Bird feeders and their effects on bird-window collisions at residential houses

Feeding wild birds creates an important link between homeowners and conservation. The effects of bird feeders and year-round feeding on birds have not been well studied, however, particularly in relationship to bird-window collisions. We determined effects of bird feeder presence and placement on bird-window collisions at residential homes. Paired month-long trials in which a feeder was either present or absent for one month and then removed or added for the second month were completed at 55 windows at 43 houses. In each trial, homeowners were asked to search their study window daily for evidence of a bird-window collision. During the study there were 51 collisions when there was no bird feeder and 94 when the feeder was present. The season when each trial was set up was the best individual predictor of bird-window collisions. The largest number of collisions was observed during fall migration and the lowest during the winter months. There were no collisions at 26 of the study windows. High variance was observed in the number of collisions at different houses, indicating that effects of bird feeders are context dependent. Changing the occurrence, timing, and placement of feeders can alter collision rates but is only one of many factors that influence whether a residential house is likely to have a bird window-collision or not.

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.