Short-term Response of Breeding Barred Owls to Forestry in a Boreal Mixedwood Forest Landscape

Forestry and other activities are increasing in the boreal mixedwood of Alberta, with a concomitant decrease in older forest. The Barred Owl (Strix varia) is an old-growth indicator species in some jurisdictions in North America. Hence, we radio-tagged Barred Owls in boreal mixedwood in Alberta to determine whether harvesting influenced habitat selection. We used three spatial scales: nest sites, i.e., nest tree and adjacent area of 11.7 m radius around nests, nesting territory of 1000 m radius around nests, and home range locations within 2000 m radius of the home range center. Barred Owls nested primarily in balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera) snags > 34 cm dbh and nest trees were surrounded by large, > 34 cm dbh, balsam poplar trees and snags. Nesting territories contained a variety of habitats including young < 80-yr-old, deciduous-dominated stands, old deciduous and coniferous-dominated stands, treed bogs, and recent clear-cuts. However, when compared to available habitat in the study area, they were more likely to contain old conifer-dominated stands and recent cutblocks. We assumed this is because all of the recent harvest occurred in old stands, habitat preferred by the owls. When compared with random sites, locations used for foraging and roosting at the home range scale were more likely to be in young deciduous-dominated stands, old conifer-dominated stands and cutblocks > 30 yr old, and less likely to occur in old deciduous-dominated stands and recent cutblocks. Hence, although recent clearcuts occurred in territories, birds avoided these microhabitats during foraging. To meet the breeding requirements of Barred Owls in managed forests, 10–20 ha patches of old deciduous and mixedwood forest containing large Populus snags or trees should be maintained. In our study area, nest trees had a minimum dbh of 34 cm. Although cut areas were incorporated into home ranges, the amount logged was low, i.e., 7%, in our area. Hence more research is required to determine harvest levels tolerated by owls over the long term.

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.