Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 515

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Estimates of Movement and Site Fidelity Using Mark‐Resight Data of Wintering Canada Geese

Hestbeck, Jay B., Nichols, James D., Malecki, Richard A.·1991·Ecology

Abstract

Population ecologists have devoted disproportionate attention to the esti— mation and study of birth and death rates and far less effort to rates of movement. Movement and fidelity to wintering areas have important ecological and evolutionary implications for avian populations. Previous inferences about movement among and fidelity to wintering areas have been restricted by limitations of data and methodology. We use multiple observation data from a large—scale capture—resighting study of Canada Geese in the Atlantic flyway to estimate probabilities of returning to previous wintering locations and moving to new locations. Mark—resight data from 28,849 Canada Geese (Branta canadensis) banded woth individually coded neck bands in the mid—Atlantic (New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey), Chesapeake (Delaware, Maryland, Virginia), and Carolinas (North and South Carolina) were used to estimate movement and site—fidelity. Two three—sample mark—resight models were developed and programmed using SURVIV to estimate the probability of moving among or remaining within these three wintering regions. The model (MV2) that incorporated t radition" or memory of previous wintering regions fit the data better than the model (MV1) that assumes that a first—order Markov chain described movement among regions. Considerable levels of movement occured among regions of the Atlantic flyway. The annual probability of remaining in the same region for two successive winters, used as a measure of site fidelity, was 0.710 plus or minus 0.016 (estimated mean plus or minus SE, 0.889 plus or minus 0.006, and 0.562 plus or minus 0.025, for the mid—Atlantic, Chesapeake, and Carolinas, respectively. The estimated probability of moving between years corresponded to changes in winter harshness. In warm years, geese moved north and in cold years, they moved south. Geese had a high probability of moving to and remaining in the Chesapeake. Annual changes in the movement probabilities did not correspond to annual changes in the United States Fish and Wildlife midwinter survey. Considerable numbers of geese from the Carolinas appeared to be wintering in more northerly locations (s hort—stopped) in subsequent winters.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/2937193

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 515

Metadata

Authors
Hestbeck, J. B., Nichols, J. D., & Malecki, R. A.
Venue
Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1991-04
Volume
72
Issue
2
Pages
523-533
ISSN
  • 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-9170
OpenAlex
W1988052870
Cited by
515
References
0
FWCI
8.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Estimates of Movement and Site Fidelity Using Mark‐Resight Data of Wintering Canada Geese. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2937193
The paper
Hestbeck, J. B., Nichols, J. D., & Malecki, R. A. (1991). Estimates of Movement and Site Fidelity Using Mark‐Resight Data of Wintering Canada Geese. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/2937193

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.