Habitat management guides for birds of prey /

Call, Mayo W.

doi:10.5962/bhl.title.59365

Cited by 16 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 4 publications

(6 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To avoid electrocutions of nesting birds and power outages caused by nest sticks contacting live conductors, artificial nest structures can encourage eagles to nest in safe places on towers (Olendorff et al 1980;Call 1979;Nelson unpubl. docs., in Olendorff et a2.…”

Section: Golden Eagle Population Project 27mentioning

confidence: 99%

A pilot golden eagle population study in the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area, California

Hunt

1995

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

NREL/TP-44 1 -7821 UC Category: 1 2 1 0 DE95009220This pilblici~Iioll wus reproduced from the best iivaili\ble camera-ready copy submilled by the subcontractor and received no editorial review at NREL. NOTICEThis report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government.Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof GOLDEN EAGLE POPULATION PROJECT i EXECUTIVE SUMMARYDuring 1994, the Predatory Bird Research Group, University of California, Santa Cruz, conducted a preliminary field investigation of the ecology of golden eagles (Aquila chrymem) in the vicinity of the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area (WRA). The facility contains about 6,500 wind turbines on 189 km2 just east of San Francisco Bay in California. Grassland and oak savanna habitats surrounding the WRA support a substantial population of golden eagles. Each year, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service receives reports from the wind industry of about 30 golden eagle casualties occurring at the WRA, with over 90 percent attributed to collisions with wind turbines. The purpose of this pilot study was to clarify and set in motion a research program that will identify (1) the effect of turbine-related mortality on the golden eagle population, (2) factors attracting eagles to the WRA, and (3) conditions that increase the risk of turbine strikes.To show the distribution of the population potentially impacted and to obtain survival data, we radio-tagged 31 adult and subadult eagles in the WRA vicinity during January and February 1994 and an additional 25 juveniles from nests surrounding the WRA in spring. Each transmitter contained a mortality sensor and was expected to last five years. Throughout 1994, we determined the location and status of each eagle in twice-weekly airplane roll-call surveys.Of the 31 winter-tagged eagles, 5 were members of pairs breeding near the WRA. Of the remaining 26 birds, 19 were subadults and seven were non-breeding adults (floaters). Over the course of the year, four (15 %) of the 26 non-breeders either departed the region or their radios failed. The remainder traveled within the northern Diablo Range which extends from the Qakland Hills southeast to San Luis Reservoir, an area of about 3,500 km2, for which we developed a digitized (GIS) vegetation map from satellite photographs. Our findings suggest that at least three-quarters of the golden eagles frequenting the WRA vicinity in winter are yearround residents of the Diablo Range.T...

show abstract

Section: Golden Eagle Population Project 27mentioning

confidence: 99%

A pilot golden eagle population study in the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area, California

Hunt

1995

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…). During incubation, periods of exposure while adults are away from nests can result in overheating of eggs and embryonic death when temperatures are high (Call ). Young nestlings are susceptible to mortality from hyperthermia and dehydration because they are less efficient at thermoregulation (Gill ) and their sole source of water is the prey items they consume (Kirkley and Gessaman ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative breeding ecology of Mississippi Kites in urban and exurban areas of West Texas

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Birds of prey are becoming increasingly common occupants of urbanized settings, but the comparative benefits or detriments they experience in urban environs compared to exurban areas are poorly understood. We examined the reproductive success and phenology of Mississippi Kites (Ictinia mississippiensis) nesting concurrently in urban and exurban areas in west Texas during the 2010-2012 and 2014 breeding seasons. Our objective was to better understand the reproductive advantages or disadvantages that kites may experience by nesting in urban areas rather than exurban areas. We calculated annual productivity, estimated daily survival rates of nests, and estimated hatch dates. Kites produced 0.52 fledglings per urban nesting attempt and 0.33 fledglings per exurban nesting attempt. We found no difference in the mean number of young that fledged from successful urban (1.06) and exurban (1.07) nests, but kites in urban areas had greater nesting success within years than those in exurban areas. Both heat and drought were associated with low productivity and success in both areas, but the urban landscape appears to have provided some buffer to their effects. These factors may have had direct (e.g., exposure) or indirect (e.g., negative influences on prey availability) influences on reproductive success. Counter to previous studies of urban raptors, we found that exurban kites nested significantly earlier than urban kites. This may be linked to differences in environmental conditions and prey availability between the areas. Our results suggest that urban areas provide a reproductive advantage for Mississippi Kites in terms of facilitating an overall higher nesting success, but this does not translate into increased productivity for successful pairs. Further, our data suggest that, although urban areas may buffer species from drought or heat, that buffer can be breached during severe conditions.

show abstract

“…Timber harvest operations near nests increase the probability of abandonment, a serious consideration since goshawks usually do not renest (Call 1979, Forsman 1980. Disturbance in the vicinity of nests should be avoided during nesting and brood-rearing, generally early March through summer (Jones 1979, Reynolds 1983, Warren and others 1989.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stand density index applied to timber and goshawk habitat objectives in Douglas-fir

Lilieholm

Kessler

Merrill

1993

Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

/ Silvicultural guidelines are presented for the management of intermountain Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesfi) stands for sawtimber production and goshawk (Accipiter gentilis) nesting habitat in the northern Rocky Mountains. Data from 14 goshawk nest stands in Douglasfir forests on the Targhee National Forest in Idaho (Patla 1991) were used to characterize the range of stand conditions considered suitable for goshawk nesting. A density management regime is presented using Reineke's stand density index that includes a technical rotation designed to produce sawlogs with a single commercial thinning. On average timber-growing sites, stands reach goshawk habitat suitability when site height is 25 m at age 75 and provide 65 years of goshawk nesting habitat until the final harvest at age 140. Approximately 1320 m3/ha are harvested over the rotation. On higher-quality sites, rotation length declines from 140 to 85 years, of which roughly 35 years are suitable for goshawk nesting.Threatened, endangered, and sensitive wildlife commonly are protected by setting aside habitat areas. However, this practice is often only a temporary measure since plant communities are dynamic. Moreover, natural disturbances-may transcend protected-area boundaries; for example, California's wildfires of the late 1980s destroyed habitat management areas for the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis), and hurricane Hugo in 1989 severely damaged 90% of redcockaded woodpecker (Dendrocopus borealis) habitat in South Carolina (Boucher 1990).While maintaining existing suitable habitat is an important component of species management, increasing populations or providing for the long-term viability of a species may require that suitable habitat be "created" in anticipation of succession and natural disturbance. Because suitable habitat may require centuries to develop, management requires careful

show abstract

Habitat management guides for birds of prey /

Cited by 16 publications

References 4 publications

A pilot golden eagle population study in the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area, California

A pilot golden eagle population study in the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area, California

Comparative breeding ecology of Mississippi Kites in urban and exurban areas of West Texas

Stand density index applied to timber and goshawk habitat objectives in Douglas-fir

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About