14 
to that of 1960. Snow pack was extremely 
deficient in southern Idaho, while timbered 
northern Idaho received copious amounts of 
winter and spring moisture, largely in the 
form of rain. 
The drought cycle continued in southern 
Idaho. Shallow marsh and pothole areas 
dried out in early summer and probably 
contributed very little to 1961 duck pro- 
duction. Several major irrigationreservoirs 
would be at minimum pool by August. 
Spring waterfowl movements were on 
schedule but lighter than normal. 
BREEDING POPULATION INDEXES 
Aerial trend counts were conducted onall 
Major goose nesting areas of the State for 
the 7th consecutive year (table E-8, p. 88.). 
PRODUCTION INDEXES 
Canada goose nesting surveys were con- 
ducted for the 10th consecutive year. The 
indicated goose production trend is based on 
the number of nests and hatching success 
found on identical areas surveyed in the 
Same manner each year. From 1960 to 
1961, gosling production was down 18 per- 
cent for all seven units combined (table E-9). 
All major goose nesting units shared the 
drop in production and this decline occurred 
despite a continued upward trend in spring 
breeding populations. 
On the six areas for which a long-term 
trend is available, goose production in1961l 
was 6 percent below the 1954-60 average. 
Two duck brood production trend routes 
were censused in south-central and south- 
eastern Idaho. The routes were run twice 
with all classes of broods counted on the 
early July run and only class I broods 
counted on the late July run. Other brood 
trend routes run in the past could not be 
counted this year because water levels were 
too low to permit boat operation; on some 
routes, there was no water at all. Results 
for the one south-central Idaho canal 
sample and for the Camas National Wild- 
life Refuge route in southeast Idaho are 
shown in tables F-8 and F-9 (p. 109, 110). 
CONCLUSIONS 
Numbers of geese on Idaho goose breeding 
areas during the spring of 1961 were the 
highest since aerial counts began in 1955; 
however, goose production for all units 
combined was considerably below that of 
1960, the good goose production year, and 
slightly below the long-term average. 
Duck production is judged to be down 
appreciably in Idaho due to the drought 
condition in the southern part of the State, 
which removed many shallow water areas 
from the habitat base. Production on per- 
manent waters in the State was normal. 
OREGON 
Data supplied by Chester E. 
Kebbe, Oregon State Game 
Commission 
WEATHER AND WATER CONDITIONS 
Continued drouth in southeastern Oregon 
caused many small marshes to go dry and 
seriously affected water levels onthe major 
waterfowl production areas. Very little snow 
fell during the winter and, although Oregon 
experienced a very wet spring, little of this 
moisture fell in southeastern Oregon where 
it was badly needed. Alarge part of Malheur 
Refuge and Warner Valley, two major pro-. 
duction areas, are completely dry. 
PRODUCTION INDEXES 
Preliminary surveys on Malheur Refuge 
show Canada goose production to be down 
50 percent from the previous 3-year aver- 
age, mallard down 42 percent, gadwall 
down 85 percent, and redhead down 88 
percent. 
Warner Valley is almost completely dry 
and waterfowl production was almost elimi- 
nated. Tables F-10, F-11, and F-12(p. 111, 
112) present measurements on permanent 
transects elsewhere in eastern Oregon. This 
sampling shows Canada goose productionto 
be up 8 percent from 1960 and up 5 percent 
from the average of the previous 3 years. 
Duck production over the sampled areas 
indicates an increase of 6 percent over that 
of 1960, but 20 percent below that of the 
previous 3-year average. 
CONCLUSIONS 
Sampling results on permanent water 
areas showed goose production to be up 8 - 
