American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016-2025

Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016-2025

Prepared by IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME May 2016

Recommended Citation: Idaho Department of Fish and Game. 2016. Management plan for the conservation of American white pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025. Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise, USA.

Front and Back Cover Photographs: Front Cover: “One pelican on the foreground and a small group of pelicans on the background”, Image ID 94978795, Igor Kovalenko©, shutterstock.com. Back Cover: “American white pelican lifting off”, Image ID 94978789, Igor Kovalenko©, shutterstock.com.

Additional copies: Additional copies can be downloaded from the Idaho Department of Fish and Game website at idfg.idaho.gov

Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) adheres to all applicable state and federal laws and regulations related to discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, gender, disability or veteran’s status. If you feel you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility of IDFG, or if you desire further information, please write to: Idaho Department of Fish and Game, P.O. Box 25, Boise, ID 83707 or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Federal Assistance, Mailstop: MBSP-4020, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22203, Telephone: (703) 358-2156. This publication will be made available in alternative formats upon request. Please contact IDFG for assistance.

Costs associated with this publication are available from IDFG in accordance with Section 60-202, Idaho Code. Approved May 2016 Idaho Fish and Game Commission Meeting. Printed 1/2015/50/PCA 47872

Idaho Department of Fish & Game iii Executive Summary

umbers of practices were modified to reduce opportunistic NAmerican white predation by pelicans. Significant hazing actions pelicans (Pelecanus (noise making and bird wires), with lethal erythrorhynchos), reinforcement, have been conducted in an including adult attempt to reduce pelican predation on migrating nesting birds, have Yellowstone cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii PELICAN CCBY IDAHO FISH AND GAME increased dramatically bouvieri). Lethal actions have been authorized in southern Idaho since 2002. These increases by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service through a have been well documented at Idaho’s main depredation permit in an attempt to increase two nesting colonies located on islands in the effectiveness of hazing. Modifications to Blackfoot Reservoir and Lake Walcott (Minidoka the nesting island, hazing at the nesting island, National Wildlife Refuge [NWR]). Numbers at and USFWS-permitted egg/nest destruction Minidoka NWR increased from approximately have been used to reduce the number of nesting 400 breeding birds in 2002 to more than 4,000 pelicans and their productivity. breeding birds in 2008. The Blackfoot Reservoir This document represents the IDFG-proposed colony increased from approximately 1,400 ten-year management plan (2016-2025) for breeding birds in 2002 to 2,400 breeding birds in reducing pelican predation on fish in areas where 2008. Since implementation of the 2009 pelican current management conflicts exist. The plan management plan, the Blackfoot and Minidoka identifies both statewide and regional pelican colonies have averaged 2,126 breeding birds/ population and management objectives. In yr (range 724-3,174) and 3,400 breeding birds/ southeast Idaho (IDFG Southeast Region), where yr (range 1,998-4,408), respectively. Pelicans impacts of avian predation on fish are greatest, established a new breeding colony at Island the regional population objective (established Park Reservoir in 2012 with approximately 300 in 2009) is to maintain a five-year average of breeding birds, increasing to over 600 birds by 700 breeding pelicans at Blackfoot Reservoir. 2015. Pelican distribution and abundance has The colony objective for Minidoka is to maintain increased at other water bodies throughout 1,800 breeding birds, and the objective for Island southeastern Idaho. Park is 300 breeders. Collectively, management Increases in pelican populations are generally objectives are intended to reduce pelican considered as positive contributions to pelican predation on migrating native cutthroat trout, and conservation goals in the western population, to reduce pelican predation on sport fish in other but the increased number of pelicans has also important recreational fisheries. resulted in documented predation impacts The overall goal of this plan is to maintain viable on native cutthroat trout and other important breeding populations of pelicans in Idaho while recreational fisheries in southern Idaho. Idaho reducing impacts to native fish and recreational Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) believes fisheries. Emphasis is on reducing predation there is a need to develop an approach to rates in fisheries in southern Idaho through manage impacts of pelicans on native trout and a combination of management actions that sport fisheries in Idaho that balance conservation include hazing of foraging birds, manipulation of and recreation interests for both birds and fish. nesting habitat, and/or directly limiting pelican IDFG has conducted numerous management production and recruitment. Comprehensive actions in recent years in an attempt to reduce monitoring of both bird and fish populations will impacts of pelicans on trout in the Blackfoot facilitate an adaptive management approach Reservoir-Blackfoot River complex. Trout stocking throughout the life of this plan. iv Idaho Department of Fish & Game Table of Contents

Introduction...... 1 Plan Goals and Objectives...... 1

American White Pelicans...... 2 Population Status and Trends...... 2

Rangewide...... 2

Western Population...... 2

Idaho...... 4

Ecology...... 5

Taxonomy and Distribution ...... 5

Breeding...... 6

Reproductive Success and Survival...... 6

Feeding Habits...... 6

Conservation status...... 7

State classification...... 7

Fisheries Conflicts...... 8 Native Trout...... 8

Yellowstone Cutthroat Trout...... 8

Bonneville Cutthroat Trout...... 8

Other Sport Fisheries...... 9

Adaptive Management...... 10

Management Goals, Objectives and Actions...... 11 Statewide...... 11

Goal...... 11

Objectives...... 11

Panhandle, Clearwater, and Salmon Regions...... 12

Management Objectives and Actions...... 12

Southwest Region...... 12

Pelican Populations and Trends...... 12

Management Issues...... 12

Strategies Implemented...... 12

Idaho Department of Fish & Game v Table of Contents cont.

Management Objectives and Actions...... 12

Magic Valley Region...... 13

Pelican Population and Trends...... 13

Management Issues...... 14

Strategies Implemented...... 16

Management Objectives and Actions...... 16

Southeast Region...... 17

Pelican Populations and Trends...... 17

Management Issues...... 18

Strategies Implemented...... 19

Hazing and Lethal Reinforcement...... 19

Bird Lines on River...... 20

Nesting Island Exclusion and Hazing...... 20

Nest Destruction...... 21

Management Objectives and Actions...... 21

Upper Snake Region...... 22

Pelican Populations and Trends...... 22

Management Issues...... 23

Strategies Implemented...... 24

Management Objectives and Actions...... 24

Statewide Coordination...... 25 Pelican Monitoring...... 25

Breeding Population Estimates ...... 25

Statewide Distribution and Abundance ...... 25

Production and Productivity...... 26

Marking...... 26

Fisheries...... 27

Pelican Predation Estimates...... 27

Catch Rates and Return to Creel of Hatchery Trout...... 27

Statewide Information Needs...... 28

vi Idaho Department of Fish & Game Public Outreach...... 28

Literature Cited...... 29

Appendices...... 32

List of Figures

Figure 1. Number of nests reported from western American white pelican colonies from 1980-2013, with a comparison between the number of nests from five colonies which have been continuously active since at least the 1960s (“Old”) and four colonies that are new or re-established since 1980 (“New”)...... 2

Figure 2. Current locations and relative sizes (average of 2010-2014 nest counts) of western pelican colonies...... 3

Figure 3. Relative contribution by state and province of breeding adult American white pelicans in the western population (these data represent population estimates from the 2014 Pacific Flyway range wide survey effort)...... 3

Figure 4. Estimated number of breeding pelicans at Idaho’s three nesting colonies during annual nest counts, 1989-2015. Counts were conducted once per season during the peak nesting period. For Blackfoot Reservoir, the gap between 1993 and 2002 reflects lack of survey effort, not necessarily absence of pelicans...... 4

Figure 5. Historic (pre-1960) and current (2013) distribution of western American white pelican colonies. The dashed black line represents median latitude of historic colonies and the solid black line represents median latitude of currently active colonies...... 5

Figure 6. Number of breeding pelicans at Minidoka National Wildlife Refuge, 1989–2015, and the population objective for 2016-2025...... 13

Figure 7. Pelican response to mortality disposal at private hatcheries...... 14

Figure 8. Number of breeding pelicans at Blackfoot Reservoir, 1993 and 2002–2015, and number of spawning cutthroat trout in the Blackfoot River above the Reservoir, 2001–2015...... 17

Figure 9. Estimated productivity (pre-fledglings / nest) and production (number of pre-fledglings) at Blackfoot Reservoir, 2007 – 2015. The triangle symbol represents productivity of remaining nests after colony management actions...... 18

Figure 11. Detections of banded pelicans from the Blackfoot (black dots) and Minidoka (red dots) colonies, 2007-2015...... 27

Figure A. Relationship between a study waters’ distance from the nearest American white pelican colony and the recovery efficiency (at the nearest colony) of PIT tags implanted in hatchery Rainbow Trout and fed directly to pelicans at that study water. The line and equation depict an exponential relationship fit to the data...... 34

Idaho Department of Fish & Game vii List of Figures cont.

Figure B. Relationship between a study waters’ distance to the nearest American white pelican nesting colony and the pelican predation rate on hatchery Rainbow Trout stocked at that water. Predation rates for the waters labeled with an “x” were predicted based on the relationship in Figure A. The line and equation depict an exponential relationship fit tothe data...... 34

Figure C. Relationship between estimates of American white pelican predation and angler harvest in select Idaho waters where pelicans have been known to congregate. Predation rates for the waters labeled with an “x” were predicted based on the relationship in Figure A...... 35

PELICAN CCBY IDAHO FISH AND GAME

viii Idaho Department of Fish & Game Introduction

merican white pelicans (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos; Apelican) breed at three nesting colonies in Idaho and abundance of breeders has increased significantly since the 1990s. The pelican colony on Blackfoot Reservoir increased from approximately 200 breeding birds in 1993 to almost 2,400 in 2008. The colony at Minidoka National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) experienced similar growth, reaching over 4,400 breeding birds in 2012, and pelicans established a new breeding colony at Island Park Reservoir in 2012. Increases in pelican distribution and abundance were documented throughout southern Idaho through 2010, generally coinciding with documented population increases at the nesting colonies. Since 2010 the statewide breeding population has fluctuated annually, with a most- recent 5-year average of 5,600 breeding pelicans. In Idaho, pelicans predominantly forage on abundant populations of nongame fish resulting in non-consequential or acceptable impacts to other resource values and users. However, pelican predation in some areas measurably impacts sport fishing and native trout conservation programs, creating conflict between pelican and fisheries management objectives.

Based primarily on the documented conflict between ADULT PELICANS CCBY IDAHO FISH AND GAME increasing pelican predation and native Yellowstone cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii bouvieri; YCT) in the Blackfoot River drainage, Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) developed a five-year pelican management plan in 2009 (IDFG 2009). Emphasis was on maintaining viable populations of breeding pelicans in Idaho while reducing predation on YCT and other fisheries. Since 2009 IDFG has actively monitored pelican populations and, in coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), implemented a number of measures at Blackfoot to reduce predation impacts. IDFG has also completed several projects to document direct pelican predation impacts at Blackfoot and other southern Idaho fisheries which help describe the scope of conflicts. This new information serves as a basis on which to update the 2009 plan. An adaptive approach to managing pelican predation conflicts, and ongoing monitoring of both pelicans and fisheries, will be required to ensure an appropriate balance between pelican conservation goals and other public resources.

Plan Goals and Objectives

The overall goal of this plan is to establish a management framework which ensures viable breeding populations of pelicans in Idaho while reducing impacts to native trout and recreational fisheries. Emphasis is on reducing predation rates through a combination of management actions that could include hazing and lethal reinforcement of foraging birds, manipulation of nesting habitat, and directly limiting pelican production and recruitment by removing or oiling eggs. Comprehensive monitoring of both pelican and fish populations will facilitate an adaptive management approach throughout the duration of this plan.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 1 American White Pelicans

Population Status and Trends 1984), this included four colonies in Idaho. By the late 1970s, the western population declined to eight colonies and 16,000 breeding birds, none Rangewide of which were in Idaho. Pelicans of the western The continental population of pelicans population are an example of a “boom-and-bust” experienced long-term declines until the 1960s species (Anderson and King 2005), with breeding (Knopf and Evans 2004). The population has colonies fluctuating in size and productivity from subsequently experienced a steady increase since year to year. In less than a five-year period, the the 1980s, likely due to the decrease in the use of number of nesting birds and/or nest success at organochlorine pesticides, increased federal and particular colonies can vary by 50–100% or more. state protection, and the adaptability of pelicans Changes in colony size from year to year may not (Keith 2005). The most current continental be reflected in the pelican population as a whole estimate, using survey data from 1998-2001, was or in the number of birds using local areas during 134,000 breeding pelicans in North America (King the nesting season. and Anderson 2005) and an unknown number of non-breeding individuals. Following the decline in pelican abundance in the western population, the USFWS drafted the Western Population “Guidelines for the Management of the American White Pelican, Western Population” in 1984, in In the early 1900s, there were approximately hopes of establishing or reestablishing colonies 24 breeding pelican colonies in the western in the West to avoid potential ESA listing of population segment, and 60,000 breeding birds the western pelican population. The western (compilation of data from: Schaller 1964; Shuford population subsequently increased through the 2005; Keith 2005; D. Withers, pers. comm.; Luft, 1990s to a peak of 46,000 breeding birds, and pers. comm.). According to the USFWS (USFWS has since remained relatively stable (Moulton et

2 Idaho Department of Fish & Game American White Pelicans

al. In Review; Fig. 1). Three new colonies were established in the early 1990s and include Arod Lake (MT), Canyon Ferry Lake (MT), and Badger Island on the Columbia River (WA). Since 2007, three additional colonies have become active. These include Malheur NWR (OR), which was inactive for a number of years but has been used consistently by breeding birds since 2010, Miller Sandspit (WA; established in 2010), and Island Park Reservoir (ID; established in 2012). Current (2014) information indicates the western population includes 18 colonies (four were inactive in 2014) and approximately 43,000 breeding birds (Pacific Flyway Council 2015; Fig. 2). In 2014 approximately 92% of the breeding population was distributed among six colonies; these include the colonies at Minidoka NWR and Blackfoot Reservoir. Idaho currently supports approximately 16% of the western pelican breeding population and is the third largest relative contributor to this population (Fig. 3). Figure 2. Current locations and relative sizes (average of 2010-2014 nest counts) of western pelican colonies.

Data provided by: Ministry of Environment (Canada), Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, National Park Service, Oregon State University, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Utah Division of Wildlife Services, and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 3 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025

Idaho The three documented nesting colonies in Idaho IDFG began installing nest exclusion fences and are located at Blackfoot Reservoir, Minidoka flagging to reduce the habitat available to nesting NWR, and Island Park Reservoir. It is assumed pelicans at the Blackfoot Reservoir colony. that the Blackfoot Reservoir colony (Gull Island) The Minidoka NWR colony in Lake Walcott was originated shortly after the construction of active in the early 1910s, but became inactive in Blackfoot Reservoir in 1910. Local anglers deterred the late 1950s, likely as a result of disturbance successful nesting at this site as late as the early from recreational boating near the nesting 1960s (Burleigh 1972; USFWS 1984). Surveys islands (USFWS 1984). Pelicans were successful conducted in the mid-1980s documented adult at reestablishing this colony in the 1980s. Similar birds but no evidence of nesting (Trost 1985). to the Blackfoot colony, this colony increased In 1991 and 1992, IDFG contracted with USDA steadily to a peak of 4,408 in 2012, and has Wildlife Services to remove native predators averaged 3,400 breeding birds the last 5 years (badgers) from Gull Island. The following year (range 1,998–4,408; Fig. 4). (1993) was the first record of pelican production at Blackfoot Reservoir when 80–100 nearly- The Island Park Reservoir colony on Trude Island fledged young were observed (Trost and Gerstell became established in 2012. There are no prior 1994). IDFG began surveying the colony in 2002 records of pelicans nesting in this location. There and counted 1,352 breeding birds. The colony were approximately 300 and 460 breeding increased to a peak of 3,418 breeding birds in birds during 2012 and 2013, respectively, but 2007 and has averaged 1,860 breeding birds the no fledglings were produced. The colony was last 5 years (range 724–3,034; Fig. 4). In 2010,

4 Idaho Department of Fish & Game American White Pelicans successful in 2014 when 326 breeding birds produced 88 young (Fig. 3). In 2015, 632 birds bred on the island; the colony was successful at producing young, but a count was not conducted.

Ecology

The American white pelican is the second largest bird in North America, next to the California condor (Gymnogyps californianus). They are colonial-nesting, long-lived, fish-eating birds. The typical lifespan of a pelican is 12–14 years, although the maximum reported lifespan is 26.4 years (Clapp et al. 1982). During the breeding season, pelicans predominantly use isolated, permanent islands in freshwater lakes or ephemeral islands in shallow wetlands (Knopf and Evans 2004). In Idaho, pelicans currently nest successfully only on isolated islands within managed reservoirs. Winter range typically includes southern and western coastal marine habitats, including shallow coastal bays, inlets, and estuaries (Chapman 1988). However, band returns from pelicans banded as fledglings in Idaho indicate that most winter inland on reservoirs and large rivers that remain ice-free. Figure 5. Historic (pre-1960) and current (2013) Birds usually winter where minimum January distribution of western American white pelican colonies. The dashed black line represents median temperature stays above 40º F (Root 1988), latitude of historic colonies and the solid black line although some birds banded in Idaho have been represents median latitude of currently active colonies. observed over-wintering in the Salt Lake, Utah area. Distribution changes resulting from colony inactivity and new colony establishment have Taxonomy and Distribution resulted in a change in the mean and median Breeding range for the pelican is from Canada latitude of western pelican colonies since the through Minnesota, the Dakotas, Montana, 1960s. While much of the initial change was the Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Nevada, California, result of the historic colony loss in southern and Oregon, and Idaho. Pelicans are divided into two central California, primarily from water diversion distinct populations (eastern and western) based (Shuford 2005), recent changes have been a on their breeding and wintering distributions, as result of new colonies becoming established at reflected in banding data, and the contrasting higher latitudes. The current median location of ecological conditions they inhabit. Most pelicans active colonies is 44.01 degrees latitude (Moulton from the western population (including Idaho’s et al. In Review). This represents a 2.57 degree birds) breed west of the Continental Divide. northward change in latitude, which is a 285 Winter range includes the Pacific coast from km shift over 53 years. Currently, Anaho Island central California south to Mexico and the (Pyramid Lake, NV) is the southernmost active Yucatan Peninsula. Pelicans migrate annually, colony; there were seven other historic colonies traveling to northern breeding grounds during at lower latitudes that have not been active since the spring, and returning to winter range during the 1970s (Fig. 5). Of the ten colonies that are the fall. new or reestablished since the 1980s, all are at

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 5 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025

40 degrees latitude or higher and their median latitude is 45.24 degrees. The most recently established colony, at Island Park Reservoir (ID), is located less than 1 km from the current median latitude.

Breeding Pelicans breed colonially on isolated islands in lakes of the inland northern U.S. and Canada, and require minimal disturbance at the nesting colony for successful nesting and rearing of young. JUVENILE PELICANS CCBY IDAHO FISH AND GAME When disturbance is significant, pelicans may Feeding Habits abandon their nests or young (Knopf and Evans 2004). Breeding begins at age 3 (Sloan 1982), Pelicans require shallow water (typically 1–2 ft; and individuals may breed each year thereafter Ivey and Herziger 2006), or fish that can be (Knopf and Evans 2004). Although pelicans lay reached within 3.3 ft of the surface of deep two eggs per clutch, it is rare for more than one water (Finholdt and Anderson 1995). Pelican chick to fledge. Young are capable of flight at diets are predominantly comprised of nongame 9–10 weeks and typically begin leaving the colony fish such as chubs, suckers (Castostomus sp.), in late August to early September (O’Malley and and carp (Knopf and Evans 2004, Teuscher Evans 1982). 2004). However, pelicans are opportunistic foragers, selecting sites and prey that are most Reproductive Success and Survival readily available (Hall 1925; Knopf and Kennedy 1980, 1981; Lingle and Sloan 1980; Flannery Average annual productivity (chicks fledged / 1988; Findholt and Anderson 1995). They are nest) in the western population has declined cooperative feeders that herd schools of fish to over the last 30 years, from 0.78 in the 1980s to shore (or toward a culvert/weir) by forming a 0.38 during 2003-2013 (Moulton et al. In Review). herding wing. Foraging groups are generally less Despite this trend, overall abundance of breeding than 10 birds, but can be up to 300 birds. Pelicans birds in the west has been stable or increasing are capable of successfully foraging at night. over the last 30 years (Fig. 1), and Idaho Nestlings close to fledging are fed approximately populations have increased dramatically (Fig. 4). 2.4 lbs of fish once a day (Knopf and Evans At the Blackfoot Reservoir colony productivity 2004). Breeding adult foraging requirements has averaged 0.34 from 2007 to 2014 (range 0.13 have been estimated at 4.0 lbs per day (20–40% –0.60; see Southeast Region for details). After of body mass). Total food to rear one young fledging, mortality has been estimated at 41% to fledging was estimated to be 150 lbs (Hall through the first year, 16% in the second year, and 1925). During the breeding season, foraging a mean of 21.3% for the third through thirteenth sites generally need to be within 50 miles of year (Strait and Sloan 1974). the nest colony, but it is not uncommon for

6 Idaho Department of Fish & Game American White Pelicans pelicans to regularly travel up to 80 miles to find et al. In Review, Murphy and Tracy 2005, Rocke et food (Findholt and Anderson 1995, D. Withers, al. 2005, Shuford 2005). pers. comm.). Using PIT-tagged fish, Meyer et The same methodology was used by IDFG (a al. (2016) documented foraging distances up member program of NatureServe) in 2015 to to 120 miles from Idaho colonies. Idaho likely calculate a state conservation rank of S3B, provides foraging habitat for nesting birds from or “vulnerable.” Other efforts to assess the Utah’s colony at the Great Salt Lake (~22% of conservation status of the pelican include the western population), and migrating birds Audubon’s watchlist (status is “green” for the from Utah, Montana, and Wyoming (~32% of the pelican indicating no current conservation western population). concerns), and North American Waterbird Conservation Plan’s (NAWCP) Conservation Conservation status Concern List (pelican categorized as “moderate Standard natural heritage methodology concern” - species that are either declining developed by NatureServe is used to compile with moderate threats or distribution, stable population data and to assess current with known potential threats and moderate to conservation condition across a species’ range restricted distributions, or relatively small with and within individual states and provinces (http:// restricted distributions). www.natureserve.org/aboutUs/network.jsp). In 2008, NatureServe ranked pelicans rangewide State classification as G4, or “apparently secure.” The reasons Pelicans are classified as a species of greatest cited for the ranking were that the population conservation need in all eight western states included more than 120,000 breeding birds, in which they breed, are listed as state-listed and had increased greatly since the 1960s, but endangered in Washington, and are classified as remained highly vulnerable to disturbance, endangered in British Columbia. In Idaho, pelicans with continued concerns regarding habitat are classified under the Idaho Administrative protection and increased incidence and severity Procedures Act (IDAPA) as “protected nongame”. of disease (NatureServe 2015). Current threats The Idaho State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP) to the western population include relatively few identifies the pelican as one of 205 “species of colonies, large fluctuations in colony size and greatest conservation need” due to (1) a low productivity, hydrological alterations, disease number of breeding colonies in Idaho, and (2) pandemics, and possibly West Nile virus (Moulton

PELICAN EGGS CCBY IDAHO FISH AND GAME a vulnerable rangewide conservation status (IDFG 2016). Specific conservation actions identified in the SWAP include working with the Pacific Flyway Council’s Nongame Technical Committee to develop and implement a wetland connectivity assessment to address impacts of drought, analyze trends in population size and productivity, and determine current survivorship rates.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 7 Fisheries Conflicts

Native Trout observed foraging at the mouth of McCoy Creek during the cutthroat spawning run. At Henry Yellowstone Cutthroat Trout Lake, large flocks of pelicans assemble around the mouths of key YCT spawning tributaries in spring, and also in mid-summer when YCT and other trout use these tributaries as thermal refugia. Specific predation rates and impacts to populations and/or fisheries have not been quantified in these locations. All of these YCT spawning streams are managed with restrictive seasons and bag limits to reduce or eliminate YellowstoneCutthroatTrout CCBY Joesph Tomelleri angler harvest, and managers are concerned In Blackfoot Reservoir and the Blackfoot that unmanaged pelican predation will negate River drainage above, IDFG’s primary fisheries the benefits from harvest closures, habitat management objective is to recover the native improvements, and other actions to conserve cutthroat population, including the adfluvial YCT. component that rears in the reservoir and ascends the river to spawn. This fishery collapsed Bonneville Cutthroat Trout by the 1980s primarily due to overharvest, prompting development of a Blackfoot River Management Plan (Labolle and Schill 1988). In 1990 IDFG began restricting angler harvest and by 1998 both the reservoir and the river above were closed to YCT harvest. The cutthroat trout population responded dramatically, increasing from a few hundred spawning fish to an estimated run of over 4,700 spawners in 2001. BonnevilleCutthroatTrout CCBY Joesph Tomelleri Despite the early success of harvest closures, The Bear Lake population of Bonneville cutthroat the run collapsed to a low of only 16 fish in 2005 trout (Oncorhynchus clarki utah; BCT) is the only and has since remained low with an average natural adfluvial stock existing in Idaho, with key run size of about 650 (range 19 to 1,843). This spawning habitat in Fish Haven Creek and St. more recent YCT trout collapse coincided with Charles Creek. Since 2002, pelicans have been a rapidly expanding pelican breeding colony observed foraging in spring at the mouth of on Blackfoot Reservoir and increases in pelican St. Charles Creek, which is the most important use of the Blackfoot River to forage (Teuscher spawning tributary for BCT in Bear Lake (IDFG and Schill 2010). Subsequent work by IDFG staff and USFS 2007). Spawning BCT are particularly has documented that pelican predation rates vulnerable to pelican predation in drought years on adult and juvenile cutthroat trout generally when tributary flows are below average and exceeded 20%, with the highest values above Bear Lake elevation is low. These conditions have 60% (Teuscher et al. 2015). occurred about 5 of the last 10 years. No direct estimates of pelican predation rate are available Pelicans have also been observed foraging for Bear Lake tributaries, but based on extensive on other YCT spawning runs in southeast and experience at Blackfoot IDFG believes that BCT eastern Idaho. McCoy Creek, a tributary to conservation goals may be compromised in Palisades Reservoir, also supports a spawning some years. The IDFG and other conservation run of YCT. As many as 250 pelicans have been partners have spent considerable effort restoring

8 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Fisheries Conflicts and reconnecting stream habitats in both of Appendix I). Pelican predation on hatchery trout these important Idaho tributaries. In order to be averaged 17% and ranged from 0-48%, whereas successful in building spawning runs to viable angler catch averaged 20% and ranged from levels in both tributary systems, pelican predation 0% to 82%. Pelican predation rate was inversely must be appropriately managed. proportional to distance from the nearest colony and inversely proportional to angler catch Other Sport Fisheries (Appendix I). The highest pelican predation rates observed were generally at waters within 100 Avian predation impacts at Blackfoot Reservoir km of the nearest nesting colony except at CJ extend beyond native YCT and have also affected Strike Reservoir, which was over 200 km from other sport fishing opportunity in the reservoir. the nearest colony yet still received relatively Teuscher (2004) and Teuscher et al. (2005) heavy predation pressure by pelicans in some documented significant avian predation on years. Results indicate that in some southern stocked rainbow trout. While over 96% of pelican Idaho fisheries, pelicans are exploiting as many diets was nongame fish (Teuscher 2004), the or more catchable-sized hatchery trout than small proportion of the diet that was composed anglers catch, and these two entities are in direct of rainbow trout amounted to a total weight competition for this public resource. of 7.6 tons, similar to the total weight of trout Meyer et al. (2016) noted that most hatchery stocked during the study. Both pelicans and catchable trout fisheries in southern Idaho are cormorants opportunistically forage on trout in within the foraging range of pelicans nesting at Blackfoot Reservoir, but predation on rainbow colonies other than Minidoka NWR and Blackfoot trout was significantly higher immediately Reservoir, such as at Island Park Reservoir following stocking events. Pelican counts near (northeast Idaho), Gunnison Island (northern the trout stocking site increased from 21 birds the Utah), Malheur NWR (eastern Oregon), Badger day prior to stocking to 150 birds the day after Island (eastern Washington), and Molly Island stocking. During the first week after stocking, (western Wyoming). In October 2014, biologists an estimated 27% (150,000) of the newly- recovered 11 PIT-tags on Gunnison Island from stocked hatchery rainbow trout were lost to four of the study waters (up to 231 km away). bird predation (Teuscher et al. 2005). Over the At the Island Park Reservoir colony, one PIT-tag 90-day period, total rainbow trout consumption was recovered from a hatchery catchable trout by pelicans and cormorants was an estimated stocked in Lake Walcott. The number of pelican- 7.7 tons, which was 102% of the total weight of consumed PIT-tags recovered at the Lake Walcott hatchery trout stocked in 2003 (7.5 tons). This and Blackfoot colonies (n = 383) compared to the prompted a change to a fall stocking strategy in Gunnison, Molly Island, and Island Park colonies (n 2005 to avoid avian predation. Subsequent fish = 12) led Meyer et al. (2016) to conclude that little population monitoring in the reservoir indicates of the pelican predation occurring in southern increases in overall hatchery trout abundance Idaho hatchery trout fisheries stems from pelicans since the shift to fall stocking. breeding at colonies other than Lake Walcott and Since completion of the 2009-2013 pelican Blackfoot. management plan (IDFG 2009), IDFG has examined broader impacts of pelican predation on other fisheries in southern Idaho. Meyer et al. (2016) used fish tagged with Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tags to estimate the proportion of stocked hatchery trout consumed by pelicans for 19 stocking events over three years at various southern Idaho waters, and compared rates of pelican predation to angler catch for those same waters (see summary tables and figures in

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 9 Adaptive Management

he goals, objectives, and actions outlined 5. Install bird lines in foraging areas–feasible Tbelow will be implemented by IDFG with an in specific circumstances but high cost; adaptive management approach in partnership implemented at Blackfoot, then abandoned for with other state and federal entities, landowners, more effective measures. and other cooperators. While many non-lethal management actions to reduce predation 6. Haze birds at foraging, loafing and nesting conflicts such as hazing and habitat alteration areas–feasible in some locations, requires high can be implemented under IDFG authority, intensity; implemented intensively at Blackfoot, any actions resulting in direct take of eggs or intermittently on other waters. birds must be authorized by USFWS through a 7. Translocations (establish new nesting depredation permit to the state under guidelines colonies)–deemed infeasible and undesirable developed by the Pacific Flyway Council (2012). as long as statewide abundance exceeds The Pacific Flyway Council guidelines (2012) objectives. outline expectations to document depredation conflicts, and to investigate and apply non-lethal 8. Manipulate nesting habitat–deemed feasible techniques to the extent practicable before but labor intensive and costly; implemented seeking take authority from USFWS to resolve at Blackfoot. conflicts. 9. Introduce predators to nesting islands– Since 2009 IDFG has evaluated the utility of feasible but a risk to non-targeted species, several potential management approaches to and there are other more efficient methods for reduce pelican predation conflicts, dismissing take; attempted and failed at Blackfoot. some as impractical and implementing others 10. Harvest season on birds (by public)- as resources and federal permit authority deemed infeasible due to federal protections allow. A brief summary of management actions in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. A harvest considered and/or implemented by IDFG would require ammendments to international is provided below (for more details see treaties. Appendix II). 11. Oil eggs to limit pelican productivity and/ 1. Increase reservoir water levels to provide fish or recruitment–feasible; implemented at refugia–deemed infeasible due to state water Blackfoot under USFWS permit. law, existing federal water contracts, and expense. 12. Remove eggs to limit pelican colony expansion–feasible; implemented at Blackfoot 2. Modify pelican prey composition (stocking under USFWS permit but caused more additional species)–feasible, but deemed dispersal than desired. impractical & unrealistic. 13. Site-specific lethal take of adult pelicans– 3. Modify hatchery trout stocking strategies– feasible; implemented at Blackfoot under feasible on a case-by-case basis, implemented USFWS permit; used only in support of hazing. in some locations.

4. Provide refugia (physical barriers to separate pelicans and fish)–feasible in site-specific circumstances but impractical to address the broad scope of documented conflicts.

10 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Management Goals, Objectives and Actions his section describes statewide long-term Snake Region section). To achieve the statewide Tgoals and objectives that are further refined objective the Minidoka colony objective is 1,800 into regional objectives tied to near-term and breeding birds, roughly similar to estimated long-term actions. The Intermountain West abundance in 2003–2005. Waterbird Conservation Plan established a Staff will continue to monitor for new colonies or statewide population objective of maintaining nesting activities in addition to annual breeding or increasing the current (2005) population of bird counts at the three current colonies in 2,770 breeding birds (2,800 birds, rounded to Idaho. As long as statewide abundance exceeds the nearest 100; Ivey and Herziger 2006). In objectives, staff will use dissuasion techniques the absence of other state or flyway population where possible to prevent establishment of new objectives from USFWS, IDFG adopted this colonies. If statewide abundance declines to statewide objective in 2009 (IDFG 2009) 2,800 or fewer due to colony management or and remains committed to maintaining 2,800 other factors, IDFG staff will allow one or more breeding pelicans statewide, regardless of the new colonies to establish at sites that serve to number of colonies. Actions identified to reduced disperse the breeding population. predation impacts are primarily focused on hazing where conflicts occur, and on managing recruitment at existing colonies, rather than lethal Statewide take of adult birds. IDFG remains committed to collaboration with USFWS and the Pacific Flyway Goal Council to monitor pelican populations and Maintain a viable population of pelicans while refine population objectives as new data become reducing impacts of pelicans on public resources available. throughout Idaho. See regional sections and This plan is primarily driven by the need to statewide coordination section for more details reduce pelican predation on native fish and on the following statewide objectives. important recreational fisheries. The statewide population objectives are split between three Objectives pelican colonies. In the 2009 Idaho Pelican Objective 1: Manage for a total of 2,800 breeding Management Plan (IDFG 2009), a pelican pelicans at nesting colonies in Idaho; population objective of 700 breeding birds was discourage establishment of new established for the Blackfoot Reservoir breeding colonies until this objective is met. colony. This objective was presumed to reflect Action: Present and discuss the acceptable rates of pelican predation that would statewide population objective with not limit YCT recovery in the Blackfoot drainage. the Nongame Technical Committee of The balance of the 2,800 objective for breeding the Pacific Flyway Council. pelicans was then simply allocated to Minidoka, the only other Idaho colony at that time. Objective 2: Implement adaptive management The breeding colony at Island Park Reservoir actions at pelican foraging areas to subsequently became established in 2012 (first reduce predation on native fishes successful in 2014). The Island Park objective is no and important sport fisheries more than 300 breeding birds which is expected throughout Idaho. to keep pelican predation impacts relatively low Objective 3: Monitor pelican population trends, and also preserve important nesting habitat distribution, and foraging patterns for other species at this location (see Upper in Idaho.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 11 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025 Objective 4: Work with other Pacific Flyway Southwest Region states to monitor and analyze broader pelican demographic trends Pelican Populations and Trends and population parameters; develop There is currently no nesting colony in the a population model to evaluate Southwest Region. Pelican eggs have occasionally the influence of state population been cast on islands within C.J. Strike Reservoir, objectives on viability in the western but no nest structures have been built and population. no incubation has been observed. Surveys Objective 5: Communicate and coordinate with conducted on regional waters during the federal and state agencies as well breeding season (late May/early June) in 2010 as the public regarding strategies through 2014 documented a regional average of for managing pelicans and 807 pelicans (range 415–1,247). Pelicans are most associated conflicts. commonly observed along the Snake River, at C.J. Strike and Cascade reservoirs, and in Lake Lowell, Panhandle, Clearwater, and with other small groups observed throughout the region. Salmon Regions

There are currently no nesting colonies in these Management Issues regions, pelican abundance is relatively low, Pelicans are locally/seasonally abundant on and conflicts with fisheries or other resources some regional waters, but predation impacts have not been identified. The Panhandle and to fisheries resources are not known in most Clearwater regions participated in statewide locations. C.J. Strike and Cascade reservoirs pelicans counts conducted during the breeding were the only regional waters included in the season (late May/early June) in 2010, and 2012- southern Idaho pelican predation study (Meyer 14. In the Panhandle Region, an average of 260 et al. 2016; Appendix I). In C.J. Strike, estimated pelicans was observed (range 173-314), nearly all predation rates on hatchery rainbow ranged from associated with the Chain Lakes (Coeur d’Alene 4% to 48%, suggesting that in some years pelican River) and Hepton Lake (St. Joe River) areas. predation can significantly impact angler harvest Average pelican count in the Clearwater Region opportunity. At C.J. Strike, years with higher was just 5 birds (range 0–8). Pelicans are rarely predation rates coincided with lower angler catch. observed in the Salmon Region. Each of these regions will continue to participate in coordinated Strategies Implemented monitoring to document abundance and Regional staff have monitored potential nesting distribution trends for pelicans, but no additional habitat on C.J. Strike annually to determine data collection or management actions are whether the presence of pelicans and some anticipated for the duration of this plan. eggs has resulted in the production of fledglings. Based on recent research, staff have also altered Management Objectives and Actions the timing of rainbow trout stocking in C.J. Strike Objective 1: In coordination with statewide Reservoir. Now, the majority of catchables are efforts, monitor pelican abundance stocked during the fall to minimize the time that and distribution every three years relatively naïve, recently stocked rainbow trout beginning in 2017. are available to pelicans. Action: Use ground, boat and aerial survey techniques to census pelican Management Objectives and Actions populations. Objective 1: In coordination with statewide efforts, monitor pelican abundance and

distribution in the Southwest Region

every three years beginning in 2017.

12 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Management Goals, Objectives and Actions

Action: Use ground, boat and aerial Objective 4: If successful nesting occurs, and total survey techniques to census pelican statewide abundance of breeding populations in the Southwest Region. birds exceeds the 2,800 objective, preclude future nesting attempts. Objective 2: Identify conflicts, prioritize locations, Action: Employ physical barriers and implement actions where pelican and/or hazing prior to nesting predation prevents the achievement season to prevent establishment of of fish management goals. a new colony. Action: As available, allocate resources to minimize predation at highest priority conflict locations. Magic Valley Region Action: Continue to modify stocking strategies as feasible where conflicts Pelican Population and Trends arise to minimize pelican predation. Pelicans are found seasonally throughout the Magic Valley Region. The abundance of Objective 3: Monitor regional waters for suitable breeding, feeding, and loafing habitat establishment of new colonies. combined with abundant forage make this region Action: Survey potential nesting suitable for pelican persistence. The greatest islands within regional waters at concentration of pelicans is associated with least once per breeding season to the Minidoka NWR nesting colony located on determine if pelicans are attempting Lake Walcott. Minidoka NWR was established to nest. in 1909 as a “preserve and breeding ground for

Figure 6. Number of breeding pelicans at Minidoka National Wildlife Refuge, 1989–2015, and the population objective for 2016-2025.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 13 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025

VIDEO STILL CCBY IDAHO FISH AND GAME Figure 7. Pelican response to mortality disposal at private hatcheries. native birds”. The majority of pelicans generally Management Issues concentrate along the Snake River corridor; Increases in pelican abundance over the last two however, birds have been observed in large decades have resulted in increasing conflicts at groups (50-200+ birds) as far north as Anderson local fisheries. The Magic Valley Region fisheries Ranch Reservoir and as far south as Salmon Falls program includes approximately 60 waters Creek and Oakley reservoirs near the Nevada managed with supplemental stocking of hatchery border. It is common to observe large flocks of trout. At six of these fisheries included in the pelicans thought to be foraging birds associated Meyer et al. (2016) study, pelican predation rates with the Minidoka NWR colony; however, it is also ranged from 7% to 34% of all stocked trout. possible they may originate from other colonies In some waters (Lake Walcott, Freedom Park or be non-nesting birds. Pond, Magic Reservoir) pelicans were estimated The majority of Idaho pelicans are found in the to consume more stocked trout than anglers Magic Valley Region during annual spring counts. caught. In general, peak stocking and angling Both breeding and presumed non-breeding effort in spring and early summer coincides with pelicans increased dramatically from 2002 peak pelican foraging. Impacts to wild fishes to 2008 and now appear relatively stable. An are suspected at Anderson Ranch Reservoir average of 3,200 pelicans was observed in the (kokanee) and Silver Creek (wild trout). These region from 2010 through 2014. The breeding conflicts are most prevalent near the Minidoka bird population objective established in 2009 NWR Colony, but are increasing across the region (2,100 breeding birds) has been exceeded in five and are a high management priority. of the previous six years (Fig. 6). Despite pelicans This region has many commercial, State, and exceeding abundance objectives, no specific Federal aquaculture facilities, most of which are colony management strategies were developed located along the Snake River within 70 miles or implemented from 2009 to present. This was of the Minidoka colony. Some facilities utilize due in part to a lack of data on specific predation open mortality pits for daily disposal of dead impacts, which has since been collected on fish (Fig. 7). This management practice has several regional waters (Meyer et al. 2016). resulted in pelican scavenging and artificially-high

14 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Management Goals, Objectives and Actions Table 1. Magic Valley Region fisheries where pelican predation has resulted in management changes and/or has impacted angler opportunity or ability to meet fish management goals. Fish mgmt. Fishery Speciesa Conflict Action(s) goals met? (Y/N/Unk.) Increased stocking, Oster Lakes 1–4 Hrbt Hatchery returns N hazing Increased stocking, Riley Pond Hrbt/CC Hatchery returns N hazing Increased stocking, Settling Pond Hrbt Hatchery returns N hazing

Filer Ponds Hrbt Hatchery returns Limited hazing N

Crystal Lake Hrbt Hatchery returns Stopped stocking N

Anderson Ponds CC Hatchery returns Curtailed catfish stocking N

Nighttime stocking, reduced stocking, Connor Pond Hrbt Hatchery returns changed stocking N season, established warmwater fishery Nighttime stocking, reduced stocking, Emerald Lake Hrbt Hatchery returns changed stocking N season, reestablished warmwater fishery

Rupert Gun Club Pond Hrbt Hatchery returns Curtailed stocking N

Freedom Park Pond Hrbt Hatchery returns Reduced stocking N

Eliminated fingerlings, Lake Walcott Hrbt Hatchery returns Y changed stocking season

Snake River Hrbt Hatchery returns Increased stocking Unk.

Changed stocking Magic Res. Hrbt Hatchery returns Unk. season Altered stocking timing, Mormon Res. Hrbt Hatchery returns Y reduced fingerlings Premier wild Silver Creekb Nat Limited hazing Unk. trout fishery

Salmon Falls Cr. Res. Hrbt Hatchery returns Altered stocking location Unk.

Spawner Anderson Ranch Res.c KoK Limited hazing Unk. escapement a Hrbt=Hatchery rainbow trout; Kok=Kokanee; CC=Channel catfish; Nat=Other wild or native fish species. b Recent increase in number of pelicans on the fishery (past 5 years). c Pelican predation on spawning kokanee mainly occurs in drought years when kokanee are staged at the mouth of the South Fork Boise River but are unable to ascend the river to spawn. Actual impacts are unknown. Idaho Department of Fish & Game 15 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025 concentrations of birds habituated to this food Action: As available, allocate source. The impacts of these concentrations are resources to intensively haze at not well understood but local conflicts are likely. highest priority conflict locations (e.g. Silver Creek, Crystal Lake, and Strategies Implemented Filer Ponds). Action: Continue to modify stocking There are approximately 17 fisheries in the Magic strategies as feasible where conflicts Valley where fisheries management has been arise to minimize pelican predation. adjusted (mainly stocking) in an effort to avoid or Objective 3: Manage for 1,800 breeding birds at reduce pelican predation (Table 1). When pelicans the Minidoka National Wildlife Refuge are present, hatchery personnel haze prior to fish colony. stocking events. On small fishing ponds adjacent Action: Use available data to to the Hagerman State Fish Hatchery and Wildlife determine viability of the Minidoka Management Area (WMA), hatchery personnel NWR colony under current breeding regularly haze avian predators, including pelicans. bird abundance objectives. In Lake Walcott, stocking of fingerling rainbow Action: Present predation impact trout was discontinued due to poor returns likely data, pelican breeding colony associated with avian predation. Lake Walcott objectives, and management is now stocked with fewer catchable-sized strategies required to meet rainbow trout late in the season in an attempt objectives to USFWS Minidoka to avoid predation. Hatchery trout stocking was Wildlife Refuge staff. discontinued at Emerald Lake and Connor Pond, Action: Request and obtain, if resulting in a loss of harvest opportunity for possible, authorization from USFWS anglers in these small ponds. Additionally, channel to implement measures to meet the catfish stocking in Riley Pond was discontinued 1,800 breeding bird objective. due to a near complete loss of stocked fish to Action: Develop monitoring pelican predation. techniques that are both non- intrusive and effective at monitoring Management Objectives and Actions breeding and productivity at the Objective 1: In coordination with statewide Minidoka NWR colony. efforts, monitor pelican abundance and distribution in the Magic Valley Objective 4: Monitor other regional waters for Region every three years beginning establishment of new colonies. in 2017. Action: Survey potential nesting Action: Use ground, boat and aerial islands within regional waters at survey techniques to census pelican least once per breeding season to populations in the Magic Valley determine if pelicans are attempting Region. to nest.

Objective 2: Identify conflicts, prioritize locations, Objective 5: If successful nesting occurs, and total and implement actions where pelican statewide abundance of breeding predation prevents the achievement birds exceeds the 2,800 objective, of fish management goals. preclude future nesting attempts. Action: At high priority waters, Action: Employ physical barriers implement fish monitoring strategies and/or hazing prior to nesting season (Meyer et al. 2016) to assess the to prevent establishment of a new predation impacts of foraging colony. pelicans on native fishes and sport Objective 6: Minimize artificially-high fisheries. concentrations of scavenging

16 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Figure 8. Number of breeding pelicans at Blackfoot Reservoir, 1993 and 2002–2015, and number of spawning cutthroat trout in the Blackfoot River above the Reservoir, 2001–2015.

pelicans which result from open were observed (Trost and Gerstell 1994). IDFG disposal of hatchery mortalities. began annual surveys of the colony in 2002. The Action: Work with private number of breeding pelicans increased annually aquaculture facilities to develop best through 2007 when it peaked at 3,418 birds (Fig. practices for mortality disposal to 8). Since 2007 the number of breeding birds has reduce concentrations of scavenging fluctuated annually, but with a downward trend. pelicans. Management actions to reduce the number Action: Assess impacts of of breeding pelicans appear to be having the implementation on pelican desired effect on the colony’s abundance and distribution. the associated potential for predation impacts. In 2010, IDFG began installing nest exclusion fences Southeast Region and flagging to reduce nesting pelican abundance at the Blackfoot Reservoir colony and to restrict Pelican Populations and Trends nesting to a portion of Gull Island that would The Southeast Region has one pelican nesting accommodate 350 nests. In 2012, IDFG began colony, located on Blackfoot Reservoir. Burleigh managing the productivity of nesting pelicans (1972) reported a nesting attempt in the early using USFWS-permitted nest destruction. 1960s which ended in nest destruction by local Because pelicans also have attempted to nest on anglers. Trost (1985) documented adult birds on nearby Willow Island and Long Island, IDFG staff Gull Island in the mid-1980s with no evidence of have used a variety of dissuasion techniques and nesting. In 1993, 80–100 nearly-fledged young nest destruction to restrict use of these islands.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 17 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025

Pelican production (number of pre-fledglings) Management Issues and productivity (number of pre-fledglings/ Historically, the upper Blackfoot River Drainage nest attempt) has been estimated annually at supported angler harvest of tens of thousands the Blackfoot Reservoir colony since 2007 (Fig. of wild YCT. For example, Cuplin (1963) reported 9). Productivity averaged 0.39 pre-fledglings/ harvest of 17,000 and 11,000 cutthroat trout nest through 2015 but is highly variable from in the upper Blackfoot River in 1959 and 1960, year to year. The highest productivity (0.68) respectively. As the popularity of the fishery was recorded in 2007 and coincided with the increased, angler exploitation became a limiting peak number of breeding pelicans. The lowest factor for the population (Labolle and Schill 1988). recorded productivity was 0.13 in 2014, when In 1990, a management plan was implemented colony management activities on Long Island to reduce harvest and bolster the wild stock. The resulted in abandonment by other pelicans first step of that plan was to close harvest on nesting on that island. Management activities cutthroat trout in the reservoir. In 1998, further since 2012 to reduce the number of chicks protection was afforded by closing harvest of produced at the colony have created some bias cutthroat trout in the spawning and rearing in productivity rates estimated by simply dividing environments upstream of the reservoir in the number of fledglings by the number of nests Blackfoot River and its tributaries. Over the initiated. Nest destruction presumably decreases ensuing decade, the cutthroat trout population total production compared to an unmanaged responded dramatically. Adult escapement colony. Productivity of untreated nests (not oiled estimates increased from a few hundred nor eggs removed) is substantially higher. For spawning fish to an estimated run size of 4,747 example, since 2012, productivity for untreated in 2001. Despite the early success of harvest nests at Blackfoot averaged 0.60 (range 0.23 to closures, the run collapsed to a low of only 16 fish 0.83). in 2005. Since then, the population has remained low with an average run size of about 650 (range 19 to 1,843). This more recent cutthroat trout

18 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Management Goals, Objectives and Actions collapse coincided with a rapidly expanding study from the southeast region, but impacts pelican breeding colony on Blackfoot Reservoir were much lower (Meyer et al. 2016). and increases in pelican use of the Blackfoot River to forage (Teuscher and Schill 2010). Strategies Implemented Fisheries biologists also began noticing bird scars on migrating adult cutthroat trout. In 2004, Past actions to reduce impacts of foraging 70% of adult cutthroat trout migrants exhibited pelicans on native YCT in the Blackfoot River wounds consistent with pelican attacks (Teuscher include hazing with zon guns, cracker shells and Schill 2010). and other pyrotechnics, airboat, and installing flagged lines across the river to exclude pelican In 2010, IDFG began a focused research project to foraging activity, as well as taking adult birds in directly quantify the level of pelican predation on conjunction with hazing. At nest islands, attempts Blackfoot River cutthroat trout. During a 4-year have been made to limit the number of nesting study, 4,653 wild cutthroat trout were tagged birds to achieve the state’s population objective using a combination of radio-telemetry and PIT of 700 breeding adults. Actions have included tags. Annual predation rate estimates were made installing fencing and fladry on nesting islands by recovering cutthroat trout tags from pelican to exclude nesting, destroying nests, and hazing nesting islands. On-island tag recovery rates were adults from nesting islands. As a result, after corrected for ingested tags that went undetected several years of adaptive approaches using non- during island searches and for tags that were lethal methods and implementation of lethal take deposited away from the nesting islands. Pelicans authority from USFWS, the abundance objective consumed tagged cutthroat trout ranging from for the Blackfoot colony has been achieved 150 mm to 580 mm in length and showed no size- three of the last five years (Fig. 10). Reaching selection within that range for their prey. Annual that objective through implementation of non- pelican predation rates averaged about 30% lethal methods and take authority was a result for adult and juvenile cutthroat trout, with the of extensive coordination and communication highest values above 60% (Teuscher et al. 2015). between IDFG and USFWS. One product from Pelicans have been observed foraging on other that coordination was the Bird Conservation cutthroat trout runs in southeast Idaho. Since Strategy: reducing American white pelican/ 2002, pelicans have been observed foraging at Yellowstone cutthroat trout conflicts (IDFG 2013). the mouth of St. Charles Creek, which is the most This strategy outlines practicable measures to important spawning tributary for BCT in Bear avoid and minimize pelican take and courses of Lake (IDFG and USFS 2007). Pelicans have also action to determine when and how take will be been observed foraging at the mouth of Swan employed. The document provides a detailed Creek, a Utah tributary to Bear Lake. In 2005, overview of the conflict, past and ongoing IDFG pelicans concentrated at the mouth of Swan management practices, and future plans to Creek below the Utah Department of Natural reduce pelican/YCT conflicts in the Blackfoot Resources (UDNR) spawning and egg take trap. River and reservoir while ensuring long-term To reduce predation losses, UDNR installed bird conservation of pelicans at the Blackfoot lines, set up a human effigy, and regularly shot Reservoir colony. Management activities, by year, cracker shells at the birds (S. Tolentino, UDNR, are summarized in Appendix III. Actions to reduce pers. comm.). both pelican impacts on migrating adult and juvenile YCT will likely require annual, intensive Pelican predation has also been measured on management efforts. important sport fisheries in the region. During a repeated study, pelican predation on hatchery Hazing and Lethal Reinforcement rainbow trout stocked in American Falls Reservoir IDFG has employed various actions to discourage was 30% (Meyer et al. 2016). There were several pelican foraging along sections of the Blackfoot other waters included in the pelican predation River and its mouth at the Blackfoot Reservoir

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 19 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025

Figure 10. Number of breeding pelicans during nest count in late May/early June and after egg oiling and nest removal actions at Blackfoot Reservoir. A depredation permit was secured for nest destruction in 2012-2015. during the YCT migration to and from spawning Bird Lines on River areas. Zon guns, pyrotechnics, boats, ATVs, In 2005, monofilament line with flagging attached volunteer and IDFG personnel hazers have been was installed across portions of the Blackfoot used to varying degrees since 2003. Generally, River between the mouth of the Blackfoot hazing is conducted twice daily, at peak foraging Reservoir and the fish trap at Caribou County times, in May and June, with timing depending on Sportsman Park. This technique was effective the fish spawning run. To enhance effectiveness at eliminating pelican foraging within the of hazing the USFWS has issued IDFG scientific lined section of the river. However, fluctuating collection or depredation permits annually since water levels, and the associated hazards and 2006 for limited take of adult pelicans foraging maintenance, makes this technique inappropriate on the Blackfoot River. IDFG has improved and on this portion of the Blackfoot River. intensified hazing and take in subsequent years and monitoring information, where a hiatus Nesting Island Exclusion and Hazing in hazing results in a subsequent increase in Following Commission approval of the 2009 birds observed on the river, suggests we have Pelican Management Plan, in 2010, IDFG began been able to influence behavior using hazing the implementation of actions to limit the number accompanied by periodic take of foraging birds. of nesting pelicans at Blackfoot Reservoir. These The take of pelicans is spread over the spawning efforts include attempting to exclude nesting run. Generally, 1-6 birds are taken daily depending from portions of the nesting islands by installing on the number of birds present. Although hazing fencing and a network of fladry attached to does not eliminate pelican presence on the river t-posts in the exclosure. Fencing and flagging long-term, even short-term reduction in pelican techniques have been adapted to reduce impacts foraging may have benefits for migrating trout. to nesting gull, tern, and waterfowl species. Night foraging by pelicans has been reported Fencing allows for the movement of unflighted (McMahon and Evans 1992) and has been nestlings in and out of the exclosure. The lines documented on the Blackfoot River using remote with flagging are installed at a height and cameras. It is unknown to what degree if any the spacing that limits the risk of entanglement of daytime hazing efforts affect night foraging by flighted birds. In 2015, IDFG began hazing birds pelicans. from nesting islands prior to and during nest establishment. The timing, location, and intensity of hazing activities are adjusted annually to

20 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Management Goals, Objectives and Actions improve effectiveness and minimize disturbance Nest Destruction to other species nesting within and near the Beginning in 2012, the USFWS issued permits for pelican colony. the destruction of up to 500 pelican nests, to be Techniques and materials have been modified implemented only if the total number of nests over time as staff have adapted to conditions exceeded the IDFG goal of 350 (Fig. 10). IDFG and bird behavior. In 2013, a ‘conservation area’ implemented this permit by oiling eggs in 2012 was established on the east side of Gull Island and 2013. Vegetable oil was sprayed onto eggs with the remainder of the island fenced and using a backpack sprayer. Regional staff opted flagged to exclude nesting. The ‘conservation to oil eggs to reduce the potential for possible area’ was selected to include that portion of renesting attempts. We monitored oiled nests Gull Island with nesting snowy egrets (Egretta to determine effectiveness of this technique. In thula), black-crowned night herons (Nycticorax 2013, a sample of treatment and control eggs nycticorax), great blue herons (Ardea herodias) was monitored, and no successful hatching was and double-crested cormorants (Phalacrocorax observed for oiled eggs. auritus), in order to provide additional protection In 2014, in coordination with USFWS, nests were from disturbance to non-target species. Pelicans destroyed by removing eggs to increase the nested in the ‘conservation area’ and initially likelihood pelicans would disperse and leave avoided the exclosure on both Gull and Willow the conflict area. On Long Island, 474 of 906 islands. However, in 2014, the majority of pelicans nests were destroyed by removing the eggs. attempted to nest on Long Island, an island they Following this action all nests were abandoned had not previously used for nesting. When nests on this island, with the exception of fewer were destroyed on Long Island, nests became than 20 where chicks had already hatched. established within the enclosure portion of Gull Immediately following the abandonment of Long Island shortly thereafter. Island, almost 200 pelicans began nesting in the The number of pelicans initiating nesting at the exclosure area of Gull Island. It is assumed these Blackfoot Reservoir colony has generally declined were birds moved from Long Island that were since the initiation of fencing and flagging to attempting to renest. reduce the availability of nesting habitat. The In 2015, hazing was used to prevent pelican average number of breeding pelicans at the nesting on any island except within the colony from 2005-2009 was 2,867. Since fencing ‘conservation area’ on Gull Island. This was the and flagging has been used, from 2010-2015, first year human disturbance was used as the the average number of breeding pelicans has primary action to dissuade nesting. The island been 1,842. This represents a 36% decrease in hazing appeared to be successful. No nests the average number of pelicans initiating nesting were established on Willow or Long islands, and for the 6 years following fencing and flagging as total egg take required to meet objectives was compared to the 5 years prior. less than the number allowable under USFWS It also should be noted that while the reduction authority. of the number of nesting birds at the Blackfoot Reservoir colony may reduce foraging on YCT on Management Objectives and Actions the Blackfoot River, it may not be a proportional Objective 1: In coordination with statewide efforts, relationship. The use of the river by pelicans that monitor pelican abundance and are not nesting on the Blackfoot Reservoir is distribution in the Southeast Region not well understood. A limited radio telemetry every three years beginning in 2017. study conducted in 2010, found that not all Action: Use ground, boat and aerial birds captured foraging on the Blackfoot River survey techniques to census pelican appeared to be associated with the Blackfoot populations in the Southeast Region. Reservoir colony.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 21 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025

Objective 2: Identify conflicts, prioritize locations, USFWS authority to remove or oil and implement actions where pelican eggs to meet colony objectives. predation prevents the achievement Action: Conduct pre-fledgling count of fish management goals. to document productivity (fledgling/ Action: Implement fish monitoring nest) for the colony. strategies (Meyer et al. 2016) to assess the predation impacts of Objective 4: Monitor other regional waters for foraging pelicans on native fishes and establishment of new colonies. sport fisheries. Action: Survey potential nesting islands within regional waters at Action: Monitor adult YCT escapement to Blackfoot River fish least once per breeding season to trap annually. determine if pelicans are attempting to nest. Action: As available, allocate resources to minimize predation at Objective 5: If successful nesting occurs, and total highest priority conflict locations. statewide abundance of breeding Action: Continue to modify stocking birds exceeds the 2,800 objective, strategies as feasible where conflicts preclude future nesting attempts. arise to minimize pelican predation. Action: Employ physical barriers Action: Document pelican use and and/or hazing prior to nesting season intensively haze birds from foraging to prevent establishment of a new areas where there is conflict. colony. Action: Seek annual renewal of USFWS authority as needed to lethally remove foraging pelicans Upper Snake Region from the Blackfoot River to reinforce non-lethal hazing activities. Pelican Populations and Trends Action: Seek additional authority American white pelican occurrence in the Upper from the USFWS to lethally remove Snake watershed was documented by early pelicans foraging on specific high- European American naturalists and a nesting quality, intensively-managed fisheries colony was confirmed at Yellowstone Lake (60 where deemed necessary. miles from Henrys Lake, Idaho) in 1890 (Schaller 1964). It is likely that pelicans periodically Objective 3: Manage for 700 breeding birds foraged in the Upper Snake Region of Idaho at the Blackfoot Reservoir colony. since at least European American settlement. Action: Establish and maintain a Pelicans were known to use Island Park Reservoir ‘conservation area’ on Blackfoot since the 1950s. In the 1990s, pelicans in the Reservoir’s Gull Island where 700 Upper Snake Region expanded from scattered, pelicans (350 nests) are allowed infrequent occurrences to larger, consistently to nest undisturbed by fencing, occurring foraging flocks. Since the mid-2000s, flagging, and hazing efforts. pelicans have been commonly observed on most Action: Maintain fencing and flagging major waters within the Upper Snake Region. on Gull Island to restrict nesting area From 2010-2014, IDFG staff completed spring available to breeding pelicans to the aerial pelican surveys to monitor abundance ‘conservation area’. and distribution (Table 2). The total pelican Action: Haze pelicans from abundance averaged 819, and ranged from 998 in nesting islands on Blackfoot 2011 to 467 in 2012. Reservoir (except within Gull Island ‘conservation area’) prior to nest establishment. Action: Seek annual renewal of

22 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Management Goals, Objectives and Actions

Management Issues this fishery, but continued monitoring of pelican IDFG staff have detected concentrated pelican predation is necessary. activity on Trude Island in Island Park Reservoir The Henrys Fork River is a world-renowned annually since 2010. Nesting was first observed sport fishery comprised of nonnative rainbow in 2012. Pelicans have nested on Trude Island and brown trout and limited numbers of native annually since establishment, although the colony YCT. The majority of this river is managed for failed to produce fledglings until 2014 (Table 2). wild or native trout while other portions receive One area of high concern for anglers and the supplemental stocking. Impoundments (Island IDFG in the Upper Snake Region is increasing Park and Ashton reservoirs) are supported pelican abundance and predation on native fishes largely by stocked fish. Since the mid-2000s, and important sport fisheries in the Henrys Fork pelican predation has been a fish management River, including Henrys Lake and tributaries. concern along the upper Henrys Fork River and Henrys Lake and the Henrys Fork River fisheries Henrys Lake. More recently, observations and collectively support 851 jobs and a total economic reports of congregations of foraging pelicans output of over fifty million dollars (Loomis 2005). have been associated with spawning runs or concentrations of fish in many parts of the Henrys Lake is managed as a quality fishery region, prompting additional concerns from and is supported by IDFG stocking and natural managers. The magnitude of pelican predation recruitment. For the last fifteen years, IDFG has on native or sportfish populations is unknown. stocked Henrys Lake with more than 1 million However, fisheries managers and the public have fingerling trout annually. Native YCT spawn concerns about population-level impacts to in several tributaries to Henrys Lake including fisheries resources at current pelican abundances. Targhee, Duck, Howard and Timber creeks. Expansion of the existing pelican colony or Pelicans concentrate foraging efforts at tributary creation of additional colonies will exacerbate mouths during the YCT spring spawning period these concerns. and also during the summer when trout seek thermal refuge (Buelow 2012 and 2013). Currently, pelican predation does not appear to be limiting

Pelicans Counted in Upper Snake Region Pelican Nests on Trude Island, Year Aerial Survey (2010-2014) Island Park Reservoir

2010 859

2011 998

2012 467 150*

2013 785 232**

2014 988 163

2015 N/A 316***

*Number of nests is based on a field estimate; Colony failed sometime after nest establishment ** Colony failed sometime after nest establishment ***Pelicans fledged young but no accurate count of fledglings was obtained

Table 2. American White Pelicans counted during spring aerial surveys in the Upper Snake Region from 2010-2014; and pelican nests counted on Trude Island in Island Park Reservoir since 2012.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 23 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025 Strategies Implemented Action: Implement fish monitoring strategies (Meyer et al. 2016) to The Upper Snake regional staff has employed assess the predation impacts of several strategies to better understand pelican foraging pelicans on native fishes and use of regional habitats and its potential impacts sport fisheries. on fish populations and recreation. Action: As available, allocate resources to minimize predation at Outreach to Private Landowners–IDFG staff has highest priority conflict locations. engaged Trude Island landowners about pelican Action: Continue to modify stocking management. strategies as feasible where conflicts Monitoring the Island Park Reservoir pelican arise to minimize pelican predation. colony on Trude Island–Since 2010, IDFG staff Objective 3: Manage for no more than 300 has monitored the status of nesting birds on the breeding pelicans at the Island Park island. IDFG staff estimates pelican nest success colony (Trude Island). when feasible. Action: Work collaboratively with landowners to maintain the nesting Management Objectives and Actions colony on Island Park Reservoir at an Objective 1: In coordination with statewide appropriate level. efforts, monitor pelican abundance Action: Install fencing and fladry to and distribution in the Upper Snake reduce colony size and discourage Region every three years beginning in pelican colony expansion. 2017. Action: Monitor pelican occupancy Action: Use ground, boat and aerial and nesting phenology to aid in survey techniques to census pelican management decisions. populations in the Upper Snake Action: Haze pelicans attempting Region. to nest outside of the enclosure. Action: Conduct pre-fledgling count Objective 2: Identify conflicts, prioritize locations, to document productivity (fledgling/ and implement actions where pelican nest) for the colony. predation prevents the achievement Action: Monitor other colonial of fish management goals. nesting birds on Trude Island to gauge impacts from pelicans and related management activities.

Objective 4: Monitor other regional waters for establishment of new colonies. Action: Survey potential nesting islands within regional waters at least once per breeding season to determine if pelicans are attempting to nest.

Objective 5: If successful nesting occurs, and total statewide abundance of breeding birds exceeds the 2,800 objective, preclude future nesting attempts. Action: Employ physical barriers and/or hazing prior to nesting season to prevent establishment of a new

ADULT PELICAN CCBY IDAHO FISH AND GAME colony.

24 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Statewide Coordination

he actions and help determine the actions required to reach Tdescribed before established population objectives. will be implemented Methods: Monitoring of the breeding pelican largely by regional population will be aligned with protocols outlined staff along with by the Western Colonial Waterbird Survey (Seto partner agencies in 2008). This survey entails an annual ground- accordance with this based nest count of each island used by nesting plan. The Wildlife pelicans and occurs in the late incubation/early Bureau will coordinate nestling stage of most of the nesting birds; activities such as typically late May–early June. Estimates are statewide pelican counts and nesting colony typically done with a single walk through the surveys, pelican banding or tagging studies, and colony to minimize disturbance. This survey has compiling and analyzing data to assess trends in been conducted annually at the Blackfoot colony pelican abundance, distribution, and productivity since 2002, at the Minidoka colony since 2006, at the state and flyway scale. Annually both the and at the Island Park colony since 2012. These Fisheries Bureau and Wildlife Bureau will work surveys are expected to be continued indefinitely; with regional staff and USFWS staff as needed however, annual ground-based counts at to secure depredation permit authority where Minidoka are contingent upon USFWS approval. necessary to alleviate specific predation impacts. The use of aerial photograph counts, perhaps Wildlife Bureau staff will work with regional staff using drones, will be evaluated as a less intrusive to meet reporting requirements associated with alternative. IDFG staff will refine survey timing any take authority issued by USFWS. and methodologies as needed to ensure valid representation of breeding bird abundance and Pelican Monitoring trends.

IDFG will continue monitoring pelican populations Statewide Distribution and Abundance in Idaho, including annual surveys of nesting colonies to estimate breeding bird abundance Documenting pelican distribution and abundance and productivity, and periodic comprehensive across Idaho will help managers assess effects surveys to describe statewide distribution and of management actions on pelican populations, abundance. Focused studies using marked and may also help identify and prioritize waters birds or birds fitted with GPS transmitters will where site-specific predation impacts may be be implemented when feasible to increase significant or merit further investigation. Previous understanding of movement and life-history statewide surveys (2010 and 2012-14) included characteristics of Idaho’s birds. coordinated aerial counts and ground/boat counts generally conducted over 1-2 days. Counts Breeding Population Estimates were summarized by water body and include both breeding and non-breeding birds. Due to Estimates of the state breeding pelican variations in weather and other factors, year-to- population will be necessary to assess the effects year variability in counts is high for individual of control actions, direct future control efforts, waters and for the statewide total. and monitor statewide population viability. The estimated number of breeding birds will be used Methods: Statewide pelican counts will be each year to reassess a five-year average, predict conducted during the breeding season (late the current trajectory of the breeding population, May/early June) every three years beginning in 2017. This schedule aligns with that proposed

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 25 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025 by the Pacific Flyway Council to monitor all breeding colonies in the western population (Pacific Flyway Council 2013). As in previous surveys, counts will be conducted with consistent methods over the same geographic area, primarily by fixed- wing aircraft and supplemented with ground/boat counts in additional waters. The Wildlife and Fisheries bureaus will plan and coordinate this activity with regional staff, and the Wildlife Bureau will compile and report statewide results.

Production and Productivity TAGGED PELICAN CCBY IDAHO FISH AND GAME Estimates of pelican production and productivity Marking at Idaho’s nesting colonies are important to document continued pelican recruitment in The trapping and marking of juvenile birds with Idaho, and also serve as the primary tool to patagial tags from Idaho’s breeding colonies assess effectiveness of colony management can provide insight into the post-fledging actions, such as physical barriers, hazing, and dispersal, habitat preferences, migration routes, nest destruction where such actions occur. over-wintering habitats, survival rates, age at Productivity monitoring can also help assess first reproduction, and fidelity to natal and other mortality concerns, such as disturbance and breeding sites. Understanding these fundamental disease. While true productivity will be difficult to life-history characteristics will be valuable in obtain, an estimate of maximum productivity can assessing the long-term effects of control actions be obtained by estimating the number of chicks on the pelican population and on reducing the at the colony just prior to fledging. predation pressure imposed by pelicans on Idaho waters. Collection of these data conforms Methods: The number of juveniles at breeding to Strategy 2 under the Population Assessment colonies will be estimated in late July Objective of the Pacific Flyway framework for or early August, just prior to fledging. white pelican management (Pacific Flyway Juvenile counts can be made during Council 2012). These data could be combined the late summer banding and tagging with similar data from other states and partners activities during years that the banding in the Pacific Flyway and used to construct a project is conducted. IDFG staff will population model that predicts broader flyway- also explore aerial imagery (e.g. drones) level effects based on state population objectives. as an option to count fledglings in less From 2007 through 2014, approximately 600 intrusive ways.

26 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Statewide Coordination pre-fledging juvenile pelicans (300 each from suspected to significantly impact native fish the Minidoka and Blackfoot breeding colonies populations or sport fisheries. Regional and HQ Fig. 11) were trapped and marked each year. Each staff will evaluate whether direct estimates of bird received a USFWS metal leg band and a pelican predation rate are necessary to develop unique alpha-number cattle ear-tag placed in specific management strategies or to evaluate the patagium of the wing. The tag colors were effectiveness of those strategies. Where deemed specific to the breeding colony, with red tags necessary, staff will use the methods of Meyer et for Minidoka birds and black tags for Blackfoot al. (2016) to quantify impacts, and will coordinate birds. Analysis of band recoveries and re-sighting this work with HQ staff and other partners. records resulting from this effort is ongoing and will be completed before this plan lapses in 2025. Catch Rates and Return to Creel of Hatchery The need for additional tagging/banding studies Trout will be determined based on information gaps IDFG will employ standardized creel surveys and remaining after this analysis. tagging studies at important recreational sport fisheries to assess catch composition, catch rates, Fisheries and return to the creel of hatchery trout.

Pelican Predation Estimates During this planning period, additional waters may be identified where pelican predation is

Figure 11. Detections of banded pelicans from the Blackfoot (black dots) and Minidoka (red dots) colonies, 2007-2015.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 27 Statewide Information Needs a. Analyze pelican population data and 2007- b. Determine breeding status and nesting location 2014 banding data; determine trends in of pelicans foraging on YCT in the Blackfoot population size and productivity for Idaho and River system through satellite telemetry. the western population; summarize movement data and update survivorship estimates; c. Obtain better information on the biology of develop a model for pelican population Idaho’s pelicans with specific emphasis on viability to validate or adjust current statewide loafing, foraging behavior, home range size, abundance objectives. habitat use, and the percent of the overall population that are adult breeders. Public Outreach

here are two aspects of public outreach associated with the implementation of this plan. First, Tpublic input on a draft plan was sought from a variety of user groups and state and federal agencies during a formal 30–day public comment period. Comments were solicited through a variety of avenues including press releases, public meetings, social media, and the IDFG website. Input was compiled and reviewed by staff, and was incorporated as appropriate into the final draft. Lastly, staff requested IDFG Commission approval on May 17, 2016 before the plan took effect.

A second aspect of public outreach associated with this plan includes communicating objectives and actions to stakeholders, and developing educational materials on pelican conservation and pelican- fish conflicts. Where appropriate, staff will engage other agencies and citizen volunteers in pelican monitoring, banding or tagging, and other conflict management actions such as hazing.

JUVENILE PELICANS CCBY IDAHO FISH AND GAME

28 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Literature Cited

Anderson, D.W. and D.T. King. 2005. Introduction: Idaho Department of Fish and Game and U.S. Biology and conservation of the American white Forest Service. 2007. Management plan for pelican. Waterbirds 28:1–8. conservation of Bonneville cutthroat trout in Idaho. Boise, Idaho. Burleigh T.D. 1972. Birds of Idaho. Caxton Printers, Caldwell, Idaho. Ivey, G.L. and C.P. Herziger. 2006. Intermountain West Waterbird Conservation Plan, Version Chapman, B.R. 1988. History of the white 1.2. A plan associated with the Waterbird pelican colonies in south Texas and northern Conservation for the Americas Initiative. Tamaulipas. Colonial Waterbirds 11:275–283. Portland, Oregon.

Clapp, R.B., M.K. Klimkiewicz, and J.H. Kennard. Keith, J.O. 2005. An overview of the American 1982. Longevity records of North American white pelican. Waterbirds 28:9–17. birds: Gaviidae through Alcidae. Journal of Field Ornithology 53:81–124. King, D.T. and D.W. Anderson. 2005. Recent population status of the American white pelican: Findholt, S.L. and S.H. Anderson. 1995. Diet a continental perspective. Waterbirds 28:48–54. and prey use patterns of the American white pelican (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos) nesting Knopf, F.L. and R.M. Evans. 2004. American white at Pathfinder Reservoir, Wyoming. Colonial pelican (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos). The Birds Waterbirds 18:58–68. of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.) Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Flannery, A.W. 1988. Foraging habitat of white Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds. pelicans on Great Salt Lake marshes. Masters cornell.edu/bna/species/057 Thesis, Utah State Univ. Knopf, F.L. and J.L. Kennedy. 1980. Foraging Hall, E.R. 1925. Pelicans versus fishes in Pyramid sites of white pelicans nesting at Pyramid Lake, Lake. The Condor 27:147–160. Nevada. Western Birds 11:175–180.

Idaho Department of Fish and Game. 2007. Knopf, F.L. and J.L. Kennedy. 1981. Differential Management plan for conservation of predation by two species of piscivorous birds. Yellowstone cutthroat trout in Idaho. Boise, Wilson Bulletin 93:554–556. Idaho. LaBolle, L. and D.J. Schill. 1988. Upper Blackfoot Idaho Department of Fish and Game. 2009. River Fishery Management Plan. Idaho Management of American white pelicans in Department of Fish and Game. Boise, Idaho. Idaho. Boise, Idaho. Lingle, G.R. and N.R. Sloan. 1980. Food habits of Idaho Department of Fish and Game. 2013. Bird white pelicans during 1976 and 1977 at Chase conservation strategy: reducing American white Lake National Wildlife Refuge, North Dakota. pelican / Yellowstone cutthroat trout conflicts. Wilson Bulletin 92:123–125. Boise, Idaho. McEneaney, T. 2006. Yellowstone Bird Report Idaho Department of Fish and Game. 2013. 2006. Yellowstone Center for Resources, Fisheries Management Plan 2013-2018. Boise, National Park Service, Yellowstone National Idaho. Park, Wyoming. YCT-2007-01. Idaho Department of Fish and Game. 2016. Draft State Wildlife Action Plan. Boise, Idaho.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 29 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025

McMahon, B.F. and R.M. Evans. 1992. Nocturnal Rocke, T., K. Converse, C. Meteyer, and B. McLean. foraging in the American white pelican. The 2005. The impact of disease in the American Condor 94:101–109. white pelican in North America. Waterbirds 28:87-94. Meyer, K.A., C.L. Sullivan, P. Kennedy, D.J. Schill, D.M. Teuscher, A.F Brimmer, and D.T. King. 2016. Root, T. 1988. Atlas of wintering North American Predation by American white pelicans and birds. Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois. double-crested cormorants on catchable-sized hatchery rainbow trout in select Idaho lentic Schaller, G.B. 1964. Breeding behavior of the white waters. North American Journal of Fisheries pelican at Yellowstone Lake, Wyoming. The Management 36:294-308. Condor 66:3–23.

Moulton, C.E., S.B. Roberts, J.S. Horne, and Shuford. W.D. 2005. Historic and current status M. Wackenhut. In Review. Changes in of the American white pelican breeding in abundance, productivity, and distribution of California. Waterbirds 28:35–47. western American white pelicans (Pelecanus Sloan, N.F. 1982. Status of breeding colonies of erythrorhynchos), 1981-2014. white pelicans in the United States through 1979. American Birds 36:250–254. Murphy, E.C and J.C. Tracy. 2005. Century-long impacts of increasing human water use on Strait, L.E. and N.R. Sloan. 1974. Life table analysis numbers and production of the American white for the white pelican. Inland Bird Banding News pelican at Pyramid Lake, Nevada. Waterbirds 46:20–28. 28:61-72. Teuscher, D. 2004. Regional Fishery Management NatureServe. 2015. NatureServe Explorer: An Investigations. Job performance report. Report online encyclopedia of life [web application]. F-71-R-28. Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Boise. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed: May 4, 2015). Teuscher, D., R. Hillyard, and R. Scully. 2005. Regional Fishery Management Investigations. O’Malley, J.B.E. and R.M. Evans. 1982. Flock Southeast Region. Job performance report. formation in white pelicans. Canadian Journal of Project F-71-R-28. Idaho Department of Fish and Zoology 60:1024–1031. Game, Boise.

Pacific Flyway ouncil.C 2012. Pacific Flyway Plan: Teuscher, D. and D.J. Schill. American white A framework for the management of American pelican predation on Yellowstone cutthroat trout white pelican depredation on fish resources in in the Blackfoot River system, Idaho. Pp 242- the Pacific Flyway. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 249 in Carline, R.F. and C LoSapio, editors. 2010. Portland, Oregon. Conserving Wild Trout. Proceedings of the Wild Trout X Symposium. Bozeman, MT. Pacific Flyway ouncil.C 2013. A monitoring strategy for the western population of American Teuscher, D.M., M.T. Green, D.J. Schill, A.F. Brimmer, white pelicans within the Pacific Flyway. Pacific and R.W. Hillyard. 2015. Predation by American Flyway Council, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, white pelicans on Yellowstone cutthroat trout Portland, Oregon. 18pg. in the Blackfoot River drainage, Idaho. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 35: Pacific Flyway ouncilC 2015. Pacific Flyway 454-463. Council recommendations, informational notes, and subcommittee reports, July 2015. http:// Trost, C.H. 1985. Status and distribution of colonial www.pacificflyway.gov/Documents/Recs_jul.pdf. nesting waterbirds in Idaho. Nongame Wildlife Accessed 9/28/15/ Program, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise, Idaho.

30 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Statewide Information Needs

Trost, C.H. and A. Gerstell. 1994. Status and distribution of colonial nesting waterbirds in southern Idaho, 1993. U.S. Department of the Interior. Bureau of Land Management Technical Bulletin No. 94-6. Boise, Idaho.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1984. Guidelines for the management of the American white pelican western population. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 31 Appendices 111 113 152 187 231 313 156 170 154 202 230 448 Island Gunnison 0 111 32 32 56 95 141 118 119 201 140 304 NWR Minidoka Minidoka 27 83 95 84 181 181 231 412 148 274 252 354 Reservoir Blackfoot Blackfoot a 174 271 199 314 272 252 253 323 385 248 363 268 Reservoir Island Park Island Park 213 315 415 275 275 347 259 366 483 459 346 403 Molly Island (Yellowstone (Yellowstone National Park) National 1 1 7 4 52 82 504 1,569 3,335 3,035 10,994 22,369 Water size (ha) size Water Summary of pelican predation impacts on hatchery rainbow trout fisheries in southern Idaho (from Meyer et al. 2016) Meyer fisheries in southern Idaho (from trout rainbow impacts on hatchery Summary of pelican predation Study Waters Study Foster Reservoir Foster Glendale Reservoir Chesterfield Chesterfield Reservoir American Falls American Falls Reservoir Lake Walcott Lake Freedom Park Pond Park Freedom Rupert Gun Club Pond Magic Reservoir Riley Creek Pond Creek Riley Filer Pond CJ Strike Reservoir Strike CJ Cascade Reservoir Pelican nesting was attempted but no offspring were produced at this location during the study. during the at this location produced were but no offspring attempted was nesting Pelican Appendix I. Table A. Distance (km) from study waters where hatchery trout were stocked and (or) fed to American white pelicans, to nearby pelican nearby pelicans, to American white to fed and (or) stocked were trout hatchery where waters study (km) from A. Distance Table et al. 2016). Meyer (from colonies nesting a

32 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Appendices - - - CI 0.18 0.16 0.10 0.07 0.07 0.07 0,02 0.07 0.02 0.03 0.20 0.69 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.04 90% .32 0.31 0.10 0.82 0,02 0.02 0.03 0.68 0.69 0.03 0.06 0.30 0.09 0.09 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 Angler Catch Estimate 0.12 0.29 0.29 0.26 0.00 0.00 Pelican Pelican Predicted Predicted Predation - - CI 0.17 0.16 0.22 0.67 0.32 0.07 0.05 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.04 90% 0.15 0.31 0.25 0.07 0.34 0.05 0.48 0.08 0.30 0.30 0.04 0.00 0.00 Pelican Predation Pelican Estimate ------52 171 99 20 Other Cormorant Cormorant Recoveries 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 22 96 140 Stocked ------Fed 1 2 3 2 5 3 4 4 11 4 0 0 0 0 17 41 16 16 65 194 Stocked Pelicans Cormorant Pelicans to: tags assigned Recovered ------2 2 2 9 6 0 0 12 16 19 24 53 44 189 Fed 99 99 100 100 100 100 397 293 385 393 398 396 399 399 208 449 450 400 400 5,565 Stocked Initial PIT 0 0 0 0 0 0 81 91 10 tags at large tags at 39 83 95 64 80 101 125 104 100 100 Fed 1,073 0 0 111 27 32 32 to 56 56 83 95 118 84 118 118 201 201 201 304 304 Colony Nearest Nearest Distance Distance 2012 2012 2013 2013 2013 2012 2012 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 Year Total Pond Water Reservoir Reservoir Filer Pond Lake Walcott Lake Lake Walcott Lake American Falls American Falls American Falls American Falls Magic Reservoir Foster Reservoir Foster Rupert Gun Club Riley Creek Pond Creek Riley Riley Creek Pond Creek Riley Riley Creek Pond Creek Riley Cascade Reservoir Cascade Reservoir Glendale Reservoir CJ Strike Reservoir Strike CJ CJ Strike Reservoir Strike CJ CJ Strike Reservoir Strike CJ Freedom Park Pond Park Freedom Chesterfield Reservoir Chesterfield Table B. Initial numbers of hatchery Rainbow Trout (with PIT tags and anchor tags) fed to pelicans or stocked in study waters and subsequently recovered from American from and subsequently recovered waters in study pelicans or stocked to fed (with PIT tags and anchor tags) Trout Rainbow B. Initial numbers of hatchery Table et al. 2016). Meyer (from and angler catch of pelican predation well as estimates as in Idaho, or other loafing areas colonies pelican nesting white Appendix I. Continued.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 33 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025 Appendix I. Continued.

34 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Appendices

Appendix I. Continued.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 35 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025 success Likelihood of Likelihood Unpredictable Unpredictable of success level with associated waters treatment only Regulatory Regulatory Constraints Potential federal, federal, Potential and tribal state, constraints Cost Analysis Cost Although of costs direct withholding water the might be low, to costs indirect users and water cost the potential may of mitigation be high in- Currently or flow stream use in-reservoir not currently are under recognized rental water rules and further would discussion occur need to with the Idaho Resource Water Board estimate No cost this at possible time Social Impact There would would There be a likely divided public reaction Practical Practical Logistical Logistical Considerations Not practical Not practical because the demand for resources water high is too energy, (i.e., agriculture, commercial, and residential needs) Multiple users and diverse demands water for make would coordination complicated Biological Impact–Fish Increased loss of loss Increased species at prey other fisheries from pelicans displaced of prey loss Reduced treatment species at an due to waters in refugia increase in increase Potential and/or the survival of prey recruitment species because of levels water stable Fish impacts – depends unknown on timing and of flow duration changes Biological Impact–Birds Decrease forage forage Decrease opportunity reducing by water shallow habitat foraging Decrease habitat nesting reducing by of area surface island(s) displace Could foraging pelicans to other bodies of water Action Action Description Maintain reservoir levels at water provide that adequate fish for refugia times and/ at or locations needed require Would cooperation with water users and associated water management agencies Description and analysis of 12 potential management actions considered to address impacts of pelicans on fish in Idaho. address to management actions considered of 12 potential Description and analysis Increase Increase Reservoir Reservoir Water Levels Water Appendix II.

36 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Appendices success Likelihood of Likelihood Unpredictable Unpredictable of success level Dependant on fishery current bird diversity, and behavior, viability stocking Regulatory Regulatory Constraints IDFG – seven – seven IDFG process step species new for introductions Cost Analysis Cost The estimated estimated The of stocking cost hatchery-reared to trout rainbow one adult feed pelican consuming trout only rainbow be between would $15–50 / day estimated The of modifying cost composition prey introducing by fishes non-native fish” or “rough would carp) (i.e., be approximately $500 / day delayed The realized cost of loss through a quality fishery to or treatment a quality recover fishery (both scenarios common occurring following introduction of non-native / undesired could species) be thousands to millions of dollars Social Impact Divided public if fishery quality is compromised Practical Practical Logistical Logistical Considerations Sources of Sources additional fish species may to be difficult due to acquire hatchery state of Viability fish stocked and uncertain require may continued supplementation Biological Impact–Fish Potentially reduce reduce Potentially impacts predation a single species, to increase but could impacts if pelicans to drawn are foraging increased opportunities negative Potential on other fish effect species through interspecific competition Biological Impact–Birds Additional Additional prey stocked species may increase foraging opportunity in treatment waters Potential in increase / fecundity of survival piscivorous associated birds with treatment waters attract May piscivorous to birds treatment waters Action Action Description Stock game Stock and/or nongame fish species diversify to pelican prey base Modify Prey Modify Prey Composition Appendix II. Continued.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 37 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025 success Likelihood of Likelihood Depends on action taken, of characteristics location, stocking and adaptability of pelicans to changes in foraging opportunities stocking - Changing spring to time from to likely more fall than be successful simply changing or time of day number of release sites stocking - Fall be to likely more in larger successful / reservoirs lakes to likely - More if be successful to pelicans slow adapt foraging in behavior release to response of fish Regulatory Regulatory Constraints None Cost Analysis Cost Expensive due Expensive changes to in hatchery only if production and species, size, numbers change Changes in angler affect use could local economies (up or down) No significant if change in costs and species, size, numbers similar Social Impact Mixed public Mixed opinion because this action could change quality of fishery Practical Practical Logistical Logistical Considerations Fall release more more release Fall due difficult water lower to levels Hatchery due constraints production to timing and needs Biological Impact–Fish May reduce reduce May predation mortality of fish hatchery increase May mortality of fish hatchery other from causes - Changing time stocking spring to from affect could fall overwinter of survival fish hatchery - Longer of retention fish hatchery could in trucks survival affect - Increased handling mortality possible Biological Impact–Birds May affect short-term short-term affect May opportunities foraging reducing by birds for of hatchery availability fish change location May time of pelican and/or foraging Action Description Action Distribute stocking stocking Distribute in time location(s) / daily) (seasonal and space time of - Alter from stocking (after fall spring to pelicans have migrated) the - Increase number of stocking reduce to locations risk predation - Change stocking to day time from dusk fish Reduce some at stocking - May locations be applicable in some cases, either or temporarily permanently Fish Modify Stocking Stocking Strategies Appendix II. Continued.

38 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Appendices success Likelihood of Likelihood May prove prove May in effective areas localized immediately (e.g., weirs below or other fish barriers) passage of Difficulty may maintenance limit long-term on effectiveness scale a large likelihood Overall low of success Potentially to moderate high likelihood in of success localized very depending area on physical of constraints site Very effective effective Very short-river for with high reaches concentrations but may of birds, long for not work and reaches river wide rivers Fluctuating can levels water bird inundate lines making them ineffective Regulatory Regulatory Constraints Unknown; Unknown; may Permitting be required of Corps by Engineers May cause May water navigable if conflicts in implemented popular boating areas Cost Analysis Cost Potentially Potentially install to expensive and maintain dependent on method rope- -Floating for $1,000 to materials 100 x 50 protect $1,400 ft area; to in manpower implement through run; spawning cost $2,400 total platforms -Floating $100 in materials; in $1,750 during manpower run; spawning cost $1,850 total Materials are are Materials relatively (~$600 inexpensive / mile) Labor intensive set up and to maintain (daily maintenance) about at estimated $8,600 / mile total Estimated about $9,200 cost / mile Social Impact May be May unpopular with public due to areas creating to unavailable anglers Unsightly Socially acceptable Practical Practical Logistical Logistical Considerations Difficult and Difficult to labor intensive maintain fishing Reduced opportunity anglers, i.e., for under the areas barriers would to be unavailable anglers to Hindrance navigation hazard) (boating Potential entanglement liability Limited by area area by Limited and covered levels. water If reservoirs filling, are lines become and inundated increased require maintenance Biological Impact–Fish IReduced fish loss fish loss IReduced under barriers areas Fish resting under barriers reduce Could in refugia foraging areas concentrate Could foraging and increase areas in non-refugia loss reduce Could of fish in areas i.e., concentration, streams, spawning mouths of tributaries, etc. May reduce bird bird reduce May on predation cutthroat migrating and other trout fish concentrated species Biological Impact–Birds Little to no Little to impact physical birds to Risk of bird entanglement could Platforms perches provide birds for May reduce reduce May foraging opportunities cause May mortality by entanglement in lines. Fluctuating levels water can inundate lines and risk of increase entanglement Action Action Description Create physical physical Create barriers to separate pelicans and fish: rope -Floating -Anchored or plastic wood platforms Install lines Install across waterways birds where to concentrate forage Use flagging increased for with visibility, line spaced at 20 yard 20 yard at intervals lines 2–3 String water ft above Fish Lines Provide Provide Install Bird Bird Install Refugia for for Refugia Appendix II. Continued.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 39 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025 success Likelihood of Likelihood Variable depending Variable on scale of High likelihood if hazing is success an and at intense scale appropriate be more May in areas effective or weirs around tributary mouths Regulatory Regulatory Constraints None – as long as injury or does take not occur Cost Analysis Cost Expensive Expensive depending on method, intensity, and scale should Volunteers to be considered implement hazing $20 / Labor costs twice hour; haze 3-hr for per day time periods 6 hrs / totaling @ $120 / day day; = $5,400 45 days about Costs / mile $2,700 Social Impact Divided public Practical Practical Logistical Logistical Considerations Labor intensive Labor intensive depending on method and scale Human safety or if boats issues used are aircraft Biological Impact–Fish Reduced Reduced at predation hazing site birds move May and predation of areas to issues biological greater significance fish native to populations birds move May and predation of areas to issues economic greater (see importance 4) Table Biological Impact–Birds Displacement foraging Lost hazing opportunity at site cause May of regurgitation contents, stomach additional requiring meet to predation dietary demands Action Description Action Haze only foraging only foraging Haze (no or loafing birds hazing on nesting islands) Methods could include: air by -Harassment or boat motor boat, aircraft by -Harassment human presence dogs and/or by -Harassment shells, crackers guns, or zon pyrotechnics by -Disturbance lasers or strobe lights by -Disturbance or human presence effigies Haze Birds Haze Appendix II. Continued.

40 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Appendices success Likelihood of Likelihood May reduce the reduce May numbers of birds site predation at but temporarily simply it may the problem move elsewhere not reduce Will in any the problem very for area given a very long unless number of large moved are birds and do not return the No guarantee come won’t birds back Regulatory Regulatory Constraints Would Would require special permit from USFWS Cost Analysis Cost No guarantee of No guarantee and no success to experience model efforts Costly is labor -Capture intensive is costly -Transport transport due to and vehicle personnel needs Monitoring at at Monitoring could site release be labor intensive, and difficult, very potentially ineffective Scale of removal make to necessary a measurable impact on local be may populations prohibitive Social Impact May give the give May that appearance expanding are we of distribution the pelicans can use so we aggressive more management alternatives oiling eggs, (e.g., shooting adults) areas in problem such as Blackfoot Reservoir Translocations would demonstrate our dedication maintaining to numbers in Idaho, in particularly light of aggressive management such approaches as oiling eggs Practical Practical Logistical Logistical Considerations Should question Should question have birds why not naturally the colonized would we areas them to move Biological Impact–Fish Unknown long- Unknown impact term Immediate impact on fish capture if bird and removal at occurred problem targeted (hazing areas with associated removal, bird and the actual of birds removal will reduce immediate foraging) in Reduction local pelican population reduce may fish predation not but may overall improve numbers trout is if predation compensatory Biological Impact–Birds May break pair break May bonds survival Unknown for prediction birds translocated may sites Release unknown have such as factors of high levels or predation human disturbance limits adult that survival may Transport the to birds stress point of reduced survival chick Reduced if breeding survival adults moved during incubation, or nestling fledgling period Action Action Description Capture adult Capture on nesting birds islands adult Translocate alternate to birds locations nesting bird reduce to numbers at original colony while establishing or colonies new supplementing numbers at bird colonies existing require Could wing clipping of translocated prevent adults to the to their return site capture use require Could of wing-clipped at birds decoy site new Colonies) (Establish (Establish New Nesting Nesting New Translocations Translocations Appendix II. Continued.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 41 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025 success Likelihood of Likelihood Regulatory Regulatory Constraints Cost Analysis Cost Estimated total total Estimated @ per day cost includes $7,440 horse trailers, boats, manpower, vehicles, and fencing supplies / birds Handling 75 amount would day $100 / bird to Social Impact Anglers at Anglers at sites release see pelican may translocations as simply a of the distribution problem Practical Practical Logistical Logistical Considerations Biological Impact–Fish Biological Impact–Birds Capture of adults Capture or without a nest not could young be guaranteed and capture unless was translocation prior to conducted nesting is space- If colony of removal limited, a colony at adult birds open up space may that birds new for outside in from come Great (e.g., areas in effect Salt Lake) statewide increasing numbers new establish May colonies, breeding increasing thereby in the abundance future Action Action Description Appendix II. Continued.

42 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Appendices success Likelihood of Likelihood level of success level Moderate short- Moderate dependent term of on the effects of productivity pelicans (fewer be fed) to chicks of and behavior pelicans displaced Potentially high long-term dependant on pelican population impacts Unpredictable Regulatory Regulatory Constraints Would likely likely Would require and approval permitting federal, by state and/or entities Depends on island ownership 2 Cost Analysis Cost depending on 2 Planting willow Planting willow 1 shrub at cuttings cost would / yd2 an estimated / acre $4,000 An excavator an cost would $1,200 estimated modify to / week suitable or remove or add habitat rock costs Blasting $2–6 / from range ft accessibility nesting The in islands range 13,000– from size ft 200,000 Social Impact Divided public reduced -A and/ productivity or population of pelicans size be likely would to acceptable public with fish but concerns not be for may public with bird concerns Practical Practical Logistical Logistical Considerations Logistically Logistically and feasible highly practical dependent on technique planting (e.g., vegetation be easily may accomplished; however, deposition of or the rock use of heavy machinery may be economically and logistically difficult) Biological Impact–Fish May reduce reduce May of fish the loss pelicans on to (less short-term be fed) to chicks long-term and/or pelican (reduced if fewer numbers) pelicans young from result treatment Biological Impact–Birds Potential Potential of displacement birds nesting reduced Potential if the productivity nesting available is a substrate limiting factor negative Potential on other effects island nesters (cormorants, egrets, herons, etc.) Action Action Description Reduce nesting nesting Reduce available habitat pelicans for Techniques include: -Manipulate add (i.e., habitat or vegetation rock) large habitat -Remove blasting) (i.e., fence, -Erect barriers physical island break-up to area surface Habitat Nesting Nesting Manipulate Manipulate Appendix II. Continued.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 43 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025 success Likelihood of Likelihood Unknown and Unknown of high probability impacting the other nesting colonial birds Regulatory Regulatory Constraints Investigated with Investigated through USFWS development of the Bird Conservation (IDFG Strategy 2013) has IDFG authority to and capture predators release Cost Analysis Cost Relatively Relatively inexpensive Unknown effectiveness costs Trapping about $120 / predator and Transport about release $280 / predator about cost Total $400 / predator no Assuming than more 10 predators / year released the approximate annual cost be would / year ~$5,000 Social Impact Mixed public Mixed opinion Practical Practical Logistical Logistical Considerations Feasible Predators and leave may be need to reintroduced annually can Predators if be removed necessary may A predator select smaller nesting colonial species rather than pelican lose May of control ability to manage pelican size colony Biological Impact–Fish Chick mortality reduce may predation fish demand for reduce May local pelican population and associated demand foraging If other colony decline, nesters fish predation also be may reduced A portion or the may colony entire an to relocate with similar area fish predation concerns Biological Impact–Birds May reduce pelican reduce May population reduce May reproductive success cohort reduce May to contribution production future may Pelicans abandon nesting colony cause May and disturbance on other predation nesting colonial species bird Action Action Description Translocate native native Translocate mammalian to predators islands used (i.e., nesting for badgers, raccoons, coyotes) foxes, Islands Introduce Introduce Predators Predators to Nesting Nesting to Appendix II. Continued.

44 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Appendices success Likelihood of Likelihood Low given regulatory regulatory given Low constraints Regulatory Regulatory Constraints Pelicans are are Pelicans federally under protected not are MBTA, considered and game birds, not thus would be considered hunting for seasons without to modification MBTA Modifications MBTA to require would ammendments international to with treaties both Canada and Mexico Cost Analysis Cost Unknown cost cost Unknown ammending for Bird Migratory Act Treaty (MBTA) A portion of the related costs pelican to management be could by supported pelican tag sales Enforcement of harvest regulations and land use restrictions be costly could the IDFG to enforcement bureau of Development protocol harvest tag ~ $2,000; ~ 400 fees tags @ $10.50 generates $4,200; law enforcement personnel time @30 days ~$5,250; net $3,050 costs Depends on public participation Social Impact Possible conflict conflict Possible anglers between and hunters between Conflict consumptive and non- consumptive user groups Potentially to disruptive other user in groups area immediate Practical Practical Logistical Logistical Considerations Pelicans are are Pelicans not classified as game birds or state by wildlife federal management agencies Biological Impact–Fish Immediate Immediate on reduction of predation fish if harvest at targeted was areas problem in Reduction local pelican population reduce may fish predation not but may overall improve numbers trout is if predation compensatory Biological Impact–Birds Potential Potential to disturbance other species break May pair bonds if adults is breeding in turn harvested, overall reducing productivity chick Reduced if survival adult breeding during harvested incubation, or nestling fledgling period Immediate in reduction pelican abundance is if harvest effective Action Action Description Lethal take of take Lethal in problem birds through areas IDFG-regulated season harvest hunt Controlled or quota hunt Birds Harvest Harvest Season on (By the Public) (By Appendix II. Continued.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 45 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025 success Likelihood of Likelihood High expectation High expectation of reducing of pelicans impacts on fish Regulatory Regulatory Constraints Consider IDFG IDFG Consider regarding policy and fertility control predator permit Federal required Cost Analysis Cost Relatively Relatively inexpensive effective Very reducing at production require May years several to of treatment predation reduce conflicts $460; Materials labor and transportation costs $900; total ~$1,360 / year Social Impact Mixed public Mixed opinion Practical Practical Logistical Logistical Considerations Relatively easy easy Relatively implement to Can be for selective pelican nests and specific treatment goals can be identified Biological Impact–Fish May reduce reduce May on fish, predation because adult not pelicans are young feeding impacts Predation nesting by be adults may maintained until adults abandon nests Oiling eggs may impact the length of time adults nests will tend adults and how will disperse nest after abandonment Biological Impact–Birds May reduce reduce May pelican population reduce May reproductive success cohort reduce May to contribution production future Potential to disturbance other colonial species nesting will Pelicans to continue eggs incubate than renest rather the increase May period, incubation which could reduce Action Action Description Spray vegetable vegetable Spray oil on incubating eggs, which the suffocates embryo require May multiple of application oil vegetable and/or and/or Oil Eggs to to Oil Eggs Productivity Productivity Recruitment Limit Pelican Limit Pelican Appendix II. Continued.

46 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Appendices success Likelihood of Likelihood High expectation High expectation of reducing impacts of pelicans on fish Regulatory Regulatory Constraints Consider IDFG IDFG Consider regarding policy and fertility control predator permit Federal required Cost Analysis Cost Relatively Relatively inexpensive effective Very reducing at production require May years several to of treatment predation reduce conflict $460; Materials labor and transportation costs $900; total ~$1,360 / year Social Impact Mixed public Mixed opinion Practical Practical Logistical Logistical Considerations More difficult to difficult More implement than oiling; requires disposal off-site of eggs Can be for selective pelican nests and specific treatment goals can be identified Biological Impact–Fish May reduce reduce May on fish, predation because adult not pelicans are young feeding impacts Predation nesting by be adults may maintained until adults abandon nests Biological Impact–Birds May reduce reduce May pelican production and colony productivity cohort reduce May to contribution production future time Increased may required cause colony abandonment Potential to disturbance other colonial species nesting may Pelicans renest to attempt Action Action Description Selectively Selectively remove eggs incubating Remove Remove expansion expansion eggs to limit eggs to pelican colony pelican colony Appendix II. Continued.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 47 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025 success Likelihood of Likelihood High if financial are resources committed Regulatory Regulatory Constraints USFWS approval approval USFWS required Cost Analysis Cost Given a specific Given depredation this conflict, method can be an effective management tool Materials (ammunition) / 200 $1,000 labor and birds; transportation 30 $3,600 for work NEPA days; $500 Social Impact Mixed public Mixed opinion Practical Practical Logistical Logistical Considerations Feasible species- Very specific and of locations can be concern targeted Biological Impact–Fish May reduce fish reduce May predation Biological Impact–Birds May reduce reduce May pelican reproductive if control success during the occurs season nesting Action Action Description Use agency Use agency to shoot staff at adult birds high impact actively to areas manage pelican depredation, hazing, enhance target to and/or individuals that habituated have specific sites to Site-specific Site-specific lethal take of lethal take adult pelicans Appendix II. Continued.

48 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Appendices

Islands Hazing at Nest Nest Hazing at Not used Not used Not used Nest/egg Nest/egg Destruction Not used Not used Not used Islands Exclusion Exclusion at Nesting Nesting at Fencing/Fladry Fencing/Fladry Not used Not used Not used Bird Lines at Blackfoot River Blackfoot Lines at Bird Flagged lines were installed installed Flagged lines were portions of the across the between River Blackfoot mouth Reservoir Blackfoot and the Caribou County avoided Birds Sportsman Park. using the flagged river segments. Not used Not used Adult Take at at Take Adult Blackfoot River Blackfoot Not used Not used Not used Hazing at Blackfoot River Blackfoot Hazing at Not used Propane cannons (zon guns) guns) cannons (zon Propane used were and pyrotechnics along AWPE haze to intermittently the between River the Blackfoot mouth and the Reservoir Blackfoot Sportsman Park. Caribou County zon to quickly habituated Birds birds hazing moved guns. While was not the affect the area from long-term from birds haze to Used air boat could Birds River. the Blackfoot with boat, river from be moved so returned, readily they however abandoned. was this technique Propane cannons (zon guns) guns) cannons (zon Propane used were and pyrotechnics along AWPE haze to intermittently the between River the Blackfoot mouth and the Reservoir Blackfoot Sportsman Park. Caribou County zon to quickly habituated Birds birds hazing moved guns; While was not the affect the area from long-term. Summary of management actions to reduce AWPE foraging on the Blackfoot River and nesting at the Blackfoot Reservoir colony, colony, Reservoir the Blackfoot at and nesting River on the Blackfoot foraging AWPE reduce Summary of management actions to Year 2003 2005 2004 Appendix III. 2003-2015.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 49 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025 Hazing Islands at Nest Nest at Not used Not used Not used Not used Not used Nest/egg Nest/egg Destruction Not used Not used Not used Not used Not used Islands Nesting Nesting Fladry at Fladry at Fencing/ Exclusion Exclusion Not used Not used Not used Not used Not used Bird Lines at Lines at Bird Blackfoot River Blackfoot Not used Not used Not used Not used However water level level water However created fluctuations and safety maintenance problems. Adult Take at Blackfoot River Blackfoot at Take Adult USFWS permit was used to take 13 take used to permit was USFWS with nonlethal pelicans in conjunction hazing. Not used 10 take used to permit was USFWS with nonlethal pelicans in conjunction use to continued hazing. Pelicans River. Blackfoot 50 take used to permit was USFWS with nonlethal pelicans in conjunction hazing. Services Wildlife Hazing at Blackfoot River Blackfoot Hazing at Pyrotechnics were used intermittently used intermittently were Pyrotechnics along the Blackfoot AWPE haze to Reservoir the Blackfoot between River mouth and the Caribou County hazing moved While Sportsman Park. was not the affect the area from birds long-term used intermittently were Pyrotechnics along the Blackfoot AWPE haze to Reservoir the Blackfoot between River mouth and the Caribou County hazing moved While Sportsman Park. was not the affect the area from birds long-term and ATV used pyrotechnics Volunteers along the Blackfoot AWPE haze to Reservoir the Blackfoot between River mouth and the Caribou County done Hazing was Sportsman Park. through mid-May daily from twice birds hazing moved While mid-June. was not the affect the area from long-term. and ATV used pyrotechnics Volunteers along the Blackfoot AWPE haze to Reservoir the Blackfoot between River mouth and the Caribou County done Hazing was Sportsman Park. through mid-May daily from twice 2007 2008 2006 2009 Year Appendix III. Continued.

50 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Appendices Hazing Islands at Nest Nest at Not used Not used Nest/egg Nest/egg Destruction Not used Not used Exclusion Fencing/ Exclusion Fladry at Nesting Islands Nesting Fladry at An exclosure area was was area An exclosure the around constructed Island. of Willow perimeter included orange Materials barrier fencing construction with an t-posts to attached installed fladry network interior levels High water on t-posts. and the the fencing inundated island. on Willow occurred No nesting flooding caused Island due to levels. high reservoir by barrier construction Orange was placed and fladry fencing on a portion of Gull Island, by destroyed it was however winds, so pelicans used the area nesting. for An exclosure area was was area An exclosure on the north half constructed Island. Materials of Willow construction included orange to attached barrier fencing fladry with an interior t-posts on t-posts. installed network within the did not nest AWPE area. exclosure Bird Bird River Lines at Lines at Blackfoot Blackfoot Not used Not used Adult Take at Blackfoot River Blackfoot at Take Adult Not Used – due to fisheries research research fisheries Not Used – due to project. personnel implemented the take the take personnel implemented permit. research a fisheries Not used - due to radio for and pelican trapping project tagging. Hazing at Blackfoot River Blackfoot Hazing at Not Used – due to fisheries Not Used – due to project. research mid June. While hazing moved hazing moved While mid June. was the affect the area from birds not long-term. Not used – due to a fisheries Not used – due to and pelican project research tagging. radio for trapping 2011 2010 Year Appendix III. Continued.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 51 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025 Hazing Islands at Nest Nest at Not used Not used Nest/egg Destruction Nest/egg USFWS permit allowed for for permit allowed USFWS 500 of up to the destruction with eggs. nests were nests of 461 A total eggs spraying by destroyed oil. Nests with vegetable on both destroyed were islands. Gull and Willow oiled Gull Island eggs were Island eggs and Willow once treatments. two received no obvious was There of rates in hatch difference marking the islands, but nest for unreliable with paint was assessment. adequate USFWS permit allowed for for permit allowed USFWS 500 of up to the destruction with eggs. nests were of 382 nests A total eggs spraying by destroyed oil. Nest with vegetable on both occurred destruction islands. and Gull Willow and of oil treated Monitoring eggs showed non-treated with oil one treatment reducing at effective was No success. hatching eggs was of treated hatching observed. Exclusion Fencing/ Exclusion Fladry at Nesting Islands Nesting Fladry at No fencing and flagging was and flagging No fencing Island on Willow installed to anticipated because it was flood again during the spring run off as it had the previous year. was area An exclosure on a portion of constructed included Gull Island. Materials fencing wire small mesh welded with an t-posts to attached installed fladry network interior nesting Limited on t-posts. within the exclosure occurred area. An exclosure area was was area An exclosure the around constructed Island. of Willow perimeter of Gull perimeter entire The with the fenced Island was of a ‘conservation exception side of the on the east area’ area’ ‘conservation Island. The area 1 acre is an approximately nesting, AWPE set aside for flagging, so it has no fencing, annual beyond or disturbance included Materials counts. nest with an t-posts panels to cattle attached fladry network interior nesting t-posts.Limited to within the exclosure. occurred outside of the occurred Nesting Island, in an on Willow exclosure vegetation have thought to area or nesting dense for too by be inundated to expected level. water reservoir River Bird Lines Bird at Blackfoot Blackfoot at Not used Not used Adult Take at at Take Adult Blackfoot River Blackfoot Not used USFWS permit USFWS the take for allowed of 50 adults on the from River Blackfoot the Lanes Creek- Diamond Creek to the confluence Reservoir, Blackfoot 1 15 April to from July. of 43 birds A total in taken were with association nonlethal hazing efforts. Hazing at Blackfoot River Blackfoot Hazing at Volunteers used pyrotechnics used pyrotechnics Volunteers along AWPE haze to and ATV the between River the Blackfoot mouth and the Reservoir Blackfoot Sportsman Park. Caribou County daily from done twice Hazing was While mid-June. through mid-May the area from birds hazing moved was not long-term. the affect Volunteers and IDFG personnel and IDFG Volunteers haze to and ATV used pyrotechnics River along the Blackfoot AWPE Reservoir the Blackfoot between mouth and the Caribou County done Hazing was Sportsman Park. through mid-May daily from twice more Hazing was mid-June. combined with when effective lethal take. 2012 2013 Year Appendix III. Continued.

52 Idaho Department of Fish & Game Appendices Hazing Islands at Nest Nest at Not Used Nest/egg Destruction Nest/egg USFWS permit allowed for for permit allowed USFWS 500 of up to destruction with eggs. nests by occurred destruction Nest nests. eggs from removing 26 from removed were Eggs on Gull and nests and 474 islands, respectively. Long egg removal, Following Island on Long the birds It abandoned their nests. some of these appeared the Gull to moved birds and area Island exclusion attempt. began renesting Exclusion Fencing/ Exclusion Fladry at Nesting Islands Nesting Fladry at An exclosure area was was area An exclosure a wider around constructed Island to of Willow perimeter reservoir lower for account of perimeter entire The levels. with the fenced Gull Island was of a ‘conservation exception side of the on the east area’ area’ ‘conservation Island. The area 1 acre is an approximately nesting, AWPE set aside for flagging, so it has no fencing, annual beyond or disturbance included Materials counts. nest with an t-posts panels to cattle attached fladry network interior t-posts. to on occurred nesting No AWPE Island. Willow the first for occurred Nesting Island. time on Long only in nested AWPE Initially, on Gull area’ the ‘conservation abandonment Island. Following occurred Island nesting of Long on Gull area in the exclosure Island. River Bird Lines Bird at Blackfoot Blackfoot at Not Used Adult Take at at Take Adult Blackfoot River Blackfoot USFWS permit USFWS the take for allowed adults on the of 75 from River Blackfoot the Lanes Creek- Diamond Creek to the confluence Reservoir, Blackfoot 1 15 April to from July. birds of 69 A total in taken were with association nonlethal hazing efforts. Hazing at Blackfoot River Blackfoot Hazing at IDFG personnel used pyrotechnics personnel used pyrotechnics IDFG along AWPE haze to and ATV the between River the Blackfoot mouth and the Reservoir Blackfoot Sportsman Park. Caribou County daily from done twice Hazing was Hazing mid-June. through mid-May combined when effective more was with lethal take. 2014 Year Appendix III. Continued.

Idaho Department of Fish & Game 53 Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016–2025 Islands Hazing at Nest Nest Hazing at Nonlethal hazing of adult began on April AWPE were Pyrotechnics 10. hazing. reinforce used to at conducted Hazing was Islands, and Long Willow side as the west as well of Gull Island. All nests on both Long initiated islands were and Willow egg prior to destroyed laying. Nest/egg Nest/egg Destruction USFWS permit USFWS of destruction for 500 nests up to with eggs. Exclusion Fencing/ Exclusion Fladry at Nesting Islands Nesting Fladry at An exclosure area was was area An exclosure the entire around constructed of Gull Island with perimeter of a ‘conservation the exception side of the on the east area’ area’ ‘conservation Island. The area 1acre is an approximately nesting, AWPE set aside for flagging, so it has no fencing, annual beyond or disturbance included Materials counts. nest with an t-posts panels to cattle attached fladry network interior t posts. to on Willow area exclusion The not maintained this Island was implemented Hazing was year. barriers in lieu of constructing islands. and Long on Willow River Bird Lines Bird at Blackfoot Blackfoot at Not used Adult Take at at Take Adult Blackfoot River Blackfoot USFWS permit USFWS the take for allowed adults on the of 75 from River Blackfoot the Lanes Creek- Diamond Creek to the confluence Reservoir, Blackfoot 1 15 April to from July. Hazing at Blackfoot River Blackfoot Hazing at IDFG personnel used pyrotechnics personnel used pyrotechnics IDFG along AWPE haze to and ATV the between River the Blackfoot mouth and the Reservoir Blackfoot Sportsman Park. Caribou County daily from done twice Hazing was Hazing mid-June. through mid-May combined when effective more was with lethal take. 2015 Year Appendix III. Continued.

54 Idaho Department of Fish & Game

Management Plan for the Conservation of American White Pelicans in Idaho 2016-2025