Whaling error

You published recently (Nature 374, 587; 1995) a report headed "Error re-opens 'scientific' whaling debate". The error in question, however, relates to commercial whaling, not to scientific whaling. Although Norway cites science as a basis for the way in which it sets its own quota. scientific whaling means something quite different. namely killing whales for research purposes. Any member of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) has the right to conduct a research catch under the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling. 1946. The IWC has reviewed new research or scientific whaling programs for Japan and Norway since the IWC moratorium on commercial whaling began in 1986. In every case, the IWC advised Japan and Norway to reconsider the lethal aspects of their research programs. Last year, however, Norway started a commercial hunt in combination with its scientific catch, despite the IWC moratorium.

Dogs Gone Wild: Feral Dog Damage in the United States

Feral dogs have been documented in all 50 states and estimates of damage in the U.S. from these animals amount to >$620 million annually. In Texas alone, it is estimated that over $5 million in damage to livestock annually can be attributed to feral dogs. We reviewed national statistics on feral dog damage reported to USDA, APHIS, Wildlife Services for a 10-year period from 1997 through 2006. Damage by feral dogs crossed multiple resource categories (e.g., agriculture, natural resources); some examples of damage include killing and affecting the behavior and habitat use of native wildlife; killing and maiming livestock; and their role as disease vectors to wildlife, domestic animals, and humans. We review the role of dog damage in the U.S., synthesize the amount of damage between resource categories (agriculture, human health and safety, disease, and natural resources), and report trends in dog damage during the 10-year period. Results showed an increase in dog damage across all resource categories indicating the importance of management.

The Effects of Ornamentation on Wolf Spider Foraging

ABSTRACT: As a secondary sexual trait that can increase reproductive success, ornamentation is believed to be costly for organisms to acquire and possess. This study investigates possible costs of ornamentation on wolf spider foraging by comparing foraging abilities of two male forms that differ in ornamentation upon maturation. The two male forms, found syntopically in a mixed population in Mississippi, USA, resemble two sibling species: Schizocosa ocreata, in which males develop large black brushes on their forelegs upon maturation, and Schizocosa rovneri, in which males lack ornamentation following maturation. Individuals of both forms participated in foraging trials as penultimates (juveniles) and as matures. Analyses were conducted to compare behaviors and determine changes in foraging abilities between male forms (non-ornamented vs. brush-legged) and between age groups (penultimate vs. mature). Most foraging behaviors of the two male forms during immaturity were similar with the exception that brush-legged males attacked more frequently than non-ornamented males. Brush-legged males attacked less, spent more time moving, and improved capture abilities as matures, while non-ornamented males retained similar trends for these behaviors with age. Additionally, while capture abilities improved with age among brush-legged males, killing abilities remained constant. This disparity was due to increased escapes made by captured prey items, possibly due to hindrances caused by brush presence preventing secure holds onto crickets. In summary, differences in foraging exist between brush-legged and non-ornamented males prior to sexual maturation, and the development of/presence of brushes appears to influence adult male foraging efficiency.

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.

ECOLOGICAL CONTROL OF BIRD HAZARD TO AIRCRAFT

The Canadian Wildlife Service has had twenty-five years experience with the problem caused by bird contacts with aircraft. I experienced my first bird strike, while flying as an observer on a waterfowl survey in August, 1940. Officers of the Service investigated bird problems at airports at Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, and Cartierville, Quebec, in the late 1940's. Those incidents involving gulls and low speed piston-engined aircraft caused minor damage to the aircraft but considerable disturbance to the operators. As aircraft speeds increased and airports became more numerous and busier the problem increased in extent and complexity. By 1960 it was apparent that the problem would grow worse and that work should be directed toward reducing the number of incidents. In 1960 an electra aircraft crashed at Boston, Massachusetts, killing 61 passengers. Starlings were involved in the engine malfunction which preceded the crash. In November, 1962 a viscount aircraft was damaged by collision with two swans between Baltimore and Washington and crashed with a loss of 17 lives. Those incidents focused attention on the bird hazard problem in the United States.