I am fearful of new challenges. In 1993, when I began to study the behavioral ecology of loons on a cluster of 12 Wisconsin lakes, doubt gnawed at me. How can one carry out meaningful, publishable, scientific research, if one’s study animals are large, aquatic, diving birds that range over huge territories, dive constantly, and must be followed in boats? Would my work be severely limited in scope, like that of researchers on porpoises, whales, and sea turtles? I had no training in field techniques for study of aquatic animals, only my childhood experiences paddling canoes over vast stretches of Lake Temagami in central Ontario. But my fascination with loons — which also grew during summers on Temagami — and my sense that canoes could be an effective means of tracking them without altering their behavior pushed me forward. And so, for reasons that I do not understand, I began to treat seemingly insurmountable problems with funding, logistics, and personnel as mere nuisances. And I ignored warning signals that any reasonable young scientist would have heeded. I began to study loons.

So it was in Minnesota. Although one might surmise that beginning a field project on loons in one state would be much like doing so in another, this is not so. True: loons are loons. We see many of the same behaviors, hear the same basic calls, and witness the same sorts of human-loon interactions in Minnesota that we have seen over the past 29 years in Wisconsin. But all else is new. Starting a major field study in the Crosslake area has reminded us that we have an army of friends, lake residents, and supporters in Wisconsin. These folks have housed us, fed us, carried us around in their boats at times, and — most important — provided us with a trove of information on our study animals to supplement our field data.

And our Minnesota study lakes are far larger than those in Wisconsin. Only a masochist would attempt to study loons on the massive Whitefish Chain — where about half of our Minnesota study animals reside — by canoe. So a growing list of Minnesota friends and supporters have provided us with boats — thanks, John, Mike, Mary, Keith, and Dawn! — that permit us to cover the big water. (By the way, several others have made our work possible by providing housing — thanks, Melanie, Charlie, Mary, Jim and Jon!) In fact, we have learned that we can move about far more easily on huge lakes than on the tiny lakes where most of our Wisconsin loons live. Moreover, we can hold our position in the water more effectively and work in greater comfort on the Chain, providing winds are calm.

However, loon capture is another matter. Having caught rather few loons on huge lakes in Wisconsin, I was concerned that my team would waste many hours each night scanning the dark water before our spotlight came to rest upon a tiny light smudge that would become, on approach, a loon parent and a chick that we could capture. In truth, we do spend somewhat more time searching for Minnesota loon pairs that we are accustomed to. Furthermore, locating loon families acoustically is more difficult in Minnesota, because Minnesota loons seem less vocal at night than their small-lake brethren in Wisconsin. But once located, loons in Crow Wing County have proved easier to capture. So my irrational fear that loon capture would be slower and more difficult in our new western study area was unfounded.

What progress have we made in Minnesota so far? Despite the ill-timed failure of an outboard motor that forced us to cut short our night and limp back to our boat landing using only a single canoe paddle and three tote box lids, we have marked 37

adults and chicks in four nights. We banded sixteen loons on Ossawinamakee alone last night. In a few hours’ time, five anonymous territorial loon pairs on Ossie have become a valuable set of individuals whose behaviors, life histories, and survival rates we can track to enrich our understanding of loon breeding behavior and population dynamics. Moreover, our experience in Wisconsin tells us that the brief capture and marking process leaves little or no imprint on loon behavior. Loons caught and marked one night act the next day as if the event never happened. They display the same casual indifference towards us and other humans that they showed on the day before.

On the other hand, we ourselves are greatly changed after we capture and mark loons. Marked loons are individuals to whom we are committed forever afterwards. Yes, we get scientific data from them. But marking creates a lifetime bond between observer and loon. We know these birds. We cheer as chicks we marked return as adults to the study area and claim territories. We mourn when marked parents lose a chick or abandon a nest. And we move heaven and earth to guard these individuals and come to their rescue, if they need it. It has proved impossible to maintain pure scientific indifference to our study animals.

In short, Minnesota loons are excellent study subjects. They ignore our visits to their territories and forgive us immediately after capture and marking. My initial fears and doubts about marking and observing Minnesota loons have subsided. We can now see that we will learn an immense amount about territorial behavior, breeding ecology, and population dynamics of Minnesota loons — if we are willing to shoulder the burden of an intensive field project in a new state on these most engaging birds.

Yes, it has come to this. Chick production of breeding pairs in northern Wisconsin has declined steadily during the past quarter-century. Black fly outbreaks have made hatching success even worse in the past five years. So we are searching desperately for a positive outcome that we can greet with a sigh of relief. And we have one: breeding success has ticked slightly upwards in 2021.

I wish I could report that breeding success has rebounded with a vengeance. After a dreadful 2020, I felt that a strong rebound might be in order. But the recovery has been modest. Looking at the numbers, only three breeding pairs in our study area had chicks as of this date in 2020. That laughably low number resulted from 97% abandonment rate of May 2020 nesting attempts owing to black flies. Meanwhile 59 pairs were incubating eggs on this date in 2020. As of August of last year, 36 pairs were rearing chicks. This amounts to about 33% chick production in 2020 (36 of 110 breeding pairs). At present, we have 24 pairs in Wisconsin raising chicks and 41 other pairs still sitting on eggs. If we use the 2020 nesting outcomes to project 2021 success, we should end up this year with roughly 46 of 110 pairs with chicks in northern Wisconsin. A 42% breeding success rate is nothing to crow about. But since I am a positive person, I will choose to focus instead on the 28% increase in chick production between last and this year!

What about Minnesota? We have only just arrived in Minnesota and have no data from 2020. So we are not able to provide a very calibrated picture of breeding success in the Crosslake area, where we are located. Furthermore, Crow Wing County, where we work, is running about a week behind Wisconsin, so our data are even more preliminary in Minnesota than in Wisconsin. Still, we can already say that 2021 was a light black fly year in north-central Minnesota, as it was in northern Wisconsin. And that is a good thing. Out of 104 territorial pairs we are currently following in the Crosslake area, Jordana and Katy reported a few days ago that 13 have chicks and 42 are on nests. We estimate that the total pairs with chicks will number about 40, by the time August rolls around. But we are still scouting many of our Minnesota lakes, so that number could grow to 50.

Scouting new lakes is a tricky business, by the way. Going onto a new lake with no information on previous loon usage or breeding success forces you to read the behavior of loons on the lake to infer if those you see are: 1) an established pair that has is not currently incubating eggs, 2) a pair that hangs out together but never breeds, 3) an unpaired young floater, or 4) the “off-nest” member of a pair, whose mate is on a nest on the lake. Katy and Jordana’s daily sleuthing has been effective so far. But sometimes you misread the signs, which, in fact, can be thrilling. No doubt a few lakes where K and J found no loon or only a skittish loner on their first visit will offer a view like that in Linda’s photo on their second.

2016-08-01 02.16.10

In many recent posts, I have emphasized a certain theme: male loons begin to die off at a rapid rate after age twenty, while females linger on. Part of the reason for this contrast is the nature of territorial contests in each sex. Territorial males fight hard in attempting to hold their breeding position on a lake and commonly die in territorial battles. With rare exceptions, territorial females survive eviction from a territory, move to an unoccupied lake nearby, and resettle on a new territory when opportunity permits.

While the escalation of male territorial battles is interesting in itself, it also impacts the composition of the breeding population. Specifically, adult male loons’ propensity to die frequently in battle skews the sex ratio towards females in the breeding population.

These excess females are “floaters” — adults capable of breeding but prevented from so doing by the lack of a mate and/or a territory. Floaters are the loons that one sees living alone on small lakes, drifting about aimlessly on large lakes, and intruding into territories from time to time to confront breeders. A large proportion of the loons that gather in flotillas of five adults or more during July and August are floaters. Floaters can be thought of as “hopeful breeders”; that is, they are always ready to settle and breed with a mate and territory, if they can find one. The excess of female floaters means that there are always far more of them looking to settle and breed than there are male floaters able to pair with them. In effect, males are snapped up by females as soon as they become available for breeding.

In May of this year, we re-encountered one of our veteran breeders, “Silver over Blue, Green over Orange” (or “S/B,G/O”), whose breeding history illustrates the striking contrast between males and females brought about by male-biased mortality. S/B,G/O was first captured and marked as an adult in 1997 on Dorothy Lake, where she raised two chicks with her mate. Her mate was evicted in 2001 and died either during eviction or shortly afterwards. But she lingered on. When an opening became available in 2002, she settled and nested with a different male on Hasbrook Lake, just a few miles to the northwest. Having failed to raise chicks on Hasbrook, S/B,G/O (now at least 14 years old) evicted the female breeder on Hodstradt in 2004, paired with a third male, a six year-old, and reared four chicks there during the next three years. She followed this young male to Horsehead Lake in 2008, when he was driven off of Hodstradt, and the pair fledged 3 more chicks over the next four years on their new lake. When the male was evicted yet again in 2013, S/B,G/O traded experience for youth and found a new six year-old male as a breeding partner. We breathed a sigh of relief when she broke up with this youngster after a year together, as he was unfortunately her son from Hodstradt! Then 23+ years old, S/B,G/O again became a floater, forced to return to the breeding grounds in 2014 and 2015 with no clear prospects for breeding.

I have become attached to the birds in the study area, so I was delighted to find S/B,G/O back at Hodstradt in May of this year with her fifth recorded mate. At 26+ years of age, she is perhaps fortunate to be paired again. Her mate this time: a four year-old hatched on Clear Lake. We observed no breeding attempt by this new pair – only a small percentage of four- year-old males that settle on territories actually nest – but it is likely they will nest in 2017.

As a human, I like to think of S/B,G/O’s life as a lesson in resilience – the dogged refusal of an animal to forsake breeding despite repeated setbacks and advancing age. But, as a behavioral ecologist, I think of this female more as a striking example of how animals adapt to maximize their breeding capacity regardless of the breeding environment they face. By the way, S/B,G/O is not the only female in our study area who has continued to breed despite frequent changes of partner. S/R,O/O, another 26+ year-old from Swamp Lake that we recaptured a few nights ago (see photo with Eric), has gone through at least 5 younger mates during her 20 years of breeding there. Clearly the pairing of tough, old females with much younger males is – as my daughter says – a thing.

2016-07-23 06.11.39

He doesn’t look it, but this male from Townline Lake, just outside of Rhinelander, is at least twenty-seven years old. He is among a dwindling few males from among those we banded in the mid 90s. This bird was banded in 1994, at which point he was certainly at least five years old, which means that he was hatched in 1989 or before. Thus, twenty-seven is a minimum estimate for his age.

The age of “Silver over Red, Orange over Green” (as I call him affectionately) is not his only remarkable attribute. What sets this individual apart from most others is his ability to hold onto his territory year after year while fledging healthy chicks. (Below, he relaxes near his mate and two strapping chicks from 2016.) A successful common loon is not only good at locating safe nest sites and defending and feeding young. A breeder that wishes to

2016-07-23 06.11.47

reproduce successfully must confront intruders that land in the territory without warning throughout the breeding period.

Intrusions are especially frequent during the chick-rearing period. A common scenario plays out as follows. Early in the morning, a male is diving for food, while his two chicks track his progress from the surface. Each time he surfaces, the chicks rush over to him, snatch food from his grasp, and nibble relentlessly at his bill, neck and chest, signaling their unquenchable appetites. On one occasion, he surfaces holding a small yellow perch, only to find five adult loons in flight above his lake. He drops the fish, gives a short barking call, and the chicks dive and head to the nearest shore. The male too dives but surfaces near the middle of the lake, drawing the now-descending intruders to himself. Three quarters of an hour later he has driven off the intruders, thanks in part to a lunge and point yodel that caused his five visitors to scatter and tremolo. Shortly afterwards his mate returns, and both parents forage for the chicks. The family suffers no further disruptions until the evening, when another group of three nonbreeders circle and land, causing yet another brief skirmish.

Considering that a large pool of territorial intruders are constantly sizing up the resident male or female of any successful territory for an eviction attempt, it seems remarkable that residents are able to hold on to their territories for even a single year. Yet Silver over Red, Orange over Green has put together a string of 23 years of straight ownership, the only blemishes a half-year in 1996 and another in 2003, when he was briefly deposed. He has fledged 20 chicks during his breeding career with four different mates. This male is not the only resident with an impressive resume. A female on nearby Langley has fledged 17 chicks on that territory since 1995, while the O’Day female has been on territory since at least 1997 and has produced at least 16 full-grown chicks during her breeding career.

But female loons are survivors. Females enjoy a high rate of survival and no detectable senescence well into their twenties. Males, on the other hand, hit the wall abruptly at age 20; almost half of all territorial males of age 20 will perish before the subsequent year. So when we see a male who defies the odds, like this one, it is worth looking closely to see if he possesses an attribute that sets him apart. As a scientist, I am loathe to draw conclusions based on a sample of one. Colleagues in my field would dismiss any such conclusions out of hand. But today Nelson, one of my Chapman research students this year, reported that Silver over Red, Orange over Green is the tamest bird we have ever measured in the study area. So let me invite ridicule by advancing a very preliminary hypothesis. Perhaps the key to lifetime productivity in a habitat rife with human recreation is picking one’s battles carefully. Maybe by ignoring the inquisitive, well-meaning primates in their watercraft, this male has been able to conserve his metabolic resources for provisioning young and driving off pesky intruders.

The first round of censuses in the study area each year is always bittersweet. On the one hand, it is exciting to see the crop of new young adults that have settled and to wonder how well they will defend their new territories. On the other hand, some old familiar loons are missing. This year is typical in that the disappeared veterans are mostly males. Three of 12 males of 20+ years have failed to reclaim their 2015 territory; only 1 of 12 20+ females have not resettled on their territory from the year before. Thus, male senescence lives!

Among the 2016 no-shows are the Jersey City Flowage male, who bounced back from a nasty fishing entanglement in 2014, regained his territory in 2015 and hatched a chick there. Another loss is the Soo Lake male, who was among the most aggressive in our study area. I still tremble when I recall his response when we played a few loon calls in his direction in 2000. He approached my canoe to within 2 feet, sat right next to me in the stern and glowered for the better part of two minutes. A spine-tingling experience for sure!

Yet the news is not all bad. Six young ABJs (“adults banded as juveniles”) have settled in the study area, providing us with valuable data on loons whose age is known precisely. New settlers include two females hatched in Vilas County — a 9 year-old that settled on Manson and a 6 year-old now paired with the male on Harrison Flowage. New male faces belong to an 8 year-old that took over Brandy Lake (near Woodruff) and a 7 year-old that battled and evicted the 22 year-old male from Oscar Jenny. (Thanks to Jeremy, who observed this eviction in progress.)

Perhaps the most intriguing findings from the first round of lake visits by Kristin and Linda are the serendipitous ones. Kristin relocated one of our oldest males — a bird known to be 27 years of age or older. Evicted two years ago from Muskellunge Lake, this loon licked his wounds and got himself back in the game by settling on nearby Swanson Lake, which had fallen into disuse in 2015. We had not seen this bird in two years and were almost ready to give up on him. Linda found a female with even greater resiliency. This old loon produced a dozen chicks over the years as the breeder on Buck Lake from 1998 to 2009. After her eviction from Buck in 2010, she floated, found a breeding position on Hildebrand in 2012 and produced a chick there in 2013. But she was driven off of Hildebrand last year. Her response to this second setback was typical of female loons — she bided her time and claimed that territory again when the opportunity presented itself. As I confront another season of hauling canoes from lake to lake, my back begins to ache in anticipation. I hope the examples of these two dogged old codgers gives me the strength to persevere!

 

LMG_9628 Manson Lake Male Yodeling

Loons do not settle on territories as we think they should. Traditional models in long-lived animals maintain that hopeful young individuals should be systematic in settling on territories. By current theory, a young loon should explore a certain region within proper habitat, find several territories that might be suitable for breeding, and then routinely monitor those potential breeding spots, waiting for a vacancy to occur. During this exploratory period, it is thought, the young loon gains familiarity with this small cohort of territories that will lead to a competitive advantage in territorial battles with other would-be settlers once a territorial slot opens up. The “foothold hypothesis”, as I call this model, is quite pleasing and logical. What’s more, there is evidence that many territorial animals gain territories in this manner. Loons do not.

We got another reminder of the quirky territorial settlement pattern of loons this past week, when Linda and Kristin scoured the study area and ID’d the pairs that had taken possession of the lakes we monitor. Among these settlers were many familiar faces — including a male on Townline Lake that has been in possession of the territory since 1994 and a female on West Horsehead who has bred there with a series of different males since 1995. One of the surprises was a 9 year-old female hatched on Rock Lake in Vilas County who settled on Manson, replacing a female that had bred on Manson for a dozen years. Owing to Linda’s careful observations, we know this Rock Lake female as a frequent intruder during 2014 and 2015. But she did not intrude into Manson Lake, where she eventually settled; instead she intruded repeated onto nearby Muskellunge Lake! Thus, our expectation that the Rock female was laying the groundwork for settlement on Muskellunge was not fulfilled.

There are several possible reasons why loons often do not settle on lakes that they seem to prefer. One of the most obvious is that settlement is not merely a matter of finding a desirable territory.  A loon bent on settling must also contend with the current resident on a territory where it hopes to settle. So a young nonbreeder that visits Territories A, B, and C might prefer Territory A but be prevented from settling there by a healthy and aggressive territorial resident of the same sex. In that case, the nonbreeder might end up settling on Territory B or Territory C. The Rock female is fortunate; Manson Lake, where she has settled, is one of the most productive territories in the study area. So even if she could not take possession of the territory she seemed to prefer, her future breeding prospects are bright.

You can read more about our testing of the “foothold model” for territory settlement in this blog post, which is based on a paper published in Animal Behavior. E-mail me if you would like a pdf of the paper.

The crisp photo above is by Linda Grenzer. It shows the Rock female performing a wing flap on Manson, her new breeding lake, while her mate, an 18 year-old male, yodels in the foreground.

Several months have passed since Gabby Jukkala’s and my article was accepted for publication in the Journal of Avian Biology. We have been anxiously tapping our feet while the wheels turn and our article comes out in the journal. This has just happened. You may now view our article here.  Gabby and I are thrilled that: 1) our article has been selected as “Editor’s Choice” for this issue of the journal, 2) Linda Grenzer’s nice photo of the female on her lake with a chick from 2015 is the cover photo for the issue (and a second is featured in the blog spot), and 3) the journal has included extra information about us and our article on their website here.

I have already described the findings we report in the article, so I will not rehash those here, but do take a look at the article, which the journal is making available free of charge, since it is “Editor’s Choice”. It is a very small honor, in fact. Still, these days I am often on the Newport Pier, as that is a good local birding spot and I must prepare for the Ornithology class I am teaching this fall. Whenever a member of my study species wanders nearby, as it forages for mackerel or smelt, I find myself smiling a bit more strongly than before.

IMG_4317

“Wow”, Lainey said, “that band number is right next to the female we caught last night on Sherry”. She was right; the adult male from Skunk, which we had just netted and whose band number I was reading aloud to Lainey for data entry during banding, had a number imprinted on his aluminum USGS band that followed immediately after that of the Sherry female from the previous night. The reason for consecutive bands is that the Sherry female is the mother of the Skunk male and was caught and banded with him a decade ago (less two days) on Sherry Lake. I remember July 31st, 2005 on Sherry vividly, because I was equipped with a video recorder on top of a helmet with which we recorded the capture process for research presentations. But the recapture of mother and son on back to back nights ten years after we had first marked them has also caused me to reflect upon several key features of loon biology that have become familiar to me through my work.

First, loons live a long time. In this twenty-third year of my work, I still encounter birds in the study area that were on territory, as adults, when I first started covering them. Females, in particular, are survivors. While males have rather high mortality –partly owing to their proclivity for battling dangerously — females linger. When their mate dies, females find another; when a female is evicted unceremoniously from her territory, she stoically moves to a new lake nearby and awaits a chance to re-insert herself back into the breeding population. So it goes with the Sherry female whose worn-out band from 2005 is pictured on the bottom in the photo. She was “widowed” suddenly in 2009 (a possible eagle kill) but hung onto her territory and was joined by a new male in short order, who has been her mate since.

Second, young males do not disperse far from their natal lakes to breed. The Skunk male, from whom we removed the top band in the photo last night, moved about 15 miles from his natal haunt, Sherry. That dispersal is, actually, a bit longer than average for males, many of whom settle to breed on a lake adjacent to where they hatched years earlier. Short-distance male dispersal is essential to my work; without it, I would not have a large marked cohort of 2 to 5 year-olds of known age and natal origin in the study area at all times whose territory settlement strategies could be investigated. (At last count, we had seen 295 adult loons in the study area that were marked originally as chicks.)

Third, loons vary tremendously in their behavior towards humans. My assistants and I dread the Sherry female, because she is the most skittish individual we know. She cannot be approached easily within 100 meters on the water; she tremolos (i.e. alarm calls) incessantly when a chick is present and a canoe appears on the water. In fact, my assistants tell me that she begins to tremolo in anticipation of a canoe being placed on the water and that they have begun a strategy of hiding behind bushes and trees along the shoreline in order to make observations of her when she is with the chick. (Fortunately, Sherry Lake is tiny, so this observation strategy is workable.) I joked that we should wear camouflaged clothing when visiting Sherry; my assistants did not find this funny. Oddly, the Sherry female’s mate is among the tamest loons we study and never tremolos at us when we collect data there.

The great variety in loon tameness is a topic of great interest to us, as I have mentioned. It amazes me that an adult such as the Sherry female could react so strongly (and, it would seem, maladaptively) to humans, which she encounters constantly. Doesn’t she waste energy with her fruitless calls? Shouldn’t skittish birds like her leave fewer offspring and live shorter lives than other adults who tolerate humans without constant complaint? If so, she is not a good example of the pattern, as she has behaved this way for the ten years we have known her while cranking out chicks. Indeed, the Sherry female and the Oneida-East male, another vociferous but fecund individual with whom my staff has to cope, make me wonder if I have got it backwards. Maybe loud-mouthed loons warn humans away, lessening the likelihood of injury to themselves and their brood, and are rewarded with high evolutionary fitness.

P1120757

Two days ago, Mark Naniot of Wild Instincts got a report that a loon on Two Sisters Lake had been hooked by a fisherman in the leg and was trailing 50 feet of monofilament line and a bobber. Mark learned also that a well-intentioned kayaker had approached the loon and cut much of the line, including the bobber, but leaving the hook and several yards of fishing line trailing. Having captured and unhooked a loon several weeks before on the same lake, we were disappointed to hear of another angling incident. Could the same bird have become entangled again?

Seth happened to be collecting data on Two Sisters Lake yesterday. He found the impacted loon, which was not the Two Sisters-West male that we had rescued in June but the female from Two Sisters-East. (The lake has east and west halves, each with a successful loon pair.) Seth reported that the female was using her right leg sparingly, trailing fishing line, and had tried but failed to take off and fly on several occasions. She was not with her mate and two young chicks. Clearly the bird was in trouble.

After digesting Mark and Seth’s reports, I turned my attention to the prospect of catching the impacted loon. I viewed the challenge with mixed feelings. On the one hand, this female, hatched on Crab Lake in Vilas County in 2004, was well-known to us as a rather tame individual, making capture more feasible. On the other hand, we had captured her four nights earlier, which raised the possibility that she would recall that event and be more difficult to approach a second time. The most crucial card we held was that the female had chicks to protect.

Several major research programs that focus on common loons in the northern U.S. and Canada rely, more than any other factor, on the ability to approach adult loons closely at night and net them when they have chicks. If researchers could not approach adults closely during this reproductive window, we would not be able to mark them and study their behavior, health or survival. We would therefore be unable to generate models to determine whether loon populations are increasing or decreasing. In short, loon research would grind to a halt without the presence of chicks to freeze adults on the surface and permit us to catch and mark them.

Last night’s adventure served as a vivid reminder of the value of chicks to adult capture. We began searching for the hooked female shortly after nine p.m. and located her quickly along the southwest corner of the lake’s eastern half. Her behavior was odd; she seemed to restrict her movements to one small portion of the lake and was not anywhere near her mate or two large chicks. She held her hooked leg out of the water when resting on the surface. Before full darkness, we spotlighted and approached her to attempt capture, but she repeatedly dove before we could get within a net’s reach. Although frustrating, this cheered us a bit, because it showed that she was still relatively healthy despite the hook. At the same time, we were vexed to see that a loon that was in dire need of human assistance and which we had scooped out of the water with ease four nights before was resisting capture. We made several more passes by the female, until it became clear that the distance at which she dove was increasing rather than decreasing. We had a loon in need of help, a huge staff from Wild Instincts on shore waiting to assist it, and no obvious means of catching the bird. The critical ingredient missing was her chicks, which were nowhere nearby and which, we felt, might have held her on the surface and permitted us to net her.

We shut down the motor and listened. As luck would have it, an adult loon tremoloed far to the northwest, near the small bay where the Two Sisters-East pair had nested. Eric drove us up to the northwest corner, where, after 20 minutes of searching, we located the male and two chicks. Freshly banded from four nights before, the male and two strapping youngsters were nonetheless easy to net and pull into the boat. We set out southwards, where we had left the recalcitrant female, and released all three birds there. After several minutes of silence, the just-released male finally wailed and an answering tremolo came from 400 yards southeast. Again, we were in a bind, because the female had clearly swum a good distance away, where she would not soon encounter the chicks that we had released in hopes of capturing her. So again we netted a chick — leaving one near the male — and motored southeast to where we had heard the female. Having glimpsed the female for an instant before she dove, we gently held the chick in the boat until it vocalized. The injured female was transformed: she immediately sat up in the water, alert, and wailed to call her chick to her. We released the chick, the two reunited, and the female remained alert and protective next to her chick as we slowly approached and netted her.

After all of our efforts, it was rewarding to learn that, while the hook had punched cleanly through the female’s leg a few centimeters above her colored leg bands (see photo, courtesy of Wild Instincts), the prognosis (according to Mark) was excellent for recovery.

Looking back, we spent three hours capturing a family of loons that we had just caught and banded four days earlier. The rescue was a major production, requiring us not merely to locate and capture her but to find and capture her family in a remote location on the lake and transport them to her vicinity in order to restore her parental instincts and permit us to approach and net the impacted loon. This effort threw a wrench in our capture schedule, necessitating that we rush to three more lakes to capture loons there and cancel plans to attempt capture at two more lakes. Still, our team effort with Wild Instincts left us glowing; we had rescued a loon in peril and given her a chance to return to her life as a plucky protector of two young offspring.