Waterfowl in Ontario s Boreal Region

Transcription

1 Looking back, looking forward Prepared by Kenneth F. Abraham Peterborough, Ontario Prepared for Ducks Unlimited Canada Ontario August 2014 Black Scoter female with brood on 25 July 2006 near Peawanuck, Ontario. Photo by Brenda Hill.

2 Table of Contents List of Figures... iv List of Tables... v Acronyms... vi Acknowledgements... vii Executive Summary... viii 1 Introduction Why is there interest in the boreal? What is the purpose of this report? Ontario s Boreal Region Boreal Classifications Characteristics of Ontario s Boreal Region Overview of Ontario s Boreal Waterfowl Waterfowl Surveys In Ontario s Boreal Region Waterfowl Breeding Population and Habitat Survey Northern Ontario Breeding Waterfowl Survey Clay Belt Waterfowl Population and Habitat Survey Eastern Waterfowl Survey Hudson Bay Lowlands Late-Breeding Waterfowl Survey Hudson Bay Lowlands Canada Goose Spring Survey Hudson Bay Lowlands Snow Goose Breeding Colony Survey Hudson Bay Lowlands Coastal Duck Staging Surveys Moulting Scoter Survey Summer Goose Productivity Surveys on Hudson Bay and James Bay Spring and Fall Staging Goose Distribution and Productivity Surveys on Hudson and James Bay Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas North American Breeding Bird Survey Ontario Duck Banding Hudson Bay Lowlands Goose Banding Other Population Surveys, Inventories and Research Programs Short term surveys and studies Canada Goose Nesting Ecology in the Hudson Bay Lowlands P a g e i

3 CWS Long Range Transport of Acid Precipitation (LRTAP) Studies Christmas Bird Counts Trumpeter Swan Surveys Habitat Surveys Spring Snow Surveys Coastal habitat assessment Harvest Surveys Species accounts Greater White-fronted Goose Snow Goose Ross s Goose Brant Cackling Goose Canada Goose Mute Swan Trumpeter Swan Tundra Swan Wood Duck Gadwall American Wigeon American Black Duck Mallard Blue-winged Teal Northern Shoveler Northern Pintail Green-winged Teal Canvasback Redhead Ring-necked Duck Greater Scaup Lesser Scaup King Eider Common Eider Harlequin Duck Surf Scoter White-winged Scoter P a g e ii

4 5.29 Black Scoter Long-tailed Duck Bufflehead Common Goldeneye Barrow s Goldeneye Hooded Merganser Common Merganser Red-breasted Merganser Ruddy Duck Discussion Populations and Status Survey Constraints and Information Limits Spatial and Temporal Gaps Methods Variation Looking Forward Literature Cited Unpublished Files Cited Appendix 1. Place Names Appendix 2. Contact Information for Data Holders Appendix 3. Waterfowl Breeding Pair Densities and Population Estimates Appendix 4. Survey Dates Appendix 5. Duck Banding Locations Appendix 6. Unpublished Source Documentation Appendix 7. Fields (column headings) used in databases for selected waterfowl systematic surveys described in first section of this report P a g e iii

5 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Canada s boreal region (source: Boreal Songbird Initiative) Figure 2. Figure 3. Figure 4. Figure 5. Ontario s boreal region, as defined by Ducks Unlimited Canada for the purposes of this review of boreal waterfowl, includes that portion of the province covered by the Hudson Plains Ecozone (yellow) and the majority of the Boreal Shield Ecozone (green) (source: Ecological Stratification Working Group 1995) Banding stations and band recoveries of ducks and geese banded in Ontario s boreal region (data from CWS/USFWS Bird Banding Office) Locations of strata, transects and plots surveyed in the Waterfowl Breeding Population and Habitat Survey. Stratum 50 (Western Ontario) is part of the Traditional Survey Area; all other strata are part of the Eastern Survey area. Note: Anticosti Island (southern part of Stratum 70) is no longer surveyed Locations of plots surveyed for breeding pairs in the Northern Ontario Breeding Waterfowl Survey Figure 6. Locations of plots in the Clay Belt Waterfowl Population and Habitat Survey Figure 7. Locations of the Eastern Waterfowl Survey helicopter plots in Ontario Figure 8. Figure 9. Figure 10. Figure 11. Figure 12. Figure 13. Figure 14. Locations of transects surveyed in 2009 for scoters and other late breeding waterfowl in the Hudson Bay Lowlands Locations of transects surveyed for breeding pairs of Canada geese in the Hudson Bay Lowlands Location of lesser snow goose colonies in the Hudson Bay Lowlands of Ontario and James Bay Distribution of transects for the survey of lesser snow goose nests in the Cape Henrietta Maria colony. Southeast trending lines are from the initial survey year before inland endpoints were fixed Sectors used for recording migrant waterfowl during Canadian Wildlife Service Hudson Bay Lowlands Coastal Waterfowl Staging Surveys Locations of flocks of moulting scoters recorded in July-August surveys in James Bay and Hudson Bay Survey effort undertaken during the Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas in northern Ontario (from Cadman et al. 2007) Figure 15. Locations of bait banding stations and airboat banding in boreal Ontario Figure 16. Hudson Bay and James Bay coastal areas where annual banding of Canada geese and lesser snow geese is conducted Figure A1.1. Boreal region communities, First Nations, and place names mentioned in the text P a g e iv

6 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Waterfowl species breeding and migration status in Ontario s boreal region Table 2. Surveys of waterfowl in Ontario s boreal region Table 3. Table 4. Estimated number of breeding pairs of waterfowl in the two largest BCRs in Ontario s boreal region (unless otherwise indicated, source is Canadian Wildlife Service data, with estimates prepared by Ken Ross, October 1999, see Appendix 6 for description of the estimation methods) Population trend assessment for breeding waterfowl for three boreal Bird Conservation Regions in Ontario s boreal region based on comparison of survey data obtained from six surveys between 1960 and 2005 (source: Blancher et al., unpublished database, created by Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Canadian Wildlife Service; see Blancher et al. (2009) for methods) Table A3.1. Estimated breeding pair densities (pairs per 100 km 2 ) from sub-regions of Ontario s boreal forest over various survey periods between 1973 and Abbreviations as above Table A3.2. Estimated annual breeding pair density of waterfowl (pairs per 100 km 2 ) from from the BDJV/EWS helicopter plots of Northeastern Ontario (source: Ross 2004). All survey data are used in each year, and these data are those used in the preceding summary Table A3.1. Thus, the same caveat about spatial and temporal coverage as noted above applies Table A3.3. Abundance rank of waterfowl species in sub-regions of Ontario s boreal forest over various survey periods between 1973 and 1999 based on the average indicated pair densities in Table A3.1. Note: lesser snow goose, Ross s goose and tundra swan densities were not included in Table A3.1 and are not ranked Table A3.4. Waterfowl breeding pair estimates for the 1980 to 1990 survey period for the Hudson Bay Lowlands and Precambrian Shield in Ontario s boreal region. Unless otherwise indicated, source is Canadian Wildlife Service data, with estimates prepared by Ken Ross, October 1999, see Appendix 6 for documentation) Table A3.5. Estimated average breeding populations (thousands, adjusted for visibility bias) for Stratum 50 (Western Ontario) and Stratum 51 (Central Ontario) (source: USFWS 2000, and data accessed on line by R. Brook, 2011) Table A3.6. Estimated average breeding populations of the most abundant species (thousands, adjusted for visibility bias) for Stratum 57, Stratum 58 and Stratum 59 (source: USFWS, data accessed by R. Brook, 2011) Table A4.1. Dates of coastal waterfowl staging surveys in Hudson Bay and James Bay Table A4.2. Dates of Mississippi Valley Population (MVP) and Southern James Bay Population (SJBP) Canada goose spring population surveys in the Hudson Bay Lowland Table A5.1. Duck bait banding stations in the boreal region of Ontario with years of operation P a g e v

7 ACRONYMS AGJV AMR BBS BCR BDJV CWS DUC EC EHJV EWS HBL HPE KPA LRTAP NABCI NAWMP NOBWS OBBA OEHJV OMNR SDJV USFWS WBPHS WCR Arctic Goose Joint Venture Avian Monitoring Review Breeding Bird Survey Bird Conservation Region Black Duck Joint Venture Canadian Wildlife Service Ducks Unlimited Canada Environment Canada Eastern Habitat Joint Venture Eastern Waterfowl Survey Hudson Bay Lowlands Hudson Plains Ecozone Key Program Area of the Ontario Eastern Habitat Joint Venture Long Range Transport of Acid Precipitation North American Bird Conservation Initiative North American Waterfowl Management Plan Northern Ontario Breeding Waterfowl Survey Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas Ontario Eastern Habitat Joint Venture Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Sea Duck Joint Venture United States Fish and Wildlife Service Waterfowl Breeding Population and Habitat Survey Waterfowl Conservation Region P a g e v i

8 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I thank several people who provided significant assistance to help me complete this report. Erling Armson (DUC) provided guidance and feedback on content and direction throughout the preparation of the report. Rod Brook (OMNR), Sarah Hagey (OMNR), and Chris Sharp (CWS) provided files and information on various survey databases. Briar McBoyle (DUC/OWA) prepared the majority of the final figures. Shannon Badzinski (CWS), Sarah Hagey, Kevin Middel (OMNR), Chris Sharp and Andrew Pratt (DUC) provided shapefiles for figures or assisted with their preparation. Diana Abraham provided documentation advice and editorial review, and provided copy editing and final formatting. For reviews of the draft report, I thank Shannon Badzinski, Rod Brook, Brigitte Collins, Mark Gloutney, Shawn Meyer, Ken Ross, and Stuart Slattery. Recommended citation: Abraham, K.F Waterfowl in Ontario s Boreal Region: Looking Back, Looking Forward. Report prepared for Ducks Unlimited Canada. Kingston, Ontario. 97 pp. P a g e vii

9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Boreal ecosystems comprise one of the earth s largest forested landscapes. The boreal region covers over 50% of Canada s land mass. The region is known for realized and potential economic contributions in the form of its renewable and non-renewable natural resources, including its vast wetlands, a variety of iconic Canadian wildlife species and millions of waterfowl and waterbirds. Its importance to breeding waterfowl on a continental scale has long been recognized and is generally attributed to its vast size, relative habitat stability and its generally intact state. Like other ecosystems, the future holds change for this vast area. Climate change in the region is emerging as a threat to the long term sustainability of its wetland systems. Increased natural resources exploration and extraction and a trend for continuing northward expansion and intensification of those industries is also emerging as a stressor on the boreal ecosystem. Ducks Unlimited Canada initiated the Western Boreal Forest Initiative in 1997 to work with industry, government and aboriginal partners to significantly increase knowledge of wetlands and waterfowl and other wildlife and to promote sustainable land use policies and practices. This program grew into DUC s Western Boreal Program and in 2012, merged with activities in the eastern boreal to become the National Boreal Program. In 2013, Ducks Unlimited Canada and its partners established an agreement to focus on issues in the boreal region of eastern Canada, similar to the efforts in the west. In Ontario, the boreal region spans two ecozones which cover 81% of the province. The region has recently been the focus of a great deal of attention on two fronts: 1) the provincial government passed a Far North Act to enable land use planning and sustainable development of resources in the region in cooperation with First Nations, and 2) since the early 2000s, the region has experienced a mining and mineral exploration and staking boom. The provincial government also made a commitment to protect 50% of the region. Community-based land use planning is currently underway and an umbrella Far North Land Use Strategy is in development. DUC recognized the opportunity to provide input to the identification and protection of critical waterfowl and wetland habitat. A meeting of Ducks Unlimited Canada (Ontario Region), the Canadian Wildlife Service (Ontario Region) and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources was held in Peterborough, Ontario in August The purpose was to review the state of knowledge about waterfowl populations in boreal Ontario in advance of the development of a DUC boreal conservation program in Ontario. It was determined that before moving forward, it would be good to have a technical document that synthesized existing information about waterfowl: what species occur, where are their highest densities, what are their population trends, where are the data and how are they managed? This report has thus been prepared as a guide to existing information about waterfowl in the boreal region of Ontario, and to provide the material to answer the general question What do we know about this topic, and where do we find that information? The focus is on waterfowl at the species and population levels, not on the habitats that support them. This report provides basic metadata for pertinent waterfowl surveys and monitoring/research programs, a summary of information about density and distribution in species accounts, and a commentary on some limitations of current and past survey programs. This report should be of use in the preparation and design of new surveys and monitoring endeavours, and is also intended to provide a basis for waterfowl conservation planning in the context of Ontario s land use planning initiatives in the boreal and Far North (Far North Act 2010). The array of waterfowl species that occur in Ontario s boreal region is impressive (37 of continental North America s 45 species have occurred in the region). Thirty-one species breed or have bred in the region, and 22 of these are regular and relatively widespread within suitable habitats. Six non-breeding species pass through as migrants, only one of which is regular and common. It is P a g e v i i i

10 estimated that over 2 million breeding waterfowl of all species combined (ducks, geese and swans) occupy the region, with an estimated fall flight of 4-5 million birds. Fifteen current and historic systematic surveys of waterfowl are described in this report plus several shorter term inventories and research programs. No single, long-term, spatially comprehensive survey of waterfowl exists for the entire boreal region of Ontario. Waterfowl surveys have focused on estimating Indicated Breeding Pair (IBP) densities within certain regions for varying periods of years. These are a mix of ground surveys, aerial fixed-wing surveys and aerial helicopter surveys. One helicopter survey design incorporated comprehensive coverage of northern Ontario, but it was completed only for one multi-year period in the 1980s. Aerial fixed-wing surveys cover the majority of the area, but not consistently through time nor are they spatially comprehensive. One area of northwestern Ontario has had fixed-wing coverage (Stratum 50 of the Waterfowl Breeding Population and Habitat Survey, WBPHS) in most years since Goose surveys have focused on coastal staging numbers and on estimating population size and productivity in the Hudson Bay Lowland. Estimates of waterfowl population sizes are complicated by the varying ages and current applicability of data in different parts of the boreal, but are best for the eastern Shield area which has been consistently surveyed since Various assessments of waterfowl population trends have been made recently for subsections of Ontario s boreal region or for selected species that met data requirements. The majority of speciesregion combinations showed stable populations or moderate to large increases. Some inconsistencies among assessments occurred, but these were attributed to slight differences in geographic area and no contradictions in trends were noted. Mallard, American black duck, ring-necked duck, bufflehead, common goldeneye, and hooded merganser increased in at least one subsection. Notably, most species in the sea duck tribe, which has high representation in the boreal waterfowl community, were stable or increasing. The large-bodied species (geese and swans) showed large increases. Only four of 31 breeding species showed large declines, most notably blue-winged teal in all subsections, American wigeon in the Lowlands and American black duck in the boreal-hardwood transition. Indicated Breeding Pair densities indicate some broad patterns of spatial variation in waterfowl species distribution and abundance across the boreal region of Ontario. Overall, duck IBP densities trend from highest in the western Shield to lowest in the eastern Shield, with the exception of the rise in the Clay Belt. Several species have their highest densities on the western edge of the Ontario Shield (adjacent to Minnesota and Manitoba prairies and parkland) or in the Clay Belt the eastern Shield. Some species are restricted to the Hudson Bay coast (tundra swan, snow goose, common and king eider, longtailed duck) while other species (Canada goose, northern pintail) clearly have their highest densities at the Hudson Bay and James Bay coasts and decline towards the interior. These patterns might reflect higher habitat diversity and wetland productivity and the presence of ecotones at these edges. All of the multi-species surveys have limitations and constraints that affect their application. The most common constraint is that individually none provides a spatially comprehensive coverage of the entire boreal region of Ontario. As a result, a picture of population trend and relative abundance across the boreal region of Ontario as a whole can only be constructed using a combination of older data from one area and contemporary data from others. The WBPHS covers only one stratum in the northwest but does provide a good assessment of population trends for the longest period ( , and ) for that area. The Eastern Waterfowl Survey helicopter plot component has annual, continuous data since 1990 and is the most consistent survey for breeding densities. The more specialized surveys aimed at single species (e.g., Canada goose, snow goose) are designed for trend monitoring purposes. Variation in survey methods, changing frameworks through time and varying precision limit the analysis of trends and calculations of densities and abundance. P a g e ix

11 A recent national assessment of all avian monitoring programs identified moderate gaps with moderate risks for the waterfowl group. The boreal was also a noted geographic gap for monitoring of most bird groups (shorebirds, land birds, sea birds, and inland waterbirds). One species gap identified was the monitoring of sea ducks, which are mostly boreal in distribution. The need for multi-species surveys, the competing demands related to monitoring these other bird groups in the boreal and declining overall resources for monitoring, present both opportunity and challenge for renewal of a comprehensive scheme waterfowl survey efforts over larger parts of Ontario s boreal region. Identification of important non-coastal staging waterfowl areas is needed. The potential of the vast interior region of northern Ontario to provide moulting habitat for scaup, goldeneye, bufflehead and mergansers has not been assessed, but could be important in the context of threat assessment in the face of climate change and resource extraction activities. The existing storehouse of information has the potential for additional analyses. A comprehensive analysis of existing IBP density information that would integrate data from the multiple surveys to provide a region-wide picture of distribution and relative abundance was identified in the August 2013 workshop as a major step in identifying gaps and future needs. It is easy enough to note the inadequacies of spatial and temporal coverage of the existing set of surveys but correspondingly difficult to find a solution that would overcome the constraints. Sufficient future monitoring and inclusion of both temporal and spatial coverage may be difficult to achieve at a time of declining resources for surveys in general and waterfowl in particular. A reinvigoration of helicopter surveys in the western part of the Shield (BCR 8 and BCR 12) and the Lowlands (BCR 7) as one priority seems warranted. These surveys would provide up to date estimates of densities and critical habitats to provide advice to communities and the province during planning for protected areas. Within a well-designed monitoring plan, areas of immediate interest due to planning timelines or imminent industrial development should be targeted for the pilot work of the renewed survey effort. Recent terrestrial monitoring programs in the boreal region indicate that the lengthy interface between the Hudson Bay Lowlands and the Ontario Shield is an area of high value in terms of seasonal abundance and annual wildlife use by a diversity of species, probably based on the increased diversity of habitats and ecosystem units found there. Investigation of this region for similar patterns in waterfowl and wetland species abundance and diversity would be of significant interest for land use planning and would be especially important in the near term because of the focus of future development by the mining and energy industries in this ecotone (e.g., the Ring of Fire). P a g e x

12 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Why is there interest in the boreal? Boreal ecosystems comprise one of the earth s largest forested landscapes. The boreal region covers over 50% of Canada s land mass (Figure 1). The region is known for realized and potential economic contributions in the form of its renewable and non-renewable natural resources. It is home to a variety of iconic Canadian wildlife, such as caribou, moose, grizzly bear, wolves and wolverine in intact landscapes. Sometimes overlooked is the fact that the region is home to millions of waterfowl and waterbirds because among its component habitats there exist a great number, extent and diversity of wetlands, ranging from the coastal marshes of inland seas to vast peatlands of the taiga to myriad small wetlands and ponds, large lakes and rivers of the Precambrian Shield (Ducks Unlimited 2006). While the presence and general status of most waterfowl species in boreal Canada has long been known (e.g., Kortright 1942; Bellrose 1980), the importance of the region to breeding waterfowl on a continental scale has generally been attributed to its vast size and relative habitat stability (e.g., high proportion of permanent wetlands) and its intact state (i.e., not highly impacted by industrial development), rather than its productivity measured in densities or population sizes (Wellein and Lumsden 1964; Hawkins et al. 1984). In addition to providing stable breeding habitat for many species, Canada s boreal regions provide moulting habitat for post-breeding males, failed breeding females and non-sexually mature segments from more southern breeding populations, refuge habitat for birds from those populations which are displaced by drought in some years, and migration habitat for millions of northern breeding birds and their offspring. Climate change in the region is emerging as a threat to the long-term sustainability of boreal wetland systems (Roach et al. 2011). Recent increased natural resources exploration and extraction, and a trend for continuing northward expansion and intensification of those industries in Ontario, as well as potential hydroelectric and wind energy developments, are also emerging as stressors on the boreal ecosystem. In Ontario s boreal region, both climate change and industrial expansion have come to the forefront of conservation discussions in recent years. P a g e 1

13 Figure 1. Canada s boreal region (source: Boreal Songbird Initiative). 1.2 What is the purpose of this report? The importance of Canada s boreal regions for waterfowl has long been recognized (Ducks Unlimited 2006), and in 1997 Ducks Unlimited initiated the Western Boreal Forest Initiative which evolved into its Western Boreal Program. Working with industry, government and aboriginal partners with interests in the western boreal forest, Ducks Unlimited has developed programs to significantly increase knowledge of wetlands and waterfowl and other wildlife and to promote sustainable land use policies and practices. In 2013, Ducks Unlimited and its partners established an agreement to focus on similar issues in the boreal region of eastern Canada, as part of its National Boreal Program. DUC recognized the opportunity to provide input to the identification and protection of critical waterfowl and wetland habitat. A meeting of Ducks Unlimited Canada (Ontario Region), the Canadian Wildlife Service (Ontario Region) and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources was held in Peterborough, Ontario in August The purpose was to review the state of knowledge about waterfowl populations in boreal Ontario in advance of the development of a DUC boreal conservation program Ontario. At that meeting, it was determined that a practical first step for moving forward would be the creation of a technical document that synthesized existing information. Toward that end, this report has been prepared as a guide to existing information about waterfowl in the boreal region of Ontario. It attempts to answer the general question What do we know about this topic, and where do we find that information? by consolidating available knowledge from the published and unpublished literature generated by government, academic and private sector sources. The focus is on waterfowl at the species and population levels, and not on the wetlands or other aquatic and terrestrial habitats which support them, although it is assumed that high densities and diversity of species reflects high value habitats. P a g e 2

14 Basic meta-data for pertinent waterfowl surveys, monitoring programs and some research are provided, with a description of each program including the why, what, when and where components, a summary of major findings and a commentary on limitations. This information should help inform the design of new surveys and monitoring endeavors and provide a basis for waterfowl conservation planning in the context of Ontario s Far North Community Based Land Use Planning process and the Far North Land Use Strategy initiative underway in Ontario mandated by the Far North Act (2010). These initiatives are concurrent with recent increased interest in mineral exploration, energy production and transmission, and transportation needs of northern communities (Far North Advisory Council 2009; OMEI and OMNDMF 2009). 2 ONTARIO S BOREAL REGION 2.1 Boreal Classifications Landscape description and designation of landscape planning units is always complicated. It would be nice if there was just one system but such is no more the case in Ontario than elsewhere. The boreal region of Ontario, as defined for this report, includes parts of two national ecozones: (1) the Hudson Plains Ecozone; and (2) the Boreal Shield Ecozone (Figure 2) (Wiken 1986; Ecological Stratification Working Group 1995, but see Rankin (2011) for modifications). These national ecozones have equivalents in provincial ecological land classifications: the national Hudson Plains ecozone is closely equivalent to the provincial Hudson Bay Lowlands Ecozone, including the tundra and foresttundra zones, and the national Boreal Shield Ecozone is closely equivalent to the provincial Ontario Shield Ecozone. Together, these ecozones cover over 81% of Ontario (Crins et al. 2009). The two regions have their roots in the forest classification of Rowe (1972). There are other schemes of classification that incorporate these ecozones. The North American Bird Conservation Initiative (NABCI) has amalgamated ecozones of this scale into larger areas of ecological similarity in bird communities, habitats and surface features called Bird Conservation Regions (BCR). Additionally, the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) created Waterfowl Conservation Regions (WCR) with similar intent. The Hudson Plains/Hudson Bay Lowlands Ecozone is part of the Taiga Shield and Hudson Plains BCR (BCR 7) and WCR 7.1, and the Boreal Shield/Ontario Shield ecozone is part of the Boreal Softwood Shield BCR (BCR 8) which is subdivided into WCR 8.0 in the east and WCR 8.1 in the west. A small portion at the southern edge of what is defined as boreal in this report and in the national and provincial classifications is part of the Boreal Hardwood Transition BCR (BCR 12) and WCR 12w (OEHJV 2007; Birds Studies Canada and NABCI 2014). The Eastern Habitat Joint Venture (EHJV 1994, OEHJV 2007) has also defined three Key Program Areas (KPA) in the boreal region of Ontario. The Hudson Bay Lowlands KPA is closely aligned with the Hudson Plains/Hudson Bay Lowlands ecozone/bcr 7/WCR 7.1. The Boreal Forest KPA aligns with the Boreal Shield/Ontario Shield ecozone/ WCR 12w/BCR 8 (with the exception that the Clay Belt of northeastern Ontario was separated as the Clay Belt KPA which aligns with WCR 8.0). For simplicity, this report uses the term Hudson Bay Lowlands or Lowlands throughout as an equivalent for the ecozone terms Hudson Plains and Hudson Bay Lowland, and uses Ontario Shield and Shield throughout as an equivalent for terms such as Boreal Shield, Precambrian Shield, Canadian Shield, etc., except where a specific reference is needed and where numbers have been calculated or a trend determined specifically for one of those other designators, e.g., indicated breeding P a g e 3

15 pairs in a defined area. The majority of the figures show BCR boundaries and numbering in the background. Akimiski Island is included in this review because of its biogeographical affinity to Ontario and its history of traditional use and scientific research by Ontario based agencies. Figure 2. Ontario s boreal region, as defined by Ducks Unlimited Canada for the purposes of this review of boreal waterfowl, includes that portion of the province covered by the Hudson Plains Ecozone (yellow) and the majority of the Boreal Shield Ecozone (green) (source: Ecological Stratification Working Group 1995). 2.2 Characteristics of Ontario s Boreal Region Beyond the nomenclature, the overall boreal landscape of Ontario ranges from a northern zone of subarctic marine coast and tundra through taiga (muskeg and open boreal forest) to upland closed boreal forest to boreal-hardwood mixed forests at its southern extent. Wetlands across the region are extensive and diverse. The Hudson Bay Lowlands is the wettest terrestrial region in Canada and contains the third largest wetland complex in the world (Abraham and Keddy 2005). Riley (2011) describes the wetland types and variability in a regional overview and estimates that 85% of the ecozone is either mineral wetland or organic peatland. It is characterized by its flat terrain, underlying permafrost, its unfettered rivers and almost complete lack of roads and other linear disturbances that typically alter P a g e 4

16 drainage. The Ontario Shield contains a variety of water dominated areas, including many rivers and lakes, and small wetlands. Water and wetlands cover from 3-30% of the zone s landscape as measured at the ecoregion level (Crins et al. 2009). The majority of boreal Ontario is sparsely populated, with cities and towns of significant size restricted to the southern third where forestry and mining dominate the land uses along with relatively small amounts of agriculture. The northern two-thirds of Ontario s boreal region contains 34 First Nations communities accessible mainly by air and winter roads (Far North Science Advisory Panel 2010), leaving a largely roadless area with generally intact boreal landscape (Abraham et al. 2011; ESTR Secretariat 2014). Place names used throughout the text are shown in Figure A1.1 (Appendix 1). 3 OVERVIEW OF ONTARIO S BOREAL WATERFOWL The array of waterfowl species that occur in Ontario s boreal region is impressive (37 of continental North America s 45 species have occurred in the region) (Table 1). Thirty-one species breed or have bred in the region, and 22 of these are regular and relatively widespread within suitable habitats. Six non-breeding species pass through as migrants, only one of which is regular and common. It is estimated that over 2 million breeding waterfowl of all species combined (ducks, geese and swans) occupy the region, with an estimated fall flight of 4-5 million birds (CWS, unpublished data). Several species are of special interest. Ontario s portion of the Hudson Bay Lowlands contains major breeding and production areas for two populations of Canada goose (Hughes and Abraham 2007), the eastern population of northern pintail (Malecki et al. 2006), the eastern population of black scoter (Brook et al. 2012), and the province s largest colony of lesser snow goose (Abraham 2007e). The Ontario Shield produces a significant proportion of eastern North America s American black duck and mallard (Ross and Fillman 1990), ring-necked duck (Leckie 2007a), common goldeneye (Mallory 2007b), and common merganser (Dunn 2007). Other species with strong affinity for the Ontario boreal ecosystem include the lesser scaup, American wigeon, and the green-winged teal. The American black duck occurs widely in boreal Ontario and once held sway over its close relative, the mallard (Dennis 1974); nevertheless it is found at low to moderate densities in its primary habitat relative to densities of waterfowl in other production areas, such as on the prairies. The sea ducks (15 species in the Tribe Mergini) are also widely distributed in boreal Ontario, but again at relatively low densities compared to most species of ducks. Notably, the North American ranges of many of these species are centered largely in boreal regions such as Ontario s, rather than the prairies. For many of these species, the remoteness of their boreal breeding centres combined with their life and natural history characteristics limit the state of knowledge about their population size and biology. When the North American Waterfowl Management Plan was implemented in 1986, most sea duck species were thought to have relatively stable populations. However, a recent focus on boreal areas in Canada has reshaped and refined that thinking based on new information (NAWMP 2004; DUC 2006; SDJV 2008). Table 1. Waterfowl species breeding and migration status in Ontario s boreal region. Species Breeding Status 1 Migration Status 1 Greater White-fronted Goose Anser albifrons No evidence Rare P a g e 5

17 Species Breeding Status 1 Migration Status 1 Snow Goose Chen caerulscens Ross's Goose Chen rossii Brant Brant bernicla Cackling Goose Branta hutchinsii Canada Goose Brant canadensis Mute Swan Cygnus olor Trumpeter Swan Cygnus buccinator Tundra Swan Cygnus columbianus Wood Duck Aix sponsa Gadwall Anas strepera American Wigeon Anas americana American Black Duck Anas rubripes Mallard Anas platyrhynchos Blue-winged Teal Anas discors Northern Shoveler Anas clypeata Northern Pintail Anas acuta Green-winged Teal Anas crecca Canvasback Aythya valisineria Redhead Aythya americana Locally Common Uncommon No evidence Rare Common No evidence Uncommon Uncommon Uncommon Rare Uncommon Common Common Common Uncommon Common Common Rare Rare Abundant Uncommon Common Common Common Vagrant Uncommon Uncommon Uncommon Uncommon Common Common Common Common Uncommon Common Common Rare Rare P a g e 6

18 1 Species Breeding Status 1 Migration Status 1 Ring-necked Duck Aythya collaris Greater Scaup Aythya marila Lesser Scaup Aythya affinis King Eider Somateria spectabilis Common Eider Somateria mollissima Harlequin Duck Histrionicus histrionicus Surf Scoter Melanitta perspicillata White-winged Scoter Melanitta fusca Black Scoter Melanitta nigra Long-tailed Duck Clangula hyemalis Bufflehead Bucephala albeola Common Goldeneye Bucephala clangula Barrow's Goldeneye Bucephala islandica Hooded Merganser Lophodytes cucullatus Common Merganser Mergus merganser Red-breasted Merganser Mergus serrator Ruddy Duck Oxyura jamaicensis Common Uncommon Common Rare Uncommon No evidence Common Common Common Uncommon Common Common No evidence Common Common Common Rare Common Common Common Rare Uncommon Rare migrant Common Common Common Common Common Common Vagrant Common Common Common Vagrant (one to very few records, not expected annually); Rare (few records, expected most years); Uncommon (expected annually in low numbers but not widespread in the region); Common (expected annually in high numbers and widespread in the region); Locally Common (expected annually in high numbers but in only part of the region, e.g., a colony). Rare P a g e 7

19 As indicated by band recoveries, Ontario s boreal region breeding waterfowl migrate largely to the Mississippi and Atlantic Flyways (Figure 3), with some contribution to the Central Flyway, e.g., lesser snow goose (Francis and Cooke 1992). Figure 3. Banding stations and band recoveries of ducks and geese banded in Ontario s boreal region (data from CWS/USFWS Bird Banding Office). Surveys and monitoring of waterfowl have been conducted widely in Ontario s boreal region since the late 1940s, but many of the early efforts (during the 1940s-1970s) were one-time explorations and most covered relatively short spans of time (Hanson et al. 1949). As a result, relatively few long term data sets exist. The major reason for the low effort in early years was likely the remoteness of the region and lack of supporting infrastructure, but a contributing factor may have been the assumed low densities of birds. While most of the rest of the continent was being explored by the waterfowl management community (see accounts in Hawkins et al. 1984), Ontario s north was largely ignored. Exceptions were targeted explorations of the James Bay marshes (Smith 1943, 1944, 1984) and the Hudson Bay coast (Lumsden 1959). Aerial surveys of interior boreal areas were likewise limited (Addy et al. 1952; Creighton 1962; Chamberlain and Kaczynski 1965; Kaczynski and Chamberlain 1968). Although the prairies and parklands, including boreal regions of western and eastern Canada, were included in the design of annual waterfowl population and breeding habitat surveys in the early 1950s which is now the primary means of monitoring North American Waterfowl Populations (USFWS 2014), only a small portion of Ontario was included (i.e., the extreme west, Stratum 50). P a g e 8

20 Responsibility for waterfowl population management and monitoring in the boreal region rests with the federal government as mandated by the international Migratory Bird Treaty and enabling Migratory Bird Convention Act 1994, and responsibility is assigned to the Canadian Wildlife Service of Environment Canada. There has also always been a great deal of American involvement in management of Canada s migratory waterfowl species because they are shared; partners in management include the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and various state governments through the waterfowl flyway council system. Most of the habitat in Ontario s boreal region is provincial Crown land, and responsibility for land use planning and practice on these areas lies with the province of Ontario. The Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (formerly Department of Lands and Forests) has long maintained a presence in resources management in the region. Recognition of these dichotomies of responsibility in Ontario has, in practice, made waterfowl monitoring a cooperative venture between several levels of government over much of the past half century. 4 WATERFOWL SURVEYS IN ONTARIO S BOREAL REGION This section of the report contains a descriptive account for each of the waterfowl survey programs that have been conducted in Ontario (Table 2). Table 2. Surveys of waterfowl in Ontario s boreal region. 1 Waterfowl Breeding Population and Habitat Survey Multi-species, breeding pairs 2 Northern Ontario Breeding Waterfowl Survey Multi-species, breeding pairs 3 Clay Belt Waterfowl and Habitat Survey Multi-species, breeding pairs and broods 4 Eastern Waterfowl Survey Multi-species, breeding pairs 5 Hudson Bay Lowlands Late-Breeding Waterfowl Survey 6 Hudson Bay Lowlands Canada Goose Spring Survey 7 Hudson Bay Lowlands Snow Goose Breeding Colony Survey 8 Hudson Bay Lowlands Coastal Waterfowl Staging Survey Multi-species, breeding pairs, late nesters Single species, breeding pairs Single species, nest counts Multi-species, distribution and abundance, trend 9 Moulting Scoter Survey Primarily black scoter, trend 10 Summer Goose Productivity Survey on Hudson Bay and James Bay 11 Spring and Fall Goose Distribution and Productivity Survey on Hudson Bay and James Bay 12 Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas All species, trend Canada and snow goose, early season assessment Multi-species, assessment of northern colonies P a g e 9

21 13 North American Breeding Bird Survey All species, trend 14 Ontario Duck Banding Ducks, recovery distribution and harvest rate 15 Hudson Bay Lowlands Goose Banding Canada and snow goose, recovery distribution and harvest rate 16 Other Population Surveys, Inventories and Research Programs Multiple species, breeding biology, acid rain, winter abundance, etc. 16 Habitat Surveys Suitability, seasonal condition 17 Harvest Surveys All species Each descriptive survey account contains the following information: Years of the survey and brief history Map of plot or transect locations Conducting agency Type of information collected (what data, what format, accuracy) Timing of survey Data location (holding agency) (contact office or person is in Appendix 2) Publications/reports (key outputs or examples only). 4.1 Waterfowl Breeding Population and Habitat Survey The Waterfowl Breeding Population and Habitat Survey (also referred to as the fixed-wing survey) is a collaborative effort of the USFWS and the CWS. It is the flagship waterfowl population survey in North America (USFWS 2014, CWS 2013), and has been conducted since 1955 in the Traditional Survey Area in the mid-continent region of Canada, Alaska and the northern US states. In the Traditional Survey Area there is one stratum (Stratum 50) in northwestern Ontario (Figure 4) which has been flown in , , and In the more recently established Eastern Survey Area (see section 4.4) there are two strata in the Ontario Shield (51, 52) which have been covered annually since 1990 and three strata in the Hudson Bay Lowlands (57, 58 and 59) which have been flown periodically since the early 1990s (57 was flown in 1992, 1993, 2001, 2002, , and 2011; 58 was flown in 1993 and ; 59 was flown in ). Within strata, two-person aerial crews of USFWS biologists and pilot biologists count ducks along established transect lines approximately 50 m above ground level. Transects are 400 m wide and divided into segments, each roughly 29 km in length. Identification is mostly to species level but some is to group level (scaup spp., merganser spp.), and lone hen ducks are not counted. Survey crews also assess habitat conditions at a wetland basin level. Unlike much of the Traditional Survey area, where USFWS fixed wing counts are adjusted for detection using CWS ground surveys, counts for strata in Ontario s boreal are adjusted by other means. In areas that include both CWS helicopter plot surveys and US Fish and Wildlife Service annual surveys, visibility correction factors (VCFs) for each species and stratum are calculated by adjusting fixed wing counts using CWS helicopter counts; VCFs for strata where only US Fish and Wildlife Service surveys are conducted are calculated from historical, dedicated helicopter surveys that were conducted along a sample of segments. Fast et al. (2011) provide relative detection rates for 10 species that occur in boreal Ontario. P a g e 10

22 Results are published annually by the USFWS in the continental Waterfowl Population Status report series (e.g., USFWS 2014). Data are managed by the USFWS and are available online at: Annual reports were formerly produced giving the results for the Northern Saskatchewan, Northern Manitoba and Western Ontario Waterfowl Breeding Pair/Population surveys (e.g., Brazda and Nun 1965a, 1966) or Western and Central Ontario (e.g., USFWS 2000). From 1962 to at least 1965, there were also Waterfowl Production Surveys conducted in July in the same general area as the spring surveys, and annual reports were issued (e.g., Brazda and Nun 1965b). 50 Figure 4. Locations of strata, transects and plots surveyed in the Waterfowl Breeding Population and Habitat Survey. Stratum 50 (Western Ontario) is part of the Traditional Survey Area; all other strata are part of the Eastern Survey area. Note: Anticosti Island (southern part of Stratum 70) is no longer surveyed. 4.2 Northern Ontario Breeding Waterfowl Survey Next to the WBPHS, the Northern Ontario Breeding Waterfowl Survey (NOBWS) is the most spatially extensive survey of waterfowl in Ontario (Figure 5) and it is the most intensive survey in term of fine scale resolution. It is also the earliest formal aerial survey designed to estimate pair densities of breeding ducks in the Hudson Bay Lowlands and the majority of the Ontario Shield. The survey was developed to fill gaps in knowledge about waterfowl in northern Ontario (Ross 1987), as well as support for the acid rain program (see Section ) (K. Ross, pers. comm.) and later supported the Black Duck P a g e 11

23 Joint Venture. The survey was initiated in 1980 but full initial coverage of all survey blocks was not completed until The survey comprised two components: (1) an extensive survey area covering the Hudson Bay Lowlands ecozone and the Ontario Shield north and west of Lake Superior reaching to the Manitoba and Minnesota borders, and (2) an intensive survey area in the Boreal Shield and Mixed Woods Plains ecozones south of the Great Clay Belt, north and east of Lake Superior reaching to the Quebec border (Ross 1987; Ross and Fillman 1990). The second of these two areas was specifically chosen to monitor the American black duck population in northeastern Ontario; this intensive portion in northeastern Ontario was surveyed in and served as developmental work for the operational Black Duck Joint Venture survey that started in Plot size in the extensive survey area was 2 km x 2 km and 25 such plots were systematically distributed within 100 km x 100 km UTM blocks across the northernmost part of survey area. Similarly, plots in the intensive survey area were 2 km x 2 km and 25 such plots were systematically spaced across km x 100 km UTM blocks, with some adjustments for partial blocks. In total, 144 plots were included in the extensive area and 170 plots in the intensive area (Figure 5). Overall, surveys of some blocks were conducted in , , and Surveys were timed to coincide with the nest initiation period for early nesting waterfowl species. Survey dates fell between 4 May and 18 May in (Ross and Fillman 1990). In the Hudson Bay Lowlands, some of the plots were re-surveyed in the Ft. Severn area in 1997 and 2006 near Peawanuck. Additional survey plots (5 km x 5 km) were surveyed in 1996 in the Cape Henrietta Maria area. Blocks near Pickle Lake, Red Lake and Lake-of-the-Woods (near the Experimental Lakes Area) were re-surveyed in 2009 in support of the acid rain program (K. Ross, pers. comm.). Observational data for all species of waterfowl and loons were collected by survey crews. For each observation, the number of individuals (i.e., group size), sex of individuals (whenever possible) and location were recorded and geo-referenced to specific wetland polygons. Data are stored in an MS Access database with GIS shapefile for plots, and are managed by CWS Ontario Region. Results have been reported by Ross (1987a) and Ross and Fillman (1990), and were incorporated into the Eastern Habitat Joint Venture implementation plan (OEHJV 2007). P a g e 12

24 Figure 5. Locations of plots surveyed for breeding pairs in the Northern Ontario Breeding Waterfowl Survey. 4.3 Clay Belt Waterfowl Population and Habitat Survey The Clay Belt Waterfowl Population and Habitat Survey was conducted as a partnership among CWS, DUC and OMNR. It was developed in part to assist in the planning of wetland conservation efforts by Ducks Unlimited Canada in the Clay Belt of northeastern Ontario, which had been identified as a Key Program Area through the Eastern Habitat Joint Venture (EHJV 1994). The Clay Belt has more fertile and more productive substrates than the Precambrian Shield portions of the boreal region. As its name implies, the survey covered most of the Great Clay Belt, Little Clay Belt and Chapleau Plain of northern Ontario which lies within BCR 8 (Ross et al. 2002). The survey was conducted in three years (1988, 1989, 1990) and consisted of a pair survey timed to be optimal for early breeding species such as American black duck and mallard, a pair and brood survey timed to be optimal for later nesting species such as green-winged teal and ring-necked duck, and a brood survey timed to be optimal for the later nesting P a g e 13

25 species. The dates of the breeding pair surveys were May 1988, May 1989 and May Plots were 2 km x 2 km (n=141 for the first pair survey each year and n=103 for the latter two pair/brood surveys each year) located in the southwest corner of 100 km x 100 km Universal Transverse Mercator grids (Figure 6). The plots were chosen randomly within the grid stratification. The dates of the brood surveys were 28 June to 4 July 1988, July 1988; July 1989, August 1989; July 1990, and August Observational data were collected for all species of waterfowl and other conspicuous waterbirds (e.g., loons, gulls) and other wildlife (e.g., moose). For each observation, the number of individuals (i.e., group size), sex of individuals (whenever possible) and location were recorded and geo-referenced to specific wetland polygons. Data are stored in an MS Access database with GIS shapefiles for plots, and are managed by CWS Ontario Region. The results of the surveys have been published in three papers: Gabor et al. 1995; Rempel et al. 1997; and Ross et al Figure 6. Locations of plots in the Clay Belt Waterfowl Population and Habitat Survey. 4.4 Eastern Waterfowl Survey The Eastern Waterfowl Survey (EWS) is the current survey designed to measure densities of breeding waterfowl (focusing on ducks) in eastern Canada and was designed to cover the primary breeding habitat of American black duck in Ontario, Quebec, Newfoundland and Labrador and the Maritimes. It evolved from the Black Duck Joint Venture survey that was initiated in 1990 and which is now synonymous with the EWS. In Ontario, the survey comprises a plot-based helicopter survey component conducted by the CWS and a fixed-winged survey component conducted by the USFWS. The P a g e 14

26 two components have been integrated since This has included limited changes to survey methods and data collection to produce a single status and trend indicator over a larger area for management purposes (Wilkins et al. 2005); historical data have been re-analyzed with these new methods (USFWS 2014; also see USFWS, Division of Migratory Bird Management website). In forested environments, such as those covered in the majority of this survey area, helicopter surveys have higher detection rates than fixed-wing surveys. This is an advantage where air-to-ground survey comparisons for development of detection factors are difficult, such as in roadless forest areas (Ross 1985b). For integration, fixed-wing transects are combined into reference areas, the one in Ontario being BDJV Stratum 4 (the westernmost) and composite estimates for species common to both components are made by using the helicopter data to adjust for visibility bias (Meyer 2011). In Ontario, the helicopter portion of the EWS evolved from the Black Duck Joint Venture pair survey that was initiated by the Canadian Wildlife Service in 1990 (Ross 2000) as part of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan s Black Duck Joint Venture to improve information about the distribution and abundance of American black duck on the breeding grounds. That survey, in turn, was modelled after the Clay Belt Waterfowl Population and Habitat Survey of the late 1980s (see below) that immediately preceded it, which in turn used methods similar to the Northern Ontario Waterfowl Breeding Pair Survey of the 1980s. The Eastern Waterfowl Survey helicopter plots in Ontario cover parts of BCR 8 and BCR 12 (Figure 7) and include the approximately 230,000 km 2 area of highest breeding density of American black duck extending from Pembroke in the southeast to Hornepayne in the northwest (Ross 2000) (i.e., more than just the boreal region). The survey has been conducted annually since 1990, with adjustments over time to meet funding constraints while still meeting objectives of precision of estimates for change detection. From 1990 to 1995, 10 km x 10 km plots were surveyed annually (n=40). From 1996 to the present, plot size has been 5 km x 5 km located in the southwest corner of the former 10 x 10 km plots. Currently, 40 plots are surveyed in a four year rotation (with 20 plots surveyed each year and all plots surveyed twice in the rotation). The helicopter survey period is timed to be optimal for early nesting waterfowl species such as American black duck and mallard, and is annually adjusted to phenological conditions. The average starting date of the survey from 1991 to 2013 has been 5 May, and the average end date has been 20 May (note that the reduction of plots shortens the period needed for the survey and thus the average end date has become earlier). The survey is conducted by three observers in a helicopter. Data about the observations of all species of waterfowl and other conspicuous waterbirds (e.g., loons, gulls) are collected. For each observation, the number of individuals (i.e., group size), sex of individuals (whenever possible), and location are recorded and geo-referenced to specific wetland polygons. As noted above, the data have been integrated with the data from boreal Ontario Strata 51 and 52 of the USFWS fixedwing survey of eastern Canada (also covered as Black Duck Survey Stratum 4, Ontario and Western Quebec) (USFWS 2014) (Figure 4). The Ontario helicopter survey is conducted by CWS Ontario Region and the data are managed by CWS Ontario Region and stored in an MS Access database with GIS shapefiles for plots (see Appendix 2 and Appendix 7). For USFWS fixed-wing survey methods, see the Section 4.1 and Smith (1995). Results are published annually by the USFWS in the Waterfowl Population Status report series and CWS in its Population Status of Migratory Game Birds in Canada series: P a g e 15

27 Figure 7. Locations of the Eastern Waterfowl Survey helicopter plots in Ontario. 4.5 Hudson Bay Lowlands Late-Breeding Waterfowl Survey The Hudson Bay Lowlands is known to be home to breeding scoters (surf scoter, white-winged scoter and black scoter), but until recently the abundance of and habitat use by these three species has been poorly documented (Ross 2007d, 2007e, 2007b, respectively). Previous surveys to quantify densities of ducks breeding in the Hudson Bay Lowlands have usually been conducted too early for latebreeding species like scoters (Ross 1987). To determine densities of this group of sea ducks and other late-breeding waterfowl, a pilot survey was designed and conducted in 2009 south of Peawanuck (in BCR 7), and centrally located in the Hudson Bay Lowlands (Figure 8). Ten transects of 100 km each were established in an area of km 2. Timing was determined using information from a previous survey (Ross 1987, Ross and Fillman 1990, CWS, unpublished data) and on the personal experience of Ken Ross and Ken Abraham. The survey was flown from 7-10 June 2009 using a helicopter at low level (Brook et P a g e 16

28 al. 2012). Observations of all waterfowl and other identifiable birds (e.g., loons, shorebirds) and large mammals (e.g., caribou) were recorded and geo-referenced with a GPS unit. Distance sampling bands on either side of the aircraft were used to help assess detection rate and improve precision of the resulting density estimates. It was assumed that scoters were uniformly distributed throughout the study area, and average density was calculated for each species on the transect survey area. Estimated numbers of indicated breeding pairs (IBP) for scoters were based on general guidelines for other species. The survey was conducted by the OMNR and CWS with support from the Sea Duck Joint Venture. Data are housed in an MS Access database and managed by the Wildlife Research and Monitoring Section, OMNR, in Peterborough. The results of the survey were reported to the Sea Duck Joint Venture and have been published in one journal paper (Brook et al. 2012). Figure 8. Locations of transects surveyed in 2009 for scoters and other late breeding waterfowl in the Hudson Bay Lowlands. 4.6 Hudson Bay Lowlands Canada Goose Spring Survey Before 1990, estimates of breeding pair abundance and distribution of Canada geese were made from general aerial waterfowl surveys in a spatially and temporally opportunistic manner throughout the boreal region (e.g., Boyer et al. 1958; Creighton 1962). Historically, the main monitoring for population size of Canada geese that breed in northern Ontario was conducted during fall and winter surveys in the Mississippi and Atlantic Flyways (Orr et al. 1998). In the late 1980s, due to growth of temperate breeding Canada goose populations and an increasing inability to assign birds to specific populations based on the fall-winter surveys, there was a shift in monitoring strategy to a breeding ground emphasis in the Mississippi Flyway. Consequently, Canada geese of the Mississippi Valley Population and Southern James Bay Population have been surveyed annually in the Hudson Bay Lowlands since 1989 and 1990, respectively, and procedures and area were adjusted somewhat during the first 2-3 years (Leafloor et al. 1990; Leafloor 1992; Tacha et al. 1998; Leafloor and Abraham 2000). P a g e 17

29 The surveys are a partnership between OMNR, CWS and the Mississippi and Atlantic flyways (Abraham et al. 2008; Brook and Luukkonen 2010). Aerial surveys are flown along 10 km x 500 m (250 m on each side) transects which were initially chosen randomly within strata based on distance to the coast; the same transects are flown each year (Figure 9) (Leafloor et al. 1990). In the Mississippi Valley Population range there are 74 transects and in the Southern James Bay Population range there are 82 transects. The surveys have been flown in a DeHavilland Twin Otter for all but one year (2005) at an altitude of approximately 100 m. Observations of geese are recorded as singles, pairs, and groups >3 (with size noted), and georeferenced with a GPS unit (at the transect level from 1989 to 2006 and at the individual observation level since 2007). Other conspicuous wildlife including swans, sandhill cranes, and large mammals (e.g., moose, bears, wolves) are also recorded. Figure 9. Locations of transects surveyed for breeding pairs of Canada geese in the Hudson Bay Lowlands. Population size estimates are generated for continuity and comparison of long term trends but beginning in 2007, the objective of the surveys was re-focused to emphasize change detection at the transect and strata level to feed into harvest regulation decisions which are based on harvest rates. Data are stored in an MS Excel database with shapefiles for transect and stratum locations, and are managed by the Wildlife Research and Monitoring Section, OMNR, in Peterborough. Preliminary administrative reports are issued annually in time for the summer flyway council meetings (e.g., Brook and Hughes 2014a,b) and results are rolled up into national status reports (e.g., CWS 2013; USFWS 2014). The results are also incorporated into the respective flyway population management plans. P a g e 18

30 4.7 Hudson Bay Lowlands Snow Goose Breeding Colony Survey Surveys of the distribution and abundance of lesser snow geese nesting in the Hudson Bay Lowlands have been conducted periodically since the late 1940s (e.g., Lumsden 1957). Mid-summer productivity surveys (below) were the first attempt to delineate breeding distribution of snow geese, providing the earliest information we have on the colony at Cape Henrietta Maria and the scattered nesting at various river mouths along the Hudson Bay and James Bay coasts (Hanson et al. 1972). These surveys usually attempted to photograph all brood and non-breeding flocks and thus attempted to arrive at a tally of the total colony size at each of several discrete locations where geese bred (Figure 10). Mid-summer surveys and banding programs provided information on distribution, annual productivity and abundance through the early 1990s (Abraham et al. 1998). Figure 10. Location of lesser snow goose colonies in the Hudson Bay Lowlands of Ontario and James Bay. Quantitative photographic surveys of the nesting colony at Cape Henrietta Maria were conducted in 1972 (Kerbes 1975), 1978 (Angehrn 1979) and 1997 (Kerbes et al. 2006) to obtain estimates of breeding pairs. Because of the expense and long post-survey processing time required by the photographic surveys, a visual transect survey method was developed in the mid 1990s to obtain more timely estimates at lower cost (Ross et al. 2004). The surveys are a collaboration between the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Canadian Wildlife Service with additional support from the Arctic Goose Joint Venture. Surveys have been conducted at Cape Henrietta Maria approximately every second year since 1997 (1997, 1999, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2012) and at the Pen Islands and Shell Brook in 1997 and At Cape Henrietta Maria, twenty-five fixed transects are oriented north-south roughly perpendicular to the coast (Figure 11); length is variable and depends on the area occupied in a given year (each extends to the limit of nest occurrence and year to year changes are small). The survey is flown in a helicopter at approximately 50 m above ground level. Two rear observers record all nests in 500 m transect segments within a discrete 40 m band on the right and left side of the aircraft, respectively, while the navigator/front observer records a 20 m forward-looking band (total transect width is 100 m). Data are geo-referenced to the 500 m segment level, and densities are estimated from P a g e 19

31 either statistical analysis or kriging (Ross et al. 2004; Hudson Bay Project 2012). Data are housed in an Access database with GIS shapefiles of transect locations and kriged distribution maps and are managed by the Wildlife Research and Monitoring Section, OMNR, in Peterborough. Results have been reported in the CWS Status of Migratory Game Birds in Canada (November) report series (e.g. CWS 2013). Figure 11. Distribution of transects for the survey of lesser snow goose nests in the Cape Henrietta Maria colony. Southeast trending lines are from the initial survey year before inland endpoints were fixed. 4.8 Hudson Bay Lowlands Coastal Duck Staging Surveys Much of the earliest attention to waterfowl in the Hudson Bay and James Bay coastal region was given to geese because of their importance to hunters in both Canada and the United States. In 1976, CWS initiated a series of aerial surveys of ducks staging along the coasts (Ross 1977) to obtain relative abundance estimates and link abundance to habitat features. Sixteen aerial surveys were conducted from during spring, summer and fall (Ross 1982) (Table A4.1). Although additional aerial surveys for ducks were conducted by CWS (1981) and later for multiple species collaboratively with OMNR ( , 1994, 1995, 1997, 1998), only a few were spatially comprehensive (e.g., Ross 1992) and James Bay was more frequently surveyed than Hudson Bay. Although an intensive, regularly repeated program of coastal duck distribution surveys was and CWS in its Population Status of Migratory Game Birds in Canada series, it was never established. The surveys were conducted at an altitude of about 100 m above sea level from a variety of aircraft types (Bell and Hughes helicopters, DeHavilland Otter, Cessna 337, Piper Apache) with a variable number of observers (sometime 1, usually 2). Surveys from the 1990s onward were conducted in DeHavilland Twin Otters, Bell Helicopters or Eurocopter A-Star helicopters. The surveys followed the coastlines along the high tide line where duck concentrations were usually the highest, with occasional diversions to investigate distant flocks. All waterfowl were recorded to the limit of visibility (ca. 300 m on either side of the aircraft). These procedures were followed during later surveys, and most of the surveys had some continuity of P a g e 20

32 organizers and observers (Ken Ross, Don Fillman). For recording and estimation purposes, the coasts were divided into survey sectors (Figure 12) based primarily on major rivers and named, prominent features (e.g., Cape Henrietta Maria and Ekwan Point) and data were geo-referenced to sector (in later years, some observations were geo-referenced to GPS determined points). The surveys most similar to the summer surveys were those done in 1991 and 1992 in collaboration with the OMNR during its Hudson Bay Lowlands Habitat Based Wildlife Assessment study (Ross 1991, 1992). Data are housed in an MS Access database with GIS shapefiles for survey sectors, and are managed by CWS in Ottawa. Large concentrations of moulting scoters were detected during the earliest surveys and these became a special category of duck distribution surveys (Section 4.9). Staging goose surveys have their own history (Section 4.11). The results of the surveys were published by Ross (1982). Figure 12. Sectors used for recording migrant waterfowl during Canadian Wildlife Service Hudson Bay Lowlands Coastal Waterfowl Staging Surveys. 4.9 Moulting Scoter Survey The coastal waters of James Bay and Hudson Bay have been identified as key moulting locations for eastern populations of scoters, especially the black scoter, based on surveys in 1977 and 1991 (Ross 1983, 1994). Surveys of moulting scoters in James and Hudson Bay have been identified as having very high potential for monitoring population trends by the Sea Duck Joint Venture (SDJV 2007) and surveys P a g e 21

33 were conducted in 2006, 2009, 2012 and 2013 by CWS and OMNR with support from the Sea Duck Joint Venture. In most years, the survey area covered the coastal waters of James Bay from Cape Henrietta Maria, Ontario to the Ontario-Quebec border. In some years, the coastal waters of Hudson Bay from Cape Henrietta Maria to Churchill, Manitoba and/or the coastal waters of James Bay in Quebec have also been included (Figure 13). The aircraft type has varied among years depending on commercial availability. The aircraft is flown at approximately 150 m above sea level on days with good weather and visibility and preferably at high tide to ensure flocks are drifting or loafing offshore. A continuous zig-zag flight path was followed along the and within 10 km of the coast at an altitude amenable to detecting flocks on the water. Timing of the survey has been during the last week of July and the first week of August based on previous experience of the moulting period. The surveys are conducted by two observers in a small twin engine aircraft with high wings to allow photography of flocks. Each flock is photographed and geo-referenced with a GPS unit; in some years a simultaneous visual estimation of each flock was recorded. Photographs are post-processed and counting of birds in each flock is done manually or with the aid of image identification software. Analysis of the relationship between visual estimates and photographic counts indicated that photography should be used to the greatest extent possible. Results of the surveys were reported in papers (Ross 1983, 1984) and administrative reports for the SDJV (e.g., Ross and Abraham 2006; Ross et al. 2009; Badzinski et al. 2012). Data are housed in Excel spreadsheets with GIS shapefiles for flock locations and jpeg files of photographs and are managed by the Ontario Region, Canadian Wildlife Service in Ottawa. Figure 13. Locations of flocks of moulting scoters recorded in July-August surveys in James Bay and Hudson Bay. P a g e 22

34 4.10 Summer Goose Productivity Surveys on Hudson Bay and James Bay A survey designed to determine mid-summer productivity of geese was established in 1957, by H.C. Hanson (Illinois Natural History Survey) and H.G. Lumsden (Ontario Department of Lands and Forests) with support from various organizations. The survey was initially focused on estimating Canada goose reproductive success in mid-summer, in time for the annual US waterfowl harvest regulation setting process (Hanson et al. 1972). However, the opportunity and potential to provide estimates of snow geese in relatively newly occupied colonies of the southern Hudson Bay coast was recognized from the outset (1957). The states of the Mississippi Flyway Council, especially Illinois and Wisconsin, later became more involved in the Canada goose survey portion. The survey was conducted annually from 1957 through 1991 using a variety of aircraft types. After 1963, the coast was followed between Eskimo Point, N.W.T (now Arviat, Nunavut) to Moosonee, Ontario in most years, and sometimes to the Ontario- Quebec border. At least two observers were involved, one of whom was a photographer who took large format black and white aerial photographs of flightless adults and goslings in flocks on the ground. Negatives were developed in the field to ensure successful capture of images. These were printed to hard copy for analysis once crews returned to their home bases, and all individual geese in the images were aged and counted manually. Lesser snow goose colour morphs were also determined for both age groups. In the mid 1980s, large format black and white photography was replaced by commercially processed colour slides, which were projected and counted in a manner equivalent to the method used for prints. During the survey, one observer recorded the location of the photographs with reference to prominent landmarks (e.g., rivers, villages, headlands) and the photograph tallies were then linked to the location of the photographs by coastal segment from these field records. Data are housed in hard copy files, reports and Excel spreadsheets and are managed by the Wildlife Research and Monitoring Section, OMNR, in Peterborough Spring and Fall Staging Goose Distribution and Productivity Surveys on Hudson and James Bay The Hudson Bay Lowlands coasts have long been known to host large numbers of staging lesser snow geese from northern colonies, Cackling geese from northern breeding areas, Canada geese from Hudson Bay Lowlands (HBL) breeding populations, and brant from the Atlantic population (Stirrett 1954; Boyer and Cooch 1960; Thomas and Prevett 1982). A fall survey was developed in the early 1970s (Lumsden 1971; Curtis 1973c) based on a combination of ocular counts and photographs, which borrowed methods from the earlier summer productivity surveys (Hanson et al. 1972). The primary objective was the estimation of age ratios of the eastern arctic lesser snow goose population prior to the fall hunting season and it was conducted from 1971 to 1987, with partial surveys in 1998 and The breeding areas of the eastern arctic snow goose population are remote, and difficult and expensive to access. Consequently, the arrival of snow geese in the Hudson Bay Lowlands in September was at that time the first opportunity to efficiently capture information about the annual reproductive success of the population; it was also an opportunity to inform population management before any significant hunting season mortality occurred (Prevett et al. 1982). In addition to counting and photographing snow geese, counts were recorded for large waterfowl and conspicuous wildlife (Canada geese, Cackling geese, brant, tundra swans, sandhill cranes, raptors and polar bears). Various aircraft were used during the two decades of these surveys, depending on availability. A minimum of 3 observers plus a photographer conducted the survey in a high-winged airplane to allow observation and photography. The primary aircraft was a DeHavilland Otter flown at about 120 m altitude. One observer on either side of the aircraft visually counted/estimated all white morph geese in each flock and recorded the time of P a g e 23

35 flock observation and major landmarks (villages, rivers, headlands) called out by the photographer/navigator; communication by intercom ensured non-duplication of flock counts. The other observers recorded visual estimates of other species. The photographer in the co-pilot seat took pictures of representative flocks in each coastal sector, geo-referenced by time and landmarks. Postprocessing included manual counting of geese by age and colour morph, determining sector means and extrapolating visual counts using the colour ratios as for summer productivity surveys. Results were reported in publications (Thomas and Prevett 1982; Prevett et al. 1983) and a series of annual technical reports (e.g., Lumsden 1971; Curtis 1973c; Prevett 1975, 1976, 1979; Abraham 1982, 1983b). The most recent fall survey to be conducted was a modified version using a Twin Otter with two observers, and it covered only part of the Hudson Bay and James Bay coasts (Brook and Sharp 2009). A pilot spring survey was conducted in 1972 using the same methods (Curtis 1973b) but was not annually implemented. Surveys were conducted in spring 1994 (Abraham and Miyasaki 1994) and 1995 (OMNR, unpublished data) to compare results with the earlier work. As noted, Atlantic brant were counted, however, because they are usually slightly offshore due to their propensity to feed on eelgrass, and because they seem to take flight earlier and are more difficult to detect, a special pilot survey was conducted in 1972 to better determine Atlantic brant distribution and association with eelgrass in western James Bay (Curtis 1973a). This survey was not annually implemented, although counts of brant during the snow goose survey were continued. Data are currently in hard copy files, reports and some Excel spreadsheets, but are in the process of being entered into an MS Access database. The data are managed by the Wildlife Research and Monitoring Section, OMNR, in Peterborough. Brant were surveyed in spring 2001 and Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas The distribution and relative abundance of breeding birds in Ontario has been assessed over two five-year spans ( and ) and published in the Atlas of Breeding Birds of Ontario (Cadman et al. 1987, 2007). Both the original and the updated atlases were organized by a collaborative group of non-government and government organizations including the Ontario Federation of Naturalists (Ontario Nature), Long Point Bird Observatory (Bird Studies Canada), Canadian Wildlife Service, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Field Ornithologists. Data were collected primarily by thousands of volunteers assigned to repeatedly survey individual 10 km x 10 km Mercator grid squares throughout the five year period (Figure 14). Breeding status was categorized by behavioural characteristics of observed birds in three levels of breeding evidence (Confirmed, Probable and Possible). Additionally, point counts (5 minutes, 100 m unlimited distance, all birds seen or heard) were conducted by qualified volunteers in the second atlas period; in northern Ontario, hired atlas crews investigated remote areas to conduct point counts to obtain relative abundance measures. Waterfowl breeding evidence is relatively well-suited to atlas methods because of their conspicuousness. However, differences in timing of breeding between waterfowl (early) vs. many passerines and the relative lack of vocalization by males and cryptic behaviour of nesting females makes the point count methods and nest finding methods of atlassers, respectively, less applicable for waterfowl. Conspicuous and abundant species (e.g., Canada goose and mallard) may be reasonably tracked, but species with remote ranges and cavity nesters are not well-surveyed. Data are geo-referenced to 10 km x 10 km squares although some higher resolution information is available. Data are housed in an MS Access database with GIS shapefiles managed by Bird Studies Canada. Online access is available for download from P a g e 24

36 Figure 14. Survey effort undertaken during the Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas in northern Ontario (from Cadman et al. 2007) North American Breeding Bird Survey The Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) has been conducted in the US since 1965 and in Canada since The survey program is jointly coordinated by the Canadian Wildlife Service and the US Geological Survey, with operational assistance and Canadian coordination by Bird Studies Canada. The BBS program was designed to measure population trends over the long term on permanent road-side survey routes. The number of active routes is large (over 3000) and although distribution of routes is continent wide, it has limitations in the north beyond settled areas. Skilled volunteers and professional biologists conduct the survey. BBS routes are approximately 40 km long and consist of 50 three-minute stops, every 0.8 km. At each stop, volunteers record the total number of each bird species seen or heard within about 400 meters (Birds Studies Canada, In Ontario s boreal region, coverage is good in BCR 12 (the Boreal Hardwood Transition) where there are 17 routes in the defined area, but limited to the southern edge of BCR 8 (Boreal Softwood Shield) where there are 20 routes (Blancher et al. 2009). In general, similar to the atlas, waterfowl are not well-surveyed by the BBS because of differences in timing of breeding between waterfowl (early) vs. many passerines and because of the relative lack of vocalization by males and cryptic behaviour of nesting females. Conspicuous and abundant species (e.g., Canada goose and mallard) may be reasonably tracked. Blancher et al. (2009) P a g e 25

37 and Borger and Nudds (2014) used BBS data in analyses of population trends of waterfowl in portions of the boreal region and both noted significant trends in Canada geese. Data for the BBS are readily available online from: as are trend results and analyses (for Canada: ) Ontario Duck Banding Duck banding has occurred throughout Ontario for over six decades by volunteers and professional biologists and technicians. Both the Canadian Wildlife Service and Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources have coordinated banding programs, the former on federal lands (e.g., National Wildlife Areas) and the latter on both private and public lands. In the boreal, banding began in the 1950s with state, provincial and federal biologists visiting the Hudson Bay Lowlands areas that were known or thought to be major breeding and molting areas for waterfowl. MacFie (1955) describes banding of ducks on rivers and in coastal lakes between Niskibi River and Shell Brook near Fort Severn on the Hudson Bay coast. Bait banding stations were run on the James Bay coast annually from 1967 to 1987 (e.g., Bailey 1969b; Anonymous 1970; Stitt 1979, 1984). Sites included Big Piskwamish Point from , East Point from and Shipsands Island in Additionally, drive-trapping for moulting ducks was undertaken on the Hudson Bay coast in 1974 (Prevett, unpublished), 1988 (Davies 1989) and 1991 (Leafloor, unpublished). Bait banding stations were run near communities throughout the eastern boreal (BCR 8) in the 1960s and 1970s (Anonymous 1970; see also Appendix 5, Table A5.1). After a hiatus of about a decade, several of the bait stations were re-established in 1985 between Thunder Bay and Lake Timiskaming (including White River, Wawa, Chapleau, Gogama, Kapuskasing, Timmins, Cochrane, Kirkland Lake, and Temagami). The number of bait stations has varied and currently only two bait banding stations are in operation in the boreal region: Temagami and Thunder Bay. A USFWS airboat was used to band ducks between 1966 to 1970 at Porcupine Lake (Timmins) and Lillabelle Lake (Cochrane) (Anonymous 1970). In the early 1990s, an airboat banding program was established by OMNR in cooperation with the flyways and it has now largely replaced bait banding as the primary duck banding method and covers most of the area formerly covered by that network (Figure 15). The current banding program is a partnership of the OMNR, CWS, and the Atlantic and Mississippi Flyway Councils. Results of the annual banding are reported to the flyways in administrative reports. The data are contributed to the North American bird banding databases (CWS, USGS) through the standard routes (BandIt) and are housed there in a game bird database available online and formerly distributed annually via an FTP managed by the USGS. The original data are also housed in a database managed by the Wildlife Research and Monitoring Section, OMNR, in Peterborough. Analysis and reporting of recoveries, distribution, and harvest rates have been done by CWS and USGS and various academic researchers. P a g e 26

38 Figure 15. Locations of bait banding stations and airboat banding in boreal Ontario Hudson Bay Lowlands Goose Banding Canada geese and lesser snow geese have been banded on the Hudson Bay and James Bay coasts of Ontario since the 1950s. Canada goose banding was first conducted by the Mississippi Flyway Council and included the Hudson Bay coast (MacFie 1955; Vaught and Arthur 1965) and some parts of James Bay. Exploratory banding on Akimiski Island, Nunavat was supported by the Mississippi Flyway Council beginning in 1971 (Bailey 1971) but did not become annual until Similarly, exploratory Canada goose banding on the Ontario coasts of Hudson Bay and James Bay began in 1977 (Anonymous 1978) and became annual in Lesser snow geese were banded on the Hudson Bay coast near Cape Henrietta Maria annually from 1969 to 1979 (Bailey 1969a; Francis and Cooke 1992) and from 2001 to 2007 and sporadically in other locations and years. Lesser snow geese have been banded on Akimiski Island annually since 1995 except 2011 (e.g., Hagey et al. 2013a) and were banded occasionally before that (Abraham et al. 1999a). Ross s geese are incidentally banded when they occur in mixed flocks with snow geese (Abraham 2002). Banding is currently conducted by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources as part of the eastern arctic goose banding program. Canada goose banding takes place from the first week of July to the first week of August each year, using helicopters. All goose banding occurs in BCR 7 (Figure 16). Crews of 5-8 people are based in Moosonee for southern James Bay mainland banding, Attawapiskat for western James Bay mainland banding, Akimiski Island, and Peawanuck for P a g e 27

39 Hudson Bay coast banding. The banding takes place during the flightless period when reproductive age adults and non-productive subadults are moulting flight feathers and young goslings are approximately half grown. Approximately Canada geese are handled each year, including previously banded birds from Hudson Bay, James Bay and up to 35 other North American jurisdictions. Between 1000 and 1500 lesser snow geese are handled annually, including previously banded birds. Data collected are date and location of banding, age and sex of each newly banded bird, band number and sex of previously banded birds, and for a subsample of birds measurements are taken (e.g., total head length, culmen, tarsus, mass, wing feather moult score, etc.). Details can be found in a series of annual Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources technical reports (e.g., Hudson Bay Project 2012, and other annual reports between ; Abraham et al. 2002; Hagey et al. 2013a,b). Support for the banding program comes from the Mississippi, Atlantic and Central Flyways, including both USFWS and CWS, and the Arctic Goose Joint Venture. Ontario goose banding data are housed in Access databases and are managed by the Wildlife Research and Monitoring Section, OMNR, in Peterborough. These data are also contributed to the North American bird banding databases (CWS, USGS) through the standard routes (BandIt) and are housed there in a game bird database available online and formerly distributed annually on CD by the USGS. Analyses of recoveries and harvest rates and reporting have been done by OMNR, CWS, USGS and other flyway partners. They are included in annual discussions about regulations and in population management plans. A number of papers have been published from the goose banding program over the years by both government and academic researchers. P a g e 28

40 Figure 16. Hudson Bay and James Bay coastal areas where annual banding of Canada geese and lesser snow geese is conducted Other Population Surveys, Inventories and Research Programs In addition to the long-term systematic survey efforts, there have been several short term surveys and both short and long-term research programs with survey components built into them. This section lists and briefly describes the majority of these surveys in roughly chronological order Short term surveys and studies The Canadian Wildlife Service established ground-based plot surveys of breeding waterfowl in the 1970s in previously un-investigated areas. Dennis (1974) established 344 one-half square mile (64 ha) plots equally spaced throughout the road accessible areas of the Clay Belt and Precambrian Shield area of northeastern Ontario (from Lake Nipissing in the southeast to Hornepayne in the northwest). The plots were surveyed in Another similar ground survey was conducted in 1979 in northwestern P a g e 29

41 Ontario in an area bounded by the Rainy River in the south and 50 o 45 N in the north, 90 o W in the east and the Manitoba border in the west (an area within BCR 12). Again, plots (64 ha in size) were randomly selected but then locations were modified for access by roads (Dennis and North 1984). Methods for both northern ground surveys were based on the southern Ontario plot surveys which continue to this day. The northern ground surveys were not continued. The nesting ecology of common goldeneye was studied at Elk Lake, Long Lake and in the Cochrane area in the 1970s (Lumsden et al. 1977), and nesting and brood ecology of common goldeneye was studied in connection with acidification studies (see below) near Sudbury (Mallory et al. 1993; Wayland and McNicol 1994). Studies of snow goose and Canada goose migration ecology, foraging ecology, energetics and to a limited extent breeding ecology were conducted in northwestern James Bay and near Cape Henrietta Maria between 1978 and A series of published papers was produced (Prevett et al. 1979, 1985; Wypkema and Ankney 1979; Thomas 1990). Snow goose nesting ecology was studied on Akimiski Island from and occasionally since then (Hudson Bay Project 2012 and previous annual reports). Lumsden (1984a) reported on an aerial survey of tundra swan conducted in 1984 in the eastern portion of the Hudson Bay Lowlands, primarily in the tundra triangle east of the Sutton River to Cape Henrietta Maria. The survey used an Otter aircraft and the King distance estimation method in This is the only quantitative survey of tundra swans in Ontario breeding range. A cooperative observational survey of spring and fall migration timing of Canada geese and snow geese was conducted from Observations of migration chronology were made weekly by staff in OMNR district offices and by selected naturalist groups and volunteers (Abraham and Muldal 1986; Davies 1988). The summary migration chronology data were used in various papers (e.g., Tacha et al. 1991; Abraham et al. 1999b). A two-year survey was conducted in 1990 and 1991 by the OMNR to establish habitat associations of breeding birds and other wildlife at five sites along the James Bay Hudson Bay coasts (Moosonee, Longridge Point, Ekwan Point, Brant River and Shagamu River). Crews visited each site three times per year during migration and nesting periods to record birds and habitat associations, and the status of birds was reported by Wilson and McRae (1993). Black duck breeding ecology was studied in central Ontario by Merendino and Ankney (1994), including part of the area defined here as boreal, and an aerial survey component was included (Merendino et al. 2000). The Marsh Monitoring Program coordinated by Bird Studies Canada has few assessment sites in the boreal region as defined in this report, however, it has the potential to contribute to monitoring for some waterfowl species (Tozer 2013) Canada Goose Nesting Ecology in the Hudson Bay Lowlands Basic studies of Canada goose nesting ecology have been conducted in the Hudson Bay Lowlands since the 1960s. Raveling and Lumsden (1977) reported on a pioneering study of the breeding ecology of the interior subspecies of Canada goose. The study took place from near Kinoje Lake, located in the interior of the James Bay Lowlands. At the time of the study, the geese were considered to be part of the Mississippi Valley Population but later banding and telemetry work indicated that this part of the Lowlands supported birds that were part of the mainland component of the Southern James Bay Population. Bruggink et al. (1994) report on the first Hudson Bay coast nesting studies of the Mississippi Valley Population of Canada geese; these studies were conducted from just east of the P a g e 30

42 Winisk River mouth. The establishment of these studies followed several years of telemetry work on the distribution of nesting birds and their migration and wintering ground affinities (Bartelt et al. 1984; Tacha et al. 1988, 1991). Leafloor et al. (1996, 2000) reported on the nesting ecology program established on Akimiski Island which began monitoring the Southern James Bay Population in 1993 and continues annually to the present; similar ground studies of the Mississippi Valley Population were conducted in Polar Bear Provincial Park at Burntpoint Creek in and from 2007 to the present (Bennett et al. 2013) CWS Long Range Transport of Acid Precipitation (LRTAP) Studies Concerns about degradation of aquatic ecosystems by acid precipitation deposition led the Canadian Wildlife Service to develop a program to research and monitor the effects on waterfowl in northeastern and central Ontario (McNicol et al. 1987) spanning portions of BCR 8 and 12. The studies included a series of waterfowl breeding pair and brood surveys along the north shore of Lake Huron from Sault Ste Marie to southeast of Sudbury. Surveys were flown in 2 km x 2 km plots laid out in the southwest corner of each 100 km x 100 km UTM block and then every 20 km to the north and east yielding 25 plots per block. The surveys were conducted in 1980, 1981, 1983, , and ((McNicol et al. 1995b, LRTAP database). Survey methods followed Ross (1985b). A number of reports and papers were published describing information about both the waterfowl populations and aspects of their habitat and its use, including invertebrates and other aquatic biota, brood ecology, nest site selection, fish, and water chemistry (e.g., Bendell and McNicol 1987a, 1987b; McNicol et al. 1987; McNicol and Wayland 1992; Wayland and McNicol 1994). A synthesis of the information was used to create a model (WARMS) of the effects of acid precipitation on waterfowl and their habitats (McNicol et al. 1995a) and a summary of the science assessment on acid rain effects on aquatic chemistry and biology, including waterfowl foods, breeding pairs and productivity was published in 2004 (Jeffries et al. 2004) Christmas Bird Counts Waterfowl do not spend the winter in most of boreal Ontario, but stragglers do occur and these are indexed by Christmas Bird Counts an annual North America-wide volunteer based survey of all species present during a pre-set period in early winter. The Christmas Bird Count was initiated in 1900 and is the oldest bird survey in North America. A single day between December 14 and January 5 is chosen for a count of at least 8 hours within a 24 km circle which is fixed for long term continuity. Results are compiled and sent to a central data centre, currently through an on-line data entry program. Bird Studies Canada coordinates the survey in Canada. Data are regularly accessed for analysis (e.g., NABCI Canada 2012). In the boreal region as defined here, there are counts at Atikokan, Blind River, Dryden, Eagle River, Ear Falls, Fort Frances, Haileybury, Hearst, Ignace, Iroquois Falls, Kenora, Kirkland Lake, Marathon, Mashkinonje-North Monetville, Massey, Moose River Estuary, Mountain Chutes, Nipigon-Red Rock, Red Lake, Sudbury, Thunder Bay, Timmins, and Wawa. Data are available at: Trumpeter Swan Surveys A continental survey of trumpeter swans has been conducted approximately every 5 years since 1968 (Groves 2012). The focus is on breeding range surveys and estimation of total population size. In Ontario, volunteers with help from the OMNR have conducted the survey in the boreal parts of the P a g e 31

43 species range in northwestern Ontario (parts of BCR 12 and 8) (Lumsden et al. 2012). The next survey is planned for 2015 with CWS playing a larger role Habitat Surveys Spring Snow Surveys A survey of snow conditions in early spring, concurrent with arrival of Canada geese in the Hudson Bay Lowlands, was conducted for a period of years in the early 1980s (e.g., Lumsden 1982). These were designed to develop information that would allow prediction of the relationship between snow melt and annual reproduction Coastal habitat assessment Alteration of coastal marshes by a burgeoning population of lesser snow geese in the 1980s-1990s was a major conservation issue (Batt 1997). As part of the Hudson Bay Project research program, coastal habitat was assessed sporadically between 1993 and Measurements of stand condition, above ground biomass at peak growth, and percent cover of land by vegetation, bare sediments and other land cover types including goose-damaged areas were made at over 150 sites along the James Bay and Hudson Bay coasts in , , and (see Hudson Bay Project annual progress reports , PDFs available from K. Abraham) Harvest Surveys Surveys of waterfowl harvest have been undertaken on a periodic basis since the 1950s. Harvest surveys were undertaken in the Hudson Bay Lowlands for the purpose of establishing domestic subsistence harvest (e.g., Hanson and Currie 1957) as well as harvest at goose hunt camps catering to non-aboriginal hunters. Hunter check stations were also conducted at various locations, most notably the Moose River estuary (McCall and Prevett 1981). Fewer harvest surveys were conducted in the interior of the boreal region (Ross 1985a). The Canadian Wildlife Service conducts an annual mail survey and parts collection survey for licensed hunters, but the boreal area has a relatively small sample size. Results of the HBL surveys were published in journals (Prevett et al. 1983; Berkes et al. 1994, 1995) and reported in Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources technical reports (e.g., Prevett 1977; Thompson and Hutchison 1987). CWS harvest surveys were published in a series of Canadian Wildlife Service Progress Notes and in other technical publications (e.g., Boyd and Finney 1978). See also: 5 SPECIES ACCOUNTS This section provides information on the breeding and migration distribution, general abundance and recent status and trends of individual waterfowl species in the boreal region of Ontario. The intent is to present an overview of distribution, relative abundance and trends for each species from both a breeding and non-breeding perspective. The intent is not to include an exhaustive list of available information or to reprise the comprehensive accounts of breeding evidence and changes in relative abundance written for the most recent Ontario breeding bird atlas (Cadman et al. 2007). There is also no P a g e 32

44 detailed discussion of habitat requirements or breeding biology as these are well covered in the species accounts in a book on habitat requirements and status of Ontario birds (Sandilands 2005). Key resources for these accounts include the two Atlases of Breeding Birds of Ontario (Cadman et al. 1987, 2007), (Sandilands 2005), a paper on population trends of Ontario s forest birds by Blancher et al. (2009) and the associated database (Blancher et al. unpublished), a national review of waterfowl status and trends by Fast et al. (2011), and USFWS and CWS Waterfowl Status reports issued annually (e.g., CWS 2013, USFWS 2014). Breeding pair densities resulting from the various surveys in the earlier section of this report were gleaned from published and unpublished papers, reports and files. These include Dennis (1974) for the Clay Belt and northeastern Shield in 1973, Dennis and North (1984) for the northwest in 1979, Boyd (1984) for the northwest from , Ross (1987) for the eastern Shield and Clay Belt in , Ross (1987) and (Ross and Fillman 1990) for northern Ontario in , CWS (unpublished data) for the Hudson Bay Lowlands in (see Appendix 6), Ross et al. (2002) for the Clay Belt in , and Ross (2004) for the Clay Belt and eastern Shield from 1990 to The assessment derived from the sources above for each species is as specific to the boreal region of Ontario (as defined in this report) as possible without new analyses. Waterfowl population estimates based on these survey results are presented in Table 3 and Table 4 and tables in Appendix 3. Table 3. Estimated number of breeding pairs of waterfowl in the two largest BCRs in Ontario s boreal region (unless otherwise indicated, source is Canadian Wildlife Service data, with estimates prepared by Ken Ross, October 1999, see Appendix 6 for description of the estimation methods). Species BCR 7 BCR 8 Total Source Snow Goose ca 150,000 0 ca 150,000 Abraham 2007e Ross's Goose < <1000 Abraham 2007d Cackling Goose <5 0 <5 Abraham 2007a Canada Goose 207,000 Brook and Hughes 2014a,b Trumpeter Swan <5 <5 <10 Lumsden et al Tundra Swan < <1000 Abraham 2007f Wood Duck Gadwall American Wigeon American Black Duck Mallard Blue-winged Teal Northern Shoveler 2100 P 2100 Northern Pintail Green-winged Teal Canvasback Redhead Ring-necked Duck Greater Scaup P 0? Lesser Scaup King Eider NA 0 0 Cadman et al Common Eider P 0 0 P a g e 33

45 Species BCR 7 BCR 8 Total Source Surf Scoter White-winged Scoter Black Scoter Long-tailed Duck P 0 0 Bufflehead Common Goldeneye Hooded Merganser Common Merganser Red-breasted Merganser P = Present as breeder but no estimate available. In the case of scaup, greater scaup in the Hudson Bay Lowlands is included in the totals for lesser scaup. The trend status at the beginning of each account and in Table 4 is based largely on the database used by Blancher et al. (unpublished) (see also Blancher et al but not all waterfowl species are covered in that source). In brief, the method looked at data from ten bird monitoring surveys that occurred in BCRs 7, 8 and 12 (only species with >30% of their Ontario population in BCRs 8 and 12 are reported in the paper, but BCR 7 is included in the database). Six of the ten surveys included information on waterfowl (the two Ontario atlases of breeding birds, the North American breeding birds survey, the Canadian Migration Monitoring Network, the Forest Bird Monitoring Program, the Black Duck Joint Venture waterfowl surveys, and the Southern Ontario Waterfowl Plot Survey (SOWPS); note that the SOWP has plots in BCR 12 only, and none of them are in the area defined as the boreal region for this report). Trend assessment of breeding species was made for four time frames: recent (<10 years), 20 years, long term (>20 years), and current versus past in 5-year periods. Trend categories defined by Blancher et al. (2009) were the percentage change over defined periods: large decrease, moderate decrease, stable, moderate increase, large increase). See Blancher et al. (2009) for details and Table 4 for a summary of trend by BCR. Trend assessment and other information for non-breeding species is based on other sources (e.g., USFWS and CWS status reports, Ontario Bird Records Committee reports, Sandilands (2005), and unpublished OMNR and CWS surveys and data for rare and uncommon species). P a g e 34

46 Table 4. Population trend assessment for breeding waterfowl for three boreal Bird Conservation Regions in Ontario s boreal region based on comparison of survey data obtained from six surveys between 1960 and 2005 (source: Blancher et al., unpublished database, created by Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Canadian Wildlife Service; see Blancher et al. (2009) for methods). Species Taiga Shield and Hudson Plains (BCR7) Boreal Softwood Shield (BCR 8) Snow Goose Large Increase Out of Range Out of Range Ross's Goose Large Increase Out of Range Out of Range Cackling Goose NA Out of Range Out of Range Boreal Hardwood Transition (BCR 12) Canada Goose Moderate Increase Large Increase Large Increase Trumpeter Swan NA NA Large Increase Tundra Swan Moderate Increase Out of Range Out of Range Wood Duck NA Large Increase Moderate Increase Gadwall NA NA Large Increase American Wigeon Large Decline Moderate Decline Moderate Increase American Black Stable Stable Large Decline Duck Mallard Stable Moderate Increase Moderate Increase Blue-winged Teal Large Decline Large Decline Large Decline Northern Shoveler Moderate Increase Large Increase Stable Northern Pintail Stable NA Large Decline Green-winged Moderate Decline Stable Moderate Decline Teal Canvasback Out of Range Out of Range Out of Range Redhead Out of Range Out of Range Out of Range Ring-necked Duck Large Increase Moderate Increase Moderate Increase Greater Scaup Stable Out of Range Out of Range Lesser Scaup Moderate Increase Stable Moderate Increase King Eider NA Out of Range Out of Range Common Eider Moderate Decline Out of Range Out of Range Surf Scoter NA Out of Range Out of Range White-winged NA NA Out of Range Scoter Black Scoter NA Out of Range Out of Range Long-tailed Duck Stable Out of Range Out of Range P a g e 35

47 Species Taiga Shield and Hudson Plains (BCR7) Boreal Softwood Shield (BCR 8) Boreal Hardwood Transition (BCR 12) Bufflehead Large Increase Large Increase Moderate Increase Common Stable Stable Moderate Increase Goldeneye Hooded Large Increase Moderate Increase Moderate Increase Merganser Common Stable Stable Stable Merganser Red-breasted Moderate Decline Stable Stable Merganser Ruddy Duck NA NA NA NA = no or insufficient data available for trend analysis 5.1 Greater White-fronted Goose Status: Not a breeder. Rare migrant. Increasing. There are no records of the greater white-fronted goose as a breeding species in Ontario. The species is rare in boreal Ontario, usually appearing only with other goose species in migration. Occasional birds are seen in the Hudson Bay Lowlands, and historically a few were reported to the Moose River hunter check stations (OMNR, unpublished data). Although primarily a bird of central and western North America, in the last two decades the greater white-fronted goose has been increasingly observed in Ontario (Cranford 2012), as has been the case in other parts of eastern North America. The mid-continent population of this species has grown considerably (CWS 2013) and some eastward expansion of wintering and spring migration has occurred. 5.2 Snow Goose Status: Locally common breeder (abundant/common in a few discrete colonies). Abundant migrant. Large increase (since 1970s), recently stable. There are three snow goose breeding colonies in the defined region, all of the lesser snow goose subspecies: (1) the West Pen Island colony; (2) the Cape Henrietta Maria colony; and (3) the Akimiski Island colony (Abraham et al. 1998; Kerbes et al. 2006; Abraham 2007e). Colony size has been tracked since the 1950s when the first colony was documented (Lumsden 1957; Kerbes 1975; Angehrn 1979; Abraham et al. 1999a, Hudson Bay Project 2012). Current estimates for the colonies are approximately 8500 pairs at West Pen Island, 140,000 pairs at Cape Henrietta Maria, and 2300 pairs at Akimiski Island (OMNR, unpublished data). Other breeding locations are scattered along the coast in suitable habitats, consisting mostly of individual pairs and small groups of pairs (<200) (Hanson et al. 1972; Abraham 2007e; Hudson Bay Project, unpublished data). Nest/pair densities vary greatly from a few per km 2 to over 2300 birds per km 2 (Kerbes et al. 2006). The total number of breeding birds grew by 300% from the P a g e 36

48 1970s to the mid 1990s (Kerbes et al. 2006), concurrent with a continent-wide increase (Abraham et al. 1996; Ankney 1996; Abraham and Jefferies 1997), but has changed little since the mid 1990s, decreasing slightly (Hudson Bay Project 2012). The Hudson Bay Lowlands historically has been highly important to migrating and staging birds in both spring and fall (Curtis 1973b, 1973c; Thomas and Prevett 1982, see Section 4.11). Spring migration connected wintering areas in the Missouri and Mississippi River valleys and intermediate staging areas in the northern US prairies and southern Manitoba to final pre-breeding staging areas on the Hudson Bay and James Bay coasts via a passage across the interior of the boreal region of northwestern Ontario (Cooch 1955; Blokpoel 1974; Gauthier et al. 1976). Some snow geese also migrated in spring from wintering areas in Louisiana and Virginia on more easterly routes across the boreal region to pre-breeding staging areas on James Bay (Bellrose 1980) and then northward to Baffin Island. In fall, birds from the eastern arctic colonies on western Hudson Bay and Southampton Island made the southern Hudson Bay coast of Ontario their major fall staging area before departure for the northern prairies, while birds from Baffin Island made James Bay and especially the extreme southern reaches of James Bay their major fall staging area before migration to Louisiana and Virginia (Stirrett 1954; Cooch 1955). These patterns held from the 1940s to the early 1990s (Prevett et al. 1982; OMNR unpublished data). Currently, lesser snow geese are still relatively abundant in spring and fall in the northern part of James Bay and along the southern Hudson Bay coast of Ontario (Abraham and Miyasaki 1994; OMNR unpublished data) but not in southern James Bay (Brook and Sharp 2009); the fall migration tradition in southern James Bay has been all but extinguished since the early 1990s (Wesley 1993). 5.3 Ross s Goose Status: Uncommon breeder. Uncommon migrant. Large increase. The breeding range of Ross s goose is expanding in eastern North America (Alisauskas 2001; Jonsson et al. 2013; Kerbes et al. 2013) as the mid-continent population grows (Kerbes et al. 2013). The species now nests almost everywhere that the lesser snow goose nests, usually in mixed colonies including those in Ontario (Abraham 2007d; Coady et al. 2007). In the Hudson Bay Lowlands, the number of Ross s geese is not well quantified because they are difficult to distinguish from white morph lesser snow geese in aerial surveys and few ground surveys have been conducted. Flightless goslings captured in 1975 at Cape Henrietta Maria were the first evidence of breeding in Ontario (Prevett and Johnson 1977). The current estimate is several hundred breeding pairs based on the capture of flightless goslings during banding operations (Abraham 2002, 2007d). They occur mostly at the large lesser snow goose colony at Cape Henrietta Maria, and one large estuarine island may support the most pairs (OMNR, unpublished data). No nest density information is available. The species presumably also nests at the West Pen Island lesser snow goose colony but no evidence exists, and although documented on Akimiski Island, the Ross s goose is rare there (OMNR, unpublished data). The eastward expansion of Ross s geese generally has accompanied the growth of the species population in the mid-continent of North America (Moser 2001; Jonsson et al. 2013), and it now occurs regularly in small numbers as a migrant throughout the province (Ontario Bird Records Committee annual reports). Its migration routes through the boreal region of Ontario undoubtedly mimic those of the lesser snow goose. Overall, the Ross s goose is a relatively uncommon species in boreal Ontario. It comprised about 3% of the combined lesser snow goose/ross s goose migrants harvested by one family at Winisk in spring 1983 (Abraham 1983a) and less than 1% of combined captures of flightless geese at Cape Henrietta Maria from (Abraham 2007d). P a g e 37

49 5.4 Brant Status: Not a breeder. Common migrant. Stable. Brant (of the hrota subspecies/atlantic population) have been recorded breeding once in boreal Ontario, but only as an anomaly; there have been birds reported in summer as moulters, but there is no evidence that the species has ever occurred as a breeder on the Hudson Bay coast of Ontario (Lumsden 1987a). Brant traverse the eastern portion of Ontario s boreal region, roughly paralleling the Ontario- Quebec border in northeastern Ontario, on migration to and from the US Atlantic coast wintering areas (Massachusetts to North Carolina). Brant are observed regularly during brief stopovers on Lake Temiskaming near New Liskeard (B. Murphy, pers. comm., OMNR, unpublished data), and they are also known to follow major rivers that flow into southern James Bay (Curtis 1973a). Their route takes them to the James Bay coastal zone, which is a critical spring and fall migration area (Lewis 1937; Thomas and Prevett 1982). There is a concern among Quebec Cree communities that hydroelectricity developments in eastern James Bay are having negative effects on Atlantic brant by way of impacts on eelgrass beds through changes in river outflows that alter salinities (Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans 2008). It is reported that few brant are now found on eastern James Bay north of Rupert Bay (Castelli et al. 2010); a high proportion (about 90%) of the Atlantic brant population stages on western James Bay salt-marshes for up to a month from mid-may to mid-june in preparation for the final leg of migration to breeding areas in the Foxe Basin and further north (Thomas and Prevett 1982; OMNR, unpublished data). The course of migration is reversed in autumn, with some individuals reaching the southern Hudson Bay coast between Brant River and Cape Henrietta Maria, perhaps coming from the west, as early as the third week of August (OMNR, unpublished data). This area is a consistent fall staging area and again, the western James Bay coast between Ekwan Point and along the north shore of Akimiski Island (near Attawapiskat), and near North Point are the areas of greatest abundance (Curtis 1973a; Castelli et al. 2010). Numbers currently staging in boreal Ontario are not well quantified, but in a minimum of were counted in a spring survey (OMNR and CWS, unpublished data). Brant were counted on annual or special fall surveys in the 1970s and 1980s (e.g., Prevett 1975, 1979; Abraham 1982, 1983b) and 45,000-50,000 were estimated on a single day in the fall of 1972 (Curtis 1973a). At that time, this would have represented over 70% of the population. No counts have taken place since the late 1980s and thus no trend analysis is possible. The continental population of Atlantic brant is currently stable ( period) at about 140,000 birds (USFWS 2014). There has been no information on eelgrass along the Ontario coast since the boat surveys of Smith (1943, 1944) and the preliminary aerial surveys conducted by the Canadian Wildlife Service in the early 1970s (Curtis 1973a). 5.5 Cackling Goose Status: Rare breeder. Common migrant. Increasing. Formerly considered a small subspecies of the Canada goose (Bellrose 1980), the cackling goose is now recognized as a species (Banks et al. 2003). As a summer resident it is rare, with fewer than 15 records of moulting birds among over 250,000 Canada geese handled in banding drives on the Hudson Bay and James Bay coast since the early 1970s, indicating that breeding must be rare. Indeed, although easy to overlook, the cackling goose has been recorded as a breeder in Ontario only once based on the capture of a pair with flightless young near Cape Henrietta Maria (Abraham 2007a). However, it is a P a g e 38

50 relatively abundant spring and fall migrant in the Hudson Bay Lowlands (Thomas and Prevett 1982) and, over the last 20 years as its mid-continent population has increased, it has also become a common migrant through the boreal region of northwestern Ontario in both spring and fall. Its spring migration corridor takes it through northwestern Ontario, notably west of Lake Superior where a few thousand individuals stage briefly in the Slate River valley (D. Bascello, pers. comm.). It travels across the boreal on the way from wintering areas in the southern Mississippi River Valley to staging areas on the western James Bay coast between Albany River and Hook Point and along the Hudson Bay coast, especially between Black Currant Creek and Winisk River (Prevett 1979). Banding and morphological data indicate that Ontario cackling geese are associated with breeding areas on western Baffin Island and possibly Southampton Island (Abraham 1997, 2005). These breeding areas are assigned to the Tall Grass Prairie Population. Fall aerial surveys in the 1970s and 1980s provide the best data on relative abundance (Prevett 1975, 1979); counts of nearly 50,000 were recorded, representing approximately 25% of the Tall Grass Prairie population at that time. Like other mid-continent wintering arctic-nesting geese, this population has grown by over 300% in the past years (CWS 2013, USFWS 2014). 5.6 Canada Goose Status: Common breeder. Common migrant. Stable. The Hudson Bay Lowlands are highly important to Canada geese in eastern North America. Birds comprising two managed populations (the Mississippi Valley Population (MVP) and the Southern James Bay Population (SJBP)) breed primarily in the Hudson Bay Lowlands of Ontario and Akimiski Island, Nunavut. Breeding pair densities are highly variable, with the most dense occurring in the coastal areas where they can occur semi-colonially ( nests per 100 km 2 on the Hudson Bay coast near Winisk, Bruggink et al. 1994; nests per 100 km 2 on the north shore of Akimiski Island, Leafloor et al. 2000; nests per 100 km 2 on the Hudson Bay coast near Burntpoint Creek, Bennett et al. 2013). Much lower densities (6-200 pairs per 100 km 2 ) are characteristic of the more interior fen and bog complexes (Raveling and Lumsden 1977, Abraham et al. 2008). The number of breeding geese is estimated annually and the long term ( ) average estimate is 352,000 breeding adults in the MVP (Brook and Hughes 2014a) and 75,600 breeding adults in the SJBP (Brook and Hughes 2014b). Based on the annual spring surveys (Section 4.6), the 25 year trend in population size of the MVP is negative, but not significantly so (Brook and Luukkonen 2010; Brook and Hughes 2014a) and the 25 year trend of the SJBP population is stable but variable within the geographic range; there is a long term decline on Akimiski Island and a long term increase on the mainland of James Bay in Ontario (Brook and Hughes 2014b). Non-breeding geese from these two populations may comprise another 30% but quantification is difficult and best determined from modelling of survival and reproduction. It is thought that many or most of these non-breeders spend the period from late May to the middle or end of August on the Hudson Bay and James Bay coasts, but an unknown number undertake moult-migrations to northern Hudson Bay (J. Caswell, pers. comm.). Locally within the Lowlands (specifically the Moose Factory-Moosonee area), aboriginal knowledge indicates a decline in Canada geese over the period , which may in part be due to changes in migration patterns (Robus 2012) but also captures a longer period that the spring survey; other information from winter surveys does agree that the SJBP declined in the 1980s (Leafloor et al. 1996). Canada geese from temperate breeding populations throughout central and eastern North America, including southern Ontario (also known as temperate-nesting or giant Canada geese) migrate to and through Ontario s boreal region to undertake a complete flight feather moult each summer P a g e 39

51 (Abraham et al. 1999b; Luukkonen et al. 2008) in the Hudson Bay Lowlands and further north. The number of Canada geese from temperate-nesting populations that spend the wing moult period on the coast of the Hudson Bay Lowlands is likely over 100,000 in total; however, this has not been quantified by comprehensive surveys. Locations with high concentrations include Cape Henrietta Maria and the coast and islands of western and southern James Bay from Albany to Hannah Bay, including the southeast coast of Akimiski Island and Charlton Island. In the Shield portion of the boreal region, nesting by Canada geese has increased in the past 30 years (Lumsden 1987b; Hughes and Abraham 2007). Highest densities in this region occur in the northwest adjacent to Manitoba and in urban and rural agricultural areas, and are largely the result of reintroductions and natural expansion of reintroduced populations. Densities in other parts of the range are 1 to 3.5 pairs per km 2 in the Clay Belt (Ross et al. 2002) and 1 to 5 pairs per km 2 over a larger area of northeastern Ontario (Ross 2004). There are also moult migrant geese from temperate-nesting populations in the US that spend summers in urban areas such as Thunder Bay and Sudbury. 5.7 Mute Swan Status: Not a breeder. Vagrant. The non-native mute swan has been observed in the Hudson Bay Lowlands on rare occasions (Abraham and Ross 2005). It has also been observed occasionally in the Shield portion of the boreal region (Richards 2008) but does not breed except in semi-captivity (Sandilands 2005). These northern mute swans are presumed to be vagrants or possible moult migrants from southern populations. In North America, the mute swan is not considered to be very mobile, i.e., not a regular migrant, rather they are relatively sedentary. Thus these observations which pre-suppose long distance movements are a curiosity. Although the provincial population of mute swan is increasing (Petrie and Francis 2003; Sandilands 2005, Meyer et al. 2012), it is unlikely to become established as a breeding species in boreal Ontario despite potentially highly suitable coastal marsh habitats in the Lowlands. It would not be able to overwinter as it does in its lower Great Lakes range. 5.8 Trumpeter Swan Status: Uncommon breeder. Uncommon migrant. Increase. Since the active re-introduction of the trumpeter swan began in the late 1970s in the midwestern United States and in earnest in 1982 in southern Ontario, this species has begun to expand its breeding range into the boreal region (Lumsden 2007). The largest cluster is in northwestern Ontario in the Kenora District, from Rainy River northward. In 2010, there was a minimum of 279 birds (adults and cygnets) in this group (Lumsden et al. 2012). An exceptional observation and photographic record of a brood was made in the Hudson Bay Lowlands near Little Sachigo Lake in 2005 during the second breeding bird atlas. To date, fewer than 5 records have been reported in the eastern boreal, such as one brood near Wabatongushi Lake northwest of Chapleau (Lumsden et al. 2012) and lone individuals in the Little Claybelt and James Bay. The northwestern population is the result of natural expansion from reintroduced populations in Minnesota and Wisconsin, and it is increasing and considered selfsustaining; the eastern wanderers are likely derived from the south-central Ontario introductions P a g e 40

52 (Lumsden et al. 2012). The historical occurrence of the trumpeter swan in the Hudson Bay Lowlands was described by Lumsden (1984b) based on indirect evidence. It is anticipated that there will be continued expansion of the species in both the Shield and the Lowlands in the years to come. 5.9 Tundra Swan Status: Uncommon breeder. Uncommon migrant. Moderate Increase. The tundra swan is the only well-established breeding species of swan in Ontario s boreal region and it is confined to the Hudson Bay Lowlands. Extirpated during the fur trade era, the first modern record of breeding was in 1973 when a single brood was observed (Lumsden 1975). Surveys in 1984 yielded an estimate of breeding pairs (Lumsden 1984a). Since then, the number has continued to increase and it is likely there are now over two hundred breeding pairs in the Ontario population (Abraham 2007f) along with an equal or greater number of sub-adult pre-breeders (they mature at >3 years). The species currently nests all along the Hudson Bay coast with one area of concentration occurring from the Sutton River east to Cape Henrietta Maria where it occupies a wedge of rich tundra habitat. West of the Winisk River to Manitoba, it rarely nests more than 5 km from the coast (Lumsden 1987c; Abraham 2007f). In fall, concentrations of post-breeding birds that include families of fledged young occur at several estuaries including those at the Severn, Winisk and Sutton Rivers (Prevett 1979; Abraham 1983b; OMNR, unpublished data). In 1983, over 600 birds were tallied on the fall survey, including young of the year (a subsample in which all birds could be aged contained 40 cygnets and 143 adults, or 22% young). The trend from 1975 to 1983 was a strong increase. No recent surveys have been conducted, although the concentrations still occur at the same places (M. Obbard, pers. comm.). If the 1983 total represented only Ontario breeding stock (i.e., if no Manitoba or Nunavut migrants were involved), then the total population of tundra swans of Ontario origin may now be nearing These birds comprise the southernmost breeding population of the species in Canada and they belong to the eastern population of tundra swans that winters primarily on the Atlantic coast of the United States between Maryland and North Carolina. The eastern population consists of about 100,000 individuals (USFWS 2014) and has moderately increased over the past 30 years. Although the migration route through the boreal is not well known, the birds are observed to travel through the Little Clay Belt and stage along the southwestern James Bay coast in spring (OMNR, unpublished data) Wood Duck Status: Uncommon breeder. Uncommon migrant. Increasing. The wood duck is primarily a bird of southern forests and is found more in the southern reaches and transitional forests of the Ontario Shield than further north in the Shield. It is essentially absent from the Hudson Bay Lowlands, but there are historical records from Moosonee where nest boxes have been erected. Its history in the province and its continuing expansion over the past several decades is summarized by Sandilands (2005). It has never been common in the boreal (Zimmerling 2007a). Indicated pair densities ranged from 0.5 to 2.88 pairs per 100 km 2 with a mean of 1.86 pairs per 100 km 2 in the Clay Belt from ; earlier estimates were about half that, which might reflect an increasing population trend. In the Shield region south of the Clay Belt, densities were higher and ranged from 6.0 to 19.7 pairs per 100 km 2, increasing in a southeasterly direction from Sudbury. P a g e 41

53 Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas and BBS trends concur with the increases noted in the aerial surveys; the atlas showed a more than 100% increase in probability of observation between and in the northern Shield, and the BBS showed a 4% annual increase. The wood duck will likely remain uncommon and patchily distributed in the boreal, preferring habitat characterized by nutrient rich clay substrates and higher productivity wetlands (such as new beaver-created ponds) Gadwall Status: Rare breeder. Uncommon migrant. Stable or increasing. The gadwall population in Ontario has grown and the species has concurrently expanded its breeding range over the last 30 years (Sandilands 2005; Curry 2007). It appears to have affinities for settled areas or at least enriched and human altered habitats such as sewage lagoons, artificial islands and shallow wetlands, although this may be an artifact of search effort. The gadwall is and apparently always has been rare in the boreal (Dennis and North 1985), and it is rare in aerial surveys that have been conducted in the eastern boreal (Ross 2004). Observations during the breeding bird atlas period were primarily associated with human communities; exceptions occurred in marshes along the James Bay coast (Curry 2007). In the Ontario Shield, atlas data showed a positive trend in probability of observation, and gadwall appear to be increasing from the south into the southern boreal. In the Hudson Bay Lowlands the species is rare but was observed in both atlases without any change in probability of observation and a few hundred have been observed in moulting flocks near the Pen Islands (R. Brook, pers. comm.) American Wigeon Status: Uncommon breeder. Common migrant. Stable or decreasing. The American wigeon is widely distributed at low densities in the boreal region. It is more common in the Hudson Bay Lowlands and the Clay Belt than in the Ontario Shield (Gendron 2007a). In the Clay Belt, it has somewhat specialized breeding habitat requirements, being associated with rich lake estuary marshes (Rempel et al. 1997). Elsewhere it is associated with large permanent waterbodies with much open water (Sandilands 2005) and rich brackish marshes and estuaries (Ross 1984). Reported densities vary from under 1 pair per 100 km 2 to about 4 pairs per 100 km 2. A somewhat anomalous density of 17.8 pairs per 100 km 2 was found in ground surveys in the Clay Belt in 1973, but all estimates from the 1980s onwards are far lower. It is not known whether this pattern represents a decline in abundance or a difference in survey methods or years American Black Duck Status: Common breeder. Common migrant. Stable. The American black duck population in Ontario has experienced long term declines, but has recently stabilized in northern Ontario (Ross 2007a). Historically it was the most common duck in the P a g e 42

54 Clay Belt with densities of 31.1 pairs per 100 km 2 (Dennis 1974). However, between 1973 and 1988, black ducks declined in northeastern Ontario by 50% (to between 11.4 and 18.7 pairs per 100 km 2 ) (Ross and Fillman 1990). More recently, the trends in the western portion of the breeding range (Ontario and Western Quebec, Stratum 4 of the Black Duck Joint Venture Survey) have been positive (increases of 2.23% per year in the Clay Belt, 2.81% per year in western Quebec) (Brook et al. 2006). It still ranks as the most abundant duck species in the eastern Shield (not including the Clay Belt area) (16.6 to 22.7 pairs per 100 km 2 ) (Ross 2004; CWS unpublished data, see Appendix 3). Elsewhere in the boreal region of Ontario, densities range from 6.6 pairs per 100 km 2 in the Hudson Bay Lowlands to 7 pairs per 100 km 2 in the far western Shield. The distribution of recoveries of black ducks banded in Ontario and recovered in the US over the long term shows that about 60% are recovered in the Atlantic Flyway and about 40% in the Mississippi Flyway. This proportion has been shifting toward a higher proportion in the Atlantic Flyway as the numbers of wintering birds in the Mississippi Flyway decline (Brook et al. 2006). The southern James Bay coast has been shown to be important to post-breeding moulting males (Stitt 1980) Mallard Status: Common breeder. Common migrant. Increasing. The mallard is the most abundant duck species overall in the boreal region of Ontario, and consistently ranks first in all sub-regions except the eastern Shield and the Clay Belt where either the American black duck or the ring-necked duck ranks first, respectively, depending on the set of survey years (see Appendix 3). Mallards have increased significantly over the last half century (Zimmerling 2007b). Ross and Fillman (1990) described the species distribution in northern Ontario as a whole based on the NOWPBS plot surveys of Breeding densities are highest (20 to 70 pairs per 100 km 2 ) in the northwest Shield where there may be a prairie influence, the Clay Belt (16 to 25 pairs per 100 km 2 ) and the Hudson Bay Lowlands (20.9 pairs per 100 km 2 ). Densities on the eastern Shield range from 5.5 to 15.8 pairs per 100 km 2. A recent analysis (Brook et al. 2006) of trends in the western portion of the black duck breeding range (Stratum 4 of the black duck survey) showed a mallard increase of between 2.54% and 10% per year since 1990, depending on the geographic area, with the smallest increase in the Clay Belt, where the American black duck was also increasing. Mallards breeding in northern Ontario contribute significantly to both mid-continent and eastern populations as shown by the distribution of recoveries of birds banded in the Ontario s boreal region Blue-winged Teal Status: Common breeder. Common migrant. Stable. Blue-winged teal breed throughout Ontario s boreal region in low numbers, but are more common in the Ontario Shield than in the Hudson Bay Lowlands (Ross 2007c). In the Lowlands they appear to have a restricted coastal distribution, much like the northern shoveler, presumably due to suitability of marsh habitat. Although sparsely distributed across the Shield in general, areas of concentration are found in the northwest (e.g. in the agricultural belts near Thunder Bay) and in BCR 12 adjacent to the prairies (12 pairs per 100 km 2 ) (Dennis and North 1984) and also in the Clay Belt (5.88 to 6 pairs per 100 km 2 ) (Dennis 1974, Ross et al. 2002) where they are also associated with agricultural P a g e 43

55 areas (Ross 2007c). In the province in general, blue-winged teal have declined over the last three decades, particularly in the south; in their northern Ontario range, however, they have increased from historical numbers (Ross 1987, Ross 2007c) and the population is considered stable. In migration their abundance is highly variable. For example, the species was rare in (Wilson and McRae 1993), but occasional high fall flights are recorded in James Bay (e.g., in 1983, Stitt 1984). These fluctuations are probably linked to variable habitat conditions on the prairies as the species migrates eastward into the province from the mid-continent (Sandilands 2005) Northern Shoveler Status: Uncommon breeder. Uncommon migrant. Increasing. The northern shoveler is a relatively recent arrival in Ontario as a breeding species (Sandilands 2005, 2007a). All published evidence suggests that up to the 1970s it was a rare breeder and primarily found in southern Ontario in enriched habitats, such as sewage lagoons. Through the late 1960s and early 1970s, it was not found in ground surveys of the Clay Belt (Dennis 1974) or in BCR 12 in the southwestern corner of northwestern Ontario adjacent to the prairies (Dennis and North 1984). USFWS aerial surveys recorded northern shoveler in only two of 18 years between 1955 and 1973 in Stratum 50 of the WBPHS traditional survey (Boyd 1984), but noted that it was not known to breed. It was still rare in the Clay Belt in the late 1980s when it was observed only incidentally in three years ( ) of aerial surveys (Ross et al. 2002). In the Hudson Bay Lowlands, the northern shoveler was first reported as a breeder by Ross and North (1983) and has since been found along most of the James Bay and Hudson Bay coastline, including Akimiski Island (Wilson and McRae 1993; Sandilands 2005, 2007a; OMNR, unpublished data). No reliable pair densities are available due to its low abundance. The HBL coastal marshes are its primary breeding area in the boreal and in Ontario as a whole, presumably due to suitability of habitat. Although it increased in the Ontario Shield during the second atlas it remains rare to uncommon (Sandilands 2007a). Likewise, as a migrant it is regular but uncommon along the Hudson Bay and James Bay coasts and rare across the southern parts of the boreal (Ross 1984; Wilson and McRae 1993; Sandilands 2005) Northern Pintail Status: Common breeder. Common migrant. Stable. The northern pintail was historically the most abundant dabbling duck breeding species observed along the coasts of the Hudson Bay Lowlands (Hawkins et al. 1950). It was also the primary duck species in the harvest of aboriginal and non-aboriginal hunters until the early 1980s when it was surpassed by the mallard (McCall and Prevett 1981). The Hudson Bay Lowlands breeding areas for the pintail (Gendron 2007b) are the core of its eastern North American population (Malecki et al. 2006). Surveys in the 1980s indicated that in the Hudson Bay Lowlands as a whole, northern pintail ranked fourth in abundance behind mallard, green-winged teal and lesser scaup (CWS, unpublished data), with the highest reported density of any area in the province (8.56 pairs per 100 km 2 ). It is an incidental breeding species in both the eastern Shield (0.07 pairs per 100 km 2 ) and the Clay Belt (0.06 pairs per 100 km 2 ), and seems to have always had that status (Dennis 1974, Ross et al. 2002). It has a similar status in the western Shield with densities of less than 2 pairs per 100 km 2 (Boyd 1984; Dennis and North 1984). P a g e 44

56 During spring migration, pintails are abundant in the Little Clay Belt of northeastern Ontario (K. Abraham, pers. obs.; P. Gilboe, pers. comm.). Post-breeding concentrations of thousands of moulting pintails of both sexes have been recorded in the slot lakes along the Hudson Bay coast, particularly west of the Winisk River (Hawkins et al. 1950; Ross 1982) Green-winged Teal Status: Common breeder. Common migrant. Stable. The green-winged teal is fairly common throughout the boreal region of Ontario and is present as a breeder throughout most of Ontario. It reaches its highest densities in the Hudson Bay Lowlands where it ranks second (behind mallard) among all ducks in abundance. Evidence suggests it has always been most common in Ontario s far north compared to other parts of the province. Survey results indicate densities in the Hudson Bay Lowlands of pairs per 100 km 2 (CWS, unpublished data), 5 to 11 pairs per 100 km 2 in the western Shield (Boyd 1984; Dennis and North 1984), 1.6 to 3.6 pairs per 100 km 2 in the eastern Shield (Dennis 1974; Ross 1987; CWS, unpublished data), and 5.3 to 9.7 pairs per 100 km 2 in the Clay Belt (Ross et al. 2002; CWS, unpublished data). The species has experienced an increase in North America in general, including in Ontario, but appears stable in Ontario s boreal region (Hughes 2007). Green-winged teal from the boreal region are strongly linked to the eastern US wintering areas based on evidence from banding in the Hudson Bay Lowlands in the late 1970s and early 1980s Canvasback Status: Rare breeder. Rare migrant. Stable. The canvasback is rare in Ontario s boreal region and is seen mainly as a migrant. It is primarily a western Canada breeder (Bellrose 1980) and it is currently doing well there, with population estimates in recent years above the long-term average (USFWS 2014). Due to geographical proximity, it might be expected to be found breeding in those parts of boreal Ontario closest to the Manitoba border, however, outside southern Ontario, there are only five confirmed breeding records in two locations (Berens Lake, Peck and James 1987; Hearst, Sutherland et al., in prep) and one probable record during the second atlas between Ear Falls and Red Lake (Coady 2007). Canvasbacks may have a preference for nutrient rich habitats when found breeding in northern Ontario, such as sewage lagoons. The species status in Ontario has not changed over the past several decades and it is a common migrant in the southern Great Lakes Redhead Status: Rare breeder. Rare migrant. Stable. The redhead is a rare breeder in Ontario (Sandilands 2005, 2007b) but a common migrant in the southern Great Lakes. Like the canvasback it is seen in Ontario s boreal region mainly in migration. It may be slightly more abundant than the canvasback in the boreal. There are no documented breeding P a g e 45

57 records in the north, but there were six records of possible and probable breeding evidence in the boreal region during the second atlas, including on Akimiski Island. It is seen in rich marshes and sewage lagoons. Like the canvasback, the redhead breeding population is centered to the west of Ontario in the prairies, and its population in recent years is well above the long term average (USFWS 2014) Ring-necked Duck Status: Common breeder. Common migrant. Moderate to large increase. The ring-necked duck is one of the most common and widespread waterfowl species in boreal ecosystems of North America. Boreal regions are the species preferred breeding areas and Ontario is part of its core range. It is one of the most common species banded in the annual airboat duck banding program. In boreal Ontario, it ranks among the four most abundant breeding species in all zones where surveys have been done. Reported nesting densities are highest (56 pairs per 100 km 2 ) in northwestern Ontario near the zone of prairie influence (BCR 12) based on a ground survey in 1979 (Dennis and North 1984). The ring-necked duck expanded eastward from this region of Ontario but nowhere else does it reach those densities (7 pairs per 100 km 2 across the bulk of the northwest based on USFWS surveys, 7.1 pairs per 100 km 2 in the Hudson Bay Lowlands, 15.3 to 29.3 pairs per 100 km 2 in the northeast Shield, and 12.4 to 22.0 pairs per 100 km 2 in the Clay Belt). All sources indicate an historical increase in population at the provincial scale (Table 3) and the continental scale (USFWS 2014) continuing to the present (Sandilands 2005; Leckie 2007a). Ontario s ring-necked ducks winter in the southeast Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico states, where winter populations may be declining or re-distributing (Roy et al. 2012) Greater Scaup Status: Uncommon breeder. Common migrant. Stable. The greater scaup is one of only a few waterfowl species whose Ontario breeding distribution is restricted to the Hudson Bay Lowlands (the others are the eiders and long-tailed duck, species with arctic affinities and breeding ranges). The species is primarily found in open tundra-like habitats on the Hudson Bay coast but also along parts of the James Bay coast; it is sparsely distributed through the interior taiga and on Akimiski Island (Badzinski 2007a). In these habitats it is regular but not overly common and it seems to be more abundant in the Cape Henrietta Maria region although that may be an artifact of survey effort. As a breeding species in the boreal, it is overall much less abundant than its close relative, the lesser scaup. Sandilands (2005) summarized other authors accounts and the consensus was that it was an uncommon breeder, although survey methods were a constraint. The two scaup species cannot be reliably separated in fixed-wing surveys, and thus continental population estimates and status trends can only be derived indirectly (Kessel et al. 2002). There is concern about declines in winter populations and in changing dynamics of breeding populations (e.g., an increase in flocked birds and a decline of paired birds). No reliable breeding pair densities exist for Ontario, however, atlas data suggest the species is stable as a breeding bird in Ontario (Badzinski 2007a). P a g e 46

58 5.23 Lesser Scaup Status: Common breeder. Common migrant. Stable to moderate increase. In contrast to the greater scaup, the lesser scaup is found throughout the treed areas of the boreal region in both the Hudson Bay Lowlands and sparsely throughout most of the Ontario Shield. It ranks low in all subsections of the boreal in terms of overall abundance (10 th to 12 th among all ducks) except in the Hudson Bay Lowlands where it was the third most common species and density was also highest there (note: scaup spp. density was pairs per 100 km 2, however, given the known range of the two species from other sources, the majority of these would be lesser scaup). The western Shield near the zone of prairie influence had the next highest reported densities (7 pairs per 100 km 2 ) (Dennis and North 1984). Elsewhere reported densities are no higher than 1.7 pairs per 100 km 2. These density values are corroborated by the atlas relative abundance data from point counts. Observation probability in the Lowlands increased significantly in the second atlas (Badzinski 2007b). Despite the continental declines of lesser scaup, the eastern boreal trend has been stable (USFWS 2014). As noted above, the similarity of the two scaup species and limitations associated with the aerial survey methods constrain the ability to assess individual species breeding populations at the provincial scale King Eider Status: Rare breeder. Rare migrant. Decreasing. Evidence of king eider breeding in Ontario is limited and now quite dated. It consists of a single nest, a few confirmed broods, and a few specimen adult females with brood patches (summarized in Alison 1975; Peck and James 1983, 1987; Cooke and Hussell 1987; and Sandilands 2005). It has apparently always been rare in the province (Alison 1975) and may nest only irregularly. Alison (1975) suggested that as many as 200 breeding pairs might be scattered along the entire Hudson Bay coast. However, Peck and James (1983) were more conservative, limiting the suggested range to the area between Sutton River mouth (where a brood was reported in the first atlas period) and Cape Henrietta Maria (site of the nest and most of the broods), and Cooke and Hussell (1987) suggested either a decline from the small population of the 1940s or irregular breeding. The species was included among historical breeders in the second Ontario breeding bird atlas (Sutherland 2007) because of the lack of contemporary evidence of its presence despite a fair amount of survey activity. The dispersed nature of breeding of eider species in Ontario and in the Hudson Bay Lowlands in general, lack of access to some of the best potential breeding sites (offshore islands), and superficial similarity of appearance of females to common eider make a firm conclusion about abundance and regularity of breeding impossible, but undoubtedly the number is small. In the Hudson Bay Lowlands, and elsewhere, it is often reported with common eider (Abraham and Cooke 1979; Abraham and Finney 1986) and is occasionally reported as a migrant or taken by hunters in the fall in southern James Bay (Alison 1975; OMNR, unpublished data). Gilchrist and Robertson (2000) reported wintering of king eider in polynyas and along ice edges in the Belcher Islands, Nunavut, which is a likely location for any Ontario eiders to winter. Elsewhere in Ontario, the king eider is rare but occasionally observed on the Great Lakes in winter. P a g e 47

59 5.25 Common Eider Status: Uncommon breeder. Uncommon migrant. Occasional wintering. Stable or decreasing. The Hudson Bay Lowlands has a small population of this arctic nesting species, and the Hudson Bay subspecies sedentaria that occurs in Ontario is so named for its habit of not migrating outside its breeding range, but rather wintering near there as well. Its breeding area extends to its southern limit in the James Bay region (Goudie et al. 2000). Small groups of pairs nest on islands in shallow lakes in the Cape Henrietta Maria area (OMNR, unpublished data) and on small offshore islands near the Pen Islands, Cape Henrietta Maria and Akimiski Island; densities can be locally high on such offshore islands (Cooke 1987; Sandilands 2005; Abraham 2007b). There is no indication of a change in breeding abundance between the two atlas periods. Wintering common eiders have been observed in the open water leads along the James Bay coast near Cape Henrietta Maria during winter polar bear surveys (Abraham and Finney 1986) and in polynyas and ice edges further offshore. In the James Bay and Hudson Bay region, the largest wintering concentrations are found in the Belcher Islands (Gilchrist and Robertson 2000) and declines there due to winter ice events may have impacted the Ontario nesting population (Robertson and Gilchrist 1998) Harlequin Duck Status: Not a breeder. Rare migrant. There are no nesting records of harlequin duck in Ontario. During the first atlas period, a bird was salvaged in 1983 at the mouth of the Sutton River on the Hudson Bay coast. It was not reported during the second atlas period. The species has also been reported from James Bay in autumn (Cranford 2013). In Ontario, the species is observed most frequently in the Great Lakes and on some large rivers, including some in the boreal region where individuals are reported regularly in migration and during the winter (e.g., Richards 2008, 2009; Cranford 2012, 2013). The North American distribution of harlequin duck is disjunct, with a Pacific northwest population that ranges from Alaska to Idaho including British Columbia and an eastern population in northern Labrador and northern Québec including the east coast of James Bay as far south as Cape Jones (Robertson and Goudie 1999). Presumably, Ontario birds are vagrants or stragglers from this eastern population but their regular appearance in Ontario suggests the possibility of a minor migration route Surf Scoter Status: Common breeder. Common migrant. Stable. Conservation of the three scoter species has become a concern because of suspected continental declines, including the eastern populations (SDJV 2007, 2008). Information about the breeding ecology, distribution and status of scoters is limited compared with most other waterfowl, and has been identified as a major gap in knowledge. The surf scoters that breed in the Hudson Bay Lowlands belong P a g e 48

60 to the eastern population of the species which winters on the Atlantic coast (SDJV 2007). Monitoring of the size of this population, like other scoters, is done during winter aerial surveys, most of which do not distinguish among the three scoter species. Likewise, fixed-wing aerial surveys of breeding pairs generally do not distinguish among scoter species. In boreal Ontario, the surf scoter occurs as a sparse breeder in the northern Hudson Bay Lowlands and as a dispersed moulter on James Bay and Hudson Bay (Ross 2007d). Pair densities obtained from aerial helicopter surveys in the 1980s (average 2.2 pairs per 100 km 2, peak 5.0 pairs per 100 km 2 ) were about one-fifth to one-half the average densities reported in northern Québec (10.0 pairs per 100 km 2, Gauthier and Aubry 1996). However, those Ontario surveys were aimed at early nesting waterfowl species and were not thought to be appropriately timed for scoters. Breeding pair surveys with timing more appropriate for scoters were not conducted until recently (Brook et al. 2012) and these revealed relatively high breeding pair densities in the Hudson Bay Lowlands (11.0 pairs per 100 km 2 ), equivalent to those reported by Gauthier and Aubry (1996). Although the probability of observation was higher in the second Ontario atlas than the first atlas, it isn t thought that this indicates an increase, due to differences between atlases in access and methods White-winged Scoter Status: Common breeder. Common migrant. Stable. The white-winged scoter migrates through southern Ontario, notably using the Great Lakes, on its way from Atlantic coast wintering areas to breeding areas in the boreal region of Ontario and further west in the prairies and parklands. Of the three scoter species in Ontario, white-winged scoters have the lowest breeding pair densities (average 0.9 pairs per 100 km 2, peak 4.2 pairs per 100 km 2, Ross 2007e; 6.0 pairs per 100 km 2, Brook et al. 2012) but the broadest breeding range (Ross 2007e). This is less than one-tenth of the densities found on the east side of James Bay in northern Québec (peak of 80 pairs per km 2, Gauthier and Aubry 1996). Although white-winged scoters use taiga habitats in the northern Hudson Bay Lowlands, they also occur further south in the more heavily forested areas of the Ontario Shield in northwestern Ontario. This is consistent with their use of closed boreal forest habitat in western North America (Brown and Frederickson 1997). The species occurs in small numbers as a moulter along the coast of James Bay and Hudson Bay (Ross 2007e), usually in the company of the more abundant black scoter as well as a small number of surf scoters. Like the other two scoter species, whitewinged scoters are thought to be declining on a continental scale based on winter aerial surveys and declines on western breeding areas have been reported (SDJV 2003). Too little information is available from Ontario to support any conclusions about a trend here or in the eastern population as a whole Black Scoter Status: Common breeder. Common migrant. Stable. Among the three scoter species that nest in Ontario, the black scoter is the most abundant and conspicuous. However, assessment of its status is plagued by all of the same issues facing monitoring efforts for surf and white-winged scoters with the exception that moulting concentrations of black scoter occur on James Bay and Hudson Bay, offering an alternative to winter surveys (Ross 1983, 1994; Badzinski et al. 2012). As many as 140,000 black scoters have been counted during targeted surveys in late July early August and there is no indication of long term declines of moulting birds, suggesting a P a g e 49

61 stable population between the 1980s and the late 2000s (Ross and Abraham 2006). Aerial surveys in the Lowlands during the 1980s indicated that this species had the highest breeding pair densities of the three scoter species (average 2.6 pairs per 100 km 2, peak of 8.0 pairs per 100 km 2, Ross 2007b) but those densities were still lower than peak densities reported in northern Quebec (12.0 pairs per km 2, Savard and Lamothe 1991). However, the 1980s lowland surveys were earlier than optimal and more recent aerial surveys conducted in 2009 which were timed more appropriately for detecting breeding evidence (Brook et al. 2012) suggest high breeding pair densities in the Hudson Bay Lowlands (16 pairs per 100 km 2 ) which are equivalent to the highest densities reported elsewhere. Although breeding in the Lowlands was long suspected, the first evidence wasn t found until 2006 (Abraham et al. 2008). Followup work after the 2009 surveys revealed that pairs and broods preferred habitats with more small wetlands ( 100 ha) and avoided treed wetlands and fen habitats (Brook et al. 2012). The surveys suggest that the Hudson Bay Lowlands have a very high conservation value for the eastern black scoter Long-tailed Duck Status: Uncommon breeder. Common migrant. Stable or decreasing. In Ontario, the Long-tailed duck nests in small numbers along the Hudson Bay coast, primarily in tundra habitats (Sandilands 2005; Abraham 2007c) where it reaches its continental southern breeding limit (Robertson and Savard 2002). There are no breeding density data for Ontario because few plots have been surveyed in the narrow Hudson Bay coastal strip. In the core of its North American range, the species occurs at relatively high densities in suitable tundra habitats ( pairs per 100 km 2, Robertson and Savard 2002). Perhaps a few hundred pairs may breed in Ontario because of the restricted distribution of tundra, and atlas observation data suggest a stable population in Ontario. The species is a common staging migrant along the Ontario shores of James Bay in both spring and fall and it uses the major rivers that empty into James Bay as migration corridors (Abraham and Wilson 1997). Recent telemetry studies, including the lower Great Lakes in Ontario (SDJV 2014), are helping to define migration routes and timing through northern Ontario and James Bay. Continentally there is a concern about possible declines, especially in the west. However, the available indicators are contradictory and better methods of population monitoring are needed (Robertson and Savard 2002; SDJV 2007, 2008) Bufflehead Status: Common breeder. Common migrant. Moderate to large increase. The bufflehead s breeding distribution in Ontario coincides with the three northern BCRs (7, 8 and 12) where it is a widespread but low density breeder. Continentally, it is also a boreal and parkland breeding species (Gauthier 2014). Reported densities in Ontario are highest in BCR 12 near the zone of prairie parkland influence (15.0 pairs per 100 km 2, Dennis and North 1984). Overall, western and eastern Shield areas support nearly equivalent numbers: 4.0 pairs per 100 km 2 (Boyd 1984) and pairs per 100 km 2 (Dennis 1974; CWS unpublished data), respectively. It is uncommon in the Clay Belt (0.8 pairs per 100 km 2 (Ross et al. 2002). Mallory (2007a) reported an increase in the species in Ontario and elsewhere based on atlas and other long term monitoring programs. Mallory (2007a) also noted an association with northern flickers and pileated woodpeckers, which are cavity-excavating species on which the Bufflehead relies for nest sites. The bufflehead is one the first migrants to appear in the P a g e 50

62 boreal during April when streams and rivers thaw (Sandilands 2005) and one of the last to leave. Ontario nesters winter in the Great Lakes and from the Gulf Coast to the Atlantic coastal region (Gauthier 2014) Common Goldeneye Status: Common breeder. Common migrant. Stable to moderate increase. The common goldeneye is the most abundant inland breeding species in the sea duck tribe (bufflehead, goldeneyes and mergansers) and is a species for which Ontario has a high conservation responsibility. Like its smaller congener the bufflehead, reported densities of the common goldeneye in Ontario are highest in BCR 12 near the zone of prairie parkland influence (45 pairs per 100 km 2, Dennis and North 1984). Densities are similar across western and eastern Shield areas but vary somewhat within the Shield overall: 19 pairs per 100 km 2 in the northwest (Boyd 1984) and pairs per 100 km 2 in the east (Dennis 1974; CWS unpublished data). Unlike bufflehead, the Clay Belt supports substantial densities of goldeneye, equivalent to other areas of the Ontario Shield ( pairs per 100 km 2, Ross 1987, Ross et al. 2002, CWS unpublished data). The species had one of the highest rates of confirmed breeding evidence among waterfowl in the second atlas (Mallory 2007b) with broods and nests in nearly all 100 km 2 blocks in BCRs 8 and 12. Lower levels in the Hudson Bay Lowlands (BCR 7) likely reflected lower densities (1.84 pairs per 100 km 2 ) associated with sparser forest cover and fewer suitable deciduous tree cavity sites as well as distribution of atlas effort. Ontario populations in the core breeding range appear stable, but an increasing trend is evident along the southern edge of the range (Mallory 2007b). The common goldeneye is a common migrant in the boreal. It is regular as a wintering bird on the lower Great Lakes and occurs on some boreal area Christmas Bird Counts in BCR 12 (Sandilands 2005) Barrow s Goldeneye Status: Not a breeder. Vagrant. There are no breeding records of Barrow s goldeneye in Ontario. The nearest breeding centre for the species is well to the east along the north shore of the St. Lawrence River in Québec. In Ontario as a whole it is a rare vagrant, usually associated with the much more abundant congener common goldeneye. Its similarity to that species likely masks its actual abundance in the province. In boreal Ontario, it is most likely to occur during migration. A single bird was observed on the Brant River in 2001 (D. Fillman, pers. obs) Hooded Merganser Status: Common breeder. Common migrant. Moderate to large increase. Ontario is at the center of the breeding distribution for the eastern North American hooded merganser population (Bellrose 1980; Dugger et al. 2009). It is most common in BCR 12, but also nests in the southern portion of BCR 8 and to a limited extent in BCR 7 (although it may be more common there P a g e 51

63 than atlas records indicate, due to limitations of survey effort). Reported densities in the boreal are fairly uniform across the Shield with a reported 16 pairs per 100 km 2 in BCR 12 near the zone of prairie parkland (Dennis and North 1984) and pairs per 100 km 2 in the eastern Shield (Dennis 1974, Ross 2004, CWS unpublished data). The Clay Belt also holds reasonable numbers with densities of pairs per 100 km 2 (Ross et al. 2002; Ross 2004; CWS unpublished data). The only Hudson Bay Lowland density estimate (2.09 pairs per 100 km 2 ) is from the NOWBS (CWS, unpublished data). The probability of observation was significantly higher in the second atlas in all regions of the province except the Hudson Bay Lowlands where it increased but not significantly and this increasing trend was corroborated by other surveys (Bouvier 2007), including continental level surveys (Dugger et al. 2009). The hooded merganser is a common migrant throughout southern Ontario and the boreal and individuals regularly overwinter on the Great Lakes and in large rivers, although the majority of the population migrates to the southeastern US (Sandilands 2005; Dugger et al. 2009) Common Merganser Status: Common breeder. Common migrant. Stable. The common merganser occurs regularly throughout boreal Ontario, ranking fourth in abundance in most waterfowl communities (Dunn 2007; CWS, unpublished data, see Appendix 3). Its varied nest site locations mark it as a generalist nester from a habitat perspective (Sandilands 2005). The highest reported densities come from the BCR 12 ground study by Dennis and North (1984), who estimated 39 pairs per 100 km 2. Densities from the eastern Shield using the same methods were only a tenth of that in 1973 at 4.2 pairs per 100 km 2 (Dennis 1974). Aerial helicopter surveys provide average densities on the eastern Shield of pairs per 100 km 2 (Ross 2004; CWS, unpublished), on the Clay Belt of pairs per 100 km 2 (Ross et al. 2002, Ross 2004; CWS, unpublished), and in the Lowlands of 2.72 pairs per 100 km 2 ) (CWS, unpublished data). The species status did not change between atlases and a stable trend is indicated by various aerial surveys and continental scale monitoring (Mallory and Metz 1999). It should be noted that while there are longer term fixed-wing surveys in core merganser range, there are method constraints on population trend monitoring of individual species from these because both the USFWS winter survey and breeding fixed-wing surveys lump all mergansers. Large boreal lakes and rivers are potentially important habitats for moulting scoters, but the distribution of birds during moult and the ecology of moult is unknown Red-breasted Merganser Status: Common breeder. Common migrant. Stable to moderate decrease. The red-breasted merganser is the least well known species of the merganser group with a singular breeding distribution unlike any other species in Ontario (Craik 2007). Although widespread overall, there is a clear concentration of breeding records along shorelines of large waterways and water bodies, including the central and northern Great Lakes but also along major river systems in the Hudson Bay Lowlands. It is virtually absent from the Clay Belt (Ross et al. 2002; Ross 2004). Most helicopter density estimates that have been made indicate sparse breeding populations throughout the boreal, however caution is warranted because these aerial surveys may not adequately cover the preferred linear habitats. The highest densities (15 pairs per 100 km 2 ) come from the 1979 ground plot survey by P a g e 52

64 Dennis and North (1984) in BCR 12 (in the corner of the province adjacent to Minnesota and Manitoba). All aerial survey estimates are under 1.5 pairs per 100 km 2. There were no significant changes in probability of observation between the two atlases, and the population trend based on atlas data suggests a stable population with a possible decline in the Lowlands. Elsewhere in the eastern Canadian boreal Shield there is a slight decrease since 1990 (Craik 2007) Ruddy Duck Status: Rare breeder. Rare migrant. Stable. Like the canvasback and redhead, the ruddy duck is a bird of the prairies. It is rare to uncommon in Ontario where most records are in highly productive marsh habitats in the settled agricultural south. The ruddy duck is rare in boreal Ontario, and its distribution (or at least the distribution of observations) there is strongly correlated with sewage lagoons (Leckie 2007b). Although more northern locations were recorded in the second atlas period, there was no overall increasing trend. A provincial breeding population of less than 300 pairs was estimated by Sandilands (2005). 6 DISCUSSION 6.1 Populations and Status Fast et al. (2011) reported on national trends of breeding waterfowl using both fixed-wing and helicopter data from the various strata of Waterfowl Breeding Population and Habitat Survey. Trends for several species in the Eastern Survey Area were presented by ecozone using a slight modification (ecozone+, Rankin et al. 2011) of the Terrestrial Ecozones of Canada national ecological land classification. For the strata in the two ecozones which cover Ontario s boreal region, there were insufficient data from the Hudson Plains Ecozone for analysis but in the Boreal Shield Ecozone as a whole, Fast et al. report significant positive trends for ring-necked duck (2.395%/yr), black duck (1.315%/yr), mallard (3.896%/yr) and Canada goose (6.746%/yr). They did not report on snow geese as none of the transects in the Ontario WBPHS strata cover snow goose colonies. They report nonsignificant positive trends for bufflehead (2.169%/yr), goldeneye spp. (2.155%/yr), and a non-significant negative trend (-1.654%/yr) for green-winged teal. Although these results should be interpreted cautiously, since the strength of the signal from Ontario in this analysis may be outweighed by the several other strata in the ecozone+, they are corroborated by other analyses at the Ontario scale (below). Blancher et al. (2009) assessed trend status for eight waterfowl species that breed in BCR 8 and BCR 12: Canada goose, wood duck, black duck, bufflehead, common goldeneye, hooded merganser, common merganser and red-breasted merganser, all of which are classified as Short Distance Migrants. Three of these species had large increases in at least one BCR (Canada goose and bufflehead in both BCR 8 and 12, wood duck in BCR 8), three had moderate increases in at least one BCR (wood duck and common goldeneye in BCR 12, hooded merganser in both BCR 8 and 12), and the rest were stable in both BCRs. The same methods were applied to all other boreal waterfowl by a committee of OMNR and CWS waterfowl biologists (see Table 4). The majority of species-bcr combinations showed stable or moderate to large increases. Notably, most species in the sea duck tribe, which has high representation P a g e 53

65 in the boreal waterfowl community, were stable or increasing. The large bodied species (geese and swans) showed large increases, a pattern noted among all large-bodied and generalist birds in the OBBA (Cadman et al. 2007). Only four of 31 species showed declines (blue-winged teal had large declines across all BCRs, northern pintail and black duck had large declines in the boreal hardwood transition zone (BCR 12), and American wigeon had a large decline in the Lowlands (BCR 7). Additionally, there were some moderate declines within each BCR (common eider, green-winged teal and red-breasted merganser in the Lowlands (BCR 7), American wigeon in the softwood Shield (BCR 8) and green-winged teal in the boreal hardwood transition (BCR 12)). Brook et al. (2006) summarized productivity and population survey information available from the more intensive Eastern Waterfowl surveys for black ducks and mallards. They analyzed data from the Eastern Waterfowl Survey helicopter plots from , the LRTAP waterbird survey helicopter plots from , and from the USFWS Fixed-Wing EWS Stratum 51 and Stratum 52 from The results were somewhat contradictory, depending on survey type and geographic scale of analysis. Black duck showed a significant positive linear trend in the Clay Belt, whereas mallard showed a nonsignificant positive trend there. Elsewhere, the mallard had a significant positive trend in all geographic areas. Significant positive non-linear trends were indicated for both species from , but both species showed a significant decline in the Clay Belt between 2003 and The fixed-wing strata areas analyzed all had significant or non-significant negative trends for black duck. The authors suggested that the discrepancy was the result of differing geographic coverage. Indicated Breeding Pair (IBP) densities show some broad patterns of waterfowl abundance across the boreal region of Ontario. Some species are restricted to the Hudson Bay coast (tundra swan, snow goose, and the arctic affinity ducks) while other species (Canada goose, northern pintail) clearly have their highest densities along the Hudson Bay and James Bay coasts, declining toward the interior. Several species have their highest densities along the western edge of the Ontario Shield (adjacent to Minnesota and Manitoba prairies and parkland) or in the eastern boreal (in the Clay Belt and agricultural plains). Overall, duck IBP densities trend from highest in the western Shield to the lowest in the eastern Shield, with the exception of the rise in the Clay Belt. These patterns might reflect higher habitat diversity and wetland productivity and the presence of ecotones at these edges. 6.2 Survey Constraints and Information Limits Spatial and Temporal Gaps All of the multi-species surveys have limitations and constraints that affect their application for assessing distribution, abundance and population trend. The most common constraint of the surveys is that their individually none provides a spatially comprehensive coverage of the entire boreal region of Ontario nor even of whole ecosystems within it (e.g., at the BCRs or Ecozone levels). The exception is the Northern Ontario Breeding Waterfowl Survey, which was designed to systematically cover the entire boreal region and was the pre-cursor to and design model for all of the ensuing helicopter plot surveys up to the present. Secondly, with the exception of the northeast (where the NOWBS was succeeded by Clay Belt survey, then by the Black Duck Joint Venture survey, then by the Eastern Waterfowl Survey) there are significant temporal gaps in coverage for all areas. Unfortunately, the spatially comprehensive Northern Ontario Waterfowl Breeding Survey is the least temporally comprehensive, having been completed only once over a 7-year period in the 1980s. Finally, when there are contemporary surveys in at least part of each subregion, they come from mixed methods that are difficult to integrate (e.g., EWS helicopter plots in the northeast, traditional WBPHS transects in the northwest, and EWS fixed-wing P a g e 54

66 transects in the HBL, the Clay Belt and the eastern Shield); however, most of the fixed-wing survey has no ground- or helicopter-verified detection correction, the exception being the northeastern Shield. As a result, a picture of relative abundance across the boreal region of Ontario as a whole can only be constructed using a combination of older data (e.g yrs) from the Hudson Bay Lowlands helicopter plots (raising the question of contemporary usefulness of the density estimates due to trends detected by other surveys, e.g., the OBBA) paired with contemporary data from the northeast and northwest Shield. The Eastern Waterfowl Survey (the combination of helicopter plots and fixed-wing survey) has annual, continuous data since 1990 and is the most consistent survey providing the greatest reliability because of its design and frequency. Consequently, it was the primary survey used by Blancher et al. (2009) for trend assessment of waterfowl species in the boreal. Even this has the constraint that since 2005 it has consisted of a rotation of plots wherein each plot is surveyed twice in a four year period. Different sets of 20 of the 40 plots have different relative coverage of ecodistricts within the survey area, meaning that non-randomness of coverage can lead to high annual variation (Ross 2004). The annual, fixed-wing surveys of Stratum 51 and Stratum 52 that are now integrated with the helicopter plots for reporting of regional trends also require annual detection rate correction for each species and habitat. These are costly to obtain for most of the region and many are so high that a single pair means a difference of hundreds in the population estimate. The linear fixed-wing transects are also less conducive to estimation of pair densities than helicopter surveys because of the detection rate differences, and some species groups (scaup and mergansers) are lumped together due to difficulty of species identification, precluding the survey s use for population estimates of some of the most important boreal species. While the EWS includes most of the early nesting boreal waterfowl species, spatially it does not cover the northwestern part of the boreal or the Hudson Bay Lowlands and is not timed appropriately for other species, consequently it does not adequately survey certain later nesting species, e.g., the scoters, pintails, and American wigeon. As noted, despite the comprehensive spatial coverage of its design, the Northern Ontario Breeding Waterfowl Survey has the obvious disadvantages that the size of the area required several years to survey the entire region and it has only been conducted completely once between , with some plots in the Hudson Bay Lowlands and in the western Shield getting re-surveyed in the mid 1990s and 2000s. Not as obvious, but of concern for inference, is that the design is non-random. Although the systematic layout of the plots and blocks is unlikely to cause any uniform bias of habitat coverage (because of the high heterogeneity of land cover in the region), an analysis of the representativeness of the plots with respect to land cover should be conducted to determine the level of inference possible. There are gradients in ecozone characteristics which may mean that gaps in certain types of habitat representation exist. The more specialized surveys aimed at single species (e.g., Canada goose, snow goose) are generally adequate for trend monitoring purposes because the highest concentrations are discrete and thus manageably surveyed (e.g., snow goose colonies) or the design of the surveys utilizes many years of data to support stratification (e.g., Canada goose surveys) and analysis at the transect level for higher power to detect year to year changes. These surveys could not be easily modified to include other waterfowl, although data are collected on incidentally observed species Methods Variation The survey windows for most aerial multi-species waterfowl surveys are timed for early nesting species (e.g., black duck, mallard, Canada goose, etc.) and this limits the accuracy of density estimation P a g e 55

67 for certain species, e.g., late migrants and later nesting species such as scoters and eiders. An exception to this constraint was the Clay Belt survey which had 3 seasonal surveys and captured both early and late nesting species as well as broods). In the other surveys, this timing may lead to underestimation of the importance of a given area for waterfowl as a whole or species/species groups. The HBL late waterfowl breeding pair survey aimed at the scoter group also addressed this problem with promising results (Brook et al. 2012), but it has not received additional support beyond the exploratory year and was not been implemented on a wide scale. Both of these factors limit the inferences that can be made for certain species from the majority of data available for other areas of the boreal. The temporal consistency of the surveys (e.g., timed for early nesting species) over long periods is a positive aspect in terms of allowing assessment of trends for those targeted species. This assumes that relative timing of nesting among the species is a constant, or that change in timing is occurring synchronously among species. However, Blancher et al. (unpublished database) point out that the surveys having no restriction on time of day may impact detection rates of birds that behave differently over the course of the day. Variation in survey methods (e.g., plots vs. transects, helicopter vs. fixed-wing), changing frameworks through time (e.g., the shift from Clay Belt Survey to Black Duck Joint Venture Survey to EWS and declining number of plots as time went on) and varying precision (observations have been georeferenced to plots, to wetlands, to transect or to instantaneous location; some survey results are adjusted for visibility bias while others are not) severely limits the comparative analysis of trends and calculations of densities and abundance over time. One of the difficulties with integrating results (specifically, pair densities or population estimates) is the variation in estimation accuracy of densities or populations. For example, the ground surveys in 1979 of the northwest boreal transition zone (Dennis and North 1984) consistently yielded higher indicated pair densities than the helicopter surveys of later years. Is this due to differing areas of coverage, population change over time, or accuracy of method assumptions? Likewise, the population estimates derived from fixed-wing surveys of Stratum 50 in the northwest consistently yield much higher values than helicopter surveys. Indicated pairs densities from helicopter surveys, which are unadjusted for visibility bias, are extrapolated to survey area. Fixed-wing survey-derived densities are adjusted for visibility bias with factors as high as 300. Is one survey too conservative and the other too liberal? This is overcome in the EWS by using helicopter adjustment surveys, but this is costly and thus unlikely to be effectively applied over the entire boreal region. Another difference is the ability of surveyors to identify species from different aircraft. Fixed-wing surveyors are unable to reliably distinguish highly similar species within certain groups (scaup, scoter, mergansers) and, in the more remote locations, estimating ratios of species from helicopters or the ground for adjustments cannot be done annually, as is done for the Traditional Survey in the west (Hawkins et al. 1984). The Breeding Bird Atlas of Ontario was the second most useful survey for the trend assessment of waterfowl conducted by Blancher et al. (2009; unpublished assessment). This was primarily based on the evidence of breeding (an important component of the methods) and the measurement of effort that, combined, allowed probability of observation to be calculated. However, allotment of effort was unequal between atlases in the vast boreal where coverage was limited by access. There was also little standardization of effort for the non-point count breeding evidence data collection. Atlas quantitative methods for relative abundance (i.e., point counts in the second atlas) do not adequately capture waterfowl because territorial vocalizations are the key component of point counts, and waterfowl do not make such vocalizations. Additionally, the cryptic behaviour of waterfowl while nesting (and in some cases the mismatch of timing of nesting and the majority of atlas effort) confounds the visual component of point counts. The North American Breeding Bird Survey, similarly based on point counts P a g e 56

68 and further constrained to roadsides, also does not adequately capture waterfowl except possibly for the most common human associated species like mallard and Canada goose. 7 LOOKING FORWARD The existing storehouse of information has good potential for additional analyses. A comprehensive analysis of existing pair density information that would integrate data from the multiple surveys to provide a region wide picture of distribution and relative abundance was identified in the August 2013 workshop as a first step in identifying gaps and needs. It was recognized that the data come from different decades and different spatial areas, making such integration difficult, but using modern spatial and statistical techniques should overcome many, but not all, of the problems. Choosing the appropriate underlying spatial units and the most appropriate information sources will be challenging. Nonetheless, this comprehensive integration analysis should be a high priority in the near-term, while potential new surveys or gap filling is considered. The potential for the development of habitat associations using the existing survey information is high (K. Ross, pers. comm.). It is easy enough to note the inadequacies of spatial and temporal coverage of the existing set of surveys but correspondingly difficult to find a solution that would overcome the constraints. Sufficient future monitoring and inclusion of both temporal and spatial coverage may be difficult to achieve at a time of declining resources for surveys in general and for waterfowl in particular. Given the large area involved and the staleness of the data, a reinvigoration of helicopter surveys in the western part of the Shield (BCR 8 and 12) and the Lowlands (BCR 7), or a hybrid helicopter plot plus fixed-wing survey approach similar to the EWS, as a priority seems warranted. It could be argued that the fixed-wing Traditional Survey (Stratum 50) and the fixed-wing component of the Eastern Waterfowl Survey (51, 57-59) cover those areas sufficiently, but the constraints on those surveys listed above (section 6.2.1, 6.2.2) are cautionary notes that apply to determination of accurate densities and gaining habitat association data. The results of the integrated analysis will be informative in that regard. Cost and the vast area to be covered argue for a staged replication of the 1980s surveys of northern Ontario. The national Avian Monitoring Review completed by Environment Canada (AMR Steering Committee 2012) determined that most surveys contributed appropriate results that supported Environment Canada program needs, specifically the need for cost-effective and scientifically rigorous estimates of population status and trend to assist in prioritization, planning and conservation actions to protect and restore bird populations. The review included several major waterfowl monitoring programs, most of which were deemed important to continue. However, it also emphasized the need for approaches that improve survey design and/or coordination, and attract sufficient partner funding to make them sustainable. Assessment of monitoring gaps and evaluation of the risks to waterfowl populations of current monitoring levels identified moderate gaps with moderate risks to the species involved. Of note for this review, one gap identified was the monitoring of sea ducks. The boreal was also a noted geographic gap for monitoring of other bird groups. The need for multi-species waterfowl surveys combined with competing demands for resources to undertake surveys of other bird groups in the boreal (shorebirds, land birds, sea birds, and inland waterbirds) presents both opportunity and challenge for renewal of a comprehensive scheme of waterfowl survey efforts over larger parts of Ontario s boreal region and perhaps beyond. Similarly, expanded surveys of other bird groups (e.g., colonial waterbirds, secretive marsh birds) present opportunities to obtain useful monitoring information for some waterfowl species. The surveys of late-breeding species (e.g., scoters, mergansers) P a g e 57

69 as undertaken in 2009 should be extended to other areas to obtain more accurate estimates of distribution and abundance of this group and its contribution to eastern North American stocks. Hudson Bay and James Bay have received more attention from waterfowl biologists than other areas of the boreal region in Ontario due to the concentrations of birds along the coasts and the historical importance of waterfowl to both aboriginal and non-aboriginal hunters. As a result, an estimation of the numbers of species and individuals in coastal areas during migration and moult, has been made over and above the identification of the value of these coastal regions for breeding birds per se. This has resulted in a spatially comprehensive set of coastal Important Bird Areas (IBAs) which have high value in conservation and land use planning. Identification of important non-coastal staging waterfowl areas is needed for the same purpose, in light of the focus of mining and energy developments in the interior of Ontario s undisturbed boreal region (e.g., the Ring of Fire). Large lakes in boreal regions often provide moulting habitat for post-breeding waterfowl such as scaup, redheads, and canvasbacks (Bergman 1973; Bailey 1983). The potential of the vast interior region of northern Ontario to provide similar moulting habitat for scaup, goldeneye, bufflehead and mergansers has not been assessed, but could be important in the context of threat assessment. Likewise, virtually no quantification of spring and fall migration in the interior of the boreal exists, a major gap in knowledge of the importance of the region to pre- and post-breeding success. Addressing these shortfalls in knowledge is essential to conservation planning. Lessons from recent terrestrial monitoring for caribou, moose, wolves and wolverine in the Far North (e.g., Berglund et al. 2014) indicates that the lengthy interface between the Hudson Bay Lowlands and the Ontario Shield is an area of high value in terms of seasonal abundance and annual wildlife use by a diversity of species, probably because of the high diversity of habitats and ecosystem units found there. Investigation of this region for similar patterns in other species groups has begun, including birds (e.g., OMNR Far North Biodiversity project), however, the design is a multi-species inventory method adapted from the US Forest Service and is not designed for population estimates of waterfowl and other wetland species. More specific surveys are needed to determine whether this ecotone has any disproportional value to waterfowl and wetland associate birds, particularly because of the current focus of the mining and energy industries on this ecotone. Higher levels of information may be required in selected parts of the boreal as land use planning proceeds or industrial activity expands. For each such area, a routine could be developed to gather and assess the available waterfowl information. Assessment criteria should include: (1) currency of data collection, (2) frequency of data collection, (3) variability of estimates, and (4) proportion of the land use planning area covered by surveys. A natural follow up would be a carefully designed data collection protocol to fill gaps and support weak areas of knowledge, and to build support for its implementation. Identification of areas deemed important by First Nations has obvious links to this effort because most First Nations communities are found throughout the vast interior. Habitat associations of Ontario s boreal waterfowl are not well known because of the paucity of direct studies in Ontario; only studies of mallard and common goldeneye have been conducted. These kinds of studies are difficult to mount because of low densities of most species and difficulty of access to suitable study areas (road accessible areas have potential for such studies but they come with biases related to alterations of habitats). Another approach is the analysis of distribution and density of waterfowl determined from aerial surveys in relation to remotely sensed land cover as was done by Rempel et al. (1997) and Brook et al. (2012). There is potential for this kind of analysis in the long term helicopter plot dataset from the eastern boreal. It is clear that habitat influences density within the boreal, as demonstrated in the differences in densities and species composition (e.g., cavity nesting species) between the Clay Belt and the Precambrian Shield (reflecting differences in forest structure and P a g e 58

70 composition, lake and river deltas, ringed fens, etc.). The LRTAP studies resulted in fine resolution habitat characterization and a model of waterfowl habitat associations in the southeastern most section of the boreal. Finally, surveys of First Nations harvest were frequently undertaken in the latter half of the twentieth century. As First Nations populations have grown and their harvest practices have evolved over that period, use and relative dependence on waterfowl as country food may have changed. Therefore, these surveys have now become dated (the last comprehensive survey was in ) and the data are inappropriate for assessment of either harvest trend or population trend. Harvest by non First Nations hunters across the region is nominally incorporated in the stratified, random annual National Harvest Survey, but low non First Nations populations in the region may limit the precision of results. A new round of First Nations and non First Nations harvest surveys specifically designed for the boreal is critical for determination of contemporary First Nations take and use of waterfowl for food and thereby its social and economic value to them; conducted in the context of local knowledge, these surveys would also contribute importantly to an understanding of patterns of waterfowl migration and local ecology. An assessment of the harvest of waterfowl produced in Ontario s boreal region but harvested elsewhere (southern Canada and the US) would be of complementary value in determining the region s contributions to waterfowl hunting in general. The extensive duck banding database should be intensively analysed to determine associations between breeding areas in the boreal region and migration and wintering ground harvest areas. P a g e 59

71 8 LITERATURE CITED Abraham, K.F fall productivity survey and inventory of geese and swans on Ontario s James and Hudson Bay coasts. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources unpublished report. 14 pp. Abraham, K.F. 1983a. Spring goose studies at Winisk Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources unpublished report. 12 pp. Abraham, K.F. 1983b. Autumn 1983 productivity survey and inventory of geese and swans on Ontario s James and Hudson Bay coasts. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources unpublished report. 14 pp. Abraham, K.F Small Canada geese in Ontario. OFO News 15:4. Abraham, K.F Record round-up of Ross s Geese. OFO News 20:1. Abraham, K.F Cackling Goose, NOT new to Ontario. OFO News 23:2-6. Abraham, K.F. 2007a. Cackling Goose. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Abraham, K.F. 2007b. Common Eider. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Abraham, K.F. 2007c. Long-tailed Duck. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Abraham, K.F. 2007d. Ross s Goose. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Abraham, K. 2007e. Snow Goose. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Abraham, K.F. 2007f. Tundra Swan. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Abraham, K.F. and F. Cooke First record of king eiders nesting in Manitoba. Blue Jay 37: Abraham, K.F. and G.H. Finney Eiders of the eastern Canadian arctic. Pages in A. Reed (ed.) Eider ducks in Canada. Canadian Wildlife Service Report Series No. 47, 177 pp. Abraham, K.F. and C.E. Keddy The Hudson Bay Lowlands: a unique wetland legacy. Chapter 4, Pages in Fraser, L.H. and P.A. Keddy (eds.) The World s Largest Wetlands: Their Ecology and Conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. P a g e 60

72 Abraham, K.F. and R.L. Jefferies High goose populations: causes, impacts and implications. Part II. Pages 7-61 in Batt, B. D. J. (ed) Arctic ecosystems in peril: report of the Arctic Goose Habitat Working Group. Arctic Goose Joint Venture Special Publication. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. and Canadian Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Ontario. 120 pp. Abraham, K.F. and W.G. Miyasaki A spring survey of staging geese on Hudson Bay and James Bay coasts of Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, unpublished technical report, Maple, Ontario. 17 pp. Abraham, K.F. and A. Muldal Northern Ontario goose migration survey Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources report. Moosonee, Ontario. 4 pp. Abraham, K.F. and R.K. Ross Mute swans in the Hudson Bay Lowland. Ontario Birds 23: Abraham, K.F. and N. Wilson A collision of oldsquaws. Ontario Birds 15: Abraham, K.F., K. Couling, and L.R. Walton Snow goose banding at Akimiski Island, Nunavut and Cape Henrietta Maria, Ontario, in Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 15 pp. Abraham, K.F., D. Filliter, and D.A. Sutherland First documentation of Black scoter breeding in Ontario. Ontario Birds 26: Abraham, K.F., R.L. Jefferies, R.F. Rockwell, and C.D. MacInnes Why are there so many white geese in North America? Pages in J. Ratti (ed.). Proceedings of the 7th International Waterfowl Symposium, February 4-6, 1996, Memphis, Tennessee. Abraham, K.F., R.L. Jefferies, R.K. Ross, and J.O. Leafloor Snow geese in Polar Bear Provincial Park: Implications of a trophic cascade. Pages in K. Van Osch (ed.). Parks Research Forum for Ontario Proceedings. Abraham, K.F., J.O. Leafloor, and H.G. Lumsden. 1999a. Establishment and growth of the lesser snow goose nesting colony on Akimiski Island, James Bay, Northwest Territories. Canadian Field-Naturalist 113: Abraham, K.F., J.O. Leafloor, and D.H. Rusch. 1999b. Molt migrant Canada geese in northern Ontario and western James Bay. Journal of Wildlife Management 63: Abraham, K.F., L.M. McKinnon, Z. Jumean, S.M. Tully, L.R. Walton, and H.M. Stewart (lead coordinating authors and compilers) Hudson Plains Ecozone+ Status and Trends Assessment. Canadian Biodiversity: Ecosystem Status and Trends 2010, Technical Ecozone+ Report. Canadian Councils of Resource Ministers. Ottawa, Ontario. xxi pages. Abraham, K.F., W.A. Phelps, and J.C. Davies (eds.) A management plan for the Southern James Bay Population of Canada geese. Mississippi and Atlantic Flyway Council Technical Sections. 56 pp. Addy, C.E., W.F. Crissey, H.R. Webster, and G.F. Boyer Waterfowl breeding ground survey in eastern Canada. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Scientific Report No pp. Alisauskas, R.T Species description and biology. Pages 5-9 in The status of Ross s geese. Moser, T.J. (ed.). Arctic Goose Joint Venture Special Publication, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. and Canadian Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Ontario. Alison, R.M The king eider in Ontario. Canadian Field-Naturalist 89: AMR (Avian Monitoring Review) Steering Committee Environment Canada Avian Monitoring Review Final Report. Environment Canada, Ottawa, ON, 170 pp. P a g e 61

73 Angehrn, P.A.M A population estimate of the lesser snow goose nesting colony at Cape Henrietta Maria, Ontario, on 14 June Report prepared for Canadian Wildlife Service, Ontario region. Ankney, C.D An embarrassment of riches: too many geese. Journal of Wildlife Management 60: Anonymous Waterfowl banding Cochrane District Ontario Department of Lands and Forests report, Cochrane, Ontario. 10 pp. Anonymous Cooperative TVP-MVP goose banding in Ontario, pp. Badzinski, S., K. Ross, K. Abraham, R. Brook, S. Meyer, R. Cotter, and S. Earsom Sea Duck Joint Venture Annual Project Summary, Project 82, James Bay Molting Scoter Survey. 8 pp. Badzinski, S.S. 2007a. Greater Scaup. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Badzinski, S.S. 2007b. Lesser Scaup. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Bailey, J.R. 1969a. Snow goose banding at Cape Henrietta Maria in Ontario Department of Lands and Resources report. 6pp. Bailey, J.R. 1969b. Waterfowl banding program Big Piskwanish Point James Bay1969. Ontario Department of Lands and Resources report. 17 pp. Bailey, J.R Canada goose banding on Akimiski Island Ontario Department of Lands and Resources unpublished report. 6pp. Bailey, R.O Distribution of post breeding diving ducks (Aythyini and Mergini) on southern boreal lakes in Manitoba. Canadian Wildlife Service Progress Notes No pp. Banks, R.C., C. Cicero, J.L. Dunn, A.W. Kratter, P.C. Rasmussen, J.V. Remsen, Jr., J. D Rising, and D.F. Stotz Forty-fifth supplement to the American Ornithologists Union Checklist of North American Birds. Auk 121: Bartelt, C., W. Wheeler, and D. Doberstein Surveys of radio-marked Canada geese in the Hudson Bay Lowlands of northern Ontario. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Research Report pp. Batt, B.D.J. (ed) Arctic ecosystems in peril: report of the Arctic Goose Habitat Working Group. Arctic Goose Joint Venture Special Publication. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. and Canadian Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Ontario. 120 pp. Bellrose, F.C Ducks, Geese and Swans of North America. Stackpole Books, Harrison, Pennsylvania. Revised and enlarged edition. 568 pp. Bendell, B.E. and D.K. McNicol. 1987a. Fish predation, lake acidity and the composition of aquatic insect assemblages. Hydrobiologia 150: Bendell, B.E. and D.K. McNicol, 1987b. Estimation of nektonic insect populations. Freshwater Biology 18: P a g e 62

74 Bennett, K., R.W. Brook, S. Hagey, and K.F. Abraham Monitoring reproductive success of Southern James Bay and Mississippi Valley populations of Canada geese. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources unpublished report. 9 pp. Berglund, N.E., G.D. Racey, K.F. Abraham, G.S. Brown, B.A. Pond and L.A. Walton Woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in the Far North of Ontario: Background information in support of land use planning. Technical Report TR-147, Ministry of Natural Resources, Thunder Bay, Ontario. 160 pp. Bergman, R.D Use of southern boreal lakes by post breeding canvasbacks and redheads. Journal of Wildlife Management 37: Berkes, F., P.J. George, R.J. Preston, A. Hughes, J. Turner, and B.D. Cumming Wildlife harvesting and sustainable regional native economy in the Hudson and James Bay Lowlands, Ontario. Arctic 47: Berkes, F., A. Hughes, P.J. George, R.J. Preston, B.D. Cummins, and J. Turner The persistence of aboriginal land use: fish and wildlife harvest areas in the Hudson and James Bay Lowlands, Ontario. Arctic 48: Bird Studies Canada and NABCI Bird Conservation Regions. Published by Bird Studies Canada on behalf of the North American Bird Conservation Initiative. Accessed 21 April Blancher, P.J., R.D. Phoenix, D.S. Badzinski, M.D. Cadman, T.L. Crewe, C. M. Downes, D. Fillman, C.M. Francis, J. Hughes, D.J.T. Hussell, D. Lepage, J.D. McCracken, D.K. McNicol, B.A. Pond, R.K. Ross, R. Russell, L.A. Venier, and R.C. Weeber Population trend status of Ontario s forest birds. Forestry Chronicle 85: Blokpoel, H Recent changes in chronology of spring snow goose migration from southern Manitoba. Canadian Field-Naturalist 88: Borger, L. and T.D. Nudds Fire, humans, and climate: modeling distribution dynamics of boreal forest waterbirds. Ecological Applications 24: Bouvier, J Hooded Merganser. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.). Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Boyd, H U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service estimates of duck numbers in northwestern Ontario. Pages in H. Boyd (ed.) Waterfowl studies in Ontario, Canadian Wildlife Service Occasional Paper No pp. Boyd, H. and G.H. Finney Migratory game bird hunters and hunting in Canada. Canadian Wildlife Service Report Series Number pp. Boyer, G.F. and F.G. Cooch James Bay investigation Ontario Department of Lands and Forests. 6 pp. Boyer, G.F., H.G. Lumsden, and H.C. Hanson Aerial waterfowl surveys James Bay-Hudson Bay coastal plain of Ontario and Akimiski Island, N.W.T., CWS unpublished report. 9 pp. P a g e 63

75 Brazda, A.R. and G.J. Nun. 1965a. Waterfowl Breeding Population Survey: Northern Saskatchewan, Northern Manitoba and Western Ontario. USFWS, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife report. 17 pp. Brazda, A.R. and G.J. Nun. 1965b. Waterfowl Production Survey July 1965: Northern Saskatchewan, Northern Manitoba and Western Ontario. USFWS, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife report. 10 pp. Brazda, A.R. and G.J. Nun Waterfowl Breeding Pair Survey: Northern Saskatchewan, Northern Manitoba and Northern Ontario (Strata 16, 17, 18, 23, 36). USFWS, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife report. 24 pp. Brook, R.W. and D. Luukkonen (eds.) A management plan for the Mississippi Valley Population of Canada Geese. Mississippi Flyway Council Technical Section. 37 pp. Brook, R.W. and J.R. Hughes. 2014a Preliminary spring survey results for MVP Canada geese. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Canadian Wildlife Service. Administrative report. 4 pp. Brook, R.W. and J.R. Hughes. 2014b Preliminary spring survey results for SJBP Canada geese. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Canadian Wildlife Service. Administrative report. 4 pp. Brook, R. and C. Sharp James Bay fall waterfowl staging survey. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Unpublished report. Peterborough, Ontario. 8 pp. Brook, R.W., K.F. Abraham, K.R. Middel, and R.K. Ross Abundance and habitat selection of breeding scoters (Melanitta spp.) in Ontario s Hudson Bay Lowlands. Canadian Field-Naturalist 126: Brook, R., K. Ross, K. Abraham, and C. Davies Analysis of black duck and mallard Population and Productivity Trends. A preliminary report for the Black Duck Joint Venture Technical Committee. 31 pp. Brown, P.W. and L.H. Frederickson White-winged Scoter (Melanitta fusca). The Birds of North Online (A. Poole, ed.). Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: Bruggink, J.G., T.C. Tacha, J.C. Davies, and K.F. Abraham Nesting and brood-rearing ecology of Mississippi Valley Population Canada geese. Wildlife Monographs No pp. Cadman, M.D., P.F.J. Eagles, and F.M. Helleiner (eds.) Atlas of the breeding birds of Ontario, Federation of Ontario Naturalists and Long Point Bird Observatory. University of Waterloo Press, Waterloo, Ontario. 611 pp. Cadman, M.D., D.A. Sutherland, G.G. Beck, D. Lepage, and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the breeding birds of Ontario, Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Castelli, P.M., K.M. Dickson, and D.M Cramer Spatial and temporal distribution of Atlantic Brant. Final report to the Atlantic Flyway Council, Summer pp. Chamberlain, E.B. and C.F. Kaczynski Problems in aerial surveys of waterfowl in eastern Canada. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Special Scientific Report Wildlife No pp. Coady, G Canvasback. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.). Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, P a g e 64

76 Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Coady, G., D.A. Sutherland, C.D. Jones, M.K. Peck, and G. Binsfield First documented nest records of Ross s goose in Ontario. Ontario Birds 25: Cooch, F.G Observations on the autumn migration of blue geese. Wilson Bulletin 67: Cooke, F Common Eider. Page 513 in M.D. Cadman, P.F.J. Eagles, and F.M. Helleiner. Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario. University of Waterloo Press. 617 pp. Cooke, F. and D.J.T. Hussell King Eider. Page 514 in M.D. Cadman,., P.F.J. Eagles, and F.M. Helleiner. Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario. University of Waterloo Press. 617 pp. Craik, S.R Red-breasted Merganser. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.). Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Cranford, M.H Ontario Bird Records Committee Report for Ontario Birds 30: Cranford, M.H Ontario Bird Records Committee Report for Ontario Birds 31: Creighton, W.A Aerial goose breeding ground survey Cochrane District, Ontario and Akimiski Island, N. W. T Ontario Department of Lands and Forests report. 10 pp. Crins, W.J., P.A. Gray, P.W.C. Uhlig, and M.C. Wester The Ecosystems of Ontario, Part 1:Ecozones and Ecoregions. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Peterborough, Ontario, Inventory, Monitoring and Assessment, SIB TER IMA TR pp. Crissey, W.F Forecasting waterfowl harvest by flyways. Pages in J.B. Trefethen (ed.). Transactions of the Twenty-second North American Wildlife Conference. Wildlife Management Institute, Washington, D.C. Curry, B Gadwall. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.). Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Curtis, S.G. 1973a. The Atlantic Brant and eelgrass (Zostera marina) in James Bay, A preliminary report, February Report No. 8 in the James Bay report series, Canadian Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Ontario. 6 pp. Curtis, S.G. 1973b. The movement of geese through James Bay, Spring A preliminary report, February Report No. 10 in the James Bay Report Series, Canadian Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Ontario. 30 pp. Curtis, S.G. 1973c. The movement of geese through James Bay, Fall A preliminary report, March Canadian Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Ontario. 24 pp. CWS (Canadian Wildlife Service) Waterfowl Committee Population status of migratory game birds in Canada, November CWS Migratory Birds Regulatory Report No pp. Davies, J.C Northern Ontario goose migration survey Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources report. Moosonee, Ontario. 7 pp. P a g e 65

77 Davies, J.C Drive trapping of moulting ducks on the Hudson Bay coast, Ontario 1988: Progress report and banding proposal. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources report. Moosonee, Ontario. 8 pp. Dennis, D.G Waterfowl observations during the nesting season in Precambrian and clay belt areas of northern Ontario. Pages in H. Boyd (ed.) Canadian Wildlife Service waterfowl studies in eastern Canada Canadian Wildlife Service Report Series pp. Dennis, D.G. and N.R. North Waterfowl densities in northwestern Ontario during the 1979 breeding season. Pages 6-9 in S.G. Curtis, D.G. Dennis and H. Boyd (eds.) Waterfowl studies in Ontario, Canadian Wildlife Service Occasional Paper No pp. DUC (Ducks Unlimited Canada) Waterfowl of the boreal forest. 108 pp. Dugger, B.D., K.M. Dugger, and L.H. Fredrickson Hooded Merganser (Lophodytes cucullatus). The Birds of North American Online (A. Poole, ed.). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: Accessed July Dunn, E.H Common Merganser. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. EHJV (Eastern Habitat Joint Venture) Ontario Implementation Plan for the Eastern Habitat Joint Venture of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. 63 pp. Ecological Stratification Working Group A National Ecological Framework for Canada. Agriculture and Agri-food Canada, Research Branch, Centre for Land and Biological Resources Research and Environment Canada, State of the Environment Directorate, Ecozone Analysis Branch, Ottawa, Ontario/ Hull, Quebec. 125 pp. ESTR Secretariat Boreal Shield and Newfoundland Boreal ecozones + evidence for key findings summary. Canadian Biodiversity: Ecosystem Status and Trends 2010, Evidence for Key Findings Summary Report No. 10. Canadian Councils of Resource Ministers. Ottawa, Ontario. xv pp. Accessed July Far North Act An Act with respect to land use planning and protection in the Far North. Bill 191 enacted as Chapter 18 of the Statutes of Ontario, Accessed July Far North Advisory Council Consensus advice to the Ontario Minister of Natural Resources March pp. Far North Science Advisory Panel Science for a changing Far North. The Report of the Far North Science Advisory Panel. A report submitted to the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Queen s Printer for Ontario, Toronto, Ontario. 141 pp. Fast, M., B. Collins, and M. Gendron Trends in breeding waterfowl in Canada. Canadian Biodiversity: Ecosystem Status and Trends Technical Thematic Report No. 8. Canadian Councils of Resource Ministers. Ottawa, Ontario. iv+32pp. Available at Accessed July Francis, C.M. and F. Cooke Migration routes and recovery rates of lesser snow geese from southwestern Hudson Bay. Journal of Wildlife Management 56: P a g e 66

78 Gabor, T.S., T.R. Gadawski, R.K. Ross, R.S. Rempel, and D.W. Kroeker Visibility bias of waterfowl brood surveys using helicopters in the Great Clay Belt of northern Ontario. Journal of Field Ornithology 66: Gauthier, G Bufflehead (Bucephala albeola). The Birds of North Online (A. Poole, ed.). Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: Accessed July Gauthier, J. and Y.E. Aubry The Breeding Birds of Québec: Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Southern Québec. Association québecoise des groupes d ornithologuiqes. Province of Québec Society for the Protection of Birds, Canadian Wildlife Services, Environment Canada, Québec Region, Montreal. Gauthier, M.C., H. Blokpoel, and S.G. Curtis Observations on the spring migration of snow geese from southern Manitoba to James and Hudson Bays. Canadian Field-Naturalist 90: Gendron, M. 2007a. American Wigeon. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Gendron, M. 2007b. Northern Pintail. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Gilchrist, H.G. and G.J. Robertson Observations of marine birds and mammals wintering at polynyas and ice edges in the Belcher Islands, Nunavut, Canada. Arctic 53: Goudie, R.I., G.J. Robertson and A. Reed Common Eider (Somateria mollissima). The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: Accessed July Groves, D.J The 2010 North American Trumpeter Swan Survey a cooperative North American survey. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Migratory Bird Management. Juneau, Alaska. Hagey, S., R.W. Brook, and K.F. Abraham. 2013a. Snow goose banding at Akimiski Island, Nunavut, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources unpublished technical report. Peterborough, Ontario. 2 pp Hagey, S., R.W. Brook, and K.F. Abraham. 2013b. Canada goose banding on the coasts of James Bay and Hudson Bay, Ontario and Akimiski Island, Nunavut Territory, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources unpublished technical report. Peterborough, Ontario. 8 pp. Hanson, H.C. and C. Currie The kill of wild geese by natives of the Hudson-James Bay region. Arctic 10: Hanson, H.C., H.G. Lumsden, J.J. Lynch, and H.W. Norton Population characteristics of three mainland colonies of blue and lesser snow geese nesting in the southern Hudson Bay region. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Research Report (Wildlife) No. 92. Maple, Ontario. Hanson, H.C., M. Rogers, and E.S. Rogers Waterfowl in the forested portion of the Canadian Precambrian Shield and Paleozoic Basin. Canadian Field-Naturalist 69: Hawkins, A.S., W.F. Crissey, and E.G. Wellein Waterfowl reconnaissance in the James Bay Hudson Bay area. Unpublished report to the Flyways. 9 pp. P a g e 67

79 Hawkins, A.S., R.C. Hanson, H.K. Nelson, and H.M Reeves (eds.) Flyways: Pioneering waterfowl management in North America. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 517 pp. Hudson Bay Project The Hudson Bay Project: 2012 Annual Report. 59 pp. Hughes, J. and K.F. Abraham Canada Goose. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Hughes, J Green-winged Teal, Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Hussell, D.J.T Oldsquaw. Page 515 in M.D. Cadman, P.F.J. Eagles, and F.M. Helleiner. Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario. University of Waterloo Press. 617 pp Jeffries, D.S., D.K. McNicol and R.C. Weeber Effects on aquatic chemistry and biology. Chapter 6, Pages in H.A. Morrison and S. Carou (eds.) Canadian Acid Deposition Science Assessment. Environment Canada, Meteorological Service of Canada, Downsview, Ontario. 440 pp. Jonsson, J.E., J.P. Ryder, and R.T. Alisauskas Ross s Goose (Chen rossii). The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: Accessed July Kaczynski, C.F. and E.B. Chamberlain Aerial survey of Canada geese and black ducks in eastern Canada. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Scientific Report No Kerbes, R.H Lesser snow geese in the eastern Canadian Arctic. Canadian Wildlife Service Report Series No. 35. Ottawa, Ontario. Kerbes, R.H., K. M. Meeres, R.T. Alisauskas, F.D. Caswell, K.F. Abraham, and R.K. Ross Inventory of nesting mid-continent lesser snow and Ross s geese in Eastern and Central Arctic Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service Technical Report, Winnipeg, Manitoba. 54 pp. Kerbes, R.H., K.M. Meeres, and R.T. Alisauskas Surveys of nesting lesser snow geese and Ross s geese in arctic Canada, Arctic Goose Joint Venture Special Publication, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. and Canadian Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Ontario. 56 pp. Kessel, B., D.A. Rocque, and J.S. Barclay Greater Scaup (Aythya marila). The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, ed.). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: Accessed July Kortright, F.H The Ducks, Geese and Swans of North America. The American Wildlife Institute, Washington, D.C. 476 pp. Leafloor, J.O Breeding pair surveys of the Southern James Bay Population of Canada geese in Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Unpublished report. 11 pp. Leafloor, J.O. and K.F. Abraham Procedures for monitoring the Mississippi Valley Population of Canada geese and suggestions for improvement. Pages in K.M. Dickson (ed) Towards conservation of the diversity of Canada geese (Branta canadensis). Canadian Wildlife Service Occasional Paper No P a g e 68

80 Leafloor, J.O., K.F. Abraham, D.H. Rusch, R.K. Ross, and M.H. Hill Status of the Southern James Bay Population of Canada geese. Pages in J. Ratti (ed.) Proceedings of the 7th International Waterfowl Symposium, February 1996, Memphis, Tennessee. Leafloor, J.O., M.R.J. Hill, D.H. Rusch, K.F. Abraham, and R.K. Ross Nesting ecology and gosling survival of Canada geese on Akimiski Island, Northwest Territories. Pages in K.M. Dickson (ed) Towards conservation of the diversity of Canada geese (Branta canadensis). Canadian Wildlife Service Occasional Paper No Leafloor, J.O., T.C. Tacha, and J.C. Davies Breeding pair surveys for the Southern James Bay Population of Canada geese. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Unpublished report. 7 pp. Leckie, S. 2007a. Ring-necked Duck. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage, and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Leckie, S. 2007b. Ruddy Duck. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage, and A.R. Couturier (eds) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Lewis, H.F Migrations of the American Brant. Auk 54: Lumsden, H.G Snow goose breeding colony in Ontario. Canadian Field-Naturalist 71: Lumsden, H.G The Status of Waterfowl in the Cape Henrietta Maria Region of Ontario Transactions of the Northeast Wildlife Conference Proceeding of the10th Annual Meeting pages Lumsden, H.G Goose surveys on James Bay Ontario Department of Lands and Forests unpublished technical report, Maple, Ontario. 32 pp. Lumsden, H.G Differential migration in yearling and adult lesser snow geese (Anser caerulescens). Bird-Banding 46: Lumsden, H.G Snow cover survey, Hudson Bay Lowlands, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Maple, Ontario. 4 pp. Lumsden, H.G. 1984a. The breeding status of Tundra Swans (Cygnus columbianus) in northern Ontario. Ontario Field Biologist 38:1-4. Lumsden, H.G. 1984b. The pre-settlement breeding distribution of Trumpeter (Cygnus buccinator) and Tundra Swans (C. columbianus) in eastern Canada. Canadian Field-Naturalist 94: Lumsden, H.G. 1987a. Brant. Page 563 in M.D. Cadman, P.F.J. Eagles, and F.M. Helleiner. Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario. University of Waterloo Press. 617 pp. Lumsden, H.G. 1987b. Canada Goose. Pages in M.D. Cadman, P.F.J. Eagles, and F.M. Helleiner. Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario. University of Waterloo Press. 617 pp. Lumsden, H.G. 1987c. Tundra Swan Pages 509 in M.D. Cadman, P.F.J. Eagles, and F.M. Helleiner. Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario. University of Waterloo Press. 617 pp. Lumsden, H.G Trumpeter Swan. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird P a g e 69

81 Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Lumsden, H., R. Kingdon, B. Kingdon, K. Intini and J. Kee Recent history of Trumpeter Swans in Ontario and Quebec and their status in Ontario Birds 30: Lumsden, H.G., R.E. Page and N. Quinn Goldeneye studies in northern Ontario. Ontario Fish and Wildlife Review 16:7-11. Luukkonen, D.R., H.H. Prince, and R.C. Mykut Movements and survival of molt migrant Canada geese from southern Michigan. Journal of Wildlife Management 72: MacFie, J.A Waterfowl banding Fort Severn, Ontario Department of Lands and Forests report. 7 pp. Malecki, R., S. Sheaffer, D. Howell, and T. Strange Northern pintails in eastern North America: Their seasonal distribution, movement patterns, and habitat affiliations. Atlantic Flyway Council Technical Section Final Report. 68 pp. Mallory, M. 2007a. Bufflehead. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Mallory, M. 2007b. Common Goldeneye. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Mallory, M.L. and K. Metz Common Merganser (Mergus merganser). The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, ed.). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: Accessed July Mallory, M.L., P.J. Weatherhead, D.K. McNicol, and M.E. Wayland Nest site selection by common goldeneyes in response to habitat features influenced by acid precipitation. Ornis Scandinavica 24: McCall, C.I. and J.P. Prevett The 1981 Moose River estuary waterfowl hunt and summary o information since Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources unpublished technical report. Moosonee, Ontario. 43 pp McNicol, D.K. and M. Wayland Distribution of waterfowl broods in Sudbury area lakes in relation to fish, macroinvertebrates and water chemistry. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 49 (Supplement 1): McNicol, D.K., B.E. Bendell, and R.K. Ross Studies of the effects of acidification on aquatic wildlife in Canada: waterfowl and trophic relationship in small lakes in northern Ontario. Canadian Wildlife Service Occasional Paper No pp. McNicol, D.K., M.L. Mallory, and C.H.R. Wedeles. 1995a. Assessing biological recovery of acid-sensitive lakes in Ontario, Canada using WARMS. Water Air Soil Pollution, Acid Reign 95? Conference Proceedings. 6 pp. P a g e 70

82 McNicol, D.K., R.K. Ross, M.L. Mallory, and L.A. Brisebois. 1995b. Trends in waterfowl populations: evidence of recovery from acid rain. Chapter 16, pages in J. Gunn (ed.) Environmental Restoration and Recovery of an Industrial Region. Springer-Verlag, New York. Merendino, M.T. and C.D. Ankney Habitat use by mallards and American black ducks breeding in central Ontario. Condor 96: Merendino, M.T., C.D. Ankney, and R.K Ross A helicopter-based survey of waterfowl broods in central Ontario. Canadian Field-Naturalist 114: Meyer, S Ontario Eastern Waterfowl Survey Plot Component. Canadian Wildlife Service report. 7 pp. Meyer, S.W., S.S Badzinski, M.L. Schummer and C.M. Sharp Changes in summer abundance and distribution of mute swans along the lower Great Lakes of Ontario, Ontario Birds 30: Moser, T.J. (ed.) The status of Ross s geese. Arctic Goose Joint Venture Special Publication, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. and Canadian Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Ontario. NABCI Canada (North American Bird Conservation Initiative) The state of Canada s Birds Eastern Boreal. NAWMP (North American Waterfowl Management Plan, Plan Committee) North American Waterfowl Management Plan 2004: Implementation Framework: Strengthening the Biological Foundation. Canadian Wildlife Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales. 106 pp. OEHJV (Ontario Eastern Habitat Joint Venture) Ontario Eastern Habitat Joint Venture Five-year Implementation Plan pp. OMEI and OMNDMF (Ontario Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure and Ontario Ministry of Northern Development, Mines and Forestry) Proposed Growth Plan for Northern Ontario. Queen s Printer, Toronto. Ontario. 61 pp. Orr, D.H., E.F. Bowers, and O. Florschutz, Jr Canada geese population trends, distributions, and management strategies in the southeastern United States. Pages in D.H. Rusch, M.D. Samuel, D.D. Humburg, and B.D. Sullivan (eds.). Biology and Management of Canada Geese. Proceeding of the International Canada Goose Symposium, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Peck, G.K. and R.D. James Breeding birds of Ontario: Nidiology and Distribution. Vol. 1: nonpasserines. Life Sciences Miscellaneous Publications. Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, Ontario. 321 pp. Peck, G.K. and R.D. James Breeding birds of Ontario: nidiology and distribution. Vol. 2: Passerines. Life Sciences Miscellaneous Publications. Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, Ontario. 387 pp. Petrie, S.A. and C.M. Francis Rapid increase in the lower Great Lakes population of feral Mute Swan: A review and recommendation. Wildlife Society Bulletin 31: Prevett, J.P Productivity appraisals of lesser snow and Canada geese in the James-Hudson Bay Lowlands of Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources unpublished report, Moosonee, Ontario. 27 pp. Prevett, J.P Fall surveys of lesser snow goose productivity in-hudson and James Bays Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources unpublished report, Moosonee, Ontario. 6 pp. P a g e 71

83 Prevett, J.P Current kill levels of waterfowl by Cree hunters of James and Hudson Bays, Ontario. A progress report March Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources unpublished report, Moosonee, Ontario. 20 pp. Prevett, J.P Productivity of lesser snow geese of the Hudson Bay Populations. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources unpublished report, Moosonee, Ontario. 14 pp. Prevett, J.P. and F.C. Johnson Continued expansion of breeding range of Ross goose. Condor 79: Prevett, J.P., A.R. Brazda, H.G. Lumsden, and J.J. Lynch Problems with snow goose productivity appraisals. Wildlife Society Bulletin 10: Prevett, J.P., H.G. Lumsden, and F.C. Johnson Waterfowl kill by Cree hunters of the Hudson Bay Lowlands, Ontario. Arctic 36: Prevett. J.P., I.F. Marshall, and V.G. Thomas Fall foods of lesser snow geese in the James Bay region. Journal of Wildlife Management 43: Prevett, J.P., I.F. Marshall, and V.G. Thomas Spring foods of snow and Canada geese at James Bay. Journal of Wildlife Management 49: Rankin, R., M. Austin, and J. Rice Ecological classification system for the ecosystem status and trends report. Canadian Biodiversity: Ecosystem Status and Trends Technical Thematic Report No. 1. Canadian Councils of Resource Ministers. Ottawa, Ontario. Available at: Accessed July Raveling, D.G. and H.G. Lumsden Nesting ecology of Canada geese in the Hudson Bay Lowlands of Ontario: evolutions and population regulation. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Fish and Wildlife Research Report No pp. Rempel, R.S., K.F. Abraham, T.R. Gadawski, R.K. Ross, and S. Gabor A simple wetland habitat classification for boreal forest waterfowl. Journal of Wildlife Management 61: Richards, I.M Ontario Bird Records Committee Report for Ontario Birds 26: Richards, I.M Ontario Bird Records Committee Report for Ontario Birds 27: Riley, J.L Wetlands of the Ontario Hudson Bay Lowlands: A regional overview. Nature Conservancy of Canada, Toronto, Ontario. 156 pp + app. Roach, J., B. Griffith, D. Verbyla, and J. Jones Mechanisms influencing changes in lake area in Alaskan boreal forest. Global Change Biology 17: Robertson, G.J. and H.G. Gilchrist Evidence for population declines among common eiders breeding in the Belcher Islands. Arctic 51: Robertson, G.J. and R.I. Goudie Harlequin Duck (Histrionicus histrionicus). The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: Accessed July Robertson, G.J. and J.-P. Savard Long-tailed Duck (Clangula hyemalis). The Birds of America Online. (A. Poole, ed.). Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: Accessed July P a g e 72

84 Robus, J Linking two ways of knowing to understand climate change impacts on geese and First Nations in the Hudson Bay Lowland. M.Sc. Thesis, Trent University, Peterborough, Ontario. 189 pp. Ross, R.K A mid-june waterfowl survey along the southeastern Hudson Bay shore of Ontario. Canadian Wildlife Service Technical Report. 31 pp. Ross, R.K Duck distribution along the James and Hudson Bay coasts of Ontario. Le Naturaliste canadien (Revue Ecologie Systematique) 109: Ross, R.K An estimate of the black scoter, Melanitta nigra, population in James and Hudson Bays. Canadian Field-Naturalist 97: Ross, R.K Use of the James Bay and Hudson Bay coasts of Ontario by dabbling ducks. Pages in S.G. Curtis, D.G. Dennis, and H. Boyd Waterfowl studies in Ontario, Canadian Wildlife Service Occasional Paper No. 54. Ross, R.K. 1985a. A survey of migratory birds harvested by native people from the communities of Big Trout Lake, Kasabonika Lake, and Wapekeka Lake. Canadian Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Ontario. 18 pp. Ross, R.K. 1985b. Helicopter vs. ground surveys of waterfowl in the boreal forest. Wildlife Society Bulletin 13: Ross, R.K Interim report on waterfowl breeding pair surveys in northern Ontario, Canadian Wildlife Service Progress Notes No pp. Ross, R.K Migrant and staging waterfowl survey. Pages in N. Wilson (ed). A habitat based wildlife assessment of Ontario s sub-arctic coast. Annual Report March Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Moosonee, Ontario. 26 pp. Ross, R.K Migrant and staging waterfowl survey. Pages in N. Wilson (ed). A habitat based wildlife assessment of Ontario s sub-arctic coast. Annual Report March Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Moosonee, Ontario. 32 pp. Ross, R.K The black scoter in northern Ontario. Ontario Birds 12:1-7. Ross, R.K Black Duck survey of northeastern Ontario. CWS unpublished technical report. Ottawa, Ontario 7 pp. Ross, R.K Black Duck survey of northeastern Ontario. CWS unpublished technical report. Ottawa, Ontario 7 pp. Ross, R.K. 2007a. American Black Duck. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.). Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Ross, R.K. 2007b. Black Scoter. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.). Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Ross, R.K. 2007c. Blue-winged Teal. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.). Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. P a g e 73

85 Ross, R.K. 2007d. Surf Scoter. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.). Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Ross, R.K. 2007e. White-winged Scoter. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.). Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Ross, R.K. and K.F. Abraham Feasibility assessment of monitoring the eastern black scoter population through aerial surveys of moulting flocks in James Bay. Canadian Wildlife Service, Ottawa and Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Peterborough. 8 pp. Ross, R.K. and D. Fillman Distribution of American black duck and mallard in northern Ontario. Canadian Wildlife Service Progress Notes No Ottawa, Ontario. 5pp. Ross, R.K. and N.R. North Breeding records of northern shoveler, Anas clypeata, along the northern coast of Ontario. Canadian Field-Naturalist 97:113. Ross, R.K., K.F. Abraham, R. Brook, and R. Cotter Feasibility assessment of monitoring the eastern black scoter population through aerial surveys of moulting flocks in James Bay. Canadian Wildlife Service, Ottawa and Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Peterborough. 8 pp. Ross, R.K., K.F. Abraham, D. Fillman, B.T. Collins, and R.H. Kerbes A helicopter-based survey method for monitoring the nesting component of snow goose colonies. Northeast Wildlife 58:9-22. Ross, R.K., K.F. Abraham, T.R. Gadawski, R.S. Rempel, T.S. Gabor, and R. Maher Abundance and distribution of breeding waterfowl in the Great Clay Belt of northern Ontario. Canadian Field- Naturalist 116: Rowe, J.S Forest Regions of Canada. Publication No Department of the Environment, Canadian Forestry Service, Ottawa, Ontario. 172 pp. Roy, C.L., C.M. Herwig, W.L. Hohman, and R.T. Eberhardt Ring-necked Duck (Aythya collaris). The Birds of North Online (A. Poole, ed.). Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York.Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: Accessed July Sandilands, A Birds of Ontario: Habitat requirements, limiting factors and status. UBC Press. 365 pp. Sandilands, A. 2007a. Northern Shoveler. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.). Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Sandilands, A. 2007b. Redhead. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.). Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Savard, J.-P.L. and P Lamothe Distribution, abundance and aspects of breeding ecology of black scoters, Melanitta nigra, and surf scoters, M. perspicillata, in northern Québec. Canadian Field- Naturalist 105: P a g e 74

86 SDJV (Sea Duck Joint Venture) White-winged Scoter (Melanitta fusca) in Sea Duck Information Series. Accessed July SDJV (Sea Duck Joint Venture) Recommendations for monitoring distribution, abundance and trends for North American Sea Ducks. December U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska, and Canadian Wildlife Service, Sackville, New Brunswick. 101 pp. SDJV (Sea Duck Joint Venture) Sea Duck Joint Venture Strategic Plan U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska, and Canadian Wildlife Service, Sackville, New Brunswick. SDJV (Sea Duck Joint Venture) Atlantic and Great Lakes sea duck migration study: progress report February Accessed August Smith, R.H An investigation of the waterfowl resources of the south and east coasts of James Bay Unpublished report. 62 pp. Smith, R.H An investigation of the waterfowl resources of the west coast of James Bay Unpublished report. 80 pp. Smith, R.H Exploring James Bay by canoe. Pages in A.S. Hawkins, R.C. Hanson, H.K. Nelson and H.M Reeves (eds) Flyways: Pioneering waterfowl management in North America. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 517 pp. Smith, G.W A critical review of the aerial and ground surveys of breeding waterfowl in North America. U.S. Department of Interior Biological Services Report 5. Washington, D.C. Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans House of Commons Canada. FOPO Number 016, 2 nd Session, 39 th Parliament. March 4, Available at Accessed June Stirrett, G.M Field Observations of geese in James Bay, with special reference to the blue goose. Proceeding of the 19 th North American Wildlife Conference, Wildlife Management Institute. Pages Stitt, R.J Big Piskwamish Point banding report. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Moosonee, Ontario. 14 pp. Stitt, R.J Investigation of potential black duck banding sites in southern James Bay, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Moosonee, Ontario. Stitt, R.J Duck banding at East Point, James Bay, Ontario in Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Moosonee, Ontario. 22 pp. Sutherland, D.A King Eider. Pages 630 in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Sutherland, D.A., W.J. Crins, and K.F. Abraham. In prep. Canvasback breeding at Hearst. Unpublished manuscript intended for Ontario. Tacha, T.C., J.C. Davies, D.D. Thornburg, and K.F. Abraham Estimating breeding pairs and spring numbers of Mississippi Valley Population Canada geese. Pages in D.H. Rusch, M.D. Samuel, D.D. Humburg and B.D. Sullivan (eds.). Proceedings of the 1991 International Canada Goose Symposium. Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Tacha, T.C., A. Woolf, and W.D. Klimstra Breeding distribution and subpopulations of the Mississippi Valley Population of Canada geese. Journal of Wildlife Management 52: P a g e 75

87 Tacha, T.C., A. Woolf, W.D. Klimstra and K.F. Abraham Migration patterns of the Mississippi Valley Population of Canada geese. Journal of Wildlife Management 55: Thomas, V.G Adaptations of breeding geese to unpredictable environmental conditions of the arctic. Transactions of the 19 th IUGB Congress, Tronheim, Norway: Thomas, V.G. and J.P. Prevett The roles of the James and Hudson Bay Lowlands in the annual cycle of geese. Le Naturaliste canadien (Revue Ecologie Systematique) 109: Thompson, J.E. and W.A. Hutchison Resource use by native and non-native hunters of the Ontario Hudson Bay Lowlands. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Moosonee. 150 pp. Tozer, D.C The Great Lakes Marsh Monitoring Program : 18 years of surveying birds and frogs as indicators of ecosystem health. Bird Studies Canada, Port Rowan, Ontario. 10 pp. USFWS (United States Fish and Wildlife Service) Western and Central Ontario Waterfowl Breeding Population Survey Preliminary report, Office of Migratory Bird Management, Patuxtent, Maryland. 18 pp. USFWS (United States Fish and Wildlife Service) Waterfowl population status, US Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 82 pp. Vaught, R.W. and G.C. Arthur Migration routes and mortality rates of Canada geese banded in the Hudson Bay Lowlands. Journal of Wildlife Management 29: Wayland, M. and D.K. McNicol Movements and survival of common goldeneye broods near Sudbury, Ontario, Canada. Canadian Journal of Zoology 72: Wellein, E.G. and H.G. Lumsden Northern Forests and Tundra. Pages in J.P. Linduska (ed) Waterfowl Tomorrow. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Wesley, N.F Migratory bird harvesting and management study. Wabun-Wetum Consulting, Moose Factory, Ontario. Wiken, E.B Terrestrial Ecozones of Canada. Ecological Land Classification Series No. 19, Lands Directorate, Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario. 19 pp. Wilkins, K.A., M.C. Otto, and M.D. Koneff Trends in duck breeding populations, USFWS Administrative Report. Laurel, Maryland. 21 pp. Wilson, N.C. and R.D. McRae Seasonal and geographical distribution of birds for selected sites in Ontario s Hudson Bay Lowland. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Toronto, Ontario. Wypkema, R.C.P. and C.D. Ankney Nutrient reserve dynamics of lesser snow geese staging at James Bay, Ontario. Canadian Journal of Zoology 57: Zimmerling, J.R. 2007a. Wood Duck. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. Zimmerling, J.R. 2007b. Mallard. Pages in M.D. Cadman, D.A. Sutherland, G.C. Beck, D. LePage and A.R. Couturier (eds.) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp. P a g e 76

88 8.1 Unpublished Files Cited Waterfowl Population Calculations for Ontario in 1999 prepared by K. Ross. This is referred to as CWS, unpublished data throughout the report. See Appendix 6 for details. Canadian Wildlife Service/Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Waterfowl Trend Assessment. This is referred to as Blancher et al. (unpublished database) throughout the report. This is a spreadsheet that includes survey data for all species in all BCRs in Ontario. Data from all applicable surveys were included in this spreadsheet and rates of change were assessed in the assessment process over various time periods (including: most recent 10 years, first atlas to second atlas ( vs ), and long term (late 1960s to 2006)). Additionally, it was determined whether the population was currently at a maximum or minimum over the whole period of available data. Reliability of trend assessment criteria (precision, coverage, design) was also assessed. Blancher et al. (2009) describe the methods used, but report only on certain forest species. OMNR (unpublished data). These are in various files and notebooks from OMNR biologists. The data are housed in the Wildlife Research and Monitoring Section, Peterborough, Ontario. K. Abraham (unpublished data). These are in various files and notebooks from OMNR biologists. The data are housed by the author, but may also be duplicated in the Wildlife Research and Monitoring Section, Peterborough, Ontario. P a g e 77

89 APPENDIX 1. PLACE NAMES Figure A1.1. Boreal region communities, First Nations, and place names mentioned in the text. P a g e 78