DOCSLIB.ORG

Helminth Parasites of Hooded Mergansers, Lophodytes Cucullatus (L.), from Ontario

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Helminth Parasites of Hooded Mergansers, Lophodytes Cucullatus (L.), from Ontario OF WASHINGTON, VOLUME 44, NUMBER 2, JULY 1977 219 coverslip method was 36% to 61%. Accumu- 95% in 48 hours. This is, however, a higher lated recovery by gravity pan flotation at 2, 4, range of recovery than was found with the al- 8, 16, 24 and 48 hours was 15, 27, 39, 44, and ternate methods investigated, and does not 51% (SD 2.01) respectively. Forty-eight-hour require elaborate equipment or constant atten- gravity pan flotation, without intervening agi- tion. tation, yielded only 12% of the total oocysts so that the range of recovery was 12% to 56%. GARY MCCALLISTER Recovery by gradient centrifugation was 69% Division of Biological Sciences (SD 1.56). The range was 52% to 73%. Mesa College Wassal and Denham reported 100% recov- Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 ery of Nematodirus ova after 3 hours and Vet- terling reported 100% recovery of coccidian LARI M. COWGILL oocysts at the rate of 1 man hr/1, whereas with Department of Zoology the Seinhorst method the maximum recovery of Brigham Young University Eimeria tenella oocysts ranged from 81% to Provo, Utah 84602 Research Note Helminth Parasites of Hooded Mergansers, Lophodytes cucullatus (L.), from Ontario The mergansers as a group are cosmopolitan latus from Ontario and constitutes the first de- in their distribution (Scott, 1968, A Coloured tailed study of the parasite fauna of this host. Key to the Waterfowl of the World, Wildfowl The viscera of 32 L. cucullatus (9 adults Trust, London, 91 p.). Three species are fre- and 23 immatures) were collected by hunters quently found in the Nearctic: the common during September and October, 1974 at two merganser, Mergus merganser (L.), the red- locations in Ontario: Cache Bay, Lake Nipis- breasted merganser, M. senator (L.), and the sing (46°22'N, 79°59'W) and Long Point, hooded merganser, Lophodytes cucullatus Lake Erie (42°40'N, 80°10'W). All material (L.). The latter is restricted to this region was deep frozen and examined at a later date (Kortright, 1967, The Ducks, Geese, and using conventional parasitological techniques, Swans of North America, Stackpole Co., Har- which included separating the various organs risburg, Pa. and Wildl. Mgmt. Inst., Washing- so that they could be examined individually, ton, D.C., 476 p.). The parasite fauna of M. and washing the gut contents through a screen merganser and M. senator is well known (vide with a 250-m/x mesh to collect the parasites. Lapage, 1961, Parasitology 51: 1-109; Mc- Techniques employed in the preparation of all Donald, 1969a, U.S. Fish. Wildl. Scrv. Spec. parasites prior to identification were listed by Sci. Eep. Wildl. 125, 333 p.; 1969b, ibid. 126, Andrews and Threlfall (1975, Proc. Helmin- 692 p.) However, little work has been done thol. Soc. Wash. 42: 24-28). Specimens of on that of L. cucullatus. The majority of works all the parasites recovered have been placed in which this species is mentioned are qualita- in the collection of the junior author. Infec- tive and not quantitative in approach, Lapage tions are recorded as prevalence (i.e., percent (1961, op. cit.) and McDonald (1969a, b, op. of birds infected) and intensity (i.e., average cit.) having provided host-parasite and para- number of helminths per infected individual). site-host lists, respectively, and bibliographies. Twenty species of parasites (excluding Ces- The present study was undertaken to deter- toda) were recovered from the host species mine the helminth fauna, if any, of L. cucul- during the present study, of which 17 were Copyright © 2011, The Helminthological Society of Washington 220 PROCEEDINGS OF THE HELMINTHOLOGICAL SOCIETY Table 1. Helminths of 32 hooded mergansers from Ontario. Prevalence Intensity/infected bird Most common No. ( % ) birds location Parasite infected average range in bird* Diplostomum mergi Dubois, 1932f 4 (13) 6 1-13 3 (b) Tylodelphys com/era (Mehlis, 1846) ft 1 (3) 4 4 3 (a), 4 Apatemon gracilis (Rudolphi, 1819) 10 (31) 5 1-14 3 (a) Cotylttrus cornutus (Rudolphi, 1808)§ 15 (47) 8 1-28 3 (a) Cotylunts erraticus (Rudolphi, 1809 )§ 6 (19) 12 1-41 3 (a) Notocotylus attenuatus (Rudolphi, 1809)§ 2 (6) 3 1-4 3 (c), 5 Echinostoma revolutum (Froelich, 1802 )§ 4 (13) 2 1-4 3, 4 Echinoparypliium recurvatum (Linstow, 1873 )§ 6 (19) 2 1-5 3 (c) Echinoparypliium alegans (Looss, 1899 )§ 1 (3) 4 4 3 (b) Microphallus primas (Jagerskiold, 1908 )§ 2 (6) 2 1-2 3 (c) Prosthogonimus cuneatus (Rudolphi, 1809 )§ 14 (44) 3 1-2 4, 6, 7 Zygocotyle lunata (Diesing, 1836 )§ 1 (3) 1 1 3 (c) Psilostomum sp.§ 9 (28) 8 2-27 3 Stcphanoprora mergi Cannon, 1938§ 1 (3) 4 4 3 (c), 4 Capillara anatis ( Schrank, 1790 ) § 9 (28) 4 1-15 3 (cV, 5 Tetrameres sp. ( gravid female ) § 1 (3) 1 1 1 Streptocara crassicauda (Creplin, 1829) 2 (6) 2 1-2 2 Streptocara formosensis Sugimoto, 1930§ 4 (13) 1 1 2 Polymorphic cucullatus Van Cleave and Starrett, 1940 1 (3) 1 1 3 (c) Corynosoma constrictum Van Cleave, 1918§ 1 (3) 2 2 3 (c) * 1, provcntriculus wall; 2, below gizzard lining; 3, small intestine, (a) anterior, (b) mid, (c) posterior; 4, large in- testine; 5, caeca; 6, Bursa of Fabricius; 7, cloaca. § New host record. f New host/North American record. t New record for A n a t i d a e . new host records, two were new records for in Newfoundland. However, it should be noted North America, and one was a new record for that the results presented herein do not repre- the Anatidae. Among those collected were 14 sent the whole picture with regard to the species of Trematoda (12 genera), four of "normal" parasite burden of L. cucullatus due Nematoda (three genera), and two of Acan- to several factors. Firstly, most host specimens thocephala (two genera) (Table 1). Twenty- (97%) were collected in one location on the eight (87%) of the birds were infected. The same day within four hours of each other. Psilostomum sp. that was recovered did not fit Hosts examined by Turner and Threlfall (1975, the description of any of the known species op. cit.) and Bishop and Threlfall (1974, op. and will be described in the future. Cestodes cit.) were taken in several areas. Secondly, were recovered from 14 (44%) of the birds the hosts collected during this study were taken examined. The majority of specimens were too during the period of fall migration and at no poorly preserved to make exact determinations other time of the year. Buscher (1965, J. of numbers or species. However, it was pos- Wildl. Mgmt. 29: 772-781) studied the sea- sible to identify Schistocephalus solidus (Muel- sonal dynamics of helminth populations of ler, 1776) in six (19%) of the birds, two three species of anatids and provided evidence Hymenolepis spp. in seven (22%) of the birds, that there is a change in the parasite burden of and unidentified cestodes in two (7%). a host at different times of the year. The number of parasite species recovered Prior to this study nine species of helminths from hosts during the present study—range had been recorded from this host (vide Mc- 1-9 (mean 3) per infected bird—closely ap- Donald, 1969b, op. cit.) (three of Trematoda, proximates those found by Turner and Threl- four of Cestoda, one of Nematoda, and one of fall (1975, Proc. Helminthol. Soc. Wash. 42: Acanthocephala). Perhaps the reason that few 157-169), who reported 20 species of hel- parasite species have previously been recovered minth in Anas crecca L. (range 1—7, mean 2) is that in the past relatively few hosts were and 18 in Anas discors L. (range 1—8, mean 2) examined thoroughly. The sample size was from eastern Canada, and Bishop and Threlfall not large enough to compare statistically the (1974, Proc. Helminthol. Soc. Wash. 41: 25- helminth burdens of adults (9) with immatures 35), who recovered 23 helminth species (range (23). However, the data point to the im- 1—13, mean 8) from Somateria mollissima (L.) mature birds being more frequently infected Copyright © 2011, The Helminthological Society of Washington OF WASHINGTON, VOLUME 44, NUMBER 2, JULY 1977 221 and having a higher intensity of infection Council of Canada for the grant (NB.CC- than the adults. Buscher (1965, op. cit.) sug- A3500) to Dr. Threlfall which funded the field gested that this is probably because the young work. We thank Mr. Harry G. Lumsden and birds had not developed an age immunity to Dr. Robert M. Alison of the Ontario Ministry parasite infections. Also the feeding habits may of Natural Resources for help while the senior differ between the age classes; until a study author was in Ontario. This work would not of the stomach contents has been done this have been possible without the help of Peter can not be proven conclusively. Bain, Bill Maclntyre, Trevor Alcock, and many It is interesting to note that during this study other residents of Cache Bay, Ontario who col- one species of parasite, Microphallus primas, lected the majority of the host specimens. which is known to have a marine intermediate host (Deblock and Pearson, 1969, Ann. P a r a - GEOFFREY A. BAIN sitol. 44: 391-414) was recovered. Godfrey Dept. of Zoology (1966, The Birds of Canada, Queen's Printer, University of Western Ontario Ottawa, 428 p.) and Kortright (1967, op. cit.) London, Ontario both report L. cucullatus as being found infre- N6A 5B7 quently in areas of salt water; where it has been recorded from the marine habitat, it was WILLIAM THRELFALL during the winter. To date no evidence has Dept.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hooded Merganser
    Mergansers Order Anseriformes Family Anatinae Subfamily Mergini The Mergansers are grouped among the diving ducks but belong to their own subfamily. They are long, slender-bodied diving ducks with long, narrow saw-edged (or serrated - below, center) bills, which help them grip and hold on to fish. Often called “sawbirds,” mergansers are known for their colorful plumage and habits of flying fast & close to the water’s surface. Most species have crests on their heads, which they can hold up or down at will (top photos and below left). In flight, their head, bill, body and tail are held in a straight horizontal line. Mergansers prey on fish, fish eggs and other aquatic animals. The hooded merganser (Lod- phodytes cucullatus) - top right -lives among reeds in Pennsylvania’s swampy, woodland habi- tats using a tree cavity near a pond, lake, river or stream. They will also use a man-made nesting box placed in the proper habitat. The common merganser (Mergus merganser) - top left) needs a wilder, less inhabited site in order to nest. They too are cavity-nesters, but will also nest in a rock pile or even a hole in a stream bank (like a kingfisher). Red-breasted merganser (Mergus serrator) females build her nests in thick vegetation on the ground - though she nests in Canada and Alaska, not in Pennsylvania. But they can be seen on our open rivers during mi- gration. Merganser ducklings from various nests are often grouped to- gether and looked after by a single female..
    [Show full text]
  • Lophodytes Cucull Atus): Evidence from Genetic, Mark–Recapture, and Comparative Data John M
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln USGS Staff -- ubP lished Research US Geological Survey 2008 Site Fidelity Is an Inconsistent Determinant of Population Structure in the Hooded Merganser (Lophodytes cucull atus): Evidence from Genetic, Mark–Recapture, and Comparative Data John M. Pearce 1U.S. Geological Survey, Alaska Science Center, 1U.S. Geological Survey, Alaska Science Center, [email protected] Peter Blums University of Missouri-Columbia, Puxico, Missouri Mark S. Lindberg University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub Pearce, John M.; Blums, Peter; and Lindberg, Mark S., "Site Fidelity Is an Inconsistent Determinant of Population Structure in the Hooded Merganser (Lophodytes cucull atus): Evidence from Genetic, Mark–Recapture, and Comparative Data" (2008). USGS Staff -- Published Research. 808. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub/808 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 USGS Staff -- ubP lished Research by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. The Auk 125(3):711–722, 2008 The American Ornithologists’ Union, �����2008. Printed in USA. SITE FIDELITY Is AN INCONSISTENT DETERMINANT OF POPULATION STRUCTURE IN THE HOODED MERGANSER (LOPHODYTES CUCUllATUS): EVIDENCE FROM GENETIC, MARK–RECAPTURE, AND COMPARATIVE DATA JOHN M. PEARCE,1,2,4 PETER BLUMS,3,5 AND MARK S. LINDBERG2 1U.S. Geological Survey, Alaska Science Center, 4210 University Drive, Anchorage, Alaska 99508, USA; 2Institute of Arctic Biology and Department of Biology and Wildlife, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska 99775, USA; and 3Gaylord Memorial Laboratory, The School of Natural Resources, University of Missouri-Columbia, Puxico, Missouri 63960, USA Abstract.—The level of site fidelity in birds is often characterized as “high” on the basis of rates of return or homing from mark–recapture data.
    [Show full text]
  • P0227-P0236.Pdf
    THE SEXUAL BEHAVIOR AND SYSTEMATIC POSITION OF THE HOODED MERGANSER PAUL A. JOHNSGARD T has been over 15 years since Delacour and Mayr (1945) first urged that the I mergansers (Mergzzs) and the goldeneye-Bufflehead group (Bucephala) be merged into a single tribe (Mergini) rather than being maintained in separate subfamilies (Aythyinae and Merginae) . Their reasons for this change were several, and included such points as the similarities in the downy young, female color patterns, occurrence of wild hybrids between the two genera, and tracheal structure. Indeed, except for the shape of the bill in these two groups there is no good means of distinguishing the two subfamilies. As Delacour and Mayr pointed out, bill shape and structure is highly adaptive and should not be used for the erection of major taxonomic categories. However, these two subfamilies are still upheld in the fifth edition of the AOU Check-list. Delacour and Mayr described the general similarities in the sexual behavior of lMergus and Bucephala, but no one has yet had the opportunity of critically comparing the behavior of most species in the two groups. Myres (1957,1959a, 1959b) reviewed well the behavior of the Bucephala species, but was not for- tunate enough to compare directly copulatory behavior in this genus and Mer- gus. He has, however, provided detailed descriptions of courtship and copulation in the Common Goldeneye (B. clangula) , Barrows’ Goldeneye (B. islandica) , and Bufflehead (B. albeola) . The behavior of the Common Goldeneye has also recently been described by Dane et al. (1959) and Lind (1960). I have been able to observe closely courtship display in all three species of Bucephala and in four species of Mergus, including the Hooded Merganser (M.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020-2021 NEBRASKA BIRD LIST See Science Olympiad General Rules, Eye Protection & Other Policies on As They Apply to Every Event
    2020-2021 NEBRASKA BIRD LIST See Science Olympiad General Rules, Eye Protection & other Policies on www.soinc.org as they apply to every event Kingdom – ANIMALIA ORDER: Pelecaniformes ORDER: Gruiformes Pelicans (Pelecanidae) Rails, Gallinules, and Coots (Rallidae) Phylum – CHORDATA American White Pelican Pelecanus Clapper Rail Rallus longirostris Subphylum – VERTEBRATA erythrorhynchos Sora Bitterns, Herons, and Allies Purple Gallinule Class - AVES (Ardeidae) American Coot Family Group (Family Name) American Bittern Cranes (Gruidae) Common Name Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias Sandhill Crane Antigone canadensis [Scientific name is in italics] Snowy Egret Egretta thula Whooping Crane Grus americana Green Heron ORDER: Anseriformes Black-crowned Night-heron ORDER: Charadriiformes Ducks, Geese, and Swans (Anatidae) Ibises and Spoonbills Lapwings and Plovers (Charadriidae) Black-bellied Whistling-duck (Threskiornithidae) American Golden-Plover Snow Goose Roseate Spoonbill Platalea ajaja Piping Plover Charadrius melodus Canada Goose Branta canadensis Killdeer Charadrius vociferus Trumpeter Swan ORDER: Suliformes Oystercatchers (Haematopodidae) Wood Duck Aix sponsa Cormorants (Phalacrocoracidae) American Oystercatcher Mallard Anas platyrhynchos Double-crested Cormorant Stilts and Avocets (Recurvirostridae) Northern Shoveler Phalacrocorax auritus Black-necked Stilt Green-winged Teal Darters (Anhingida) American Avocet Recurvirostra Canvasback Anhinga Anhinga anhinga americana Hooded Merganser Frigatebirds (Fregatidae) Sandpipers, Phalaropes,
    [Show full text]
  • Diseases of Seaducks in Captivity
    Diseases of seaducks in captivity NIGELLA HILLGARTH and JANET KEAR For many years the Wildfowl Trust has Bufflehead Bucephaia albeola are, on the monitored the health of its collections by other hand, notoriously difficult to breed carrying out post-mortem examinations. (Williams 1971), and the Hooded Merganser Detailed records have been kept by J. V. M. cucullatus is only a little easier (Lubbock Beer (1959—1969), by N. A. Wood 1973). (1970-1973), and by M. J. Brown sub­ The difficulty with which these ducks are sequently. This analysis of the accumulated bred is, to some extent, reflected in the records is the first of a series that will numbers available from the Wildfowl Trust’s describe the cause of death in the various collections at post-mortem. For instance, wildfowl groups. eiders predominate in the records, and saw­ There are seven genera, and 18 species, of bills are commoner than scoters. However, seaducks (M ergini) including the eiders eggs have been collected on a number of oc­ (Johnsgard 1960). All except one species in­ casions from the wild, and hatched artificial­ habit the higher latitudes of the northern ly, so post-mortem findings from dead dow­ hemisphere; the rare exception, the Brazilian ny and juvenile birds do exist, even for M erganser Mergus octosetaceus, has never species that have seldom bred in captivity. been maintained for long in captivity. The whole group is generally difficult to keep and to persuade to breed. There are many M aterials reasons for this; seaducks are divers and animal eaters; most of them spend the Post-mortem data from 641 seaducks dying winter, and some breed, on salt water; those between 1959 and 1976 have been examined.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Native and Naturalized Fauna of Virginia
    Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources List of Native and Naturalized Fauna of Virginia August, 2020 (* denotes naturalized species; ** denotes species native to some areas of Virginia and naturalized in other areas of Virginia) Common Name Scientific Name FISHES: Freshwater Fishes: Alabama Bass * Micropterus henshalli * Alewife Alosa pseudoharengus American Brook Lamprey Lampetra appendix American Eel Anguilla rostrata American Shad Alosa sapidissima Appalachia Darter Percina gymnocephala Ashy Darter Etheostoma cinereum Atlantic Sturgeon Acipenser oxyrhynchus Banded Darter Etheostoma zonale Banded Drum Larimus fasciatus Banded Killifish Fundulus diaphanus Banded Sculpin Cottus carolinae Banded Sunfish Ennaecanthus obesus Bigeye Chub Hybopsis amblops Bigeye Jumprock Moxostoma ariommum Bigmouth Chub Nocomis platyrhynchus Black Bullhead Ameiurus melas Black Crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Blacktip Jumprock Moxostoma cervinum Black Redhorse Moxostoma duquesnei Black Sculpin Cottus baileyi Blackbanded Sunfish Enneacanthus chaetodon Blacknose Dace Rhinichthys atratulus Blackside Dace Chrosomus cumberlandensis Blackside Darter Percina maculata Blotched Chub Erimystax insignis Blotchside Logperch Percina burtoni Blue Catfish * Ictalurus furcatus * Blue Ridge Sculpin Cottus caeruleomentum Blueback Herring Alosa aestivalis Bluebreast Darter Etheostoma camurum Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Bluehead Chub Nocomis leptocephalus Blueside Darter Etheostoma jessiae Bluespar Darter Etheostoma meadiae Bluespotted Sunfish Enneacanthus gloriosus Bluestone
    [Show full text]
  • PHYLOGENY and EVOLUTIONARY ECOLOGY of MODERN SEADUCKS (ANATIDAE: MERGINI)L
    The Condor97:233-255 0 The Ccaper OrnithologicalSociety 1995 PHYLOGENY AND EVOLUTIONARY ECOLOGY OF MODERN SEADUCKS (ANATIDAE: MERGINI)l BRADLEY C. LIVEZEY Section of Birds, CarnegieMuseum of Natural History, 4400 ForbesAvenue, Pittsburgh,PA 15213-4080 Abstract. Phylogenetic relationships of modem seaducks(Me&i) were investigated using a cladistic analysis of 137 morphological characters.The analysis produced a single tree (consistencyindex = 0.692, excludingautapomorphies) with complete resolutionof the relationshipsamong the 25 taxa recognized. Phylogeneticinferences include: (1) the eiders (Polystictaand Somateria) constitutea monophyletic group and are the sister-groupof other Mergini; (2) the remaining generic groups of Mergini, sequencedin order of increasingly close relationship, are Histrionicus,Melanitta + Camptorhynchus,Clangula, Bucephala + Mergellus.Lophodytes, and Mergus;(3) Somateria is monophyletic with S. jischerithe sister- group of its congeners;(4) the black scoters(Melanitta nigra-group)are the sister-groupof other scoters;(5) the Bufflehead (Bucephalaalbeola) is the sister-groupof the goldeneyes (B. clangufaand B. islandica);and (6) relationshipsamong mergansersare as presentedby Livezey (1989). Bootstrappingrevealed that the placement of the Smew as the sister-group of the goldeneyesis only weakly supported,and ancillary analysesrevealed that this place- ment is only one step shorter than its reduction to a trichotomy with the goldeneyesand mergansers(including Lophodytes).A phylogenetic classification of modem seaducksis
    [Show full text]
  • Bird List 4A.Xlsx
    List of Birds Observed at the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie Group/Family Scientific Name Common Name Status At Midewin Gaviiformes Gaviidae Gavia immer Common Loon SM, FM Podicipediformes Podicipedidae Podilymbus podiceps (T) Pied-billed Grebe CB Podicipediformes Phalacrocoracidae Phalacrocorax auritus Doublecrested Cormorant NB Ciconiiformes Ardeidae Ardea herodias Great Blue Heron CB Botaurus lentiginosus (E) American Bittern NB Bubulcus ibis Cattle Egret NB Butorides virescens Green Heron CB Ixobrychus exilis Least Bittern CB Ardea alba Great Egret NB Nycticorax nycticorax (E) Black-crowned Night-Heron NB Ciconiiformes Cathartidae Cathartes aura Turkey Vulture SB Anseriformes Anatidae Aix sponsa Wood Duck CB Anas americana American Wigeon SM, FM Anas clypeata Northern Shoveler SM, FM Anas discors Blue-winged Teal CB Anas platyrhynchos Mallard CB Anas rubripes American Black Duck SM Anas strepera Gadwall SM, FM Aythya affinis Lesser Scaup SM, FM Aythya collaris Ring-necked Duck SM, FM Branta canadensis Canada Goose CB Bucephala albeola Bufflehead SM, FM Bucephala clangula Common Goldeneye SM, FM Lophodytes cucullatus Hooded Merganser CB Mergus serrator Red-breasted Merganser SM, FM Falconiformes Accipitridae Accipiter cooperii (E) Cooper's Hawk NB Accipiter striatus Sharp-shinned Hawk SM, FM Buteo jamaicensis Red-tailed Hawk CB Buteo lineatus Red-shouldered Hawk NB Buteo platypterus Broad-winged Hawk NB, SM, FM Buteo swainsoni (E) Swainson's Hawk SM, FM Circus cyaneus (E,A) Northern Harrier CB Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald Eagle
    [Show full text]
  • ANSERIFORMES Taxon Advisory Group Regional Collection Plan 3Rd Edition • 2020 - 2025
    ANSERIFORMES Taxon Advisory Group Regional Collection Plan 3rd Edition • 2020 - 2025 Edited by Photo by Pinola Conservancy Keith Lovett, Anseriformes TAG Chair Buttonwood Park Zoo Table of Contents Acknowledgements 03 TAG Operational Structure 04 TAG Steering Committee and Advisors: Table 1 05 TAG Definition 06 TAG Mission 06 TAG Vision 06 TAG Strategic Planning Overview 07 TAG Goals Sustainability 08 Conservation 09 Husbandry and Welfare 09 Educational Waterfowl Awareness and Program Support 10 TAG Taxonomy 11 TAG Taxonomy: Table 2 12 Conservation Status of Anseriformes Overview 13 Conservation Status of Anseriformes: Table 3 14 RCP History and Program Designation Program Management Designation 20 Additional Management Designation 21 Selection Criteria Selection Criteria Overview 22 Decision Tree Selection Criteria Categories 23 Proposed EAZA Waterfowl TAG European Endangered 24 Species Program (EEP) Species Anseriformes Decision Tree: Table 4 25 Anseriformes TAG Selection Criteria / Decision Tree: Table 5 26 Anseriformes TAG Selection Criteria / Decision Tree Summary 33 Space Assessment Space Assessment Overview 34 Space Survey Accountability:Responding Insititutions: Table 6 35 Space Survey Accountability: Non-responding Insititutions: Table 7 37 Space Survey Results and Target Size: Table 8 38 Regional Anseriformes Populations: Table 9 39 Summary Table 46 Non-Recommended Species Replacement Overview 47 Non-Recommended Species Replacement Chart: Table 11 48 Management Update: Table 12 51 SSP Five Year Goals and Essential Actions 53
    [Show full text]
  • Birds of Toronto
    i BIRDS OF TORONTO A GUIDE TO THEIR REMARKABLE WORLD • City of Toronto Biodiversity Series • Imagine a Toronto with flourishing natural habitats and an urban environment made safe for a great diversity of wildlife species. Envision a city whose residents treasure their daily encounters with the remarkable and inspiring world of nature, and the variety of plants and animals who share this world. Take pride in a Toronto that aspires to be a world leader in the development of urban initiatives that will be critical to the preservation of our flora and fauna. Cover photo: Jean Iron A flock of Whimbrel viewed from Colonel Samuel Smith Park on 23 May 2007 frames the Toronto skyline. Since the early 20th century, Toronto ornithologists have noted the unique and impressive spring migration of Whimbrel past the city’s waterfront within a narrow 22 – 27 May time frame. In this short stretch of May, literally thousands of Whimbrel migrate past Toronto each spring between their South American wintering grounds and their breeding grounds on the tundra coast of the Hudson Bay Lowlands. In some years, as much as one quarter of the entire eastern North American population is witnessed passing along the Lake Ontario shoreline. Afforded protection by the Migratory Birds Convention Act of 1917, its population is probably still rebounding from intense market hunting pressure in the 19th century. City of Toronto © 2011 American Woodcock ISBN 978-1-895739-67-1 Barry Kent MacKay 1 “Indeed, in its need for variety and acceptance of randomness, a flourishing TABLE OF CONTENTS natural ecosystem is more like a city than like a plantation.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Canadian NAWMP Report
    September 2016 nawmp.wetlandnetwork.ca HabitatMatters 2016 Canadian NAWMP Report “Offshore Wind – Surf Scoters” from the 2016 Canadian Wildlife Habitat Conservation Stamp series. Artist: Pierre Leduc, Stoneham (QC) North American Waterfowl Management Plan —— Plan nord-américain de gestion de la sauvagine —— Plan de Manejo de Aves 2016 Canadian North American Waterfowl Management Plan Report AcuáticasHabitat MattersNorteaméricaa TableContents of 1 About the NAWMP 2 National Overview 2 Accomplishments 3 Expenditures and Contributions 4 Special Feature – A Year of Milestones 6 Habitat Joint Ventures 7 Pacific Birds Habitat Joint Venture 14 Canadian Intermountain Joint Venture 18 Prairie Habitat Joint Venture 24 Eastern Habitat Joint Venture 28 Species Joint Ventures 29 Black Duck Joint Venture 32 Sea Duck Joint Venture 34 Arctic Goose Joint Venture 36 Partners b Habitat Matters 2016 Canadian North American Waterfowl Management Plan Report About the NAWMP Mallards landing on water. The North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP or Ducks Unlimited Canada ‘the Plan’) is an international partnership to restore, conserve and protect waterfowl populations and associated habitats through management decisions based on strong biological waterfowl populations. Mexico became a signatory to foundations. The ultimate goal is to achieve abundant and the Plan with its update in 1994. As a result, the NAWMP resilient waterfowl populations and sustainable landscapes. partnership extends across North America, working at national The Plan engages the community of users and supporters and regional levels on a variety of waterfowl and habitat committed to conservation and valuing waterfowl. management issues. In 1986, the Canadian and American governments signed this Since the creation of the Plan, NAWMP partners have worked international partnership agreement, laying the foundation to conserve and restore wetlands, associated uplands and for international cooperation in the recovery of declining other key habitats for waterfowl across Canada, the United States and Mexico.
    [Show full text]
  • WILDLIFE National Wildlife Refuge
    PEA ISLAND WILDLIFE National Wildlife Refuge • General Information • Amphibians • Reptiles • Mammals • Birds • Birds • Birds General Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge, located in Dare County, North Carolina, is one of over 400 national wildliferefuges nationwide administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Though each refuge was established to provide habitat for certain primary species, each is managed to provide for a diversity of wildlife and opportunities for public enjoyment of these natural resources. Wildlife observation is a popular pastime for millions of people each year. This publication is designed to help refuge visitors observe and identify the wildlife of Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge. Established in 1938 as a wintering sanctuary for waterfowl, Pea Island contains 5,915 acres of coastal barrier island and 25,700 acres of Proclamation Boundary Waters in the Pamlico Sound. Management of the refuge provides diverse habitat types including beach, dunes, salt marsh, fresh and brackish water ponds and salt flats. , In observing the 'Yildlife populations here, remember the dynamic nature of a barrier island. Over the years inlets open and close. The ocean overwashed inter­ mittently during frequent winter storms. Sometimes all surface water is salty. Animal populations here generally have more limiting factors than other places. On an island the mere existence of a species may depend soleiy on its ability to swim or fly. Survival largely relates to its ability to tolerate the harsh salt environment. Is it any wonder that our richest diversity of wildlife is among the avian popu­ lations and our least diverse, the amphibians, who would dehydrate in salt water? Ponder these environ­ mental factors as you observe refuge wildlife.
    [Show full text]