Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Population Biology
Size Difference In Whooping Cranes Reared For Two Reintroduction Methods, Richard P. Urbanek, Marianne M. Wellington, Sabrina Servanty
Size Difference In Whooping Cranes Reared For Two Reintroduction Methods, Richard P. Urbanek, Marianne M. Wellington, Sabrina Servanty
Proceedings of the North American Crane Workshop
We investigated a possible size difference in whooping cranes (Grus americana) captive-reared for 2 reintroduction methods to establish a migratory population in eastern North America. Cranes reared for ultralight aircraft-led migration (UL) to Florida were significantly larger than cranes reared for direct autumn release (DAR) on the natal area in central Wisconsin. Mean tarsal length was 315.5 ± 0.98 (1 SE) and 308.1 ± 1.87 mm, respectively, for UL and DAR males and 296.9 ± 1.03 and 290.8 ± 2.60 mm, respectively, for UL and DAR females. Because of the different rearing schedules, eggs for the DAR method …
Photoperiod And Nesting Phenology Of Whooping Cranes At Two Captive Sites, Glenn H. Olsen
Photoperiod And Nesting Phenology Of Whooping Cranes At Two Captive Sites, Glenn H. Olsen
Proceedings of the North American Crane Workshop
Increasing day length is considered to be a stimulus to breeding in many avian species in northern latitudes (Welty 1975). Crane species that breed in high latitudes include Siberian crane (Leucogeranus leucogeranus), lesser sandhill crane (Grus canadensis canadensis), hooded crane (G. monacha), and whooping crane (G. americana). The first captive breeding records for hooded and Siberian cranes were induced with the use of artificially extended photoperiods (Mirande et al. 1996). Most likely, cranes that breed in mid-latitudes also respond to increasing daylight. In 1 study, captive greater sandhill cranes (G. c. …
An Update On Mortality Of Fledged Whooping Cranes In The Aransas / Wood Buffalo Population, Thomas V. Stehn, Carey L. Haralson-Strobel
An Update On Mortality Of Fledged Whooping Cranes In The Aransas / Wood Buffalo Population, Thomas V. Stehn, Carey L. Haralson-Strobel
Proceedings of the North American Crane Workshop
From winter 1950 through spring 2011, 6,364 whooping cranes (Grus americana) overwintered at Aransas National Wildlife Refuge, or rarely, elsewhere. Documented winter losses amounted to 105 birds dead or disappeared. About 20% of total losses occurred in the wintering area, where birds spend 5 to 6 months of the year including a few birds that over-summer. Losses of white-plumaged whooping cranes on the summering area in Canada appear to be low with only 3 instances documented. The most significant losses seem to occur in migration and may comprise over 80% of the annual mortality. Migration involves only 17-20% of the …
Protocol And Results From The First Season Of Captive-Rearing Whooping Cranes For A Non-Migratory Release In Louisiana, Glenn H. Olsen, Jane N. Chandler
Protocol And Results From The First Season Of Captive-Rearing Whooping Cranes For A Non-Migratory Release In Louisiana, Glenn H. Olsen, Jane N. Chandler
Proceedings of the North American Crane Workshop
The principal historic range of the whooping crane (Grus americana) consisted of the tall grass prairies and wetlands of southwest Louisiana, Texas, and parts of Mexico (Allen 1952). Whooping cranes migrated there from Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Dakotas, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and breeding grounds of the remnant flock in and near Wood Buffalo National Park, Canada.
The Utility Of Census Or Survey For Monitoring Whooping Cranes In Winter, Bruce H. Pugesek, Thomas V. Stehn
The Utility Of Census Or Survey For Monitoring Whooping Cranes In Winter, Bruce H. Pugesek, Thomas V. Stehn
Proceedings of the North American Crane Workshop
We discuss recent changes in the monitoring program for endangered whooping cranes (Grus americana) on their winter habitat in Texas. A 61-year annual census was replaced in the winter of 2011-2012 with a distance sampling procedure. Justification for the change was, in part, based on criticism of the previous methods of counting cranes and the assessment of crane mortality on the wintering grounds. We argue here that the arguments, methods, and analyses employed to discount the census procedure and mortality estimates were applied incorrectly or with flawed logic and assertions. We provide analysis and logical arguments to show …
Use Of Freshwater Ponds By Whooping Cranes During A Drought Period, Karis Ritenour, Elizabeth Smith, Barry K. Hartup
Use Of Freshwater Ponds By Whooping Cranes During A Drought Period, Karis Ritenour, Elizabeth Smith, Barry K. Hartup
Proceedings of the North American Crane Workshop
Whooping cranes (Grus americana) spend nearly half their annual cycle in coastal habitats within and around the Aransas National Wildlife Refuge Complex (ANWRC) located in the central portion of the Texas Coast. When drought conditions prevail in their winter range and salinities in the local bays exceed 23 parts per thousand (ppt), whooping cranes must seek alternate sources of dietary drinking water (Stehn 2008, Chavez- Ramirez and Wehtje 2012). They begin frequent (often daily) trips to freshwater sources in upland areas. These trips may result in extra energy expenditures that can impact their overall health and ability to …
Ten-Year Status Of The Eastern Migratory Whooping Crane Reintroduction, Richard P. Urbanek, Sara E. Zimorski, Eva K. Szyskoski, Marianne M. Wellington
Ten-Year Status Of The Eastern Migratory Whooping Crane Reintroduction, Richard P. Urbanek, Sara E. Zimorski, Eva K. Szyskoski, Marianne M. Wellington
Proceedings of the North American Crane Workshop
From 2001 to 2010, 132 costume-reared juvenile whooping cranes (Grus americana) were led by ultralight aircraft from Necedah National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) in central Wisconsin to the Gulf Coast of Florida on their first autumn migration (ultralight-led or UL), and 46 juveniles were released directly on Necedah NWR during autumn of the hatch year (direct autumn release or DAR). Return rate in spring was 90.5% for UL and 69.2% for DAR, the lower value of the latter attributable to 1 cohort with migration problems. Overall population survival 1 year and from 1 to 3 years post-release was 81% and 84%, …