Webless Migratory Game Bird Program - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

More documents

Recommendations

Info

% MCP cranes 100 80 60 40 20 Mean % presence Yearly variation (SD) 0 18-Feb 25-Feb 04-Mar 11-Mar 18-Mar 25-Mar 01-Apr 08-Apr 15-Apr Date Figure 2. Annual mean percentage of sandhill cranes present at the Platte River during spring migration (solid line) and annual variation (dashed line), 2001–2007. Table 1. Percentage of midcontinent sandhill cranes staging in CPRV that were present, not yet arrived, or already departed the area during the scheduled survey date on the fourth Tuesday of March each year, 2001–2007. Year Cranes Date During scheduled survey % present % not arrived % departed 2001 16 27 Mar 94 6 0 2002 34 26 Mar 91 9 0 2003 24 25 Mar 75 17 8 2004 59 23 Mar 81 10 9 2005 42 22 Mar 88 10 2 2006 86 28 Mar 94 2 4 2007 44 27 Mar 71 2 27 Mean 85 8 7 SD 9 5 9 We encountered between 12 and 40 thousand cranes during each of 24 ground-based transect surveys conducted over an 8-year period during 1998–2002 and 2009–2011. We estimated 0–11% of cranes were outside of the established survey boundary during the week of the scheduled crane survey (mean = 3%; SD = 4%; Table 2). A smaller percentage of cranes were encountered outside of the survey boundary the week preceding scheduled surveys (mean = 2%) and a greater percentage during week after the scheduled survey (mean = 11%; Table 2). 40 Table 2. Percentage of midcontinent sandhill cranes observed outside of the survey boundary used in the USFWS coordinated crane survey along the CPRV the week preceding, week of, and week after the scheduled survey, 1998-2002 and 2009-2011. Year Pre-survey During survey Post survey 1998
Alternatively, a different survey method, potentially counting roosting birds, would alleviate this source of variation. Based on natural variation in cranes present at the Platte River, certain changes to the crane survey may be necessary before it can be used to reliably track midcontinent crane population abundance. Initially, variation associated with the Platte River survey itself could be minimized or eliminated, including sampling error and error due to estimation of observation bias. This could be achieved by a fundamental change to how the survey is conducted, potentially shifting from a diurnal sample survey approach to a nocturnal enumeration of roosting cranes. With these sources of variation minimized, efforts would still be needed to reduce variation due to population turnover at the Platte River staging area. Surveying areas outside of the Platte River area represent one potential solution. Although PTTmarked cranes were observed only in South Dakota during scheduled survey, results from VHF-marked birds indicate that surveys could be useful south and north of the Platte River, likely in South Dakota, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas. Compatibility with estimates from the Platte River survey could be achieve through improvements from incidental counts that have been conducted in association with the spring survey in the past. Our ground-survey in South Dakota provided a reasonable survey area, although data from PTT-marked cranes indicated that a larger area may need to be included. An aerial survey would likely be necessary to effectively survey the area if the goal were to generate an estimate of abundance for the region. Developing and conducting these surveys annually might prove cost prohibitive if birds are distributed over a large area. Alternatively, annual estimates or predictions of the percentage of the population present at the Platte River could be used in conjunction with the survey. Our study provided 7 years of data, which could serve as initial estimates for this endeavor. Additional years of data would be necessary to capture the level of variation that might be apparent in this measure. To facilitate these efforts, a manuscript is in preparation that presents these provisional estimates and sets forth a framework for updating estimates as new data become available. This type of approach may be useful because it is reasonable to assume estimates will change with time due to changes in land use and climate. 41 Acknowledgments Funding for analysis of these data was provided by the Webless Migratory Game Bird Research Program. We thank numerous organizations and individuals for financial and field support in collection of the larger data sets (see Krapu et al. 2011 for a complete list). Reviewers provided comments to earlier versions of this manuscript. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the United States Government. Literature Cited Benning, D. S., and D. H. Johnson. 1987. Recent improvements to sandhill crane surveys in Nebraska's central Platte River Valley. Proceedings North American Crane Workshop 5:10-16. Kinzel, P. J., J. M. Nelson, R. S. Parker, and L. R. Davis. 2006. Spring census of mid-continent sandhill cranes using aerial infra-red videography. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:70–77. Krapu, G. L., D. A. Brandt, K. L. Jones, and D. H. Johnson. 2011. Geographic distribution of the mid-continent population of sandhill cranes and related management applications. Wildlife Monographs 175:1–38. Kruse, K. L., D. E. Sharp, and J. A. Dubovsky. 2008. Status and harvests of sandhill cranes: Mid- Continent, Rocky Mountain and Lower Colorado River Valley Populations. Administrative Report, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, Colorado. 11pp. Tacha, T. C., S. A. Nesbitt, and P. A. Vohs. 1994. Sandhill Cranes. Pages 77-94 in T. C. Tacha and C. E. Braun, eds. Migratory Shore and Upland Game Bird Management in North America. International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Washington D.C. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1981. The Platte River Ecology Study. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Jamestown, North Dakota, USA. Wheeler, R. H., and J. C. Lewis. 1972. Trapping techniques for sandhill crane studies in the Platte River Valley. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Resource Publication 107.
Page 1 and 2: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Webles
Page 3 and 4: CONTENTS Development and History of
Page 5 and 6: HISTORY AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE W
Page 7 and 8: Program Administration The USFWS Pr
Page 9 and 10: Appendix A - Priority Information N
Page 11 and 12: Table 1. Harvest and crippling of m
Page 13 and 14: idge between current monitoring eff
Page 15 and 16: Figure 1. Estimated age ratios of m
Page 17 and 18: other, showing similar behavior (e.
Page 19 and 20: Table 5. Detection probability and
Page 21 and 22: mechanism for accurate aging of whi
Page 23 and 24: Currently laboratory measurements o
Page 25 and 26: Band-tailed Pigeons BAND-TAILED PIG
Page 27 and 28: flux:rock), fused at 1000°C in a m
Page 29 and 30: The mineral station design was adju
Page 31 and 32: unripe], cascara, and blue elderber
Page 33 and 34: at the station each day ranged from
Page 35 and 36: that Interior birds tended to retai
Page 37 and 38: Sandhill Cranes POPULATION GENETIC
Page 39 and 40: distinguishing between nearly ident
Page 41 and 42: Table 2. Pairwise Fst Values betwee
Page 43: VHF transmitters were synchronized
Page 47 and 48: (Bennett and Bennett 1990, Nesbitt
Page 49 and 50: Spatial Data Landscape-scale data
Page 51 and 52: time-dependent variable of minimum
Page 53 and 54: We found colt survival was lower on
Page 55 and 56: McWethy, D. B., and J. E. Austin. 2
Page 57 and 58: Recent advancements in technology a
Page 59 and 60: Wildlife Resource Agency, Obion (So
Page 61 and 62: Figure 4. Preliminary breeding terr
Page 63 and 64: American Woodcock HABITAT USE AND O
Page 65 and 66: Figure 2: Map of a pointing dog tra
Page 67 and 68: Figure 4: Kriged 13th secondary fea
Page 69 and 70: Texas A&M University, College Stati
Page 71 and 72: ASSESSMENT OF TECHNIQUES FOR EVALUA
Page 73 and 74: ivers, marshes, and shrub swamps. V
Page 75 and 76: adio-marked broods 5-7 days per wee
Page 77 and 78: adult female, considerably lower th
Page 79 and 80: FACTORS AFFECTING DETECTION OF AMER
Page 81 and 82: We classified land-cover types at e
Page 83 and 84: were neighbor = 1.0, observer = 1.0
Page 85 and 86: was included within the official su
Page 87 and 88: Beyer, H. L. 2004. Hawth's Analysis
Page 89 and 90: Marshbirds THE EFFECT OF WATERFOWL
Page 91 and 92: Table 2. Relative Importance of mod
Page 93 and 94: nests to account for repeated measu
Page 95 and 96:
Literature Cited Bogner, H. E. and
Page 97 and 98:
a common nest substrate. Tall forms
Page 99 and 100:
despite rails’ apparent ability t
Page 101 and 102:
EVALUATION OF AN EXPERT-BASED LANDS
Page 103 and 104:
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NATIONAL MARS
Page 105 and 106:
truthed before the actual survey. H
Page 107 and 108:
IMPLEMENTATION OF A NATIONAL MARSHB
Page 109 and 110:
Table 1. Numbers of individuals of
Page 111 and 112:
was required because it was not rea
Page 113 and 114:
ESTIMATING POPULATION TRENDS, RELAT
Page 115 and 116:
This abstract represents a final ab
Page 117 and 118:
Virginia Rail (Rallus limicola), So
Page 119 and 120:
volunteers to cover new sites in la
Page 121 and 122:
Plain of Louisiana (Figure 1). We s
Page 123 and 124:
for concentrations of wintering sni
Page 125 and 126:
Table 1. Model selection results an
Page 127 and 128:
DEVELOPING OPTIMAL SURVEY TECHNIQUE
Page 129 and 130:
Conway, C. J., and J. P. Gibbs. 201
Page 131 and 132:
Figure 1. Red Slough Wildlife Manag
Page 133 and 134:
estimate visual obstruction 10 m fr
Page 135 and 136:
Table 3. Habitat measurements recor
Page 137 and 138:
Thesis, South Dakota State Universi
Page 139 and 140:
Reproductive Success and Survival i
Page 141 and 142:
The goal of the study is to address
Page 143 and 144:
When interacting with private lando
show all

Webless Migratory Game Bird Program - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?