1. Enhancing the Productivity of American Oystercatchers in the Cape Romain Region, SC
Samantha Collins 1,2, Patrick Jodice 1,2, and Felicia Sanders 3
1Department of Forestry and Natural Resources
2USGS South Carolina Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit
3South Carolina Department of Natural Resources

2. Purpose of Study
Determine productivity of AMOY nesting in three study areas
Assess methods to improve nesting success of American Oystercatchers

3. REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS 2006-2008

4. Study Objectives
Measure and compare reproductive success of AMOY nesting in three study areas
Identify and quantify factors affecting nest survival in oystercatchers
Determine whether or not head- starting nests improves hatch and fledge success
Refine techniques for head-starting, nest monitoring, and monitoring chick survival via radio-telemetry
Compare parental attendance during incubation and chick rearing stage at two study sites

5. Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway
Study Areas
Southwest Bulls Bay
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway
Shell rakes vs. Barrier beach

6. Nest Monitoring Every 3 days along AICW & SW Bulls Bay
Twice a week on Lighthouse Island
134 nesting attempts made by 35 pair along the AICW, 19 pair in SW Bulls Bay, and 18 pair on Lighthouse Island

7. Attendance Surveys
1hr long attendance and behavioral surveys conducted for active nests along AICW and SW Bulls Bay at low tide (~2hr before-after)
Conducted from either boat or land and using a minimum buffer of 150m
Eighteen behaviors identified
Attendance rates for 2010 field season:
AICW: 82% during incubation,88% during chick-rearing
SW Bulls Bay: 78% during incubation, 86% during chick-rearing
The presence and absence on the territory for each adult associated with the nest was noted throughout the duration of the survey Behaviors – such as forage, vigilance, incubate, brood, alarm..etc
Total attendance for each territory was calculated by combining the attendance time of the two adults during the survey and dividing by the total combined time of the survey for each adult
SWBB with lower attendance rates since oysterbed foraging grounds closer to territory

8. Productivity
Highest productivity along the AICW, lowest productivity in SW Bulls Bay
17 chicks fledged from all three study areas
Productivity for all nests monitored was 0.24 chicks fledged per pair
No.
No. nest
No. clutches
No. chicks
Productivity
 SITE
pairs
attempts
that hatched
that fledged
Estimate (1,2)
1 egg (%) 
(%)
AICW 35 61
23 (38)
13 (21)
0.37
SW Bulls Bay 19 37
6 (16)
1 (3)
0.05
Lighthouse Island 18 36
8 (22)
3 (8)
0.17
Total
 72
 134
 37 (28)
 17 (13)
 0.24
1 No. young fledged/ No. pairs
2 Includes head-starting data

9. Nest Failure
Causes of nest failure of America Oystercatchers in three study sites within the Cape Romain Region, South Carolina,
April-July 2010
Unknown is likely predation (no signs of overwash) but tracks/ signs difficult to observe on sites

10. Headstarting
collecting designated clutches during stage of vulnerability (incubation), incubating clutch in a controlled setting, and returning chicks to nest immediately after hatch
Collect partial clutches from odd numbered nests along AICW and in SW Bulls Bay
Fake wooden eggs attached by string to a nail anchor secured into the scrape to insure parents continue to incubate
Eggs were removed from 39 clutches along the AICW and SW Bulls Bay from 14 April through 1 July
53 eggs were collected for incubation between the two study sites
A total of 26 pairs were used for the headstarting program (17 pairs along AICW, 9 pairs in SW Bulls Bay).
Left one egg in the nest as an indicator of predation or egg loss due to overwash
Several ways to go about headstarting – in this study, headstarting essentially involved __

11. Chick Survival
Radiotelemetry was implemented for this project to more accurately determine timing and causes of chick loss in SW Bulls Bay and along the AICW
Attached 1.3g transmitters to 23 newly hatched headstarted chicks before returning them to the nest
Chicks located and measured every three days
Chicks were considered “fledged” at 35 days or when observed in flight
Identifiable causes of death for these chicks included predation, exposure, killed by adults, and overwash
Transmitters from chicks taken by predators were recovered near mink scat, as well as mink dens. Ex – one transmitter found in front of mink den where we observed a mink with two kits.

12. Headstarting problems
Anchoring system for fake eggs
Incubator malfunction
Abandon fake eggs
Extreme overwash burying scrape and shell rake
Three pair did not accept chicks
Six experimental nests between the two study areas failed due to loss of fake eggs – predators pull out of scrape
Had to securely anchor eggs to insure they were not predated – use of large nail upgraded to long piece of rebar hammered into scrape
Most adults accept fake eggs – abandoning nests occurred in SWBB where predation pressures likely caused adults to abandon

13. Headstarting Results
Results of American Oystercatcher nests used for the headstarting experiment in Cape Romain Region, South Carolina, April-July 2010
Site
No. nests fledged (%)
No. nests failed before hatch (%)
No. nests failed after hatch (%)
Total no. of headstarted nests
AICW
6 (24)
9 (36)
10 (40) 25
SW Bulls Bay
0 (0)
10 (71)
4 (29) 14
Productivity greater along AICW for headstarted nests. Headstarting did not help productivity in SW Bulls Bay.
Of the 39 nests collected, 28 nests lost the real egg during incubation.
Of the headstarted nests, 6 chicks fledged from the AICW and no chicks fledged from SW Bulls Bay . This yielded a productivity estimate for both study sites of 0.23 chicks per nest.
Of the 39 nests collected, 28 nests lost the real egg during incubation. This indicates that, without the aid of headstarting, 72% of the experimental nests would have likely failed.

14. Improvements Incubator settings/ placement
Cameras on active nests to identify predators in study area

15. Acknowledgements Funding and Material Support
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
US Geological Survey Cooperative Research Unit
SC Department of Natural Resources
Clemson University Department of Forestry and Natural Resources
US Fish and Wildlife Service – Cape Romain National Wildlife Refuge
Field and Logistical Support
Felicia Sanders, Mark Spinks, Sarah Dawsey

16. Questions?