Numerical Response of Breeding Birds Following Experimental Selection Harvesting in Northern Hardwood Forests

Silvicultural treatments have been shown to alter the composition of species assemblages in numerous taxa. However, the intensity and persistence of these effects have rarely been documented. We used a before-after, control-impact (BACI) paired design, i.e., five pairs of 25-ha study plots, 1-control and 1-treated plot, to quantify changes in the density of eight forest bird species in response to selection harvesting over six breeding seasons, one year pre- and five years postharvest. Focal species included mature forest associates, i.e., Northern Parula (Setophaga americana) and Black-throated Green Warbler (Setophaga virens), forest generalists, i.e., Yellow-bellied Sapsucker (Sphyrapicus varius) and Swainson’s Thrush (Catharus ustulatus), early-seral specialists, i.e., Mourning Warbler (Geothlypis philadelphia) and Chestnut-sided Warbler (Setophaga pensylvanica), species associated with shrubby forest gaps, i.e., Black-throated Blue Warbler (Setophaga caerulescens), and mid-seral species, i.e., American Redstart (Setophaga ruticilla). As predicted, we found a negative numerical response to the treatment in the Black-throated Green Warbler, no treatment effect in the Yellow-bellied Sapsucker, and a positive treatment effect in early-seral specialists. We only detected a year effect in the Northern Parula and the American Redstart. There was evidence for a positive treatment effect on the Swainson’s Thrush when the regeneration started to reach the pole stage, i.e., fifth year postharvest. These findings suggest that selection harvesting has the potential to maintain diverse avian assemblages while allowing sustainable management of timber supply, but future studies should determine whether mature-forest associates can sustain second- and third-entry selection harvest treatments.

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.