DOCSLIB.ORG

Impact of Interspecific Aggression and Herbivory by Mute Swans on Native

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Impact of Interspecific Aggression and Herbivory by Mute Swans on Native 744 ShortCommunications andCommentaries [Auk,Vol. 111 ervation of avian blood and tissue samplesfor predominantlymonogamous bird: Genetic evi- DNA analysis.Can. J. Zool. 69:82-90. dence. Anim. Behav. 35:877-886. SHERMAN,P. W. ANDM. L. MORTON.1988. Extra-pair WESTNEAT,D.F. 1990. Geneticparentage in the In- fertilizationsin mountain White-crownedSpar- digo Bunting: A study using DNA fingerprint- rows. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 22:413-420 ing. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 27:67-76. SH•N, H.-S., T. A. BARGIELLO,B. T. C•a•ac, F. R. JACKSON, WESTNEAT,D. F., P. W. SH•RMAN, AND M. L. MORTON. AND M. W. YOUNG. 1985. An unusual coding 1990. The ecology and evolution of extra-pair sequencefrom a Drosophilaclock gene is con- copulations in birds. Curt. Ornithol. 7:331-369. served in vertebrates. Nature 317:445-448. WETTON, J. H., R. E. CARTER,D. T. PARICIN,AND D. SMITH, H. G., R. MONTGOMERIE,T. POLDMAA, B. N. WALTERS.1987. Demographicstudy of a wild WHITE,AND P. T. BOAG. 1991. DNA fingerprint- HouseSparrow population by DNA fingerprint- ing reveals relation between tail ornaments and ing. Nature 327:147-149. cuckoldry in Barn Swallows, Hirundorustica. Be- hav. Ecol. 2:90-98. Received30 June1993, accepted 17 November1993. WESTNEAT,D. F. 1987. Extra-pair fertilizations in a The Auk 111(3):744-748, 1994 Impact of InterspecificAggression and Herbivory by Mute Swanson Native Waterfowl and Aquatic Vegetation in New England MICHAEL R. CONOVER • AND GARY S. KANIA 2 •BerrymanInstitute and Department of Fisheriesand Wildlife, Utah State University, Logan,Utah 84322, USA; and 2Depart:aentof WildlifeManagement, National Rifle Association, 11250 Waples Mills Rd., Fairfax,Virginia 22030, USA One of the greatestthreats to American avifauna is whether theseconcerns are real or whether swanpop- the establishmentof free-rangingexotic avian pop- ulationsshould be controlled.At present,Mute Swans ulations (Temple 1992). Despite evidenceof substan- are protectedin some statesand unprotectedin oth- tial harm causedby exotic birds, most exotic species ers;in still others,government employees attempt to are so poorly studiedthat many of their alleged en- control swan populationsby shaking eggs and re- vironmental impacts remain largely undocumented moving adults (Allin et al. 1987). In this study, we (Temple 1992). One such exotic speciesis the Mute examined interspecificaggression by free-ranging Swan (Cygnusolor), a Eurasianspecies that has been adult Mute Swanswith breeding territories in fresh- introduced severaltimes into North America, begin- water ponds and the impact of their herbivory on ning in the late 1800s(Allin et al. 1987).By the 1970s, aquatic vegetation. free-ranging populations existed in Michigan, Min- Methods.--Territorial pairs of free-ranging Mute nesota,Wisconsin, Wyoming, British Columbia, On- Swanswere observedat 15 freshwaterponds (2 to 30 tario, and in Atlantic coastalstates from Maryland to ha) in New Haven County,Connecticut from 1982to Massachusetts(Allin 1981). In the Atlantic Flyway, 1987.These ponds represented all freshwatersites in free-rangingpopulations increased from 200 birds in the study area known to have nestingpairs of free- 1955 to 5,300 in 1987 (Allin et al. 1987). ranging Mute Swans in 1982. Observationswere lim- Some biologistsare concernedthat the increasing ited to freshwater sites because these were the main populationof free-rangingMute Swansmay havean areas where Mute Swans came into contact with na- adverse impact on native waterfowl, owing to the tive waterfowl. swan'saggressive nature (Reese1975, Williams 1989). Data on the impactof interspecificaggression were Swanssometimes attack other waterfowl, causingin- collectedon both membersof a swan pair simulta- jury or death (Stone and Marsters1970, Willey and neously;data for males and femaleswere analyzed Halla 1972,Allin et al. 1987).Furthermore, aggressive separately.Sex of pair memberswas determinedby swansmay displaceother waterfowl (Willey and Hal- the larger body size and larger fleshy knob on the la 1972). An additional concern is that the foraging forehead of males (Bellrose 1980). Pairs were observed behavior of swansmay adverselyaffect aquaticplant year-round for 30-rain periods, randomly selected biomass,reducing the food available for other wa- amongdaylight hours.Observations were madefrom terfowl. Currently, data are insufficient to judge shore,usually from a car to minimizedisturbance of July 1994] ShortCommunications and Commentaries 745 the birds.During an observationperiod, we notedall T^BLE1. Number of aggressiveinteractions per hour aggressivebehaviors by swans,the other speciesin- (œñ St) initiatedby free-rangingmale (n = 15)and volved, and the outcomes.Agonistic behaviors by female (n = 15) Mute Swans against swans and swansincluded threats (raising wings above back), other waterfowl at 15 freshwater sites in Connect- icut. chases,and physical attacks. All sites were searched weekly from a boat or shorefor nestingwaterfowl. Samplesizes for all statisticaltests were the number Speciesbeing attacked Male Female pa of subjectsunder observation.Paired t-testswere used to ascertainif there were sexualdifferences in ag- Mute Swan 0.62 ñ 0.21 0.31 ñ 0.11 0.03 gressivebehavior. To test whether seasonalvariation Mallard 0.10 ñ 0.03 0.07 ñ 0.01 0.07 occurredin swanaggressiveness, data on eachswan's American Black Duck 0.03 ñ 0.01 0.01 ñ 0.001 0.10 behaviorduring March to May, Juneto August,and Canada Goose 0.38 ñ 0.29 0.01 ñ 0.01 0.11 Septemberto Februarywere analyzedusing a two- Human 0.25 ñ 0.07 0.16 ñ 0.06 0.08 wayANOVA (seasonsvs. subjects). Linear regressions Total interspecific were usedto compareinterspecific aggression rates aggression 0.80 ñ 0.30 0.31 ñ 0.09 0.04 of individual swansto their intraspecificaggression Paired one-tailed t-test comparingmales and female swans. rates. To determinewhether waterfowlwere avoiding areas near swans, we prepared a map of each site site was consideredas being composedof five sec- noting water depths.At the beginning of eachob- tions. Eachtime a site was sampled,all of the above- servation period, we noted a swan's location and ran- groundvegetation was harvestedwithin a 0.33 x 0.33 domlyselected from the mapanother point of similar m sampling frame placed within each section. Sub- depth.At 5-rainintervals, we thenvisually estimated sequent sampling was taken elsewhere in each sec- the distancefrom the nearestindividual of everywa- tion so that no area was harvested more than once. terfowl speciespresent to both the swan and the ran- Samplingwas conductedin late May or early June domlyselected point. For eachindividual swan,these when the exclosureswere established(year 1, spring), datafrom all observationperiods were then combined three months later (year 1, fall), and 15 months later to yield a single mean distancevalue between it and (year 2, fall). Vegetationwas segregatedby species, each waterfowl species.A similar mean value was driedfor morethan 24 h at 110øC,and weighed.Paired obtainedfor the pairedrandom points. Hence, sample t-testswere usedto comparethe biomassof grazed sizes consisted of the number of individual swans and ungrazedsites. One grazedand one ungrazed under study. A paired t-test was then used to test samplewere obtainedfrom eachpond with eachsam- whethermean distances between a waterfowlspecies ple consistingof 10 sampleframes collected from the and a swan differed from the distance between that samepond (five sampleframes per exclosurex two speciesand a random point. exclosuresper pond). Hence, for thesestatistical tests, The experimenton the impactof swanherbivory the samplesize equalled the number of ponds under was conductedat 12 of the freshwaterponds used in study. the other part of this study.Exclosures were erected Results.--During405.0 h of observationon 15 males in late May or early June at two ponds in 1983, six and 398.5h on 15females, we observed870 aggressive ponds in 1984, two in 1985, one in 1986, and one in interactionsby free-ranging Mute Swans;410 were 1987.At each pond, we locatedtwo sites (3 x 3 m directedagainst other swansand 460 againstother each)between 20 and 50 m apart that were similar in species.Swans were aggressivetowards humans 174 water depth (between0.5 and 1.0 m) and appeared times (usuallyinvolving a threat displaydirected at to have similar vegetation. One of these sites was peopletrying to feed them). They were alsoaggres- randomly selectedto serve as an open site where sive towardsGreat Blue Herons (Ardeaherodias) three swanscould graze (hereafterreferred to as grazed times, gulls (Larusspp.) three times, scaups(Aythya site)and markedwith a woodenpost. The other site spp.) twice, Gadwalls (Anasstrepera) once, domestic served as the ungrazed site and a 3 x 3 m swan ducksseven times, and domesticgeese 21 times.On exclosure was centered on it. The exclosure was built all other occasions,interspecific aggressive behavior by attaching a 0.3 to 0.5 m wide chicken-wire fence was directedat Mallards (Anasplatyrhynchos), Amer- to eight posts.The fence was built so that its bottom icanBlack Ducks (A. rubripes),and CanadaGeese (Branta edge was level with the water surfaceso that it would canadensis;Table 1). excludeswans but not other aquaticherbivores such There were no significantdifferences among years as fish, turtles,diving ducks,and muskrats.Another in the aggressivebehavior of swans.Hence, data were pair of grazedand exclosuresites was set up on the summarizedfor eachindividual subjectacross years oppositeside of the pond. Data from thesetwo pairs
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Captive Wild Animal Farm License Application
    Mail to: Department of Natural Resources Captive Wild Animal Farm Captive Wildlife - CS/1 License Application PO Box 7924 Madison, WI 53707-7924 dnr.wi.gov Consult the attached instructions before completing Notice: Pursuant to ch. 169, Wis. Stats., and ch. NR 16, Wis. Adm. Code, Fees: completion of this form is required to apply for a captive wild animal farm license. Class A Captive Wild Animal Farm Operation of a captive wild animal farm without a license may result in forfeitures (Annual sales of $10,000 or more) of up to $500 in addition to suspension of eligibility for future licenses. A social $200 Initial license $100 Annual renewal security number or federal employer identification number is REQUIRED when applying for licenses according to ss. 169.34 and 169.35, Wis. Stats., but it may Class B Captive Wild Animal Farm not be disclosed by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to anyone (Annual sales less than $10,000) except the Departments of Children and Families, Workforce Development or the $50 Initial license $ 25 Annual renewal Department of Revenue. Personal information collected may be used for participation in surveys, eligibility for approvals, law enforcement and other $ 0 Sport Club or 4-H member under age 14. secondary purposes and may be provided to requesters to the extent required by Attach proof of current membership Wisconsin's Open Records laws (ss. 19.31-19.39, Wis. Stats.). + $20 Late fee if application filed after license expiration date. A. Applicant Information Last Name First MI DNR Customer ID Current License # (if renewal) Address Date of Birth (mm/dd/yyyy) SSN OR FEIN City State ZIP Code Daytime Phone (incl.
    [Show full text]
  • Free Download! the Trumpeter Swan
    G3647 The Trumpeter Swan by Sumner Matteson, Scott Craven and Donna Compton Snow-white Trumpeter Swans present a truly spectac- Swans of the Midwest ular sight. With a wingspan of more than 7 feet and a rumpeter Swans, along with ducks and geese, belong height of about 4 feet, the Trumpeter Swan (Cygnus buc- to the avian Order Anseriformes, Family Anatidae. cinator) ranks as the largest native waterfowl species in T Trumpeters have broad, flat bills with fine tooth-like North America. serrations along the edges which allow them to strain Because the Trumpeter Swan disappeared as a breed- aquatic plants and water. The birds’ long necks and ing bird in the Midwest, several states have launched strong feet allow them to uproot plants in water up to 4 restoration programs to reintroduce it to the region. This feet deep. publication will provide you with background informa- Most Trumpeter Swans weigh 21–30 pounds, tion on the Trumpeter Swan’s status and life history, and although some males exceed the average weight. The on restoration efforts being conducted in the upper male is called a cob; the female is called a pen; and a swan Midwest. in its first year is called a cygnet or juve- nile. The Trumpeter is often con- fused with the far more common Tundra Swan (formerly Whistling Swan, Cygnus columbianus), the only other native swan found routinely in North America. Tundra Swans can be seen in the upper Trumpeter Swan Midwest only during spring and fall migration. You can distinguish between the two native species most accurately by listening to their calls.
    [Show full text]
  • Mute Swans Make Noise: Lower Great Lakes Population Scrutinized
    Mute Swans Make Noise: Lower Great Lakes Population Scrutinized Scott A. Petrie* Introduction and 10 to15 percent per year. At this growth Population Status rate, the southern Ontario population Mute Swans (Cygnus olor), endemic to will double every seven to eight years. Eurasia, were introduced to North Also, given that the lower Great Lakes American city parks, zoos, avicultural includes about 116,000 acres of coastal collections, and estates in the late 1800s wetland habitat, the population could and early 1900s. The intentional releas- potentially reach 30,000 swans. If Mute es and accidental escape of these birds Swans populations increase to the point and their progeny resulted in a rapidly that they begin nesting on inland wet- expanding free-flying feral population lands and man-made waterbodies, as along the northeastern Atlantic Coast of they have in Poland and along the the United States, portions of the Pacific Atlantic Coast of the United States, we Coast, and more recently, much of the could expect that the southern Ontario southern half of the Great Lakes basin. population could even surpass 30,000 It is well known that exotic waterfowl birds. can have negative ecological impacts on The rapid growth rate of southern native species, particularly if the intro- Ontario’s feral Mute Swans can probably duced species is aggressive, competes be attributed to a number of factors. with other waterfowl for food or habi- The lower Great Lakes is climatically tat, and/or hybridizes with native similar to the native Eurasian range of species. Although hybridization is not Mute Swans.
    [Show full text]
  • Mute Swan (Cygnus Olor) ERSS
    Mute Swan (Cygnus olor) Ecological Risk Screening Summary U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, February 2011 Revised, November 2018, March 2019 Web Version, 8/16/2019 Photo: Nolasco Diaz. Licensed under CC BY-SA. Available: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cisne_por_la_noche.jpg. (11/28/2018). 1 Native Range and Status in the United States Native Range According to GISD (2018), Cygnus olor is native to Australia, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Europe, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Kazakhstan, Korea, Democratic People's Republic Of Korea, Republic Of Latvia, Lithuania, Republic Of Moldova, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Serbia And Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom. 1 From BirdLife International (2018): “NATIVE Extant (breeding) Kazakhstan; Mongolia; Russian Federation (Eastern Asian Russia); Turkmenistan Extant (non-breeding) Afghanistan; Armenia; Cyprus; Iran, Islamic Republic of; Iraq; Korea, Republic of; Kyrgyzstan; Spain Extant (passage) Korea, Democratic People's Republic of Extant (resident) Albania; Austria; Azerbaijan; Belarus; Belgium; Croatia; Czech Republic; Greece; Hungary; Ireland; Italy; Liechtenstein; Luxembourg; Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of; Montenegro; Netherlands; Russian Federation; Serbia; Slovenia; Switzerland; Turkey; United Kingdom Extant Bosnia and Herzegovina; Bulgaria; China; Denmark; Estonia; Finland;
    [Show full text]
  • Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza a (H5N8) Virus in Swans, China, 2020
    Article DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2706.204727 Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza A (H5N8) Virus in Swans, China, 2020 Appendix Materials and Methods Samples Two sick swans, whooper swan (Cygnus cygnus) and mute swan (Cygnus olor) were found almost at the same site in Wuliangsuhai Lake in Bayannur city, Inner Mongolia, China (41.826234°N, 107.54972°E) on 17 October 2020. The swans died soon and virus was detected and collected from organs at the same day. We collected multiple organs (brains, larynx, liver, lung, pancreas, kidney, spleen and rectum) from two dead swans. We sequenced the H5N8 genomes directly from organs, and we used them in whole genetic analysis. The egg passages were used to confirm the genome and to get the long-term preserved viral strains. We inoculated 10-day-old specific pathogen-free chicken embryos (National Poultry Laboratory Animal Resource Center, Harbin Veterinary Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Agriculture Sciences, Harbin 150069, China) with the homogenates of mixed organs, respectively. All chicken embryos dead within 48 hours, the allantoic fluid was harvested, and the hemagglutinin (HA) activity was assayed. Subtypes of influenza viruses were identified initially by using the hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test. Viral RNA was extracted from organs or HA positive samples from incubated allantoic fluid using a QIAamp Viral RNA Mini Kit (Qiagen, Germany), reverse transcribed using the primer Un12 and subjected to RT-PCR using the method described in the WHO manual (World Health Organization [WHO], 2002) to further confirm AIV positive. The PCR products of eight fragments of the isolates were sequenced using a set of specific sequencing primers listed in a previous dissertation (1).
    [Show full text]
  • Alpha Codes for 2168 Bird Species (And 113 Non-Species Taxa) in Accordance with the 62Nd AOU Supplement (2021), Sorted Taxonomically
    Four-letter (English Name) and Six-letter (Scientific Name) Alpha Codes for 2168 Bird Species (and 113 Non-Species Taxa) in accordance with the 62nd AOU Supplement (2021), sorted taxonomically Prepared by Peter Pyle and David F. DeSante The Institute for Bird Populations www.birdpop.org ENGLISH NAME 4-LETTER CODE SCIENTIFIC NAME 6-LETTER CODE Highland Tinamou HITI Nothocercus bonapartei NOTBON Great Tinamou GRTI Tinamus major TINMAJ Little Tinamou LITI Crypturellus soui CRYSOU Thicket Tinamou THTI Crypturellus cinnamomeus CRYCIN Slaty-breasted Tinamou SBTI Crypturellus boucardi CRYBOU Choco Tinamou CHTI Crypturellus kerriae CRYKER White-faced Whistling-Duck WFWD Dendrocygna viduata DENVID Black-bellied Whistling-Duck BBWD Dendrocygna autumnalis DENAUT West Indian Whistling-Duck WIWD Dendrocygna arborea DENARB Fulvous Whistling-Duck FUWD Dendrocygna bicolor DENBIC Emperor Goose EMGO Anser canagicus ANSCAN Snow Goose SNGO Anser caerulescens ANSCAE + Lesser Snow Goose White-morph LSGW Anser caerulescens caerulescens ANSCCA + Lesser Snow Goose Intermediate-morph LSGI Anser caerulescens caerulescens ANSCCA + Lesser Snow Goose Blue-morph LSGB Anser caerulescens caerulescens ANSCCA + Greater Snow Goose White-morph GSGW Anser caerulescens atlantica ANSCAT + Greater Snow Goose Intermediate-morph GSGI Anser caerulescens atlantica ANSCAT + Greater Snow Goose Blue-morph GSGB Anser caerulescens atlantica ANSCAT + Snow X Ross's Goose Hybrid SRGH Anser caerulescens x rossii ANSCAR + Snow/Ross's Goose SRGO Anser caerulescens/rossii ANSCRO Ross's Goose
    [Show full text]
  • RIDEM, Fish & Wildlife Mute Swan Management Plan 2007
    STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT DIVISION OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Mute Swan Management Plan Prepared May 30, 2006 Rhode Island Mute Swan Management Plan I. Introduction The mute swan (Cygnus olor), an indigenous waterfowl species of Europe, was imported into North America in the late 1800s and sold to private estates, public parks, and zoos. Many of the 500+ birds imported between 1910 and 1912 had their flight feathers cut (Phillips 1928) to prevent flight capability. Owners of some birds failed to continue the practice of pinioning and small numbers of birds escaped into the wild and established a feral population. These early introductions to the wild are believed to have occurred along the Hudson River (1910) and on Long Island, New York (1912) (Bull 1964) and likely provided the nucleus for the current Atlantic Flyway mute swan population (Table 1). Table 1.The spread of feral mute swans within the Atlantic Flyway is indicated by early reported sightings as follows: (from Atlantic Flyway Mute Swan Management Plan). State/Province Year State/Province Year New York 1910 Quebec 1965 New Jersey 1919 New Hampshire 1967 Massachusetts 1922 West Virginia 1986 Rhode Island 1923 North Carolina 1989 Pennsylvania 1930s Georgia 1989 Ontario 1934 Maine 1990 Virginia ~1950 South Carolina 1993 Maryland 1954 New Brunswick 1993 Connecticut 1957 Vermont 1993 Delaware 1958 The first report of mute swans in Rhode Island occurred on Block Island in 1923, and the second on Quonochontaug Pond, Charlestown during 1938 (Willey and Halla 1972). Nesting attempts of the birds were first observed on Briggs Marsh, Little Compton in 1948.
    [Show full text]
  • ( 174 ) the Early History of the Mute Swan in England. The
    ( 174 ) THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE MUTE SWAN IN ENGLAND. BY N. F. TICEHURST, M.A., F.R.C.S., ENG. THE earliest particulars of the history of the Mute Swan in England hitherto known are contained in the statements by Saunders (Yarrell's Brit. Birds, IV., p. 327) that " Swans, it is said, were first brought into England from Cyprus by Richard I., who began his reign in 1189 ; and they are particularly mentioned in a manuscript of the time of Edward I. (1272)." These naturally have been extensively copied (not always correctly) and appear in many books on British birds. Thus, Gurney (Early Annals of Ornithology, p. 57) writes " Mr. H. Saunders states that tame Swans are particularly mentioned in a manuscript of 1272, which I have not seen. The passage referred to, as I learn from Mr. Harting who was Saunders' informant, is to be found in the Wardrobe Accounts of Edward I., published by the Society of Antiquaries." As a matter of fact, these Wardrobe Accounts are those for the twenty-first year of Edward I., 1299-1300, so that we may say that the earliest documentary evidence of the existence of the Mute Swan in England so far brought to light belongs to the last year of the thirteenth century. The authority for the statement that it was brought into England by Richard I. from Cyprus, presumably about 1192 at the termination of the third Crusade, would appear to have been known to Newton, as he designates it (Om. Did., p. 930) as "uncertain," but hitherto it has evaded my search.
    [Show full text]
  • Accelerating Declines Revealed by New Bto Report
    Bird Populations 7:136-139 Reprinted with permission BTO News 232:8-9 © British Trust for Ornithology 2001 ACCELERATING DECLINES REVEALED BY NEW BTO REPORT HUMPHREY CRICK, JOHN MARCHANT, DAVID NOBLE AND STEPHEN BAILLIE British Trust for Ornithology The National Centre for Ornithology The Nunnery, Thetford Norfolk, IP24 2PU, United Kingdom The latest report of bird population trends from the BTO’s monitoring schemes has just been published — but this time on the World Wide Web. It brings together information from BBS, CBC, WBS, NRS and CES to provide a detailed picture for over 100 species of landbirds. Humphrey Crick, John Marchant, David Noble and Stephen Baillie describe the report and its latest results. Susan Waghorn has been designing and putting together the report’s web site (which can be found on http://www.bto.org). NUEVO INFORME DEL BTO REVELA UNA ACELERACIÓN EN LOS DECLIVES El último informe sobre tendencias poblacionales de aves de los programas de seguimiento del BTO acaba de ser publicado, pero esta vez en Internet. Recoge información del BBS, CBC, WBS, NRS y CES para aportar una detallada descripción de más de 100 especies de aves terrestres. Humphrey Crick, John Marchant, David Noble y Stephen Baillie describen el informe y sus últimos resultados. Susan Waghorn ha diseñado el sitio del informe en internet (en http://www.bto.org). The reports entitled “Breeding Birds in the Wider charges and can make much greater levels of Countryside,” produced by the BTO/JNCC detail available than ever before. For those that Partnership in 1996 and 1997, had a great do not have access to the web, a summary impact, not only in the press, but also because printed version will also be available.
    [Show full text]
  • Mute Swans in the Hudson Bay Lowland
    26 Mute Swans in the Hudson Bay Lowland Kenneth F. Abraham and R. Kenyon Ross Mute Swans (Cygnus alar) are from a helicopter and visually con­ increasing throughout eastern firmed by another occupant (Brian North America (Ciaranca et al. Arquilla, OMNR summer student). 1997). In Ontario, they are wide­ The bird was alone but took flight spread throughout the lower Great as we approached to attempt to Lakes, especially in coastal marshes take a photograph. and large inland wetlands, and they On 10 June 1997, during a heli­ are increasing at a rate of 10-18% copter waterfowl survey along the per year (Petrie and Francis 2003). Hudson Bay coastline from Their occurrence in northern Churchill, Manitoba to Moosonee, Ontario is minimal and is correlat­ Ontario, we encountered a single ed with humans (e.g., where captive Mute Swan at 56° 55.7' N, 89° 30.6' birds are seasonally placed on W on the Manitoba coast between lakes, as in Cochrane, or as in Kaskattama River and Black Duck Thunder Bay, where feral popula­ River. Ontario Ministry of Natural tions are established nearby in Resources (OMNR) helicopter Lake Superior areas of Michigan pilot Kevin Mulcair spotted the and Wisconsin). Mute Swans are swan and reported to us: "there's a uncommon in Manitoba and con­ swan with a yellow bill"; we imme­ fined to the southern part of the diately reversed direction to try to province (MARC 2003). In this locate it. We (KFA and RKR) were note, we report four observations both able to visually confirm the representing the first known occur­ identification as we flew along side rences of feral Mute Swans in the it and attempted to take photo­ Hudson Bay Lowland (hereafter graphs.
    [Show full text]
  • Handbook of Waterfowl Behavior: Tribe Anserini (Swans and True Geese)
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Handbook of Waterfowl Behavior, by Paul Johnsgard Papers in the Biological Sciences January 1965 Handbook of Waterfowl Behavior: 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/bioscihandwaterfowl Part of the Ornithology Commons Johnsgard, Paul A., "Handbook of Waterfowl Behavior: Tribe Anserini (Swans and True Geese)" (1965). Handbook of Waterfowl Behavior, by Paul Johnsgard. 11. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/bioscihandwaterfowl/11 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 Handbook of Waterfowl Behavior, by Paul Johnsgard by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Handbook of Waterfowl Behavior other whistling duck. Although there is no crescent of color on the upper-tail coverts and the wings do not produce special sounds in flight, the upper surface of the wing does flash a brilliant white when the bird is flying. The species occurs from the southern tip of the United States through most of South America, and two subspecies are recognized. It is broadly sympatric with the fulvous and the white- faced whistling duck, and possibly also with the Cuban. Hybrids with all these species have been obtained in captivity. General behavior. The red-billed whistling duck is a highly vocal and noisy bird, and its usual call is more musical than that of any other whistling duck. The call consists of from five to seven notes, and can be written as whech, wha-cW-whe-whewhew or whech, wha-chew-whew-whew'.
    [Show full text]
  • Mute Swans and Their Chesapeake Bay Habitats:Proceedings of A
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Publications of the US Geological Survey US Geological Survey 2004 Mute Swans and Their hesC apeake Bay Habitats:Proceedings of a Symposium Matthew .C Perry USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgspubs Part of the Geochemistry Commons, Geology Commons, Geomorphology Commons, Hydrology Commons, and the Other Earth Sciences Commons Perry, Matthew C., "Mute Swans and Their heC sapeake Bay Habitats:Proceedings of a Symposium" (2004). Publications of the US Geological Survey. 138. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgspubs/138 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Geological Survey at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Publications of the US Geological Survey by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Perry, M. Perry, Mute Swans and Their Chesapeake Bay Habitats: — Mute Swans and Their Chesapeake Bay Habitats: Proceedings of a Symposium Proceedings of a Symposium — USGS/BRD/ITR—2004–0005 USGS/BRD/ITR—2004–0005 Information and Technology Report U.S. Department of the Interior Printed on recycled paper U.S. Geological Survey Cover photos: (Matthew Perry, U.S. Geological Survey, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center). Mute Swans and Their Chesapeake Bay Habitats: Proceedings of a Symposium Edited by Matthew C. Perry Information and Technology Report USGS/BRD/ITR—2004–0005 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey iii U.S. Department of the Interior Gale A. Norton, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Charles G. Groat, Director U.S.
    [Show full text]