Feeding–Danger Trade-Offs Underlie Stopover Site Selection by Migrants

To migrate successfully, birds need to store adequate fat reserves to fuel each leg of the journey. Migrants acquire their fuel reserves at stopover sites; this often entails exposure to predators. Therefore, the safety attributes of sites may be as important as the feeding opportunities. Furthermore, site choice might depend on fuel load, with lean birds more willing to accept danger to obtain good feeding. Here, we evaluate the factors underlying stopover-site usage by migrant Western Sandpipers (Calidris mauri) on a landscape scale. We measured the food and danger attributes of 17 potential stopover sites in the Strait of Georgia and Puget Sound region. We used logistic regression models to test whether food, safety, or both were best able to predict usage of these sites by Western Sandpipers. Eight of the 17 sites were used by sandpipers on migration. Generally, sites that were high in food and safety were used, whereas sites that were low in food and safety were not. However, dangerous sites were used if there was ample food abundance, and sites with low food abundance were used if they were safe. The model including both food and safety best-predicted site usage by sandpipers. Furthermore, lean sandpipers used the most dangerous sites, whereas heavier birds (which do not need to risk feeding in dangerous locations) used safer sites. This study demonstrates that both food and danger attributes are considered by migrant birds when selecting stopover sites, thus both these attributes should be considered to prioritize and manage stopover sites for conservation.

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.