Oregon Explorer CrossSearch Search Results

Search

You searched for: Start Over Wildlife refuges Remove constraint Wildlife refuges Subject Wildlife management Remove constraint Subject: Wildlife management Material Types Image Remove constraint Material Types: Image

1 - 9 of 9

Search Results

1. [Image] Articles discussing bird refuges and conservation



	Citation Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Articles discussing bird refuges and conservation Author: Oregon Journal (Firm); News-Telegram (Portland, Or.); Oregonian (Firm) Year: 1935 Title: Articles discussing bird refuges and conservation Author: Oregon Journal (Firm); News-Telegram (Portland, Or.); Oregonian (Firm) Year: 1935

2. [Image] Article discussing bird refuges and waterfowl populations



	Citation Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Article discussing bird refuges and waterfowl populations Author: Oregonian (Firm) Year: 1940 Title: Article discussing bird refuges and waterfowl populations Author: Oregonian (Firm) Year: 1940

3. [Image] "A line on the sportsman"


	Newspaper clipping discussing William Finley's talk for the Junior Chamber of Commerce.
	Citation Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: "A line on the sportsman" Author: Oakland Tribune Year: 1936 Newspaper clipping discussing William Finley's talk for the Junior Chamber of Commerce. Title: "A line on the sportsman" Author: Oakland Tribune Year: 1936 Newspaper clipping discussing William Finley's talk for the Junior Chamber of Commerce.

4. [Image] Wholesale waterfowl destruction in the Klamath Country


	Manuscript discusses how the waterfowl in Klamath country are now protected from hunters by game laws. The Bureau of Reclamation destroyed areas of sanctuary for waterfowl because the demand for land for ...
	Citation Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Wholesale waterfowl destruction in the Klamath Country Author: Finley, William L. (William Lovell), 1876-1953 Year: 1930 Manuscript discusses how the waterfowl in Klamath country are now protected from hunters by game laws. The Bureau of Reclamation destroyed areas of sanctuary for waterfowl because the demand for land for agricultural use was so high. According to Dr. C. F. Marbut from the Department of Agriculture, the soil from the land in and around the bed of the Lower Klamath Lake could not support agricultural means successfully. Instead, the area became a refuge similar to Clear Lake. Title: Wholesale waterfowl destruction in the Klamath Country Author: Finley, William L. (William Lovell), 1876-1953 Year: 1930 Manuscript discusses how the waterfowl in Klamath country are now protected from hunters by game laws. The Bureau of Reclamation destroyed areas of sanctuary for waterfowl because the demand for land for agricultural use was so high. According to Dr. C. F. Marbut from the Department of Agriculture, the soil from the land in and around the bed of the Lower Klamath Lake could not support agricultural means successfully. Instead, the area became a refuge similar to Clear Lake.

5. [Image] Articles, lecture schedule, and brochure


	Document includes lecture schedule and newspaper clipping discussing "Birds, bergs and Kodiak bears" lecture. Newspaper clipping discussing establishment of wildlife sanctuaries and brochure for the Moose ...
	Citation Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Articles, lecture schedule, and brochure Author: Oregon Journal (Firm); Massachusetts Audubon Society; Moose Hill Wildlife Sanctuary; Izaak Walton League of America Year: 1934 Document includes lecture schedule and newspaper clipping discussing "Birds, bergs and Kodiak bears" lecture. Newspaper clipping discussing establishment of wildlife sanctuaries and brochure for the Moose Hill Bird Sanctuary are included. Title: Articles, lecture schedule, and brochure Author: Oregon Journal (Firm); Massachusetts Audubon Society; Moose Hill Wildlife Sanctuary; Izaak Walton League of America Year: 1934 Document includes lecture schedule and newspaper clipping discussing "Birds, bergs and Kodiak bears" lecture. Newspaper clipping discussing establishment of wildlife sanctuaries and brochure for the Moose Hill Bird Sanctuary are included.

6. [Image] Oregon State Planning Board, 1935


	1. Letter describing proposed creation of a State Planning Board and State Department of Conservation and Development as well as funding for wildlife research; 2. Letter to Chancellor W. J. Kerr recommending ...
	Citation Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Oregon State Planning Board, 1935 Author: Stanbery, V. B. (Van Buren), 1889-; Finley, William L. (William Lovell), 1876-1953; Parsons, Philip A. (Philip Archibald), 1879-1943; Mote, Don C. (Don Carlos), 1887-; Bean, Lucile G.; Willard, Rex E.; Lambert, Francis; Ziesenhenne, Fred C.; Ahlstrom, Elbert H. Year: 1935 1. Letter describing proposed creation of a State Planning Board and State Department of Conservation and Development as well as funding for wildlife research; 2. Letter to Chancellor W. J. Kerr recommending that Oregon State College be responsible for overseeing game management funding; 3. Letter from Philip Parons recommending the formation of a committee to make suggestions to the Oregon Fish and Game Commissions; 4. Letter discussing joint meeting of the Washington State Planning Council and Oregon State Planning Board; 5. Letter discussing issues with midges and a study of pelicans at the Upper Klamath Lake; 6. Program for joint meeting of the Washington State Planning Council and Oregon State Planning Board; 7. Letter requesting recommendations for legislation relating to natural resources in Oregon; 8. Correspondence discussing conference in Gold Beach to discuss Rogue River pollution; 9. Letter discussing meeting of State Planning Board and Advisory Research Committees; 10. Letter and memorandum discussing questions posed by V. B. Stanbery regarding Oregon wildlife conservation and responses of George Aiken, an Oregon State Game Commission member; 11. Correspondence discussing Curry County Planning Commission's proposed bill to create a board responsible for forest and range improvements; 12. Letter discussing the transfer of Land Planning Specialists to the Resettlement Administration; 13. Letter discussing current and proposed ground water surveys in eastern Oregon and Willamette Valley; 14. Correspondence discussing proposed establishment of refuges at Wapato Lake and upper Long Tom River; 15. Letter discussing a draft of William Finley's talk at joint meeting of the State Planning Board and Advisory Research Council; 16. Letter discussing proposed establishment of Hart Mountain Game Reserve; 17. Correspondence discussing proposed acquisition of Wapato Lake to establish a wildlife refuge; 18. Letter discussing appointment of members to Stream Pollution Committee; 19. Letter discussing Wildlife Committee members and contribution to report on natural resources in Oregon; 20. Reports focusing on stream improvements in the Siskiyou, Mount Hood, and Fremont National Forests; 21. "Oregon State Planning Board Research Program for 1936" Title: Oregon State Planning Board, 1935 Author: Stanbery, V. B. (Van Buren), 1889-; Finley, William L. (William Lovell), 1876-1953; Parsons, Philip A. (Philip Archibald), 1879-1943; Mote, Don C. (Don Carlos), 1887-; Bean, Lucile G.; Willard, Rex E.; Lambert, Francis; Ziesenhenne, Fred C.; Ahlstrom, Elbert H. Year: 1935 1. Letter describing proposed creation of a State Planning Board and State Department of Conservation and Development as well as funding for wildlife research; 2. Letter to Chancellor W. J. Kerr recommending that Oregon State College be responsible for overseeing game management funding; 3. Letter from Philip Parons recommending the formation of a committee to make suggestions to the Oregon Fish and Game Commissions; 4. Letter discussing joint meeting of the Washington State Planning Council and Oregon State Planning Board; 5. Letter discussing issues with midges and a study of pelicans at the Upper Klamath Lake; 6. Program for joint meeting of the Washington State Planning Council and Oregon State Planning Board; 7. Letter requesting recommendations for legislation relating to natural resources in Oregon; 8. Correspondence discussing conference in Gold Beach to discuss Rogue River pollution; 9. Letter discussing meeting of State Planning Board and Advisory Research Committees; 10. Letter and memorandum discussing questions posed by V. B. Stanbery regarding Oregon wildlife conservation and responses of George Aiken, an Oregon State Game Commission member; 11. Correspondence discussing Curry County Planning Commission's proposed bill to create a board responsible for forest and range improvements; 12. Letter discussing the transfer of Land Planning Specialists to the Resettlement Administration; 13. Letter discussing current and proposed ground water surveys in eastern Oregon and Willamette Valley; 14. Correspondence discussing proposed establishment of refuges at Wapato Lake and upper Long Tom River; 15. Letter discussing a draft of William Finley's talk at joint meeting of the State Planning Board and Advisory Research Council; 16. Letter discussing proposed establishment of Hart Mountain Game Reserve; 17. Correspondence discussing proposed acquisition of Wapato Lake to establish a wildlife refuge; 18. Letter discussing appointment of members to Stream Pollution Committee; 19. Letter discussing Wildlife Committee members and contribution to report on natural resources in Oregon; 20. Reports focusing on stream improvements in the Siskiyou, Mount Hood, and Fremont National Forests; 21. "Oregon State Planning Board Research Program for 1936"

7. [Image] Endangered species consultation handbook : procedures for conducting consultation and conference activities under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act


	EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (Act) [16 U.S.C. 1531 etseq.] outlines the procedures for Federal interagency cooperation to conserve Federally listed species and designated critical ...
	Citation Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Endangered species consultation handbook : procedures for conducting consultation and conference activities under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act Author: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Year: 1998, 2005 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (Act) [16 U.S.C. 1531 etseq.] outlines the procedures for Federal interagency cooperation to conserve Federally listed species and designated critical habitats. Proactive Conservation Efforts by Federal Agencies Section 7(a)(l) directs the Secretary (Secretary of the Interior/Secretary of Commerce) to review other programs administered by them and utilize such programs to further the purposes of the Act. It also directs all other Federal agencies to utilize their authorities in furtherance of the purposes of the Act by carrying out programs for the conservation of species listed pursuant to the Act. This section of the Act makes it clear that all Federal agencies should participate in the conservation and recovery of listed threatened and endangered species. Under this provision, Federal agencies often enter into partnerships and Memoranda of Understanding with the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for implementing and funding conservation agreements, management plans, and recovery plans developed for listed species. Biologists for the Services should encourage the development of these types of partnerships and planning efforts to develop pro-active approaches to listed species management. Avoiding Adverse Effects of Federal Actions Section 7(a)(2) states that each Federal agency shall, in consultation with the Secretary, insure that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. In fulfilling these requirements, each agency must use the best scientific and commercial data available. This section of the Act defines the consultation process, which is further developed in regulations promulgated at 50 CFR ?402. The Handbook This handbook was primarily developed to aid FWS and NMFS biologists implementing the section 7 consultation process. The purpose of the handbook is to provide information and guidance on the various consultation processes outlined in the regulations. Additionally, the handbook will ensure consistent implementation of consultation procedures by those biologists responsible for carrying out section 7 activities. Chapters of the handbook deal with major consultation processes, including Informal, Formal, Emergency, and Special Consultations; and Conferences. Standardized language is provided for incorporation into Biological Opinion documents to achieve consistency and to ensure that all consultation documents are complete from a regulatory standpoint. Background information and example documents are provided in Appendices. Although primarily targeted towards employees of the Services, other groups participating in the consultation process, including other Federal agencies; State, local, and tribal governments; and private individuals, consultants, and industry groups should find the handbook helpful in explaining section 7 processes and providing examples of various types of consultations. This handbook will be updated periodically as new regulations and policies are developed affecting implementation of the section 7 regulations, or as new consultation or assessment techniques evolve, and as additional examples or graphics become available. The Washington Offices of the Services have the lead for preparation of the handbook. Regional offices are encouraged to develop example documents appropriate for their geographical area and individual situations, and to coordinate with other Federal and State agencies in distributing these documents. Consultation Framework Use of Sound Science An overriding factor in carrying out consultations should always be the use of the best available scientific and commercial data to make findings regarding the status of a listed species, the effects of a proposed action on the species or critical habitat, and the determination of jeopardy/no jeopardy to listed species or destruction or adverse modification/no destruction or adverse modification to designated critical habitats. The Services have jointly published a policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered Species Act [59 FR 34271 (July 1, 1994)]. This policy calls for review of all scientific and other information used by the Services to prepare biological opinions, incidental take statements, and biological assessments, to ensure that any information used by the Services to implement the Act is reliable, credible, and represents the best scientific and commercial data available. Flexibility and Innovation The section 7 process achieves greatest flexibility when coordination between all involved agencies and non-Federal representatives, and the Services, begins early. Often, proposed actions can be modified so there is no need for formal consultation. The Services should ensure that all information needed to make an informed decision is made available. It is particularly critical when formal consultation begins that all parties are fully involved in providing information and discussing project options. Although it is the responsibility of the Services to make the determination of jeopardy or destruction/adverse modification in the biological opinion, action agencies and applicants should be fully informed and involved in the development of Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives, Reasonable and Prudent Measures, and Terms and Conditions to minimize the impacts of incidental take. Biologists should be creative in problem solving and look for ways to conserve listed species while still accommodating project goals. Coordination The Services have a policy to ensure coordination with State Agencies for gathering information in implementing the consultation program. [59 FR 34274-34275 (July 1, 1994)] The Services have a joint policy on coordination with tribal governments. Secretarial Order #32306 (June 5, 1997) entitled "American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act" recognizes that the consultation process should include input from affected tribal governments. State and tribal government biologists often have information available that is pertinent to the description of the action area or to the species of interest in the consultation. Shortening Timeframes Recently, the Services have been implementing measures to streamline consultation processes. Examples include projects reviewed under the Northwest Forest Plan and nationwide Timber Salvage Program. These procedures have been able to effectively shorten consultation timeframes without giving up any protection for listed species/designated critical habitats or the use and review of the best available information. This has been achieved through enhanced interagency coordination, development of guidelines for implementation of a larger program (i.e. timber salvage) which can tier to an individual project (timber sale), and by providing consultation simultaneously with project analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Biologists for the Services are encouraged to review examples of these streamlined consultations and to look for ways to incorporate streamlining techniques into other consultation procedures. Title: Endangered species consultation handbook : procedures for conducting consultation and conference activities under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act Author: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Year: 1998, 2005 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (Act) [16 U.S.C. 1531 etseq.] outlines the procedures for Federal interagency cooperation to conserve Federally listed species and designated critical habitats. Proactive Conservation Efforts by Federal Agencies Section 7(a)(l) directs the Secretary (Secretary of the Interior/Secretary of Commerce) to review other programs administered by them and utilize such programs to further the purposes of the Act. It also directs all other Federal agencies to utilize their authorities in furtherance of the purposes of the Act by carrying out programs for the conservation of species listed pursuant to the Act. This section of the Act makes it clear that all Federal agencies should participate in the conservation and recovery of listed threatened and endangered species. Under this provision, Federal agencies often enter into partnerships and Memoranda of Understanding with the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for implementing and funding conservation agreements, management plans, and recovery plans developed for listed species. Biologists for the Services should encourage the development of these types of partnerships and planning efforts to develop pro-active approaches to listed species management. Avoiding Adverse Effects of Federal Actions Section 7(a)(2) states that each Federal agency shall, in consultation with the Secretary, insure that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. In fulfilling these requirements, each agency must use the best scientific and commercial data available. This section of the Act defines the consultation process, which is further developed in regulations promulgated at 50 CFR ?402. The Handbook This handbook was primarily developed to aid FWS and NMFS biologists implementing the section 7 consultation process. The purpose of the handbook is to provide information and guidance on the various consultation processes outlined in the regulations. Additionally, the handbook will ensure consistent implementation of consultation procedures by those biologists responsible for carrying out section 7 activities. Chapters of the handbook deal with major consultation processes, including Informal, Formal, Emergency, and Special Consultations; and Conferences. Standardized language is provided for incorporation into Biological Opinion documents to achieve consistency and to ensure that all consultation documents are complete from a regulatory standpoint. Background information and example documents are provided in Appendices. Although primarily targeted towards employees of the Services, other groups participating in the consultation process, including other Federal agencies; State, local, and tribal governments; and private individuals, consultants, and industry groups should find the handbook helpful in explaining section 7 processes and providing examples of various types of consultations. This handbook will be updated periodically as new regulations and policies are developed affecting implementation of the section 7 regulations, or as new consultation or assessment techniques evolve, and as additional examples or graphics become available. The Washington Offices of the Services have the lead for preparation of the handbook. Regional offices are encouraged to develop example documents appropriate for their geographical area and individual situations, and to coordinate with other Federal and State agencies in distributing these documents. Consultation Framework Use of Sound Science An overriding factor in carrying out consultations should always be the use of the best available scientific and commercial data to make findings regarding the status of a listed species, the effects of a proposed action on the species or critical habitat, and the determination of jeopardy/no jeopardy to listed species or destruction or adverse modification/no destruction or adverse modification to designated critical habitats. The Services have jointly published a policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered Species Act [59 FR 34271 (July 1, 1994)]. This policy calls for review of all scientific and other information used by the Services to prepare biological opinions, incidental take statements, and biological assessments, to ensure that any information used by the Services to implement the Act is reliable, credible, and represents the best scientific and commercial data available. Flexibility and Innovation The section 7 process achieves greatest flexibility when coordination between all involved agencies and non-Federal representatives, and the Services, begins early. Often, proposed actions can be modified so there is no need for formal consultation. The Services should ensure that all information needed to make an informed decision is made available. It is particularly critical when formal consultation begins that all parties are fully involved in providing information and discussing project options. Although it is the responsibility of the Services to make the determination of jeopardy or destruction/adverse modification in the biological opinion, action agencies and applicants should be fully informed and involved in the development of Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives, Reasonable and Prudent Measures, and Terms and Conditions to minimize the impacts of incidental take. Biologists should be creative in problem solving and look for ways to conserve listed species while still accommodating project goals. Coordination The Services have a policy to ensure coordination with State Agencies for gathering information in implementing the consultation program. [59 FR 34274-34275 (July 1, 1994)] The Services have a joint policy on coordination with tribal governments. Secretarial Order #32306 (June 5, 1997) entitled "American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act" recognizes that the consultation process should include input from affected tribal governments. State and tribal government biologists often have information available that is pertinent to the description of the action area or to the species of interest in the consultation. Shortening Timeframes Recently, the Services have been implementing measures to streamline consultation processes. Examples include projects reviewed under the Northwest Forest Plan and nationwide Timber Salvage Program. These procedures have been able to effectively shorten consultation timeframes without giving up any protection for listed species/designated critical habitats or the use and review of the best available information. This has been achieved through enhanced interagency coordination, development of guidelines for implementation of a larger program (i.e. timber salvage) which can tier to an individual project (timber sale), and by providing consultation simultaneously with project analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Biologists for the Services are encouraged to review examples of these streamlined consultations and to look for ways to incorporate streamlining techniques into other consultation procedures.

8. [Image] Game management school at Corvallis


	Manuscript praising the establishment of the Oregon State Agricultural College. There is praise also for the courses in game management that will be offered. The courses are considered to be the best measurement ...
	Citation Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Game management school at Corvallis Author: Finley, William L. (William Lovell), 1876-1953 Year: 1930 Manuscript praising the establishment of the Oregon State Agricultural College. There is praise also for the courses in game management that will be offered. The courses are considered to be the best measurement instituted in order to develop wildlife resources for Oregon. The college will offer several courses that will provide training for game management of estates and land using industries. Local establishments such as game refuges and fish hatcheries will be used to give hands on experience. At the time, Oregon was the only state in the west to receive federal funding for education in respects to conservation of wildlife. Title: Game management school at Corvallis Author: Finley, William L. (William Lovell), 1876-1953 Year: 1930 Manuscript praising the establishment of the Oregon State Agricultural College. There is praise also for the courses in game management that will be offered. The courses are considered to be the best measurement instituted in order to develop wildlife resources for Oregon. The college will offer several courses that will provide training for game management of estates and land using industries. Local establishments such as game refuges and fish hatcheries will be used to give hands on experience. At the time, Oregon was the only state in the west to receive federal funding for education in respects to conservation of wildlife.

9. [Image] Careful management needed for big game


	Manuscript that describes the lessons learned from the Jackson elk herd at Yellowstone Park and how to apply them to future animal refuges.
	Citation Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Careful management needed for big game Author: Finley, William L. (William Lovell), 1876-1953 Year: 1930 Manuscript that describes the lessons learned from the Jackson elk herd at Yellowstone Park and how to apply them to future animal refuges. Title: Careful management needed for big game Author: Finley, William L. (William Lovell), 1876-1953 Year: 1930 Manuscript that describes the lessons learned from the Jackson elk herd at Yellowstone Park and how to apply them to future animal refuges.