007 Goldeneye Gun

[Jessica Wilson]

fathomwhat species of duckling was receiving this unanticipated caregiving. A frantic web search of ducks breeding in the vicinity revealed that this is a young Common Goldeneye. But how could such a duckling escape the watchful eye of its own mother and blunder into the path of a pair of loons?

In short, rearing of massive goldeneye broods seems haphazard and impersonal when compared with the parental behavior of common loons. If common loons are modern-day human parents in the era of small families, abundant participation awards, and kindergarten SAT prep; goldeneyes are the all-out reproducers of the pioneer days, never quite certain of how many young they have and where they all are! So we should not be surprised to encounter a misplaced or forgotten goldeneye duckling.

While we can understand how the adoption of a goldeneye by loons is plausible, it is still a remarkable event. The likeliest outcome of a close brush between a small duckling and a loon pair is an attack; many ducklings are killed by loons each year. Perhaps this loon pair was primed for adoption by having lost their second chick shortly before they encountered the stray duckling.

Hey everyeone. As a full time game developer, I have always been a huge Goldeneye fan. I decided to make a Goldeneye remake for fun as a side project. This demo you see is the result of just a few days of work, using my FPS system and custom lighting engine. The demo is running in Unity engine and the Facility map is a direct rip from the game. Let me know your thoughts!

it is probably a good idea to assume the worst when it comes to licening issues. Because you are using (what appear to be at least, it been a long time since i played goldeneye) the sounds from the game (ie, the james bond theme), and the exact level from the game, it is likly suspect.

Be a good fan and be inspired from the game instead of stealing from it. Make your own little story and map and you are fine without having to worry that the owner of that IP will sue you for a mount that you probably do not able to pay that easily.

If i would spend my free time on a game project and would not be able to share it with anyone i would feel like i have wasted my time. But that is my personal feelings and if you not indeed to publish it sure go ahead.

The fact the original remake was in 95% complete when Nintendo scrapped it is a shame. We almost had a HD remake of Goldeneye when Rare Replay was release for the Xbox 1. I still shed a tear every time I see this.

This sea duck species breeds in Washington, has low population numbers, and has been declining in Puget Sound. Sources of impacts have not been clearly identified. Increasing development in the Puget Sound region has led to more disturbance, pollution, and degradation of foraging areas used by sea ducks. Some aquaculture practices may impact foraging areas through exclusion of sea ducks. Forest management activities may remove older trees and snags that provide most nest cavities and may increase predation at remaining cavities.

Animal matter can comprise over 75 percent of the diets of breeding Barrow's goldeneyes, including aquatic insects, mollusks, crustaceans, and small fish. During winter they feed in shallow water, primarily on mussels but also clams, crustaceans, and fish eggs.

The breeding population of Barrow's goldeneye in the state is thought to be widespread within the Cascades and between Okanogan and Pend Oreille Counties. A unique population nests in cavities within the talus slopes and basalt cliffs surrounding Lake Lenore and Alkali Lake in central Washington.

Barrow's goldeneye dependence on specific nesting, breeding, and wintering sites significantly increases this species' sensitivity to climate change. Disturbances such as fire could result in nesting tree loss, and changes in water chemistry (e.g., dissolved oxygen, pH) or temperature may lead to declines in food availability (e.g., mussels, aquatic insects, crustaceans, clams, etc.). Diminished snowpack that leads to wetland drying could also impact this species.

Sea ducks are game species, managed under state and federal migratory waterfowl regulations cooperatively through the Pacific Flyway Council. The Pacific Flyway Council is an administrative body that forges cooperation among public wildlife agencies for the purpose of protecting and conserving migratory birds in western North America. The Council is composed of the director or an appointee from the public wildlife agency in each state and province in the western United States, Canada, and Mexico. Washington waterfowl hunters pursuing sea ducks in western Washington are required to record and report all harvest effort and activities, including for Barrow's goldeneye.

WDFW has various game management plans to track populations and harvest of games species around the state, including waterfowl. These plans have information about harvest statistics from recent years, and the department's long-term vision and goals for a variety of species.

WDFW conducts survey flights over a period of several days from November through February annually to monitor the abundance, trends, and distribution of sea ducks and other marine birds in the Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca (U.S. portion of the Salish Sea). Learn more about this research on the project's page.

The common goldeneye is an active diving duck that can be identified by its golden yellow eyes and white, rounded face patches. It visits the open waters of the Chesapeake Bay and its rivers from late autumn through spring.

A regular breeding resident and migrant; a regular winter resident particularly along the North Shore of Lake Superior and on the Lower Mississippi River. The Common Goldeneye was an uncommon species during the Minnesota Breeding Bird Atlas (MNBBA).

Global in distribution, the Common Goldeneye can be found across the interior of Alaska and in Canada, Europe, and Asia. In North America, the southern limit of its breeding range is found in the northern Rockies, northern New England, and the northern Great Lakes region. Some of the highest breeding densities have been reported in northwestern Canada. Its distribution and relative abundance in southern Canada and the United States, as depicted by the federal Breeding Bird Survey (BBS), are shown in Figure 1.

A game species, the Common Goldeneye was assigned a Moderately High Continental Priority by the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. Partners in Flight assigned it a Continental Concern Score of 11/20.

Little has changed in the intervening years since Roberts wrote his comprehensive account of the species. Green and Janssen (1975) reported goldeneyes could be found breeding across north- central and northeastern Minnesota. Densities, however, were highest in two north-central counties, Beltrami and Itasca. Janssen (1987) delineated 14 northern counties where breeding had been confirmed since 1970; Aitkin, Cass, and Crow Wing Counties established the southern boundary of its breeding range in the state; Becker and Roseau Counties established the western boundary. By 1998, when Hertzel and Janssen published an updated breeding distribution map, nothing had changed.

Field staff with the Minnesota Biological Survey (MBS) reported 118 breeding season locations that were segregated into two major population centers: one in the northern regions of the Arrowhead region, and one in the central stretches of north-central Minnesota including Beltrami, Clearwater, Hubbard, and Itasca Counties. A few records were found farther south in Crow Wing, Morrison, and Otter Tail Counties (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 2016).

Summary statistics for the Common Goldeneye observations by breeding status category for all blocks and priority blocks (each 5 km x 5 km) surveyed during the Minnesota Breeding Bird Atlas (2009-2013).

Common Goldeneyes select a variety of wetlands, from large lakes and rivers to smaller ponds and streams that are embedded within forested habitats where there are suitable nest cavities. Because both coniferous and deciduous trees are used for nesting, wetland features are more important to habitat selection than the cover type of the surrounding forest.

The most important feature influencing habitat selection may be the abundance of aquatic invertebrates. Because fish also compete for these prey items, goldeneyes are frequently found on fishless lakes. Yet, in Minnesota, high breeding densities were observed on lakes with highly productive fish populations (Zicus et al. 1995). Fishless lakes may simply be preferred when they are available (Eadie et al. 1995).

Throughout their breeding range, population densities vary widely. Estimates across Canada range from approximately 0.08 nesting pair per km2 in the western and central provinces to 0.02-0.19 nesting pair per km2 in the eastern provinces (Eadie et al. 1995). In Minnesota, data from 1980 to 1985 show densities averaging 0.5 to 3.5 pairs per km of shoreline (unpublished data provided to Eadie et al. 1995 by M.C. Zicus).

When local populations experience a decline due to conditions on the breeding or wintering range, recovery can be slow given that birds usually do not breed until their second year and when nesting attempts fail, the birds rarely renest that same year. Overall, availability of nest cavities may be the most important factor regulating population numbers (Eadie et al. 1995).

North American Bird Conservation Initiative, U.S. Committee. 2010. The State of the Birds 2010 Report on Climate Change, United States of America. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior. _files/State of the Birds_FINAL.pdf

North American Waterfowl Management Plan, Plan Committee. 2004. North American Waterfowl Management Plan 2004. Implementation Framework: Strengthening the Biological Foundation. Canadian Wildlife Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales. -Framework.pdf

The Minnesota Breeding Bird Atlas Website was a collaborative project led by Audubon Minnesota and the University of Minnesota, Natural Resources Research Institute. Major funding was provided by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund as recommended by the Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCCMR).

3a8082e126