BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY 3 9999 06317 685 1 144. BREEDING AND WINTERING AREAS OF MALLARDS HARVESTED IN VARIOUS STATES AND PROVINCES Boston Public Library Superintendent of Document* SEP 14 1971 DEPOSITORY United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife Special Scientific Report-Wildlife No. 144 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife BREEDING AND WINTERING AREAS OF MALLARDS HARVESTED IN VARIOUS STATES AND PROVINCES by Aelred D. Geis Migratory Bird Populations Station Division of Wildlife Research Special Scientific Report - Washington, D. C. -Wildlife No. 1971 144 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 60 cents Stock Number 2410-0274 CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 DATA USED AND PROCEDURES 1 RESULTS 5 Wintering Areas Associated with the Mallard Kill in Various Harvest Areas 5 Breeding Area Derivation of the Kill 7 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 9 LITERATURE CITED 10 TABLES Table 1. --Summary of winter inventory counts and winter bandings of mallards in the United States, 1966-68. Table 2. --Number of immature mallards banded during the 1966- 68 preseason banding periods and weighting factors used in the analysis of recoveries the first hunting season after banding Table 3 — Number of adult mallards banded during the 1966-68 preseason banding periods and weighting factors used in the analysis of recoveries the first hunting season after banding . . Table k — Comparison of the distribution of the mallard kill throughout North America (excluding Alaska), during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted band recoveries and mail questionnaire and wing collection surveys Table 5. --Wintering area derivation (in percent) of the adult mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from banding post season in winter areas Table 6 — Breeding area derivation (in percent) of the mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from summer and pre-hunting season bandings of adult and immature mallards . . . Table Al. --Number of first hunting season recoveries from mallards banded postseason (winter), 1966-68 occur- ring in each State and Province of recovery .... Table A2. --Number of first hunting season recoveries from immature mallards banded preseason, 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. . Table A3 — Number of direct recoveries from adult mallards banded preseason, 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery 11 13 16 18 20 29 37 hk 52 iii ABSTRACT Band recoveries from mallards banded in breeding and wintering areas, weighted to reflect the population sizes they represent, were used to estimate the relative contribution of various breeding and wintering areas to the harvest in each State and Province . Sources of population data in addition to conventional waterfowl breeding population surveys were utilized resulting in larger cont inent -wide population estimates than those previously published. The estimates of the relative importance of various breeding and wintering areas to the kill in each State and Province are presented in a series of tables. Patterns among States in the similarity or the dissimilarity in the source of harvest are mentioned. iv INTRODUCTION In establishing waterfowl hunting regulations in the United States, an attempt is made each year to adjust the level of harvest to the waterfowl population levels . The harvest of waterfowl occurs largely during migration and frequently is a considerable distance from either breeding or wintering areas. Thus, the breeding and wintering areas of the harvested waterfowl are not readily apparent. Also, it is desirable to know the extent to which waterfowl breeding or wintering in specific areas contribute to the harvest in different States or Provinces. In order to judge the appropriateness of regu- lations and to better understand the harvest characteristics of birds breeding and wintering in various areas, it is important to have estimates of the relative contribution to the harvest in various States and Provinces of populations associated with various pro- duction and wintering areas. This paper presents recent information on this subject for the mallard (Anas platyrhynchos ) based on banding accomplished during 1966, 1967 > and 1968. A comprehensive analysis of many aspects of the mallard banding and population data, including the subject of this paper, is now in preparation at the Migratory Bird Populations Station. This more complete analysis will include data for additional years and will be based on more biologically logical areas of reference than the "States and Provinces" used in this study. Because of the timely nature of information about the breeding and wintering ground source of the mallard harvest, this preliminary report has been completed to make current information accessible. DATA USED AND PROCEDURES Banding data used in this study relate only to normal wild mallards banded during a pre -hunting -seas on period of July 1- September 30 and a winter period of January 1-February 29. The re- coveries included were limited to those reported as shot or found dead during the first hunting season after banding. Birds found dead during the hunting season were assumed to have been shot and, therefore, provided additional information on the derivation of the kill. A total of 8,078 recoveries was available to determine the breeding area derivation of the immature mallard kill; ^-,392 re- coveries related to adult mallards banded in breeding areas . A total of 7j35^ recoveries related to postseason bandings of mallards in wintering areas. At the time these data were extracted from the files, a small percentage of the recovery records may have been missing. It is not believed this seriously biased the results. The number of recoveries occurring in each harvest area and their State or Province of banding is shown in appendix tables Al, A2 and A3. To obtain reliable estimates of the wintering and breeding area origin of the kill in a harvest area, certain conditions must be met. All breeding and wintering areas from which birds make a significant contribution to the harvest in a State or Province must be repre- sented by banded birds. Also, population data must be available to serve as a basis for weighting the banding data. Population data would not be required if the same fraction of the population were banded in each breeding and wintering area. This is not the case, however, as shown clearly in table 1. This table summarizes winter population data for 1966 through 1968, based primarily on the winter inventory sponsored in January by the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. Wintering population totals shown for the New England States were those reported in the Annual Christmas Count of the National Audubon Society. These counts were used because they are more accurate than those of the winter inventory in this area. For example, the Audubon Christmas counts averaged 8,877 mallards in Connecticut, while the winter inventory yielded an average of only 700. In New England, mallards apparently are not found in typical waterfowl habitat and are missed by the winter inventory. The total number of mallards banded during the winter period in each area is also shown in table 1. The average wintering population was divided by the number of birds banded to determine the average winter popula- tion per banded bird. This value was used in weighting the recovery data. It is significant that most areas had sizeable samples of banded birds . The most important gap in the winter banding program was in Louisiana where 263 banded birds yielding only 15 first-season recoveries, represented an average mallard wintering population of over l/2 million. Several States having relatively small wintering popu- lations completely lacked banding data; this probably affected estimates only in these areas and usually to a minor degree. Generally speaking, all major segments of the continental mallard population in January of 1966, 1967, and 1968 were well represented by banded birds. The results of the summer and preseason banding program used to indicate the breeding area derivation of the kill are shown in table 2 for immature mallards and in table 3 for adult mallards . These tables also present estimates of the size of the breeding population associated with each area and the population per bird banded (weighting factor ) . The population data used in weighting summer and preseason band- ing data were obtained in a variety of ways. The basis of the estimate for each area is identified in tables 2 and 3- The results of the annual aerial survey of the breeding population in May, adjusted to account for birds present that are not recorded from the air based on air versus ground count comparisons, provided estimates for most of the major areas . This information was supplemented by several other sources. The Bureau's Division of Wildlife Refuges in cooperation with State biologists and Regional Office personnel developed population estimates as part of the Refuge Division's Flyway Habitat Management Unit Project. These estimates which related to 1965 were used for seven areas. These included the relatively important States of Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. The estimate for British Columbia was developed by John Chattin, following essentially the same approach used in the adjacent States . The Bureau-sponsored "Breeding Bird Survey" (Robbins and Van Velzen, 19^9) conducted in June for all species of birds provided information on mallard summer populations in a number of areas . An index for the mallard breeding population was obtained from the breeding bird survey by multiplying the average number of mallards recorded per route in each State by the number of square miles in the State. If a single route was responsible for a large portion of the mallards recorded in an entire State, the route was omitted. In New York, for example, the mallard count made on the "Jones Beach Route" on Long Island was omitted since it represented more than half the birds recorded in the State. In nine States indexes for the mallard breeding population were obtained both by conventional waterfowl population surveys and by the breeding bird survey. Thus, it was possible to determine a ratio between population values derived from the two methods. In all instances, population indexes obtained in the conventional way were smaller than the index calculated from the breeding bird survey, and the ratios ranged from .30 for Montana to .8l for Wyoming. In most areas the ratios were reasonably close to an average of .63 mallards. Thus, the indexes of the mallard popula- tion based on the breeding bird survey were multiplied by .63 for 17 States (mostly having small populations ) to obtain population figures comparable to the others listed in the table. The total average breeding population, resulting from the sum of the various estimates used in this study, is about 1.2 million higher than that resulting from previously published summaries of breeding population surveys (G-eis, Martinson, and Anderson, 1969)- Population estimates used in the current study recognized a larger population in such areas as Wisconsin, eastern United States and eastern Canada than earlier estimates. Evidence to suggest that earlier estimates were somewhat low has been presented in another paper (Geis, 1970 )• The additional population values developed in this study to represent these "fringe areas" are believed to be minimal in most cases because of the conservative assumptions made in their development. The number of immatures in each breeding area was estimated by assuming an average of one immature per adult in the fall flight in all areas. This was based on observed production ratios which averaged 1:1 from 1966 through 1968 for the continent -wide mallard population. The relative size of the contribution of each preseason and winter handing area to the retrieved kill in a harvest area was esti- mated by multiplying the number of adult and/or immature recoveries from each banding area that occurred in a harvest area by the re- spective adult and/or immature weighting factor for that banding area. This was done for each banding area contributing to the kill in a harvest area and these products were then added together to obtain a weighted total recovery figure. The total recovery figures provide an index of the size of the harvest in the area. The percentage of the total kill in a harvest area coming from each banding area was computed by dividing the weighted recovery total from each banding area by the weighted recovery total from all banding areas that con- tributed band recoveries in the harvest area. Because the sample sizes of recoveries of preseason bandings were small when distributed by banding area and harvest area, the weighted recoveries for adults and immatures from each banding area were com- bined, and the combined weighted recoveries in the area were used to estimate the relative importance of various breeding areas . The weighted recoveries of winter banding reflect only the distribution of adults, since the birds are adults during the first hunting season after banding. The accuracy of these estimates can be examined by comparing them, area by area, with estimates calculated from the mail question- naire and wing collection surveys conducted in Canada and the United States during the same years (table h) . When estimates based on recoveries from winter banding are compared with the kill of adult mallards based on mail surveys, there is a remarkable agreement, especially at the flyway level. There are some differences, however, which deserve comment. The comparatively larger kills in Washington, Arkansas and Louisiana calculated from weighted band recoveries suggest that too much weight was given to the bands recovered in the three States . Since most of the harvest of adults in Washington, Louisiana, and Arkansas (89, 68, and 66 percent, respectively) were related to populations wintering within each of those States (as is true for most States with significant wintering populations), it follows that the population value used for weighting winter bandings in each of the three States was probably relatively high. Conversely, the comparatively low kill estimates based on weighted recoveries in Texas, Utah, and Colorado and in the Atlantic Flyway suggest that population estimates relating to these wintering areas were relatively low. A discrepancy, present also in Pennsylvania, also may be due to a lack of winter banding in that State. Weighted recovery totals by flyways, States, and Provinces from preseason banding also showed a good agreement with the distribution of kill as measured by mail surveys. A possible exception was the indication of a slightly larger kill in the Central Flyway, based on weighted recoveries, than was to be expected based on mail surveys. As mentioned earlier, however, the assumption was made when develop- ing weighting factors for preseason banding that production rates were the same in each breeding area. Drought conditions in prairie Canada and adjacent States in 1968 probably depressed production in an area that supplied many ducks to the Central Flyway more than in breeding areas that supplied other flyway s . It is possible, therefore, that the weighting factor used for the Central Flyway was larger than it should have been, which resulted in an exaggerated estimate of comparative kill. Although the distribution of weighted recoveries from preseason and postseason banding did not agree perfectly with the distribution of harvest as measured by the kill surveys, the agreement was suf- ficiently good to conclude that weighted recoveries provide a reasonable basis for judging the relative importance of both breeding and wintering areas in supplying birds to the mallard harvest in various States and Provinces. RESULTS Wintering Areas Associated with the Mallard Kill in Various Harvest Areas The relative importance of various wintering areas to the mallard harvest in States and Provinces is shown in table 5 • The kill in British Columbia was related almost entirely to wintering areas in the northern portion of the Pacific Flyway, principally Washington. Harvest in the three prairie provinces was associated with wintering populations in all four f lyways ' in the United States. However, the relative importance of the f lyways differed markedly between provinces. For example, the importance of Pacific Flyway wintering populations decreased from west to east with 53 percent of the adult kill in Alberta, being related to the Pacific Flyway, k.2 percent in Saskatchewan, and only 0.5 percent in Manitoba. In contrast, winter- ing areas in the Mississippi Flyway were progressively more important from west to east, providing ±5.3} 63.7, and 81.9 percent of the kill in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba, respectively. Although wintering populations in the Atlantic Flyway were not of great im- portance to any of the prairie provinces, their contribution also increased markedly from west to east ranging from only 0.2 percent of the kill in Alberta to 1.2 percent in Manitoba. Birds killed in Ontario wintered in areas in both the Mississippi and Atlantic F lyways . Within the Mississippi Flyway, wintering areas associated with Ontario kill were located farther east than the areas related to the harvest in Manitoba and Saskatchewan. Wintering populations in Ohio and Tennessee were the most important in this respect. Over 30 percent of the birds killed in Ontario wintered in areas in the Atlantic Flyway, with those in South Carolina being the most important. The adult mallard harvest in Quebec was from populations that wintered in the Atlantic Flyway, with a small contribution coming from the eastern part of the Mississippi Flyway (Ohio). Almost all adult mallards killed in the Pacific Flyway wintered within the flyway. In those States having large wintering populations, most of the kill was related to birds wintering within the State. For example, more than 80 percent of the kill in Washington, Idaho, and California were birds that wintered in the State. In other Pacific Flyway States the kill consisted of birds wintering either in the State or in adjacent States. Arizona was the only exception, but there were no bandings to represent the wintering population in Arizona. It was not possible to examine the data separately for the parts of States originally in the Central Flyway that had been moved into the Pacific Flyway. Therefore, in Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico the derivation of the kill is shown for the entire State. The adult mallard harvest in the western tier of Central Flyway States (Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico) was associated most strongly with wintering populations within each State, and the strength of the association increased from north to south (50, 56, 71> a^d Sni- per cent, respectively). The Central Flyway States lying east of the western tier of States all have a common characteristic in that a significant proportion of their adult kill was associated with wintering populations in the Mississippi Flyway. Most of the adult mallards killed in the Dakotas, which have small wintering populations, were from populations winter- ing in the Mississippi Flyway wintering populations (73 a*id 50 percent in North and South Dakota, respectively). The most important wintering location in the Mississippi Flyway associated with the adult harvest in North and South Dakota was Arkansas (28 percent in both States). The adult kill in Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas depended most heavily on wintering populations within the State, although from 18 to 35 percent of the harvest was related to Mississippi Flyway wintering areas. Within the Mississippi Flyway those States having significant wintering populations derived the largest portion of their adult kill from populations wintering within the State. Except for Michigan and Ohio 87 percent or more of the adult harvest was associated with populations wintering within the Mississippi Flyway. Although the kill in Michigan and Ohio was largely related to wintering populations in the Mississippi Flyway (86 and 80 percent, respectively) there was a significant contribution from wintering populations in the southern half of the Atlantic Flyway. South Carolina was the most important Atlantic Flyway wintering area related to the harvest in both Michigan and Ohio. The apparent substantial relationship of wintering 6 populations in Texas to the kill in Alabama, is due to one recovery occurring in Alabama where there were relatively few recoveries of winter banded birds . It seems likely that the wintering area relationship to the kill in Alabama should be similar to that in other southern Mississippi Flyway States. In most Atlantic Flyway States, the relative importance of various wintering areas associated with the adult mallard kill were probably not measured with very high precision because relatively few winter banded mallards were shot. The adult kill in Pennsylvania and New York, the two most important mallard harvest areas in the Flyway, was related to a variety of Atlantic Flyway wintering areas, and 31 and 21 percent, respectively, of the harvest was associated with wintering areas in the Mississippi Flyway. The kill in South Carolina, the third most important harvest area in the flyway, was composed mostly of mallards wintering in South Carolina (88 percent ) . Breeding Area Derivation of the Kill Estimates of the proportion of the total mallard kill in each State and Province derived from each State and Province in the breed- ing range are shown in table 6. Those Canadian Provinces in which significant numbers of mallards were harvested derived most of their kill from breeding areas within the Province. This was true even for the relatively large mallard kill that occurred in Ontario (93 percent of the kill was of mallards breeding in Ontario according to the banded samples). It is worthy of note, however, that fairly significant breeding populations of mallards in northern Manitoba were not represented by banded samples . In view of the generally southeastward orientation of migration from this general area, Ontario may derive more mallards from other Canadian breeding areas than is suggested by these data. In the Pacific Flyway, locally produced mallards provide the bulk of the harvest in California, Utah, and Nevada. Although locally produced mallards contributed substantially to the kill in Washington and Oregon, breeding areas in Canada, principally Alberta, were a major source of the harvest. Arizona, Idaho, and Utah were the only States that did not obtain one-third or more of their kill from breeding populations within the State. The estimate for Arizona is imprecise, however, because no birds were banded there preseason. In the Central Flyway,' the portions of Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico that are assigned to the Pacific Flyway could not be identified in the tabulations available for this study. Therefore, the derivation of the kill in these States could not be related to the Pacific and Central Flyway portions. Generally speaking, the mallard harvest in the Central Flyway depended heavily on Canadian breeding areas, principally in Alberta and Saskatchewan. The degree of dependence increased from north to south reaching from 8^ to 89 percent in Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and New Mexico. The importance of local production was comparatively high in Montana, Worth Dakota and South Dakota (lj-3, 32>and 20 percent, respectively). The data suggest that kl percent of the harvest in Colorado was contributed from local populations. There is reason to believe, however, that the October experimental hunting seasons in the San Luis Valley of Colorado may have biased the data from Colorado due to an intensive banding and data collecting program there before migrants arrive. Within the Mississippi Flyway, eight States (iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Kentucky, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi) derived the majority of their kill (generally over 70 percent ) from Saskatchewan and Alberta in western Canada and relatively little from any other single location. These eight Mississippi Flyway States derived their kill from essentially the same breeding area that furnished the harvest in Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas in the Central Flyway. Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, and Ohio were the only Mississippi Flyway States where local production contributed significantly to harvest within the States (72, kO, 31. and 27 percent, respectively). The importance of locally produced birds in Ohio may be somewhat exaggerated if the breeding population estimate of 32,000 used for weighting purposes was too high. Ontario contributed signif- icantly to the harvest in Ohio and Michigan while Manitoba and Saskatchewan contributed a considerable number of birds to the harvest in Minnesota. Ohio and Michigan are more similar to Atlantic Flyway States in the breeding ground derivation of the mallard harvest than they are to the other Mississippi Flyway States due to a lesser im- portance of western Canada birds and a substantial contribution from Ontario. Although Tennessee derived about one-half its kill from western Canada, an additional 25 percent was derived from Ontario. Weighted recoveries from Alabama suggested that North Dakota was the most important breeding area supplying the kill to Alabama followed by Ontario. It is possible that there may be a considerable sampling error associated with the relatively few recoveries occurring in Alabama. Within the Atlantic Flyway, Ontario was consistently the major contributor to the harvest in States having a relatively large kill. In New York and Pennsylvania, breeding populations occurring within the State were quite significant. Pennsylvania was the only State in which locally produced birds provided a larger part of the kill than birds from other States or Provinces . Beginning in Maryland and con- tinuing south in the flyway through Georgia, western Canada made a contribution to the kill. In the Atlantic Flyway south of Virginia, the northern Mississippi Flyway States also made a significant contribution to the harvest. 8 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS This report uses band recoveries, weighted to reflect the popu- lation they represent to estimate the relative importance of various production and wintering areas in providing the mallard harvest in each State and Province. The population values used for weighting were obtained from a variety of sources. This resulted in a total population higher than those previously presented due largely to a recognition of more mallards in eastern Canada and States not normally considered in the conventional breeding population survey. This study revealed some general patterns of similarity and dissimilarity among States concerning the source of their harvest. Sometimes these patterns did not conform to existing flyway boundaries used in estab- lishing hunting regulations. For example, the breeding ground source of the harvest in the eastern tier of Central Flyway States resembled that of most of the Mississippi Flyway States more than the source of the harvest in other States in the Central Flyway. Also, Michigan and Ohio in the Mississippi Flyway were far more similar to Atlantic Flyway States in breeding ground source of harvest than they were to the other Mississippi Flyway States. Logical areas of reference for establishing regulations, however, must consider many factors in addition to the breeding area source of the mallard kill. A wide variety of specific information having management implications is suggested by the tables, which in this report present estimates of the breeding and wintering area source of the kill in each State and Province . LITERATURE CITED Geis, Aelred D. 1970. Role of banding data in migratory bird population studies. Proceedings of Symposium, "Population Ecology of Migratory Birds." Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, Laurel, Maryland. In press. Geis, Aelred D., R. Kahler Martinson, and David R. Anderson. I969. Establishing hunting regulations and allowable harvest of mallards in the United States . Journal of Wildlife Management. Vol. 33 (h): 8*18-859. Robbins, Chandler S.,and Willet T. Van Velzen. 1969. The breeding bird survey - 1967 and 1968. U. S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, Special Scientific Report-- Wildlife No. 12k. 107 p. 10 CO ■3 u co H H I O •H a u l HI m -p a • 3 co o vo o ON H ffvO °SQ -p on fl H & " a co •H CD -P h co 0 -P •p CO fl •H Tj > CD -P o H fl cu ,fl 5 CD H ■§ EH fl o ■d CD -H u Tl M-P ff co •H CD P -d ^ H a Ph CD P < O ft ft H ^H rd co (1) CD -p s ■3 o a &H 3 CO 0 ,a CU CO ^ vo CD VO t> ON < H X) H •H 5 t- H sO *8 CO C-- H CM D— CO O C--CO LA O VO CKlACM O CM O 1AHIAOO\ •\ «\ *v »s *\ *\ C—-* VO CM H CM ON ON-* ON CO CM CM CM H ON LAVO LA CM CArlHlA ON-* CM •h n •* *t * >v *t ON CM VO -* ONVO LfN -* -* LAC0 H H t-H4-CM VO CM O -* CO CO O CM H O VO H O O COH CM l>- t- CO CM •s *\ »\ *\ *\ *\ »\ OHt-[-Ht-if\ t— H L^VO H CO H-* CM .* CO O LA CM CM CO ON LT\ j- CM co-* co CM CM CO t- ONV0-* ■% •* •* •* •* «% ■* f- CO-* -* CONO LfN cm o mo CM t— H LfN CO C— CM H 0\0 OCO VO ON J" CO -* H CM H OMA H CM -* O •* »\ *\ «\ *\ *\ *\ CM H VO H4 LA LA LA H LTNCO CM CO VO CM CO CM cd •H a g 03 O cd fl •H H i > ■§ O [0 ■H cd cu P Jh o S t=> <3 COCO -* VO H la CM H J CM CM HJ- C—O ON -4" CO CM LTN ONCO ON CM l^-rl J- J-qO HCOCO l"-CM -* CO LA CO ON -* CM CM CM CO O LTN NO O CO H rlVD CM CM ChJ-VD LfN O O H C— H O CO HOH .* HLAOncOOJ-*COHIA CM VO O VO CO CM -* HOD ON »\ •* *\ »\ »v »* •* »fc •* ^ CO O ON ON CO CO-* NO O ON -* H l>- LA C— ON H -* O LA CM CM CM NO CM CM LTN O LTN NO CM CO -* H -* H L^ LTN t— [— ON-* NO LTN NO VO C--CM CO H-* t^CO LTNCMNO LA CM 00 ON O V0 -* CM H ON H HCMLA-*OLACOON i-i CM CO CO t— CO CO LTN LTN LA O LfN-* O -* CM -*OJHCO\OONCQD— d^_ CM OJ NOVO CO CO ONCO -* VO 8n •V *v •% CM CO LfNVO O CO O VO CO LTN " co.* oSvo ' LTN H NO CO _ LTN H-* CM CM VO CM rl H LTN-* VO LfN O- H ONVO H O LfNVO CO CO H O H Ov O I— CO H CM HLfNLfNHVO LfN NOVO COCOO-* C— ONCM-* t>-CM LrNHCOCOt-OJ LfNCO H CM H CM CM -* CM a3 a3 -P -P o g o o3 ro a! O o •H cd P R WM tJ a fl co a3 CO s cfl ^! & -H o3 U 03 s P> -P -P H ^ O CO fl U 0 O p H fl > O O O !>s d) O CO CD SScosSo W s I CO H t~- LfN ON LfN I t-CM HriCM H O O ONt— LfNt-HcX) H HVO O [^ CO C04HOCOH •\ •% •! »V «\ «^ CM CM CO CO H CO H COLfNHCO ONt-COCO H O CM CO CO COCO CO LfNOOOCM COOO-* HCO C^CM-*-* LfNCO H f- LfN-* COON H CO CO OOOOOOOO OOOOOOOO VOf-H-*VOCMCMON L^-LfNt-tr-LfNCM OJCO H H H -* LfN CO H CO CO LfN CO H CM ONCO VO CM CM fOCOCMOCMCMCMH •\ «\ »v »\ *\ L* — -* LfN C^ CO ON •»-* CO H CM CO.* LfNC H-* VO ^S LfN On On CM -* lavo co O ONCOt~-COCOCM c^- VOONHCOHHCOCM CM CM ONVO CO LACO CO r-i r-\ CO t- LACOCM . CM -* LA a •H CO § fl w O •H o Xi CO o •H ■H s= s CO o CO CO •H H H O g 11 CO H H i O •H cd fi rM 0) •h cd P fl cq o p • flco o on H >> i JhM) °SC -P On flH CD & ■» a co ■H CD P U cd ON <; i o CD WW H row H 1 W LTN H W H H s H ON w •N •\ u a H co Counts fo al Audubo •*">* p LT\-d- H COCO tfN O O LTNO O [— t— W LTNOMD WCOCOMD ONW CO C— W CO MD CO ONMD W H 00 H -* o HMD HMD t— CM CO • tH co w row Ovo W CO H LTN-d" CO ON f- W -4- H CQ P •\ *\ *\ »s *s •N »\ *V *\ *\ cd cd W O MD LTN H H W W H ON > 13 H H resentati sored by CO O O hroo w w HH r^HO O rof-t-roroo O t— co CO O O MD CO O LTN CO-^- CArlrl w o MD H t— LTN O O COMD MD CO CO O O MD CO -=F-d-C0 CCNCO LTNONW W H ONONO ITNON Ph fl H CD o •V *\ «\ *\ «\ •* •\*\ »^*\ •v*\*v*^*\*\*\*\ K Ph OOiArot-H WOO COMD LfNHMDCOOHHH CQ W CO ir\ O MD -=t- H CO H CO >> W (OIAH cd CQ H ! Flyw count O O O O O O W H oj-ooooooooooooo .fl -d o o o o o o -=f -=r LTNMD woooooooooooo LTN J3- LTN !>-MD J-VO J ONHMD C— -4" ONW ^B MD CO CO O ON t>- ■\ «\ *\ ^ *% *\ •\*\ *\*\ *\ *\*\»\*\*\ tH P li"N CO ON H CO LTN W J- coao O co W O f--4- -* O t--* CO H o H CO H t- CQ CO W CO w by each Chris tma o o o o o o S3 W^tMDLTNOOOOOOOOOOO o o o o o o OMDH-3-OOOOOOOOOOO CO-31 LTN J" J-COMD-J-CO LTNO ONCOHO CQ C— ON H IHMD W w f d •* *\ K «\ »\ «\ •V*\ •S»\»S"\*\»\*\*\*\*V*S U cd -* O t— CTN H CO J- l/N J" J" ^ Wt^ MDLfNHLrNC— COHCOCOHCO o fl H W H CO fk fl J- J- J- H CD fl H shed r from A O O O O O O -=t CO H L^ J- CQOO'OOOOOOOOO COOONOOOOOOOOOOOO •H o o o o o o H H H tJ CO t^CO CO ON-* ITN CO LTN LTN-* COMD O H CO W H CO t~-MD ^3 CD *\ *\ «S »\ »\ *V *v»\ *\*\ »\»\*\*\»\*\"\*v II HMD ON LTN O ON CO O MD CO LTN CO W 00 W ON MD ITN-4- 00 ONMD H W H H LTN 00 fl cd J- COMD H fl P fe H S>> cd cd cd cq aJ fl fl U P "d cd -H -H tH ed in tes ob H •H £5 •H p p fl -H fl H H N cd pq Ph 1 rflCD^Scd fl'H>>3 OO •H 4^ CD cd Ph cocQOH cdbDcD H^ pH^'HcQ^^^cQfDr^jajcdcd | W •H l>l » 1) fl 'ri H • Ph M cd cq cd to cd P"H P S,flPH h H'ri ^ U fl-HOU cd cd 8 o o oS>cDcdcdfl -Hrcj # "3 >j Ph O CO CQ -H CQ S fl 11 P •H fl fl cu co -h cd P CC fl -H tfl ,Q o CD O McdCDCD^HCQ h>^H'Hfl^ltiO-H CD CO •H fl P 10 flTj ,_ flP^ Cd>5fjOPPfHM CQ H •H CQ fl M fl 3 cq cd p •H S >CQflO>flCQ^H^H^^H^OO bfl CJ •H , £ 1 12 tJ U a fl cd O d cd -P d Ph 0) ,Q rl CQ < O Ph 3 U -P Xi p CO C O (D O -P CQ tQ CQ cd U CD tH CO & VO U ON CD Ph -p H > O CD O CO ^ CD H VO -P r( cd i -P vo P^ o vp EH 5S •H rH &a •B CQ >> d H 00 cd cd is cd ,Q CD S CQ -P •H >a d U p a cd -h cd t- H H d ,a * cd d) Ch H a co O 3 0) U $-1 to 3 u cd -P o >H cd -p -X) 1 cd & •H Ch H S 9 •rl 8 cd i •H ,Q M Tj S "H P 3 fp cd i P o] 0) rH £ cd EH VO Lr\VO OJ OJ ONOJ vo mw CA-H/ f- D— OJ CO VO -* OJ rH H < Pil, <; J 3 P O H cd cd ■H >> O Ji iH > a cd O 0) -P CQ s O -H ,3 cd o fl PM P> 0 & cd cj ,o o o e H a a o cd CQ -P -P O -H O CO • Lx< •H !h Cd -P r) 0) H Ph •H O O Ch d -P CD J4 -H cd fi Cd • O A3 bO ,2 -rj cd to CD cd H !> cd tH'H^(oa+>ID!> W > •H cd 3rtHcdcdC3o gpqj o> o S S o W S VO OJ H OJ LfNCO D— CO H LTNH H o8c8HWOt500 pq pq co OOLTNCOVOVOOJO OJ LTN f- H OO H H HOOCMOiHCMONOOOoO -H-HHOJOOt— OJOO OOCO VO LTN H-=t t- t-VQ VO OO OJ OO OJ LTN O LTN OOVO O O OO OOVO H LTN ON ON OO OO H LTN H CM OJ H OO LT\VO f^^ CM _ ON J" OO ON t— CO O ONOO H H D— CM H CM O O OO C--OJ C— OLTNOOf-OO H OO H CM H VO CO OO LTN J" OO ^ OOOJ H H OO ft •H ft ft •H CO CQ ■H CO CQ •H ft ni d s H H H O S EH S 14 d U a a a) o -d cd -P CD ■h h id to cd S3 -P -H CD cd £i d -d H H g o a CD d h cd •H o > ft o CD O CO ,£) CD HMD -P H Cd I P>VO ^ o\o B OS •H H P*-H T3 CQ >i 0 cd ISi 1? ■P Ofl cd -P .5 VO i £ a b ni g tt •H Ch y H '3 d°!. •H bO in -p d CD ,d -H rQ bD-d g -h a 5 > -P FP cd cd cohms Ooo ooroco lAPOlAOMA 1 1 H CO HJ t~- l^- CO LT\ LTNVO II >irH CD •H H H CD O •» o < & •H CD -P fl fe ,a > Cd O -H pq •H •H M P> CQ >a CQ P> bD pi •H cd -H fl o ^ •s > p S o o ^ CQ CD bD d PI -H CO H U CD •% -P -H pti O CQ +> cd ^ Ch CD CQ O o Ch OOOWMOOOOOWOO i i -d CD P> Repr iali muni ist, •H ch •H o at ion. Lldlife Re CQ u e so cd 3 !>i CD O O Ph •1-3 cd ft O • H -d ? CO *-» O • CtJ >j H d -H ON d O44OOc\lJc0iAC\lO4ro CO H Ch cd O W Ph Ch d -H \0 -H OS -p CQ ►* OJ O co j- oj O oovo H on no -4 -4 i i H cd o p> ■H -P CQ Cd ,C| H +) cd m 'd OJ CO II d CO ft CO H P> O ft^-- CD CO m O O at ion: ;ion c CD •H ft cd co M CO ,C| CQ s CQ O 1 pi H^ !>s •HO O CQ CD O Popul Divis CD CQ O Cd -H CD & h) t> co o -p p a a E •h cd cd cd S_ a -d H h> cu a P> O ON CO [-- O OJ COCO ON O CO LT\ LTNVO C^OJ J- -d" OJ -d" VO OOVT) OJ ON LA f- OJ HVO J" t— -5 CO a o ^^jd ^ ft e CO Cd CD O O d M > PL, m ft H Q) Ch CO CO •H CO •H -p cc3' H awki r. G sur ird is f fe CD CO Migratory B t Report No , 5 W n d pq cd pq • O CO t— CO H H CM OJ COVO H IPvOOH O ft O d e> • a cd >, CO O M • H * O O p CO OJ VO OMArllArim CO H OOH ft H^d O CD H $ M ch ^- n -p pi cd cd -d tb •H A'-^ O m CD CD CD o -d -P CD -H UD H H < -> CD CD M Ch > -H H •H & -o CD < -H h S o CQ h Pq Ph CO H VO C"- O COCO H P> H -P O P> •» H LT\ CO CO $ m •H CD CQ +3 •n^ Ch -H O a t- >>-H CQ C7\ -H H •» 3 C\ CD d ■H P VO 08 H cd OA On >d -h vn H co H o OS • d H d H^ >d ^ CQ cd •> d -p a CQ CD -H CD H CD H ON co d £? £" ° £? d ^ ^-^ dH^OOVDW cd CD •> -H ^ ft H CO U CD ^ a H O H T) lj CO O ON-4- VOVO H H -4 h c- H 3' H CD co t*- co ^ 0) A cd d H H CO >H M o CQ Hc1 s •H bO m cd H E CD -H d -H h CD - d CQ d jo (in cd pq 0) K co# d PQ rfl •\ p h d L fl d cd „, ,„ ^ s S vo CO (D p cd >* a H •H Hj •s •H ^ cd to ctj d d vo P1 H O H CD cd M 0 'd p> H P1 'd cb -h -h i-\ *d ■? if 3 •* a h h c^ CD ft O O o H > ch > P> CD d cd O •H CD P ? A a) ** a g-Hj>3 oo CQCQOH CO bO CD U U ftd'H CQ.M^HCQCD'dCdCdCd cd CO CO CQ cd R -p M ■P H -H H ch O p co d u Ch ch O M Ch cd cd +5 TO £h iJ§^H^^^ ^ fl^HOO O O -H -H O co d a O S3 CD O O O >s > CD Cd Cd C ajgwcdgjcDtHCQ h> ? h -h ,d ,s CD SP cd h d cd O h ■H O a h cd CD •H •H CD cd H CD d h CD -d id P H o -P SSoESPSffl CD > < | a ft CQ >) U CD cd cd H -3 S « pq (x, < < pq o P w fe o w 15 u p § cO a CO o t3 to cO 0) to ■2 a S3 a cO P p CO fl h o ■H CO Ch cO (0 0 co fl (D -P fH ft CO O O Q) Sh CD ,s3 =h P O •H 03 •t! cO a •tf cO a; • § CO -3 t3 W 2 S w M P o H -P tf $3 O Tj •H Jh tH. p -H CD CO ,Q TJ H S3 2 Sh CO ft CD ,Q O ft ft O P 3 O n3 CO CO Ch <+H O ff . U •H +3 9 CD ,d •H £ M TJ •H S g JP 1 > rQ oo 0) H fl CO EH o CQ S3 O - ir\co O O LTN LTN ON H H H <(h<<<00 < tn n < o o <<<<;< O " O O O CO ITv O O C— O IT\ O CM H-=t- t— CM H LTNVO C— CM CM -* LTN OOCO -=f- VO 00 CM VO -^ CM OO f- ON LTN CO CO CM VO -^ MOOCO vo on oo rn ON-d- t— -4" LfNCO O H CM ONVO CO -4- COCO H CM H CO H LTN O CO H OO H H CO H h- ON oovo m H J- CM VO VO ON CM H t— H CO O t>- J" roroHH t— O ONLTNVOCM O OO H C— OO OO LTN J" OOCM H CO H OO cO II O t— 00 o t-vo • 1 OOCO LTN LTN CM -3 ONCO CM VO t— ON CM -3- CM ON 00 LT\VO H H H CM -=J- CM H t-VO VO -* ON CM CM VO O CM LTN 00 00 CJ\VO ON LTN LTN H H CM CM VO OO LTN CM CO O OO C^VO VO OO ON VDt-040 0O-4- LTN fc- IT\ ONCO O O rlOH4lAOH LTN J" LTN CM [-- 00 oo-d- t— ONCO H CO CM CVJ VO H VO O ON H H CO t^- O H VO CM VO t— O -* 1^ OO 00 40t-OCMU\00 t-OOO -H- CO J- LTNCO oo tr- H H CM itn oo ir\ oo-* ONCO O ON H CM l/NVO H VO OO ONVO H OO H H CM >- -* CO H-* ONVO OO CO OOHJ- t^ONOOH CM VO t— -* CO CM CM H CM H CO tH CO a CO o 1 S3 -S cO cO H cO cO -H >5 >> P P O > -H > S3 cO CO O O o O 0) P CO _, ^3 cO O S3 e O -H M S S3 S3 O cO i CO CO cO O -H fl di O^J O Op WPP O-H OW S H H S3 S3 CQ CO co 0) P"H ft •H Sh cO P Sh 0) pq •H O O CO H PPP0ShOco^ EH'HrQCQS3p(U>»> 3ShHc0c0S3pIO P S3 SScq&SoSS cO ft O O 16 1 cd CO -fl O •H (U ft •H cd a o to S CO i) ft 00 VO i VO U Q) -P =h cd O CO cd Q) ca I -P a •H Cm OJ -P CO O o 0 M fl en -p 0 fl° CO •H ■H rn M 3 ir T) cd a -d 3 -fl 0) S -P CO "H d U d cd > I § cu co cd 3 cd fl cd ft p^ co co o h cd bD cu j CO fl "H H ftfl-HcoJ»J>^coaj'flcd -P ft O CO cd -h cd U X cd cd co bD Ofl pow-Hco N +3afl-PHfHH-HMMfl-rj o ft CO fl flcdoo o >>> ?H-H fl •H cu o •H fl cd O fl fl CO tH o -P CO fl o ,q cd -H -H O CO -p cd "H CQ •H fliSkwfld>fl-P,di>5bO •i-lfH>coflO>rico|iHfHfH o CO fl CO O >HTi -H CQ fl J*i fl CQ •P o •H •H -H •H O H fl fl -H 3 CO H fH •H 2 -P < o 17 Table k. --Comparison of the distribution of the mallard kill throughout Worth America (excluding Alaska), during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted band recoveries and mail questionnaire and wing collection surveys . Adult kill based on: Winter banding Mail surveys Total kill based on: Preseason banding Mail surveys Canada NWT 0.1 British Columbia 6.5 Alberta 31-5 Saskatchewan 39.6 Manitoba 1U.9 Ontario 7.2 Quebec 0.3 TOTAL (Canada) 100.1 Pacific Flyway Washington 12.0 Oregon 3-6 Idaho 5-1 California 6.0 Nevada 0.6 Utah 0.7 Arizona 0.1 28. 2 Central Flyway Montana 2.9 North Dakota k.9 South Dakota k.k Wyoming 0.6 Nebraska k.8 Colorado 2.2 Kansas 3-7 New Mexico 0.2 Oklahoma 1.6 Texas 2.6 27.9 12.9 28.5 31.2 16.2 10.2 Q-9 99.9 7.9 3.5 6.k 7-1 0.9 2.2 0.2 "2o\2 3-3 3-9 3-7 0.6 h.6 3.1 3-1 0.3 2.0 3.3 27.9 7-5 2U.8 26.1 11.7 28.1 1-7 99-9 7-5 k.8 k.8 5-k 0.9 1.9 0.1 k~ 25 k.o 5.6 k.l 0.8 3.9 2.8 3.0 0.5 1.2 2.9 "2o\F lU.6 28.3 22.0 12. k 20.0 2.6 100.0 7-8 k.O 5. 9. 1. 2, 0, 30.2 3.2 3-9 3-2 0.6 3-2 2.3 2.2 0.2 l.k 2.5 22.7 18 Table k. --Comparison of the distribution of the mallard kill throughout North America (excluding Alaska), during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted band recoveries and mail questionnaire and wing collection surveys. -- continued. Adult kill based on: Total kill based on: Winter Mail Preseason Mail banding surveys banding surveys Mississippi Flyway Minnesota 6.0 5.0 3-7 7-5 Wis cons in 2.6 2.9 3-6 k.2 Michigan 0.7 1.2 1.6 2.1 Iowa 2.0 2.8 2.2 3.0 Illinois t.5 5-1 k.2 k.l Indiana 0.6 0-5 0.8 0.5 Ohio o.k 0.7 0.8 0.9 Missouri 3.7 2.8 k.5 2.5 Kentucky 0.6 0.5 0.7 O.k Arkansas 9-6 7-6 • 8.3 5-7 Tennessee 1.8 1-9 1.5 1-7 Louisiana 7-3 5-6 5-7 5.5 Mississippi l.k l.k 1.5 1.2 Alabama 0.5 0.6 o.k O.k 41.7 3B.6 39.5 40.3 Atlantic Flyway New England 0.1 0.7 0.3 0.7 New York 0.3 0.8 1-3 1.5 Pennsylvania 0.2 0.9 1.1 1.3 West Virginia T T . 0.1 T New Jersey 0.1 O.k 0.5 0.5 Delaware 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.3 Maryland 0.2 0.5 0.6 . 0.6 Virginia 0.1 0.6 0.7 0.6 North Carolina 0.2 O.k o.k 0.3 South Carolina 0.6 0.8 0.9 0.7 Georgia 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.2 Florida T T 0.1 0.1 2.0 5-6 6.3 6.8 TOTAL (U. S. ) 99-8 100.3 100.0 100.0 19 Table 5- — Wintering area derivation (in percent) of the adult mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from post season banding in winter areas . Harvest area Banding area B.C. Alta. Sask. Man. Ont. Que. Pacific Flyway Washington 71.0 28.3 1-9 ~ -- -- Oregon 16.2 2.8 0.1+ 0.5 -- -- Idaho 2.8 19-2 1.8 -- -- -- California 1+.2 2.6 -- -- -- -- Nevada -- -- 0.1 -- -- -- Utah — 0.1 53-0 0.0 I4-.2 -- -- — Total 9I+.2 0.5 — *-- Central Flyway Montana 1.0 3-8 0.8 -- -- -- North Dakota -- 0.1 0.2 -- -- -- South Dakota -- 3.7 2.7 5-0 -- -- Wyoming — 1.6 0.5 -- -- — Nebraska -- 3-9 $.k 3-5 -- -- Colorado 0.6 6.6 2-9 0-5 -- -- Kansas -- 7-fc 9.8 3-1* -- — New Mexico -- 0.8 0.3 0.1 — -- Oklahoma 1.5 1.2 3-9 3-9 — -- Texas — 2.2 31-3 7-0 31-5 -- — -- Total 3-1 16.1+ — — Mississippi Flyway Michigan — -- 0.1 0.2 2.7 — Iowa -- 1.1 t.7 1+.6 -- -- Illinois 2.0 1.0 5-3 11.8 9-1 — Indiana — -- 0.1+ 1.7 3-0 -- Ohio -- -- -- 1.2 15-7 13-6 Missouri — 3-8 8.1+ 8.1 -- — Kentucky — 0.0 0.1+ 0.8 -- -- Arkansas -- 7.3 25.5 1+0.8 8.0 -- Tennessee 0.8 1.3 k.2 9-1 26.2 — Louisiana -- -- 11.6 -- -- — Mississippi -- 0.8 2.6 1.1 1-9 -- Alabama -§3 — 0.5 63.7 2.5 81.9 0.8 67.I+ -- Total 15.3 13-6 Atlantic Flyway Massachusetts -- -- — -- 0.3 -- New York -- -- --■ — 1.3 23.1 West Virginia -- — — -- 0.8 -- New Jersey — — — -- 0.9 -- Delaware -- -- — -- 2.2 16.3 Maryland — — -- 0.2 3-2 22.3 Virginia -- -- 0.1 0.2 2.2 — North Carolina -- -- -- -- 1.7 18.1+ South Carolina — 0.2 0.5 0.8 18.3 6.3 Florida _rz_ -- — -- 0-5 31.1* -- Total 0.2 0.6 1.2 86.1+ TOTAL 100.1 99-8 100.0 100.0 98.8 100.0 20 Table 5 ■ --Wintering area derivation (in percent) of the adult mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from banding post season in winter areas . --continued Harvest area Banding area Wash. Ore. Idaho Calif. Nev. Utah Pacific Flyway Washington 88.7 28.5 9-3 2.6 -- -- Oregon 7.5 U5.6 1.1* 1.2 -- 1.7 Idaho 1.6 7-7 8U.0 0.5 13-1* 2^.2 California l.l 1U.0 -- 95-0 1*0.8 6.1 Nevada — 0.2 0-3 — U5.1 18.2 Utah 0.0 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.6 37.2 Total 98.9 96.1 95-6 99 -k 99-9 87. 1* Central Flyway Montana 0.5 0.9 1.8 0.2 — 0.7 North Dakota 0.0 -- -- -- -- -- Wyoming -- -- O.k -- -- 2.9 Nebraska 0.1 O.k -- 0.1 -- 1.2 Colorado o.k 0.6 1.0 0.1* -- 2.5 Kansas — 0.1* 0.6 -- -- -- New Mexico — 0.1 o.k -- -- 3-1 Oklahoma -- -- -- -- -- 2.2 Total 1.0 2.1* k.2 0.7 -- 12.6 Mississippi Flyway Iowa , 1-5 -- -- -- -- Illinois 0.1 0.1 -- 0.2 0.2 -- -- -- Total 1-5 -- -- -- TOTAL 100.1 100.0 100.0 100.1 99-9 100.0 21 Table 5« --Wintering area derivation (in percent) of the adult mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from banding post season in vinter areas . — continued Harvest area Banding area Ariz. Mont. N.Dak. S.Dak. Wyo. Nebr, Pacific Flyway Washington -- 12.2 -- -- 6.5 1.7 Idaho kk.l 15.2 0.6 -- -_ 0.6 California -- l.k 0.9 -- -- __ Nevada 35-2 -- -- -- 1.2 __ Utah 3-2 82. 5 0.3 29.1 — -- -- -- Total 1.5 -- 7-7 2.3 Central Flyway Montana — U9. 6 o.k 0.6 1.6 0.7 North Dakota -- -- 0.8 0.2 -- -_ South Dakota -- 0.6 *K7 21. h 2.7 I4..2 Wyoming -- 1-7 -- 0.1+ 56.3 -- Nebraska — 1-9 3.2 l+.o 3-9 29.1 Colorado 9-1 3-1 1.6 2.0 ll+.O 6.1 Kansas -- 2.7 11.3 10.8 5.2 17.8 New Mexico 8.3 0.6 O.k 0.2 1.3 0.2 Oklahoma -- 2.1 2.7 7-5 -- U.7 Texas -- 7-5 69.7 -- 2.5 1+9.6 -- -- Total 17.^ 25.1 85.0 62.8 Mississippi Flyway Michigan -- -- 0.2 0.1 -- -- Iowa -- -- 3-2 3-0 -- 1.7 Illinois -- 0.3 7.0 3-^ — 1-3 Indiana -- -- 1.2 0.1 -- -- Ohio — -- 0-3 -- -- -- Missouri -- -- 7-6 10.6 -- 3.9 Kentucky — -- 0-3 0.2 -- 0.1 Arkansas -- -- 28.3 27.5 7.3 12.2 Tennessee -- 0.6 6.3 3-5 -- -- Louisiana -- -- lU.5 -- -- 1I+.9 Mississippi -- -- 3-3 1.7 -- 1.0 Alabama -- — 0.6 72.8 -- -- -- Total — 0.9 50.1 7.3 35-1 Atlantic Flyway Maryland -- -- 0.1 — -- -- Virginia -- -- 0.0 0.0 — -- North Carolina -- -- -- 0.1 -- -- South Carolina -- 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.7 0.1+ 0.5 -- -- Total — — -- TOTAL 99-9 99-8 100.1 100.2 100.0 100.2 22 Table 5- --Wintering area derivation (in percent) of the adult mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from banding post season in winter areas .--continued Harvest area Banding area Colo. Kans. N.Mex. Okla. Tex. Minn, Pacific Flyway Idaho 2.5 1-5 -- 1.8 — Utah 0.1 2.6 -- -- -- -- -- Total 1-5 -- 1.8 -- — Central Flyway Montana 1.1 0.1 3.0 -- 0.2 __ South Dakota 1-5 3-1 -- 1.1 0.6 0.3 Wyoming 1.8 -- -- _- __ Nebraska 2.2 3.0 5-0 3-1 2.1 0.7 Colorado 70.7 1-9 7-1 1.5 l.l 0.1 Kansas 3.6 55-3 -- 29.3 18.0 2.1 New Mexico k.6 0.2 8U.8 -- 0.7 -- Oklahoma -- 13. h -_ in.o 6.2 0.2 Texas 9.8 95.3 2.9 79.9 -- — . U5.2 fk.i 3.6 Total 99-9 76.0 7-0 Mississippi Flyway Michigan — 0.0 -- -- — 0.2 Iowa -- 2.2 -- 6.8 3.0 — Illinois -- 0.8 -- -- 1.1 9-5 Indiana -- -- -- -- 0.2 1.2 Ohio -- -- -- -- -- 0.9 Missouri — 1-3 -- -- 5-3 15.5 Kentucky — 0.1 -- -- -- 0.6 Arkansas 2.0 12.2 -- 1U.3 15-3 26.0 Tennessee -- 0.9 -- 0.5 0.3 9.1 Louisiana -- -- -- — -- 23.6 Mississippi -- 1.0 -- 0.8 0.5 3-9 Alabama -- -- -- — — 0.5 Total 2.0 18. 5 -- 22.4 25.7 91.0 Atlantic Flyway New York — -- -- -- -- T Maryland -- — -- — -- 0.1 Virginia -- -- -- -- -- 0.1 South Carolina -- -- -- --^:— 1-7 Total -- -- -- 1-9 TOTAL 99-9 99.9 99-9 100.2 99.8 99-9 23 Table 5 — Wintering area derivation (in percent) of the adult mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from banding post season in winter areas. --continued Harvest area Banding area Wis. Mich. Iowa 111. Ind. Ohio Pacific Flyway Oregon -- -- -- 0.3 -- -- Idaho — -- l.k l.k — -- -- Total -- — 0.3 -- — Central Flyway Montana 0.2 -- -- 0.1 -- -- South Dakota 1-9 -- 0.8 1.1 — — Nebraska 0-3 -- 2.U 0-7 1.3 -- Colorado -- -- 0.6 0.1 -- -- Kansas 0.6 -- 3.9 1.8 -- -- Oklahoma — 2.0 2.0 2.2 9.9 0.7 -- 3-9 Total 3-0 1-3 3-9 Mississippi Flyway Michigan 0.9 9-7 0.3 0.3 1-5 2.7 Iowa -- -- 7.9 -- -- -- Illinois 13.8 l.k 12.5 2U.1 11-9 2.7 Indiana 6.0 5.9 0.8 1.5 37-9 1.1+ Ohio 2.2 k.l -- 0.8 1.2 33-0 Missouri 11.0 — 11.6 7-3 -- -- Kentucky 0.6 1.1 0.7 1-5 -- -- Arkansas 21.0 12.1 37-9 22.9 15-1 11.8 Tennessee 25.3 37-1 11-3 13-3 21.9 23. k Louisiana -- -- — 15.8 -- -- Mississippi 8.2 -- 3.7 5-7 6.2 -- Alabama 1.8 90TF 3-8 75.8 0.9 8T£ 0.6 93.8 -- 5.0 Total 95-7 80.O Atlantic Flyway Massachusetts 0.1 -- 0.2 — — New York 0.2 0.6 — — -.- -- West Virginia 0.1 -- -- — -- -- Delaware 0.3 l.l — — -- T" Maryland o.fc 1-5 0.3 -- -- 1.5 Virginia 0.6 1.5 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.9 North Carolina . 0.3 1.0 -- 0.1 -- 1.9 South Carolina 3.7 16.2 0.5 l.U 2.7 11-9 Georgia 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 -- Florida o.k 6.2 -- -- ~TE -- -- Total 22.1 1.2 2-9 16.2 TOTAL 100.0 99.9 100.1 100.2 99.9 100.1 21+ Table 5 — Wintering area derivation (in percent) of the adult mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from banding post season in winter areas . --continued Harvest area Banding area Mo. Ky. Ark. Tenn. La. Miss Pacific Flyway • Washington -- -- 0.8 -- — — Oregon -- -- 0.1 0-9 -- -- -- Total -- -- -- -- — Central Flyway Montana 0-3 -- 0.1 0.3 0.2 -- South Dakota 1.8 -- 0-7 — 0.2 1.2 Nebraska 0.9 -- 0.9 O.k 1.0 1.1 Colorado 0.2 -- 0.1 -- 0.2 — Kansas 6.9 -- 3.0 -- 1-7 -- Oklahoma 2.0 -- 0.2 -- 0.8 2.1 Texas -- -- -- 5-9 6.6 1-5 5-6 -- Total 12.1 -- 5.0 k.k Mississippi Flyway Michigan -- 0.6 -- o.k — — Iowa 6.5 -- l.k l.k 0-7 3-7 Illinois 6.9 13-3 5-3 13.2 3-0 e.k Indiana 0.3 0.9 0.2 1.2 0.1 0.8 Ohio 0.2 2.3 0.1 2.3 0.3 -- Missouri 19-2 23.1 7-3 5.1 3-2 -- Kentucky 0.2 3-6 O.k 0.9 0.1 0.2 Arkansas 26.9 29.5 65.5 2k.k 1^.1 28.2 Tennessee 3.5 17.3 3.5 39-1 0.9 6.2 Louisiana 19.5 -- 7-1* -- 68.3 -- Mississippi k.O 6.1 2.6 2.0 3-2 V7.5 Alabama 0-3 Bo. 6 -- 0.2 93-9 2.6 92.6 0.3 9J+.2 0.7 Total 96.7 93.7 Atlantic Flyway Maryland -- -- -- -- -- o.k Virginia -- 0.2 -- 0.1 -- 0.1 North Carolina -- -- -- -- — 0.2 South Carolina o.k 3.2 0.2 0.7 0.1 l.k Georgia — -- T 0.2 0.1 0.9 -- -- Total O.k 3-4 0.1 2.1 TOTAL 100.0 100.1 100.0 100.1 99-9 100.2 25 Table 5. --Wintering area derivation (in percent) of the adult mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from banding post season in winter areas. --continued. Harvest area Banding area Ala. Maine Vt. N.H. Mass. Conn Central Flyway South Dakota 3-3 -- -- -- -- -- Texas 21.9 25.2 -- -- -- -- -- Total -- -- -- -- -- Mississippi Flyway Michigan 0.2 -- -- -- -- -- Illinois 8.1 — — -- -- -- Ohio k.2 -- -- -- -- -- Kentucky 1.1 -- -- -- __ -- Arkansas 18.1 -- -- -- -- — Tennessee 22.9 -- -- -- -- -- Mississippi 9-9 -- -- -- -- -- Alabama 9-5 7I+.0 — -- -- -- -- notal — — -- -- -- Atlantic Flyway New Hampshire « 53-3 -- 100.0 -- — Massachusetts — 15.0 -- -- 52.8 — New York -- 21.1 -- -- 10.6 U5.2 New Jersey -- -- -- -- 7-8 -- Maryland -- -- -- — 12.8 5^.8 Virginia -- -- 100.0 -- — — North Carolina -- 10.5 -- -- 15-9 — South Carolina 0.7 0.7 -- -- -- -- -- Total 99-9 100.0 100.0 99-9 100.0 TOTAL 99-9 99-9 100.0 100.0 99-9 100.0 26 Table 5 ---Wintering area derivation (in percent) of the adult mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from banding post season in winter areas. --continued Harvest area Banding area R.I. N.Y. Pa. W.Va. N.J. Del. Mississippi Flyway Michigan — -- 0.7 -- -- — Iowa -- 9-6 -- -- -- -- Illinois -- -- 11-9 -- -- -- Ohio -- -- k.l -- -- -- Tennessee -- 11.7 21.3 1^.3 31.0 -- -- 7.2 Total — — — - — 7.2 Atlantic Flyway Massachusetts 100.0 -- -- — 3-6 — Connecticut -- -- -- 100.0 -- -- New York -- 36.8 2.8 -- 12.8 2.1 New Jersey — 3.8 6.2 -- ^5.3 -- Delaware -- 3-0 9.9 ■ -- -- 37.1 Maryland — 16.6 23.7 -- 24.8 ko.-j Virginia -- 6.1 k.O — - k.B 3-0 North Carolina -- M l.k -- 5-1 k.2 South Carolina -- 8.2 78.8 21.0 69.O -- 3-5 99-9 5.8 Total 100.0 100.0 92.9 TOTAL 100.0 100.1 100.0 100.0 99-9 100.1 27 Table 5. — Wintering area derivation (in percent) of the adult mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from banding post season in winter areas. --continued Harvest area Banding area Md. Va. N.C. S.C. Ga. Fla. Mississippi Flyway Michigan 0.5 1-5 0.6 -- — -- Illinois J+.7 -- 10.8 1.7 — — Indiana -- — -- 3.7 -- -- Ohio 3-2 9-3 3-7 — 8.3 -- Kentucky -- 1.8 -- 0.5 3-2 -- Tennessee __ 10.8 13-0 k.l 27.9 60.2 Mississippi -- -- 19.7 -- -- — Alabama -- -- -- -- 11.2 70.6 -- Total ' 8.4 23. k 47. B 10.0 60.2 Atlantic Flyway New York -- 1.6 -- -- -- — West Virginia 1.0 -- -- -- -- -- New Jersey 1.6 -- 1-9 0.6 — -- Delaware 7.7 5-6 -- -- 9.9 -- Maryland 63.6 19.2 3-1 1.0 -- -- Virginia 3-1 40.5 k.Q 0.2 -- -- • North Carolina 3-3 3.2 16.1+ — - -- -- South Carolina 10.5 6.5 24.2 88.1 15-3 -- Georgia - 0.8 -- 1-9 0.3 K.l -- Florida -- -- -- -- -- 39-8 Total 91.6 76.6 52.3 90.2 29.3 39.B TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.1 100.2 99-9 100.0 28 Table 6. — Breeding area derivation (in percent) of the mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from summer and pre-hunting-season bandings of adult and immature mallards . Harvest area Banding area B.C. Alta. Sask. Man. Ont. Que. Canada NWT 8.1 k.9 8.8 British Columbia 61+. 6 Alberta 11. 7 91.O 9.6 5-3 Saskatchewan -- k.O 80.2 1+.8 1.0 Manitoba -- -- 0-9 81+. 2 0.2 Ontario -- -- -- -- 92-9 13 -1*- Quebec -- -- -- -- 2.1+ 76. 0 Total OT+7T+ 99.9 99.5 91+3 9^3 B9T Pacific Flyway Washington 15.1+ Idaho 0.1 T -- -- -- -- Total 15.5 T Central Flyway Montana -- 0.1 O.k 0.3 North Dakota -- -- 0.1 1-3 0.1 South Dakota -- 1.1 0.1 -- Total -- 0.1 0.5 2.7 0.2 Mississippi Flyway Minnesota -- -- -- 2.8 0.3 Wisconsin -- — -- 0.1 0.1+ Michigan -- — -- — l.U 0.2 Iowa -- -- -- -- T Indiana — -- -- -- T Ohio -- -- -- — 0.3 -- Total -- -- -- 2.9 2.1+ 0.2 Atlantic Flyway Vermont -- -- -- -- -- 0.1 New Hampshire -- -- -- -- -- 8.0 Massachusetts -- -- -- -- T 0.2 New York -- -- -- -.- 0.6 2.1 Pennsylvania -- -- 0.2 Total -- -- -- -- 0.8 10.1+ TOTAL 99.9 100.0 100.0 99.9 99.9 100.0 T (trace ) = less than 0.1 29 Table 6. — Breeding area derivation (in percent) of the mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from summer and pre -hunting season bandings of adult and immature mallards . --continued Harvest area Banding area Wash. Ore. Idaho Calif. Nev. Utah Ariz. Canada NWT 7-5 3-1 10.0 2.0 -- 13-1+ -- British Columbia . 15-8 15.9 16.0 1+.0 -- -- — Alberta 38.0 22.9 1+9.1+ 8.3 17.2 17-7 1+0.8 Saskatchewan 2.1 0.7 3.7 2.2 — 1.6 -- Manitoba -- -- 0.6 79-7 0.1+ 16.9 -- -- -- Total 63. 1+ 1+2.6 17-2 32.7 1+0.8 Pacific Flyway Washington 33-8 8.6 0.8 0.1+ -- -- -- Oregon 1-5 1+0.5 1.2 9-3 2.1+ -- -- Idaho o.k 0.1+ 11-3 0.2 0.7 l.l -- California -- 5.2 -- 70. 5 1.2 -- -- Nevada — 0.1 0.3 1-5 71.0 1.3 27.1+ Utah -- -- 1.6 15-2 0.6 82.5 3-2 78.5 12.8 65.2 10.8 Total 35.7 5U.8 38.2 Central Flyway Montana 0.9 2.3 5-1 0.1+ 1+.3 2.0 17.2 South Dakota -- o.k -- 0.1 -- -- -- Colorado -- -- T 5.1 -- -- -- 3-8 Total 0.9 2.7 0.5 1-.3 2.0 21.0 TOTAL 100.0 100.1 100.0 99-9 100.0 99-9 100.0 30 Table 6. — Breeding area derivation (in percent) of the mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from summer and pre-hunting-season bandings of adult and immature mallards continued Harvest area Banding area Mont. N.Dak. S.Dak. Wyo. Nebr. Colo. Kans . Canada NWT 5-h 10.0 12.5 18.3 5.6 9.k 22.6 Alberta i+5-3 19. k 16. k 32.1 20.7 16.6 15.6 Saskatchewan k.6 10.7 31.3 17.7 k2.Q 13-2 k6. 3 Manitoba -- 8.8 7-5 -- 2.6 3.9 1.5 Ontario -- 0.2 ^9.1 0.2 67.9 -- -- -- 0.8 Total 55-3 68.1 70.9 43.1 86.8 Pacific Flyway Oregon -- -- -- 0.6 -- -- -- Idaho o.k -- — 0.3 -- 0.2 -- Nevada 0.1 — Utah 0.2 0.6 -- -- -- — O.k 0.7 -- Total -- -- 0.9 -- — Central Flyway Montana U2.7 1.0 2.k 6.8 k.6 2.9 Z.k North Dakota 1.3 31-5 7-5 6.k 6.0 O.k 3.0 South Dakota — 16.7 20.5 -- k.5 0.2 1-9 Wyoming -- -- — 17.6 3A 10.0 -- Nebraska -- 0.2 0.8 -- 9-9 2.1 2.3 Colorado T T — 0.1 0.1 U0.6 -- Kansas 3.1 Total hk.o ks.k 31.1 30.9 28.5 56.2 12.7 Mississippi Flyway Minnesota T 1.5 0.9 -- 0.6 -- 0.5 Wisconsin -- T Michigan -- — — -- T -- -- Iowa -- T Ohio — T 1.5 T 0.9 Total T -- 0.6 -- 0-5 TOTAL 99-9 100.0 99-9 99.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 31 Table 6. --Breeding area derivation (in percent) of the mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from summer and pre -hunting -seas on bandings of adult and immature mallards . --continued Banding area Harvest area N.Mex. Okla. Texas Minn. Wise. Mich. Canada NWT Alberta Saskatchewan Manitoba Ontario Quebec Total Pacific Flyway Utah Central Flyway Montana North Dakota South Dakota Nebraska Colorado Kansas Total 88.6 H8T0" 1.7 1.2 8~5 "9^7 22 1 h 9 .6 9 12.6 16.9 50.3 k.O 0-3 k.l 5-2 11.0 20.1 6.3 k.k 3.2 6.6 1.2 15^ 2.6 6.6 3-6 2.0 0..3 0.9 k.S 8.2 1.1 1.7 k.2 6.3 8178" UHi WTj I3T3 1.7 2.8 11.1 3-1 2U.8 0.5 l.l 15.1 13.9 ~^5 1.1 Mississippi Flyway Minnesota Wisconsin Michigan Iowa Illinois Indiana Ohio Total 0.8 0.6 31.3 h.3 2.k 0.2 k.Q 72.1 6.6 0.7 2.3 39-7 1.3 1.8 0.1 l.l 1.1 1.2 0.1 0.3 0.2 -- -- T 0.2 U.3 "oTB" "oTB" 39-3 B2T1 5^ Atlantic Flyway New York TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.9 99-9 0.1 99-9 32 Table 6. --Breeding area derivation (in percent) of the mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from summer and pre -hunting -seas on bandings of adult and immature mallards . --continued Harvest area Banding area Iowa 111. Ind. Ohio Mo. Ky. Ark. Canada NWT 9.7 -- -- -- 11.6 -- 6.3 British Columbia -- 2.5 Alberta 15-3 20.0 1*9.1 -- 22.0 16.2 13.8 Saskatchewan 3U.2 31-9 8.0 -- 36.9 3^-3 52.6 Manitoba 19-5 12.7 2.8 8-3 11-5 10. k 6.7 Ontario 0.8 3-7 15.6 31-9 0.8 21.7 2.0 Quebec 0.1 Total 79-5 70.8 75-5 40.2 82.8 82.6 81.5 Central Flyway Montana 2.2 0.3 -- -- 0.7 0.8 1.6 North Dakota k.l 3.0 3.2 1.6 6.9 _- 7.0 South Dakota 2.7 k.l 0.9 5-3 k.k 1.9 6.6 Nebraska -- -- -- -- 0.3 -- -- Kansas 0.2 Total 9.0 7.4 k.l 6.9 12.3 2.7 15-4 Mississippi Flyway Minnesota 5-9 5-7 3-1 l.k 1.2 2.0 1.5 Wisconsin 3.1 9-2 5.8 6.2 0.9 6.8 1-3 Michigan 0.7 0.7 3.2 8.0 0.1 3-1 0.1 Iowa . 1-7 1.0 -- -- -- 0-3 0.1 Illinois k.Q -_ — 2.7 — — Indiana -- 0.2 6.6 1.0 — 1.2 T Ohio 0.1 11.5 0.2 21.8 l.k 20.1 27.2 k$.8 -- 1.1 lk.$ 0.1 Total k.9 3-1 Atlantic Flyway New York — T ' 0.2 0.3 -- 0-3 T Pennsylvania "" -- -- 8.8 9-1 -- -- Total T 0.2 -- 0.3 T TOTAL 100.0 100.0 99-9 100.0 100.0 100.1 100.0 33 Table 6. --Breeding area derivation (in percent) of the mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from summer and pre -hunting -seas on bandings of adult and immature mallards . --continued Harvest area Banding area Tenn. La. Miss . Ala. Maine vt. N.H. Canada NWT 10.14- 4-5 Alberta 2.6 16.5 22.1 9-6 -- -- -- Saskatchewan 26.7 50.5 35-6 7.9 -- -- -- Manitoba 10.0 8.9 15-3 10.9 -- -- — Ontario 25.3 1.0 5.8 18.0 -- -- -- Quebec 0.6 75-6 -- -- -- -- 70.4 70.1)- — Total 81.1+ 78.8 1+6.4 -- -- Pacific Flyway Idaho -- 0.2 Central Flyway Montana o.k 1.7 1.1 North Dakota 5.2 8.6 4.1 32.6 -- -- -- South Dakota 6.2 5.0 9.6 3A — — -- Nebraska -- 0.2 Colorado -- T Kansas -- 0.2 15.7 Total 11.B ik.B 36.0 -- -- — Mississippi Flyway Minnesota 2.5 l.k 2.5 2.2 -- -- -- Wisconsin k.6 1.0 2.7 6.2 — -- — Michigan 2.9 0.1 0.8 h.k -- — -- Iowa 0.2 T Indiana l.l -- o.k Ohio 1.1 12. k 0.1 2.6 0.1 6.5 0.7 13-5 -- -- -- Total -- -- -- Atlantic Flyway Maine -- -- -- -- 89.8 -- 51-9 Vermont 2U.1 -- Massachusetts -- -- -- -- 9-3 -- 1*8.1 New York 0.2 T T 0.6 0-9 5.5 -- Pennsylvania -- -- -- 3.4 1+.0 -- -- -- Total 0.2 T T 100.0 29.6 100.0 TOTAL 100.0 99-9 100.1 99-9 100.0 100.0 100.0 34 Table 6. --Breeding area derivation (in percent) of the mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from summer and pre -hunting -seas on bandings of adult and immature mallards . --continued Harvest area Banding area Mass . Conn. R.I. N.Y. Pa. W.Va. N.J. Canada NWT 22.6 Manitoba -- -- -- 3-9 1-9 -- k.6 Ontario -- 21.3 -- 57-1 kl.k 33-6 36.7 Quebec 9-9 28.1 60.8 7-2 2.6 11. h 11.5 Total 9-9 k9.k 60.8 68.2 45.9 45.0 75.4 Central Flyway North Dakota 16.6 -- Mississippi Flyway Minnesota -- -- -- O.k 0.7 -- 0.5 Wisconsin -- -- -- 0.6 1.8 -- -- Michigan -- -- -- 1.6 3-h 11.9 2.k Ohio -- -- -- 0.2 2.8 1-3 7.2 1-3 13-2 — Total -- — -- 2.9 Atlantic Flyway Maine 13-2 -- 15.2 0.9 -- -- k.l Vermont -- 0.1 -- 0.1 T -- 0.1 New Hampshire -- 2.0 Massachusetts 73-8 1*6.1+ -- 0.1 -- -- 0.5 Rhode Island -- 2.0 24.0 T 0.1 -- -- New York 3.0 -- -- 27.0 1-9 l.k 3.8 Pennsylvania -- -- -- 0-7 kh. 0 -- -- West Virginia 23.8 — New Jersey -- -- -- 0.2 -- -- 12.1 Delaware -- -- -- -- 0.7 W>.7 -- 1.0 Total 90.0 50.5 39-2 29.0 25.2 21.6 total 99.9 99.9 100.0 100.0 99.8 100.0 99.9 35 Table 6. --Breeding area derivation (in percent) of the mallard kill in various harvest areas during the 1966-68 hunting seasons based on weighted first hunting season recoveries from summer and pre -hunting -seas on bandings of adult and immature mallards — continued Earvest area Banding area Del. Md. Va. N.C. s.c. Ga. Fla. Mex. Canada Saskatchewan -- 10.8 18.4 -- 17.3 11.2 -- -- Manitoba -- -- 3-3 -- -- 23.3 -- -- Ontario 58. k ^3-7 46.1 59-7 ^3.5 40.2 65.6 -- Quebec 6.1 64.5 6-5 6l.0 67. 8 2.4 62.1 1.0 61.8 -- -- -- Total 74.7 65.6 -- Pacific Flyway California 83.6 Central Flyway Montana 0.7 North Dakota 7-1 7.3 South Dakota -- -- 2.0 1-9 0.8 8.7 7-9 -- Colorado 16.4 Total -- -- 2.0 9.0 8.8 8.7 7-9 16.1+ Mississippi Flyway ■ Minnesota 1.8 -- 0.6 1-3 2.7 1.6 5-1 -- Wisconsin 1-9 2.5 6.5 6.0 10.5 6.0 13.7 -- Michigan 6.2 1-7 k.o 5-7 5-3 4.5 1.5 -- Iowa 0.7 Indiana 2.3 -- Ohio -- 0.6 4.8 1.9 13.0 2.6 15.6 2.4 21.6 2.3 l4.4 l.l 23.7 -- Total 9-9 -- Atlantic Flyway Maine -- 0.3 -- 0.5 Vermont 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 ■T -- -- — Massachusetts 0.3 Rhode Island -- 0.1 New York 12.1 3-6 3-8 6.5 2.3 0.6 2.8 . __ Pennsylvania -- 3.1 2.7 3.9 4.8 1.6 -- — New Jersey -- -- o.4 Delaware 8.3 2.1 -- 1.9 0.8 Maryland 5.0 24.8 1.1 Virginia -- -- 9-1 17.2 Total 25.6 3^-1 13.2 7-9 2.2 2.8 — TOTAL 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.1 100.0 100.0 100.0 36 Table Al. --Number of first hunting season recoveries from mallards banded postseason (winter), 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. Recovery area Banding area Alaska NWT B.C. Alta. Sask. Man. Ont. Que. Pacific Flyway Washington 1 - 18 35 3 - - _ Oregon 1 - ik 12 2 1 _ _ Idaho - - 1 3^ U _ _ _ California - - 1 3 _ - _ _ Nevada - - - - 1 _ _ _ Utah - - - 3 1 - - - Central Flyway Montana - - 2 38 10 - _ _ North Dakota - - - 1 5 - _ _ South Dakota - - - 11 10 7 _ _ Wyoming - - - 8 3 - - - Nebraska - - - 2k 26 10 _ _ Colorado - - 1 56 31 2 _ _ Kansas - 1 - 23 38 5 - - New Mexico - - - 15 7 1 _ _ Oklahoma - - 1 k 16 6 _ _ Texas - - - 1 k - - - Mississippi Flyway Michigan - - - 1 6 k 27 - Iowa - - - 2 11 k - - Illinois - - 2 5 32 27 10 - Indiana - - - - 5 7 8 _ Ohio - - - - - k 25 1 Missouri - - - k 11 k _ _ Kentucky - - - - 9 7 - - Arkansas - - 8 35 21 2 _ Tennessee - - ' 1 8 32 26 36 - Louisiana - - - - 1 - - - Mississippi - - - 3 13 2 2 - Alabama - - - - 3 6 1 - Atlantic Flyway Massachusetts - - - _ _ - 1 _ New York - - - _ _ - 6 5 West Virginia - - - _ _ - k New Jersey - - - - - - 3 - Delaware - - - - - - 3 1 Maryland - - - - - 1 6 2 Virginia - - - - 3 5 22 - North Carolina - - - - _ - 8 k South Carolina - - - 3 9 6 63 1 Florida - - - - - - 1 - TOTAL 2 1 kl 37 302 331 156 228 Ik Table Al .- -Number of first hunting season recoveries 1 from mallards banded postseason (winter), 1966-6E > occurring in each State i and Province of recovery. — continued Recovery area Banding area N.B. Wash. Ore. Idaho Calif. Nev. Utah Ariz. Pacific Flyway Washington -- 269 26 12 k Oregon -- 78 lU2 6 6 — 1 -- Idaho -- 7 10 155 1 3 6 1 California -- 3 12 -- 136 6 1 -- Nevada -- -- 1 2 — 38 17 3 Utah -- 1 1 15 2 2 128 1 Central Flyway Montana — 13 7 19 2 -- 1 -- North Dakota -- 1 Wyoming 2 — — 2 — Nebraska -- 1 2 -- 1 -- 1 -- Colorado — 9 k 9 h -- 3 1 Kansas -- — 1 2 New Mexico -- -- 1 8 -- -- 8 2 Oklahoma 1 — Mississippi Flyway Iowa -- -- 2 Illinois -- 1 -- 1 Atlantic Flyway Maine 1 TOTAL 383 209 231 156 U9 169 38 Table Al. --Number of first hunting season recoveries from mallards banded postseason (winter), 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. --continued Recovery area Banding area Mont. N.D. S.D. Wyo. Nebr. Colo. Kans. N.M. Pacific Flyway Washington 9 -- -- 1 2 -- — -- Idaho 16 1 -- -- 1 2 2 -- California l 1 Nevada 1 Utah 5 1 -- -- Central Flyway Montana 297 k 5 2 7 5 1 1 North Dakota -- 13 3 South Dakota l Ik 57 1 12 2 7 — Wyoming 5 -- 2 35 -- U -- -- Nebraska 7 20 22 3 175 6 Ik 1 Colorado 16 Ik 15 15 51 272 12 2 Kansas 5 35 30 2 5^ 5 129 -- New Mexico 7 7 3 3 3 39 3 52 Oklahoma k 9 22 — 15 -- 33 -- Texas 2 -- 1 -- -- 2 l -- Mississippi Flyway Michigan -- 9 2 -- -- -- l -- Iowa -- 6 5 — 3 -- 3 -- Illinois 1 3^ 15 -- 6 -- 3 -- Indiana -- 11 1 Ohio -- 2 Missouri -- 8 10 -- k -- 1 -- Kentucky — 6 3 — l -- 2 -- Arkansas -- 31 27 1 13 l 10 -- Tennessee 2 38 19 -- -- -- k -- Louisiana -- l -- -- l -- -- -- Mississippi -- 13 6 -- 'k -- 3 -- Alabama -- 3' Atlantic Flyway Maryland -- 1 Virginia -- 2 l North Carolina -- -- 1 South Carolina 1 9 5 TOTAL 379 292 255 6k 352 339 229 56 39 Table Al. --Number of first hunting season recoveries from mallards "banded postseason (winter), 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. --continued Banding area Recovery area Okla. Texas Minn. Wise. Mich. Iowa 111. Ind. Pacific Flyway Oregon Idaho Central Flyway Montana South Dakota Nebraska Colorado Kansas New Mexico Oklahoma Texas Mississippi Flyway Minnesota Michigan Iowa Illinois Indiana Ohio Missouri Kentucky Arkansas Tennessee Louisiana Mississippi Alabama Atlantic Flyway Massachusetts New York New Jersey Delaware Maryland Virginia North Carolina South Carolina Georgia Florida TOTAL — 1 — 1 -- 7 -- — 1 1 1 3 -- 1 3 -- 6 7 5 1 -- 6 k 1 k 5 1 -- -- 2 1 -- 29 30 8 1 -- 5 5 -- -- 7 k3 11 1 -- . 1 3 2 — — 11 2 1 __ — 12 21 6k 5 12 8 k 3 6 -- -- -- 3 57 35 1 25 108 7 — l 13 28 8 3 12 in -- -- 8 8 5 -- 5 1 -- 3 20 6 -- 5 7 -- -- -- . Ik 6 3 5 25 -- 5 9 35 12 2 17 23 2 1 l 68 80 3^ 28 7^ 16 -- -- 2 1 -- 1 1 19 17 -- 6 21 3 — — 3 5 3 2 3 — ■" 1 1 .. l 2 1 1 2 1 -- -- 1 2 2 1 -- -- -- — 5 13 10 2 3 l -- -- -- 3 3 -- 1 -- -- -- 31 29 37 3 19 5 1 1 l 1 -- 2 95 9k 308 279 177 128 332 85 ko Table Al. --Number of first hunting season recoveries from mallards banded postseason (winter), 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. --continued Recovery area Banding area Ohio Mo. Ky. Ark. Tenn. La. Miss. Ala. Pacific Flyway - Washington 2 Oregon 1 Central Flyway Montana -- 2 -- 2 1 3 -- -- South Dakota -- k -- k -- 1 1 1 Nebraska -- k -- 11 1 9 2 -- Colorado -- 1 -- 2 -- 3 -- -- Kansas -- 16 -- 18 — 8 -- -- Oklahoma 1 5 -- 1 -- k 2 -- Texas 1 1 -- 1 Mississippi Flyway Michigan 9 -- 3 k 7 -- -- 1 Iowa -- 9 -- 5 1 2 2 -- Illinois l 25 8 50 2k 22 9 k Indiana l 2 1 3 k 1 2 -- Ohio 18 1 2 2 6 3 -- 3 Missouri -- 15 3 15 2 5 -- -- Kentucky -- 3 8 13 6 k 1 2 Arkansas l 22 k ll*0 10 23 9 2 Tennessee 11 16 13 1* 89 8 11 lU Louisiana -- 1 -- 1 -- 7 -- -- Mississippi -- 12 3 20 3 19 55 1* Alabama 2 1 -- 2 5 2 1 5 Atlantic Flyway Maryland l 1 -- Virginia 3 -- 1 1 l -- 1 — North Carolina 3 1 -- South Carolina Ik k 6 6 k 2 6 1 Georgia l 1 TOTAL 65 1U3 52 3U5 166 127 10U 38 in Table Al. --Number of first hunting season recoveries from mallards banded postseason (winter), 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. --continued Recovery area Banding area Me. Vt. N.H. Mass. Conn. R.I. N.Y. Fa. Mississippi Flyway Michigan — -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 Iowa -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 Illinois Ohio -- -- -- -- — -- -- 1 Tennessee -- -- -- -- -- -- ^3 Atlantic Flyway New Hampshire 2 2 Massachusetts 1 -- -- 7 1 New York 2 — — 2 2 — k3 2 New Jersey -- -- 1 — --3 3 Delaware — -- -- -- — 1 Maryland ______! 1 — 8 7 Virginia -- 1 — — -- -- 15 6 North Carolina 1 — — 3 — — 5 1 South Carolina — — -- -- -- -- 7 H TOTAL 6 1 2 lit- 3 1 87 39 US Table Al. --Number of first hunting season recoveries from mallards banded postseason (winter), 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. --continued Banding area W.Va. Recovery area N.J. Del. Md. Va. N.C. Mississippi Flyway Michigan Illinois Ohio Kentucky Tennessee Mississippi Atlantic Flyway Massachusetts New York West Virginia New Jersey Delaware Maryland Virginia North Carolina South Carolina Georgia TOTAL — — 1 2 1 1 2 —--12 1 1 1—2 3 - 3 l 5 l -- 1 2 1 12 l l 5 2 1 ~ k 8 2U 5 1 h 3 6 5^ 8 2 2 3 2 13 12 7 3 1^ 1 2 29 22 1*8 73 h9 s.c. Ga. Fla. Mississippi Flyway Illinois 1 -- -- Indiana 1+ -- -- Ohio -- 1 — Kentucky 1" 1 — Tennessee 3 5 1 Alabama -- 1 Atlantic Flyway New Jersey 1 — -- Delaware -- 1 -- Maryland 1 — — Virginia 1 -- -- South Carolina 162 k — Georgia 1 2 -- Florida TOTAL 175 15 1 2 U3 Table A2. --Number of first hunting season recoveries from immature mallards banded preseason, 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. Recovery area Banding area NWT B.C. Alta. Sask. Man. Ont. Que. N.S. Canada • NWT 2 1 2 5 British Columbia 7 Alberta -- 5 100 10 2 Saskatchewan -- -- 6 106 3 2 -- -- Manitoba 2 109 1 -- -- Ontario 736 5 -- Quebec 28 50 -- Nova Scotia 2 Pacific Flyway Washington -- ^7 Central Flyway Montana 1 1 North Dakota 1 South Dakota 2 Mississippi Flyway Minnesota 6h h -- -- Wis cons in . 5 -- -- Michigan 77 l -- Iowa 1 -- -- Indiana 1 -- -- Ohio 22 -- -- Atlantic Flyway Vermont k .-- New Hampshire l -- Massachusetts 1 l -- New York 128 25 -- TOTAL 2 60 108 124 182 1006 87 2 kk Table A2. --Number of first hunting season recoveries from immature mallards banded preseason, 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. --continued Recovery area Banding area N.B. Wash. Ore. Idaho Calif. Nev. Utah Ariz. Canada - NWT — 3 1 1 -- — 1 -- British Columb ia — 2 3 3 1 Alberta — 21 9 15 k 1 2 -- Saskatchewan -- 1 -- 3 2 Manitoba 1 New Brunswick 5 Pacific Flyway Washington -- 193 25 2 3 Oregon -- 15 266 5 kO 2 -- -- Idaho -- 3 2 52 1 1 2 — California -- -- 16 -- 253 1 -- -- Nevada -- -- 1 3 12 93 3 2 Utah -- -- -- 3 -- l 80 -- Central Flyway Montana -- 3 6 8 1 2 l 1 South Dakota -- -- 1 Colorado 2 Atlantic Flyway New York 1 TOTAL 6 2Ul 330 96 317 101 89 J+5 Table A2 . - -Number of first hunting season recoveries from immature mallards banded preseason, 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. --continued Recovery area Banding area Mont. N.D. S.D. Wyo. Nebr. Colo. Kans . N.M. Canada NWT -- 3 2 1 -- 1 3 -- Alberta Ik 11 7 2 3 1 -- -- Saskatchewan 1 7 Ik 1 17 3 10 -- Manitoba -- 7 7 — 2 3 -- -- Ontario -- l 1 Pacific Flyway Oregon 1 Idaho 2 Nevada 1 — -- Utah 1 1 Central Flyway Montana 7^ 2 k 1 5 l 3 -- North Dakota 1 19 2 1 2 -- l -- South Dakota -- 37 26 -- 6 -- 2 -- Wyoming 1 1 2 — -- Nebraska -- -- 1 -- 12 1 2 -- Colorado 1 562 -- 18 Kansas 3 -- Mississippi Flyway Minnesota 1 29 13 -- 6 -- 6 — Wisconsin -- l Michigan 1 -- -- — Iowa -- 1 Ohio -- -- 1 Missouri -- -- 1 TOTAL 9^ 118 79 8 56 -575 30 19 k6 Table A2 — Number of first hunting season recoveries from immature mallards banded preseason, 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. --continued Recovery area Banding area Okla. Texas Minn. Wise. Mich. Iowa ill. Ind. Canada NWT -- 1 1 Alberta 5 2 3 -- -- 2 6 -- Saskatchewan 6 17 1 -- 2 6 13 -- Manitoba -- 1 15 3 1 9 10 -- Ontario -- 1 ' Ik 19 21+ 2 11 5 Quebec 1 Central Flyway y Montana 1 3 2 -- -- 2 -- -- North Dakota -- 2 1 -- -- 1 -- -- South Dakota 2 1+ 11 2 1 3 5 -- Nebraska -- 1 Colorado -- 3 Mississippi Flyway Minnesota 5 7 kko 38 10 hi 66 5 Wisconsin -- 2 51 682 11 20 62 7 Michigan -- -- 7 ^7 309 6 15 11 Iowa -- -- 8 29 1 18 20 -- Illinois 1 -- h -- Indiana -- -- l 2 2 -- l 12 Ohio -- -- 1 7 14-0 2 6 5 Atlantic Flyway s New York — -- 1 -- k -- 1 3 TOTAL 19 uu 557 829 koj ill 221 US ^7 Table A2. --Number of first hunting season recoveries from immature mallards banded preseason, 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. --continued Recovery area Banding area Ohio Mo. Ky. Ark. Tenn. La. Miss . Ala. Canada • NWT -- 2 -- 2 1 1 -- — Alberta -- 7 1 8 -- 7 h — Saskatchewan -- 12 3 kk 5 32 6 — Manitoba -- 8 l 10 2 7 2 -- Ontario 16 1 8 15 15 6 If 5 Quebec 1 1 -- — — Pacific Flyway Idaho 1 — Central Flyway Montana -- 1 -- 3 -- 3 -- -- North Dakota -- 3 -- 5 — 6 -- 2 South Dakota 2 7 -- 19 h 9 6 -- Colorado l -- — — Mississippi Flyway Minnesota 3 19 2 36 9 33 8 2 Wisconsin 5 8 6 20 6 13 8 2 Michigan 23 2 11 6 18 3 6 5 Iowa '-- -- l 1 2 l -- -- Illinois -- 2 Indiana 1 -- k 1 5 — -- -- Ohio 117 -- 1 1 6 5 1 3 Tennessee 1 — -- ~ ™ Atlantic Flyway New York 7 -- 5 1 1+ 1 1 3 Pennsylvania 5 TOTAL 179 72 U3 173 79 129 *»6 22 1*8 Table A2. --Number of first hunting season recoveries from immature mallards banded preseason, 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. --continued Recovery area Banding area Me. Vt. N.H. Mass. Conn. R.I. N.Y. Pa. Canada Manitoba -- -- -- -- — -- 1 Ontario -- -- -- -- -- -- 52 18 Quebec __ 3 __ 1 1 __ 8 2 New Brunswick 1 1 Mississippi Flyway Minnesota -- — -- -- -- -- -- 3 Wisconsin -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 Michigan -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 10 Ohio -- 3 6 Atlantic Flyway Maine l6 -- -- 1 -- 2 Vermont -- 56 -- -- 1 Massachusetts 3-- k 2k 2 Connecticut — — -- -- 5 Rhode Island -- -- — — -- 5 New York 12---- 3 __ Pennsylvania TOTAL 21 6l 1+ 27 12 7 699 99 1 -- 8 -- 1 -- 1 2 618 21 1 35 ^9 Table A2.- -Number of first hunting season recoveries from immature mallards banded preseason, 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. — continued Recovery area Banding area W.Va. N.J. Del. Md. Canada Ontario -- 8 6 11 Quebec 1 5 1 3 New Brunswick — 1 -- -- Mississippi Flyway Wisconsin -- -- 1 1 Michigan k 6 1 2 Ohio 1 Atlantic Flyway Maine -- — — 1 Vermont — k -- 3 Massachusetts -- 2 -- -- Rhode Island -- -- -- 1 New York 3 15 7 37 Pennsylvania- — — — 1 West Virginia 2 New Jersey — 9 — -- Delaware — -- 1 -- Maryland -- — 1 15 TOTAL 11 50 18 75 50 Table A2. --Number of first hunting season recoveries from immature mallards banded preseason, 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. --continued Recovery area Banding area Va. N.C. S.C. Ga. Fla. Canada Saskatchewan 1 -- 2 Ontario 19 17 21 Quebec — 1 1 Central Flyway South Dakota Mississippi Flyway Minnesota 2 l 7 1 1 Wisconsin 3 2 9 2 3 Michigan 10 7 18 h 1 Indiana -- -- — -- 1 Ohio 3 3 5 -- 1 Atlantic Flyway Maine -- l -- -- -- Vermont k 2 1 — — Massachusetts -- 1 -- — -- New York 37 31 31 5 3 Pennsylvania -- l 1 -- -- Delaware -- 1 1 -- -- • Maryland 1 — — — -- TOTAL 80 68 97 17 16 51 Table A3- --Number of direct recoveries from adult mallards banded preseason, 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. Banding area Recovery area B.C. Alta. Sask. Man. Ont. Que, Wash . Ore . Canada NWT British Columbia Alberta Saskatchewan Manitoba Ontario Quebec 1 5 5U 2 8 83 2 3 2 ^7 163 k 2 10 1 7 33 3 1 11 1 Pacific Flyway Washington Oregon Idaho California 10 1 8k 7 k 18 103 2 13 Central Flyway Montana North Dakota South Dakota k 1 1 3 1 2 Mississippi Flyway Minnesota Wisconsin Michigan Ohio 6 1 9 10 19 5 Atlantic Flyway Vermont New York Pennsylvania TOTAL 17 61 19 k 1 5 100 63 237 18 1U2 151 52 Table A3- --Number of direct recoveries from adult mallards banded preseason, 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. --continued Recovery area Banding area Idaho Calif. Nev. Utah Ariz. Mont. Canada NWT 3 1 -- 1 -- 2 British Columb ia 1 -- -- -- — -- Alberta 32 k 2 5 1 20 Saskatchewan -- — -- 1 -- h Manitoba -- 1 -- -- -- -- Pacific Flyway Washington 2 -- -- -- -- -- Oregon 6 56 2 -- -- -- Idaho 88 3 -- k — 2 California -- 193 -- -- -- -- Nevada -- 5 38 2 3 -- Utah 5 3 2 58 1 -- Central Flyway Montana 20 l 1 1+ -- 88 South Dakota — l -- -- -- — Colorado 2 -- -- -- l 1 TOTAL 159 268 ^ 75 6 117 53 Table A3 •--Number of direct recoveries from adult mallards banded preseason, 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of re cover y . - - cont inued Recovery area Banding area N.D. S.D. Wyo. Nebr. Colo. Kans. N.M. Okla Canada NWT 1 2 -- 2 1 2 -- 1 Alberta 7 k 3 15 10 12 1 3 Saskatchewan 6 15 2 20 6 25 -- 7 Manitoba 13 5 -- 2 1 2 -- l Ontario 1 -- -- Pacific Flyway . Idaho -- -- 1 -- 2 -- — -- Utah 1 Central Flyway Montana h 6 7 17 11 k 1 6 Worth Dakota 61 16 -- 10 1 .3 -- 3 South Dakota U2 57 -- 10 1 3 -- 6 Wyoming -- -- 2 — 2 Nebraska 1 1 -- 10 3 2 -- -- Colorado 1 -- 1 2 381 -- 15 -- Kansas 2 -- l Mississippi Flyway Minnesota 12 5 -- 1+ -- 1 -- -- Ohio 1 TOTAL lU9 111 16 92 teo 57 17 28 5* Table A3- --Number of direct recoveries from adult mallards banded preseason, 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of re cover y • — cont inued Recovery area Banding area Texas Minn. Wise. Mich. Iowa ill. Canada NWT 2 -- -- -- 2 -- British Columbia 1 Alberta 7 5 1 2 5 10 Saskatchewan 15 11 2 2 13 18 Manitoba k Ik' 3 1 8 11 Ontario — k 2 7 -- 2 Central Flyway Montana 5 -- — — -- 3 2 North Dakota 7 10 5 -- 3 10 South Dakota 5 16 10 -- 1 12 Nebraska 3 Colorado 1+ Mississippi Flyway Minnesota 2 126 3^ 8 21 ^5 Wis cons in -- 11 212 20 h 56 Michigan -- k 6 65 2 3 Iowa -- 5 2 -- l l Illinois — l l -- -- 3 Indiana — -- 1 -- -- l • Ohio -- -- -- 10 — l Mississippi l TOTAL 5U 207 279 115 63 177 55 Table A3. --Number of direct recoveries from adult mallards banded preseason, 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. --continued Banding area Recovery area Ind. Ohio Mo. Ky. Ark. Term. La. Miss, Canada NWT -- -- 2 -- 2 -- 1 Alberta 1 -- 12 1 Ik 1 11 Saskatchewan 2 -- 30 2 56 3 32 Manitoba 1 3 13 2 12 k Ik Ontario 3 k 1 3 1 9 -- Pacific Flyway Idaho 1 Central Flyway Montana -- -- 3 1 15 l 8 Worth Dakota 2 l 12 -- 25 6 Ik South Dakota 1 l 11 2 31 3 19 Nebraska -- -- 1 -- -- -- 1 Kansas -- 1 -- 1 1 6 8 2 3 5 Mississippi Flyway Minnesota 6 2 J k 21 87 9 Wisconsin 7 9 5 8 15 13 6 5 Michigan 3 9 .-- 2 — 5 1 1 Iowa -- -- -- — 1 Illinois — -- 2 Indiana 5 1 1 — 1 Ohio 2 32 -- 2 2 3 — Missouri -- -- 2 Tennessee -- -- -- -- -- 1 New York -- -- -- -- -- 1 Pennsylvania -- 5 TOTAL 33 67 101 27 196 59 116 ^7 56 Table A3. --Number of direct recoveries from adult mallards banded preseason, 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of r e c ove r y . - - c ont inued Recovery area Banding area Ala. Me. Vt. N.H. Mass. Conn. Canada Alberta 1 Saskatchewan 1 Manitoba 2 Ontario 1 -- -- -- -- 1 Quebec -- -- -- -- -- 2 Central Flyvay North Dakota 2 South Dakota 2 Mississippi Flyway Minnesota 2 Wisconsin ■ 5 Michigan 3 Atlantic Flyway Maine -- 1 -- 1 1 -- Vermont -- -- 9 Massachusetts -- -- -- 1 8 Connecticut -- -- -- -- -- 1 New York 1 -- 1 -- 2 1 Pennsylvania 3 TOTAL 23 1 10 2 11 5 57 Table A3. --Number < 3f direct recoveries . from adult : mallards banded preseason, 1966-68 occurrir ig in each State and Pr ovine :e of recovery. - •-continued Recovery area Banding area R.I. N.Y. Pa. W.Va. N.J. Del. Md. Va. Canada NWT 1 Saskatchewan 2 2 Manitoba -- 1 1 -- 1 -- -- 1 Ontario -- 10 12 1 1+ 1 6 5 Quebec 1 2 1 -- 1 -- 1 -- Central Flyway North Dakota 1 South Dakota 2 Mississippi Flyway Minnesota -- 2 1 -- 1 1 -- -- Wisconsin -- 2 k 3 9 Michigan -- k 7 1 1 2 2 5 Ohio -- -- 3 1 3 Atlantic Flyway Maine -- 1 -- -- 2 Vermont -- 2 1 -- 1 1 2 -- Rhode Island 2 New York -- 99 11 -- 10 11 6 9 Pennsylvania -- — 39 2 k West Virginia 1 New Jersey -- l — — 9 -- -- l Delaware -- — 3 -- 2 2 5 -- Maryland 3 -- Virginia 2 TOTAL 12k 83 33' 18 33 ^3 58 Table A3. --Number of direct recoveries from adult mallards banded preseason, 1966-68 occurring in each State and Province of recovery. --continued Banding area Recovery area N.C. S.C, Ga. Fla. Mex. Canada Saskatchewan Manitoba Ontario 2 l 7 l 3 3 -- Pacific Flyway California -- — -_ Central Flyway Montana North Dakota South Dakota Colorado 2 1 1 5 1 1 1 Mississippi Flyway Minnesota Wisconsin Michigan Iowa Ohio 1 h 3 2 k 17 6 1 5 1 3 2 2 1 1 Atlantic Flyway New York Pennsylvania 9 l 7 7 1 1 TOTAL 25 59 17 h 59 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1971-437-569/115 As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has basic responsibilities for water, fish, wildlife, mineral, land, park, and recreational resources. Indian and Ter- ritorial affairs are other major concerns of this department of natural resources. The Department works to assure the wisest choice in managing all our resources so that each shall make its full contribution to a better United States now and in the future. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE BUREAU OF SPORT FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE WASHINGTON. D. C. 20240 POSTAGE AND FEES PAID DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. MAIL