DOCSLIB.ORG

Parasitism of Canvasback Nests by Redheads

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Parasitism of Canvasback Nests by Redheads j. Field Ornithol., 51(4):361-364 PARASITISM OF CANVASBACK NESTS BY REDHEADS BY LAWSON G. SUGDEN Redheads(Aythya americana) lay eggsparasitically in the nestsof sev- eral other duck species(Weller 1959,Joyner 1973, 1976). Where Can- vasbacks(A. valisineria)are sympatricwith Redheads,they are the pri- mary host for Redhead nest parasitismbecause the two specieshave similar habitat requirementsand breeding seasons(Weller 1959). Al- though several studies(Hochbaum 1944, Weller 1959, Olson 1964) have consideredvarious aspectsof Redhead parasitismof Canvasback nests,our understandingof the interspecificrelationship is incomplete, particularly for pothole habitat. A study of Canvasbacksin the Saskatch- ewan parklandsfrom 1971 through 1975 afforded an opportunityto record some host-parasiterelationships between the two species. STUDY AREA AND METHODS The studyarea and methodshave been described previously (Sugden 1977, 1978). The area (52øN, 106øW), 48 km east of Saskatoon,Sas- katchewan, was a 15.5 km" block of farmland in 1971 and 1972 and 31.1 km2 in 1973, 1974, and 1975. Pond densitiesaveraged about 18 to 26 per km2. Size of ponds ranged from lessthan 0.04 ha to 8.1 ha. Breeding pair countswere made in May. Two countswere made in 1971, 10 in 1972 and 1973, and nine in 1974 and 1975. Pairs and lone drakes were used to indicate breeding pairs of Canvasbacks,and total femalesindicated pairs of Redheads.Two nest searcheswere made be- tween late May and late July. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION FactorsAffecting Rate of Parasitism Weller (1959: 352) concludedthat the incidenceof Redhead parasit- ism was "influencedby habitat preferencesof the parasite,chronology of laying by host and parasite, and especiallyby the number of host nestsper parasite." My data support the first two conclusions.Using a subjectivescale for rating nestingpond quality (Sugden 1978), I con- cluded that Canvasbacknests in preferred Redhead habitat had higher rates of parasitismthan thoseon pondsconsidered to be inferior (X" = 8.08, df = 2, P < .02). Similarly, Canvasbacknests initiated in June had a higher rate of parasitism(80%) than thosestarted before June (58%) (x "= 6.25, df = 1, P < .02). Because Redheads tended to nest later than Canvasbacks,it is reasonableto expectlate neststo receivemore parasiticintrusions. My data on Canvasbacknest densitiesand numbers of female Red- heads(Table 1) indicatethat the relationshipbetween the two in pothole habitat is complex. Data for 1973 are of particular interest because, despitethe lowesthost-nest/parasite ratio, the rate of parasitismwas also lowest. This, of course, is contrary to the expected relationship (see 361 362] L.G. Sugden J.Field Ornithol. Autumn 1980 TABLE 1. Breeding pairs, nests,and egg data for Redheads and Canvasbacks. Year 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 Size of area (km'-') 15.5 15.5 31.1 31.1 31.1 Redhead indicated pairs 14 16 49 26 43 Canvasbackindicated pairs 18 27 74 40 54 Redhead nests 2 8 28 9 35 Canvasback nests 17 21 45 51 66 Canvasbacknests per • Redhead 1.21 1.31 0.92 1.96 1.53 Percent Canvasbacknests I parasitized 63 86 54 62 68 Eggs/• Redhead in Redhead nests" 0.64 3.37 3.65 2.35 5.44 Eggs/• Redheadin Canvasbacknests" 1.07 3.37 1.73 2.85 5.05 1 Completed nests. "Includes eggsoutside nests. Weller [1959: 351] for discussion).Egg data (Table 1) alsoindicate that parasitismwas comparatively depressed in 1973. The ratio of eggslaid parasiticallyto those laid in Redhead nestswas relatively constantfor other years,agreeing with Olson's(1964) report. However,in 1973, the ratio was lower. I suggestthat the unexpectedlow rate of parasitismin 1973 was related to the large number of non-nestingCanvasback pairs that year (Sugden1978), which gave false information to female Red- heads searchingfor host nests. On large marshesRedheads locate nests by observingthe activitiesof the host, by searchingthe cover for host nests,and probablyby com- binations of the two (Weller 1959). Canvasbacknests in the pothole habitat were so widely distributedthat cover searchingalone would be unproductive.Canvasbacks tended to neston pondssolitarily (Sugden 1978); during the five years, 200 nestswere found on 177 different ponds. On the average,only about 8% of the ponds had one or more Canvasbacknests. These includedterminated nests,so at any given time the percentageof ponds occupiedby active host nestswould have been lower. With this kind of nest distribution, the presenceof the host (fe- male Canvasback)on a nest pond must have been a major factor in determining the successof a female Redhead in locating a host nest. Seeinga female Canvasbackon a pond likely stimulatesnest searching on the pond by a Redhead.Thus, in 1973, the presenceof non-nesting Canvasbackpairs would have thwarted would-be parasitic Redheads. Effect on CanvasbackClutches The mean number of Canvasbackeggs in 74 completednests that were not parasitizedby Redheadswas 8.1 compared with 5.4 in 168 parasitizednests. The differenceof 2.7 eggsper nestwas significant (t -- 7.34, P < .001). Bellrose (1976) summarized data from other studies Vol.51, No. 4 CanvasbackNest Parasitism [363 8 I ß Y= 7.523-0.370X 7 13 R2=.25 •6 e•'- P<O.001 • 4 8•'• 3•• 3 •2' I 1I I 3I I 5I I 7I i • i 11I I 13I I 15I I 17I Number of Redhead eggs at Canvasback nest FIGUREl. Relationshipbetween number of Canvasbackeggs in the nest and total Red- head eggspresent. Numbers indicate number of nestsin sample. reporting similar clutch reductions,and Weller (1959) stated that re- duced clutchesresulted from suppressedovulation in the hostand loss of eggsfrom the nest. During the last three years,systematic searches were made for eggsoutside all nestsso I could comparetotal eggslaid in parasitizedand unparasitizednests. The mean number of Canvasback 1 Y:O.378x- O.Oll ß R2-- .42 0.001 3 ß 4 1 I 4I I 6I I 8I I 1I0 I 12I I -14I I 16I i Number of Redhead eggs at Canvasback nest FIGURE2. Relationshipbetween number of Canvasbackeggs outside the nest and total Redheadeggs present. Numbers indicate number of nestsin sample. 364] L.G. Sugden J.Field Ornithol. Autumn 1980 eggsin and around 40 completedunparasitized nests was 8.7 compared with 7.6 for 67 parasitizednests (t -- 2.38, P < .02), indicatingthat sup- pressedovulation through parasitismresulted in about one lessCan- vasbackegg per clutch. In the same sample,eggs outsideparasitized nests averaged 1.84 compared with 0.23 outside unparasitizednests. Thus, Redheadparasitism resulted in a total reductionof about 2.7 eggs per nest--l.1 due to suppressedovulation and 1.6 due to eggs lost outside the nest. The number of Canvasbackeggs found inside parasitizednests was inverselyrelated to the total number of Redheadeggs found at the nest (Fig. 1). A similar relationshiphas been shownfor CinnamonTeal (Anas cyanoptera)nests parasitizedby Ruddy Ducks (Oxyurajamaicensis) and Redheads(Joyner 1976). Conversely,the number of Canvasbackeggs outsideparasitized nests was directly related to the number of Redhead eggs(Fig. 2). Total Canvasbackeggs was unrelated to the number of Redhead eggs (P > 0.7), indicating that egg reduction due to sup- pressedovulation was unrelated to the number of parasiticintrusions. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank my field assistantsand the farmers upon whose land we worked. I am grateful to Milton W. Weller and Arthur S. Hawkins for commentingon the manuscript. LITERATURE CITED BELI•ROSE,F.C. 1976. Ducks,geese & swansof North America. Harrisburg,PA, Stack- pole Books. HOCVIBAt•, H. A. 1944. The Canvasbackon a prairie marsh. Washington,Am. Wildl. Inst. JoY•ER,D. E. 1973, Interspecificnest parasitism by ducksand cootsin Utah. Auk 90: 692-693. 1976. Effectsof interspecificnest parasitismby Redheadsand Ruddy Ducks.J. Wildl. Manage. 40: 33-38. OLson, D. P. 1964. A study of Canvasbackand Redheadbreeding populations,nesting habitatsand productivity.Ph.D. dissertation,Univ. of Minnesota,Minneapolis. St•ct)•, L. G. 1977. Horned Grebe breeding habitat in Saskatchewanparklands. Can. Field-Nat. 91:372-376. 1978. Canvasbackhabitat use and productionin Saskatchewanparklands. Can. Wildl.Serv. Occas. Paper No. 34. 30 p. WELLER,M. W. 1959. Parasiticegg laying in the Redhead (Aythyaamericana) and other North American Anatidae. Ecol.Monogr. 29:333-365. CanadianWildlife Service,115 PerimeterRoad, Saskatoon,Saskatchewan, CanadaS7N OX4. Received20 November 1979, accepted11 March 1980. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fish and Wildlife Program Table 11-2 Upper Columbia Subbasin Wildlife Mitigation Priorities
    Appendix C: Wildlife Provisions Wildlife Provisions Mitigation Priorities Bonneville and Wildlife Managers Ensure that wildlife mitigation projects implemented in fulfill- ment of this program are consistent with the basinwide implementation priorities described in Tables 11-1, 11-2 and 11-3, below. Table 11-1 Lower Columbia Subbasin Wildlife Mitigation Priorities Habitat Types--Target Species Priority Riparian/Riverine High • Great Blue Heron Old Growth Forest High • Northern Spotted Owl Wetlands High • Great Blue Heron • Band-tailed Pigeon • Western Pond Turtle Coniferous Forest Medium • Ruffed Grouse • Elk • American Black Bear/Cougar C-1 2000 Columbia river Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Table 11-2 Upper Columbia Subbasin Wildlife Mitigation Priorities Habitat Types--Target Species Priority Riparian/River High • Bald Eagle (breeding) • Black-capped Chickadee • Peregrine Falcon Shrub-Steppe High • Sharp-tailed Grouse • Pygmy Rabbit • Sage Grouse • Mule Deer Wetlands High • Mallard • Redhead Islands Medium • White Pelicans Agricultural Lands Low • Swainson’s Hawk • Ring-necked Pheasant Table 11-3 Snake River Subbasin Wildlife Mitigation Priorities Habitat Type--Target Species Priority Riparian/Riverine High • Bald Eagle (breeding) • Bald Eagle (wintering) • River Otter • Black-capped Chickadee • Peregrine Falcon • Ruffed Grouse Wetlands High • Mallard Native Grasslands and Shrubs Medium • Mule Deer/Elk • White-tailed Deer • Sharp-tailed Grouse Coniferous Forest Medium • Elk Old Growth Forest Medium • Pileated Woodpecker Lowland Forest Low • White-tailed deer 2000 Columbia river Basin Fish and Wildlife Program C-2 Monitor and Evaluate Wildlife Efforts at Non- federal Projects Non-federal hydroelectric projects are licensed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The Elec- tric Consumers Protection Act of 1986 (ECPA) mandates that the Fed- eral Energy Regulatory Commission give equal consideration to the pro- tection, mitigation of damage to, and enhancement of wildlife in licensing and relicensing decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • Bears in Oklahoma
    April 2010 Bears in Oklahoma Our speaker for the April 19 meeting of the Oklahoma City Audubon Society will be Jeremy Dixon, wildlife biologist at the Wichita Mountains Wildlife Refuge. His presentation is titled “The Strange But True History of Bears in Oklahoma.” For many years Jeremy was a biologist in Florida where he studied the interactions between black bears and humans. His master’s research was on the Conservation Genetics of the Florida Black Bear. Jeremy moved to Lawton in 2009 to experience life out here in the middle of the continent. Our grass prairie and ancient granite mountains are a new living environment for him. However, the black bears are coming back across Oklahoma from the east presenting birders an experience with a new and large predator to which we are unaccustomed. With an education from Jeremy, hopefully we can learn how to watch the birds while not feeding the bears ourselves. Come out for bear-hugging good time at bird club and bring a friend. County Birding: Kingfisher Jimmy Woodard On March 11, the group of 7 birders entered Kingfisher County in the far southeast corner. We located several small lakes with waterfowl: Canada Geese, Gadwall, Mallard, Green- Winged Teal and Ruddy Duck. We also found an adult Bald Eagle, the first of two found during the trip. Driving the back roads, we observed Great Horned Owl, Phoebe, King- fisher, and a bunch of sparrows – Harris, White Crowned, Song, Savannah, & Lincoln’s. We visited fields along the Cimarron River southeast of Dover. Carla Brueggen & her hus- band lease fields in this area.
    [Show full text]
  • REDHEAD (Aythya Americana) Edward C
    II SPECIES ACCOUNTS Andy Birch PDF of Redhead account from: Shuford, W. D., and Gardali, T., editors. 2008. California Bird Species of Special Concern: A ranked assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of immediate conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds 1. Western Field Ornithologists, Camarillo, California, and California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento. California Bird Species of Special Concern REDHEAD (Aythya americana) Edward C. Beedy and Bruce E. Deuel + Criteria Scores Population Trend 10 Range Trend 10 Population Size 7.5 Range Size 5 Endemism 0 Population Concentration 0 Threats 10 * + + * Current Breeding Range Historic Breeding Range ? + Recent Extralimital Breeding * Historic Extralimital Breeding ? Status Uncertain * County Boundaries Water Bodies Kilometers 100 50 0 100 Current and historic (ca. 1944) breeding range of the Redhead in California. Numbers reduced greatly overall, and range has retracted in the Central Valley and on the southern coastal slope since 1944; breeds, or has bred, very locally and sporadically outside the primary range. Occurs more widely in winter, when numbers augmented by migrants. Redhead Studies of Western Birds 1:85–90, 2008 85 Studies of Western Birds No. 1 SPECIAL CONCERN PRIORITY Redhead numbers were “greatly reduced” in California in the early 20th century in response Currently considered a Bird Species of Special to drainage of wetlands and overharvest of breed- Concern (breeding), priority 3. Not included on ing and wintering birds by market hunters, as prior special concern lists (Remsen 1978, CDFG evidenced by the declining numbers sold in the 1992). markets after about 1910 (Grinnell et al.
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 Disease Summary
    SUMMARY OF DISEASES AFFECTING MICHIGAN WILDLIFE 2015 ABSCESS Abdominal Eastern Fox Squirrel, Trumpeter Swan, Wild Turkey Airsac Canada Goose Articular White-tailed Deer Cranial White-tailed Deer Dermal White-tailed Deer Hepatic White-tailed Deer, Red-tailed Hawk, Wild Turkey Intramuscular White-tailed Deer Muscular Moose, White-tailed Deer, Wild Turkey Ocular White-tailed Deer Pulmonary Granulomatous Focal White-tailed Deer Unspecified White-tailed Deer, Raccoon, Canada Goose Skeletal Mourning Dove Subcutaneous White-tailed Deer, Raccoon, Eastern Fox Squirrel, Mute Swan Thoracic White-tailed Deer Unspecified White-tailed Deer ADHESION Pleural White-tailed Deer 1 AIRSACCULITIS Egg Yolk Canada Goose Fibrinous Chronic Bald Eagle, Red-tailed Hawk, Canada Goose, Mallard, Wild Turkey Mycotic Trumpeter Swan, Canada Goose Necrotic Caseous Chronic Bald Eagle Unspecified Chronic Bald Eagle, Peregrine Falcon, Mute Swan, Redhead, Wild Turkey, Mallard, Mourning Dove Unspecified Snowy Owl, Common Raven, Rock Dove Unspecified Snowy Owl, Merlin, Wild Turkey, American Crow Urate Red-tailed Hawk ANOMALY Congenital White-tailed Deer ARTHROSIS Inflammatory Cooper's Hawk ASCITES Hemorrhagic White-tailed Deer, Red Fox, Beaver ASPERGILLOSIS Airsac American Robin Cranial American Robin Pulmonary Trumpeter Swan, Blue Jay 2 ASPERGILLOSIS (CONTINUED ) Splenic American Robin Unspecified Red-tailed Hawk, Snowy Owl, Trumpeter Swan, Canada Goose, Common Loon, Ring- billed Gull, American Crow, Blue Jay, European Starling BLINDNESS White-tailed Deer BOTULISM Type C Mallard
    [Show full text]
  • Download Fact Sheet
    FACT SHEET WEST VIRGINIA (Based on numbers available 01/01/2021) MEMBERSHIP YOUR STATE GOVERNMENT’S CONTRIBUTION TO DU FOR GRAND TOTAL: 1,498 CANADIAN PROJECTS: • Members: 1,462 • Total contributions granted: $528,200 General Members: 1,398 • Location of Projects/Landscapes: Ontario, Quebec: St. Lawrence Greenwings: 21 Islands, Lake Brompton Legacy Greenwing Members: 8 Sponsor Members: 35 • Major Sponsors: 36 Life Sponsor: 28 WEST VIRGINIA STATE CHAIRMAN Diamond Life Sponsor: 6 Trad Dill, State Chairman 2236 Oil Ridge Rd. Sponsor in Perpetuity: 0 Sistersville, WV 26175 Diamond Sponsor in Perpetuity: 0 (304) 771-0652 Heritage Sponsor: 2 [email protected] Diamond Heritage Sponsor: 0 Benefactor Roll of Honor: 0 Gold Benefactor Sponsor: 0 Diamond Benefactor Sponsor: 0 FOR INFORMATION ON DUCKS UNLIMITED EVENTS Legacy Sponsor: 0 CONTACT: Gold Legacy Sponsor: 0 Aaron Dynes, Senior Regional Director Platinum Legacy Sponsor: 0 609 Lambert Drive Diamond Legacy Sponsor: 0 Piqua, OH 45356 Conservation Pioneer Sponsor: 0 (937) 903-4035 Waterfowl Patron Sponsor: 0 [email protected] Wetland Guardian Sponsor: 0 FEATHER SOCIETY MEMBERS: 8 Dan DeLawyer, Director of Fundraising & Volunteer Relations - Region 6 • Silver: 7 (607) 331-8695 • Gold: 0 [email protected] • Emerald: 0 • Platinum: 1 • Diamond: 0 • Legacy Conservation Pioneer: 0 FOR INFORMATION ON BECOMING A MAJOR SPONSOR • Legacy Waterfowl Patron: 0 CONTACT: Chad Manlove, Managing Director of Development • Legacy Wetlands Guardian: 0 (601) 206-5442 [email protected] U.S. CONSERVATION PROGRAMS
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Populations in Texas
    Wildlife Populations in Texas • Five big game species – White-tailed deer – Mule deer – Pronghorn – Bighorn sheep – Javelina • Fifty-seven small game species – Forty-six migratory game birds, nine upland game birds, two squirrels • Sixteen furbearer species (i.e. beaver, raccoon, fox, skunk, etc) • Approximately 900 terrestrial vertebrate nongame species • Approximately 70 species of medium to large-sized exotic mammals and birds? White-tailed Deer Deer Surveys Figure 1. Monitored deer range within the Resource Management Units (RMU) of Texas. 31 29 30 26 22 18 25 27 17 16 24 21 15 02 20 28 23 19 14 03 05 06 13 04 07 11 12 Ecoregion RMU Area (Ha) 08 Blackland Prairie 20 731,745 21 367,820 Cross Timbers 22 771,971 23 1,430,907 24 1,080,818 25 1,552,348 Eastern Rolling Plains 26 564,404 27 1,162,939 Ecoregion RMU Area (Ha) 29 1,091,385 Post Oak Savannah 11 690,618 Edwards Plateau 4 1,308,326 12 475,323 5 2,807,841 18 1,290,491 6 583,685 19 2,528,747 7 1,909,010 South Texas Plains 8 5,255,676 28 1,246,008 Southern High Plains 2 810,505 Pineywoods 13 949,342 TransPecos 3 693,080 14 1,755,050 Western Rolling Plains 30 4,223,231 15 862,622 31 1,622,158 16 1,056,147 39,557,788 Total 17 735,592 Figure 2. Distribution of White-tailed Deer by Ecological Area 2013 Survey Period 53.77% 11.09% 6.60% 10.70% 5.89% 5.71% 0.26% 1.23% 4.75% Edwards Plateau Cross Timbers Western Rolling Plains Post Oak Savannah South Texas Plains Pineywoods Eastern Rolling Plains Trans Pecos Southern High Plains Figure 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Canvasback Aythya Valisineria
    Canvasback Aythya valisineria Class: Aves Order: Anseriformes Family: Anatidae Characteristics: A large diving duck, in fact the largest in its genus, the canvasback weighs about 2.5-3 pounds. The male has a chestnut-red head, red eyes, light white-grey body and blackish breast and tail. The female has a lighter brown head and neck that gets progressively darker brown toward the back of the body. Both sexes have a blackish bill and bluish-grey legs and feet. Range & Habitat: Behavior: Breeds in prairie potholes and A wary bird that is very swift in flight. They prefer to dive in shallow water winters on ocean bays to feed and will also feed on the water surface (Audubon). Reproduction: Several males will court and display to one female. Once a female chooses the male, they will form a monogamous bond through breeding season. They build a floating nest in stands of dense vegetation above shallow water and lay 7-12 olive-grey eggs. Often redheads will lay their eggs in canvasback nests which will result in canvasbacks laying fewer eggs. The female incubates the eggs which hatch after 23-28 days. The young feed themselves and mom leads them to water within hours of hatching. Lifespan: up to 20 years in Diet: captivity, 10 years in the wild. Wild: Seeds, plant material, snails and insect larvae, they dive to eat the roots and bases of plants Special Adaptations: They go Zoo: Scratch grains, greens, waterfowl pellets from freshwater marshes in summer to saltwater ocean bays in Conservation: winter. Some say the populations are decreasing while others say they are increasing due to habitat restoration and the ban on lead shot.
    [Show full text]
  • Raccoons, Robbers and Radios” 2 Nearer to Jace
    Backpack Adventures Series Raccoons, Robbers and Radios by Marguerite Swilling Produced through the Partnership for Environmental Education and Rural Health, Texas A&M University Marguerite Swilling, author of the Backpack Adventure Series, has loved reading, writing and science all Backpack Adventure Series her life. From writing and directing an original play in sixth grade, she advanced to essay competitions in high school and First Printing, June 2005 published poetry at Texas A & M where she majored in English and minored in Earth Science. Although she is a Produced though the Partnership for Environmental certified secondary teacher, Mrs. Swilling has spent the past Education and Rural Health (http://peer.tamu.edu) twenty-three years in the business world and has written and Larry Johnson, PI presented training seminars on a variety of topics. Mrs. Swilling lives in Georgetown, Texas with her husband and Funded by the National Institute of Environmental Health two daughters. Sciences (NIEHS) For information regarding these materials contact [email protected] Backpack Adventures Series Raccoons, Robbers and Radios by Marguerite Swilling Produced through the Partnership for Environmental Education and Rural Health, Texas A&M University 1 Jace felt a drop of rain hit his head and he ran 2 back to the museum at Longhorn Cavern. As a 3 lightning storm raged overhead, Jace wandered 4 around the small rooms of the museum, looking 5 intently at the grainy black and white photos that 6 told the story of the CCC and the building of the 7 cavern pathways and that very building. 8 The walls of the museum were substantial, 9 strong and rough.
    [Show full text]
  • Canvasback and Lesser Scaup Activities and Habitat-Use on Pool 19, Upper Mississippi River
    Transactions of the Illinois State Academy of Science (1993), Volume 86, 1 and 2, pp. 33 - 45 Canvasback and Lesser Scaup Activities and Habitat-Use on Pool 19, Upper Mississippi River David M. Day1, Richard V. Anderson and Michael A. Romano Department of Biological Sciences Western Illinois University Macomb, IL 61455 1Current address: Illinois Department of Conservation Streams Program Aledo, IL 61231 ABSTRACT Behavior and habitat use of canvasback (Aythya valisineria) and lesser scaup (Aythya affinis) were assessed on Pool 19 of the Upper Mississippi River during the spring and fall of 1982 and the spring of 1983. Ducks were frequently observed in three sections of the study area; on the Illinois side of the river from Hamilton to Nauvoo; between Montrose and Niota; and in spring near Dallas City. Resting behavior was most prevalent, followed by diving (feeding) and loafing (sleeping). Lesser scaup dove more and spent less time loafing than canvasbacks. For all three seasons, within nonvegetated habitat, no significant seasonal or behavioral differences were found between male and female canvasbacks, but significant differences were found between the sexes of lesser scaup. Differences in activities between male and female lesser scaup did not persist when fall observations were excluded, suggesting seasonal differences in use of Pool 19. No significant seasonal or behavioral differences between species were observed in ducks using submergent vegetation during the spring periods. Activity patterns for both species, during the combined spring periods, were significantly different between submergent vegetation and nonvegetated areas. It appears these differences were due largely to changes in the distribution of diving and loafing activities between habitats.
    [Show full text]
  • Derivation of Non-Breeding Duck
    North American Waterfowl Management Plan Science Support Team Technical Report No. 2019–01 Derivation of Regional, Non-breeding Duck Population Abundance Objectives to Inform Conservation Planning in North America — 2019 Revision Kathy K. Fleming U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management Michael K. Mitchell Ducks Unlimited, Inc. Southern Regional Office Michael G. Brasher Ducks Unlimited, Inc., Gulf Coast Joint Venture John M. Coluccy Ducks Unlimited, Inc., Great Lakes and Atlantic Regional Office J. Dale James Ducks Unlimited, Inc. Southern Regional Office Mark J. Petrie Ducks Unlimited, Inc., Western Regional Office, Pacific Coast Joint Venture Dale D. Humburg Ducks Unlimited, Inc., National Headquarters Gregory J. Soulliere U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Upper Mississippi / Great Lakes Joint Venture ABSTRACT During the early 2000s, a methodology was developed to derive regional non-breeding population abundance objectives from continental abundance estimates (M. Koneff, USFWS, unpublished data). This information was foundational to North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) Joint Venture (JV) habitat conservation planning and implementation for non-breeding waterfowl, especially wintering ducks. The 2012 NAWMP Revision and its amended population objectives motivated JVs to begin updating their waterfowl implementation plans. Fleming et al. (2017) revisited the initial work to derive non- breeding abundance objectives and developed an updated approach. Although Fleming et al. (2017) made use of the least biased and most geographically consistent datasets, they identified outstanding issues to be resolved before the derivation technique could be effectively applied across all regions of North America. We updated the work of Fleming et al. (2017) by addressing 3 of those issues.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Waterfowl Population Status Survey
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Waterfowl Population Status, 2019 Waterfowl Population Status, 2019 August 19, 2019 In the United States the process of establishing hunting regulations for waterfowl is conducted annually. This process involves a number of scheduled meetings in which information regarding the status of waterfowl is presented to individuals within the agencies responsible for setting hunting regulations. In addition, the proposed regulations are published in the Federal Register to allow public comment. This report includes the most current breeding population and production information available for waterfowl in North America and is a result of cooperative eforts by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS), various state and provincial conservation agencies, and private conservation organizations. In addition to providing current information on the status of populations, this report is intended to aid the development of waterfowl harvest regulations in the United States for the 2020–2021 hunting season. i Acknowledgments Waterfowl Population and Habitat Information: The information contained in this report is the result of the eforts of numerous individuals and organizations. Principal contributors include the Canadian Wildlife Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, state wildlife conservation agencies, provincial conservation agencies from Canada, and Direcci´on General de Conservaci´on Ecol´ogica de los Recursos Naturales, Mexico. In addition, several conservation organizations, other state and federal agencies, universities, and private individuals provided information or cooperated in survey activities. Appendix A.1 provides a list of individuals responsible for the collection and compilation of data for the “Status of Ducks” section of this report.
    [Show full text]
  • DEVELOPMENT of MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES for MALLARD and CANVASBACK Region 6
    • l ... I .....1 r v DEVELOPMENT OF MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR MALLARD AND CANVASBACK Region 6 Materials used in support of presentation by Robert L. Croft at Project Leader's Meeting January 18, 1983 . -- • TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction 1 Di stri buti on 1 Statement of Reponsibilities 1 Supply and Demand Mallard 4 Canvasback 5 Objectives Mallard 5 Canvasback 5 Definition of Problems Mallard 6 Canvasback 6 Analysis of Causes and Consequences Mallard 6 Canvasback 10 Description of Strategy Elements Habitat Development 12 Habitat Development off Service Lands 15 Management of Predation 17 Increase High Protein Foods (Service Refuges Only) 20 Habitat Preservation 20 Population Surveys 23 Research and Development 24 Disease Management 25 FWS Administration 26 Preliminary Screening 27 Characteristics of Affected Publics 28 Sources of Information 28 DEVELOPMENT OF MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR MALLARD AND CANVASBACK INTRODUCTION This paper summarizes accomplishments from Regional Resource Planning efforts concerning the mallard (Anas platyrhynchos platyrhynchos) and the canvasback (Aythya valisineria) due~ The purpose is to provide a bases for developing four or five strategies to test, using the Mallard Management Model, for accomplishing the population objectives for mallards and canvasbacks in Region 6. To develop these strategies, a list and description of potential strategy elements is given. Our intent is to identify all potential strategy elements regardless of their cost or practicability for use in developing the test strategies. We need your help to review and to add potential strategy elements (management techniques) to this list. There are approximately 25 times more breeding mallards than canvasbacks in Region 6. It is our judgement that public demand requires the mallard to be the lead species for strategy development.
    [Show full text]