Evolving Bird Management Research at the USDA Wildlife Service’s National Wildlife Research Center

As the methods-development arm of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services program, the National Wildlife Research Center (NWRC) is charged with developing tools and information for protecting agriculture, human health and safety, and property from problems caused by wildlife, including birds. Increasingly the NWRC is being asked to provide basic ecological information on the population status of various bird species, and its role is expanding from a reactive one of providing management options to that of predicting long-term implications of various management actions. This paper describes several areas of research by NWRC scientists to address population-level questions in support of WS mission.

PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORDS — THEIR IMPORTANCE IN TODAY'S ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE BIRD MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS

We are living in a day of change. Environmental awareness is a part of our everyday life in a way unprecedented in history. The courts, in their infinite wisdom, have initiated the joint and several liability (deep pocket) rules that make everyone at risk in almost all situations. Bird management programs, by their very nature, are extremely sensitive. Any project, if not evaluated, planned, carried out, and documented properly can result in adverse regulatory agency action, bad publicity, and even fines or lawsuits. Proper photographic documentation can play a vital part in helping to provide the necessary records to help prevent problems and/or defend yourself in case of lawsuit or regulatory action. In the preparation of this paper, we surveyed state pesticide lead agencies, state Department of Conservation (Fish and Wildlife) agencies, some U.S. Fish and Wildlife Law Enforcement personnel, and several individuals to get their reaction to and their comments about this concept of supplemental recordkeeping. Of those responding, a majority thought the concept of supplemental photographic recordkeeping would be an asset to individuals and organi¬zations conducting bird management projects.

THE ROLE OF BIRD MANAGEMENT IN FIRE PROTECTION

Two years ago, Mike Fall and I showed you some ideas we had regarding mod¬ern architecture and bird problems. This year we've switched to considering bird hazards in older frame dwellings and on buildings where a fire hazard may be ap¬parent. During a class project some time ago, I was examining a nest of house sparrows and discovered that these birds incorporated cellulose cigarette filters into their nests. Filters were stripped of their paper wrapping and were apparently used by the sparrows as a substitute for or a supplement to fluffy air-born seeds and seed mat¬erials. The incidence of the cigarette filters varied. In the nests that I sampled the numbers varied anywhere from six up to two dozen filter remnants. We feel that the incidence will probably vary with the relative availability of discarded cigarette filter butts. We are concerned with the incidence of filters as an index to the possibility that the birds are picking up live cigarette butts, and this leads us to investigate some records of fires over the past three quarters of a century that were claimed to have been caused by birds.

BIRD CONTROL METHODS AND DEVICES--COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL PEST CONTROL ASSOCIATION

It may be useful to review some of the considerations that go into recommendations concerning bird management. Later I will make some comments concerning specific methods and devices being used in or promoted for bird control work regardless of whether or not they are new. Members of the National Pest Control Association provide a variety of services, such as fumigation, termite control and general pest control which includes rodent control. There are eight such categories listed in our roster, but only one member in five provides every service listed. Bird control is a rather recent development and is the newest category of service to be listed in the NPCA roster where it appeared for the first time in 1959. As of September 1, 1966, 45% of our members' offices indicated that they were prepared to offer bird control service. Less than 40% did so in 1964. Why is it that more of our members do not declare themselves as ready to do bird control work? I believe the most common answer you would find is that bird control is not yet sufficiently established that they can provide a service comparable in quality to that which is provided against termites or cockroaches or rats. Our members simply do not want to jeopardize their reputation on methods that are not certain or are too complex. Others recognize the emotional reaction evidenced by much of the population concerning control of birds and do not want to become involved in work that might offend some of their clientele. Still others simply do not agree that birds are their responsibility.

BIRD CONTROL UNDER A STATE FISH AND GAME PERMIT SYSTEM

I guess the impetus for laws in our state, really was the action of the city of Boston in 1963, when the Parks and Recreation Department felt that it was time to do something about massive populations of pigeons on the Boston Commons and in the city. The Parks Department came to our agency to find out what could be done. We immediately found as a result of a reorganization and recodification of the laws some 20 years before, that it was illegal to use or apply poisons for the purpose of killing any birds or mammals in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Property owners were given the privilege to destroy animals that were doing damage to their property, but only through mechanical means, certainly not by the use of toxicants. We helped the city of Boston draft a bill in 1963, which allowed our agency, the Division of Fisheries and Game, the agency responsible for all wildlife species in the state, the opportunity to issue certain permits for the use of poison, giving full authority to the director of Fisheries and Game with, of course, approval of my board. This allowed certain discretion on our part.

Avian Use of Harvested Crop Fields in North Dakota During Spring Migration

Broad-spectrum herbicide applications and improved harvesting efficiency of crops have reduced the availability of weed seeds and waste grains for game and nongame wildlife. Over the last decade, corn and soybean plantings have steadily increased in the Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North Dakota, while sunflower plantings have declined. The PPR is an important corridor for migratory birds, and changes in food availabilities at stopover habitats may affect how food resources are used. In early spring 2003 and 2004, we compared bird use of harvested fields of sunflower, soybeans, small grains, and corn in the PPR of North Dakota. Across both years and all crop types, we observed 20,400 birds comprising 29 species. Flocks of Lapland Longspurs (Calcarius lapponicus) and Horned Larks (Eremophila alpestris) and flocks of Red-winged Blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus) made up 60% and 15%, respectively, of the bird counts. We found that species richness and bird densities were higher in harvested sunflower fields and cornfields than in harvested small-grain and soybean fields, with soybean fields harboring the fewest species and lowest bird density. Blackbird densities tended to be lower in fields tilled after fall harvest than in fields not tilled. These results suggest that some granivorous bird populations in the Northern Great Plains could be positively affected by planting of row crops with postharvest vertical structure (e.g., sunflower, corn) and use of no-till land management practices.

Ecology, stable isotopes, and management of grassland songbirds at National Park Service properties on the Great Plains

Grassland ecosystems have been severely reduced and grassland bird populations have experienced consistent declines. National Park Service (NPS) properties on the Great Plains provide breeding habitat for grassland songbirds, though little is known about the quality of this habitat. A short-term study on songbirds at three NPS properties complemented current monitoring, providing an among park comparison addressing grassland bird productivity and fidelity relative to NPS property size. During 2008-2009, I assessed avian species richness, and estimated bird density and grassland songbird nest success. Bird species richness was greatest at small and medium sites, while number of nesting obligate species was greatest at the large site. Species-specific densities varied among sites, with few grassland obligates occurring at all three sites. Nest success estimates for grassland obligates were highest at the small site and lower at the large site. Another method to quantify habitat quality is assessment of breeding site fidelity. Current extrinsic markers used in monitoring site fidelity are inadequate for small birds; stable isotope analyses provide an alternative. I compared two techniques for assigning stable isotope tissue origin and measured grassland songbird site fidelity. My method of assigning origin provided site-specific variances of expected stable isotope values, an improvement over the most commonly used method. Fidelity tended to be higher at the large site, which may indicate a more robust breeding community of grassland birds. The small size of two of my sites precluded large sample sizes and made strong inferences difficult. To quantify how scientists cope with weak inference, I conducted a literature review. Strong inference was rarely observed, and most authors of weak-inference papers provided specific management recommendations. I suggest that adaptive management is an ideal method to resolve uncertainty from weak inference. Managers should consider my results within the context of regional and global management and the extent to which their unit might aide songbird conservation.

Bird Depredation

A survey of catfish producers by the United States Department of Agriculture, Centers for Epidemiology and Animal Health (CEAH) in 1996 indicated that the two primary sources of catfish losses in commercial operations were disease (45%) and wildlife (37%) (CEAH 1997a). A variety of avian and mammalian predators are amracred to aquaculture facilities in the United States (Parkhurs: er al. 1992) because ponds and open raceways provide a constant and readily accessible food supply for these animals. However, the mere presence of these predators arcund aquaculture faciliries does not necessarily mean that significant depredation problems are occurring. At catfish farms, three species or species groups of birds are primarily cited by catfish producers as causing most depredation problems (Wywialowski 1999). These include doublecrested cormorants, wading birds (herons and egrets), and American white pelicans, in order of importance to catfish producers (Wywialowski 1993). Although all of these species consume catfish, their biology, distribution, dietary preferences dictare the extent of depredation problems they cause and the approaches needed to alleviate their depredations. With the exception of total bird exclusion from ponds, there are no simple solutions for resolving all bird depredation problems in catfish aquaculture. Thus, in most cases, an integrated management approach to alleviating bird depredations must be considered.

Wildlife Risk Management at Vancouver International Airport

The Vancouver International Airport (YVR) is the second busiest airport in Canada. YVR is located on Sea Island in the Fraser River Estuary - a world-class wintering and staging area for hundreds of thousands of migratory birds. The Fraser Delta supports Canada’s largest wintering populations of waterfowl, shorebirds, and raptors. The large number of aircraft movements and the presence of many birds near YVR pose a wide range of considerable aviation safety hazards. Until the late 1980s when a full-time Wildlife Control Program (WCP) was initiated, YVR had the highest number of bird strikes of any Canadian commercial airport. Although the risks of bird strikes associated with the operation of YVR are generally well known by airport managers, and a number of risk assessments have been conducted associated with the Sea Island Conservation Area, no quantitative assessment of risks of bird strikes has been conducted for airport operations at YVR. Because the goal of all airports is to operate safely, an airport wildlife management program strives to reduce the risk of bird strikes. A risk assessment establishes the current risk of strikes, which can be used as a benchmark to focus wildlife control activities and to assess the effectiveness of the program in reducing bird strike risks. A quantitative risk assessment also documents the process and information used in assessing risk and allows the assessment to be repeated in the future in order to measure the change in risk over time in an objective and comparative manner. This study was undertaken to comply with new Canadian legislation expected to take effect in 2006 requiring airports in Canada to conduct a risk assessment and develop a wildlife management plan. Although YVR has had a management plan for many years, it took this opportunity to update the plan and conduct a risk assessment.

AGRICULTURAL BIRD PROBLEMS IN THE SOUTHEAST

Our chairman has wisely asked that we not spend all of our time here telling each other about our bird problems. In the Southeast, our difficulties with blackbirds are based upon the same bird habits that cause trouble elsewhere: they flock, they roost and they eat, generally taking advantage of the readily available handouts that today's agricul¬tural practices provide. Those of us on the receiving end of these de¬predations of course think that damage in our own particular area must be far the worst, anywhere. Because of the location of our meeting place today, perhaps it is worthwhile to point out that a report prepared by our Bureau's Washington office this year outlined the problem of blackbird damage to corn in the Middle Atlantic States, the Great Lakes Region and in Florida, and then followed with this statement--"An equally serious problem occurs in rice and grain sorghum fields of Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas and Louisiana." The report also men¬tions that the largest winter concentrations of blackbirds are found in the lower Mississippi Valley. Our 1963-64 blackbird-starling survey showed 43 principal roosts totaling approximately 100 million of these birds in Virginia, the Carolinas, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee and Kentucky. We have our own birds during the summer plus the "tourist" birds from up here and elsewhere during the winter, and all of these birds must eat, so suffice it to say that we, too, have some bird problems in the Southeast. I'm sure you're more interested in what we're doing about them. To keep this in perspective also, please bear in mind that against the magnitude of these problems, our blackbird control research staff at Gainesville consists of 3 biologists, 1 biochemist and one technician. And unfortunately, none of us happens to be a miracle worker. I think, though, we have made great progress toward solving the bird problems in the Southeast for the man-hours that have been expended in this re¬search. My only suggestion to those who are impatient about not having more answers is that they examine the budget that has been set up for this work. Only then could we intelligently discuss what might be expected as a reasonable rate of research progress. When I think about what we have accomplished in a short span of time, with very small expenditure, I can assure you that I am very proud of our small research crew at Gainesville--and I say this quite sincerely. At the Gainesville station, we work under two general research approaches to the bird damage problem. These projects have been assigned to us. The first is research on management of birds, particularly blackbirds and starlings destructive to crops or in feedlots, and, secondly, the development and the adaptation of those chemical compounds found to be toxic to birds but relatively safe to mammals. These approaches both require laboratory and field work that is further subdivided into several specific research projects. Without describing the details of these now, I want to mention some of our recent results. From the results, I'm sure you will gather the general objectives and some of the procedures used.