Geology topics

Elisabeth B. Webb

Publications and source records attributed to Elisabeth B. Webb.

64 records · Page 4Linked to original sources

USGS2016

How will predicted land-use change affect waterfowl spring stopover ecology? Inferences from an individual-based model

Habitat loss, habitat fragmentation, overexploitation and climate change pose familiar and new challenges to conserving natural populations throughout the world. One approach conservation planners may use to evaluate the effects of these challenges on wildlife populations is scenario planning. We developed an individual-based model to evaluate the effects of future land use and land cover changes on spring-migrating dabbling ducks in North America. We assessed the effects of three Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change emission scenarios (A1B, A2 and B1) on dabbling duck stopover duration, movement distances and mortality. We specifically focused on migration stopover duration because previous research has demonstrated that individuals arriving earlier on the nesting grounds exhibit increased reproductive fitness. Compared to present conditions, all three scenarios increased stopover duration and movement distances of agent ducks. Although all three scenarios presented migrating ducks with increased amounts of wetland habitat, scenarios also contained substantially less cropland, which decreased overall carrying capacity of the study area. Synthesis and applications . Land-use change may increase waterfowl spring migration stopover duration in the midcontinent region of North America due to reduced landscape energetic carrying capacity. Climate change will alter spatial patterns of crop distributions with corn and rice production areas shifting to different regions. Thus, conservation planners will have to address population-level energetic implications of shifting agricultural food resources and increased uncertainty in yearly precipitation patterns within the next 50 years.

Journal of Applied Ecology↗

USGS2016

Invertebrates in managed waterfowl marshes

Invertebrates are an important food for breeding, migrating, and wintering waterfowl. Sparse study has been devoted to understanding the influence of waterfowl and wetland management on production of invertebrates for waterfowl foods; however, manipulation of hydrology and soils may change or enhance production. Fish can compete with waterfowl for invertebrate forage in wetlands and harm aquatic macrophytes; biomanipulation (e.g., stocking piscivores) may improve waterfowl habitat quality. Similarly, some terrestrial vertebrates (e.g., beaver ( Castor canadensis )) may positively or negatively impact invertebrate communities in waterfowl habitats. Various challenges exist to wetland management for invertebrates for waterfowl, but the lack of data on factors influencing production may be the most limiting.

Book chapter↗

USGS2015

An empirical evaluation of landscape energetic models: Mallard and American black duck space use during the non-breeding period

Bird conservation Joint Ventures are collaborative partnerships between public agencies and private organizations that facilitate habitat management to support waterfowl and other bird populations. A subset of Joint Ventures has developed energetic carrying capacity models (ECCs) to translate regional waterfowl population goals into habitat objectives during the non-breeding period. Energetic carrying capacity models consider food biomass, metabolism, and available habitat to estimate waterfowl carrying capacity within an area. To evaluate Joint Venture ECCs in the context of waterfowl space use, we monitored 33 female mallards ( Anas platyrhynchos ) and 55 female American black ducks ( A. rubripes ) using global positioning system satellite telemetry in the central and eastern United States. To quantify space use, we measured first-passage time (FPT: time required for an individual to transit across a circle of a given radius) at biologically relevant spatial scales for mallards (3.46 km) and American black ducks (2.30 km) during the non-breeding period, which included autumn migration, winter, and spring migration. We developed a series of models to predict FPT using Joint Venture ECCs and compared them to a biological null model that quantified habitat composition and a statistical null model, which included intercept and random terms. Energetic carrying capacity models predicted mallard space use more efficiently during autumn and spring migrations, but the statistical null was the top model for winter. For American black ducks, ECCs did not improve predictions of space use; the biological null was top ranked for winter and the statistical null was top ranked for spring migration. Thus, ECCs provided limited insight into predicting waterfowl space use during the non-breeding season. Refined estimates of spatial and temporal variation in food abundance, habitat conditions, and anthropogenic disturbance will likely improve ECCs and benefit conservation planners in linking non-breeding waterfowl habitat objectives with distribution and population parameters. Published 2015. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Arkansas, Delaware, Louisiana, Michigan, New Jerse↗

USGS2015

Aquatic invertebrate food base for waterbirds at Wetland Reserve Program easements in the lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley

Migratory waterbirds depend on invertebrates as a key source of dietary protein, but few studies have quantified aquatic invertebrates or their response to management on privately owned wetlands. Our objectives were to quantify the effects of wetland management provided through the Migratory Bird Habitat Initiative (MBHI) on invertebrate biomass, family richness, and secondary production at Wetland Reserve Program (WRP) easements in Arkansas and Missouri. We collected core and sweep-net samples bi-weekly in autumn 2011 and sweep samples in winter 2012 at WRP easements enrolled in MBHI ( n  = 13), WRP easements not enrolled in MBHI ( n  = 12), and intensively managed public wetlands ( n  = 7) in Arkansas and Missouri. Overall mean (±SE) invertebrate biomass and production during autumn were 11.96 (±1.29) kg/ha and 1.57 (±1.09) kg/ha*season, and during winter were 3.96 (±0.55) kg/ha and 1.38 (±0.11), respectively. Macroinvertebrate biomass and family richness did not differ among wetland types or management practices, including inundation and mowing. Secondary macroinvertebrate production during autumn was 200 % greater on MBHI contracts compared to WRP easements. During winter, production was 40 % greater on MBHI and WRP easements compared to public wetlands. Our results suggest that with management, wetlands enrolled in conservation easement programs can be an important source of invertebrate production for migratory waterbirds.

Wetlands↗

USGS2015

Effects of the light goose conservation order on non-target waterfowl distribution during spring migration

The Light Goose Conservation Order (LGCO) was initiated in 1999 to reduce mid-continent populations of light geese (lesser snow geese Chen caerulescens and Ross's geese C. rossi) . However, concern about potential for LGCO activities (i.e. hunting activities) to negatively impact non-target waterfowl species during spring migration in the Rainwater Basin (RWB) of Nebraska prompted agency personnel to limit the number of hunt days each week and close multiple public wetlands to LGCO activities entirely. To evaluate the effects of the LGCO in the RWB, we quantified waterfowl density at wetlands open and closed to LGCO hunting and recorded all hunter encounters during springs 2011 and 2012. We encountered a total of 70 hunting parties on 22 study wetlands, with over 90% of these encounters occurring during early season when the majority of waterfowl used the RWB region. We detected greater overall densities of dabbling ducks Anas spp., as well as for mallards A. platyrhynchos and northern pintails A. acuta on wetlands closed to the LGCO. We detected no effects of hunt day in the analyses of dabbling duck densities. We detected no differences in mean weekly dabbling duck densities among wetlands open to hunting, regardless of weekly or cumulative hunting encounter frequency throughout early season. Additionally, hunting category was not a predictor for the presence of greater white-fronted geese Anser albifrons in a logistic regression model. Given that dabbling duck densities were greater on wetlands closed to hunting, providing wetlands free from hunting disturbance as refugia during the LGCO remains an important management strategy at migration stopover sites. However, given that we did not detect an effect of hunt day or hunting frequency on dabbling duck density, our results suggest increased hunting frequency at sites already open to hunting would likely have minimal impacts on the distribution of non-target waterfowl species using the region for spring staging.

Nebraska↗

USGS2014

Migratory bird hunter opinions regarding potential management strategies for controlling light goose populations

We expanded the Nebraska Light Goose Conservation Order (LGCO) harvest survey (NE, USA) in spring 2012 to assess migratory bird hunter opinions regarding future management strategies for controlling light goose populations. Although hunters strongly agreed that population control of light geese was an important wildlife management issue, they were generally unsupportive of wildlife officials using forms of direct control methods to control light goose populations. Respondents who indicated participation in the 2012 LGCO were also less supportive of any form of direct control compared with migratory bird hunters who did not participate in the LGCO. When presented with alternative methods by wildlife officials for future light goose population control, respondents were most supportive of wildlife agencies selectively shooting light geese on migration and wintering areas and least supportive of wildlife officials using bait with approved chemicals to euthanize light geese. A clear understanding of public perception of various potential direct-control options will likely assist wildlife biologists in making informed decisions on how to proceed with population control of light geese.

Wildlife Society Bulletin↗

USGS2014

Effects of satellite transmitters on captive and wild mallards

Satellite telemetry has become a leading method for studying large-scale movements and survival in birds, yet few have addressed potential effects of the larger and heavier tracking equipment on study subjects. We simultaneously evaluated effects of satellite telemetry equipment on captive and wild mallards ( Anas platyrhynchos ) to assess impacts on behavior, body mass, and movement. We randomly assigned 55 captive ducks to one of 3 treatment groups, including a standard body harness group, a modified harness group, and a control group. Ducks in the control group were not fitted with equipment, whereas individuals in the other 2 groups were fitted with dummy transmitters attached with a Teflon ribbon harness or with a similar harness constructed of nylon cord. At the conclusion of the 14-week captive study, mean body mass of birds in the control group was 40–105 g (95% CI) greater than birds with standard harnesses, and 28–99 g (95% CI) greater than birds with modified harnesses. Further, results of focal behavior observations indicated ducks with transmitters were less likely to be in water than control birds. We also tested whether movements of wild birds marked with a similar Teflon harness satellite transmitter aligned with population movements reported by on-the-ground observers who indexed local abundances of mid-continent mallards throughout the non-breeding period. Results indicated birds marked with satellite transmitters moved concurrently with the larger unmarked population. Our results have broad implications for field research and suggest that investigators should consider potential for physiological and behavioral effects brought about by tracking equipment. Nonetheless, results from wild ducks indicate satellite telemetry has the potential to provide useful movement data.

Wildlife Society Bulletin↗

USGS2014

Landscape effects on mallard habitat selection at multiple spatial scales during the non-breeding period

Previous studies that evaluated effects of landscape-scale habitat heterogeneity on migratory waterbird distributions were spatially limited and temporally restricted to one major life-history phase. However, effects of landscape-scale habitat heterogeneity on long-distance migratory waterbirds can be studied across the annual cycle using new technologies, including global positioning system satellite transmitters. We used Bayesian discrete choice models to examine the influence of local habitats and landscape composition on habitat selection by a generalist dabbling duck, the mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), in the midcontinent of North America during the non-breeding period. Using a previously published empirical movement metric, we separated the non-breeding period into three seasons, including autumn migration, winter, and spring migration. We defined spatial scales based on movement patterns such that movements >0.25 and <30.00 km were classified as local scale and movements >30.00 km were classified as relocation scale. Habitat selection at the local scale was generally influenced by local and landscape-level variables across all seasons. Variables in top models at the local scale included proximities to cropland, emergent wetland, open water, and woody wetland. Similarly, variables associated with area of cropland, emergent wetland, open water, and woody wetland were also included at the local scale. At the relocation scale, mallards selected resource units based on more generalized variables, including proximity to wetlands and total wetland area. Our results emphasize the role of landscape composition in waterbird habitat selection and provide further support for local wetland landscapes to be considered functional units of waterbird conservation and management.

Landscape Ecology↗

USGS2014

Comprehensive framework for ecological assessment of the Migratory Bird Habitat Initiative following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill

Following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in April 2010, the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) established and funded the Migratory Bird Habitat Initiative (MBHI), with the goal of improving and increasing wetland habitats on private lands to benefit wintering and migrating waterbirds displaced from oil-impacted coastal wetlands. The NRCS and conservation partners provided financial and technical assistance to landowners and managers of sites enrolled in various conservation easement programs, and incorporated approximately 190,000 ha of wetlands and agricultural lands in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley (MAV) and Gulf Coast regions in the MBHI. In fall 2010, the NRCS worked with scientists and graduate students from three universities and various conservation agencies to design and implement landscape-scale evaluations of (1) the use of MBHI-managed wetlands and comparable non-MBHI wetlands by Charadriiformes (shorebirds), Anseriformes (waterfowl), and other waterbirds; and (2) the relative effectiveness of different MBHI practices for providing habitat and food resources for migrating, resident, and wintering waterbirds. In this paper, we describe the scientific framework designed to evaluate the MBHI in improving waterbird habitats on private lands in the MAV, the Gulf Coast Prairies in Louisiana and Texas, and Gulf coastal wetlands of Mississippi and Alabama. The results of our evaluation will enhance our understanding of the influence of MBHI, other Farm Bill Conservation Initiative managed lands (e.g., Wetland Reserve Program), and selected agricultural working lands (e.g., Oryza sativa L. [Rice] fields in southern Louisiana and Texas) on wintering and migrating waterbirds. A proactive approach that uses science to evaluate governmental conservation programs is relevant and can inform development of meaningful public policy that likely will be needed for effective delivery of future conservation programs and to justify financial incentives paid to landowners to apply best management practices.

Southeastern Naturalist↗

USGS2014

Estimating habitat carrying capacity for migrating and wintering waterfowl: Considerations, pitfalls and improvements

Population-based habitat conservation planning for migrating and wintering waterfowl in North America is carried out by habitat Joint Venture (JV) initiatives and is based on the premise that food can limit demography (i.e. food limitation hypothesis). Consequently, planners use bioenergetic models to estimate food (energy) availability and population-level energy demands at appropriate spatial and temporal scales, and translate these values into regional habitat objectives. While simple in principle, there are both empirical and theoretical challenges associated with calculating energy supply and demand including: 1) estimating food availability, 2) estimating the energy content of specific foods, 3) extrapolating site-specific estimates of food availability to landscapes for focal species, 4) applicability of estimates from a single species to other species, 5) estimating resting metabolic rate, 6) estimating cost of daily behaviours, and 7) estimating costs of thermoregulation or tissue synthesis. Most models being used are daily ration models (DRMs) whose set of simplifying assumptions are well established and whose use is widely accepted and feasible given the empirical data available to populate such models. However, DRMs do not link habitat objectives to metrics of ultimate ecological importance such as individual body condition or survival, and largely only consider food-producing habitats. Agent-based models (ABMs) provide a possible alternative for creating more biologically realistic models under some conditions; however, ABMs require different types of empirical inputs, many of which have yet to be estimated for key North American waterfowl. Decisions about how JVs can best proceed with habitat conservation would benefit from the use of sensitivity analyses that could identify the empirical and theoretical uncertainties that have the greatest influence on efforts to estimate habitat carrying capacity. Development of ABMs at restricted, yet biologically relevant spatial scales, followed by comparisons of their outputs to those generated from more simplistic, deterministic models can provide a means of assessing degrees of dissimilarity in how alternative models describe desired landscape conditions for migrating and wintering waterfowl.

Wildfowl↗