TITLE PAGE

NON-LETHAL CONTROLS FOR "RESIDENT" CANADA GEESE

A REPORT PRESENTED BY THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
OF THE CANADA GEESE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE


The Honorable Harriet Cornell
Committee Chair & Rockland County Legislator

Robert 0. Binnewies, Executive Director
Palisades Interstate Park Commission

Diane Gruskin, Committee Coordinator & Executive Director
Rockland County Environmental Management Council

Betty Hedges, President
Rockland County Conservation Association, Inc.

Andy Turner, Committee Coordinator for Special Events &
Environmental Issue Program Leader, Cornell Cooperative Extension

PREPARED BY

Carl Dornbush
Rockland County Public Health Sanitarian

Dr. Gregg Feigelson
Chairman, Coalition Against (sic) the Destruction of Canada Geese

Diane Gruskin
Executive Director, Rockland County Environmental Management Council

Betty Hedges
President, Rockland County Conservation Association, Inc.

Andy Turner
Environmental Issue Program Leader, Cornell Cooperative Extension

1996

(a)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION.....................................................................PAGE 1

BACKGROUND INFORMATION -
CANADA GOOSE (BRANTA CANADENSIS)...................PAGES 2 AND 3

SUMMARY - COMMITTEE WORK......................................PAGES 4 THRU 6
Health/Water Quality issues.......................................PAGES 5 AND 6

RECOMMENDATIONS...........................................................PAGES 7 THRU 11

CONCLUSION.........................................................................PAGE 11

BIBLIOGRAPHY....................................................................PAGE 12

LIST OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS......................................PAGE 13

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment I *AGENDA A BLUE RIBBON PANEL OF EXPERTS ON CANADA GEESE

Attachment 2 *ROCKLAND AUDUBON SOCIETY CHRISTMAS BIRD COUNTS 1993, 1994 & 1995

Attachment 3 *ROCKLAND COUNTY CANADA GOOSE POPULATION UPDATE

Molting Period Surveys-1993, 1994, 1995 & 1996
Movement of Geese Banded in Rockland County
Occurrence of Geese Banded in Rockland County
Relocation of Geese in Clarkstown

REPORTS BY BRYAN L. SWIFT, DEC WATERFOWL SPECIALIST

COUNTY OF ROCKLAND
TOWN OF RAMAPO

FOR REDUCING CANADA GOOSE USE OF TURF GRASS AREAS BY PAUL D. CURTIS AND ASTRID S. JIRKA, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, CORNELL UNIVERSITY, ITHACA, NY

BY DR. ANN HERRIOTT, BASED ON SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS AND REFERENCES FROM THE CORNELL UNIVERSITY VETERINARY LIBRARY

KENSICO RESERVOIR, WESTCHESTER COUNTY PREPARED BY DR. GREGG B. FEIGELSON

ROCKLAND JOURNAL NEWS, 3/05/93

(b)

INTRODUCTION

This report serves to provide general information about established non-lethal methods (plus egg addling*) to minimize the impact of "resident" Canada geese in areas where concern about aesthetics and health are greatest.

During the past few years controversy has arisen in Rockland County regarding how best to control "resident" Canada geese. Numbers of these geese have proliferated in certain areas. Some citizens have complained to their municipal officials when the attendant geese feces and feathers impact on their residential property and interfere with full use of parks, golf courses and school yards. There are concerns, as well, regarding health and, water quality.

In view of these complaints and concerns, County Legislator Harriet Cornell determined that it would be productive to convene a Blue Ribbon Panel of experts to address these issues and suggest non-lethal controls. Ms. Cornell formed an Executive Committee consisting of herself, Robert 0. Binnewies, Executive Director, Palisades Interstate Park Commission; Betty Hedges, President, Rockland County Conservation Association, Inc.; and Diane Gruskin, Executive Director, Rockland County Environmental Management Council. The committee presented, "A BLUE RIBBON PANEL OF EXPERTS ON CANADA GEESE," September 22, 1993, in the Legislative Chambers to a full house. A transcript of proceedings is available at the Environmental Management Council - 914/638-5709. (See Attachment I for agenda of topics and speakers).

Because public response to the Blue Ribbon Panel was positive, the committee decided to form a Canada Geese Citizens Advisory Committee to continue research on "resident" Canada geese and non-lethal methods to control them.

Diane Gruskin, Executive Director, Rockland County Environmental Management Council, served as Coordinator. Andy Turner, Environmental Issues Program Leader, Cornell Cooperative Extension, was invited to join the Executive Committee to serve as Special Events Coordinator. Mr. Turner was an important addition to the committee since Cornell Cooperative Extension was involved in similar research.

A preliminary public meeting was held on November 30, 1993 at which residents spoke their minds. Using this input, the Executive Committee worked toward establishing the committee. Letters were sent to all five Town Supervisors inviting them to send two appointees to committee meetings. In addition Rockland Audubon, Southern Clarkstown Civic Association, and the Coalition to Prevent the Destruction of Canada geese were invited to choose an appointee. Thomas Maglaras, Nuisance Wildlife Specialist, was invited to participate. Glenn M. Cole, Regional Wildlife Specialist, and Bryan L. Swift, Waterfowl Specialist, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, were also invited to observe.

*considered lethal

-1-

BACKGROUND INFORMATION - CANADA GOOSE (BRANTA CANADENSIS)

New York is part of the Canada Goose Atlantic Flyway which extends from 'he northeast of Canada down to Florida. The Canada goose is one of the state's most familiar waterfowl . Many people enjoy experiencing Canada geese as part of nature. They find it exhilarating to observe the geese migrating in vee fomations, and to hear their call as they fly overhead heralding the seasons.

The Canada goose is readily distinguished from other geese by its black neck and head with a prominent white cheek patch. Its bill , legs and feet are black. The body feathers are gray-brown to dark brown. The life span is approximately 7-9 years. One source of information indicated that fertil ity spans 4-5 years. Canada geese are monogamous and share the work of raising and protecting the young. Early naturalists did not record Canada I geese as a breeding bird in New York State. However, during the past several years more and more geese appear to fall under the category of "resident" geese. Such geese do not honor municipal boundaries. They may fly several hundreds of miles to pursue their natural activities. We have discovered that they are a regional issue, not simply a neighborhood or county issue.

An estimated 20,000-25,000 "resident" Canada geese breeding pairs live in New York State in addition to unknown numbers of non-breeding and juvenile geese. Of the 11 races of Canada geese, none has rebounded as spectacularly as Branta canadensis maxima. Considered extinct in the mid-1950s, this large (12 pounds on average) creature now makes up most of the "resident" goose colonies around the country.

According to the last report from a study started in 1990 and coordinated by Dr. Jay Hestbeck, Massachusetts Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit University of Massachusetts - "resident" geese are, a distinct population different from the migrating geese that pass through New York each year. Reasons and/or theories for this situation include:

l. Introduction of breeding in New York State starting in the 1930's in wildlife management areas.

2. Descendants of game bird flocks raised at large estates during the 1900's and early into the 20th Century.

3. Shift of wintering patterns of migratory geese to the North. Until recent times large numbers of migratory geese wintered as far south as Florida. Now most winter in the Chesapeake Bay area. This may be the case because birds migrating farther south are losing habitat and are subject to greater hunting pressure and may therefore be experiencing lower survival rates. Over the years, those birds genetically inclined to travel greater distances south may have been steadily removed from the population. Some of these birds may opt to become "resident" geese. (New York's Wildlife Resources Cooperative Extension - Bibliography 1.)

-2-

4. Less severe winters in the northeast, which keep food supplies from being covered by ice and snow.

5. Fewer predators. However, many threats to Canada geese - primarily to their eggs and goslings - exist in Rockland. Included are: hawks, owls, coyotes, raccoons, skunks, opossums, snapping turtles, crows, domestic dogs, cats, traffic, and some sightings have been made of groundhogs eating the eggs. While we are unaware of any detailed studies on the mortality of suburban waterfowl, a mortality rate of 30% to 50% has been reported. (New York's Wildlife Resources Bibliography 1) .

-3-

SUMMARY COMMITTEE WORK

I - The Committee met five times starting in April 1994, concluding in the Fall of 1994.

2. A mission statement was created:

"We believe a healthy balance can be maintained between wildlife and the concerns of the community. Our mission is to:

*serve as an educational resource.
*provide accurate scientific information.
*offer management options to concerned citizens and government leaders.
*concentrate only on non-lethal Canada geese control methods, plus egg addling."

3. Research was carried out through 1995. Reference materials are cited in the Bibliography on Page 12.

4. Maps were sent to all town supervisors and village mayors. We requested that they indicate "resident" Canada geese nuisance areas and return the maps to us. Final county-wide maps containing the data received from participating municipalities were prepared by our Summer Intern, Deirdre Eller, and distributed to Committee members and to the towns and villages that supplied information. The maps were self evident. Nuisance areas coincided with expanses of grass located near unobstructed water bodies.

5. Committee members participated in two field trips:

A)

McFaul Environmental Center, Wykoff, NJ, to see successful planting and grounds maintenance methods employed to control "resident" Canada geese. Peter Both, Director, McFaul Nature Center, successfully controls Canada geese using several methods - his approach allows for a reduction of population in a humane manner.

1. Reducing grassy expanses by planting trees and shrubs and allowing some areas to turn into meadows.
2. Establishing large areas of ground cover.
3. Establishing shrubbery, trees and ground cover around the pond.
4. Installing vertical walls and fencing to deter pond access.
5. Using plastic filament fencing and plastic reflective tape to keep geese off of their herb garden.
6. Restricting public picnicking to a pavilion.
7. Enforcing non-feeding legislation.

Over the past five years these controls have enabled Mr. Both to lower his number of "resident" Canada geese from 500 to 250 - which he considers a manageable number.

Spook Rock Golf Club, Ramapo, NY, to witness a Border Collie demonstration organized by Dr. Ann Herriot, Cornell Cooperative Extension. Will Heintz, Superintendent, Hampshire Country Club Mamaroneck, NY, used his Border Collie on command to herd Canada Geese out of the golf club pond and chase them from the premises. (See Attachment 6 for Dr. Herriott's report - "The Use of Trained Border Collies to Discourage Geese").

-4-

7. Rockland Audubon Christmas Bird Counts over six years were reviewed. According to this data, Canada geese numbers have fluctuated between 1,800 and 3,600. (See Attachment 2 for 1993, 1994, 1995 Audubon reports. See Attachment 3 for bar chart included in surveys supplied by Bryan Swift, DEC Wildlife Specialist).

8. The committee reviewed DEC survey reports prepared by Bryan Swift, which offer information about bird counts as well as molting, relocation and banding. His statistics indicate there may be between 3,000 - 4,000 "resident" Canada geese in Rockland County (see Attachment 3).

9. Betty Hedges, Dr. Gregg Feigelson, Andy Turner and Carl Dornbush volunteered to work with Diane Gruskin on the committee report. Research continued through 1995.

10. Health/Water Quality Issues were examined:

A. Public Health

A synopsis follows, which was prepared by committee member, Dr. Gregg Feigelson of, "WATERFOWL DISEASES - WHETHER OR NOT CANADA GEESE PRESENT A THREAT TO PUBLIC HEALTH" - the presentation made at the Blue Ribbon Panel of Experts by Dr. Milton Friend, Director, Wildlife Health Research Center Water-Fowl Diseases, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Madison, Wisconsin. This synopsis was compiled from a transcript taped at the Blue Ribbon Panel. (Transcript available at the Environmental Management Council 914/638-5709).

"BLUE RIBBON PANEL - HEALTH ASPECTS
DR. MILTON FRIEND DIRECTOR, WILDLIFE HEALTH RESEARCH CENTER WATERFOWL DISEASES,
US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE; MADISON, WISCONSIN"

Dr. Friend is Director of the largest program in the world dedicated to the study of waterfowl diseases. His program deals with waterfowl disease at the local, national and international level. He shared with Rockland County his professional assessment of waterfowl diseases as they relate to human health. His message reassured individuals and parents who were concerned about whether or not Canada geese posed a health threat to humans.
He described a variety of diseases to which waterfowl are susceptible including those of viral, bacterial and parasitic origin. Interestingly, while many of the diseases could be lethal to birds, sometimes killing thousands at a time, he made it clear that those discussed do not pose a health threat to humans. Just as harmful bacteria carried by humans poses a greater risk to humans than non-humans, harmful bacteria carried by geese constitute a greater threat to other birds than to humans. Indeed, the mere presence of infectious organisms is insufficient to argue that human health is at risk. There is no significant risk of Canada geese causing serious illness in humans based on current knowledge.
While much controversy surrounds goose populations, it is hard to imagine the vast number of birds Dr. Friend and his colleagues deal with in the course of their research. Situations were described where they were surrounded by literally thousands of birds - sometimes living, sometimes diseased and sometimes dead. On occasion they were "...wading in that stuff, dead birds up to our elbows...". Even having been exposed to such exceptionally intense conditions, he pointed out that, "There is not a single documented case of any of us coming down with any kind of a disease problem as a result of Canada geese."

-5-

---

The extensive records kept on what has been isolated from Canada geese reveal why there are no documented illnesses attributed to these birds. These records show that most of the diseases that people worry about, such as Salmonellosis, are exceedingly rare in geese. Misconceptions are common. For example geese have been mistakenly accused of causing a parasitic condition known as swimmer's itch. Snails are an essential part of the life cycle of swimmer's itch. Snail populations can become infected from a wide variety of sources. The definitive hosts for avian schistosomes species are wild and domestic ducks, geese and other waterfowl , and birds. Therefore, one can not, and should not, focus on the Canada goose as the cause of swimmer's itch. Also, removing Canada geese will not remove the disease. The definitive hosts for mammalian schistosomes include a variety of domestic animals, rodents, raccoons, several other wildlife species, and dogs. Humans are an aberrant host.
Dr. Friend concluded by saying, "...we do not have a human health situation, not in the urban goose, not in the wild goose, not in the captive geese that we have also worked with. We do have a lot of diseases out there that can affect people; most of them come from different places and do not come from the Canada goose, and I'll leave you with that."

"The United States Environmental Protection Agency has calculated that run-off (non-point source pollution) from the first hour of a moderate-to-heavy storm in a typical US city will contribute more pollution load than would the city's untreated sanitary sewage during the same period of time." ("Reducing the Impacts of Stormwater Runoff from New Development" - Bibliography 20). In most settings pollution from Canada geese is a very small part of such runoff (also substantiated by the Northeastern Research Center for Wildlife Diseases, Pathology Department, University of Connecticut - Greenwich Conservation Commission Position Paper - Bibliography 2).

1) Greenwich, Ct.
In Greenwich, Ct., where there are large flocks of "resident" Canada geese near water bodies, the Town Department of Environmental Health performed tests on increased bacteria levels in several town ponds shortly after a heavy rainfall. Source of the bacteria could not be traced to the geese. Bacteria levels returned to normal the next day.

2) Kensico Reservoir
In the case of Kensico Reservoir where coliform levels are high, non-lethal controls have been put in place to discourage large concentrations of Canada geese and gulls. Methods employed include: noisemakers/harassment; landscaping; fencing and ongoing habitat surveys (see Attachment 7 - Overview of Goosebusters Program Kensico Reservoir, Westchester County).

3) Soil erosion around water bodies caused by geese pulling up the grass can be mitigated by substituting ground covers and shrubbery.

It appears that the primary concern here is the unsightly and unpleasant concentrations of droppings rather than a health risk. The extraordinary waterfowl conditions that Dr. Friend's researchers often encounter are certainly more intense than those that exist here in Rockland. Indeed, it is remarkable that none became ill as a result. However, situations do vary, and while a state of imminent danger does not exist in the county, the methods recommended in this report, if implemented properly, should help reduce or eliminate what little risk exists, where it is believed to exist.