THIRTY YEARS OF MORTALITY ASSESSMENT IN WHOOPING CRANE REINTRODUCTIONS: PATTERNS AND IMPLICATIONS

Authors

BARRY K. HARTUP, International Crane FoundationFollow
MARILYN G. SPALDING, University of FloridaFollow
NANCY J. THOMAS, USGS National Wildlife Health Center
GRETCHEN A. COLE, University of Wisconsin
YOUNG JUN KIM, Seoul National University

Date of this Version

2010

Document Type

Article

Citation

Hartup, B.K., M.G. Spalding, N.C. Thomas, G.A. Cole, and Y. Jun Kim. Thirty years of mortality assessment in whooping crane reintroductions: patterns and implications. In: Hartup, Barry K., ed., Proceedings of the Eleventh North American Crane Workshop, Sep 23-27, 2008, Wisconsin Dells, Wisconsin (Baraboo, WI: North American Crane Working Group, 2010), p. 204.

Comments

Reproduced by permission of the North American Crane Working Group.

Abstract

We reviewed postmortem data to identify primary causes of mortality in reintroduced whooping cranes (Grus americana) and assess their potential for mitigation in future reintroduction efforts. In total, 240 cases from 3 populations were reviewed for causes of death, including the Rocky Mountain migratory population (n = 24, release dates 1975-1989), the Florida resident population (n = 186, 1993-2005), and the Wisconsin migratory population (n = 30, 2001-ongoing). Traumatic injury was the leading cause of mortality among the reintroduced whooping cranes, most commonly from predation (n = 120 or 50%, range 8-58% per project) or collision with fixed structures such as electrical power lines or fences (n = 22 or 9%, range 3-46%). Disease of infectious etiology (including confirmed cases of bacterial, viral, fungal and parasitic infection) was the second leading cause of mortality (n = 19 or 8%, range 3-17%). The data were limited by the large number of undetermined causes of death due to scavenging and decomposition of carcasses (n = 64 or 27%, 8-40%). Molting and poor roosting behavior or habitat quality may have increased the risk of predation in these populations. Preventive measures for power line collisions (marking devices) are impractical except at significant roost or migration stopover sites. Health evaluations of release candidates should continue in order to minimize losses from endemic or emerging diseases and prevent the introduction of novel pathogens into native ecosystems.