BIRD CONTROL UNDER A STATE FISH AND GAME PERMIT SYSTEM

I guess the impetus for laws in our state, really was the action of the city of Boston in 1963, when the Parks and Recreation Department felt that it was time to do something about massive populations of pigeons on the Boston Commons and in the city. The Parks Department came to our agency to find out what could be done. We immediately found as a result of a reorganization and recodification of the laws some 20 years before, that it was illegal to use or apply poisons for the purpose of killing any birds or mammals in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Property owners were given the privilege to destroy animals that were doing damage to their property, but only through mechanical means, certainly not by the use of toxicants. We helped the city of Boston draft a bill in 1963, which allowed our agency, the Division of Fisheries and Game, the agency responsible for all wildlife species in the state, the opportunity to issue certain permits for the use of poison, giving full authority to the director of Fisheries and Game with, of course, approval of my board. This allowed certain discretion on our part.

Simulations of Ground-Water Flow, Transport, Age, and Particle Tracking near York, Nebraska, for a Study of Transport of Anthropogenic and Natural Contaminants (TANC) to Public-Supply Wells

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is committed to providing the Nation with credible scientific information that helps to enhance and protect the overall quality of life and that facilitates effective management of water, biological, energy, and mineral resources (http://www.usgs.gov/). Information on the Nation’s water resources is critical to ensuring long-term availability of water that is safe for drinking and recreation and is suitable for industry, irrigation, and fish and wildlife. Population growth and increasing demands for water make the availability of that water, now measured in terms of quantity and quality, even more essential to the long-term sustainability of our communities and ecosystems. The USGS implemented the National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program in 1991 to support national, regional, State, and local information needs and decisions related to water-quality management and policy (http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa). The NAWQA Program is designed to answer: What is the condition of our Nation’s streams and ground water? How are conditions changing over time? How do natural features and human activities affect the quality of streams and ground water, and where are those effects most pronounced? By combining information on water chemistry, physical characteristics, stream habitat, and aquatic life, the NAWQA Program aims to provide science-based insights for current and emerging water issues and priorities. From 1991-2001, the NAWQA Program completed interdisciplinary assessments and established a baseline understanding of water-quality conditions in 51 of the Nation’s river basins and aquifers, referred to as Study Units (http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/studyu.html).

Recovery Plan for The Blue Whale (Balaenoptera musculus)

Recovery plans identify reasonable actions which are believed to be required to recover and/or protect endangered species. Plans are prepared by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and sometimes with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and others. This plan was prepared by Randall R. Reeves, Phillip J. Clapham, Robert L. Brownell, Jr., and Gregory K. Silber for NMFS. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views nor the official positions or approvals of any individuals or agencies, other than those of NMFS, and they represent the views of NMFS only after they have been approved by the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries. Objectives will only be attained and funds expended contingent upon appropriations, priorities, and other budgetary constraints. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks described in the plan.

Studies on the Helminth Fauna of Alaska. XIII. Disease in the Sea Otter, with Special Reference to Helminth Parasites

During the spring of 1951, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service undertook the removal of sea otter, Enhydra lutris (L)., from the Aleutian Island of Amchitka, for the purpose of restocking range from which the animals have long been exterminated. The decision to undertake this activity was influenced by the nature of military operations planned for the island later the same year. The capture and removal of the otter were under the supervision of Mr. Robert D. Jones, Biologist, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Heavy losses among the animals shortly after capture made the venture unsuccessful. Many deaths were concurrent among animals in the wild state. The writer was asked to investigate the causes of disease in the sea otter, and it is the purpose of this paper to report the results of these investigation, with special reference to helminth parasites.

Management of Wolf-Livestock Conflicts in Minnesota

In 1975, the gray wolf (Canis lupus) population in Minnesota was protected by the federal Endangered Species Act (USA). At that time, there were 500-750 wolves. By 2004, the population had grown to an estimated 3,020 wolves. Over time, conflicts between wolves and livestock increased. Wolf depredation control programs have been conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1975-1986) and by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services program (1986 to present). In 1978, Minnesota’s wolves were reclassified from endangered to threatened which allowed authorized federal agents to lethally remove wolves that had depredated on livestock or pets. A State funded wolf compensation program was also established in 1978. Wildlife Services’ wolf damage management approach utilizes both nonlethal and lethal methods of control. Currently, wolf depredations are verified at 60-85 farms annually and 125-175 wolves are taken each year. Wolf compensation payments to livestock producers have averaged $67,111 per year during the past five years. Most livestock losses occur during spring and summer. Selective removal of depredating wolves, coupled with improvements in animal husbandry practices, has potential for reducing wolf-livestock conflicts. Minnesota’s wolf population is currently considered to be fully recovered and federal delisting is expected to occur in the near future.

PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORDS — THEIR IMPORTANCE IN TODAY'S ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE BIRD MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS

We are living in a day of change. Environmental awareness is a part of our everyday life in a way unprecedented in history. The courts, in their infinite wisdom, have initiated the joint and several liability (deep pocket) rules that make everyone at risk in almost all situations. Bird management programs, by their very nature, are extremely sensitive. Any project, if not evaluated, planned, carried out, and documented properly can result in adverse regulatory agency action, bad publicity, and even fines or lawsuits. Proper photographic documentation can play a vital part in helping to provide the necessary records to help prevent problems and/or defend yourself in case of lawsuit or regulatory action. In the preparation of this paper, we surveyed state pesticide lead agencies, state Department of Conservation (Fish and Wildlife) agencies, some U.S. Fish and Wildlife Law Enforcement personnel, and several individuals to get their reaction to and their comments about this concept of supplemental recordkeeping. Of those responding, a majority thought the concept of supplemental photographic recordkeeping would be an asset to individuals and organi¬zations conducting bird management projects.

NATIONWIDE ESTIMATES OF BLACKBIRDS AND STARLINGS

An estimated 538 million blackbirds and Starlings are found in the United States, based on the national cooperative blackbird/Starling winter roost survey conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service during the 1974-75 winter period of December 20-February 15. Ap- proximately 74% or 398 million of these blackbirds and Starlings occurred in the Eastern States, including the tier from Minnesota to Louisiana; 26% or 139 million birds were in the West. The national roosting population in 1974-75 was composed of 11 species (Table 1) in the following approximate proportions: 38% Red-winged Blackbirds; 22% Common Grackles; 20% Starlings; 18% Brown-headed Cowbirds; 2% Brewer’s Blackbirds; and less than 1% six species combined (Rusty Blackbirds, Boat-tailed Grackles, Great-tailed Grackles, Tri-colored Black- birds, Yellow-headed Blackbirds, and Bronzed Cowbirds). (Some 2 million robins also were reported in the 1974-75 survey, though not solicited and therefore not tabulated, from 20 of the blackbird roosts in the Southeast.) The 1974-75 species proportions are similar to those found in the last nationwide winter survey (1969-70). In the 1963-64 national winter survey, Redwings made up 33% and Common Grackles 31% of the total population.

THE HANDBOOK OF WILDLIFE DEPREDATION TECHNIQUES: A SYNOPSIS

In 1979, the Game Division Administration of the Wyoming Game and Fish Department (WGFD) appointed John Demaree and Tim Fagan to develop a handbook that would address the ever increasing problem of wildlife depredation. Field personnel were often times at a loss on how to deal with or evaluate the assorted types of damage situations they were encountering. Because Wyoming requires landowners to be reimbursed for damage done by big and trophy game and game birds to their crops and livestock, an evaluation and techniques handbook was desperately needed. The initial handbook, completed in January 1981, was 74 pages, and both John and I considered it a masterpiece. It did not take long, however, for this handbook to become somewhat lacking in information and outdated. In 1990, our administration approached us again asking this time for an update of our ten-year-old handbook. John and I went to work, and with the assistance of Evin Oneale of the Wyoming Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research unit, and Bill Hepworth and John Schneidmiller of the WGFD, have just completed the second edition. This edition is over 600 pages and titled "The Handbook of Wildlife Depredation Techniques." Neither of us care to be around when a third edition is needed. In this handbook we have attempted to cover any type of damage situation our personnel may encounter. Although the primary function of this manual is to inform department personnel about proper and uniform damage prevention and evaluation techniques, it also provides relative and pertinent information concerning the many aspects of wildlife depredation. Information for this handbook has been compiled from techniques developed by our personnel, personnel from other states and provinces, and published data on wildlife depredation. There are nine chapters, a reprint, and Appendix section in this handbook. We will briefly summarize each chapter regarding its contents.

STATE REGISTRATION AND LICENSING REGULATIONS: A NEW PROGRAM (OHIO)

We enacted a bill in Ohio this year, Senate Bill 445, that has to do with the application of pesticides. It is a very wide bill as you would normally look at it with most of the meat going to come from the regulations that are presently being written into it. In other words, the framework was developed and accepted by the two houses in our state legislature and empowered the Director of Agriculture to establish the regulations or the so-called teeth to this bill. The governor signed the bill in June and it became effective in September. The committees as of this time are meeting to develop philosophies and regulations that will be promulgated and brought into hearings and sifted through, and eventually, with a target date of December of this year, (1970), brought to the Director of Agriculture's office for acceptance. There is a committee established for rodent and bird control which is very well represented by our industry here in Ohio. John Beck (Rose Exterminator Company) is the chairman of the committee, William B. Jackson (Bowling Green State University) and Robert Yaeger (Cincinnati) are also on the committee. The important feature of this new law, in terms of pest control operators, is the examinations that will be required. We operators and our service people will both be tested and licensed, if sufficient proficiency is demonstrated on the tests. For your information they use a little different terminology in the bill than we in the industry normally use. We think of an applicator in the industry as service people. In the bill an applicator is defined as an operator. Therefore in reading the law the word operator means the man who does the job, the service man. Just the reverse is true in the industry. We think of the operator as the man who owns or manages the company while these people are referred to in the bill as applicators. The Bill calls for the development of schools for the training of our people throughout the state. Those of us who are in bird control should begin to prepare ourselves to meet this request, to be available for the schooling, have our people available for the schooling, and give this program all the co-operation that we can.

BLACKBIRD DAMAGE AND CONTROL--AN INFORMAL SEMINAR

The object is to hash over a few problems as we see them on this red-winged blackbird situation. I'm Mel Dyer, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario. Around the table are Tom Stockdale, Extension Wildlife Specialist, Ohio Cooperative Extension Service, Columbus; Maurice Giltz, Ohio Agriculture Research and Development Center, Wooster, Ohio; Joe Halusky, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Columbus, Ohio; Daniel Stiles, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.; Paul Rodeheffer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Columbus, Ohio; Brian Hall, Blackbird Research Project, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario; George Cornwell, Virginia Polytechnic Insti¬tute, Blacksburg, Va.; Dick Warren, Peavey Grain Company, Minneapolis, Minn.; Bob Fringer, N.J. Department of Agriculture, Trenton, N.J.; Charles Stone, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Columbus, Ohio; Larry Holcomb, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, Wooster, Ohio; Doug Slack, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, Wooster, Ohio; Charles Wagg, N.J. Department of Agriculture, Trenton, N.J.; Dick Smith, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Columbus, Ohio; and Jim Caslick, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Gainesville, Fla. As I see the situation, as a director of a red-winged blackbird research project, we have a problem which has been defined in human terms concerning a natural animal population.

The Vaquita: Can It Survive?

The vaquita (Spanish for "little cow"), or Gulf of California harbor porpoise (Phocoena sinus), has the most limited range of any marine cetacean and is probably the rarest. It has been caught incidentally in gill nets set commercially for totoaba (Totoaba macdonaldi), large fish that were over-exploited in the upper Gulf of California until they, too, were endangered. In 1975. the Mexican Government announced a total indefinite closure on fishing for totoaba, Between the time this porpoise was described as new to science (1958) and its listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as Endangered (early 1985), the vaquita was known from only 26 confirmed records (partial remains found on beaches) and a few sightings of live animals. (Note: the vernacular name "cochito" was cited when this animal was listed, but biologists have since learned that "vaquita" is the term used by most local fishermen.) The Endangered Species Technical Bulletin story about its listing (see BULLETIN Vol. X No. 2) said the species was on the brink of extinction "if it still exists."

Draft U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessments: 2009

Under the 1994 amendments to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) are required to publish Stock Assessment Reports for all stocks of marine mammals within U.S. waters, to review new information every year for strategic stocks and every three years for non-strategic stocks, and to update the stock assessment reports when significant new information becomes available. This report presents stock assessments for 13 Pacific marine mammal stocks under NMFS jurisdiction, including 8 “strategic” stocks and 5 “non-strategic” stocks (see summary table). A new stock assessment for humpback whales in American Samoa waters is included in the Pacific reports for the first time. New or revised abundance estimates are available for 9 stocks, including Eastern North Pacific blue whales, American Samoa humpback whales, five U.S. west coast harbor porpoise stocks, the Hawaiian monk seal, and southern resident killer whales. A change in the abundance estimate of Eastern North Pacific blue whales reflects a recommendation from the Pacific Scientific Review Group to utilize mark-recapture estimates for this population, which provide a better estimate of total population size than the average of recent line-transect and mark-recapture estimates. The ‘Northern Oregon/Washington Coast Stock’ harbor porpoise stock assessment includes a name change (‘Oregon’ is appended to ‘Northern Oregon’) to reflect recent stock boundary changes. Changes in abundance estimates for the two stocks of harbor porpoise that occur in Oregon waters are the result of these boundary changes, and do not reflect biological changes in the populations. Updated information on the three stocks of false killer whales in Hawaiian waters is also included in these reports. Information on the remaining 50 Pacific region stocks will be reprinted without revision in the final 2009 reports and currently appears in the 2008 reports (Carretta et al. 2009). Stock Assessments for Alaskan marine mammals are published by the National Marine Mammal Laboratory (NMML) in a separate report. Pacific region stock assessments include those studied by the Southwest Fisheries Science Center (SWFSC, La Jolla, California), the Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center (PIFSC, Honolulu, Hawaii), the National Marine Mammal Laboratory (NMML, Seattle, Washington), and the Northwest Fisheries Science Center (NWFSC, Seattle, WA). Northwest Fisheries Science Center staff prepared the report on the Eastern North Pacific Southern Resident killer whale. National Marine Mammal Laboratory staff prepared the Northern Oregon/Washington coast harbor porpoise stock assessment. Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center staff prepared the report on the Hawaiian monk seal. Southwest Fisheries Science Center staff prepared stock assessments for 9 stocks. The stock assessment for the American Samoa humpback whale was prepared by staff from the Center for Coastal Studies, Hawaiian Islands Humpback National Marine Sanctuary, the Smithsonian Institution, and the Southwest Fisheries Science Center. Draft versions of the stock assessment reports were reviewed by the Pacific Scientific Review Group at the November 2008, Maui meeting. The authors also wish to thank those who provided unpublished data, especially Robin Baird and Joseph Mobley, who provided valuable information on Hawaiian cetaceans. Any omissions or errors are the sole responsibility of the authors. This is a working document and individual stock assessment reports will be updated as new information on marine mammal stocks and fisheries becomes available. Background information and guidelines for preparing stock assessment reports are reviewed in Wade and Angliss (1997). The authors solicit any new information or comments which would improve future stock assessment reports. These Stock Assessment Reports summarize information from a wide range of sources and an extensive bibliography of all sources is given in each report. We strongly urge users of this document to refer to and cite original literature sources rather than citing this report or previous Stock Assessment Reports. If the original sources are not accessible, the citation should follow the format: [Original source], as cited in [this Stock Assessment Report citation].

U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessments

Under the 1994 amendments to the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) were required to produce stock assessment reports for all marine mammal stocks in waters within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. This document contains the stock assessment reports for the U.S. Pacific marine mammal stocks under NMFS jurisdiction. Marine mammal species which are under the management jurisdiction of the USFWS are not included in this report. A separate report containing background, guidelines for preparation, and .a summary of all stock assessment reports is available from the NMFS Office of Protected Resources. This report was prepared by staff of the Southwest Fisheries Science Center, NMFS and the Alaska Fisheries Science Center, NMFS. The information presented here was compiled primarily from published sources, but additional unpublished information was included where it contributed to the assessments. The authors wish to thanks the members of the Pacific Scientific Review Group for their valuable contributions and constructive criticism: Hannah Bernard, Robin Brown, Mark Fraker, Doyle Hanan, John Heyning, Steve Jeffries, Katherine Ralls, Michael Scott, and Terry Wright. Their comments greatly improved the quality of these reports, We also thanks the Marine Mammal Commission, The Humane Society of the United States, The Marine Mammal Center, The Center for Marine Conservation, and Friends of the Sea Otter for their careful reviews and thoughtful comments. Special thanks to Paul Wade of the Office of Protected Resources for his exhaustive review and comments, which greatly enhanced the consistency and technical quality of the reports. Any ommissions or errors are the sole responsibility of the authors. This is a working document and individual stock assessment reports will be updated as new information becomes available and as changes to marine mammal stocks and fisheries occur; therefore, each stock assessment report is intended to be a stand alone document. The authors solicit any new information or comments which would improve future stock assessment reports. This is Southwest Fisheries Science Center Technical Memorandum NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC- 219, July 1995. 111

DEVELOPMENTAL STATUS OF N-(3-CHLORO-4-METHYLPHENYL) ACETAMIDE AS A CANDIDATE BLACKBIRD/STARLING ROOST TOXICANT

Large winter roosts of blackbirds (Icteridae) and starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) often cause conflicts, both real and imagined, between the birds and local human popula- tions. These conflicts may range from objections to the noise and odor engendered by thousands or millions of birds, to fear of epidemic human and livestock diseases, and the possibility of economic losses from crop depredations. Many people believe the most direct way to combat these conflicts is to reduce local roosting populations by kill- ing the birds. In response to this perceived need for a roost toxicant, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) developed PA-14, a surfactant which can be aerially applied to problem roosts for population reduction (Lefebvre and Seubert 1970). Successful use of this material, however, requires concurrent rainfall and low temperatures, conditions which may not occur sufficiently often to permit roost treatment at desired times or places. Because of this difficulty, and continued pressures from management person- nel and the agricultural community, the Service has continued its search for a safe, ef- fective roost toxicant usable without severe weather restrictions. One of the current candidate materials is N-(3-chloro-4-methylphenyl)acetamide (CAT, DRC-2698), a derivative of StarlicideR (DRC-1339). This compound was initially developed by S.A. Peoples of the University of California-Davis (Peoples et al. 1976). California researchers are still investigating the avicidal potential of CAT, mainly on baits and in wick perches, while FWS interest has centered thus far on its possible utility as an aerially applied roost treatment. This report is a summary of our investigations to date.

BIRD DAMAGE TO TART CHERRIES IN MICHIGAN, 1972

Bird damage to commercial fruits has long been a problem in many coun- tries, but the true magnitude of the damage incurred is difficult to determine objectively. Often the opinions of fruit growers provide the only measure of importance. In 1972, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Michigan Department of Agriculture, and the Statistical Reporting Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture obtained quantitative information on bird damage to tart cherries (Prunus mahalob) in Michigan. The results of the survey are presented in this paper.