Seasonal activity, numbers and distribution of Canada geese (Branta canadensis) in the lower
Yellowstone Valley, Montana
by Thomas Christopher Hinz
A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE in Fish and Wildlife Management
Montana State University
© Copyright by Thomas Christopher Hinz (1974)
Abstract:
Selected aspects of the seasonal activity and changes in numbers and distribution of Canada geese
(Branta canadensis) were studied during 1972 and 1973 in three study areas on the lower Yellowstone
River, Montana. Special consideration was given to the effect of different hunting regulations in the
three study areas. Breeding pair counts in the spring of 1973 indicated that there were approximately
36, 27, and 15 pairs of geese in the Hysham, Hathaway, and Fallon study areas, respectively. Many of
the larger and more heavily-vegetated islands appeared to be used for nesting. The presence of small,
nearby gravel islands for loafing and territorial defense, and the close proximity of preferred
brood-rearing areas were believed important to the attractiveness of islands for nesting. Geese typically
reared their broods on island grasslands and meadows adjoining the river, while dense, stream-side
vegetation appeared to be used by geese when not feeding. During the molt in 1972 and 1973, a total of
106 geese were captured and banded from Bighorn to Fallon, Montana. Fall observations of
fieldfeeding geese indicated that winter wheat was heavily used in early fall, cornfields in mid-fall
(where available), and a variety of crops and field types in late fall. The average number of geese
observed in the Hysham, Hathaway, and Fallon study areas from July 16 through December 15, 1972
and 1973, was 399, 145, and 98, respectively. The concentration of resident and migrant geese in the
more westerly sections (e.g. the Hysham section) appeared to be related to the physical characters of
the river and the nature of the surrounding fields rather than to the fact that the river is closed to
hunting in those areas. Due to the increased arrival of northern migrants in the valley beginning around
October 31, 1973, numbers of geese observed in the section from the mouth of the Bighorn River to the
Glendive area increased from 2,785 on October 29 to 10,006 on November 12. Future increases in the
fall population along the lower Yellowstone River appear dependent upon the increasing return of
breeding-age and subadult geese and further building of the tradition of stopping in the valley by
migrant geese. Accelerated exploitation of the river water may inhibit such increases. Improved
management of goose hunting in the lower Yellowstone Valley may be brought about through opening
certain sections of the river to hunting which would partially compensate for increased closure of
private lands to goose hunting. Statement of PetmissioA to Copy
In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the require­
ments for an advanced degree at Montana State University, I agree that
the Library shall make it freely available for inspection.
I further
agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for
scholarly purposes may be granted by my major professor, or, in his
absence, by the Director of Libraries.
It is understood that any
copying or publication of this, thesis for financial gain shall not be
allowed without my written permission.
Signature
SEASONAL ACTIVITY, NUMBERS, AND DISTRIBUTION OF CANADA GEESE
(BRANTA CANADENSIS).IN THE LOWER YELLOWSTONE VALLEY, MONTANA.
by
THOMAS CHRISTOPHER HINZ
A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
in
Fish and Wildlife Management
Approved:
ead^Major Department
Chairman, Examini1Hgy Committee
Graduate Dean
T
MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY
Bozeman, Montana
June, 1974
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT.
I wish to extend sincere appreciation to the following for their
contributions to this study:
Dr. Robert L. Eng, Montana State University,
for organization of the study and for aid in the field and in prepara­
tion of the manuscript; Neil Martin, Montana Fish and Game Department,
fot organization of the study, aid in the field, and procurement of
necessary equipment and materials; Dr. Donald C. Quimby and Dr. William
R. Gould, Montana State University, for critically reviewing the
manuscript; Dr. W. E. Booth and Dr. J. H. Rumely, past and present
curators of the Montana State University Herbarium, for identification
of. plant specimens; those employees of the Montana Fish and Game
Department, especially those of Region 7, who freely contributed their
time and effort to this study; Miles City Aero Service for competent
and reliable aerial survey work; and to Norris Cole, Norris Grunhuvd,
William Lindvig, Robert Lindvig, and all other landowners who volunteer­
ed information and gave permission to use their lands.
I would also
/
like to thank my wife Jan for her interest and financial support during
the years of the study.
The author was supported by the Montana Fish
and Game Department under Federal Aid Projects W-12O-R (6091) and
W-I3O-R (6077).
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
VITA ...................
ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT .......................
iii
LIST OF T A B L E S ................
LIST OF FIGURES.
ABSTRACT
v
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
INTRODUCTION...................
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . ‘.......... .......... ..
. .
DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA..........
vii
viii
I
2
METHODS........ .......... .............. .........................’
■RESULTS............
10
13
Goose B a n d i n g .......................
Analysis of Island Size and Vegetational Cover.......... ..
Island Vegetation .................................... .. . .
Seasonal Goose Activities ....................... . . . . .
13
16
19
23
Breeding Season. . ........................
Flightless Period..............
Field-Feeding: July 16 through 'September 10 . . . . ;
Field-Feeding:
September 11 through October 31. . . .
Field-Feeding: November I through December 15 . . . .
23
34
39
48
57
DISCUSSION ..........................................
APPENDIX
LITERATURE C I T E D ....................... ..
67
. . . . .
74
. . . ............... ■
87
V
LIST OF TABLES
Table
1.
Page
COMPARISON OF PHYSICAL PARAMETERS IN THE THREE
STUDY AREAS ON THE LOWER YELLOWSTONE RIVER, MONTANA . . . .
5
2.
ISLAND TYPE, SUBTYPE, AND ORIGIN ANALYSIS (IN PERCENTS) . .
17
3.
COUNTS OF GEESE DURING THE BREEDING SEASON IN THREE
STUDY AREAS, 1973 ..........................
25
4.
5.
6.
7.
PERCENT OF OBSERVATIONS AND RELATIVE UTILIZATION OF
. ISLANDS DURING SELECTED PERIODS IN THE HYSHAM STUDY
AREA, 1972 AND 1973 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
...........
PERCENT OF OBSERVATIONS AND RELATIVE UTILIZATION OF
ISLANDS DURING SELECTED PERIODS IN THE HATHAWAY STUDY
AREA, 1972 AND 1973 .......... .................. - ........
27
29
PERCENT OF OBSERVATIONS AND RELATIVE UTILIZATION OF
ISLANDS DURING SELECTED PERIODS IN THE FALLON STUDY
AREA, 1972 AND 1973 ............................
3
FIELD-FEEDING STATISTICS RECORDED IN THREE STUDY AREAS
ALONG THE LOWER YELLOWSTONE RIVER, MONTANA, 1973. . . . . .
40
PEAK COUNTS OF CANADA GEESE IN THE LOWER YELLOWSTONE
VALLEY FROM THE MOUTH OF THE BIGHORN RIVER TO THE
VICINITY OF GLENDIVE, MONTANA . .•.......... ..
75
9.
CLASSIFICATION OF
ISLANDS IN THE HYSHAM STUDY AREA.........
76
10.
CLASSIFICATION OF
ISLANDS IN THE HATHAWAY STUDY AREA. . . .
77
11.
CLASSIFICATION OF
ISLANDS IN THE FALLON STUDY AREA.........
78
12.
MEAN AVERAGE COVERAGE AND. MEAN FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE
OF PLANT SPECIES AND SUBSTRATES FROM FOUR ISLANDS IN
EACH OF THREE STUDY A R E A S ........................... ..
79
GOOSE CENSUS RESULTS IN THREE STUDY AREAS FROM JUNE 17,
1972 THROUGH DECEMBER 24, 1973.......... ' .................
82
8.
13.
vi
LIST OF TABLES
(Continued)
Table
’ 14.
15.
'
.
*•
Page
TOTAL COUNTS OF CANADA GEESE PER SECTION OF THE ■
YELLOWSTONE RIVER, 1973 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
85
HUNTER COUNTS FROM FLIGHTS MADE ON TWO WEEKENDS DURING
THE 1973 WATERFOWL SEASON ............... ..................
86
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
'
.
F igure
1.
Page
The lower Yellowstone River valley and the locations
of the Hysham, Hathaway, and Fallon study areas . . . . . . .
3
2.
The Hysham study area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
3.
The Hathaway study area .............
. . . . . . . . . . . .
6
4.
The Fallon study area .........
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8
5.
Driftwood pile on the upstream end of island 2, Fallon
study area; August 14, 1972 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
6.
Abandoned goose nest found on the interior of island 2
in.the Fallon study area; August 14, 1973 . ................. . 3 2
7.
Brood-rearing area in the vicinity of Myers (A)_, and the
approach to this pasture (B); June 21, 1973 . . ........
8.
9.
. .
35
Winter wheat fields east of Marsh, Montana, which adjoin
the river south of islands 11 and 1 2 . . . . . . . .
........
46
Results of goose censuses from"the mouth of the Bighorn
River to the east end of the Fallon study area;
Fall, 1973 ............ ............................. ..
58
viii
ABSTRACT
Selected aspects of the seasonal activity and changes in numbers
and distribution of Canada geese (Branta canadensis) were studied during
1972 and 1973 in three study areas on the lower Yellowstone River,
Montana.
Special consideration was given to the effect of different
hunting regulations in the three study areas. Breeding pair counts in
the spring of 1973 indicated that there were approximately 36, 27, and
15 pairs of geese in the Hysham, Hathaway, and Fallon study areas,
respectively. Many of the larger and more heavily-vegetated islands
appeared to be used for nesting. The presence of small, nearby gravel
islands for loafing and territorial defense, and the close proximity of
preferred brood-rearing areas were believed important to the attractive­
ness of islands for nesting. Geese typically reared their broods on
island grasslands and meadows adjoining the river, while dense, streamside vegetation appeared to be used by geese when not feeding. During .
the molt in 1972 and 1973, a total of 106 geese were captured and
banded from Bighorn to Fallon, Montana. Fall observations of field­
feeding geese indicated that winter wheat was heavily used in early fall,
cornfields in mid-fall (where available), and a variety of crops and
field types in late fall. The average number of geese observed in the
Hysham, Hathaway, and Fallon study areas from July 16 through December
15, 1972 and 1973, was 399, 145, and 98, respectively. The concentra­
tion of resident and migrant geese in the more westerly sections (e.g.
the Hysham section) appeared to be related to the physical characters
of the river and the nature of the surrounding fields rather than to
the fact that the river is closed to hunting in those areas. Due to the
increased arrival of northern migrants in the valley beginning around
October 31, 1973, numbers of geese observed in the section from the
mouth of the Bighorn River to the Glendive area increased from 2,785 on
October 29 to 10,006 on November 12. Future increases in the fall
population along the lower Yellowstone River appear dependent upon the
increasing return of breeding-age and subadult geese and further build­
ing of the tradition of stopping in the valley by migrant geese.
Accelerated exploitation of the river water may inhibit such increases.
Improved management of goose hunting in the lower Yellowstone Valley
may be brought about through opening certain sections of the river to
hunting which would partially compensate for increased closure of
private lands to goose hunting.
INTRODUCTION
Through the pioneering of nesting sites in man-made impoundments
and subsequent homing to these areas, the Canada goose (Bvanta oanadensis)
is increasing in numbers in eastern Montana (McCarthy, 1973).
At the
same time, numbers of Canada geese stopping in the lower Yellowstone
valley during fall migration are also increasing (Appendix, Table 8 ).
In 1959, in response to local concern about the waterfowl of the
lower Yellowstone, the Montana Fish and Game Commission closed portions
of the river to the hunting of waterfowl.
From that time to the present,
major portions of the river have been closed to waterfowl shooting for
all or part of the day during the regular season.
This study was initiated to evaluate the effect of these hunting
closures on distribution and numbers of Canada geese on the lower
Yellowstone River.
'
Field work was carried out on a full-time basis
from June 12 through September 15, 1972.
During 1973, part-time field
work was conducted during the spring and full-time from June 14 through
December 19.
DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA
Three ten-mile sections along the lower Yellowstone River were
selected for study.
The study areas, designated by the nearest town,
are, from west to east, the Hysham, Hathaway, and Fallon areas
(Figure I).
The distribution and numbers of geese were studied in
these areas and in fields commonly visited by them.
The Hysham study area lies along an east-west oriented section
of the Yellowstone River in Treasure County.
The western border of this
area lies along the line dividing Sections 31 and 32, T7N, R36E, while
the eastern border lies along the line dividing Sections I and 2, T6N,
R37E (Figure 2).
The river channel in this area is highly braided and
sinuous, as shown by the number of islands and sinuosity value listed
in'Table I.
Sinuosity, defined by Leopold et al.
(1964) as the ratio
of mainstream length to dowti valley distance, is 1 .0 for a straight
channel.
The sinuosity and number of islands in this study area combinfe
to produce protective isolation for waterfowl.
Large acreages of
irrigated cropland are present on the south side of the river while the
north side is devoted largely to hay production and cattle grazing.
The dry benchlands on either side of the valley are planted to winter
wheat (TrityIovm aestivvm) , although the fields on the south side are
much closer to the river.
The Hathaway study area, is in Custer County, between Miles City
and Hathaway.
The western edge of this study area is marked by the
Figure I
Froze to Deat
U
Creek
Starved to Death
Creek
County Rd.
I
20 23’
Hysham
Interstate 94
LEGEND
Scale: Miles
Sorpy Creek Rood
Figure 2.
The H ysham study area.
Reservation
— Creek —
-5-
TABLE I.
Study
Area
COMPARISON OF PHYSICAL PARAMETERS IN THE THREE STUDY AREAS
ON THE LOWER YELLOWSTONE RIVER, MONTANA.
Number
of
Islands1
32
24
17
Hysham
Hathaway
Fallon
Sinuosity2
Shore­
line
(miles)
Main­
stream
Length
(miles)
Down
Valley
Distance3
(miles)
1.42
1 .2 1
1.14
72.2
45.9
41.5
14.3
12.9
13.7
10.14
10.63
11.97
1Figure subject to change due to change in river channel
2Ratio of mainstream length to down valley distance
3Distance from west to east stream center for any chosen section
boundary between Custer and Rosebud Counties.
The eastern edge lies
along the line dividing Sections 22 and 23,, T7N, R46E, in Custer County
(Figure 3).
The river in this study area flows in an ENE direction and
is only moderately braided and much less sinuous than that found in the
Hysham area (Table I).
Irrigated land on the south side of the river is
limited, although some corn (Zea mays) and alfalfa (Medioago sativa)
fields are present.
In addition, the high benches on this side of the
river are planted to winter wheat as in the other two study areas.
north side of the river is undergoing extensive alteration.
Land along
the banks of the river and up into the hills to the north is being
cleared for pivot irrigation systems for raising corn and barley
(Hordeum vulgccre) .
The
LEGEND
Scale : Miles
H athaw ay*.
Figure 3.
The Hathaway study area.
-7- .
The Fallon study area is located in Prairie and Dawson counties.
'
The western edge of this study area lies along the line dividing
Section 25, T13N, R52E and Section 30, T13N, B.53E, in Prairie County,
while the eastern border
lies along the line dividing Sections 26 and
27, T14N, R54E, in Dawson County. (Figure 4).
The river in the Fallon
study area is less sinuous than in the other two areas,. and runs in a
northeasterly direction towards its junction with the Missouri River in
■
North Dakota.
This northeast-southwest orientation of the river
'
'!
;
j
produces a greater down valley distance than in either the Hathaway or
Hysham study area.
High hills border the south side of the river lead­
ing up to a winter wheat-growing area on the bench known as the Fallon
■I
Flat.
Little irrigation is present on the Flat, although one landowner
•I
irrigates corn and sugar beets (Beta Vulga^ts) with a pivot irrigating
system.
On the north side of the river, the land is irrigated by the
'
I
Buffalo Rapids Irrigation Prbject, and corn, beets, and alfalfa are
common crops.
Winter wheat, barley, and oats (Avena sativa) are also '
I
j
planted on the north side of the Yellowstone, in addition to the acreage
of irrigated land.
Near the east end of the Fallon study area, a flat,
alluvial plain occurs on the south side of the river, where winter wheat
and irrigated cornfields crowd the banks of the river.
Although most observations were made in the three study areas,
less intensive observation was made of other sections of the river.
These other sections are similar to the study areas nearest them, and
JJ
Cracker Box
Creek
Timber Creek
Bad Route
Creek
Cottonwood
Creek
Marsh
Cabin—
, Creek
LEGEND
WSON CTT______
■ PRAIRIE CTY.
Scale: Miles
Area
Figure 4.
The Fallon study area.
-9-
follow a general trend of fewer islands and a less sinuous channel from
west to east.
Major tributaries of the Yellowstone River in southeastern Montana
include the Bighorn River which enters at Bighorn, Montana; the Tongue
River which enters at Miles City; and the Powder River which enters the
Yellowstone southwest of Terry (Figure I).
All three of these rivers
drain the rugged country which lies south, toward the Wyoming border.
In addition to these rivers, the Yellowstone is joined by many small
ephemeral and intermittent creeks in and around the three study areas.
Climatological data for Miles City show an average annual precipi­
tation of about 14 inches (Department of Commerce, 1971-1973).
During
the period 1933 through 1972, the least annual precipitation occurred
in 1934 when the area received 5.51 inches.
The highest annual precipi­
tation for the same period was 19.0 inches in 1962.
Total precipitation
for 1972 and 1973 was 17.54 and 17.86 inches, respectively.
Sixty-seven
percent of the average annual precipitation at Miles City falls during
the period from April I through August 31.
The normal daily maximum and
minimum temperatures for the year at Miles City are 58.5 and 33.2 F.,
respectively.
In 1972, the average daily maximum and minimum tempera­
tures at Miles City were 54.5 and 32.2 F., respectively.
clear days per year at Miles City is 101.
per year is 156.
Mean number of
Mean number of cloudy days
METHODS
During June and July, 1972 and 1973, molting geese were banded on
the lower Yellowstone River.
Method of capture involved the free-
banding technique described by Hanson and Eberhardt (1971). 'In 1972,
most banding was attempted with one boat and a crew of two men, although
on one occasion, a crew of six men using two boats was used.
In 1973,
banding was largely accomplished with two boats, a crew of from five to
seven men, and a dog.
Some geese were captured in the current with a
long-handled dip n e t , although most were caught on shore.
Physical data were gathered on all islands in the three study areas
during the summer of 1972.
Width and length of the small- and medium­
sized islands were measured with the use of a range finder supplemented
by pacing off beaches and extending calibrated lines across gullies and
channels.
Acreage and percent of vegetational cover were also estimated
during these surveys.
The larger islands, sometimes measuring up to a
mile or more in length, were measured from aerial photographs.
One
island of each type in each study area was then selected for vegetaI
Line transects, 100 feet in length, were run in
i
*
several locations on the islands to sample the various vegetational
tional analysis.
and/or substrate types.
After the technique described by Daubenmire
(1959), coverage was estimated of each plant species or substrate within
a frame (2x5 decimeters) placed at five-foot intervals along the line.
-11-
Height and line intercept of all major shrub species along the line were
also recorded.
Surveys of vegetation were also made in areas used for
brood-rearing.
In additionj I searched, the islands for potential nest-
ing cover and old nest locations.
Aerial photographs were used to obtain distances between loafing
sites and field-feeding areas, sinuosity, amount of shoreline, main­
stream length, and down valley distance within each study area, as well
as the composition of surrounding lands.
Amount of shoreline per study
area, including both banks and interlying islands, was measured with a
topographic map measurer.
Mainstream length was measured with a ruler
from the center of the main channel at the west end to the center "of
the main channel at the east end of the study section.
Land use
composition of surrounding lands was obtained by.use of circular
templates scaled to an inside radius of one or two miles.
These
templates were placed on the aerial photographs, centered on each
island.
In each circle, percentage of various crops, land tillage
conditions, river surface, and island surface were estimated.
Aerial flights were used to locate loafing and nesting geese on
the river.
In the spring of 1973, aerial counts were made of breeding
pairs and nonbreeding geese.
During the early summer of both years' of
the study, geese were counted and special note made of brood-rearing
areas..
From late summer through December, total counts of geese were
made from the mouth of the Bighorn River to the east end of the Fallon
— 12—
study area to determine favored loafing areas and to evaluate changes
in numbers of geeSe present in the valley.
In addition, aerial surveil­
lance was used for evaluating hunting pressure on the river from the
Rosebud-Custer County line to Glendive during two selected weekends of
the 1973 waterfowl season.
Special note was made of goose distribution
before and during the flights made September 29 and 30, the first two
days of the goose season.
Intensive observations of field-feeding geese were made during the
period July 17 to December 16, 1973.
Some field-feeding was observed
during the late summer of 1972, though this was incidental to other
work.
Field-feeding flocks were observed as to time of departure hnd
return to loafing areas on the river.
During summer and early fall,
this was done both morning and evening, but during the late fall, at
other times of the day as goose field-feeding was more erratic.
In
addition, type of field used, number of geese coming into the field,
number leaving the field, and flock sizes in each flight were determined
whenever possible.
Local people were interviewed in regard to the past history of
goose distribution and use of the valley.
Such interviews helped to
determine areas traditionally used by geese.
Frequent talks with land-
owners in the study areas, were hecessary in order to gain access to
watch geese on these lands which are almost entirely privately-owned.
RESULTS
Goose Banding
During June and July, 1972, sixteen geese were banded, of which
three (17%) were one year of age or older.
as late as the third week in July.
Flightless geese were seen
Most of the geese caught during this
summer were judged to be four to six weeks old based on the figures
presented by Hanson (1967) and Yocum and Harris (1965), although geese
as young as three and as old as eight weeks were also banded.
On June 21, 1972, an adult female goose, which had been banded
previously, was caught near island 5 in the Hathaway study area.
This
goose was banded when at least one year old on June 28, 1968, approxi­
mately 115 miles to the north, on the south shore of Fort Peck Reser­
voir.
It was darker and smaller than most of the geese seen on the
river in the summer and was believed to be a great basin Canada goose
CBvanta canadensis moffitti).
Most of the geese in this area show
characters of both B. o. maxima and S. c. moffitti, and are believed to
be hybrids of these two races (Hanson, 1965 and Rutherford, 1965).
In the summer of 1973, ninety-three geese were banded, the majority
of which were caught between the mouth of the Bighorn River and Forsyth.
Although some of the goslings were approximately two weeks old, it was
felt their feet and legs may have been large enough to hold a regular
goose band.
Flightless geese were seen as late as the first of August
though most geese were flying by mid-July.
As in 1972, all geese were
-14-
aged only as "adult" or "juvenile" and were sexed using characters
described by Hanson (1967).
Of the geese that were aged and recorded,
15.5% were one year of age or older.
Although nonbreeding geese usually make a molt migration northward
(Hanson, 1965), it is possible that some of the grbups of molting geese
along the Yellowstone River represent non-breeders from a more southerly
breeding population.
On several occasions, a group of older nonbreeding
geese were found in a draw or creek drainage adjoining the river.
On
June 26, 1973, three men caught five geese in such a situation at the
mouth of Cottonwood Creek just north of Fallon.
One of these geese, an
adult or subadult male, was shot in early October of that year in a
cornfield ten miles downstream.
The highest banding success was achieved under clear skies, with
little wind, in areas of high goose concentration, with two fast boats,
a crew of five or more men, and a retrieving dog.
During both years,
the use of boats equipped with motors propelled by jet units was found
invaluable, both for manueverability in shallow water and for safety of
the geese and the banders.
Catch
success in the Bighorn-Myers section (Figure I) was the
highest of any section.
A, crew of seven men and a dog in two boats was
able to catch and band thirty-four geese on June 21, 1973.
One of
these geese, a gosling caught about a mile upstream from Myers, was
shot that year five miles west of Myers on October 14.
-15-
In contrast to the numbers of goslings sighted in the BighornHysham section, banding crews frequently traveled through the Fallon and
Hathaway sections without sighting any geese.
This may indicate that
the number of geese raised per mile of river is higher in the Hysham
area than in either of the other two.
Though the goose banding portion
of this study was considered, to be a minor.one, the higher number of
geese found at this time in the Hysham study area may have important
implications with regard to fall populations and distribution of geese
on the river.
— 16-
Analysis of Island Size and Vegetational Cover
On the basis of acreage and percent of the island covered by
vegetation, islands in all three study sections were classified as
to
type and subtype, the details of which are listed in the Appendix, in
Tables 9 through 11, and summarized in Table 2.
As shown in Table 2, the percent of all islands in types III and
IV in the Hysham, Hathaway and Fallon study areas is 68';7, 50.0, and
,
)
4).0 percent, respectively.
Most nesting and brood-rearing geese are
usually seen on or around these large, heavily-wooded islands.
The percent of all islands in the Hysham, Hathaway, and Fallon
study areas in types I and II is 31.3, 50.0, and 52.9 percent, respec­
tively.
All study areas have a large number of these small, open islands
which are used by loafing geese, although spacing of. these islands var­
ies between sections.
Table 2 shows the Hysham area to have more large, heavily-wooded
islands than either of the other two study areas.
Though islands 18
and 20 in the Hathaway section are over 100 acres in size and are
heavily-wooded, they are open on several sides to farms and pastureland,
not to heavy woods and other large islands as in the Hysham section.
Island 6 in the Fallon study area is also over 100 acres but because
only a small beaver-dammed channel separates it from the north side of
the river, isolation of the island is poor.
Table 2 also shows the larger percentage of bars in the Fallon and
-17-
TABLE 2.
ISLAND TYPE, SUBTYPE, AND ORIGIN ANALYSIS (IN PERCENTS).
Islands type:
I
II
III
IV
Hysham
Hathaway
Fallon
21.9
9.4
15.6
53.1
41.7
8.3
2 0 .8
29.2
23.5
29.4
23.5
23.5
Type I islands subtype:
A
B
C
D
1 0 0 .0
0 .0
0 .0
0 .0
90.0
1 0 .0
0 .0
0 .0
100 .0
0 .0
0 .0
0 .0
Type II islands subtype:
A
B
C
D
66.7
0 .0
33.3
0 .0
50.0
50.0
0 .0
0 .0
80.0
2 0 .0
0 .0
0 .0
Type III islands subtype:
A
B
C
D
80.6
2 0 .0
0 .0
0 .0
40.0
40.0
2 0 .0
0 .0
Type IV islands subtype:
A
B
C
D
11.8
23.5
35.3
29.4
14.3
28.6
57.1
0 .0
25.0
0 .0
75.0
0 .0
53.1
18.8
21.9
46.9
12.5
40.6
0 .0
3$.3
29.4
0 .6
17.6
17.7
23.5
58.8
0 .0
.
75.0
25.0
0 ,0
0 .0
i
Islands
Islands
Islands
Islands
Islands
Islands
Islands
over 50% vegetational cover
over 100 acres
with 1% vegetational cover
with COM-M origin
with COM-S origin
longitudinal bars
point bars
Hathaway study sections as opposed to the Hysham area.
6.3
25.0
8.3
2 0 .8
54.2
16.7
Concurrently,
there is a larger percentage of islands in the Hysham section which
were formed by the river cutting-off a bend in the channel to form one
or more islands. . Few. islands are formed in this manner in the other
-18-
two study areas, especially in the Fallon area where the river meanders
very little.
However, wherever these multiple island groups occurred,
as around islands I, 2, and 8 in the Hathaway section and islands I
through 3 in the Fallon section, there was usually a large amount of.
goose activity.
-19-
Island Vegetation
Mean average coverage and mean frequency of occurrence Of plant
species and substrates are listed in the Appendixi Table 12.
These data
were averaged from twenty frames along all line transects measured on
one island of each type in all study sections.
High values for average
coverage and frequency of occurrence indicate relative abundance and/or
heavy coverage of the plant or substrate within each study area.
Pioneer vegetation is dominant over entire islands and bn parts of
islands which are regularly or periodically flooded or ice-gouged.
As
these become elevated through deposition of sediment, the likelihood
that vegetation close to the water will be flooded decreases and as a
result, plants increase in age and the vegetation becomes more stable.
This phenomenon is well-illustrated on island 20 in the Hathaway study
area.
On the downstream side of this island, silt has been laid down
every summer for many years which gradually lengthens the island.
This
in turn constricts the backwater channel, cutting flow, thus increasing
deposition rate.
As one moves in from the shoreline on the downstream
end, the height of the young cottonwoods (Paputus detto'id&s) increases
regularly in distinct bands.
A similar phenomenon occurs on the back­
water side of many large islands in the other study areas.
Along the
waterline of these islands, and on small islands which are regularly
flooded, the small willows, cottonwoods, and tamarisks (Tamccvix g a i H o a )
take root and grow each summer until reflooded the next spring.
-20-
In the interior of the larger islands, plants occur which are indic­
ative of much later successional stages.
Plants such as silver sage­
brush (Artemis-La aana) 3 needle-and-thread (Sttpa comat a) 3 skunkbush sumac
(Rhus tv-ilobata)3 rose (Rosa sp.), and western snowberry (Symphor-Lcarpos
occ-Ldentat-Ls) occur here.
Over most of the islands, early successional
grasses and forbs are abundant, including foxtail barley (Hordeum
jubatum)3 ragweed (Ambrosia sp.), bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare)s summer
cypress (Kochia scoparia)3 wild lettuce (Lactuaa sp.), sweetclover
'
(Melilotus sp.), broadleaf plantain (PtantagomaQor)3 goldenrod
(Sotidago occidentatis)3 and Russian thistle (Satsota kati).
Dominant grasses on the islands include prairie sand reedgrdss
(Catamovitfa tongifotia)3 sand dropseed (Sporobotus cryptandrus)3 reed
canary grass (Phataris arundinaaea)3 marsh muhly (Muhtenbergia racemosa)3
Japanese chess (Bromus Qaponicus)3 cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum)3 wheatgrasses (Agropyron sp.), and bluegrass
(Poa pratensis).
Bluegrass
was found to be an important food source for the geese during the molt
which was also reported by Hook (pers. comm.) and Hanson (1965).
The dominant tree species along the river is the plains cottonwood
(Poputus dettoides).
As the stream banks erode, cottonwoods
fall into
the river and play an important part in altering channel structure, as
materials build up behind them and islands are formed.
Occasionally,
immense driftwood piles accumulate, which may serve as nesting sites
for geese (Figure 5).
Driftwood nesting by Canada geese was also
-21-
Figure 5.
Driftwood pile on the upstream end of island 2, Fallon
study area; August 14, 1972.
reported by Dimmick (1968) in the Jackson Hole region of Wyoming.
Slender willow (Salix exigua) is the dominant shrub species along
the river.
It grows in dense clumps along the downstream ends and sides
of some islands, and in old channels and seeps where the water table is
suitable.
Salix sp. was reported by Dimmick (1968) as being important
nesting cover for Canada geese.
The security provided by the dense
stands of this plant on many islands and banks along the Yellowstone
River is also important to nesting and molting geese.
-22-
The larger islands, particularly those of Type IV, have vegetation
Which is generally found on the lands adjacent to the river.
Most of
the small islands support a more hydrophytic vegetation. While:the larger
ones sometimes have areas of prickly-pear cactus (Opuntia sp,), silver
sagebrush, and grasses common on the dry rangelands close to the river.
The nature of the vegetation therefore is most indicative of the island's
origin. Whether it was built up by the action of the river or was
carved from either side of the river by the action of the flood Waters
in the spring.
-2'3-
Seasonal Goose Activities
Breeding Season
During late March and April, 1973, the study sections were surveyed
by air to estimate the size of the breeding populations within each
:
section. Four complete trips were made through each area during which
time the numbers of geese were counted and recorded as to singles, pairs,
or groups.
During flights made on March 31 and April I, nesting activity was
observed to be in different stages in the three study areas.
Geese in
the Hysham area appeared to be well along in nesting as pairs and
singles were observed in locations which were thought to represent nest­
ing territories.
The presence of large numbers of geese in groups
indicated an early stage of nesting in the Hathaway area.
Ice along the
banks and islands of the river marked the tardiness of nesting in the
Fallon area.
During the flights on April 27 and 28, more singles were observed
loafing along the river which suggested that more females were incuba­
ting their clutches.
Loafing pairs and attendant males were fairly
evenly distributed throughout the study areas, though nest sites may
have been more localized in the preferred nesting habitat.
Since singles were counted as breeding pairs (Hanson and Browning,
1959), the combination of counts of actual pairs and those of singles
was used as an indicator of the total number of breeding pairs per
study section.
The average of the last two counts produced an estimated
— 24-
breeding population of approximately 36, 27, and 15 pairs in the Hysham,
Hathaway, and Fallon study areas respectively (Table 3).
Only the last
two counts were averaged because nesting activities at that time were
underway in all three areas and nesting pairs more readily identified.
Although the Hathaway study area had the highest total counts of
geese of all three study areas on the first three flights (Table 3),
these high figures are believed to reflect the presence of large numbers
of nonbreeding geese as indicated by the number of groups during the
first two flights.
Warmer water from the Bighorn River enters the Yellowstone River
eighteen miles above Hysham, probably causing the break-up of river ice
in the Hysham study area
sections downstream.
earlier in the spring than in successive
In the spring of 1973, large blocks of ice
covered most of the available sites which might be used by loafing pairs
and territorial males in the Fallon area.
Had this ice been less preva­
lent during the two earlier flights, it is possible that the total
counts of singles and pairs would have been higher.
Regardless, this
study area appears to support comparatively small numbers of breeding
geese as data in Table 3 indicate.
The preference geese show for nesting on islands in rivers has
been reported by many workers, including Naylor (1954) on the Susan
River in Lassen County, California; Geis (1956) on'the Flathead River
of Montana; Hanson and Browning (1959) on the Columbia and Yakima RivMrs
TABLE 3.
COUNTS OF GEESE DURING THE BREEDING SEASON IN THREE STUDY AREAS, 1973.
Hysham
Hathaway
Singles Pairs Groups Total
Fallon
Singles Pairs Groups Totals
Singles Pairs Groups Total
March 31
3
32
8
75
3
22
53
100
0
10
0
20
April I
3
23
18
67
3
28
93
152
I
7
35
50
April 27
4
21
6
52
6
23
6
58
4
10
7
31
April 28
13
33
3
82
6
19
0
44
3
12
5
32
-26-
of Washington; Dimmick (1968) on the. Snake River of Wyoming; and Hanson
and Eberhardt (1971) on the Columbia River of Washington.
The low pair
counts in relation to the large number of islands available for nesting
along this river suggest that pairs may select territories which are
most highly-preferred.
In the Hysham study area, the islands receiving
the largest amount of use were islands I, 13, 19, 20, and 27 through 31
(Table 4), which were largely types III and IV islands.
Although a
high percentage of the islands receiving light use also belonged to
types III and IV, this percentage was not as great as those of the
heavily- and moderately-used islands belonging to these types.
A sizable percentage of geese observed during the breeding season
were on islands belonging to types I and II.
However, this figure
probably contains a large number of groups of nonbreeding geese and to
a lesser extent, attendant males and loafing pairs.
Thus the actual
importance of these islands to breeding geese may be overestimated
because of the presence of non-breeders.
In the Hysham study area,
islands 27, 28, and 30 would typically be of this nature.
Although few nest sites were actually located, observations of a
single or pair in the same location on two or more of the breeding pair
counts was believed to indicate the presence of a nest.
Some of these
pairs and singles were observed on the banks of the river, though most
of the nesting appeared to be associated with the islands themselves.
Eor example, in the Hysham study area, pairs were observed near nests
TABLE 4.
Island
Number
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
PERCENT OF OBSERVATIONS PER COUNT AND RELATIVE UTILIZATION OF ISLANDS DURING SELECTED PERIODS IN THE HYSHAH AREA, 1972 and 1973.
Mar. 31-April 28
Percent
Observations Utilization1 Type2
9.9
2.2
0.4
0.0
1.1
0.0
1.5
0.7
1.5
1.5
2.9
2.9
5.8
1.5
0.7
0.4
0.4
3.3
9.5
7.7
1.1
3.3
0.0
2.2
6. 6
6.6
8.0
7.3
6.6
4.4
0.4
0.0
H
M
L
L
M
L
M
L
M
M
M
M
H
M
L
L
L
M
H
H
M
M
L
M
H
H
H
H
H
M
L
L
IV
I
III
III
IV
IV
II
I
I
IV
IV
III
IV
IV
I
IV
I
IV
IV
IV
IV
IV
IV
IV
III
III
IV
II
II
IV
I
I
Apr. I-July 15
Percent
Observations Utilization3
5.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
23.3
20.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
18.3
0.0
0.0
17.5
0.0
0.0
July 16- Sept. 10
Percent
Observations Utilization4
M
L
L
L
M
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
M
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
H
H
L
L
L
H
L
L
H
L
L
1H: Heavy use = over 5% of observations during this period.
M: Moderate use = 1-5% of observations
L: Light use = less than % observations.
2Based on island classification system, percent heavy use islands Type
Type
Type
percent moderate use islands Type
Type
Type
Type
percent light use islands Type
Type
Type
Type
4.6
0.4
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.6
0.0
5.1
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
14.0
2.5
1.8
0.2
0.0
3.2
2.3
14.2
6.0
6.8
0.0
0.6
0.9
1.2
18.8
8.8
2.9
1.5
0.5
1.0
IV -55.6
III-22.2
II -22.2
IV -69.2
III- 7.7
II - 7.7
I =15.4
IV -30.0
III-20.0
II - 0.0
I -50.0
M
L
L
L
L
L
L
M
L
L
L
L
H
L
L
L
L
L
L
H
M
M
L
L
L
L
H
M
L
L
L
L
3H:
M:
L:
4H:
M:
L:
5H:
M:
L:
6H:
M:
L:
Sept. Il-Oct. 31
Percent
Observations
3.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.8
0.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
1.4
4.1
3.8
3.0
0.0
0.0
12.7
22.5
0.9
2.9
0.0
5.9
5.7
0.0
2.5
5.3
6.6
14.0
0.3
0.0
Utilization5
M
L
L
L
L
L
L
M
L
L
L
L
L
M
M
M
L
L
H
H
L
L
L
M
M
L
L
M
M
H
L
L
Nov.
L-Dec. 15
Observations
Utilization6
4.4
2.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.4
0.2
2.0
0.0
0.0
1.8
2.2
1.1
1.2
0.9
0.0
9.9
0.0
0.4
11.9
0.0
5.6
1.4
0.0
16.3
6.3
5.5
24.6
0.0
0.0
Heavy use
over 10% of observations during this period
Moderate use = 5-10% of observations.
Light use » no observations were made
these islands.
Heavy use - over 10% of observations during this period
Moderate use = 4-10% of observations,
Light use = less than 4% of observations
Heavy use - over 10% of observations during this period
Moderate use = 3-10% of observations,
Light use = less than 3% of observations
Heavy use = over 9% of observations during this period.
Moderate use = 4-9% of observations,
less than 4% of observations
Light
M
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
H
L
L
H
L
M
L
L
H
M
M
H
L
L
— 28—
on island 13 while a' lone male was observed on two occasions on the bank
south of the island.
Although some residents of the Hysham area felt
that bank nesting was common, my observations did not indicate this.
Due to the profusion of islands in this study area, it was difficult to
determine the value of an island or bank location for nesting exclusive
of others nearby.
Islands on which large numbers of geese were observed during the
breeding season in the Hathaway study area were typically either type I,
II, or IV islands (Table 5).
However, as in the Hysham study area, the
heavy use of types I and II.islands quite often was the result of use
of these islands by groups of geese other than nesting pairs, particu­
larly large numbers of non-breeders.
Thus the islands which received
large amounts of use by nesting geese, typically were type IV islands
such as islands I, 2, 18, 20, and 24.
'
Islands 20 and 24 and their surrounding areas, each appeared to
support three of four pairs of nesting geese.
Although none of these
pairs appeared to be nesting on the banks, the bpen beaches on the
backwater side of these islands may have been utilized by bank-nesting
geese for territorial defense.
Unlike t h e .Hysham study area, geese
which nested in the Hathaway area typically nested around isolated
islands like numbers 20 and 24, where there was little doubt as to
which island was being used for nesting.
Pairs or singles observed on
type I islands like island 8 were probably nesting on nearby type III
TABLE 5.
Island
Number
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
PERCENT OF OBSERVATIONS PER COUNT AND RELATIVE UTILIZATION OF ISLANDS DURING SELECTED PERIODS IN THE HATHAWAY STUDY AREA, 1972 AND 1973.
Mar. 3I-Apr. 28
Percent
Observations Utilization1
2.3
2.5
0.9
0.9
5.4
2.3
3.1
7.6
0.3
0.0
0.0
22.3
0.9
1.4
0.6
1.4
0.0
8.8
11.0
7.9
1.1
0.6
0.6
18.4
L
L
L
L
M
L
L
M
L
L
L
H
L
L
L
L
L
M
H
M
L
L
L
H
Type2
IV
IV
III
I
III
I
III
I
III
I
III
I
IV
I
I
II
IV
IV
I
IV
II
I
III
IV
June I-Julv 15
Percent
Observations Utilization3
5.0
0.0
4.5
14.0
0.0
24.0
0.0
4.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.9
0.0
16.8
0.0
0.0
14.5
12.9
July 16--Sept. 10
Percent
Observations
M
L
M
H
L
H
L
M
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
M
L
H
L
L
H
H
1H : Heavy use = over 10% of
M: Moderate use = 5-10% of observations,
L: Light use = less than 5% of observations.
2Based on island classification system, percent heavy use islands Type IV
Type I
percent moderate use islands Type IV
Type III
Type I
percent
lightuse islands Type IV
Type i n
Type II
Type I
Utilization4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.1
5.3
10.1
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.2
0.8
0.4
0.0
0.0
4.4
1.0
12.5
2.6
8.1
8.0
19.5
3.0
17.0
- 33.3
=67.7
- 50.0
= 25.0
= 2 5.0
= 23.5
- 29.4
= 11.8
= 35.3
L
L
L
L
M
M
H
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
M
L
H
L
M
M
H
L
H
M:
L:
4H:
M:
L:
5H:
M:
L:
6H:
M:
L:
Sept., 11-Oct. 31
Observations
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
23.8
14.7
17.8
11.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
11.4
1.3
0.0
1.3
0.6
0.0
1.7
0.0
4.1
5.1
0.6
2.9
2.5
Utilization5
L
L
L
L
H
H
H
M
L
L
L
M
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
M
M
L
M
M
Nov. 1-Dec. 15
Observations
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.3
30.8
0.0
19.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.1
18.5
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
2.8
0.0
4.4
1.3
9.3
1.6
Utilization6
L
L
L
L
M
H
L
H
L
L
L
M
H
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
M
L
M
L
over 10% of observations during this period,
Moderate use = 3-10% of observations,
Light use = no observations made on these islands.
Heavy use = over 10% of observations during this period,
Moderate use = 4-10% of observations,
Light use = less than 4% of observations.
Heavy use = over 13% of observations during this period,
Moderate use = 2-13% of observations,
Light use = less than 2% of observations.
Heavy use = over 15% of observations during this period,
Moderate use = 4-15% of observations,
Light use = less than 4% of observations.
,
^
VO
I
— 301-
and IV islands like islands I and 2.
In the Fallon study area, each nest location was associated with
a single island, dufe to island dispersion within this section.
possible exception was the group of islands I through 3.
One
Island 2 was
the most heavily utilized island in this section as shown in Table 6.
The observations made on the first two flights however, were probably
not indicative of actual nesting on the island since the pairs observed
on the first flight were not seen on the second.
On the last flight,
one pair was seen nesting in the driftwood pile on the upstream end of
the island (Figure 5).
Another pair nested in the interior of the
island, where a nest was located in August, 1973, which contained four
unhatched eggs (Figure 6).
While the value of islands to nesting geese is immediately
apparent, other factors may determine which islands are preferred if
the pair is given a choice.
One of these factors may be the relation- .
ship of nest location to a brood-rearing area, as reported by Hanson
and Eberhardt (1971) in their work on the Columbia River.
For example,
in the Hysham study area, geese which nested on island I were in close
proximity to typical grassy, brood-rearing areas on the south bank of
the river and in the interior of island 5.
In the Hathaway study area,
geese nested in the vicinity of island"20 ’in close proximity to a
pasture on the north bank of the river, which was known to be utilized
by brood-rearing geese.; Islands I, 2, 3, and 4 in.the Fallon area are
TABLE 6.
Island
Number
I
2
3
U
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
PERCENT OF OBSERVATIONS PER COUNT AND RELATIVE UTILIZATION OF ISLANDS DURING SELECTED PERIODS IN THE FALLON STUDY AREA, 1972 AND 1973,
Mar. 3I-Apr. 28
Percent
Observations Utilization1 Type2
6.2
59.7
1.6
1.6
3.9
1.6
0.0
1.6
8.5
0.0
3.1
0.0
3.9
0.8
0.0
0.0
7.8
M
H
L
L
L
L
L
L
M
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
M
IV
III
III
I
III
IV
I
IV
II
II
II
I
I
II
IV
III
II
Apr. I-July 15
Percent
Observations Utilization3
0.0
0.0
0.0
40.3
33.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
25.8
0.0
0.0
July 16-$Sept. 10
Percent
Observations Utilization4
L
L
L
H
H
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
M
L
L
1H : Heavy use = over 50% of observations during this period.
M: Moderate use = 5-50%,
L: Light use = less than 5%.
2Based on island classification system, percent heavy use islands Type III
percent moderate use islands Type IV
Type II
percent light use islands Type IV
Type III
Type II
Type I
3H: Heavy use = over 30% of observations during this period
M: Moderate use = 25-30% of observations,
L: Light use = no observations made on these islands.
4.6
9.0
3.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
7.1
8.4
0.0
10.5
24.2
0.0
11.1
3.5
1.2
15.7
- 100.0
- 33.3
- 66.7
- 23.1
- 23.1
- 23.1
= 30.8
M
M
M
L
L
L
L
M
M
L
H
H
L
H
M
L
H
'H:
M:
L:
5H:
M:
L:
6H:
M:
L:
Sept. Il-Oct. 31
Percent
Observations Utilization5
19.2
38.0
7.6
14.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.9
2.0
0.0
0.2
12.1
0.0
0.0
1.4
0.0
1.8
H
H
M
H
L
L
L
M
M
L
L
M
L
L
L
L
L
Nov. 1-Dec. 15
Percent
Observations Utilization6
41.8
0.0
0.8
33.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.4
13.3
0.0
7.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
H
L
L
H
L
L
L
M
M
L
M
L
L
L
L
L
L
Heavy use = over 10% of observations during this period.
Moderate use = 3-10% of observations,
Light use = less than 3% of observations.
Heavy use ■ over 14% of observations during this period,
Moderate use = 2-14% of observations,
Light use = less than 2% of observations.
Heavy use = over 30% of observations during this period.
Moderate use = 3-30% of observations,
Light use = less than 3% of observations.
|
V
4
-32-
Figure 6.
Abandoned goose nest found on the interior of island 2
in the Fallon study area; August 14, 1973.
close to brood-rearing habitat on the north side of the river, just
downstream from island 3.
In addition to the relationship of brood-rearing habitat to the
nesting island, the presence of many islands in close association with
each other may influence goose nesting preference in two other ways.
First, the presence of other islands around the periphery of one may
increase the isolation of a nest site which is located on a protected
side of the island.
This phenomenon may occur in groups of islands
formed by the cutting-off of a meander by the river such as around
-33-
islands 19 and 31 in the Hysham area, near the east end of the Hathaway
study area (islands I, 2, and 8), and in the vicinity of islands I, 2,
and 3 in the Fallon area.
Secondly, although it was felt that the cover
provided by types III and IV >islands and vegetated banks was a strong
attractant to nesting pairs, the presence of a vantage point from which
the gander or the pair could defend the territory may.also be of impor­
tance,
Open bars, common in areas where a number of islands are close
together may contribute to the high percentage of goose observations
made on types III and IV islands during the breeding season.
Islands
which are point or lateral bars may also be important to breeding geese
for this same reason.
-34-
Flightless Period
Counts of geese during the period from June I through July 15
indicated that an average of. 60, 24, and 31 geese were present in the
Hysham, Hathaway, and Fallon study areas, respectively (Appendix,
Table 13).
These figures do not reflect an expected trend based on
breeding population data.
This was probably due to the difficulty with
which geese were observed during the flightless period.
In June, geese were found near areas of heavy vegetational growth
in which they sought cover, and open fields which they used for feeding.
Although the vegetational composition of preferred areas differed
between sections, the dense, concealing nature of escape cover and the
Widei open aspect of brood-rearing and molting areas were similar
throughout the valley.
In the Hysham study area, geese were commonly found on the north
side of the river, just north of island 22.
As is the case with most
of the land on this side of the river, this area is devoted to the
raising of hay.
It was quite common to see groups of molting adults or
subadults plus families feeding on the green vegetation in this area.
The presence of an approach to the bank which the geese could climb
with relative ease was essential before such areas were utilized
(Figure 7).
Young geese were also reared on the south side of the river just
upstream from island I, but it is doubtful that any geese raised on
-35-
A.
B.
Figure 7.
Brood-rearing area in the vicinity of Myers (A), and the
approach to this pasture (B); June 21, 1973.
— 36-
island I or below would move upstream to this area to feed.
As mention­
ed by Williams and Sooter (1940), it is uncommon to find geese rearing
their broods upstream from where they were hatched.
Similar brood-rearing areas were known to have been used in the
Hathaway study area.
Geese commonly congregated in a meadow on the
north side of the rivers, near island 20.
This was one of the few places
geese were seen during the flightless period, apart from locations near
the east end of the study area.
side of the river
Geese were found feeding on the north
just downstream from island 4 on July 2, 1973.
They
apparently were feeding on wild lettuce (Lactuea serviola)3 common
salsify (Tvagopogon dvb'tus)3 and small amounts of needle-and-thread
(Stipa oomata).
Geese were observed feeding predominantly on heads of
bluegrass (Poa pvatensis) on the same date on island I.
Judging by the
numbers of single geese and pairs seen in this area during the spring
and the numbers of broods observed here on occasion during the flight­
less period, this area is probably used by large numbers of brood­
rearing geese throughout the early summer.
This was also evidenced by
the fact that the heads on most of the bluegrass plants in this area
had been stripped.
Other plants present included mature cottonwoods,
poison ivy (Rhus radiaans)3 and showy milkweed (Asalepias speaiosa)3
although the bluegrass apparently was the only species observed to have
been fed upon extensively by geese.
Geese in this study area were also
found feeding in a semi-irrigated cornfield where the individual plants
-37-
stood six inches high.
It appeared that the geese feeding here were
utilizing succulent forbs and/or grasses rather than the corn plants
themselves.
.Few broods of geese were observed in the Fallon study area.
One
group of approximately six families was located just downstream from
island 3 on an area where a sagebrush burning program had been initiated.
The heavy growth of forbs and grasses in this area probably provided
the attraction for brood-rearing geese.
The interior of island 15
appeared to be a preferred brood-rearing area, an assumption based
primarily on sign rather than actual observation (Table 6).
Numbers of
tracks and droppings on the approach to the north side of the island
indicated repeated use by geese.
Geese in the flightless stage were, occasionally flushed from dense
streamside vegetation, including an area near island 4 in the Fallon
study area, island 5 in the Hathaway area, and in numerous places in
the Myers-Hysham-Forsyth section.
These observations seemed to indicate
that such streamside areas are favored for hiding, at least during the
\
r
daylight hours when goose feeding was less intense.
For example, on an
early flight in mid-June, 1972, a fdmily of geese was observed on the
bank of the river in the Hathaway study area in vegetation which covered
all of the birds except the heads of the adults.
be predominantly rose, tall grasses, and sedges.
This area appeared to
-38-
It appeared that by.the time many of the goslings were'approximately
six weeks old, they were congregating in backwater areas on the river
during midday and feeding on the brood-rearing areas in large groups
during Other parts of the day.
Surrendi (1970) also reported the
reduced feeding activity of goslings at midday.
When geese were approach­
ed by an observer while on these brood-rearing areas, some would run
towards the river while others would fly.
As mentioned by Hanson (1965),
geese commonly will not fly until actually forced to do so, even though
their primaries may be long enough to support them in flight.
As geese acquired the ability to fly, the security of heavy vege­
tation was abandoned for that of open bars and islands.
On July 15,
1973, geese were observed for the first time that year loafing on a bar
on the downstream end of a type III island in the Forsyth area.
For the remainder of the summer and into the fall, geese loafed
on open bars and islands and fed in fields which were suitable with
regard to food and security.
Distribution and numbers within the
study areas were believed to be directly related to these two factors.
Thus on the river during the summer, breeding adults, their young, and
possibly some non-breeders maintain numbers which I observed within a
study area, pntil an influx of geese occurred in September and continued
into the fall.
-39-
Field-Feedittg:
July 15 through September 10
Hysham Study Area.
Winter wheat fields and irrigated pastures were the first fields
utilized by field-feeding geese in the Hysham study area during this
period.
This was related to the fact that winter wheat was the only
small grain crop harvested and available to field-feeding geese at this
time.
Flights to these winter wheat fields were among the longest
recorded in this study (up to 5 miles in length), since these fields
typically lie on the benches away from the river.
Almost half of the
goose observations in winter wheat in this study area were recorded dur­
ing this time period (Table 7).
A similar situation was observed at
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge in Illinois by Raveling (1969)
where the first geese to arrive in the.early fall began feeding in hay
or wheat fields prior to the corn harvest.
Mean flock size in this study area during this period was about 12
geese (Table 7).
The average number of geese present in the study area
during this period was 195 (Appendix, Table 13).
Geese commonly loafed
on islands 10 and 29 while island 13 was used to a lesser extent
(Table 4).
The heavy use of these islands reflects their seclusion,
security which they afford the geese, and their proximity to fields in
which the geese are feeding.
Geese loafing on or around these islands
fed in winter wheat fields on the south bench of the river.
Though
islands 13, 20, and 29 were not the closest to these winter wheat fields,
t
TABLE 7.
FIELD-FEEDING STATISTICS RECORDED IN THREE STUDY AREAS ALONG THE LOWER YELLOWSTONE
RIVER, MONTANA, 1973.
Hysham
PERCENT OBSERVATIONS IN EACH CROP DURING EACH PERIOD:
Winter Wheat: July 16 through Sept. 10
Sept. 11 through Oct. 31 .
Nov. I through Dec. 15
Hathaway
Fallon
49.6
3.1
4.7
99.6
7.4
4.6
76.4
19.8
43.2
~
Barley:
July 16 through Sept. 10
Sept. 11 through Oct. 31
Nov. I through Dec. 15
45.3
29.2
0.0 ,
0.4
54.0
85.7
Corn:
July 16 through Sept. 10
Sept. 11 through Oct. 31
Nov. I through Dec. 15
0.0
67.7
48.8
0.0
15.6
10.7
ACRES OF EACH CROP PER SQ. MI. AREA OF COUNTY IN WHICH
. EACH STUDY AREA IS LOCATED:1
Winter Wheat
Barley
Corn
AVERAGE DURATION OF SUNRISE AND SUNSET FIELD-FEEDING
PERIODS IN MINUTES:
July 16 through Sept. 10; Sunrise
■ Sunset
Sept. 11 through Oct. 31 Sunrise
Sunset
Nov. I through Dec. 15
Sunrise
Sunset
3.61
2.18
1.73
157(6)2
120(11)
156(17)
71(15)
157(6)
75(2)
4.37
1.00
1.17
254(13)
81(12)
137(7)
ND
258(11)
57(2)
0.0
0.0,
0.0
0.0
74.3
. 33.1
19.11
3.83
2.23
196(13)
109(4)
170(10)
78(6)
397(2)
75(3)
TABLE 7.
(CONTINUED)
Hysham
AVERAGE FLOCK SIZE:
July 16 through Sept. 10
Sept. 11 through Oct. 31
Nov. I through Dec. 15
AVERAGE DISTANCE FLOWN TO FEED IN MILES:
July 16 through Sept. 10
Sept. 11 through Oct. 31
Nov. I through Dec. 15
Hathaway
Fallon
11.8
24.0
, 14.1
10.3
15.7
27.7
10.4
8.3
20.5
2.8
2.3
2.6
2.3
1.6
3.2
0.9
1.3
0.7
1Average acreage planted of each crop in 1970 and 1971 in Treasure (Hysham) s Custer (Hathaway)
and! Prairie (Fallon) counties.
2Number of field-feeding periods used for determining average time.
— 42—
a'longer flight path was probably chosen in preference to loafing on
closer but less preferred islands.
Geese were also observed flying out to feed in irrigated pastures
during this period.
Although the pastures used were within one-half
mile of the river, the geese flew to them as opposed to walking to
similar fields during the flightless period.
Although cattle were fed
silAge in these pastures, this feed was desiccated and dense growths of
succulent grasses appeared to supply the utilized food items.
Geese at this time of the year appeared to be making two feeding
flights per day.
Mean length of the feeding periods was about 2% hours
in the morning and 2 hours in the evening (Table 7).
All geese observed feeding in fields at this time of year were
assumed to be residents of the river proper.
Although flock size
averaged 12 geese, these flobks commonly combined into flights of up
to 200 geese or more.
Geese often flew out to feed at low elevations,
sometimes coming into fields at fence height.
Highways and powerlines
which often parallel these roads did not serve as a deterrent to fieldfeeding geese.
As the summer field-feeding progressed, geese began to feed in
barley fields.
Barley occurs commonly on the river bottom, often in
close proximity to the river itself.
As shown in Table 7, almost half
of the observations of field-feeding geese made during this period were
in barley.
One large farm on the north edge of Hysham raised large
— 43-
acreages of barley, which attracted geese from many parts of the MyersHysham section of the river.
Though some of these geese loafed on
island I, most were observed coming from large gravel islands'two to
three miles upstream from the west end of the study area.
Again, there
seemed to be evidence that geese would loaf on islands which were close
to the field in which they fed, but not necessarily the closest one.
Hathaway Study Area
In the Hathaway study area during this period nearly 100 percent
of the observations of field-feeding geese were made in winter wheat
fields on the south bench of the river (Table 7).
This figure is about
twice as large as that given for. the Hysham study area during the same
period.
As in the Hysham study area, distances flown out to feed
averaged between two and three miles.
Flights of geese feeding in
these wheat fields commonly numbered 200 or more, though many of the
individual flocks originated outside the study area itself as an aver­
age of only 81 geese were present during this period (Appendix, Table
I
13).
Average flock size was about 10 geese, based on counts of nearly
150 different flocks.
The first observations of geese feeding in fields in the Hathaway
study area were recorded during the second week of August.
Although
geese were not seen feeding before this time, the peak of the wheat
harvest around the end of July probably marked the beginning, of field­
feeding as landowners reported seeing geese in these areas by the first
of August.
— 44—
Near the end of August, numbers of geese feeding in the fields
south of island 20 were increasing rapidly, while numbers of geese feed­
ing southwest of island 7 were declining.
These changes reflect situa­
tions; often observed during this period where the number of geese feed­
ing undisturbed in a particular field reached a peak and then decreased
over a one to two week period.
Geese which fed in wheat fields on the bench south of island 20
typically loafed on islands 18, 20, 21, 22, and 24 (Table 5).
These
geese and.those loafing on islands 5, 6, and 7 (which fed just west of
Moon Creek), often utilized creek drainages and gullies in their ascent
to fields lying on the bench.
The orientation of such drainages in
relation to fields used for feeding may have influenced goose prefer­
ences for certain islands for loafing.
In addition to the winter wheat fields utilized during this period,
geese were observed feeding in a flooded field north of island 12.
This
field, a barley stubble field planted to alfalfa, attracted large
numbers of ducks as well as geese.
It was the only field on the north
side of the river in which large numbers of geese were observed from
mid-July through early December.
Fallon Study Av&a
During this period, geese in the Fallon Study area were observed
feeding in standing winter wheat, which differed from observations in
the other two study areas and from what Bossenmaier (1953) noted in
-45the Whitewater Lake District of Manitoba.
These same fields were
utilized after combining and also after discing, which is reflected in
the heavy utilization of winter wheat (over 75 percent of the observa­
tions), :during this period (Table 7). Winter wheat was the only crop in
which geese were observed during this period, although at least one oat
stubble field was reported to have been used.
All other observations
of field-feeding geese were recorded in a hayfield north of island I
which apparently had large amounts of available food following cutting
and piling of weeds in this field.
Mean flock size during this period was comparable to that ,in the
other two study areas (Table 7).
Mean number of geese observed in the
study area was 85 (Appendix, Table 13).
Average distance flown out to
feed was less than one mile, probably because fields utilized during
this period were largely adjacent to the river (Figure 8).
Flight sizes
early in this period were typically between 50 and 100 geese, although
once geese began moving into the study area, they averaged over 200.
This increase was believed related to the harvest of corn at the end of
this period.
.
Islands in this stiidy area which received the greatest amounts of
use during this period both years were islands 11, 12, 14 and 17
(Table 6), which were used by geese feeding in the Marsh area. . Islands
I, 2, 3, 8, 9, and 15 received lesser amounts of use since geese feeding
near Marsh only occasionally loafed on islands 8, 9, and 15 and islands
-46-
Figure 8.
Winter wheat fields east of Marsh, Montana, which adjoin
the river south of islands 11 and 12.
I through 3 were used by geese for only a short time prior to the corn
harvest.
As shown in Table 6, islands 12 and 17 (which are type I and type
II islands), were the most heavily-used islands during this period.
Both are open, mid-stream islands located in comparatively isolated
stretches of the river.
However, activity of fishermen at the mouth
of Cabin Creek was believed accountable for the reduced use of island
17 during the summer and early fall of 1973.
Of the islands at the
west end of the study area, island 2 was apparently preferred,
-47-
possibly due to its larger amount of loafing area and greater distance
from the north bank.
This first portion of the field-feeding observations was separated
from others based on the stage of crop harvest in the valley.
Most corn
was unharvested before the first week in September so September 10 was
selected as the break-off point.
— 48-
Field Feedingi
September 11 through October 31
Hysham Study Area
Once the corn was harvested, cornfields became the principal fields
utilized by field-feeding geese in the Hysham study area (Table 7).
This was also reported by Raveling (1969) in the Crab Orchard Lake area
of Illinois.
Most of the corn along the Yellowstone River in south­
eastern Montana is chopped for silage, a method which spills quantities
of the corn.
In addition, parts of some rows are knocked down by the
machinery rather than chopped, and it is common to see geese feeding
along the down-rows in a field of harvested corn.
Corn stubble is
frequently disced or plowed shortly after harvesting is completed,
which apparently does not reduce the desirability of cornfields for use
by field-feeding geese.
Inspection of these fields indicated that large
amounts of corn are still available for geese.
Unlike the depletion of
food in a given field which is commonly reported on refuges (Raveling,
1969), most fields in which I observed geese appeared to have sufficient
food.
Some fields without available food were used as resting areas.
Bossenmaier (1953) noticed a similar pattern of goose use of fallowed
fields in the Whitewater Lake District of Manitoba.
During this period, the average flock size observed was almost 24
geese (Table 7) and the average number of geese present in the study
areas was 340 (Appendix, Table 13).
The increase in flock size over
that observed during the preceding period in this area is believed to
-49-
ref Iect the consolidation of goose flocks during this period.
Geese
were observed coming into the fields from the north side of the river,
presumably from impoundments in that area.
These groups were not figured
into the values in Table 7.
i
As shown in Table 4, islands 19, 20, and 32 were those-most heavilyused during this period.
Nearby islands, particularly islands 26, 27,
30, and 31 also received moderate amounts of goose use.
In addition;
islands 14, 15, and 16 in the center of the study area, and islands I
and 8, near the west end, also received some use.
Counts of geese in this study area increased as much as 100 per­
cent over counts made during the previous period (Appendix, Table 13).
This is believed to reflect movement of non-breeders and stockpond
geese to the. river.
Coincident with the increase in numbers of geese
in the area, an increase was noted in use of islands 14, 15, and 16,
which were used little by geese during the earlier part of this period.
Geese using islands 30, 31, and 32 typically flew out of the east
end of the study area to a large ranch oh the rlorth side of the river,
six miles east of the study area.
Nineteen circular irrigation systems
on this ranch produced fields.of corn and barley which attracted flights
of geese believed to have originated at the east end of the study area.
At times, the geese would return to the river to loaf near the mouth .
of Reservation Creek, and at other times would return to the Hysham
study area.
-50-
Geese loafing in the vicinity of islands 19 and 20 during this
period were feeding in cornfields directly south of these islands.
One
of these fields, a large circular cornfield lying on the south bench of
the river, was used by up to 300 geese prior to hunting being allowed
in the field.
bench.
Geese then began to feed in other smaller fields off the
Cornfields in this - area appeared to be the most consistently-
used fields in the entire study area in both years of the study.
Geese
could be found in one or more of these fields nearly -every morning feed­
ing period from early September through the middle of December,
The
frequent use of these fields by large numbers of geese resulted in a
decrease in the average distance flown to feed during this period, as
shown in Table 7, and reflects the closer position of this corn to the
river than the winter wheat areas used previously.
Though sugar beets are a common crop in the Hysham Study area, I
did not observe geese in such fields.
However, landowners did occas­
ionally report observing geese feeding on beet crowns.
Use of sugar
beets by Canada geese was reported by Ellis and Frye (1964) at the
Shiawassee National Wildlife Refuge
in Michigan, but they felt that
a late corn harvest made harvested beets the major food available.
After the goose season opened on September 29, 1973, a few aspects
of field-feeding behavior changed markedly.
Immediately obvious from
observations made on October I was the fact that geese display more
caution prior to alighting in a field.
Prolonged circling of a field
-51-
became a common occurrence while such behavior was relatively rare prior
to the opening.of the season.
In addition
to their reluctance to land
in a field, geese at this time were found to fly at a much higher eleva­
tion before reaching their chosen field.
Singles through large flocks
adopted this behavior which also applied to small groups of giant
Canada geese which were commonly seen.
This appears to conflict with
statements by Hanson (1965) who felt that the low flight pattern of these
small groups of giant Canadas would subject them to higher mortality
rates in the face of hunting pressure.
Over one-quarter of the observations during this period were of
geese feeding in barley fields (Table 7).
Most geese observed-were
recorded near a single barley stubble field south of islands 19 and 21.
This field attracted geese which were feeding in nearby cornfields as
geese were frequently observed to move from the corn to the barley.
Flights of up to 300 or 400 geese were seen to use this small field dur­
ing the early part of the hunting season, possibly because it was not
hunted.
Once the stubble was disced, the geese were not known to use
this field again.
The average lengths of time geese spent in the fields in the morn­
ing and the evening during this period are similar to the values obtain­
ed during the preceding period, although length of the evening field­
feeding period was shorter, averaging slightly over an hour in length
(Table 7).
This may have been a response to hunting during this period .
• - 52—
as geese were observed coining out to feed shortly before shooting hours
closed.
In Manitoba, Bdssenriiaier (1953) also evaluated goose field­
feeding periods in the mornings of October and found them be be two to
four hours in duration.
On the morning of October 2, 1973, geese were observed for five
hours in the heavily-us&d barley stubble field mentioned above.
The
weather on this date was inclement, with wind, rain, and heavy clouds,
predominating throughout the morning.
Similar lengths of time in the
field were recorded on days of inclement weather in other areas at this
and other times of the year.
Such a phenomenon is believed to be
related to metabolic requirements of birds in relation to the weather
as described by Kendeigh (1934) who stated that greater activity and
longer feeding periods can be expected during periods of cooler
weather owing to the greater food need of birds under such conditions.
Hathaway Study Area
In contrast to the Hysham study; area, field-feeding patterns of
geese in the Hathaway area were influenced little by the harvest of corn
at the beginning of this period, possibly because most corn is harvested
for seed in this area.' Fields harvested in this manner are normally
avoided by field-feeding geese.
As a result, most geese which were
observed during this period utilized dryland crops such as wheat, disced
triticales (a wheat hybrid), and barley stubble, as shown in Table 7.
These figures are probably not entirely the result of crop preferences
-53-
since dryland crops are dominant in this area.
Flock size during this period increased over that of the preceding
one (Table 7), which may reflect flock consolidation or the presence of
comparatively large flocks of non-breeders which were believed to return
to the river during this period.
The average number of geese present in
the study area during this period was approximately 100» although exclud­
ing all counts on which, no geese were observed, the average was 128
(Appendix, Table 13).
Most field-feeding geese did not shift from the benches to the
bottomlands during this period, although a decrease in the average dis­
tance flown to feed was apparent (Table 7).
This was probably related
to increased use of fields and loafing sites which.-were>:in closer
proximity to each other.
■Because the river bends northward in a semicircle at the center o:f
the study area, most islands in this meander are close to fields near
the center of the semicircle.
Thus islands 5, 6, 7, and 12 which are
in such a position, received increased amounts of use while the
utilization of islands at the west end of the study area Was much
reduced (Table 5).
,
A small group of geese which loafed on island 8 (which accounted
■
for the moderate use of that island), fed on the south side of the
river east of the study area.
This group of geese was the only flock
loafing in the study area during this period which I observed feeding
-54in a cornfield harvested for silage.
As was noted in the Hysham study area, length of the evening field­
feeding period in the Hathaway area decreased noticeably during this
period (Table 7).
The morning period, on the other hand, was consider­
ably longer at this time of year which may reflect the number of days
of inclement weather on which I observed geese.
This would tend to bias
these data since field-feeding periods on such days are invariably longer.
Just priot to the opening of the goose season, I observed large
numbers of geese loafing on three reservoirs at the beginning of the
caprock hills north of island 20.
These observations, coupled with the
simultaneous disappearance of geese from previously used loafing sites
on the river and field-feeding areas, seemed to indicate that the geese
had shifted from the river to these stockponds.
The geese which normal­
ly fed south of the river and loafed on islands were believed to have
adopted these ponds for loafing as they were within one-quarter mile
of a first-year, circular, barley stubble field in which they fed.
By
September 30, the barley had been disced and the reservoir hunted, at
which time the geese left this area and were not observed to use it
again.
Nevertheless, the use of this field further indicated the pre­
ference of geese for feeding in barley fields at this time of year.
Geese in this study area were occasionally hunted along the river
in the morning, although no hunting in the fields was observed.
This
was probably related to the fact thdt the largest and most frequented
-55-
fields in this study area were closed to hunting.
Changes in numbers of
geese in the study area immediately following the opening of the goose
season were small and indicated a maintenance of numbers or a possible
slight increase.
■
>i
Fallon Study Avea
-i
■
Most geese observed field-feeding during this period utilized corn
and winter wheat (Table 7)» although some occasionally fed in the hayfield used during the preceding period.
Following the corn harvest,
geese regularly loafed on islands I, 2, and 3 and fed in nearby corn
stubble fields on the north side of the river.
Shortly before the
goose season opened, these geese began flying out onto the south bench
to feed in winter wheat.
Once the season opened, field-feeding geese
were observed infrequently as goose numbers in the area changed markedly
as a result of movements in and out of the study area.
Field hunting
and human activity on the islands used by geese during this period
probably influenced the periodic disappearance of geese from the study
area.
The average number of geese observed in the study area during this
period was 119 (Appendix, Table 13).
Excluding days on which no geese
were counted in the study area, the average was 158 geese.
Flights of
geese observed field-feeding commonly numbered over 200, particularly
during the early part of this period.
Mean flock size (based on counts
of 86 flocks) was the smallest observed during the study (Table 7),
— 56—
which may reflect the large number of flocks comprised of one or two
family groups.
Average distance that geese flew out to feed during this
period was greater than during the preceding one because geese began
flying out to feed on the south bench near the end of September.
Islands utilized most heavily by loafing geese during this period
i
were numbers I, 2, and 4 (Table 6).
Islands I and 2 were heavily used
during the early part of the period when geese fed in cornfields north
of these islands,
island 4 was heavily used once geese began flying
out onto the south bench to feecj.
Use of islands 8, 9, and 12 largely
reflected field-feeding in cornfields south of.island 12.
The moderate
use of island 3 (Table 6) was largely the result of its use prior to the
hunting season as hunters constructed a pit blind on this island on the
second day of the goose season.
Geese which fed on the south bench typically landed in wheat strips
on the north edge close to the river.
This edge represents only a small
fraction of the available field-feeding area.
Utilization of these
fields was further minimized because most geese in this study area fed
on the irrigated bottom lands.
This I feel is in contrast to the Hysham
and Hathaway study areas where geese were observed feeding in almost
every suitable field within reasonable flying distance of the river dur­
ing the course of the study.
These were the typical field-feeding patterns observed during the
period from September 11 to October 31.
On October 31, a large goose
-57-
migration was in evidence as a storm moved down from the north.
Aerial
counts made on the two days following the end of the storm showed goose
numbers to be two to three times greater than those prior to the storm
(Appendix, Table 13).
The movement of geese into the valley from the
north was indicated by the presence of two smaller races of geese in die
area (probably B. a. •parvi'pes and B. e„ hutdhinsii) which are believed
to be northern migrants which nest in the western Arctic between 60° and
70° latitude (Rutherford, 1965).
The rapid influx of geese into the valley following this storm
apparently was the beginning of a large-scale migration as counts of
geese increased rapidly and turnover was believed to accelerate.
Numbers
of geese present in the valley increased sharply for a time, but began
to drop off as movements of geese out of the valley apparently exceeded
those into the valley.
The peak in numbers and the rapid increase in
population size is graphically illustrated in Figure 9.
Although this
graph is representative of numbers seen within the entire surveyed
portion of the river, numbers increased in all study sections.
Field-Feeding:
November I through December 15
Hysham Study Area
In contrast to earlier periods, numbers of geese observed in the
Hysham area from the first of November until the end of December
averaged considerably higher.
The number of geese present in the
DATE OF CENSUS
Figure 9.
Results of goose censuses from the mouth of the Bighorn River to the east end
of the Fallon study area; Fall, 1973.
-59-
Hysham study area during this period averaged 896.
During the first
half of the period the average was 1,356; in the second half, 428.
Thus numbers of geese peaked near the middle of November and decreased
thereafter (Appendix, Table 13).
The mean flock size of about 14 geese during this period was less
than the preceding one, yet higher than that from July 16 to September
10 (Table 7).
This small flock size probably represents maintenance of
ties within family units and small bands during migration.
During this late period, goose field-feeding became very erratic.
Time of field-feeding, number of field-feeding flights per flock per
day, and length of field-feeding periods were radically different than
for any other period before this time.
Percent of observations in
winter wheat, corn, and barley as listed in Table 7 were not nearly as
high as for any period before the first of November.
This was due to
the diverse nature of field-feeding as geese were observed in disced
corn stubble, plowed corn stubble, fallow with no apparent food, pinto
bean fields, seeded winter wheat, hayfields and alfalfa fields.
On one occasion a flock of approximately fifty geese was seen
flying towards Vananda to feed in the evening.
Though they were neither
found in that vicinity at that time nor the following morning, geese
apparently do frequent this winter wheat-growing area.
Landowners
stated that some come out from the river in the vicinity of Sanders, a
total flight path of seven or more miles.
This flight was the longest
— 60-
field-feeding flight observed in the Hysham study area.
At this time of year, goose censuses were made with less certainty
than during earlier periods due to irregular feeding times.
particularly true on days of inclement weather.
This was
Because geese remained
in fields during most or all of the day, normal counts of geese loafing
on sites on the river at midday were less likely to be accurate.
Ravel­
ing (1969) also noted at Crab Orchard Lake in Illinois that,geese would
feed all day on certain days during the late winter.
Because of their diverse feeding habits during this later period,
geese were found to loaf in most portions of this study section, although
as shown in Table 4, the area around island 22 and the east end of the
study area appeared to be preferred.
The apparent preference for these
islands may have been exaggerated by the fact that large numbers of
geese, often between 1,000 and 1,500 moved in and out of these areas
regularly, typically to the large barley and cornfields on'ka ranch in
the Reservation Creek area.
Although the river near the mouttrof
Reservation Creek is much closer to these fields, geese apparently fly
west to loaf on the islands near the mouth of Starved to Death Creek,
wherti there is an abundance of secure loafing sites.
Geese in the Hysham area during this late period were frequently
observed in alfalfa or tame hayfields, neither of which appeared to
offer much in the way of green vegetation.
One group of geese was
observed one morning in December in a disced and leveled pinto bean
-61-
field.
Availability of food in this field appeared to be limited due to
snow cover and frozen ground.
Eathaway Study Area
As was the case in the Hyshhm study area, the numbers of geese
present in the Hathaway study area increased markedly during this period,
averaging approximately 430.
The highest count of geese in the study
area recorded was 805 bn November 3, 1973, which probably was near the
peak of numbers of geese present in the valley (Appendix, Table 13).
Mean flock size during this period was about 28 geese, which is
nearly twice the next largest figure for either previous period
(Table 7).
This reflects field-feeding by many large flocks of 100 or
more migrant geese in this area.
The average distance geese flew out
to feed was over three miles, which reflects the predilection of geese
for feeding in fields south of Interstate 94 at this time of year.
As shown in Table 7, most field-feeding geese during this period
utilized barley fields, which was due primarily to frequent use of one
large field on the bench south of islands 7 through 12.
As many as 830
geese, originating throughout the section from near Rosebud east to
Miles City, were attracted to these barley strips during the first half
of November.
The
heavy use of these fields may be attributed to their ■
wide, open nature, their abundance of food, and to the fact that the
landowner did not allow goose hunting.
This was the largest number of
t
geese observed feeding in orie field during this study.
Although an
— 62—
estimated 2,000 to 3,000 geese fed at one time on the ranch near the
mouth of Reservation Creek, these geese were widely-distributed in many
of the fields. '
Unlike the behavior of resident geese noted earlier, certain small
flocks of migrants which I observed feeding on the south bench during
this period flared to t^ie north when approaching Interstate 94.
Some
of these geese would finally land in the field after a second attempt,
though some weire observed to turn and fly back towards the river.
Once
in the field, geese did not appear to be bothered by the traffic on the
interstate even though most fed less than one-quarter mile away.
Geese during this period most commonly loafed on islands 5, 6 , 7,
8 , and 12 (Table 5), most of which were at that time, and during the
preceding period, the islands in closest proximity to the fields used
for feeding.
Flights from these fields differed from those of the
preceding period in that barley fields were used most heavily while the
winter wheat fields were largely avoided.
Recorded use of any one of
these islands was exaggerated by observation of a large flock which
used the island for a short time, a phenomenon also noted in the Hysham
study area.
In addition to the heavy utilization of barley fields during this
period, geese occasionally fed in a cornfield north of island 4.
Unlike most of the corn in the valley, this field .was^ehopped late in
the season, when almost "dry:,,at -a time- when geese were feeding -:almost
— 63—
exclusively on the bench lands.
Geese feeding in this field loafed on
island 8 , even though island 4 was closer, which further indicates that
geese may sacrifice closeness to the field in favor of a more extensive
and secure loafing area.
Observations of the geese which loafed on island 8 during this
period indicated that geese would seldom feed on clear days, and when
they did, would do so for only a short timd.
On the other hand;. on
cloudy days or snowy days, geese remained in the fields all day if
undisturbed.
Certain members of this group loafing on island 8 did not
feed during several of the morning and most of the evening feeding
periods.
This behavior may be of survival value to the geese as hunters
typically reply on the regular return of geese to chosen fields on suc­
cessive field-feeding flights.
Once overnight temperatures reached 0 to 10 F., ice began to form
on the backwater side of most islands and along the banks of the river
in this study area.
From this time, mid-December, to the end of the
month, goose counts in this study section declined, ultimately to zero
(Appendix, Table 13).
Similar temperatures in the Hysham study area
did not cause the river to ice-up, and goose numbers were observed to
drop less dramatically.
■
Fallon Study Area
I
Winter wheat and corn-fields received-nearly- equal use by fieldfeeding geese during.this period in the Fallon study area (Table 7).
-64-
Four percent of the observations recorded during this period were in a
disced and leveled oat field, which may have been utilized because of
its open nature and the fact that it had not been hunted.
Geese using
this field often walked into the adjacent disced corn stubble field
possibly because of a more preferable or abundant food supply.
Winter
wheat fields near Marsh and to a greater extent, on the Fallon Flat,
were used by small numbers of geese during this period.
The fields on
the Flat typically offer more ,security than the easily scrutinized and
frequently-hunted fields along the river in the Marsh area.
Although numbers of geese increased in this part of the valley
during this period, this increase is not evident from the average number
of geese counted in the study area which was only 77 (96, excluding
counts on which no geese were observed).
The highest count in this area
during this period was 169, on November 2, 1973 (Appendix, Table 13).
However, this figure probably represents only
a small portion of the
geese present in the Terry-Glendive section, as large numbers of geese,
some of which probably loafed in the study area earlier, now loafed in
outIying sections.
Mean flock size during this period waA higher than either previous
period (Table 7), though it is based on a small sample size, a result
of the paucity of field-feeding observations during this period.
Aver­
age distance flown to feed as in the early field-feeding period, indi­
cated that most geese were feeding on the bottom lands.
-65-
Flights of geese out to feed in the study area were generally
smaller than during the earlier periods, possibly because many of the
flights were hunted and broken up.
Flights of geese from the Cottonwood
Creek area, which were believed to contain geese which had earlier used
the study area, were often 300 to 500 geese in size, the largest
observed in this area.
Islands utilized most heavily during this period were islands I and
4 (Table 6 ), from which geese flew out to feed in winter wheat on the
south bench, in corn and.oat fields north of these islands, and in fields
near Fallon.
Islands 8 , 9, and 11 were used to a lesser extent when
geese loafing on these islands fed in cornfields on the north side of
the river.
Geese observed oh islands 8 and 9 fed in a picked cornfield
north of these islands, the only field of this kind known to havti been
used during this study.
Day to day familiarity with this field and a
preference for corn may have prompted geese to feed in this insecure
situation.
Geese loafing on island 11 fed in wheat fields in the Marsh
area during this period, which along with the fields north of islands I
through 4, were, the most consistently used fields in the study area.
At the end of this period, geese loafing on a small, midstream
bar just out of the east end of the study area fed in a circular corn­
field east of island 17.
These geese were thought to have originated
in the Cedar Creek area.
Their utilization of this circular cornfield
further indicates a preference for this crop, and for circular,
— 66— .
irrigated fields, which also appeared to be preferred at certain times
in the other two study areas.
As in the other study areas, geese were observed in the field all
day on days of inclement weather.
On NovembeS IS9 1973, one group was
observed in a disced, corn stubble field north of island 3 from before
9:00 A.M. until 4:00 P.M., at which time they returned to the river.
Blowing snow, a north wind, and subfreezing temperatures were believed
responsible for this behavior.
When the daily temperatures dropped to about 10 F . , (around Decem­
ber 10), the river in the Fallon section began to freeze-over.
Under
similar temperatures, ice was evident in the other two sections though
slush ice was absent in the river in the Hysham area.
This further
indicates that the river in the Fallon section is frozen for longer
periods of time than in either of the other two study areas.
DISCUSSION
The physical aspects of the Yellowstone River are of great
importance to resident Canada geese present in the area during the
largest part of the year.
The security which the islands provide for
nesting, molting, and brood-rearing geese, the large amount of loafing
area on the river, and the isolationiwhich geese seem to seek for all
activities are believed to attract them to the river.
This attraction
becomes less evident downstream from the more heavily-used habitat ly­
ing between the mouth of the Bighorn River and the Forsyth-Rosebud
section.
Initially, distribution of geese is believed to be determined by
the preferred nesting habitat, which offers the most security during
this period.
From the breeding season until non-breeders return in the
fall, distribution is largely determined by the security and relation­
ships of nesting, brood-rearing, loafing and feeding sites.
Movement
during this period appears minimal (as indicated by band recoveries)
and survival is enhanced by the familiarity gained through continued
use of key loafing and feeding areas.
When the non-breeders and migrants enter the valley in the fall,
their distribution follows the pattern shown by the resident geese
which typically are associated with an abundance of relatively undis­
turbed loafing areas in close proximity to preferred fields for feeding.
Geese commonly feed in fields which landowners have closed to hunting
— 68—
and loaf on islands which offer no cover for hunters or are in the
closed part of the river.
Future increases in the resident goose population along the river
are believed dependent upon homing of progeny of geese which now nest on
the river and nearby stockponds.
Subsequent homing of larger numbers
of non-breeders during migration can be expected as the number Of suc­
cessful breeding pairs on the river multiplies.
The large amount of ice-free area west of Rosebud and Forsyth
during the early part of the breeding season may attract additional
breeding pairs since pairs which home to nesting sites east of Miles
City may find these areas still covered with ice and consequently, may
move west to more open sections.
This movement probably augments the
apparent attraction of nesting pairs to areas with large numbers of
islands in the westerly sections, ultimately producing a high resident
1
population.
Of direct importance in the value of the river to geese, is the
presence of agricultural crops and field types used for field-feeding
and brood-rearing.
The future of the field-feeding complement of goose
habitat is good as large-scale irrigated farming is increasing along
the river.
This increase in the Hysham-Forsyth area already is believed
responsible for the reported reduced use of winter wheat fields on the
benches in these areas.
The combination of these two types of agriculr
ture provides extensive field-feeding area for large numbers of geese
-69-
throughout the year.
The future size of the fall population in the
valley probably depends on the availability of prime field-feeding
areas and on the number of geese which will establish the tradition of
stopping in the valley during migration.
This tradition, as shown by
past fall counts in the valley (Neil Martin, pers. comm.), appears to
be building.
Another factor which may affect distribution of geese 6n the fiver
may be the location of smaller rivers coming into the Yellowstone.
The
populations on the Tongue River and more notably, the Bighorn River,
may influence goose distribution and numbers in the Yellowstone Valley.■
The prevalence of preferred field-feeding areas along the lower end of
the Tongue River appears to hold large numbers of migrants in the Miles
City area in the late fall.
Physiography Cf the Bighorn Valley and the
warmer water in the River itself may direct geese into the MyersHysham section, as migration routes appear to follow this tributary to
some extent (Szymczak, 1972).
The future of the Yellowstone River as quality habitat for geese
is presently uncertain pending exploitation of the water resource.
Reduction of flow through removal of water for generating plant cooling
may have an impact on sedimentation and deposition rates.
This could
markedly affect the security of the existing islands by draining
channels between islands and the banks and also by reducing the rate of
island formation.
More importantly perhaps, removal of water from the
I
- f a -
river system may reduce the rate of cutting-off of meanders by the
river, the product of which process is often an important source of pref
fered nesting and brood-rearing islands.
Also under consideration is the placement of one or more dams on
the.river which could affect plant succession.
Regulation of peak flows
through a dam may also have a marked effect on physical parameters.
Loss of the effect of ice-gouging and the erosive force of high-water
in the spring may cause a reduction in the number of type I and II
islands or the advancement of plant succession on the presently open
loafing areas.
The arrival of different groups of geese in the valley in the fall
enhances hunting opportunities for waterfowlers.
During the early part
of the .hunting season, hunters take resident geese which feed at
comparatively predictable times and in small areas owing to the estab­
lishment of field-feeding patterns prior to the opening of the season.
Also at this time, many geese are harvested on stockponds and nearby
dryland grainfields which lie away from the river.
Once migrant geese
arrive in the valley, hunting opportunities increase because of the
apparent lack of familiarity of migrants with this area.
Management of waterfowl populations along the Yellowstone River in
southeastern Montana to provide the greatest hunting opportunity for
the average waterfowler is complicated by two main factors.
is the reluctance of some landowners to allow hunting.
The first
This is ■
-71-
especially true of most large-scale irrigated farms which are at times,
preferred field-feeding areas.
The second factor is the river closure,
which limits waterfowl hunting in parts of the valley where the closure
is in effect.
This closure produces the greatest loss of hunting
opportunity when most of the geese loafing in a closed area feed in
fields in which ranchers allow no hunting.
However, this protection
does not appear to induce geese to move from the open to the closed
portions of the river, which might be expected if the closed sections
were a necessary refuge.
Proportionate increases and decreases occurred
in adjacent clbsed and open sections (Sections 5 & 6 ; Appendix, Table 14).
Although late fall increases in goose numbers in the Bighorn-Forsyth
section of the river (which is closed to hunting) exceed those in sec­
tions which are at least partially open to hunting, this is not believed
entirely due to the closed nature of the river.
The security of loaf­
ing areas in the westerly sections as well as other factors which
influenced goose distribution even before the season opened are believed
more important in the large numbers of geese in these sections.
Hunting along the river was believed to induce goose movement for
short distances only.
Though the intensity of river hunting was found
to be light even on the first two days of the 1973 season,
(Appendix,
Table 15), this activity may have induced local goose movements which
in turn provided additional shooting for hunters.
In contrast, the
river closure in the westerly sections permitted geese to loaf in one
-72-
section for long periods of time.
If these geese fed on lands closed
to hunting, this section became unproductive in terms of geese in the
hunter's bag.
Thus it would appear that opening the river to hunting, if only, on
a trial basis, would help to alleviate the problem of providing more
opportunities for recreational hunting of geese.
This could be accom­
plished by opening sections of the river in the closed area for periods
of time to allow hunter access and possibly to induce local goose move­
ment.
Assuming the closed nature of the river has some value for hold­
ing geese in the valley, it may be advisable to leave portions of the
river closed to hunting at the same time.
The portions of the river
which were found to be most habitually used by geese, such as the
Myers, Starved to Death, and Reservation Creek areas might be opened
first.
Hunting these sections may induce geese to loaf in interlying
sections, where they might then feed in fields not closed to goose
hunting.
Goose hunting on the river in Custer County is likely to become
more intense in the near future for two main reasons.
First, because
the amount of land closed to hunting is likely to increase owing to
landowner sentiment in this area.
Secondly, because development of
circular, irrigated fields near the Rosebud County line will probably
draw more geese into this area, in turn attracting more hunters.
Many
of these hunters may rely on river hunting, the success of which depends
-73-
on the time geese return to the river after the morning feeding period.
Therefore, I feel that the time of daily closure of. the river should be
changed to allow for the afternoon return to the river, which in the
later parts of the season, eliminates river shooting under present
regulations.
APPENDIX
-75-
TABLE 8 .
PEAK COUNTS OF CANADA GEESE IN THE LOWER YELLOWSTONE VALLEY
FROM THE MOUTH OF THE BIGHORN RIVER TO THE- VICINITY OF
GLENDIVE.
Date
Count1
November 3, 1959
194
November.28, 1960
380
October 3, 1961
436
October 16, 1962
538
November 24 & December 5, 1968
3,631
November 17, 1969
4,894
November 3, 5, & 23, 1970
2,061
November 9, 1971
6,160
November 9, 1972
6,808
■
10,006
November 12, 1973
I
________________________________________________ . •
i______________________________________________________________ j______________________________________ ___________________
1Counts made by Montana•
•Fish & Game personnel (except 1973); peak counts
on all sections not obtained on same day (1968, 1970).
— 76—
TABLE 9.
Island
'l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
CLASSIFICATION OF ISLANDS IN THE HYSHAM STUDY AREA,
Type &
Subtype1
IVB
IA
IIIA
IIIA
IVC
IVA
IIA
IA .
IA
IVB
IVD
IIIA
IVD
IVD
IA
IVB
IA
IVB
IVD
IVC
IVC
IVC
IVA
IVD
IIIA
IIIB
IVC
IIA
IIC
IVC
LA
IA . .
Acreage2
Max. Width 3
28
800
150
I
I
80
8
300
1,750
85
600
10
400
6
250
6
80
I
950
31
' 2,700
170 .
500
10 .
3,000
260 .
4,700
475
150
2
800
27
220
I
,
1,400
35
1,700
220
1,400
60
2 ,1 0 0
75
2 ,0 0 0
130
195
2
2,950
340
400
7
700
20
1 ,1 0 0
50
500
6
1 ,2 0 0
61
1 ,0 0 0
71
115
I
.2 .......... 290
Lengthtf
3,600
350
550'
1,500
4,300
1,850
1 ,1 0 0
1,650
400
2,900
4,300
2 ,0 0 0
6,500
9,700
900
3,100
340
2,900
8 ,0 0 0
3,950
3,600
3,950
650
7,500
1,400
2 ,0 0 0
3,100
950
2,700
2,850
550
....600.
Percent
' V.C. 5
Origin6
COM-S
85
I
LB
LB
30
30
LB
COM-M
90
COM-M
55
LB
25
LB
I
COM-M
I.
COM-M
90
COM-M.
95
COM-M
45
COM-S
90
.COM-M
95
LB
I
COM-M
70
LB
I
COM-S
75
COM-M
70
■ COM-M
65
COM-M
70
COM-M
90
LB
60
COM-M7
80
LB
45 i
LB
45
COM-S
55
LB
25
COM-M '
20
COM-M
70
LB
I
.'. I . .. . L B ....
iType I: 0-10% veg. cover; II: 11-25%; III: 26-50%; and type IV: 51-100%.
Subtype A: 0-10 acres; B: 11-35; C; 36-150; and subtype D: 151 acres or
more.
2Rounded to nearest figure as changes in water level alter figures.
3Estimated width in feet taken across island at widest point.
4Estimated total length in feet.
5Percent of island surface covered with vegetation.
6LB=Longitudinal or lateral bar, COM-S=Tsland formed by a cut-off
meander, COM-M=One of a group of islands formed by a cut-off meander.
7Islands 24, 25 and 26 Consolidated into one due to sedimentation and
deposition.
TABLE 10.
Island
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
CLASSIFICATION OF ISLANDS IN THE HATHAWAY STUDY AREA.
Type &
Subtype1
IVB
IVC
IIIA
IA
IIB
LA
IIIC
IA
• IIIB
IB
IIIA
.IA
IVB
IA
IA
IA
IVA
IVC
IA
IVC
IIA
IA
IIIB
IVC
Acreage2
Max. Width3
24
95
7
3
15
6
40
10
14
12
3
7
20
2
I
10
5
114
2
113
2
10
24
55
525
1 ,2 0 0
300
150
525
200
850
250
400
250
250
350 x
650
. 165
150
500
400
1,550
150
2,650 ■
250
800
650
1,350
Length4
2,500
5,250
1,600
1,500
1,700
700 2,800
1 ,0 0 0
2 ,1 0 0
1,850.
700
1,350
2 ,2 0 0
750
150
1 ,1 0 0
850
5,750
750
2,500
450
950
2,550
2,300
Percent
V.C . 5
90
95
40
I
25
I
40
I
35
5
40
5
70
10
I
10
75
80
I
75
20
I
50
60
Origin6
C0M-M
C0M-M
LB
LB
LB
LB
COM-S
LB
PB
LB
LB
LB
COM-S
LB
LB
LB
LB
COM-S
LB
COM-S
PB
PB
PB
COM-S
1Type I: 0-10% veg.. cover; II : 11-25%; III : 26-50%; and type IV: 51-100%
Subtype A: 0-10 acres; B: 11-35; C : 36-150; and subtype D : 151 acres
or more.
2Rounded to nearest figure as changes in water level alter figures.
3Estimated width in feet taken across island at widest point.
4Estimated total length in feet.
5Percent of island surface covered with vegetation.
6LB = Longitudinal or lateral bar,
COM-S = Island formed by a cut-off meander,
'
COM-M = One of a group of islands formed by a cut-off meander.
PB = Point bar (formed by cutting-off tip of a meander).
-78-
TABLE 11.
Type &
Subtypei
Island
I
2
3
• 4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
CLASSIFICATION OF ISLANDS IN THE FALLON STUDY AREA.
.
IVA
IIIB
IIIA
LA
IIIA
IVC
IA
IVC
IIA
IIA
IIB
IA
.
IA
IIA
IVC
IIIA
IIA
Acreage2
7
28
10
3
10
120
7
84
8
7
15
8
4
10
70
3
4
■Max-. ■Width3
550
300
500
150
400
1,250
225
1 ,1 0 0
500
400
450
325
150
350
1 ,2 0 0
250
400
Lengthtf
Percent
V.C. 5
2,750
■ 75
1,950
30
1,400
45
I
700 .
1,500
50
5,450
90
1,750
I '
5,100
85
1,500
25
. 1 ,5 0 0
25
2,500
20
1,450
I
1 ,2 0 0
10
1,500
15
4,300
90
1,500
40
1 ,2 0 0
15
Origin6'
' COM-M
COM-M
COM-M
LB
COM-S
COM-S
LB
COM-S
LB
LB
LB
.LB
' LB
LB
COM-S
LB
LB
iType I: 0-10% veg. cover; II: 11-25%; III: 26-50%; and type IV: 51-100%.
Subtype A: 0-10 acres; B: 11-35; 36-150; subtype D : 151 acres or more.
2Rounded to nearest figure as changes in water level alter figures.
3Estimated width in feet taken across island at widest point.
4Estimated total length in feet.
5Percent of island surface covered with vegetation.
6LB = Longitudinal or lateral bar,
COM-S = Island formed by a cut-off meander,
COM-M = One of a group of islands formed by a cut-off meander.
-79-
TABLE 12.
MEAN AVERAGE COVERAGE^AND MEAN FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE2
OF PLANT SPECIES AND SUBSTRATES FROM FOUR ISLANDS IN EACH
OF THREE STUDY AREAS.
Hysham
M.A.C. M.F.O.
Hathaway
M.A.C. M.F.O.
Fallon
M.A.C. M.F.O
FORBS
Amavanthiis vetvoflexus
Ambrosia psilostctchya
Ambrosia trifida
Apooynion medium
Artemisia oampestris
Artemisia ludovioiana
Asdlepias speaiosa
Asparagus officinalis
Aster sp.
Cairdabia draba
Centawre.a repens
Chenopodium album
Chenopodium glauoum
.Cirsium vulgarre
Clehatis ligustioifolia
CRUCIFERAE
Erigeron canadensis
Euphorbia glyptosperma
Glyoyrrhiza lepidota
Gnaphalium palustre
Grindelia squarrosa
Eelianthus petiolaris
Koohia sooparia
Laotuoa pulohella
Laotuca serriola
Melilotus alba
Melilotus officinalis
Mentha arvensis
Oenothera biennis
Plantago major
Polygonum avioulane
Polygonum ramosissimum
Potentilla sp.
Rhus radioahs
Rumex mexicanus
Rumex sp.
Salsola kali
5.0
5.0
12.5
25.0
13.3
5.0
8.4
9.0
1 0 .0
2 0 .0
16.1
7.9
26.9
16.3
5.0
1 0 .1
5.0
2 1 .0
50.0
15.0
17.5
5.0
1 0 .0
1 2 .8
5.0
30.0
11.3
42.3
-
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
-
26.7
5.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
25.0
45.0
16.0
65.0
22.5
5.0
25.0
1 0 .0
22.5
70.0
5.0
1 0 .0
5.0
1 0 .0
35.0
16.7
1 0 .0
22.5
1 0 .0
-
7.5
8 .0
5.0
1 0 .0
37.0
11.7
5.0
7.5
25.0
14.5
8.3
25.5
28.8
1 0 .0
15.9
13.6
7.6
29.0
. 9.0
-
5.0
30.0
7.5
5.0
55.0
45.0
15.0
25.0
5.0
37.5
2 0 .0
12.5
7.5
5.0
57.5
47.5
16.7
50.0
15.0
-
15.0
7.5
'
13.0
5.0
6 .0
7.0
. 1 0 .0
6 .2
-
1 0 .0
16.9
13.3
13.0
1 1 .8
12.9
1 0 .8
5.0
7.5
23.0
5.0
7.5
11.7
25.0
15.0
15.0
5.0
7.5
5.0
2 0 .0
38.0
-.
28.0
11.7
42.5
15.0
5.0
1 0 .0
1 0 .0
i
-80TABLE 12.
(CONTINUED)
Hysham
M.A.C. M.F.O.
Hathaway
M.A.C. M.F.O.
Fallon
M.A.C. M.F.O
FORBS (CONTINUED)
S o Z a m m SaitVaohoides
SoZidago oooidentaZis
ThZasipi avvense
Vevbasbvm thapsus ■
Vevbend bvaoteata
Xanthiim stvimaviim
Unidentified Forbs
14.0
1 2 .6
-
25.0
24.2
-
5.0
5, 0
1 0 .0
5.0 •
11.3 ■ 15.0
14.2
5.7
1
__
__
-
-
-
-
5.0
1 0 .0
11.9
7.0
5.0
5.0
2 0 .0
25.0
11.7
55.0
—
—
-
-
5.0
-
5.0
-
-
■ 15.3
7.8
41.4
15.5
5.8
8.5
17.0
1 0 .0
GRASSES AND GRASS-LIKE PLANTS
Agvopyvon. smithii
1.2
9.8
Agvopyvon tvaohyoauZim'
15.8
Agvostis aZba
15.0
Beokmannia syzigaohne
22.3
. Bvomus Qaponious
14.1
Bvomus- teotovuiri
CaZamoviZfa ZongifoZia
13.5
Cavex sp.
1 0 .0
EZymus canadensis
Equisetim (hiemdle group)10.O
6.5'
GRAMIEEAE
9.4
Hovdeim gubatim
5.0
Junous tovveyi
5.0
MuhZenbevgia vaoemosa
5.0
Panioum oapiZZave
7.5
PhaZavis avundindaea
7.5
PhZeim pvatense
Spavtina gvaoiZis
SpovoboZus ovyptandvus
—
Stipa oomata
31.7
17.5
27.5
5.0
47.5
.30.0
-
1 0 .0
7.5
5.0
11.9
31.3
5.0
5.0
6.7
1 0 .0
2 0 .0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
15.7
36.0
7.1
1 1 .0
13.0
2 0 .0
95.0
35.0
25.0
2 0 .0
-
8 .0
15.0
•
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
40.0
5.0
7.3
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
8 .2
—
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
12.5
8 .0
1 0 .0
1 0 .0
30.0
26.7
1 0 .0
57.5
35.0
13.0
1 0 .8
43.0
2 0 .0
2 1 .6
1 0 .0
24.0
30.0
55.0
38.0
-
-
-
—
-
-
-
.
27.5
‘ -
■
■-
-
18.3
-
1 0 .0
2 0 .0 -
5.0
60.0
28.0
20.5
30.0
22.5
SHRUBS AND TREES
Avtemisia oana
PopuZus deZtoides
Rhus tviZobata
Rosa sp.
SaZix esrlg.ua
SaZix vigida
35.8
9.9
5.0
25.2
19.4
-
-
-
-
-
■
*
-
-
16.2
15.0
35.0
1 0 .0
— 81—
TABLE 12.
(CONTINUED
•
Hysham
M.A.C.. M.F.O.
Hathaway
M.A.C,. M.F.O.
Fallon
M.A.C,, M.F.O.
30.0 .
52.0
15.0
SHRUBS AND TREES (CONTINUED)
Symphoriaarpos
oooidentalis
Tamarix gallioa
8 .8
1 0 .8
2 0 .0
26.7
-
7.5
SUBSTRATES
Coal
Driftwood
Litter
Rocks
Sand
Silt
Water
BARE GROUND3
—
—
56.7
8.3
16.0
77.7
41.8
48.6
39.5 ' 94.0
30.5
65.0
96.7
15.0
9.0
18.7
56.3
48.1
37.0
7.5
6 6 .1
83.8
64.3
73.0
-
7.3
37.7
8.4
29.9
46.9
38.9
-
9.4
1 0 .0
54.5
48.3
82.5
80.8
-
51.0
' .26.2
82.0
34.0
93.3
—
21.5
—
1Mean average c o v e r a g e : t h e average of the average coverage of each
plant species or substrate in each transect along which it occurred.
2Frequency of occurrence: the mean of all frequencies obtained from
each transect along which the species or substrate occurred in each
study area.
3Includes coal, rocks, sand, and silt when these were not measured
separately.
-82-
TABLE 13.
GOOSE CENSUS RESULTS IN THREE STUDY AREAS FROM JUNE 17, 1972
THROUGH DECEMBER 24, 1973.
____________________________________ I________ '___________________________________________________________________ :
Date
6/17/72
6/19/72
6/21/72
7/11/72
7/20/72
7/27/72
7/28/72
7/31/72
8/1/72
8/4/72
8/5/72
8/8/72
8/9/72
8/10/72
8/14/72
8/17/72
8/21/72
8/22/72
9/8/72
9/11/72
11/21/72
11/22/72
3/31/73
4/1/73
4/27/73
4/28/73
6/17/73
6/19/73
Hysham
li
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
——
—
—
-■
540
111
129
——
—
—
—
75
67
50
82
61
-_
6/20/73
6/27/73
7/2/73
7/15/73
7/17/73
7/24/73
7/26/73
—
—
—
59
7/30/73
7/31/73
8/12/73
90
54
128
B
B
B
C
C
C
C
C
C
-—
—
Hathaway
T
39
6
7
33
——
—
—
—
——
—
76
—
----
C
B
B
B
41
—
—
B
B
—
—
327
260
0
100
152
58
44
12
28
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
B
7
B
50
30
—
C
C
—
B
C
C
B
__
—
—
—
42
157
93
111
123
54
—
72
98
—
99
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
—
—
213
—
—
—
20
50
29
32
37
—
-.
25
B
C
C
C
C
C
B
—
—
61 . C
39
C
—
—
—
35
56
T
—
—
118
Fallon
C
C
94
123
C
C
Weather
Clear, calm
Clear, windy, 55 F.
Raining, 55 F.
—
Cloudy, windy, 45 F.
Clear, 90 F .
Clear, 90 F.
Clear, windy, 95 F.
Clear, windy, 95 F.
—
-—
Clear, calm, 70 F.
Clear, light wind, 90 F.
Clear, gusty winds, 90 F.
Cloudy, light w i n d , 80 F.
Clear, calm, 85 F.
Clear, light wind, 80 F.
Clear, calm, 80 F .
Clear, windy, 70 F.
Clear, windy, 70 F.
—
-—
Partly cloudy .
Mostly cloudy
Cloudy, windy
Partly cloudy, windy
Cloudy, windy, 75 F.
Partly cloudy, gusty
winds, 55 F.
Partly cloudy, windy
Partly cloudy, calm, 85 F.
Clear, calm, 80 F.
Clear, calm, 80 F.
Clear, strong winds, 80 F.
Clear, slight wind, 70 F.
Partly cloudy, light wind.
80 F.
Partly cloudy, calm, 90 F.
Clear, light winds, 90 F .
Mostly cloudy, light winds
75 Fo
— 83'
TABLE 13.
Date
8/13/73
8/14/73
(CONTINUED)
Hysham
T 1 .Hathaway
—
—
T
66
—
B
Fallon
T
143
B
8/16/73
188
C
125
C
0
C
8/25/73
8/29/73
9/4/73
219
285
227
C
C
C
129
219
74
C
C
C
87
43
117
C
C
C
9/7/73
160
C
0
C
48
C
9/10/73
204
C
38
C
68
C
9/13/73
9/16/73
251
C
95
—
C
—
203
C
9/18/73
473
C
5
C
229
C
9/19/73
511
C
—
9/28/73
9/29/73
9/30/73
10/9/73
439
C
0
0
85
——
C
C
C
43
103
0
182
C
C
C
C
10/10/73
307
C
101
C
—
10/19/73
——
10/20/73
10/29/73
185
—
C
10/30/73
213
C
11/2/73
—
11/3/73
11/12/73
—
—
—
—
1,462
—
117
—
C
175
C
—
528
C
—
,0
C
—
188
C
—
169
.C
—
1,282
C
319
51
C
C
—
i
11/13/73
'
—
C
Weather
Partly cloudy, light winds
Partly cloudy, gusty winds.
85 F .
Partly cloudy, gusty winds.
80 F.
Clear, light winds, 80 F.
Clear, light winds, 80 F.
Partly cloudy, light winds.
70 F.
Partly cloudy, light winds.
75 F.
Partly cloudy, gusty winds,
75 F.
Clear, gusty winds, 60 F . .
Partly cloudy, rain, calm.
50 F.
Partly cloudy, light wind.
60 F. ■
Partly cloudy, light wind.
60 F.
Clear, light wind, 65 F.
Clear, calm, 50 F.
Clear, light wind, 50 F.
Overcast, strong wind.
45 F.'
Partly cloudy, light wind.
50 F.
Mostly cloudy, light wind.
70 F.
Partly cloudy, calm, 70 F.
Partly cloudy, strong
winds, 50 F.
Overcast, rain, strong
wind, 50 F.
Partly cloudy, gusty
winds, 30 F.
Partly cloudy, gusty
winds, 25 F .
Partly cloudy, gusty
winds, 50 F.
Partly cloudy, gusty
winds, 45 F.
i
—84r
TABLE 13.
Date
11/20/73
11/21/73
12/6/73
12/7/73
12/20/73
12/24/73,
(CONTINUED)
Hysham
li
Hathaway
T
' __
1,350
152
C
805
C
—
—
718
—
26
Fallon
C
C
230
——
0
C
C
^Transportation during the count:
motor (B).
T
Weather
C
Clear, light wind, 40 F.
Partly cloudy, strong
wind, 40 F.
Mostly cloudy, light wind.
25 F.
Mostly cloudy, calm, 35 F.
Partly cloudy
Partly cloudy
—
13
C
——
. 0
C
Super Cub (C) or boat with outboard
TABLE 14.
Section I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
TOTAL COUNTS OF CANADA GEESE PER SECTION OF THE YELLOWSTONE RIVER, 197-3-.
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
End of Fallon study area to Fallon
Fallon to Terry
Terry to Kinsey
Kinsey to Highway 22 bridge at Miles City
Highway 22 bridge at Miles City to Hathaway
Hathaway to Rosebud
Rosebud to Forsyth
Forsyth to Hysham
Hysham to mouth of Bighorn River
Date
Sept. 7
Sept. 13 & 16
■Sept. 28
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Nov.
Nov.
Nov.
Dec.
Dec.
9 & 10
19 & 20
29 & 30
2 & 3
12 & 13
20 & 21
6 & 7
20 & 24
River open half-days or
River closed-to
goose hunting
all day to goose hunting
7
8
■
2
3
5
6
I
4
8
203
20
12
10
623
48
97
205
113
100
99
702
203
83
217
386
6
127
114
1 20 .
916
43
, 33
GOOSE SEASON OPENED (9/29/73)
282
0
228
384
60
852
36
0
130
275
64
83.
520
34
44
0
84
295
295
651
835
972
373
150
163
264'
365
463
664
737
1 ,1 0 0 ,
0
124
205
385
929
934
835
224
0
488
161
315 .
381
253
296
675
431
1,008
1,194
. 968
537
448
714
200
157
805
437
832
2,401
3,626
3,312
890
228
Total
9
411
1,432
325
2,047
585 • 2,330
503
93
67
552
' 1,165
452
473
310
2,740
2,265
2,785
6,569
10,006
8,699
4,302
1,045
I
%
' 1
.
-86-
TABLE 15.
HUNTER COUNTS FROM FLIGHTS MADE ON TWO WEEKENDS DURING
THE 1973 WATERFOWL SEASON1 .
'
Total Geese Counted2
Sept.
28
Sept.
29
Sept.
30
Dec.
I •
Dec.
2
316
322
296
1,558
2,116
O
I
2
O
2
2(2)
O
2
4(1)
2(2)
O
O
2
O
Number of Hunters3 :
Hathaway to Miles City
Miles City to Kinsey
Kinsey to Powder River
Powder River to Terry
Terry to Fallon
Fallon to East End of Fallon S.A.
E. End Fallon S.A. to Glendive
—
-
O
O
O
O
O
2
O
b
O
O
O
O
2
O
1Season on both ducks and geese opened September 29; Midseason closure
on duck hunting in effect on December I and 2.
2From Rosebud-Ouster County Line to the east end of the Fallon stud#
area.
3Number of hunters with sets of decoys ( ).
I
%
LITERATURE CITED
Bossenmaier, E. F. and W. H. Marshall. 1958. Field-feeding by
waterfowl in southwestern Manitoba. Wildl. Monogr. No. I: 1-32.
Daubenmire, R. F. 1959. A canopy coverage method of vegetational
analysis. Northwest Sci. 33(1): 43 t-64.
Dimmick, R. W. 1968. Canada geese of Jackson Hole, their ecology
and management. Wyo. Game and Fish Comm., Bull. No. 11. 86pp.
Ellis, J. W. and J. R. Frye.
1965. Utilization of sugar beets by
Canada geese. J. Wildl. Manage. 29(2): 396-397.
Geis, M. B. 1956. Productivity of Canada geese in the Flathead
Valley, Montana.
J. Wildl. Manage. 20(4): 345-352.
Hanson, H. C. 1965. The giant Canada goose.
University Press, Carbondale. 226pp.
Southern Illinois
_____ .. 1967. Characters of age, sex, and sexual maturity in
Canada geese.
111. Nat. Hist. Surv. Biol. Notes No. 49.
15pp.
Hanson, W. C. and R. L. Browning.
1959. Nesting studies of Canada
geese on the Hanford Reservation, 1953-56. J. Wild!. Manage.
23(2): 129-137.
_____ , and L. L. Eberhardt.
population, 1950-1970.
1971. A Columbia River Canada goose
Wildl. Monogr. No. 28: 1-61.
Hook, D. L.
1973. Personal communication.
Fish and Game Dept., Livingston.
Game biologist, Montana
Kendeigh, S. C. 1934. The role of environment in the life of birds.
Ecol. Monogr. 4(3): 297-417.
Leopold, L. B . , M. G. Wolman and J. P. Miller. 1964. Fluvial proces­
ses in geomorphology. Freeman Press, San Francisco.
522pp.
Martin, N. S. 1973. Personal communication.
Fish and Game Dept., Miles City.
Game Manager, Montana
McCarthy, J. J. 1973. Response of nesting Canada geese (Branta
aanadens'Cs) to islands in stockdams in northcentral Montana.
UnpubI. Thesis (M.S.), Montana State University, Bozeman.
36pp.
-88-
Nay lor, A. E. and E. G. Hunt.
1954. A nesting study and population
survey of Canada geese on the Susan River, Lassen County,
California.
Calif. Fish and Game. 40(1): 5-16.
Raveling, D. G. 1969. Roose sites and flight patterns of Canada
geese in winter. J. Wildl. Manage. 33(2): 319-330.
Rutherford, W. H. 1965. Description of Canada goose populations
common to -the Central Flyway.
Central Flyway Waterfowl Council,
Technical Committee.
18pp.
Surrendi, D. C. 1970. The mortality, behavior, and homing of
transplanted juvenile Canada geese. J. Wildl-. Manage.
34(4):
719-733.
Szymczak, M. R. 1972.
Studies of Canada goose populations in
Colorado transplant areas.
Colorado Div. of Wildlife, Job
Progress Rep., Proj. W-88-R-17, Job 6 . 26pp.
Williams, C . S. and C. A. Sooter. 1940. Canada goose habitats in
Utah and Oregon. Trans. N. Am. Wildl. Conf. 5: 383-387.
Yocum, C. F. and S. W. Harris.
1965. Plumage descriptions and age
data for Canada goose goslings. J. Wildl. Manage. 29(4): 874-877.
*
#
I
•
1
H599
Hinz, Thomas Christopher
cop.2
Seasonal activity,
numbers, and distribution
of Canada geese,..
"n a ME A H o A b o n m n m
* '79
MAP
I N , E B L lB H A H Y
J
.
C ' ' '
S
WA R 9
-2 .U > U -
1976
IA
W TERLiBRARV
IN T E H U
/U '
m -r
(C
9 W r
^
LO AN