Author Institution: Winous Point Shooting ClubHerring gull (Larus argentatus) nesting in artificial goose-nesting structures was documented at the Winous Point Shooting Club, Port Clinton, Ohio, 1974-78. Gulls and Canada geese (Branta canadensis) nested in 14—28% and 12—23% of the structures, respectively. Gulls nesting in the structures did not influence goose nesting. Clutch sizes and egg-laying dates were synchronous with other local populations of herring gulls and Canada geese. Aggressive interactions between geese and gulls resulted in geese dominating the structures

Hoffman, Robert D.

The Ohio Journal of Science

KnowledgeBank at OSU

34 L. W. POLGAR AND G. W. BARRETT Vol. 83Copyright © 1983 Ohio Acad. Sci. 0030-0950/83/0001-0034 $2.00/0HERRING GULLS NESTING IN ARTIFICIALGOOSE-NESTING STRUCTURES1ROBERT D. HOFFMAN, Winous Point Shooting Club, Port Clinton, OH 434522ABSTRACT. Herring gull (Larus argentatus) nesting in artificial goose-nesting structureswas documented at the Winous Point Shooting Club, Port Clinton, Ohio, 1974—78.Gulls and Canada geese (Branta canadensis) nested in 14—28% and 12—23% of thestructures, respectively. Gulls nesting in the structures did not influence goose nesting.Clutch sizes and egg-laying dates were synchronous with other local populations ofherring gulls and Canada geese. Aggressive interactions between geese and gulls resultedin geese dominating the structures.OHIO J. SCI. 83 (1): 34-37, 1983INTRODUCTIONArtificial structures have provided addi-tional nesting sites for Canada geese since1944 (Yocum 1952); however, nesting inthese structures by species other thanwaterfowl has not been documented. Her-ring gulls commonly nest in colonies buthave been known to nest solitarily on in-land lakes and marshes (Wynne-Edwards1962). Monaghan and Coulson (1977) re-ported solitarily nesting herring gulls onroof tops in Great Britain. Herring gullshave been observed nesting in artificialnesting structures in Ottawa County,Ohio, at Magee Marsh Wildlife Area (K.Bednarik, pers. comm.), Ottawa NationalWildlife Refuge, and the Winous Point'Manuscript received 18 August 1981 and in re-vised form 4 June 1982 (#81-38).2Present Address: Ohio Coop. Wildl. Res. Unit,The Ohio State University, 1735 Neil Ave., Col-umbus, OH 43210Shooting Club. The objectives of thisstudy were to document herring gull nest-ing in artificial structures and to recordinteractions between gulls and geese nest-ing in the structures.METHODS AND MATERIALSThe study was conducted between 1974 and 1978at the 1,680-ha Winous Point Shooting Club, PortClinton, Ohio. The proportions of artificial struc-tures used by nesting gulls and geese during1974—75 were based on single, midsummer obser-vations. Nesting structures were checked 3 timesduring the 1976 and 1978 breeding seasons, and4 times in 1977.Nesting structures were similar to the Model Btype used by the Ohio Division of Wildlife (Bed-narik 1970, fig. 1). Twelve structures supported bysteel fenceposts were placed over water in summer1973. In winter 1976, 18 structures were placedover land, 4 of them on stumps and 14 attached tostanding trees. All structures were elevated 1—3 mand straw was added before each nesting season. Treelimbs were trimmed around the structures. Ice de-stroyed 8 structures during the study.The average initial egg-laying date was defined asthe average of the dates the first egg of each clutchwas laid. Dates were determined by back datingOhio J. Sci. ARTIFICIAL GULL NESTS 35FIGURE 1. Artificial nesting structures used by herring gulls and Canada geese at Winous Point ShootingClub, Port Clinton, Ohio, 1974-78.partially hatched clutches, pipped eggs, or downyyoung. Laying periods of 24 h and 48 h per egg,and incubation periods of 29 and 31 days for geeseand gulls, respectively, (Schoonover et al. 1970,Tinbergin I960) were used to estimate dates of nestinitiation. The Chi-square and Wilcoxon rank sumtests were used to statistically test differences be-tween artificial nesting structures and average initialegg-laying dates.RESULTSHerring gulls used the structures thefirst spring after installation, nesting in 3structures in 1974 and 6 in 1975. Canadageese nested in 3 structures in 1975. Thecombined proportions of structures occu-pied by gulls and geese during the nestingseason were consistent from 1976 to 1978(table 1). However, during this period,gull use decreased from 28 to 14%, where-as the percentage used by geese increasedfrom 12 to 23%, respectively.During the 1976-78 nesting seasons,herring gulls nested in 44% of the struc-tures over water, 31% of those on treestumps, and 7% of those attached to trees;geese nested in 22, 31, and 12%, re-spectively. Due to the small sample size, itwas inappropriate to statistically comparestructure use by year or species. However,when combined, structures attached tostanding trees were used significantly less(P < 0.005) than the other structures.The average clutch sizes of gulls andgeese were consistent from 1976 to 1978(table 2). Clutch sizes were not recordedduring the 1974-75 nesting seasons. Theaverage initial egg-laying dates of gullsand geese did not overlap (fig. 2). Canadageese nested significantly (P < 0.001)earlier than gulls during 1976-78. In1975, 3 structures contained eggs or egg-shells of both species. In 1976-77 ag-gressive interactions between gulls andgeese resulted in geese dominating theTABLE 1Percent of artificial structures used by nestingherring gulls and Canada geese. Structures were placedover water (I), on tree stumps (II), and attached to thesides of trees (III) at the Winous Point Shooting Club,Port Clinton, Ohio, 1976-78.Year1976IIIIIIAverage1977IIIIIIAverage1978IIIIIIAverageNa6415b741455b12Gulls66.725.013.028.042.925.07.120.020.040.00.013.6Geese16.725.06.712.028.625.014.320.020.040.016.722.7"Number of structuresbRenest recorded as additional structure36 R. D. HOFFMAN Vol. 83TABLE 2Mean and standard deviations of clutch sizes ofherring gulls and Canada geese nesting in artificialstructures at the Winous Point Shooting Club, PortClinton, Ohio, 1976-78.Year1976Na1977N1978NTotalaNumberClutchGulls2.71 ± 0.4572.60 ± 0.4953.00 ± 0.0032.73 ± 0.20of nestssizeGeese6.00 ± 0.16.00 ± 0.46.40 ± 1.56.20 ± 0.00000172structures. Gulls used the structures asperches before the ice on the marsh wascompletely thawed. They deposited nest-ing material in the structures before geesedrove them away. After the geese hatchedtheir own clutches, the gulls returned tosuccessfully hatch 2-egg clutches.DISCUSSIONIn Montana, Craighead and Stockstad(1961) reported that geese used 24.6% ofthe structures the authors placed in naturalconditions. Atkins and Fuller (1979) re-ported a 37.5% use rate of structures inMinnesota. In my study, decrease in gullnesting was not related to the increase ingoose nesting, but was instead a direct re-sult of dike reconstruction. Several success-ful gull nests which became inactive inlater years were located within 10 m ofactive draglines. Most of these successfulnesting structures were located near openwater. A possible explanation for the lowuse of structures attached to standing treesis that most are located near the drier pe-riphery of the marsh.Clutch sizes of gulls nesting in struc-tures were similar to clutch sizes of gulls inthe Lake Erie region. Gilman et al. (1977)reported 2.96 eggs per nest in a Lake Erieherring gull colony in 1975. Herring gullnests averaged 2.4 eggs in 1977 in a colonyFlGURE 2. Mean and range of initial egg-layingdates of herring gulls and Canada geese nesting inartificial structures at Winous Point Shooting Club,Port Clinton, Ohio, 1976-78.on West Sister Island, Ohio (R. W. Parris,pers. comm.). Clutch sizes of tub-nestingCanada geese at Crane Creek-OttawaNational Wildlife Refuge Complex, OakHarbor, Ohio, were 5.56, 5.04, and 5.69in 1976, 1977, and 1978, respectively (K.Bednarik et al. 1976, 1977, 1978).Initial laying dates for gulls nesting instructures were similar to peak layingdates reported by Gilman et al. (1977).This suggests that gulls we observednested slightly later than other Great Lakescolony gulls. Initial laying dates of geesewere later than dates for tub-nesting geeseat the Crane Creek-Ottawa National Wild-life Refuge Complex, in which averageinitial laying occurred on 8 March 1976,15 March 1977, and 19 March 1978(K. Bednarik et al. 1976, 1977, 1978).Average clutch sizes and initial egg-laying dates were not felt to be significantin explaining gull nesting in artificialstructures or the aggressive interactionsbetween the 2 species. Most interactionsbetween gulls and waterfowl referenced inthe literature have been gull predationon waterfowl (Odin 1957, Knuth 1968,Vermeer 1968). Gulls nesting in artificialstructures had no effect on goose nestingsuccess in this study.The reasons for solitary nesting of her-ring gulls in the southwestern Lake Erieregion are not understdod. Monaghan andCoulson (1977) suggested that solitary roofnesting herring gulls in Great Britain wereInitial Laying DatesOhio J. Sci. ARTIFICIAL GULL NESTS 37either from large colonies or from naturalsites near saturation. Lack (1968) hypothe-sized that rather than select sites safe frompredation, Larinae selected for availability.Inadequate nesting sites do not logicallyexplain solitary nesting in southwesternLake Erie. West Sister Island, located14.4 km north of the Magee Marsh Wild-life Area, has an active non-saturatedcolony of herring gulls.Lack (1968) proposed that solitary nest-ing of a species occurs where food suppliesare insufficient to support a colony.Structure-nesting gulls appear to over-lap feeding areas of colonial-nesting andnon-breeding gulls. Although gulls mayobtain some food from the marshes, theyprimarily feed along the shore of Lake Erieand its bays.Changes in territorial behavior are diffi-cult to explain in structure-nesting gullswhich become intolerant of other gulls inthe area. There appeared to be an increasein territory size compared to colonial-nesting birds. On several occasions I ob-served paired gulls defending a structurefrom intruding gulls which were over15 m from the structures.Solitary nesting may be perpetuated byenvironmental imprinting of young gulls.Herring gulls are sexually mature at 3years (Moore 1976) and may return to nestin structures. Ludwig (1963) showed ahigh rate of return of adult herring gulls tonatal colonies. This attachment to nestingsites occurs within the first weeks of life(Noseworthy and Lien 1976). McNicholl(1975) suggested nest site tenacity wasstrongly developed in larids in highlystable habitats but greatly reduced in un-stable habitats. Artificial structures offer astable habitat, relatively free from preda-tion and fluctuating water levels.ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. I thank R. L. Meeks for ini-tiating the study, R. A. Farney for recording obser-vations during 1974-75, and the Winous PointShooting Club for providing the opportunity to con-duct the study.LITERATURE CITEDAtkins, T. and T. Fuller 1979 An improvednesting structure for Canada geese. Wildl. Soc.Bull. 7: 192-193.Bednarik, K. 1970 Buckeye honkers, p. 89-102In: H. Dill and F. Lee (eds.), Home grownhonkers. U.S. Dep. Inter., U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv., J. Weeks and V. Barrord 1978 Ohiowetlands wildlife ecology research and manage-ment. Ohio Dept. Nat. Res., Div. Wildl., Fed.Aid Proj. W-104-R-20, Columbus.and R. Warhurst 1976 Ohiowetlands wildlife ecology research and manage-ment. Ohio Dept. Nat. Res., Div. Wildl., Fed.Aid Proj. W-104-R-18, Columbus.and 1977 Ohio wet-lands wildlife ecology research and management.Ohio Dept. Nat. Res., Div. Wildl., Fed. AidProj. W-104-R-18, Columbus.Craighead, J. and D. Stockstad 1961 Evaluatingthe use of aerial nesting platforms by Canadageese. J. Wildl. Manage. 25: 363-372.Gilman, A., G. Fox, D. Peakall, S. Teeple, T. Car-roll and G. Haymes 1977 Reproductiveparameters and egg contaminant levels ofGreat Lakes herring gulls. J. Wildl. Manage.41:458-468.Knuth, R. 1968 Herring gull attacking ducks.Pass. Pigeon 30: 127.Lack, D. 1968 Ecological adaptations for breed-ing in birds. Methuen & Co., London, England.409 p.Ludwig, J. 1963 Return of herring gulls to natalcolony. Bird-Banding 34: 68-72.McNicholl, M. 1975 Larid site tenacity andgroup adherence in relation to habitat. Auk92: 98-104.Monaghan, P. and J. Coulson 1977 Status oflarge gulls nesting on buildings. Bird Study24: 89-104.Moore, F. 1976 The dynamics of seasonal distri-bution of Great Lakes herring gulls. Bird-Banding47: 141-159.Noseworthy, C. and J. Lien 1976 Ontogeny ofnesting habitat recognition and preference inneonatal herring gull chicks, Larus argentatusPontoppidan. Anim. Behav. 24: 637—651.Odin, C. 1957 California gull predation onwaterfowl. Auk 74: 185-202.Schoonover, L., F. Lee, and C. Strutz 1970 Pro-duction, p. 29-43 In: H. Dill and F. Lee (eds.),Home grown honkers. U.S. Dep. Inter., U.S.Fish Wildl. Serv.Tinbergen, N. I960 The herring gull's world.Basic Books, Inc., New York, NY. 255 p.Vermeer, K. 1968 Ecological aspects of ducksnesting in high densities among larids. WilsonBull. 80: 78-83.Wynne-Edwards, V. 1962 Animal dispersion inrelation to social behavior. Hafner Publishing Co.,New York, NY 653 p.Yocum, C. 1952 Techniques used to increasenesting of Canada geese. J. Wildl. Manage.16: 425-428.

Herring Gulls Nesting in Artificial Goose-Nesting Structures

https://kb.osu.edu/bitstream/1811/22906/1/V083N1_034.pdf

Herring Gulls Nesting in Artificial Goose-Nesting Structures

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

KnowledgeBank at OSU