Land Cover Sampling Biases Associated with Roadside Bird Surveys

Roadside surveys such as the Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) are widely used to assess the relative abundance of bird populations. The accuracy of roadside surveys depends on the extent to which surveys from roads represent the entire region under study. We quantified roadside land cover sampling bias in Tennessee, USA, by comparing land cover proportions near roads to proportions of the surrounding region. Roadside surveys gave a biased estimate of patterns across the region because some land cover types were over- or underrepresented near roads. These biases changed over time, introducing varying levels of distortion into the data. We constructed simulated population trends for five bird species of management interest based on these measured roadside sampling biases and on field data on bird abundance. These simulations indicated that roadside surveys may give overly negative assessments of the population trends of early successional birds and of synanthropic birds, but not of late-successional birds. Because roadside surveys are the primary source of avian population trend information in North America, we conclude that these surveys should be corrected for roadside land cover sampling bias. In addition, current recommendations about the need to create more early successional habitat for birds may need reassessment in the light of the undersampling of this habitat by roads.

Off-road sampling reveals a different grassland bird community than roadside sampling: implications for survey design and estimates to guide conservation

Grassland bird species continue to decline steeply across North America. Road-based surveys such as the North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) are often used to estimate trends and population sizes and to build species distribution models for grassland birds, although roadside survey counts may introduce bias in estimates because of differences in habitats along roadsides and in off-road surveys. We tested for differences in land cover composition and in the avian community on 21 roadside-based survey routes and in an equal number of adjacent off-road walking routes in the grasslands of southern Alberta, Canada. Off-road routes (n = 225 point counts) had more native grassland and short shrubs and less fallow land and road area than the roadside routes (n = 225 point counts). Consequently, 17 of the 39 bird species differed between the two route types in frequency of occurrence and relative abundance, measured using an indicator species analysis. Six species, including five obligate grassland species, were more prevalent at off-road sites; they included four species listed under the Canadian federal Species At Risk Act or listed by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada: Sprague’s Pipit (Anthus spragueii), Baird’s Sparrow (Ammodramus bairdii), the Chestnut-collared Longspur (Calcarius ornatus), and McCown’s Longspur (Rhynchophanes mccownii). The six species were as much as four times more abundant on off-road sites. Species more prevalent along roadside routes included common species and those typical of farmland and other human-modified habitats, e.g., the European Starling (Sturnus vulgaris), the Black-billed Magpie (Pica hudsonia), and the House Sparrow (Passer domesticus). Differences in avian community composition between roadside and off-road surveys suggest that the use of BBS data when generating population estimates or distribution models may overestimate certain common species and underestimate others of conservation concern. Our results highlight the need to develop appropriate corrections for bias in estimates derived from roadside sampling, and the need to design surveys that sample bird communities across a more representative cross-section of the landscape, both near and far from roads. 

Biased representation of disturbance rates in the roadside sampling frame in boreal forests: implications for monitoring design

The North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) is the principal source of data to inform researchers about the status of and trend for boreal forest birds. Unfortunately, little BBS coverage is available in the boreal forest, where increasing concern over the status of species breeding there has increased interest in northward expansion of the BBS. However, high disturbance rates in the boreal forest may complicate roadside monitoring. If the roadside sampling frame does not capture variation in disturbance rates because of either road placement or the use of roads for resource extraction, biased trend estimates might result. In this study, we examined roadside bias in the proportional representation of habitat disturbance via spatial data on forest “loss,” forest fires, and anthropogenic disturbance. In each of 455 BBS routes, the area disturbed within multiple buffers away from the road was calculated and compared against the area disturbed in degree blocks and BBS strata. We found a nonlinear relationship between bias and distance from the road, suggesting forest loss and forest fires were underrepresented below 75 and 100 m, respectively. In contrast, anthropogenic disturbance was overrepresented at distances below 500 m and underrepresented thereafter. After accounting for distance from road, BBS routes were reasonably representative of the degree blocks they were within, with only a few strata showing biased representation. In general, anthropogenic disturbance is overrepresented in southern strata, and forest fires are underrepresented in almost all strata. Similar biases exist when comparing the entire road network and the subset sampled by BBS routes against the amount of disturbance within BBS strata; however, the magnitude of biases differed. Based on our results, we recommend that spatial stratification and rotating panel designs be used to spread limited BBS and off-road sampling effort in an unbiased fashion and that new BBS routes be established where sufficient road coverage exists.

Relationships between Duck and Grassland Bird Relative Abundance and Species Richness in Southern Saskatchewan

Digital map products that integrate long-term duck population and land-use data are currently being used to guide conservation program delivery on the Canadian Prairies. However, understanding the inter-relationships between ducks and other grassland bird species would greatly enhance program planning and delivery. We hypothesized that ducks, and Northern Pintail (Anas acuta) in particular, may function as an umbrella guild for the overall breeding habitat quality for other grassland bird species. We compared grassland bird species richness and relative abundance among areas of low, moderate, and high predicted waterfowl breeding densities (i.e., duck density strata) in the southern Missouri Coteau, Saskatchewan. We conducted roadside point counts and delineated habitats within a 400 m radius of each point. The duck high-density stratum supported greater avian species richness and abundance than did the duck low-density stratum. Overall, duck and other grassland bird species richness and abundance were moderately correlated, with all r between 0.37 and 0.69 (all P < 0.05). Although the habitat requirements of Northern Pintail may overlap with those of other grassland endemics, priority grassland bird species richness was only moderately correlated with total pintail abundance in both years, and the abundances of pintail and grassland songbirds listed by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada were not correlated. No differences in the mean number of priority grassland species were detected among the strata. Adequate critical habitat for several priority species may not be protected if conservation is focused only in areas of moderate to high wetland density because large tracts of contiguous, dry grassland habitat (e.g., pasture) occur infrequently in high-quality duck habitat.

Temporal aggregation of migration counts can improve accuracy and precision of trends

Temporal replicate counts are often aggregated to improve model fit by reducing zero-inflation and count variability, and in the case of migration counts collected hourly throughout a migration, allows one to ignore nonindependence. However, aggregation can represent a loss of potentially useful information on the hourly or seasonal distribution of counts, which might impact our ability to estimate reliable trends. We simulated 20-year hourly raptor migration count datasets with known rate of change to test the effect of aggregating hourly counts to daily or annual totals on our ability to recover known trend. We simulated data for three types of species, to test whether results varied with species abundance or migration strategy: a commonly detected species, e.g., Northern Harrier, Circus cyaneus; a rarely detected species, e.g., Peregrine Falcon, Falco peregrinus; and a species typically counted in large aggregations with overdispersed counts, e.g., Broad-winged Hawk, Buteo platypterus. We compared accuracy and precision of estimated trends across species and count types (hourly/daily/annual) using hierarchical models that assumed a Poisson, negative binomial (NB) or zero-inflated negative binomial (ZINB) count distribution. We found little benefit of modeling zero-inflation or of modeling the hourly distribution of migration counts. For the rare species, trends analyzed using daily totals and an NB or ZINB data distribution resulted in a higher probability of detecting an accurate and precise trend. In contrast, trends of the common and overdispersed species benefited from aggregation to annual totals, and for the overdispersed species in particular, trends estimating using annual totals were more precise, and resulted in lower probabilities of estimating a trend (1) in the wrong direction, or (2) with credible intervals that excluded the true trend, as compared with hourly and daily counts.

Detectability of migrating raptors and its effect on bias and precision of trend estimates

Annual counts of migrating raptors at fixed observation points are a widespread practice, and changes in numbers counted over time, adjusted for survey effort, are commonly used as indices of trends in population size. Unmodeled year-to-year variation in detectability may introduce bias, reduce precision of trend estimates, and reduce power to detect trends. We conducted dependent double-observer surveys at the annual fall raptor migration count at Lucky Peak, Idaho, in 2009 and 2010 and applied Huggins closed-capture removal models and information-theoretic model selection to determine the relative importance of factors affecting detectability. The most parsimonious model included effects of observer team identity, distance, species, and day of the season. We then simulated 30 years of counts with heterogeneous individual detectability, a population decline (λ = 0.964), and unexplained random variation in the number of available birds. Imperfect detectability did not bias trend estimation, and increased the time required to achieve 80% power by less than 11%. Results suggested that availability is a greater source of variance in annual counts than detectability; thus, efforts to account for availability would improve the monitoring value of migration counts. According to our models, long-term trends in observer efficiency or migratory flight distance may introduce substantial bias to trend estimates. Estimating detectability with a novel count protocol like our double-observer method is just one potential means of controlling such effects. The traditional approach of modeling the effects of covariates and adjusting the index may also be effective if ancillary data is collected consistently.