DOCSLIB.ORG

Migration and Wintering Ecology of the Aleutian

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Migration and Wintering Ecology of the Aleutian MIGRATION AND WINTERING ECOLOGY OF THE ALEUTIAN CANADA GOOSE by Dennis W. Woolington A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of Humboldt State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science June, 1980 MIGRATION AND WINTERING ECOLOGY OF THE ALEUTIAN CANADA GOOSE by Dennis W. Woolington Approved by the Master's Thesis Committee Paul F. Springer, Chairman Stanley W. Harks Natural Resources Graduate Program Approved by the Dean of Graduate StudiesAlba Alba M. Gillespie ABSTRACT A study to determine the migration and wintering ground distri­ bution, ecology, and population status of the endangered Aleutian Canada goose (Branta canadensis leucopareia) was conducted from October 1975 to May 1978. Field investigations extended from the western Aleutian Islands, Alaska, to the. Central Valley of California. Prior to and during the study, 536 Aleutian geese were banded to document movement and survival. It was determined that the geese use traditional migration and wintering areas away from Alaska, returning to virtually the same fields annually. During September, Aleutian Canada geese migrate along the Aleutian Island chain from Buldir Island near the western end to the easternmost island of Unimak and then apparently shift southeast on a transoceanic flight. The geese arrive in California in early October; some stop near Crescent City, but most birds continue to the Sacramento Valley where over 95 percent of the population uses a small agricultural area in the Butte Sink. From mid-November to early December the geese move southward via the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to the grass­ lands of the upper San Joaquin Valley. Most of the birds are present as a single flock near Modesto from at least late December to early February. They begin shifting southward to an area near Los Banos in mid-January, and some are present until mid-March. Aleutian geese start moving northward to the Crescent City staging grounds as early as mid- January, with most of the birds arriving during March. They peak in number there in late March and early April when nearly the entire known iv population is present. In mid-April, geese begin to leave Crescent City to the breeding grounds, and by late April or early May all have left. Although a few Aleutian Canada geese have been reported near the mouth of the Columbia River, Washington, most apparently make a transoceanic flight to the eastern Aleutians. There, they continue westward to Buldir where they have been seen as early as the first week of May. During the study, hunting and avian cholera were found to be the main sources of winter mortality. Closure on Canada goose hunting en­ acted in three areas of California at the onset of the study has reduced mortality from an estimated preclosure rate of 22.5 percent annually to approximately 11.5 percent during winters 1975-76 and 1976-77. This winter mortality may comprise the majority of the annual loss. The spring population increased 45.6 percent, from 790 in April 1975 to 1150 in March 1977. Management needs on the migration and wintering grounds include continuation of protection of the geese through hunting closures and maintenance of suitable habitat conditions on their major use areas. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study was funded by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service through a contract with Humboldt State University. Funds, equipment, and vehicles were provided by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service through the Endangered Species and Migratory Bird Programs. I would like to thank all the members of my committee for their time and assistance. Committee chairman and study supervisor Dr. Paul F. Springer of the Wildlife Research Field Station, U. S. Fish and Wild­ life Service, provided support, encouragement, and field assistance throughout both the data collection and thesis preparation phases of this study. Dr. Stanley W. Harris and Dr. John 0. Sawyer of Humboldt State University critically reviewed this thesis and suggested revisions that have been incorporated. Because of the large number of people from Alaska to California who also contributed to this study, it would be impractical to individu­ ally thank everyone involved. Personnel of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, British Columbia Fish and Wildlife Branch, and Canadian Wildlife Service as well as private individuals including naturalists, sportsmen, landowners, and university students helped conduct observations and provided other assistance. I wish to thank all of these people as a group. A special debt of gratitude is owed to biologist W. E. "Bud" Rienecker and wardens Jack Rhea and the late Leon H. Nelson of the California Department of Fish and Game and law enforcement agents Wallace B. Smith and Alva E. Weinrich of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service for vi field assistance. Employed and volunteer workers who conducted observa­ tions while I was in other areas include William E. Rodstrom, Gary Lester, Tom Greener, Ernest P. Camillari, William G. Henry, Jack T. Loris, Randy March, and Larry R. Kludt. During the study, housing was provided by the Gray Lodge, Los Banos, and Grizzly Island Wildlife Areas and the Izembek, San Luis, and Willapa National Wildlife Refuges. I wouLd like to thank the respective state and federal property managers John R. Cowan, Jerome C. Cawthorn, Clyde S. Edon, John E. Sarvis, Leon A. Littlefield, and Joseph W. Welch for this privilege and their hospitality. The late Roger Wilbur, owner of the West Butte Farms and Butte Creek Farms; Paul L. Davies, owner of the Faith Ranch; C. E. Nemethi, owner of the Nemethi Land and Cattle Company; Henry and Robert Westbrook, owners of the Reservation Ranch; and Loren C. Bliss, owner of the L. C. Bliss and Sons Livestock Company, kindly allowed access to their proper­ ties. Janice R. Chandler, secretary at the Wildlife Research Field Station, typed the thesis drafts. Finally, I would like to thank G. Vernon Byrd for first intro­ ducing me to the world of the Aleutian Canada goose. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS LIST OF TABLES xi LIST OF FIGURES xiv INTRODUCTION 1 Overview 1 Historical Perspective 2 STUDY AREA 9 Description 9 General Study Area 9 Localized Study Areas in California 11 Crescent City 11 Butte Sink 15 Grizzly Island 17 Faith Ranch and Los Banos 19 Weather 21 METHODS 23 RESULTS 27 Distribution 27 Fall Migration 27 Aleutian Islands-Alaska Peninsula 27 Northwest Coast 29 Northern California 29 viii TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page Wintering Grounds 33 Sacramento Valley 33 Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and Grizzly Island . 37 San Joaquin Valley 39 Other use areas 43 Spring Migration 46 Departure from the Central Valley 46 Occurrence in Humboldt County 47 Crescent City stating grounds 47 North of California 54 Ecology on Main Use Areas 56 Butte Sink 56 Localized use patterns 56 Food items 58 Relation to other wildlife 58 Relation to human activity 59 Grizzly Island 61 Localized use patterns 61 Food items 61 Relation to other wildlife 63 Relation to human activity 63 Faith Ranch 64 Localized use patterns 64 Food items 64 Relation to other wildlife 67 Relation to human activity 67 ix TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page Los Banos 68 Localized use patterns 68 Food items 68 Relation to other wildlife 72 Relation to human activity 72 Crescent City 73 Localized use patterns 73 Food items 77 Relation to other wildlife 77 Relation to human activity 78 Population 79 Documented Mortality 79 Hunting loss 82 Disease 82 Trapping mortality 85 Unknown causes 85 Known Survival 86 Population Levels 88 Fall 1975 88 Spring 1976 89 Fall 1976 91 Spring 1977 91 DISCUSSION 94 Distribution 94 Fall Migration 94 Wintering Areas 97 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page Spring Migration 102 Ecology on Main Use Areas 106 Localized Use Patterns 106 Food Items 107 Relation to Other Wildlife 107 Relation to Human Activity 108 Population 109 Mortality Factors 109 Mortality Rates and Survival 111 Population Levels 117 Pre-Hunting Closure Population Level 118 Population Increases 118 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 120 REFERENCES CITED 124 APPENDICES A. Common and Scientific Names of Avian Species from American Ornithologists' Union (1957) and Bellrose (1978) 131 B. Common and Scientific Names of Plant Species from Munz (1959), Mason (1957), and Usher (1974) 132 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Vegetation Types and Dominant Plants at Point Saint George, Reservation Ranch, and McNamara Field 14 2 Monthly Precipitation at Sacramento Weather Station, Winters 1975-76 and 1976-77 22 3 Observations of Migrating Aleutian Canada Geese in the Aleutian Islands, Falls 1976 through 1978 28 4 Unsuccessful Surveys for Aleutian Canada Geese, Falls 1975 and 1976 30 5 Numbers and Time of Occurrence of Aleutian Canada Geese Present at Crescent City, Falls 1975 and 1976 32 6 Occurrence and Flock Size of Aleutian Canada Geese in the Butte Sink, Fall 1976 34 7 Records of Aleutian Canada Geese in the Sacramento Valley, Winters 1975-76 and 1976-77 36 8 Aleutian Canada Geese Observed at Grizzly Island Wildlife Area, Winters 1975-76 and 1976-77 38 9 Daily Counts of Aleutian Canada Geese on the Faith Ranch, 25 December 1976 to 7 March 1977 40 10 Daily Counts of Aleutian Canada Geese on the Nemethi Ranch and Adjacent Areas, 17 January to 13 March 1977 42 11 Records of Aleutian Canada Geese in the San Joaquin Valley, Winters 1975-76 and 1976-77 44 12 Records of Verified and Probable Aleutian Canada Geese along Coastal Humboldt County, February and March 1977 and 1978 48 13 Daily Counts of Aleutian Canada Geese Observed at Crescent City, Spring 1976 49 xii LIST OF TABLES (continued) Table Page 14 Daily Counts of Aleutian Canada Geese Observed at Crescent City, Spring 1977 50 15 Number of Marked Individuals Identified during Observations of Aleutian Canada Geese at Crescent City, Springs 1976 and 1977 53 16 Observations of Migrating Aleutian Canada Geese in the Aleutian Islands, Springs 1975 through 1978 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Environmental Sensitivity Index Guidelines Version 2.0
    NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS ORCA 115 Environmental Sensitivity Index Guidelines Version 2.0 October 1997 Seattle, Washington noaa NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION National Ocean Service Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment National Ocean Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U.S. Department of Commerce The Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment (ORCA) provides decisionmakers comprehensive, scientific information on characteristics of the oceans, coastal areas, and estuaries of the United States of America. The information ranges from strategic, national assessments of coastal and estuarine environmental quality to real-time information for navigation or hazardous materials spill response. Through its National Status and Trends (NS&T) Program, ORCA uses uniform techniques to monitor toxic chemical contamination of bottom-feeding fish, mussels and oysters, and sediments at about 300 locations throughout the United States. A related NS&T Program of directed research examines the relationships between contaminant exposure and indicators of biological responses in fish and shellfish. Through the Hazardous Materials Response and Assessment Division (HAZMAT) Scientific Support Coordination program, ORCA provides critical scientific support for planning and responding to spills of oil or hazardous materials into coastal environments. Technical guidance includes spill trajectory predictions, chemical hazard analyses, and assessments of the sensitivity of marine and estuarine environments to spills. To fulfill the responsibilities of the Secretary of Commerce as a trustee for living marine resources, HAZMAT’s Coastal Resource Coordination program provides technical support to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency during all phases of the remedial process to protect the environment and restore natural resources at hundreds of waste sites each year.
    [Show full text]
  • THE ALEUTIAN CACKLING GOOSE in ARIZONA DAVID VANDER PLUYM, 2841 Mcculloch Blvd
    THE ALEUTIAN CACKLING GOOSE IN ARIZONA DAVID VANDER PLUYM, 2841 McCulloch Blvd. N #1, Lake Havasu City, Arizona, 86403; [email protected] ABSTRACT: There is little published information about the occurrence of the Aleutian Cackling Goose (Branta hutchinsii leucopareia) in Arizona. Formerly listed as endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, this subspecies has rebounded, leading to an increase in numbers occurring outside its core range, including Arizona. Since the first in 1975, at least 24 well-founded records for Arizona have accumulated, one supported by a specimen, two by band recoveries, and 20 by diagnostic photo- graphs. Since 2013 the Aleutian Cackling Goose has occurred in Arizona annually between November and February. It is most frequent along the Colorado River, but records extend as far east as Willcox, Cochise County. The taxonomy of the “white-cheeked” geese is complex and debated. Currently, most treatments list 11 or 12 taxa in this group, and Banks et al. (2004) split them into two species: the Cackling Goose (Branta hutchinsii) and the Canada Goose (B. canadensis). Taxonomists generally recognize four extant subspecies of the Cackling Goose: hutchinsii, taverneri, minima, and leucopareia (Aleutian Cackling Goose). The now extinct population formerly breeding in the Commander and Kuril islands in Russia and wintering south to Japan has been considered a separate subspecies, asiatica (Banks et al. 2004), or a western population of leucopareia (e.g., Baldassarre 2014, Reeber 2015). Birds discovered breeding on the Semidi Islands in 1979 and wintering in coastal Oregon are phenotypically interme- diate between other populations of leucopareia and taverneri (Hatch and Hatch 1983) and do differ genetically from other populations of leucopareia, but they likely represent distinct populations of leucopareia rather than a valid separate taxon (Pierson et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Cackling Geese in the East
    Cackling Geese in the East Since 2004, when Cackling Geese were formally split from Canada Geese, birders have been keeping an eye out for small-bodied and short-billed geese, termed Cackling Geese, mixed in with “typical” large-bodied, wedge-headed Canada Geese. This ID challenge is very much like a birders version of “Where’s Waldo?”An excellent overview of this split was provided by OMNR waterfowl expert, Ken Abraham, in the winter of 2005. Here’s the link: http://www.ofo.ca/site/page/view/articles.cacklinggoose. I will attempt to make this discussion as clear, digestible, and casual as possible, but if anything is unclear, please email me at [email protected] and I would be happy to go over material. Below I provide an identification overview of “Richardson’s” (hutchinsii) Cackling Geese, Myth Busting, and Quiz photos. ______________________________________________________________________________ “Richardson’s” (hutchinsii) Cackling Geese Figure 1: Ontario’s Cackling Geese: an example of five “classic” hutchinsii Cackling Geese. Note the diminutive size overall; steep forehead; proportionally small head with “blocky” shape in most postures; peaked rear to crown; relatively thick and short bill (variable and may sometimes show a pronounced droop nearest the tip; lending to a Roman’s Nose look); show short and stubby neck (esp. in relaxed posture); small, compact body; pale emarginations often seen but not always; breast averages paler than Canada Geese but this is not the case on some birds, esp. juveniles. Andrew Haydon Park — 1 October 2013. Figure 2: More prototypical hutchinsii Cackling Geese, with three interior Canada Geese at back.
    [Show full text]
  • Duck, Duck, Goose
    MAY /JUNE PHOTO QUIZ ANSWERS Duck, Duck, Goose aterfowl are among the most readily observed fam - Wilies of birds, admired by birders and non-birders alike. They are often easily identified, al - though similar species certainly present identification challenges. Most species of waterfowl can be identified by shape, size, and over - all color pattern alone. Structural characteristics hardly ever fail, and you can avoid deciphering the complicated molts and plumages of ducks, including the dreaded identification of ducks in eclipse plumage. There are times when an understanding of molt or knowl - edge of a unique plumage detail Quiz Photo A—early January . will allow you to determine the age and sex of a challenging duck at hand, but such little? Do we have anything to compare it to, so as details often are not necessary to name an individ - to judge relative size? There are several birds in ual to species. For practice, we’ll go a step beyond the background, and they are of similar shape. species identification in this quiz with brief dis - From what’s visible in the photo, they all look cussions on aging, sexing, and sub - roughly the same, so comparing our quiz bird Jessie H. Barry species. with others is not particularly helpful this time, The title already gave away that we are but it is often a great place to start. 218 Sapsucker Woods Road dealing with ducks and geese here. Ducks come in an array of shapes and sizes, as Ithaca, New York 14850 These birds are known for swimming, different species are specially adapted to utilize [email protected] for visually striking diurnal migrations, various aqueous habitats, where they feed on a and for their quacks and honks.
    [Show full text]
  • Ducks, Geese, and Swans of the World by Paul A
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Ducks, Geese, and Swans of the World by Paul A. Johnsgard Papers in the Biological Sciences 2010 Ducks, Geese, and Swans of the World: Tribe Anserini (Swans and True Geese) Paul A. Johnsgard University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/biosciducksgeeseswans Part of the Ornithology Commons Johnsgard, Paul A., "Ducks, Geese, and Swans of the World: Tribe Anserini (Swans and True Geese)" (2010). Ducks, Geese, and Swans of the World by Paul A. Johnsgard. 5. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/biosciducksgeeseswans/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Papers in the Biological Sciences at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Ducks, Geese, and Swans of the World by Paul A. Johnsgard by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Tribe Anserini (Swans and True Geese) MAP 10. Breeding (hatching) and wintering (stippling) distributions of the mute swan, excluding introduced populations. Drawing on preceding page: Trumpeter Swan brownish feathers which diminish with age (except MuteSwan in the Polish swan, which has a white juvenile Cygnus alar (Cmelin) 1789 plumage), and the knob over the bill remains small through the second year of life. Other vernacular names. White swan, Polish swan; In the field, mute swans may be readily iden­ Hockerschwan (German); cygne muet (French); tified by their knobbed bill; their heavy neck, usu­ cisne mudo (Spanish). ally held in graceful curve; and their trait of swim­ ming with the inner wing feathers raised, especially Subspecies and range.
    [Show full text]
  • Waterfowl in Iowa, Overview
    STATE OF IOWA 1977 WATERFOWL IN IOWA By JACK W MUSGROVE Director DIVISION OF MUSEUM AND ARCHIVES STATE HISTORICAL DEPARTMENT and MARY R MUSGROVE Illustrated by MAYNARD F REECE Printed for STATE CONSERVATION COMMISSION DES MOINES, IOWA Copyright 1943 Copyright 1947 Copyright 1953 Copyright 1961 Copyright 1977 Published by the STATE OF IOWA Des Moines Fifth Edition FOREWORD Since the origin of man the migratory flight of waterfowl has fired his imagination. Undoubtedly the hungry caveman, as he watched wave after wave of ducks and geese pass overhead, felt a thrill, and his dull brain questioned, “Whither and why?” The same age - old attraction each spring and fall turns thousands of faces skyward when flocks of Canada geese fly over. In historic times Iowa was the nesting ground of countless flocks of ducks, geese, and swans. Much of the marshland that was their home has been tiled and has disappeared under the corn planter. However, this state is still the summer home of many species, and restoration of various areas is annually increasing the number. Iowa is more important as a cafeteria for the ducks on their semiannual flights than as a nesting ground, and multitudes of them stop in this state to feed and grow fat on waste grain. The interest in waterfowl may be observed each spring during the blue and snow goose flight along the Missouri River, where thousands of spectators gather to watch the flight. There are many bird study clubs in the state with large memberships, as well as hundreds of unaffiliated ornithologists who spend much of their leisure time observing birds.
    [Show full text]
  • Predator-Prey Interactions Between Eagles and Cackling Canada and Ross' Geese During Winter in California
    Wilson Bull., 106(2), 1994, pp. 272-288 PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTIONS BETWEEN EAGLES AND CACKLING CANADA AND ROSS ’ GEESE DURING WINTER IN CALIFORNIA SCOTT R. MCWILLIAMS,’ JON P. DUNN,* AND DENNIS G. RAVELING’.~ ABSTRACT.-Cackling Geese (Brunta canadensis minima) were preyed on heavily in northeastern California by Golden Eagles (Aquila chysaetos) and less commonly by Bald Eagles (Haliaeetus Zeucocephalus) in 19851990. Eagle predation on Cackling Geese was minimal in other wintering locations in California. In the Klamath Basin, eagles killed Cackling Geese most frequently soon (<IO days) after the geese arrived in the fall. Eagles killed fewer Cackling Geese in the Klamath Basin when Cackling Geese were less common than Ross ’ Geese (Chen rossii) and Lesser Snow Geese (C. caerulescens caerulescens). We also examined spatial and temporal (daily, seasonal, and annual) variation in eagle predation on geese at a smaller scale in Big Valley, California. Most eagle-caused flushes of geese occurred during mid-day when the geese were using traditional day-roost sites. Roosting on water with most other Cackling and Ross ’ Geese in Big Valley reduced the frequency of eagle attacks relative to other sites. In Big Valley, the larger Great Basin Canada Goose (Brunta canadensis mojfitti) was attacked by Golden Eagles only once during 88 observation days, while the smaller Cackling and Ross ’ geese were attacked by Golden Eagles a total of 27 times. Moreover, Cackling Geese in Big Valley were attacked and killed at least twice as often as Ross ’ Geese because Cackling Geese often grazed in pasture where Golden Eagle attacks were more frequent. When feeding on pasture, geese did not increase time spent vigilant or flock size compared to habitats with less eagle predation.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Population and Harvest Trends in the United States a Technical Document Supporting the Forest Service 2010 RPA Assessment
    Wildlife Population and Harvest Trends in the United States A Technical Document Supporting the Forest Service 2010 RPA Assessment Curtis H. Flather, Michael S. Knowles, Martin F. Jones, and Carol Schilli Flather, Curtis H.; Knowles, Michael S.; Jones, Martin F.; Schilli, Carol. 2013. Wildlife popu- lation and harvest trends in the United States: A technical document supporting the Forest Service 2010 RPA Assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-296. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 94 p. Abstract: The Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act (RPA) of 1974 requires periodic assessments of the condition and trends of the nation’s renewable natural resources. Data from many sources were used to document recent historical trends in big game, small game, migratory game birds, furbearers, nongame, and imperiled species. Big game and waterfowl have generally increased in population and harvest trends. Many small upland and webless migratory game bird species have declined notably in population or harvest. Considerable declines in fur harvest since the 2000 RPA Assessment have occurred. Among the 426 breeding bird species with sufficient data to estimate nationwide trends, 45 percent had stable abundance since the mid-1960s; however, more species declined (31 percent) than increased (24 percent). A total of 1,368 bird species were formally listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act—a net gain of 278 species since the 2000 RPA Assessment. Most forest bird communities are expected to support a lower variety of species. America’s wildlife resources will continue to be pressured by diverse demands for ecosystem services from humans.
    [Show full text]
  • Greater White-Fronted Goose Snow Goose Ross's Goose Brant
    May Species Count 1992 1994 1997 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Greater White-fronted Goose Snow Goose Ross's Goose Brant Cackling Goose Canada Goose 322 251 466 706 87 398 478 1246 907 599 Goose Species Trumpeter Swan 7 1 Tundra Swan 20 Swan species Wood Duck 2 Gadwall 25 18 49 51 19 28 222 240 132 152 Eurasian Wigeon American Wigeon 6 1 2 30 9 13 84 68 30 33 American Black Duck Mallard 135 178 251 576 90 235 434 789 341 446 Blue-winged Teal 233 54 65 129 44 96 444 211 199 240 Cinnamon Teal 27 1 6 26 7 4 9 20 4 16 Northern Shoveler 39 33 44 111 38 82 95 224 87 273 Northern Pintail 26 5 12 27 17 26 42 25 40 Green-winged Teal 8 18 15 30 56 25 37 52 34 43 Canvasback 54 15 20 28 5 43 34 33 32 69 Redhead 121 52 39 67 11 105 68 180 85 160 Ring-necked Duck 24 18 32 24 4 20 8 18 37 89 Greater Scaup 1 Lesser Scaup 157 229 194 126 14 124 128 342 188 296 Harlequin Duck Surf Scoter White-winged Scoter 2 40 32 7 3 Black Scoter Long-tailed Duck Bufflehead 66 51 66 104 24 60 81 146 88 159 Common Goldeneye 80 14 20 31 19 38 57 56 91 80 Barrow's Goldeneye 48 48 10 8 Goldeneye Species Hooded Merganser 1 10 Common Merganser 7 14 7 6 9 2 5 5 15 Red-breasted Merganser Ruddy Duck 66 77 119 167 15 146 79 132 79 202 Duck species Gray Partridge 4 2 5 6 11 Ring-necked Pheasant 1 5 4 1 Ruffed Grouse 2 6 2 1 13 1 4 9 3 1992 1994 1997 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Greater Sage-Grouse Spruce Grouse Willow Ptarmigan White-tailed Ptarmigan Dusky Grouse Sharp-tailed Grouse 2 Wild Turkey Red-throated Loon Pacific Loon Common Loon 17 43 16 5 1 18 2 4 8 4 Yellow-billed
    [Show full text]
  • Finding Cackling and Canada Geese in the Central Valley
    Finding Cackling and Canada Geese in the Central Valley Bruce Deuel, 18730 Live Oak Road, Red Bluff, CA 96080 By now we've all had a winter to sort out what the American Ornitholo• gists' Union (AOU) Committee on Classification and Nomenclature has done to the Canada Goose (Branta canadensis), but I suspect there are still many birders who would like some clarification. Genetic studies have shown that the Canada Goose complex splits rather neatly into a group of seven large-bodied, more southerly nesting forms still known as Canada Geese, and a group of five (one extinct) small-bodied, more northerly nesting forms now known as Cackling Geese (Branta hutchinsii). In most of California, and especially in the Central Valley, one would be hard put to find more than two ofthe Canada Goose forms. The Great Basin Canada Goose (B. c. moffitti, a.k.a. Western Canada Goose, a.k.a. Common Canada Goose, a.k.a. "honker") is the ubiquitous large, pale-breasted bird which formerly nested in northeastern California but now - thanks to a combination of deliberate introductions, escapes from captive waterfowl breeders, and some natural range expansion - is a common sight all year long throughout the Central Valley. The other form of Canada Goose we have is usually known as the Lesser (B.c. parvipes). Formerly a common member of the wintering goose flocks in the Central Valley, all but a few hundred ofthese birds now winter in Oregon and Washington. The Lesser Canada Goose is only about half the size of moffitti, but very similar in appearance.
    [Show full text]
  • Geeseswansrefs V1.1.Pdf
    Introduction I have endeavoured to keep typos, errors, omissions etc in this list to a minimum, however when you find more I would be grateful if you could mail the details during 2018 & 2019 to: [email protected]. Please note that this and other Reference Lists I have compiled are not exhaustive and are best employed in conjunction with other sources. Grateful thanks to Alyn Walsh for the cover images. All images © the photographer. Joe Hobbs Index The general order of species follows the International Ornithologists' Union World Bird List (Gill, F. & Donsker, D. (eds). 2018. IOC World Bird List. Available from: http://www.worldbirdnames.org/ [version 8.1 accessed January 2018]). The list does not include any of the following genera: Plectropterus, Cyanochen, Alopochen, Neochen and Chloephaga. Version Version 1.1 (May 2018). Cover Main image: Greenland White-fronted Goose. Hvanneyri, near Borgarnes, Iceland. 17th April 2012. Picture by Alyn Walsh. Vignette: Whooper Swan. Southern Lowlands near Selfoss, Iceland. 28th April 2012. Picture by Alyn Walsh. Species Page No. Bar-headed Goose [Anser indicus] 12 Barnacle Goose [Branta leucopsis] 11 Bean Geese [Anser fabalis / serrirostris] 7 Black-necked Swan [Cygnus melancoryphus] 22 Black Swan [Cygnus atratus] 21 Brent Goose [Branta bernicla] 6 Cackling Goose [Branta hutchinsii] 9 Canada Goose [Branta canadensis] 9 Cape Barren Goose [Cereopsis novaehollandiae] 5 Coscoroba Swan [Coscoroba coscoroba] 21 Emperor Goose [Anser canagica] 12 Greylag Goose [Anser anser] 15 Hawaiian Goose [Branta
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Assessment for the Dusky Canada Goose (Branta Canadensis Occidentalis Baird)
    Conservation Assessment for the Dusky Canada Goose (Branta canadensis occidentalis Baird) Robert G. Bromley and Thomas C. Rothe United States Forest Pacific Northwest General Technical Report Department of Service Research Station PNW-GTR-591 Agriculture December 2003 Authors Robert G. Bromley is a wildlife biologist and president of Whole Arctic Consulting, P.O. Box 1177, Yellowknife, NT, Canada X1A 2N8; Thomas C. Rothe is Waterfowl Coordinator for the Alaska De- partment of Fish and Game, Division of Wildlife Conservation, 525 West 67th Avenue, Anchorage, AK, USA 99518. This report was prepared as a synthesis of biological information to assist agencies responsible for the management of dusky Canada geese and their habitats. Under a 1998 Memorandum of Understanding, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service have agreed to cooperate to provide for the protection, management, and maintenance of the dusky Canada goose population. Conservation Assessment for the Dusky Canada Goose (Branta canadensis occidentalis Baird) Robert G. Bromley and Thomas C. Rothe U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station Portland, Oregon General Technical Report PNW-GTR-591 December 2003 Published in cooperation with: Pacific Flyway Council U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service Abstract Bromley, Robert G.; Rothe, Thomas C. 2003. Conservation assessment for the dusky Canada goose (Branta canadensis occidentalis Baird). Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-591. Portland, OR: U.S.
    [Show full text]