RESEARCH PROPOSAL
TITLE:
Winter Habitat and Food of Seaducks in Chesapeake Bay and Late Winter Movements of Black
Scoters from the Bay to Breeding Areas

BACKGROUND/SIGNIFICANCE:
     In the Chesapeake Bay area, seaducks are typically defined as scoters (black, surf, and
white-winged) and oldsquaw.  Eiders and harlequin ducks also are seaducks, but because of their
low numbers are not typically considered important seaducks of the Bay.  Although the common
eider is more abundant in New England and the Maritimes,  the harlequin duck is very rare and is
possibly close to being threatened on the Atlantic coast.  The three species of mergansers
(common, red-breasted, and hooded), the bufflehead, and the goldeneye (common and Barrow's)
are also considered seaducks by the Sea Duck Joint Venture, but often are considered in a
separate category for waterfowl surveys of the Chesapeake Bay.  On a continental basis there are
15 species that are classified as seaducks (Elliot 1997) .  
     Seaducks on the Chesapeake Bay have received more attention in recent years as hunters
have increased hunting pressure on these species, mostly due to closed seasons on Canada geese
(Perry and Deller 1994).  The distribution and abundance of seaducks could be influenced by
hunting pressure.  Hunting could become a more serious problem in the future for seaducks in
combination with the habitat problems in the Bay.    
     Past food habits work conducted by Cottam (1939) and Stewart (1962) on seaducks
determined that they were mainly feeding on mollusks in the Bay area.  These reports indicated
no problems with regard to habitat.  Recent concerns about the decline in numbers of seaducks
on the Bay, however, have given managers reason to suspect changes in habitat conditions that
could be impacting these species.   Research is needed in the Chesapeake Bay to determine the
present food habits of seaducks and the important habitats for these birds in the Bay.  There have
been few studies conducted on harlequin ducks and no known food habits analyses conducted on
this species in the Atlantic coast area. 
     The location of the breeding and molting areas of some species of seaducks is uncertain
and in need of further study (K. McAloney, pers. comm).  The black scoter is of special concern,
because it is both the least common of the three scoter species and the species least studied
(Kehoe 1994).  The Eastern Technical Team of the Sea Duck Joint Venture has recommended
new research on this species to learn more about its movements to breeding and molting areas. 
Satellite tracking of black scoters instrumented in late winter on the Chesapeake Bay will provide
new information that will be beneficial to protecting critical breeding and molting habitat of this
species and improving future management of its populations.

OBJECTIVES:
     The proposed study will determine the current distribution and food habits of seaducks in
the Chesapeake Bay during the winter as well as the movements of black scoters from the Bay to
their breeding areas.  Specific objectives are:
     1.  Determine habitat use and food habits of Chesapeake Bay seaducks.
     2.  Determine route and destination of black scoters when they leave Chesapeake Bay in
     the late winter and migrate to breeding areas (and subsequent molting areas).
     
PROCEDURES:
     Food Habits: Locations of seaducks (scoters and oldsquaw) on the Chesapeake Bay will
be determined throughout the winters with the aid of existing aerial surveys that will identify
seaducks by species.  No attempt will be made to survey all areas of Bay or to estimate total
population of seaducks.  Information from surveys will be used to identify important wintering
areas for seaducks in the Bay so that more intensive ground observations can be conducted.  The
distribution and abundance of these ducks will be compared to mid-winter and other surveys
used to determine status of seaduck species.  Current surveys will be compared to historical
records from other surveys (e.g., Forsell transects) and also the Christmas bird counts.
     The habitat being used by the ducks for feeding and loafing will be evaluated to
determine its value to the ducks in comparison to apparently similar areas not used for feeding
and loafing.  Benthic samples will be taken from boats to determine invertebrates from bottom
sediments in areas where seaducks are observed.  Surveys at night will also be conducted from
boats especially equipped with night-lighting equipment to determine night-time distribution. 
Habitat surveys will be local in perspective and no attempt will be made to survey large areas of
seaduck habitat. 
     Present food habits will be determined by analyses of ducks obtained from hunters or
from law enforcement personnel.  Close coordination will be maintained with the staff of the
USFWS, who are conducting a special study of duck wings with hunter collected seaducks.  The
gullet (esophagus and proventriculous) and gizzard will be removed and maintained separately
for analysis.  Both organs will be used in interpreting food choices from a diversity perspective,
but because of the problem of bias associated with gizzard samples (Swanson and Bartonek
1970), the gullet samples will receive more attention in interpreting food choices from a
quantitative perspective.
     Samples will be frozen until analyses are conducted.  Contents will be removed and
analyzed in white lab trays and macroscopes.  Organisms will be separated by species, and dry
weights and volumes will be determined for each sample.  Frequencies of occurrence, average
weight, and average volume of the food items will be determined for each duck species (Perry
and Uhler 1988).  Grit content will be determined and calculated separately from food items. 
Historic food habits data for seaducks on the Chesapeake Bay will be reexamined and compared
to present food habits.   
     Because of the special status of harlequins in the Atlantic Flyway, an attempt will be
made to learn more about their habitat use.  The distribution and abundance of harlequins in the
mid-Atlantic area will be evaluated by ground surveys, which will be coordinated with known
sightings from aerial surveys (G. Haas, pers. comm.) and sightings recorded in the Christmas
bird counts.  Any known individuals or small flocks will be observed and behavioral observation
conducted to learn more about their behavior in regard to their habitats.
     Telemetry: Black scoters will be captured alive at night using standard night-lighting
procedures, i.e., they will be netted on the water at night from outboard boats with the aid of
bright lights powered by generators.   In areas where night-lighting is not possible, mist nets
(Alison 1975, Dau 1976, Briggs 1977) will be used as an alternative method.  Mist nets will have
a mesh size of 121 mm, measure 12 m by 2.6 m, and have two shelves.  Mist nets will be set
vertically over water on telescopic poles installed in floating support bases.  Nets will be
continually monitored closely to minimize mortality from drowning.  All captured black scoters
will be banded with USFWS bands, but only males will be used for the telemetry aspect of this
study.  Males are being used so that not only can breeding areas of black scoters be located, but
also the molting areas of males will be discovered.   Initial capture techniques with mist nets will
be perfected with diving ducks (ring-necked ducks and hooded mergansers) at Patuxent Research
Refuge. All ducks at Patuxent will be banded and released.
     Captured male black scoters will be held and transported in specially prepared poultry
crates either to a mobile hospital, the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center's veterinary hospital, or
other prepared facility providing an aseptic surgical theater.  Here, Dr. Olsen will use an intra-
abdominal surgical technique to implant 35 g PTT100 satellite transmitters manufactured by
Microwave, Inc., Columbia, Maryland.  Surgical procedures will generally follow those
prescribed by Korschgen et al. (1984) and Olsen et al. (1992), as modified by veterinarian Daniel
Mulcahy of the Alaska Biological Science Center, Anchorage, AK.   Dr. Mulcahy has extensive
experience with surgical implantation of PTT100  satellite transmitters with demonstrated good
success with surf and white-winged scoters. His protocols are accessible on the internet (see web
pages://www.absc.usgs.gov/research/vet).  Because of recent problems with extrusion of
cylindrically-shaped implant transmitters through the antenna perforation, transmitters used in
this study will be as recommended, i.e. wide-bodied with no abrupt edges (Mulcahy et al. 1999). 
     PTT100 transmitters obtained from Microwave, Inc., will measure approximately 5 x 3.8
x 0.6 cm and have a nominal weight of 35 grams.  This weight is slightly heavier than normal
because of potting required to allow the transmitters to withstand pressures accompanying 
diving to 100 foot depths.  The transmitters have a capacity to operate for about 100 8-hour
periods which can be programmed to 5 different duty cycles during the course of the operating
period.  The 8-hour ON period can accompany any multiple of days OFF up to 10 days.  We
have selected a 32 hour duty cycle for 75 replications (total 2400 hrs or 100 days) followed by a
slower cycle of 56 hours for 25 replications (total 1400 hrs or 58 days).  The total life of the
transmitter would be estimated at 3800 hrs or 158 days.  A transmitter activated on March 1
would then be expected to last until approximately August 5, 2000.  Considering the
instrumentation of male scoters in late winter on Chesapeake Bay, this scenario would provide
the most detailed location data for spring migration and breeding (100 days; March 1- June 8),
with good opportunity to detail molt migration and molting grounds (June 8 - August 5).
     Data will be processed from the French ARGOS satellite through Service Argos in Largo,
Maryland (main headquarters is in Toulouse, France).  The Department of Commerce (NOAA)
holds the tariff agreement that provides access to the data. Our Use Agreement with the French
Government has been approved for 15 transmitters under the program title of Atlantic Sea Duck
Study.   

TIMELINE:
     Begin field work during fall 1999.  Complete all work December 2003.

WORK AREAS:
     Chesapeake Bay (all areas where seaducks occur).

WORK SCHEDULE:
     Work will begin on testing procedures during the fall of 1999.   Aerial surveys of the Bay
will begin in November to determine location of sea duck flocks.  When flock locations are
determined sites will be selected and initial boat work with the birds will commence.  Black
scoters will be instrumented in late February to early March.
     Food habits studies will begin in November and continue until all birds have left the Bay.

HAZARD ASSESSMENT:
     Hazards associated with operation of boats in inclement weather and at night will be the
major hazard of this study.  Personnel operating boats will have training in boat handling and be
equipped with proper safety equipment.  

EXPECTED PRODUCTS:
     Progress reports will be prepared periodically (3-5 months) during the study to keep all
persons informed of most recent activities.  Manuscripts will be written following analyses of all
data.  Popular articles will be written and published promptly.  It is also hoped that daily
movement data will be available on the PWRC home page.

REPORTING SCHEDULE:
     An annual report will be prepared at the end of each fiscal year.  A final report will be
completed by 31 December 2003.

BUDGET:
     This study is a partnership initiative among three agencies (CWS, USFWS, USGS) and
much of the staff time of principal cooperators will be provided by the agencies.  Approximate
cost is $100,000 for FY00, $59,000 for FY01, and $31,000 for FY02.  The USFWS is the main
contributor of funds for this study.  The project may be expanded to include other species and
other seasons in subsequent years if more cooperators get involved and additional funding is
obtained.
                                    FY 2000       FY 2001     FY 2002
Research Scientists (PWRC)                                 $12,000        $12,000       $6,000
Veterinarian (PWRC)                                              $4,000         $2,500       $1,000
Research Assistants (PWRC)                                  $6,000         $4,000       $2,000
Aerial surveys (USFWS)                                         $8,000         $5,500       $4,000  
Equipment/Supplies (miscellaneous)                      $10,000       $5,000        $3,000
Support from NOAA for tracking                           $17,000      $10,000       $5,000
Equipment/Supplies (transmitters)                          $40,000      $20,000     $10,000
                   TOTAL                                                 $97,000      $59,000      $31,000

PERSONNEL:
Daniel D. Day, Wildlife Biologist, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, USGS, Laurel, MD
G. Michael Haramis, Research Scientist, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, USGS, Laurel, MD
Glenn Olsen, Veterinarian, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, USGS, Laurel, MD
Peter C. Osenton, Wildlife Biologist, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, USGS, Laurel, MD
Matthew C. Perry, Habitat Management Scientist, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, USGS,
     Laurel, MD
Daniel B. Stotts, Wildlife Biologist, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, USGS, Laurel, MD

LITERATURE CITED:
Alison, R. M.  1975.  Capturing and marking oldsquaws. Bird-Banding 46:248-250.
Briggs, R. L.  1977.  Mist netting waterfowl. N. Amer. Bander. 2:61-63.
Cottam, C. 1939.  Food habits of North American diving ducks. USDA Tech. Bull. 643.
Dau, C. P.  1976.  Capturing and marking spectacled eiders in Alaska. Bird-Banding 47:273.  
Elliot, R. (Ed.).  1997.  Conservation issues for North American sea ducks - a concept paper for a
     sea duck joint venture under the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. CWS,
     USFWS, USGS-BRD. 41pp.
Haramis, G. M., D. G. Jorde, and C. M. Bunck.  1993.  Survival of hatching year female
     canvasbacks wintering in Chesapeake Bay. J. Wildl. Manage. 57:563-771. 
Kehoe, P.  1994.  Status of sea ducks in the Atlantic Flyway. Ad Hoc Sea Duck Committee.
     Unpub. Report. 71pp.
Korschgen, C. E., S. J. Maxson, and V. B. Kuechle.  1984.  Evaluation of implanted radio
     transmitters in ducks. J. Wildl. Manage. 48:982-987.
Korschgen, C. E., K. P. Kenow, A. Gendron-Fitzpatric, W. L. Green, and F. J. Dein.  1996. 
     Implanting intra-abdominal radiotransmitters with whip antennas in ducks. J. Wildl.
     Manage. 60:132-137.
Martin, A. C., H. S. Zim, and A. L. Nelson.  1951.  American wildlife and plants. McGraw-Hill
     Book Co., Inc., New York. 500 pp.
Mulcahy, D. M., D. Esler, and M. K. Stoskopf.  1999.  Loss from harlequin ducks of
     abdominally implanted radio transmitters equipped with percutaneous antennas. J. Field
     Ornith. 70:244-250.
Olsen, G. H., F. J. Dein, G. M. Haramis, D. G. Jorde.  1992.  Implanting radio transmitters in
     wintering canvasbacks. J. Wildl. Manage. 56(2):325-328.  
Perry, M. C., and  F. M. Uhler.  1988.  Food habits and distribution of wintering canvasbacks,
     Aythya valisineria, on Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries 11:57-67.
Perry, M. C., and A. S. Deller.  1995.  Waterfowl population trends in the Chesapeake Bay area.
     Pages 490-504 In Paula Hill and Steve Nelson, editors. Proceedings of the 1994           
     Chesapeake Research Conference. Toward a Sustainable Watershed: The Chesapeake
     Experiment. CRC Publication No. 149. Chesapeake Research Consortium, Edgewater,
     MD. 724 pp.
Stewart, R. E. 1962. Waterfowl populations in the upper Chesapeake region. Special Scientific
     Report-Wildlife No. 65. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D. C. 208pp.
Swanson, G. A., and J. C. Bartonek.  1970.  Bias associated with food analysis in gizzards of
          blue-winged teal. J. Wildl. Manage. 34:739-746.
CLEARANCES:

Submitted by:                                                                                                               
                                                 Principal Investigator                                       Date




Initial Program Chief Review:                                                                                         
                                                            Program Chief                                        Date




Science Support Clearance:                                                                                           
                                                      Chief of Science Support                              Date




Peer Review Clearance:                                                                                                 
                                                Chief of Science Review                                     Date




Revision Clearance:                                                                                                      
                                                      Program Chief                                               Date




Center Approval:                                                                                                            
                                                   Center Director                                                 Date