DOI: 10.5061/dryad.kr006cf0
title: Data from: Harvest distribution and derivation of Atlantic Flyway Canada geese

description: Harvest management of Canada geese (Branta canadensis) is complicated by
 the fact that subarctic and temperate-breeding geese occur in many of the
 same areas during fall and winter hunting seasons. These populations
 cannot readily be distinguished, which complicates efforts to estimate
 population-specific harvest and evaluate harvest strategies. In the
 Atlantic Flyway, annual banding and population monitoring programs are in
 place for subarctic-breeding [North Atlantic Population, Southern James
 Bay Population, and Atlantic Population] and temperate-breeding (Atlantic
 Flyway Resident Population, AFRP) Canada geese. We used a combination of
 direct band recoveries and estimated population sizes to determine the
 distribution and derivation of the harvest of those four populations
 during the 2004-05-2008-09 hunting seasons. Both North Atlantic Population
 and Atlantic Population geese were harvested almost exclusively in
 Atlantic Flyway states and provinces and during regular hunting seasons,
 whereas most Southern James Bay Population geese were taken in the
 Mississippi Flyway, with about 12% of that population's harvest
 occurring during special September seasons in the U.S. Atlantic Flyway
 Resident Population geese were mainly taken in the state or province in
 which they were banded, and most of the harvest occurred during special
 September seasons (42%) and regular seasons (54%). Nearly all of the
 special season harvest was AFRP birds 98% during September seasons and 89%
 during late seasons. The regular season harvest in Atlantic Flyway states
 was also primarily AFRP geese (62%), followed in importance by the
 Atlantic Population (33%). In contrast, harvest in eastern Canada
 consisted mainly of subarctic geese (42% Atlantic Population, 17% North
 Atlantic Population, and 6% Southern James Bay Population), with
 temperate-breeding geese making up the rest. Spring and summer harvest was
 difficult to characterize because band reporting rates for subsistence
 hunters are poorly understood; consequently, we were unable to determine
 the magnitude of subsistence harvest definitively. A better understanding
 of subsistence hunting is needed because this activity may account for a
 substantial proportion of the total harvest of subarctic populations. Our
 results indicate that special September and late seasons in the U.S. were
 highly effective in targeting AFRP geese without significantly increasing
 harvest of subarctic populations. However, it is evident that AFRP geese
 still are not being harvested at levels high enough to reduce their
 numbers to the breeding population goal of 700,000.
description: CAGO AP management plan
 March 2008 FinalThe management plan
 created by the Atlantic Flyway to manage the Atlantic Population of Canada
 Geese.CAGO AFRP management
 plan final June 28 2011The management plan
 created by the Atlantic Flyway to manage Resident Canada
 Geese.Munro and
 KimballTechnical publication
 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The distribution and derivation
 of the mallard.2005 FEIS Resident CAGO
 ManagementThe Final Environmental
 Impact Statement written by the USFWS on Canada Goose
 management.FINAL SJBP Management
 Plan 17 March 2008The joint management
 plan created by the Mississippi and Atlantic Flyway to manage Southern
 James Bay Canada Geese.Final NAP Management
 Plan-July 2008The management plan
 created by the Atlantic Flyway to manage the North Atlantic Population of
 Canada Geese.Harvey and Rodrigue
 2011A
 report detailing the Atlantic population of Canada geese and area
 surveyed.Distribution and
 Derivation DataThis zip file contains
 the raw data (reported direct recoveries, estimated recoveries, and
 estimated harvest) for each population for both adults and young. Within
 each spreadsheet the first tab shows the actual reported direct recoveries
 for each state and province within each year. Reward bands were used in
 2004 and 2005 and are shown in the table. The second tab shows estimated
 recoveries calculated by adjusting the reported direct recoveries by a
 reporting rate. For all populations the reporting rate used came from
 Zimmerman et al. 2009. In the third tab in order to calculate the
 estimated harvest a weighting factor (the number of birds one banded bird
 represents) is needed. The weighting factor is calculated as the
 population estimate divided by the number of banded birds in a particular
 year. Estimated harvest is then calculated as the estimated recoveries
 multiplied by the weighting factor.Rusch et al. D&D of
 CAGO harvest in MFAbstract of Distribution
 and Derivation of the Canada goose harvest in the Mississippi Flyway in
 Biology and Management of Canada geese. Proceedings of the International
 Goose Symposium, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.