Daily Archives: April 19, 2015

Avoid landscaping with invasive tree species

Homeowners can help conservation by wisely choosing native trees and shrubs to plant this spring. Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC) foresters suggest that native trees can provide showy blooms in spring while also boosting butterflies and wildlife. Non-native trees are generally less beneficial, and some oft-planted ornamentals, such as Bradford pear, have become invasive and harmful to natural areas.

Downy serviceberry is an early blooming native tree that grows well in ornamental settings. Serviceberry is covered with white flowers in early April. The trees grow well in home landscape plantings and produce red berries that are edible by birds and people, said Wendy Sangster, MDC urban forester.

Other native choices include dogwood, yellowwood, redbud, blackhaw viburnum, hophornbeam and chokecherry. The venerable redbud tree blushes with lavish lavender flowers in spring, grows quickly and provides shade. Wild plum provides delicate white flowers for yards where a small tree fits landscape design. Dogwood trees, an Ozark native with classic four-petal white flowers, will grow in Kansas City if planted in partial shade.

Native plants and trees are a desirable part of nature’s food chain that attracts watchable wildlife. Insects evolved with natives. Those insects, such as butterfly caterpillars, provide food for birds. A native tree is essentially a living, summer time, backyard bird feeder.

Non-native trees support far fewer insects. But they also pose problems for wild areas valued for native plants on private and public lands. Bradford pears, for example, have been often planted as ornamentals in the past because they provide white blooms in spring and experts formerly considered them safe. They are hybrids and it was believed they could not produce viable seed. But a varied mix of cultivars allowed some Bradford pears to cross pollinate and produce viable seed. Those seeds are spread by birds into natural areas. Bradford pears are a Callery pear cultivar. The cultivars from Asia compete well because they leaf out early and crowds out valuable native species. Bradford pears are also poor landscaping choices because they are not strong and limbs break easily in storms, Sangster said.

MDC offers information about home landscape trees that help people and wildlife at http://www.mdc.mo.gov/discover-nature/trees-work.

The Heartland Tree Alliance, an MDC partner, provides information about trees that do well in the Kansas City area at https://www.bridgingthegap.org/heartland-tree-alliance. A useful source for information about native wildflowers, grasses, shrubs and trees is available at http://www.grownative.org.

The right tree in the right place is important because trees provide shade, clean air and wildlife habitat, Sangster said. Extra care in planting trees keeps both the urban forest and wild lands healthy.

Editor’s note: Foresters from the Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC) suggest that native trees can provide ample attractive blooms in spring while also attracting butterflies and bird species, but to avoid planting non-native trees such as Bradford pear that have become invasive and harmful to natural areas.

Find a funky nest near you!

Contest showcases unusual bird nesting sites

Spring is nesting season and some birds have a flair for the funky when it comes to finding the right real estate to lay their eggs and raise their chicks. The annual “Funky Nests in Funky Places” contest hosted by the Celebrate Urban Birds project at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology is underway. Look for another entertaining collection of nests in old boots, barbecue grills, motorcycle helmets, traffic signals, rakes, old tires and who-knows-what.

Participants may send in a photo, video, story, poem, or even some form of dance or artwork. Entries may be submitted in categories such as “cutest,” “funniest,” “funkiest,” or “most inconvenient.” Celebrate Urban Birds is offering a free, downloadable flyer showing some of the places you can look for funky nests in urban locations.

“Even in urban areas, we’re a lot closer to birds than you might think,” says project leader Karen Purcell. “This contest is a lot of fun but it’s also about really being aware of what’s around you and taking the time to appreciate birds and all of nature.”

The deadline for entries is June 15.

Participants should read the guidelines for approaching nests to be sure the birds are not disturbed in any way.

Contest prizes include a mini-iPad, binoculars, Pennington bird feeders, Inside Birding DVDs, Diversity of Animal Sounds CDs, beautiful posters, field guides, and much more.

To learn more about how to participate, plus terms and conditions, visit FunkyNests.org.

Celebrate Urban Birds is a free, year-round citizen-science project focused on birds in neighborhood settings.

Leading Sage-Grouse scientists advise Secretaries Jewell and Vilsack that heightened protections are needed for Greater Sage-Grouse

Clait E. Braun, Ph.D., John W. (“Jack”) Connelly, Ph.D., and nine other leading sage-grouse scientists sent a letter March 12, 2015 to Secretaries Jewell and Vilsack noting that current sage-grouse conservation measures in the draft agency conservation plans inconsistently apply the best available scientific information on greater sage-grouse, and will not adequately protect greater sage-grouse from further decline.

These scientists expressed concern that the Departments of Interior and Agriculture are “abandoning science-based conservation measures . . . in favor of more elastic, subjective measures.”  In particular, the scientists warned that the agencies’ conservation measures regarding mining and minerals management, livestock grazing, vegetation treatments, prescribed fires, and the calculation of the overall disturbance footprint were inadequate to protect sage-grouse populations and habitat.

The scientists concluded, “[w]e support the federal planning process and are prepared to assist your Departments in developing measures to conserve and recover greater sage-grouse, but federal planners must commit to science-based planning to achieve this goal.”

The letter http://www.westernwatersheds.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Jewel-Vilsack-Scientist-letter-3.12.15.pdf was signed by William L. Baker, Ph.D. (Laramie, Wyoming), Jeffrey L. Beck, Ph.D. (Laramie, Wyoming), Clait E. Braun, Ph.D. (Tucson, Arizona), John W. Connelly, Ph.D. (Blackfoot, Idaho), Lester D. Flake, Ph.D. (Springville, Utah), Edward O. Garton, Ph.D. (Moscow, Idaho), Robert Gibson, Ph.D. (Lincoln, Nebraska), Matt Holloran, Ph.D. (Fort Collins, Colorado), Kent C. Jensen, Ph.D. (Volga, South Dakota), Kerry P. Reese, Ph.D. (Moscow, Idaho), and E. Thomas Rinkes (Boise, Idaho).

114 Sportsmen’s groups call on Congress to reject all efforts to sell or transfer public lands

More than 100 hunting, fishing, and conservation organizations, including the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, the National Wild Turkey Federation, Pheasants Forever, Quail Forever, Trout Unlimited, Dallas Safari Club, Pope & Young Club, the American Fly Fishing Trade Association, and more than 80 state-based groups, have released a letter to local and national decision-makers opposing the sale or transfer of federally-managed public lands. Recipients include House members meeting tomorrow to discuss federal land acquisition, and its impacts on communities and the environment, and Senators who recently passed a budget resolution that could encourage the sale or transfer of public lands.

“We’re calling on lawmakers to end this conversation now,” says Whit Fosburgh, TRCP’s president and CEO, whose recent blog post addressed the Senate amendment, which passed 51-49 on March 26. “Nothing galvanizes sportsmen like the loss of access for hunting and fishing, and continuing to indulge this controversial idea is keeping us from the real task of managing our public lands.”

America’s 640 million acres of federal public lands—including our national forests and Bureau of Land Management lands—provide hunting and fishing opportunities to millions of sportsmen and women. Since late last year, efforts to wrest public lands from the federal government and put them under state ownership have been matched by the unanimous outcry of sportsmen across the country. “Decision-makers need to know what they are stepping into,” says Joel Webster, director of western public lands for the TRCP. “Over 72% of western hunters depend on public lands for access, and sportsmen are not going to stand idly by as they’re sold away.”

Sportsmen from across the West are speaking out on this pivotal issue:

In Arizona: “Can you imagine driving up to the Kaibab National Forest, home to world-class elk and mule deer habitat, only to be greeted by ‘road closed’ signs, indicating that the new uranium company owners have prohibited entry?” asks Tom Mackin, president of the Arizona Wildlife Federation. “Such a scenario absolutely could occur if the transfer of public lands gives Arizona the opportunity to sell or lease this former National Forest to the highest bidder.”

In Colorado: “Desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep rely almost exclusively on federally managed public lands for habitat,” says Terry Meyers, president of the Rocky Mountain Bighorn Society. “It’s hard to imagine any good coming from the sale or transfer of these lands, especially for a sensitive species like bighorns.”

In Idaho: “Almost every Idaho hunter and fisherman relies on public lands for their recreation, whether they’re pursuing elk in the Lemhis, mule deer near Bear Lake, chukars in the Owyhees, or steelhead on the Clearwater,” says Tad Sherman, president of the Idaho State Bowhunters, which, with its affiliated clubs, represents more than 5,000 Idaho sportsmen. “Idaho without public lands is not the Idaho that should be passed on to future generations. It’s time to end the discussion of transferring or selling America’s public lands legacy.

In Montana: “Decision makers are toying with our Western way of life,” says Tony Jones, president of Ravalli County Fish and Wildlife Association. “Sportsmen see those who want to take away our public lands no differently than those who want to take away our guns. This bad idea will not be tolerated.”

In Nevada: “I choose to live in Nevada specifically to enjoy access to its vast unspoiled public lands that are at the very heart of our Western heritage and way of life,” says Larry Johnson, president of the Coalition for Nevada’s Wildlife. “If transferred to the state, Nevada would go bankrupt trying to manage these lands without selling off the best. This would seriously impact all of us who thrive on outdoor recreation.”

In Oregon: “The loss of access to public lands has a negative effect on Oregon’s $2.5-billion outdoor industry, one that is a leader in Oregon’s economy,” says Ty Stubblefield, field administrator for Oregon Hunters Association. “We simply cannot afford to lose our public lands.”

In Utah: “Here and throughout the western states, federal public lands are the lifeblood of our American sporting traditions,” says Ernie Perkins with the Utah Chukar and Wildlife Foundation. “The proposal to transfer or sell these lands has to be one of the worst ideas to surface in America in my lifetime.”

In Wyoming: “The move by some of our decision makers to transfer or sell off federal public lands is an insult to the birthright of all Americans,” says Josh Coursey, president and CEO of the Muley Fanatics Foundation. “Not only do Wyoming’s public lands, like the Shoshone National Forest, provide suitable habitat for fish and wildlife and critical access for sportsmen and wildlife enthusiasts, but these places also provide economic balance to local communities, where visitors pour in to spend time hunting for elk, fishing our blue-ribbon trout streams, or simply enjoying wildlife in these splendid places.”

If you agree with our message, please visit www.sportsmensaccess.org and sign the petition or share the website through your social media channels.

Tell BP: Wildlife STILL suffering, restore the Gulf!

It’s time for BP to restore sensitive Gulf habitat damaged from their oil spill

If you believe BP’s recent PR, wildlife in the Gulf of Mexico are doing just fine. Better than before. The Gulf is restored!

But we know wildlife habitat in the Gulf is still severely damaged from the BP oil spill and the creatures living there are suffering—and BP should not be allowed to pretend otherwise.

Tell BP to stop its campaign of denial and deception, and pay for restoration of the damaged ecosystems that Gulf wildlife depend on.

Five years after BP’s Deepwater Horizon rig exploded and spewed millions of barrels of toxic oil into the Gulf of Mexico, wildlife are struggling. Dolphins are dying at four times a normal death rate. TONS of oil is still being buried or washing up on Gulf beaches. BP’s recent report claiming the Deepwater Horizon accident—the largest marine oil spill in U.S. history—had no “significant long-term impact to the population of any Gulf species” is not only premature, it’s false.

Don’t let BP off the hook. Demand that BP take FULL responsibility for its negligence.

In the National Wildlife Federation’s recent report, “Five Years and Counting: Gulf Wildlife in the Aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon Disaster,” they studied 20 types of wildlife that depend on a healthy Gulf for their survival. What they found is mounting evidence of ongoing damage to wildlife.

Wildlife will feel this spill for decades. This is STILL unfolding.

Bottlenose dolphins in Louisiana’s Barataria Bay are sick—very sick. They have symptoms of oil exposure—unusual lung masses, adrenal gland problems, even teeth that are falling out.

A 25,000-pound tar mat was just removed from the Gulf coastline. After the clean up, nearby tar balls were hard, thick and difficult to break. The insides were rubbery and sticky, and they smelled like asphalt. These materials are not just on the shore’s surface, they’re also buried in the sand and sediment.

Cat Island, formerly a lush habitat for wildlife, is a skeleton. Once a vibrant nesting island covered in brown pelicans, roseate spoonbills, terns and gulls, Cat Island is now just a small spit of mud.

If YOU believe BP should pay to restore wildlife habitat and stop pretending wildlife in the Gulf are better than ever, then please take action now.

https://online.nwf.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=2079&autologin=true&s_src=Affiliate_KansasWilldifeFederation

This disaster isn’t over for wildlife. Don’t let it be over for BP, either.

Thanks for all you do for wildlife.