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.