Zinc Phosphide Residues in Gray-Tailed Voles (\u3ci\u3eMicrotus canicaudus\u3c/i\u3e) Fed Fixed Particles of a 2% Grain Bait

This study measured depelted-carcass residues of zinc phosphide (Zn3P2, CAS # 1314-84-7) in 8 (4 males and 4 females) gray-tailed voles (Microtus canicaudus). Six (3 males and 3 females) voles were confined individually in 1.89 dkl (5 gal) plastic pails that contained 5,2% Zn3P2 steamrolled- oat (SRO) groats; 2 voles (1 male and 1 female) served as analytical (unbaited) controls. Four test voles (3 males and 1female) died within 7.5 h after bait exposure; whereas, 2 test voles showed no signs of toxicosis and were euthanized 7.0 h after bait exposure. Whole carcasses were stored frozen and depelted carcasses were analyzed within 31 days for Zn3P2 residues using a acid-hydrolyzation, gas-chromatographic (GC) method. Analytical controls were euthanized, with carcasses stored and analyzed the same as test voles. A mean (± SD) 4.7 (±0.8) SRO groats were consumed by the test voles; this converted to a mean (±SD) intake of 2.15 (±0.38) mg Zn3P2 and dose of 73.25 mg/kg ( ± 22.95) Zn3P2. The mean (± SD) Zn3P2 residue in the 6 test vole carcasses was 0.42 mg (± 0.68); control carcasses contained \u3c0.009 mg Zn3P2- 3P2 in voles are variable, but typically \u3c 50% of ingested rodenticide and (2) risks of secondary poisoning posed by Zn3P2-baited voles to avian and mammalian predators/scavengers are low due to the relatively high toxic thresholds (\u3e 20 mg/kg) required to affect these species

EFFECTS OF MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON GRASSLAND BIRDS: LESSER PRAIRIE-CHICKEN

Information on the habitat requirements and effects of habitat management on grassland birds were summarized from information in more than 4,000 published and unpublished papers. A range map is provided to indicate the breeding distribution of Lesser Prairie-Chicken in the United States and southern Canada. Although birds frequently are observed outside the breeding range indicated, the maps are intended to show areas where managers might concentrate their attention. It may be ineffectual to manage habitat at a site for a species that rarely occurs in an area. The species account begins with a brief capsule statement, which provides the fundamental components or keys to management for the species. A section on breeding range outlines the current breeding distribution of the species in North America. The suitable habitat section describes the breeding habitat and occasionally microhabitat characteristics of the species, especially those habitats that occur in the Great Plains. Details on habitat and microhabitat requirements often provide clues to how a species will respond to a particular management practice. A table near the end of the account complements the section on suitable habitat, and lists the specific habitat characteristics for the species by individual studies. A special section on prey habitat is included for those predatory species that have more specific prey requirements. The area requirements section provides details on territory and home range sizes, minimum area requirements, and the effects of patch size, edges, and other landscape and habitat features on abundance and productivity. It may be futile to manage a small block of suitable habitat for a species that has minimum area requirements that are larger than the area being managed. The Brown-headed Cowbird (Molothrus ater) is an obligate brood parasite of many grassland birds. The section on cowbird brood parasitism summarizes rates of cowbird parasitism, host responses to parasitism, and factors that influence parasitism, such as nest concealment and host density. The impact of management depends, in part, upon a species’ nesting phenology and biology. The section on breeding-season phenology and site fidelity includes details on spring arrival and fall departure for migratory populations in the Great Plains, peak breeding periods, the tendency to renest after nest failure or success, and the propensity to return to a previous breeding site. The duration and timing of breeding varies among regions and years. Species’ response to management summarizes the current knowledge and major findings in the literature on the effects of different management practices on the species. The section on management recommendations complements the previous section and summarizes specific recommendations for habitat management provided in the literature. If management recommendations differ in different portions of the species’ breeding range, recommendations are given separately by region. The literature cited contains references to published and unpublished literature on the management effects and habitat requirements of the species. This section is not meant to be a complete bibliography; a searchable, annotated bibliography of published and unpublished papers dealing with habitat needs of grassland birds and their responses to habitat management is posted at the Web site mentioned below

Effects of Management Practices on Grassland Birds: Grasshopper Sparrow

Grasshopper Sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum): Breeding range Suitable habitat Area requirements Brown-headed Cowbird brood parasitism Breeding-season phenology and site fidelity Species’ response to management Management Recommendations Habitat Characteristic

Effects of Management Practices on Grassland Birds: Field Sparrow

Field Sparrow (Spizella pusilla): Breeding range Suitable habitat Area requirements Brown-headed Cowbird brood parasitism Breeding-season phenology and site fidelity Species’ response to management Management Recommendations Habitat Characteristic

Effects of Management Practices on Grassland Birds: Burrowing Owl

Burrowing Owl ( Speotyto cunicularia hypugaea): Breeding range Suitable habitat Prey habitat Area requirements Brown-headed Cowbird brood parasitism Breeding-season phenology and site fidelity Species’ response to management Management Recommendations Characteristic

Effects of Management Practices on Grassland Birds: Grasshopper Sparrow

Grasshopper Sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum): Breeding range Suitable habitat Area requirements Brown-headed Cowbird brood parasitism Breeding-season phenology and site fidelity Species’ response to management Management Recommendations Habitat Characteristic

Effects of Management Practices on Grassland Birds: Sprague’s Pipit

Sprague’s Pipit (Anthus spragueii): Breeding range Suitable habitat Area requirements Brown-headed Cowbird brood parasitism Breeding-season phenology and site fidelity Species’ response to management Management Recommendations Habitat Characteristic

Effects of Management Practices on Grassland Birds: Sprague’s Pipit

Sprague’s Pipit (Anthus spragueii): Breeding range Suitable habitat Area requirements Brown-headed Cowbird brood parasitism Breeding-season phenology and site fidelity Species’ response to management Management Recommendations Habitat Characteristic

EFFECTS OF MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON GRASSLAND BIRDS: HORNED LARK

Information on the habitat requirements and effects of habitat management on grassland birds were summarized from information in more than 4,000 published and unpublished papers. A range map is provided to indicate the relative densities of the species in North America, based on Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) data. Although birds frequently are observed outside the breeding range indicated, the maps are intended to show areas where managers might concentrate their attention. It may be ineffectual to manage habitat at a site for a species that rarely occurs in an area. The species account begins with a brief capsule statement, which provides the fundamental components or keys to management for the species. A section on breeding range outlines the current breeding distribution of the species in North America, including areas that could not be mapped using BBS data. The suitable habitat section describes the breeding habitat and occasionally microhabitat characteristics of the species, especially those habitats that occur in the Great Plains. Details on habitat and microhabitat requirements often provide clues to how a species will respond to a particular management practice. A table near the end of the account complements the section on suitable habitat, and lists the specific habitat characteristics for the species by individual studies. A special section on prey habitat is included for those predatory species that have more specific prey requirements. The area requirements section provides details on territory and home range sizes, minimum area requirements, and the effects of patch size, edges, and other landscape and habitat features on abundance and productivity. It may be futile to manage a small block of suitable habitat for a species that has minimum area requirements that are larger than the area being managed. The Brown-headed Cowbird (Molothrus ater) is an obligate brood parasite of many grassland birds. The section on cowbird brood parasitism summarizes rates of cowbird parasitism, host responses to parasitism, and factors that influence parasitism, such as nest concealment and host density. The impact of management depends, in part, upon a species’ nesting phenology and biology. The section on breeding-season phenology and site fidelity includes details on spring arrival and fall departure for migratory populations in the Great Plains, peak breeding periods, the tendency to renest after nest failure or success, and the propensity to return to a previous breeding site. The duration and timing of breeding varies among regions and years. Species’ response to management summarizes the current knowledge and major findings in the literature on the effects of different management practices on the species. The section on management recommendations complements the previous section and summarizes specific recommendations for habitat management provided in the literature. If management recommendations differ in different portions of the species’ breeding range, recommendations are given separately by region. The literature cited contains references to published and unpublished literature on the management effects and habitat requirements of the species. This section is not meant to be a complete bibliography; a searchable, annotated bibliography of published and unpublished papers dealing with habitat needs of grassland birds and their responses to habitat management is posted at the Web site mentioned below

What are the living conditions and health status of those who don't report their migration status? a population-based study in Chile

BACKGROUND: Undocumented immigrants are likely to be missing from population databases, making it impossible to identify an accurate sampling frame in migration research. No population-based data has been collected in Chile regarding the living conditions and health status of undocumented immigrants. However, the CASEN survey (Caracterizacion Socio- Economica Nacional) asked about migration status in Chile for the first time in 2006 and provides an opportunity to set the base for future analysis of available migration data. We explored the living conditions and health of self-reported immigrants and respondents who preferred not to report their migration status in this survey. METHODS: Cross-sectional secondary analysis of CASEN survey in Chile in 2006. Outcomes: any disability, illness/accident, hospitalization/surgery, cancer/chronic condition (all binary variables); and the number of medical/emergency attentions received (count variables). Covariates: Demographics (age, sex, marital status, urban/rural, ethnicity), socioeconomic status (education level, employment status and household income), and material standard of living (overcrowding, sanitation, housing quality). Weighted regression models were estimated for each health outcome, crude and adjusted by sets of covariates, in STATA 10.0. RESULTS: About 1% of the total sample reported being immigrants and 0.7% preferred not to report their migration status (Migration Status - Missing Values; MS-MV). The MS-MV lived in more deprived conditions and reported a higher rate of health problems than immigrants. Some gender differences were observed by health status among immigrants and the MS-MV but they were not statistically significant. Regressions indicated that age, sex, SES and material factors consistently affected MS-MVs’ chance of presenting poor health and these patterns were different to those found among immigrants. Great heterogeneity in both the MS-MV and the immigrants, as indicated by wide confidence intervals, prevented the identification of other significantly associated covariates. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to look at the living conditions and health of those that preferred not to respond their migration status in Chile. Respondents that do not report their migration status are vulnerable to poor health and may represent undocumented immigrants. Surveys that fail to identify these people are likely to misrepresent the experiences of immigrants and further quantitative and qualitative research is urgently required