Explore the vast range of titles available.

Owls (Strigiformes) provide myriad ecosystem services and are sentinels for ecosystem health. However, they are at continued risk from anthropogenic threats such as vehicle collisions, entanglement with human-made materials, and exposure to anticoagulant rodenticides (ARs), a widespread pesticide known to affect owls. Texas is an important region for numerous migratory and non-migratory owl species in the United States (US), yet assessments of threats owls face here are lacking preventing the development of informed conservation strategies. This study coupled assessment of admittance data from two wildlife rehabilitation centers in Texas with AR liver screening to (1) identify which species of owls are commonly admitted, (2) evaluate seasonality of admittance, and (3) assess causes of admittance for owls in Texas. Between 2010 and 2021, 1,620 owls were admitted into rehabilitation, representing eight species of which the Great-horned Owl ( Bubo virginianus ) was the most common. For all owls combined admittance rates were highest in the spring, driven by an influx of juveniles (n = 703, 43.40%). The leading cause of admittance amongst species was ‘no apparent injury’ (n = 567, 34.94%). Where clear diagnoses could be made, the leading causes of admittances were ‘entrapment in human infrastructure’ (n = 100, 6.11%) and ‘collision with vehicles’ (n = 74, 4.56%). While the admittance data did not reveal any cases of AR poisoning, liver screening demonstrated high incidences of AR exposure; of 53 owls screened for ARs, 50.94% (n = 27) tested positive with 18 showing exposure to multiple ARs. Brodifacoum was the most frequently detected AR (n = 19, 43.18%) and seven owls (25.93%) tested positive within lethal ranges. Our results suggest that owls in Texas are at risk from myriad anthropogenic threats and face high exposure rates to ARs. In doing so, our results can inform conservation strategies that mitigate anthropogenic threats faced by owls in Texas and beyond.

Graduate students emerging from STEM programs face inequitable professional landscapes in which their ability to practice inclusive and effective science communication with interdisciplinary and public audiences is essential to their success. Yet these students are rarely offered the opportunity to learn and practice inclusive science communication in their graduate programs. Moreover, minoritized students rarely have the opportunity to validate their experiences among peers and develop professional sensibilities through research training. In this article, the authors offer the Science Communication (Sci/Comm) Scholar’s working group at The University of Texas at San Antonio as one model for training graduate students in human dimensions and inclusive science communication for effective public engagement in thesis projects and beyond. The faculty facilitated peer-to-peer working group encouraged participation by women who often face inequities in STEM workplaces. Early results indicate that team-based training in both the science and art of public engagement provides critical exposure to help students understand the methodological care needed for human dimensions research, and to facilitate narrative-based citizen science engagements. The authors demonstrate this through several brief profiles of environmental science graduate students’ thesis projects. Each case emphasizes the importance of research design for public engagement via quantitative surveys and narrative-based science communication interventions. Through a faculty facilitated peer-to-peer working group framework, research design and methodological care function as an integration point for social scientific and rhetorical training for inclusive science communication with diverse audiences.

Anticoagulant rodenticides (ARs) are rodent poisons used for pest control however, exposure has been documented in non-target wildlife. ARs have been confirmed in raptors sampled from around the world, yet information in Texas is lacking. This study addressed this knowledge gap by: 1) Evaluating raptor rehabilitation admissions; 2) Sampling owl livers for ARs; and 3) Surveying resident rodent pest control behaviors, attitudes toward wildlife, and knowledge of AR risks before and after an educational-intervention tool was used to test whether these could be influenced to aid conservation. Results found that Great-horned Owls (Bubo virginianus) were the most frequently admitted species to rehabilitation centers, yet AR exposure was never reported as the cause of admission. In contrast, liver sampling suggested 60% (n=12) of Great-horned Owls and 20% (n=1) of Barred Owls (Strix varia) were positive for ARs, with 77% positive for multiple exposure (i.e., more than one AR) and 38.5% within the lethal range (>100-200 ng/g). Survey results found participants Strongly Agree (36%, n=68) or were Not Sure (33%, n=61) whether ARs pose a risk to owls. Following the intervention 40% Strongly Agreed. However, no change in behavioral intention to use poison was observed in response to the intervention despite an increase in participant knowledge of AR risks. These results can inform public pest control practices and spread public awareness that aims to minimize use of ARs and the potential for non-target exposure to at-risk species including raptors.