Search USGSSearch

Geology topics

Robert J. Ritchie

Publications and source records attributed to Robert J. Ritchie.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Spatial distribution of band recoveries of black brant

On average, band recovery rates of adult black brant ( Branta bernicla nigricans ) more than doubled between the 2000s and 2010s. However, the spatial distribution of band recoveries of black brant has not been reported. Our objective was to describe the spatial distribution of band recoveries of black brant since 1990. We found that Alaska, California, and Mexico accounted for ≥89% of band recoveries for black brant released from the Arctic and the Tutakoke River Colony in southwestern Alaska, in each decade studied. Although recovery rates increased in each major harvest region from the 1990s to 2010s, increases were not even. For brant released from the Arctic, the recovery rate in Alaska has gone up 7‐fold, whereas the recovery rate in Mexico has increased 1.3‐fold since the 1990s. For brant banded in the Arctic, the increased recovery rates in Alaska resulted largely from a rise in recoveries from the Izembek Lagoon area. For brant banded at the Tutakoke River Colony, the recovery rate in Alaska increased 4.8‐fold, whereas recovery rates in Mexico increased 1.6‐fold. Despite the reduced relative contribution of Mexico to band recoveries in the 2010s, Bahia San Quintin, Mexico, still contributes more recoveries than any other wintering estuary. Because 57–60% of black brant band recoveries occur at the localities of Izembek Lagoon, Alaska; Humboldt Bay, California; and Bahia San Quintin, it is likely that accurate annual estimates of the black brant population using Lincoln's method could be derived from hunter bag checks at these 3 areas. If population managers are interested in managing harvest rates of black brant, they could focus efforts on the main hunting areas we highlight in this paper. Finally, it is unclear if the recent increases in band recovery rates are the result of increased harvest, a declining population, or both; therefore, we suggest refinement of population monitoring programs and continued monitoring of band recovery rates.

Journal of Wildlife Management

Declining survival of black brant from subarctic and arctic breeding areas

Since the mid 1990s, the number of black brant ( Branta bernicla nigricans ; brant) nests on the Yukon‐Kuskokwim Delta (YKD), Alaska, USA, the historically predominant breeding area of brant, has declined steadily. This has caused researchers and managers to question if arctic breeding populations can compensate for the reduction in brant nests on the YKD. An important component of the assessment of brant population dynamics is having current estimates of first‐year and adult survival. We banded brant at 4 locations in Arctic Alaska and western Canada, and at 1 location in the subarctic, the Tutakoke River (TR) colony on the YKD, 1990–2015. We used joint live and dead mark‐recapture models to estimate first‐year and adult (≥1 yr old) survival of brant. We also used band recovery rates from a Brownie model to assess temporal trends in band recovery rates of adult brant. First‐year survival of brant hatched at TR declined from approximately 0.60 to <0.20 and, although first‐year survival generally was higher for goslings marked in the Arctic, their survival declined from approximately 0.70 in the early 1990s to ≤0.45 in the 2010s. Annual survival of adult females decreased from an average of 0.881 (95% CI = 0.877–0.885) to 0.822 (95% CI = 0.815–0.829) at TR and from 0.851 (95% CI = 0.843–0.860) to 0.821 (95% CI = 0.805–0.836) in the Arctic, from 1990 to 2014. Band recovery rates of adults generally were <1.25% until the last several years of study, when they reached ≤3.5%. Although the current harvest rates may be partially additive to natural mortality, we do not believe that harvest is the main influence on the declines in survival. The general decline in survival rates of brant breeding across a large geographic area may be influenced by a reduction in the quality of migration and wintering ground habitats. We suggest an analysis of seasonal survival of brant to test the hypothesis that declining habitat quality on wintering or spring migration areas is reducing survival. Our results suggest that the number of breeding pairs at TR will continue to decline and also brings into question the ability of arctic breeding populations to grow at a rate necessary to offset the declines on the YKD. Researchers should continue to closely monitor survival and harvest rates of brant, and assess methods currently used to monitor their abundance.

Journal of Wildlife Management