Hay-Zama Lakes Duck Breeding and Molting...EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Hay‐Zama Lakes complex is widely...

Hay-Zama Lakes Duck Breeding and Molting Population Density Surveys, 2005 - 2007

CONSERVATIONCONSERVATION

REPORT REPORT

SERIESSERIES

CONSERVATIONCONSERVATION

REPORT REPORT

SERIESSERIES 25% Post Consumer Fibre

When separated, both the binding and paper in this document are recyclable

The Alberta Conservation Association is a Delegated Administrative Organization under Alberta’s Wildlife Act.

Hay‐Zama Lakes Duck Breeding and Molting Population Density Surveys, 2005 ‐ 2007

Ken D. Wright and Ryan Hermanutz Alberta Conservation Association

9621 – 96 Avenue Peace River, Alberta, Canada

T8S 1T4

Report Editors DOUG MANZER KELLEY KISSNER Alberta Conservation Association 50 Tuscany Meadows Cres NW Box 1139, Provincial Building Calgary, AB T3L 2T9 Blairmore, AB T0K 0E0 Conservation Report Series Type Data ISBN printed: 978‐0‐7785‐8218‐2 ISBN online: 978‐0‐7785‐8219‐9 Publication No.: Pub No. T/211 Disclaimer: This document is an independent report prepared by the Alberta Conservation Association. The authors are solely responsible for the interpretations of data and statements made within this report. Reproduction and Availability: This report and its contents may be reproduced in whole, or in part, provided that this title page is included with such reproduction and/or appropriate acknowledgements are provided to the authors and sponsors of this project. Suggested Citation: Wright, K.D., and R. Hermanutz. 2009. Hay‐Zama Lakes duck breeding and molting

population density surveys, 2005 ‐ 2007. Data Report, D‐2009‐002, produced by the Alberta Conservation Association, Peace River, Alberta, Canada. 25 pp. + App.

Cover photo credit: David Fairless Digital copies of conservation reports can be obtained from: Alberta Conservation Association 101, 9 Chippewa Road Sherwood Park, AB T8A 6J7 Toll Free: 1‐877‐969‐9091 Tel: (780) 410‐1999 Fax: (780) 410‐6441 Email: info@ab‐conservation.com Website: www.ab‐conservation.com

i

mailto:[email protected]

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Hay‐Zama Lakes complex is widely recognized as an important waterfowl staging

area, however little information exists regarding the importance of this unique wetland

area for breeding and molting waterfowl. Waterfowl management in this area has

focused on monitoring staging waterfowl numbers near the numerous producing oil

and gas well sites within the wetland complex since 1978. Ongoing monitoring is

expected to continue until oil and gas activity is phased out between 2012 and 2017.

The purpose of this survey was to provide stakeholders with additional waterfowl

population data for consideration in managing this complex as new economic values

develop. Our objectives were to estimate waterfowl population density in the Hay‐

Zama complex during breeding and molting seasons over a three‐year period, and to

identify and characterize areas within the complex with the greatest densities.

We flew a series of aerial surveys over a three‐year period during breeding and molting

seasons. Four surveys were flown each year; one in late May and one in early June for

the breeding season, and one in late July and one in early August for the molting

season. Waterfowl observed were grouped into social classes to estimate breeding

density, and total numbers observed were used to calculate molting densities. Social

classes are a tool developed for calculating densities during the breeding period and are

not applicable during the molting season.

Breeding densities of all species combined (indicated breeding birds per hectare

(IBB/ha)) ranged from 0.511 to 1.179 and molting densities from 0.916 to 2.454 birds/ha

over the three‐year survey period. Greatest densities of breeding birds were found on

the north and east portions of the complex, whereas greatest densities of molting birds

were observed in the center of the complex.

Key words: Hay‐Zama Lakes, wetlands, waterfowl, breeding birds, molting, staging,

aerial survey.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We are grateful to the following individuals and agencies for their contributions and

assistance in delivering this project. Alberta Tourism, Parks, Recreation and Culture

provided financial assistance. Technical support for aerial surveys was provided by

Robb Stavne (Alberta Conservation Association) and Reg Arbuckle (Alberta Tourism,

Parks, Recreation and Culture). Jonathon Thompson (Ducks Unlimited Canada)

advised on study design. Velma Hudson, Doug Manzer (Alberta Conservation

Association) and Kelley Kissner reviewed this report and provided valuable insights

and editorial suggestions.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................... ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................................................ iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................ iv

LIST OF FIGURES....................................................................................................................... v

LIST OF TABLES........................................................................................................................vi

LIST OF APPENDICES ............................................................................................................vii

1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Study rationale ........................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Study objectives ......................................................................................................... 2

2.0 STUDY AREA................................................................................................................. 2 2.1 Description ................................................................................................................. 2 2.2 Ecoregion, forest cover and soils ............................................................................. 4 2.3 Plant and animal communities ................................................................................ 4

3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS ................................................................................... 5 3.1 Sampling design ........................................................................................................ 5 3.2 Data manipulation................................................................................................... 11

4.0 RESULTS ....................................................................................................................... 12 4.1 Weather and habitat conditions............................................................................. 12 4.2 Aerial survey results ............................................................................................... 14 4.3 Summary................................................................................................................... 22

5.0 LITERATURE CITED .................................................................................................. 24

6.0 APPENDIX.................................................................................................................... 26

iv

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Map of the Hay‐Zama Lakes duck breeding and molting population density survey area.. ............................................................................................................ 3

Figure 2. Transect routes for aerial waterfowl surveys during breeding and molting periods in the Hay‐Zama complex, 2005............................................................. 7

Figure 3. Map of the Hay‐Zama Lakes duck breeding and molting population density survey area. ............................................................................................................. 8

Figure 4. Transect routes for aerial waterfowl surveys during breeding and molting periods in the Hay‐Zama complex, 2006 and 2007. ........................................... 9

Figure 5. Mean monthly water level recorded by Environment Canada at Sousa Creek from March to October, 2005, 2006 and 2007. ....................................... 13

Figure 6. Densities of breeding birds per hectare for each waterfowl species observed in the Hay‐Zama study area in 2005, 2006 and 2007. ...................................... 16

v

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Classification and surface area of wetland cells contained within the Hay‐Zama wetland complex sampling area, 2006 – 2007. ...................................... 14

Table 2. A comparison of breeding bird densities among years for all ducks combined and for three of the most commonly observed species within the Hay‐Zama wetland complex sampling area, for the entire study period (2005 – 2007). ......................................................................................................... 15

Table 3. A comparison of breeding bird densities among cells for all ducks combined, and for the four most commonly observed species within the Hay‐Zama wetland complex sampling area, 2006........................................... 17

Table 4. A comparison of breeding bird densities among cells for all ducks combined, and for the four most commonly observed species within the Hay‐Zama wetland complex sampling area, 2007........................................... 18

Table 5. A comparison of molting bird densities among years for all ducks combined, and for three of the most commonly observed species within the Hay‐Zama wetland complex sampling area, for the entire study period (2005 – 2007). ......................................................................................................... 19

Table 6. A comparison of densities of molting birds among cells for all ducks combined, and for the four most commonly observed species within the Hay‐Zama wetland complex sampling area, 2006........................................... 20

Table 7. A comparison of densities of molting birds among cells for all ducks combined, and for the four most commonly observed species within the Hay‐Zama wetland complex sampling area, 2007........................................... 21

vi

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 1. Weather conditions during aerial surveys of the Hay‐Zama complex

for study period, 2005 to 2007. ................................................................. 26

Appendix 2. Categories of social classes used for calculating indicated breeding birds in a waterfowl population............................................................... 27

vii

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background

The Hay‐Zama Lakes complex is recognized internationally as an important waterfowl

staging area along the Pacific, Central and Mississippi flyways. Official designations of

the complex include: “Wetland of International Importance‐Ramsar Site” (1981 Ramsar

Convention), “Wetland for Tomorrow” (Ducks Unlimited Canada/Government of

Alberta), World Heritage Site (1990 World Heritage Convention, UNESCO) and in 1999

the complex was designated by the Province of Alberta as a “Special Places Wildland

Park”.

The complex and surrounding area host a variety of user groups with significant

interests in the wetland’s resources. The people of the Dene Tha’ First Nation use the

complex extensively for traditional hunting, fishing, trapping and ceremonial activities.

The oil and gas industry is very active in this area (nearly twice the well density and

three times the density of linear disturbance relative to the entire northwest region)

with several wells situated on man‐made islands.

1.2 Study rationale

Oil and gas production within the complex is expected to cease sometime between 2012

and 2017. To date, wildlife management in the complex has focused on monitoring

concentrations of staging waterfowl within 30 m of producing well sites (Wright 1999).

Moving forward, the Hay‐Zama Committee is looking for future economic

opportunities (i.e., tourism) as activity within the complex shifts from oil and gas

extraction. Therefore, additional ecological information is needed to more fully

understand the importance of this complex for waterfowl populations.

To date, little is known about the significance of this complex for breeding and molting

waterfowl. Although waterfowl monitoring within 30 m of well heads meets the basic

requirements of the Alberta Energy Resources Conservation Board, it does not measure

waterfowl population density for the complex, nor identify areas and characteristics of

1

2

concentrated use by breeding or molting waterfowl. We attempted to clarify these data

gaps to provide further clarity on the value of this complex for waterfowl.

Annual and seasonal water levels in the complex can vary widely. Annual variability

can result in some areas providing good breeding habitat in one year, while being

completely dry and of limited value the next. Seasonal variability can also contribute to

the usefulness of particular areas to waterfowl through the breeding and molting

seasons. We suspect that the variation in water levels within and between areas may

affect temporal and spatial distribution of waterfowl on the complex.

1.3 Study objectives

Our objectives of the study were to:

i. Estimate waterfowl density in the Hay‐Zama complex during breeding

and molting seasons for three years;

ii. Identify areas (cells) within the complex with the greatest densities of

breeding and molting waterfowl; and

iii. Characterize environmental conditions of those areas of greatest

breeding and molting density compared with those areas of less dense

concentrations.

2.0 STUDY AREA

2.1 Description

The Hay‐Zama Lakes are part of a unique and diverse wetland complex located in

northwestern Alberta at 58o 45’ N, 119o 00’ W (Figure 1). Comprised of over 50,000 ha

of open water, wet meadows, rivers and floodplain woodlands, this area is

characterized by highly variable water levels both on a seasonal and annual basis

(Fearon and Larsen 1986).

Figure 1. Map of the Hay‐Zama Lakes duck breeding and molting population density survey area. Inset is a map of Alberta showing the location of the survey area within the province.

3

The complex’s major fluvial system, Hay River, meanders through the complex,

separated from lacustrine cells by high levees. Other fluvial systems entering the

complex include Sousa Creek to the southeast, Vardie River, Amber River, and Zama

River all to the north, and Mega River to the northwest, as well as several unnamed

creeks (Figure 1). Major lacustrine cells include Hay, Zama, Duck and Sand lakes.

Numerous shallow sloughs make up the remainder of the complex’s wetted area.

During spring runoff high water in the Hay River backs up Omega River and Sousa

Creek filling the complex. After peak runoff, the complex slowly discharges into the

Hay River via these same drainages. By mid‐summer some of the large ephemeral

lacustrine cells recede into vast grasslands.

2.2 Ecoregion, forest cover and soils

The Hay‐Zama Lakes complex occurs in the Mid‐boreal Mixed‐wood ecoregion (Strong

and Leggat 1992). The climate is characterized by relatively low annual precipitation,

cool summers and long, cold winters (Strong and Leggat 1992).

Forest cover in the ecoregion is dominated by trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides) and

balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera) with understories commonly containing species like

blue joint (Calamagrostis canadensis), prickly rose (Rosa acicularis), bunchberry (Cornus

canadensis), wild sarsaparilla (Arilia nudicaulis), dewberry (Rubus pubescens) and

common fireweed (Epilobium angustifolium) (Strong and Leggat 1992).

Soils in the study area include luvisols, regosols, gleysols and organic types (Bentz et al.

1994). Luvisolic soils dominate the well‐drained, upland sites where glaciolacustrine

deposits form the dominant parent material. Regosolic soils are prominent on recently

deposited sediments of fluvial origin like the floodplains of the Hay River and its

tributaries. Gleysolic soils are very common in poorly drained areas, often overlain by

organic layers or peat (Bentz et al. 1994).

2.3 Plant and animal communities

Fluctuating water levels in the complex is an important attribute of the region and

profoundly influences the structure and functioning of plant communities. Aspen and

4

balsam poplar dominate the limited upland sites with sporadic occurrence of white

spruce (Picea glauca) and paper birch (Betula papyrifera). Fluvial deposits adjacent to

watercourses are dominated by balsam poplar, with a dense understory of willow (Salix

spp.), red‐osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera) and chokecherry (Prunus virginiana).

Dense willow thickets, often associated with thick grass and sedge meadows (Carex

spp.), cover the poorly drained transitional areas between the river levees and the

ephemeral lacustrine basins. Sedges, slough grass (Beckmannia syzigachne), water

smartweed (Polygonum spp.), yellow cress (Rorippa palustris) and small bedstraw

(Galium trifidum) cover the ephemeral lacustrine basins once water levels have receded.

The Hay‐Zama Lakes complex is important for many wildlife species in addition to

migrating waterfowl, especially wood bison (Bison bison athabascae). The Hay‐Zama

herd is reported to be the only free‐ranging, disease‐free bison herd in Alberta (Moyles

1997). Wright (2000) reported 39 species of neotropical migrants in a 1999 mist‐netting

study in riparian habitats in the complex, and flooded grasslands in spring provide

spawning and rearing habitat for northern pike (Esox lucius) (Moller and Rosin 1994;

Shaffe and Wright 1997; Wright 1998).

3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 Sampling design

We flew aerial surveys in a Bell 206 rotary wing aircraft at approximately 30 m above

ground level (AGL) with ground speeds of 60 to 100 km/h. Surveys started no later

than one hour after sunrise and ended by 13:00. Our survey team consisted of one

observer/navigator on the left side of the aircraft and one observer on the right, in

addition to the pilot. Observers identified waterfowl species and social class within 200

m on their respective sides of the aircraft as recommended by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service/Canadian Wildlife Service (1987) and recorded observations on a digital voice

recorder. Survey crew members wore polarized glasses to reduce the effect of glare

from sun reflection over water. Surveys were not flown when winds exceeded 25

knots. Four surveys were flown each year; one in late May and one in early June for the

breeding season, and one in late July and one in early August for the molting season

5

6

(actual dates of the surveys are reported in Appendix 1). Environmental conditions (air

temperature, wind speed and direction, cloud cover and general survey conditions)

were recorded at the beginning of each survey flight.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service/Canadian Wildlife Service (1987) recommend spacing

transects 400 m apart for complete coverage; however due to budget constraints we

placed our transect lines 800 m apart. Prior to the surveys, we created a map of the

complex with transect lines 800 m apart laid out over the entire wet area using

geographic information system (GIS) (Esri ArcGIS 9.0) software. Waypoints at the end‐

points of each of the transect lines were provided to the pilot to enter into the aircraft’s

navigational Global Positioning System (GPS) for accurate navigation of transects. For

the first year of the study (2005), the entire wetland complex was regarded as one water

body and transects extended over the entire complex, excluding wooded upland areas

(Figure 2). The total area of the complex surveyed in 2005 equaled 30,490 ha. During

the 2005 flights, we observed that the complex was made up of a number of distinct

cells separated by levees and willow‐covered uplands and that the 2005 transects also

extended over several areas of wooded uplands between the complex’s waterbodies

that were not suitable waterfowl habitat. To identify areas within the complex most

important to breeding and molting waterfowl, 19 separate and distinct cells were

defined for 2006 and 2007 surveys (Figure 3). Using GIS software, ortho‐rectified aerial

photography and satellite imagery, boundaries of each of the 19 cells were determined,

cell area calculated and transects redrawn (Figure 4). Transects were aligned for most

efficient coverage of the wet area of each cell, while avoiding the wooded upland areas

and, as in 2005, were spaced 800 m apart. The total area of the complex surveyed in

2006 and 2007 equaled 20,786 ha. To compare environmental conditions of those areas

of greatest breeding and molting density with those areas of less dense concentrations,

we classified the cells into the following categories based on visual observations using

criteria adopted by the Alberta Water Resources Commission (1987).

Figure 2. Transect routes for aerial waterfowl surveys during breeding and molting periods in the Hay‐Zama complex, 2005.

7

Figure 3. Map of the Hay‐Zama Lakes duck breeding and molting population density survey area showing survey cells. Individual cells are identified by number to determine areas within the complex most important to breeding and molting waterfowl.

8

9

Figure 4. Transect routes for aerial waterfowl surveys during breeding and molting periods in the Hay‐Zama complex, 2006 and 2007.

Non‐permanent wetlands

Non‐permanent slough/marsh – wetland in a depression where surface drainage is

obstructed, with less than 50% of the area as open water. Surface water is not always

present; the area is usually dry for the growing season, especially in late summer and

fall.

Sheetwater – areas of relatively flat, level terrain that are periodically inundated by

shallow, open water that persists for short periods.

Seep – wet areas resulting from groundwater discharge at the soil surface.

Permanent wetlands

Permanent slough/marsh – wetland in a depression where surface drainage is obstructed,

with less than 50% of the area as open water. Surface water is present year‐round or

climax vegetation is present.

Lake/pond – permanent body of open water.

Watercourse – channel for running water and adjacent floodplain.

Fluctuating water levels in the complex (Fearon and Larson 1986) can have a

considerable effect on the area of the cells, especially non‐permanent cells, which may

affect the distribution of waterfowl within the complex. Water level data for the study

period were obtained from Environment Canada, Water Survey Division, which

monitors water levels in creeks and rivers throughout Canada. Although no

monitoring station exists within the complex boundaries, Environment Canada has a

station at Sousa Creek, a major fluvial system feeding the complex approximately 26

km upstream. This station was the closest monitoring station to the study area;

therefore, we assumed that water levels within the complex were similar to those

measured at the Sousa Creek station.

10

3.2 Data manipulation

Two surveys were completed during the spring breeding season to ensure that both

early‐ and late‐nesting species were counted. Some waterfowl species nest earlier or

later than others, therefore using highest aggregate counts to calculate densities

enhances the likelihood that early and late nesters are represented (J. Thompson, Ducks

Unlimited Canada, pers. comm.). We selected the highest aggregate count for each

species in each cell from the two spring breeding season surveys to determine numbers

of indicated breeding birds (IBB). Used by the Canadian Wildlife Service and the

United States Fish and Wildlife Service, IBB is a measure that incorporates social class

data and species‐specific formulas to provide an estimate of total members of the

breeding population for a particular season. Categories of social classes used for

breeding waterfowl surveys are listed in Appendix 2.

The formula used for calculating total number of IBB for all species except redhead

(Aythya americana), scaup (A. affinis or A. marila), ring‐necked (A. collaris) and ruddy

(Oxyura jamaicensis) ducks was:

IBB = (2 x pairs) + (2 x lone males) + (2 x flocked males < 5) + (1 x grouped birds > 4).

Lone males and males in small groups (< 5) are assumed to be mates of a breeding hen,

therefore lone females are not included in the IBB formula so the assumed pairs are not

counted twice. The formula used for calculating total number of IBB for redhead,

scaup, ring‐necked and ruddy ducks was:

IBB = (2 x pairs) + (1 x lone males) + (1 x lone females) + (1 x flocked males < 5) + (1 x

grouped birds > 4).

Lone males and males in small groups (< 5) of these species are assumed to be part of

the breeding population, but are not “paired” with an unseen female. Lone females are

included. Sex ratios for these species are skewed toward males, accounting for the

differences in IBB estimate calculations mentioned above. U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service/Canadian Wildlife Service (1987) provides standard operating procedures

outlining methods and formulas used in this study.

11

Densities of IBB per wetland cell were calculated to gain an understanding of how

waterfowl species were spatially distributed within the complex, as well as to provide a

measure of cell productivity. Indicated breeding birds (IBB) per cell were divided by

the total transect area of each cell to calculate densities (IBB/ha). Social classes were

used to determine the number of breeding birds in a population; however waterfowl do

not remain in these social classes after the breeding season is finished. Therefore,

molting season densities were estimated from the total numbers observed as:

Molting density = total of species per cell / (transect length x transect width)

All adult waterfowl observed during molting surveys were assumed to be molting

birds.

4.0 RESULTS 4.1 Weather and habitat conditions

One of the most unique characteristics of the Hay‐Zama Lakes complex is the high

variability of water levels, both annually and seasonally. Environment Canada (2007)

reported average (mean) monthly water levels ranging from 1.03 m to 2.74 m recorded

at Sousa Creek station during open water seasons for 2005 to 2007 (Figure 5).

12

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct

Month

Water level (m)

2005 2006 2007

Figure 5. Mean monthly water level recorded by Environment Canada at Sousa

Creek from March to October, 2005, 2006 and 2007.

Based on visual observation during the aerial surveys, water levels were slightly higher

in some of the ephemeral areas of the complex in 2005 than in 2006 and were

substantially higher throughout the complex in 2007. The low levels we observed in

the complex in 2006 were corroborated by the low flows entering the complex via Sousa

Creek in May (Figure 5). This spring freshette plays an important role in re‐charging

the ephemeral cells of the complex each year.

Of the 19 separate cells we identified for 2006 and 2007 surveys, five were classified as

non‐permanent wetlands and 14 as permanent wetlands (Table 1). Non‐permanent

wetlands included four non‐permanent sloughs and one sheetwater ranging in area

from 143 to 796 ha. Permanent wetlands included five permanent sloughs ranging in

area from 264 to 1,930 ha and nine permanent lakes ranging in size from 376 to 5,814 ha.

13

Table 1. Classification and surface area of wetland cells contained within the Hay‐Zama wetland complex sampling area, 2006 – 2007.

Cell no. Area (ha) Classification Non‐permanent wetlands

15 143 Non‐permanent slough/marsh 10 208 Non‐permanent slough/marsh 1 223 Non‐permanent slough/marsh 9 357 Non‐permanent sheetwater 14 796 Non‐permanent slough/marsh

Permanent wetlands (slough/marsh) 5 264 Permanent slough/marsh 3 274 Permanent slough/marsh 2 285 Permanent slough/marsh 17 441 Permanent slough/marsh 13 1,930 Permanent slough/marsh

Permanent wetlands (lake/pond) 18 376 Permanent lake/pond 4 416 Permanent lake/pond 16 428 Permanent lake/pond 12 551 Permanent lake/pond 19 867 Permanent lake/pond 6 896 Permanent lake/pond 8 1,792 Permanent lake/pond 11 4,725 Permanent lake/pond 7 5,814 Permanent lake/pond

Total 20,786

4.2 Aerial survey results

4.2.1 Breeding bird populations

Breeding bird population densities for the entire complex varied widely throughout the

study period, from a low of 0.511 IBB/ha in 2005 to a high of 1.179 IBB/ha in 2006 (Table

2). Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), lesser scaup (Aythya affinis) and bufflehead (Bucephala

albeola) were among the top six species we observed in all three years. Total densities

for these species are displayed in Table 2.

14

Table 2. A comparison of breeding bird densities (IBB/ha) among years for all ducks combined and for three of the most commonly observed species within the Hay‐Zama wetland complex sampling area, for the entire study period (2005 – 2007).

Year Mallard Lesser scaup Bufflehead All ducks

2005 0.122 0.030 0.026 0.511

2006 0.242 0.106 0.79 1.179

2007 0.065 0.076 0.037 0.899

Annual variation in population densities was even more pronounced for individual

species. Of the 16 species of ducks we observed during breeding bird surveys, only

gadwall (Anas strepera) and green‐winged teal (A. crecca) decreased in density each

consecutive year. All other dabblers, as well as lesser scaup, bufflehead and redhead,

displayed a spike in density in 2006 (Figure 6). Five species, all divers (canvasback

(Aythya valisineria), ring‐necked duck, ruddy duck, surf scoter (Melanitta perspicillata)

and white‐winged scoter (M. fusca)), increased in density each year (Figure 6).

In 2005, we observed 15 species of breeding ducks. The four most commonly observed,

in descending order, were mallard (0.122 IBB/ha), northern shoveller (Anas clypeata)

(0.043 IBB/ha), blue‐winged teal (A. discors) (0.041 IBB/ha) and lesser scaup (0.030

IBB/ha).

15

0.000

0.050

0.100

0.150

0.200

0.250

0.300

Mallard

Northern Shoveller

Lesser Scau

p

Canvasb

ack

American Widg

eon

Bufflehead

Blue‐w

inged Teal

Ruddy D

uck

Redhead

Gadw

all

Comm

on Gold

eneye

Northern Pintail

Ring‐necked Duck

Unknown T

eal

Green‐w

inged Teal

White‐w

ing Scoter

Surf S

coter

Species

Density (IBB/ha)

2005 2006 2007

Figure 6. Densities of breeding birds per hectare (IBB/ha) for each waterfowl species

observed in the Hay‐Zama study area in 2005, 2006 and 2007.

In 2006, we observed all the same species of ducks as in 2005, with the addition of surf

scoter, for a total of 16 species. The four most commonly observed species, in

descending order, were mallard (0.242 IBB/ha), northern shoveller (Anas clypeata) (0.173

IBB/ha), lesser scaup (0.106 IBB/ha) and American widgeon (A. americana) (0.092

IBB/ha).

Cell 10, a 208 ha non‐permanent slough, had the greatest density for all duck species

combined in 2006 with 5.155 IBB/ha (Table 3). We also observed high densities in cell

14 (3.082 IBB/ha) and cell 15 (3.068 IBB/ha). Both cells were classified as non‐permanent

wetlands, with cell 14 being the largest of the non‐permanent sloughs at 796 ha and cell

15 the smallest at 143 ha. Cell 14 was also where we observed the greatest density of

mallards in 2006 (1.547 IBB/ha) and cell 15 had the greatest densities of northern

shovellers (0.722 IBB/ha) and American widgeons (0.541 IBB/ha). Lesser scaup density

(0.656 IBB/ha) was greatest in cell 18, a 376 ha permanent lake.

16

Table 3. A comparison of breeding bird densities (IBB/ha) among cells for all ducks combined, and for the four most commonly observed species within the Hay‐Zama wetland complex sampling area, 2006.

Cell no. Mallard Northern shoveller

Lesser Scaup

American Widgeon

All ducks

1 0.019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.058 2 0.122 0.029 0.021 0.029 0.537 3 0.050 0.161 0.025 0.000 0.565 4 0.448 0.491 0.093 0.027 1.939 5 0.139 0.097 0.582 0.028 1.365 6 0.124 0.171 0.105 0.131 1.532 7 0.011 0.009 0.025 0.008 0.324 8 0.151 0.028 0.125 0.115 1.021 9 0.183 0.154 0.074 0.114 1.165 10 0.061 0.396 0.107 0.030 5.155 11 0.444 0.361 0.070 0.183 1.564 12 0.058 0.031 0.634 0.258 1.421 13 0.400 0.414 0.048 0.109 1.502 14 1.547 0.165 0.028 0.023 3.082 15 0.180 0.722 0.248 0.541 3.068 16 0.038 0.075 0.278 0.053 1.376 17 0.104 0.129 0.179 0.043 0.948 18 0.017 0.035 0.656 0.156 1.172 19 0.012 0.019 0.093 0.019 0.501

All cells combined 0.242 0.173 0.106 0.092 1.179

In 2007, we observed 16 species of ducks. The four most commonly observed species,

in descending order, were canvasback (0.087 IBB/ha), lesser scaup (0.076 IBB/ha), ruddy

duck (0.072 IBB/ha) and mallard (0.065 IBB/ha).

Cell 10 had the greatest density for all duck species combined in 2007 with 3.739 IBB/ha

(Table 4). We also observed high densities in cell 12 (3.739 IBB/ha) and cell 1 (1.569

IBB/ha). Cell 12 was classified as a 551 ha permanent lake and cell 1 as a 223 ha non‐

permanent slough. Cell 12 was also where we observed the greatest densities of lesser

scaup (0.532 IBB/ha) and ruddy ducks (0.274 IBB/ha) in 2007, and cell 1 was where we

observed the greatest density of mallards (0.780 IBB/ha). Canvasback density (0.573

IBB/ha) was greatest in cell 14, a 376 ha permanent lake.

17

Table 4. A comparison of breeding bird densities (IBB/ha) among cells for all ducks combined, and for the four most commonly observed species within the Hay‐Zama wetland complex sampling area, 2007.

Cell no. CanvasbackLesser scaup

Ruddy duck Mallard

All ducks

1 0.039 0.049 0.019 0.780 1.569 2 0.029 0.036 0.014 0.057 0.795 3 0.000 0.019 0.000 0.025 0.677 4 0.013 0.080 0.053 0.007 0.325 5 0.069 0.111 0.132 0.139 1.213 6 0.131 0.112 0.226 0.028 0.931 7 0.031 0.081 0.042 0.018 0.721 8 0.143 0.079 0.185 0.011 0.891 9 0.011 0.029 0.011 0.011 0.514 10 0.198 0.038 0.015 0.282 3.739 11 0.020 0.015 0.042 0.139 0.765 12 0.135 0.532 0.274 0.132 2.854 13 0.154 0.049 0.015 0.012 0.585 14 0.573 0.068 0.009 0.009 1.191 15 0.045 0.124 0.135 0.000 1.489 16 0.113 0.113 0.041 0.045 0.806 17 0.200 0.125 0.190 0.086 1.560 18 0.087 0.043 0.009 0.113 0.929 19 0.050 0.068 0.081 0.044 0.822


Other species we observed incidentally, or in very small, insignificant numbers

included Barrow’s goldeneye (Bucephala islandica), cinnamon teal (Anas cyanoptera),

eared grebe (Podiceps nigricollis), western grebe (Aechmophorus occidentalis), red‐necked

grebe (Podiceps grisegena), common merganser (Mergus merganser), red‐breasted

merganser (Mergus serrator), sandhill crane (Grus canadensis) and common loon (Gavia

immer). We also observed numerous American coots (Fulica americana) throughout the

study period that likely represent a significant breeding population; however they were

not included in this study.

Numerous ducks observed throughout the breeding bird surveys were unidentified or

identified to tribe but not to species; dabblers (Anatini) or divers (Athyini, Mergini and

Oxyurini). In 2005, unidentified teals accounted for a density of 0.032 IBB/ha,

18

unidentified dabblers 0.004 IBB/ha, unidentified divers 0.007 IBB/ha and unidentified

ducks 0.021 IBB/ha. In 2006, unidentified dabblers accounted for a density of 0.036

IBB/ha, unidentified divers 0.086 IBB/ha and unidentified ducks 0.058 IBB/ha. In 2007,

unidentified teals accounted for a density of 0.002 IBB/ha, unidentified dabblers 0.016

IBB/ha, unidentified divers 0.059 IBB/ha and unidentified ducks 0.303 IBB/ha. Most

unidentified ducks in 2007 were from one survey event on 23 May 2007 (Appendix 1).

Survey conditions were generally good on this day, but there was steady wind (not

gusting). The sky was overcast, so excessive glare was not a problem. However, the

reduced light may have affected our ability to identify species.

4.2.3 Molting bird populations

Molting bird population densities varied widely throughout the study period, from a

low of 0.916 birds/ha in 2005 to a high of 2.454 birds/ha in 2007 (Table 5). Mallard, blue‐

winged teal and gadwall were among the top five species we observed in all three

years. Total densities for these species are displayed in Table 5.

Table 5. A comparison of molting bird densities (birds/ha) among years for all ducks combined, and for three of the most commonly observed species within the Hay‐Zama wetland complex sampling area, for the entire study period (2005 – 2007).

Year Mallard Blue‐winged

teal Gadwall All ducks

2005 0.144 0.035 0.064 0.916

2006 0.096 0.084 0.066 1.762

2007 0.154 0.100 0.066 2.454

In 2005, we observed 15 species of molting ducks. The four most commonly observed

species, in descending order, were mallard (0.144 birds/ha), northern shoveller (0.088

birds/ha), gadwall (0.064 birds/ha) and blue‐winged teal (0.035 birds/ha). In 2006, we

observed 15 species of molting ducks. The four most commonly observed species, in

descending order, were lesser scaup (0.120 birds/ha), mallard (0.096 birds/ha), blue‐

winged teal (0.084 birds/ha) and gadwall (0.066 birds/ha).

19

We observed the greatest density of all molting duck species combined (4.219 birds/ha)

in 2006 in cell 19, a 867 ha permanent lake (Table 6). We also observed high densities in

cell 5 (3.466 birds/ha) and cell 8 (3.142 birds/ha). Cell 5 was classified as a 264 ha

permanent slough and cell 8 as a 1,792 ha permanent lake. Lesser scaup density (0.386

birds/ha) was greatest in cell 7, the largest permanent lake on the complex at 5,814 ha,

and mallard density (0.609 birds/ha) was greatest in cell 15, the smallest of the non‐

permanent sloughs at 143 ha. Blue‐winged teal density (0.822 birds/ha) was greatest in

cell 10 and gadwall density (0.286 IBB/ha) was greatest in cell 9, a 357 ha non‐

permanent sheetwater.

Table 6. A comparison of densities (birds/ha) of molting birds among cells for all ducks combined, and for the four most commonly observed species within the Hay‐Zama wetland complex sampling area, 2006.

Cell no. Lesser scaup Mallard

Blue‐winged teal Gadwall All ducks

1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2 0.014 0.007 0.000 0.000 1.203 3 0.000 0.000 0.311 0.000 0.615 4 0.063 0.159 0.073 0.000 2.337 5 0.000 0.076 0.430 0.097 3.466 6 0.068 0.147 0.053 0.014 2.461 7 0.386 0.049 0.016 0.066 2.043 8 0.049 0.171 0.028 0.039 3.142 9 0.000 0.228 0.006 0.286 1.605 10 0.000 0.183 0.822 0.000 2.246 11 0.001 0.073 0.067 0.100 0.779 12 0.074 0.083 0.089 0.018 2.901 13 0.001 0.072 0.247 0.005 0.904 14 0.000 0.093 0.105 0.012 0.596 15 0.000 0.609 0.575 0.068 2.166 16 0.045 0.079 0.004 0.004 1.283 17 0.064 0.089 0.000 0.111 1.428 18 0.056 0.043 0.000 0.052 0.973 19 0.081 0.261 0.114 0.228 4.219


20

In 2007, we observed 15 species of molting ducks. The four most commonly observed

species, in descending order, were American widgeon (0.226 birds/ha), canvasback

(0.196 birds/ha), mallard (0.154 birds/ha) and lesser scaup (0.152 birds/ha).

In 2007, cell 15 had the greatest density for all molting duck species combined with

4.941 birds/ha (Table 7). We also observed high densities in cell 5 (4.748 birds/ha) and

cell 1 (4.679 birds/ha). These three cells were also where the greatest densities of some

of the most commonly observed species occurred during the 2007 molting period.

Table 7. A comparison of densities (birds/ha) of molting birds among cells for all ducks combined, and for the four most commonly observed species within the Hay‐Zama wetland complex sampling area, 2007.

Cell no. American widgeon Canvasback Mallard

Lesser scaup

All ducks

1 0.409 0.000 0.614 0.000 4.679 2 0.021 0.000 0.057 0.000 0.910 3 0.547 0.006 0.068 0.043 1.894 4 0.162 0.123 0.050 0.381 3.518 5 0.749 0.000 0.277 0.028 4.748 6 0.012 0.044 0.137 0.210 2.056 7 0.520 0.668 0.073 0.323 4.189 8 0.013 0.005 0.461 0.009 0.891 9 0.029 0.000 0.171 0.126 0.914 10 0.129 0.000 0.594 0.122 3.145 11 0.080 0.018 0.189 0.064 1.526 12 0.000 0.006 0.083 0.065 0.338 13 0.030 0.054 0.077 0.073 1.050 14 0.000 0.012 0.072 0.061 0.792 15 0.056 0.000 0.259 0.395 4.941 16 0.349 0.023 0.158 0.244 3.465 17 0.326 0.000 0.215 0.004 1.958 18 0.269 0.096 0.096 0.187 3.968 19 0.381 0.073 0.006 0.077 3.567


Cell 15 had the greatest density of lesser scaup (0.395 birds/ha), cell 5 the greatest

density of American widgeon (0.749 birds/ha) and cell 1 the greatest density of mallard

(0.614 birds/ha). Canvasback density (0.668 birds/ha) was greatest in cell 7 (Table 7).

21

Numerous ducks observed throughout the molting bird surveys were unidentified or

identified to tribe but not to species; dabblers (Anatini) or divers (Athyini, Mergini and

Oxyurini). In 2005, unidentified teals accounted for a density of 0.019 birds/ha,

unidentified dabblers 0.160 birds/ha, unidentified divers 0.017 birds/ha and

unidentified ducks 0.348 birds/ha. In 2006, unidentified teals accounted for a density of

0.026 birds/ha, unidentified dabblers 0.282 birds/ha, unidentified divers 0.042 birds/ha

and unidentified ducks 0.875 birds/ha. In 2007, unidentified teals accounted for a

density of 0.015 birds/ha, unidentified dabblers 0.181 birds/ha, unidentified divers 0.109

birds/ha and unidentified ducks 0.968 birds/ha.

4.3 Summary

Throughout the survey period (2005 to 2007), we encountered 16 species of waterfowl

breeding on the Hay‐Zama complex with combined breeding densities ranging from

0.511 to 1.179 IBB/ha. Leach and Patton (2003) found similar results in the Utikima

Lake area, observing 19 species with a total breeding density of 0.700 indicated

breeding pairs (IBP)/ha, and Falk (2004) recorded 12 breeding duck species with a total

density of 0.417 IBP/ha in the Fort Nelson area to the west of Hay‐Zama. However, the

formula for calculating IBP is more conservative, including only observed pairs, lone

males and groups of males < 5. In contrast, the IBB formula also includes grouped birds

> 4. For redhead, scaup, ring‐necked and ruddy ducks, only observed pairs and lone

males are included in the IBP formula. In contrast, the IBB formula also includes lone

females, flocked males < 5 and grouped birds > 4.

The most commonly observed species breeding on the complex was different each

year. Mallard was most abundant in 2005, lesser scaup in 2006 and canvasback in 2007.

Although their ranking changed each year, mallard and lesser scaup were among the

top four breeding species each year and bufflehead was among the top six. In the Fort

Nelson area, Falk (2004) also recorded bufflehead, mallard and scaup species as the

prominent waterfowl species observed.

The greatest densities of breeding ducks were on the north and east portions of the

Hay‐Zama complex. The greatest densities of breeding ducks in both 2006 and 2007

22

were found in cell 10, a small (208 ha) non‐permanent slough on the north end of the

complex. Other areas in the complex with high densities of breeding ducks were cells

1, 12, 14 and 15. With the exception of cell 12, all were classified as non‐permanent

sloughs, and although cell 1 had the third highest density of total breeding ducks in

2007, it was completely dry in 2006, except for the small drainage running through it,

and had the lowest breeding bird density for that year.

Molting bird densities ranged from 0.916 to 2.454 birds/ha over the three‐year survey

period. Mallard, blue‐winged teal and gadwall were among the top five species

observed in all three years. Primary molting areas were found throughout the complex.

Highest densities of molting dabbling ducks were found in the center of the complex in

cell 15, a small (143 ha) non‐permanent slough, and in cell 19, a mid‐size (867 ha)

permanent lake. The Hay‐Zama complex may be more intermittently important to

molting birds than previously suspected. Poston et. al (1990) lists the Hay‐Zama

complex as a regionally important molting area (flocks of 5,000 to 20,000 ducks, or 3,000

to 8,000 ducks of a single species). Observations of total molting birds in 2005 (n =

14,711) and in 2006 (n = 19,648) fall into the range defined as regionally important.

However, in 2007 considerably more molting birds were observed (n = 27,364),

suggesting that the complex is of national importance (flocks of more than 20,000

ducks, or 8,000 ducks of a single species; (Poston et. al 1990) in some years).

Overall, the complex appears to be important habitat for breeding and molting

waterfowl, as well as for staging birds. The Hay‐Zama Lakes complex is internationally

recognized as an important waterfowl staging habitat. During the three‐year study

period, highest aggregate staging waterfowl counts ranged from 15,675 (2007) to 29,014

(2005) during spring migration and from 42,295 (2006) to 53,021 (2005) during fall

migration (Wright 2007, 2009). In 2005 and 2006, highest aggregate counts of molting

birds exceeded that of spring staging birds.

23

5.0 LITERATURE CITED Alberta Water Resources Commission. 1987. Drainage potential in Alberta: an

integrated study. Prepared for Alberta Environment, Edmonton, Alberta. 163

pp.

Bentz, J.A., A. Saxena, and D. O’Leary. 1994. Biophysical inventory of shoreline areas

of the Hay‐Zama Lakes, Alberta. Prepared by Geowest Environmental

Consultants Ltd. for Resource Information Division, Alberta Environmental

Protection, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 105 pp.

Environment Canada. 2007. File data. Environment Canada, Meteorological Service of

Canada, Water Survey Division, Peace River, Alberta, Canada.

Falk, D. 2004. Preliminary results from the Fort Nelson, British Columbia waterbird

inventory project, 2003 progress report. Ducks Unlimited Canada, Edmonton,

Alberta, Canada. 20 pp.

Fearon, P.W., and G.I. Larson. 1986. Hay Zama Lakes survey report. Ducks Unlimited

Canada, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 10 pp.

Leach, A., and K. Patton. 2003. Utikima project annual progress report, April 2002 –

March 2003. Ducks Unlimited Canada, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 28 pp.

Moller, K., and J. Rosin. 1994. Preliminary investigation of pike spawning potential on

the Hay Zama Wetland complex. Alberta Environmental Protection, Peace

River, Alberta Canada. 7 pp.

Moyles, D.L.J. 1997. Wood bison surveys in the Hay‐Zama lowlands, March 11‐12,

1997. Alberta Environmental Protection, Peace River, Alberta, Canada. 7 pp.

Poston, B., D.M. Ealey, P.S. Taylor, and G.B. McKeating. 1990. Priority migratory bird

habitats of Canadaʹs prairie provinces. Canadian Wildlife Service, Edmonton,

Alberta, Canada. 107 pp.

24

25

Strong, W.L., and K.R. Leggat. 1992. Ecoregions of Alberta. Alberta Forestry, Lands

and Wildlife, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 55 pp + App.

Schaffe, C.M., and K.D. Wright. 1997. Hay‐Zama Lakes biological study. Alberta

Environmental Protection, Peace River, Alberta, Canada. 16 pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service / Canadian Wildlife Service. 1987. Standard operating

procedures for aerial waterfowl breeding ground population and habitat

surveys in North America. U.S. Department of the Interior and Environment

Canada, Laurel, MD, USA. 103 pp.

Wright, K.D. 1998. Hay‐Zama Lakes complex fisheries and wildlife monitoring

1997/98. Data report. Alberta Conservation Association. Peace River, Alberta,

Canada. 17 pp.

Wright, K.D. 1999. Hay‐Zama Lakes complex wildlife monitoring 1998/99. Data

report, Alberta Conservation Association, Peace River, Alberta, Canada. 15 pp.

Wright, K.D. 2000. Hay‐Zama Lakes complex wildlife monitoring 1999/2000.

Unpublished report by Alberta Conservation Association, Peace River, Alberta,

Canada. 18 pp.

Wright, K.D. 2007. Hay‐Zama Lakes waterfowl staging and raptor nesting monitoring

program, 2006. Data report, D‐2007‐004, produced by the Alberta Conservation

Association, Peace River, Alberta, Canada. 19 pp + App.

Wright, K.D. 2009. Hay‐Zama Lakes waterfowl staging and bald eagle nesting

monitoring program, 2007. Data Report, D‐2009‐001, produced by the Alberta

Conservation Association, Peace River, Alberta, Canada. 21 pp. + App.

6.0 APPENDIX Appendix 1. Weather conditions during aerial surveys of the Hay‐Zama complex

for study period, 2005 to 2007.

Date Survey type

Temp (oC)

Wind direction / speed (knots)

Cloud cover (%) General conditions

26‐May‐05 breeding 8 W / 3 ‐ 5 15 Good

8‐Jun‐05 breeding 14 NW / 5 10 Good

14‐Jul‐05 molting 11 SW / 5 0 Some glare

5‐Aug‐05 molting 10 W / 10 ‐ 12 95 Light precipitation to east

8‐Sep‐05 staging 6 W / 10 75 High ceiling

22‐Sep‐05 staging 2 SW / 3 ‐ 5 10 Light fog early in survey

25‐May‐06 breeding 14 SW / 8 ‐ 15 5 Wind gusting

13‐Jun‐06 breeding 18 SE / 5 ‐ 10 20 Good

20‐Jul‐06 molting 14 W / 3 ‐ 5 0 Some glare

4‐Aug‐06 molting 10 SW / 3 ‐ 5 100 High ceiling

11‐Sep‐06 staging 5 SW / 5 ‐ 7 0 Some glare

26‐Sep‐06 staging 4 W / 10 ‐ 12 100 1500’ ceiling

23‐May‐07 breeding 3 W / 7 ‐ 10 100 High ceiling

8‐June‐07 breeding 12 W / 10 ‐ 12 10 Some glare on south‐bound transects

24‐Jul‐07 molting 11 SW / 3 ‐ 5 20 Good

14‐Aug‐07 molting 9 SW / 3 ‐ 5 100 Light, intermit. precip; 1,200’ ceiling

13‐Sep‐07 staging 1 SW / 5 ‐ 10 5 Wind gusting; some light fog

25‐Sep‐07 staging 2 W / 3 ‐ 5 100 1,500’ ceiling; some light patchy fog

26

27

Appendix 2. Categories of social classes used for calculating indicated breeding birds in a waterfowl population.

Social Class Description

Pairs Total number of male and female groupings observed.

Lone males Total number of lone males observed.

Lone females Total number of lone females observed without a male (only counted towards total for redhead, scaup, ring‐necked and ruddy ducks).

Flocked males Total number of males observed with one or more other males (no females present). Flocked males of all species numbering five or more are classified as ‘grouped birds’.

Grouped birds Total number of groups of five or more individuals, both male and female, observed in association, which cannot be separated into singles and pairs at the time of observation. Groups of five or more are not doubled when calculating total indicated breeding birds. For example, a group of five males and a female would be counted as a pair and four males.

CONSERVATIONCONSERVATIONREPORT REPORT SERIESSERIES

The Alberta Conservation Association acknowledges the following partner for their generous support of

this project

paku

Alberta logo

kkissner

Placed Image

Hay-Zama Lakes Duck Breeding and Molting...EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Hay‐Zama Lakes complex is widely...

Documents

Transcript of Hay-Zama Lakes Duck Breeding and Molting...EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Hay‐Zama Lakes complex is widely...