Proportion of Recovered Goose and Brant Bands That Are Reported

Martinson, R.K.; McCann, James A.

doi:10.2307/3798300

Cited by 15 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We showed earlier that in some geographic areas, bands were less likely to be reported than in others. Similar biases in reporting of waterfowl bands have been considered by Bellrose (1955), Geis and Atwood (1961), Martinson (1966), and Martinson and McCann (1966).…”

Section: Band Reporting Biasesmentioning

confidence: 59%

Structure of the New England Herring Gull Population

Kadlec¹,

Drury²

1968

Ecology

202

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. Ecological Society of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Ecology.In the present study, however, this species overwintered in several instars excluding the ultimate stage. Such "summer species," according to Corbet's definition, do not have a final instar diapause, though it is inferred that a diapause may occur in an earlier stage(s). This study does not clearly show if there were diapausing stages in the later instars of L. eurinus.The results obtained clearly show that both temperature and photoperioAi were involved in seasonal regulation by influencing the rate of larval development and by inferring a degree of synchrony to molting and emergence. Both factors were operative, but their combined influence was most instrumental in controlling larval development. This combined effect was further complicated by changing responses due to maturation of larvae in nature during the winter months. Temperature, photoperiod, and degree of maturity of odonate larvae should be the object of further studies to more clearly elucidate their separate and combined effects on seasonal regulation. ACK NOWLEDGMENTS

show abstract

Section: Band Reporting Biasesmentioning

confidence: 59%

Structure of the New England Herring Gull Population

Kadlec¹,

Drury²

1968

Ecology

202

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We originally hoped to treat species as a random effect, thereby allowing species‐specific estimates for all species providing data, but there have been relatively few multi‐species studies (Geis and Atwood , Martinson , Zimmerman et al , Garrettson et al ) and preliminary modeling efforts resulted in poor convergence. We therefore assessed potential species effects by contrasting ducks versus geese (Martinson , Martinson and McCann ), and by recognizing northern pintails ( Anas acuta ), canvasbacks ( Aythya valisineria ), and redheads ( Aythya americana ) as trophy ducks based on findings by Geis and Atwood (: table 4) and Martinson (: table 3).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We originally hoped to treat species as a random effect, thereby allowing species-specific estimates for all species providing data, but there have been relatively few multispecies studies (Geis and Atwood 1961, Martinson 1966, Zimmerman et al 2009, Garrettson et al 2014) and preliminary modeling efforts resulted in poor convergence. We therefore assessed potential species effects by contrasting ducks versus geese (Martinson 1966, Martinson andMcCann 1966), and by recognizing northern pintails (Anas acuta), canvasbacks (Aythya valisineria), and redheads (Aythya americana) as trophy ducks based on findings by Geis and Atwood (1961: table 4) and Martinson (1966: table 3). We modeled the logit of annual band reporting probability (p t ) using a hierarchical autoregressive model in program JAGS (JAGS 4.30, http://mcmc-jags.sourceforge.net/, accessed 1 Jul 2019), accessed using the jagsUI package (jagsUI 1.5.0, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package= jagsUI, accessed 20 Dec 2018) in program R (R version 3.5.2, www.r-project.org, accessed 20 Dec 2018).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Meta‐Analysis of Band Reporting Probabilities for North American Waterfowl

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge of band reporting is important for converting band encounter data into estimates of harvest probabilities, which can then be used to assess harvest management goals or estimate population size and other vital rates. Historical estimates of band reporting probabilities have come from reward‐band studies or joint analysis of band recovery and harvest survey data, but there are long gaps between estimates, and most studies have focused exclusively on mallards (Anas platyrhynchos). We compiled 337 estimates of band reporting probabilities for North American waterfowl and conducted a Bayesian state‐space analysis to provide a continuous time series of estimated reporting probability from 1948 to 2010. Band reporting probability increased sharply between 1996 and 2000 when toll‐free phone numbers were added to band inscriptions and agencies implemented electronic methods for band reporting, but our analysis also identified gradual long‐term trends in reporting probability throughout the time series. We found little evidence for among‐species variation in reporting probability, but a few species that are widely regarded as trophies by waterfowl hunters (canvasbacks [Aythya valisineria], redheads [Aythya americana], and northern pintails [Anas acuta]) had higher historical reporting probabilities than mallards. We also found little evidence of geographic variation in reporting probabilities, although we confirmed lower reporting probabilities for eastern Canada. We recommend using our estimates of band reporting probabilities and their variances as informed priors in future analyses of band recovery data to fully embrace uncertainty about how this parameter affects estimates of other population parameters. Retrospective studies using parts collection data are needed to explore potential among‐species variation in reporting probabilities during recent decades. © 2019 The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

“…Alisauskas et al (2009) summarized available historical estimates of ${\hat {\rho }}_{i} $ for 1989–2004, and provided justification for their use with geese harvested in the midcontinent region of North America. Although Boyd (1976) used ${\hat {\rho }}_{i} $ = 0.33, citing Martinson and McCann (1966) and Henny (1967), Nichols et al (1991) suggested that Henny and Burnham's (1976) estimate of ${\hat {\rho }}_{1972} $ = 0.39 be modified to ${\hat {\rho }}_{1972} $ = 0.26. Nichols et al (1991) further estimated that ${\hat {\rho }}_{1987- 1988} $ = 0.32 ± 0.06 (SE).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Harvest, survival, and abundance of midcontinent lesser snow geese relative to population reduction efforts

Alisauskas

Rockwell

Dufour

et al. 2011

Wildlife Monographs

104

168

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We assessed the effectiveness of an extensive and unprecedented wildlife reduction effort directed at a wide‐ranging migratory population of geese. Population reduction efforts that targeted several populations of light geese (greater snow geese [Chen caerulescens atlantica], lesser snow geese [C. c. caerulescens], and Ross's geese [C. rossii]) began in 1999 in central and eastern North America. Such efforts were motivated by a broad consensus that abundance of these geese was causing serious ecological damage to terrestrial and salt marsh ecosystems in central and eastern parts of the Canadian Arctic and subarctic regions along Hudson Bay. Starting in February 1999, special conservation measures (or, in the U.S., a conservation order) were added to the respective federal regulations that permitted hunters to take snow geese (in parts of Canada and the U.S.) and Ross's geese (in parts of the U.S.) during specified harvest periods outside of the hunting season. These measures were accompanied by increase or removal of daily kill and possession limits and by permissions to use previously prohibited equipment for hunting these species in certain regions of the continent. The intent was to reduce adult survival through increased hunting mortality, which was judged to be the most cost‐effective approach to reversing population growth. Our principal goal was to assess the effectiveness of reduction efforts directed at the midcontinent population of lesser snow geese, which was thought to be the most serious threat to arctic and subarctic ecosystems of the 3 light goose populations. Our multiple objectives included the estimation and detection of change in the response measures of total annual harvest, harvest rate, survival rate, and abundance, using the 1998 hunting period (defined as 1 Aug 1998 to 31 Jul 1999) as a point of reference. We used information about hunter recoveries of leg‐banded snow geese and estimates of regular‐season harvest to estimate 1) conservation‐order harvest and total annual harvest, 2) geographic and temporal distribution of recoveries by age class, 3) survival and recovery probability, and 4) abundance of snow geese each August using Lincoln's (1930) method. We also modeled population growth to infer the form of population response to management efforts. Toward that end, we also proposed a method of estimating conservation‐order harvest and tested for differences in band‐reporting rate between Canada and the United States. Overall, the balance of evidence favored the conclusion that the midcontinent population has continued to grow during the conservation order, although perhaps at a reduced rate. We suggest that annual rate of population growth $({\hat {\lambda }})$, derived from estimates of annual population size in August, likely provides the most reliable inference about change in the midcontinent population. There was a decline in annual survival probability between these 2 periods from about 0.89 to about 0.83 among snow geese from the southern‐nesting stratum (south of 60°N...

show abstract

Proportion of Recovered Goose and Brant Bands That Are Reported

Cited by 15 publications

References 3 publications

Structure of the New England Herring Gull Population

Structure of the New England Herring Gull Population

A Meta‐Analysis of Band Reporting Probabilities for North American Waterfowl

Harvest, survival, and abundance of midcontinent lesser snow geese relative to population reduction efforts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About