Gander behaviour and flock hierarchy Wanting to learn more

[Kimmyh51]

Just wondering if ghere is anyone here who considers themself to be pretty knowledgeable in the behaviour of geese, particularly ganders within a flock hierarch.
And also how the flock hierarchy works for geese?

Or any good books (ideally available on kindle) or websites that get into the real details, and nuts and bolts of this? I have not been able to find much online myself except at a very general level. I find waterfowl behaviour fascinating and am looking for some really in depth content or experts who can teach me more. Not just the basic stuff that you can find on Wikipedia or any general intro/advice for geese, but something more in depth from someone who has really spent a lot of time studying their behaviour in detail…?

can anyone help or suggest anything?

thanks

 

[Miss Lydia]

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/living-with-geese-139853490/

 

[3xhhheather]

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/living-with-geese-139853490/

Thank you for sharing, that was an excellent read and really hit home why geese will forever be a favorite of mine.

 

[Miss Lydia]

They really are special.

 

[Goosebaby]

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/living-with-geese-139853490/

I have never read White’s book about geese but there are several things I agree with the author of that article about and several things I disagree with him about.

He is definitly observant with their behavior, and I agree with him over the issues of anthropomorphism in animal husbandry, documentaries, and science.

However in his article he strikes me as a person who’s trying to sell his views against anthropomorphizing animals and over intellectualizing humans so hard that I think he has a predudice that’s also blinding him.
First off he starts out by villanizing people who do anthropomorphize animals, portraying them as lonely nuts. That may be true for some, but not for others, and bringing that up in his article was merely an attempt to manipulate a reader into accepting is opinions as facts when all they are, are just his opinions.

Painting an opponent as crazy rather than actually coming up with a compelling argument doesn’t disprove the subject in debate and doesn’t fly in science.

His views seem to center around the concept that animals and humans are nothing alike, but I could argue that humans aren’t very special and most of our behaviors and motives aren’t that dissimilar. I’ve seen guys fight over a girl and girls fight over a guy. I’ve seen people lie, cheat, and manipulate others just to get ahead. It could be to get a better position, to be more popular, to get Some sort of material goods. Whatever it is ultimately it’s the animalistic urge to outcompete our fellow humans and have an edge above all others, because the cost of missing out is the all too real fact that if we lose our job, lose our partner, lose our possessions, lose our social standing, lose our home it could put us on the path to possibly losing the reproductive race or even our lives one way or another.
To me humans seem like just another animal but with more higher reasoning and thumbs that enable us to put it to more complex purposes.


“Affection is of course the wrong word—mateship is more exact; my gander had found a partner in me because his mother was elsewhere and no other goose was available.”
I’ve found that geese are very individualistic. There may be some who only bond to one other, but most of what I’ve seen is that geese will bond with many individuals. Geese do prefer to have the company of geese, but they also are capable of bonding with others jest as easily regardless of the presence of other geese.
I have a few that love to be snuggled and sit on my lap, all of them have goose partners who they spend more time with, and yet they still choose to come to me for attention and snuggles. Most of them I raised, some of them I did not, but they still seek me out for attention too. So based on my observations I would disagree with his opinions, but I don’t doubt that his observations are correct for what he has witnessed, because his geese are different individuals than mine.

“An established gander will carefully scrutinize new goslings introduced into his flock. It is simply a bewildered gander being a gander, acting out a protective, perhaps paternal possessive response. It is acting on instinct, gauging where the goslings fit in to his society. Their survival depends on it.”
One could argue that it’s just instinct for us humans too. What even is affection? Is it spiritual? Chemical? Both?

“Their digestive system is a marvel—almost nonstop eating and they never grow fat (Why Geese Don't Get Obese (And We Do) is a recent book on animal physiology); their ability to drink nothing but muddy water with no obvious ill effects; and with this their conspicuous preference for clean water, especially when washing their heads and beaks, which they do routinely.”
Those are both completely untrue!
Geese are just as prone to obesity as any other species, and their ability to remain healthy after drinking from a puddle is solely dependent on what microbes or parasites happen to be present or not.

 

[The goose girl]

I'll recommend "The Year of the Greylag Goose" and "Here I Am - Where Are You?" by Konrad Lorenz. He studied goose behavior thoroughly and was a wonderful storyteller, besides winning a Nobel Prize in no small part due to his goose studies.

As a child I read his book "King Solomon's Ring" which included the story of his first imprinted goose, Martina. It founded my desire to one day own geese myself even though I'd never even seen one in real life back then.

The only thing I've come along that he got wrong was that geese don't yawn. Maybe he was so interesting they never yawned around him?