monitoring of nesting emperor geese on kigigak island, alaska, … goose... · 2018-02-09 ·...

USFWS, Yukon Delta NWR – Kigigak Emperor Goose Report, 2017 1

Monitoring of Nesting Emperor Geese on Kigigak Island, Alaska, 2017

BRYAN L. DANIELS, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge, P.O. Box 346, Bethel, AK 99559

RANDALL FRIENDLY, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge, P.O. Box 346, Bethel, AK 99559 SUMMARY: The Emperor Goose (Anser canagicus) is an endemic goose of Alaska. Emperor geese winter along the Alaska Peninsula and Aleutian Islands, and breed primarily in the Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge (YDNWR). Beginning in the early 1980’s, aerial surveys documented a population decline that led to harvest restrictions and closures implemented in 1985. In 2016, surveys indicated the population reached a threshold that would allow the reopening of Emperor goose harvest. With the opening of a hunting season, and an annual population growth rate of 2% over the previous 30 years without hunting, managers and biologists had concerns about the level of harvest the population could sustain, as well as the number of young being produced to sustain the breeding population at current levels. With the Yukon Delta being the primary breeding location for Emperor geese, YDNWR began monitoring clutch size, nest success, nest initiation dates, and adult survival of Emperor geese on Kigigak Island, YDNWR, Alaska. A total of 143 Emperor goose nests were monitored in 2017. Mean clutch size was similar to historic studies at 5.16 eggs, while apparent nest success was 81.6%. Nest predators were the highest cause of nest failure with 16% being depredated. Mean nest initiation date was 9 days earlier than recorded on the Yukon Delta from 1982-2016, with a mean nest initiation date of 15 May 2017. With limited prior information on Emperor goose nest success for Kigigak Island, the results of this study will provide a baseline for future efforts while tracking individual marked goose survival and nest success.

(Data Submitted to BBL 27 September 2017; Report Completed February 2018)

KEYWORDS Emperor goose, Kigigak Island, nesting, nest success, nest initiation

INTRODUCTION

The Emperor Goose (Anser canagicus) is an endemic goose of Alaska. Emperor geese winter along the Alaska Peninsula and Aleutian Islands, migrate in the spring and fall along the coastal areas of the Alaska Peninsula and Yukon Delta, and breed primarily along the coastal fringe of the

Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, Seward Peninsula, and Russia (Peterson 1992, Pacific Flyway Council 2016).

Emperor geese are monogamous and have high nest site fidelity (Shmutz et al. 1997), returning to the same area to nest. Adult females are important for productivity and are the most sensitive demographic to


population growth (Shmutz et al. 1997). Studies of waterfowl suggest that individuals’ lifetime reproductive success varies within a population (Raveling 1981, Owen and Black 1989), and although variation between individuals exists, individual birds often lay similar clutch sizes and initiate laying at the same time each year (Koskimies 1957, MacInnes and Dunn 1988, Gauthier 1989, Peterson 1992). Beginning in the early 1980’s, aerial surveys documented an Emperor goose population decline that led to conservation concerns, resulting in fall/spring harvest restrictions for sport and subsistence beginning in 1985 (Pacific Flyway Council 2006). With these restrictions, the population grew at 2% per year (Pacific Flyway Council 2016). In 2016, aerial surveys indicated the population reached a threshold that would allow the re-opening of Emperor goose harvest as outlined in the Pacific Flyway Emperor Goose Management Plan (Pacific Flyway Council 2016).

With majority of the Emperor goose population nesting on the Yukon Delta (Eisenhauer and Kirkpatrick 1977), a spring subsistence hunting season occurring just prior to nesting on the Yukon Delta would potentially have the greatest effect on population growth. With the opening of the subsistence hunt, managers and biologists had concerns about the populations’ ability to maintain sustainable harvest. To determine if the re-opening of the hunting seasons would have a negative effect on adult survival (and associated decrease in population size), the Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge (YDNWR) began nest monitoring and capture-mark-recapture program on nesting female

Emperor geese on Kigigak Island, YDNWR in 2017. The objectives of this study were to: 1) band nesting female Emperor geese for future mark-recapture analyses of adult female survival, 2) monitor Emperor goose nests for success and individual variation, and 3) gather morphometric data on nesting female Emperor geese to determine if female goose size influences clutch size or probability of nesting in future years. STUDY AREA

Kigigak Island (KI; 32.5 km2, 6050’N,

16550’W) was chosen as a study site because part of the island has a high density of nesting Emperor geese near an already established remote field camp. Kigigak Island has a maximal elevation of 1-3 m above sea level, and is situated northwest of Nelson Island and 20.5 km west of the village of Newtok on the Yukon Delta (Solovyeva et al. 2017). Bordered by the Ninglick River and the Bering Sea, the island exhibits diverse habitats in a small area, ranging from tidal sloughs extending into the interior of the island, to grass uplands on the eastern part of the Island, and lowland tundra and pingos in the center of the island. The preferred nest sites for Emperor geese include slough borders, grass meadows, pond shorelines, peninsulas, and ericaceous tundra (Kistchinski 1971, Mickelson 1975, Eisenhauer and Kirkpatrick 1977). The YDNWR designed 1.28 km x 2.98 km (2.98 km2) nest plots across the entire island (Figure 1). Emperor goose nest plots were selected based on densities of Emperor geese found during annual Spectacled Eider (Somateria Fischeri) nest plot surveys and coastal zone aerial surveys from 1985-2016 (Figures 2 and 3, Fischer


personal communication). These plots were between 0 and 2.4 km away from camp, making for efficient searching and trapping efforts for nesting Emperor geese. METHODS Data Collection Nest Searching Plots were searched thoroughly by foot by 1-2 people over a 12-hour period. Observers utilized binoculars to aid in detection of nesting Emperor goose. Once a nesting Emperor goose was detected, observers would then flush the nesting goose and approach nest to collect data.

Nest cards showing data collected at each nest can be found in Appendix A. Eggs were individually marked with a sharpie to detect if new eggs were laid or removed during subsequent visits. For each nest, three eggs were aged via candling and floating methods to predict expected hatch date. All nests were marked with a flag placed three meters north with the nest ID.

Trapping and Banding Nesting female geese were trapped in late stage incubation (last 4 days), to minimize probability of abandonment (Peterson 1992). When nests were nearing the final 4 predicted days of incubation, a minimum of two people returned to the nest to flush the goose and update the nest card to ensure egg age prediction was correct from the previous visit. If nest was within 4 days of hatch, traps were set and incubated eggs were swapped with 2-3 fake eggs to minimize probability of eggs being broken during trapping. After the goose was captured and removed from the bownet, the bander recorded the

band number, and affixed the size 7B stainless steel band on the bird’s right leg. The 3-coded, black on turquoise plastic auxiliary band was affixed on the left leg. Using calipers, the total tarsus, total head, and culmen length were measured and recorded to the nearest thousandth. The goose’s mass (kg) was obtained by placing the bird in a pillow case attached to a hanging scale. All capture data was recorded on the capture data sheet (Appendix B). After the bird was released, five contour feathers were collected from within the nest bowl for future stable isotope analysis, eggs were replaced, and the nest was covered with down to protect from aerial predators. Nest Fates Between one and 4 days after hatch, observers returned to the nest to determine nest fate. A nest was considered successful if ≥ 1 eggs hatched, as evidenced by membrane. Data Analysis We used simple proportions of successful nests (apparent nest success) for analysis because of the relative synchrony of Emperor goose nesting, the high probability of finding nests, and the nest visitation schedules used (Johnson and Shaffer 1990). Growth of geese is highly correlated with the quality and quantity of forage during brood rearing (Sedinger et al. 1997). Knowing that growth at a young age has negative consequences to fecundity (Owen and Black 1989), we used ANOVA to test if difference in size of adult female could predict difference in clutch sizes within a year.


All parameters are reported as mean ± 1 SE. Data is stored on YDNWR share drive at: T:\Biology Program 2017\Kigigak\DATA: Proofed Emperor Goose nest data.xlsx RESULTS Primary nest searching occurred for five days from 29 May to 2 June 2017. Trapping females on nests began on 3 June 2017, and ended on 19 June 2017. In 2017, 151 Emperor goose nests were found and monitored in 5 plots. Of the 151 nests, 143 were monitored until hatch or failure (Table 1). Of the 143 nests monitored, apparent nest success was 81% (n = 116), 17% (24 nests) were depredated, and 2% were either abandoned (2) or inviable (1). After removing 3 nests that had obvious egg dumping occur, and 15 nests with unrecorded total clutch size, mean clutch size was 5.16 ± 0.16 eggs (n = 129; Figure 4) with a mean nest initiation date of 15 May 2017 (Figure 5). Peak nesting ended on May 20. Earliest nest initiation date was 3 May, and latest initiation date was likely a re-nesting attempt on 13 June 2017. Of 86 nesting female Emperor geese captured and banded, morphometric measurements were taken from 80 individuals. Mean mass of nesting female Emperor geese at capture was 1.7 ± 0.02 kg, with a mean head length of 9.35 ± 0.03 cm, Culmen length of 3.67 ± 0.02 cm, and Tarsus length of 7.86 ± 0.05 cm. Clutch size could not be predicted by head length (ANOVA F71= 0.065, P = 0.8, Figure 6), culmen length (ANOVA; F71 = 2.00, P =

0.16), Tarsus length (ANOVA; F71 = 0.04, P = 0.84, Figure 7), or mass at time of capture (ANOVA; F72 = 0.03, P = 0.95). DISCUSSION Nest success and nest depredation in 2017 was considered normal, being similar to that in the early 1970s (82% success; Mickelson 1975), and early 1980’s (72% - 90%; Peterson 1992). Mean clutch size on Kigigak Island in 2017 was also similar to birds nesting on the Yukon Delta in the early 1980s (5 eggs; Peterson 1992, Thompson and Raveling 1987), but larger than in the late 1970’s (4 eggs; Mickelson 1975). With a population growth rate of 2% in the past 30 years, we would expect a higher clutch size than during population decline (1970’s). A larger mean clutch size implies greater individual health of geese within the population, being that Emperor geese rely heavily on body reserves for clutch formation and incubation (Ankney and Maclnnes 1978). Because 2017 was an early nesting year, Emperor geese were able to nest upon arrival to the breeding grounds, and not wait for snow to melt and utilize endogenous reserves while waiting for optimum nesting conditions. Mean nest initiation date for Emperor geese in 2017 was 9 days earlier than mean initiation date (May 24) between 1985 and 2016 (Fischer et al 2017). Timing of waterfowl nest initiation is correlated with timing of spring breakup (Raveling 1978, Dau and Mickelson 1979), which has been earlier each year. Individual goose size was not a predictor of clutch size in 2017, but may play a role in


the nesting frequency. Nesting probability for many arctic nesting geese is linked to individual quality and body condition (Sedinger et al 2008, Williams 1966; Charnov & Krebs 1974). In Barnacle geese (Branta leucopsis), larger individuals had a higher probability of breeding successfully in any year and produced more goslings than did smaller birds (Choudhury et. al 1996), and we predict this may be true for Emperor geese. Majority of nest searching was constrained to 5 days due to 2017 being an early nest initiation year, and late deployment of field crew into the field. With late arrival of crew into the field, trapping of females on the nest began on June 3, with haphazard/ incidental nest searching in plots occurring while travelling between trap events. Although nest searching was constrained, and occurred in mid to late incubation stages, we were able to locate 151 nests and monitor 143 nests until hatch. Because we cannot account for nests that were lost or abandoned in early stages of incubation when most nests are depredated (Peterson 1992), our success rate may be biased high (Mayfield 1961). However due to the conspicuous nature of Emperor goose nest located on pond and slough edges in short vegetation, they could be readily located, even if destroyed. We think researchers had a negative effect on nest success with an artificially high nest depredation than would have been seen normally. In one area (plot F6), local gulls keyed in on researchers behavior, and depredated nests shortly after researchers left a nest. Because of high nesting density, researchers were visiting the plot daily for goose capture attempts, which can increase

probability of depredation (Esler and Grand 1993). Once researchers figured this out (via gulls stealing fake eggs out of nest during trapping), all trapping ceased in that area. In 2017, only a few foxes were believed to be present on the island, and sign of fox was not seen in the study area until mid-June, when hatching already began occurring. We believe fox predation on this portion of the island was low in 2017, and avian predation (gulls) were the primary nest predator. As global climate change continues, warmer winters, earlier springs, and longer summers may create a mismatch in timing of nesting and vegetation growth for brood rearing. MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS With limited prior information on Emperor goose nest success for Kigigak Island, the results from this study will be used as a baseline moving into the future while tracking individual marked goose survival and nest success. ONGOING RESEARCH OBJECTIVES We also hope to determine if adult body size explains some frequent non-nesting in Emperor geese. ACKNOWLDGEMENTS The success of this project would not have been possible without the hard work, patience and willingness to walk many miles of the waterfowl crew members, Michele Kuter, Randall Friendly and Garrett Tallent. Thank you to YDNWR staff for providing


exceptional logistic support, especially pilot Robert Sundown for his understanding and exceptional aviation support. Finally, thanks to Joel Schmutz with USGS and Julian Fischer for guidance and recommendations during the planning of this project.


Table 1: Number of Emperor goose nests per plot monitored in 2017 on Kigigak Island, Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge.

Plot Number of

nests

Number Females Trapped

Number Nests Successful

Number Nests Failed

Unknown Nest Fate

C6 6 2 5 1 0 D5 2 0 2 0 0 D6 10 6 9 1 0 E4 19 10 15 3 1 E5 22 11 20 1 1 E6 34 23 24 7 3 F5 17 11 15 1 1 F6 39 22 25 10 4 F7a 1 1 0 0 1 G5a 1 0 1 0 0

Total 151 86 116 24 11 a: These nests were found on edge of plots and entire plots were not searched. Density of nests should not be implied for these plots.

Table 2: Morphometric measurements of female Emperor geese caught during 2017 nesting season on Kigigak island, Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska.

Mass (n=74)

Head Length (n=75)

Culmen Length (n=75)

Tarsus Length (n = 77)

Mean 1.70 9.35 3.67 7.86

SE 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.05


Figure 1: Emperor goose plots overlaid on Kigigak Island, Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge.


Figure 2: Emperor Goose concentrations based on nest plot surveys on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta between 1995 and 2016.

Figure 3: Emperor Goose concentrations based on aerial observations during coastal zone survey of the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta between 1985 and 2016.

Kigigak Island

Kigigak Island


Figure 4: Number of eggs per clutch in 143 monitored Emperor goose nests in 2017 on Kigigak Island, YDNWR.


Figure 5: Initiation date frequency of Emperor goose nests in 2017 on Kigigak island, YDNWR. Mean nest initiation date of 134 (15 May 2017).


Figure 6: Mean total head length (cm) of adult female Emperor geese with associated clutch size on Kigigak Island, Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge, 2017.


Figure 6: Mean tarsal length (cm) of adult female Emperor geese with associated clutch size on Kigigak Island, Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge, 2017.


Literature Cited Ankney, C.D., and C.D. MacInnes. 1978. Nutrient reserves and reproductive performance of

female Lesser Snow Geese. Auk 97: 459-471. Charnov, E.L., and J.R. Krebs. 1974. On clutch size and fitness. Ibis 119: 217-219. Choudhury, S., Black, J. M. and M. Owen. 1996. Body size, fitness and compatibility in Barnacle

Geese Branta leucopsis. Ibis 138: 700–709. Dau, C. P., and P G. Mickelson. 1979. Relation of weather to spring migration and nesting of

Cackling Geese on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, Alaska. In R. L. Jarvis and J. C. Bartonek, Management and biology of Pacific Flyway Geese. p. 94-104

Eisenhauer, D.I., and C.M. Kirkpatrick. 1977. Ecology of the emperor goose in Alaska. Wildlife

Monograms (57). 62pp Esler, D., and J.B. Grand. 1993. Factors Influencing Depredation of Artificial Duck Nests. Journal

of Wildlife management 57(2): 244-248. Fischer, J.B., Williams, A.R., and R.A. Stehn. 2017. Nest Population size and Potential production

of Geese and Spectacled Eiders on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, Alaska, 1985-2016. USFWS report.

Gauthier, G. 1989. The effect of experience and timing on reproductive performance in

Buffleheads. Auk 106:568-576. Johnson, D. H., and T. L. Shaffer. 1990. Estimating nest success: when Mayfield wins. Auk

107:595- 600. Kistchinski, A. A. 1971. Biological notes on the Emperor Goose in north-east Siberia. Wildfowl

22: 29-34. Koskimies, J. 1957. Variations in size and shape of eggs of the Velvet Scoter, Melanitta fusca.

Archivum 12:58-69. MacInnes, C. D., and E. H. Dunn. 1988. Components of clutch size variation in arctic-nesting

Canada Geese. Condor 90:83-89. Mayfield, H. F. 1961. Nest success calculated from exposure. Wilson Bulletin 73:255. Mickelson, P. G. 1975. Breeding biology of Cackling Geese and associated species on the Yukon-

Kuskokwim Delta, Alaska. Wildlife Monograph 45.


Owen, M. and J.M. Black. 1989. Factors affecting the survival of barnacle geese on migration from the breeding grounds. Journal of Animal Ecology 58: 603-617.

Pacific Flyway Council. 2006. Pacific Flyway Management Plan for the Emperor Goose. Pacific

Flyway Council, care of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Vancouver, Washington. 24pp

Pacific Flyway Council. 2016. Management plan for the Emperor goose. Pacific Flyway Council,

care of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Vancouver, Washington. 36 pp.

Petersen, M.R. 1992. Reproductive Ecology of Emperor Geese: Annual and Individual Variation

in Nesting. The Condor 94:383-397. Raveling, D. G. 1978. The timing of egg laying by northern geese. Auk 95:294-303. Raveling, D. G. 1981. Survival, experience, and age in relation to breeding success of Canada

Geese. Journal of Wildlife management 45:817-829. Sedinger, J.S., Lindberg, M.S., Eichholz, M., and N. Chelgren. 1997. Influence of Hatch Date

versus Maternal and Genetic Effects on Growth of Black Brant Goslings. The Auk 114: 129-132.

Sedinger, J. S., Chelgren, N. D., Ward, D. H. and M.S. Lindberg. 2008. Fidelity and breeding

probability related to population density and individual quality in black brent geese Branta bernicla nigricans. Journal of Animal Ecology, 77: 702–712.

Solovyeva, D.V., Kokhanova, V.Y., Gabrielson, M., and K. S. Christie. 2017. Testing for

Geographic Variation in Survival of Spectacled Eider (Somateria fischeri) Populations in Chukotka, Russia and the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, Alaska. Arctic 70(3): 287–294.

Thompson, S.C. and D.G. Raveling. 1987. Incubation Behavior of Emperor Geese Compared with

Other Geese: Interactions of Predation, Body Size, and Energetics. The Auk (4): 707-716. Schmutz. J.A., Rockwell, R.F., and M.R. Petersen. 1997. Relative Effects of Survival and

Reproduction on the Population Dynamics of Emperor Geese. The Journal of Wildlife Management(61): 191-201

Williams, C.G. 1966. Natural selection, the cost of reproduction, and a refinement of Lack's

principle. American Naturalist 100: 687-690.


Appendix A: Emperor goose nest check data card.

Key for front of nest searching data card

Year 2017 Plot # Which plot is nest in? Nest # Code each nest individually Typically use first initial of First, Middle, and Last name followed by a number Ex. MLG001 Species EMGO- Emperor Goose Easting & Northing Taken from GPS Collected in UTM Nest Site Description of nest location Sloughbank Pondshore Island Displaced Island Peninsula Pingo Grassflat Other – give description Is nest ON or OFF plot. Circle one Resight Was the bird marked? Were you able to read marker if so, How? Visual – binoculars, scope Camera Band # - will look it up Nasal – do not use this space Tarsal – what was code if read

Feathers Were feathers collected Yes or No Circle one How many feathers were collected? Obs Your initials When trapping also include partners initials Date Date of nest visit Time Start of nest visit End of nest visit Egg Status New Eggs – how many new eggs in nest Missing Eggs – How many eggs are missing from previous check Inv Eggs – Inviable eggs Broken Eggs – Please note whether it was from handling or from Flushed Female Aband – Abandoned eggs. Usually cold Unk – Unknown status. This will be important at the end of the field season during final checks. But if you are unsure of an eggs status mark it as unknown F Floating angle Float 2-3 eggs in the nest C Candling angle Candle 2-3 eggs in the nest Hen Status (F) Flushed (P) Present (A) Absent

YEAR: PLOT #: NEST#: SPECIES:

EASTING: NORTHING:

NEST SITE:

RESIGHT: Resight? Y N Method: Visual/ Camera

BAND # NASAL: TARSAL:

FEATHERS: Collected: Y N # Collected:

NEST VISIT:

OBS DATE TIME

NEW

EGGS

MISSING

EGGS

INV

EGGS

BROKEN

EGGS

ABAND

EGGS

UNK

EGGS F C

HEN

STATUS

NEST

STATUS COMMENTS

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

6)

Slougbank, Pondshore, Island, Displaced Island, Peninsula Pingo, Grassflat, Other

On or Off


Appendix B: Emperor Goose capture data card.

BANDING/TRAPPING INFO

YEAR: PLOT #: NEST#: SPECIES:

EASTING: NORTHING:

TIME: Start of Trapping: End of Trapping:

TRAP METHOD:Bownet Mistnet

BANDING: Recapture/Resight? Y N

BAND # NASAL: TARSAL:

WEIGHT: TARSUS: CULMEN:

FEATHERS: Collected: Y N # Collected:

NEST CHECK:

OBS DATE

TOTAL

EGGS

NEW

EGGS

MISSING

EGGS

INVBL

EGGS F1 C1

HEN

STATUS

NEST

STATUS COMMENTS

1)


Appendix C: Raw morphometric data from nesting female Emperor geese on Kigigak Island, Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge, 2017.

Band number Tarsal Code

Nest # Catch date Mass (KG) Head length

(cm) Culmen

length (cm) Tarsus length

(cm)

2017-15204 A00 JMK003 6/5/2017 1.79 9.55 3.76 7.68

2017-15205 A02 BLD027 6/5/2017 1.77 9.06 3.84 7.58

2017-15206 A04 BLD033 6/5/2017 1.685 9.27 3.73 7.39

2017-15207 A06 BLD032 6/5/2017 1.835 9.20 3.73 7.61

2017-15208 A07 BLD010 6/6/2017

8.07

2017-15209 A08 BLD017 6/6/2017

9.01 3.83 7.48

2017-15210 A09 GT019 6/6/2017 1.685 9.44 3.88 7.82

2017-15221 A10 GT023 6/5/2017 1.885 9.87 3.60 7.95

2017-15222 A11 RF031 6/5/2017 1.675 9.44 3.72 7.74

2017-15223 A12 RF035 6/6/2017 1.92 9.59 3.63 7.80

2017-15224 A13 GT037 6/6/2017 2.105 9.99 4.08 8.22

2017-15225 A14 RF024 6/7/2017 1.89 7.84 3.38 7.79

2017-15226 A15 JMK011 6/7/2017 1.52 9.28 3.54 7.67

2017-15227 A16 RF017 6/7/2017 1.725 9.51 3.67 7.89

2017-15228 A17 RF016 6/7/2017 1.71 9.27 3.78 8.02

2017-15229 A19 GT027 6/8/2017 1.64 9.44 3.77 7.74

2017-15230 A20 BLD012 6/8/2017 1.81 9.29 3.33 7.79

2017-15231 A21 BLD009 6/8/2017 1.645 9.35 3.59 7.58

2017-15232 A22 GT016 6/10/2017 1.67 9.15 3.36 7.75

2017-15233 A24 GT013 6/10/2017 1.73 9.65 3.41 8.26

2017-15234 A25 GT014 6/10/2017 1.69 9.17 3.35 7.86

2017-15235 A26 GT012 6/11/2017 1.73 9.49 3.50 8.36

2017-15236 A27 BLD008 6/11/2017 1.735 9.52 3.76 8.36

2017-15237 A28 BLD015 6/12/2017 1.665 9.49 3.66 7.59

2017-15238 A29 BLD018 6/12/2017 1.795 9.34 3.68 7.63

2017-15211 A30 BLD042 6/6/2017 1.59 9.63 3.69 7.60

2017-15212 A31 RF008 6/6/2017 1.82 9.21 3.55 7.96

2017-15213 A32 BLD037 6/6/2017 1.595 9.48 3.82 7.44

2017-15215 A34 GT020 6/7/2017 1.27 9.11 3.40 7.64

2017-15216 A35 GT018 6/7/2017 1.675 9.51 4.00 9.65

2017-15217 A36 BLD003 6/7/2017 1.63 9.27 3.82 7.77

2017-15218 A37 RF019 6/8/2017 1.875 10.15 4.01 8.02

2017-15219 A38 RF018 6/8/2017 1.75 9.48 4.13 9.40

2017-15220 A39 BLD028 6/8/2017 1.53 9.17 3.55 7.63

2017-15241 A40 RF004 6/8/2017 1.785 9.34 3.98 7.84

2017-15242 A41 GT046 6/8/2017 1.575 8.85 3.69 7.76

2017-15243 A42 GT045 6/8/2016 1.635 9.33 3.51 7.90

2017-15244 A43 GT041 6/8/2017 1.69 9.18 3.59 7.75

2017-15245 A44 BLD047 6/8/2017 1.8 9.37 4.10 8.02




(cm) Culmen


(cm)

2017-15246 A45 RF042 6/10/2017 2017-15247 A46 RF043 6/10/2017 1.715 9.49 3.41 7.86

2017-15248 A47 BLD001 6/10/2017 1.605 9.26 3.62 7.72

2017-15249 A48 BLD040 6/10/2017 1.46 9.16 3.65 7.40

2017-15250 A49 RF033 6/10/2017 1.735 9.71 3.86 7.87

2017-15261 A50 RF032 6/10/2017 1.69 9.50 3.75 8.04

2017-15262 A51 RF030 6/10/2017 1.645 9.44 3.80 7.53

2017-15263 A52 RF010 6/11/2017 1.735 9.83 3.77 7.65

2017-15264 A53 BLD038 6/11/2017 1.63 9.31 3.38 7.75

2017-15265 A54 GT008 6/11/2017 1.865 9.81 3.56 7.79

2017-15266 A55 GT006 6/11/2017

8.07

2017-15267 A56 BLD034 6/12/2017 1.61 8.95 3.67 7.69

2017-15268 A58 BLD021 6/12/2017 1.635 8.85 3.63 7.45

2017-15269 A59 BLD022 6/12/2017 1.97 9.32 3.96 8.00

2017-15239 A60 RF022 6/12/2017 1.62 9.62 3.49 7.56

2017-15240 A63 GT001 6/12/2017 1.54 9.00 3.41 9.85

2017-15251 A64 RF029 6/13/2017 1.45 8.92 3.81 7.14

2017-15252 A67 RF028 6/13/2017 1.635 9.16 3.32 7.75

2017-15253 A68 GT033 6/13/2017 1.565 9.65 4.06 7.70

2017-15254 A69 GT032 6/13/2017 1.59 9.25 3.55 7.95

2017-15270 A70 BLD025 6/12/2017 1.97 9.42 3.60 7.88

2017-15271 A71 BLD030 6/12/2017 1.795 9.32 3.84 7.99

2017-15272 A72 GT003 6/12/2017 1.65 9.23 3.75 7.90

2017-15273 A73 JMK004 6/13/2017 1.82 9.31 3.44 8.05

2017-15274 A74 JMK010 6/13/2017 1.565 9.23 3.78 7.63

2017-15275 A75 GT044 6/13/2017 1.61 9.11 3.79 7.27

2017-15276 A76 RF005 6/13/2017 1.61 9.25 3.71 7.82

2017-15277 A79 GT002 6/13/2017 1.86 9.67 3.93 7.98

2017-15255 A80 GT031 6/13/2017 1.745 9.48 3.72 8.00

2017-15256 A81 GT022 6/14/2017 1.885 9.44 3.48 7.73

2017-15257 A82 RF047 6/14/2017 1.83 9.74 3.63 7.77

2017-15258 A83 GT028 6/14/2017 1.62 9.12 3.40 7.79

2017-15259 A84 RF048 6/14/2017 1.405 9.22 3.74 7.84

2017-15260 A86 GT034 6/15/2017 1.81 8.90 3.20 7.67

2017-15291 A87 BLD007 6/15/2017 1.785 9.31 3.70 7.58

2017-15292 A88 GT042 6/16/2017 1.64 9.56 3.63 7.87

2017-15293 A89 RF027 6/17/2017 1.52 9.38 3.92 7.98

2017-15278 A90 RF045 6/14/2017 1.76 9.38 3.54 7.68

2017-15279 A92 GT015 6/14/2017 1.69 9.25 3.72 8.07

2017-15280 A93 BLD016 6/14/2017 1.73 9.56 3.49 8.16

2017-15281 A94 JMK002 6/14/2017 1.795 9.66 3.75 8.24

2017-15282 A95 BLD048 6/15/2017 1.725 9.52 3.88 7.56

2017-15283 A96 BLD044 6/17/2017 1.645 9.22 3.33 7.98




(cm) Culmen


(cm)

2017-15284 A97 JMK007 6/17/2017 1.5 8.80 3.45 7.34

2017-15285 A98 GT040 6/19/2017 1.88 9.46 3.92 7.79

2017-15294 C00 RF039 6/17/2017 1.86 9.44 3.21 7.64

monitoring of nesting emperor geese on kigigak island, alaska, … goose... · 2018-02-09 ·...

Documents