Search USGSSearch

Geology topics

Charles W. Shaiffer

Publications and source records attributed to Charles W. Shaiffer.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

Band reporting rates of mallards in the Mississippi alluvial valley

We captured 2,182 mallards ( Anas platyrhynchos ) in eastcentral Arkansas and marked 730 with standard bands, 728 with 10 reward bands, and 724 with 'dummy' radio transmitters during November 1986-89 to estimate band reporting rates in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley (MAV). Assuming all transmitters were reported, reporting rates were 0.16 (SE=0.049) for standard bands and 0.34 (SE=0.081) for 10 reward bands. Interviews with hunters indicated that flock size distributions differed ( P =0.03) between mallards wearing transmitters and those wearing bands (standard or reward). Mallards wearing transmitters were more likely to be alone and less likely to be in large flocks when recovered than were mallards wearing bands. These results suggest that either band reporting rates of mallards in the MAV are substantially less than those of midcontinent mallards ( P =0.03), or marking mallards with external transmitters increases susceptibility to hunting mortality.

Arkansas

A field test for differences in condition among trapped and shot mallards

We tested predictions from the condition bias hypothesis (Weatherland and Greenwood 1981) regarding the effects of sampling methods of body weights of mallards ( Anas platyrhynchos ) at White River National Wildlife Refuge (WRNWR), Arkansas, during 24 November-8 December 1985. Body weights of 84 mallards caught with unbaited rocket nets in a natural wetland were used as experimental controls and compared to the body weights of 70 mallards captured with baited rocket nets, 86 mallards captured with baited swim-in traps, and 130 mallards killed by hunters. We found no differences (P > 0.27) in body weight among sampling methods, but body condition (wt/wing length) of the birds killed by hunters was less (P < 0.02) than that of the controls. Power of the test statistics to reject the null hypothesis of equal body weights among sampling methods was > 0.75 for differences > 50 g. The condition bias hypothesis probably applies to ducks killed by hunters but not to trapping operations when substantial (> 20 at 1 time) numbers of birds are captured.

Arkansas

Procedures for the use of aircraft in wildlife biotelemetry studies

This is a report on the state of the art methodology and on questions that arise while one is preparing to use aircraft in a biotelemetry study. In general the first step in preparing to mount an antenna on an aircraft is to consult with a certified aircraft mechanic. Aircraft certification is discussed to provide background information concerning the role of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in regulating the use of biotelemetry antennas on aircraft. However, approval of any specific design of antenna mount rests with local FAA authority. Airplane and helicopter antenna attachments are described. Performance of the receiving antenna system is discussed with emphasis on how variables as aircraft type and antenna configuration may influence reception. The side-looking vs. front-looking antenna configuration and the VHF vs. HF frequency band are generally recommended for most aerial tracking studies. Characteristics of receivers, transmitters, and antennas that might influence tracking are discussed. Specific topics such as calibration of receivers and transmitter quality control are considered. Suggestions in preparing for and conducting tracking flights that will improve overall efficiency and safety are presented. Search techniques, including procedures for conducting large and specific area surveys as well as methods to improve and evaluate search efficiency, are discussed. A concluding section considers special topics such as low-level operations and the use of helicopters. Diagrams of antenna mounts, equipment check-off lists, and antenna test procedures are included as appendices.

Resource Publication