Upland Nesting Prairie Shorebirds: Use of Managed Wetland Basins and Accuracy of Breeding Surveys

Wetlands in southern Alberta are often managed to benefit waterfowl and cattle production. Effects on other species usually are not examined. I determined the effect of managed wetlands on upland-nesting shorebirds in southern Alberta by comparing numbers of breeding willets (Catoptrophorus semipalmatus), marbled godwits (Limosa fedoa), and long-billed curlews (Numenius americanus) among areas of managed wetlands, natural wetland basins, and no wetland basins from 1995 to 2000. Surveys were carried out at 21 sites three times each year. Nine to ten of these areas (each 2 km2) were searched for nests annually from 1998–2000. Numbers of willets and marbled godwits and their nests were always highest in areas with managed wetlands, probably because almost all natural wetland basins were dry in this region in most years. Densities of willets seen during pre-incubation surveys averaged 2.3 birds/km2 in areas of managed wetlands, 0.4 in areas of natural wetland basins, and 0.1 in areas with no wetland basins. Nest densities of willets (one search each season) averaged 1.5, 0.9, and 0.3 nests/km2 in areas of managed, natural, and no wetland basins, respectively. Similarly, pre-incubation surveys averaged 1.6, 0.6, and 0.2 godwits/km2 in areas of managed, natural, and no wetland basins, and 1.2, 0.3, and 0.1 godwit nests/km2. For long-billed curlews, pre-incubation surveys averaged 0.1, 0.2, and 0.1 birds/km2, and 0, 0.2, and 0 nests/km2. Nest success was similar in areas with and without managed wetlands. Shallow managed wetlands in this region appear beneficial to willets and marbled godwits, but not necessarily to long-billed curlews. Only 8% of marked willets and godwits with nests in the area were seen or heard during surveys, compared with 29% of pre-laying individuals and 42% of birds with broods. This suggests that a low and variable percentage of these birds is counted during breeding bird surveys, likely limiting their ability to adequately monitor populations of these species.

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.

Short-eared Owl (Asio flammeus) surveys in the North American Intermountain West: utilizing citizen scientists to conduct monitoring across a broad geographic scale

The Short-eared Owl (Asio flammeus) is an open-country species breeding in the northern United States and Canada, and has likely experienced a long-term, range-wide, and substantial decline. However, the cause and magnitude of the decline is not well understood. We set forth to address the first two of six previously proposed conservation priorities to be addressed for this species: (1) better define habitat use and (2) improve population monitoring. We recruited 131 volunteers to survey over 6.2 million ha within the state of Idaho for Short-eared Owls during the 2015 breeding season. We surveyed 75 transects, 71 of which were surveyed twice, and detected Short-eared Owls on 27 transects. We performed multiscale occupancy modeling to identify habitat associations, and performed multiscale abundance modeling to generate a state-wide population estimate. Our results suggest that within the state of Idaho, Short-eared Owls are more often found in areas with marshland or riparian habitat or areas with greater amounts of sagebrush habitat at the 1750 ha transect scale. At the 50 ha point scale, Short-eared Owls tend to associate positively with fallow and bare dirt agricultural land and negatively with grassland. Cropland was not chosen at the broader transect scale suggesting that Short-eared Owls may prefer more heterogeneous landscapes. On the surface our results may seem contradictory to the presumed land use by a “grassland” species; however, the grasslands of the Intermountain West, consisting largely of invasive cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), lack the complex structure shown to be preferred by these owls. We suggest the local adaptation to agriculture represents the next best habitat to their historical native habitat preferences. Regardless, we have confirmed regional differences that should be considered in conservation planning for this species. Last, our results demonstrate the feasibility, efficiency, and effectiveness of utilizing public participation in scientific research to achieve a robust sampling methodology across the broad geography of the Intermountain West.

Comparing the results of recall surveys and standardized searches in understanding bird-window collisions at houses

Every year a large number of birds die when they collide with windows. The actual number is difficult to ascertain. Previous attempts to estimate bird-window collision rates in Canada relied heavily on a prior citizen-science study that used memory-based surveys. Such an approach to data collection has many potential biases. We built upon this study and its recommendations for future research by creating a citizen-science program that actively searched for collision evidence at houses and apartments for an extended period with the objective to see how standardized approaches to data collection compared with memory recall. Absolute collision estimates as well as relative differences were compared between residence types in the two studies, and we found considerable differences in absolute values for collisions but similar rankings of collision rates between residence types. Collision recall rates in our study (56.5%) were very similar those in the prior 2012 study, where 50.5% of participants remembered a bird colliding with a window at some time in the past. Fatality estimates, however, were 1.4 times higher in the 2012 study than in our study based on standardized searches. Rural houses with a bird feeder consistently had the highest number of collisions. This suggests that memory recall surveys may be a useful tool for understanding the relative importance of different risk factors causing bird-window collisions.