Land Cover Sampling Biases Associated with Roadside Bird Surveys

Roadside surveys such as the Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) are widely used to assess the relative abundance of bird populations. The accuracy of roadside surveys depends on the extent to which surveys from roads represent the entire region under study. We quantified roadside land cover sampling bias in Tennessee, USA, by comparing land cover proportions near roads to proportions of the surrounding region. Roadside surveys gave a biased estimate of patterns across the region because some land cover types were over- or underrepresented near roads. These biases changed over time, introducing varying levels of distortion into the data. We constructed simulated population trends for five bird species of management interest based on these measured roadside sampling biases and on field data on bird abundance. These simulations indicated that roadside surveys may give overly negative assessments of the population trends of early successional birds and of synanthropic birds, but not of late-successional birds. Because roadside surveys are the primary source of avian population trend information in North America, we conclude that these surveys should be corrected for roadside land cover sampling bias. In addition, current recommendations about the need to create more early successional habitat for birds may need reassessment in the light of the undersampling of this habitat by roads.

A Field Evaluation of the Time-of-Detection Method to Estimate Population Size and Density for Aural Avian Point Counts

The time-of-detection method for aural avian point counts is a new method of estimating abundance, allowing for uncertain probability of detection. The method has been specifically designed to allow for variation in singing rates of birds. It involves dividing the time interval of the point count into several subintervals and recording the detection history of the subintervals when each bird sings. The method can be viewed as generating data equivalent to closed capture–recapture information. The method is different from the distance and multiple-observer methods in that it is not required that all the birds sing during the point count. As this method is new and there is some concern as to how well individual birds can be followed, we carried out a field test of the method using simulated known populations of singing birds, using a laptop computer to send signals to audio stations distributed around a point. The system mimics actual aural avian point counts, but also allows us to know the size and spatial distribution of the populations we are sampling. Fifty 8-min point counts (broken into four 2-min intervals) using eight species of birds were simulated. Singing rate of an individual bird of a species was simulated following a Markovian process (singing bouts followed by periods of silence), which we felt was more realistic than a truly random process. The main emphasis of our paper is to compare results from species singing at (high and low) homogenous rates per interval with those singing at (high and low) heterogeneous rates. Population size was estimated accurately for the species simulated, with a high homogeneous probability of singing. Populations of simulated species with lower but homogeneous singing probabilities were somewhat underestimated. Populations of species simulated with heterogeneous singing probabilities were substantially underestimated. Underestimation was caused by both the very low detection probabilities of all distant individuals and by individuals with low singing rates also having very low detection probabilities.