A scientific paper published in Wildlife Biology titled Effects of the Light Goose Conservation Order on non-target waterfowl distribution during spring migration highlights concerns that wildlife managers have had for a few years. Due to human agriculture, the snow goose (Anser caerulescens) and Ross’s goose (Anser rossii) are both having population explosions, and are overpopulated. They are destroying their Arctic breeding grounds, and that has caused managers to open up a hunting season during the spring migration in the early 2000’s. All other species of waterfowl also migrate during the spring, and there was concern for disruption of the other species such as Anas sp. The study concluded that in heavily-hunted areas such as Wildlife Management Areas, the non-target waterfowl were not affected. Waterfowl habits change during hunting season in the fall due to a phenomena known as hunting pressure. This could affect migration routes in the future. There are liberal bag limits and expanded hunting laws during the spring snow goose season in many states to reduce the population. This attracts quite a few hunters, who may invoke hunting pressure in the spring and the fall. However, this study concluded that there was no significant change in non-target waterfowl habits.
On Twitter, USFWS posted a photo link on the topic of duck banding. It is a topic near and dear to my heart, because I have banded both ducks and turkeys this year so far. It is crucial to conservation, and it helps biologists distinguish migration corridors, as well as age brackets and other objectives. The link leads to the Fish and Wildlife Service website, and it has a summary as well as a bunch of outside resources. Many people that follow social media accounts of state and federal organizations have not banded birds before, or even heard of that process before. This post is interested and informative for the general public, and it has done its purpose. It connects hard science to citizen science projects like bird banding and resighting/harvest. By connecting people with that hard science, it keeps them interested in waterfowl conservation.
Also on Twitter, Ducks Unlimited posted an article about the American black duck (Anas rubripes). The black duck is restricted to the Eastern U.S., but it is well-known to waterfowl enthusiasts that live in its range. In duck hunting, there are specific daily limits of harvest for each species depending on the population status of each species. From 1978–2016, the limit on American black duck was 1/day. Starting in 2017 and continuing in 2018, the limit has increased to 2/day. Now, agencies such as USFWS, Ducks Unlimited, the Black Duck Joint Venture, and the Atlantic Coast Joint Venture have created a new scientific tool to gauge priority habitats for protection and restoration. Many areas in the Eastern U.S. have suffered major habitat loss since the time of European settlement. The end goal is to increase black duck populations. Even though not everyone agrees with hunting, most people do agree with habitat restoration/protection and increasing populations for birdwatching/hunting and for the species in general.
This one is a bit unusual. On the app Instagram, there is a page named osborne_lab which is run by Dr. Douglas C. Osborne, of the University of Arkansas. He has a bunch of students in his program, which he highlights on the page. There are a lot of informative posts about waterfowl on the page. There are many reasons why this type of social media presence is good. One, it informs the public of general waterfowl knowledge through pretty pictures/videos and links to more dense knowledge. Second, it justifies the program through their many banding efforts and shows that his program is succeeding in their goals. Third, it attracts waterfowl hunters and biologists like me to the program.
The Twitter page @sciencereviews recently shared a scientific paper that does research on the effectiveness of a relatively new product in the market- UV-reflecting decoys. The UV-reflection supposedly attracts more ducks because duck feathers in reality reflect UV light. Over 4 years of testing occurred, and although more ducks came into decoys that were reflecting UV-light, it did not affect hunter harvest rates at all. Studies like these keep consumerism in check. If a new decoy attracts every duck in the area like a magnet, is it okay to use? How much will it affect hunter harvest rates? If new technology affects hunting too much, there may be a way to ban or reduce the use of these new products. For example, there is a new trail camera that sends pictures directly to your phone. Does this violate fair-chase ethics? I think that it might, because it lets you know instantly where a deer is located, rather than a delayed checking of the camera. As modern tech grows with us, we need to keep it in check to make sure that products on the market do not surpass wildlife ethics.
My interests in waterfowl ecology and research have kept my focus in this class, and for good reason. Even though waterfowl seems like such a specific section of the wildlife field, there are many different groups and subgroups. For example, there are around 42 species of waterfowl present in North America. That includes ducks, geese, and swans. They range all across North America, and there are many more species globally. They are a very popular birdwatching and hunting bird group, and they are banded frequently by biologists. They are the center of many scientific studies involving heavy metal ingestion, marsh and wetland preservation, agricultural issues, habitat fragmentation issues, and migratory patterns. Waterfowl research is a rabbit hole of sorts, where a lot of research is being conducted in many different ways and for many different reasons.
