IntroductionResearch and management of nativemigratory game birds are importantrequirements to ensure the protection ofthose birds listed under the MigratoryBirds Convention Act, to set sustainablehunting regulations and to maintain bio-diversity. To fulfill these requirements,both government and non-governmentorganizations collect data on various birdspecies. These data are vital to informingpolicies and setting regulations related tothe conservation and management ofmigratory birds in Ontario. In particular,the monitoring of migratory game birdsis important because population, survivaland harvest data are used to set policy andregulations that ensure sustainable harvestand support the reduction of species pop-ulations that are causing environmental oreconomic damage. For example, the pol-icy related to the issuance of nest man-agement permits in urban areas (i.e.,Damage/Danger Permits) and the deci-sion to liberalize hunting regulations fortemperate breeding Canada Geese (Bran-ta canadensis) are directly informed bypopulation and banding data.

To properly manage a game species,data regarding its abundance and distri-bution are required with habitat use andsurvival also providing key information.Bird banding is one monitoring tool thatprovides data for each of these informa-tion needs. As popular game birds inNorth America, ducks are specificallymonitored with intensive annual bandingefforts during the pre-hunting season(hereafter pre-season). The pre-season isdefined as the period of time after ducksfinish breeding in July and before thehunting season begins in September; pre-season banding is especially important todetermine annual harvest and survivalrates related to hunting.

The objective of this paper is to sum-marize pre-season duck banding efforts inOntario between 1918 and 2014 andhun t er recoveries of those banded birds.We present information regarding band-ing locations, the number and speciesbanded and large scale trends in the dis-tribution of hunter recoveries. Lastly, wehighlight some interesting hunter recov-eries.

24 Ontario Birds April 2016

Pre-season duck banding in Ontario,1918-2014 anddistribution of hunter recoveriesShawn W. Meyer and Christopher M. Sharp

Volume 34 Number 1 25

MethodsIn Ontario, ducks are banded by govern-ment agencies, (primarily the OntarioMinistry of Natural Resources andForestry (OMNRF, formerly the Depart-ment of Lands and Forest, 1920-1972and Ontario Ministry of Natural Re -sources 1972-2014) and Environmentand Climate Change Canada’s CanadianWildlife Service (CWS)), environmentalnon-government organizations (ENGOs),Conservation Authorities (CAs), avoca-tional banders and government and aca-demic researchers. Ducks are typicallycaptured during the pre-season by usingbait traps; however, other methodsinclude airboats, drive traps, mist nets andcannon and rocket and pneumatic nets(Canadian Wildlife Service Waterfowl

Committee 2013). Once captured, ducks are retrieved and typically placed in hold-ing boxes where they are held until band-ing begins. After all of the ducks are con-fined, they are removed one by one andtheir plumage (body, wing and tail feath-ers) and bill are used to identify species,age and sex; a cloacal examination issometimes also used to determine age andsex. Recorded data include band number,species, age, sex, banding location anddate. A band is then placed around theduck’s leg and crimped shut. Dependingon the study, a number of different auxil-iary markers (e.g., coloured tarsal bands,neck collars, patagial wing tags) may thenalso be placed on the bird before it isreleased. Once all of the banding has been

American Black Ducks. Barry Kent MacKay

26 Ontario Birds April 2016

completed, the data are submitted to theBird Banding Office for inclusion in aninternational Bird Banding Laboratory(BBL) database.

Once banded and released, a duckbecomes available on the landscape for anencounter. By far the most frequent en -counter is a bird shot and reported by ahunter (i.e., hunter recovery) but otheren counters include recaptures duringban ding operations, sight records (i.e., aband number or auxiliary marker issometimes read with binoculars or aspotting scope), dead birds (e.g., foundon a beach), birds collected under author-ity of a scientific permit and birds cap-tured after striking a human structure(e.g., building, car). For this paper, wefocused on hunter recoveries because theyare the most frequent encounter typethereby providing the most data (e.g.,91% of Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos)encounters are reported as recovered byhunters) and also likely provide the mostunbiased sample. For example, recoveriesfrom either dead birds or birds collectedunder a scientific permit may not repre-sent normal bird behaviour and, untilrecently, not all recapture data have beenincluded in the BBL database. Bandingand en counter data for all ducks bandedin Ontario from 1918 to 2014 wereextracted from GameBirds (USGS BBL2015). The pre-season timeframe wasdefined as the period between 1 July and30 September. Although there is thepotential overlap between pre-seasonbanding and the opening of the huntingseason in mid-to late-September in someyears, this end date was chosen becauseof the difficulty in verifying that pre-sea-son duck banding finished in all areas in

all years before the duck hunting seasoncommenced. For example, the duckhunting season has started as early as 15September in 2012, with the introduc-tion of a Waterfowler Heritage Day, andas late as 15 October in 1949 in South-ern On tario. Moreover, exclud ing pre-season bands from September wouldremove 44.1% of all pre-season bandingdata from the analyses. Hunter recoverieswere not limited to any specific monthbecause open duck hunting season dateswere not available for all areas (e.g., SouthAmerica, Caribbean Islands, etc.) andrepresent both direct (i.e., recovery dur-ing the period before, during or immedi-ately following the first period of migra-tory movement following banding) andindirect (i.e., during the second migra-tion period following banding or later)recoveries. Hunter recovery data werethen summarized for all ducks but recov-ery density distribution maps were onlycreated for those species with at least 500recoveries. Recovery densities were calcu-lated based on the proportions of all bandrecoveries for each species at each geo-graphical location and therefore representa relative density for each species. Band-ing locations and recovery density loca-tions were analyzed using ArcMap 10.1software. Recovery data were analyzedusing the kriging tool to interpolatespecies-specific recovery densities.

ResultsBandingOverall, the distribution of pre-seasonduck banding locations in Ontario hascovered much of the province; however,there has been noticeable geographic vari-ation in the distribution over time with

Volume 34 Number 1 27

Locations Pre 1966 Locations 1966 to 1975

Locations 1976 to 1985 Locations 1986 to 1995

Locations 1996 to 2005 Locations Post 2005

Bands Deployed: < 200 200-500 500-1000 1000-2000 >2000

Figure 1. Temporal changes in pre-season duck banding locations and numbers banded in Ontario.

28 Ontario Birds April 2016

long-term banding efforts focused nearpopulated areas in central and southernOntario that are easily accessible (Figure1). Between 1918 and 2014, 548,974ducks of 24 species (including Barrow’sGoldeneye (Bucephala islandica), a speciesat risk) were banded during the pre-sea-son by 182 authorized permit holders atthese sites (Table 1). The most ducksbanded in any year was 19,586 in 1971(Figure 2). An average of 13,720 (1988 to1998) and 6,742 (2004 to 2014) duckswas banded per year during the pre-sea-son in Ontario (Figure 2).

RecoveriesOf the 548,974 ducks banded between1918 and 2014, 82,220 individuals(~15%) of 19 species and one hybrid,were reported as hunter recoveries. Ofthese, 41.4% were in Canada with 91.9%

and 2.5% of those occurring in Ontarioand Quebec, respectively (Table 1). Out-side Canada, ducks from Ontario weremost frequently reported from U.S. statesin the Mississippi Flyway (31.9%), fol-lowed by the Atlantic Flyway (24.2%)and the Central Flyway (1.3%) (Table 1).Within North America, hunters recoveredOntario-banded ducks in the CaribbeanIslands (0.6%, mostly Blue-winged Teal,Anas discors), the Pacific Flyway (0.08%,mostly Mallards), Central America(0.04%, mostly Blue-winged Teal) andAlaska (0.002%). Of the remaining birds(0.5%), two Northern Pintails (Anasacuta, henceforth pintail) were recoveredin Russia and one Blue-winged Teal wasrecovered in Europe; the remaining 98recoveries did not have a specific locationattributed to them (Table 1).

American Black DuckAmerican Green-winged TealBlue-winged TealMallardNorthern PintailRing-necked DuckWood Duck

20000

18000

16000

14000

12000

10000

8000

6000

4000

2000

01955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Year

Num

ber of Bands Deployed

Figure 2. Number of ducks banded by species by year during pre-season banding (1 July to 30 September)in Ontario, 1955 to 2014. Only 7,281 total ducks were banded between 1918 and 1954, 2,760 of which werebanded in 1954.

Volume 34 Number 1 29

Figure 3A. Relative density of hunter recoveries for select duck species banded during pre-season banding(1 July to 30 September) in Ontario, 1918 to 2014. Species-specific relative densities: Lowest relative density= dark green; medium relative density = yellow; highest relative density = red.

The top five species reported by hunters were Mallard, American Black Duck (Anasrubripes, henceforth black duck), Wood Duck (Aix sponsa), Blue-winged Teal andAmerican Green-winged Teal (Anas carolinensis, henceforth green-winged teal) (Table1). Three species have only been reported once by a hunter over this timeframe, name-ly Black Scoter (Melanitta americana), Canvasback (Aythya valisineria) and GreaterScaup (Aythya marila). No hunter recoveries have been reported for Barrow’s Gold-eneye, Bufflehead (Bucephala albeola), Common Eider (Somateria mollissima), Red-breasted Merganser (Mergus serrator) or White-winged Scoter (Melanitta fusca)although fewer than 10 individuals have been banded for each of these species.

American Black Duck American Green-winged Teal

Blue-winged Teal Mallard

Total Atlantic CanadaSpecies Banded Alaska Flyway Total ON QC

American Black Duck 64,137 2,937 4,948 4,499 412

American Black Duck Dominant X Mallard Hybrid 30 1 2 2 1 4

American Wigeon 2,092 131 124 106 15

Barrow's Goldeneye 1

Black Scoter 4 1 1 1

Blue-winged Teal 89,208 563 2,561 2,162 308

Bufflehead 7

Canvasback 7 1 1 1

Common Eider 1

Common Goldeneye 1,280 31 123 115 7

Common Merganser 65 1 1 1 2

Gadwall 363 20 27 25 2

Greater Scaup 16 1

American Green-winged Teal 16,315 437 392 359 28

Hooded Merganser 3,120 223 129 128 1

Lesser Scaup 79 7 7 7 1

Mallard 310,518 1 12,325 22,604 20,986 1,086

Mallard Dominant X American Black Duck Hybrid 19 1 171 10

Mallard X American Black Duck Hybrid 2,827 134 186 2

Mallard X American Black Duck Intermediate 15 1 2 1

Northern Pintail 7,305 1 299 289 211 71

Northern Shoveler 173 6 12 6 6 1

Red-breasted Merganser 6

Redhead 729 15 58 51 7

Ring-necked Duck 4,430 391 245 234 7

Ruddy Duck 41 1 1 1 2 4

White-winged Scoter 1

Wood Duck 46,185 2,348 2,357 2,241 112

GRAND TOTAL 548,974 2 19,872 34,070 31,309 2,072

Table 1. Number of ducks banded during the pre-season in Ontario and hunter recoveries by locationfrom 1918 to 2014. Species in bold have more than 500 hunter recoveries.

30 Ontario Birds April 2016

Central Central Mississippi Pacific South GRANDCarribbean Flyway America Flyway Other Flyway America TOTAL

16 2,820 12 10,733

1 4

1 2 73 331

0

1

500 70 28 753 5 1 265 4,746

0

1

0

1 21 176

1 2

7 54

1

62 5 886 1 15 1,798

1 48 401

14

860 1 19,958 73 50 55,872

1

2 151 473

1 4

6 28 216 3 7 2 851

11 29

0

2 23 98

1 5 86 728

2 4

0

42 1,144 7 5,898

508 1,091 34 26,202 101 73 267 82,220

Volume 34 Number 1 31

32 Ontario Birds April 2016

With respect to the distribution ofthose species with more than 500 report-ed recoveries, namely black duck, green-winged teal, Blue-Winged Teal, Mallard,pintail, Ring-necked Duck (Aythya col-laris) and Wood Duck, areas with con-sistently high species-specific recoverydensity are evident. The lower GreatLakes and the Atlantic coast representareas with high recovery density for allspecies, except Ring-necked Ducks (Fig-ures 3A, 3B). Concentrations of recov-eries for On tario pintails, Blue-wingedTeal, green-winged teal, Wood Ducksand Ring-necked Ducks were alsoreported from Florida and Blue-wingedTeal were reported as far south as Brazil.Recovery densities for black duck andgreen-winged teal were high in both theMississippi and Atlantic Flyways. With-in Canada, areas along the Hudson-James Bay coastline had a high recoverydensity for pintail while Mallards, blackducks and green-winged teal showedhigh recovery densities along the lowerGreat Lakes (Figures 3A, 3B). Blackducks and Blue-winged Teal showed lowrecovery densities in Quebec and theMaritime Provinces while green-wingedteal, Ring-necked Duck and black duckrecovery densities were high in the bore-al forest of Ontario.

Figure 3B. Relative density of hunter recoveries forselect duck species banded during the pre-season (1 July to 30 September) in Ontario, 1918 to 2014.Lowest relative density = dark green; medium relative density = yellow; highest relative density = red.

Wood Duck

Ring-necked Duck

Northern Pintail

Volume 34 Number 1 33

DiscussionDistribution of Pre-Season Banding LocationsOver the years, there has been an impres-sive effort to band ducks in Ontario dur-ing the pre-season. OMNRF and CWS,in conjunction with biologists at Con-servation Authorities, the United StatesFish and Wildlife Service (USFWS),state agencies and ENGOs along withmembers of the public have played animportant role in this effort. TheOMNRF, however, has been vital to thesuccess of pre-season duck banding inthe province since the 1950s. NumerousOMNRF district and area offices hadwell-established duck banding programsbeginning in the 1960s and continuinginto the mid-2000s, resulting in a wide-spread effort throughout much ofOntario, including the north (Figure 1).During this period, over 267,000 duckswere banded by these district OMNRFoffices. Declining levels of support, how-ever, resulted in the loss of local bandingprograms over time and hence, changesin the distribution of banding effortsoccurred. OMNRF continues to operatesome district duck banding stations (e.g.,Temagami, North Bay and Kemptville)and administers a contract banding pro-gram, with financial support from theAtlantic and Mississippi Flyway Coun-cils, which helps to fund banding effortsby local banders throughout theprovince. Furthermore, OMNRF estab-lished an airboat banding program in1996 with support from both Councils.This program operates throughoutsouthern and northeastern Ontario andhas averaged over 2,700 ducks bandedper year since 2010 (Buchanan et al.

2014). The airboat also enables bandingof species that are not generally capturedusing bait traps; since 2012, the airboatprogram has banded over 95% of allgreen-winged teal, Blue-winged Teal andRing-necked Ducks banded in Ontario.

The majority of pre-season duckbanding effort has been centered insouthern Ontario or near more populat-ed areas in northern Ontario, but therehave been targeted efforts to band ducksin the boreal region of northern Ontario,which includes the Hudson Bay Low-lands (Figure 1). Beginning in the 1950s,provincial, federal and US state biologistsbegan banding ducks in the Lowlands.Early efforts were sporadic, but by 1965,OMNRF was conducting annual duckbanding operations along the southernJames Bay coastline; occasional bandingwas attempted along the Hudson Baycoastline. Annual banding efforts in theLowlands continued until 1990 andresulted in about 12,000 ducks bandedin the region and accounts for approxi-mately 58% of all pintails ever banded inOntario. In addition to efforts in theLowlands, the USFWS conducted band-ing operations in northwestern Ontariofrom 1989-1998 near Weagamow Lake(52° 56' 13" N, -91° 18' 45" W) which,in part, explains the increase in totalducks banded during this period.Although the OMNRF airboat programcontinues to band annually in the borealregion, and a few banding stationsremain there, no duck banding hasoccurred in the remoter areas of theregion since 1998 and no ducks havebeen banded in the Lowlands since1990. While banding in this region islogistically and financially challenging,

34 Ontario Birds April 2016

renewing efforts should be consideredgiven that this is a region of continentalimportance for many species (Abraham2014) and there may be a possible re-dis-tribution of species farther north with achanging climate.

Diversity of Banded SpeciesMallards, black ducks and Wood Duckswere three of the four most frequentlybanded species. All of these species areabundant breeders in Ontario and com-prise a large percentage of the total obser-vations during waterfowl breeding pairsurveys (Canadian Wildlife ServiceWaterfowl Committee 2015). Pre-seasonbanding programs also regularly targetthese three species because they representthe bulk of the duck harvest in Ontario(Canadian Wildlife Service WaterfowlCommittee 2015), are easily capturedusing conventional techniques (e.g., baittrap and air boat) and are often conser-vation priority species (EnvironmentCanada 2014).

While the proportion of Mallards,Wood Ducks and Green-winged Teal inthe banded sample has remained rela-tively constant over time, the proportionsof other species have varied substantially.Blue-winged Teal, for instance, is the sec-ond most banded species in Ontariosince 1918 (Table 1), however, its num-bers in the banding sample have droppedoff substantially since the mid-1990s(Figure 2). Although the mechanism forthe decrease in banded Blue-winged Tealis unclear, it seems reasonable to assumethat it is linked to the dramatic declinein the breeding population in Ontario.The breeding Blue-winged Teal popula-tion has declined 5.9% per year since

1971, with the most dramatic declineoccurring between 1971 and 1995 (Ross2007, Canadian Wildlife Service Water-fowl Committee 2015). Although Blue-winged Teal are thriving in the Canadi-an Prairies (Dooley et al. 2015) andPrairie teal do migrate through Ontario(Bellrose 1976), it is unclear what pro-portion of Blue-winged Teal banded dur-ing the pre-season in Ontario are Prairieversus Ontario natal teal. Answering thisquestion, in addition to identifying theproportion of Prairie versus Ontarionatal Blue-winged Teal harvested byhunters, would help direct future con-servation initiatives aimed at reversingthe population decline of Blue-wingedTeal breeding in Ontario.

Changes in pintail banding have beenprimarily affected by banding effort. TheHudson Bay Lowlands represent the pri-mary breeding area for pintail in Ontario(Gendron 2007). As a result, whenefforts were made to band ducks in theLowlands, the number of pintails band-ed annually increased markedly, withpeak numbers reaching over 900 (Figure2). Since 1990, however, an average ofonly 22 pintails have been banded peryear in Ontario, which also coincideswith the last year of banding in the Low-lands. While Prairie pintails have showna considerable population decline (Cana-dian Wildlife Service Waterfowl Com-mittee 2015), pintails in the Lowlands inOntario continue to do well (Gendron2007). As a result, renewing bandingefforts in the Lowlands may be advanta-geous in determining why these two pop-ulations are experiencing different popu-lation trajectories.

Volume 34 Number 1 35

The increased use of airboats for cap-turing ducks has resulted in more Ring-necked Ducks and Hooded Mergansers(Lophodytes cucullatus) being bandedsince 1996 than in the past. Bait trappingis not conducive to the capture of thesespecies due to their preference to forageon aquatic vegetation, invertebrates andfish by diving. As a result, they tend touse more open deep water areas com-pared to dabbling ducks; these areas areoften unsuitable for bait trapping opera-tions because of water depth. Because anairboat is highly mobile and does not relyon birds to concentrate in a specific areaprior to capture, it is much more efficientat targeting these ducks than bait trap-ping. Prior to the airboat program, fewerthan 20 Ring-necked Ducks and fiveHooded Mergansers were banded annu-ally, on average, in Ontario; since the air-boat was introduced this average hasincreased to 180 and 162 ducks bandedper year, respectively. This improvement,particularly for Ring-necked Ducks, hasprovided data for continental monitor-ing and managing harvest of this species.This is important because the Ring-necked Duck is consistently one of thetop five duck species harvested in East-ern Canada (Leckie 2007) and Ontariohas banded over 50% of all Ring-neckedDucks banded in Eastern North Ameri-ca since 2005.

In addition to the focal species men-tioned above, the high diversity of ducks(e.g., 24 species of dabblers, divers andsea ducks) banded during the pre-seasonin Ontario was somewhat unexpected(Table 1). While many of these less com-mon species were likely captured as by-catch in traps targeting other species or

captured opportunistically, some speciesmay be targeted in small scale projectsfocussing on species of conservation con-cern or local interest. Although the totalnumber of banded ducks was often fewerthan ten per species, it was surprising thatspecies such as Barrow’s Goldeneye, Buf-flehead, Common Eider, Red-breastedMerganser, White-winged Scoter andBlack Scoter have been banded in On -tario during the pre-season. Not only aresome of these species rare in accessibleparts of Ontario, especially from Augustto September, but many are also difficultto catch due to their tendency to useinaccessible offshore areas.

Distribution of RecoveriesMallards, black ducks and Wood Ducksare the species with the most recoverieswhich is not surprising as they are oftenthe focus of banding efforts and are high-ly sought after by hunters. (CanadianWildlife Service Waterfowl Committee2015, Raftovich et al. 2015). The highavailability of banded birds on the land-scape undoubtedly explains the relative-ly high species-specific recoveries inmany local areas as well as in/aroundOntario. At a local scale, most duckstend to remain in the area where theywere banded well into the hunting sea-son as birds mature and/or deposit fatreserves for migration. Then, as autumnprogresses, flights begin to occur withspecies demonstrating different migra-tion phenology. For example, Ring-necked Ducks and Wood Ducks tend tomigrate earlier than Mallards and blackducks with most leaving Ontario by mid-November; many Mallards and blackducks remain in Ontario or northern US

36 Ontario Birds April 2016

states throughout the entire winter. As aresult, there is a relatively high propor-tion of banded birds in Ontario well intothe hunting season and, depending onthe species’ migration phenology, someof these banded birds may never be avail-able to hunters further south. Thisexplains, in part, why a large proportionof Ontario pre-season banded ducks areharvested in Ontario and around thelower Great Lakes in general, comparedto mid- and lower US states (Figures 3A,3B). Other differences in recovery distri-bution are also affected by species-spe-cific migration phenology. For example,hunter recoveries for Mallards that werebanded during the pre-season in Ontarioshow a declining trend with latitudewithin the Mississippi Flyway: Michigan(total = 22%), Ohio (13%), Tennessee(15%), Mississippi (5%), Alabama (5%)and Louisiana (3%). Conversely, pro-portionally more Ontario Wood Duckswere harvested in Louisiana (23%), Ala-bama (21%) and Mississippi (15%)compared to Michigan (8%), Ohio (8%)and Tennessee (6%). Roy et al. (2015)also showed a high band recovery forducks in southern Ontario and Iversonet al. (2014) showed a similar result forCanada geese banded in Ontario.

Changes in the distribution and pop-ulation of duck species, duck bandingstations and banding effort have result-ed in shifts in the proportion of Ontarioducks recovered in the Mississippi andAtlantic Flyways. Since 1920, the Mis-sissippi Flyway has accounted forapproximately 57% of all recoveriesbetween the Mississippi and Atlantic Fly-ways (Table 1). This proportion, howev-er, has varied considerably over the last

50 years. For example, during the 1966to 1975 and 1976 to 1985 decades, theMississippi Flyway accounted forapproximately 49% of hunter recoveries.Then, from 1986 to 2005, the propor-tion increased to approximately 64%with some years reaching 68% and 69%of total recoveries. Since 2006, the pro-portion of recoveries has declined backto 53%. Undoubtedly, some of thesechanges correspond to changes in thebreeding population of ducks in Ontarioas species such as Mallards and WoodDucks have increased dramatically fromthe 1970s (Canadian Wildlife Service

Volume 34 Number 1 37

Waterfowl Committee 2015). However,changes in the distribution of bandingstations over time have also resulted inchanges in the composition of speciesbanded, which, in turn, may influence thedistribution of recoveries (Figure 2). Forexample, the proportion of Mallardsbanded in Ontario increased significant-ly from 1986 to 2005; many of theseducks were banded in southwesternOntario in areas west of Toronto and,therefore, were more likely to travel downthe Mississippi Flyway. Before then, blackducks and Blue-winged Teal comprised ahigher proportion in the banded species

composition (Figure 2). Ontario bandedBlue-winged Teal tend to use the AtlanticFlyway more than the Mississippi Flyway(Figure 3A) and over 30% of the blackducks were banded in Eastern Ontario(e.g., Cornwall) pre-1986. Since 2006,banding stations in western and north-eastern Ontario have closed while newstations have opened further east (e.g.,Ottawa); other stations (e.g., Lake St.Clair) have been unable to band as manyducks, mainly Mal lards,during the pre-season in some years because of lake waterlevels. All of these changes undoubtedlyaffect flyway hunter recoveries as ducks

A typical pre-season bait trap at Thunder Bay, Ontario. Photo: Dan Bascello

38 Ontario Birds April 2016

in southwestern Ontario and northeast-ern Ontario tend to use the MississippiRiver valley while those further east trav-el south through the Atlantic Flyway(Zimpfer and Conroy 2010, Baldassarre2014).

As evident from the recovery densitydistribution maps (Figures 3A, 3B),many Ontario banded ducks used themid-to southern Atlantic coast states dur-ing fall and overwintered in these loca-tions. For species such as the black duck,this is not unusual given the high histor-ical and current overwintering use of thisarea. For example, data from the USFWSMid-Winter Waterfowl Survey (MWS)for the Atlantic Flyway show that onaverage between 2012 and 2015 approx-imately 240,000 black ducks overwin-tered in this area with approximately45% using New Jersey (USFWS 2015).Baldassarre (2014) also summarized theimportance of the area between LongIsland, New York, and North Carolinafor wintering black ducks. In fact, theblack duck is one of the focal species formajor conservation initiatives (e.g.,Chesapeake Bay Program, Atlantic CoastJoint Venture) and refuge management(e.g., Edwin B. Forsythe National Wild -life Refuge) in this area. Similarly, south-ern Atlantic coast states, particularlyNorth Carolina and South Carolina,respectively, had on average approxi-mately 70% and 16% of all overwinter-ing green-winged teal and 76% and 11%of all overwintering pintails in theAtlantic Flyway between 2012 and 2015(MWS -x = 106,000 green-winged tealand 85,000 pintails in the Atlantic Fly-way) (USFWS 2015). Clearly, this area isimportant to many ducks from Ontario.

The Clay Belt of northeastern On -tario, which extends from approximatelyLake Timiskaming near New Liskeard,north to Cochrane and west to Hearst,represents an important area for breedingand migrating ducks. Ross et al. (2002)found that the Clay Belt had a higherdensity of breeding waterfowl comparedto surrounding boreal areas with Mallard,Ring-necked Duck, black duck andCom mon Goldeneye (Buc ephala clangu-la) being the most common ducksdetected during waterfowl breeding pairsurveys (see also Cadman et al. 2007,Baldassarre 2014). The area is alsoimportant to autumn migrating ducks.Specifically, black duck, green-wingedteal and Ring-necked Duck had a highrecovery density in this area. This is, inpart, not surprising given the concen-trated banding effort in this area (Figure1), resulting in a high availability ofbanded ducks as well as a proportionate-ly large hunting population in the area.Although it is part of the CanadianShield, the Clay Belt contains relativelyproductive clay soil with high watertables and, therefore, intensive large scaleagricultural operations are commonwithin this area (Abraham 2014). Withcontinuing land conversion of forest andwetlands to agriculture within the ClayBelt, there is some concern that land usechange may be negatively affecting someduck species (e.g., black duck) while ben-efiting others (e.g., Mallard). Futurebanding in this area should shed light onpossible changes in species distributionand abundance over time.

Volume 34 Number 1 39

The Blue-winged Teal was, by far, thelongest distance migrant of all ducksbanded during the pre-season inOntario. Hunter recoveries of theseducks were reported from BritishColumbia to Newfoundland and as farsouth as the Caribbean Islands, Colum-bia, Venezuela, Peru and Brazil. Variousaccounts show that the Blue-winged Tealis a long distance migrant (Rohwer et al.2002, Baldassarre 2014) and our resultsconfirm this observation. Interestingly,our recovery density figure for Blue-winged Teal also confirms Bellrose’s(1976) migration map that shows a size-able segment of these teal migrate direct-ly east to as far as the Maritimes and thensouth. This supports the hypothesis thatBlue-winged Teal from the CanadianPrairie are being banded in Ontario.Interestingly, many of the distant recov-eries of several species are drakes whichlikely are pairing up with females on thewintering grounds and then dispersingwith them back to their natal grounds.For example, of the banded Mallards,three were reported near Great SlaveLake in the Northwest Territories (two ofthese were males, one was unknown), 17were reported in California (12 malesand five females), one male was reportedin Mexico and one female was reportedin Alaska. Five green-winged teal (fourfemales and 1 male) and 17 Blue-wingedTeal (15 males and two females) wererecovered in Mexico. In Cuba, five pin-tails (four females and one male), onefemale Ring-necked Duck and onefemale American Wigeon (Anas ameri-cana) were recovered. Other pintails have

been recovered as far away as Russia (n =2), California (n = 5) and Venezuela(n =1). One Blue-winged Teal was recov-ered in Europe in 1971 (Azores, Portu-gal) and two extralimital Wood Duckswere recovered, one in Colorado and onealong the James Bay coastline in Ontario.

Results from this paper show that sig-nificant effort has gone into delivering asuccessful pre-season duck banding pro-gram in Ontario. Recovery maps showmany high density areas, many of whichhave been corroborated by various water-fowl surveys (e.g., MWS, CWS GreatLakes Decadal Waterfowl Survey [Smithet al. 2013], waterfowl breeding pair sur-veys). It must be realized, however, thatthe main purpose of pre-season duckbanding in Ontario (and elsewhere) is toprovide information for harvest manage-ment for many species. Documentingthe proportion of recovered bands byspecies in relation to the total number ofannual available bands on the landscapefor that species is fundamental in deter-mining how much harvest pressure isoccurring on a population of migratorygame birds. This, combined with popu-lation monitoring, determines howhunting regulations are changed to allowsustainable harvest. Lastly, identifyingmigration patterns and important over-wintering areas from recoveries helps linkbreeding population monitoring effortsto wintering areas (i.e. migratory con-nectivity), as well as encouraging localhabitat management initiatives in thoseareas (e.g., refuge management), in orderto ultimately, conserve those species.

40 Ontario Birds April 2016

AcknowledgementsWe thank all of the duck banders in On -tario and hunters who report bandedbirds; their support provides data toinform the conservation and managementof migratory game birds. We thank theOMNRF, particularly J. Chris Davies, fortheir support in migratory bird conserva-tion and management as well as theAtlan tic and Mississippi Flyway Councilsfor funding duck banding programs inOn tario. Courtney Young provided pre-liminary summaries for this paper.

Thank you to Barry Kent Mackay forthe generous use of his American BlackDuck illustration.

Lastly, Tina Knezevic, Brigitte Collins,Jack Hughes and the editors providedcomments that improved this paper.

Literature CitedAbraham, K.F. 2014. Waterfowl in Ontario’sBoreal Region: Looking Back, Looking For-ward. Report prepared for Ducks UnlimitedCanada. Kingston, ON. 97 pp.

Baldassarre, G. 2014. Ducks, Geese, andSwans of North America. Volume 1. JohnHopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.565 pp.

Bellrose, F.C. 1976. Ducks, Geese & Swansof North America. Stackpole Books, Harris-burg, PA. 540 pp.

Buchanan, T., M. Purvis, C. Davies, K.Bennett, S. Bennett, I. Hebert, L. Nituch,G. Meadows, S. Mills and A. Orton. 2014.Ontario Duck Banding Program – 2014.Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources andForestry. Peterborough, ON. 7 pp.

Cadman, M.D., D.A. Sutherland, G.G.Beck, D. Lepage and A.R. Couturier (eds.).2007. Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario,2001-2006. Bird Studies Canada, Environ-ment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists,Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, andOntario Nature. Toronto, xxii + 706 pp.

Canadian Wildlife Service Waterfowl Committee. 2013. Capture of Waterfowl andWaterbirds Using Common Traps and Tech-niques. Canadian Wildlife Service, Ottawa,ON. 24 pp.

Canadian Wildlife Service Waterfowl Committee. 2015. Population Status ofMigratory Game Birds in Canada: November2015. CWS Migratory Birds RegulatoryReport Number 45. 242 pp.http://www.ec.gc.ca/rcom-mbhr/default.asp?lang=En&n= 762C28AB-1

Dooley J., K. Fleming, P. Garrettson, W. Rhodes and N. Zimpfer. 2015. USFWS Waterfowl Population Status, 2015.USFWS, Division of Migratory Bird Man-agement, Laurel, MD. http://www.fws.gov/birds/surveys-and-data/reports-and-publica-tions.php. 82 pp.

O

B

Birding • Nature • Optics • Books

Steiner

636 Point Pelee Dr. Leamington ON N8H 3V4

Birding • Nature • Optics • BooksCanada’s Largest Selection of Binoculars and Scopes

New Swarovski ATX / STX Modular

Spotting Scopes

SwarovskiKowaZeissLeicaBushnellCelestronMinoxVortexPentaxNikonEagle

KOWA 88mm SCOPES ON SALE

Volume 34 Number 1 41

Environment Canada. 2014. Bird Conserva-tion Strategy for Bird Conservation Region 13in Ontario Region: Lower Great Lakes/St.Lawrence Plain. Canadian Wildlife Service,Environment Canada, Ottawa, ON. 197 pp + appendices.

Gendron, M. 2007. Northern Pintail., pp. 84-85 in Cadman, M.D., D.A. Suther-land, G.G. Beck, D. Lepage and A.R. Couturier (eds.). 2007. Atlas of the BreedingBirds of Ontario, 2001-2006. Bird StudiesCanada, Environment Canada, Ontario FieldOrnithologists, Ontario Ministry of NaturalResources, and Ontario Nature. Toronto, xxii + 706 pp.

Iverson, S. A., E.T. Reed, R.J. Hughesand M.R. Forbes. 2014. Age and breedingstage�related variation in the survival and har-vest of temperate�breeding Canada geese inOntario. The Journal of Wildlife Management78:24-34.

Leckie, S. 2007. Ring-necked Duck, pp. 92-93 in Cadman, M.D., D.A. Suther-land, G.G. Beck, D. Lepage and A.R. Couturier (eds.). 2007. Atlas of the BreedingBirds of Ontario, 2001-2006. Bird StudiesCanada, Environment Canada, Ontario FieldOrnithologists, Ontario Ministry of NaturalResources, and Ontario Nature. Toronto, xxii+ 706 pp.

Raftovich, R.V., S.C. Chandler and K.A. Wilkins. 2015. Migratory bird huntingactivity and harvest during the 2013-14 and2014-15 hunting seasons. U.S. Fish andWildlife Service, Laurel, MD, USA. 68 pp.http://www.fws.gov/birds/surveys-and-data/reports-and-publications/hunting-activity-and-harvest.php.

Rohwer, F.C., W.P. Johnson and E.R. Loos.2002. Blue-winged Teal (Anas discors), TheBirds of North America Online (A. Poole,Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology;Retrieved from the Birds of North AmericaOnline: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/625

Ross, R.K. 2007. Blue-winged Teal, pp. 80-81 in Cadman, M.D., D.A. Suther-land, G.G. Beck, D. Lepage and A.R. Coutu-rier (eds.). 2007. Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario, 2001-2006. Bird Studies Canada,

Ross, R.K., K.F. Abraham, T.R. Gadawski,R.S. Rempel, T.S. Gabor and R. Maher.2002. Abundance and distribution of breedingwaterfowl in the Great Clay Belt of northernOntario. Canadian Field-Naturalist 116:42-50.

Roy, C., S.G. Cumming and E.J.B. McIntire. 2015. Spatial and temporal varia-tion in harvest probabilities for American blackduck. Ecology and Evolution 5(10):1992-2004.

Smith, P., S.S. Badzinski and S.W. Meyer.2013. Migrant Waterfowl use of the OntarioShorelines of the Southern Great Lakes. Cana-dian Wildlife Service. Unpublished report.64 pp. Ottawa, ON.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service.2015. Mid-Winter Waterfowl Survey.https://migbirdapps.fws.gov/mbdc/databas-es/mwi/aboutmwi_allflyways.htm

United States Geological Survey, Bird Banding Laboratory. 2015. Gamebirds software (Version 22). Laurel, MD.

Zimpfer, N.L. and M.J. Conroy. 2010. Modeling Movement and Fidelity of AmericanBlack Ducks. The Journal of Wildlife Manage-ment 70(6):1770-1777.

Shawn W. MeyerEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaCanadian Wildlife Service – Ontario Region335 River Rd. Ottawa, Ontario K1A OH3 E-mail: Shawn.Meyer@canada.ca

Christopher M. Sharp Environment and Climate Change CanadaCanadian Wildlife Service – Ontario Region,335 River Rd. Ottawa, Ontario K1A OH3