Description
Other Taxonomic Groupings- Migratory and resident Branta canadensis (Canada Geese) appear to be somewhat distinct genetic populations, though some hybridization, and behavioral alteration may result in mixing. Migratory birds in the Chesapeake region are B. c. canadensis (Atlantic Canada Goose) (Limpert 1981). Resident nonmigratory flocks in the region and elsewhere on the Atlantic Coast appear to be mostly B. c. maxima (Giant Canada Goose), native to the midwest United States (Hanson 1965; Pottie and Heussman 1979; Allin 1980). There are at least 12 subspecies of B. canadensis in North America, distinguishable largely by overall size and morphometry, as well as geographic range. The smallest subspecies, B. c. hutchinsi, is about 50-60% the body length of the largest, B. c. maxima (Johnsgard 1978; Moser and Rolley 1990).
Taxonomy
Kingdom | Phylum | Class | Order | Family | Genus |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Animalia | Chordata | Aves | Anseriformes | Anatidae | Branta |
Synonyms
Invasion History
Chesapeake Bay Status
First Record | Population | Range | Introduction | Residency | Source Region | Native Region | Vectors |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1935 | Established | Expanding | Introduced | Regular Resident | North America | North America | Fisheries(Fisheries Intentional,Fisheries Accidental) |
History of Spread
Branta canadensis (Canada Geese) have been present since before European colonization in the Chesapeake Bay region and the Atlantic Coast of North America as wintering birds and migrants. However, this species did not become a widespread breeding bird and resident on the Atlantic coast and much of North America until the mid-20th century (Sauer et al. 1996). Breeding grounds of the original Chesapeake Bay wintering subspecies, B. c. canadensis and B. c. interior, are in Canada north of the St. Lawrence River and Great Lakes (Johnsgard 1978; Peterson 1980).
Resident nonmigratory Canada geese on the east Coast appear to be predominantly one subspecies, B. c. maxima (Giant Canada Goose) (Allan et al. 1995; Allin 1980; Johnsgard 1978; Pottie and Heusman 1979), which was originally native to the Great Plains and Great Lakes Basin, and was at one time believed to be extinct (Hanson 1965; Johnsgard 1978). The original breeding range of B. c. maxima (Giant Canada Goose) stretched from the shores of Lake Erie and the eastern Ohio River valley, south to the Ohio-Mississippi River junction, and west on the Great Plains to Rocky mountain foothills from Alberta to CO (Hanson 1965).
In its native Midwest, B. c. maxima breeds in local wetlands and then migrates in an irregular fashion Newly molted (molt-migrant) birds may migrate northward for feeding, to Hudson Bay, and the Arctic Ocean, and then southward to the Mississippi River Valley, Gulf Coast, and southern Great Plains for wintering (Hanson 1965). However, many midwestern populations winter in northern areas, especially in urban regions where food is plentiful (Addison and Amernic 1983; Hanson 1965; Laycock 1982). This subspecies appears to be more tolerant of people than other B. canadensis subspecies, a trait that may have contributed to its near-extinction but also to its semi-domestication by Indians, and later by European settlers and 20th century suburbanites (Hanson 1965).
In the early 20th century, populations of B. c. maxima appeared to be endangered, as a result of over-hunting and conversion of prairies and pothole marshes to farmland. Extensive game-farm rearing of B. c. maxima was undertaken by government agencies and private individuals to restore resident Branta canadensis populations within their native midwestern range (Hanson 1965; Mikula et al. 1970; Lumsden 1981). Branta canadensis maxima were also widely introduced to new areas as well. For example, 167 B. c. maxima were released in RI between 1958 and 1971 (Allin 1980). Another source of resident birds was the release of captive birds kept as live decoys, after 1918, when this practice became illegal. (Murray 1952; Pottie and Heusmann 1979).
By 1962, B. c. maxima were nesting along the Atlantic coast from ME to FL (Johnsgard 1978; Allin 1980). In the 1960's, many resident flocks were established by deliberate release of B. c. maxima in wildlife refuges in southeastern states, including TN, GA, and FL (Oberheu 1973). An additional source of resident B. canadensis, of originally migratory stock (B. c. canadensis and B. c. interior), was injured birds, which were unable to migrate, but bred in the relative protection of wildlife refuges (e.g., Wass 1972). However, morphometric studies of resident Canada Geese populations suggest that most of the birds fit the criteria for B. c. maxima, although some interbreeding between subspecies may have occurred (Pottie and Heusmann 1979; Limpert 1981).
By the 1980's, populations in suburban areas of the Great Lakes region and the eastern United States were dense enough to be regarded as a problem (Addison and Amernic 1983; Conover and Chasko 1984; Laycock 1982). Highest densities of breeding geese on the Atlantic seaboard now occur from southeast PA to southwest CT, in the New York City suburban area (Sauer et al. 1996).
Branta canadensis is a relatively new breeding bird in the Chesapeake Bay region. It was not mentioned as a breeder for MD by Kirkwood (1895), for VA by Bailey (1913), or for Washington DC (Cooke 1908; Cooke 1921). Forty-one non-migratory B. c. maxima were introduced to Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge, Dorchester County, from the Midwest. In 1946, a flock of breeding B. c. maxima was established on the lands of the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, in Prince George County MD, from eight resident birds captured at the Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge. Geese from the Patuxent flock, examined 30 years later, were closest to B. c. maxima in their measurements (Limpert 1981). This Patuxent population appears to be the source of most of the resident birds in the Washington DC area (Robbins and Blom 1996).
Additional birds in the Chesapeake Bay region probably resulted from releases of birds used as live decoys. A pair of B. canadensis nesting in 1940 on Ragged Island, Back Bay, south of Virginia Beach VA, were 'probably of decoy stock' (Murray 1952). Other VA breeding reports are: Hog Island Wildlife Management Area, James River (1952), Chincoteague (1971), Hopewell Wildlife Management Area, James River (1977). Flocks were spending the summer in the vicinities of Chincoteague, Hopewell, and Alexandria, and presumably breeding in these areas (Checklist Committee 1979; Wass 1972). Nonmigratory B. canadensis now appear to be common as breeders throughout the Chesapeake Bay region (Sauer et al. 1996; Fofonoff personal observations 1995-1996; Robbins and Blom 1996).
History References - Addison and Amernic 1983; Allan et al. 1996; Allin 1980; Bailey 1913; Checklist Committee 1979; Conover and Chasko 1984;; Cooke 1908; Cooke 1921; Hanson 1965; Johnsgard 1978; Kirkwood 1895; Laycock 1982; Lumsden 1981; Mikula et al. 1970; Murray 1952; Oberheu 1973; Pottie and Heusmann 1979; Robbins and Blom 1996; Sauer et al. 1996; Van Velsen 1967; Wass 1972
Invasion Comments
Ecology
Environmental Tolerances
For Survival | For Reproduction | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Minimum | Maximum | Minimum | Maximum | |
Temperature (ºC) | ||||
Salinity (‰) | 35.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
Oxygen | ||||
pH | ||||
Salinity Range | fresh-eu |
Age and Growth
Male | Female | |
---|---|---|
Minimum Adult Size (mm) | 766.0 | 766.0 |
Typical Adult Size (mm) | 800.0 | 800.0 |
Maximum Adult Size (mm) | 840.0 | 840.0 |
Maximum Longevity (yrs) | 23.0 | 23.0 |
Typical Longevity (yrs | 4.0 | 4.0 |
Reproduction
Start | Peak | End | |
---|---|---|---|
Reproductive Season | |||
Typical Number of Young Per Reproductive Event |
|||
Sexuality Mode(s) | |||
Mode(s) of Asexual Reproduction |
|||
Fertilization Type(s) | |||
More than One Reproduction Event per Year |
|||
Reproductive Startegy | |||
Egg/Seed Form |
Impacts
Economic Impacts in Chesapeake Bay
Resident Branta canadensis (Canada Geese ) populations are increasing in the Chesapeake Bay region, from 25,000 in 1989 to 90,000 in 1999. As a result, impacts of these birds are increasingly regarded as a problem (Maryland Department of Natural Resources 2001).
Fisheries - Resident B. canadensis (Canada Geese) probably provide a portion of the annual B. canadensis harvest in the Chesapeake region, but because of the large size of the wintering population (primarily B. c. canadensis andB. c. interior), the contribution of introduced feral birds (mostly B. c. maxima) is probably small but growing (Meanley 1978; White 1989). Expanding populations of B. c. maxima) are suspected of adversely affecting wintering populations of migratory Canada Geese, both in their Canadian Arctic breeding grounds (Ankney 1996), and locally as both groups of birds winter in the Chesapeake Bay region. Competition for winter foods between resident and migratory B. canadensis is a concern in refuges in the Bay Chesapeake region, as indicated in signs and posters at the Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge (Fofonoff, personal observations). Competition with introduced resident populations is considered to be a major factor in the decline of migratory populations in the Chesapeake Bay region. The resident birds tend to be larger than the migrants, and have the advantage of knowing local food resources and patterns of hunting (Hestbeck 1995).
Agriculture - Wintering B. canadensis feed extensively in agricultural fields, affecting pastures and such crops as winter wheat and rye. Much of what they eat in winter is waste grain, but resident birds also feed on green crops such as soybeans. Since they will feed to a varying degree on most green plants, they have a potential for crop damage (Addison and Amernic 1983; Allan et al. 1995; Laycock 1982). Impacts are probably small in the Chesapeake region at this time, compared to those in the midwest.
Health - High densities of B. canadensis can degrade water quality through defecation, resulting in elevated fecal coliform concentrations, resulting in the contamination of water supplies and the closure of beaches and shellfish beds. One 23.5 ha reservoir in the Chesapeake watershed (Lake Needwood, Montgomery County MD) had 2,931 wintering geese (Hench et al. 1994). This lake is not used for drinking water, but it shows the potential for water quality effects. Since resident birds are more likely to be abundant in urban and suburban areas, they are more likely to contribute to drinking water problems than migrant birds (Conover and Chasko 1985).
Flocks of resident B. canadensis, which frequently graze near airports, can pose a significant safety hazard to airplanes (Addison and Amernic 1983).
Aesthetic - Large flocks of resident B. canadensis can graze and defecate heavily on lawns and golf courses, causing serious aesthetic problems. In the mid-Atlantic region (NY-VA), golf courses had an average of 229 geese per course in summer and 364 in winter. More than 40 geese were considered to be a serious problem. Managers who were surveyed said that they would be willing to pay an average of $561 per year to eliminate goose problems. Methods currently used to control geese (chemical repellants, trapping, noisemakers, shooting blanks, allowing hunting, dogs, etc.) had some success for about 40% of managers. Similar problems have been noted in parks, lawns, and other aesthetically important grasslands (Conover and Chasko 1985).
On the positive side, B. canadensis in parks and residential areas are valued by many people as a handsome bird and a symbol of wildness. They are frequently watched and fed by people. Consequently, control programs involving killing of birds are frequently unpopular (Addison and Amernic 1983; Allan et al. 1995; Laycock 1982). A press release from the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (2001) discusses control methods including harassment by dogs, decoys, sprinklers, repellants,etc., banning feeding, allowing hunting, and habitat modification to make lakes and fields less attractive.
References - Addison and Amernic 1983; Allan et al. 1995; Ankney 1996; Conover and Chasko 1985; Hench et al. 1994; Laycock 1982; Maryland Department of Natural Resources 2001; Meanley 1978; White 1989
Economic Impacts Outside of Chesapeake Bay
The rescue of Branta canadensis maxima (Giant Canada Goose) from apparent extinction can be viewed as 'a wildlife management success story without parallel' (Laycock 1982), but in the 1980's, this goose reached densities in urban areas and wildlife refuges that posed serious management problems, both within and outside its native range (Addison and Amernic 1983; Allan et al. 1995; Ankney 1996; Conover and Chasko 1985; Laycock 1982). Its tolerance of human disturbance (Hanson 1965), which may have led to its near-demise, has given it an advantage in exploiting man-modified habitats such as lawns, golf-courses, and agricultural fields. Some hunters have taken to referring to them as 'sky carp' (Ankney 1996). Ankney suggests that the policies which have successfully resurrected B. c. maxima populations now need to be revised to solve ecological problems caused by excessive numbers of this bird and other geese.
In urban and suburban areas, control of geese by hunting may be limited by safety concerns, and public outcry may limit control to non-lethal means, including various kinds of noisemakers, chemical repellents, egg removal, dogs, etc. Translocation of birds was used early on to solve local problems, but managers now find few areas which want additional geese (Addison and Amernic 1983; Allan et al. 1995; Ankney 1996; Conover and Chasko 1985).
References - Addison and Amernic 1983; Allan et al. 1995; Ankney 1996; Conover and Chasko 1985; Hanson 1965; Laycock 1982
Ecological Impacts on Chesapeake Native Species
Resident Branta canadensis (Canada Geese, mostly B. c. maxima, Giant Canada Geese) have the potential to interact with both wintering and breeding waterfowl, including migratory populations of their own species. As herbivores that feed both on land and in water, they have the potential to affect both terrestrial and aquatic vegetation. Since they often feed on land and defecate in water, they can be an important local source of nutrients to small ponds and coves (Allan et al. 1995; Ankney 1996). Impacts in North America are best known in the Great Lakes region (Addison and Amernic 1983; Laycock 1982); and the northeast United States from MA to MD (Conover and Chasko 1985).
Competition - Populations of resident B. canadensis in the Chesapeake region, though rapidly increasing, appear to be still small relative to migratory ones (Checklist Committee 1979; White 1989). Locally, competition for winter foods between resident and migratory B. canadensis is a concern in refuges in the Chesapeake Bay region, as indicated in signs and posters at the Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge (Fofonoff, personal observations). Hestbeck (1995) considers competion with resident geese to be likeliest cause of the decline of migratory B. canadensis in the region. Resident birds have the advantage of local knowledge of food resources and hunting areas, as well as larger body size, which gives them an advantage over migrants (Hestbeck 1995). Breeding B. canadensis can be territorial and aggressive (Allan et al. 1995) and could drive Anas rubripes (American Black Ducks) and other native breeding waterfowl away from nest or feeding sites, but this is not documented.
On the continental scale, large numbers of B. c. maxima molt-migrants, from the recovered and expanding mid-continental population (mostly from Ontario) may have been competing with nesting B. c. interior and B. c. canadensis in the Canadian Arctic, possibly resulting in reduced survival of goslings and reduced numbers of migratory B. canadensis in the Mississippi and Atlantic Flyways (Ankney 1996). These impacts could affect wintering populations in the Chesapeake Bay. In Europe, competition with native waterfowl is a serious concern, but is not well-documented (Allan et al. 1995).
Herbivory- Increases in abundance of resident B. canadensis along Jug Bay, on the Patuxent River, appear to be associated with a decline in Zizania aquatica (Wild Rice) in the tidal fresh marsh. Fencing of plots to exclude geese and other herbivores resulted in increased plant diversity and increased abundance of Z. aquatica and several other food plants (Baldwin and Pendleton 2003).
Habitat Change - Heavy grazing by B. canadensis on land seems to have been treated largely as an aesthetic concern (Conover and Chasko 1985), but could affect wetland plant communities. However, their defecation in small bodies of water can cause eutrophication. (Allan et al. 1995). Unlike Cygnus olor (Mute Swans), which largely recycle nutrients by eating aquatic vegetation, B. canadensis do much of their feeding on land, transporting 'new' nutrients into the water. In tidal Chesapeake Bay waters, this effect would be greatest in small, poorly flushed coves.
References - Addison and Amernic 1983; Allan et al. 1995; Ankney 1996; Checklist Committee 1979; Conover and Chasko 1985; Laycock 1982; White 1989
Ecological Impacts on Other Chesapeake Non-Native Species
Resident Branta canadensis (Canada Geese ) have the potential to interact with other introduced waterfowl, particularly during the breeding season.
Competition - In England, competition for winter grazing between introduced Branta canadensis (Canada Geese) and Cygnus olor (Mute Swans, native) has been reported from England (Allan et al. 1995). In New England, C. olor (introduced) frequently showed aggression to introduced resident B. c. maxima, displaying and attacking, driving the geese away from feeding sites (Conover and Kania 1994). Nesting B. canadensis are aggressive (Allan et al. 1995), and could affect the feeding and nesting of introduced breeding populations of Anas platyrhynchos (Mallard Ducks).
References - Allan et al. 1995; Conover and Kania 1994
References
Addison, Lynn R.; Amernic, Jerry (1983) An uneasy truce with the Canada Goose, International Wildlife 13: 12-14Allan, John R.; Kirby, Jeffrey S.; Feare, Christopher J. (1995) The biology of Canada geese Branta canadensis in relation to the management of feral populations, Wildlife Biology 1: 129-143
Allin, Charles C. (1980) Canada Geese in Rhode Island, , Providence R.I.. Pp.
Ankney, C. Davison (1996) An embarassment of riches: Too many geese, Journal of Wildlife Management 60: 217-223
Bailey, Harold H. (1913) The birds of Virginia, In: (Eds.) . , Lynchburg, VA. Pp.
Barnes, Gregory C.; Nudds, Thomas D. (1991) Salt tolerance in American Black Ducks, Mallards, and their F1-hybrids, The Auk 108: 89-98
Birkhead, Mike; Perrins, Christopher (1986) The Mute Swan, In: (Eds.) . , London. Pp.
Checklist Committee (1979) Virginia's Birdlife, an Annotated Checklist, , Richmond VA. Pp.
Conover, Michael; Chasko, Gregory C. (1985) Nuisance Canada goose problems in the eastern United States, Wildlife Society Bulletin 13: 228-233
Conover, Michael; Kania, Gary S. (1994) Impact of interspecific aggression and herbivory by mute swans on native waterfowl and aquatic vegetation in New England, The Auk 111: 744-748
Cooke, May T. (1921) Birds of the Washington region, Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 34: 1-22
Cooke, Wells W. (1908) Bird migration in the District of Columbia, Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 21: 107-118
Hanson, Harold C. (1965) The Giant Canada Goose, In: (Eds.) . , Carbondale, IL. Pp.
Hench, John E.; Gibbs, Ron; Hench, Jayne S. (1994) Some observations on Hydrilla and wintering waterfowl in Montogomery County, Maryland, The Maryland Naturalist 38: 3-9
Johnsgard, Paul A. (1978) Ducks, Geese, and Swans of the World, , Lincoln. Pp.
Kirkwood, F. C. (1895) A list of the birds of Maryland, , Baltimore. Pp.
Laycock, George (1982) The urban goose, Audubon 84: 44-87
Limpert, Roland J. C. (1981) Subspeciation and wintering ecology of Canada Geese on the western shore, Chesapeake Bay, , Baltimore. Pp.
Lumsden, Harry G. (1981) History of breeding Canada Geese (Branta canadensis) in southwestern Ontario, Ontario Field Biologist 35: 49-56
Meanley, Brooke (1982) Waterfowl of the Chesapeake Bay Country, , Centreville, MD. Pp.
Mikula, Edward J.; Hunt, Richard A.; Lee, Forrest B.; Schoonover, Lyle J., Drewien, Rod C. (1970) From the Great Plains to the Great Lakes., In: (Eds.) Home-Grown Honkers. , Washington, D.C.. Pp. 76-88
Moser, Timothy J.; Rolley, Robert E. (1990) Discrimination of Giant and Interior Canada Geese of the Mississippi Flyway, Wildlife Society Bulletin 18: 318-388
Murray, Joseph J. (1952) A check-list of the birds of Virginia, , Richmond VA. Pp.
Oberheu, John C. (1973) Success of resident Canada Geese on national wildlife refuges in the Southeast, Proceedings of the Southeastern Association of Game and Fish Commissioners 27: 56-61
Perry, Matthew C. (1981) Asiatic Clam (Corbicula manilensis) and other foods used by waterfowl in the James River, Virginia, Estuaries 4: 229-233
Peterson, Roger T. (1980) A guide to the birds, , Boston. Pp.
Pottie, James J.; Heusmann, H. W. (1979) Taxonomy of resident Canada Geese in Massachusetts, Transactions of the Northeast Section, The Wildlife Society 36: 132-137
Robbins, Chandler S.; Blom, Eirik A. T. (1996) Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Maryland and the District of Columbia, , Pittsburgh. Pp. 70-305
1996 The North American Breeding Bird Survey.
Van Velsen, Willet T. (1967) Maryland nest summary, Maryland Birdlife 23: 7-10
White, Christopher P. (1989) Chesapeake Bay- Nature of the estuary: A field guide, , Centreville MD. Pp.
White, Marie E.; Wilson, Elizabeth A. (1996) Predators, pests, and competitors., , College Park. Pp. 559-579