An Estimate of Nest Loss in Canada Due to Industrial Forestry Operations

Annual loss of nests by industrial (nonwoodlot) forest harvesting in Canada was estimated using two avian point-count data sources: (1) the Boreal Avian Monitoring Project (BAM) dataset for provinces operating in this biome and (2) available data summarized for the major (nonboreal) forest regions of British Columbia. Accounting for uncertainty in the proportion of harvest occurring during the breeding season and in avian nesting densities, our estimate ranges from 616 thousand to 2.09 million nests. Estimates of the impact on numbers of individuals recruited into the adult breeding population were made based on the application of survivorship estimates at various stages of the life cycle. Future improvements to this estimate are expected as better and more extensive avian breeding pair density estimates become available and as provincial forestry statistics become more refined, spatially and temporally. The effect of incidental take due to forestry is not uniform and is disproportionately centered in the southern boreal. Those species whose ranges occur primarily in these regions are most at risk for industrial forestry in general and for incidental take in particular. Refinements to the nest loss estimate for industrial forestry in Canada will be achieved primarily through the provision of more accurate estimates of the area of forest harvested annually during the breeding season stratified by forest type and Bird Conservation Region (BCR). A better understanding of survivorship among life-history stages for forest birds would also allow for better modeling of the effect of nest loss on adult recruitment. Finally, models are needed to project legacy effects of forest harvesting on avian populations that take into account forest succession and accompanying cumulative effects of landscape change.

What you find depends on where you look: responses to proximate habitat vary with landscape context

There is persistent interest in understanding responses of passerine birds to habitat fragmentation, but research findings have been inconsistent and sometimes contradictory in conclusions about how birds respond to characteristics of sites they occupy, such as habitat patch size or edge density. We examined whether these inconsistencies could result from differences in the amount of habitat in the surrounding landscape, e.g., for woodland birds, the amount of tree cover in the surrounding landscape. We compared responses of 22 woodland bird species to proximate-scale tree cover in open landscapes versus wooded landscapes. Our main expectation was that woodland birds would tolerate less suitable sites (less tree cover at the site scale) in open environments where they had little choice–where little tree cover was available in the surrounding area. We compared responses using logistic regression coefficients and loess plots in open and wooded landscapes in eastern North Dakota, USA. Responses to proximate-scale tree cover were stronger, not weaker, as expected, in open landscapes. In some cases the sign of the response changed from positive to negative in contrasting landscapes. We draw two conclusions: First, observed responses to proximate habitat measures such as habitat extent or edge density cannot be interpreted reliably unless landscape context is specified. Second, birds appear more selective, not less so, where habitat is sparse. Habitat loss and fragmentation at the landscape scale are likely to reduce the usefulness of local habitat conservation, and regional drivers in land-use change can have important effects for site-scale habitat use.