My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7605
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Copyright
>
7605
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:01:45 PM
Creation date
5/20/2009 1:33:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
7605
Author
Schaeffer, L.
Title
Avian Predators at ODFW Hatcheries
USFW Year
1992.
USFW - Doc Type
Their Identification and Control.
Copyright Material
YES
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />predation or disease, and so they stock their ponds with a higher <br />percentage of fish than that allocated for release. The <br />overstock requires funds for holding and rearing, but until the <br />fish are larger, the money required is not substantial. Some <br />hatchery managers consider the overstock a non-game contribution <br />that literally "raises" birds like osprey, which attract and <br />delight visitors. Installation of physical barriers can be <br />costly and should be weighed against the loss attributed to <br />predation. When losses are high or valuable fish are lost, <br />expensive measures to control that loss are justified. <br /> <br />Lethal Solution <br /> <br />The most effective way to control predation on fish is to <br />kill the predators. In the past, fish eating birds were harassed <br />or killed by private citizens. Some of this persecution was <br />legal because all cormorants, common and hooded mergansers, and <br />kingfishers could be killed legally through 1958. Further, <br />belted kingfishers and double-crested cormorants could be killed <br />legally in Oregon until 1972 (Bayer 1989). However, killing <br />these birds is not an acceptable solution at present. Since <br />1972, all migratory birds have been protected, but this does not <br />mean that none were killed. <br /> <br />The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issues permits to kill <br />offending birds only if they". . . cause or threaten to cause <br />serious damage. Permits to take birds at aquaculture facilities <br />are issued only after scare techniques, physical barriers, or <br />both, have been used correctly and qualified u.s. Fish and <br />wildlife Service personnel certify that these methods have been <br />ineffective" (Salmon and Conti 1981). Species that are listed as <br />threatened or endangered by the federal government cannot be <br />harassed legally in any way. <br /> <br />Similarly, the State of Oregon does not issue kill permits <br />except under certain conditions. Some species may be killed <br />during hunting season if they are a game species and all hunting <br />regulations are observed. Oregon does require that a state <br />permit be obtained by the landowner to haze or harass wildlife on <br />private property, but only. when it is necessary to avoid damage <br />to the property. No hazing on public lands is allowed. <br /> <br />SUMMARY <br /> <br />Responses to two questionnaires about avian predation on <br />fish and measures to control predation sent to 43 managers of <br />fish rearing facilities showed that 17 species of birds were <br />responsible for the predation. Two species of heron, however <br />accounted for most of the damage. Control measures consist of <br />frightening devices that scare birds and physical devices that <br />prevent birds from seizing prey. Frightening devices are <br />effective only when they are used at random intervals and are <br /> <br />12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.