Table 2.

Summary of ecological, management, and socio-economic issues associated with various sizes of the greater snow goose population throughout its annual cycle based on the reviews of Batt (1998) and Reed and Calvert (2007) and the analysis of Bélanger (unpubl.), and the status assigned to various population levels for management purpose

Population size	Population status	Use of farmlands versus natural habitat in relation to carrying capacity (K)	Socio-economic valuesa	Hunting and population control
0–250 000 geese	Historical level population	Wetland ≥ Farmlands Arctic breeding habitats < K Migration & wintering natural habitats < K	Benefits = Costs Localized benefits and low crop damage	Restrictive regulations
250 000–500 000 geese	Abundant population	Farmlands > Natural Arctic breeding habitats < K Migration & wintering natural habitats ≈ K	Benefits > Costs Widespread benefits and moderate crop damage	Standard to liberal regulations
500 000–750 000 geeseb	Very abundant population	Farmlands ≫ Natural Arctic breeding habitats < K Migration & wintering natural habitats > K	Benefits ≫ Costs Very high benefits and high crop damage	Liberal regulations
750 000–1 000 000 geese	Over abundant population	Farmlands ≫ Natural Arctic breeding habitats < K Migration & wintering natural habitats > K	Benefits > Costs Saturation of benefits and very high crop damages	Liberal regulations and special conservation measures (spring harvest)

^aConsider all socio-economic benefits related to the presence of geese including activities such as hunting, bird watching, tourism, etc

^bCurrent population objective