NUNAVUT WILDLIFE RESEARCH PERMIT
APPLICATION
APPLICANT: Dr. Christopher Williams (Co-PI)
Dr. Kenneth Abraham (Co-PI)
Clark Nissley (Graduate Student)
ADDRESS: For Dr. Williams and Mr. Nissley:
531 South College Avenue, Room 253 Townsend Hall, University of
Delaware, Newark, DE 19716
PHONE: 302-831-4592
FAX:
EMAIL: Chris Williams: ckwillia@udel.edu
Clark Nissley: can@udel.edu
SPONSOR(S): University of Delaware, Trent University
FUNDING SOURCES: Arctic Goose Joint Venture, Polar Continental Shelf
Program
ADDITIONAL LICENCES REQUIRED: Environmental Assessment Screening; Nunavut
Impact Review Board Screening; Exemption Permit for Inuit Owned Lands; Water
License (Nunavut Water Board); Migratory Bird Permit-For Scientific Take or
Disturbance (Canadian Wildlife Service); Migratory Bird Permit-Sanctuary (Canadian
Wildlife Service)
PROJECT TITLE AND RATIONALE:
ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF LESSER SNOW GEESE AND CACKLING GEESE
COMPETITION ON BREEDING ATLANTIC BRANT
Atlantic brant (Branta bernicla hrota) (hereafter brant) populations have experienced longterm fluctuations as estimated from Mid-winter waterfowl surveys. However recent Lincoln
estimated population counts (Alisaukas and Leafloor, personal communication) show the brant
population may have declined by more than a third in the last decade. One possible limitation in
brant breeding success may be due to increasing interspecific competition amongst increasing
populations of lesser snow geese (Chen caerulescens caerulescens) and cackling geese (Branta
hutchinsii) breeding in the Foxe Basin. Four types of direct and indirect competition on Atlantic
brant could be occurring including exploitative competition, interference competition, pre-emptive
competition, and apparent competition. Identifying if any or all forms of competition may be
occurring between lesser snow geese, cackling geese, and Atlantic brant, will be critical to determine
in Atlantic brant are in danger of having increasingly lower reproductive success as snow geese and
cackling geese populations increase. Little effort has been conducted on understanding limitations to
brant breeding success. We propose to use careful monitoring of behaviors, time budgets, and
reproductive success amongst lesser snow geese, cackling geese, and Atlantic brant at East Bay,
Southampton Island, during the 2014–2015 breeding seasons. This proposal addresses High priority
Information Needs for Atlantic brant (Population Status, Habitat Concerns), and cackling geese
(Population Status). It addresses components of 3 Focus Areas identified in the AGJV Strategic Plan:
Population Status of brant, Population Status of TGPP, and Habitat degradation caused by
populations of snow and ross’ geese, Item 4 (Assessing the nature of impacts on other species); the
latter is at the top of the priority list in the 2013 AGJV RFP.
TIME PERIOD: 1 May – 30 July 2014
LOCATION: Southampton Island
SPECIES: Lesser Snow Geese, Atlantic Brant, Cackling Geese
PROJECT LEADERS: Christopher Williams, Kenneth Abraham, Clark Nissley
PROJECT PERSONNEL: 3 Additional Hired Technicians
OBJECTIVES: (Key expected results & Management implications)
Through this research we will attempt to quantify if asymmetric competition is occurring by
lesser snow geese and cackling geese on Atlantic brant. The results produced by this research will
improve current management plans for Atlantic brant populations in the face of currently increasing
populations of lesser snow geese and cackling geese. The products of this research will be made
widely available and promoted for use by a diversity of partners to focus their conservation efforts on
areas of greatest impact. Results will be published in a professional journal in addition to individual
graduate student thesis documents.
As Atlantic brant populations have experienced long-term fluctuations, efforts to understand
their limitations have focused on the wintering grounds. However, as lesser snow geese and cackling
geese populations continue to grow and exert potentially direct or indirect competitive pressure of the
brant breeding grounds, it is critical for future management to quantify the presence and strength of
such a possible limitation. Knowledge from this research will assist biologists to better adapt
planning for Atlantic brant population and habitat management goals.
METHODS: (i.e. Details of capture, handling, and disposition – be SPECIFIC)
To quantify ultimate and proximate causes of competition, during the summers of 2014 and 2015, we
will measure a series of activity budgets, nest initiation, habitat and food selection, competition, and
predation during the pre-nesting, incubation, and brood rearing periods. We will discuss in detail:
Pre-nesting Period
a) Activity Budgets via Behavioral Scan Sampling: During pre-nesting at each sampling point,
we will conduct scan samples every 30 minutes for a 10 minute period to quantify time all
species spend in different behaviors including feeding, resting, walking, flying, swimming,
alert, nest initiation, and agonistic (noting the direction of the agonistic behavior). We will
also record microhabitat habitat type and status (individual, paired, or in groups) at the time
of scan sample. The percent time species spend in different behaviors will be correlated to
the number and distance of neighboring geese of other species. After 10 min scan samples
have been completed, observers will scan for aggression between species for the remaining
20 minutes and if spotted the observer will conduct a detailed focal scan documenting the
time engaged in aggression, habitat, location, competitive direction, and outcome of the
aggressive interaction. Scan samples will occur at each point for 3 hours and the observer
will move to a new location. We will attempt to collect samples throughout the 24-hour
cycle depending on personnel available to assist with the project. We will model the effect of
presence and distance of lesser snow geese and/or cackling geese on the proportion of time
that Atlantic brant spend engaged in different activities, while including time of day, weather,
and habitat use as covariates.
b) Food Selection via Fecal Samples: Plant epidermal fragments remain intact during passage
through the alimentary canal of geese, enabling dietary analysis based on dropping contents
(Owen 1975). Only very fresh droppings will be collected in the field from the exact
positions where geese had been observed feeding for at least one hour. Flushed birds at the
point of collection will confirm species responsible. At least ten individual droppings will be
gathered per sample, separated into areas where both species had been feeding in the
previous hour and areas where only one focal species had been present. Samples will be dried
in the field, returned to the lab, ground to powder, filtered (2 mm mesh) and analyzed.
Powder samples will be eluted with water and mixed thoroughly before subsamples are
mounted on slides and examined microscopically. Food composition will be quantified by
determination of fragments following Owen (1975), sampling the first 100 fragments in 1
mm steps that fell within a 4 mm diameter circle inscribed on a graticule in the ocular. We
will attempt to identify all foods from reference plants collected on the study area. We will
attempt to correlate food selection with presence/absence of competing species.
c) Vegetation Sampling: Species composition of vegetation in areas subject to different levels of
grazing pressure by brant and snow geese will be quantified using transect and quadrat
sampling. Biomass will be recorded by harvesting and weighing above-ground plant material.
Grazing pressure will be estimated by comparison with control plots temporarily protected by
wire exclosures using both biomass and fecal counts.
d) Predation: Observers will also watch for predation events and record predator type, outcome,
microhabitat use by brant at time of predation, and the number and distance of neighboring
geese of other species.
Incubation Period
a) We will first need to determine nest density and inter-nest distances. We will conduct
systematic nest searches of the 10 study areas with priority given to 1km 2 blocks that held
brant in 2010. All found nests will be GPS recorded and assigned a species-specific
alphanumeric code. Although brant are the focus, we will collect data on all geese species.
Depending on results of the search of historical areas, and if there is time after complete
search of historical blocks, then searching new blocks to the west (high historical density)
and east (low historical density) or inland (low historical density) on a trial basis would yield
new information. Once nests are located, we will age embryos utilizing both field candler and
egg floating techniques to estimate the incubation stage and hatch date. We will also record
clutch size, egg loss, predator identification, and adult behavior. The nesting parameters
addressed by this study include mean clutch size, nest survival, mean hatchability (the
number of eggs that hatch within a clutch), mean nest initiation, and mean hatch dates.
b) Activity Budgets: We will continue scan/focal scans during incubation as detailed above with
emphasis on recording how the species directly or indirectly affect one another’s behaviors.
To supplement this effort we will additionally place 30 cameras near brant nests that will
record time-lapse video of brant activity budgets, possible competitive interactions, and
predation events.
c) Food Selection via Fecal Samples: If opportunities exist to monitor brant feeding off the nest,
we will attempt to collect fecal samples (following the methodology above) to determine
food selection of actively nesting female brant while off the nest.
d) Nest Microhabitat Selection: We will continue to measure nest site characteristics as have
been collected at the study area in 1979, 1980, and 2010 (Abraham and Ankney 1980, Sharp
and Abraham personal communication). We will also collect 100 cm2 turf samples (n=5 per
territory) to measure above ground biomass available during incubation (3 times even spaced
during incubation). While we will focus on collecting information on all brant nests, we will
attempt to sample 30 snow goose nests and 30 cackling goose nests per year. We will build a
series of models to test, using AICc, what determines nest site selection including
microhabitat characteristics, intra-specific and inter-specific nest distance, and snow goose
and cackling goose densities.
e) Nest success. We will determine the nest fate and apparent nest success for testing
hypotheses of effects; e.g., separating abandonment by females who don’t get or have access
to enough food from depredation during laying or incubation stage by an increased predator
population supported by the snow goose increase. Using Cox proportional hazards modeling
we will model the effects of habitat, forage quality, weather, date, predator presence, and
sympatric goose species on nest success.
Brood Rearing
f) If we are able to follow brant broods after hatching we will conduct daily observations of
broods for 2 weeks post hatch to identify chick survival. We will use Cox proportional
hazards modeling to model the effects of habitat, forage quality, weather, date, predator
presence, and sympatric goose species on chick survival.
Will there be fuel cached for this project (Yes / No): (if yes; give the number of
drums, the location of the caches, and the dates of
deployment /removal.)
No
COMMUNITY CONSULTATION PLAN:
We will consult with the community of Coral Harbour. This will be done through a
community visit in winter 2014 either by one of the research team, or in cooperation with
our partners Paul Smith, Grant Gilchrist or Jim Leafloor, each of whom have ongoing
research at East Bay or Southampton Island.
PROPOSED USE OF LOCAL KNOWLEDGE:
One of us (KFA) has worked in the past with local residents. Local knowledge about the
research site will be sought to make sure our camp and our work on the land is
responsive to any local sensitivities.
OPPORTUNITIES FOR LOCAL PARTICIPATION:
We intend to hire an Inuit Field Research Assistant, who might come from Coral
Harbour. We may also be able to engage local participation in our camp logistics. After
establishing a relationship locally, and because we have plans to return in 2015, further
opportunities may become more apparent.
TERMS & CONDITIONS:
This application is submitted and will be evaluated prior to issuance of a Research Permit or Collection
Licence, as issued by the Department of Environment – Wildlife Management Division, Nunavut Territory.
All submitted applications become the property of the Department of Environment– Wildlife Division and
may not be returned to the applicant.
The application review process requires that copies be distributed to a number of reviewers. The
contents of this application form may be subject to access under the Freedom of Information and
Protection of Privacy Act.
Principal Researcher’s signature
1/28/14
Date
Additional Investigator’s signature
1/28/14
Date
Additional Investigator’s signature
1/28/14
Date
RABIES ADVISORY:
Rabies is naturally occurring disease that is endemic to wildlife, particularly canids, in Nunavut. Rabies
can infect human beings, and if left untreated can cause death. All persons who may be exposed to
rabies are strongly encouraged to obtain and keep updated a pre-exposure vaccination.
All applications for Wildlife Research Permits should be submitted to:
Wildlife Research Section
Department of Environment
Box 209, Igloolik, NU, X0A 0L0
Tel: (867) 934-2178
Fax: (867) 934-2190
Email: wildlife_research@gov.nu.ca