishery. (b) Project the amount of the reduction and...

  7. 50 CFR 600.1005 - Content of a request for a subsidized program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 10 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false Content of a request for a subsidized program. 600.1005 Section 600.1005 Wildlife and Fisheries FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT, NATIONAL... subsidized program shall: (a) Specify the reduction fishery. (b) Project the amount of the reduction and...

  8. 50 CFR 600.1003 - Content of a request for a financed program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 12 2012-10-01 2012-10-01 false Content of a request for a financed program. 600.1003 Section 600.1003 Wildlife and Fisheries FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT, NATIONAL... financed program shall: (a) Specify the reduction fishery. (b) Project the amount of the reduction and...

  9. 50 CFR 600.1003 - Content of a request for a financed program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 10 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false Content of a request for a financed program. 600.1003 Section 600.1003 Wildlife and Fisheries FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT, NATIONAL... financed program shall: (a) Specify the reduction fishery. (b) Project the amount of the reduction and...

  10. 50 CFR 600.1003 - Content of a request for a financed program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 12 2014-10-01 2014-10-01 false Content of a request for a financed program. 600.1003 Section 600.1003 Wildlife and Fisheries FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT, NATIONAL... financed program shall: (a) Specify the reduction fishery. (b) Project the amount of the reduction and...

  11. 50 CFR 80.122 - May an agency deduct the costs of generating program income from gross income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH... SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.122 May an agency deduct the costs of generating program...-funded habitat-management or facilities-construction project. (2) Cost of publishing research results as...

  12. 50 CFR 84.30 - How are projects selected for grants?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...) that help achieve the management goals and objectives of the National Coastal Wetlands Conservation... National Office of the Fish and Wildlife Management and Habitat Restoration Program for distribution to a...

  13. 50 CFR 84.30 - How are projects selected for grants?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...) that help achieve the management goals and objectives of the National Coastal Wetlands Conservation... National Office of the Fish and Wildlife Management and Habitat Restoration Program for distribution to a...

  14. Evaluating projects for improving fish and wildlife habitat on National Forests.

    Treesearch

    Fred H. Everest; Daniel R. Talhelm

    1982-01-01

    Recent legislation (PL. 93-452; P.L. 94-588) has emphasized improvement of fish and wildlife habitat on lands of the National Forest System. A sequential procedure has been developed for screening potential projects to identify those producing the greatest fishery benefits. The procedure—which includes program planning, project planning, and intensive benefit/cost...

  15. Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigation Project; Idaho Department of Fish and Game 2007 Final Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Cousins, Katherine

    The Idaho Department of Fish and Game maintained a total of about 2,743 acres of wildlife mitigation habitat in 2007, and protected another 921 acres. The total wildlife habitat mitigation debt has been reduced by approximately two percent (598.22 HU) through the Department's mitigation activities in 2007. Implementation of the vegetative monitoring and evaluation program continued across protected lands. For the next funding cycle, the IDFG is considering a package of restoration projects and habitat improvements, conservation easements, and land acquisitions in the project area.

  16. Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Annual Implementation Work Plan for Fiscal Year 1991.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration; Northwest Power Planning Council; Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority

    1990-09-01

    The Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (Program) was developed by the Northwest Power Planning Council (Council) in accordance with Public Law 96-501, the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act (Act). The purpose of the Program is to guide the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and other Federal agencies in carrying out their responsibilities to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife of the Columbia River Basin. The Act explicitly gives BPA the authority and responsibility to use the BPA fund for these ends, to the extent that fish and wildlife are affected by the development and operationmore » of hydroelectric generation in the Columbia River Basin. The Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Annual Implementation Work Plan (AIWP) presents BPA's draft plans for implementing the Program during Fiscal Year (FY) 1991. The AIWP reflects the primary goals of the Council's Action Plan (Section 1400 of the Program): to provide a solid, timely, and focused basis for budgeting and planning. In addition, the AIWP provides a means to judge the progress and the success of Program implementation. The AIWP is based on the outline developed by the Policy Review Group (PRG) during Step 1 of the annual cycle of the Implementation Planning Process (IPP), which is described in Section III. This AIWP has been organized and written to meet the specific needs of Program Items 10.1-10.3. The AIWP includes schedules with key milestones for 1 and beyond, and addresses the Action Items assigned to BPA in Section 1400 of the 1987 Program and in subsequent amendments. All Program projects discussed in the AIWP are listed in Tables 1 and 2 according to their status as of September 1, 1990. Table 1 (pp. 3-14) lists completed, ongoing, and deferred projects. Table 2 (pp. 15-17) lists FY 1991 new-start projects. ''Ongoing'' status indicates that the project started in FY 1990 or before and that it is expected to continue through part or all of FY 1991. ''Deferred'' means that BPA implementation has been postponed to FY 1992 or later. ''Completed'' indicates completion during FY 1990. ''New'' denotes projects planned for BPA implementation in FY 1991. However, several of these new projects were still under review by the Policy Review Group as the FY 1991 AIWP went to press. The new projects still under review have been noted in Table 2 and in the text of the AIWP. A number of projects are expected to begin in late FY 1990 and have been listed in Table 1 of the Draft AIWP as ''Projected FY '90 Starts,'' based on their projected start dates. Several other projects are expected to end in late FY 1990. These projects have been listed in Table 1 as ''Projected FY '90 Completions,'' based on their projected completion dates. Section VIII describes BPA's non-Program, internal support projects. These projects were not subject to review by the PRG and have been included in the AIWP to help the PRG and the public to better understand what BPA is doing.« less

  17. Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Annual Implementation Work Plan for Fiscal Year 1990.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration; Northwest Power Planning Council; Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority

    1990-01-01

    The Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (Program) was developed by the Northwest Power Planning Council (Council) in accordance with Public Law 96-501, the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act (Act). The purpose of the Program is to guide the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and other Federal agencies in carrying out their responsibilities to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife of the Columbia River Basin. The Act explicitly gives BPA the authority and responsibility to use the BPA fund for these ends, to the extent that fish and wildlife are affected by the development and operationmore » of hydroelectric generation in the Columbia River Basin. This document presents BPA's plans for implementing the Program during Fiscal Year (FY) 1990. The Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Annual Implementation Work Plan (AIWP) reflects the primary goals of the Council's Action Plan (Section 1400 of the Program): to provide a solid, timely, and focused basis for budgeting and planning. In addition, the AIWP provides a means to judge progress and the success of Program implementation. The FY 1990 AIWP also follows the outline developed by the Policy Review Group (PRG) during Step 1 of initial cycle of the Implementation Planning Process (IPP), which is described in Section III. A number of new FY 1990 projects were still under review by the PRG as the AIWP went to press. These projects have been noted in Table 2, New FY 1990 Program Projects, and in the text of the AIWP. This AIWP has been organized and written to meet the specific needs of Program Action Items 10.1-10.3. The AIWP includes schedules with key milestones for FY 1990 and beyond, and addresses the Action Items assigned to BPA in Section 1400 of the 1987 Program. All BPA-funded Program projects discussed in the FY 1990 AIWP are listed in Tables 1 and 2 according to their status as of September 30, 1989. Table 1 (pp. 3-14) lists completed, ongoing, and deferred projects. Table 2 (pp. 15-18) lists all projects which BPA plans to fund as ''new'' projects in FY 1990. ''Ongoing'' status indicates that the project started in FY 1989 or before, and that it is expected to continue in FY 1990. ''Deferred'' means that BPA implementation has been postponed to FY 1991 or later. ''Completed'' indicates completion during FY 1989. ''New'' denotes projects that BPA plans to start in FY 1990. One new FY 1990 project was included in the draft FY 1990 AIWP as a ''conditional'' project, as a result of PRG recommendations at the May 25, 1989, PRG meeting. If specified conditions are met, BPA will begin to implement the project in FY 1990. Section VII describes BPA's non-Program, internal support projects. These projects were not subject to review by the PRG and have been included in the AIWP to help the PRG and the public to better understand what BPA is doing.« less

  18. Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Work Plan for Fiscal Year 1989.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration. Division of Fish and Wildlife.

    1988-11-01

    The FY 1989 Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Work Plan (Work Plan) presents Bonneville Power Administration's plans for implementing the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (Program) in FY 1989. The Work Plan focuses on individual Action Items found in the 1987 Program for which Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) has determined that it has authority and responsibility to implement. Each of the entries in the Work Plan includes objectives, background, and progress to date in achieving those objectives, and a summary of plans for implementation in FY 1989. Most Action Items are implemented through one or moremore » BPA-funded projects. Each Action Item entry is followed by a list of completed, ongoing, and planned projects, along with objectives, results, schedules, and milestones for each project. The FY 1989 Work Plan emphasizes continuation of 113 projects, most of which involve protection, mitigation, or enhancement of anadromous fishery resources. BPA also plans to start 20 new projects in FY 1989. The number of ongoing FY 1988 projects to be continued in FY 1989 and the number of new projects planned to start in FY 1989 are based on current (September 7, 1988) procurement expectations. Several projects presently in BPA's procurement process are expected to be contracted by September 30, 1988, the last day of FY 1988. Although these projects have not yet started, they have been listed in the Work Plan as ongoing FY 1988 projects, based on projected start dates in late September 1988. Throughout the Work Plan, those projects with projected start dates in September 1988 have been noted.« less

  19. 50 CFR 80.122 - May an agency deduct the costs of generating program income from gross income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT... DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.122 May an agency deduct the costs of... to a grant-funded habitat-management or facilities-construction project. (2) Cost of publishing...

  20. 50 CFR 80.122 - May an agency deduct the costs of generating program income from gross income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT... DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.122 May an agency deduct the costs of... to a grant-funded habitat-management or facilities-construction project. (2) Cost of publishing...

  1. Mud Mountain Wildlife Inventory and Habitat Analysis.

    DTIC Science & Technology

    1979-01-01

    PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT, TASK Intern Program AREA & WORK UNIT NUMBERS Western Interstate Commission for...RIPARIAN ZONE CHARACTERISTICS .... .......... .26 5 SNAG SUCCESSION CHARACTERISTICS .. .. . .... ... 29 6 THREE SISTERS- GRASS MOUNTAIN AREA ...recommendations appropriate with regard to their wildlife potential. Throughout the report, essential habitat areas have been noted. Management guidelines

  2. 50 CFR 84.30 - How are projects selected for grants?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Project Selection § 84.30 How are projects selected for grants? Project selection is...) Provides public conservation benefits that are cost effective and long-term, i.e., at least 20 years; and...

  3. 78 FR 25093 - Multistate Conservation Grant Program; Priority List and Approval for Conservation Projects

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-04-29

    ... Fish Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 777 et seq.) and established the Multistate Conservation Grant Program...-9410-0000] Multistate Conservation Grant Program; Priority List and Approval for Conservation Projects... year 2013 priority list of wildlife and sport fish conservation projects from the Association of Fish...

  4. 50 CFR 80.55 - May an agency receive a grant to carry out part of a larger project?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH...

  5. 50 CFR 80.55 - May an agency receive a grant to carry out part of a larger project?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH...

  6. 50 CFR 80.55 - May an agency receive a grant to carry out part of a larger project?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH...

  7. 50 CFR 80.55 - May an agency receive a grant to carry out part of a larger project?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH...

  8. Willow Creek Wildlife Mitigation Project. Final Environmental Assessment.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    NONE

    1995-04-01

    Today`s notice announces BPA`s proposal to fund land acquisition or acquisition of a conservation easement and a wildlife management plan to protect and enhance wildlife habitat at the Willow Creek Natural Area in Eugene, Oregon. This action would provide partial mitigation for wildlife and wildlife habitat lost by the development of Federal hydroelectric projects in the Willamette River Basin. The project is consistent with BPA`s obligations under provisions of the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act of 1980 as outlined by the Northwest Power Planning Council`s 1994 Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. BPA has prepared anmore » environmental assessment (DOE/EA-1023) evaluating the proposed project. Based on the analysis in the EA, BPA has determined that the proposed action is not a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. Therefore, the preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required and BPA is issuing this FONSI.« less

  9. Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program—2016 year in review postcard

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Organ, John F.; Thompson, John D.; Dennerline, Don E.; Childs, Dawn E.

    2017-02-22

    Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program—2016 Year in Review postcardThis postcard provides details about the Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units (CRU) Program—2016 Year in Review, Circular 1424. This Circular provides information relating to fish and wildlife science, students, staffing, vacancies, research funding, outreach and training, science themes, background on the CRU program, accolades, and professional services. Snapshots of Unit projects with information on how results have been or are being applied by cooperators are included. This is the essence of what we do: science that matters.Throughout the year, keep up with our research projects at www.coopunits.org.

  10. Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP) Report for the Pend Oreille Wetlands Wildlife II Project, Technical Report 2002.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Holmes, Darren

    The Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP), developed in 1980 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS 1980a, USFWS 1980b), uses a habitat/species based approach to assessing project impacts, and is a convenient tool to document the predicted effects of proposed management actions. The Northwest Power Planning Council (NPPC) endorsed the use of HEP in its Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program to evaluate wildlife benefits and impacts associated with the development and operation of the federal Columbia River Basin hydroelectric system (NPPC 1994). The Albeni Falls Interagency Work Group (AFIWG) used HEP in 1987 to evaluate wildlife habitat lossesmore » attributed to the Albeni Falls hydroelectric facility (Martin et al. 1988). In 1992, the AFIWG (Idaho Department of Fish and Game; Kalispel, Coeur d'Alene, and Kootenai Tribes) began implementing activities to mitigate these losses. Implementation activities include protecting, restoring and enhancing wildlife habitat. HEPs are used extensively within the NPPC's Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. Wildlife managers use HEP to determine habitat lost from the construction of the federal hydroelectric projects and habitat gained through NPPC mitigation program. Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) models for each of the seven target species are used to determine habitat quality and quantity losses for representative habitat cover types for this project. Target species include Bald Eagle, black-capped chickadee, Canada goose, mallard, muskrat, white-tailed deer and yellow warbler. In 2002, a HEP team determined the habitat condition of the 164-acre Pend Oreille Wetlands Wildlife II Project (Figure 1). The HEP team consisted of the following members and agencies: Roy Finley, Kalispel Natural Resource Department (KNRD); Neil Lockwood, KNRD; Brian Merson, KNRD; Sonny Finley, KNRD; Darren Holmes, KNRD; Anna, Washington Dept. of Fish and Game (WDFW); and Scott, WDFW. Baseline Habitat Units (HU) will be credited to Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) for protection of habitats within the project area. The HSI models used were identical to those modified for use in 1991 (Appendix 2). The objective of using HEP as an assessment tool is two-fold. First, it provides an unbiased and measured assessment of wildlife habitats within the mitigation parcel. This data is used to offset the Albeni Falls Dam HU loss ledger. That ledger accounts for the loss of wildlife habitat that resulted from the construction and inundation of Albeni Falls hydroelectric project and the extent to which those losses have been mitigated. Additionally, the baseline HEP evaluation describes existing habitat conditions on the property and will be used, along with other tools, to determine initial management, restoration, and enhancement activities. HEP analyses will be completed every five years to quantitatively evaluate the effectiveness of management strategies in improving and maintaining habitat conditions while providing additional HU crediting to BPA for enhanced habitat values.« less

  11. Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP) Report for the Pend Oreille Wetlands Wildlife Project, Technical Report 2002.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Holmes, Darren

    The Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP), developed in 1980 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS 1980a, USFWS 1980b), uses a habitat/species based approach to assessing project impacts, and is a convenient tool to document the predicted effects of proposed management actions. The Northwest Power Planning Council (NPPC) endorsed the use of HEP in its Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program to evaluate wildlife benefits and impacts associated with the development and operation of the federal Columbia River Basin hydroelectric system (NPPC 1994). The Albeni Falls Interagency Work Group (AFIWG) used HEP in 1987 to evaluate wildlife habitat lossesmore » attributed to the Albeni Falls hydroelectric facility (Martin et al. 1988). In 1992, the AFIWG (Idaho Department of Fish and Game; Kalispel, Coeur d'Alene, and Kootenai Tribes) began implementing activities to mitigate these losses. Implementation activities include protecting, restoring and enhancing wildlife habitat. HEPs are used extensively within the NPPC's Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. Wildlife managers use HEP to determine habitat lost from the construction of the federal hydroelectric projects and habitat gained through NPPC mitigation program. Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) models for each of the seven target species are used to determine habitat quality and quantity losses for representative habitat cover types for this project. Target species include Bald Eagle, black-capped chickadee, Canada goose, mallard, muskrat, white-tailed deer and yellow warbler. In 2002, a HEP team determined the habitat condition of the 436-acre Pend Oreille Wetlands Wildlife Project (Figure 1). The HEP team consisted of the following members and agencies: Roy Finley, Kalispel Natural Resource Department (KNRD); Neil Lockwood, KNRD; Brian Merson, KNRD; Sonny Finley, KNRD; Darren Holmes, KNRD; Anna, Washington Dept. of Fish and Game (WDFW); and Scott, WDFW. Baseline Habitat Units (HU) will be credited to Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) for protection of habitats within the project area. The HSI models used were identical to those modified for use in 1991 (Attachment A). The objective of using HEP as an assessment tool is two-fold. First, it provides an unbiased and measured assessment of wildlife habitats within the mitigation parcel. This data is used to offset the Albeni Falls Dam HU loss ledger. That ledger accounts for the loss of wildlife habitat that resulted from the construction and inundation of Albeni Falls hydroelectric project and the extent to which those losses have been mitigated. Additionally, the baseline HEP evaluation describes existing habitat conditions on the property and will be used, along with other tools, to determine initial management, restoration, and enhancement activities. HEP analyses will be completed every five years to quantitatively evaluate the effectiveness of management strategies in improving and maintaining habitat conditions while providing additional HU crediting to BPA for enhanced habitat values.« less

  12. Planning for climate change on the National Wildlife Refuge System

    Treesearch

    B. Czech; S. Covington; T. M. Crimmins; J. A. Ericson; C. Flather; M. Gale; K. Gerst; M. Higgins; M. Kaib; E. Marino; T. Moran; J. Morton; N. Niemuth; H. Peckett; D. Savignano; L. Saperstein; S. Skorupa; E. Wagener; B. Wilen; B. Wolfe

    2014-01-01

    This document originated in 2008 as a collaborative project of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the University of Maryland's Graduate Program in Sustainable Development and Conservation Biology. The original title was A Primer on Climate Change for the National Wildlife Refuge System. The Primer has evolved into Planning for Climate Change on the...

  13. Rainwater Wildlife Area Management Plan : Executive Summary.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Childs, Allen B.; Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation in Oregon.

    The purpose of the project is to protect, enhance, and mitigate fish and wildlife resources impacted by Columbia River Basin hydroelectric development. The effort is one of several wildlife mitigation projects in the region developed to compensate for terrestrial habitat losses resulting from the construction of McNary and John Day Hydroelectric facilities located on the mainstem Columbia River. While this project is driven primarily by the purpose and need to mitigate for wildlife habitat losses, it is also recognized that management strategies will also benefit many other non-target fish and wildlife species and associated natural resources. The Northwest Power Actmore » directs the NPPC to develop a program to ''protect, mitigate, and enhance'' fish and wildlife of the Columbia River and its tributaries. The overarching goals include: A Columbia River ecosystem that sustains an abundant, productive, and diverse community of fish and wildlife; Mitigation across the basin for the adverse effects to fish and wildlife caused by the development and operation of the hydrosystem; Sufficient populations of fish and wildlife for abundant opportunities for tribal trust and treaty right harvest and for non-tribal harvest; and Recovery of the fish and wildlife affected by the development and operation of the hydrosystem that are listed under the Endangered Species Act.« less

  14. Nellis Air Force Base Capital Improvements Program Environmental Assessment

    DTIC Science & Technology

    2013-08-01

    Air Force Warfare Center USC United States Code USCB United States Census Bureau USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service VOC Volatile...project arise with the potential to affect desert tortoise, consultation with the United States (U.S.) Fish and Wildlife Service would be initiated...Environmental Design (LEED) facilities and decrease energy consumption on military installations. The projects described in the CIP are derived

  15. 50 CFR 80.5 - Eligible undertakings.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.5 Eligible undertakings. The... necessary to be a responsible hunter or archer. (b) Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act. (1) Projects...

  16. 50 CFR 81.6 - Project Agreement.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED... Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-95 (as revised). (d) The Project Agreement will follow...

  17. 50 CFR 81.6 - Project Agreement.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED... Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-95 (as revised). (d) The Project Agreement will follow...

  18. 50 CFR 84.30 - How are projects selected for grants?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL...) Proposal acceptance. (1) The Regional Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Offices decide whether a proposal... (acres enhanced, restored, or protected) that help achieve the management goals and objectives of the...

  19. 50 CFR 84.30 - How are projects selected for grants?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL...) Proposal acceptance. (1) The Regional Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Offices decide whether a proposal... (acres enhanced, restored, or protected) that help achieve the management goals and objectives of the...

  20. 50 CFR 81.6 - Project Agreement.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED... Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-95 (as revised). (d) The Project Agreement will follow...

  1. Wildlife habitat management on college and university campuses

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Bosci, Tierney; Warren, Paige S.; Harper, Rick W.; DeStefano, Stephen

    2018-01-01

    With the increasing involvement of higher education institutions in sustainability movements, it remains unclear to what extent college and university campuses address wildlife habitat. Many campuses encompass significant areas of green space with potential to support diverse wildlife taxa. However, sustainability rating systems generally emphasize efforts like recycling and energy conservation over green landscaping and grounds maintenance. We sought to examine the types of wildlife habitat projects occurring at schools across the United States and whether or not factors like school type (public or private), size (number of students), urban vs. rural setting, and funding played roles in the implementation of such initiatives. Using case studies compiled by the National Wildlife Federation’s Campus Ecology program, we documented wildlife habitat-related projects at 60 campuses. Ten management actions derived from nationwide guidelines were used to describe the projects carried out by these institutions, and we recorded data about cost, funding, and outreach and education methods. We explored potential relationships among management actions and with school characteristics. We extracted themes in project types, along with challenges and responses to those challenges. Native plant species selection and sustainable lawn maintenance and landscaping were the most common management actions among the 60 campuses. According to the case studies we examined, we found that factors like school type, size, and location did not affect the engagement of a campus in wildlife habitat initiatives, nor did they influence the project expenditures or funding received by a campus. Our results suggest that many wildlife habitat initiatives are feasible for higher education institutions and may be successfully implemented at relatively low costs through simple, but deliberate management actions.

  2. Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program—2017 year in review postcard

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Organ, John F.; Thompson, John D.; Dennerline, Donald E.; Childs, Dawn E.

    2018-02-08

    This postcard provides details about the Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program—2017 Year in Review, U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1438, now available at https://doi.org/10.3133/cir1438. In this report, you will find details about the Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units (CRU) Program relating to its background, fish and wildlife science, students, staffing, vacancies, research funding, outreach and training, science themes, accolades, and professional services. You will see snapshots of CRU projects with information on how results have been or are being applied by cooperators. This is the essence of what we do: science that matters.Throughout the year, keep up with CRU research projects at http://www.coopunits.org.

  3. 50 CFR 80.99 - Are symbols available to identify projects?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General... follows: ER01AU11.031 (b) The symbol of the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act follows: ER01AU11...

  4. 50 CFR 80.99 - Are symbols available to identify projects?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General... follows: ER01AU11.031 (b) The symbol of the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act follows: ER01AU11...

  5. Spokane Tribal Hatchery, 2002 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Peone, Tim L.

    2003-03-01

    The Spokane Tribal Hatchery (Galbraith Springs) project originated from the Northwest Power Planning Council (NPPC) 1987 Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. The goal of this project is to aid in the restoration and enhancement of the Lake Roosevelt and Banks Lake fisheries adversely affected by the construction and operation of Grand Coulee Dam. The objective is to produce kokanee salmon and rainbow trout for release into Lake Roosevelt for maintaining a viable fishery. The goal and objective of this project adheres to the NPPC Resident Fish Substitution Policy and specifically to the biological objectives addressed in the NPPC Columbiamore » River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program to mitigate for hydropower related fish losses in the blocked area above Chief Joseph/Grand Coulee Dams.« less

  6. 50 CFR 86.54 - How must I submit proposals?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG... from Tier Two projects. (e) You must describe each project in Tier Two separately, so that the Service...

  7. Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Annual Implementation Work Plan for Fiscal Year 1994.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration; Northwest Power Planning Council; Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority

    1994-02-01

    This document is part of Bonneville Power Administration`s program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife affected by the development and operation of hydroelectric facilities on the Columbia River and its tributaries. The Fiscal Year 1994 (FY 1994) Annual Implementation Work Plan (AIWP) presents Bonneville Power Administration`s (BPA`s) plan for implementation of the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (Program). The purpose of the Program is to guide BPA and other federal agencies in carrying out their responsibilities to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife in the Columbia River Basin. Phase I began the work of salmonmore » recovery with certain fast-track measures completed in August 1991. Phase II dealt with Snake and Columbia river flow and salmon harvest and was completed in December 1991. Phase III dealt with system-wide habitat and salmon production issues and was completed in September 1992. Phase IV planning, focusing on resident fish and wildlife, began in August 1993, and was finished and adopted in November 1993. This report provides summaries of the ongoing and new projects for FY 1994 within the areas of juvenile migration, adult migration, salmon harvest, production and habitat, coordinated implementation, monitoring and evaluation, resident fish, and wildlife.« less

  8. 50 CFR 84.31 - An overview of the ranking criteria.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Project Selection § 84.31 An overview of the ranking criteria. (a) The primary...

  9. 77 FR 65203 - Information Collection Request Sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Approval...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-10-25

    ...-FF09E30000] Information Collection Request Sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Approval; Wolf-Livestock Demonstration Project Grant Program AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION... Number: 1018-XXXX. This is a new collection. Title: Wolf-Livestock Demonstration Project Grant Program...

  10. 77 FR 52755 - Programmatic Incidental Take Permit and Environmental Assessment for Development Activities...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-08-30

    ... developing a public awareness program and brochure; siting a project to maximize the best habitat... DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R4-ES-2012-N202; 40120-1112-0000-F2..., Escambia County, FL AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Under the...

  11. Feral Hogs Management at Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge: Analysis of Current Management Program

    NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

    Rosenfeld, Arie; Hinkle, C. Ross; Epstein, Marc

    2002-01-01

    This ST1 Technical Memorandum (TM) summarizes a two-month project on feral hog management in Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge (MINWR). For this project, feral hogs were marked and recaptured, with the help of local trappers, to estimate population size and habitat preferences. Habitat covers included vegetation cover and Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) data for MINWR. In addition, an analysis was done of hunting records compiled by the Refuge and hog-car accidents compiled by KSC Security.

  12. DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Hoffman, Greg; Marotz, Brian L.; Dunnigan, James

    ''Mitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam'' is part of the Northwest Power Planning Council's resident fish and wildlife program. The program was mandated by the Northwest Planning Act of 1980, and is responsible for mitigating for damages to fish and wildlife caused by hydroelectric development in the Columbia River Basin. The objective of Phase I of the project (1983 through 1987) was to maintain or enhance the Libby Reservoir fishery by quantifying seasonal water levels and developing ecologically sound operational guidelines. The objective of Phase II of the project (1988 through 1996) was to determine the biologicalmore » effects of reservoir operations combined with biotic changes associated with an aging reservoir. The objectives of Phase III of the project (1996 through present) are to implement habitat enhancement measures to mitigate for dam effects, to provide data for implementation of operational strategies that benefit resident fish, monitor reservoir and river conditions, and monitor mitigation projects for effectiveness.« less

  13. 50 CFR 80.100 - Does an agency have to display one of the symbols in this part on a completed project?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General Grant Administration § 80.100 Does an agency have to...: (a) An agency may display the appropriate symbol(s) on: (1) Areas such as wildlife-management areas...

  14. 50 CFR 80.100 - Does an agency have to display one of the symbols in this part on a completed project?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General Grant Administration § 80.100 Does an agency have to...: (a) An agency may display the appropriate symbol(s) on: (1) Areas such as wildlife-management areas...

  15. Framework for ecological monitoring on lands of Alaska National Wildlife Refuges and their partners

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Woodward, Andrea; Beever, Erik A.

    2010-01-01

    National Wildlife Refuges in Alaska and throughout the U.S. have begun developing a spatially comprehensive monitoring program to inform management decisions, and to provide data to broader research projects. In an era of unprecedented rates of climate change, monitoring is essential to detecting, understanding, communicating and mitigating climate-change effects on refuge and other resources under the protection of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and requires monitoring results to address spatial scales broader than individual refuges. This document provides guidance for building a monitoring program for refuges in Alaska that meets refuge-specific management needs while also allowing synthesis and summary of ecological conditions at the ecoregional and statewide spatial scales.

  16. Predicted effect of landscape position on wildlife habitat value of Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program wetlands in a tile-drained agricultural region

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Otis, David L.; Crumpton, William R.; Green, David; Loan-Wilsey, Anna; Cooper, Tom; Johnson, Rex R.

    2013-01-01

    Justification for investment in restored or constructed wetland projects are often based on presumed net increases in ecosystem services. However, quantitative assessment of performance metrics is often difficult and restricted to a single objective. More comprehensive performance assessments could help inform decision-makers about trade-offs in services provided by alternative restoration program design attributes. The primary goal of the Iowa Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program is to establish wetlands that efficiently remove nitrates from tile-drained agricultural landscapes. A secondary objective is provision of wildlife habitat. We used existing wildlife habitat models to compare relative net change in potential wildlife habitat value for four alternative landscape positions of wetlands within the watershed. Predicted species richness and habitat value for birds, mammals, amphibians, and reptiles generally increased as the wetland position moved lower in the watershed. However, predicted average net increase between pre- and post-project value was dependent on taxonomic group. The increased average wetland area and changes in surrounding upland habitat composition among landscape positions were responsible for these differences. Net change in predicted densities of several grassland bird species at the four landscape positions was variable and species-dependent. Predicted waterfowl breeding activity was greater for lower drainage position wetlands. Although our models are simplistic and provide only a predictive index of potential habitat value, we believe such assessment exercises can provide a tool for coarse-level comparisons of alternative proposed project attributes and a basis for constructing informed hypotheses in auxiliary empirical field studies.

  17. 50 CFR 84.32 - What are the ranking criteria?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... improvements to the quality of the coastal wetland and associated waters through protection from contaminants... project proposal designed to leverage other ongoing coastal wetlands protection projects in the area, such... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

  18. 50 CFR 84.32 - What are the ranking criteria?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... improvements to the quality of the coastal wetland and associated waters through protection from contaminants... project proposal designed to leverage other ongoing coastal wetlands protection projects in the area, such... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

  19. 50 CFR 84.32 - What are the ranking criteria?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... improvements to the quality of the coastal wetland and associated waters through protection from contaminants... project proposal designed to leverage other ongoing coastal wetlands protection projects in the area, such... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

  20. 50 CFR 84.32 - What are the ranking criteria?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... improvements to the quality of the coastal wetland and associated waters through protection from contaminants... project proposal designed to leverage other ongoing coastal wetlands protection projects in the area, such... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

  1. 50 CFR 84.32 - What are the ranking criteria?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... improvements to the quality of the coastal wetland and associated waters through protection from contaminants... project proposal designed to leverage other ongoing coastal wetlands protection projects in the area, such... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

  2. 50 CFR 81.3 - Cooperative Agreement.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... Project Agreement can be approved for endangered or threatened species projects. A cooperative agreement under § 81.2 must be reconfirmed annually to reflect new laws, species lists, rules and regulations, and...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED...

  3. 50 CFR 81.3 - Cooperative Agreement.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... Project Agreement can be approved for endangered or threatened species projects. A cooperative agreement under § 81.2 must be reconfirmed annually to reflect new laws, species lists, rules and regulations, and...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED...

  4. 50 CFR 81.3 - Cooperative Agreement.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... Project Agreement can be approved for endangered or threatened species projects. A cooperative agreement under § 81.2 must be reconfirmed annually to reflect new laws, species lists, rules and regulations, and...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED...

  5. Natural Resources at Kennedy Space Center

    NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

    Phillips, Lynne

    2015-01-01

    Informative presentation on the purpose and need for an Ecological Program at the Kennedy Space Center. Includes the federal laws mandating the program followed by a description of many of the long term monitoring projects. Projects include wildlife surveying by observation as well as interactive surveys to collect basic animal data for analysis of trends in habitat use and ecosystem health. The program is designed for a broad range in audience from elementary to college level.

  6. The application of remote sensing to resource management and environmental quality programs in Kansas

    NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

    Barr, B. G.; Martinko, E. A.

    1976-01-01

    Activities of the Kansas Applied Remote Sensing Program (KARS) designed to establish interactions on cooperative projects with decision makers in Kansas agencies in the development and application of remote sensing procedures are reported. Cooperative demonstration projects undertaken with several different agencies involved three principal areas of effort: Wildlife Habitat and Environmental Analysis; Urban and Regional Analysis; Agricultural and Rural Analysis. These projects were designed to concentrate remote sensing concepts and methodologies on existing agency problems to insure the continued relevancy of the program and maximize the possibility for immediate operational use. Completed projects are briefly discussed.

  7. Final Nellis Air Force Base Capital Improvements Program Environmental Assessment

    DTIC Science & Technology

    2013-08-01

    USCB United States Census Bureau USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service VOC Volatile Organic Compound WINDO Wing Infrastructure and...desert tortoise, consultation with the United States (U.S.) Fish and Wildlife Service would be initiated. Consultation with the U.S. Army Corps of...and decrease energy consumption on military installations. The projects described in the CIP are derived from the Base Comprehensive Asset Management

  8. Supplement Analysis for the Wildlife Mitigation Program EIS (DOE/EIS-0246/SA-18)

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    N /A

    2001-10-17

    BPA proposes to fund the acquisition and preservation of approximately 99 acres of native wet prairie and oak woodland habitat in Lane County, Oregon. Title to the land will be held by The Nature Conservancy, who will convey permanent mitigation rights to BPA in the form of a conservation easement. These newly acquired parcels will become part of the existing 330-acre Willow Creek Wildlife Mitigation Area. Passive management practices may take place on the land until a wildlife mitigation and management plan is developed and approved for the property. The compliance checklist for this project was completed by Cathy MacDonaldmore » with The Nature Conservancy and meets the standards and guidelines for the Wildlife Mitigation Program Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Record of Decision (ROD). A comprehensive wildlife mitigation and management plan will be prepared for the property after it is acquired and will follow the guidelines and mitigation measures detailed in the Wildlife Mitigation Program EIS and ROD. No plant or animal species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) will be affected by the proposed acquisition of the subject property. Through contact with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and the Oregon Natural Heritage Program, staff from The Nature Conservancy identified a number of federal and state listed species that have the potential to occur at the project site. ESA Section 7 consultation will be conducted by BPA and The Nature Conservancy, as necessary, prior to the implementation of any restoration or enhancement activities on the site. A cultural resource survey was conducted at the Eugene Wetlands Phase II site on July 9, 2001. No prehistoric or historic cultural materials were observed during the survey and no landforms considered likely to be archaeological sites were noted. The nearest recorded archeological find consists of two prehistoric sites that are located within a mile of the project area along Willow Creek. Based on the findings of this survey, BPA concluded that there would be no effect on prehistoric or historic artifacts associated with the Eugene Wetlands acquisition project. The Oregon State Historic Preservation Office concurred with BPA's determination on September 18, 2001. In the unlikely event that archaeological material is encountered during developments that may occur on the site, an archeologist will immediately be notified and work halted in the vicinity of the finds until they can be inspected and assessed. Phase I Environmental Site Assessments were conducted on the Eugene wetland site by staff from The Nature Conservancy and Hahn and Associates, Inc. The surveys did not reveal evidence of recognized environmental conditions in conjunction with the subject properties. Fred Walasavage an Environmental Specialist with BPA reviewed the Phase I assessments and reported to The Nature Conservancy on May 14, 2001 that he concurred with these findings. Public involvement associated with this project has included written notification and solicitation of comments to interested parties, adjacent landowners, local tribes, government agencies, and non-governmental organizations. Public response from the solicitation indicated general support for the project. Because of initial favorable comments on this project, it was decided that subsequent public meetings and/or workshops were not warranted.« less

  9. DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Sather, Nichole K.; Johnson, Gary E.; Storch, Adam

    The tidal freshwater monitoring (TFM) project reported herein is part of the research, monitoring, and evaluation effort developed by the Action Agencies (Bonneville Power Administration, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [USACE], and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation) in response to obligations arising from the Endangered Species Act (ESA) as a result of operation of the Federal Columbia River Power System. The project is being performed under the auspices of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council’s Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (Project No. 2005-001-00). The research is a collaborative effort among the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, the Oregon Departmentmore » of Fish and Wildlife, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and the University of Washington.« less

  10. 50 CFR 253.14 - Economic and financial requirements.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 7 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Economic and financial requirements. 253... Obligation Guarantee Program § 253.14 Economic and financial requirements. (a) Income and expense projections... project's economic, technical, or financial feasibility. The Division will select and employ the necessary...

  11. Supplement Analysis for the Wildlife Mitigation Program EIS (DOE/EIS-0246/SA-36)

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    N /A

    2003-10-10

    The compliance checklist for this project was originally completed by the Burns Paiute Tribe in 2000, and meets the standards and guidelines for the Wildlife Mitigation Program Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Record of Decision (ROD), as well as the Watershed Management Program Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Record of Decision (ROD). The Logan Valley Wildlife Mitigation Plan, now being implemented, continues to be consistent with the above mentioned EISs and RODs. Pursuant to its obligations under the Endangered Species Act, BPA has made a determination of whether its proposed project will have any effects on any listed species undermore » the jurisdiction of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). A species list was obtained from USFWS on June 12, 2003, identifying bald eagles, Canada lynx, and bull trout as potentially occurring in the project area. A site assessment was conducted on July 15, 2003 to determine if these species were present and the potential effects of project activities. A ''No Effect'' determination was made for all ESA-listed species. There were no listed species under the jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries present in the project area. As management activities proceed in the future, BPA will annually re-assess potential effects of planned activities on listed species. The Burns-Paiute Tribe conducted a literature search for historic and archaeological sites on the property on January 11, 1999. No known sites were identified. Further site-specific surveys will be conducted for individual ground disturbing activities. The results of these surveys will be sent to the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office and BPA. BPA will annually summarize and submit a report to the State Historic Preservation Office. On December 29, 1999, Fred Walasavage of BPA completed a Phase I Site Assessment and concluded that the site did not reveal any environmental factors that would pose a significant liability for remedial action or cleanup under the Comprehensive Recovery, Compensation and Liability Act. A public meeting was held when the property was initially acquired where the property acquisition and proposed activities were discussed. Subsequent public involvement was conducted on July 23, 2002 for commenting on the proposed Logan Valley Wildlife Mitigation Plan.« less

  12. 75 FR 8989 - Meeting Announcements: North American Wetlands Conservation Council; Neotropical Migratory Bird...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-02-26

    ... Wildlife Service, on the strategic direction and management of the NMBCA program. Proposal due dates... Avenue L'Auberge, Lake Charles, LA 70601. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael J. Johnson, Council... management projects for recommendation to, and final funding approval by, the Commission. Project proposal...

  13. Yakima/Klickitat Fisheries Project Genetic Studies; Yakima/Klickitat Fisheries Project Monitoring and Evaluation, 2005-2006 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Busack, Craig A.; Fritts, Anthony L.; Kassler, Todd

    2006-05-01

    This report covers one of many topics under the Yakima/Klickitat Fisheries Project's Monitoring and Evaluation Program (YKFPME). The YKFPME is funded under two BPA contracts, one for the Yakama Nation and the other for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (Contract number 22370, Project Number 1995-063-25). A comprehensive summary report for all of the monitoring and evaluation topics will be submitted after all of the topical reports are completed. This approach to reporting enhances the ability of people to get the information they want, enhances timely reporting of results, and provides a condensed synthesis of the whole YKFPME. Themore » current report was completed by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.« less

  14. Chemical contamination in aquatic ecosystems.

    PubMed

    Iwata, Hisato; Kim, Eun-Young; Yamauchi, Masanobu; Inoue, Suguru; Agusa, Tetsuro; Tanabe, Shinsuke

    2007-03-01

    The 21st Century's Center of Excellence (COE) Program "Coastal Marine Environmental Research" in Ehime University, funded by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Government of Japan, started its activities in October 2002. One of the core projects of the COE Program in Ehime University is "studies on environmental behavior of hazardous chemicals and their toxic effects on wildlife". This core project deals with studies of the local and global distribution of environmental contaminants in aquatic ecosystems, retrospective analysis of such chemicals, their toxicokinetics in humans and wildlife, molecular mechanisms to determine species-specific reactions, and sensitivity of chemically induced effects, and with the development of methodology for risk assessment for the conservation of ecological and species diversity. This presentation describes our recent achievements of this project, including research on contamination by arsenic and organohalogen pollutants in the Mekong River basin and molecular mechanisms of morphologic deformities in dioxin-exposed red seabream (Pagrus major) embryos. We established the Environmental Specimen Bank (es-BANK) in Ehime University in 2004, archiving approximately 100000 cryogenic samples containing tissues of wildlife and humans that have been collected for the past 40 years. The CMES homepage offers details of samples through online database retrieval. The es-BANK facility was in operation by the end of 2005.

  15. Libby Mitigation Program, 2007 Annual Progress Report: Mitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Dunnigan, James; DeShazer, J.; Garrow, L.

    Libby Reservoir was created under an International Columbia River Treaty between the United States and Canada for cooperative water development of the Columbia River Basin (Columbia River Treaty 1964). Libby Reservoir inundated 109 stream miles of the mainstem Kootenai River in the United States and Canada, and 40 miles of tributary streams in the U.S. that provided habitat for spawning, juvenile rearing, and migratory passage (Figure 1). The authorized purpose of the dam is to provide power (91.5%), flood control (8.3%), and navigation and other benefits (0.2%; Storm et al. 1982). The Pacific Northwest Power Act of 1980 recognized possiblemore » conflicts stemming from hydroelectric projects in the northwest and directed Bonneville Power Administration to 'protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife to the extent affected by the development and operation of any hydroelectric project of the Columbia River and its tributaries' (4(h)(10)(A)). Under the Act, the Northwest Power Planning Council was created and recommendations for a comprehensive fish and wildlife program were solicited from the region's federal, state, and tribal fish and wildlife agencies. Among Montana's recommendations was the proposal that research be initiated to quantify acceptable seasonal minimum pool elevations to maintain or enhance the existing fisheries (Graham et al. 1982). Research to determine how operations of Libby Dam affect the reservoir and river fishery and to suggest ways to lessen these effects began in May 1983. The framework for the Libby Reservoir Model (LRMOD) was completed in 1989. Development of Integrated Rule Curves (IRCs) for Libby Dam operation was completed in 1996 (Marotz et al. 1996). The Libby Reservoir Model and the IRCs continue to be refined (Marotz et al 1999). Initiation of mitigation projects such as lake rehabilitation and stream restoration began in 1996. The primary focus of the Libby Mitigation project now is to restore the fisheries and fish habitat in basin streams and lakes. 'Mitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam' is part of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council's (NPCC) resident fish and wildlife program. The program was mandated by the Northwest Planning Act of 1980, and is responsible for mitigating damages to fish and wildlife caused by hydroelectric development in the Columbia River Basin. The objective of Phase I of the project (1983 through 1987) was to maintain or enhance the Libby Reservoir fishery by quantifying seasonal water levels and developing ecologically sound operational guidelines. The objective of Phase II of the project (1988 through 1996) was to determine the biological effects of reservoir operations combined with biotic changes associated with an aging reservoir. The objectives of Phase III of the project (1996 through present) are to implement habitat enhancement measures to mitigate for dam effects, to provide data for implementation of operational strategies that benefit resident fish, monitor reservoir and river conditions, and monitor mitigation projects for effectiveness. This project completes urgent and high priority mitigation actions as directed by the Kootenai Subbasin Plan.« less

  16. Golden Gardens: A Wildlife Gardening Program for Seniors.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Pike, Judy

    This document is a guide for older persons who are beginner gardeners. It provides 16 projects to choose from and explains what is needed for each before getting started. Each chapter contains projects suitable for small, medium, and large garden spaces. Contents include: (1) "Getting Started"; (2) "Beckoning Birds, Bees, and Butterflies"; (3)…

  17. Grand Coulee Dam Wildlife Mitigation Program : Pygmy Rabbit Programmatic Management Plan, Douglas County, Washington.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Ashley, Paul

    1992-06-01

    The Northwest Power Planning Council and the Bonneville Power Administration approved the pygmy rabbit project as partial mitigation for impacts caused by the construction of Grand Coulee Dam. The focus of this project is the protection and enhancement of shrub-steppe/pygmy rabbit habitat in northeastern Washington.

  18. Wildlife Loss Estimates and Summary of Previous Mitigation Related to Hydroelectric Projects in Montana, Volume Three, Hungry Horse Project.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Casey, Daniel

    1984-10-01

    This assessment addresses the impacts to the wildlife populations and wildlife habitats due to the Hungry Horse Dam project on the South Fork of the Flathead River and previous mitigation of theses losses. In order to develop and focus mitigation efforts, it was first necessary to estimate wildlife and wildlife hatitat losses attributable to the construction and operation of the project. The purpose of this report was to document the best available information concerning the degree of impacts to target wildlife species. Indirect benefits to wildlife species not listed will be identified during the development of alternative mitigation measures. Wildlifemore » species incurring positive impacts attributable to the project were identified.« less

  19. Libby/Hungry Horse Dams Wildlife Mitigation : Montana Wildlife Habitat Protection : Final Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Wood, Marilyn

    1992-12-01

    The purpose of this project was to develop and obtain information necessary to evaluate and undertake specific wildlife habitat protection/enhancement actions in northwest Montana as outlined in the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. Three waterfowl projects were evaluated between September 1989 and June 1990. Weaver's Slough project involved the proposed acquisition of 200 acres of irrigated farmland and a donated conservation easement on an additional 213 acres. The proposal included enhancement of the agricultural lands by conversion to upland nesting cover. This project was rated the lowest priority based on limited potential for enhancement and no further actionmore » was pursued. The Crow Creek Ranch project involved the proposed acquisition of approximately 1830 acres of grazing and dryland farming lands. The intent would be to restore drained potholes and provide adjacent upland nesting cover to increase waterfowl production. This project received the highest rating based on the immediate threat of subdivision, the opportunity to restore degraded wetlands, and the overall benefits to numerous species besides waterfowl. Ducks Unlimited was not able to participate as a cooperator on this project due to the jurisdiction concerns between State and tribal ownership. The USFWS ultimately acquired 1,550 acres of this proposed project. No mitigation funds were used. The Ashley Creek project involved acquisition of 870 acres adjacent to the Smith Lake Waterfowl Production Area. The primary goal was to create approximately 470 acres of wetland habitat with dikes and subimpoundments. This project was rated second in priority due to the lesser threat of loss. A feasibility analysis was completed by Ducks Unlimited based on a concept design. Although adequate water was available for the project, soil testing indicated that the organic soils adjacent to the creek would not support the necessary dikes. The project was determined not feasible for mitigation implementation. Although no waterfowl/wetland projects were implemented using mitigation funds, 1,550 acres were protected based on work done under this project.« less

  20. Geographic information analysis: An ecological approach for the management of wildlife on the forest landscape

    NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

    Ripple, William J.

    1995-01-01

    This document is a summary of the project funded by NAGw-1460 as part of the Earth Observation Commericalization/Applications Program (EOCAP) directed by NASA's Earth Science and Applications Division. The goal was to work with several agencies to focus on forest structure and landscape characterizations for wildlife habitat applications. New analysis techniques were used in remote sensing and landscape ecology with geographic information systems (GIS). The development of GIS and the emergence of the discipline of landscape ecology provided us with an opportunity to study forest and wildlife habitat resources from a new perspective. New techniques were developed to measure forest structure across scales from the canopy to the regional level. This paper describes the project team, technical advances, and technology adoption process that was used. Reprints of related refereed journal articles are in the Appendix.

  1. Mitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam, 2004-2005 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Dunnigan, James; DeShazer, Jay; Garrow, Larry

    2005-06-01

    ''Mitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam'' is part of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council's (NPCC) resident fish and wildlife program. The program was mandated by the Northwest Planning Act of 1980, and is responsible for mitigating damages to fish and wildlife caused by hydroelectric development in the Columbia River Basin. The objective of Phase I of the project (1983 through 1987) was to maintain or enhance the Libby Reservoir fishery by quantifying seasonal water levels and developing ecologically sound operational guidelines. The objective of Phase II of the project (1988 through 1996) was to determine themore » biological effects of reservoir operations combined with biotic changes associated with an aging reservoir. The objectives of Phase III of the project (1996 through present) are to implement habitat enhancement measures to mitigate for dam effects, to provide data for implementation of operational strategies that benefit resident fish, monitor reservoir and river conditions, and monitor mitigation projects for effectiveness. This project completes urgent and high priority mitigation actions as directed by the Kootenai Subbasin Plan. Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (MFWP) uses a combination of techniques to collect physical and biological data within the Kootenai River Basin. These data serve several purposes including: the development and refinement of models used in management of water resources and operation of Libby Dam; investigations into the limiting factors of native fish populations, gathering basic life history information, tracking trends in endangered and threatened species, and the assessment of restoration or management activities designed to restore native fishes and their habitats.« less

  2. Nationwide forestry applications program. Analysis of forest classification accuracy

    NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

    Congalton, R. G.; Mead, R. A.; Oderwald, R. G.; Heinen, J. (Principal Investigator)

    1981-01-01

    The development of LANDSAT classification accuracy assessment techniques, and of a computerized system for assessing wildlife habitat from land cover maps are considered. A literature review on accuracy assessment techniques and an explanation for the techniques development under both projects are included along with listings of the computer programs. The presentations and discussions at the National Working Conference on LANDSAT Classification Accuracy are summarized. Two symposium papers which were published on the results of this project are appended.

  3. Grande Ronde Endemic Spring Chinook Project - ODFW, 2008 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Patterson, Scott

    2009-04-10

    Core activities of the Grande Ronde Endemic Spring Chinook Supplementation Program (GRESCSP) are funded through the authority of the Lower Snake River Fish and Wildlife Compensation Plan (LSRCP). The LSRCP program was approved by the Water Resources Development Act of 1976, PL 94-587, Section 102, 94th Congress substantially in accordance with the Special Report, LSRCP, June 1975 on file with the Chief of Engineers. The LSRCP was prepared and submitted in compliance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1958, PL 85-624, 85th Congress, August 12, 1958 to mitigate for the losses of fish and wildlife caused by themore » construction of dams on lower Snake River. The GRESCSP is an artificial propagation program that was initiated by Bonneville Power Administrations Fish and Wildlife program in the mid 1990's. The intent of this program was to change the mitigation aspect of the LSRCP program (harvest mitigation) to an integrated supplementation program; inasmuch as, hatchery produced fish could be experimentally used as a recovery tool and fish surplus to mitigation would be available for in-place and in-kind harvest. Fish production is still authorized by the LSRCP with the original mitigation return goal of 5,860 adult spring Chinook to the project area. The GRESCSP was developed with two primary components: (1) conventional broodstock (projects 199800702; 199800703; 199800704) and (2) captive brood (projects 199801001; 199801006). The GRESCSP relies on cooperative M&E efforts from the LSRCP including setting aside the Wenaha and Minam tributaries as natural production reserves components used for reference streams. The GRESCSP, coordinated with federal and tribal partners, identifies production levels for both propagation components and weir management strategies for each of the three supplemented tributary areas within the Grande Ronde Sub-basin. The three supplemented areas are Catherine Creek, Lostine River, and upper Grande Ronde River. Lookingglass Creek, an extirpated area, will be stocked (smolts and adults) with Catherine Creek origin salmon to initiate natural production in unseeded habitat, and to initiate future harvest opportunities. The current production levels have been incorporated into the U.S. v. Oregon Interim Management Agreement. The purpose of this contract is to integrate Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) efforts with the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP) program utilizing Lookingglass Hatchery as the primary rearing facility. BPA constructed an adult holding and spawning structure on the hatchery grounds; however, maintenance of this infrastructure was discontinued due to funding limitation and transferred to the LSRCP program in 2007. These integrated efforts focus on holding and spawning adults, rearing juveniles, fish health, and monitoring natural production (Redd counts) for Catherine Creek, Lostine River, and Upper Grande Ronde stocks.« less

  4. Facing the Future: Sharing Habitats with Wildlife; A Civic Engagement Partnership between St. Mary's College and Lindsay Wildlife Museum through SENCER-ISE

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Baldridge, A. M.; Bachofer, S.; Pan, W.

    2014-12-01

    The phrase "Enter to Learn, Leave to Serve " is at the heart of St Mary's College of California's education philosophy. The community engagement requirement of the core curriculum requires that students leave the classroom and engage with the world "to apply their intellectual experiences to communities beyond [the campus]". St. Mary's College actively participates with SENCER-ISE (Science Education for New Civic Engagements and Responsibilities-Informal Science Education), a National Science Foundation program developed to inspire more community engagement science projects in higher education to make science more real, accessible and civically important. Through this program, St. Mary's College and Lindsay Wildlife Museum have developed the project "Facing the Future: Sharing Habitats with Wildlife", which explores issues of urban habitats - their ephemerality, and the need for citizens to share responsibility and promote their success. The institutions are (1) studying a San Francisco Bay Area watershed habitat; (2) designing data collection methods, (GIS mapping and mobile app creation) intended to educate children and adults on urban habitats and the need to protect them; and (3) preparing interpretive materials to raise awareness of habitat issues. Here we report on the impact of this work, which is in the first year of a three-year grant and how a durable partnership can be established.

  5. Adaptive management in the U.S. National Wildlife Refuge System: Science-management partnerships for conservation delivery

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Moore, C.T.; Lonsdorf, E.V.; Knutson, M.G.; Laskowski, H.P.; Lor, S.K.

    2011-01-01

    Adaptive management is an approach to recurrent decision making in which uncertainty about the decision is reduced over time through comparison of outcomes predicted by competing models against observed values of those outcomes. The National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS) of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is a large land management program charged with making natural resource management decisions, which often are made under considerable uncertainty, severe operational constraints, and conditions that limit ability to precisely carry out actions as intended. The NWRS presents outstanding opportunities for the application of adaptive management, but also difficult challenges. We describe two cooperative programs between the Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Geological Survey to implement adaptive management at scales ranging from small, single refuge applications to large, multi-refuge, multi-region projects. Our experience to date suggests three important attributes common to successful implementation: a vigorous multi-partner collaboration, practical and informative decision framework components, and a sustained commitment to the process. Administrators in both agencies should consider these attributes when developing programs to promote the use and acceptance of adaptive management in the NWRS. ?? 2010 .

  6. Rainwater Wildlife Area Management Plan Executive Summary : A Columbia Basin Wildlife Mitigation Project.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Childs, Allen B.

    This Executive Summary provides an overview of the Draft Rainwater Wildlife Area Management Plan. The comprehensive plan can be viewed on the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) website at: www.umatilla.nsn.us or requested in hard copy from the CTUIR at the address below. The wildlife area was established in September 1998 when the CTUIR purchased the Rainwater Ranch through Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) for purposes of fish and wildlife mitigation for the McNary and John Day dams. The Management Plan has been developed under a standardized planning process developed by BPA for Columbia River Basin Wildlife Mitigation Projectsmore » (See Guiding Policies Section below). The plan outlines the framework for managing the project area, provides an assessment of existing conditions and key resource issues, and presents an array of habitat management and enhancement strategies. The plan culminates into a 5-Year Action Plan that will focus management actions and prioritize funding during the 2002-2006 planning period. Since acquisition of the property in late 1998, the CTUIR has conducted an extensive baseline resource assessment in preparation for the management plan, initiated habitat restoration in the Griffin Fork drainage to address road-related resource damage caused by roads constructed for forest practices and an extensive flood event in 1996, and initiated infrastructure developments associated with the Access and Travel Management Plan (i.e., installed parking areas, gates, and public information signs). In addition to these efforts, the CTUIR has worked to set up a long-term funding mechanism with BPA through the NPPC Fish and Wildlife Program. The CTUIR has also continued to coordinate closely with local and state government organizations to ensure consistency with local land use laws and maintain open lines of communication regarding important issues such as big game hunting, tribal member exercise of treaty rights, and public access. During the past two years, non-Indian public concern over big game hunting issues has at times overwhelmed other issues related to the wildlife area. In 2001, the CTUIR Fish and Wildlife Committee closed the wildlife area to tribal branch antlered bull elk harvest in response to harvest data that indicated harvest rates were greater than expected. In addition, illegal harvest of mature bull elk in southeastern Washington during the 2001 season exceeded the legal tribal and nontribal harvest combined which has created a potential significant regression in the bull;cow ratio in the Blue Mountain Elk herd. CTUIR Fish and Wildlife Committee and staff and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Regional Director and staff have been coordinating regularly to develop strategies to address harvest rates and ensure protection of viable big game herds in southeastern Washington. The CTUIR Fish and Wildlife Committee and WDFW has jointly agreed to continue close coordination on this and other issues and continue working together to ensure the long-term vigor of the elk herd on the Rainwater Wildlife Area. The purpose of the project is to protect, enhance, and mitigate fish and wildlife resources impacted by Columbia River Basin hydroelectric development. The effort is one of several wildlife mitigation projects in the region developed to compensate for terrestrial habitat losses resulting from the construction of McNary and John Day Hydroelectric facilities located on the mainstem Columbia River. While this project is driven primarily by the purpose and need to mitigate for wildlife habitat losses, it is also recognized that management strategies will also benefit many other non-target fish and wildlife species and associated natural resources.« less

  7. TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEM SIMULATOR

    EPA Science Inventory

    The Terrestrial Habitats Project at the Western Ecology Division (Corvallis, OR) is developing tools and databases to meet the needs of Program Office clients for assessing risks to wildlife and terrestrial ecosystems. Because habitat is a dynamic condition in real-world environm...

  8. The cooperative research unit program and wildlife education: Historic development, future challenges

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Bissonette, J.A.; Loftin, C.S.; Leslie, David M.; Nordstrom, L.A.; Fleming, W.J.

    2000-01-01

    In 1932, J. N. 'Ding' Darling proposed a 3-year tripartite arrangement between the Iowa Fish and Game Commission, Iowa State University, and himself to establish the first Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit. Three years later, the Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit Program was broadened to include 9 land-grant colleges representing recognized ecoregions in the United States. In 1960, the Units were given statutory recognition by Public Law 86-686 that also included provision for establishing Cooperative Fishery Units. The Cooperative Research Unit idea has evolved to 39 Units in 2000. Today, the main cooperators of the Unit program are the land-grant university, the state fish and game or conservation agency, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the Wildlife Management Institute. The Cooperative Units mission, as stated in Public Law 86-686, remains: 'To facilitate cooperation between the Federal Government, colleges and universities, and private organizations for cooperative unit programs of research and education relating to fish and wildlife and for other purposes.' Graduate research and education continue to be the program's primary missions. In any given year >600 graduate and post-graduate students are involved. Post-graduate employment of Unit-afffiliated students is >90%. Perhaps the primary benefit to the education process is the Units' formal connection to the state cooperator and to their federal agency that might not otherwise be available to university faculty and students. Units are conduits to state and federal funding for research projects conducted by university faculty and students. The CRU program is well positioned to educate a multitalented, ethnically diverse cadre of graduate students who will be prepared not only for their first professional job but also for their career by having been instilled with a desire for life-long professional accomplishment.

  9. Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program—2017 year in review

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Organ, John F.; Thompson, John D.; Dennerline, Donald E.; Childs, Dawn E.

    2018-02-08

    The Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program was involved in a number of notable events during 2017, many concerning our personnel. Dr. Barry Grand left his position as Leader of the Alabama Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit to become the Cooperative Units Program Supervisor for the South, replacing Dr. Kevin Whalen who took over as Supervisor for the West. We welcomed Dr. Sarah Converse who left the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center to become Leader of the Washington Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit. Dr. Amanda Rosenberger joined the Tennessee Cooperative Fishery Research Unit as Assistant Leader, transferring from the Missouri Cooperative Unit. Dr. Scott Carleton left his position as Assistant Unit Leader in New Mexico to become Chief of the Region 2 Migratory Bird Program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.We said farewell to many colleagues who retired. Their departure is bittersweet as we wish them health, happiness, and wellness in retirement. We will miss their companionship and the extraordinary contributions they have made to the Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program and conservation.The Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program has a record high number of vacant scientist positions due to a combination of retirements and base funding short-falls. These issues are affecting our ability to meet cooperator needs. Yet, we remain highly productive. For example, this year we released a report (https://doi.org/10.3133/cir1427) containing abstracts of nearly 600 of our research projects, covering thematic areas ranging from advanced technologies to wildlife diseases. We provided highly competent, trained scientists and natural resource managers for our cooperators’ workforce. We delivered technical training and guidance to professional practitioners. We provided critical information to cooperators for decisions on species status assessments and management of species of greatest conservation need.This year we had an active presence at major national meetings, including the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference where we co-sponsored a workshop on continuing education as a means to bridge the gap between science and management. During the coming year, with support from the U.S. Geological Survey and our cooperators, we intend to reduce the number of vacancies in the program. It will take time and active support of our cooperators to get back to full strength, but I am committed to this goal and encouraged by the resolve of our partners. We look forward to an even more productive year in 2018!

  10. Resolving Environmental Effects of Wind Energy

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Sinclair, Karin C; DeGeorge, Elise M; Copping, Andrea E.

    Concerns for potential wildlife impacts resulting from land-based and offshore wind energy have created challenges for wind project development. Research is not always adequately supported, results are neither always readily accessible nor are they satisfactorily disseminated, and so decisions are often made based on the best available information, which may be missing key findings. The potential for high impacts to avian and bat species and marine mammals have been used by wind project opponents to stop, downsize, or severely delay project development. The global nature of the wind industry - combined with the understanding that many affected species cross-national boundaries,more » and in many cases migrate between continents - also points to the need to collaborate on an international level. The International Energy Agency (IEA) Wind Technology Collaborative Programs facilitates coordination on key research issues. IEA Wind Task 34 - WREN: Working Together to Resolve Environmental Effects of Wind Energy-is a collaborative forum to share lessons gained from field research and modeling, including management methods, wildlife monitoring methods, best practices, study results, and successful approaches to mitigating impacts and addressing the cumulative effects of wind energy on wildlife.« less

  11. 77 FR 75265 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Termination of the Southern Sea Otter...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-12-19

    ... designed and intended, we committed to a full and final evaluation of the program. We have now completed... its sea otter research project and would no longer be able to assist if we resumed capturing sea.... In light of our inability to implement the translocation program as designed and intended, we...

  12. Gila River Basin Native Fishes Conservation Program

    Treesearch

    Doug Duncan; Robert W. Clarkson

    2013-01-01

    The Gila River Basin Native Fishes Conservation Program was established to conserve native fishes and manage against nonnative fishes in response to several Endangered Species Act biological opinions between the Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on Central Arizona Project (CAP) water transfers to the Gila River basin. Populations of some Gila...

  13. Physical, chemical, and biological data for detailed study of the Sun River Irrigation Project, Freezout Lake Wildlife Management Area, and Benton Lake National Wildlife Refuge, west-central Montana, 1990-92, with selected data for 1987-89

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Lambing, J.H.; Nimick, D.A.; Knapton, J.R.; Palawski, D.U.

    1994-01-01

    Physical chemical, and biological data were collected in the lower Sun River area of west-central Montana during 1990-92 as part of a U.S. Department of the Interior detailed study of the extent, magnitude, sources, and potential biological impacts of contaminants associated with irrigation drainage. Physical and chemical data were collected from areas within and near the Sun River Irrigation Project and from wetland areas receiving irrigation drainage. Biological data were collected from areas in and near Freezout Lake Wildlife Management Area and Benton Lake National Wildlife Refuge. Additional biological data were collected previously during 1987-89 as part of a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service program. This report presents data for selenium and other potentially toxic constituents in solid-phase, water, and biological media. Data consist of concentrations of major and trace elements in soil and drill cores; concen- trations of major ions, nutrients, and trace elements in ground water and surface water; and trace-element concentrations in bottom sediment and biological tissue. Hydrogeologic data for domestic and test wells and daily streamflow data for selected sites also are included.

  14. Lake Roosevelt Fisheries Evaluation Program : Limnological and Fisheries Monitoring Annual Report 1999.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    McLellan, Holly; Lee, Chuck; Scofield, Ben

    1999-08-01

    The Grand Coulee Dam was constructed in 1939 without a fish ladder, which eliminated steelhead (Onchorhynchus mykiss), chinook salmon (O. twshwastica), coho salmon (O. kisutch) and sockeye salmon (O. nerka) from returning to approximately 1,835 km (1,140 miles) of natal streams and tributaries found in the upper Columbia River Drainage in the United States and Canada. The Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act of 1980 gave the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), the authority and responsibility to use its legal and financial resources, 'to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife to the extent affected by the development andmore » operation of any hydroelectric project of the Columbia River and its tributaries. This is to be done in a manner consistent with the program adopted by the Northwest Power Planning Council (NWPPC), and the purposes of the Act' (NWPPC, 1987). With the phrase 'protect, mitigate and enhance', Congress signaled its intent that the NWPPC's fish and wildlife program should do more than avoid future hydroelectric damage to the basin's fish and wildlife. The program must also counter past damage, work toward rebuilding those fish and wildlife populations that have been harmed by the hydropower system, protect the Columbia Basin's fish and wildlife resources, and mitigate for harm caused by decades of hydroelectric development and operations. By law, this program is limited to measures that deal with impacts created by the development, operation and management of hydroelectric facilities on the Columbia River and its tributaries. However, off-site enhancement projects are used to address the effects of the hydropower system on fish and wildlife (NWPPC 1987). Resident game fish populations have been established in Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, the reservoir behind Grand Coulee Dam, since the extirpation of anadromous fish species. The resident game fish populations are now responsible for attracting a large percentage of the recreational visits to the region. An increase in popularity has placed Lake Roosevelt fifth amongst the most visited State and Federal parks in Washington. Increased use of the reservoir prompted amplified efforts to enhance the Native American subsistence fishery and the resident sport fishery in 1984 with hatchery supplementation of rainbow trout (O. mykiss) and kokanee salmon (O. nerka). This was followed by the formation of the Spokane Tribal Lake Roosevelt Monitoring Project (LRMP) in 1988 and later by formation of the Lake Roosevelt Data Collection Project in 1991. The Lake Roosevelt Data Collection Project began in July 1991 as part of the BPA, Bureau of Reclamation, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers System Operation Review process. This process sought to develop an operational scenario for the federal Columbia River hydropower system to maximize the in-reservoir fisheries with minimal impacts to all other stakeholders in the management of the Columbia River. The Lake Roosevelt Monitoring/Data Collection Program (LRMP) is the result of a merger between the Lake Roosevelt Monitoring Program (BPA No. 8806300) and the Lake Roosevelt Data Collection Project (BPA No. 9404300). These projects were merged in 1996 forming the Lake Roosevelt Monitoring Program (LRMP), which continues the work historically completed under the separate projects. The LRMP has two main goals. The first is to develop a biological model for Lake Roosevelt that will predict in-reservoir biological responses to a range of water management operational scenarios, and to develop fisheries and reservoir management strategies accordingly. The model will allow identification of lake operations that minimize impacts on lake biota while addressing the needs of other interests (e.g. flood control, hydropower generation, irrigation, and downstream resident and anadromous fisheries). Major components of the model will include: (1) quantification of entrainment and other impacts to phytoplankton, zooplankton and fish caused by reservoir drawdowns and low water retention times; (2) quantification of seasonal distributions, standing crop, and habitat use of fish food organisms; (3) examination of variations in fish growth and abundance in relation to reservoir operations, prey abundance and predator/prey relationships; and (4) quantification of habitat alterations due to hydrooperations. The second goal of the LRMP is to evaluate the impacts of hatchery kokanee salmon and rainbow trout on the ecosystem and to determine stocking strategies that maximize angler harvest and return of adult kokanee salmon to egg collection facilities. Major tasks of the hatchery evaluation portion of the project include conducting a year round reservoir wide creel survey, sampling the fishery during spring, summer and fall via electro-fishing and gillnet surveys, and collecting information on diet, growth, and age composition of various fish species in Lake Roosevelt.« less

  15. ACHP | News

    Science.gov Websites

    Foundation Honored For Creation and Implementation of New Preserve America Historic-Educational Grants grant program to create and improve interpretive, educational, and visitor experiences on the nation's fund National Wildlife Refuge System interpretive and educational projects focusing on history and

  16. Kootenai River Wildlife Habitat Enhancement Project : Long-term Bighorn Sheep/Mule Deer Winter and Spring Habitat Improvement Project : Wildlife Mitigation Project, Libby Dam, Montana : Management Plan.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Yde, Chis

    1990-06-01

    The Libby hydroelectric project, located on the Kootenai River in northwestern Montana, resulted in several impacts to the wildlife communities which occupied the habitats inundated by Lake Koocanusa. Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, in cooperation with the other management agencies, developed an impact assessment and a wildlife and wildlife habitat mitigation plan for the Libby hydroelectric facility. In response to the mitigation plan, Bonneville Power Administration funded a cooperative project between the Kootenai National Forest and Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks to develop a long-term habitat enhancement plan for the bighorn sheep and mule deer wintermore » and spring ranges adjacent to Lake Koocanusa. The project goal is to rehabilitate 3372 acres of bighorn sheep and 16,321 acres of mule deer winter and spring ranges on Kootenai National Forest lands adjacent to Lake Koocanusa and to monitor and evaluate the effects of implementing this habitat enhancement work. 2 refs.« less

  17. Using Implementation and Program Theory to Examine Communication Strategies in National Wildlife Federation's Backyard Wildlife Habitat Program

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Palmer, Dain; Dann, Shari L.

    2004-01-01

    Our evaluative approach used implementation theory and program theory, adapted from Weiss (1998) to examine communication processes and results for a national wildlife habitat stewardship education program. Using a mail survey of 1427 participants certified in National Wildlife Federation's (NWF) Backyard Wildlife Habitat (BWH) program and a study…

  18. 75 FR 71325 - Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-11-23

    ... Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program AGENCY: Commodity Credit Corporation, Natural Resources Conservation... final rule for the Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program (WHIP). This final rule sets forth how NRCS, using... Albert Cerna, National Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program Manager, Financial Assistance Programs Division...

  19. DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Knedsen, Curtis M.; Schroder, Steven L.; Johnston, Mark V.

    This report covers three of many topics under the Yakima/Klickitat Fisheries Project's Monitoring and Evaluation Program (YKFPME) and was completed by Oncorh Consulting as a contract deliverable to the Yakama Nation and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. The YKFPME (Project Number 1995-063-25) is funded under two BPA contracts, one for the Yakama Nation (Contract No. 00022449) and the other for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (Contract No. 22370). A comprehensive summary report for all of the monitoring and evaluation topics will be submitted after all of the topical reports are completed. This approach to reporting enhances themore » ability of people to get the information they want, enhances timely reporting of results, and provides a condensed synthesis of the whole YKFPME.« less

  20. Northwest Montana Wildlife Habitat Enhancement: Hungry Horse Elk Mitigation Project: Monitoring and Evaluation Plan.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Casey, Daniel; Malta, Patrick

    Portions of two important elk (Cervus elaphus) winter ranges totalling 8749 acres were lost due to the construction of the Hungry Horse Dam hydroelectric facility. This habitat loss decreased the carrying capacity of the both the elk and the mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus). In 1985, using funds from the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) as authorized by the Northwest Power Act, the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP) completed a wildlife mitigation plan for Hungry Horse Reservoir. This plan identified habitat enhancement of currently-occupied winter range as the most cost-efficient, easily implemented mitigation alternative available to address these large-scalemore » losses of winter range. The Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program, as amended in 1987, authorized BPA to fund winter range enhancement to meet an adjusted goal of 133 additional elk. A 28-month advance design phase of the BPA-funded project was initiated in September 1987. Primary goals of this phase of the project included detailed literature review, identification of enhancement areas, baseline (elk population and habitat) data collection, and preparation of 3-year and 10-year implementation plans. This document will serve as a site-specific habitat and population monitoring plan which outlines our recommendations for evaluating the results of enhancement efforts against mitigation goals. 25 refs., 13 figs., 7 tabs.« less

  1. 50 CFR 80.14 - Application of Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program funds.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Application of Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program funds. 80.14 Section 80.14 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM...

  2. Science and Civics: Sustaining Wildlife

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Council for Environmental Education, 2011

    2011-01-01

    Project WILD's new high school curriculum, "Science and Civics: Sustaining Wildlife", is designed to serve as a guide for involving students in environmental action projects aimed at benefitting the local wildlife found in a community. It involves young people in decisions affecting people, wildlife, and their shared habitat in the community. The…

  3. Wildlife underpasses on U.S. 64 in North Carolina: integrating management and science objectives

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Jones, Mark D.; Van Manen, Frank T.; Wilson, Travis W.; Cox, David R.

    2010-01-01

    This chapter on wildlife underpasses on U.S. Highway 64 in North Carolina is from a book on highways, wildlife, and habitat connectivity. U.S. 64 is an important route in North Carolina connecting major population centers and highways that underwent a major upgrade from a two-lane rural road to a major highway. New routes were proposed for a large portion of the project (28 miles) to improve driver safety and increase speed limits to 70 miles per hour (from the previously posted 55 mph). The authors review the geographical, historical, political, and social setting; the roadway and environmental issues; the rationale for the project; critical factors; outcomes of the project; and lessons learned. The area of the project supports high wildlife densities, including American black bears, white-tailed deer, red wolves, and bobcats. Critical factors to be incorporated into wildlife mitigation measures: driver safety, underpass construction costs, and permitting by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The U.S. 64 underpasses, completed in 2005, were the first in North Carolina designed specifically for wildlife and according to specifications provided by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC). The authors describe the underpass specifications recommended based on this project, including size, control of public access, fencing, gates, and maintenance (notably vegetation management). The authors conclude that one of the most beneficial outcomes of this project was the fact that, since the completion of the U.S. 64 underpasses, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) routinely considers wildlife passageways for road projects in the state.

  4. Duck Valley Habitat Enhancement and Protection, 2001-2002 Progress Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Allen, Mattie H.; Sellman, Jake

    The Duck Valley Indian Reservation's Habitat Enhancement project is an ongoing project designed to enhance and protect critical riparian areas, natural springs, the Owhyee River and its tributaries, and native fish spawning areas on the Reservation. The project commenced in 1997 and addresses the Northwest Power Planning Council's measures 10.8C.2, 10.8C.3, and 10.8C.5 of the 1994 Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. The performance period covers dates from April 2001 through August 2002.

  5. Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat Mitigation Plan for Hungry Horse Hydroelectric Project, Final Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Bissell, Gael

    1985-01-01

    This report describes the proposed mitigation plan for wildlife losses attributable to the construction of the Hungry Horse hydroelectric project. In this report, mitigation objectives and alternatives, the recommended mitigation projects, and the crediting system for each project are described by each target species. Mitigation objectives for each species (group) were established based on the loss estimates but tailored to the recommended projects. 13 refs., 3 figs., 19 tabs.

  6. Wildlife Habitat Improvement Guide for Minnesota Youth.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Halsey, Clifton

    This publication outlines projects to increase wildlife, primarily fowl and deer, and to help rural youth better understand wildlife requirements. The publication outlines six basic steps that are involved in initiating a wildlife project. These are: (1) Determine the types of wild animals for which the land is best suited; (2) Study the life…

  7. A comprehensive review of Farm Bill contributions to wildlife conservation, 1985-2000

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Heard, P.L.; Allen, A.W.; Best, Louis B.; Brady, S.J.; Burger, W.; Esser, A.J.; Hackett, E.; Johnson, D.H.; Pederson, R.L.; Reynolds, R.E.; Rewa, C.; Ryan, M.R.; Molleur, R.T.; Buck, P.

    2000-01-01

    A comprehensive review of the scientific literature was undertaken to determine wildlife responses to programs established under the conservation title of the 1985 Food Security Act as amended in 1990 and 1996 (Farm Bill). Literature was annotated and summaries of wildlife responses were provided for the Conservation Reserve Program CRP, Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP), Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP) and Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). The report recognized that Farm Bill conservation programs were created to serve many purposes. Foremost among these purposes was to enable Americaa??s farmers and ranchers to be better stewards of their lands. In general, wildlife responded positively to improvements in land stewardship, particularly when the needs of wildlife were considered in conservation planning and implementation. Whereas authors acknowledged that their understanding of wildlife responses to Farm Bill conservation programs was still incomplete, they concluded that these programs were making significant contributions toward conservation of the nationa??s fish and wildlife resources.

  8. 78 FR 64002 - South Farallon Islands Invasive House Mouse Eradication Project; Farallon National Wildlife...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-10-25

    ...-FF08RSFC00] South Farallon Islands Invasive House Mouse Eradication Project; Farallon National Wildlife... Statement (revised DEIS) for the South Farallon Islands Invasive House Mouse Eradication Project on the... non-native invasive house mice from the South Farallon Islands, part of the Farallon National Wildlife...

  9. Hellsgate Big Game Winter Range Wildlife Mitigation Project : Annual Report 2008.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Whitney, Richard P.; Berger, Matthew T.; Rushing, Samuel

    The Hellsgate Big Game Winter Range Wildlife Mitigation Project (Hellsgate Project) was proposed by the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (CTCR) as partial mitigation for hydropower's share of the wildlife losses resulting from Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dams. At present, the Hellsgate Project protects and manages 57,418 acres (approximately 90 miles2) for the biological requirements of managed wildlife species; most are located on or near the Columbia River (Lake Rufus Woods and Lake Roosevelt) and surrounded by Tribal land. To date we have acquired about 34,597 habitat units (HUs) towards a total 35,819 HUs lost from original inundationmore » due to hydropower development. In addition to the remaining 1,237 HUs left unmitigated, 600 HUs from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife that were traded to the Colville Tribes and 10 secure nesting islands are also yet to be mitigated. This annual report for 2008 describes the management activities of the Hellsgate Big Game Winter Range Wildlife Mitigation Project (Hellsgate Project) during the past year.« less

  10. Grande Ronde Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement Project : 2007 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    McGowan, Vance R.; Morton, Winston H.

    2008-12-30

    On July 1, 1984 the Bonneville Power Administration and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife entered into an intergovernmental contract to initiate fish habitat enhancement work in the Joseph Creek subbasin of the Grande Ronde River Basin in northeast Oregon. In 1985 the Upper and Middle Grande Ronde River, and Catherine Creek subbasins were included in the contract, and in 1996 the Wallowa River subbasin was added. The primary goal of 'The Grande Ronde Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement Project' is to create, protect, and restore riparian and instream habitat for anadromous salmonids, thereby maximizing opportunities for natural fish productionmore » within the basin. This project provided for implementation of Program Measure 703 (C)(1), Action Item 4.2 of the Northwest Power Planning Council's Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (NPPC, 1987), and continues to be implemented as offsite mitigation for mainstem fishery losses caused by the Columbia River hydro-electric system. All work conducted by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and partners is on private lands and therefore requires that considerable time be spent developing rapport with landowners to gain acceptance of, and continued cooperation with this program throughout 10-15 year lease periods. Both passive and active restoration treatment techniques are used. Passive regeneration of habitat, using riparian exclosure fencing and alternate water sources are the primary method to restore degraded streams when restoration can be achieved primarily through changes in management. Active restoration techniques using plantings, bioengineering, site-specific instream structures, or whole stream channel alterations are utilized when streams are more severely degraded and not likely to recover in a reasonable timeframe. Individual projects contribute to and complement ecosystem and basin-wide watershed restoration efforts that are underway by state, federal, and tribal agencies, and coordinated by the Grande Ronde Model Watershed Program (Project. No.199202601). Work undertaken during 2007 included: (1) Starting 1 new fencing project in the NFJD subbasin that will protect an additional 1.82 miles of stream and 216.2 acres of habitat; (2) Constructing 0.47 miles of new channel on the Wallowa River to enhance habitat, restore natural channel dimensions, pattern and profile and reconnect approximately 18 acres of floodplain and wetland habitat; (3) Planting 22,100 plants along 3 streams totaling 3.6 stream miles; (4) Establishing 34 new photopoints on 5 projects and retaking 295 existing photopoint pictures; (5) Monitoring stream temperatures at 10 locations on 5 streams and conducting other monitoring activities; (6) Completing riparian fence, water gap and other maintenance on 116.8 miles of project fences; (7) Initiated writing of a comprehensive project summary report that will present a summary of conclusions of the benefits to focal species and management recommendations for the future. Since initiation of this program 56 individual projects have been implemented, monitored and maintained along 84.8 miles of anadromous fish bearing streams that protect and enhance 3,501 acres of riparian and instream habitat.« less

  11. Shillapoo Wildlife Area, Annual Report 2006-2007.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Calkins, Brian

    This report summarizes accomplishments, challenges and successes on WDFW's Shillapoo Wildlife Area funded under Bonneville Power Administration's (BPA) Wildlife Mitigation Program (BPA project No.2003-012-00) during the Fiscal Year 07 contract period October 1, 2006-September 30, 2007. The information presented here is intended to supplement that contained in BPA's PISCES contract development and reporting system. The organization below is by broad categories of work but references are made to individual work elements in the PISCES Statement of Work as appropriate. The greatest success realized during this contract period was significant positive changes in the vegetative community in several wetland basins throughoutmore » the wildlife area. This major goal is being achieved in part by new equipment and operation capability funded under the BPA contract, state capital and migratory bird stamp funds, and the past or ongoing investment of other partners including Ducks Unlimited, The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), Clark Public Utilities and others. We continue to be challenged by requirements under the archaeological and historic preservation act necessary to protect many sensitive sites known to occur within the wildlife area. The problems encountered to date have been largely administrative in nature and those experienced this year were unforeseen and probably unavoidable. Early in the contract period, WDFW and BPA had agreed to have a BPA staff archaeologist perform the survey and reporting work. Unexpectedly, just prior to the expected start date for the surveys, the employee resigned leaving BPA's staff short handed and necessitated contracting the work with an archaeological consultant. This delay caused us to forego work on several projects that are now deferred until the next contract period. The most notable projects impacted by this unfortunate circumstance are those involving the construction or repair of fences.« less

  12. 50 CFR 80.83 - What is the Federal share of allowable costs?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS... grant-funded project in a program or subprogram authorized by the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration... Mariana Islands and the territories of Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa. The Regional...

  13. 50 CFR 80.83 - What is the Federal share of allowable costs?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION... costs of a grant-funded project in a program or subprogram authorized by the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish... Mariana Islands and the territories of Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa. The Regional...

  14. 50 CFR 80.83 - What is the Federal share of allowable costs?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION... costs of a grant-funded project in a program or subprogram authorized by the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish... Mariana Islands and the territories of Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa. The Regional...

  15. 50 CFR 80.83 - What is the Federal share of allowable costs?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS... grant-funded project in a program or subprogram authorized by the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration... Mariana Islands and the territories of Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa. The Regional...

  16. Results from three years on the prairie - improving management through volunteer-collected data

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Hadley, N.; Force, A.; Holsinger, K.

    2017-12-01

    Citizen science is a nascent and diversifying field with the ability to support wide-ranging outcomes from volunteer education and empowerment to data-driven decisions. Adventure Scientists is a nonprofit organization that focuses on the latter. We approach citizen science through a solutions-oriented lens, in which quality data can influence decisions leading to improved policy, land management and business practices. All our work is interdisciplinary, as we collaborate with partners in government, academia, industry and nonprofits to help fill their data collection needs. In addressing our partners' data needs, it is critical that we align any newfound knowledge with tangible outcomes. Therefore, our projects and partnerships incorporate concrete theories of change and involve the collaborations and relationships necessary to support decision-making. In this presentation, we will highlight Landmark, a landscape-scale project spanning 30,000 acres of North American prairie in Montana, to illustrate one example of a partnership that resulted in improved management from our volunteer-collected data. This was a multi-year citizen science project, where we assisted the American Prairie Reserve's effort to create the largest grasslands and wildlife protected area in the continental U.S. Our partners identified a need to better understand the extent and diversity of wildlife inhabiting and migrating through the space. To provide this enhanced understanding, we helped design and implement a program to collect key wildlife data on the prairie. We recruited, trained and managed specialized volunteers from the outdoor adventure community. Volunteers were responsible for collecting data year-round on animals moving through the landscape to support their management and protection. After three years of data collection and over 19,000 wildlife observations made while monitoring 29 species, the grasslands preserve is now moving forward with an expansive wildlife dataset to inform conservation action. We will share key insights from our experience as well as how the project established the foundation for our partner to institute key management actions and monitor progress on restoration goals.

  17. Yakima/Klickitat Fisheries Project; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Policy/Technical Involvement and Planning, 2001-2002 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Easterbrooks, John A.; Pearsons, Todd N.

    2003-03-01

    The Yakima/Klickitat Fisheries Project (YKFP) is a supplementation project sponsored by the Northwest Power Planning Council (Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program 1994, Measure 7.4K). The objectives of the YKFP are: (1) to test the hypothesis that new supplementation techniques can be used in the Yakima River Basin to increase natural production and to improve harvest opportunities while maintaining the long-term genetic fitness of the wild and native salmonid populations and keeping adverse ecological interactions within acceptable limits (Yakima Fisheries Project Final Environment Impact Statement, 1996); (2) provide knowledge about the use of supplementation, so that it may bemore » used to mitigate effects on anadromous fisheries throughout the Columbia River Basin; (3) to maintain and improve the quantity and productivity of salmon and steelhead habitat, including those areas made accessible by habitat improvements; (4) to ensure that Project implementation remains consistent with the Council's Fish and Wildlife Program; and (5) to implement the Project in a prudent and environmentally sound manner. Current YKFP operations have been designed to test the principles of supplementation (Busack et al. 1997). The Project's experimental design has focused on the following critical uncertainties affecting supplementation: (1) The survival and reproductive success of hatchery fish after release from the hatchery; (2) The impacts of hatchery fish as they interact with non-target species and stocks; and, (3) The effects of supplementation on the long-term genetic fitness of fish stocks. The YKFP endorses an adaptive management policy applied through a project management framework as described in the Yakima/Klickitat Fisheries Project Planning Status Report (1995), Fast and Craig (1997), Clune and Dauble 1991. The project is managed by a Policy Group consisting of a representative of the Yakama Nation (YN, lead agency) and a representative of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). The functions of the parties are described in an MOU between the YN and the WDFW. A Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee (STAC) consisting of one representative from each management entity reports to the Policy Group and provides technical input on policy and other issues. Additional committee's, such as the Monitoring Implementation and Planning Team (MIPT), serve as the discretion of STAC. The Policy Group and STAC meet periodically (usually monthly) to conduct the business of the YKFP. Although the YKFP is an all stocks initiative (BPA 1996), most effort to date has been directed at spring chinook salmon and coho salmon. This report is a compilation of the year's activities between August 1, 2001 and July 31, 2002. All findings should be considered preliminary until data collection is completed or the information is published in a peer-reviewed journal.« less

  18. Developing partnerships for implementing continental-scale citizen science programs at the local-level

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Newman, S. J.; Henderson, S.; Ward, D.

    2012-12-01

    Project BudBurst is a citizen science project focused on monitoring plant phenology that resides at the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON, Inc). A central question for Project BudBurst and other national outreach programs is: what are the most effective means of engaging and connecting with diverse communities throughout the country? How can continental scale programs like NEON's Project BudBurst engage audiences in such a way as to be relevant at both the local and continental scales? Staff with Project BudBurst pursued partnerships with several continental scale organizations: the National Wildlife Refuge System, the National Park Service, and botanic gardens to address these questions. The distributed nature of wildlife refuges, national parks, and botanic gardens around the country provided the opportunity to connect with participants locally while working with leadership at multiple scales. Project BudBurst staff talked with hundreds of staff and volunteers prior to setting a goal of obtaining and developing resources for several Refuge Partners, a pilot National Park partner, and an existing botanic garden partner during 2011. We were especially interested in learning best practices for future partnerships. The partnership efforts resulted in resource development for 12 Refuge partners, a pilot National Park partner, and 2 botanic garden partners. Early on, the importance of working with national level leaders to develop ownership of the partner program and input about resource needs became apparent. Once a framework for the partnership program was laid out, it became critical to work closely with staff and volunteers on the ground to ensure needs were met. In 2012 we began to develop an online assessment to allow our current and potential partners to provide feedback about whether or not the partnership program was meeting their needs and how the program could be improved. As the year progressed, the timeline for resource development became more of a suggestion than a set schedule. Maintaining flexibility was critical to the success of the partnerships. Unanticipated fieldwork, new priorities within organizations, and differing levels of involvement from partner staff, advisory boards, or Friends groups, led to varying resource development timelines. The distributed nature of and the willingness of partner staff and volunteers to implement Project BudBurst at their facilities have broadened the participation of the public in this program more than could have been accomplished alone. The new partners benefit from the free and customized education and outreach materials provided by Project BudBurst, while Project BudBurst benefits from the local knowledge and contacts with the public from the partner organizations.

  19. Rainwater Wildlife Area, Watershed Management Plan, A Columbia Basin Wildlife Mitigation Project, 2002.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Childs, Allen B.

    This Management Plan has been developed by the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) to document how the Rainwater Wildlife Area (formerly known as the Rainwater Ranch) will be managed. The plan has been developed under a standardized planning process developed by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) for Columbia River Basin Wildlife Mitigation Projects (See Appendix A and Guiding Policies Section below). The plan outlines the framework for managing the project area, provides an assessment of existing conditions and key resource issues, and presents an array of habitat management and enhancement strategies. The plan culminates into a 5-Yearmore » Action Plan that will focus our management actions and prioritize funding during the Fiscal 2001-2005 planning period. This plan is a product of nearly two years of field studies and research, public scoping, and coordination with the Rainwater Advisory Committee. The committee consists of representatives from tribal government, state agencies, local government, public organizations, and members of the public. The plan is organized into several sections with Chapter 1 providing introductory information such as project location, purpose and need, project goals and objectives, common elements and assumptions, coordination efforts and public scoping, and historical information about the project area. Key issues are presented in Chapter 2 and Chapter 3 discusses existing resource conditions within the wildlife area. Chapter 4 provides a detailed presentation on management activities and Chapter 5 outlines a monitoring and evaluation plan for the project that will help assess whether the project is meeting the intended purpose and need and the goals and objectives. Chapter 6 displays the action plan and provides a prioritized list of actions with associated budget for the next five year period. Successive chapters contain appendices, references, definitions, and a glossary. The purpose of the project is to protect, enhance, and mitigate fish and wildlife resources impacted by Columbia River Basin hydroelectric development. The effort is one of several wildlife mitigation projects in the region developed to compensate for terrestrial habitat losses resulting from the construction of McNary and John Day Hydroelectric facilities located on the mainstem Columbia River. While this project is driven primarily by the purpose and need to mitigate for wildlife habitat losses, it is also recognized that management strategies will also benefit many other non-target fish and wildlife species and associated natural resources. The Rainwater project is much more than a wildlife project--it is a watershed project with potential to benefit resources at the watershed scale. Goals and objectives presented in the following sections include both mitigation and non-mitigation related goals and objectives.« less

  20. Facilitating Learnscape Development, Maintenance and Use: Teachers' Perceptions and Self-Reported Practices.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Skamp, Keith; Bergmann, Iris

    2001-01-01

    Introduces two pilot schools participating in the project Learnscapes, a learning program in which users interact with the environment on school grounds with features such as an edible garden, a poetry corner, or a wildlife corridor. Presents teachers' ideas on the relationship of learnscapes to environmental education and discusses pedagogical…

  1. Impact of Undergraduate Research on Academic Performance, Educational Planning, and Career Development

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Kinkel, Doreen H.; Henke, Scott E.

    2006-01-01

    An undergraduate research mentoring program (URMP), initiated at Texas A&M University-Kingsville, was developed (1) to aid undergraduate wildlife students in the design, conduct, and analysis of original research projects; and (2) to encourage students to become effective written and oral communicators by preparing a manuscript of their…

  2. Wildlife of New Mexico: A Coloring Book.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    MacCarter, Don L.; Oldham, Pat

    This coloring book showing 31 of New Mexico's wild animals was prepared in conjunction with Project WILD, an environmental and conservation education program for elementary and secondary school students. Each page contains a large line drawing of a wild animal, a brief description of its habitat and behavior, and a range map that indicates the…

  3. Watershed Landscape Ecology: Interdisciplinary and Field-based Learning in the Northeast Creek Watershed, Mount Desert Island, Maine

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Hall, S. R.; Anderson, J.; Rajakaruna, N.; Cass, D.

    2014-12-01

    At the College of the Atlantic, Bar Harbor, Maine, undergraduate students have the opportunity to design their own curriculum within a major of "Human Ecology." To enable students to have early research experiences, we developed a field-based interdisciplinary program for students to learn and practice field methods in a variety of disciplines, Earth Science, Botany, Chemistry, and Wildlife Biology at three specific field sites within a single watershed on Mt. Desert Island. As the Northeast Creek watershed was the site of previous water quality studies, this program of courses enabled continued monitoring of portions of the watershed. The program includes 4 new courses: Critical Zone 1, Critical Zone 2, Wildlife Biology, and Botany. In Critical Zone 1 students are introduced to general topics in Earth Science and learn to use ArcGIS to make basic maps. In Critical Zone 2, Wildlife Biology, and Botany, students are in the field every week using classic field tools and methods. All three of these courses use the same three general field areas: two with working farms at the middle and lower portion of the watershed and one uninhabited forested property in the higher relief headwaters of the watershed. Students collect daily surface water chemistry data at five stream sites within the watershed, complete basic geologic bedrock and geomorphic mapping, conduct wildlife surveys, botanical surveys, and monitor weather patterns at each of the main sites. Beyond the class data collected and synthesized, students also complete group independent study projects at focused field sites, some of which have turned into much larger research projects. This program is an opportunity for students and faculty with varied interests and expertise to work together to study a specific field locality over multiple years. We see this model as enhancing a number of positive education components: field-based learning, teamwork, problem solving, interdisciplinary discussion, multiple faculty interaction, student mentoring, and original research. In the future we see the possibility of welcoming even more interdisciplinary work including rigorous studies spanning the arts and humanities.

  4. Colville Confederated Tribes' Performance Project Wildlife Mitigation Acquisitions, Annual Report 2006.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Whitney, Richard; Berger, Matthew; Tonasket, Patrick

    2006-12-01

    The Colville Confederated Tribes Wildlife Mitigation Project is protecting lands as partial mitigation for hydropower's share of the wildlife losses resulting from Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dams. The Mitigation Project protects and manages 54,606 acres for the biological requirements of managed wildlife species that are important to the Colville Tribes. With the inclusion of 2006 acquisitions, the Colville Tribes have acquired approximately 32,018 habitat units (HUs) towards a total 35,819 HUs lost from original inundation due to hydropower development. This annual report for 2006 briefly describes that four priority land acquisitions that were considered for enrollment into the Colvillemore » Tribes Mitigation Project during the 2006 contract period.« less

  5. Grande Ronde Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement Project, Annual Report 2002-2003.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    McGowan, Vance

    On July 1, 1984 the Bonneville Power Administration and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife entered into an agreement to initiate fish habitat enhancement work in the Joseph Creek subbasin of the Grande Ronde River Basin in northeast Oregon. In July of 1985 the Upper and Middle Grande Ronde River, and Catherine Creek subbasins were included in the intergovernmental contract, and on March 1, 1996 the Wallowa River subbasin was added. The primary goal of 'The Grande Ronde Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement Project' is to create, protect, and restore riparian and instream habitat for anadromous salmonids, thereby maximizing opportunitiesmore » for natural fish production within the basin. This project provided for implementation of Program Measure 703 (C)(1), Action Item 4.2 of the Northwest Power Planning Council's Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (NPPC, 1987), and continues to be implemented as offsite mitigation for mainstem fishery losses caused by the Columbia River hydro-electric system. All work conducted by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife is on private lands and therefore requires that considerable time be spent developing rapport with landowners to gain acceptance of, and continued cooperation with this program throughout 10-15 year lease periods. This project calls for passive regeneration of habitat, using riparian exclosure fencing as the primary method to restore degraded streams to a normative condition. Active remediation techniques using plantings, off-site water developments, site-specific instream structures, or whole channel alterations are also utilized where applicable. Individual projects contribute to and complement ecosystem and basin-wide watershed restoration efforts that are underway by state, federal, and tribal agencies, and local watershed councils. Work undertaken during 2002 included: (1) Implementing 1 new fencing project in the Wallowa subbasin that will protect an additional 0.95 miles of stream and 22.9 acres of habitat; (2) Conducting instream work activities in 3 streams to enhance habitat and/or restore natural channel dimensions, patterns or profiles; (3) Planting 31,733 plants along 3.7 stream miles, (4) Establishing 71 new photopoints and retaking 254 existing photopoint pictures; (5) Monitoring stream temperatures at 12 locations on 6 streams; (6) Completing riparian fence, water gap and other maintenance on 100.5 miles of project fences. Since initiation of the project in 1984 over 68.7 miles of anadromous fish bearing streams and 1,933 acres of habitat have been protected, enhanced and maintained.« less

  6. Hood River Production Master Plan.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    O'Toole, Patty

    1991-07-01

    The Northwest Power Planning Council's 1987 Columbia River Fish and Wildlife Program authorizes the development of artificial production facilities to raise chinook salmon and steelhead for enhancement in the Hood, Umatilla, Walla Walla, Grande Ronde and Imnaha rivers and elsewhere. On February 26, 1991 the Council agreed to disaggregate Hood River from the Northeast Oregon Hatchery Project, and instead, link the Hood River Master Plan (now the Hood River Production Plan) to the Pelton Ladder Project (Pelton Ladder Master Plan 1991).

  7. Olympic Fisher Reintroduction Project- 2009 Progress Report

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Lewis, Jeffrey C.; Happe, Patti J.; Jenkins, Kurt J.; Manson, David J.

    2009-01-01

    The 2009 progress report is a summary of the reintroduction, monitoring, and research efforts undertaken during the first two years of the Olympic fisher reintroduction project. Jeffrey C. Lewis of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Patti J. Happe of Olympic National Park, and Kurt J. Jenkins of U. S. Geological Survey are the principal investigators of the monitoring and research program associated with the reintroduction. David J. Manson of Olympic National Park is the lead biological

  8. Olympic Fisher Reintroduction Project: 2010 Progress Report

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Lewis, Jeffrey C.; Happe, Patti J.; Jenkins, Kurt J.; Manson, David J.

    2010-01-01

    The 2010 progress report is a summary of the reintroduction, monitoring, and research efforts undertaken during the third year of the Olympic fisher reintroduction project. Jeffrey C. Lewis of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Patti J. Happe of Olympic National Park, and Kurt J. Jenkins of U. S. Geological Survey are the principal investigators of the monitoring and research program associated with the reintroduction. David J. Manson of Olympic National Park is the lead biological technician.

  9. Selenium contamination and remediation at Stewart Lake Waterfowl Management Area and Ashley Creek, middle Green River basin, Utah

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Rowland, Ryan C.; Stephens, Doyle W.; Waddell, Bruce; Naftz, David L.

    2003-01-01

    Selenium is an element required in trace amounts for human and animal health, but it can cause health problems for livestock, wildlife, and humans when ingested in higher-than-required concentrations. Incidences of mortality, birth defects, and reproductive failure in waterfowl were discovered at Kesterson National Wildlife Refuge, San Joaquin Valley, California, by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in 1983 (Presser, 1994). These problems were attributed to elevated concentrations of selenium in irrigation drainage that discharged to the refuge. Because of concern about possible adverse effects from irrigation drainage on Department of the Interior (DOI) projects elsewhere in the United States, the DOI organized scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), USFWS, Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), and Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to form the National Irrigation Water-Quality Program (NIWQP). The objectives of the program are to investigate DOI-managed lands for potential contamination related to irrigation drainage, conduct studies to identify the problems, investigate methodologies to remediate those problems, and implement remediation plans (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2002).

  10. 50 CFR 80.56 - How does a proposed project qualify as substantial in character and design?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH... SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Eligible Activities § 80.56 How does a proposed project qualify as... principles of fish and wildlife conservation and management, research, or education; and (d) Is cost...

  11. Snakes. A Conservation Education Program of the Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Hubbard, Kelly; Theiss, Nancy S.

    The Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources is charged with the responsibility to preserve, protect, and perpetuate the fish and wildlife in Kentucky. Involved in this broad program are a number of services, including the Wildlife Conservation Education Program. During the months of September through April, Conservation Club leaders…

  12. Information resources

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Friend, Milton; Franson, J. Christian; Friend, Milton; Gibbs, Samantha E.J.; Wild, Margaret A.

    2015-10-19

    A wide variety of entities across North America are involved in wildlife disease investigations; however, the formal assembly of multidimensional programs that primarily address disease for the benefit of free-ranging wildlife is rather limited. The Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife Disease Study (SCWDS), the National Wildlife Health Center (NWHC), and the Canadian Wildlife Health Cooperative (CWHC) are selected examples. These programs are highlighted because of the scope of their capabilities and long-term involvement in assisting State and Federal natural resource agencies combat wildlife disease. A variety of other sources for possible assistance in addressing wildlife disease issues exists throughout North America and globally. It is prudent for wildlife conservation field biologists, managers, and administrators to be aware of such local resources. Ideally, awareness and knowledge of the types of assistance those programs can provide should be obtained prior to disease crisis events since appropriate, timely intervention often is required to minimize wildlife losses from disease and prevent the establishment of new infectious diseases within wildlife populations and geographic areas. Increasing recognition of the substantial number of infectious diseases being transferred between wildlife, domestic animals, and humans has led to increased collaborative investigations between wildlife, domestic, and human health programs. That collaboration has led to a heightened focus on wildlife disease within some public health and agriculture agencies. For purposes of this Chapter, wildlife disease is narrowly defined as those diseases (infectious and noninfectious) causing morbidity and mortality in free-ranging wildlife populations. Therefore, there is no focus on the numerous fish disease or environmental contaminant programs that exist on behalf of North American fauna.

  13. Grand Ronde Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement Project, 2008 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    McGowan, Vance R.; Morton, Winston H.

    2009-07-01

    On July 1, 1984 the Bonneville Power Administration and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife entered into an intergovernmental contract to initiate fish habitat enhancement work in the Joseph Creek subbasin of the Grande Ronde River Basin in northeast Oregon. In 1985 the Upper and Middle Grande Ronde River, and Catherine Creek subbasins were included in the contract, and in 1996 the Wallowa River subbasin was added. The primary goal of 'The Grande Ronde Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement Project' is to create, protect, and restore riparian and instream habitat for anadromous salmonids, thereby maximizing the opportunities for natural fishmore » production within the basin. This project originally provided for implementation of Program Measure 703 (C)(1), Action Item 4.2 of the Northwest Power Planning Council's Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (NPPC, 1987), and continues to be implemented under revisions of the Fish and Wild Program as offsite mitigation for mainstem fishery losses caused by the Columbia River hydro-electric system. All work conducted by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and partners is on private lands and therefore requires considerable time be spent developing rapport with landowners to gain acceptance, and continued cooperation with this program throughout 10-15 year lease periods. Both passive and active restoration treatment techniques are used. Passive regeneration of habitat, using riparian exclosure fencing and alternate water sources, is the primary method to restore degraded streams when restoration can be achieved primarily through changes in management. Active restoration techniques using plantings, bioengineering, site-specific instream structures, or whole stream channel alterations are utilized when streams are more severely degraded and not likely to recover in a reasonable timeframe. Individual projects contribute to and complement ecosystem and basin-wide watershed restoration efforts that are underway by state, federal, and tribal agencies, and coordinated by the Grande Ronde Model Watershed Program (Project. No. 199202601). Work undertaken during 2008 included: (1) completing 1 new fencing project in the North Fork John Day subbasin that protects 1.82 miles of stream and 216.2 acres of habitat, and 1 fencing project in the Wallowa subbasin that protects an additional 0.59 miles of stream and 42.5 acres of habitat; (2) constructing 0.47 miles of new channel on the Wallowa river to enhance habitat, restore natural channel dimensions, pattern and profile and reconnect approximately 18 acres of floodplain and wetland habitat; (3) planting 10,084 plants along 0.5 miles of the Wallowa Riverproject; (4) establishing 34 new photopoints on 5 projects and retaking 295 existing photopoint pictures; (5) monitoring stream temperatures at 10 locations on 5 streams and conducting other monitoring activities; (6) completing riparian fence, water gap and other maintenance on 116.8 miles of project fences; and (7) completed a comprehensive project summary report to the Independent Scientific Review panel (ISRP) that provided our conclusions regarding benefits to focal species, along with management recommendations for the future. Since initiation of this program 57 individual projects have been implemented, monitoring and maintained along 84.9 miles of anadromous fish bearing streams, that protect and enhance 3,564 acres of riparian and instream habitat.« less

  14. State Highway 9 wildlife crossings monitoring – annual report year 1.

    DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

    2017-02-02

    This research evaluates the effectiveness of the SH 9 Colorado River South Wildlife & Safety Improvement Project, including two wildlife overpasses, and five wildlife underpasses connected with 10.4 miles of wildlife exclusion fencing in Grand County...

  15. 77 FR 65321 - Importation, Exportation, and Transportation of Wildlife; User Fee Exemption Program for Low-Risk...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-10-26

    ... DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 14 [Docket No. FWS-HQ-LE-2012... Wildlife; User Fee Exemption Program for Low-Risk Importations and Exportations AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife... parts and products. To address this issue, the Service is implementing a program that exempts certain...

  16. Improve wildlife species tracking—Implementing an enhanced global positioning system data management system for California condors

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Waltermire, Robert G.; Emmerich, Christopher U.; Mendenhall, Laura C.; Bohrer, Gil; Weinzierl, Rolf P.; McGann, Andrew J.; Lineback, Pat K.; Kern, Tim J.; Douglas, David C.

    2016-05-03

    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) staff in the Pacific Southwest Region and at the Hopper Mountain National Wildlife Refuge Complex requested technical assistance to improve their global positioning system (GPS) data acquisition, management, and archive in support of the California Condor Recovery Program. The USFWS deployed and maintained GPS units on individual Gymnogyps californianus (California condor) in support of long-term research and daily operational monitoring and management of California condors. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) obtained funding through the Science Support Program to provide coordination among project participants, provide GPS Global System for Mobile Communication (GSM) transmitters for testing, and compare GSM/GPS with existing Argos satellite GPS technology. The USFWS staff worked with private companies to design, develop, and fit condors with GSM/GPS transmitters. The Movebank organization, an online database of animal tracking data, coordinated with each of these companies to automatically stream their GPS data into Movebank servers and coordinated with USFWS to improve Movebank software for managing transmitter data, including proofing/error checking of incoming GPS data. The USGS arranged to pull raw GPS data from Movebank into the USGS California Condor Management and Analysis Portal (CCMAP) (https://my.usgs.gov/ccmap) for production and dissemination of a daily map of condor movements including various automated alerts. Further, the USGS developed an automatic archiving system for pulling raw and proofed Movebank data into USGS ScienceBase to comply with the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002. This improved data management system requires minimal manual intervention resulting in more efficient data flow from GPS data capture to archive status. As a result of the project’s success, Pinnacles National Park and the Ventana Wildlife Society California condor programs became partners and adopted the same workflow, tracking, and data archive system. This GPS tracking data management model and workflow should be applicable and beneficial to other wildlife tracking programs.

  17. Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat Loss Assessment at Green Peter-Foster Project; Middle Fork Santiam River, Oregon, 1985 Final Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Noyes, J.H.

    1986-02-01

    A habitat based assessment was conducted of the US Army Corps of Engineers' Green Peter-Foster Dam and Reservoir Project on the Middle Fork Santiam River, Oregon, to determine losses or gains resulting from the development and operation of the hydroelectric related components of the project. Preconstruction, postconstruction, and recent vegetation cover types at the project site were mapped based on aerial photographs from 1955, 1972, and 1979, respectively. Vegetation cover types were identified within the affected area and acreages of each type at each period were determined. Eleven wildlife target species were selected to represent a cross-section of species groupsmore » affected by the project. An interagency team evaluated the suitability of the habitat to support the target species at each time period. An evaluation procedure which accounted for both the quantity and quality of habitat was used to aid in assessing impacts resulting from the project. The Green Peter-Foster Project extensively altered or affected 7873 acres of land and river in the Santiam River drainage. Impacts to wildlife centered around the loss of 1429 acres of grass-forb vegetation, 768 acres of shrubland, and 717 acres of open conifer forest cover types. Impacts resulting from the Green Peter-Foster Project included the loss of critical winter range for black-tailed deer and Roosevelt elk, and the loss of year-round habitat for deer, upland game birds, river otter, beaver, pileated woodpecker, and many other wildlife species. Bald eagle and osprey were benefited by an increase in foraging habitat. The potential of the affected area to support wildlife was greatly altered as a result of the Green Peter-Foster Project. Losses or gains in the potential of the habitat to support wildlife will exist over the life of the project.« less

  18. 7 CFR 636.4 - Program requirements.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-01-01

    ... AGRICULTURE LONG TERM CONTRACTING WILDLIFE HABITAT INCENTIVE PROGRAM § 636.4 Program requirements. (a) To... for the development of fish and wildlife habitat as described in § 636.9; (5) Provide NRCS with... in a program where fish and wildlife habitat objectives have been sufficiently achieved, as...

  19. 7 CFR 636.4 - Program requirements.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-01-01

    ... AGRICULTURE LONG TERM CONTRACTING WILDLIFE HABITAT INCENTIVE PROGRAM § 636.4 Program requirements. (a) To... for the development of fish and wildlife habitat as described in § 636.9; (5) Provide NRCS with... in a program where fish and wildlife habitat objectives have been sufficiently achieved, as...

  20. 7 CFR 636.4 - Program requirements.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-01-01

    ... AGRICULTURE LONG TERM CONTRACTING WILDLIFE HABITAT INCENTIVE PROGRAM § 636.4 Program requirements. (a) To... for the development of fish and wildlife habitat as described in § 636.9; (5) Provide NRCS with... in a program where fish and wildlife habitat objectives have been sufficiently achieved, as...

  1. 7 CFR 636.4 - Program requirements.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-01-01

    ... AGRICULTURE LONG TERM CONTRACTING WILDLIFE HABITAT INCENTIVE PROGRAM § 636.4 Program requirements. (a) To... for the development of fish and wildlife habitat as described in § 636.9; (5) Provide NRCS with... in a program where fish and wildlife habitat objectives have been sufficiently achieved, as...

  2. 50 CFR 80.56 - How does a proposed project qualify as substantial in character and design?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH... SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Eligible Activities § 80.56 How does a proposed project qualify as... principles of fish and wildlife conservation and management, research, or education; and (d) Is cost...

  3. 50 CFR 80.56 - How does a proposed project qualify as substantial in character and design?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH... SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Eligible Activities § 80.56 How does a proposed project qualify as... principles of fish and wildlife conservation and management, research, or education; and (d) Is cost...

  4. Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program—2016 year in review

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Organ, John F.; Thompson, John D.; Dennerline, Donald E.; Childs, Dawn E.

    2017-02-22

    SummaryThe Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units (CRU) Program had a productive year in 2016. Despite vacancies in our scientist ranks exceeding 20 percent, our research, training, and teaching portfolio was full and we graduated 93 students and published 398 manuscripts primarily focused on addressing the real conservation challenges of our cooperators. As I’ve stated before, our mission is our legacy: meeting the actionable science needs of our cooperators, providing them technical guidance and assistance in interpreting and applying new advances in science, and developing the future workforce through graduate education and mentoring. Our scientists and the manner in which they approach our mission continue to inspire me. The most rewarding part of my job is meeting and engaging with the students they recruit—the conservation professionals of the future. I cannot help but feel uplifted after discussions with and presentations by these young men and women. Personally, I owe my place in the profession today to the mentoring I received as a CRU student, and today’s CRU scientists have raised the bar. It gives me hope for the future of conservation, and added motivation to see our vacancies filled so that we can expand our portfolio.The National Cooperators’ Coalition has been active and is strategically working to build support on our behalf. Sincere thanks to the American Fisheries Society, the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, the Boone and Crockett Club, the National Association of University Fish and Wildlife Programs, the Wildlife Management Institute, and The Wildlife Society for their efforts and those of their affiliated members.We co-sponsored a workshop at the 2016 North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference along with the American Fisheries Society, the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, the Wildlife Management Institute, and The Wildlife Society, titled “Barriers and Bridges in Reconnecting Natural Resources Science and Management.” The workshop was well received and we have been asked to continue the dialogue with a second workshop in 2017. It was evident during the workshop that the CRU is viewed by our cooperators as an important and essential linkage between academia and practitioners. This is testament to the legacy of the CRU Program and the foundation it is built upon. In this Year in Review report, you will find details on staffing, vacancies, research funding, and other pertinent information. You will also see snapshots of CRU projects with information on how results have been or are being applied by cooperators. That is the essence of what we do: science that matters.

  5. On-site monitoring of construction of Terror Lake hydroelectric project, Kodiak, Alaska. Final report

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Hosking, H.

    The report describes the effort by the Fish and Wildlife Service to monitor the construction of the first hydroelectric project built on national wildlife refuge lands under license by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Recommendations are offered for use in planning other projects. Fish and wildlife species of concern included brown bears, Sitka black-tailed deer, mountain goats, raptors (including bald eagles), and several species of salmonid fish. Construction practices relating to erosion control, contaminant management, culvert placement, and siting of project structures are covered.

  6. 77 FR 4825 - Golden Eagles; Programmatic Take Permit Application; Draft Environmental Assessment; West Butte...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-01-31

    ... regulations, as well as the first eagle take permit issued to a wind- energy company. Background BGEPA allows... methods. Email: pacific_birds@fws.gov . Include ``DEA for the West Butte Wind Project'' in the subject..., Division of Migratory Birds and Habitat Programs, Pacific Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 911 NE...

  7. 77 FR 20408 - [FWS-R9-MB-2011-N215; 91400-5110-0000-7B; 91400-9410-0000-7B

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-04-04

    ... Sport Fish Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 777 et seq.) and established the Multistate Conservation Grant...; 91400-9410-0000-7B] Multistate Conservation Grant Program; Priority List and Approval for Conservation... the fiscal year 2012, priority list of wildlife and sport fish conservation projects from the...

  8. Emerging Infectious Diseases in Free-Ranging Wildlife–Australian Zoo Based Wildlife Hospitals Contribute to National Surveillance

    PubMed Central

    Cox-Witton, Keren; Reiss, Andrea; Woods, Rupert; Grillo, Victoria; Baker, Rupert T.; Blyde, David J.; Boardman, Wayne; Cutter, Stephen; Lacasse, Claude; McCracken, Helen; Pyne, Michael; Smith, Ian; Vitali, Simone; Vogelnest, Larry; Wedd, Dion; Phillips, Martin; Bunn, Chris; Post, Lyndel

    2014-01-01

    Emerging infectious diseases are increasingly originating from wildlife. Many of these diseases have significant impacts on human health, domestic animal health, and biodiversity. Surveillance is the key to early detection of emerging diseases. A zoo based wildlife disease surveillance program developed in Australia incorporates disease information from free-ranging wildlife into the existing national wildlife health information system. This program uses a collaborative approach and provides a strong model for a disease surveillance program for free-ranging wildlife that enhances the national capacity for early detection of emerging diseases. PMID:24787430

  9. Future frequencies of extreme weather events in the National Wildlife Refuges of the conterminous U.S.

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Martinuzzi, Sebastian; Allstadt, Andrew J.; Bateman, Brooke L.; Heglund, Patricia J.; Pidgeon, Anna M.; Thogmartin, Wayne E.; Vavrus, Stephen J.; Radeloff, Volker C.

    2016-01-01

    Climate change is a major challenge for managers of protected areas world-wide, and managers need information about future climate conditions within protected areas. Prior studies of climate change effects in protected areas have largely focused on average climatic conditions. However, extreme weather may have stronger effects on wildlife populations and habitats than changes in averages. Our goal was to quantify future changes in the frequency of extreme heat, drought, and false springs, during the avian breeding season, in 415 National Wildlife Refuges in the conterminous United States. We analyzed spatially detailed data on extreme weather frequencies during the historical period (1950–2005) and under different scenarios of future climate change by mid- and late-21st century. We found that all wildlife refuges will likely experience substantial changes in the frequencies of extreme weather, but the types of projected changes differed among refuges. Extreme heat is projected to increase dramatically in all wildlife refuges, whereas changes in droughts and false springs are projected to increase or decrease on a regional basis. Half of all wildlife refuges are projected to see increases in frequency (> 20% higher than the current rate) in at least two types of weather extremes by mid-century. Wildlife refuges in the Southwest and Pacific Southwest are projected to exhibit the fastest rates of change, and may deserve extra attention. Climate change adaptation strategies in protected areas, such as the U.S. wildlife refuges, may need to seriously consider future changes in extreme weather, including the considerable spatial variation of these changes.

  10. The Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Indian Reservation of Oregon John Day Basin Office : Watershed Restoration Projects : 2002 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon. John Day Basin Office.

    The John Day is the nation's second longest free-flowing river in the contiguous United States and the longest containing entirely unsupplemented runs of anadromous fish. Located in eastern Oregon, the basin drains over 8,000 square miles, Oregon's fourth largest drainage basin, and incorporates portions of eleven counties. Originating in the Strawberry Mountains near Prairie City, the John Day River flows 284 miles in a northwesterly direction, entering the Columbia River approximately four miles upstream of the John Day dam. With wild runs of spring Chinook salmon and summer steelhead, westslope cutthroat, and redband and bull trout, the John Day systemmore » is truly a basin with national significance. The majority of the John Day basin was ceded to the Federal government in 1855 by the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon (Tribes). In 1997, the Tribes established an office in the basin to coordinate restoration projects, monitoring, planning and other watershed activities on private and public lands. Once established, the John Day Basin Office (JDBO) formed a partnership with the Grant Soil and Water Conservation District (GSWCD), also located in the town of John Day, who contracts the majority of the construction implementation activities for these projects from the JDBO. The GSWCD completes the landowner contact, preliminary planning, engineering design, permitting, construction contracting, and construction implementation phases of most projects. The JDBO completes the planning, grant solicitation/defense, environmental compliance, administrative contracting, monitoring, and reporting portion of the program. Most phases of project planning, implementation, and monitoring are coordinated with the private landowners and basin agencies, such as the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and Oregon Water Resources Department. In 2002, the JDBO and GSWCD proposed continuation of their successful partnership between the two agencies and basin landowners to implement an additional twelve (12) watershed conservation projects. The types of projects include off channel water developments, riparian fencing, juniper control, permanent diversions, pump stations, infiltration galleries and return-flow cooling systems. Project costs in 2002 totaled $423,198.00 with a total amount of $345,752.00 (81%) provided by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and the remainder coming from other sources such as the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Partners in Wildlife Program and individual landowners.« less

  11. 50 CFR 86.117 - [Reserved

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false [Reserved] 86.117 Section 86.117 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM How...

  12. 50 CFR 86.135 - [Reserved

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false [Reserved] 86.135 Section 86.135 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM How...

  13. Transformation through time: How wildlife disease became a focus of conservation

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Friend, Milton

    2012-01-01

    When I began my career as an assistant waterfowl biologist in 1956, wildlife disease was not a major concern for conservation agencies. Some states— such as California, Michigan, New York, Wyoming, and Colorado— had small internal wildlife disease programs to investigate wildlife mortality events, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) had a program focused on migratory birds.

  14. Cooperative fish-rearing programs in Hanford Site excess facilities

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Herborn, D.I.; Anderson, B.N.

    1994-05-01

    In, 1993, two successful fish-rearing pilot projects were conducted in Hanford Site 100 K Area water treatment pools (K Pools) that are excess to the US Department of Energy needs. Beginning this spring, two larger cooperative fish programs will be undertaken in the K Pools. One program will involve the Yakama Indian Nation, which will rear, acclimate, and release 500,000 fall chinook salmon. The other program involves the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, which will rear warm-water specie (walleye and channel catfish) for planting in state lakes. Renewed economic vitality is the goal expected from these and follow-on fishmore » programs.« less

  15. Monitoring of Downstream Salmon and Steelhead at Federal Hydroelectric Facilities, 1993 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Wood, Lynette A.; Graves, Ritchie J.; Killins, Susan D.

    1994-04-01

    The seaward migration of juvenile salmonids was monitored by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) at Bonneville and John Day Dams on the Columbia River in 1993 (river mile 145 and 216, respectively, Figure 1). The NMFS Smolt Monitoring Project is part of a larger Smolt Monitoring Program (SMP) coordinated by the Fish Passage Center (FPC) for the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority. This program is carried out under the auspices of the Northwest Power Planning Council Fish and Wildlife Program and is funded by the Bonneville Power Administration. The purpose of the SMP is to index Columbia Basinmore » juvenile salmonid stocks and develop and implement flow and spill requests intended to facilitate fish passage. Data is also used for travel time, migration timing and relative run size magnitude analysis. The purpose of the NMFS portion of the program is to provide FPC with species specific data; numbers, condition, length, brand recaptures and flow data from John Day, and Bonneville Dams on a daily basis.« less

  16. Monitoring of Downstream Salmon and Steelhead at Federal Hydroelectric Facilities, 1992 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Hawkes, Lynnette A.; Martinson, Rick D.; Absolon, Randall F.

    1993-05-01

    The seaward migration of salmonid smolts was monitored by the National marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) at two sites on the Columbia River in 1992. The NMFS Smolt Monitoring Project is part of a larger Smolt Monitoring Program to index Columbia Basin juvenile salmonied stocks. It is coordinated by the Fish Passage Center (FPC) for the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Agencies and Tribes. Its purpose is to facilitate fish passage through reservoirs and at dams by providing FPC with timely smolt migration data used for flow and spill management. Data is also used for travel time, migration timing and relativemore » run size magnitude analysis. This program is carried out under the auspices of the Northwest Power Planning Council Fish and Wildlife Program and is funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA). Sampling sites were John Day and Bonneville Dams under the 1992 Smolt Monitoring Program. All pertinent fish capture, condition, brand recovery, and flow data, were reported daily to FPC. These data were incorporated into the FPC`s Fish Passage Data System (FPDS).« less

  17. Leadership and management influences the outcome of wildlife reintroduction programs: findings from the Sea Eagle Recovery Project.

    PubMed

    Sutton, Alexandra E

    2015-01-01

    Wildlife reintroductions and translocations are statistically unlikely to succeed. Nevertheless, they remain a critical part of conservation because they are the only way to actively restore a species into a habitat from which it has been extirpated. Past efforts to improve these practices have attributed the low success rate to failures in the biological knowledge (e.g., ignorance of social behavior, poor release site selection), or to the inherent challenges of reinstating a species into an area where threats have already driven it to local extinction. Such research presumes that the only way to improve reintroduction outcomes is through improved biological knowledge. This emphasis on biological solutions may have caused researchers to overlook the potential influence of other factors on reintroduction outcomes. I employed a grounded theory approach to study the leadership and management of a successful reintroduction program (the Sea Eagle Recovery Project in Scotland, UK) and identify four critical managerial elements that I theorize may have contributed to the successful outcome of this 50-year reintroduction. These elements are: 1. Leadership & Management: Small, dedicated team of accessible experts who provide strong political and scientific advocacy ("champions") for the project. 2. Hierarchy & Autonomy: Hierarchical management structure that nevertheless permits high individual autonomy. 3. Goals & Evaluation: Formalized goal-setting and regular, critical evaluation of the project's progress toward those goals. 4. Adaptive Public Relations: Adaptive outreach campaigns that are open, transparent, inclusive (esp. linguistically), and culturally relevant.

  18. Umatilla River Subbasin Fish Habitat Improvement Program, 2004-2005 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    St. Hilaire, Danny R.

    This annual report is in fulfillment of contractual obligations with Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), which is the funding source for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife's (ODFW), Umatilla River Subbasin Fish Habitat Improvement Program (Program). The Program works cooperatively with private landowners to develop long-term restoration, under which, passive and active Habitat Improvement Projects are conducted. Historically, projects have included livestock exclusion fencing (passive restoration) to protect riparian habitats, along with the installation of instream structures (active restoration) to address erosion and improve fish habitat. In recent years, the focus of active restoration has shifted to bioengineering treatments and,more » more recently, to channel re-design and reconstruction aimed at improving fish habitat, by restoring stable channel function. This report provides a summary of Program activities for the 2004 calendar year (January 1 through December 31, 2004), within each of the four main project phases, including: (1) Implementation--Pre-Work, (2) Implementation--On Site Development, (3) Operation and Maintenance, and (4) Monitoring and Evaluation. This report also summarizes Program Administrative, Interagency Coordination, and Public Education activities.« less

  19. Mitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam, 2003-2004 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Dunnigan, James; DeShazer, Jay; Garrow, Larry

    2004-06-01

    ''Mitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam'' is part of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council's (NPCC) resident fish and wildlife program. The program was mandated by the Northwest Planning Act of 1980, and is responsible for mitigating for damages to fish and wildlife caused by hydroelectric development in the Columbia River Basin. The objective of Phase I of the project (1983 through 1987) was to maintain or enhance the Libby Reservoir fishery by quantifying seasonal water levels and developing ecologically sound operational guidelines. The objective of Phase II of the project (1988 through 1996) was to determinemore » the biological effects of reservoir operations combined with biotic changes associated with an aging reservoir. The objectives of Phase III of the project (1996 through present) are to implement habitat enhancement measures to mitigate for dam effects, to provide data for implementation of operational strategies that benefit resident fish, monitor reservoir and river conditions, and monitor mitigation projects for effectiveness. This project completes urgent and high priority mitigation actions as directed by the Kootenai Subbasin Plan. Montana FWP uses a combination of diverse techniques to collect a variety of physical and biological data within the Kootenai River Basin. These data serve several purposes including: the development and refinement of models used in management of water resources and operation of Libby Dam; investigations into the limiting factors of native fish populations, gathering basic life history information, tracking trends in endangered, threatened species, and the assessment of restoration or management activities intended to restore native fishes and their habitats.« less

  20. 77 FR 9692 - Keālia Pond National Wildlife Refuge and Kakahai`a National Wildlife Refuge, Maui County, HI...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-02-17

    ...: Glynnis Nakai, Project Leader, Maui National Wildlife Refuge Complex, P.O. Box 1042, K[imacr]hei, Hawai`i 96753. In-Person Viewing or Pickup: Call (808) 875-1582 to make an appointment during regular business... FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Glynnis Nakai, Project Leader, Maui NWR Complex, phone number (808) 875-1582...

  1. 50 CFR 86.50 - When must I apply?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false When must I apply? 86.50 Section 86.50 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM How...

  2. 50 CFR 86.131 - Must I do a plan?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Must I do a plan? 86.131 Section 86.131 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM How...

  3. Alaska Wildlife Week--Upper Elementary Teachers' Guide. Unit 7. Together, We Can Help Wildlife. April 23-29, 1989.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Sigman, Marilyn, Ed.

    Wildlife is often described as one of Alaska's most important and valuable resources. Helping wildlife can take many forms. In this educational packet, a variety of activities are included to help intermediate students understand which human activities help wildlife and which harm wildlife. In addition, suggestions on planning hands-on projects to…

  4. Mesa prescribed fire

    Treesearch

    Scott Glaspie; Erik Rodin

    2008-01-01

    (Please note, this is an abstract only) The Mesa project is a landscape scale restoration treatment for a pinyon/ juniper woodland. Primarily, the goal of the project is to reduce encroaching woodland on savanna grasslands, thus improving rangeland and wildlife habitat. This project is financed by several non-profit wildlife organizations.

  5. 50 CFR 600.1006 - Accepting a request for, and determinations about conducting, a subsidized program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 8 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Accepting a request for, and... reduction amendment, the requirements in § 600.1002(a); (2) Certify that the CFMP meets, or will meet after an appropriate reduction amendment, the requirements in § 600.1002(b)(1) and (2); and (3) Project the...

  6. 50 CFR 86.11 - What does the national BIG Program do?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What does the national BIG Program do? 86.11 Section 86.11 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE... GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM General Information About the Grant Program § 86.11 What does the national BIG...

  7. 50 CFR 86.130 - What does the State program plan do?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What does the State program plan do? 86.130 Section 86.130 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE... GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM How States Will Complete the State Program Plans § 86.130 What does the State...

  8. The Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Indian Reservation of Oregon John Day Basin Office : Watershed Restoration Projects : 2003 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon. John Day Basin Office.

    The John Day is the nation's second longest free-flowing river in the contiguous United States and the longest containing entirely unsupplemented runs of anadromous fish. Located in eastern Oregon, the basin drains over 8,000 square miles, Oregon's fourth largest drainage basin, and incorporates portions of eleven counties. Originating in the Strawberry Mountains near Prairie City, the John Day River flows 284 miles in a northwesterly direction, entering the Columbia River approximately four miles upstream of the John Day dam. With wild runs of spring Chinook salmon and summer steelhead, westslope cutthroat, and redband and bull trout, the John Day systemmore » is truly a basin with national significance. The majority of the John Day basin was ceded to the Federal government in 1855 by the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon (Tribes). In 1997, the Tribes established an office in the basin to coordinate restoration projects, monitoring, planning and other watershed activities on private and public lands. Once established, the John Day Basin Office (JDBO) formed a partnership with the Grant Soil and Water Conservation District (GSWCD), which contracts the majority of the construction implementation activities for these projects from the JDBO. The GSWCD completes the landowner contact, preliminary planning, engineering design, permitting, construction contracting, and construction implementation phases of most projects. The JDBO completes the planning, grant solicitation/defense, environmental compliance, administrative contracting, monitoring, and reporting portion of the program. Most phases of project planning, implementation, and monitoring are coordinated with the private landowners and basin agencies, such as the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and Oregon Water Resources Department. In 2003, the JDBO and GSWCD proposed continuation of their successful partnership between the two agencies and basin landowners to implement an additional twelve (12) watershed conservation projects. The types of projects include off channel water developments, juniper control, permanent diversions, pump stations, and return-flow cooling systems. Due to funding issues and delays, permitting delays, fire closures and landowner contracting problems, 2 projects were canceled and 7 projects were rescheduled to the 2004 construction season. Project costs in 2003 totaled $115,554.00 with a total amount of $64,981.00 (56%) provided by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and the remainder coming from other sources such as the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Partners in Wildlife Program and individual landowners.« less

  9. John Day Watershed Restoration Projects, annual report 2003.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Brown, Linda

    The John Day is the nation's second longest free-flowing river in the contiguous United States and the longest containing entirely unsupplemented runs of anadromous fish. Located in eastern Oregon, the basin drains over 8,000 square miles, Oregon's fourth largest drainage basin, and incorporates portions of eleven counties. Originating in the Strawberry Mountains near Prairie City, the John Day River flows 284 miles in a northwesterly direction, entering the Columbia River approximately four miles upstream of the John Day dam. With wild runs of spring Chinook salmon and summer steelhead, westslope cutthroat, and redband and bull trout, the John Day systemmore » is truly a basin with national significance. The majority of the John Day basin was ceded to the Federal government in 1855 by the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon (Tribes). In 1997, the Tribes established an office in the basin to coordinate restoration projects, monitoring, planning and other watershed activities on private and public lands. Once established, the John Day Basin Office (JDBO) formed a partnership with the Grant Soil and Water Conservation District (GSWCD), which contracts the majority of the construction implementation activities for these projects from the JDBO. The GSWCD completes the landowner contact, preliminary planning, engineering design, permitting, construction contracting, and construction implementation phases of most projects. The JDBO completes the planning, grant solicitation/defense, environmental compliance, administrative contracting, monitoring, and reporting portion of the program. Most phases of project planning, implementation, and monitoring are coordinated with the private landowners and basin agencies, such as the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and Oregon Water Resources Department. In 2003, the JDBO and GSWCD proposed continuation of their successful partnership between the two agencies and basin landowners to implement an additional twelve (12) watershed conservation projects. The types of projects include off channel water developments, juniper control, permanent diversions, pump stations, and return-flow cooling systems. Due to funding issues and delays, permitting delays, fire closures and landowner contracting problems, 2 projects were canceled and 7 projects were rescheduled to the 2004 construction season. Project costs in 2003 totaled $115,554.00 with a total amount of $64,981.00 (56%) provided by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and the remainder coming from other sources such as the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Partners in Wildlife Program and individual landowners.« less

  10. Building an archive of Arctic-Boreal animal movements and links to remote sensing data

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Bohrer, G.; Handler, M.; Davidson, S. C.; Boelman, N.

    2017-12-01

    Climate is changing in the Arctic and Boreal regions of North America more quickly than anywhere else on the planet. The impact of climate changes on wildlife in the region is difficult to assess, as they occur over decades, while wildlife monitoring programs have been in place for relatively short periods, have used a variety of data collection methods, and are not integrated across studies and governmental agencies. Further, linking wildlife movements to measures of weather and climate is impeded by the challenge of accessing environmental data products and differences in spatiotemporal scale. To analyze the impact of long-term changes in weather and habitat conditions on wildlife movements, we built an archive of avian, predator and ungulate movements throughout the Arctic-Boreal region. The archive is compiled and hosted in Movebank, a free, web-based service for managing animal movement data. Using Movebank allows us to securely manage data within a single database while supporting project-specific terms of use and access rights. By importing the data to the Movebank database, they are converted to a standard data format, reviewed for quality and completeness, and made easily accessible for analysis through the R package 'move'. In addition, the Env-DATA System in Movebank allows easy annotation of these and related time-location records with hundreds of environmental variables provided by global remote sensing and weather data products, including MODIS Land, Snow and Ice products, the ECMWF and NARR weather reanalyses, and others. The ABoVE Animal Movement Archive includes 6.6 million locations of over 3,000 animals collected by 50 programs and studies, contributed by over 25 collaborating institutions, with data extending from 1988 to the present. Organizing the data on Movebank has enabled collaboration and metaanalysis and has also improved their quality and completeness. The ABoVE Animal Movement Archive provides a platform actively used by data contributors and analysts from the ABoVE science team, and offers contributing institutions support in managing newer data and tools for data sharing and analysis beyond the completion of the project, providing significant resources for researchers and wildlife managers in the region.

  11. Biological Information Document, Radioactive Liquid Waste Treatment Facility

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Biggs, J.

    1995-12-31

    This document is intended to act as a baseline source material for risk assessments which can be used in Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements. The current Radioactive Liquid Waste Treatment Facility (RLWTF) does not meet current General Design Criteria for Non-reactor Nuclear Facilities and could be shut down affecting several DOE programs. This Biological Information Document summarizes various biological studies that have been conducted in the vicinity of new Proposed RLWTF site and an Alternative site. The Proposed site is located on Mesita del Buey, a mess top, and the Alternative site is located in Mortandad Canyon. The Proposedmore » Site is devoid of overstory species due to previous disturbance and is dominated by a mixture of grasses, forbs, and scattered low-growing shrubs. Vegetation immediately adjacent to the site is a pinyon-juniper woodland. The Mortandad canyon bottom overstory is dominated by ponderosa pine, willow, and rush. The south-facing slope was dominated by ponderosa pine, mountain mahogany, oak, and muhly. The north-facing slope is dominated by Douglas fir, ponderosa pine, and oak. Studies on wildlife species are limited in the vicinity of the proposed project and further studies will be necessary to accurately identify wildlife populations and to what extent they utilize the project area. Some information is provided on invertebrates, amphibians and reptiles, and small mammals. Additional species information from other nearby locations is discussed in detail. Habitat requirements exist in the project area for one federally threatened wildlife species, the peregrine falcon, and one federal candidate species, the spotted bat. However, based on surveys outside of the project area but in similar habitats, these species are not expected to occur in either the Proposed or Alternative RLWTF sites. Habitat Evaluation Procedures were used to evaluate ecological functioning in the project area.« less

  12. Report of the workshop on evidence-based design of national wildlife health programs

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Nguyen, Natalie T.; Duff, J. Paul; Gavier-Widén, Dolores; Grillo, Tiggy; He, Hongxuan; Lee, Hang; Ratanakorn, Parntep; Rijks, Jolianne M.; Ryser-Degiorgis, Marie-Pierre; Sleeman, Jonathan M.; Stephen, Craig; Tana, Toni; Uhart, Marcela; Zimmer , Patrick

    2017-05-08

    SummaryThis report summarizes a Wildlife Disease Association sponsored workshop held in 2016. The overall objective of the workshop was to use available evidence and selected subject matter expertise to define the essential functions of a National Wildlife Health Program and the resources needed to deliver a robust and reliable program, including the basic infrastructure, workforce, data and information systems, governance, organizational capacity, and essential features, such as wildlife disease surveillance, diagnostic services, and epidemiological investigation. This workshop also provided the means to begin the process of defining the essential attributes of a national wildlife health program that could be scalable and adaptable to each nation’s needs.

  13. 50 CFR 81.6 - Project Agreement.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Project Agreement. 81.6 Section 81.6... SPECIES OF FISH, WILDLIFE, AND PLANTS-COOPERATION WITH THE STATES § 81.6 Project Agreement. (a) Subsequent to the establishment of a Cooperative Agreement pursuant to § 81.3, the Secretary may further agree...

  14. 50 CFR 81.6 - Project Agreement.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 9 2013-10-01 2013-10-01 false Project Agreement. 81.6 Section 81.6... SPECIES OF FISH, WILDLIFE, AND PLANTS-COOPERATION WITH THE STATES § 81.6 Project Agreement. (a) Subsequent to the establishment of a Cooperative Agreement pursuant to § 81.3, the Secretary may further agree...

  15. Author Slide Shows & Texas Wildlife: Thematic Multimedia Projects.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Monahan, Susan; Susong, Dee

    1996-01-01

    Describes two multimedia projects at Brentwood Elementary School (Austin, Texas) that are models for training teachers, and students with special needs, about technology. Students authored a multimedia slide show and created HyperStudio stacks about Texas wildlife. The projects increased motivation and improved reading, writing, problem-solving,…

  16. 50 CFR 15.26 - Approval of cooperative breeding programs.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 1 2014-10-01 2014-10-01 false Approval of cooperative breeding programs. 15.26 Section 15.26 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE... program requested for the exotic bird species, including: (i) A breeding protocol, including a genetic...

  17. 50 CFR 15.26 - Approval of cooperative breeding programs.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 1 2013-10-01 2013-10-01 false Approval of cooperative breeding programs. 15.26 Section 15.26 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE... program requested for the exotic bird species, including: (i) A breeding protocol, including a genetic...

  18. 50 CFR 15.26 - Approval of cooperative breeding programs.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 1 2012-10-01 2012-10-01 false Approval of cooperative breeding programs. 15.26 Section 15.26 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE... program requested for the exotic bird species, including: (i) A breeding protocol, including a genetic...

  19. Forestation of surface mines for wildlife

    Treesearch

    Thomas G. Zarger

    1980-01-01

    This report reviews TVA program efforts to promote the use of wildlife shrubs in mined-land reclamation including work on plant materials development, demonstrations to acquaint landowners with a variety of food and cover plants, and action programs to incorporate wildlife plants into postmining land use. It deals briefly with wildlife considerations under Public Law...

  20. Assessing the Impact of a Wildlife Education Program on Japanese Attitudes and Behavioral Intentions

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Sakurai, Ryo; Jacobson, Susan K.; Matsuda, Naoko; Maruyama, Tetsuya

    2015-01-01

    Human-wildlife conflicts are common in agricultural communities and mountainous villages in Japan. Tochigi prefecture has one of the highest amounts of agricultural damage caused by wildlife in the country. To reduce conflicts, the Nature Preservation Division of Tochigi Prefecture launched a wildlife damage prevention program. We evaluated the…

  1. Decade of wildlife tracking in the Sky Islands

    Treesearch

    Jessica A. Lamberton-Moreno; Sergio Avila-Villegas

    2013-01-01

    In 2001 Sky Island Alliance developed a citizen science program that uses track and sign identification and count surveys to monitor potential wildlife corridors throughout southeastern Arizona and southwestern New Mexico. The goal of the Wildlife Linkages Program is to protect and advocate for an interconnected landscape where wildlife, based on their ecological needs...

  2. 50 CFR 86.82 - What must be in the reports?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 9 2012-10-01 2012-10-01 false What must be in the reports? 86.82 Section 86.82 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM Reporting Requirements for the...

  3. Yakima Tributary Access and Habitat Program, 2002-2003 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Myra, D.; Ready, C.

    2003-12-01

    The Yakima Tributary Access and Habitat Program (YTAHP) was organized to restore salmonid passage to Yakima tributaries that historically supported salmonids and to improve habitat in areas where access is restored. This program intends to (a) screen unscreened diversion structures to prevent fish entrainment into artificial waterways; (b) provide for fish passage at man-made barriers, such as diversion dams, culverts, siphons and bridges; and (c) provide information and assistance to landowners interested in to contributing to the improvement of water quality, water reliability and stream habitat. The YTAHP developed from a number of groups actively engaged in watershed management, and/ormore » habitat restoration within the Yakima River Basin. These groups include the Washington State Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), Kittitas County Conservation District (KCCD), North Yakima Conservation District (NYCD), Kittitas County Water Purveyors (KCWP), and Ahtanum Irrigation District (AID). The US Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) and Yakama Nation (YN) both participated in the development of the objectives of YTAHP. Other entities that will be involved during permitting or project review may include the YN, the federal Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and US Army Corps of Engineers (COE). The objectives of YTAHP are listed below and also include subtasks detailed in the report: (1) Conduct Early Action Projects; (2) Review Strategic Plan; (3) Restore Access, including stream inventory, prioritization, implementation; and (4) Provide opportunities to improve habitat and conserve resources. The BPA YTAHP funding supported activities of the program which are described in this report. These activities are primarily related to objective 1 (conduct early action projects) and parts of objectives 2-4. The work supported by YTAHP funding will support a series of scheduled projects and be made larger by complementary funding through NRSC EQIP, Irrigation Efficiencies, WA State Salmon Recovery Funding Board and other local, state and federal programs. Projects completed FY-03: The Cooke Creek siphon and screen/bypass was completed on time and within budget. The Rosbach Farms project was completed in cooperation with the NRCS Environmental Quality Incentives Program and the KCCD's Irrigation Efficiencies Program. Tributary survey teams were trained and surveys of tributaries in Yakima and Kittitas counties commenced in December of 2002. By the end of September 2003 Cowiche Creek in Yakima County was completed as well as Coleman, Reecer, Currier, Dry, Cabin, Indian, and Jack Creeks in Kittitas County. A screen was installed on the Hernandez/Ringer diversion in cooperation with the NRCS office in Kittitas County. YTAHP submitted six applications to the Salmon Recovery Funding Board and three were selected and funded. Another Salmon Recovery Funding Board project awarded in 2000 to the Yakama Nation was transferred to the KCCD. Two miles of fencing of riparian zones on the north fork Ahtanum was completed by the North Yakima Conservation District in cooperation with the Department of Natural Resources and the Ahtanum Irrigation District and funded by US fish and Wildlife as part of YTAHP's outreach partnering. Completion of this year's effort has provided significant inroads to working on the private lands in two counties which will be vital to future efforts by YTAHP and others to protect and enhance Yakima River Basin habitat. 2003 saw the migration of the WEB site from MWH to the Kittitas County Conservation District and can be accessed at www.kccd.net.« less

  4. Mobile application for field data collection and query: Example from wildlife research (Invited)

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Bateman, H.; Lindquist, T.; Whitehouse, R.

    2013-12-01

    Field data collection is often used in many scientific disciplines and effective approaches rely on accurate data collection and recording. We designed a smartphone and tablet application (app) for field-collected data and tested it during a study on wildlife. The objective of our study was to determine the effectiveness of mobile applications in wildlife field research. Student software developers designed applications for mobile devices on the iOS and Android operating systems. Both platforms had similar user interactions via data entry on a touch screen using pre-programmed fields, checkboxes, drop-down menus, and keypad entry. The mobile application included features to insure collection of all measurements in the field through pop-up messages and could proof entries for valid formats. We used undergraduate student subjects to compare the duration of data recording and data entry, and the frequency of errors between the mobile application and traditional (paper) techniques. We field-tested the mobile application using an existing study on wildlife. From the field, technicians could query a database stored on a mobile device to view histories of previously captured animals. Overall, we found that because the mobile application allowed us to enter data in a digital format in the field we could eliminate timely steps to process handwritten data sheets and double-checking data entries. We estimated that, for a 2-month project, using the mobile application instead of traditional data entry and proofing reduced our total project time by 10%. To our knowledge, this is the first application developed for mobile devices for wildlife users interesting in viewing animal capture histories from the field and could be developed for use in other areas of field research.

  5. California partners for fish and wildlife program: conserving birds through private partnerships

    Treesearch

    Debra Schlafmann; Philip Morrison

    2005-01-01

    The Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) habitat restoration assistance program for private landowners, was created primarily to improve habitat for waterfowl. Since its inception in 1987, however, the program has grown to include the restoration of all types of habitat. The purpose of this paper is to explain how...

  6. Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units - A model partnership program

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Dennerline, Donald E.; Childs, Dawn E.

    2017-04-20

    The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units (CRU) program is a unique model of cooperative partnership among the USGS, other U.S. Department of the Interior and Federal agencies, universities, State fish and wildlife agencies, and the Wildlife Management Institute. These partnerships are maintained as one of the USGS’s strongest links to Federal and State land and natural resource management agencies.Established in 1935 to meet the need for trained professionals in the growing field of wildlife management, the program currently consists of 40 Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units located on university campuses in 38 States and supports 119 research scientist positions when fully funded. The threefold mission of the CRU program is to (1) conduct scientific research for the management of fish, wildlife, and other natural resources; (2) provide technical assistance to natural resource managers in the application of scientific information to natural resource policy and management; and (3) train future natural resource professionals.

  7. Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP) Report; Tacoma/Trimble Area Management Plan, Technical Report 2001-2003.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Entz, Ray; Lockwood, Jr., Neil; Holmes, Darren

    2003-10-01

    In 2000 and 2001, the Kalispel Natural Resource Department (KNRD) continued to mitigate the wildlife habitat losses as part of the Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigation Project. Utilizing Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) funds, the Kalispel Tribe of Indians (Tribe) purchased three projects totaling nearly 1,200 acres. The Tacoma/Trimble Wildlife Management Area is a conglomeration of properties now estimated at 1,700 acres. It is the Tribe's intent to manage these properties in cooperation and collaboration with the Pend Oreille County Public Utility District (PUD) No. 1 and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to benefit wildlife habitats and associated species, populations,more » and guilds.« less

  8. 50 CFR 80.56 - How does a proposed project qualify as substantial in character and design?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH... SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Eligible Activities § 80.56 How does a proposed project qualify as...

  9. 50 CFR 31.15 - Public hunting and fishing programs.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 9 2013-10-01 2013-10-01 false Public hunting and fishing programs. 31.15 Section 31.15 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR... Reduction and Disposal § 31.15 Public hunting and fishing programs. The privilege of hunting and fishing may...

  10. 50 CFR 31.15 - Public hunting and fishing programs.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 8 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false Public hunting and fishing programs. 31.15 Section 31.15 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR... Reduction and Disposal § 31.15 Public hunting and fishing programs. The privilege of hunting and fishing may...

  11. 50 CFR 31.15 - Public hunting and fishing programs.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 9 2012-10-01 2012-10-01 false Public hunting and fishing programs. 31.15 Section 31.15 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR... Reduction and Disposal § 31.15 Public hunting and fishing programs. The privilege of hunting and fishing may...

  12. 50 CFR 31.15 - Public hunting and fishing programs.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 9 2014-10-01 2014-10-01 false Public hunting and fishing programs. 31.15 Section 31.15 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR... Reduction and Disposal § 31.15 Public hunting and fishing programs. The privilege of hunting and fishing may...

  13. 50 CFR 31.15 - Public hunting and fishing programs.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Public hunting and fishing programs. 31.15 Section 31.15 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR... Reduction and Disposal § 31.15 Public hunting and fishing programs. The privilege of hunting and fishing may...

  14. THE BENEFITS OF WETLANDS: THE UPPER HALFWAY CREEK PROJECT

    EPA Science Inventory

    Researchers from the U.S. EPA are working in collaboration with U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services on this project. Upper Halfway Creek marsh is a constructed wetland managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This project will assist the U.S. EP...

  15. Shillapoo Wildlife Area, Annual Report 2007-2008.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Calkins, Brian

    This report summarizes accomplishments, challenges and successes on WDFW's Shillapoo Wildlife Area funded under Bonneville Power Administration's (BPA) Wildlife Mitigation Program (BPA project No.2003-012-00) during the Fiscal Year 08 contract period October 1, 2007-September 30, 2008. The information presented here is intended to supplement that contained in BPA's PISCES contract development and reporting system. The organization below is by broad categories of work but references are made to individual work elements in the PISCES Statement of Work as appropriate. Significant progress was realized in almost all major work types. Of particular note was progress made in tree plantings and pasturemore » rehabilitation efforts. This year's tree planting effort included five sites detailed below and in terms of the number of plants was certainly the largest effort on the wildlife area to date in one season. The planting itself took a significant amount of time, which was anticipated. However, installation of mats and tubes took much longer than expected which impacted planned fence projects in particular. Survival of the plantings appears to be good. Improvement to the quality of waterfowl pasture habitats is evident on a number of sites due to replanting and weed control efforts. Continuing long-term weed control efforts will be key in improving this particular type of habitat. A prolonged cold, wet spring and a number of equipment breakdowns presented stumbling blocks that impacted schedules and ultimately progress on planned activities. The unusual spring weather delayed fieldwork on pasture planting projects as well as weed control and slowed the process of maintaining trees and shrubs. This time lag also caused the continued deferral of some of our fencing projects. The large brush hog mower had the driveline break twice and the smaller tractor had an engine failure that caused it to be down for over a month. We have modified our budget plan for next year to include a temporary employee that will work primarily on tree maintenance and fencing projects to make sure that we make progress in these areas and we will be investigating whether a heavier duty driveline can be obtained for the mower.« less

  16. Satellite tracking of threatened species

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Williams, M.; Lunsford, A.; Ellis, D.; Robinson, J.; Coronado, P.; Campbell, W.

    1998-01-01

    In 1990, a joint effort of two U.S. federal agencies, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) and the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, began. We initially joined forces in a project that used satellite telemetry to discover the winter home of a tiny dwindling population of Siberian Cranes. Since then several projects have emerged, and a web site was created to follow some of these activities. This web site is called the Satellite Tracking of Threatened Species and its location is http://sdcd.gsfc.nasa.gov/ISTO/satellite_tracking. It describes the overall program, and links you to three subsections that describe the projects in more detail: Satellite Direct Readout, Birdtracks, and Birdworld.

  17. Cross border waters: Fragile treasures for the 21st Century; Ninth U.S./Mexico Border States Conference on Recreation, Parks, and Wildlife; 1998, June 3-6

    Treesearch

    G. J. Gottfried; C. B. Edminster; Madelyn C. Dillon

    1998-01-01

    This conference brought together scientists and resource managers from government, universities, and private organizations in the United States and Mexico. In a continuing international forum, participants exchanged information on existing or potential cooperative projects, agency functions and programs, and issues were concerning natural and cultural resource...

  18. Prairie restoration at the National Wildlife Health Laboratory (Wisconsin)

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Windingstad, R.M.

    1986-01-01

    The National Wildlife Health Laboratory (NWHL), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Madison are in the process of a 7-ha prairie restoration project on their lands to create a microcosmic representation of presettlement Wisconsin. Visiting scientists, personnel from local schools and universities, and neighboring public will eventually be able to use this land for its educational and esthetic value while becoming more familiar with the goals and objectives of the Fish and Wildlife Service and the NWHL. Self-guiding nature trails and a kiosk will facilitate public use after the project is completed.

  19. Exploring Wildlife, Unit 1, Colorado Division of Wildlife.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Hooper, Jon K.; Smith, Dwight R.

    This booklet on wildlife is part of a series to encourage youth to pursue environmental projects. The booklet discusses various aspects of wildlife management such as life zones, pollution, predator control, game stocking, habitat improvement, hunting, legislation, and careers. Key words are defined, and suggested activities are listed. (MR)

  20. Innoko National Wildlife Refuge land cover mapping project users guide

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Markon, Carl J.

    1987-01-01

    Conservation Act of 1980 (ANILCA, 1980) requires the Secretary of Interior to conduct a continuing study of fish, wildlife, and habitats on the Innoko National Wildlife Refuge (INWR). Included in this study is a determination of the extent, location, and carrying capacity of fish and wildlife habitats.

  1. 50 CFR 86.80 - What are my reporting requirements for this grant program?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What are my reporting requirements for this grant program? 86.80 Section 86.80 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE... INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM Reporting Requirements for the States § 86.80 What are my reporting...

  2. 50 CFR 86.72 - Do any other Federal requirements apply to this program?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Do any other Federal requirements apply to this program? 86.72 Section 86.72 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE... INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM How States Manage Grants § 86.72 Do any other Federal requirements apply to...

  3. Preaching to the Converted? Designing Wildlife Gardening Programs to Engage the Unengaged

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Shaw, Amy E.; Miller, Kelly K.

    2016-01-01

    If wildlife gardening programs wish to maximize their contribution to the biodiversity of their area, they need to be recruiting individuals who would not have undertaken wildlife activities of their own accord. This study sought to assess which program features equate to the most success in recruiting previously unengaged members. Providing site…

  4. 50 CFR 23.79 - How may I participate in the Plant Rescue Center Program?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false How may I participate in the Plant Rescue Center Program? 23.79 Section 23.79 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE... may I participate in the Plant Rescue Center Program? (a) Purpose. We have established the Plant...

  5. Technology transfer program: Perspective

    NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

    Toyshov, A. J.

    1981-01-01

    Most of NASA's technology transfer activities are in the area of land use (development, suitability, and planning); forestry (including wildlife and range and vegetation inventories) agriculture related activities; and water resources. The technology dissemination function is exercised through three regional applications centers which are involved in 91 applications projects within 22 states. In addition there are approximately eight application system verification transfer (ASVT) projects, 21 university applications branches, institutionalized liason activities with public interest groups, and user requirements activities. As the result of budget cuts, the ASVT and user requirements and awareness programs are to be phased out at the end of FY81. The university applications programs are to be phased down and terminated by 1985. NASA will continue to work with the user more in an R & D and an applications development capacity, and not in a national scale or administrative way.

  6. CTUIR Grande Ronde River Watershed Restoration Program McCoy Creek/McIntyre Creek Road Crossing, 1995-1999 Progress Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Childs, Allen B.

    2000-08-01

    The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) and Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) entered into a contract agreement beginning in 1996 to fund watershed restoration and enhancement actions and contribute to recovery of fish and wildlife resources and water quality in the Grande Ronde River Basin. The CTUIR's habitat program is closely coordinated with the Grande Ronde Model Watershed Program and multiple agencies and organizations within the basin. The CTUIR has focused during the past 4 years in the upper portions of the Grande Ronde Subbasin (upstream of LaGrande, Oregon) on several major project areas in the Meadow, McCoy,more » and McIntyre Creek watersheds and along the mainstem Grande Ronde River. This Annual Report provides an overview of individual projects and accomplishments.« less

  7. 7 CFR 636.1 - Applicability.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-01-01

    ... AGRICULTURE LONG TERM CONTRACTING WILDLIFE HABITAT INCENTIVES PROGRAM § 636.1 Applicability. (a) The purpose of the Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP) is to help participants develop fish and wildlife habitat on private agricultural land, nonindustrial private forest land, and Indian land. (b) The...

  8. 50 CFR 80.11 - Submission of proposals.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.11 Submission of...) authorized to sign the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program documents, and any changes in such...

  9. Summary of oceanographic and water-quality measurements in Chincoteague Bay, Maryland and Virginia, 2014–15

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Suttles, Steven E.; Ganju, Neil K.; Brosnahan, Sandra M.; Montgomery, Ellyn T.; Dickhudt, Patrick J.; Beudin, Alexis; Nowacki, Daniel J.; Martini, Marinna A.

    2017-05-25

    U.S. Geological Survey scientists and technical support staff measured oceanographic, waterquality, seabed-elevation-change, and meteorological parameters in Chincoteague Bay, Maryland and Virginia, during the period of August 13, 2014, to July 14, 2015, as part of the Estuarine Physical Response to Storms project (GS2–2D) supported by the Department of the Interior Hurricane Sandy recovery program. These measurements provide time series data that quantify the response and can be used to better understand the resilience of this back-barrier estuarine system to storms. The Assateague Island National Seashore (National Park Service) and the Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) are on the east side of Chincoteague Bay.

  10. Wildlife studies on the Hanford Site: 1993 Highlights report

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Cadwell, L.L.

    The Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) Wildlife Resources Monitoring Project was initiated by DOE to track the status of wildlife populations to determine whether Hanford operations affected them. The project continues to conduct a census of wildlife populations that are highly visible, economically or aesthetically important, and rare or otherwise considered sensitive. Examples of long-term data collected and maintained through the Wildlife Resources Monitoring Project include annual goose nesting surveys conducted on islands in the Hanford Reach, wintering bald eagle surveys, and fall Chinook salmon redd (nest) surveys. The report highlights activities related to salmon and mollusks on the Hanford Reachmore » of the Columbia River; describes efforts to map vegetation on the Site and efforts to survey species of concern; provides descriptions of shrub-steppe bird surveys, including bald eagles, Canada geese, and hawks; outlines efforts to monitor mule deer and elk populations on the Site; and describes development of a biological database management system.« less

  11. 50 CFR 80.120 - What is program income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80...

  12. 50 CFR 80.120 - What is program income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80...

  13. 50 CFR 80.123 - How may an agency use program income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program...

  14. 50 CFR 80.123 - How may an agency use program income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program...

  15. Supplemental Environmental Assessment & Finding of No Significant Impact: Louisville Bend State Wildlife Area Fish and Wildlife Habitat Rehabilitation

    DTIC Science & Technology

    2013-05-01

    and Maintenance of the Missouri River Bank Stabilization and Navigation Project, and Operation of the Kansas River Reservoir System, and acquiring and...developing lands to produce habitat as directed by the BSNP Mitigation Project. The proposed project would be constructed under the authority of...the Mitigation Project. The Missouri River BSNP Mitigation Project of Missouri, Kansas , Iowa, and Nebraska was authorized by Section 601 (a) of the

  16. 7 CFR 636.1 - Applicability.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-01-01

    ... AGRICULTURE LONG TERM CONTRACTING WILDLIFE HABITAT INCENTIVE PROGRAM § 636.1 Applicability. (a) The purpose of the Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program (WHIP) is to help participants develop fish and wildlife habitat on private agricultural land, nonindustrial private forest land (NIPF), and Indian land. (b) The...

  17. 7 CFR 636.1 - Applicability.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-01-01

    ... AGRICULTURE LONG TERM CONTRACTING WILDLIFE HABITAT INCENTIVE PROGRAM § 636.1 Applicability. (a) The purpose of the Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program (WHIP) is to help participants develop fish and wildlife habitat on private agricultural land, nonindustrial private forest land (NIPF), and Indian land. (b) The...

  18. 7 CFR 636.1 - Applicability.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-01-01

    ... AGRICULTURE LONG TERM CONTRACTING WILDLIFE HABITAT INCENTIVE PROGRAM § 636.1 Applicability. (a) The purpose of the Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program (WHIP) is to help participants develop fish and wildlife habitat on private agricultural land, nonindustrial private forest land (NIPF), and Indian land. (b) The...

  19. 7 CFR 636.1 - Applicability.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-01-01

    ... AGRICULTURE LONG TERM CONTRACTING WILDLIFE HABITAT INCENTIVE PROGRAM § 636.1 Applicability. (a) The purpose of the Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program (WHIP) is to help participants develop fish and wildlife habitat on private agricultural land, nonindustrial private forest land (NIPF), and Indian land. (b) The...

  20. Introduction to symposium: Arthropods and wildlife conservation: synergy in complex biological systems

    USDA-ARS?s Scientific Manuscript database

    The symposium will discuss the effects of arthropods and other stressors on wildlife conservation programs. Speakers with affiliations in wildlife biology, parasitology and entomology will be included in the program. Research of national and international interest will be presented....

  1. 50 CFR 80.120 - What is program income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.120 What...

  2. 50 CFR 80.123 - How may an agency use program income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program...

  3. 50 CFR 80.123 - How may an agency use program income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program...

  4. 50 CFR 80.120 - What is program income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.120 What...

  5. Monitoring of Downstream Salmon and Steelhead at Federal Hydroelectric Facilities, 1990 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Hawkes, Lynette A.

    1991-03-01

    The seaward migration of salmonid smolts was monitored by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) at three sites on the Columbia River system in 1990. This project is a part of the continuing Smolt Monitoring Program to monitor Columbia Basin salmonid stocks coordinated by the Fish Passage Center (FPC) for the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Agencies and Indian Tribes. It's purpose is to provide timely data to the Fish Passage Managers for in season flow and spill management for fish passage and post-season analysis for travel time, relative magnitude and timing and the smolt migration. This program is carriedmore » out under the auspices of the Northwest Power Planning Council Fish and Wildlife Program and is funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA). Sampling sites were John Day and Bonneville Dams under the Smolt Monitoring program, and the Dallas Dam under the Fish Spill Memorandum of Agreement'' for 1990. All pertinent fish capture, condition and brand data, as well as dam operations and river flow data were reported daily to FPC. These data were incorporated into the FPC Fish Passage Data Information System (FPDIS). 10 refs., 8 figs., 1 tab.« less

  6. Bozeman Pass wildlife channelization ITS project : executive summary.

    DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

    2006-05-31

    Animal-vehicle collisions (AVCs) are a growing concern as vehicle miles traveled and : human encroachment into wildlife habitat continues to increase throughout the United : States. Measures to prevent AVCs such as wildlife exclusion fencing and wild...

  7. 50 CFR 80.121 - May an agency earn program income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80...

  8. 50 CFR 80.121 - May an agency earn program income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80...

  9. Final Independent External Peer Review Report for the Intake Diversion Dam Modification Lower Yellowstone Project, Montana Draft Supplement to the 26 April 2010 Environmental Assessment and Appendices

    DTIC Science & Technology

    2013-02-08

    Fish and Wildlife Service WRDA Water Resources Development Act Intake Project IEPR Final IEPR Report February 8, 2013 x... Wildlife Service (USFWS), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), Montana Department of Environmental Quality, The Nature Conservancy...30% design features and channel entrance and exit pre-appraisal study to provide fish passage around Intake Dam, Montana. U.S. Fish and Wildlife

  10. 50 CFR 80.9 - Notice of desire to participate.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.9 Notice of desire to... Federal Assistance which contains plans for the use of Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program funds...

  11. 78 FR 49445 - Wildlife Services Policy on Wildlife Damage Management in Urban Areas

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-08-14

    ...] Wildlife Services Policy on Wildlife Damage Management in Urban Areas AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health... Health Inspection Service's Wildlife Services (APHIS-WS) program is making a policy decision on how to.... FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. William H. Clay, Deputy Administrator, Wildlife Services, APHIS...

  12. 50 CFR 80.121 - May an agency earn program income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.121 May...

  13. 50 CFR 80.121 - May an agency earn program income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.121 May...

  14. Micro-Credit and Community Wildlife Management: Complementary Strategies to Improve Conservation Outcomes in Serengeti National Park, Tanzania

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Kaaya, Emmanuel; Chapman, Margaret

    2017-09-01

    Community wildlife management programs in African protected areas aim to deliver livelihood and social benefits to local communities in order to bolster support for their conservation objectives. Most of these benefits are delivered at the community level. However, many local people are also seeking more individual or household-level livelihood benefits from community wildlife management programs because it is at this level that many of the costs of protected area conservation are borne. Because community wildlife management delivers few benefits at this level, support for their conservation objectives amongst local people often declines. The study investigated the implications of this for reducing poaching in Serengeti National Park, Tanzania. Three community wildlife management initiatives undertaken by Park management were compared with regard to their capacity to deliver the individual and household-level benefits sought by local people: community conservation services, wildlife management areas and community conservation banks. Interviews were carried out with poachers and local people from four villages in the Western Serengeti including members of village conservation banks, as well as a number of key informants. The results suggest that community conservation banks could, as a complementary strategy to existing community wildlife management programs, potentially provide a more effective means of reducing poaching in African protected areas than community wildlife management programs alone.

  15. 50 CFR 80.30 - Why must an agency certify the number of paid license holders?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH... apportion funds in the Wildlife Restoration and Sport Fish Restoration programs among the States. ...

  16. 50 CFR 80.30 - Why must an agency certify the number of paid license holders?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH... apportion funds in the Wildlife Restoration and Sport Fish Restoration programs among the States. ...

  17. Grande Ronde Basin Chinook Salmon Captive Brood and Conventional Supplementation Programs, 2003 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Hoffnagle, Timothy L.; Hair, Don; Carmichael, Richard W.

    2004-07-01

    BPA Fish and Wildlife Program Project Number 1998-01-001 provides funding for the Grande Ronde Basin Spring Chinook Salmon Captive Broodstock Program. This report satisfies the requirement that an annual report be submitted for FY 2003. The Grande Ronde Basin Spring Chinook Salmon Captive Broodstock Project is designed to rapidly increase numbers of salmon in stocks that are in imminent danger of extirpation. Parr are captured in Catherine Creek, upper Grande Ronde River and Lostine River and reared to adulthood in captivity. Upon maturation, these fish are spawned (within stocks) and their progeny reared to smoltification before being released into themore » natal stream of their parents. This program is co-managed by ODFW, National Marine Fisheries Service, Nez Perce Tribe and Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation. This report covers activities conducted and provides data analyses for the Grande Ronde Spring Chinook Salmon Captive broodstock Program from 1 January--31 December 2003. Since the fiscal year ends in the middle of the spawning period, an annual report based on calendar year is more logical. This document is the FY 2003 annual report. Detailed information on historic and present population status, project background, goals and objectives, significance to regional programs and relationships to other programs, methods and previous results are available in the 1995-2002 Project Status Report (Hoffnagle et al 2003).« less

  18. Florida manatee avoidance technology: A pilot program by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Frisch, Katherine; Haubold, Elsa

    2003-10-01

    Since 1976, approximately 25% of the annual Florida manatee (Trichechus manatus latirostris) mortality has been attributed to collisions with watercraft. In 2001, the Florida Legislature appropriated $200,000 in funds for research projects using technological solutions to directly address the problem of collisions between manatees and watercraft. The Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission initially funded seven projects for the first two fiscal years. The selected proposals were designed to explore technology that had not previously been applied to the manatee/boat collision problem and included many acoustic concepts related to voice recognition, sonar, and an alerting device to be put on boats to warn manatees. The most promising results to date are from projects employing voice-recognition techniques to identify manatee vocalizations and warn boaters of the manatees' presence. Sonar technology, much like that used in fish finders, is promising but has met with regulatory problems regarding permitting and remains to be tested, as has the manatee-alerting device. The state of Florida found results of the initial years of funding compelling and plans to fund further manatee avoidance technology research in a continued effort to mitigate the problem of manatee/boat collisions.

  19. 50 CFR 253.18 - Program operating guidelines.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 7 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Program operating guidelines. 253.18 Section 253.18 Wildlife and Fisheries NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC... Guarantee Program § 253.18 Program operating guidelines. The Division may issue Program operating guidelines...

  20. 50 CFR 85.31 - Grant selection.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Grant selection. 85.31 Section 85.31...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CLEAN VESSEL ACT GRANT PROGRAM Grant Selection § 85.31 Grant selection. The Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Federal Aid, will convene a ranking...

  1. 50 CFR 86.10 - What does this regulation do?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What does this regulation do? 86.10... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG... Boating Infrastructure Grant (BIG) Program. “We” and “us” refers to the Fish and Wildlife Service. This...

  2. 50 CFR 80.25 - Multiyear financing under the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ...-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Program. 80.25 Section 80.25 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH... SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.25 Multiyear financing under the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration...

  3. 50 CFR 86.13 - What is boating infrastructure?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 9 2014-10-01 2014-10-01 false What is boating infrastructure? 86.13 Section 86.13 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR... (BIG) PROGRAM General Information About the Grant Program § 86.13 What is boating infrastructure...

  4. Columbia Basin Wildlife Mitigation Project : Rainwater Wildlife Area Final Management Plan.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Childs, Allen

    This Draft Management Plan has been developed by the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) to document how the Rainwater Wildlife Area (formerly known as the Rainwater Ranch) will be managed. The plan has been developed under a standardized planning process developed by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) for Columbia River Basin Wildlife Mitigation Projects (See Appendix A and Guiding Policies Section below). The plan outlines the framework for managing the project area, provides an assessment of existing conditions and key resource issues, and presents an array of habitat management and enhancement strategies. The plan culminates into amore » 5-Year Action Plan that will focus our management actions and prioritize funding during the Fiscal 2001-2005 planning period. This plan is a product of nearly two years of field studies and research, public scoping, and coordination with the Rainwater Advisory Committee. The committee consists of representatives from tribal government, state agencies, local government, public organizations, and members of the public. The plan is organized into several sections with Chapter 1 providing introductory information such as project location, purpose and need, project goals and objectives, common elements and assumptions, coordination efforts and public scoping, and historical information about the project area. Key issues are presented in Chapter 2 and Chapter 3 discusses existing resource conditions within the wildlife area. Chapter 4 provides a detailed presentation on management activities and Chapter 5 outlines a monitoring and evaluation plan for the project that will help assess whether the project is meeting the intended purpose and need and the goals and objectives. Chapter 6 displays the action plan and provides a prioritized list of actions with associated budget for the next five year period. Successive chapters contain appendices, references, definitions, and a glossary.« less

  5. 50 CFR 401.3 - Submission of documents.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ..., DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE); ENDANGERED SPECIES COMMITTEE REGULATIONS SUBCHAPTER A ANADROMOUS FISHERIES....3 Wildlife and Fisheries JOINT REGULATIONS (UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF... the concerned Regional Office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, or for projects relating...

  6. Predator Bounties in Western Canada Cause Animal Suffering and Compromise Wildlife Conservation Efforts

    PubMed Central

    Proulx, Gilbert; Rodtka, Dwight

    2015-01-01

    Although predation bounty programs (rewards offered for capturing or killing an animal) ended more than 40 years ago in Canada, they were reintroduced in Alberta in 2007 by hunting, trapping, and farming organizations, municipalities and counties, and in 2009 in Saskatchewan, by municipal and provincial governments and the Saskatchewan Cattlemen’s Association. Bounty hunters use inhumane and non-selective killing methods such as shooting animals in non-vital regions, and killing neck snares and strychnine poisoning, which cause suffering and delayed deaths. They are unselective, and kill many non-target species, some of them at risk. Predator bounty programs have been found to be ineffective by wildlife professionals, and they use killing methods that cause needless suffering and jeopardize wildlife conservation programs. Our analysis therefore indicates that government agencies should not permit the implementation of bounty programs. Accordingly, they must develop conservation programs that will minimize wildlife-human conflicts, prevent the unnecessary and inhumane killing of animals, and ensure the persistence of all wildlife species. PMID:26479482

  7. Predator Bounties in Western Canada Cause Animal Suffering and CompromiseWildlife Conservation Efforts.

    PubMed

    Proulx, Gilbert; Rodtka, Dwight

    2015-10-19

    Although predation bounty programs (rewards offered for capturing or killing an animal) ended more than 40 years ago in Canada, they were reintroduced in Alberta in 2007 by hunting, trapping, and farming organizations, municipalities and counties, and in 2009 in Saskatchewan, by municipal and provincial governments and the Saskatchewan Cattlemen's Association. Bounty hunters use inhumane and non-selective killing methods such as shooting animals in non-vital regions, and killing neck snares and strychnine poisoning, which cause suffering and delayed deaths. They are unselective, and kill many non-target species, some of them at risk. Predator bounty programs have been found to be ineffective by wildlife professionals, and they use killing methods that cause needless suffering and jeopardize wildlife conservation programs. Our analysis therefore indicates that government agencies should not permit the implementation of bounty programs. Accordingly, they must develop conservation programs that will minimize wildlife-human conflicts, prevent the unnecessary and inhumane killing of animals, and ensure the persistence of all wildlife species.

  8. Fostering community-based wildlife health monitoring and research in the Canadian North.

    PubMed

    Brook, Ryan K; Kutz, Susan J; Veitch, Alasdair M; Popko, Richard A; Elkin, Brett T; Guthrie, Glen

    2009-06-01

    Many northern Canadians have continued a subsistence lifestyle of wildlife harvesting and, therefore, value sustainable wildlife populations. At a regional wildlife workshop in the Sahtu Settlement Area, Northwest Territories in 2002, elders and community leaders raised concerns regarding wildlife health, food safety, and the effects of climate change on wildlife. They requested that efforts be put toward training youth in science and increasing involvement of hunters and youth in wildlife research. In response, we initiated a long-term, integrated approach to foster community-based wildlife health monitoring and research. Annual trips were made to all schools in the Sahtu from 2003 to 2009 to provide hands-on learning for 250-460 students on a range of wildlife topics. In addition, interviews were conducted with 31 hunters and elders to document their local ecological knowledge of wildlife health and local hunters were trained as monitors to collect tissue samples and measurements to assess body condition and monitor health of harvested caribou (n = 69) and moose (n = 19). In 2007 the program was extended to include participation in the annual caribou hunt held by one community. Each year since 2005, a graduate student and/or a postdoctoral trainee in the veterinary or biological sciences has participated in the program. The program has evolved during the last 6 years in response to community and school input, results of empirical research, hunter feedback, local knowledge, and logistical constraints. The continuity of the program is attributed to the energetic collaboration among diverse partners and a unified approach that responds to identified needs.

  9. Evaluation of Planning for Fish and Wildlife at Corps of Engineers Reservoirs, Eufaula Reservoir Project, Oklahoma.

    DTIC Science & Technology

    1982-09-01

    Eufaula Lake, the largest body of water in Oklahoma, extends into McIntosh, Haskell, Pittsburg and Olwiulgee counties , Oklahoma. Construction of the...TABLES iv LIST OF FIGURES vii PROJECT PERSONNEL viii INTRODUCTION 1 Location I Authorization 1 Physical Features 3 Area Description 4 WILDLIFE RESULTS AND...TableLa I Eufaula Lake Project. Summary of pertinent physical 4 characteristics. 2 Eufaula Project. Comparison of terrestrial habitat 9 affected by

  10. Building on the International Year of Astronomy: The Dark Skies Awareness Program

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Walker, C. E.; Sparks, R. T.; Pompea, S. M.

    2010-08-01

    The International Year of Astronomy (IYA2009) offered opportunities to create exemplary educational programs in astronomy, such as those through the cornerstone project, Dark Skies Awareness (DSA). The preservation of dark skies is important for many reasons including astronomy, energy conservation, wildlife conservation, and even human health. Light pollution is a growing concern, yet it is one of the easiest global environmental problems citizen scientists can address on a local level. The Dark Skies workshop imparted the skills necessary for participants to lead activities at their home institution for conserving dark skies. Workshop participants experienced the hands-on activities, which are suitable for use in a variety of settings including museums, science centers, planetariums, schools, university outreach efforts, and astronomy club events. Participants were immersed in activities that illustrate proper lighting, light pollution's effects on wildlife, and how to measure the darkness of your skies. Several citizen science projects were highlighted, including GLOBE at Night, the Great World Wide Star Count, and How Many Stars. These programs enlist the help of students and the general public to collect data on the night sky conditions in their community and contribute to a worldwide database on light pollution. The data can be analyzed using various online tools. A CD of activities, a light shielding demonstration, a book, a two DVD set with a planetarium show, and many other resources are included in a Dark Skies Education Kit, which workshop participants received at the close of the workshop.

  11. Use of a GIS-based model of habitat cores and landscape corridors for the Virginia Department of Transportation's project planning and environmental scoping.

    DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

    2006-01-01

    As important habitats are being lost to human development, transportation agencies are facing increased expectations that their road projects avoid or minimize further habitat destruction and adverse effects on wildlife populations. Wildlife linkage ...

  12. 76 FR 19313 - Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest, Wisconsin, Lakewood Southeast Project

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-04-07

    ... area. The project-specific needs include: Reintroduction of natural regimes, wildlife habitat and... for change in: (1) Loss of natural regimes (2) wildlife habitat (3) stream improvement (4) species age... is Township 31-32 North, Range 17 East. The Forest Service proposes to reintroduce natural regimes in...

  13. Baseline wildlife monitoring at I-90 Snoqualmie Pass East, prior to the installation of wildlife crossing structures.

    DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

    2012-12-01

    The I-90 Snoqualmie Pass East Project (SPE) is located along a 15-mile stretch of Interstate 90 : that passes through the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest. The project corridor has been : identified as a critical connectivity zone for Pacific North...

  14. A national survey of Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) participants on environmental effects, wildlife issues, and vegetation management on program lands

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Allen, Arthur W.; Vandever, Mark W.

    2003-01-01

    A national survey of Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) contractees was completed to obtain information about Abstract environmental and social effects of the program on participants, farms, and communities. Of interest were observations concerning wildlife, attitudes about long-term management of program lands, and effectiveness of U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) assistance in relation to these issues. Surveys were delivered to 2,189 CRP participants with a resultant response rate of 64.5%. Retired farmers represented the largest category of respondents (52%). Enhanced control of soil erosion was the leading benefit of the CRP reported. Over 73% of respondents observed increased numbers of wildlife associated with lands enrolled in the program. The majority of respondents reported CRP benefits, including increased quality of surface and ground waters, improved air quality, control of drifting snow, and elevated opportunities to hunt or simply observe wildlife as part of daily activities. Income stability, improved scenic quality of farms and landscapes, and potential increases in property values and future incomes also were seen as program benefits. Negative aspects, reported by a smaller number of respondents, included seeing the CRP as a source of weeds, fire hazard, and attracting unwanted requests for trespass. Over 75% of respondents believed CRP benefits to wildlife were important. A majority of respondents (82%) believed the amount of assistance furnished by USDA related to planning and maintaining wildlife habitat associated with CRP lands was appropriate. Nearly 51% of respondents would accept incorporation of periodic management of vegetation into long-term management of CRP lands to maintain quality of wildlife habitats. Provision of funds to address additional costs and changes in CRP regulations would be required to maximize long-term management of program lands. Additional, on-ground assistance related to management of CRP, and other agricultural lands, to maintain wildlife habitats was commonly identified as a need by survey respondents.

  15. Walnut creek watershed monitoring project, Iowa: Monitoring water quality in response to prairie restoration

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Schilling, K.E.; Thompson, C.A.

    2000-01-01

    Land use and surface water data for nitrogen and pesticides (1995 to 1997) are reported for the Walnut Creek Watershed Monitoring Project, Jasper County Iowa. The Walnut Creek project was established in 1995 as a nonpoint source monitoring program in relation to watershed habitat restoration and agricultural management changes implemented at the Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The monitoring project utilizes a paired-watershed approach (Walnut and Squaw creeks) as well as upstream/downstream comparisons on Walnut for analysis and tracking of trends. From 1992 to 1997, 13.4 percent of the watershed was converted from row crop to native prairie in the Walnut Creek watershed. Including another 6 percent of watershed farmed on a cash-rent basis, land use changes have been implemented on 19.4 percent of the watershed by the USFWS. Nitrogen and pesticide applications were reduced an estimated 18 percent and 28 percent in the watershed from land use changes. Atrazine was detected most often in surface water with frequencies of detection ranging from 76-86 percent. No significant differences were noted in atrazine concentrations between Walnut and Squaw Creek. Nitrate-N concentrations measured in both watersheds were similar; both basins showed a similar pattern of detection and an overall reduction in nitrate-N concentrations from upstream to downstream monitoring sites. Water quality improvements are suggested by nitrate-N and chloride ratios less than one in the Walnut Creek watershed and low nitrate-N concentrations measured in the subbasin of Walnut Creek containing the greatest amount of land use changes. Atrazine and nitrate-N concentrations from the lower portion of the Walnut Creek watershed (including the prairie restoration area) may be decreasing in relation to the upstream untreated component of the watershed. The frequencies of pesticide detections and mean nitrate-N concentrations appear related to the percentage of row crop in the basins and subbasins. Although some results are encouraging, definitive water quality improvements have not been observed during the first three years of monitoring. Possible reasons include: (1) more time is needed to adequately detect changes; (2) the size of the watershed is too large to detect improvements; (3) land use changes are not located in the area of the watershed where they would have greatest effect; or (4) water quality improvements have occurred but have been missed by the project monitoring design. Longer-term monitoring will allow better evaluation of the impact of restoration activities on water quality.An overview is given on the Walnut Creek Watershed Monitoring Project established as a nonpoint source monitoring program in relation to watershed habitat restoration and agricultural management changes implemented at the Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services. Focus is on land use and surface water data for nitrogen and pesticides. Initial results obtained for the first three years of monitoring are discussed.

  16. Hood River and Pelton Ladder Evaluation Studies : Annual Report 1994.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Olsen, Erik A.; French, Rod A.; Ritchey, Alan D.

    1995-09-01

    In 1992, the Northwest Power Planning Council approved the Hood River and Pelton ladder master plans within the framework of the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. The master plans define an approach for implementing a hatchery supplementation program in the Hood River subbasin. The hatchery program as defined in the master plans is called the Hood River Hatchery Production Program (HRPP). The HRPP will be phased in over several years and will be jointly implemented by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) and the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs (CTWS) Reservation. In December 1991, amore » monitoring and evaluation program was implemented in the Hood River subbasin to collect life history and production information on stocks of anadromous salmonids returning to the Hood River subbasin. The program was implemented to provide the baseline information needed to: (1) evaluate various management options for implementing the HRPP and (2) determine any post-project impacts the HRPP has on indigenous populations of resident fish. Information collected during the 1992-94 fiscal years will also be used to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) evaluating the program`s impact on the human environment. To begin construction on project facilities, it was proposed that the HRPP be implemented in two phases. Phase I would include work that would fall under a {open_quotes}categorical exclusion{close_quotes} from NEPA, and Phase II would include work requiring an EIS prior to implementation. This report summarizes the life history and escapement data collected in the Hood River subbasin and the status work of implemented under Phase I of the HR Life history and escapement data will be used to: (1) test the assumptions on which harvest and escapement goals for the Hood River and Pelton ladder master plans are based and (2) develop biologically based management recommendations for implementing the HRPP.« less

  17. Umatilla River Subbasin Fish Habitat Improvement Program, 1996-2003 Summary Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    St. Hilaire, Danny R.; Montgomery, Michael; Bailey, Timothy D.

    This annual report is in fulfillment of contractual obligations with Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), which is the funding source for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife's (ODFW), Umatilla River Subbasin Fish Habitat Improvement Program (Program). The last Annual Program Report was submitted in 1997, and described projects undertaken in 1995. This report describes Program activities carried out in 2003, along with a summary of projects undertaken during the years 1996 through 2002. The Program works cooperatively with private landowners to develop long-term restoration agreements, under which, passive and active Habitat Improvement Projects are conducted. Historically, projects have included livestockmore » exclusion fencing (passive restoration) to protect riparian habitats, along with the installation of instream structures (active restoration) to address erosion and improve fish habitat. In recent years, the focus of active restoration has shifted to bioengineering treatments and, more recently, to channel re-design and re-construction aimed at improving fish habitat, by restoring stable channel function. This report provides a summary table of past projects (1996-2002), along with a text description of more extensive habitat improvement projects, including: (1) Implementation of a four-phased project on the Lobato property (Birch Creek) beginning in 1996 and involving a demonstration bioengineering site and riparian improvements (fencing, planting), (2) Implementation of stable channel design/instream structure placement on the Houser property, East Birch Creek, beginning in 1998, an (3) Implementation of a joint, US Army Corps of Engineers/ODFW (cost share) project beginning in 2001 on the Brogoitti property, East Birch Creek, which involved implementation of stable channel design/construction and riparian improvement treatments.« less

  18. 50 CFR 86.133 - What are the plan standards?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 9 2012-10-01 2012-10-01 false What are the plan standards? 86.133 Section 86.133 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR...) PROGRAM How States Will Complete the State Program Plans § 86.133 What are the plan standards? You must...

  19. 50 CFR 86.133 - What are the plan standards?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 9 2014-10-01 2014-10-01 false What are the plan standards? 86.133 Section 86.133 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR... (BIG) PROGRAM How States Will Complete the State Program Plans § 86.133 What are the plan standards...

  20. 50 CFR 84.21 - How do I apply for a National Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... Wetlands Conservation Grant? 84.21 Section 84.21 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Applying for Grants § 84.21 How do I apply...

  1. 50 CFR 86.53 - What are funding tiers?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 9 2014-10-01 2014-10-01 false What are funding tiers? 86.53 Section 86.53 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR... (BIG) PROGRAM How States Apply for Grants § 86.53 What are funding tiers? (a) This grant program will...

  2. Implications of climate change for northern Canada: freshwater, marine, and terrestrial ecosystems.

    PubMed

    Prowse, Terry D; Furgal, Chris; Wrona, Fred J; Reist, James D

    2009-07-01

    Climate variability and change is projected to have significant effects on the physical, chemical, and biological components of northern Canadian marine, terrestrial, and freshwater systems. As the climate continues to change, there will be consequences for biodiversity shifts and for the ranges and distribution of many species with resulting effects on availability, accessibility, and quality of resources upon which human populations rely. This will have implications for the protection and management of wildlife, fish, and fisheries resources; protected areas; and forests. The northward migration of species and the disruption and competition from invading species are already occurring and will continue to affect marine, terrestrial, and freshwater communities. Shifting environmental conditions will likely introduce new animal-transmitted diseases and redistribute some existing diseases, affecting key economic resources and some human populations. Stress on populations of iconic wildlife species, such as the polar bear, ringed seals, and whales, will continue as a result of changes in critical sea-ice habitat interactions. Where these stresses affect economically and culturally important species, they will have significant effects on people and regional economies. Further integrated, field-based monitoring and research programs, and the development of predictive models are required to allow for more detailed and comprehensive projections of change to be made, and to inform the development and implementation of appropriate adaptation, wildlife, and habitat conservation and protection strategies.

  3. Wildlife, Snow, Coffee, and Video: The IPY Activities of the University of Alaska Young Researchers' Network

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Pringle, D.; Alvarez-Aviles, L.; Carlson, D.; Harbeck, J.; Druckenmiller, M.; Newman, K.; Mueller, D.; Petrich, C.; Roberts, A.; Wang, Y.

    2007-12-01

    The University of Alaska International Polar Year (IPY) Young Researchers' Network is a group of graduate students and postdoctoral fellows. Our interdisciplinary group operates as a volunteer network to promote the International Polar Year through education and outreach aimed at the general public and Alaskan students of all ages. The Young Researchers' Network sponsors and organizes science talks or Science Cafés by guest speakers in public venues such as coffee shops and bookstores. We actively engage high school students in IPY research concerning the ionic concentrations and isotopic ratios of precipitation through Project Snowball. Our network provides hands-on science activities to encourage environmental awareness and initiate community wildlife monitoring programs such as Wildlife Day by Day. We mentor individual high school students pursuing their own research projects related to IPY through the Alaska High School Science Symposium. Our group also interacts with the general public at community events and festivals to share the excitement of IPY for example at the World Ice Art Championship and Alaska State Fair. The UA IPY Young Researchers' Network continues to explore new partnerships with educators and students in an effort to enhance science and education related to Alaska and the polar regions in general. For more information please visit: http://ipy-youth.uaf.edu or e-mail: ipy-youth@alaska.edu

  4. Effects on fish and wildlife of chemical treatments of large areas

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    George, J.L.

    1959-01-01

    Summary: The history of field investigations of the effects of DDT on wildlife is reviewed briefly, from the initial studies in 1945 through the more recent studies of the effects of the large-scale programs for spruce-budworm control and gypsy-moth eradication. DDT dosages and procedures that are recommended for protection of wildlife are reviewed. Effects of aldrin, heptachlor, and toxaphene are discussed in connection with the grasshopper and Mormon cricket control programs. Delayed and indirect effects of chemical treatments are emphasized as an important current problem. Cited in this connection are fish losses in the Yellowstone and Miramichi rivers and losses of wildlife from eating earthworms a year after treatment of the area with DDT. Currently recommended procedures to safeguard wildlife in pesticidal programs are listed.

  5. Municipal biosolid applications: Improving ecosystem services across urban, agricultural, and wildlife interfaces in Austin, Texas

    USDA-ARS?s Scientific Manuscript database

    Our project encompasses emerging contaminants, ecosystem services, and urban-agriculture-wildlife interfaces. This seminal research collaboration between USDA-ARS Grassland, Soil, and Water Research Laboratory, The City of Austin Water Utility, and Texas Parks and Wildlife Environmental Contaminant...

  6. Review of BPA Funded Sturgeon, Resident Fish and Wildlife Projects for 1990/1991.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration.

    1990-12-01

    The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) held a public meeting on November 19--21, 1991, for the purpose of review, coordination, and consultation of the BPA-funded projects for sturgeon, resident fish, and wildlife in the Columbia River Basin (Basin). The comments received after the meeting were favorable and the participants agreed that the meeting was stimulating and productive. The information exchanged should lead to better coordination with other projects throughout the Basin. This document list the projects by title, the project leaders and BPA's project officers, and an abstract of each leader's presentation.

  7. Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation; 2003-2004 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Schwartz, Jesse D.M.; Contor, Craig C.; Hoverson, Eric

    2005-10-01

    The Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project (UBNPMEP) is funded by Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) as directed by section 4(h) of the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act of 1980 (P. L. 96-501). This project is in accordance with and pursuant to measures 4.2A, 4.3C.1, 7.1A.2, 7.1C.3, 7.1C.4 and 7.1D.2 of the Northwest Power Planning Council's (NPPC) Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (NPPC 1994). Work was conducted by the Fisheries Program of the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR). UBNPMEP is coordinated with two ODFW research projects that also monitor and evaluatemore » the success of the Umatilla Fisheries Restoration Plan. Our project deals with the natural production component of the plan, and the ODFW projects evaluate hatchery operations (project No. 19000500, Umatilla Hatchery M & E) and smolt outmigration (project No. 198902401, Evaluation of Juvenile Salmonid Outmigration and Survival in the Lower Umatilla River). Collectively these three projects comprehensively monitor and evaluate natural and hatchery salmonid production in the Umatilla River Basin. Table 1 outlines relationships with other BPA supported projects. The need for natural production monitoring has been identified in multiple planning documents including Wy-Kan-Ush-Mi Wa-Kish-Wit Volume I, 5b-13 (CRITFC 1996), the Umatilla Hatchery Master Plan (CTUIR & ODFW 1990), the Umatilla Basin Annual Operation Plan (ODFW and CTUIR 2004), the Umatilla Subbasin Summary (CTUIR & ODFW 2001), the Subbasin Plan (CTUIR & ODFW 2004), and the Comprehensive Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation Plan (Schwartz & Cameron Under Revision). Natural production monitoring and evaluation is also consistent with Section III, Basinwide Provisions, Strategy 9 of the 2000 Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (NPPC 1994, NPPC 2004). The need for monitoring the natural production of salmonids in the Umatilla River Basin developed with the efforts to restore natural populations of spring and fall Chinook salmon, (Oncorhynchus tshawytsha) coho salmon and (O. kisutch) and enhance summer steelhead (O. mykiss). The need for restoration began with agricultural development in the early 1900's that extirpated salmon and reduced steelhead runs (BOR 1988). The most notable development was the construction and operation of Three-Mile Falls Dam (3MD) and other irrigation projects that dewatered the Umatilla River during salmon migrations. The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) developed the Umatilla Hatchery Master Plan to restore the historical fisheries in the basin. The plan was completed in 1990 and included the following objectives: (1) Establish hatchery and natural runs of Chinook and coho salmon. (2) Enhance existing summer steelhead populations through a hatchery program. (3) Provide sustainable tribal and non-tribal harvest of salmon and steelhead. (4) Maintain the genetic characteristics of salmonids in the Umatilla River Basin. (5) Produce almost 48,000 adult returns to Three-Mile Falls Dam. The goals were reviewed in 1999 and were changed to 31,500 adult salmon and steelhead returns (Table 2). We conduct core long-term monitoring activities each year as well as two and three-year projects that address special needs for adaptive management. Examples of these projects include adult passage evaluations (Contor et al. 1995, Contor et al. 1996, Contor et al. 1997, Contor et al. 1998), genetic monitoring (Currens & Schreck 1995, Narum et al. 2004), and habitat assessment surveys (Contor et al. 1995, Contor et al. 1996, Contor et al. 1997, Contor et al. 1998). Our project goal is to provide quality information to managers and researchers working to restore anadromous salmonids to the Umatilla River Basin. This is the only project that monitors the restoration of naturally producing salmon and steelhead in the basin.« less

  8. 50 CFR 86.61 - What process does the Service use to select projects for grants?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What process does the Service use to....61 What process does the Service use to select projects for grants? The Service's Division of Federal... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

  9. Influence of financial incentive programs in sustaining wildlife values

    Treesearch

    Thomas J. Straka; Michael A. Kilgore; Michael G. Jacobson; John L. Greene; Steven E. Daniels

    2007-01-01

    Conservation incentive programs have substantial impacts on the nation’s forests and wildlife habitat. There are eight major conservation incentive programs. The Forest Stewardship Program (FSP) provides forest landowner assistance by focusing on resource management plans embodying multi-resource stewardship principles. The Forest Land Enhancement Program (FLEP) is the...

  10. Northeast Oregon Wildlife Mitigation Project : Final Environmental Assessment.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration; Nez Perce Tribe

    1996-08-01

    Development of the hydropower system in the Columbia River Basin has had far-reaching effects on many species of wildlife. The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) is responsible for mitigating the loss of wildlife habitat caused by the Federal portion of this system, as allocated to the purpose of power production. BPA needs to mitigate for loss of wildlife habitat in the Snake River Subbasin.

  11. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge land cover mapping project users guide

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Markon, Carl J.

    1986-01-01

    Section 1002 of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (ANILCA, 1980) requires the Secretary of Interior to conduct a continuing study of fish, wildlife, and habitats on the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). Included in this study is a determination of the extent, location, and carrying capacity of fish and wildlife habitats.

  12. 50 CFR 86.70 - What are my requirements to acquire, install, operate, and maintain real and personal property?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What are my requirements to acquire, install, operate, and maintain real and personal property? 86.70 Section 86.70 Wildlife and Fisheries...-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM How States Manage Grants...

  13. Science Sampler: Inquiry Goes Outdoors--What Can We Learn at the Pond?

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Bourdeau, Virginia; Arnold, Mary E.

    2008-01-01

    The Oregon 4-H Wildlife Stewards program has been training teachers and volunteers to convert school grounds to education sites by constructing schoolyard wildlife habitats since 1997. The publication "What Can We Learn at the Pond? 4-H Wildlife Stewards Master Leader Guide" (Bourdeau 2004a) was written to support the program's focus on developing…

  14. The Wildlife Habitat Education Program: Moving from Contest Participation to Implementation

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Allen, Kevin; Elmore, R. Dwayne; Harper, Craig

    2013-01-01

    Do members participating in the Wildlife Habitat Education Program (WHEP) apply knowledge gained by implementing wildlife management practices at the local level? 4-H members who participated in the National WHEP Contest from 2003-2005 and 2007-2011 completed an evaluation at the end of each contest. The evaluation asked participants if they…

  15. Evaluation of the Monkey-Persimmon Environmental Education Program for Reducing Human-Wildlife Conflicts in Nagano, Japan

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Sakurai, Ryo; Jacobson, Susan K.

    2011-01-01

    Co-existing with wildlife and maintaining rural livelihoods are common challenges in remote villages in Japan. The authors assess the effects of the Monkey-Persimmon Environmental Education Program developed to reduce wildlife conflicts and to revitalize a community in Nagano Prefecture. Development of a logic model helped guide interviews with…

  16. Some contributions of the Cooperative Wildlife Research Units to forest wildlife management

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Leedy, Daniel L.

    1955-01-01

    Although the Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit Program is nationwide in scope and has been in existence since 1935, it is probable that many readers of the Journal of Forestry are unaquainted with the program's objectives and accomplishments. This paper was written at the suggestion of a S.A.F. member to provide such information.

  17. 50 CFR 80.124 - How may an agency use unexpended program income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

  18. 50 CFR 80.124 - How may an agency use unexpended program income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

  19. Use of wetlands for water quality improvement under the USEPA Region V Clean Lakes Program

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Landers, Judith C.; Knuth, Barbara A.

    1991-03-01

    The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Region V Clean Lakes Program employs artificial and modified natural wetlands in an effort to improve the water quality of selected lakes. We examined use of wetlands at seven lake sites and evaluated the physical and institutional means by which wetland projects are implemented and managed, relative to USEPA program goals and expert recommendations on the use of wetlands for water quality improvement. Management practices recommended by wetlands experts addressed water level and retention, sheet flow, nutrient removal, chemical treatment, ecological and effectiveness monitoring, and resource enhancement. Institutional characteristics recommended included local monitoring, regulation, and enforcement and shared responsibilities among jurisdictions. Institutional and ecological objectives of the National Clean Lakes Program were met to some degree at every site. Social objectives were achieved to a lesser extent. Wetland protection mechanisms and appropriate institutional decentralization were present at all sites. Optimal management techniques were employed to varying degrees at each site, but most projects lack adequate monitoring to determine adverse ecological impacts and effectiveness of pollutant removal and do not extensively address needs for recreation and wildlife habitat. There is evidence that the wetland projects are contributing to improved lake water quality; however, more emphasis needs to be placed on wetland protection and long-term project evaluation.

  20. 50 CFR 81.13 - Inspection.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Inspection. 81.13 Section 81.13 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED...

  1. 50 CFR 81.12 - Contracts.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Contracts. 81.12 Section 81.12 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED...

  2. 50 CFR 222.404 - Observer program sampling.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 9 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false Observer program sampling. 222.404 Section 222.404 Wildlife and Fisheries NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC... Requirement § 222.404 Observer program sampling. (a) During the program design, NMFS would be guided by the...

  3. 50 CFR 222.404 - Observer program sampling.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 7 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Observer program sampling. 222.404 Section 222.404 Wildlife and Fisheries NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC... Requirement § 222.404 Observer program sampling. (a) During the program design, NMFS would be guided by the...

  4. 50 CFR 15.26 - Approval of cooperative breeding programs.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... WILDLIFE AND PLANTS WILD BIRD CONSERVATION ACT Permits and Approval of Cooperative Breeding Programs § 15.26 Approval of cooperative breeding programs. Upon receipt of a complete application, the Director... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 1 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false Approval of cooperative breeding programs...

  5. Wanaket Wildlife Area Management Plan : Five-Year Plan for Protecting, Enhancing, and Mitigating Wildlife Habitat Losses for the McNary Hydroelectric Facility.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Wildlife Program

    The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) propose to continue to protect, enhance, and mitigate wildlife and wildlife habitat at the Wanaket Wildlife Area. The Wanaket Wildlife Area was approved as a Columbia River Basin Wildlife Mitigation Project by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and Northwest Power Planning Council (NWPPC) in 1993. This management plan will provide an update of the original management plan approved by BPA in 1995. Wanaket will contribute towards meeting BPA's obligation to compensate for wildlife habitat losses resulting from the construction of the McNary Hydroelectric facility on the Columbia River. By funding themore » enhancement and operation and maintenance of the Wanaket Wildlife Area, BPA will receive credit towards their mitigation debt. The purpose of the Wanaket Wildlife Area management plan update is to provide programmatic and site-specific standards and guidelines on how the Wanaket Wildlife Area will be managed over the next five years. This plan provides overall guidance on both short and long term activities that will move the area towards the goals, objectives, and desired future conditions for the planning area. The plan will incorporate managed and protected wildlife and wildlife habitat, including operations and maintenance, enhancements, and access and travel management. Specific project objectives are related to protection and enhancement of wildlife habitats and are expressed in terms of habitat units (HU's). Habitat units were developed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service's Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP), and are designed to track habitat gains and/or losses associated with mitigation and/or development projects. Habitat Units for a given species are a product of habitat quantity (expressed in acres) and habitat quality estimates. Habitat quality estimates are developed using Habitat Suitability Indices (HSI). These indices are based on quantifiable habitat features such as vegetation height, shrub cover, or other parameters, which are known to provide life history requisites for mitigation species. Habitat Suitability Indices range from 0 to 1, with an HSI of 1 providing optimum habitat conditions for the selected species. One acre of optimum habitat provides one Habitat Unit. The objective of continued management of the Wanaket Wildlife Mitigation Area, including protection and enhancement of upland and wetland/wetland associated cover types, is to provide and maintain 2,334 HU's of protection credit and generate 2,495 HU's of enhancement credit by the year 2004.« less

  6. 50 CFR 80.122 - May an agency deduct the costs of generating program income from gross income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH... SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.122 May an agency deduct the costs of generating program...

  7. 50 CFR 80.124 - How may an agency use unexpended program income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

  8. 50 CFR 80.124 - How may an agency use unexpended program income?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

  9. 76 FR 38414 - James Campbell National Wildlife Refuge, Honolulu County, HI; Draft Comprehensive Conservation...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-06-30

    ...] James Campbell National Wildlife Refuge, Honolulu County, HI; Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and...`iwa, HI 96712. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Ellis, Project Leader, (808) 637-6330...`ahu National Wildlife Refuge Complex, 66-590 Kamehameha Highway, Room 2C, Hale`iwa, HI 96712. The...

  10. 75 FR 2158 - Palmyra Atoll National Wildlife Refuge, U.S. Pacific Island Territory

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-01-14

    ... migratory birds, coral reefs, and threatened and endangered species in their natural setting. Palmyra Atoll..., (808) 792-9586. U.S. Mail: Beth Flint, Acting Project Leader, Pacific Reefs National Wildlife Refuge..., Pacific Reefs National Wildlife Refuge Complex, phone (808) 792-9553. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Refuge...

  11. Coordinating across scales: Building a regional marsh bird monitoring program from national and state Initiatives

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Shriver, G.W.; Sauer, J.R.

    2008-01-01

    Salt marsh breeding bird populations (rails, bitterns, sparrows, etc.) in eastern North America are high conservation priorities in need of site specific and regional monitoring designed to detect population changes over time. The present status and trends of these species are unknown but anecdotal evidence of declines in many of the species has raised conservation concerns. Most of these species are listed as conservation priorities on comprehensive wildlife plans throughout the eastern U.S. National Wildlife Refuges, National Park Service units, and other wildlife conservation areas provide important salt marsh habitat. To meet management needs for these areas, and to assist regional conservation planning, survey designs are being developed to estimate abundance and population trends for these breeding bird species. The primary purpose of this project is to develop a hierarchical sampling frame for salt marsh birds in Bird Conservation Region (BCR) 30 that will provide the ability to estimate species population abundances on 1) specific sites (i.e. National Parks and National Wildlife Refuges), 2) within states or regions, and 3) within BCR 30. The entire breeding range of Saltmarsh Sharp-tailed and Coastal Plain Swamp sparrows are within BCR 30, providing an opportunity to detect population trends within the entire breeding ranges of two priority species.

  12. 50 CFR 86.134 - What if I am already carrying out a plan?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What if I am already carrying out a plan? 86.134 Section 86.134 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF... INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM How States Will Complete the State Program Plans § 86.134 What if I am already...

  13. Long Term Ecological Monitoring Program on the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska: An FIA adjunct inventory

    Treesearch

    Bowser John M. Morton; Edward Berg; Dawn Magness; Todd Eskelin

    2009-01-01

    Kenai National Wildlife Refuge (KENWR) has a legislative mandate "to conserve fish and wildlife populations and habitats in their natural diversity". To improve our understanding of spatial and temporal variation at the landscape level, we are developing the Long Term Ecological Monitoring Program (LTEMP) to assess change in biota on the sample frame used by...

  14. Monitoring pesticides in wildlife

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Dustman, E.H.; Martin, W.E.; Heath, R.G.; Reichel, W.L.

    1971-01-01

    Early in the development of the wildlife monitoring program, certain criteria were recognized as being important in the selection of species of wild animals suitable for pesticide monitoring purposes. Ideally, the forms selected should be geographically well distributed, and they should be reasonably abundant and readily available for sampling. In addition, animals occurring near the top of food chains have the capacity to reflect residues in organisms occurring at lower levels in the same food chains. Based on these criteria, species chosen for monitoring include the starling (Sturnus vulgaris), mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) and black ducks (Anas rubripes), and the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). The black duck is substituted for the mallard in States where suitable numbers of mallards cannot be obtained. The Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife is held responsible for the execution of the wildlife portion of the National Pesticide Monitoring Program. The primary objective is to ascertain on a nationwide basis and independent of specific treatments the levels and trends of certain pesticidal chemicals and other pollutants in the bodies of selected forms of wildlife. The program was first described by Johnson et al. (4) in 1967. The purpose of this report is to update and redescribe the wildlife monitoring program and briefly review accomplishments.

  15. 77 FR 43222 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Tidewater...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-07-24

    ... DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2011... Federal Actions On April 15, 2009, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) filed a lawsuit in the U.S... consultation history for natural resource management projects suggests that these projects are generally...

  16. Hellsgate Big Game Winter Range Wildlife Mitigation Site Specific Management Plan for the Hellsgate Project.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Berger, Matthew T.; Judd, Steven L.

    This report contains a detailed site-specific management plan for the Hellsgate Winter Range Wildlife Mitigation Project. The report provides background information about the mitigation process, the review process, mitigation acquisitions, Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP) and mitigation crediting, current habitat conditions, desired future habitat conditions, restoration/enhancements efforts and maps.

  17. On the Brink: Activity and Resource Guide to Teaching about Massachusetts Endangered Species.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Cervoni, Cleti, Ed.

    Project WILD is the first large-scale curriculum supplement focusing on wildlife concepts and integrated with many areas of the general school curriculum. It features decision-making processes and explores a diversity of attitudes toward wildlife. The goal of Project WILD is to prepare young people to make decisions affecting people and wildlife…

  18. Readings in Wildlife and Fish Conservation, High School Conservation Curriculum Project.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Ensminger, Jack

    This publication is a tentative edition of readings on Wildlife and Fish Conservation in Louisiana, and as such it forms part of one of the four units of study designed for an experimental high school course, the "High School Conservation Curriculum Project." The other three units are concerned with Forest Conervation, Soil and Water…

  19. Research, monitoring and evaluation of fish and wildlife restoration projects in the Columbia River Basin: Lessons learned and suggestions for large-scale monitoring programs.

    Treesearch

    Lyman L. McDonald; Robert Bilby; Peter A. Bisson; Charles C. Coutant; John M. Epifanio; Daniel Goodman; Susan Hanna; Nancy Huntly; Erik Merrill; Brian Riddell; William Liss; Eric J. Loudenslager; David P. Philipp; William Smoker; Richard R. Whitney; Richard N. Williams

    2007-01-01

    The year 2006 marked two milestones in the Columbia River Basin and the Pacific Northwest region's efforts to rebuild its once great salmon and steelhead runs: the 25th anniversary of the creation of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council and the 10th anniversary of an amendment to the Northwest Power Act that formalized scientific peer review of the council...

  20. Water-Resources Investigations in Tennessee: Programs and Activities of the U.S. Geological Survey, 1988-89

    DTIC Science & Technology

    1988-01-01

    quality of farmstead wells in Tennessee 11 Sediment chemistry at Reelfoot Lake evaluated for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 12 Investigation of...pesticides and nutrients from storm runoff into Reelfoot Lake , West Tennessee 28 Reconnaissance of the impact of agricultural chemicals on ground... Reelfoot area in support of a project to determine suspended-sediment and nutrients loads to the lake . Sediment is considered perhaps the “most important

  1. Iskuulpa Watershed Management Plan : A Five-Year Plan for Protecting and Enhancing Fish and Wildlife Habitats in the Iskuulpa Watershed.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Wildlife Program

    The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) propose to protect, enhance, and mitigate wildlife and wildlife habitat and watershed resources in the Iskuulpa Watershed. The Iskuulpa Watershed Project was approved as a Columbia River Basin Wildlife Fish and Mitigation Project by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and Northwest Power Planning Council (NWPPC) in 1998. Iskuulpa will contribute towards meeting BPA's obligation to compensate for wildlife habitat losses resulting from the construction of the John Day and McNary Hydroelectric facilities on the Columbia River. By funding the enhancement and operation and maintenance of the Iskuulpa Watershed, BPA will receivemore » credit towards their mitigation debt. The purpose of the Iskuulpa Watershed management plan update is to provide programmatic and site-specific standards and guidelines on how the Iskuulpa Watershed will be managed over the next three years. This plan provides overall guidance on both short and long term activities that will move the area towards the goals, objectives, and desired future conditions for the planning area. The plan will incorporate managed and protected wildlife and wildlife habitat, including operations and maintenance, enhancements, and access and travel management.« less

  2. 50 CFR 81.7 - Availability of funds.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Availability of funds. 81.7 Section 81.7 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED...

  3. 50 CFR 81.15 - Audits.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Audits. 81.15 Section 81.15 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES OF FISH...

  4. 50 CFR 81.14 - Comprehensive plan alternative.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Comprehensive plan alternative. 81.14 Section 81.14 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND...

  5. 50 CFR 81.10 - Submission of documents.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Submission of documents. 81.10 Section 81.10 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND...

  6. 50 CFR 81.9 - Assurances.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Assurances. 81.9 Section 81.9 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES OF FISH...

  7. Albeni Falls Wildlife Protection, Mitigation, and Enhancement Plan, Final Report 1987.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Martin, Robert C.

    1988-08-01

    A wildlife impact assessment and mitigation plan has been developed for the US Army Corps of Engineers Albeni Falls Project in northern Idaho. The Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP) was used to evaluate pre- and post-construction habitat conditions at the Albeni Falls Project. There were 6617 acres of wetlands converted to open water due to development and operation of the project. Eight evaluation species were selected with impacts expressed in numbers of Habitat Units (HU's). For a given species, one HU is equivalent to one acre of prime habitat. The Albeni Falls Project resulted in estimated losses of 5985 mallard HU's,more » 4699 Canada goose HU's, 3379 redhead HU's, 4508 breeding bald eagle HU's, 4365 wintering bald eagle HU's, 2286 black-capped chickadee HU's, 1680 white-tailed deer HU's, and 1756 muskrat HU's. The yellow warbler gained 71 HU's. Therefore, total target species estimated impacts were 28,587 HU's. Impacts on peregrine falcons were not quantified in terms of HU's. Projects have been proposed by an interagency team of biologists to mitigate the impacts of Albeni Falls on wildlife. The HEP was used to estimate benefits of proposed mitigation projects to target species. Through a series of proposed protection and enhancement actions, the mitigation plan will provide benefits of an estimated 28,590 target species HU's to mitigate Albeni Falls wildlife habitat values lost. 52 refs., 9 figs., 14 tabs.« less

  8. Wildlife as valuable natural resources vs. intolerable pests: A suburban wildlife management model

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    DeStefano, S.; Deblinger, R.D.

    2005-01-01

    Management of wildlife in suburban environments involves a complex set of interactions between both human and wildlife populations. Managers need additional tools, such as models, that can help them assess the status of wildlife populations, devise and apply management programs, and convey this information to other professionals and the public. We present a model that conceptualizes how some wildlife populations can fluctuate between extremely low (rare, threatened, or endangered status) and extremely high (overabundant) numbers over time. Changes in wildlife abundance can induce changes in human perceptions, which continually redefine species as a valuable resource to be protected versus a pest to be controlled. Management programs thatincorporate a number of approaches and promote more stable populations of wildlife avoid the problems of the resource versus pest transformation, are less costly to society, and encourage more positive and less negative interactions between humans and wildlife. We presenta case example of the beaver Castor canadensis in Massachusetts to illustrate how this model functions and can be applied. ?? 2005 Springer Science + Business Media, Inc.

  9. 50 CFR 31.16 - Trapping program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM WILDLIFE SPECIES MANAGEMENT Terms and Conditions of Wildlife Reduction and... areas where trapping has been authorized shall secure and comply with the provisions of a Federal permit...

  10. 50 CFR 31.16 - Trapping program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM WILDLIFE SPECIES MANAGEMENT Terms and Conditions of Wildlife Reduction and... areas where trapping has been authorized shall secure and comply with the provisions of a Federal permit...

  11. 50 CFR 31.16 - Trapping program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM WILDLIFE SPECIES MANAGEMENT Terms and Conditions of Wildlife Reduction and... areas where trapping has been authorized shall secure and comply with the provisions of a Federal permit...

  12. Palila restoration research, 1996−2012

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Banko, Paul C.; Farmer, Chris; Atkinson, Carter T.; Brinck, Kevin W.; Camp, Richad; Cole, Colleen; Canner, Raymond; Dougill, Steve; Goltz, Daniel; Gray, Elizabeth; Hess, Steven C.; Higashino, Jennifer; Jarvi, Susan I.; Johnson, Luanne; Laniawe, Leona; Laut, Megan; Miller, Linda; Murray, Christopher J.; Nelson, Daniel; Leonard, David L.; Oboyshi, Peter; Patch-Highfill, Leanne; Pollock, David D.; Rapozo, Kalei; Schwarzfeld, Marla; Slotterback, John; Stephens, Robert M.; Banko, Paul C.; Farmer, Chris

    2014-01-01

    The Palila Restoration Project was initiated in 1996 by the U.S. Geological Survey to assist government agencies mitigate the effects of realigning Saddle Road (Highway 200) through Palila Critical Habitat (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998, Federal Highway Administration 1999). Ecological research on the palila (Loxioides bailleui), an endangered Hawaiian forest bird, carried out by the U.S. Geological Survey (formerly organized as the Research Division of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) since 1987 and research conducted by the Palila Restoration Project provided the scientific bases for developing a recovery strategy (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2006) and its adaptive implementation. The main objectives of the Palila Restoration Project were to develop techniques for reintroducing the palila to a portion of its former range, investigate the biological threats to the palila and its habitat, and synthesize the existing body of ecological knowledge concerning the palila. Five broad study themes formed the research framework: 1. Population reintroduction and restoration 2. Demography and breeding ecology 3. Habitat use and food ecology 4. Vegetation ecology 5. Predator ecology and management An element that was not included in the research program of the project was the ecology and management of introduced ungulates, which has historically constituted the single greatest threat to Palila Critical Habitat (Banko et al. 2009). The absence of ungulate studies should not be interpreted to mean that we believe ungulates no longer damage palila habitat. Other research has already established that removing alien browsers and grazers from Mauna Kea is essential for the recovery of the subalpine forest on which palila now depend (Scowcroft and Giffin 1983; Scowcroft and Sakai 1983; Scowcroft and Conrad 1988, 1992; Hess et al. 1999). Moreover, the Federal District Court of Hawai‘i has ordered the state of Hawai‘i to remove browsing ungulates from Palila Critical Habitat (Banko et al. 2009, Hess and Banko 2011). This final report summarizes results of Palila Restoration Project research from December 1996 to December 2012. Even though some results contained in this report have been published in scientific journals and other technical reports (Appendix I), they are included here to provide a comprehensive chronicle of all project activities. 

  13. Palila Restoration Research, 1996−2012. Summary and management implications

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Banko, Paul C.; Farmer, Chris; Dougill, Steve; Johnson, Luanne

    2015-01-01

    The Palila Restoration Project was initiated in 1996 by the U.S. Geological Survey to assist government agencies mitigate the effects of realigning Saddle Road (Highway 200) through Palila Critical Habitat (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998, Federal Highway Administration 1999). Ecological research on the palila (Loxioides bailleui), an endangered Hawaiian forest bird, carried out by the U.S. Geological Survey (formerly organized as the Research Division of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) since 1987 and research conducted by the Palila Restoration Project provided the scientific bases for developing a recovery strategy (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2006) and its adaptive implementation. The main objectives of the Palila Restoration Project were to develop techniques for reintroducing the palila to a portion of its former range, investigate the biological threats to the palila and its habitat, and synthesize the existing body of ecological knowledge concerning the palila. Five broad study themes formed the research framework: 1. Population reintroduction and restoration 2. Demography and breeding ecology 3. Habitat use and food ecology 4. Vegetation ecology 5. Predator ecology and management An element that was not included in the research program of the project was the ecology and management of introduced ungulates, which has historically constituted the single greatest threat to Palila Critical Habitat (Banko et al. 2009). The absence of ungulate studies should not be interpreted to mean that we believe ungulates no longer damage palila habitat. Other research has already established that removing alien browsers and grazers from Mauna Kea is essential for the recovery of the subalpine forest on which palila now depend (Scowcroft and Giffin 1983; Scowcroft and Sakai 1983; Scowcroft and Conrad 1988, 1992; Hess et al. 1999). Moreover, the Federal District Court of Hawai‘i has ordered the State of Hawai‘i to remove browsing ungulates from Palila Critical Habitat (Banko et al. 2009, Hess and Banko 2011). This final report summarizes results of Palila Restoration Project research from December 1996 to December 2012. Even though some results contained in this report have been published in scientific journals and other technical reports (Appendix I), they are included here to provide a comprehensive chronicle of all project activities.

  14. Science to support adaptive habitat management: Overton Bottoms North Unit, Big Muddy National Fish and Wildlife Refuge, Missouri [Volumes 1-6

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Jacobson, Robert B.

    2006-01-01

    Extensive efforts are underway along the Lower Missouri River to rehabilitate ecosystem functions in the channel and flood plain. Considerable uncertainty inevitably accompanies ecosystem restoration efforts, indicating the benefits of an adaptive management approach in which management actions are treated as experiments, and results provide information to feed back into the management process. The Overton Bottoms North Unit of the Big Muddy National Fish and Wildlife Refuge is a part of the Missouri River Fish and Wildlife Habitat Mitigation Project. The dominant management action at the Overton Bottoms North Unit has been excavation of a side-channel chute to increase hydrologic connectivity and to enhance shallow, slow current-velocity habitat. The side-channel chute also promises to increase hydrologic gradients, and may serve to alter patterns of wetland inundation and vegetation community growth in undesired ways. The U.S. Geological Survey's Central Region Integrated Studies Program (CRISP) undertook interdisciplinary research at the Overton Bottoms North Unit in 2003 to address key areas of scientific uncertainty that were highly relevant to ongoing adaptive management of the site, and to the design of similar rehabilitation projects on the Lower Missouri River. This volume presents chapters documenting the surficial geologic, topographic, surface-water, and ground-water framework of the Overton Bottoms North Unit. Retrospective analysis of vegetation community trends over the last 10 years is used to evaluate vegetation responses to reconnection of the Overton Bottoms North Unit to the river channel. Quasi-experimental analysis of cottonwood growth rate variation along hydrologic gradients is used to evaluate sensitivity of terrestrial vegetation to development of aquatic habitats. The integrated, landscape-specific understanding derived from these studies illustrates the value of scientific information in design and management of rehabilitation projects.

  15. US 93 North post-construction wildlife-vehicle collision and wildlife crossing monitoring on the Flathead Indian reservation between Evaro and Polson, Montana : final report.

    DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

    2016-12-01

    The US Highway 93 North reconstruction project on the Flathead Indian Reservation in northwest Montana represents one of the most extensive wildlife-sensitive highway design efforts to date in North America. The reconstruction of the 56 mile (90 km) ...

  16. WILDLIFE RISK ASSESSMENT: DEVELOPMENT OF METHODS TO ASSESS THE EFFECTS OF MERCURY AND HABITAT ALTERATION ON POPULATIONS OF AQUATIC-DEPENDENT WILDLIFE

    EPA Science Inventory

    NHEERL is conducting a demonstration project to develop tools and approaches for assessing the risks of multiple stressors to populations of piscivorous wildlife, leading to the development of risk-based criteria. Specifically, we are developing methods and approaches to assess...

  17. 76 FR 16440 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Permits, Town of Apple Valley, San Bernardino...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-03-23

    ... facilities and roads; construction of new public facilities (approximately 1,400 acres of the ground-disturbance total); and construction, operation, and maintenance of renewable energy projects, including solar... Supervisor, Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2493 Portola Road, Suite B...

  18. Fuels planning: science synthesis and integration; environmental consequences fact sheet 15: The Wildlife Habitat Response Model

    Treesearch

    David Pilliod

    2005-01-01

    The Wildlife Habitat Response Model (WHRM) is a Web-based computer tool for evaluating the potential effects of fuel-reduction projects on terrestrial wildlife habitats. It uses species-habitat associations in ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), dry-type Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), lodgepole pine (Pinus...

  19. 50 CFR 86.51 - To whom must I apply?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM How..., Fax: 303-236-8192 7 Alaska Division of Federal Aid, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, 1011 East Tudor Road...

  20. 50 CFR 81.5 - Information for the Secretary.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Information for the Secretary. 81.5 Section 81.5 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND...

  1. 50 CFR 86.31 - How much money may I charge the public to use tie-up facilities?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false How much money may I charge the public to use tie-up facilities? 86.31 Section 86.31 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE... PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM Public Use of the Facility § 86.31 How much money may I...

  2. Fish Passage Assessment: Big Canyon Creek Watershed, Technical Report 2004.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Christian, Richard

    2004-02-01

    This report presents the results of the fish passage assessment as outlined as part of the Protect and Restore the Big Canyon Creek Watershed project as detailed in the CY2003 Statement of Work (SOW). As part of the Northwest Power Planning Council's Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (FWP), this project is one of Bonneville Power Administration's (BPA) many efforts at off-site mitigation for damage to salmon and steelhead runs, their migration, and wildlife habitat caused by the construction and operation of federal hydroelectric dams on the Columbia River and its tributaries. The proposed restoration activities within the Big Canyonmore » Creek watershed follow the watershed restoration approach mandated by the Fisheries and Watershed Program. Nez Perce Tribal Fisheries/Watershed Program vision focuses on protecting, restoring, and enhancing watersheds and treaty resources within the ceded territory of the Nez Perce Tribe under the Treaty of 1855 with the United States Federal Government. The program uses a holistic approach, which encompasses entire watersheds, ridge top to ridge top, emphasizing all cultural aspects. We strive toward maximizing historic ecosystem productive health, for the restoration of anadromous and resident fish populations. The Nez Perce Tribal Fisheries/Watershed Program (NPTFWP) sponsors the Protect and Restore the Big Canyon Creek Watershed project. The NPTFWP has the authority to allocate funds under the provisions set forth in their contract with BPA. In the state of Idaho vast numbers of relatively small obstructions, such as road culverts, block thousands of miles of habitat suitable for a variety of fish species. To date, most agencies and land managers have not had sufficient, quantifiable data to adequately address these barrier sites. The ultimate objective of this comprehensive inventory and assessment was to identify all barrier crossings within the watershed. The barriers were then prioritized according to the amount of habitat blocked at each site and the fish life history stages impacted. This assessment protocol will hopefully prove useful to other agencies and become a model for use in other watersheds.« less

  3. 50 CFR 550.151 - Program accessibility: New construction and alterations.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 7 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Program accessibility: New construction and alterations. 550.151 Section 550.151 Wildlife and Fisheries MARINE MAMMAL COMMISSION ENFORCEMENT OF NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF HANDICAP IN PROGRAMS OR ACTIVITIES CONDUCTED BY MARINE MAMMAL...

  4. 50 CFR 550.149 - Program accessibility: Discrimination prohibited.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 7 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Program accessibility: Discrimination prohibited. 550.149 Section 550.149 Wildlife and Fisheries MARINE MAMMAL COMMISSION ENFORCEMENT OF NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF HANDICAP IN PROGRAMS OR ACTIVITIES CONDUCTED BY MARINE MAMMAL COMMISSION § 550.149...

  5. Environmental Education & Ecology in a Life Science Course for Preservice K-8 Teachers Using Project Wildlife in Learning Design

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Nelson, Allan

    2010-01-01

    During laboratory sessions devoted to ecology, 182 preservice K-8 teachers participated in a Project Wildlife in Learning Design (WILD) workshop. Participants rated the workshop highly, indicated they would use more inquiry-based activities, and were more interested in teaching ecology following the workshop. Post-test scores indicated an…

  6. Projected changes in wildlife habitats in Arctic natural areas of northwest Alaska

    Treesearch

    Bruce G. Marcot; M.Torre Jorgenson; James P. Lawler; Colleen M. Handel; Anthony R. DeGange

    2015-01-01

    We project the effects of transitional changes among 60 vegetation and other land cover types (Becotypes^) in northwest Alaska over the 21st century on habitats of 162 bird and 39 mammal species known or expected to occur regularly in the region. This analysis, encompassing a broad suite of arctic and boreal wildlife species, entailed building wildlifehabitat matrices...

  7. 50 CFR 86.43 - May someone else supply the match?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false May someone else supply the match? 86.43 Section 86.43 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

  8. 50 CFR 86.133 - What are the plan standards?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What are the plan standards? 86.133 Section 86.133 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

  9. 50 CFR 86.14 - Who may apply for these grants?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Who may apply for these grants? 86.14 Section 86.14 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

  10. 50 CFR 86.44 - What are my allowable costs?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What are my allowable costs? 86.44 Section 86.44 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

  11. 50 CFR 86.110 - What does the State survey do?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What does the State survey do? 86.110 Section 86.110 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

  12. 50 CFR 86.82 - What must be in the reports?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What must be in the reports? 86.82 Section 86.82 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

  13. 50 CFR 86.42 - What are the match requirements?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What are the match requirements? 86.42 Section 86.42 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

  14. 50 CFR 86.15 - How does the grant process work?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false How does the grant process work? 86.15 Section 86.15 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

  15. 50 CFR 86.71 - How will I be reimbursed?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false How will I be reimbursed? 86.71 Section 86.71 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

  16. 50 CFR 86.45 - When will I receive the funds?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false When will I receive the funds? 86.45 Section 86.45 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

  17. 50 CFR 84.45 - How do I amend a proposal?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 8 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false How do I amend a proposal? 84.45 Section 84.45 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

  18. 50 CFR 84.43 - How do States get the grant monies?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 8 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false How do States get the grant monies? 84.43 Section 84.43 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

  19. 50 CFR 2.1 - Regional offices.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 1 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Regional offices. 2.1 Section 2.1 Wildlife... FIELD ORGANIZATION § 2.1 Regional offices. The program operations of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service..., endangered species stations, fishery assistance offices, national fish hatcheries, national wildlife refuges...

  20. Factors Affecting Persistence of Undergraduate Students in a Fisheries and Wildlife Program: Transfer Students

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Wolter, Bjorn H. K.; Millenbah, Kelly F.; Montgomery, Robert A.; Schneider, James W.

    2011-01-01

    Transfer students are of recognized importance to postsecondary education and every year feed thousands of students into natural resources programs across America. This influx of students can have a sustaining effect on many academic programs, including fisheries and wildlife programs, which are suffering from a nation-wide decrease in interest…

  1. Beyond Single Species Interpretation.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Richie, Deborah

    1995-01-01

    Species diversity, learning about wildlife in its natural habitats and conservation goals are integral to Watchable Wildlife programs. Examines the role of wildlife observation in spreading the message of biodiversity importance. Twenty-three references cited. (LZ)

  2. DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Dunnigan, James L.; Marotz, Brian L.; DeShazer, Jay

    Libby Reservoir was created under an International Columbia River Treaty between the United States and Canada for cooperative water development of the Columbia River Basin (Columbia River Treaty 1964). Libby Reservoir inundated 109 stream miles of the mainstem Kootenai River in the United States and Canada, and 40 miles of tributary streams in the U.S. that provided habitat for spawning, juvenile rearing, and migratory passage (Figure 1). The authorized purpose of the dam is to provide power (91.5%), flood control (8.3%), and navigation and other benefits (0.2%; Storm et al. 1982). The Pacific Northwest Power Act of 1980 recognized possiblemore » conflicts stemming from hydroelectric projects in the northwest and directed Bonneville Power Administration to ''protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife to the extent affected by the development and operation of any hydroelectric project of the Columbia River and its tributaries...'' (4(h)(10)(A)). Under the Act, the Northwest Power Planning Council was created and recommendations for a comprehensive fish and wildlife program were solicited from the region's federal, state, and tribal fish and wildlife agencies. Among Montana's recommendations was the proposal that research be initiated to quantify acceptable seasonal minimum pool elevations to maintain or enhance the existing fisheries (Graham et al. 1982). Research to determine how operations of Libby Dam affect the reservoir and river fishery and to suggest ways to lessen these effects began in May, 1983. The framework for the Libby Reservoir Model (LRMOD) was completed in 1989. Development of Integrated Rule Curves (IRCs) for Libby Dam operation was completed in 1996 (Marotz et al. 1996). The Libby Reservoir Model and the IRCs continue to be refined (Marotz et al 1999). Initiation of mitigation projects such as lake rehabilitation and stream restoration began in 1996. The primary focus of the Libby Mitigation project now is to redevelop fisheries and fisheries habitat in basin streams and lakes.« less

  3. 50 CFR 15.23 - Permits for zoological breeding or display programs.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... OF WILDLIFE AND PLANTS WILD BIRD CONSERVATION ACT Permits and Approval of Cooperative Breeding Programs § 15.23 Permits for zoological breeding or display programs. (a) Application requirements for... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 1 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false Permits for zoological breeding or display...

  4. 50 CFR 15.23 - Permits for zoological breeding or display programs.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... OF WILDLIFE AND PLANTS WILD BIRD CONSERVATION ACT Permits and Approval of Cooperative Breeding Programs § 15.23 Permits for zoological breeding or display programs. (a) Application requirements for... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 1 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Permits for zoological breeding or display...

  5. Movement, Transport, and Scour of Particulate Organic Matter and Aquatic Invertebrates Downstream from a Peaking Hydropower Project.

    DTIC Science & Technology

    1983-05-01

    tigations, Clemson, S. C . 29631 and U. S. Army ED- It. REPORT DATE gineer Waterways Experiment Station, Environmental May 1983 Laboratory, P. 0. Box 631...ON eport) Washington, D. C . 20314 Unclassified I&. NMITORING AGENCY NAME & ADORVESS( Idfieuf orn o C ..,bDIMi OW~~ IS. DECkASFCTO(ONRDN W DISTRIBUTION...Reservoir Research Program, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Ser- vice, Clemson, S. C .; and Drs. John Nestler and Gary Saul, EL, WES. Preparation of this report

  6. Columbia River System Operation Review : Final Environmental Impact Statement, Appendix N: Wildlife.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Columbia River System Operation Review

    1995-11-01

    The Columbia River System is a vast and complex combination of Federal and non-Federal facilities used for many purposes including power production, irrigation, navigation, flood control, recreation, fish and wildlife habitat and municipal and industrial water supply. Each river use competes for the limited water resources in the Columbia River Basin. This technical appendix addresses only the effects of alternative system operating strategies for managing the Columbia River system. The environmental impact statement (EIS) itself and some of the other appendices present analyses of the alternative approaches to the other three decisions considered as part of the SOR. This documentmore » is the product of the Wildlife Work Group, focusing on wildlife impacts but not including fishes. Topics covered include the following: scope and process; existing and affected environment, including specific discussion of 18 projects in the Columbia river basin. Analysis, evaluation, and alternatives are presented for all projects. System wide impacts to wildlife are also included.« less

  7. 75 FR 65646 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Permit, Santa Barbara County, CA

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-10-26

    ... II of the Lompoc Wind Energy Project would involve the construction and operation of wind turbines... DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R8-ES-2010-N235; 1112-0000-81440-F2] Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Permit, Santa Barbara County, CA AGENCY: U.S. Fish and...

  8. Design and implementation of monitoring studies to evaluate the success of ecological restoration on wildlife

    Treesearch

    William M. Block; Alan B. Franklin; James P. Ward; Joseph L. Ganey; Gary C. White

    2001-01-01

    Restoration projects are often developed with little consideration for understanding their effects on wildlife. We contend, however, that monitoring treatment effects on wildlife should be an integral component of the design and execution of any management activity, including restoration. Thus, we provide a conceptual framework for the design and implementation of...

  9. Forest invasive adaptive management on national wildlife refuge lands in the central hardwood region

    Treesearch

    Damon B. Lesmeister; Sean M. Blomquist; Eric V. Lonsdorf; Daniel Wood; Perry J. Williams; Brad Pendley; Karen E. Mangan; Benjamin A. Walker

    2014-01-01

    Approximately 2.4 million acres of National Wildlife Refuge System lands are impacted by invasive plants and are the primary challenge for habitat management in the Central Hardwood region. In 2011, biologists, managers, and contracted support staff from six national wildlife refuges in southern Indiana, Illinois, and Missouri developed an adaptive management project...

  10. Columbia Estuary Ecosystem Restoration Program: Restoration Design Challenges for Topographic Mounds, Channel Outlets, and Reed Canarygrass

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Diefenderfer, Heida L.; Borde, Amy B.; Sinks, Ian A.

    The purpose of this study was to provide science-based information to practitioners and managers of restoration projects in the Columbia Estuary Ecosystem Restoration Program (CEERP) regarding aspects of restoration techniques that currently pose known challenges and uncertainties. The CEERP is a program of the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Portland District, in collaboration with the National Marine Fisheries Service and five estuary sponsors implementing restoration. The estuary sponsors are Columbia Land Trust, Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce, Cowlitz Tribe, Lower Columbia Estuary Partnership, and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. The scope ofmore » the research conducted during federal fiscal year 2015 included three aspects of hydrologic reconnection that were selected based on available scientific information and feedback from restoration practitioners during project reviews: the design of mounds (also called hummocks, peninsulas, or berms); the control of reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinaceae); and aspects of channel network design related to habitat connectivity for juvenile salmonids.« less

  11. Walla Walla River Fish Passage Operations Program, 2000-2001 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Zimmerman, Brian C.; Duke, Bill B.

    2004-02-01

    In the late 1990's, the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, along with many other agencies, began implementing fisheries restoration activities in the Walla Walla Basin. An integral part of these efforts is to alleviate the inadequate migration conditions in the basin. The migration concerns are being addressed by removing diversion structures, constructing fish passage facilities, implementing minimum instream flow measures, and initiating trap and haul efforts. The objective of the Walla Walla River Fish Passage Operations Project is to increase the survival of migrating adultmore » and juvenile salmonids in the basin. The project is responsible for coordinating operation and maintenance of ladders, screen sites, bypasses, trap facilities, and transportation equipment. In addition, the project provides technical input on passage criteria and passage and trapping facility design and operation. Operation of the various passage facilities and passage criteria guidelines are outlined in an annual operations plan that the project develops. During the 2000-2001 project year, there were 624 summer steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss), 24 bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), and 47 spring chinook (O. tshawytscha) counted at the Nursery Bridge Dam adult trap between December 27, 2000 and June 7, 2001. The Little Walla Walla River juvenile trap was not operated this year. The project transported 1600 adult spring chinook from Ringold Springs Hatchery to the South Fork Walla Walla Brood Holding Facility and outplanted 1156 for natural spawning in the basin. The project also provided equipment for transportation of juveniles captured during the construction fish salvage at Nursery Bridge Dam.« less

  12. Hydrology Role in Sustaining Ecological Functions in the Everglades; an Experimental Approach.

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Moustafa, Z. Z.; Gawlik, D.; Sklar, F.; Nachabe, M. H.

    2003-12-01

    The Everglades ecosystem, the largest subtropical wetland in the United States, has been historically altered to achieve numerous goals such as flood protection, water supply, restoration, conservation, enhancement of specific emergent vegetation types, maintenance or restoration of landscape habitats, and enhancing waterfowl habitat. This "River of Grass" consists of several topographic landscape features (ridges, sloughs, and tree islands), supports a unique variety of plants and wildlife, and provides water resources for both agricultural and urban needs. The South Florida Water Management District and the US Army Corps of Engineers are currently conducting an integrated large-scale effort to restore this ecosystem to a more natural condition. A major part of the ongoing restoration effort is to re-establish the Everglades hydrology by controlling both flow and marsh water levels. The South Florida Water Management District, in collaboration with the A.R.M. Loxahatchee Wildlife Refuge and researchers from several academic institutions, has modified two existing impoundments to replicate the Everglades landscape. The Loxahatchee Impoundment Landscape Assessment (LILA) is designed to assess the impact of seasonal changes in water level and pulsing on wading bird foraging, the significance of flow for the creation and persistence of ridge and slough topography, and to evaluate techniques for restoring tree islands. This project utilizes a scaled-down version of the Everglades landscape to measure responses of wildlife, tree islands, and ridges and sloughs to hydrologic manipulations. Specifically, this study examines the effects of a highly-pulsed (event) pattern of water discharge on wildlife, ridge and slough, and tree island components of the natural system as compared to effects of sustained discharge. LILA provides the opportunity to quantitatively link hydrologic regimes with biological performance measures in a scientifically sound manner that allows for replication and provides information more rapidly than observational studies in the natural system. The main goal of the research program in LILA is to define hydrologic regimes that sustain a healthy Everglades ecosystem. Results of this research program will contribute to supporting routine water management operations and establishing quantitative targets for the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Project (CERP) Performance Measures. This research program will help develop and recommend options for hydrologic operation of the Everglades, particularly during flood events, when the flexibility to move water through the system is critical. Our discussion is focused on the effects of sediment transport and water velocities on marsh topography, habitat diversity, and their role in sustaining certain ecological functions in the Everglades.

  13. 50 CFR 84.42 - What if a grant agreement is not signed?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 8 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false What if a grant agreement is not signed? 84.42 Section 84.42 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

  14. Monitoring and modeling terrestrial arthropod diversity on the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge

    Treesearch

    Matthew L. Bowser; John M. Morton

    2009-01-01

    The primary purpose of the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge (KENWR) is to "conserve fish and wildlife populations in their natural diversity," where "fish and wildlife" explicitly includes arthropods. To this end, we developed a Long Term Ecological Monitoring Program (LTEMP), a collaborative effort with the USDA Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA)...

  15. Environmental Management and the New Politics of Western Water: The Animas-La Plata Project and Implementation of the Endangered Species Act.

    PubMed

    ELLISON

    1999-05-01

    / This paper explores the new politics of western water policy through an examination of the Animas-La Plata water project and implementation of the Endangered Species Act. It is suggested that the focus of western water programming has shifted from the source of distributed funds, the United States Congress, to the agencies originally created to deliver federal benefits because funding for new project construction has not been forthcoming. Under this new system, members of Congress continue to excite their constituents with promises of money for new project starts, while the administrative agencies perform the myriad duties needed to keep these projects alive. The result is that political objectives have replaced operational/management objectives in administrative processes. In this case, the author demonstrates how resource managers in the Bureau of Reclamation manipulated hydrological analysis to control administrative process, why their manipulation was unfair, and perhaps illegal, and why biologists from the US Fish and Wildlife Service accepted the analysis. While ostensibly protecting all interests, the result is that none of the objectives of federal water programming are achieved. KEY WORDS: Environmental management; Administrative politics; Water policy; Endangered Species Act; Animas-La Plata, Bureau of Reclamation

  16. Bozeman Pass wildlife channelization ITS project.

    DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

    2006-06-01

    Animal-vehicle collisions (AVCs) are a growing concern as vehicle miles traveled and human encroachment into wildlife habitat : continues to increase throughout the United States. Few studies have examined the application of intelligent transportatio...

  17. 78 FR 3026 - Establishment of Swan Valley Conservation Area, Montana

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-01-15

    ... Swan River National Wildlife Refuge. The project will help ensure the perpetual conservation of one of... wildlife resources in the conservation area, primarily through the purchase of perpetual easements and a...

  18. Wildlife fatalities project (phase I).

    DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

    2006-03-01

    The New Mexico 2025 Statewide Multimodal Transportation Plan, published by the New Mexico Department of Transportation, outlines long range objectives for the state. Two of the long-range objectives deal specifically with wildlife-vehicle encounters:...

  19. Wildlife software: procedures for publication of computer software

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Samuel, M.D.

    1990-01-01

    Computers and computer software have become an integral part of the practice of wildlife science. Computers now play an important role in teaching, research, and management applications. Because of the specialized nature of wildlife problems, specific computer software is usually required to address a given problem (e.g., home range analysis). This type of software is not usually available from commercial vendors and therefore must be developed by those wildlife professionals with particular skill in computer programming. Current journal publication practices generally prevent a detailed description of computer software associated with new techniques. In addition, peer review of journal articles does not usually include a review of associated computer software. Thus, many wildlife professionals are usually unaware of computer software that would meet their needs or of major improvements in software they commonly use. Indeed most users of wildlife software learn of new programs or important changes only by word of mouth.

  20. Environmental Assessment for Management of South End of Runway Wetlands, Moody AFB, Georgia

    DTIC Science & Technology

    2010-11-01

    implement a management program for the wetlands at the south end of runway (EOR) at Moody AFB to reduce the bird/wildlife aircraft strike hazard (BASH) risk...because birds and other wildlife pose an increased bird/wildlife aircraft strike hazard (BASH) risk to aircraft utilizing the Moody AFB airfield. ln...support ofthe military mission, Moody AFB has implemented a BASH management program designed to minimize aircraft exposure to potentially hazardous

  1. U.S. Geological Survey science for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative—2016 annual report

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Bowen, Zachary H.; Aikens, Ellen; Aldridge, Cameron L.; Anderson, Patrick J.; Assal, Timothy J.; Chalfoun, Anna D.; Chong, Geneva W.; Eddy-Miller, Cheryl; Garman, Steven L.; Germaine, Stephen S.; Homer, Collin G.; Johnston, Aaron; Kauffman, Matthew J.; Manier, Daniel J.; Melcher, Cynthia P.; Miller, Kirk A.; Walters, Annika W.; Wheeler, Jerrod D.; Wieferich, Daniel; Wilson, Anna B.; Wyckoff, Teal B.; Zeigenfuss, Linda C.

    2018-05-10

    This is the ninth annual report highlighting U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) science and decision-support activities conducted for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative (WLCI). The activities address specific management needs identified by WLCI partner agencies. In fiscal year (FY) 2016, there were 26 active USGS WLCI science-based projects. Of these 26 projects, one project was new for FY2016, and three were completed by the end of the fiscal year (though final products were still in preparation or review). USGS WLCI projects were grouped under five categories: (1) Baseline Synthesis, (2) Long-Term Monitoring, (3) Effectiveness Monitoring, (4) Mechanistic Studies of Wildlife, and (5) Data and Information Management. Each of these topic areas is designed to address WLCI management needs: identifying key drivers of change, identifying the condition and distribution of key wildlife species and habitats and of species’ habitat requirements, development of an integrated inventory and monitoring strategy, use of emerging technologies and development and testing of innovative methods for maximizing the efficiency and efficacy of monitoring efforts, evaluating the effectiveness of habitat treatment projects, evaluating the responses of wildlife to development, and developing a data clearinghouse and information management framework to support and provide access to results of most USGS WLCI projects.In FY2016, we assisted with updating the WLCI Conservation Action Plan and associated databases as part of the Comprehensive Assessment, and we also assisted with the Bureau of Land Management 2015 WLCI annual report. By the end of FY2016, we completed or had nearly completed assessments of WLCI energy and mineral resources and had submitted a manuscript on modeled effects of oil and gas development on wildlife to a peer-reviewed journal. We also initiated a study on the effects of wind energy on wildlife in the WLCI region. A USGS circular on WLCI long-term monitoring was in review at the end of the fiscal year, and seven projects monitoring water and vegetation (including changes in sagebrush cover and patterns of sagebrush mortality) continued through the year. USGS scientists continued many projects in FY2016 that evaluate the effectiveness of habitat conservation actions (including sagebrush, cheatgrass, and aspen habitat treatments) and provide tools in support of mechanistic studies of wildlife. In FY2016, USGS scientists, along with university and State partners, continued work on five focal wildlife species/communities (pygmy rabbits [Brachylagus idahoensis], greater sage grouse , mule deer, sagebrush songbirds, and native fish). In FY2016, the USGS Information Management Team presented information to WLCI scientists on how USGS tools and resources can be used to fulfill the requirements of new USGS policies regarding data release, data management, and data visualization.

  2. Acid rain publications by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1979-1989

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Villella, Rita F.

    1989-01-01

    Pollution of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems has been a concern to society since the burning of fossil fuels began in the industrial revolution. In the past decade or so, this concern has been heightened by evidence that chemical transformation in the atmosphere of combustion by-products and subsequent long-range transport can cause environmental damage in remote areas. The extent of this damage and the rates of ecological recovery were largely unknown. "Acid rain" became the environmental issue of the 1980's. To address the increasing concerns of the public, in 1980 the Federal government initiated a 10-year interagency research program to develop information that could be used by the President and the Congress in making decisions for emission controls. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been an active participant in acid precipitation research. The Service provided support to a number of scientific conferences and forums, including the Action Seminar on Acid Precipitation held in Toronto, Canada, in 1979, an international symposium on Acidic Precipitation and Fishery Impacts in Northeastern North America in 1981, and a symposium on Acidic Precipitation and Atmospheric Deposition: A Western Perspective in 1982. These meetings as well as the growing involvement with the government's National Acidic Precipitation Assessment Program placed the Service in the lead in research on the biological effects of acidic deposition. Research projects have encompassed water chemistry, aquatic invertebrates, amphibians, fish, and waterfowl. Water quality surveys have been conducted to help determine the extent of acid precipitation effects in the northeast, Middle Atlantic, and Rocky Mountain regions. In addition to lake and stream studies, research in wetland and some terrestrial habitats has also been conducted. Specific projects have addressed important sport species such as brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis), Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar), and striped bass (Morone saxatilis). Trace metal accumulation in fish has been investigated and a symposium sponsored on related work. U.S> Fish and Wildlife Service scientists serve as advisors and participants in research being conducted by industry, nonprofit groups, State and other Federal agencies. Researcher have worked closely with colleagues in Canada, England, Norway, Scotland, the Soviet Union, and Sweden to gain additional understanding of the problem. In 1982, the Service implemented a mitigation research program to provide resource managers with information to help them protect sensitive ecosystems, and rehabilitation methods for resources already affected by acidification. An international workshop was convened to outline the research needs. Several conferences were organized to develop appropriate field and laboratory procedures. Scientists with the mitigation research program are evaluating the ecological effects of liming (addition of base material) surface waters and surrounding watershed to provide buffering against acidic inputs. Through long-term cooperative project with States and other organizations, investigations are studying possible abatement methods for regions most affected by acidic deposition. To date, more than 200 reports the describe these studies have been published. These products include conference proceedings, journal articles, and in-house scientific publications. An education poster describing the effects of acid rain on aquatic ecosystems was developed and distributed to individuals, conservations and State organizations, and the public education system. This annotated bibliography lists current publications by Service authors, cooperators, or contractors on acid rain and related quality. Entire are arranged alphabetically by author surname. For further information about the research program, contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Acid Precipitation Section, National Fishery Research Center -- Leetown, Box 700, Kearneysville, WV 25430.

  3. Supplement Analysis for the Wildlife Mitigation Program EIS (DOE/EIS-0246/SA-24) - Herbert Conservation Easement

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Stewart, Shannon C.

    BPA proposes to purchase a conservation easement on approximately 221 acres of the Herbert parcel in Benton County, Oregon for the protection of wetland, riparian, and riverine habitats. The Herbert parcel is located within the Willamette Basin Mitigation Program’s Canby Muddy Creek/Mary’s River Focus Area southwest of the City of Corvallis. The Herbert site is a cooperative project principally facilitated by BPA, Trust for Public Land, City of Corvallis, and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Once the conservation easement is finalized, the participants will develop a management plan for the Herbert parcel. Future management actions will likely involve themore » restoration and enhancement of riparian forests, wetlands, and riverine habitats. This Supplement Analysis covers the acquisition of the Herbert conservation easement only; all proposed management activities will require additional NEPA analysis prior to implementation.« less

  4. Supplement Analysis for the Wildlife Mitigation Program EIS (DOE/EIS-0246/SA-23) - Canby Ferry Conservation Easement

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Stewart, Shannon C.

    2002-05-15

    BPA proposes to purchase a conservation easement on approximately 16 acres of the Canby Ferry parcel in Clackamas County, Oregon for the protection of wetland, riparian, and riverine habitats. This project is part of a multi-agency effort to protect Willamette River frontage and to connect existing Oregon State Park lands with recreational trails. Once the conservation easement is finalized, a management plan will be developed for the Canby Ferry parcel and adjacent parcels, including the Fish Eddy parcel and the Molalla State Park parcel. Future management actions on these lands will likely involve wildlife habitat and riparian area enhancement, restoration,more » and preservation activities. This Supplement Analysis covers the acquisition of the Canby Ferry conservation easement only; all proposed management activities (on the Canby Ferry parcel and adjacent parcels) will require additional NEPA analysis prior to implementation.« less

  5. 50 CFR 80.100 - Does an agency have to display one of the symbols in this part on a completed project?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT... DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General Grant Administration § 80.100 Does an agency have to...: (a) An agency may display the appropriate symbol(s) on: (1) Areas such as wildlife-management areas...

  6. 50 CFR 80.17 - Maintenance.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.17 Maintenance. The State is responsible for maintenance of all capital improvements acquired or constructed with Wildlife and Sport Fish...

  7. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Pre-project Rare Plant and Wildlife Surveys For the Pit 7 Drainage Diversion and Groundwater Extraction and Treatment Facility

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Paterson, L; Woollett, J

    In January 2007, the Department of Energy (DOE) released the final Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Environmental Remediation at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) Site 300 Pit 7 Complex. At the same time, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) released the final Negative Declaration and Initial Study covering the Pit 7 remediation. No substantial adverse effect on wildlife species of concern was anticipated from the project. However, it was proposed that wildlife surveys should be conducted prior to construction because species locations and breeding areas could potentially change by the time construction activities began. Although no known populationsmore » of rare or endangered/threatened plant species were known to occur within the project impact area at the time these documents were released, rare plants listed by the California Native Plant Society had been observed in the vicinity. As such, both DOE and DTSC proposed that plant surveys would be undertaken at the appropriate time of year to determine if rare plants would be impacted by project construction. This document provides the results of wildlife and rare plant surveys taken prior to the start of construction at the Pit 7 Complex.« less

  8. Factors Affecting Persistence of Undergraduate Students in a Fisheries and Wildlife Program: Leavers

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Wolter, Bjorn H. K.; Millenbah, Kelly F.; Montgomery, Robert A.; Schneider, James W.

    2011-01-01

    Undergraduate enrollment in natural resources-related programs are 13% lower than they were 30 years ago, even though overall collegiate enrollment has increased by roughly 8.5 million students during the same period. Because of this, we decided to investigate the question of student retention in a fisheries and wildlife (FW) program from the…

  9. 50 CFR 679.65 - Bering Sea Chinook Salmon Bycatch Management Program Economic Data Report (Chinook salmon EDR...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 13 2014-10-01 2014-10-01 false Bering Sea Chinook Salmon Bycatch Management Program Economic Data Report (Chinook salmon EDR program). 679.65 Section 679.65 Wildlife and Fisheries FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE (CONTINUED) FISHERIES OF THE...

  10. Water resources planning under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Stutzman, Karl F.

    1980-01-01

    This paper briefly discusses the more significant provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (1958). It covers pertinent aspects of legislative history, the development and current status (April 1980) of certain policies relevant to administering the Act, and other matters. It is directed primarily to practicing fish and wildlife agency field biologists, planners, and decisionmakers engaged in water resources development activities under the Act. It is not intended to be exhaustive in its treatment. The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act provides a basic procedural framework for the orderly consideration of fish and wildlife conservation measures to be incorporated into Federal and Federally permitted or licensed water development projects. The principal provisions of the Act include: 1. a statement of Congressional purpose that fish and wildlife conservation shall receive equal consideration with other project features; 2. mandatory consultation with wildlife agencies with a view to achieving such conservation; 3. full consideration by action of the recommendations stemming from consultation; 4. authority for action agencies to implement such recommendations as they find acceptable. The FWCA in effect amends, conditions, or supplements other Federal laws and is thus closely linked in its application and interpretation. It is similarly linked to Federal planning standards and procedures. Because of this, interpretations tend to be flexible and evolve, adapting to changing situations. The following reference matrix outlines selected sections of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act which are of particular relevance to planners.

  11. 50 CFR 253.15 - Recourse against parties.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 9 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false Recourse against parties. 253.15 Section 253.15 Wildlife and Fisheries NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AID TO FISHERIES FISHERIES ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS Fisheries Finance Program...

  12. 50 CFR 253.15 - Recourse against parties.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 11 2014-10-01 2014-10-01 false Recourse against parties. 253.15 Section 253.15 Wildlife and Fisheries NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AID TO FISHERIES FISHERIES ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS Fisheries Finance Program...

  13. 50 CFR 253.15 - Recourse against parties.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 11 2013-10-01 2013-10-01 false Recourse against parties. 253.15 Section 253.15 Wildlife and Fisheries NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AID TO FISHERIES FISHERIES ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS Fisheries Finance Program...

  14. 50 CFR 253.15 - Recourse against parties.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 11 2012-10-01 2012-10-01 false Recourse against parties. 253.15 Section 253.15 Wildlife and Fisheries NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AID TO FISHERIES FISHERIES ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS Fisheries Finance Program...

  15. 50 CFR 660.16 - Groundfish observer program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 13 2014-10-01 2014-10-01 false Groundfish observer program. 660.16 Section 660.16 Wildlife and Fisheries FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE (CONTINUED) FISHERIES OFF WEST COAST STATES West Coast...

  16. 50 CFR 222.404 - Observer program sampling.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 10 2012-10-01 2012-10-01 false Observer program sampling. 222.404 Section 222.404 Wildlife and Fisheries NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE MARINE MAMMALS GENERAL ENDANGERED AND THREATENED MARINE SPECIES Observer...

  17. 78 FR 48035 - Conservation Reserve Program, Re-Enrollment

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-08-07

    ... purpose of CRP is to cost- effectively assist producers in conserving and improving soil, water, wildlife... producers in conserving and improving soil, water, wildlife, and other natural resources by converting..., Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Soil conservation, Technical assistance, Water resources, Wildlife...

  18. 50 CFR 13.11 - Application procedures.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... Rescue Center Program 50 CFR 23 (1) (1) CITES Registration of Commercial Breeding Operations for Appendix..., POSSESSION, TRANSPORTATION, SALE, PURCHASE, BARTER, EXPORTATION, AND IMPORTATION OF WILDLIFE AND PLANTS... Conservation Act permits (50 CFR 15); injurious wildlife permits (50 CFR 16); captive-bred wildlife...

  19. 50 CFR 13.11 - Application procedures.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... Rescue Center Program 50 CFR 23 (1) (1) CITES Registration of Commercial Breeding Operations for Appendix..., POSSESSION, TRANSPORTATION, SALE, PURCHASE, BARTER, EXPORTATION, AND IMPORTATION OF WILDLIFE AND PLANTS... Conservation Act permits (50 CFR 15); injurious wildlife permits (50 CFR 16); captive-bred wildlife...

  20. 50 CFR 13.11 - Application procedures.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... Rescue Center Program 50 CFR 23 (1) (1) CITES Registration of Commercial Breeding Operations for Appendix..., POSSESSION, TRANSPORTATION, SALE, PURCHASE, BARTER, EXPORTATION, AND IMPORTATION OF WILDLIFE AND PLANTS... Conservation Act permits (50 CFR 15); injurious wildlife permits (50 CFR 16); captive-bred wildlife...

  1. 50 CFR 13.11 - Application procedures.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... Rescue Center Program 50 CFR 23 (1) (1) CITES Registration of Commercial Breeding Operations for Appendix..., POSSESSION, TRANSPORTATION, SALE, PURCHASE, BARTER, EXPORTATION, AND IMPORTATION OF WILDLIFE AND PLANTS... Conservation Act permits (50 CFR 15); injurious wildlife permits (50 CFR 16); captive-bred wildlife...

  2. 50 CFR 80.98 - How must an agency report barter transactions?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General...) Designs the farming or grazing to advance the agency's fish and wildlife management objectives. ...

  3. Effects of cattle grazing and haying on wildlife conservation at National Wildlife Refuges in the United States

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Strassmann, Beverly I.

    1987-01-01

    The National Wildlife Refuge System is perhaps the most important system of federal lands for protecting wildlife in the United States. Only at refuges has wildlife conservation been legislated to have higher priority than either recreational or commercial activities. Presently, private ranchers and farmers graze cattle on 981,954 ha and harvest hay on 12,021 ha at 123 National Wildlife Refuges. US Fish and Wildlife Service policy is to permit these uses primarily when needed to benefit refuge wildlife. To evaluate the success of this policy, I surveyed grassland management practices at the 123 refuges. The survey results indicate that in fiscal year 1980 there were 374,849 animal unit months (AUMs) of cattle grazing, or 41% more than was reported by the Fish and Wildlife Service. According to managers' opinions, 86 species of wildlife are positively affected and 82 are negatively affected by refuge cattle grazing or haying. However, quantitative field studies of the effect of cattle grazing and haying on wildlife coupled with the survey data on how refuge programs are implemented suggest that these activities are impeding the goal of wildlife conservation. Particular management problems uncovered by the survey include overgrazing of riparian habitats, wildlife mortality due to collisions with cattle fences, and mowing of migratory bird habitat during the breeding season. Managers reported that they spend 919,740 administering cattle grazing and haying; thus refuge grazing and haying programs are also expensive. At any single refuge these uses occupy up to 50% of refuge funds and 55% of staff time. In light of these results, prescribed burning may be a better wildlife management option than is either cattle grazing or haying.

  4. Flathead River Focus Watershed Coordinator, 2003-2004 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    DuCharme, Lynn

    2004-06-01

    The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) has long been involved with funding of the Cooperative Habitat Protection and Improvement with Private Landowners program in accordance with the Northwest Power Planning Council's (NPPC) Fish & Wildlife Program (Section 7.7). Section 7.7B.1 requires the establishment of ''at least one model watershed coordinator selected by each representative state''. This project was initiated in 1997 with the purpose of fulfilling the NWPCC's watershed program within the Flathead River basin in western Montana. Currently, the Flathead watershed has been radically altered by hydropower and other land uses. With the construction of Hungry Horse, Bigfork and Kerrmore » dams, the Flathead River system has been divided into isolated populations. Bull trout have been listed as threatened by the US Fish and Wildlife Service and westslope cutthroat trout have been petitioned for listing. Many streams in the drainage have been destabilized during recent decades. Past legal and illegal species introductions are also causing problems. This project fosters in-kind, out-of-place mitigation to offset the impacts of hydroelectric power to 72 miles of the South Fork of the Flathead River and its tributaries upstream of Hungry Horse Dam. Key subbasins within the Flathead drainage, which are critical to native species restoration, are experiencing rapid changes in land ownership and management direction. Subdivision and residential development of agricultural and timber lands adjacent to waterways in the drainage pose one of the greatest threats to weak but recoverable stocks of trout species. Plum Creek Timber Company, a major landholder in the Flathead drainage is currently divesting itself of large tracks of its lakeshore and streamside holdings. Growth of small tract development throughout the area and its tributaries is occurring at a record rate. Immediate to short-term action is required to protect stream corridors through many of these areas if cost-effective recovery efforts are to be implemented. In order to adequately address the issues, other segments of society and other (non-BPA) funding sources must be incorporated into the solution. As stated in the 1994 Fish and Wildlife Program (section 7.7), ''Comprehensive watershed management should enhance and expedite implementation of actions by clearly identifying gaps in programs and knowledge, by striving over time to resolve conflicts, and by keying on activities that address priorities''. A watershed coordinator helps to initiate and facilitate efforts for addressing the issues mentioned above and pulling together a plan for mitigation. Local support is essential before local governments and individual citizens are going to allow government initiatives to be implemented.« less

  5. Flathead River Focus Watershed Coordinator, 2002 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    DuCharme, Lynn

    2003-04-01

    The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) has long been involved with funding of the Cooperative Habitat Protection and Improvement with Private Landowners program in accordance with the Northwest Power Planning Council's (NPPC) Fish & Wildlife Program (Section 7.7). Section 7.7B.1 requires the establishment of ''at least one model watershed coordinator selected by each representative state''. This project was initiated in 1997 with the purpose of fulfilling the NPPC's watershed program within the Flathead River basin in western Montana. Currently, the Flathead watershed has been radically altered by hydropower and other land uses. With the construction of Hungry Horse, Bigfork and Kerrmore » dams, the Flathead River system has been divided into isolated populations. Bull trout have been listed as threatened by the US Fish and Wildlife Service and westslope cutthroat trout have been petitioned for listing. Many streams in the drainage have been destabilized during recent decades. Past legal and illegal species introductions are also causing problems. This project fosters in-kind, out-of-place mitigation to offset the impacts of hydroelectric power to 72 miles of the South Fork of the Flathead River and its tributaries upstream of Hungry Horse Dam. Key subbasins within the Flathead drainage, which are critical to native species restoration, are experiencing rapid changes in land ownership and management direction. Subdivision and residential development of agricultural and timber lands adjacent to waterways in the drainage pose one of the greatest threats to weak but recoverable stocks of trout species. Plum Creek Timber Company, a major landholder in the Flathead drainage is currently divesting itself of large tracks of its lakeshore and streamside holdings. Growth of small tract development throughout the area and its tributaries is occurring at a record rate. Immediate to short-term action is required to protect stream corridors through many of these areas if cost-effective recovery efforts are to be implemented. In order to adequately address the issues, other segments of society and other (non-BPA) funding sources must be incorporated into the solution. As stated in the 1994 Fish and Wildlife Program (section 7.7), ''Comprehensive watershed management should enhance and expedite implementation of actions by clearly identifying gaps in programs and knowledge, by striving over time to resolve conflicts, and by keying on activities that address priorities''. A watershed coordinator helps to initiate and facilitate efforts for addressing the issues mentioned above and pulling together a plan for mitigation. Local support is essential before local governments and individual citizens are going to allow government initiatives to be implemented.« less

  6. Flathead River Focus Watershed Coordinator, 2004-2005 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    DuCharme, Lynn

    2006-06-26

    The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) has long been involved with funding of the Cooperative Habitat Protection and Improvement with Private Landowners program in accordance with the Northwest Power Planning Council's (NPPC) Fish & Wildlife Program (Section 7.7). Section 7.7B.1 requires the establishment of ''at least one model watershed coordinator selected by each representative state''. This project was initiated in 1997 with the purpose of fulfilling the NWPCC's watershed program within the Flathead River basin in western Montana. Currently, the Flathead watershed has been radically altered by hydropower and other land uses. With the construction of Hungry Horse, Bigfork and Kerrmore » dams, the Flathead River system has been divided into isolated populations. Bull trout have been listed as threatened by the US Fish and Wildlife Service and westslope cutthroat trout have been petitioned for listing. Many streams in the drainage have been destabilized during recent decades. Past legal and illegal species introductions are also causing problems. This project fosters in-kind, out-of-place mitigation to offset the impacts of hydroelectric power to 72 miles of the South Fork of the Flathead River and its tributaries upstream of Hungry Horse Dam. Key subbasins within the Flathead drainage, which are critical to native species restoration, are experiencing rapid changes in land ownership and management direction. Subdivision and residential development of agricultural and timber lands adjacent to waterways in the drainage pose one of the greatest threats to weak but recoverable stocks of trout species. Plum Creek Timber Company, a major landholder in the Flathead drainage is currently divesting itself of large tracks of its lakeshore and streamside holdings. Growth of small tract development throughout the area and its tributaries is occurring at a record rate. Immediate to short-term action is required to protect stream corridors through many of these areas if cost-effective recovery efforts are to be implemented. In order to adequately address the issues, other segments of society and other (non-BPA) funding sources must be incorporated into the solution. As stated in the 1994 Fish and Wildlife Program (section 7.7), ''Comprehensive watershed management should enhance and expedite implementation of actions by clearly identifying gaps in programs and knowledge, by striving over time to resolve conflicts, and by keying on activities that address priorities''. A watershed coordinator helps to initiate and facilitate efforts for addressing the issues mentioned above and pulling together a plan for mitigation. Local support is essential before local governments and individual citizens are going to allow government initiatives to be implemented.« less

  7. Flathead River Focus Watershed Coordinator, 2005-2006 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    DuCharme, Lynn

    2006-05-01

    The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) has long been involved with funding of the Cooperative Habitat Protection and Improvement with Private Landowners program in accordance with the Northwest Power Planning Council's (NPPC) Fish & Wildlife Program (Section 7.7). Section 7.7B.1 requires the establishment of ''at least one model watershed coordinator selected by each representative state''. This project was initiated in 1997 with the purpose of fulfilling the NWPCC's watershed program within the Flathead River basin in western Montana. Currently, the Flathead watershed has been radically altered by hydropower and other land uses. With the construction of Hungry Horse, Bigfork and Kerrmore » dams, the Flathead River system has been divided into isolated populations. Bull trout have been listed as threatened by the US Fish and Wildlife Service and westslope cutthroat trout have been petitioned for listing. Many streams in the drainage have been destabilized during recent decades. Past legal and illegal species introductions are also causing problems. This project fosters in-kind, out-of-place mitigation to offset the impacts of hydroelectric power to 72 miles of the South Fork of the Flathead River and its tributaries upstream of Hungry Horse Dam. Key subbasins within the Flathead drainage, which are critical to native species restoration, are experiencing rapid changes in land ownership and management direction. Subdivision and residential development of agricultural and timber lands adjacent to waterways in the drainage pose one of the greatest threats to weak but recoverable stocks of trout species. Plum Creek Timber Company, a major landholder in the Flathead drainage is currently divesting itself of large tracks of its lakeshore and streamside holdings. Growth of small tract development throughout the area and its tributaries is occurring at a record rate. Immediate to short-term action is required to protect stream corridors through many of these areas if cost-effective recovery efforts are to be implemented. In order to adequately address the issues, other segments of society and other (non-BPA) funding sources must be incorporated into the solution. As stated in the 1994 Fish and Wildlife Program (section 7.7), ''Comprehensive watershed management should enhance and expedite implementation of actions by clearly identifying gaps in programs and knowledge, by striving over time to resolve conflicts, and by keying on activities that address priorities''. A watershed coordinator helps to initiate and facilitate efforts for addressing the issues mentioned above and pulling together a plan for mitigation. Local support is essential before local governments and individual citizens are going to allow government initiatives to be implemented.« less

  8. Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP) Report; Steigerwald Lake National Wildlife Refuge, Technical Report 2000-2001.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Allard, Donna

    2001-09-01

    Steigenvald Lake National Wildlife Refuge (NWR, refuge) was established as a result of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) transferring ownership of the Stevenson tract located in the historic Steigerwald Lake site to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS, Service) for the mitigation of the fish and wildlife losses associated with the construction of a second powerhouse at the Bonneville Dam on the Columbia River and relocation of the town of North Bonneville (Public Law 98-396). The construction project was completed in 1983 and resulted in the loss of approximately 577 acres of habitat on the Washingtonmore » shore of the Columbia River (USFWS, 1982). The COE determined that acquisition and development of the Steigenvald Lake area, along with other on-site project management actions, would meet their legal obligation to mitigate for these impacts (USCOE, 1985). Mitigation requirements included restoration and enhancement of this property to increase overall habitat diversity and productivity. From 1994 to 1999, 317 acres of additional lands, consisting of four tracts of contiguous land, were added to the original refuge with Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) funds provided through the Washington Wildlife Mitigation Agreement. These tracts comprised Straub (191 acres), James (90 acres), Burlington Northern (27 acres), and Bliss (9 acres). Refer to Figure 1. Under this Agreement, BPA budgeted $2,730,000 to the Service for 'the protection, mitigation, and enhancement of wildlife and wildlife habitat that was adversely affected by the construction of Federal hydroelectric dams on the Columbia River or its tributaries' in the state of Washington (BPA, 1993). Lands acquired for mitigation resulting from BPA actions are evaluated using the habitat evaluation procedures (HEP) methodology, which quantifies how many Habitat Units (HUs) are to be credited to BPA. HUs or credits gained lessen BPA's debt, which was formally tabulated in the Federal Columbia River Power System Loss Assessments and adopted as part of the Northwest Power Planning Council's Fish and Wildlife Program as a BPA obligation (BPA, 1994). Steigenvald Lake NWR is located in southwest Washington (Clark County), within the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area. Historically part of the Columbia River flood plain, the refuge area was disconnected from the river by a series of dikes constructed by the COE for flood control in 1966. An aerial photograph from 1948 portrays this area as an exceedingly complex mosaic of open water, wetlands, sloughs, willow and cottonwood stands, wet meadows, upland pastures, and agricultural fields, which once supported a large assemblage of fish and wildlife populations. Eliminating the threat of periodic inundation by the Columbia River allowed landowners to more completely convert the area into upland pasture and farmland through channelization and removal of standing water. Native pastures were 'improved' for grazing by the introduction of non-native fescues, orchard grass, ryegrass, and numerous clovers. Although efforts to drain the lake were not entirely successful, wetland values were still significantly reduced.« less

  9. 50 CFR 253.29 - CDQ loans.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 11 2013-10-01 2013-10-01 false CDQ loans. 253.29 Section 253.29 Wildlife and Fisheries NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AID TO FISHERIES FISHERIES ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS Fisheries Finance Program § 253.29 CDQ...

  10. 50 CFR 253.29 - CDQ loans.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 11 2012-10-01 2012-10-01 false CDQ loans. 253.29 Section 253.29 Wildlife and Fisheries NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AID TO FISHERIES FISHERIES ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS Fisheries Finance Program § 253.29 CDQ...

  11. 50 CFR 253.29 - CDQ loans.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 9 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false CDQ loans. 253.29 Section 253.29 Wildlife and Fisheries NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AID TO FISHERIES FISHERIES ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS Fisheries Finance Program § 253.29 CDQ...

  12. 50 CFR 253.29 - CDQ loans.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 11 2014-10-01 2014-10-01 false CDQ loans. 253.29 Section 253.29 Wildlife and Fisheries NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AID TO FISHERIES FISHERIES ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS Fisheries Finance Program § 253.29 CDQ...

  13. 50 CFR 84.31 - An overview of the ranking criteria.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS... objective of the proposal will be to acquire, restore, enhance, or manage coastal wetlands to benefit coastal wetlands and the hydrology, water quality, and fish and wildlife dependent upon them. The Program...

  14. 50 CFR 80.98 - How must an agency report barter transactions?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...; and (2) Designs the farming or grazing to advance the agency's fish and wildlife management objectives. ...

  15. 50 CFR 80.98 - How must an agency report barter transactions?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...; and (2) Designs the farming or grazing to advance the agency's fish and wildlife management objectives. ...

  16. Projected changes in wildlife habitats in Arctic natural areas of northwest Alaska

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Marcot, Bruce G.; Jorgenson, M. Torre; Lawler, James P.; Handel, Colleen M.; DeGange, Anthony R.

    2015-01-01

    We project the effects of transitional changes among 60 vegetation and other land cover types (“ecotypes”) in northwest Alaska over the 21st century on habitats of 162 bird and 39 mammal species known or expected to occur regularly in the region. This analysis, encompassing a broad suite of arctic and boreal wildlife species, entailed building wildlife-habitat matrices denoting levels of use of each ecotype by each species, and projecting habitat changes under historic and expected accelerated future rates of change from increasing mean annual air temperature based on the average of 5 global climate models under the A1B emissions scenario, and from potential influence of a set of 23 biophysical drivers. Under historic rates of change, we project that 52 % of the 201 species will experience an increase in medium- and high-use habitats, 3 % no change, and 45 % a decrease, and that a greater proportion of mammal species (62 %) will experience habitat declines than will bird species (50 %). Outcomes become more dire (more species showing habitat loss) under projections made from effects of biophysical drivers and especially from increasing temperature, although species generally associated with increasing shrub and tree ecotypes will likely increase in distribution. Changes in wildlife habitats likely will also affect trophic cascades, ecosystem function, and ecosystem services; of particular significance are the projected declines in habitats of most small mammals that form the prey base for mesocarnivores and raptors, and habitat declines in 25 of the 50 bird and mammal species used for subsistence hunting and trapping.

  17. US 93 preconstruction wildlife monitoring field methods handbook : final report.

    DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

    2006-11-01

    The US 93 reconstruction project on the Flathead Indian Reservation in northwest Montana represents one of the most extensive wildlife-sensitive highway design efforts to occur in the continental United States. The reconstruction will include install...

  18. 50 CFR 80.97 - May an agency barter goods or services to carry out a grant-funded project?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH... SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General Grant Administration § 80.97 May an agency barter goods or services...

  19. 50 CFR 80.97 - May an agency barter goods or services to carry out a grant-funded project?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH... SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General Grant Administration § 80.97 May an agency barter goods or services...

  20. Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP) Report; Precious Lands Wildlife Management Area, Technical Report 2000-2003.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Kozusko, Shana

    The Nez Perce Tribe (NPT) currently manages a 15,325 acre parcel of land known as the Precious Lands Wildlife Management Area that was purchased as mitigation for losses incurred by construction of the four lower Snake River dams. The Management Area is located in northern Wallowa County, Oregon and southern Asotin County, Washington (Figure 1). It is divided into three management parcels--the Buford parcel is located on Buford Creek and straddles the WA-OR state line, and the Tamarack and Basin parcels are contiguous to each other and located between the Joseph Creek and Cottonwood Creek drainages in Wallowa County, OR.more » The project was developed under the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-501), with funding from the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA). The acreage protected under this contract will be credited to BPA as habitat permanently dedicated to wildlife and wildlife mitigation. A modeling strategy known as Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP) was developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and adopted by BPA as a habitat equivalency accounting system. Nine wildlife species models were used to evaluate distinct cover type features and provide a measure of habitat quality. Models measure a wide range of life requisite variables for each species and monitor overall trends in vegetation community health and diversity. One product of HEP is an evaluation of habitat quality expressed in Habitat Units (HUs). This HU accounting system is used to determine the amount of credit BPA receives for mitigation lands. After construction of the four lower Snake River dams, a HEP loss assessment was conducted to determine how many Habitat Units were inundated behind the dams. Twelve target species were used in that evaluation: Canada goose, mallard, river otter, downy woodpecker, song sparrow, yellow warbler, marsh wren, western meadowlark, chukar, ring-necked pheasant, California quail, and mule deer. The U.S. Army Corp of Engineers and the Washington Department of fish and Wildlife subsequently purchased numerous properties to mitigate for the identified Snake River losses. These projects, however, were not sufficient to mitigate for all the HU's lost. The Northwest Power Planning Council amended the remaining 26,774 HU's into their 1994-1995 Fish and Wildlife Program as being unmitigated (NPPC 2000), which allowed the Nez Perce Tribe to contract with BPA to provide HU's through the Precious Lands Project. The Precious Lands project contains a different composition of cover types than those assessed during the lower Snake loss assessment. For example, no mallard or Canada goose habitat exists on Precious Lands but the area does contain conifer forest, which was not present on the area inundated by dam construction. These cover type differences have resulted in a slightly different suite of species for the current HEP assessment. Target species for Precious Lands are downy woodpecker, yellow warbler, song sparrow, California Quail, mule deer, sharp-tailed grouse (brood rearing), west em meadowlark, beaver, and black-capped chickadee. This list is a reflection of the available cover types and the management objectives of the Nez Perce Tribe. For example, chukar was not used in the present assessment because it is an introduced Eurasian game bird that does not provide an accurate representation of the ecological health of the native grasslands it was supposed to represent. Initial model runs using the chukar confirmed this suspicion so the brood-rearing section of the sharp-tailed grouse model was used instead. Additionally, the beaver model was used in place of the river otter model because the otter model used in the loss assessment was not a published model, was overly simplistic, and did not provide an accurate assessment of riparian condition. The beaver model, however, provides a detailed evaluation of overstory class structure that the NPT felt was a good compliment to the yellow warbler and song sparrow models that evaluated understory shrub layers. Overall, such substitutions should result in a more accurate evaluation of the ecological conditions on Precious Lands, and provide better information for decision making. A baseline HEP analysis was initiated on the Precious Lands in 2000, and data collection continued throughout the 2001 and 2002 field seasons. In the future, HEP analysis will be used to evaluate habitat changes resulting from management activities. Repeat surveys will be useful in assessing long-term trends in plant community health, weed encroachment, wildlife limiting factors, habitat degradation, and establishing desired future condition guidelines for the management program.« less

  1. 50 CFR 648.95 - Offshore Fishery Program in the SFMA.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 10 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false Offshore Fishery Program in the SFMA. 648.95 Section 648.95 Wildlife and Fisheries FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FISHERIES OF THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES Management...

  2. Lake Roosevelt Fisheries Monitoring Program; 1988-1989 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Peone, Tim L.; Scholz, Allan T.; Griffith, James R.

    1990-10-01

    In the Northwest Power Planning Council's 1987 Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (NPPC 1987), the Council directed the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) to construct two kokanee salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) hatcheries as partial mitigation for the loss of anadromous salmon and steelhead incurred by construction of Grand Coulee Dam [Section 903 (g)(l)(C)]. The hatcheries will produce kokanee salmon for outplanting into Lake Roosevelt as well as rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) for the Lake Roosevelt net-pen program. In section 903 (g)(l)(E), the Council also directed BPA to fund a monitoring program to evaluate the effectiveness of the kokanee hatcheries. Themore » monitoring program included the following components: (1) a year-round, reservoir-wide, creel survey to determine angler use, catch rates and composition, and growth and condition of fish; (2) assessment of kokanee, rainbow, and walleye (Stizostedion vitreum) feeding habits and densities of their preferred prey, and; (3) a mark and recapture study designed to assess the effectiveness of different locations where hatchery-raised kokanee and net pen reared rainbow trout are released. The above measures were adopted by the Council based on a management plan, developed by the Upper Columbia United Tribes Fisheries Center, Spokane Indian Tribe, Colville Confederated Tribes, Washington Department of Wildlife, and National Park Service, that examined the feasibility of restoring and enhancing Lake Roosevelt fisheries (Scholz et al. 1986). In July 1988, BPA entered into a contract with the Spokane Indian Tribe to initiate the monitoring program. The projected duration of the monitoring program is through 1995. This report contains the results of the monitoring program from August 1988 to December 1989.« less

  3. Grande Ronde Basin Supplementation Program; Lostine River, 2000 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Onjukka, Sam T.; Harbeck, Jim

    2003-03-01

    The Northwest Power Planning Council (NPPC) identified supplementation as a high priority to achieve its goal of increasing runs of anadromous fish in the Columbia Basin. Supplementation activities in the Lostine River and associated monitoring and evaluation conducted by the Nez Perce Tribe relate directly to the needs addressed in the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (NPPC 1994). Measure 7.4L.1 of the Program mandates that appropriate research accompany any proposed supplementation. In addition, measure 7.3B.2 of the Program stresses the need for evaluating supplementation projects to assess their ability to increase production. Finally, Section 7.4D.3 encourages the studymore » of hatchery rearing and release strategies to improve survival and adaptation of cultured fish. In 1997, Oregon Department of Fisheries and Wildlife (ODFW) requested a modification of Permit 1011 to allow the take of adult spring chinook salmon. In 1998, the Nez Perce Tribe also requested a permit specific to activities on Lostine River. The permit was issued in 2000. A special condition in the permits required the development of a long term management plan for the spring chinook salmon of the Grande Ronde Basin. The Nez Perce Tribe, ODFW, and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) completed a formal long range plan entitled ''Grande Ronde Basin Endemic Spring Chinook Salmon Supplementation Program''. The program proposes to increase the survival of spring chinook salmon in the Grand Ronde Basin through hatchery intervention. Adult salmon from the Lostine River, Catherine Creek, and the Upper Grande Ronde River are used for a conventional supplementation program in the basin. The Nez Perce program currently operates under the ESA Section 10 Permit 1149.« less

  4. Grande Ronde Basin Supplementation Program; Lostine River, 2001 Annual Report.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Onjukka, Sam T.; Harbeck, Jim

    2003-03-01

    The Northwest Power Planning Council (NPPC) identified supplementation as a high priority to achieve its goal of increasing runs of anadromous fish in the Columbia Basin. Supplementation activities in the Lostine River and associated monitoring and evaluation conducted by the Nez Perce Tribe relate directly to the needs addressed in the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (NPPC 1994). Measure 7.4L.1 of the Program mandates that appropriate research accompany any proposed supplementation. In addition, measure 7.3B.2 of the Program stresses the need for evaluating supplementation projects to assess their ability to increase production. Finally, Section 7.4D.3 encourages the studymore » of hatchery rearing and release strategies to improve survival and adaptation of cultured fish. In 1997, Oregon Department of Fisheries and Wildlife (ODFW) requested a modification of Permit 1011 to allow the take of adult spring chinook salmon. In 1998, the Nez Perce Tribe also requested a permit specific to activities on Lostine River. The permit was issued in 2000. A special condition in the permits required the development of a long term management plan for the spring chinook salmon of the Grande Ronde Basin. The Nez Perce Tribe, ODFW, and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) completed a formal long range plan entitled ''Grande Ronde Basin Endemic Spring Chinook Salmon Supplementation Program''. The program proposes to increase the survival of spring chinook salmon in the Grand Ronde Basin through hatchery intervention. Adult salmon from the Lostine River, Catherine Creek, and the Upper Grande Ronde River are used for a conventional supplementation program in the basin. The Nez Perce program currently operates under the ESA Section 10 Permit 1149.« less

  5. 50 CFR 80.132 - Does an agency have to control the land or water where it completes capital improvements?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 9 2014-10-01 2014-10-01 false Does an agency have to control the land or water where it completes capital improvements? 80.132 Section 80.132 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM...

  6. Savannah River Ecology Laboratory. Annual technical progress report of ecological research, period ending July 31, 1994

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Not Available

    1994-07-31

    The Savannah River Ecology Laboratory (SREL) is a research unit of the University of Georgia (UGA) that is managed in conjunction with the University`s Institute of Ecology. The laboratory`s overall mission is to acquire and communicate knowledge of ecological processes and principles. SREL conducts basic and applied ecological research, as well as education and outreach programs, under an M&O contract with the US Department of Energy at the Savannah River Site. Significant accomplishments were made during the year ending July 31, 1994 in the areas of research, education and service. Reviewed in this document are research projects in the followingmore » areas: Environmental Operations Support (impacted wetlands, streams, trace organics, radioecology, database synthesis, wild life studies, zooplankton, safety and quality assurance); wood stork foraging and breeding ecology; defence waste processing facility; environmental risk assessment (endangered species, fish, ash basin studies); ecosystem alteration by chemical pollutants; wetlands systems; biodiversity on the SRS; Environmental toxicology; environmental outreach and education; Par Pond drawdown studies in wildlife and fish and metals; theoretical ecology; DOE-SR National Environmental Research Park; wildlife studies. Summaries of educational programs and publications are also give.« less

  7. Evaluation of Planning for Fish and Wildlife at Corps of Engineers Reservoirs, Beltzville Reservoir Project, Pennsylvania.

    DTIC Science & Technology

    1981-04-01

    community studies 56 Angler survey 63 Fishery Resources -- Discussion of Planning Input 73 SUMARY 81 BIBLIOGRAPHY OF SOURCE REFERENCE MATERIAL 88 - ii...necessary and Identify by block number) Fishery resources Wildlife resources Planning recommendation Pre-impoundment prediction Planning evaluation Post...impoundment occurrences Beltzville Wildlife communities \\ Pennsylvania Fish communities 20. AISSrRACT (Camtflue rm *r e.fth f nrceweary awd Idertify by

  8. Birds of the Savannah Harbor Navigation Project, Dredged Material Disposal Areas, 19942012

    DTIC Science & Technology

    2016-03-01

    frequently the targeted beneficiaries of wildlife habitat creation because of their well-documented population declines, sensitive or endangered status...shorebirds (USACE 1996). This on-off rotation schedule also provides habitat for other fish and wildlife species and serves to control mosquitoes by...South Carolina Department of Natural Resources with the assistance of interested agencies including the USACE and U.S. Federal Wildlife Service (USFWS

  9. 7 CFR 1455.20 - Criteria for grant selection.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-01-01

    ... OF AGRICULTURE LOANS, PURCHASES, AND OTHER OPERATIONS VOLUNTARY PUBLIC ACCESS AND HABITAT INCENTIVE... necessary to achieve the project's goals will be evaluated. (4) Appropriate wildlife habitat. The... assistance with respect to establishing and maintaining appropriate wildlife habitat on public access land...

  10. Dredging Operations Technical Support Program. Long-Term Monitoring of Habitat Development at Upland and Wetland Dredged Material Disposal Sites 1974-1982.

    DTIC Science & Technology

    1985-07-01

    soil salinity was high and acidity was low. Grasses established themselves and grew better than legumes. Wildlife response to vegetation establishment...Apalachicola Bay marsh project was developed on hydraulically pumped fine- and coarse-grained material placed in a saline intertidal environment in early 1976...is 10.5°C, the highest in Connecticut, which is due to a moderating influence by the Sound. The average tide is 0.75 m and the salinity ranges from

  11. 50 CFR 80.22 - [Reserved

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.22 [Reserved] ...

  12. 50 CFR 80.19 - [Reserved

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.19 [Reserved] ...

  13. 50 CFR 600.1006 - Accepting a request for, and determinations about conducting, a subsidized program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ..., state and regional authorities, affected fishing communities, participants in the reduction fishery... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 10 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false Accepting a request for, and determinations about conducting, a subsidized program. 600.1006 Section 600.1006 Wildlife and Fisheries FISHERY...

  14. 50 CFR 600.1006 - Accepting a request for, and determinations about conducting, a subsidized program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ..., state and regional authorities, affected fishing communities, participants in the reduction fishery... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 12 2014-10-01 2014-10-01 false Accepting a request for, and determinations about conducting, a subsidized program. 600.1006 Section 600.1006 Wildlife and Fisheries FISHERY...

  15. 50 CFR 600.1006 - Accepting a request for, and determinations about conducting, a subsidized program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ..., state and regional authorities, affected fishing communities, participants in the reduction fishery... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 12 2013-10-01 2013-10-01 false Accepting a request for, and determinations about conducting, a subsidized program. 600.1006 Section 600.1006 Wildlife and Fisheries FISHERY...

  16. 50 CFR 600.1006 - Accepting a request for, and determinations about conducting, a subsidized program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ..., state and regional authorities, affected fishing communities, participants in the reduction fishery... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 12 2012-10-01 2012-10-01 false Accepting a request for, and determinations about conducting, a subsidized program. 600.1006 Section 600.1006 Wildlife and Fisheries FISHERY...

  17. 50 CFR 20.20 - Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program... IMPORTATION OF WILDLIFE AND PLANTS (CONTINUED) MIGRATORY BIRD HUNTING Taking § 20.20 Migratory Bird Harvest... information will be used to provide a sampling frame for the national Migratory Bird Harvest Survey. Response...

  18. 50 CFR 20.20 - Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 8 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program... IMPORTATION OF WILDLIFE AND PLANTS (CONTINUED) MIGRATORY BIRD HUNTING Taking § 20.20 Migratory Bird Harvest... information will be used to provide a sampling frame for the national Migratory Bird Harvest Survey. Response...

  19. 76 FR 59304 - 2011-2012 Refuge-Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing Regulations; Correction

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-09-26

    ...-0038; 93270-1265-0000-4A] RIN 1018-AX54 2011-2012 Refuge-Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing Regulations... our regulations concerning hunting and sport fishing programs at national wildlife refuges... part 32 concerning hunting and sport fishing programs at national wildlife refuges. The final rule...

  20. 50 CFR 654.4 - Trap limitation program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 8 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Trap limitation program. 654.4 Section 654.4 Wildlife and Fisheries FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE STONE CRAB FISHERY OF THE GULF OF MEXICO General Measures § 654.4 Trap...

  1. Rainwater Wildlife Area Habitat Evaluation Procedures Report; A Columbia Basin Wildlife Mitigation Project.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Childs, Allen B.

    The 8,768 acre Rainwater Wildlife Area was acquired in September 1998 by the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) through an agreement with Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) to partially offset habitat losses associated with construction of the John Day and McNary hydroelectric facilities on the mainstem Columbia River. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP) were used to determine the number of habitat units credited to BPA for acquired lands. Upland and riparian forest, upland and riparian shrub, and grassland cover types are evaluated in this study. Targeted wildlife species include downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens),more » black-capped chickadee (Parus atricopillus), blue grouse (Dendragapus obscurus), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), yellow warbler (Dendroica petechia), mink (Mustela vison), and Western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta). Habitat surveys were conducted in 1998 and 1999 in accordance with published HEP protocols and included 65,300, 594m{sup 2}2 plots, and 112 one-tenth-acre plots. Between 153.3 and 7,187.46 acres were evaluated for each target wildlife mitigation species. Derived habitat suitability indices were multiplied by corresponding cover-type acreages to determine the number of habitat units for each species. The total baseline habitat units credited to BPA for the Rainwater Wildlife Area and its seven target species is 5,185.3 habitat units. Factors limiting habitat suitability are related to the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of past livestock grazing, road construction, and timber harvest which have simplified the structure, composition, and diversity of native plant communities. Alternatives for protecting and improving habitat suitability include exclusion of livestock grazing, road de-commissioning/obliteration, reforestation and thinning, control of competing and unwanted vegetation (including noxious weeds), reestablishing displaced or reduced native vegetation species, allowance of normative processes such as fire occurrence, and facilitating development of natural stable stream channels and associated floodplains. Implementation of habitat enhancement and restoration activities could generate an additional 1,850 habitat units in 10 years. Baseline and estimated future habitat units total 7,035.3 for the Rainwater Wildlife Area. Habitat protection, enhancement and restoration will require long-term commitments from managers to increase probabilities of success and meet the goals and objectives of the Northwest Power Planning Council's Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Program.« less

  2. Integration of Fish and Wildlife Data with Geobased and Remotely Sensed Land Use/land Cover Data: a Demonstration Using Sites in Pennsylvania. [Berwick and Lancaster

    NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

    Cushwa, C. T.; Laroche, G.; Dubrock, C. W.

    1982-01-01

    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service developed a statewide fish and wildlife data base for the Pennsylvania Game Commission that includes 125 categories of information on each of the 844 species. This species data base is integrated with geobased and remotely-sensed land use/land cover data from two sites in Pennsylvania. One site is an energy development project; the other is a high-energy use area. Analyses using the combined animal and land use data bases can be demonstrated for a variety of land use/land cover types at both sites. The ability to make "what if" analysis prior to project implementation is presented.

  3. Gilliam County Riparian Buffers; 2003-2004 Annual Reports.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Coiner, Josh

    Interest appears to be at an all-time high for riparian conservation programs in Gilliam County. With the recently added Herbaceous Buffer and the already established CREP program interest is booming. However, more and more people are turning towards the herbaceous buffer because of expense. The riparian forest buffer is becoming too expensive. Even with the excellent cost share and incentives landowners are having trouble with Farm Service Agency's payment limitation. Because of this payment limitation landowners are not receiving their full rental and incentive payments, usually in year one. This has cooled the installation of riparian forest buffers and peakedmore » interest in the CP-29 (Herbaceous Buffer for Wildlife). Either way, riparian lands are being enhanced and water quality is being improved. Year three should be very similar to the accomplishments of year 2. There has already been several projects proposed that may or may not be approved during year 3. I am currently working on three projects that are all over 2.5 miles long on each side and total anywhere from 60 to 250 acres in size. Along with these three projects there at least seven small projects being proposed. Four of those projects are riparian forest buffers and the remaining are herbaceous buffers.« less

  4. Methodology for prioritizing appropriate mitigation actions to reduce wildlife-vehicle collisions on Idaho highways.

    DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

    2014-08-01

    Vehicle collisions with large wild animals are a safety issue for motorists and an ecological concern for : wildlife populations. The objective of this research was to advance the efficacy of Idaho Transportation : Departments (ITDs) project pl...

  5. Methodology for prioritizing appropriate mitigation actions to reduce wildlife-vehicle collisions on Idaho highways.

    DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

    2014-08-01

    Vehicle collisions with large wild animals are a safety issue for motorists and an ecological concern for wildlife populations. The objective of this research was to advance the efficacy of Idaho Transportation Departments (ITDs) project planni...

  6. 50 CFR 80.100 - Does an agency have to display one of the symbols in this part on a completed project?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT... DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General Grant Administration § 80.100 Does an agency have to...

  7. The crucial contribution of veterinarians to conservation biology.

    PubMed

    Reading, Richard P; Kenny, David E; Fitzgerald, Kevin T

    2013-11-01

    Conservation biology is a relatively new (began in the 1980s), value-based discipline predicated on the belief that biological diversity-from genes to populations to species to communities to ecosystems-is good and extinction is bad. Conservation biology grew from the recognition that the Earth has entered its sixth great extinction event, one that differs from previous great extinctions in that a single species-Homo sapiens-has caused this biodiversity crisis. A diverse, interacting set of variables drive current extinctions. As such, to succeed, conservation efforts usually require broad-based, interdisciplinary approaches. Conservationists increasingly recognize the importance of contributions by veterinary science, among many other disciplines, to collaborative efforts aimed at stemming the loss of biodiversity. We argue that, to improve success rates, many wildlife conservation programs must incorporate veterinarians as part of an interdisciplinary team to assess and address problems. Ideally, veterinarians who participate in conservation would receive specialized training and be willing to work as partners as part of a larger team of experts who effectively integrate their work rather than work independently (i.e., work as interdisciplinary, as opposed to multidisciplinary, teams, respectively). In our opinion, the most successful and productive projects involve interdisciplinary teams involving both biological and nonbiological specialists. Some researchers hold multiple degrees in biology and veterinary medicine or the biological and social sciences. These experts can often offer unique insight. We see at least 3 major areas in which veterinarians can immediately offer great assistance to conservation efforts: (1) participation in wildlife capture and immobilization, (2) leadership or assistance in addressing wildlife health issues, and (3) leadership or assistance in addressing wildlife disease issues, including using wildlife as sentinels to identify new and emerging diseases or epidemics of old diseases. We cover each of these main topics in detail. © 2013 Published by Elsevier Inc.

  8. Biosocial Conservation: Integrating Biological and Ethnographic Methods to Study Human-Primate Interactions.

    PubMed

    Setchell, Joanna M; Fairet, Emilie; Shutt, Kathryn; Waters, Siân; Bell, Sandra

    2017-01-01

    Biodiversity conservation is one of the grand challenges facing society. Many people interested in biodiversity conservation have a background in wildlife biology. However, the diverse social, cultural, political, and historical factors that influence the lives of people and wildlife can be investigated fully only by incorporating social science methods, ideally within an interdisciplinary framework. Cultural hierarchies of knowledge and the hegemony of the natural sciences create a barrier to interdisciplinary understandings. Here, we review three different projects that confront this difficulty, integrating biological and ethnographic methods to study conservation problems. The first project involved wildlife foraging on crops around a newly established national park in Gabon. Biological methods revealed the extent of crop loss, the species responsible, and an effect of field isolation, while ethnography revealed institutional and social vulnerability to foraging wildlife. The second project concerned great ape tourism in the Central African Republic. Biological methods revealed that gorilla tourism poses risks to gorillas, while ethnography revealed why people seek close proximity to gorillas. The third project focused on humans and other primates living alongside one another in Morocco. Incorporating shepherds in the coproduction of ecological knowledge about primates built trust and altered attitudes to the primates. These three case studies demonstrate how the integration of biological and social methods can help us to understand the sustainability of human-wildlife interactions, and thus promote coexistence. In each case, an integrated biosocial approach incorporating ethnographic data produced results that would not otherwise have come to light. Research that transcends conventional academic boundaries requires the openness and flexibility to move beyond one's comfort zone to understand and acknowledge the legitimacy of "other" kinds of knowledge. It is challenging but crucial if we are to address conservation problems effectively.

  9. 50 CFR 80.18 - Responsibilities.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.18 Responsibilities. In the...

  10. Fall 1994 wildlife and vegetation survey, Norton Air Force Base, California

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Not Available

    The fall 1994 wildlife and vegetation surveys were completed October 3-7, 1994, at Norton Air Force Base (AFB), California. Two biologists from CDM Federal Programs, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regional biologist and the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) lead biologist conducted the surveys. A habitat assessment of three Installation Restoration Project (IRP) sites at Norton Air Force Base was also completed during the fall survey period. The IRP sites include: Landfill No. 2 (Site 2); the Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant (IWTP) area; and Former Fire Training Area No. 1 (Site 5). The assessments were designed to qualitatively characterizemore » the sites of concern, identify potential ecological receptors, and provide information for Remedial Design/Remedial Action activities. A Reference Area (Santa Ana River Wash) and the base urban areas were also characterized. The reference area assessment was performed to provide a baseline for comparison with the IRP site habitats. The fall 1994 survey is the second of up to four surveys that may be completed. In order to develop a complete understanding of all plant and animal species using the base, these surveys were planned to be conducted over four seasons. Species composition can vary widely during the course of a year in Southern California, and therefore, seasonal surveys will provide the most complete and reliable data to address changes in habitat structure and wildlife use of the site. Subsequent surveys will focus on seasonal wildlife observations and a spring vegetation survey.« less

  11. 50 CFR 80.1 - What does this part do?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General § 80.1 What does this... apportionments from the Federal Aid to Wildlife Restoration Fund (16 U.S.C. 669(b)), if authorized, and the Sport...

  12. 50 CFR 80.1 - What does this part do?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General § 80.1 What does this part do... the Federal Aid to Wildlife Restoration Fund (16 U.S.C. 669(b)), if authorized, and the Sport Fish...

  13. 50 CFR 80.1 - What does this part do?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General § 80.1 What does this... apportionments from the Federal Aid to Wildlife Restoration Fund (16 U.S.C. 669(b)), if authorized, and the Sport...

  14. 77 FR 18852 - Lee Metcalf National Wildlife Refuge, Stevensville, MT; Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-03-28

    ... management purpose, for migratory birds'' (Migratory Bird Conservation Act); and (2) ``for (a) incidental... participate in interpretive programs in the indoor and outdoor classrooms. The Refuge provides habitat for... National Wildlife Refuge System, consistent with sound principles of fish and wildlife management...

  15. 50 CFR 80.1 - What does this part do?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General § 80.1 What does this part do... the Federal Aid to Wildlife Restoration Fund (16 U.S.C. 669(b)), if authorized, and the Sport Fish...

  16. Building Ecological and Community Resilience and Measuring Success of the Department of Interior Hurricane Sandy Resilience Projects

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Taylor, S. M.; Worman, S. L.; Bennett, R.; Bassow, A.

    2017-12-01

    The Department of the Interior (DOI) partnered with the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) to administer an external funding competition to support coastal resilience projects in the region affected by Hurricane Sandy. The projects complement the DOI Bureau-led projects, but are led by state and local governments, universities, non-profits, community groups, tribes, and other non-Federal entities. In total, the Hurricane Sandy Resilience Program invested over $750 million in approximately 180 projects to repair damage and improve the resilience of habitats, communities and infrastructure to future storms and sea level rise. Project activities include waterway connection and opening, living shoreline, marsh restoration, community resilience planning, data/mapping/modeling, and beach and dune restoration. DOI and NFWF initiated a resilience assessment in 2015 to evaluate the impact of this investment. The assessment began by clarifying the program's resilience goals and the development of ecological and socio-economic metrics across the project activities. Using these metrics, the evaluation is assessing the ecological and community outcomes, cost effectiveness of activities, improved scientific understanding, and temporal and spatial scaling of benefits across resilience activities. Recognizing the unique opportunity afforded by the scale and distribution of projects, NFWF and DOI have invested in monitoring through 2024 to better understand how these projects perform over time. This presentation will describe the evaluation questions, approach, long-term monitoring, online metrics portal, and findings to date.

  17. Georgia resource assessment project: Institutionalizing LANDSAT and geographic data base techniques

    NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

    Pierce, R. R.; Rado, B. Q.; Faust, N.

    1981-01-01

    Digital data from LANDSAT for each 1.1-acre cell in Georgia were processed and the land cover conditions were categorized. Several test cases were completed and an operational hardware and software processing capability was established at the Georgia Institute of Technology. The operational capability was developed to process the entire state (60,000 sq. miles and 14 LANDSAT scenes) in a cooperative project between eleven divisions and agencies at the regional, state, and federal levels. Products were developed for State agencies such as in both mapped and statistical formats. A computerized geographical data base was developed for management programs. To a large extent the applications of the data base evolved as users of LANDSAT information requested that other data (i.e., soils, slope, land use, etc.) be made compatible with LANDSAT for management programs. To date, geographic data bases incorporating LANDSAT and other spatial data deal with elements of the municipal solid waste management program, and reservoir management for the Corps of Engineers. LANDSAT data are also being used for applications in wetland, wildlife, and forestry management.

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

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Khalil, Mona

    2016-09-09

    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.

  19. 50 CFR 80.90 - What are the grantee's responsibilities?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General...

  20. 50 CFR 80.6 - Prohibited activities.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.6 Prohibited activities. The...

  1. 50 CFR 80.12 - Cost sharing.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.12 Cost sharing. Federal...

  2. 50 CFR 80.90 - What are the grantee's responsibilities?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General...

  3. 50 CFR 80.21 - Assurances.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.21 Assurances. The State must...

  4. Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP) Report; Iskuulpa Wildlife Mitigation and Watershed Project, Technical Report 1998-2003.

    DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Quaempts, Eric

    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP) were used to determine the number of habitat units credited to evaluate lands acquired and leased in Eskuulpa Watershed, a Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation watershed and wildlife mitigation project. The project is designed to partially credit habitat losses incurred by BPA for the construction of the John Day and McNary hydroelectric facilities on the Columbia River. Upland and riparian forest, upland and riparian shrub, and grasslands cover types were included in the evaluation. Indicator species included downy woodpecker (Picuides puhescens), black-capped chickadee (Pams atricopillus), blue grouse (Beadragapusmore » obscurus), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), yellow warbler (Dendroica petschia), mink (Mustela vison), and Western meadowlark (Sturnello neglects). Habitat surveys were conducted in 1998 and 1999 in accordance with published HEP protocols and included 55,500 feet of transects, 678 m2 plots, and 243 one-tenth-acre plots. Between 123.9 and f 0,794.4 acres were evaluated for each indicator species. Derived habitat suitability indices were multiplied by corresponding cover-type acreages to determine the number of habitat units for each species. The total habitat units credited to BPA for the Iskuulpa Watershed Project and its seven indicator species is 4,567.8 habitat units. Factors limiting habitat suitability are related to the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of past livestock grazing, road construction, and timber harvest, which have simplified the structure, composition, and diversity of native plant communities. Alternatives for protecting and improving habitat suitability include exclusion of livestock grazing or implementation of restoration grazing schemes, road de-commissioning, reforestation, large woody debris additions to floodplains, control of competing and unwanted vegetation, reestablishing displaced or reduced native vegetation species, and the allowance of normative processes such as fire occurrence. Implementation of these alternatives could generate an estimated minimum of 393 enhancement credits in 10 years. Longer-term benefits of protection and enhancement activities include increases in native species diversity and structural complexity in all cover types. While such benefits are not readily recognized by HEP models and reflected in the number of habitat units generated, they also provide dual benefits for fisheries resources. Implementation of the alternatives will require long-term commitments from managers to increase probabilities of success and meet the goals and objectives of the Northwest Power Planning Council's Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Program.« less

  5. PROJECTING WILDLIFE RESPONSES TO ALTERNATIVE FUTURE LANDSCAPES IN OREGON'S WILLAMETTE VALLEY

    EPA Science Inventory

    Increasingly, environmental quality is becoming recognized as a critical factor that should constrain land use planning. One important measure of a landscape's quality is its capacity to support viable populations of wildlife species. But the ability of land managers to balance c...

  6. EFFECTS OF CHRONIC STRESS ON WILDLIFE POPULATIONS: A POPULATION MODELING APPROACH AND CASE STUDY

    EPA Science Inventory

    This chapter describes a matrix modeling approach to characterize and project risks to wildlife populations subject to chronic stress. Population matrix modeling was used to estimate effects of one class of environmental contaminants, dioxin-like compounds (DLCs), to populations ...

  7. Presentation from 2016 STAR Tribal Research Meeting: ANTHC Rural Alaska Monitoring Program (RAMP): Assessing, Monitoring, and Adapting to Emerging Environmental Human and Wildlife Health Threats

    EPA Pesticide Factsheets

    This presentation, ANTHC Rural Alaska Monitoring Program (RAMP): Assessing, Monitoring, and Adapting to Emerging Environmental Human and Wildlife Health Threats, was given at the 2016 STAR Tribal Research Meeting held on Sept. 20-21, 2016.

  8. 50 CFR 660.150 - Mothership (MS) Coop Program.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 13 2014-10-01 2014-10-01 false Mothership (MS) Coop Program. 660.150 Section 660.150 Wildlife and Fisheries FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE (CONTINUED) FISHERIES OFF WEST COAST STATES West Coast Groundfish-Limited Entry Trawl Fisheries § 660.15...

  9. 50 CFR 84.21 - How do I apply for a National Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... Wetlands Conservation Grant? 84.21 Section 84.21 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE... PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Applying for Grants § 84.21 How do I apply for a National Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant? (a) Eligible applicants should submit their...

  10. Answering the Call of the Wild

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Zaiglin, Robert

    2006-01-01

    In order to become a professional wildlife manager, one must make several choices in order to reach their objectives. The first choice is to select a college that has a wildlife management program in place. For those interested in a two-year technical program, Southwest Texas Junior College is offering an applied science degree in wildlife…

  11. Environmental Compliance Assessment Management Program (ECAMP) - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)

    DTIC Science & Technology

    1994-06-01

    and Wildlife Service, began research on the Environmental Compliance Assessment and Management Program (ECAMP). The concept was to combine Code of ... The number of environmental laws and regulations have continued to grow in the United States and worldwide, making compliance with these regulations...Service has adopted an environmental compliance program that identifies compliance problems before they are cited as violations by the U.S

  12. Lessons from a Community-Based Program to Monitor Forest Vertebrates in the Brazilian Amazon

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Benchimol, Maíra; von Mühlen, Eduardo M.; Venticinque, Eduardo M.

    2017-09-01

    A large number of sustainable use reserves recently have been titled in the Brazilian Amazonia. These reserves require public participation in the design and implementation of management and monitoring programs. Species-monitoring programs that engage local stakeholders may be useful for assessing wildlife status over the long term. We collaborated on the development of a participatory program to monitor forest vertebrates in the Piagaçu-Purus Sustainable Development Reserve and to build capacity among the local people. We examined relations between the distance to the nearest human community and sighting rates of each species, and evaluated the program overall. Eighteen wildlife monitors received training in line transect and sign surveys and then conducted surveys along a total of ten transects. Sighting rates of most species in the Piagaçu-Purus Sustainable Development Reserve were higher than those reported in other Amazonian forests. Distance to the human community was not associated with the overall vertebrate sighting rate. Use of the trained monitors was successful in terms of data acquisition and engagement. The involvement of local people promoted discussions about regulation of hunting in the reserve. Implementation of community-based programs to monitor forest wildlife in Amazonian sustainable use reserves may empower local communities and assess the status of wildlife through time.

  13. 50 CFR 80.54 - What activities are ineligible for funding?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Eligible...

  14. 50 CFR 80.32 - What is the certification period?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Certification of...

  15. 50 CFR 80.54 - What activities are ineligible for funding?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Eligible...

  16. 50 CFR 80.54 - What activities are ineligible for funding?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Eligible...

  17. 50 CFR 80.54 - What activities are ineligible for funding?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Eligible...

  18. 50 CFR 80.8 - Availability of funds.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.8 Availability of funds. Funds...

  19. 50 CFR 80.13 - Substantiality in character and design.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.13...

  20. 50 CFR 80.16 - Payments.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.16 Payments. Payments must be made for the...

  1. 50 CFR 80.134 - How must an agency use real property?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Real...

  2. 50 CFR 80.7 - Appeals.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.7 Appeals. Any difference of opinion over the...

  3. The California Wildlife/Fish Habitat Relationship System

    Treesearch

    William E. Grenfell; Hal Salwasser; William F. Laudenslayer

    1982-01-01

    The California Wildlife/Fish Habitat Relationships (WFHR) System is an ongoing effort to apply our knowledge of wildlife habitat requirements to identify and explain the consequences of proposed land use activities, particularly those activities that affect vegetation. The U.S. Forest Service initiated the WFHR program in California in 1976 and has developed it for all...

  4. Whooping crane recovery: Progress through research

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Carpenter, J.W.; Smith, D.G.

    1988-01-01

    Cooperative efforts of the Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), Wood Buffalo National Park in Canada, and Patuxent Wildlife Research Center have established a captive flock of whooping cranes, and at least two additional wild populations. Efforts have focused on research, habitat protection, law enforcement, and conservation education programs.

  5. 50 CFR 17.22 - Permits for scientific purposes, enhancement of propagation or survival, or for incidental taking.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ..., TRANSPORTATION, SALE, PURCHASE, BARTER, EXPORTATION, AND IMPORTATION OF WILDLIFE AND PLANTS (CONTINUED) ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS Endangered Wildlife § 17.22 Permits for scientific purposes... participate in a cooperative breeding program and to maintain or contribute data to a studbook; (2) Issuance...

  6. 50 CFR 17.22 - Permits for scientific purposes, enhancement of propagation or survival, or for incidental taking.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ..., TRANSPORTATION, SALE, PURCHASE, BARTER, EXPORTATION, AND IMPORTATION OF WILDLIFE AND PLANTS (CONTINUED) ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS Endangered Wildlife § 17.22 Permits for scientific purposes... participate in a cooperative breeding program and to maintain or contribute data to a studbook; (2) Issuance...

  7. 50 CFR 17.22 - Permits for scientific purposes, enhancement of propagation or survival, or for incidental taking.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ..., TRANSPORTATION, SALE, PURCHASE, BARTER, EXPORTATION, AND IMPORTATION OF WILDLIFE AND PLANTS (CONTINUED) ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS Endangered Wildlife § 17.22 Permits for scientific purposes... participate in a cooperative breeding program and to maintain or contribute data to a studbook; (2) Issuance...

  8. 50 CFR 17.22 - Permits for scientific purposes, enhancement of propagation or survival, or for incidental taking.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ..., TRANSPORTATION, SALE, PURCHASE, BARTER, EXPORTATION, AND IMPORTATION OF WILDLIFE AND PLANTS (CONTINUED) ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS Endangered Wildlife § 17.22 Permits for scientific purposes... participate in a cooperative breeding program and to maintain or contribute data to a studbook; (2) Issuance...

  9. 50 CFR 17.22 - Permits for scientific purposes, enhancement of propagation or survival, or for incidental taking.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ..., TRANSPORTATION, SALE, PURCHASE, BARTER, EXPORTATION, AND IMPORTATION OF WILDLIFE AND PLANTS (CONTINUED) ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS Endangered Wildlife § 17.22 Permits for scientific purposes... participate in a cooperative breeding program and to maintain or contribute data to a studbook; (2) Issuance...

  10. 50 CFR 92.13-92.19 - [Reserved

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false [Reserved] 92.13-92.19 Section 92.13-92.19 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS MIGRATORY BIRD SUBSISTENCE HARVEST IN ALASKA Program Structure §§ 92.13-92.19 [Reserved] ...

  11. 50 CFR 92.13-92.19 - [Reserved

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 8 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false [Reserved] 92.13-92.19 Section 92.13-92.19 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS MIGRATORY BIRD SUBSISTENCE HARVEST IN ALASKA Program Structure §§ 92.13-92.19 [Reserved] ...

  12. 77 FR 33764 - Information Collection Request Sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Approval...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-06-07

    ... and Budget (OMB) for Approval; Wildlife and Sport Fish Grants and Cooperative Agreements AGENCY: Fish...: OMB Control Number: 1018-0109. Title: Wildlife and Sport Fish Grants and Cooperative Agreements, 80... Sport Fish Restoration Program (WSFR), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, administers financial assistance...

  13. General Constraints on Sampling Wildlife on FIA Plots

    Treesearch

    Larissa L. Bailey; John R. Sauer; James D. Nichols; Paul H. Geissler

    2005-01-01

    This paper reviews the constraints to sampling wildlife populations at FIA points. Wildlife sampling programs must have well-defined goals and provide information adequate to meet those goals. Investigators should choose a State variable based on information needs and the spatial sampling scale. We discuss estimation-based methods for three State variables: species...

  14. Standardized methods for Grand Canyon fisheries research 2015

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Persons, William R.; Ward, David L.; Avery, Luke A.

    2013-01-01

    This document presents protocols and guidelines to persons sampling fishes in the Grand Canyon, to help ensure consistency in fish handling, fish tagging, and data collection among different projects and organizations. Most such research and monitoring projects are conducted under the general umbrella of the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program and include studies by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), National Park Service (NPS), the Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD), various universities, and private contractors. This document is intended to provide guidance to fieldworkers regarding protocols that may vary from year to year depending on specific projects and objectives. We also provide herein documentation of standard methods used in the Grand Canyon that can be cited in scientific publications, as well as a summary of changes in protocols since the document was first created in 2002.

  15. DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

    Sather, Nichole K.; Storch, Adam; Johnson, Gary E.

    The study reported here was conducted by researchers at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW), the University of Washington (UW), and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District (USACE). This research project was initiated in 2007 by the Bonneville Power Administration to investigate critical uncertainties regarding juvenile salmon ecology in shallow tidal freshwater habitats of the lower Columbia River. However, as part of the Washington Memorandum of Agreement, the project was transferred to the USACE in 2010. In transferring from BPA to the USACE, themore » focus of the tidal freshwater research project shifted from fundamental ecology toward the effectiveness of restoration in the Lower Columbia River and estuary (LCRE). The research is conducted within the Action Agencies Columbia Estuary Ecosystem Restoration Program (CEERP). Data reported herein spans the time period May 2010 to September 2011.« less

  16. 50 CFR 217.202 - Permissible methods of taking.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 10 2012-10-01 2012-10-01 false Permissible methods of taking. 217.202 Section 217.202 Wildlife and Fisheries NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC... Redevelopment Project § 217.202 Permissible methods of taking. (a) Under Letters of Authorization issued...

  17. 50 CFR 217.202 - Permissible methods of taking.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 10 2013-10-01 2013-10-01 false Permissible methods of taking. 217.202 Section 217.202 Wildlife and Fisheries NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC... Redevelopment Project § 217.202 Permissible methods of taking. (a) Under Letters of Authorization issued...

  18. 50 CFR 217.201 - Effective dates.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 9 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false Effective dates. 217.201 Section 217.201 Wildlife and Fisheries NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION... Redevelopment Project § 217.201 Effective dates. Regulations in this subpart are effective from July 15, 2009...

  19. 78 FR 51205 - Culebra National Wildlife Refuge, PR; Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Finding of No...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-08-20

    ... observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation. We will review and update... Observation Point at Punta Flamenco; (5) increasing funding for sea turtle projects; (6) controlling or... partnerships to restore and reopen the Observation Post for [[Page 51206

  20. 50 CFR 217.220 - Specified activity and specified geographical region.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 10 2014-10-01 2014-10-01 false Specified activity and specified geographical region. 217.220 Section 217.220 Wildlife and Fisheries NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL... Elliott Bay Seawall Project § 217.220 Specified activity and specified geographical region. (a...

Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.
Top