DOCSLIB.ORG

Atlantic Flyway Resident Population Canada Goose Management Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Atlantic Flyway Resident Population Canada Goose Management Plan Atlantic Flyway Resident Population Canada Goose Management Plan Prepared by the Canada Goose Committee Atlantic Flyway Migratory Game Bird Technical Section Adopted by the Atlantic Flyway Council July 2011 ATLANTIC FLYWAY RESIDENT POPULATION CANADA GOOSE MANAGEMENT PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............................................................................................................ii INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................1 DISTRIBUTION AND STATUS .................................................................................................... 2 Breeding Distribution ......................................................................................................................2 Migration and Winter Distribution ..................................................................................................3 Population Trends .............................................................................................................................4 POSITIVE VALUES AND USE ......................................................................................................6 Aesthetic Values ..............................................................................................................................6 Sport Hunting and Harvest ..............................................................................................................7 Harvest Distribution……………………………………………………………………………….8 Harvest Derivation………………………………………………………………………………….9 DAMAGE AND CONFLICTS .......................................................................................................10 Property Damage ............................................................................................................................11 Human Health and Safety Concerns ..............................................................................................11 Agricultural Resources ...................................................................................................................13 Natural Resources ..........................................................................................................................15 Goose Damage Management .........................................................................................................15 INTERACTIONS WITH MIGRANT GOOSE POPULATIONS .................................................16 MANAGEMENT GOAL ................................................................................................................17 MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES.................................................................18 Population Management ................................................................................................................18 Monitoring and Evaluation .............................................................................................................21 Compatibility with Other Goose Populations..................................................................................22 Relief of Damage and Conflicts...........................................................................................................23 Public Use and Enjoyment…………………………………………………………………….……26 REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................................28 FIGURES AND TABLES……......................................................................................................36 APPENDIX: Resident Canada Goose Population Status in Atlantic Flyway States and Provinces ………………………………………………………………….………………………………...57 ATLANTIC FLYWAY ii RESIDENT POPULATION CANADA GOOSE MANAGEMENT PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Local-nesting or “resident” Canada geese were introduced into the Atlantic Flyway (AF) during the early 1900s and now comprise the largest population of geese in the flyway, with an estimated 1.1 million birds in spring 2011. This plan describes the status and values (positive and negative) of Atlantic Flyway Resident Population (AFRP) Canada geese and summarizes the consensus of wildlife agencies in the AF with respect to management of these birds. As such, this document provides direction and objectives for cooperative efforts. Direct actions resulting from implementation of the plan must still go through normal regulatory procedures, where additional environmental assessment and public input can occur. The overall management goal of this plan is to: Manage AFRP Canada geese to achieve a socially acceptable balance between the positive values and negative conflicts associated with these birds. Specific management objectives to achieve this goal are as follows: 1. Reduce AFRP Canada geese to 700,000 birds (spring estimate) by 2020, distributed in accordance with levels prescribed by individual states and provinces. 2. Permit a wide variety of effective and efficient options for relief of damage and conflicts associated with AFRP Canada geese. 3. Provide maximum opportunities for use and appreciation of AFRP Canada geese, consistent with population objectives. 4. Ensure compatibility of AFRP goose management with management of migrant goose populations in the AF. 5. Annually monitor populations, harvest, and damage/conflict levels to evaluate effectiveness of management actions. For each objective, specific strategies are identified which represent activities or policies to be undertaken or supported by state and federal wildlife agencies. Strategies include: (1) increasing sport harvest of AFRP Canada geese (without adversely affecting migrant geese), (2) allowing capture and euthanasia of geese in problem areas, (3) reducing recruitment on public and private lands, (4) allowing a wide variety of damage control techniques by private and public property owners, (5) monitoring population size, distribution, harvest, and damage complaints, (6) conducting research, and (7) effectively communicating with the public about the need for balance rather than eradication of AFRP geese. In addition to member agencies of the Atlantic Flyway Council, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services program has a primary role in AFRP goose management, and they were full partners in development and anticipated implementation of this plan. Their assistance here and in providing programs to alleviate goose damage in the AF are acknowledged and appreciated. iii ATLANTIC FLYWAY RESIDENT POPULATION CANADA GOOSE MANAGEMENT PLAN INTRODUCTION For purposes of this plan, Atlantic Flyway Resident Population (AFRP) Canada geese are geese that hatch or nest in any Atlantic Flyway (AF) state, or in Canada at or below 48 N latitude and east of 80 W longitude, excluding Newfoundland (Figure 1). As their name implies, resident geese spend most of the year near their breeding areas, although many in northern latitudes do migrate. Population dynamics vary across the breeding range and local flocks exhibit a high degree of site fidelity, so management of sub-populations at the state or provincial level is possible. However, because federal laws and regulations protect all Canada geese, including non-migratory resident geese, coordinated management within the flyway is necessary. Atlantic Flyway Resident Population geese are distinctly different from Canada geese that nested in the flyway historically. The original stock in pre-colonial times was primarily Branta canadensis canadensis (Delacour 1954), but they were extirpated long ago. The present- day population was introduced and established during the early 20th century, and is comprised of various subspecies or races of Canada geese, including B. c. maxima, B. c. moffitti, B. c. interior, B. c. canadensis, and possibly other subspecies, reflecting their diverse origins (Dill and Lee 1970, Pottie and Heusmann 1979, Benson et al. 1982). The first resident geese were birds released by private individuals in the early 1900s. When use of live decoys for hunting was prohibited in 1935, captive flocks of domesticated or semi-domesticated geese were numerous (estimated at more than 15,000 birds), and many were liberated in parks or allowed to wander at large (Dill and Lee 1970). From the 1950s through the 1980s, wildlife agencies in many AF states were actively involved in relocation and stocking programs to establish resident goose populations, primarily in rural areas. Nuisance flocks in urban/suburban conflict areas were a primary source of birds for these programs, which were highly successful and were mostly discontinued by 1990. Populations of resident Canada geese have increased dramatically in recent years across North America (Ankney 1996, Nelson and Outing 1998). The dramatic growth and importance of the AFRP was not fully recognized until recently. The first management plan for these birds was developed in 1989, when it became apparent that they were contributing significantly to sport harvests, and human/goose conflicts were becoming more common, especially in urban/suburban areas. In the 1980s, biologists also became concerned that increasing numbers of AFRP geese might be masking a decline in the number of migratory Atlantic Population (AP) Canada geese as measured by the Midwinter Waterfowl Survey. Banding studies have confirmed that resident geese are not AP geese that simply stopped migrating north to breed; they are distinct populations with very different population growth rates, management needs and opportunities.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Canada's Aging Population and Income Support Programs
    FRASER RESEARCH BULLETIN April 2021 Canada’s Aging Population and Income Support Programs by Steven Globerman Summary There are two major taxpayer-funded in- the GIS Allowance and administrative costs) are come support programs for Canadians aged 65 projected to increase by almost 70 percent and and older: The Old Age Security (OAS) and the by an additional 136 percent from 2030 to 3060. Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) pro- Total expenditures related to these in- grams. come support programs are projected to range The absolute number of individuals in Can- between 2.8 percent and 3.1 percent of Gross ada aged 65 and older is projected to approxi- Domestic Product between 2020 and 2060 with mately double between 2019 and 2060, so that a peak between 2030 and 2035. by 2060, 25 percent of Canada’s projected total By way of context, expenditures on the OAS population will be 65 or older. and GIS programs were almost 50 percent greater Over the 10-year period from 2020 to 2030, than the federal government’s transfer payments to total expenditures on the OAS and GIS (plus the provinces for health care services. fraserinstitute.org FRASER RESEARCH BULLETIN 1 Aging and Income Support Programs Introduction plications for the federal government’s fiscal “Demography is destiny” is an old saying, and it position. reflects the fact that demographic change, par- The OAS is a monthly payment to individuals ticularly given the age distribution of a popu- aged 65 or older up to a maximum amount of lation, is unlikely to depart substantially from approximately $615 per month (as of January- a predictable path.
    [Show full text]
  • Atlantic Flyway Shorebird Initiative
    2021 GRANT SLATE Atlantic Flyway Shorebird Initiative NFWF CONTACTS Bridget Collins Senior Manager, Private Lands and Bird Conservation, [email protected] 202-297-6759 Scott Hall Senior Scientist, Bird Conservation [email protected] 202-595-2422 PARTNERS Red knots ABOUT NFWF Chartered by Congress in 1984, OVERVIEW the National Fish and Wildlife The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF), the US Fish and Wildlife Service and Foundation (NFWF) protects and Southern Company announce a fourth year of funding for the Atlantic Flyway Shorebird restores the nation’s fish, wildlife, program. Six new or continuing shorebird conservation grants totaling nearly $625,000 plants and habitats. Working with were awarded. These six awards generated $656,665 in match from grantees, for a total federal, corporate and individual conservation impact of $1.28 million. Overall, this slate of projects will improve habitat partners, NFWF has funded more management on more than 50,000 acres, conduct outreach to more than 100,000 people, than 5,000 organizations and and will complete a groundbreaking, science-based toolkit to help managers successfully generated a total conservation reduce human disturbance of shorebirds year-round. impact of $6.1 billion. The Atlantic Flyway Shorebirds program aims to increase populations for three focal Learn more at www.nfwf.org species by improving habitat functionality and condition at critical sites, supporting the species’ full annual lifecycles. The Atlantic Flyway Shorebird business plan outlines NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS strategies to address key stressors for the American oystercatcher, red knot and whimbrel. 1133 15th Street, NW Suite 1000 approaches to address habitat loss, predation, and human disturbance.
    [Show full text]
  • Exporter Guide
    Required Report: Required - Public Distribution Date: December 31,2020 Report Number: CA2020-0100 Report Name: Exporter Guide Country: Canada Post: Ottawa Report Category: Exporter Guide Prepared By: Aurela Delibashi, Agricultural Marketing Specialist Approved By: Evan Mangino Report Highlights: Canada was the number one overseas market for U.S. food and agricultural exports in 2019, importing more than $16 billion of U.S. high-value, consumer-oriented goods. Unparalleled regulatory cooperation, comparability and trustworthiness in food safety systems, sophisticated transportation logistics and financial markets, geographic proximity, similar consumer preferences, and relatively affluent consumers are among the reasons why Canada continues to offer excellent export opportunities for new-to-export small- and medium-sized U.S. companies. THIS REPORT CONTAINS ASSESSMENTS OF COMMODITY AND TRADE ISSUES MADE BY USDA STAFF AND NOT NECESSARILY STATEMENTS OF OFFICIAL U.S. GOVERNMENT POLICY Market Fact Sheet: Canada Executive Summary CANADA QUICK FACTS 2019 The population of Canada is approximately 38 million with Total Imports of Consumer-Oriented Products roughly 90 percent of Canadians living within 100 miles of the $27 billion U.S. border. In 2019, Canada was the leading export destination Imports of U.S. Consumer-Oriented Products for U.S. agricultural products. For new-to-market and new-to- $16 billion export firms, Canada offers stable financial markets and a List of Top 10 Growth Packaged Food Products in Canada sophisticated logistics network supporting $136 million of daily 1) Biscuits/Snack Bars/Fruit Snacks 6) Confectionary two-way trade in food and agricultural products. In 2019, 2) Savory Snacks 7) Baked Goods Canada’s food and beverage sector was valued at $262 billion, 3) Spreads 8) Processed Fruits/Veg.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecoregions of New England Forested Land Cover, Nutrient-Poor Frigid and Cryic Soils (Mostly Spodosols), and Numerous High-Gradient Streams and Glacial Lakes
    58. Northeastern Highlands The Northeastern Highlands ecoregion covers most of the northern and mountainous parts of New England as well as the Adirondacks in New York. It is a relatively sparsely populated region compared to adjacent regions, and is characterized by hills and mountains, a mostly Ecoregions of New England forested land cover, nutrient-poor frigid and cryic soils (mostly Spodosols), and numerous high-gradient streams and glacial lakes. Forest vegetation is somewhat transitional between the boreal regions to the north in Canada and the broadleaf deciduous forests to the south. Typical forest types include northern hardwoods (maple-beech-birch), northern hardwoods/spruce, and northeastern spruce-fir forests. Recreation, tourism, and forestry are primary land uses. Farm-to-forest conversion began in the 19th century and continues today. In spite of this trend, Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and 5 level III ecoregions and 40 level IV ecoregions in the New England states and many Commission for Environmental Cooperation Working Group, 1997, Ecological regions of North America – toward a common perspective: Montreal, Commission for Environmental Cooperation, 71 p. alluvial valleys, glacial lake basins, and areas of limestone-derived soils are still farmed for dairy products, forage crops, apples, and potatoes. In addition to the timber industry, recreational homes and associated lodging and services sustain the forested regions economically, but quantity of environmental resources; they are designed to serve as a spatial framework for continue into ecologically similar parts of adjacent states or provinces. they also create development pressure that threatens to change the pastoral character of the region.
    [Show full text]
  • A Story of Migration P/E LTM 34.8X EV/EBITDA LTM 24.7X Canada Goose Parkas Have Been Well Loved by Those in the Cold for Over Six Decades
    RESEARCHFebruaryREPORT 3, 2020 FebruaryA 3, Story 2020 of Migration Stock Rating BUY Price Target CAD $66.56 Current Price CAD $39.64 Bear Price Bull Case Target Case $53.75 $66.56 $72.96 Ticker GOOS Canada Goose Holdings Inc. Market Cap (MM) $4,755 A Story of Migration P/E LTM 34.8x EV/EBITDA LTM 24.7x Canada Goose parkas have been well loved by those in the cold for over six decades. The company was founded in 1957 under the name Metro 52 Week Performance Sportswear, originally serving as a small-scale supplier to the most demanding winter customers such as the Canadian Rangers and RCMP. 115 Since then, the brand has grown to global prominence, going public in 2017 while committing to keep design and manufacturing in Canada. 100 GOOS generated a C$144M in profit on C$830M in revenue in 2019 while commanding gross margins of 62%. However, shares have fallen over 50% since the high in November 2018, creating an intriguing opportunity to 85 look at an emerging Canadian icon with a promising future. Investment Theses 70 (1) Authentic identity brand with a storied past is underpinned by technical product excellence, creating a formidable barrier to entry. 55 Canada Goose parkas are becoming a worldwide status symbol among 01-Feb-19 01-Aug-19 01-Feb-20 luxury consumers. GOOS S&P/TSX Disc. Index (2) The company maintains a seemingly long runway, drawing on a channel shift, geographic shift, and category shift to drive margin Consumers expansion and top-line growth over the next decade.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 8 Migration Studies
    Chapter 8 Migration Studies 100 Migration Studies Overview Theme he Pacific Flyway is a route taken by migratory birds during flights between breeding grounds in the north and wintering grounds in the south. Steigerwald Lake National Wildlife Refuge plays an important role in migration by providing birds with a protected resting area during their arduous journey. Migration makes it possible for birds to benefit the most from favorable weather conditions; they breed and feed in the north during the summer and rest and feed in the warmer south during the winter. This pattern is called return migration — the most common type of migration by birds. Through a variety of activities, students will learn about the factors and hazards of bird migration on the Pacific Flyway. Background The migration of birds usually refers to their regular flights between summer and winter homes. Some birds migrate thousands of miles, while others may travel less than a hundred miles. This seasonal movement has long been a mystery to humans. Aristotle, the naturalist and philosopher of ancient Greece, noticed that cranes, pelicans, geese, swans, doves, and many other birds moved to warmer places for the winter. Like others of times past, he proposed theories that were widely accepted for hundreds of years. One of his theories was that many birds spent the winter sleeping in hollow trees, caves, or beneath the mud in marshes. 101 Through natural selection, migration evolved as an advantageous behavior. Birds migrate north to nest and breed because the competition for food and space is substantially lower there. In addition, during the summer months the food supply is considerably better in many northern climates (e.g., Arctic regions).
    [Show full text]
  • Harvest Distribution and Derivation of Atlantic Flyway Canada Geese
    Articles Harvest Distribution and Derivation of Atlantic Flyway Canada Geese Jon D. Klimstra,* Paul I. Padding U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, 11510 American Holly Drive, Laurel, Maryland 20708 Abstract Harvest management of Canada geese Branta canadensis is complicated by the fact that temperate- and subarctic- breeding geese occur in many of the same areas during fall and winter hunting seasons. These populations cannot readily be distinguished, thereby complicating efforts to estimate population-specific harvest and evaluate harvest strategies. In the Atlantic Flyway, annual banding and population monitoring programs are in place for subarctic- breeding (North Atlantic Population, Southern James Bay Population, and Atlantic Population) and temperate- breeding (Atlantic Flyway Resident Population [AFRP]) Canada geese. We used a combination of direct band recoveries and estimated population sizes to determine the distribution and derivation of the harvest of those four populations during the 2004–2005 through 2008–2009 hunting seasons. Most AFRP geese were harvested during the special September season (42%) and regular season (54%) and were primarily taken in the state or province in which they were banded. Nearly all of the special season harvest was AFRP birds: 98% during September seasons and 89% during late seasons. The regular season harvest in Atlantic Flyway states was also primarily AFRP geese (62%), followed in importance by the Atlantic Population (33%). In contrast, harvest in eastern Canada consisted mainly of subarctic geese (42% Atlantic Population, 17% North Atlantic Population, and 6% Southern James Bay Population), with temperate- breeding geese making up the rest. Spring and summer harvest was difficult to characterize because band reporting rates for subsistence hunters are poorly understood; consequently, we were unable to determine the magnitude of subsistence harvest definitively.
    [Show full text]
  • Age Ratios and Their Possible Use in Determining Autumn Routes of Passerine Migrants
    Wilson Bull., 93(2), 1981, pp. 164-188 AGE RATIOS AND THEIR POSSIBLE USE IN DETERMINING AUTUMN ROUTES OF PASSERINE MIGRANTS C.JOHN RALPH A principal interest of early students of passerine migration was the determination of direction, location and width of migratory routes. In such studies, it was presumed that an area where the species was most abun- dant was the main migration route. However, during fall, passerine mi- grants tend to be silent and inconspicuous, rendering censusing subjective at best. Species also differ in preferred habitat, affecting the results of censuses and the number captured by mist netting. In this study, I used the abundance of migrants with another possible criterion, their age ratios, in order to hypothesize possible migratory routes. Based upon information about species abundance in different areas, a lively debate sprang up in the past between a school favoring narrow routes and one advocating broad front migration. The former suggested that birds followed topographical features (“leading lines”) such as river valleys, coast lines and mountain ranges (Baird 1866, Palmen 1876, Winkenwer- der 1902, Clark 1912, Schenk 1922). The latter group proposed that a species migrated over a broad geographical area regardless of topograph- ical features (Gatke 1895; Cooke 1904, 1905; Geyr von Schweppenburg 1917, 1924; Moreau 1927). Thompson (1926) and later Lincoln (1935), sug- gested that both schools were probably right, depending upon the species involved. Early ornithologists were possibly misled because of the differ- ences between easily observable (and often narrow front), diurnal migra- tion and less obvious, but probably more common, nocturnal movements.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Flyway Databook 2020 MIGRATORY GAME BIRD HUNTING PERMITS by PROVINCE/TERRITORY of PURCHASE in CANADA
    CENTRAL FLYWAY HARVEST AND POPULATION SURVEY DATA BOOK 2020 compiled by: James A. Dubovsky CENTRAL FLYWAY REPRESENTATIVE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE DIVISION OF MIGRATORY BIRD MANAGEMENT 134 Union Blvd., Suite 540 Lakewood, CO 80228 (303) 275-2386 Suggested Citation: Dubovsky, J. A., compiler. 2020. Central Flyway harvest and population survey data book 2020. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Lakewood CO. CENTRAL FLYWAY 1948-2020 73 YEARS OF MIGRATORY BIRD CONSERVATION Important Note to Users: From 1961-2001, estimates of waterfowl harvest, waterfowl hunter participation, and waterfowl hunter success in the United States were derived from a combination of several sources: 1) sales of migratory bird conservation stamps (Duck Stamps), 2) a Mail Questionnaire Survey of individuals who purchased ducks stamps for hunting purposes, and 3) the Waterfowl Parts Collection Survey (PCS). This survey, which was based on duck stamp sales was discontinued after the 2001 hunting season. Beginning in 1999, new survey methods were implemented that obtained estimates of waterfowl harvest, hunter participation, and hunter success from: 1) States' lists of migratory bird hunters identified through the Harvest Information Program (HIP), 2) a questionnaire (HIP Survey) sent to a sample of those hunters, and 3) the Waterfowl PCS. The basic difference is that during 1961 - 2001 waterfowl hunter activity and harvest estimates were derived from a Mail Questionnaire Survey (MQS) of duck stamp purchasers, whereas from 1999 to the present those estimates were derived from HIP surveys of people identified as migratory bird hunters by the States. Both survey systems relied on the Waterfowl PCS for species composition data.
    [Show full text]
  • Canadian Demographics at a Glance
    Catalogue no. 91-003-X ISSN 1916-1832 Canadian Demographics at a Glance Second edition by Demography Division Release date: February 19, 2016 How to obtain more information For information about this product or the wide range of services and data available from Statistics Canada, visit our website, www.statcan.gc.ca. You can also contact us by email at [email protected] telephone, from Monday to Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., at the following toll-free numbers: • Statistical Information Service 1-800-263-1136 • National telecommunications device for the hearing impaired 1-800-363-7629 • Fax line 1-877-287-4369 Depository Services Program • Inquiries line 1-800-635-7943 • Fax line 1-800-565-7757 Standards of service to the public Standard table symbols Statistics Canada is committed to serving its clients in a prompt, The following symbols are used in Statistics Canada reliable and courteous manner. To this end, Statistics Canada has publications: developed standards of service that its employees observe. To . not available for any reference period obtain a copy of these service standards, please contact Statistics .. not available for a specific eferencer period Canada toll-free at 1-800-263-1136. The service standards are ... not applicable also published on www.statcan.gc.ca under “Contact us” > 0 true zero or a value rounded to zero “Standards of service to the public.” 0s value rounded to 0 (zero) where there is a meaningful distinction between true zero and the value that was rounded p preliminary Note of appreciation r revised Canada owes the success of its statistical system to a x suppressed to meet the confidentiality requirements long-standing partnership between Statistics Canada, the of the Statistics Act citizens of Canada, its businesses, governments and other E use with caution institutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Canada-Goose-Investor-Presentation
    This presentation includes forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements generally can be identified by the use of words such as “anticipate,” “expect,” “plan,” “could,” “may,” “will,” “believe,” “estimate,” “forecast,” “goal,” “project,” and other words of similar meaning. These forward-looking statements address various matters including our outlook for fiscal 2020 and our long-term outlook, related assumptions, and our plans for strategic investments to support future growth. Each forward-looking statement contained in this presentation is subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such statement. Applicable risks and uncertainties include, among others, our expectations regarding industry trends, our business plan and growth strategies, our expectations regarding seasonal trends, our inventory levels ahead of these seasonal trends, our ability to implement our growth strategies, our ability to keep pace with changing consumer preferences, our ability to maintain the strength of our brand and protect our intellectual property, as well as the risks identified under the heading “Risk Factors” in our Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2019, and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), and the securities commissions or similar securities regulatory authorities in each of the provinces and territories of Canada (“Canadian securities regulatory authorities”), as well as the other information we file with the SEC and Canadian securities regulatory authorities. We caution investors not to rely on the forward-looking statements contained in this presentation when making an investment decision in our securities. The forward-looking statements in this presentation speak only as of May 29, 2019, and we undertake no obligation to update or revise any of these statements.
    [Show full text]
  • A Bird's EYE View on Flyways
    A BIRD’S EYE VIEW ON FLywayS A brief tour by the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals IMPRINT Published by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Secretariat of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) A BIRD’S EYE VIEW ON FLywayS A brief tour by the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals UNEP / CMS Secretariat, Bonn, Germany. 68 pages. Produced by UNEP/CMS Text based on a report by Joost Brouwer in colaboration with Gerard Boere Coordinator Francisco Rilla, CMS Secretariat, E-mail: [email protected] Editing & Proof Reading Hanah Al-Samaraie, Robert Vagg Editing Assistant Stéphanie de Pury Publishing Manager Hanah Al-Samaraie, Email: [email protected] Design Karina Waedt © 2009 United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) / Convention on Migratory Species (CMS). This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. UNEP would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from the United Nations Environment Programme. DISCLAIMER The contents of this volume do not necessarily reflect the views of UNEP or contributory organizations.The designations employed and the presentations do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNEP or contrib- utory organizations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area in its authority, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
    [Show full text]