Laura Bies

The Ornithological Council has released another updated version of A Guide to the Processes and Procedures for Importing Bird Products into the United State for Scientific Research and Display. This extensive guide, which was thoroughly updated in 2020, provides a step-by-step guide for ornithologists importing birds or bird products into the U.S. for research and display, including template documents and checklists to follow. The recent updates were made to ensure that the guide remains up to date as permitting requirements and system change.

The Import Guide is available to download for free from the Ornithological Council’s website at BIRDNET.org, as a service to the ornithological community. It contains sections on the import permitting requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, USDA APHIS, and the Centers for Disease Control, as well as information about planning your travel and how to ship your specimen. It leads the ornithologist through the entire process, from paperwork to port and beyond. In addition to the hard-and-fast rules and requirements, this guide also offers best practices and helpful hints.

The guide is updated regularly as agency permitting requirements change, keeping ornithologists in compliance with the many laws and regulations governing the import of bird products.

If you have any questions after reading the Import Guide or find areas that require further clarification, please contact Laura Bies (laurabiesoc@gmail.com), Executive Director of the Ornithological Council.

About the Ornithological Council

The Ornithological Council is a consortium of scientific societies of ornithologists; these societies span the Western Hemisphere and the research conducted by their members spans the globe. Their cumulative expertise comprises the knowledge that is fundamental and essential to science-based bird conservation and management.  The Ornithological Council is financially supported by our member societies and the individual ornithologists who value our work. If the OC’s resources are valuable to you, please consider joining one of our member societies or donating directly at Birdnet.org. Thank you for your support!

USFWS press release:

This week, a federal grand jury returned indictments charging six Cuban nationals who resided in Houston with illegal trafficking of migratory songbirds. The six separate indictments allege violations of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Lacey Act.  

The scheme allegedly involved the illegal trapping and selling of protected songbirds, including indigo buntings, painted buntings, rose-breasted grosbeaks, blue grosbeaks and house finches, among others. 

The birds are often used in singing competitions in which the participating owners gamble thousands of dollars on the winning bird, a common practice in Cuba and elsewhere. The birds migrate from Canada, through Texas, to South America. They are trapped as they pass through the Houston area, commonly using a live “bait bird” whose singing attracts other birds to the trap.  

The joint investigation led by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Office of Law Enforcement Special Agents and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department’s Texas Game Wardens led to the seizure of over 300 illegally trapped songbirds. 

“The illegal wildlife trade doesn’t just happen behind closed doors – many of our native species are being traded out in the open in flea markets and online marketplaces like Facebook,” said U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Special Agent in Charge Victoria Owens. “In addition to seeking justice for our native wildlife and the American public, we want the prosecution of these cases to help educate the public about wildlife laws and deter people from committing these crimes in the future. We will pursue and hold accountable anyone who violates fish and wildlife laws for commercial gain.”

"Texas Game Wardens have a long, proud history of working alongside the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Office of Law Enforcement to protect wildlife species found throughout the state, and this case is just the latest success from this partnership," said Colonel Chad Jones, Director of Law Enforcement for the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. "Without the help of Operation Game Thief, and the reporting of this initial crime by the public, the positive outcome for this operation would not have been possible. We encourage Texans to report suspicious activity whenever it's encountered, and we hope the successful conclusion to this case helps to educate the public and deter future commercial gain from the illegal wildlife trade in Texas."

The seized songbirds were turned over to the Houston Zoo and Moody Gardens where they were evaluated and photographed. Healthy birds were released to the wild, while those that were too sick or injured to survive unaided will remain under the care of the zoos.

The illegal trapping has a significant impact on the wild songbird populations. The birds are poorly suited to captivity and typically die soon after being confined to a cage.

“We are pleased to see a positive outcome in this case as the plight of native birds is just now becoming clear. It is our core role as an Association of Zoos and Aquariums accredited organization to preserve natural resources and protect threatened and endangered wildlife,” said General Curator Greg Whittaker of Moody Gardens. 

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act was enacted in 1918 for the protection of migratory birds. The Lacey Act prohibits trafficking in wildlife that was taken in violation of federal, state, tribal or foreign law. 

If convicted, they each face a maximum penalty of five years in prison for violating the Lacey Act, two years for violating the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and possible fines of up to $250,000.

For more information, visit the United States Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas website here: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdtx/pr/six-indicted-trafficking-songbirds. 

The OFFLU ad-hoc group on HPAI H5 in wildlife of South America and Antarctica, part of WOAH/FAO Network of Expertise on Animal Influenza (OFFLU), a global network of expertise on animal influenzas, recently released a statement entitled “Southward expansion of high pathogenicity avian influenza H5 in wildlife in South America: estimated impact on wildlife populations, and risk of incursion into Antarctica.”

The report summarizes the spread of high pathogenicity avian influenza subtype H5 clade 2.3.4.4b through wildlife South America, since its first detection there in October 2022. It also evaluates the risk for incursion into Antarctica.

According to the report, the impacts of the current avian influenza outbreak on South American wildlife are “enormous,” with more than 500,000 wild birds and more than 20,000 wild mammals reported dead so far, with “actual mortality likely many times larger.” The virus has spread to the southern tip of South America and the report indicates that, “there is a substantial risk it will continue southwards and in the near future reach Antarctica and its offshore islands, which provide breeding habitat for over 100 million birds every spring.”

Read more about OFFLU’s work on avian influenza in their 2022 Annual Report.

About the Ornithological Council

The Ornithological Council is a consortium of scientific societies of ornithologists; these societies span the Western Hemisphere and the research conducted by their members spans the globe. Their cumulative expertise comprises the knowledge that is fundamental and essential to science-based bird conservation and management.  The Ornithological Council is financially supported by our member societies and the individual ornithologists who value our work. If the OC’s resources are valuable to you, please consider joining one of our member societies or donating directly at Birdnet.org. Thank you for your support!

Press release from American Bird Conservancy - 

A new report published by the Law, Ethics and Animals Program at the Yale Law School (LEAP) and American Bird Conservancy (ABC) reveals how local laws and policies are speeding up protections for birds, such as the Blackpoll Warbler, from deadly building collisions. The first-of-its-kind report, “Building Safer Cities for Birds: How Cities Are Leading the Way on Bird-Friendly Building Policy,” unveils critical insights and data that will help inform building design standards to significantly reduce avian mortality.

“A growing number of U.S. cities and counties have emerged as leaders in advancing bird-friendly building design and practice over the past two decades, in the absence of federal and state action to reduce bird collisions,” said coauthor and LEAP Executive Director Viveca Morris. “They have set an important example, showing that good bird-friendly building policies are possible, impactful, and affordable.”

A staggering number of birds are killed by window collisions each year in the United States, with estimates of up to 1 billion. ABC, a leading authority on preventing bird collisions, partnered with LEAP on the policy study, with four of its experts contributing to the report:  Bryan Lenz, Kaitlyn Parkins, Christine Sheppard, and Anikó Tótha.

Research focused on the experiences of cities that have already passed bird-friendly laws, to empower other cities in doing the same. The report also features five in-depth case studies of municipal policies passed in New York, New York; Arlington County, Virginia; Madison, Wisconsin; Cupertino, California; and San Francisco, California. Nearly two dozen policymakers, advocates, glass manufacturers, architects, scientists, and community members involved in designing, implementing or working on local policies were interviewed for the report.

Since 2008, more than 20 U.S. cities and municipalities have enacted bird-friendly building policies. The first law was passed by Cook County, Illinois. At least three bird-friendly building laws were passed this summer, including by Washington, D.C., and the states of Maryland and Maine. 

“Policies are critical tools, because they have wide impacts, often beyond their local area. We don't have the luxury of addressing this problem one building at a time,” said Christine Sheppard, ABC's Glass Collisions Program Director. 

Sheppard helped develop ABC's official rating system for measuring threats to birds posed by different building materials — a standard that is now used in many bird-friendly building policies. Commonly approved bird-friendly materials include treatments for glass like fritting and etching, exterior insect screens, exterior blinds, and architectural features that shield large sheets of glass. 

According to the report, bird-friendly building policies vary in scope and comprehensiveness by city. Laws share many of the same limitations, such as those in California that limit regulations to “bird-sensitive areas” near green spaces and waterways, while other hazardous parts of the city remain without regulations. Some policies include lighting provisions to reduce light pollution, which is also a key contributor to bird collisions. Yet none of the bird-friendly building policies studied apply retroactively to existing buildings. 

“New rules and innovative strategies for mitigating existing building stocks are urgently needed, especially at high-collisions buildings,” explained Meredith Barges, coauthor of the study, policy researcher, and co-chair of Lights Out Connecticut. “The types of building renovations that trigger most laws will not happen fast enough to save many threatened birds in the decades ahead.”

Local governments could use a range of financial programs and regulatory policies to motivate developers, businesses, and homeowners to adopt practices, with strong participation rates. One successful example includes Arlington County, which incentivized bird-friendly architecture in 2020 with a density bonus requirement through its Green Building Incentive Program.

The report's findings show that bird collisions prevention can be simple and inexpensive when following recommended science, technology, and standards. Morris, Barges, and the report's contributors hope its conclusions will inform and inspire better local policies in the future to protect birds from preventable collision-related injuries and avoidable deaths.

“Building Safer Cities for Birds: How Cities Are Leading the Way on Bird-Friendly Building Policy” is a publication of the Yale Bird-Friendly Building Initiative, which aims to accelerate the development and adoption of bird-friendly building design. The Yale Bird-Friendly Building Initiative is a collaboration of the Law, Ethics and Animals Program (LEAP) at Yale Law School, the Yale Peabody Museum of Natural History, the Yale Office of Sustainability, and American Bird Conservancy. The Yale Bird-Friendly Building Initiative is supported by a seed grant from the Yale University Planetary Solutions Project. 

Read online here. 

Download the report here. 

The Ornithological Council has released a new edition of its foundational publication, the Guidelines to the Use of Wild Birds in Research. The 4th edition incorporates text from the 3rd edition (published in 2010) with lists of new references published since that edition’s release.

The Guidelines provides an in-depth guide to the animal welfare considerations when performing research involving wild birds, including ethical considerations and the legal framework that must be followed by researchers. Topics include: investigator impact generally, collecting and trapping, marking, transport, housing and captive breeding, minor and major manipulative procedures, and euthanasia.

First published in 1988, by the Wilson Ornithological Society, the Cooper Ornithological Society, and the American Ornithologists' Union - with encouragement and financing from the National Science Foundation - the Guidelines to the Use of Wild Birds in Research was later revised in 1997, 1999, and 2010. 

This new edition was made possible by the contributions of several individuals who conducted literature searches for each chapter and compiled lists of new references. Chapter reference lists were provided by Kayla Martin (Chapter 2), Laura Bies (Chapters 4, 5, and 8), Ian Ausprey (Chapter 3), Jeanne Fair and Alicia Romero (Chapter 6), Lisa Tell and Emily Graves (Chapter 7), and Rick Spaulding and Émile Brisson Curadeau (Drone Supplement). The text remains that from the 3rd edition, skillfully written and compiled by Anne Barrett Clark, Clara Davie, Jeanne Fair, Jason Jones, Gary Kaiser and Ellen Paul.

You can download a PDF of the Guidelines to the Use of Wild Birds in Research here.

About the Ornithological Council

The Ornithological Council is a consortium of scientific societies of ornithologists. Their cumulative expertise comprises the knowledge that is fundamental and essential to science-based bird conservation and management.  The Ornithological Council is financially supported by our member societies and the individual ornithologists who value our work. If the OC’s resources are valuable to you, please consider joining one of our member societies or donating directly at Birdnet.org. Thank you for your support!

A new study found that in four Western US states between 2019 and 2022, "both raptors and corvids were more likely to die from gunshot than from other causes, along both trans- mission and distribution lines." Read the paper here: https://www.cell.com/iscience/pdf/S2589-0042(23)01351-2.pdf

From the National Audubon Society - 

As Climate Impacts Loom, Audubon Calls for Rapid Expansion of Well-Sited Clean Energy Transmission

New report lays out the importance of building the clean energy grid to stabilize climate.

NEW YORK – The National Audubon Society released a report today that addresses the importance of rapidly expanding electric transmission to meet climate goals while also protecting wildlife habitat. The report, Birds and Transmission: Building the Grid Birds Need, outlines the urgent need for additional transmission capacity, as well as the current scientific understanding of solutions to minimize risks to birds. 

By broadly identifying high priority areas where transmission development and bird impacts overlap, the report suggests how collaborative planning efforts can responsibly upgrade the clean energy transmission grid to help protect birds and people from climate threats.

“We risk losing billions of birds if we don’t lower emissions, and a responsibly expanded transmission grid that will deliver clean energy is critical to slowing the rate of global temperature rise,” said Marshall Johnson, Chief Conservation Officer for the National Audubon Society. “Clean energy should benefit climate, communities, and conservation. This report will help identify how clean energy developers, conservation organizations, and other stakeholders can work together to build the kind of grid that both birds and people need for a cleaner future.”

Birds and Transmission: Building the Grid Birds Need builds on Audubon's 2019 Survival by Degrees report, which found that two-thirds of North American bird species will be vulnerable to extinction if global temperatures continue to rise at the current rate. To achieve a clean energy future where birds and people can thrive, the U.S. will need to effectively double or even triple transmission capacity to connect the volume of renewable energy facilities needed to reach emission goals. Because current processes for developing transmission lines take too long and do not always provide adequate environmental and cultural protections, collaborative efforts are needed to speed up the buildout of transmission while also minimizing risks to biodiversity.

“Audubon understands the urgency of making the critical investments that will prepare the transmission grid to handle a clean energy future. We also understand how important it is to do it in the right way,” said Johnson. “By proactively implementing bird-friendly solutions before breaking ground and taking reactive measures once transmission is established, we can meet our emission goals and protect wildlife at the same time.”

In the report, Audubon highlights some of the ways to reduce transmission risks to birds based on a well-established and robust scientific knowledge base. These include proactive solutions, which should be implemented during the planning process, and reactive solutions, which are implemented after construction is complete. In a map that overlays important bird areas with areas that are important for energy transmission, Audubon found that 33% of existing and planned transmission and 27% of planned and potential transmission coincide with priority areas for birds. Most of these planned and potential priority areas are likely to occur within existing rights of way, which means that many of these areas can support projects that will not lead to new habitat degradation, although some disturbances may still occur.

The Birds and Transmission report will be a resource for Audubon staff and chapter leaders to identify priority areas where they can work to influence clean energy transmission sited with bird-friendly solutions. Staff work closely with clean energy developers, government agencies, tribal nations, communities, partner organizations, and the Audubon Network to support, expedite, and expand the responsible development of clean energy projects, planning, and policies. More about Audubon’s position on transmission policy can be found here.    

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service previously announced proposed revisions to their regulations governing migratory bird and eagle permits. The proposed changes span several sections of regulations and several permit types, modifying five existing regulatory authorizations (situations where a permit is not necessary) and proposing several new regulatory authorizations.

The Ornithological Council submitted comments on the proposal, touching on many of the proposed regulatory changes. In particular, the OC thanked the USFWS for the proposed citizen salvage provision, which would allow citizens to collect and donate to museums and education institutions bird carcasses they find, without requiring them to secure a salvage permit. The OC was also grateful to see the proposed regulatory authorization for drone use in ornithological research, which the OC has been working towards for years.

Learn more about the other proposed changes and the OC’s suggestions in our comment letter.

About the Ornithological Council

The Ornithological Council is a consortium of scientific societies of ornithologists; these societies span the Western Hemisphere and the research conducted by their members spans the globe. Their cumulative expertise comprises the knowledge that is fundamental and essential to science-based bird conservation and management.  The Ornithological Council is financially supported by our member societies and the individual ornithologists who value our work. If the OC’s resources are valuable to you, please consider joining one of our member societies or donating directly at Birdnet.org. Thank you for your support!

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will list the Cactus Ferruginous Pygmy-owl (Glaucidium brasilianum cactorum) as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, with critical habitat to be designated later.  According to the Federal Register notice, the main threats to the owl are habitat loss/fragmentation and climate change/climate conditions. 

The listing will become final on 21 August. 

Learn more in the press release from USFWS, below. 

*****

USFWS Press Release

Service Federally Lists Cactus Ferruginous Pygmy-Owl as Threatened

Jul 19, 2023

Media Contacts: Al Barrus

PHOENIX–Following a 60-day public comment period, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is listing the cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl as a threatened subspecies under the Endangered Species Act, along with a 4(d) rule that tailors protections for the owl. Service biologists will propose designating critical habitat for the species in a separate rule at a later date.  

In response to comments made by stakeholders, partners, and the public, Service biologists made additions to this final rule to further explain new information received between the previous not-warranted finding in 2011 and the 2021 proposed listing, as well as incorporated data and information provided during the public comment period, as appropriate.

The pygmy-owl is a 6-inch-tall raptor currently found in southern Arizona, southern Texas, and Mexico. The owl is imperiled throughout its range by activities that reduce and fragment its habitat. These threats include but are not limited to, invasive species, urbanization, agriculture and forest production, and climate change . It has been extirpated from key areas of its historical range in both Arizona and Texas. Notable declines are also reported in the Mexican portion of the pygmy-owl’s range, especially in Northern Sonora, Mexico.  

“The Endangered Species Act provides a critical safety net for fish, wildlife and plants and has prevented the extinction of hundreds of imperiled species like the pygmy-owl,” said Southwest Regional Director Amy Lueders. “In addition, collaborative conservation efforts with a diversity of cooperators in Arizona, Texas and Mexico have further protected pygmy-owl habitat through habitat acquisition and protection in Arizona and have greatly enhanced our understanding of the species.”   

Pygmy-owl habitat has been protected through conservation planning and habitat acquisition and protection as part of implementing the Pima County Multi-Species Conservation Plan. Participation in the plan is voluntary and provides non-federal landowners and industry the opportunity to implement proactive conservation practices that address specific threats to imperiled species. In turn, the landowner receives assurances that if the species eventually becomes listed under the Endangered Species Act, they can continue to manage their land as outlined in their agreements with no additional requirements. In addition, the Altar Valley Watershed Plan has been developed and will contribute to the enhancement of pygmy-owl habitat in Altar Valley, Arizona. Other collaborative efforts with a diversity of cooperators have enhanced our knowledge of pygmy-owl needs through ongoing cooperative surveys, research, and monitoring in Arizona, Texas, and Mexico.   

The Service developed a species status assessment (SSA) using the best available science and available information from a team of local, state, federal, and Tribal experts, as well as conservation partners, concerning the past, present, and future threats, as well as ongoing conservation efforts. Based on the analysis in the SSA regarding the projected future condition of the species, the cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl is likely to become an endangered species in the foreseeable future primarily due to habitat loss and fragmentation, and climate change. 

The 4(d) rule prohibits the same activities as outlined in the Endangered Species Act for an endangered species but allows certain exceptions. These exceptions include specific types of education and outreach activities already allowed under a Migratory Bird Treaty Act permit, surveying and monitoring conducted in Arizona under a state-issued Scientific Collection License, and habitat restoration and enhancement activities that improve habitat conditions and which are coordinated with and approved by the Service. 

This announcement comes as the ESA turns 50 years old in 2023. Throughout the year, the Department of the Interior is celebrating the ESA’s importance in preventing imperiled species extinction, promoting the recovery of wildlife and conserving the habitats upon which they depend. 

The full listing rule will be available at www.regulations.gov by searching under docket number FWS-R2-ES-2021-0098. This listing rule goes into effect 30 days after publication. The service remains interested in information regarding the status and conservation of, and any potential threat to, the cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl. Please submit information by email to incomingazcorr@fws.gov. 

The Scientific Task Force on Avian Influenza and Wild Birds, a cooperative task force established by the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, has  released a statement on high pathogenicity avian influenza in wild birds.

The statement was developed in response to the extensive and large-scale outbreaks and global spread of H5N1 high pathogenicity avian influenza in wild birds, with a goal of informing stakeholders in governments, disease control, wildlife management, site management, conservation and the poultry sectors about HPAI viruses in wild birds and appropriate responses. The statement provides both a situation update and also recommendations and guidance for those responding to the threat of HPAI to wild birds.

Read the full statement here.

About the Ornithological Council

The Ornithological Council is a consortium of scientific societies of ornithologists; these societies span the Western Hemisphere and the research conducted by their members spans the globe. Their cumulative expertise comprises the knowledge that is fundamental and essential to science-based bird conservation and management.  The Ornithological Council is financially supported by our member societies and the individual ornithologists who value our work. If the OC’s resources are valuable to you, please consider joining one of our member societies or donating directly at Birdnet.org. Thank you for your support!

The Ornithological Council submitted comments on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s proposal to update its regulation regarding the exhibition of migratory birds and eagles. Currently, the agency regulates the exhibition of migratory birds under a Special Purpose Possession Live permit (through FWS Form 3–200–10c, issued under 50 CFR 21.95) and the exhibition of bald eagles and golden eagles under an Eagle Exhibition Live permit (through FWS Form 3–200–14, issued under 50 CFR 22.50)

The USFWS is proposing to issue new migratory bird exhibition regulations to authorize possession of live, non-releasable or captive-bred migratory birds for use in teaching people about migratory bird conservation and ecology, and to revise the regulations authorizing eagle exhibition.

Under the USFWS’ proposal, the agency would continue to regulate the movement of migratory birds from the wild to exhibition, with the care of exhibition birds primarily regulated by USDA under the Animal Welfare Act, through a mechanism called a regulatory authorization, which would establish eligibility criteria and conditions for the take or possession of migratory birds by an entity without requiring a permit to conduct those activities.

The OC’s comments supported the use of a regulatory authorization for those institutions that are registered with the USDA under the Animal Welfare Act, thereby reducing the regulatory burden for exhibitors of migratory birds and eagles.

In 2010, the USFWS proposed new regulations for the possession and use of migratory birds in educational programs and exhibits, but that regulation was never finalized. Read the Ornithological Council’s comments on the 2010 proposal here.

Learn more about the USFWS’ proposed changes here.

Read the Federal Register notice from the USFWS here.

About the Ornithological Council

The Ornithological Council is a consortium of scientific societies of ornithologists; these societies span the Western Hemisphere and the research conducted by their members spans the globe. Their cumulative expertise comprises the knowledge that is fundamental and essential to science-based bird conservation and management.  The Ornithological Council is financially supported by our member societies and the individual ornithologists who value our work. If the OC’s resources are valuable to you, please consider joining one of our member societies or donating directly at Birdnet.org. Thank you for your support!

The 64th Supplement to the American Ornithological Society’s (AOS) Check-list of North American Birds, published today in Ornithology, includes numerous updates to the classification of North American bird species. 

A few highlights from this year’s supplement, detailed below, include a species lump for the Western Flycatcher, species status for the goshawk of North America, and species splits in several Caribbean birds leading to five additional species. 

The Check-list, published since 1886, is updated annually by the AOS’s North American Classification Committee (NACC), the official authority on the names and classification of the region’s birds, and is consulted by birders and professional ornithologists alike. 

The full Check-list supplement is available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/ornithology/ukad023.

Species Lumps and Splits

(Re)lumping of Cordilleran Flycatcher and Pacific-slope Flycatcher as Western Flycatcher 

In 1989, the Western Flycatcher (Empidonax difficilis) was split into the Pacific-slope Flycatcher (E. difficilis) and the Cordilleran Flycatcher (E. occidentalis), based mainly on research that identified differences in vocalizations and allozyme frequencies, differences maintained across a small contact zone in California. “These flycatchers are suboscine birds, so vocalizations are extremely important in determining species limits,” NACC chair R. Terry Chesser of the U.S. Geological Survey explains. Researchers W. Alexander Hopping, Ethan Linck, and others recently studied a separate contact zone in a large region of the northern Rockies, which was not known when the previous research led to the species split. This region includes parts of the U.S. states of Washington, Idaho, and Montana, as well as the Canadian provinces of British Columbia and Alberta. Hopping and Linck (in Proposal 2023-D-7) noted that the morphology, vocalizations, and genetics of the Cordilleran Flycatcher and Pacific-slope Flycatcher are not consistently distinguishable in this broad region. “According to the proposal, bird record committees in this area list only a single default species rather than expecting people to identify individual birds as Cordilleran or Pacific-slope,” Chesser says. Thus, although the lump will result in the loss of a species for North America, bird identification should be more straightforward for regional checklists.

Species Split for Northern Goshawk 

The Northern Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis) is being split into two species. A proposal (Proposal 2023-B-11) from NACC member Shawn M. Billerman of the Cornell Lab of Ornithology highlights key vocal and genetic differences between what had been treated as two subspecies groups within Northern Goshawk, the Palearctic gentilis and Nearctic atricapillus groups. Because the newly recognized Eurasian Goshawk (A. gentilis) has occasionally been recorded from North America, a few lucky bird enthusiasts might be able to include both Eurasian Goshawk and American Goshawk (A.atricapillus) on their North American lists. “This is an interesting split not only because both species are known from North America, one as a resident and the other as an accidental, but because two different subspecies of the Eurasian Goshawk are known from North America,” Chesser says. “Two individuals of the Asian subspecies albidus have turned up in Alaska, and there’s an old specimen of the European subspecies gentilis from Labrador.”

Five Newly Split Species in the Caribbean

The AOS’s NACC and SACC (South American Classification Committee) members are collaborating with the Working Group on Avian Checklists, which is part of the International Ornithologists’ Union, to consolidate the four main global checklists into a single standardized checklist. “The four global checklists differ in many ways, such as whether to recognize particular species splits or what genus a species belongs to,” Chesser explains, adding, “The working group, which includes two members from NACC and one from SACC, is going through all the discrepancies among the four main lists and trying to resolve them.” As part of this effort, Chesser and other NACC members have been preparing proposals to help reconcile the differences that involve North American birds. This year, their efforts resulted in the recognition of five additional bird species in the Caribbean, among others.

Cuban Bullfinch Species Split

The Cuban Bullfinch (Melopyrrha nigra), a finch-like tanager, is being split into two species, Cuban Bullfinch (M. nigra), now restricted to Cuba, and Grand Cayman Bullfinch (M. taylori). The NACC passed a proposal by NACC members Jonathan Dunn and Chesser (Proposal 2023-A-13) to split the bullfinch after re-evaluating evidence showing song and morphological differences. Significantly, the research supporting the split was spurred on by a birdwatcher’s observations of song differences between individuals on Cuba and Grand Cayman. “It goes to show that amateur ornithologists can, and do, make very real contributions to the field of ornithology; in this case their comments led to further important research,” Dunn and Chesser wrote in their proposal.

Greater Antillean Nightjar Species Split

The Greater Antillean Nightjar (Antrostomus cubanensis) is being split into two species based on vocal differences. Former subspecies ekmani, whose range includes the western third of the Dominican Republic and the western part of the Tiburon Peninsula, Haiti, is being elevated to species status. A proposal (Proposal 2023-A-2) submitted by NACC members Dunn, Chesser, and Carla Cicero summarized the convincing differences between what will now be the Cuban Nightjar (A. cubanensis) and the Hispaniolan Nightjar (A. ekmani). 

Three-way Split for Antillean Euphonia

The Antillean Euphonia (Chlorophonia musica) is a small, attractive woodland finch found on many Caribbean islands. This species formerly consisted of three subspecies that will now be considered separate species. Researchers Nicholas A. Mason, Samantha L. Rutledge, and David Vander Pluym from Louisiana State University recommended the split in a new proposal (Proposal 2023-B-7) based largely on plumage differences on a par with those between other species of euphonia; the three species will now be the Hispaniolan Euphonia (C. flavifrons), Puerto Rican Euphonia (C. sclateri), and Lesser Antillean Euphonia (C. musica).

Palm Crow Species Split

The Palm Crow (Corvus palmarum), a corvid long shared between Hispaniola and Cuba, will now be treated as two species: the Hispaniolan Palm Crow (C. palmarum) and the Cuban Palm Crow (C. minutus), thus adding another species to the Check-list area. NACC member Pamela C. Rasmussen, then at Michigan State University (now at Cornell Lab of Ornithology), based her proposal (Proposal 2023-B-8) primarily on differences in vocalizations, genetic evidence, and apparent differences in tail-flicking behavior. Based on the vocalizations alone, “We're surprised that they hadn't been split before,” Chesser says. “If we can tell the calls apart, probably the birds can also tell them apart.”

Transfers Between Genera

New Genus for Tiny Hawk

The Tiny Hawk (now Microspizias superciliosus) was for many years placed in Accipiterand has been treated as such by both the North and South American checklists. NACC Early Career Systematics Group member Max T. Kirsch of San Diego State University and Rasmussen submitted a proposal (Proposal 2023-B-10) to transfer the Tiny Hawk to the new genus Microspizias, based on research that identified substantial morphological and molecular differences between the Tiny Hawk and other species of Accipiter.

Other species transferred between genera include three species of Neotropical crake, as well as the critically endangered Zapata Rail (now Mustelirallus cerverai), the Thicket Antpitta (now Myrmothera dives), and the Crimson-collared Grosbeak (now Periporphyrus celaeno).

Over the last month, the Ornithological Council has provided three different sets of comments to federal agencies on permitting issues. Given that many of the ornithologists who are members of the organizations that make up the Ornithological Council must secure various permits from federal agencies either regularly or from time to time during their career, ensuring that the process of applying for, renewing, and amending these permits is efficient and predictable is of the utmost concern to the OC.

The OC provided comments to the USDA Animal and Plants Health Inspection Service on their import/export permits. Among other comments, the OC recommended that the permit duration be extended from one year to three years. The comments also recommended clarifying how disease categories apply and which countries can be included on blanket permits (i.e. permits that cover all imports and exports over the permit duration).

The OC also provided comments to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the Form 3-177 and the online eDecs system. Those comments asked that the USFWS add the capacity to upload bulk information on spreadsheets, rather than having to enter each specimen individually within eDecs. The OC also asked that the eDecs system more clearly indicated which permits are needed for each species.

Finally, the OC submitted brief comments on the USFWS Form 3–200–7 (application for a Migratory Bird and Eagle Scientific Collecting permit). The USFWS is proposing to add a question regarding whether institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) approval is required for the work that a permit is being applied for. The OC comments note that a researcher might be applying for a scientific collecting permit before they apply for or secure approval from their institution’s IACUC, and so recommended adding an additional possible answer to the proposed question, which would allow the applicant to indicate that they have not yet applied for or secured IACUC approval but plan to do so before beginning their field work.

About the Ornithological Council

The Ornithological Council is a consortium of scientific societies of ornithologists; these societies span the Western Hemisphere and the research conducted by their members spans the globe. Their cumulative expertise comprises the knowledge that is fundamental and essential to science-based bird conservation and management.  The Ornithological Council is financially supported by our member societies and the individual ornithologists who value our work. If the OC’s resources are valuable to you, please consider joining one of our member societies or donating directly at Birdnet.org. Thank you for your support!

DOI PRESS RELEASE

HONOLULU — Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland today announced that the Department has committed nearly $16 million as part of President Biden’s Investing in America agenda to prevent the imminent extinction of Hawaiian Forest Birds.

The funding will support a new Hawaiian Forest Bird Conservation Keystone Initiative, which was unveiled as part of the Department’s Restoration and Resilience Framework. The Framework is guiding $2 billion in investments from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction Act to restore lands and waters and advance climate resilience. Secretary Haaland announced the historic funding during remarks at the Hawai’i Conservation Conference in Honolulu.

“Hawaiian Forest Birds are a national treasure and represent an irreplaceable component of our natural heritage. Birds like the ‘I’iwi, Kiwikiu and ‘Akikiki are found nowhere else in the world and have evolved over millennia to adapt to the distinct ecosystems and habitats of the Hawaiian Islands,” said Secretary Deb Haaland. “Thanks to President Biden’s Investing in America agenda, we are working collaboratively with the Native Hawaiian Community and our partners to protect Hawaiian Forest Birds now and for future generations.”

Historically, there were over 50 different species of honeycreeper birds in Hawaiʻi. That number is now down to just 17, due to an array of threats that have caused significant declines in their populations. Habitat loss, invasive species, climate change and disease, such as avian malaria spread by mosquitoes, are urgent challenges impacting bird species across the Hawaiian Islands.

In December 2022, the Interior Department released a Strategy for Preventing the Extinction of Hawaiian Forest Birds. The strategy provides a shared vision among the Department’s bureaus for a comprehensive approach to prevent the extinction of Hawaiian Forest Birds by applying a science-based approach, various conservation techniques, and Native Hawaiian biocultural knowledge and practices. This approach is rooted in close coordination with federal and non-federal partners to leverage resources and expertise to meet common goals.

Funding from President Biden’s Investing in America agenda offers an historic opportunity to allocate substantial resources toward the conservation efforts required to save these endangered and threatened species from the brink of extinction. Without this funding, experts assessed that two species could go extinct within the next year.

The Hawaiian Forest Bird Conservation Keystone Initiative will pursue several key objectives, including:

Captive Care: Expanding captive care programs and facilities for bird species most at risk of imminent extinction.

Invasive Mosquito Eradication: Implementing cutting-edge strategies to control and eradicate invasive mosquitoes that spread avian malaria, which has ravaged Hawaiian forest bird populations in recent years.

Establish New Bird Populations Through Translocation: Relocating new populations of bird species to higher elevation refugia within the Hawaiian Islands where avian malaria is not yet present will help prevent further extinctions.

Research and Monitoring: Conducting extensive scientific research and monitoring to ensure mosquito control efforts are effective and enhancing our knowledge on mosquito and forest bird biology. This knowledge will inform more effective conservation strategies.

Native Hawaiian Community Engagement: Actively engaging Native Hawaiian cultural practitioners and experts through consultation, knowledge sharing, protocol and traditional practices at each major stage of a conservation action. This not only contributes to the overall forest bird recovery efforts but also sustains the Native Hawaiian Community’s biocultural relationship with the forest birds.

###

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recently proposed several changes to the permits that it issues under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. Among those proposed changes, which are open for public comment until 31 July, are changes to the ability of public entities to possess migratory bird specimens without a permit.

Current regulations allow certain public entities to possess migratory bird specimens without a permit.  Under 50 CFR 21.12(b)(1), public museums, public zoological parks, accredited institutional members of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums  and public scientific or educational institutions (among others) are exempt from the permitting requirements for possession of migratory birds and eagles.

One of the changes recently proposed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would both restrict this authorization to possession of specimens only (i.e., exclude live birds) and also expand this authorization to all public entities.

The proposal would also clarify some relevant terms. ‘Public’ in relation to a museum, zoological park, or scientific or educational institution is currently defined as referring to museums, zoological parks, and scientific or educational institutions that are open to the general public and are either established, maintained, and operated as a governmental service or are privately endowed and organized but not operated for profit. In the proposal, the USFWS provides more information about how to interpret these terms:

- ‘‘Open to the general public’’ would mean an entity that is open on a regularly scheduled basis during publicly posted hours of at least 400 hours per calendar year or conducts at least 12 public educational programs per year. The entity may charge a fee for entry or to attend programs. A program would not qualify as a public program if access is restricted to a limited group of individuals.

- ‘‘Governmental service’’ would mean services provided by government agencies, including Federal, State, Tribal, or local agencies, as well as services provided by entities operating on behalf of a government agency, such as contractors.

- ‘‘Nonprofit organization’’ would mean an entity that is privately endowed (i.e., funded) and Internal Revenue Service tax-exempt under 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3). The term ‘‘endowed’’ would be synonymous with ‘‘funded’’ and does not require a minimum endowment to qualify as public.

While the current regulations authorize possession of live birds without a permit in certain situations for qualifying entities, the proposed regulation would eliminate this authorization. However, the USFWS also recently announced that it will be changing its rules regarding the exhibition of live migratory birds and eagles for educational purposes. Until those exhibition regulations are finalized, any entity currently operating under 50 CFR 21.12(b)(1) may continue activities currently authorized by the regulatory authorization until the agency finalizes the proposed educational use regulations.

Currently, an eagle exhibition permit is required to possess eagle specimens for exhibition purposes, including mounts, feathers, parts, eggs, and nests and these permits are limited to public museums, public scientific societies, or public zoological parks. The proposed regulatory changes would allow public museums, public scientific societies, and public zoological parks to possess eagle specimens for exhibition use without a permit.

The regulatory changes would also provide an interpretation of the term ‘scientific societies.’ As proposed, a public scientific society is any entity that, as part of its purpose, promotes public knowledge about science or conducts research and makes data and findings available to the public. Public scientific societies may include government agencies, schools and universities, and nongovernmental organizations. Qualifying as a public museum, scientific society, or zoological park is only one of the criteria necessary to conduct eagle exhibition or eagle scientific collecting activities.

The attached chart summarizes the proposed changes.

exhibit chart.pdf

About the Ornithological Council

The Ornithological Council is a consortium of scientific societies of ornithologists; these societies span the Western Hemisphere and the research conducted by their members spans the globe. Their cumulative expertise comprises the knowledge that is fundamental and essential to science-based bird conservation and management.  The Ornithological Council is financially supported by our member societies and the individual ornithologists who value our work. If the OC’s resources are valuable to you, please consider joining one of our member societies or donating directly at Birdnet.org. Thank you for your support!

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service released its Final Report: 2023 Peregrine Falcon Status Assessment, Sustainable Take Rate, and Take Limits, which provides an updated assessment of the status of North American peregrine falcons to inform discussions of possible changes to the current take strategy. Learn more here. 

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the source of many protections for native birds in the U.S., does not prevent the harassment of migratory birds. However, the Airborne Hunting Act does prohibit the use of aircraft, including unmanned aircraft systems or drones, to harass any wildlife, including migratory birds. This has resulted in confusion for a number of years regarding the use of drones for ornithological research.

Current regulations authorize the harassment of migratory birds under the AHA only for activities under depredation permits issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Those AHA regulations have not been substantively revised since they were promulgated in 1974. The Ornithological Council has been calling for changes to the AHA regulations to clearly allow the use of the drones for wildlife research for several years.

In 2017, the Ornithological Council asked the Department of the Interior’s Office of the Solicitor to advise the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, other federal agencies, and state agencies that the use of drones for wildlife research is not subject to the Airborne Hunting Act. The OC also asked that if the Solicitor determined that the use of drones to study wildlife is subject to the AHA, then the Solicitor should address the need for federal permits because there are few, if any, state laws pertaining to drone use for wildlife research and monitoring.

In 2018, the OC filed a petition for rule-making, asking the USFWS to issue permits for the use of drones to study wildlife. That petition proposed the changes necessary for the USFWS to issue permits under the AHA, since, if the Solicitor were to determine that the use of drones for wildlife research was covered by the AHA, permits would be needed.

Although an official determination has not been made by the Solicitor, the regulatory changes proposed recently by the USFWS includes a proposal to continue authorizing aircraft use (including drone use) that may potentially harass migratory birds under migratory bird permits or eagle permits and to expand the authorization to include any appropriate Part 21 (Migratory Bird Treat Act) or Part 22 (Eagle) permit, not just depredation permits. If finalized, the proposal would eliminate the current regulatory confusion as to the use of drones for ornithological research. The authorization to use drones could then be requested under any MBTA or Eagle permit.

Comments on the proposed changes are due 31 July.

In recent years, the Department of the Interior banned the use of drones by department personnel. That policy was overturned in late 2022. Read the OC’s letter thanking the department for this change.

Read the OC’s Fact Sheet on Drone Use.

Additional resources regarding drone use and the AHA.

About the Ornithological Council

The Ornithological Council is a consortium of scientific societies of ornithologists; these societies span the Western Hemisphere and the research conducted by their members spans the globe. Their cumulative expertise comprises the knowledge that is fundamental and essential to science-based bird conservation and management.  The Ornithological Council is financially supported by our member societies and the individual ornithologists who value our work. If the OC’s resources are valuable to you, please consider joining one of our member societies or donating directly at Birdnet.org. Thank you for your support!

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recently released a proposal with a number of changes to its regulations regarding permits under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. You can read a summary of those proposed changes here. Comments are being accepted on the proposal though 31 July. Read on to learn more about the proposed changes to salvage authorization specifically.

Currently, a permit is required for any person to salvage (i.e., pick up) migratory birds found dead, including parts, feathers, nonviable eggs, and inactive nests. Last week’s proposal would instead create a new regulatory authorization so that any person could salvage dead migratory birds (as well as feather, inactive nests and nonviable eggs). Of course, Federal, State, and/or local guidance for safe handling and disposal of dead wildlife should always be followed. All birds salvaged must be promptly disposed of by donation to a person or entity authorized to receive them or disposed of by complete destruction. Birds may not be retained for personal use, sold, bartered, or traded.

Private citizens often find dead birds and take the carcasses to museums. However, because those citizens are not currently legally authorized to pick up the dead birds, the museums (and university teaching collections) are often reluctant to accept them. If a person who finds a dead bird is discouraged from bringing that specimen to a museum, valuable educational and scientific material is lost.

The Ornithological Council has long supported a citizen salvage policy or regulation. With this new rule in place, valuable scientific and educational information will be retained. In addition, the proposal would relieve the administrative burden of the permitting process for both the USFWS and for those who salvage birds with some regularity.

In addition to permitting citizen salvage of migratory birds, the proposal also addresses the disposition of salvaged bald eagles and golden eagles. Currently, salvage permit conditions require that salvaged eagles, parts, and feathers be donated to the National Eagle Repository. If someone without a salvage permit finds an eagle, they must notify a wildlife agency with authorization to salvage the eagle, which will then send it to the National Eagle Repository. However, most wildlife agencies have limited capacity to to this, meaning that many found eagles do not reach the National Eagle Repository.

Under the proposed regulation, any salvaged bald eagles or golden eagles would still be donated to the National Eagle Repository. However, if determined unsuitable by the National Eagle Repository, they could be donated for scientific or exhibition purposes or completely destroyed.

The proposal also includes a new regulatory authorization for USFWS and state wildlife agency employees, which would allow them to salvage birds, use migratory bird specimens for educational programs, transport birds to medical care, and relocate birds in harm’s way without a permit. This change would facilitate agency employees conducting routine activities and reduce the administrative burden of the permit process on both the USFWS and other natural resource agencies.

The proposed language for these new authorizations is below. Thoughts on the changes? The USFWS is collecting public comment through 31 July. Remember, while these changes have been proposed by the USFWS, they are not yet effective - meaning that, for now, a permit is still required for salvage. Stay tuned to the ‘News from the OC’ forum on Ornithology Exchange to follow the rule-making process for this proposal.

Proposed regulatory language:

§ 21.16 Salvage authorization.

The regulations in this section authorize salvage activities and provide an exception to permit requirements for these activities.

(a) Salvage of migratory birds. Any person may salvage migratory bird specimens under the conditions set forth in this section. Specimens include whole birds found dead, parts, and feathers, including bald eagles and golden eagles. Inactive nests and nonviable eggs, except for those of bald eagles or golden eagles, may also be salvaged under the regulations in this section. This authorization does not apply to live birds, viable eggs, or active nests.

(1) All salvaged specimens must be disposed of within 7 calendar days.

(2) You must tag each specimen intended for donation with the date, location of salvage, and the name and contact information of the person who salvaged the specimen. The tag must remain with the specimen.

(3) Nonviable eggs may not be salvaged during breeding season unless you are sufficiently skilled and able to discern viable eggs from nonviable eggs. Salvage of viable eggs is not authorized.

(4) If you encounter a migratory bird with a Federal band, you must report the band to the U.S. Geological Survey Bird Banding Laboratory.

(b) Disposition of bald eagles and golden eagles.

(1) If you salvage a whole bald eagle or golden eagle (eagle), part of an eagle (e.g., wing or tail), or feathers, you must immediately contact the National Eagle Repository and follow the Repository’s instructions on transferring the eagle, parts, or feathers to the Repository.

(2) If you salvage an eagle specimen that are not accepted by or the National Eagle Repository provides written authorization for donation of eagle specimen type listed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, you may donate specimens to a public museum, public scientific society, or public zoological park authorized to receive eagle specimens for scientific or exhibition purposes under a valid permit authorization (50 CFR 22.15) or permit (50 CFR 22.50).

(3) If not disposed of in accordance with the regulations in paragraphs (b)(1) or (2) of this section, eagle specimens must be disposed of at the direction of the Service Office of Law Enforcement. Personal use is not authorized. Eagles may not be held in possession for more than 7 calendar days and may not be sold, bartered, or offered for purchase, sale, or barter.

(c) Disposition of all other migratory birds.

(1) Except for bald eagles or golden eagles, migratory bird specimens may be disposed of by donation to any person or institution authorized to receive them under a valid permit or regulatory authorization.

(2) If not donated, migratory bird specimens must be disposed of by destroying specimens in accordance with Federal, State, and local laws and ordinances. Personal use is not authorized. Birds, parts, nests, and eggs may not be held in possession for more than 7 calendar days and may not be purchased, sold, bartered, or offered for purchase, sale, or barter.

(d) Records. You must maintain records of all donated birds, including eagles sent to the National Eagle Repository for 5 years. Records must include species, specimen type, date, location salvaged, and recipient. At any reasonable time upon request by the Service, you must allow the Service to inspect any birds held under this authorization and to review any records kept.

(e) Other requirements. Additional Federal, State, Tribal, or Territorial permits may be required. This authorization does not grant land access. You are responsible for obtaining permission from landowners when necessary and for complying with other applicable laws.

(f) Reporting to law enforcement. You must notify the Service Office of Law Enforcement (see 50 CFR 10.22 for contact information) if you suspect birds were illegally killed or if five or more birds are found dead and there is a risk of mortality due to disease.

§ 21.34 Natural resource agency employees authorization.

(a) Excepted activities. While performing their official duties, employees of Federal, State, Territorial, and federally recognized Tribal natural resource agencies may conduct the following activities without a permit:

(1) Salvage. Natural resource agency employees may salvage migratory bird remains found dead in accordance with the salvage authorization (§ 21.16).

(2) Educational use. Natural resource agency employees may possess migratory bird specimens for conservation education programs in accordance with the authorizations for use of educational specimens (§ 21.18) and the exhibition of eagle specimens (50 CFR 22.15). A permit is required to possess live birds, viable eggs, or active nests for educational use.

(3) Transport. Natural resource agency employees may transport sick, injured, or orphaned birds in accordance with
§ 21.76(a). If transport is not feasible within 24 hours, follow the instructions of a federally permitted migratory bird rehabilitator to provide supportive care, retain in an appropriate enclosure for up to 72 hours, or euthanize the birds.

(4) Relocate. Natural resource agency employees may trap and relocate migratory birds, nests, eggs, and chicks in accordance with § 21.14. Employees are authorized to conduct these activities to remove birds from structures or whenever birds or humans are at risk if birds are not relocated. Additional authorization is required for bald eagles, golden eagles, or migratory birds on the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife (50 CFR 17.11).

(b) Volunteers and contractors. Individuals under the direct supervision of an agency employee (e.g., volunteers or agents under contract to the agency) may, within the scope of their official duties, conduct the activities authorized by this authorization. An authorized individual must have a designation letter from the agency describing the activities that may be conducted by the individual and any date and location restrictions that apply.

(c) Official capacity. Employees and other authorized individuals must act within their official duties, training, and experience when conducting authorized activities, especially when handling live birds. Live birds must always be cared for under humane and healthful conditions as defined in § 21.6.

(d) Records. Agencies must keep records for 5 years of activities conducted under this authorization. The records must include the species and number of birds, the type of activity, date, and disposition.

About the Ornithological Council

The Ornithological Council is a consortium of scientific societies of ornithologists; these societies span the Western Hemisphere and the research conducted by their members spans the globe. Their cumulative expertise comprises the knowledge that is fundamental and essential to science-based bird conservation and management.  The Ornithological Council is financially supported by our member societies and the individual ornithologists who value our work. If the OC’s resources are valuable to you, please consider joining one of our member societies or donating directly at Birdnet.org. Thank you for your support!

From the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - 

Songbirds, Shorebirds and Other Migratory Birds to Benefit from More Than $24 Million in Funding Throughout the Americas

Jun 7, 2023

Media Contacts: Vanessa Kauffman

Today, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is announcing more than $24 million in funding has been approved for grants through the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act for conservation projects to benefit migratory birds and people throughout the Americas.

For over two decades, the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act has provided critical support for neotropical bird conservation and research throughout the Western Hemisphere each year. It is the only source of federal funding solely dedicated to the conservation of migratory birds shared throughout the Americas. This year, more than $5.1 million in federal funds will be matched by more than $19.6 million in partner contributions going to 32 collaborative conservation projects in 30 countries across the Americas.

“We have lost nearly three billion birds in North America alone since 1970. These grants and partnerships play a crucial role in addressing bird declines across the Western Hemisphere by working to protect and positively impact millions of acres of diverse habitats where birds winter in the south, breed in the north, and where they migrate along the way,” said Service Director Martha Williams. “Thanks to the many networks that have developed through these projects, powerful conservation alliances and partnerships are growing to help many of the most at-risk species and their habitats.”

There are 390 species of neotropical migratory birds that migrate across the Western Hemisphere, to and from the U.S. each year, including songbirds, shorebirds and birds of prey. In addition to their role in pollination, seed dispersal and pest control, birds also provide early warnings of the effects of  climate change  and environmental contamination and contribute billions of dollars to the economy through bird watching and photography. 

This funding will help prevent these species from being listed as threatened or endangered, with priority given to more imperiled species that are listed on the Service’s Birds of Conservation Concern 2021report. This year’s project highlights include:

Implementing Golden-cheeked Warbler Conservation Plan in Chiapas VI (Mexico)

This project will increase habitat protection through forest management and recovery, research, and outreach to reduce habitat pressures on the endangered golden-cheeked warbler, four Birds of Conservation Concern and dozens of other migratory species impacted by deficient forest management practices, forest fires and illegal logging activities throughout Chiapas State in Mexico. 

Strengthening Shorebird Conservation in Parita Bay (Panama)

The National Audubon Society is partnering with the Inter-American Development Bank and Panama Audubon Society to implement a three-year project focused on the conservation and protection of coastal habitats along the Pacific coast of Panama, some of the most important stopover and wintering habitat for neotropical migrant shorebird species in the Americas, including American oystercatcher, Wilson’s plover, marbled godwit and willet.

Protecting and Restoring the Ecuadorian Chocó (Ecuador)

Partners will implement the first phase of BirdLife International’s 10-year Conservation Investment Strategy for the Ecuadorian Choco-Andes which will protect priority bird habitat and improve knowledge on the abundance and distribution of migratory birds, including at least three Birds of Conservation Concern: cerulean warbler, Canada warbler and olive-sided flycatcher.

Since 2002, the NMBCA has provided more than $89 million in grants to support 717 projects in 43 countries. These projects have positively affected more than 5 million acres of bird habitat and spurred partnerships on multiple levels contributing an additional $346 million.

A complete list of this year’s approved grants projects is available and all projects in the database. Additional information about migratory bird conservation can be found by visiting online the Service’s Migratory Bird Program.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has announced proposed revisions to their regulations governing migratory bird and eagle permits. The proposed changes span several sections of regulations and several permit types. Comments on the proposed changes are due 31 July.

A summary of the proposed changes is below; additional articles on the Ornithology Exchange in the coming weeks will delve further into the details of the various changes.

The proposal would modify five existing regulatory authorizations, and propose several new regulatory authorizations.

Airborne Hunting Act Regulations -

The Airborne Hunting Act prohibits the use of an aircraft to harass any wildlife, which includes migratory birds. Current regulations authorize the harassment of migratory birds under the AHA under depredation permits. The proposal would expand this to allow authorization of aircraft use (including drone use) that may potentially harass migratory birds under migratory bird permits or eagle permits.

Salvage Authority -

The USFWS proposes a new authorization for any person to salvage migratory birds found dead. Any salvaged bird must be promptly disposed of by donation to a person or entity authorized to receive them, such as for purposes of education or science, or disposed of by complete destruction. (Contact the USFWS Migratory Bird Program to determine if an entity is authorized to receive donated birds). Salvaged birds cannot be retained for personal use, sold, bartered, or traded. Anyone salvaging birds should follow all applicable Federal, State, and/or local guidance for safe handling and disposal of dead wildlife.

Currently, a permit from USFWS is required to salvage dead birds. Eliminating this permit requirement will relieve the administrative burden of the permitting process for both the agency and for those who salvage birds with some regularity.

Current regulations also require that, if someone without a salvage permit finds an eagle, they must notify a local, State, or Federal wildlife agency that has authorization to salvage the eagle, parts, or feathers. The agency then sends the items to the National Eagle Repository. Current salvage permit conditions require that salvaged eagles, parts, and feathers be disposed of by donation to the National Eagle Repository.

Under the proposal, the agency would continue to require that any salvaged bald eagles or golden eagles be donated to the National Eagle Repository and to allow the National Eagle Repository to determine if eagles, parts, or feathers are unsuitable for distribution. However, the proposed rule provides that, if determined unsuitable by the National Eagle Repository, those items could be donated for scientific or exhibition purposes or completely destroyed.

Public Institutions -

The current regulations authorize certain public entities to possess migratory bird specimens. The proposal would change to this authorization by restricting the authorizations to the possession of specimens only ( i.e., excluding live birds) and expanding this authorization to all public entities. Additional revisions would incorporate current universal permit conditions required in possession permits for educational use under the special purpose regulations.

Public Institutions—Authorization for Exhibition Use of Eagle Specimens - 

Under the current rules, an eagle exhibition permit is required to possess eagle specimens for exhibition purposes. The proposal would allow public museums, public scientific societies, and public zoological parks to possess eagle specimens for exhibition use without a permit.

Licensed Veterinarians Authorization  -

Under the current rule, licensed veterinarians are authorized to provide veterinary care of sick, injured, and orphaned migratory birds including eagles. The proposal would edit the existing language to improve readability, clarify what is included in veterinary care, and clarify expectations regarding disposition of live and dead migratory birds.

Mortality Event Authorization -

Regulations currently authorize natural resource and public health agency employees to address avian disease outbreaks without a permit. The USFWS' proposal would clarify the existing language and expand the current scope of this authorization from disease outbreaks to all mortality events. The primary use of this regulatory authorization is to respond to avian infectious disease outbreaks, such as avian influenza or West Nile virus. The proposed authorization also clarifies that take of asymptomatic birds for activities such as disease monitoring is not covered by this regulatory authorization. Instead, agencies conducting disease monitoring of asymptomatic, live birds should obtain a scientific collecting permit.

Natural Resource Agency Employees Authorization -

USFWS and State wildlife agency employees are authorized under special purpose permits to salvage birds, use migratory bird specimens for educational programs, transport birds to medical care, and relocate birds in harm's way. The USFWS is proposing to establish a new regulatory authorization for these activities and no longer require a permit.

Law Enforcement Authorization (Proposed for Revision) - 

Regulations currently authorize Department of the Interior law enforcement personnel to conduct certain activities without a permit. The proposal would clarify that this authorization pertains to all law enforcement agencies authorized to enforce laws consistent with the MBTA or Eagle Protection Act, as long as they are performing official law enforcement duties. It would also allow law enforcement agents to temporarily designate authority to another individual to acquire, possess, transport, or dispose of migratory birds on behalf of law enforcement in certain circumstances—for example, to pick up and dispose of a deceased bird in a remote area.

Humane and Healthful Conditions Definition -

Regulations currently require any live wildlife to be possessed under “humane and healthful conditions” but do not provide a definition of that term. The agency has proposed adding a definition: humane and healthful conditions means using methods supported by the best available science that minimize fear, pain, stress, and suffering of a migratory bird held in possession. This definition applies during capture, possession (temporary or long term), or transport. Humane and healthful conditions pertain to handling (e.g., during capture, care, release, restraint, and training), housing (whether temporary, permanent, or during transport), shelter, feeding and watering, sanitation, ventilation, protection from predators and vermin, and, as applicable, enrichment, veterinary care, and euthanasia.

Rehabilitation Regulations -

The proposal would remove the reference to the Minimum Standards for Wildlife Rehabilitation (2000) as guidelines for evaluating the adequacy of caging dimensions, and instead move the reference to policy, so that the regulations do not need to be updated through rule making with each update of those standards.

Removal of Birds from Buildings -

Current regulations include a regulatory authorization that authorizes any person to remove a migratory bird from the interior of a building or structure.  The proposal would expand the authorization from the current text of “residence or a commercial or government building” to “residence, business, or similar human-occupied building or structure,” so that structures similar to buildings, such as belltowers, are also included.

Stay tuned to the News from the Ornithological Council forum for more on these changes!

Bald eagles are often touted as a massive conservation success story due to their rebound from near extinction in the 1960s. But now a highly infectious virus may put that hard-fought comeback in jeopardy. New research showed highly pathogenic avian influenza, also known as H5N1, is killing off unprecedented numbers of mating pairs of bald eagles. Learn more here and read the underlying research paper here. 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is planning to update its regulation regarding the exhibition of migratory birds and eagles. Currently, the agency regulates the exhibition of migratory birds under a Special Purpose Possession Live permit (through FWS Form 3–200–10c, issued under 50 CFR 21.95) and the exhibition of bald eagles and golden eagles under an Eagle Exhibition Live permit (through FWS Form 3–200–14, issued under 50 CFR 22.50)

The USFWS is proposing to issue new migratory bird exhibition regulations to authorize possession of live, non-releasable or captive-bred migratory birds for use in teaching people about migratory bird conservation and ecology, and to revise the regulations authorizing eagle exhibition.

Earlier this year, the USDA’s Animal Plant Health Inspection issued a new rule, regulating the care of birds under the Animal Welfare Act. The USFWS, in the new and revised exhibition regulations, is seeking “to prevent conflicting regulations and minimize regulatory burden to exhibitors,” according to the agency’s Federal Register notice.

The USFWS is considering continuing to regulate the movement of migratory birds from the wild to exhibition, with the care of exhibition birds primarily regulated by USDA under the Animal Welfare Act, through a mechanism called a regulatory authorization. Regulatory authorizations are regulations that establish eligibility criteria and conditions for the take or possession of migratory birds by an entity without requiring a permit to conduct those activities.

Under the regulatory authorization, a permit from USFWS would not be required to exhibit migratory birds for AWA license holders. If an AWA license was not required, then the USFWS would require an exhibition permit for migratory birds and eagles.

The USFWS is requesting feedback on several specific questions to assist it in developing its new and revised regulations, as summarized below. For the full questions and additional context, please read the notice from the agency here.

Question 1. What regulatory authorization conditions should the USFWS require in addition to AWA license conditions? (e.g., “migratory birds may not be handled by the general public” or “migratory birds may be held but not otherwise touched by the general public.”)

Question 2. The USFWS is seeking estimates of how many exhibitors are not likely to be required to or hold an AWA license. For these exhibitors, should the USFWS continue using special purpose permits for migratory birds or promulgate a new regulation for migratory bird exhibition. Additionally, should the USFWS continue to have separate permits for migratory birds and eagles, or combine exhibition authorization for migratory birds and eagles into a single permit?

Question 3. Should the USFWS continue the requirement that the transfer of any wild bird to exhibition must be approved by the USFWS prior to transfer?

Question 4. The USFWS is considering being more restrictive in ensuring wild birds approved for exhibition are suitable for long-term captivity. Is this an appropriate role for the USFWS?  How should the USFWS design the information requested and review of transfer requests to ensure birds are suitable for exhibition use without being unduly burdensome to exhibitors or the USFWS?

Question 5. Should there be restrictions on the compensation that can be received for exhibition, and if so, under what circumstances and conditions?

Question 6. Should the breeding of exhibition birds be authorized, and if so, under what circumstances and conditions?

Question 7. Exhibition activities are occasionally conducted by those who hold migratory birds under other permit types, such as falconry, raptor propagation, and others. For circumstances where exhibition is not the primary use of the migratory bird, the USFWS is considering the following three approaches. (1) For State-licensed falconers, a regulatory authorization where no permit is required for State-licensed falconers who receive less than a set amount in compensation per calendar year for exhibition programs ( e.g., $1,000). (2) For falconry schools, if a falconry school holds an AWA license, then an MBTA exhibition permit is not required. If the falconry school does not hold an AWA license, an MBTA exhibition permit is required. (3) For other MBTA permittees who conduct exhibition activities, but exhibition is not the primary use of the migratory bird, the following would apply: If the permittee holds an AWA license for exhibition, then an MBTA exhibition permit is not required. If the permittee does not qualify for an AWA license, exhibition authorization can be added to the existing MBTA permit ( e.g., raptor propagation, waterfowl sale and disposal, etc.). Do the three approaches described above make sense for those unique use cases? Are there other unique cases we have not considered?

Question 8. Should the USFWS change practice and allow marked, individual migratory birds to be held under multiple permits? (i.e., a banded raptor could be authorized for falconry, raptor propagation, and exhibition)

Comments are due by July 3.

In 2010, the USFWS proposed new regulations for the possession and use of migratory birds in educational programs and exhibits, but that regulation was never finalized. Read the Ornithological Council’s comments on the 2010 proposal here.

About the Ornithological Council

The Ornithological Council is a consortium of scientific societies of ornithologists; these societies span the Western Hemisphere and the research conducted by their members spans the globe. Their cumulative expertise comprises the knowledge that is fundamental and essential to science-based bird conservation and management.  The Ornithological Council is financially supported by our member societies and the individual ornithologists who value our work. If the OC’s resources are valuable to you, please consider joining one of our member societies or donating directly at Birdnet.org. Thank you for your support!

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has proposed adding the Sira Curassow and Southern Helmeted Curassow, found in Peru and Bolivia respectively, to the list of species protected under the Endangered Species Act. Both species are threatened by hunting, and, to a less extent, habitat loss and degradation.

In 1991, the International Council for Bird Preservation petitioned the USFWS to add 53 foreign bird species, including the southern helmeted curassow, to the ESA list. Three years later, the agency determined that the southern helmeted curassow, was a candidate for listing. The Sira curassow was recognized as a separate species in 2014 and so also became listed as a candidate.

USFWS will accept comments on the proposal through 31 July.

*****

USFWS PRESS RELEASE

May 31, 2023 

Contact: publicaffairs@fws.gov  

Service Proposes to List Two South American Bird Species as Endangered 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is proposing to list both the Sira curassow and southern helmeted curassow, two bird species from South America, as endangered under the Endangered Species Act. Both species currently are classified as critically endangered on the IUCN Red List.  

The Sira curassow is endemic to central Peru, and the southern helmeted curassow is endemic to central Bolivia. Both species are large, heavy-bodied birds with bright red bills and pale blue “helmets” on their heads. Hunting, habitat loss and degradation, small population size and climate change are main factors that affect the species’ viability throughout their ranges. Climate change will result in additional loss of forested habitat for these species.   

Both curassow species are considered rare, locally uncommon, and decreasing. The Sira curassow’s population is very small (50–249 mature individuals); the southern helmeted curassow’s population is also small (1,000–4,999 individuals) and has declined by 90 percent over the past 20 years.  

In 2022, a species status assessment team prepared an SSA report for the two species. The SSA team was composed of Service biologists, in consultation with other species experts. The SSA report represents a compilation of the best scientific and commercial data available concerning the status of the species, including the impacts of past, present, and future factors (both negative and beneficial) affecting the species. Information about the status of both species populations is supplemented with anecdotal information based on interviews with local indigenous communities. 

The Service is seeking public comments on the proposal to list both species, particularly regarding:  

The species’ biology, range and population trends, including: 

Biological or ecological requirements of the species, including habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering. 

Genetics and taxonomy.  

Historical and current range, including distribution patterns and the locations of any populations of these species.  

Historical and current population levels, and current and projected trends. 

Past and ongoing conservation measures for the species, their habitats or both. 

Threats and conservation actions affecting the species, including: 

Factors that may be affecting the continued existence of the species, which may include habitat destruction, modification, or curtailment; overutilization; disease; predation; the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or other natural or manmade factors. 

Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning any threats (or lack thereof) to these species. 

Existing regulations or conservation actions that may be addressing threats to these species. 

Existing regulations whether either of these species are protected species in their range countries. 

Additional information concerning the historical and current status of these species. 

For more information and to submit comments, visit the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0053, which is the docket number for this rulemaking. 

*****

About the Ornithological Council

The Ornithological Council is a consortium of scientific societies of ornithologists. Their cumulative expertise comprises the knowledge that is fundamental and essential to science-based bird conservation and management.  The Ornithological Council is financially supported by our member societies and the individual ornithologists who value our work. If the OC’s resources are valuable to you, please consider joining one donating to the OC at Birdnet.org. Thank you for your support!

A recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Sackett v. EPA found that the Clean Water Act’s reach only extends to those wetlands with a continuous surface connection with a larger body of water, such that it is “difficult to determine where the ‘water’ ends and the ‘wetland’ begins.”

The case turns on the definition of “waters of the U.S” under the Clean Water Act. At the center of the case is property owned by Michael and Chantell Sackett near Priest Lake in Idaho. The Environmental Protection Agency, charged with administering permits issued under the Clean Water Act, argued that the property that the Sacketts wanted to develop was adjacent to the lake 300 feet away, making it subject to federal jurisdiction.

The Supreme Court disagreed, finding the wetlands’ connection to the nearby lake too tenuous to qualify as “waters of the U.S.” and therefore fall under the jurisdiction of the CWA.

Last week’s ruling was unanimous, but the justices provided different reasons for their rulings. The conservative majority ruled that the CWA did not apply to the property, since a roadway runs between the wetlands on the property and the nearby lake. The liberal justices also found that the CWA should not apply to the Sackett’s property, but noted that they felt that the majority opinion strayed too far from the text of the CWA itself. A third option, penned by Justice Kavanaugh and joined by the three liberal justices, warned that limiting the reach of the CWA to adjoining wetlands would leave many adjacent (but not adjoining) wetlands unprotected.

The interpretation of “waters of the U.S." dates back to a 1986 rule. In 2006, in Rapanos v. U.S., the Supreme Court, in a 4-1-4 ruling developed two separate tests for whether a body of water was subject to the CWA. In one, a surface water connection was required. The other, broader approach, which was more widely adopted by federal courts, required a “significant nexus” between the area in question and navigable waters.

The Obama administration in 2015 finalized a rule that attempted to more clearly defined which waters received CWA protection after the Rapanos case, and others, created uncertainty. The 2015 rule extended CWA protections for wetland habitats and other interconnected aquatic systems.

The Trump administration then developed a new rule, limiting the reach of the CWS. The 2020 rule only protected wetlands under the CWA if they had “relatively permanent” surface water connections with other nearby waterways - an interpretation that meant that about 51 percent of the nation’s wetlands lost protections under the regulation.

Recently, the Biden Administration has finalized yet another interpretation of “water of the U.S.” The 2023 rule is broader than the 2020 rule, but not as inclusive as the 2015 rule. However, it now will need to be revised to be in accordance with the recent Supreme Court decision.

The decision in Sackett throws into question the legal status and protection of as many as 90 million acres of wetlands across the U.S. Such wetlands, of course, are critical to birds during migration, as breeding sites, and as wintering sites.

About the Ornithological Council

The Ornithological Council is a consortium of scientific societies of ornithologists. Their cumulative expertise comprises the knowledge that is fundamental and essential to science-based bird conservation and management.  The Ornithological Council is financially supported by our member societies and the individual ornithologists who value our work. If the OC’s resources are valuable to you, please consider joining one donating to the OC at Birdnet.org. Thank you for your support!

The WOS is pleased to announce the latest winners of our annual publication awards, for papers and reviews published in 2022.

The Edwards Prize, awarded to the authors of the best Major Article in each volume of The Wilson Journal of Ornithology, goes to Amanda W. Van Dellen and James S. Sedinger for their paper Predation risk and settlement decisions by colonially nesting Black Brant (Branta bernicla nigricans). You can read Dr. Sedinger’s blog post about the prize-winning paper here.

The Olson Prize, awarded to the author of the best book review in each volume of The Wilson Journal of Ornithology, goes to Christopher J. Clark for his review of Hummingbirds: A Celebration of Nature’s Jewels by Glenn Bartley and Andy Swash.

The Edwards Prize-winning article and the Olson Prize-winning review are available Open Access via the links above. Plaques commemorating the awards will be presented to the winners at our annual meeting, to be held in Allentown, Pennsylvania, on June 20–23, 2023.

The Edwards Prize, first awarded by the Society in 1970, is named in memory of Ernest P. “Buck” Edwards (1919–2011), who proposed the idea of a prize for best paper and provided initial supporting funds. The Edwards Prize-winning paper is chosen by a panel comprised of the Editor-in-Chief of the WJO and the corresponding authors of the two previous award-winning papers. The Olson Prize, first awarded by the Society in 2009, is named in honor of Storrs L. Olson (1944–2021), a prolific writer of witty, erudite book reviews for the WJO and other bird journals. The Olson Prize-winning review is chosen by a panel comprised of the Book Review Editor of the WJO and the authors of the two previous award-winning reviews.

Congratulations to this year’s publication award winners!