EFFECTS OF NECK BANDS ON REPRODUCTION AND SURVIVAL OF FEMALE GREATER SNOW GEESE

• Main Authors: Reed, Eric, Gauthier, Gilles, Pradel, Roger
• Other Authors: Département de Biologie & Centre d’études nordiques Canada, Université Laval Québec (ULaval), Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive (CEFE), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Université de Montpellier (UM)-École pratique des hautes études (EPHE), Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Centre international d'études supérieures en sciences agronomiques (Montpellier SupAgro)-Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 (UPVM)-Institut national d’études supérieures agronomiques de Montpellier (Montpellier SupAgro), Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement (Institut Agro)-Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement (Institut Agro)-Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD France-Sud )
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: HAL CCSD 2005
• Subjects: reproduction; survival 91; breeding propensity; Chen caerulescens atlantica; clutch size; greater snow goose; mark-recapture; multi- state models; neck band; nest success; [SDE]Environmental Sciences; Bylot Island; Nunavut
• Online Access: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02126361; https://doi.org/10.2193/0022-541X(2005)069<0091:EONBOR>2.0.CO;2

International audience An assumption of mark-recapture studies is that the marker has no effect on the animal. Neck bands have been used extensively for goose research, but there has long been concern that they may have negative effects on some demographic parameters, and recent studies have yielded contradictory results. We evaluated the effects of neck bands on adult female greater snow geese (Chen caerulescens atlantica) by contrasting breeding propensity and apparent survival of geese marked with both a plastic neck band and a metal leg band and those marked solely with metal leg bands over an 11-year period on Bylot Island, Nunavut Territory. The use of multistate mark-recapture models also allowed us to estimate neck band loss and to obtain survival and capture probabilities that were not biased by such loss. Finally, we tested the effects of neck bands on other reproductive parameters (laying date, clutch size and nest success) over a 3-year period. Neck-banded females had decreased clutch size and capture probabilities, but their apparent survival rate, nest initiation and hatching dates, and nest survival were not affected compared to leg-banded only or unbanded females. Breeding propensity, indexed by capture probabilities of neck-banded females was, on average, 48% lower that that of leg-banded-only females but clutch size was only 10% lower. Neck band loss of females was low in this population (3% per year). We urge researchers to be cautious in the use of neck bands for estimation of population parameters, and that the potential negative effects of neck bands be assessed as it is likely to be species-specific. JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT 69(1):91-100, 2005