Origin and Availability of Large Cavities for Barrow’s Goldeneye (Bucephala islandica), a Species at Risk Inhabiting the Eastern Canadian Boreal Forest

Large secondary-nesting birds such as ducks rely on appropriate cavities for breeding. The main objective of this study was to assess the availability of large cavities and the potential of a managed boreal coniferous landscape to provide nesting trees within the breeding area of the eastern population of Barrow’s Goldeneye (Bucephala islandica), a cavity-nesting species at risk in Canada. Woodpecker surveys were conducted in both conifer and mixed-wood landscapes, and cavities were sought in line transects distributed in unharvested and linear remnant stands of balsam fir (Abies balsamea) and black spruce (Picea mariana) as well as in cutblocks. No Pileated Woodpeckers (Dryocopus pileatus) were detected in the breeding area of Barrow’s Goldeneye, but the species was present in the nearby lowland area in which trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides) is abundant. Only 10 trees (0.2% of those sampled) supported cavities considered suitable for Barrow’s Goldeneye in terms of dimensions and canopy openness. Most of the suitable cavities found during this study were nonexcavated apical (chimney) cavities in relatively short snags that showed advanced states of decay. A diameter-at-breast-height threshold was determined for each tree species, after which the probability of cavity occurrence was enhanced in terms of potential cavity trees for Barrow’s Goldeneye. Remnant linear forest sites had lower potential tree densities than did their unharvested equivalents. Large cavities were thus a rare component in this boreal landscape, suggesting that they may be a limiting factor for this population at risk. Current even-aged forest management that mainly relies on clear-cut practices is likely to further reduce the potential of this landscape to provide trees with suitable cavities.

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.