Issuu

Canada Geese on Long Island

Credit: Ekaterina Chernetsova

National Center for Suburban Studies Hofstra University

The National Center for Suburban Studies is pleased to share this report: Canada Geese on Long Island In suburban Long Island, the conflict between the large Canada geese population and local residents and business owners has received tremendous attention. While some of us enjoy these large birds in our coastal and natural settings, others of us find them a nuisance due to their waste, noise, and presence on our roadways and runways. This report provides an assessment of the history and current status of Canada geese on Long Island. It includes current management strategies and policy initiatives along with recommendations and resources that will be of use to residents, wildlife managers, local officials, residents, and business owners across Long Island. - Lawrence Levy, Executive Dean

Authors Christina Knoll Student Research Associate, National Center for Suburban Studies Graduate Student, Urban Ecology

With

Russell L. Burke, Ph.D Professor of Biology

Robert Brinkmann, Ph.D. Director of Sustainability Studies Director of Sustainability Research, National Center for Suburban Studies Professor of Geology, Environment, and Sustainability

Table of Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 Project Summary.............................................................................................. 2 Previous Research ............................................................................................ 4 Population Summary ....................................................................................... 7 Migratory and Resident Canada Geese ......................................................... 8 Conflicts and Environmental Issues ............................................................... 9 Management ................................................................................................... 20 Laws ................................................................................................................. 32 Resources for Long Island Residents ........................................................... 35

Research Needs ............................................................................................... 38 Bibliography ................................................................................................... 39 Glossary of Terms ........................................................................................... 46

Introduction Every year, thousands of Canada geese (Branta canadensis) migrate south in the fall and winter along paths of travel called flyways. A portion of the population migrates through an area which includes eastern states in the U.S. from Maine down to Florida; this area is known as the Atlantic Flyway (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), n.d). Within the flyway, several populations of Canada geese exist, distinguished by their breeding ranges and subspecies composition (USFWS, n.d). One such population is known as the Atlantic flyway resident population due to their mostly year-round presence in the southernmost parts of Canada and eastern United States (USFWS, n.d). These geese populations occupy an area that contrasts with other Canada geese populations, which subsist in northern regions of Canada for most of their lives (USFWS, n.d). Resident Canada geese were introduced through a combination of government sanctioned efforts to increase the Canada geese population and changes in hunting regulations which made it illegal to use live Canada geese to attract other birds (USFWS, n.d). Both events occurred in the mid-1900s, and people who used to keep geese to use as decoys set them free after the practice was made illegal (USFWS, n.d). These factors and the instinct of Canada geese to breed near their birthplace culminated in the establishment of a localized population (USFWS, n.d). Canada geese are monogamous and will stay with their mate throughout their lives (NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), 2007). The breeding season for resident population geese begins in February (NYSDEC, 2007). A pair of geese will construct a nest and tend to a clutch of five or six eggs for close to one month (NYSDEC, 2007). After goslings hatch in the spring, the adults molt their feathers during the summer, becoming flightless for a brief time (NYSDEC, 2007). In the fall and winter the geese regain the ability to fly with newly grown feathers and have an expanded foraging range (NYSDEC, 2007). Resident geese populations have become a unique case for wildlife management organizations and the public alike. Canada geese are listed under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, which assigns protection to migratory birds wherein it is a violation of federal law to kill, capture, hunt, breed, handle, harm, sell, or move them without federal permits (USFWS, n.d). However, the large population size of resident Canada geese within the Atlantic flyway is considered to be a source of conflict for people (NYSDEC, 2007). The ensuing conflict has spurred wildlife management organizations to address management of the birds with a heightened focus (USDA, 2004). Anecdotes, professional research, and passionate citizenry chronicle the history of Long Island residents and the local Canada geese. For some, interactions with the birds consist only of an ongoing battle to keep the geese off of their property. For others, the only battle is an ongoing effort to keep the birds from being disturbed. This report is an assessment of the history and current status of the Canada geese population on Long Island. As a result of consultation with municipalities, private groups, individuals, and state and federal wildlife management organizations, conflicts, management strategies, applicable laws, and plans for the future regarding the geese are detailed within the report. Resources for residents of Long Island are also provided.

Note: For the purpose of this report, all references to the geographic area of Long Island are meant to describe Nassau, Suffolk, Kings, and Queens counties collectively.

Project Summary Canada geese that do not migrate are considered nuisance wildlife in many places across the country. Known as resident geese, the controversy about their presence is complex, and Long Island has been home to this conflict between the geese and residents for several decades. Nearly all of what is known about Canada geese on Long Island comes from local municipalities and private groups struggling with population control, private companies hired to control geese populations, non-profit environmental groups interested in birds and humane issues, and citizen scientists. Those focusing on population control are concerned with specific associated issues such as sanitary conditions, aesthetics, and public safety. Citizen scientists simply census geese and otherwise help with counts. This report attempts to evaluate and document the human-wildlife conflict between Long Island residents and Canada geese. Our exploration of the issue has revealed some of the history of the conflict and how it is handled today. Some of the conflict involves aesthetics, with residents and business owners reporting that geese ruin the appearance of their lawns, parks, and golf courses by overgrazing and leaving excrement. Another large portion of the conflict involves hazards to the public. Airport officials work to manage geese at airports due to safety risks caused by birds colliding with planes. Many others say the geese are the cause of disease and nutrient contamination of Long Island water bodies. There is also concern about aggression from geese, especially during their nesting season. Long Island residents interested in goose management face both legal restrictions and a variety of options for help. Federal and state laws put restrictions on goose management methods, hunting, and how people can interact with them. Many of the local laws involving Canada geese on Long Island are meant to prevent people from feeding the birds. Residents can call town and state agencies for guidance on goose management or contact private companies for population control. Despite the level of human-goose conflict little focused research has been conducted in the region. Canada geese numbers and movement on Long Island are monitored largely through raw banding data, hunting data, and highly localized studies for airports. Citizen science projects such as Ebird and the Christmas Bird Count provide data on population numbers in specific areas across Long Island. An overall estimate of Canada geese on Long Island is conducted by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation annually.

The information aggregated in this report reveals aspects of the conflict, indicating its deeply woven presence in the lives of Long Island residents. First, it appears that the localized population control efforts by non-profit organizations, private companies, municipalities, and activists are not well documented or monitored, making it is impossible to assess their effectiveness.

Additionally, despite the widespread opinion that Canada geese are the direct cause of dangerous levels of bacteria in Long Island water bodies, such claims are not documented by scientific testing either locally or elsewhere. The method of doing such testing reliably is still in development. Therefore, studies that have attempted to evaluate the possible role of Canada geese as sources of bacteria levels in water could not rule out other sources. The scarcity of research conducted on Canada geese on Long Island leaves many questions unanswered. When several population control methods are used in close proximity to each other, the results of one program may affect another. Whether the control methods reduce local population size, or just move local populations around Long Island remains to be seen. An evaluation of how much residents and municipalities across Long Island spend to remove geese and the cost effectiveness of each method would provide a more detailed picture of the extent of the conflict as well as the efficiency of each removal method. Testing of bacteria levels in water could be expanded with a comparison of potential bacteria levels per goose against other potential sources, such as septic systems, runoff, and other wildlife. Decisions regarding treatment methods may subsequently benefit from such information. This report is a broad depiction of the conflict on Long Island which begets many more specific answers. Without these answers, the effects of the conflict on both geese and Long Island residents will become more and more obscure.

Previous Research Despite their ubiquitous presence, professional research regarding Canada geese which pertains specifically to Long Island is scarce. Most studies that have taken place in New York either focus on areas located in upstate New York, or utilize the entire state of New York as the research site. Much of what has been documented about Canada geese on Long Island is encompassed in population surveys from citizen science projects and activities done as part of management strategies. In June of 2006, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)/Wildlife Services worked with multiple agencies to place neck collars on 300 Canada geese (Seamans, Scott, Allen, & Gosser, 2009). The geese were collared at sites which were within approximately 5.6 miles of John F. Kennedy Airport and LaGuardia Airports (Figure 1) (Seamans et al., 2009). Their intention was to examine the traveling range of Canada geese near airports (Seamans et al., 2009).

Collared geese were observed in the area for two years and analysis of their work led the researchers to discover that almost half of the geese that were collared subsisted in a territory that was no larger than 5 miles (Seamans et al., 2009). They concluded that their collective findings indicated an approximate three mile territory range for geese on western Long Island (Seamans et al., 2009).

Figure 1. The locations where the neck collars were placed on the geese, from “Observations of neck-collared Canada geese near John F. Kennedy International Airport, New York” (Seamans et al., 2009) (Reprinted with permission)

According to Laura Francoeur, Chief Wildlife Biologist for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the normal wildlife control operations for John F. Kennedy Airport and LaGuardia Airport include six surveys per month of Canada geese on and off airport property. She explained that surveys done outside of airport property are done by the USDA, while survey efforts on airport property are handled by the Port Authority. She added that the purpose of the surveys is to monitor geese population size around the airport to gauge the effectiveness of current management strategies and to plan for strategy adjustments.

Kelly Hamilton, a Waterfowl Biologist for the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) explained that in following the directives of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), each year the NYSDEC places neck collars on Canada geese when they are molting. She stated that at least 200 birds are collared during the months of June and July, and the locations where the collaring takes place are spread out across Long Island. Ms. Hamilton added that collar numbers from hunter harvests are reported to the USGS Bird Banding Lab and the data are sent back to the USFWS.

A Canada goose wearing a neck collar

Credit: Helena Jacoba

Birdwatchers often keep a list of birds that they observe each day. In 2002, the National Audubon Society and Cornell Cooperative Extension collaborated to create an online cataloging system for bird sightings called eBird (eBird, n.d). Millions of observations are entered into eBird every year, making it a reliable source of data on bird population sizes and species diversity (eBird, n.d). According to John Sepenoski, a GIS Technician for the Town of Southold, the town of Southold relies on eBird data to generate lists of local bird species for nature preserves in the area as well to keep track of where certain species of birds are located. The list of data for Canada geese on Long Island in eBird is substantial and includes observations from prior to 2002 due to contributions of those who entered sightings from older bird lists (eBird, n.d).

The Christmas Bird Count originated in 1900 after an ornithologist named Frank M. Chapman suggested that birds which were traditionally hunted during Christmas time should be counted instead (National Audubon Society, n.d). His suggestion to conduct a population survey of the birds was done in the name of conservation which was becoming of popular interest at the time (National Audubon Society, n.d). Today the count is done between December 14th and January 5th of each year (National Audubon Society, n.d). Each count occurs over the span of one day within specific locations designated by the National Audubon Society (National Audubon Society, n.d). Birdwatchers search for birds as part of an organized group within a 15 mile diameter circle (National Audubon Society, n.d). During the 2014 Christmas Bird Count there were 11 circles on Long Island with a total of 45,188 Canada geese observed (National Audubon Society, 2010) According to a 2006 New York Post article, the NYSDEC planned to test several species of birds on Long Island for the avian influenza virus, including Canada geese (Moran, 2006).

Population Summary Today the number of resident Canada geese in New York State is estimated to be over 200,000 (NYSDEC, n.d) and the number is increasing (Figure 2.). According to Bryan Swift, Game Management Section Head for the NYSDEC, the NYSDEC Breeding Waterfowl Population Survey estimates the current population of resident Canada geese on Long Island to be approximately 16,000. A USDA report from 2004 stated that the estimate from 1997 to 1999 for the Lower Hudson Valley and Long Island was 18,000 (USDA, 2004). Mr. Swift said that today that number is approximately 25,000.

Figure 2. New Yor k State r esident Canada geese population over

Migratory and Resident Canada Geese On Long Island, resident populations exist year-round while North Atlantic and Atlantic populations of Canada geese may migrate to the island during the late fall and winter (Figure 3) (USFWS, 2015). Hunting seasons are adjusted for the fall in some areas of Long Island in anticipation of the arrival of migratory geese (NYSDEC, n.d). The changes are in consideration of the migratory Canada geese population size, which is not thought to be in excess (NYSDEC, n.d).

Figure 3. Range of Canada geese in the Atlantic flyway, fr om “Waterfowl Population Status, 2015” (USFWS, 2015)

Conflicts and Environmental Issues Resident Canada geese are most often the target of public complaints and management actions as their numbers are considered to be excessive (NYSDEC, n.d). Migratory geese are less often considered to be an issue, except in the case of airports which may engage in geese management at all times out of concern for bird strikes. The year -round presence of resident geese on Long Island has created conflicts for residents which range from daily struggles to lurking disturbances. The evidence which condemns the birds in the eyes of some people is at times clear and at other times, controversial. Issues with geese in the New York area can be traced back to at least several decades ago. An article titled “Annual Roundup of Geese Readied” published by the New York Times in 1980 claims: It all started when President Dwight Eisenhower played golf at one of Westchester's clubs and wondered aloud if something couldn't be done about the geese that were fouling the fairways and greens. The Department of Interior took up the problem, and in 1958 the United States Fish and Wildlife Service began relocating the county's Canada geese (NY Times, 1980). Although the translocation of geese is no longer permitted in New York, issues with the geese on golf courses remain (USDA, 2004). According to Timothy Benedict, Superintendent of the Woodmere Club in Woodmere, NY the golf course sustains damage from the geese eating the grass. Brian Benedict, Superintendent of the Seawane Club in Hewlett, NY said the golf course grass sustains damage from goose feces. Some people point to Canada geese as the source of bacterial growth and eutrophication while others worry about the safety of geese A Canada goose in Mill Pond and fellow humans when it comes to road travel. The following topics discuss the main human-wildlife conflicts specific to Cana- Credit: Terry Ballard da geese on Long Island. Contamination of water bodies

In 2011, the Long Island Groundwater Research Institute at Stony Brook University analyzed water samples from Laurel Hollow Beach in Oyster Bay (Pfoertner, 2011). The goal of the study was to try to trace the source of contamination that often resulted in closures of the beach (Pfoertner, 2011). The samples were obtained from the Nassau County Department of Health, which took samples each week at the beach from April until August or September (Pfoertner, 2011). For their study, the research institute looked at samples from 2002 to 2011 (Pfoertner, 2011). They found that high coliform levels were present in the months of June and July in 2002 and 2010 (Pfoertner, 2011). The report suggested that the high levels of bacteria may be partly due to the presence of Canada geese (Pfoertner, 2011). However, the statement was followed by clarification that the contamination could be from many sources and not just the geese (Pfoertner, 2011).

The researchers concluded by saying that the source of contamination could be more accurately discerned with the use of DNA analysis (Pfoertner, 2011). In a later report from Friends of the Bay, it was stated that the Nassau County Department of Health concluded that the cause of elevated bacteria at the beach was most likely due to Canada geese (Friends of the Bay, 2013). The Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County sampled water from 16 locations in Goldsmiths Inlet in Southold, NY in 2013 (Brousseau & Curatolo-Wagermann, 2013). They intended to study the levels of coliform, as well as the nutrients nitrogen and phosphorus in the inlet (Brousseau & Curatolo-Wagermann, 2013). Additionally, the researchers attempted to track sources of E. coli in the samples by matching the DNA from water samples to a library of E. coli DNA found specifically on Long Island, which was created by the Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County (Brousseau & Curatolo-Wagermann, 2013). The DNA matching and statistical modeling used showed where sources of E. coli most likely came from (Brousseau & Curatolo-Wagermann, 2013). The library was specific to species names some for E. coli DNA matches (Brousseau & Curatolo-Wagermann, 2013). Through using the library, they were able to source the coliform in Goldsmiths Inlet to group types (humans, birds, wildlife, and domestic animals) and a few species (Brousseau & Curatolo-Wagermann, 2013). Out of the four stations around the inlet that were tested for E. coli only two of them contained E. coli samples which were matched to be most likely from Canada geese (Brousseau & Curatolo-Wagermann, 2013). Most of the E. coli DNA was sourced to birds and wildlife, then domestic animals. Potential sources for the bird group for the study included Black Ducks, Herring Gulls, Cormorants, Mute Swans, Greater Black Backed Gulls, and Mallard ducks (Brousseau & Curatolo-Wagermann, 2013). The wildlife group included raccoons, muskrats, deer, and red fox while the domestic animal group included dogs and horses (Brousseau & Curatolo-Wagermann, 2013). In March 2012, a study on pathogen loading in the Peconic Estuary in Yaphank, NY, was detailed in a report for the Suffolk County Department of Health Services (Cameron Engineering & Associates, LLP, 2012). The focus of the study was to estimate the amount of pathogens that might enter the Peconic Estuary from different sources in the area (Cameron Engineering & Associates, LLP, 2012). The study looked at waterfowl, dogs, septic systems (also known as onsite wastewater management systems) and other wildlife as potential sources (Cameron Engineering & Associates, LLP, 2012). In their examination of waterfowl, the company that conducted the study, focused on Canada geese and Mute Swans due to the two species being blamed most often in cases of elevated bacteria found in water bodies (Cameron Engineering & Associates, LLP, 2012). In order to assess potential pathogen loads from each source the company utilized multiple strategies (Cameron Engineering & Associates, LLP, 2012). Scientific literature reviews, pet ownership surveys, and census data were employed in determining how to calculate estimates for pathogen loads (Cameron Engineering & Associates, LLP, 2012). For the waterfowl analysis, the company conducted a population survey of all waterfowl around the estuary and inserted the count totals into a mathematic formula (Cameron Engineering & Associates, LLP, 2012). The formula accounted for the location of the birds around the estuary and how much fecal coliform per bird was released each day according to previous studies (Cameron Engineering & Associates, LLP, 2012).

The study found that the population of ducks in many locations around the estuary was the same or greater than the population of Canada geese (Cameron Engineering & Associates, LLP, 2012). Regarding these observations, the report stated: This finding is of critical concern to this study because the daily production of fecal coliform that is reported for a duck (see table 3-2) is approximately 1,000 times greater than that for a Canada goose and over 150 times higher than that for a mute swan. (Cameron Engineering & Associates, LLP, 2012). Additionally, the report found that the standard amount of fecal coliform released per day by Canada geese varied within literature on the subject (Cameron Engineering & Associates, LLP, 2012). They described high quantities for Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) reports, with the highest amount (amongst the papers they reviewed) belonging to a report from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (Cameron Engineering & Associates, LLP, 2012). Lower figures came from research in scholarly papers, which are thoroughly scrutinized by other researchers and publishers (Cameron Engineering & Associates, LLP, 2012). Meanwhile the TMDL reports often cited weak evidence or studies that were not reviewed by others in the field (Cameron Engineering & Associates, LLP, 2012). The USEPA’s approximated amount came from a paper published in 1978 which contrived the standard quantity through the correlation of results not directly involving the connection between coliform and Canada geese (Cameron Engineering & Associates, LLP, 2012). The report concluded with the suggestion that ducks are more likely to be one of the biggest contributors to E. coli loading in the estuary than Canada geese (Cameron Engineering & Associates, LLP, 2012).

Lake Ronkonkoma has a history of being in turmoil when it comes to water quality. The sporadic beach closures that have occurred for years due to elevated bacteria go back at least as far as 2003 (Nelson & Voorhis, 2008). Suspicions about Canada geese as a major source appeared in a New York Times article published in 2004, where geese feces were referred to as the “most problematic” material found in storm water runoff which enters the lake (Everitt, 2004). In 2015, the situation had not changed. In an article from Newsday published in July, Canada geese were said to be the source of elevated E. coli levels that caused closures of the Ronkonkoma several times over the summer (Chang, 2015).

E. coli exists in the bodies of people as well as animals, but not every type of E. coli puts people at risk of becoming sick (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), n.d.). However, coming into contact with feces can increase the chances of illness due to the types of bacteria, including E. coli that can exist within it. Additionally, it is important to distinguish between fecal coliform and E. coli. Fecal coliforms are a type of bacteria, and E. coli is a type of fecal coliform (CDC, n.d.). According to Dana Flint, an employee with the USEPA Watershed Management Branch, New York State does not require information on E. coli levels from water bodies to be submitted to the NYSDEC and USEPA for regulation in accordance with water quality laws. However, she explained that the state does require that coliform values are submitted. Although many people implicate Canada geese as the source of inadequate water quality and/or E. coli for some Long Island water bodies, in most cases the belief is not grounded in a definitive link between the geese and bacteria in the water. Rather, the idea seems to come from observations of geese in the water and in some cases the knowledge that Canada goose feces contains E. coli. The USEPA, NYSDEC, and local Long Island health departments work together to monitor and establish safety regulations for water quality on Long Island. However, information collected through interviews contrasts with assumptions made about geese conclusively being a large source or the main source of bacteria in the water over other sources. Dana Flint confirmed that the USEPA does not have established guidelines to determine a link between certain bacteria levels or types and Canada geese. According to Mike Jensen, a Supervisor for the Suffolk County Department of Health Services, it is only a hypothesis that Canada geese cause elevated bacteria levels at Lake Ronkonkoma-one which arose due to staff observing geese when they sample water. Furthermore, Mark Rothstein, a Director for the Nassau County Department of Health said Canada geese are only suspected to be the source of elevated bacteria in some Long Island water bodies. Thus, it would appear that the only study showing scientific evidence for a possible link between the geese and bacteria on Long Island was the 2013 Goldsmiths Inlet study (Brousseau & Curatolo-Wagermann, 2013).

During a 2009 study for the Nassau County Department of Public Works, de Bruin Engineering, PC sampled water from Merokee Pond in Bellmore, NY and the water sources feeding into it (deBruin Engineering, P.C., 2009). The goal was to examine water quality there and make subsequent management suggestions (deBruin Engineering, P.C., 2009). After testing for coliform they concluded that Canada geese may be the source for increased bacteria levels in the water after storms (deBruin Engineering, P.C., 2009). Additional sanitation concerns The majority of the Long Island municipalities interviewed for this report cited feces as their number one complaint from the public regarding Canada geese. The complaints about feces within the districts surround different facets, from concerns about contracting illnesses to general messiness. Some cited complaints from parents who were unhappy that the feces would get on their children’s clothing while they played or participated in athletic events. These concerns sometimes intertwined with fears about sickness caused by bacteria from the feces. Others expressed unease with geese leaving behind droppings on their lawns. Bird strikes Birds are a threat to aviation safety, and Long Island airports have experienced their own share of accidents from bird strikes. From 2000 to 2014, there have been 43 Canada geese bird strikes between John F. Kennedy International Airport, LaGuardia Airport, Francis S. Gabreski Airport, Republic Airport, and MacArthur Airport (Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), n.d). MacArthur Airport and Francis S. Gabreski Airport had the least, with both having just one incident, followed by Republic Airport with four (FAA, n.d). John F. Kennedy International Airport had 19 and LaGuardia had 18 (FAA, n.d). In an article published by Newsday on June 28, 2015 it was reported that the overall number of bird strikes throughout the nation is increasing, and Joseph Sitt, Chairman of the Global Gateway Alliance was quoted as saying bird strikes would always be a hazard in New York due to the airports being in the Atlantic Flyway and near wildlife habitat (Ruud, 2015). The Airbus engines were tested to withstand the impact of a single bird weighing less than five pounds, according to Greg Feith, a former National Transportation Safety Board investigator. –Wall Street Journal “Double Engine Bird Strike Is Incredibly Rare (Pasztor, 2009).

One of the most well-known bird strike incidents occurred on January 15, 2009, when Canada geese flew into the engines of Airbus 320 which departed from LaGuardia Airport (FAA), n.d). The pilot safely landed the plane on the Hudson River and the incident brought national attention to the danger of bird strikes, resulting in increased fears about the presence of Canada geese at airports (Fallon, 2009). Though smaller birds such as doves and pigeons collide with planes most often, as the size of a bird increases, so does the likelihood that it will cause significant damage to an aircraft (FAA, n.d.). Due to the average size of Canada geese and the fact that several of them struck the Airbus 320 in 2009, it is no surprise that the pilot could not regain control of the engines to land at an airport once the damage was done. The size of Canada geese in comparison to smaller birds, combined with the subsequently increased risk of severe damage to aircraft is likely the reason for the heightened focus on their presence at airports.

Informing the public after a close call After the Airbus 320 incident the Port Authority created a program geared towards public education about wildlife hazards at airports. The program consisted of staff from different departments in the Port Authority and informed people about wildlife hazards and what the airports do to manage wildlife in the area. Referring to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s terrorism awareness slogan Laura Francoeur, Chief Wildlife Biologist for the Port Authority explained, “A big part of that [the program] was just like ‘If you see ….something, say something’ [in regards to geese presence].” She went on to say that after the program was initiated people began to call in about geese being on roadways leading to the airport and in other areas

Port Authority of New York and New Jersey LaGuardia and John F. Kennedy International Airport Laura Francoeur, Chief Wildlife Biologist for the Port Authority confirmed that bird strikes are the only issue with the geese at John F. Kennedy Airport and said that it is a struggle to keep the geese off of airport property and out of the airspace. She added that in the winter it is even more difficult to keep the geese away because the frozen water near the bay reduces available food sources for the geese, which forces them onto the land at the airport. Francis S. Gabreski Airport Airport Manager Anthony Ceglio said that the movement of geese through the airport is considered an issue, though bird strikes have been prevented through tower personnel. He explained that seeing geese near the airport, staff will warn pilots or hold pilots until the geese pass by. Mr. Ceglio attributes the geese movement to the adjacent Quogue Wildlife Refuge, which he said provides habitat for the geese. He added that the geese pass through the airport to reach the refuge, and occasionally land on the airfield to forage. MacArthur Airport Robert Schneider, the Deputy Commissioner and Director of Operations at MacArthur Airport says bird strikes are the main concern of the airport. He said that aircraft utilizing the airport usually experience bird strikes with European Starlings, not Canada geese. Republic Airport According to John Lauth, Airport Operations Manager, wildlife assessments done at the airport showed that 14% of wildlife strikes from 1990-2011 were from Canada geese. He also said that bird strikes are the only concern there.

Destruction of vegetation Many establishments on Long Island claim that Canada geese do physical damage to their property. The diet of Canada geese consists of various types of grasses and the Long Island landscape provides acres of grass that are easily accessed by the geese (NYSDEC, n.d). In addition, the grass happens to sometimes be in the vicinity of open water bodies, making them an even stronger attractant (NYSDEC, 2007). Across the island many golf courses, parks, and lawns have experienced damage to their grass from overgrazing and defecation. Brian Benedict, Superintendent of the Seawane Club in Hewlett, NY described the damage to the golf course: Pecking of turf to the point where there is no tissue left and left to dirt. The droppings have urea in them so large piles of Goose droppings create burn spots. During the winter it is worse because the turf isn’t growing and recovering. During snow events when only a few areas are exposed and most of the turf is under snow cover they congregate in the areas of exposed grass / tissue and devour those areas down to the dirt; resulting in resodding in the spring. [sic] Timothy Benedict, Superintendent of the Woodmere Club in Woodmere, NY also described a similar situation: Typically geese will eat the grass right down to the crowns sometimes pulling the whole plant. Several municipalities on Long island report that Canada geese consume a lot of grass within their districts. According to Gerry Castro, a Village Clerk for the Village of Hewlett Harbor, Canada geese overgraze on the lawns of residents. Harry Weed, Superintendent of Public Works for the Village of Rockville Centre cited struggles with overgrazing on village athletic fields. Richard Groh, Chief Environmental Analyst for the Town of Babylon said that the town has overgrazing issues from the geese in parks. Georgine Posillico, a Village Official for the Village of Saltaire described issues with Canada geese eating the sod put down on a newly restored athletic field. Another type of grass that Canada geese consume is eelgrass, an aquatic type of grass found in brackish or salt water along the shores of eastern Long Island (Short, Koch, Creed, Magalhaes, Fernandez, & Gaeckle, 2006). The grass has been found to be in a state of decline, and efforts to restore the grass are threatened by human and wildlife factors (Cornell Cooperative Extension, n.d). According to researchers from the Cornell Cooperative Extension Eelgrass Program, Canada geese were recently observed to be feeding on eelgrass on Long Island shores (Cornell Cooperative Extension, n.d). Canada geese are considered to be a real threat to eelgrass restoration due to findings from previous studies which showed that the geese are capable of causing significant damage to eelgrass beds (Short et al., 2006). A technical report from 2003 by the Long Island Sound Study suggested that eelgrass restoration could be more successful through the management of birds that reduce its quantities (Long Island Sound Study, 2003). Additionally, according to Andrew Clapper, a District Supervisor for the USDA, the eastern end of Long Island encounters issues with Canada geese eating agricultural crops.

Aesthetics A part of the unease with which goose droppings are met is due to its appearance. Some parks departments on Long Island struggle to clean up Canada geese feces which dots park pathways. Homeowners are also displeased with its appearance on their lawns. Frank Camerlengo, the Deputy Commissioner of Nassau County Parks said that two ponds that were constructed in Eisenhower Park and Christopher Morley Park have become green and acquired an unpleasant smell due to up to 20 inches of goose feces on the bottom of them. He added that the pond at Christopher Morley Park has become so unpleasant it will be filled in. Nesting and Aggression

Mated Canada geese pairs remain together throughout their lives and nest on the ground each year during February and March (NYSDEC, 2007). According to Tom Licata, Assistant Director for the Department of Environmental Resources at the Town of Oyster Bay, the nests are concentrated around water bodies, with the male standing sentinel to guard the eggs as the female incubates them. Nests can create two potential issues in the eyes of Long Island residents. Besides the fact that a nest sighting represents a possible increase in the local resident geese populations, aggression from the geese while protecting their eggs is also a concern. According to Lindsay Ries, a Wildlife Biologist for the National Park Service at Fire Island, two pairs of Canada geese nest near the Patchogue Ferry Terminal in Patchogue, NY each year. She said that out of fear for public safety from goose aggression, the National Park Service at Fire Island staff use management strategies to discourage the geese from residing in the area. Despite several mentions of the potential hazard, the only incidents of attacks from Canada geese reported during interviews for this report were from private goose management companies. Traffic Every year the lifecycle of resident Canada geese meets with the daily activities of human beings. Perhaps one of the most unfortunate examples is on roadways. A New York State Department of Transportation employee said that detailed records on accidents with geese are not kept by the agency. However, the person did mention that there was an accident that occurred in the summer of 2015 on the Meadowbrook Parkway where one to two Canada geese were hit and multiple rear end collisions occurred as a result.

“I was driving three years ago on the Meadowbrook Parkway after noon on a weekday by exit M3 going north [sic]. Two adult Canada Geese with their four young crossed in front of my car while I was going 55 miles per hour. My passenger screamed and I came to a full stop. The cars behind me avoided hitting me and just went to either side of me. I immediately started up again. I have no idea what happened to any of the geese. I could have had a serious accident. That is when I started oiling eggs for the Town of North Hempstead [sic]. This environment is too urban or suburban for wild animals such as Canada Geese.” –Peggy Maslow, Vice President, North Shore Audubon Society

Though data on accidents involving Canada geese are not available, it can be said that several Long Island entities are worried about road safety. Airport Manager Anthony Ceglio explained that Francis S. Gabreski Airport experiences Canada geese crossing the main entranceway to the airport. Although there have not been any accidents in the past few years according to Mr. Ceglio, he did cite it as an issue. According to Bob Lietzke, Environmental Programs Coordinator for the Town of Huntington, Canada geese have nests next to ponds near Park Avenue. He added that during the molting season the geese walk across Park Avenue and New York State Route 25a, creating traffic concerns because people stop to let them across. Gerry Castro, a Village Clerk for the Village of Hewlett Harbor and Bob Barra, a Village Clerk for the Village of Valley Stream both said that their villages experience geese crossing roadways and that they consider it a hazard. Abundance

Despite the lack of definitive population estimates for Canada geese on Long Island, it can be said that the geese have been seen on a great deal of designated natural and human made land area types. The birds inhabit lawns, parks, athletic fields, golf courses, beaches, nature preserves, river banks, and land surrounding lakes, ponds, and roadways. It is the proliferation of the geese throughout an expanded area which fuels conflicts between them and people. The geese even call recharge basins throughout Long Island their home, according to Christian Granelli, a planner for the Town of Huntington who is also involved in goose management. Nutrient loading/algae Canada goose feces contains nitrogen and phosphorous, and though these nutrients can be found naturally in water bodies, they can also be detrimental to water quality in large quantities (Unckless & Makarewicz, 2007) . Nitrogen and phosphorous are essential to plant growth, however excess plant growth can remove dissolved oxygen fr om the water , r esulting in a condition called hypoxia (NYDEC, n.d). Bob Lietzke, Environmental Programs Coordinator for the Town of Huntington explained that some of the water bodies in the town have been experiencing increased algae growth, and that Canada geese feces are suspected to be the cause.

Canada geese walk near a dog silhouette at Our Lady of Mercy Convent in Syosset, NY Credit: Bill Alemaghides

Public Complaints Data on public complaints can be used to reflect the magnitude of a conflict within a specified area. Not all entities on Long Island keep detailed records about complaints regarding Canada geese, and sometimes only estimates from personal experiences are available. Below is a snapshot of public complaint numbers from around Long Island. Sources and contexts for each quantity are included.

Table 1. Annual Canada Geese Complaints on Long Island

Entity

Annual Number of Complaints

Source

How estimate was developed

Village of Hewlett Harbor

Gerry Castro, Village Clerk

Person experience estimate

Village of Rockville Centre

1-2

Village of Valley Stream

Town of Brookhaven

Anthony Graves, Chief Environmental Analyst

Person experience estimate

Town of Babylon

Richard Groh, Chief Environmental Analyst

Person experience estimate

Nassau Country Parks

Group for the East End

< 10

Harry Weed, Superintendent of Public Works Bob Barra, Village Clerk

Frank Camerlengo, Deputy Commissioner of Nassau Country Parks Aaron Virgin, Vice President

Person experience estimate Person experience estimate

Negative impacts on Canada geese from humans

Many of the park and municipality representatives on Long Island who were interviewed for this report mentioned that they observe people feeding Canada geese, regardless of whether signs saying not to feed them were posted. Artificial feeding of Canada geese and other water fowl can cause damage to their health (NYDEC, n.d). Although many people feed waterfowl at parks and other public establishments with the interpretation that they are caring for the animals, the opposite is actually occurring. The NYSDEC’s website describes the problems caused by artificial feeding (NYDEC, n.d). A few of the issues are described below (NYDEC, n.d). Malnutrition Many people who feed waterfowl give them food items which are not a part of their natural diet (NYDEC, n.d). These food products lack the nutrition that waterfowl require, and birds who consume them on a frequent basis can develop bodily deformities as a result (NYDEC, n.d). 

Illness Waterfowl who are fed artificially return often to the same location to feed (NYDEC, n.d). Large gatherings of the birds in the same place, increases the risk of disease transmission 

(NYDEC, n.d).

Disrupted life cycles Consistently being fed can encourage the birds to rely on people for food instead of seeking outtheir own (NYDEC, n.d). Sometimes birds will remain at an artificial feeding site instead of preparing to migrate (NYDEC, n.d). 

“…Residents themselves are causing the problems to escalate a little bit more by feeding them….You’re actually doing more harm physically to the goose by feeding it the breads and all the other stuff than you are helping it. And you’re also causing them to be comfortable and stay.” -Tom Licata, Assistant Director for the Department of Environmental Resources at the Town of Oyster Bay

Management 1. Strategies Management of Canada geese on Long Island is overseen by the USFWS, USDA, and NYSDEC. The goal of the agencies regarding resident Canada geese is to reduce the population to 85,000 in New York (NYSDEC, n.d). While all three agencies provide information on management techniques for the geese, only the USDA employs management strategies for the geese on a regular basis. Many establishments on Long Island take on management strategies themselves whilst adhering to state and federal legislation. This section describes and details the techniques used for different establishments. Airports The Federal Avian Administration (FAA) mandates that if an airport has had incidents of aircraft collisions with wildlife in its operating history then it must create a Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (Airport Cooperative Research Program, 2013). The programs must abide by state and federal laws pertaining to wildlife management as well as FAA regulations for such programs (Rillstone & Dineen, 2013). A snapshot of management strategies at Long Island airports: Port Authority of New York and New Jersey LaGuardia and John F. Kennedy International Airport Laura Francoeur, Chief Wildlife Biologist for the Port Authority explained that the Port Authority utilizes Canada goose management strategies on and off airport property. She added that LaGuardia Airport and John F. Kennedy International Airport use a variety of techniques such as lasers, paintballs, pyrotechnics, and vehicles to harass geese. Ms. Francoeur also mentioned that lethal methods are used. A passive strategy is also in place, she explained, in the form of tall fescue plantings. According to Ms. Francoeur, the fescue is a type of grass that has been altered by growers with an endophyte which makes consuming the grass less appealing to the geese. Francis S. Gabreski Airport Airport Manager Anthony Ceglio explained that the airport utilizes wooden dog silhouettes on rods that rotate with wind direction to scare Canada geese away. He said that the technique is successful as the geese do not land on the airport anymore. Mr. Ceglio stated that the silhouettes were placed around the airport approximately two years ago and have remained there throughout the year. Brookhaven Calabro Airport According to Martin Haley, Commissioner of General Services and Management for the airport, there are no issues with Canada geese so the airport does not use any management strategies.

MacArthur Airport Robert Schneider, Deputy Commissioner and Director of Operations for the airport explained that several strategies are used to manage Canada geese there as part of their Wildlife Hazard Management Program. He said that the airport has ten air cannons which go off on a timer every fifteen minutes and make a loud noise to scare the geese and that if that is unsuccessful then pyrotechnics are used. Mr. Schneider also stated that a shotgun is used only a few times per year if the other techniques are not successful.

Republic Airport John Lauth, Airport Operations Manager said that the airport uses a variety of management methods for Canada geese. Cracker shells from shotguns which make a loud noise and propane air cannons which go off during cloudy conditions are two strategies used to scare geese away from the airport, he explained. He also mentioned that electronic owls that make screeching sounds are placed around the airport to scare the geese.

Golf courses Attempts to manage Canada geese on Long Island golf courses stem from a variety of conflicts as previously described. Golf course literature describes the geese as a potential issue and recommends methods to mitigate damage they can cause. A report titled “Best management practices for New York State Golf Courses” warns that Canada geese and other waterfowl may contaminate water and suggests water quality monitoring for golf courses (Portmess, Grant, Jordan, & Rossi, 2014). Goose management strategies are also incorporated into pest control initiatives for lands including golf courses. A 2007 Integrated Pest Management Program report for Nassau County recommended planting tall species of grass around water bodies on golf courses and in parks to avert geese (Cornell Cooperative Extension, 2007). The report suggested that the grass would serve as a natural boundary around the water thus making access to the water difficult (Cornell Cooperative Extension, 2007). On Long Island Canada goose management mostly employs the herding and chasing skills of dogs. A snapshot of management strategies at Long Island golf courses: The Woodmere Club According to Timothy Benedict, Superintendent, the club uses two dogs, a Border Collie and an Australian Shepard, to chase geese on a daily basis. He noted that previously, the club utilized pyrotechnics to ward off the geese. Atlantic Golf Club W. James Matthers, General Manager, explained that the golf course does not use any management strategies for Canada geese. He attributed their lack of presence on the course to corn fields and a pond which are adjacent to it. He explained that these features are a bigger attractant for the geese than the golf course, so the course does not experience issues with them.

The Seawane Club Golf Course Superintendent Brian Benedict explained that the only management strategy used for Canada geese on the golf course is the use of two Border Collies that herd the geese away each day. He noted that previously the club used decoys in the shape of coyotes but found them to be unsuccessful in keeping geese off the property. Gull Haven Golf Club; St. George’s Golf and Country Club; Windwatch Golf and Country Club Kristine Schmidt, President and owner of Environmental Geese Control stated that her company provides goose management services for the golf course. Municipalities Strategies utilized by municipalities are diverse and range from actively hazing geese to enacting laws to discourage their presence. Information on Canada goose management in the following counties, towns, and villages was available for this report. Queens and Kings Counties Andrew Clapper, a District Supervisor for the USDA, the USDA does population estimates of Canada geese in New York City parks within a seven mile radius of New York City airports. He explained that the estimates are only done at parks which the USDA has determined to have ideal environmental settings for the geese.

Hunting is the best management tool we have [for ducks and geese],’ Harry Knock, regional wildlife supervisor [New York State Department of Environmental Conservation]” –“Toxic Ducks Worry Hunters” (Lederer, 1981)

Nassau County The county has enacted legislation related to Canada goose management. Local Law Number 7 prohibits the feeding of migratory waterfowl on county property (Nassau County, 2007). The fine for an initial offense is $100 to $500 (Nassau County, 2007). An additional violation within five years will warrant a fine ranging from $250 to $750 (Nassau County, 2007).

Nassau County Parks According to Frank Camerlengo, Deputy Commissioner of Nassau County Parks, the parks department collaborates with the USDA to manage Canada geese. He said that USDA has captured the geese in Nassau County parks about three times in the last four years and processed the meat for food pantries. Mr. Camerlengo added that the USDA has also done egg oiling sporadically for the past four years in Grant Park, Inwood Park, and North Woodmere Park. He also provided the information that for the past several years the county has used the Geese Peace program, which services all county facilities with goose hazing by Border Collies. In addition, he said that signs are posted throughout the parks to dissuade people from feeding the geese and that dog silhouettes are also up. Mr. Camerlengo expressed that he personally felt that all of the management techniques have been greatly successful and have reduced the goose population in the last four years. Town of North Hempstead In 2005, the town began using the Geese Peace program, but by 2013 they had entered into a controversy when they planned to let the USDA euthanize hundreds of geese in town parks (Chauvin, 2005; Tedesco, 2013). They ultimately decided not to go through with the plan as a result of pressure from animal rights groups and the public (Tedesco, 2013). According to Ryan Mulholland, Deputy Commissioner of Communications, the town currently uses management strategies which follow the Geese Peace model for Canada goose management. to haze geese. He added that there are signs up dissuading people from feeding geese in Ridders Pond Park and Roslyn Pond Park.

Town of Oyster Bay According to Tom Licata, Assistant Director for the Department of Environmental Resources, town employees draw upon knowledge from Geese Peace training and information from the NYSDEC to manage Canada geese. He said that three border collies are used in three zones within the town to chase geese. Mr. Licata added that the town used to be involved with private entities, but now only provide services for the town. He expressed that he found the use of Border Collies to be successful. He said that the town’s Department of Environmental Resources is responsible for all Canada goose management, and that residents can sign a waiver if a nest is on their property for egg oiling services, but any other management needs are the homeowner’s responsibility. Mr. Licata also confirmed that signs are up in the town dissuading people from feeding the geese. A 2005 news article mentioned that a method the town used in the past was flying hawk shaped kites to scare geese away (Karppi, 2005). The town also has also enacted legislation involving Canada geese. Ordinance §103-20 prohibits the feeding of migratory waterfowl on town property (Town of Oyster Bay, n.d). An initial offense can be penalized with a $100 to $500 fine (Town of Oyster Bay, n.d). If the ordinance is violated again within five years, the fine can range from $250 to $750 (Town of Oyster Bay, n.d). The following villages have Canada goose management programs in place, the details of which are not known: Village of Laurel Hollow, Village of Cove Neck, Village of Oyster Bay Cove, Village of Muttontown, Village of Upper Brookville, Village of Mill Neck, Village of Lattingtown (Oyster Bay Cold Spring Harbor Protection Committee, n.d.)

Canada geese on the golf course at the Woodcrest Club in Muttontown, NY Credit: Bill Alemaghides

Town of Hempstead According to the town’s website, the town utilizes the Geese Peace program to manage Canada geese through egg oiling and “nuisance abatement” (Town of Hempstead, n.d). The website also says that management services can be provided through the Town of Hempstead Department of Conservation and Waterways (Town of Hempstead, n.d). In February of 2014 the town passed legislation that makes it a violation to overfeed geese and other birds (Town of Hempstead, 2014). A New York Post article from 2010 reviewed some of the management methods that were used at the time-which included using a remote controlled car and boat to scare geese away, as well as border collies (Crowley, 2010). The article also mentioned that the town did egg oiling (Crowley, 2010). Village of Rockville Centre According to Harry Weed, Superintendent of Public Works, the village utilizes a remote control toy car on baseball and soccer fields as needed to haze Canada geese. He added that sometimes a green laser pointer is used at night to scare them away. Suffolk County

Town of Babylon Richard Groh, Chief Environmental Analyst explained that town employees have been trained by Geese Peace and use Border Collies to chase the geese daily in the morning and evening. He said that the dogs work in five parks in the town: Phelps Lane Park, Tanner Park, Venetian Shores Park, Van Bourgondien Park, and the town hall complex. Mr. Groh also mentioned that the town does egg oiling in the early spring and that signs are posted telling people not to feed the geese. Ordinance §106-40 prohibits feeding domestic or migratory waterfowl on town property (Town of Babylon, n.d). An initial offense warrants a fine ranging from $100 to $500 (Town of Babylon, n.d). An additional violation during a five year time span raises the penalty to a range of $250 to $750 (Town of Babylon, n.d). Town of Brookhaven Anthony Graves, Chief Environmental Analyst said that the town has one person who is licensed to do egg oiling, but little egg oiling is actually done. He confirmed that no other management takes place in the town but said that there are signs up saying that feeding the geese is prohibited. Town ordinance §10A-3 prohibits feeding waterfowl in any park (Town of Brookhaven, n.d). . The penalty can be either a fine up to $250 and/or up to ten days in jail (Town of Brookhaven, n.d). A storm water management plan for the town suggested that geese should not be fed and that distributed educational material should discuss geese and the risk of pathogen transmission (Town of Brookhaven, n.d).

Town of Huntington Christian Granelli, a Planner for the town said that egg oiling is done in late April for two to three days by staff trained by Geese Peace, himself included. However, he said he could not tell if the oiling has been successful for goose population reduction as no population estimates are done. He also mentioned that about 10 years ago Border Collies were used to haze geese. According to Bob Lietzke, Environmental Programs Coordinator, the town has tried to offset what is suspected to be the effects of goose feces by releasing 36 sterilized Asian grass carp two years ago to reduce algae growth in Heckscher Pond. Mr. Lietzke also said that there are signs up in the town discouraging people from feeding geese. Town ordinance §159-4 prohibits the feeding of wildlife in parks and a violation can carry a fine ranging from $50 to $1,000 (Town of Huntington, n.d). Town of Islip, Village of Saltaire In an effort to avert Canada geese from new sod on an athletic field, Georgine Posillico, a Village Official, said that decoy coyotes were used but they were not successful. She added that recently installed gas cannons that make noise every 20 minutes were effective but scared pet dogs, so the village is hoping to seek alternatives. Town of Riverhead Ordinance §112-2 prohibits the feeding of geese on town property and the fine for an offense is $50 (Town of Riverhead, n.d). . Town of Southampton According to Ed Warner, Jr., President of the Town of Southampton Trustees, there is no Canada goose management taking place in the town. Ordinance §150-14.1 prohibits feeding geese on public property (Town of Southhampton, n.d). The first offense fine ranges from $50 to $250, the second offense fine can be $100 to $250, and there is a penalty of $150 to $250 for any additional offenses (Town of Southhampton, n.d).

Town of Southold John Sepenoski, a GIS Technician stated that there is no management program currently in place for Canada geese in the town. Ideas from employees and members of the public drafted in “The New Comprehensive Plan for the Town of Southold” describe potentially creating plans to manage Canada geese in the future and to work with state and federal agencies to establish a year round hunting season for farmers to mitigate crop damage (Town of Southold, 2013). Ordinance §83-28 prohibits feeding waterfowl on public land or water and designates a $250 fine for a violation (Town of Southold, 2013).

Goose culls Goose culls have long been a controversial practice, and Long Island has not been isolated from the much debated management method. Frank Camerlengo explained that culls by the USDA have greatly reduced the goose population in Nassau County Parks and cited it as a benefit. However, organizations such as Long Island Orchestrating for Nature, Friends of Animals, and Goose Watch NYC have advocated against the cullings for years (Tedesco, 2013; Rao, 2012). Depending on the people or entity which applies for a permit, there are several methods that could potentially be used to cull geese.

A flyer for the Canada goose management program in the Town of Babylon (Reprinted with Permission) Credit: Adrienne Holmes and the Town of Babylon Environmental Control

2. Services Non-profit organizations Geese Peace is a national organization which aims to manage geese in a humane way (86). Their program for goose management encompasses several different strategies, including harassment of geese using Border Collies and lasers, egg oiling, and land modification (86). In using these techniques, the organization hopes to deescalate conflicts with Canada geese (86). Some municipalities on Long Island receive training from Geese Peace staff to manage geese on their property (86). Private companies Goose management companies on Long Island operate through the talents of Border Collies and their handlers. Border Collies are working dogs that were originally bred to herd sheep in England. Today they are still widely trained as herding dogs, and on Long Island they use their skills to chase Canada geese. There are at least five companies operating on Long Island as goose management services which use Border Collies to chase geese away.

Jade, a Border Collie with Long Island Geese Control, swims after a Canada goose at Islip High School Credit: Freddy Bayer Courtesy of Bill Alemaghides

A closer look at goose management service operations

Town of Huntington

Figure 4. Eggs oiled ar ound the Town of Huntington dur ing 2014

Credit: Christian Granelli

Figure 5. Number of eggs oiled in the Town of Huntington by year

Town of North Hempstead

2011: 179 eggs oiled through the Geese Peace program (56)

2012: 188 eggs oiled through the Geese Peace program (57) Credit: Peter Radunzel (Image modified by adding text boxes and border)

Town of Oyster Bay

Figure 6. Number of eggs oiled in the Town of Oyster Bay by year (58) Table 2. . Selected inter view r esponses fr om two pr ivate goose management companies.

Most service requests occur Attempted attacks by geese during time of operation Type of establishment serviced the most Most common reason people want geese moved from their property Service request demand over time

Long Island Goose Control, Est. 1998 Interviewee: Bill Alemaghides, Jr. President

Environmental Geese Control Est. 2002 Interviewee: Kristine Schmidt President and Owner

Spring and Winter

Spring and Fall

Yes

Schools, gated communities

Office buildings, golf courses, parks, home owner associations

Excessive goose feces

Has increased

Laws Canada geese are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, which means that federal authorization is required in order to kill, capture, hunt, breed, handle, harm, sell or move them permits (USFWS, n.d). The following summaries are intended to describe federal and state laws pertaining to Canada geese. The full contents of each law can be found within the code of federal regulations. Code of federal regulations Title 36- Parks, Forests, and Public Property PART 2—Resource Protection, Public Use and Recreation §2.2-Wildlife Protection In all U.S. parks holding, handling, feeding, touching, or killing wildlife is a violation of federal law (National Park Service (NPS), n.d.). Hunting and trapping of wildlife is permitted with federal authorization only, and equipment must be in accordance with federal regulations (NPS, n.d.). Title 50- Wildlife and Fisheries §21.49-Control order for resident Canada geese at airports and military airfields This control order grants permission to all U.S. airports to create and employ Canada goose management programs if they are determined to be a danger to aircraft operation (U.S. Government Publishing Office (GPO), n.d.). The programs may include a variety of management techniques including harassment, trapping, egg oiling, and lethal methods, so long as more than one method is used (GPO, n.d.) The use of each method must adhere to time frames when they are authorized (GPO, n.d.). Egg and nest management can only occur between March 1 and June 30 of each year, while capture, the use of pharmaceuticals, trapping, and other lethal methods can only occur from April 1 to September 15 (GPO, n.d.). Title 50- Wildlife and Fisheries §21.50- Depredation order for resident Canada geese nests and eggs This depredation order grants permission to people who own land privately or publicly to manage resident Canada geese on their property through the destruction of eggs or nests (GPO, n.d.). Landowners and staff can only engage in such practices after registering for a permit online (GPO, n.d.). Depredation techniques can only be used to protect people or property and cannot be used if they have a negative impact on species listed under the Endangered Species Act (GPO, n.d.). Title 50- Wildlife and Fisheries §21.51- Depredation order for resident Canada geese at agricultural facilities This depredation order grants permission to agricultural facilities to employ non-lethal and lethal management strategies in order to mitigate harm to agriculture related properties (GPO, n.d.). Egg and nest management can only occur between March 1 and June 30 of each year, while capture, the use of pharmaceuticals, trapping, and other lethal methods can only occur from May 1 to August 31 (GPO, n.d.).

Title 50- Wildlife and Fisheries §21.52- Public health control order for resident Canada geese In this public health control order, permission is granted to wildlife departments in state and Tribal governing bodies to utilize non-lethal and lethal management strategies for resident Canada geese if it is determined that they are hazards to public health (GPO, n.d.).

Hunting Regulations The following is a summary of hunting information for Canada geese on Long Island and is not extended to be exhaustive. Visit the NYSDEC website for complete details. Hunters wishing to hunt Canada geese on Long Island must abide by federal guidelines regarding equipment (GPO, n.d.). Hunting geese also requires that the hunter be registered with the Harvest Information Program so that the USFWS can select people to take harvest surveys (USFWS, n.d). The survey information contributes to data regarding the species and quantities of birds that are being harvested (USFWS, n.d). Registration can be done by phone by calling 1-888-427-5447 or visiting www.ny-hip.com (NYSDEC, n.d.). Hunters must also use ammunition that is not poisonous to birds and abide by bag limits (NYSDEC, n.d.). The seasons in which hunting Canada geese is allowed may change from year to year, and there are four areas on Long Island where hunting geese is permitted (NYSDEC, n.d.). Each of the areas has very specific boundaries which divide them, and the hunting season varies between each one (NYSDEC, n.d.). The areas are Western Long Island, Central Long Island, Eastern Long Island, and Special Late Hunting Area, which is smaller than the former three and lies within the Central Long Island Hunting Area (NYSDEC, n.d.).

A timeline of hunting regulation changes for hunting Canada geese on Long Island Bag Limit: 3 per day (Bryant, 1981) 1981

Notable season changes: Accor ding to an ar ticle published in the New Yor k times in 1981, the NYSDEC extended the hunting season by 20 days to prevent Canada geese from settling in one area for too long (Lederer, 1981). Bag Limit: 1-3 per day (Lederer, 1981)

1994

1995

Notable season changes: Accor ding to an ar ticle published in the New Yor k times in 1994, the bag limit for migratory Canada geese started out as just one for the beginning of the season, then increased up to two or three by the end of the season, because the migratory Canada goose population had decreased (Lederer, 1981) Bag Limit: N/A Notable season changes: The fall hunting season for migr ator y Atlantic Population Canada geese was suspended in most states in the Atlantic Flyway, including New York, due to population declines (Dunn & Jacobs, 2000)

1996

Bag Limit: Unknown Notable season changes: The fall hunting season for Atlantic Population Canada geese was suspended due to population declines, with the exception of selected states which were permitted to hold special seasons for resident geese (Snow & Rose, 1996). On Long Island, hunting Canada geese was permitted in only one area in Nassau County (Kellerman, 1996).

1998

Bag Limit: Unknown Notable season changes: Accor ding to a 1998 New Yor k Post article, the Long Island zone was one of a few areas in New York State where the fall hunting season for Canada geese was not suspended (Moran, 1998). Bag Limit: 2 for some ar eas in New Yor k (Long Island unconfir med) (Mor an, 2003)

2002

2004

2013

Notable season changes: Nine goose hunting ar eas wer e cr eated for New Yor k to specify where Canada geese could be hunted (Moran, 2004). Previously, hunters could choose locations to hunt Canada geese within the five waterfowl hunting zones (Moran, 2004). Bag Limit: 8 per day (Moran, 2004) Notable season changes: Incr eased bag limit of eight geese per day (Mor an, 2004). Bag Limit: 15 per day (NYSDEC, n.d) Notable season changes: Sever al changes wer e made to this hunting season in the name of attempting to reduce resident Canada goose population numbers (NYSDEC, n.d). The bag limit was increased from 8 to 15, daily hunting hours were extended, and the use of additional specified types of hunting equipment was allowed (NYSDEC, n.d)

Resources for Long Island Residents Goose management resources for all Long Island residents USDA 

Andrew Clapper, a District Supervisor for the USDA says that residents can call his office at (718) 553-3514 for advice and management services.

NYSDEC 

DEC Region 1 (Nassau and Suffolk Counties) (631) 444-0200 for advice (NYSDEC, n.d)



DEC Region 2 (Kings and Queens Counties) (718) 482-4900 for advice (NYSDEC, n.d)

Private companies which provide goose management services 

Geese Off, Phone: (845) 278-0472 (Geese Off, 2010)



Geese Chasers (Nassau, Suffolk, Queens Counties only), Phone: (844) 544-3373 (Geese Chasers, n.d.)



Long Island Geese Control. Phone: (631) 656-7084 (LI Geese Control, n.d)



Environmental Geese Control (Nassau and Suffolk Counties only). Phone: (631) 827-2900 Email: envirogeese@yahoo.com (Environmental Geese Control, n.d)

Goose waste removal service 

Scoopy Doo. Phone: (516) 676-0083 (Scoopy Doo, n.d)

Goose management service 

Geese Peace, Email: info@geesepeace.com (Geese Peace, n.d)

Resources for residents in selected municipalities for which information was available. For municipalities that are not listed, residents can call the USDA or NYSDEC. Kings County 

Call the USDA or NYSDEC at numbers listed above

Queens County 

Call the USDA or NYSDEC at numbers listed above

Nassau County 

Town of Oyster Bay

Tom Licata, Assistant Director for the Department of Environmental Resources says residents can call the Town of Oyster Bay Department of Environmental Resources. The phone number for the department is (516) 677-5811 (Town of Oyster Bay, n.d.) Suffolk County 

Town of Babylon

Richard Groh, Chief Environmental Analyst says residents can call town hall for advice. The town hall phone number is (631) 957-3000 (Town of Babylon, n.d.) From the town website: “Residents are encouraged to call Volunteers for Wildlife at (631) 423-0928 or the Star Foundation at (800) 564-5704 for concerns involving birds, ducks, geese and other fowl wildlife.” (Town of Babylon, n.d.) Town of Brookhaven Anthony Graves, Chief Environmental Analyst says residents can call the town hall for advice. The town hall phone number is (631) 451-8696 (Town of Brookhaven, n.d.). 



Town of Huntington

Bob Lietzke, Environmental Programs Coordinator says residents can call the town hall for advice. The town hall phone number is (631) 351-3000 (Town of Huntington, n.d.)

Hunting Information The NYSDEC can assist with information regarding hunting guidelines. For assistance, you can contact the Region 1 Office which serves Nassau and Suffolk County (631) 444-0200 or (718) 482-4900 for the Region 2 Office if you reside in Brooklyn or Kings Counties (NYSDEC, n.d.). Permit Information The NYSDEC can assist with information regarding permits. For assistance, you can contact the Region 1 Office which serves Nassau and Suffolk County (631) 444-0200 or (718) 482-4900 for the Region 2 Office if you reside in Brooklyn or Kings Counties (NYSDEC, n.d.)

People feed waterfowl in the Stony Brook area of Long Island Credit: Doug Kerr

Research Needs As previously mentioned, research studies pertaining to the ecology of Canada geese on Long Island are lacking. Though there are a variety of management strategies taking place to reduce the goose population there are no efforts to track the success rate of such strategies. Although citizen science efforts compose a significant contribution to scientific research, Long Island may benefit even more from scientific studies which focus on specific attributes of population dynamics-such as the existence of predators and resource availability. Furthermore, the concerns about water quality on Long Island and suspicions about the role of Canada geese in connection with such issues warrants examination of the matter. Though the technique of coliform sourcing is not completely developed, the pairing of statistical models with a DNA library such as was demonstrated by the Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County can strengthen investigations of water quality conflicts. Expanding research efforts for Canada geese on Long Island can help to ensure that resources are allocated to appropriate causes. Christian Granelli, a Planner for the Town of Huntington mentioned that groups of Canada geese are often found in recharge basins within the town. This observation carries with it implications for water quality management, as recharge basins filter water through the ground and the water may potentially reach drinking water sources (United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), n.d.). Studying water which has originated from recharge basins that serve as goose habitat may help to examine correlations between goose feces and elevated bacteria levels. As the definitive effects of egg oiling on the Long Island resident Canada goose population remain to be seen, so do the effects on the behavioral ecology of the geese. Since egg oiling has been taking place for years on Long Island, it would be useful to examine what kind of changes such nest disturbances may cause in the life cycle of the geese. One aspect that could be studied is whether the biological mechanisms of a pair of geese undergo changes as a reaction to experiencing failed reproduction attempts due to egg oiling. More specifically, one could observe whether failed reproduction attempts influence how long a pair stays together, even though they normally remain together throughout their lives except in the event of death. Lastly, it should be noted that goose feces was the most common concern voiced by interviewees, as well as the driving force for the implementation of many management strategies. Therefore, an evaluation of economic factors connected to goose feces conflicts would serve to more accurately measure the impact of resident Canada geese on Long Island. An assessment of goose feces or even goose presence and its effect on real estate values in the Long Island market could bolster the economic knowledge factored into goose management plans.

Bibliography Brousseau, L., and Curatolo-Wagemann, S. (2013). Goldsmiths Inlet: Coliform Enumeration and DNA Source Tracking, p. 1-35. Retrieved from http://www.southoldtownny.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1805 Bryant, N. (1981, October 5). Outdoors: Bit of optimism for waterfowler hunters. The New Y ork Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/1981/10/05/sports/outdoors-bit-of-optimism-for-waterfowlerhunters.html Cameron Engineering & Associates, LLP. (2012). Pathogen load assessment for the Peconic Estuary Program. Retrieved from http://www.peconicestuary.org/ reports/2b56f963d6f13cbabac732e7d3ab5e3eb1a0fc9f.pdf. Chang, S. (2015, July 23). More than three weeks of beach closures at Lake Ronkonkoma so far this summer. Newsday. Retrieved from http://www.newsday.com/long-island/suffolk/more-than-three-weeks -of-beach-closures-at-lake-ronkonkoma-so-far-this-summer-1.10668715. Chauvin, David. (2005, March 24). North Hempstead New Y ork. Retrieved from http://www.northhempsteadny.gov/content/7350/7121/4479/5043/5127.aspx. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d). E.coli (Escherichia coli: General Information. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/ecoli/general/ Cornell Cooperative Extension. (2007). Nassau Country storm water management program: Pollution prevention. Retrieved from http://www.nassaucountyny.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1303 Cornell Cooperative Extension Marine Program. (n.d). Seagrass.LI. Retrieved from http://www.seagrassli.org/

Cornell Lab of Ornithology. (n.d.). A ll A bout Bird: European Starling. Retrieved from http://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/European_Starling/id. Crowley, Kieran. (2010, July 26). Wild goose chase. New Y ork Post. Retrieved from http://nypost.com/2010/07/26/wild-goose-chase/ de Bruin Engineering, P.C. (2009. February 13). Merokee Pond, Bellmore. Retrieved from https://www.nassaucountyny.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1326 DeChillo, S. (1980, June 15). Annual Roundup of Geese Readied. The New Y ork Times. Retrieved from www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic

Dunn, J.P., and Jacobs, K.J (2000). Special resident Canada goose hunting season in Pennsylvania: Management implications for controlling resident Canada geese. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1044&context=icwdm_wdmconfproc eBird. (n.d). About eBird: Global tools for birders, critical data for science. Retrieved from http://ebird.org/content/ebird/about/ Environmental Geese Control. (n.d). Environmental Geese Control. Retrieved from http://www.environmentalgeese.com/ Everitt, D. (2004, November 28). Lake Ronkonkoma gets a makeover. The New Y ork Times. Retrieved from http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B07E4D7173EF93BA15752C1A9629C8B63 Fallon, S. (2009). Environmental work boosts fears of bird strikes at Teterboro airport. NorthJersey.com. Retrieved from http://www.northjersey.com/news/environmental-work-boosts-fears-of-bird-strikes-atteterboro-airport-1.1252537?page=all Federal Aviation Administration. (n.d.). Federal A viation A dministration: W ildlife Strike Database. Retrieved from http://wildlife.faa.gov/database.aspx Friends of the Bay. (2013). 2011/2012 Annual water quality report: Water quality monitoring program. Retrieved from http://friendsofthebay.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Final-Report-Pages-1-57.pdf Geese Chasers. (n.d.). Geese Chasers. Retrieved from http://longisland.geesechasers.com/ Geese Off. (2010). Geese Off. Retrieved from http://www.geeseoff.com/new-york/westchester/contact.php Geese Peace. (n.d.). Geese Peace. Retrieved from http://geesepeace.com/ Kaiman, J. ( 2012, January 25). Town of North Hempstead. Retrieved from http://www.northhempstead.com/filestorage/7350/7121/7546/State_of_the_Town_-_TownStat_2012.pdf Kaiman, J. ( 2013, January 30). Town of North Hempstead. Retrieved from http://www.northhempsteadny.gov/filestorage/7350/7121/7546/State_of_the_Town_2013_KEY_INDICATORS.pdf Karppi, Dagmar Fors. (2005. February 11). Oyster Bay Enterprise Pilot. Retrieved from http://www.antonnews.com/oysterbayenterprisepilot/2005/02/11/news/geese.html Kellerman, V. (1996 February 4) Ban on killing Canada geese poses a conservation predicament. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/1996/02/04/nyregion/ban-on-killing-canada-geeseposes-a-conservation-predicament.html

Lederer, T. (1981, November 15). Toxic ducks worry hunters. The New Y ork Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/1981/11/15/nyregion/toxic-ducks-worry-hunters.html Lederer, T (1994, October 5). Outdoors: Know the limits as seasons change. The New Y ork Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/1994/10/05/sports/outdoors-know-the-limits-as-seasonschange.html Long Island Sound Study. (2003). Long Island Sound habitat restoration initiative. Retrieved from http://longislandsoundstudy.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/LIS.Manual.pdf Long Island Geese Control. (n.d). Long Island Geese Control. Retrieved from http://www.longislandgeesecontrol.com/pages/contact.html. Montana State University. (n.d). What is an Endophyte. Retrieved from http://plantsciences.montana.edu/ facultyorstaff/faculty/strobel/endophytes.html. Moran, K. (1998 September 23). Duck hunters get final instructions. The New Y ork Post, Retrieved from www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic Moran, K. (2003 September 28). Waterfowl levels healthy. The New Y ork Post. Retrieved from http://nypost.com/2003/09/28/waterfowl-levels-healthy/ Moran, K. (2004, July 11). Schedule ahead for best waterfowl hunting. The New Y ork Post. Retrieved from http://nypost.com/2004/07/11/schedule-ahead-for-best-waterfowl-hunting/ Moran, K. (2004, October 3). Canadian conditions boost waterfowl season. The New Y ork Post. Retrieved from http://nypost.com/2004/10/03/canadian-conditions-boost-waterfowl-season/ Moran, K. (2006, October 18). Keep eye out for Avian Flu. New Y ork Post. Retrieved from http://nypost.com/2006/10/18/keep-eye-out-for-avian-flu/ National Audubon Society. (n.d.). History of the Christmas Bird Count. Retrieved from http://www.audubon.org/content/history-christmas-bird-count National Audubon Society. (2010). The Christmas Bird Count Historical Results. Retrieved from http://www.christmasbirdcount.org National Park Service (n.d.). Code of Federal Regulations, Title 36: Parks, Forests, and Public Property. Retrieved from http://www.nps.gov/goga/planyourvisit/upload/36%20CFR%202.2.pdf Nassau County. (2007). Local Law NO. 7. Retrieved from http://www.nassaucountyny.gov/ DocumentCenter/View/3053 Nelson, Pope and Voorhis, LLC. (2008). Lake Ronkonkoma clean lake study update. Retrieved from http://www.ronkonkomalakefoundation.org/page5/files/Main%20Text.pdf

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. (2007). When geese become a problem. Retrieved from http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/geeseproblem.pdf New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. (n.d.). Status of populations and harvest of Canada geese in New York. Retrieved from http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/ popharcangeesenys.pdf New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. (n.d.). Nuisance Canada geese. Retrieved from http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/7003.html New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. (n.d.) On-Line HIP Registration. Retrieved from http://www.ny-hip.com/ New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. (n.d.). Harmful Algal Blooms and marine biotoxins. Retrieved from http://www.dec.ny.gov/outdoor/64824.html New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. (n.d.). Tentative 2015-16 Canada goose seasons. Retrieved from http://www.dec.ny.gov/outdoor/28496.html New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. (n.d.). DEC announces changes to September Canada goose hunting seasons. Retrieved from http://www.dec.ny.gov/press/93076.html New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (n.d.). DEC Regional Office Directory. Retrieved from http://www.dec.ny.gov/about/558.html New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. (n.d.). Top ten water quality issues in New York State: Nutrient loadings and eutrophication. Retrieved from http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/water_pdf/ top10nutloading.pdf New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. (n.d.). Stop feeding waterfowl. Retrieved from http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/7001.html. Northeast Geese Removal. (n.d.). Northeast Geese Removal. Retrieved from http://www.northeastgeeseremoval.com/index.asp

Oyster Bay Cold Spring Harbor Protection Committee. (n.d.). Resident Canada geese Management Program. Retrieved from http://www.oysterbaycoldspringharbor.org/

Pasztor, A. (2009, January 16). Double engine bird strike is incredibly rare. W all Street Journal. Retrieved from http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123207391538888729 Pfoertner, Christie. (2011). Contamination and beach closures at Laurel Hollow Beach. Retrieved from https://you.stonybrook.edu/somas/files/2015/01/LIGRIsbuLauralHollow-2bxnxi7.pdf

Portmess, R.E., Grant, J.A., Jordan, B., and Ross, F.S. (2014). Best management practices for New York State gold courses. Retrieved from http://nysgolfbmp.cals.cornell.edu/ny_bmp_feb2014.pdf Rao, S. (2012, July 10). More than 700 Canada geese culled near JFK Airport. DNA Info. Retrieved from http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20120710/new-york-city/more-than-700-canada-geese-culled-near-jfkairport Rillstone, D.J., and Dineen, C.M. (2013). Airport Responsibility for Wildlife Management. Retrieved from http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/acrp/acrp_lrd_020.pdf. Ruud, C. (2015, June 28). Trouble takes wing: Bird strikes go up in NY and nationwide, even after efforts to curtail them. Newsday. Retrieved from www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic Seamans, T.W.., Clemons, S.E., and Gosser, A.L. (2009). Observations of neck-collared Canada geese near John F. Kennedy International Airport, New York. Human–Wildlife Interactions, p. 242-248. Scoopy Doo. (n.d.). Canadian geese waste removal. Retrieved from http://scoopydoony.com/canadian-geese/ Short, F.T., Koch, E.W., Creed, J.C., Magalhaes, K., Fernandez, E., and Gaeckle, J.L. (2006). SeagrassNet monitoring across the Americas: Case studies of seagrass decline. Marine Ecology, 27(4), 277-289. Snow, M. and Rose, S. (1996). Service proposes waterfowl hunting season limits. Retrieved from https://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/pressrel/96-49.html Tedesco, R. (2013, May 30). Town reconsiders geese-control policy. The Island Now. Retrieved from http://www.theislandnow.com/williston_park/news/town-reconsiders-geese-control-policy/article_f2c07cccc94b-11e2-b443-0019bb2963f4.html Town of Babylon. (n.d.). Town of Babylon, NY . Retrieved from http://ecode360.com/12392971? highlight=feeding,feed#12392971 Town of Babylon. n.d. Town of Babylon. Retrieved from www.townofbabylon.com/

Town of Brookhaven. n.d. Town of Brookhaven Town Directory. Retrieved from www.brookhaven.org/ Departments/Town-Directory Town of Brookhaven. n.d. Town of Brookhaven Code,. Retrieved from ecode360.com/8590237? highlight=feeding,feed#8590237 Town of East Hampton, NY. (n.d). Town of East Hampton, NY . Retrieved from http:// ecode360.com/29171271?highlight=feeding#29171271 Town of Hempstead. (n.d). Town of Hempstead. Retrieved from http://toh.li/geesepeace Town of Hempstead. (2014). Town of Hempstead. Retrieved from http://www.toh.li/news/1038-hempsteadtown-board-passes-legislation-to-restrict-overfeeding-ofTown of Huntington. (n.d.). Town of Huntington, NY . Retrieved from ://www.ecode360.com/7226508? highlight=wildlife#7226508 Town of Huntington. (n.d.) Town of Huntington. Retrieved from http://www.huntingtonny.gov/ Town of Oyster Bay. (n.d.). Town of Oyster Bay, NY . Retrieved from http://ecode360.com/26874811? highlight=feeding,feed#26874811 Town of Oyster Bay. (n.d.). Town of Oyster Bay. Retrieved from http://oysterbaytown.com/departments/ environmental-resources/ Town of Riverhead. (n.d.) Town of Riverhead, NY . Retrieved from http://ecode360.com/14537170? highlight=feeding,feed#14537168 Town of Southampton. (n.d.). Town of Southampton, NY . Retrieved from http://ecode360.com/16125320? highlight=feeding#16125320 Town of Southold. (2013). "Document Center." Retrieved from http://ny-southold.civicplus.com/ DocumentCenter/View/1720 Town of Southhold. (n.d.). Town of Southold. Retrieved from http://ecode360.com/16261939? highlight=feeding,feed#16261944 Unckless, R.L., and Makarewicz, J.C. (2007). The impact of nutrient loading from Canada Geese (Branta canadensis) on water quality, a mesocosm approach. Hydrobiologia, 586, 393-401. United States Department of Agriculture (2004). Canada Goose management in the State of New York. Retrieved from http://www.aphis.usda.gov/regulations/pdfs/nepa/NYgoose.pdf United States Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d.) United States Environmental Protection A gency. Retrieved from http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/swbmp/Infiltration-Basin.cfm

United States Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d.). Identifying polluted water and developing plans to restore them. Retrieved from http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa/tmdl/overviewoftmdl.cfm U.S. National Library of Medicine. (2015). What is DNA? Retrieved from https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/ basics/dna U.S. Department Of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration, U.S. (2014). Wildlife strikes to civil aircraft in the United States, 1990-2013. Retrieved from http://wildlife.faa.gov/downloads/Wildlife-StrikeReport-1990-2013-USDA-FAA.pdf U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Division of Congressional and Legislative Affairs. (n.d.) Digest of Federal Resource Laws of Interest to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Retrieved from https://www.fws.gov/laws/ lawsdigest/migtrea.html U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. (2015). "Waterfowl Population Status, 2015. Retrieved from http://flyways.us/ sites/default/files/uploads/statusreport2015_final_7-23-15.pdf U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (n.d.) Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program. Retrieved from http:// www.fws.gov/hip/

U.S. Government Publishing Office. Code of Federal Regulations: Title 50 - Wildlife and Fisheries, section 21.49 Retrieved from http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2014-title50-vol9/xml/CFR-2014-title50-vol9sec21-49.xml U.S. Government Publishing Office. (n.d). Code of Federal Regulations: Title 50 - Wildlife and Fisheries, section 21.50. Retrieved from http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2014-title50-vol9/xml/CFR-2014-title50vol9-sec21-50.xml U.S. Government Publishing Office. (n.d.) Code of Federal Regulations: Title 50 - Wildlife and Fisheries, section 21.51. Retrieved from http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2014-title50-vol9/xml/CFR-2014-title50vol9-sec21-51.xml U.S. Government Publishing Office. (n.d.). Code of Federal Regulations: Title 50 - Wildlife and Fisheries, section 21.52. Retrieved from http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2014-title50-vol9/xml/CFR-2014-title50vol9-sec21-52.xml U.S. Government Publishing Office. (n.d.). Code of Federal Regulations: Title 50 - Wildlife and Fisheries, section 20.21. Retrieved from http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx? SID=0f0da6939fad324834601b2049a34804&mc=true&node=se50.9.20_121&rgn=div8

Glossary of Terms Algae

Aquatic life form with similarities to plants (NYSDEC, n.d)

Artificial feeding

When an animal consumes food it obtained from people that is not part of its natural diet

Bag limits

A term which describes the maximum number of a species of animal which can be killed by a hunter legally

Bird strikes

The term used to describe when a bird collides with an aircraft

Coliform

A type of bacteria (CDC, n.d.)

Depredation

The act of destroying or damaging something

Dissolved oxygen

Oxygen that is present in water

DNA

Molecule that forms the genetic basis for the existence of life forms (U.S. National Library of Medicine, 2015)

E. coli

A type of coliform bacteria (CDC, n.d.)

European Starlings

Small birds with a ubiquitous presence across the United States. The feather coloration of adult birds is black with purple and green flecks or brown with white flecks depending on the time of year (Cornell Lab of Ornithology, n.d.)

Eutrophication

A condition which occurs in water bodies when there are excess nutrients present, which often results in conditions that are detrimental to the health of the water body

Hypoxia

A condition that occurs in water bodies wherein the oxygen level is extremely low

Neck collars

A collar that is placed on birds to identify them and track their activities

Pathogen

Biological entity which can transmit disease

Recharge basins

An area of land which has been manipulated and reconstructed for the purpose of guiding precipitation and surface water through the soil as a primary filtration system (EPA, n.d.)

Subspecies

The term for individuals belonging to a species that have been grouped according to a subset of characteristics

Total Maximum Daily A quantity of pollutants which is the maximum amount permitted to safely exist in Load (TMDL) a body of water. TMDL quantities are determined by the USEPA (EPA, n.d.)