Upload
porter-perfect
View
218
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Utilization and Colonization of Artificial Nesting Cylinders by Mallards (Anas
platyrhynchos) and Wood Ducks (Aix sponsa) in Northwest Pennsylvania and Southern
Ontario
Jeremy Stempka: M.Sc. Candidate
Dr. Scott Petrie: Supervisor
Dr. Robert Bailey: Co Supervisor
Partners & CooperatorsPartners•Pennsylvania Game Commission – NW Region & BWM
•Flyway Foundation (SC)
•Long Point Waterfowl and Wetlands Research Fund
•Delta Waterfowl
•University of Western Ontario
•NW Pennsylvania Duck Hunters Association
•Susquehanna River Waterfowlers Association
Cooperators
•Canadian Wildlife Service
•Pennsylvania Conservation Corps
•Western Pennsylvania Chapter Delta Waterfowl
•DCNR - Presque Isle State Park
•Private landowners
Hen Houses?
• Nest success rates typically range between 60% and 100%.
• Increase duckling survival.
• Increase hen survival.
• Relatively inexpensive. Photo by Kevin Jacobs
Tripod
Advantages• Very inexpensive (< $10).• Easily made and installed.• Requires no predator guard.• Can be relocated very easily.
Disadvantages• Placement influenced by water
depth and substrate type.• Susceptible to ice damage.• Strong winds may blown over
HH if not firmly installed.Photo by Kevin Jacobs
Delta Design
Advantages• Well built and very sturdy.
• Easily adaptable for different water and soil depth.
• Easy to install through ice in the winter.
Disadvantages• Expense ($50 + labor).Photo by Kevin Jacobs
Study Objectives
• Conduct a regional comparison of hen house occupancy and nest success between Northwest Pennsylvania and Southern Ontario.
• Determine variables that influence hen house occupancy (wetland type, size, food availability, surrounding habitat, land use, mount)
• Investigate philopatry of mallard hens and female offspring to nesting structures.
• Conduct an interspecific comparison of success rates and parameters associated with HH’s utilized by mallards and wood ducks (i.e. surrounding habitat, wetland type, wetland productivity).
Data Collection
• Classifying each wetland type and measuring size.
• Measuring water depth and distance of HH above water.
• Invertebrate sampling.
• Banding hen mallards to measure return rates.
• Web tagging ducklings to investigate offspring philopatry.
• Using satellite imagery to define surrounding habitat and land use.
Hen House Monitoring• Hen houses were checked every
20 days for use.
• Occupied nests checked and candled every 7-10 days to estimate hatch date.
• Nests checked daily near estimated hatch date.
Photo by Kevin Jacobs
Capturing Hens
• Hens captured and banded to detect homing.
• Hens banded on day 16 of incubation or later to decrease nest abandonment.
• Captured primarily by sneaking perpendicular to the nest with dip nets.
Photo by Scott Petrie
Banding Hens• In 2006, 18 Hens were banded with
standard leg bands in Northwest PA and Southern Ontario.
• 50% of those hens returned to nest in the same or adjacent hen house.
• In 2007 an additional 25 hen mallards were banded, 24 ASY, 1 SY
• Hen immobilized by placing the mallard’s head under the wing and rocking it back and forth until it is relaxed and then placing the hen back into the HH.
• No post banding nest abandonment.
Photo by Scott Petrie
Web Tagging• In 2006, 180 mallard ducklings
were web tagged to investigate offspring philopatry.
• No offspring philopatry in 2007 from ducklings tagged in 2006.
• In 2007, an additional 250 mallard ducklings were web tagged.
• Majority were web tagged in the egg.
Photo by Kevin Jacobs
Summary Comparison of Hen House Occupancy in Northwest Pennsylvania and Southern Ontario
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
2006 2007 2006 2007
Ontario Pennsylvania
Wood duck
Mallard
Summary Comparison of Hen House Success Rates in Northwest Pennsylvania and Southern Ontario
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2006 2007 2006 2007
Ontario Pennsylvania
Wood duck
Mallard
2008 Plans
• Winter HH maintenance.• Complete 2008 fieldwork
March – July.• Data analysis and thesis
completion target date of December 2008.
Photo by Kevin Jacobs