An Estimate of Nest Loss in Canada Due to Industrial Forestry Operations

Annual loss of nests by industrial (nonwoodlot) forest harvesting in Canada was estimated using two avian point-count data sources: (1) the Boreal Avian Monitoring Project (BAM) dataset for provinces operating in this biome and (2) available data summarized for the major (nonboreal) forest regions of British Columbia. Accounting for uncertainty in the proportion of harvest occurring during the breeding season and in avian nesting densities, our estimate ranges from 616 thousand to 2.09 million nests. Estimates of the impact on numbers of individuals recruited into the adult breeding population were made based on the application of survivorship estimates at various stages of the life cycle. Future improvements to this estimate are expected as better and more extensive avian breeding pair density estimates become available and as provincial forestry statistics become more refined, spatially and temporally. The effect of incidental take due to forestry is not uniform and is disproportionately centered in the southern boreal. Those species whose ranges occur primarily in these regions are most at risk for industrial forestry in general and for incidental take in particular. Refinements to the nest loss estimate for industrial forestry in Canada will be achieved primarily through the provision of more accurate estimates of the area of forest harvested annually during the breeding season stratified by forest type and Bird Conservation Region (BCR). A better understanding of survivorship among life-history stages for forest birds would also allow for better modeling of the effect of nest loss on adult recruitment. Finally, models are needed to project legacy effects of forest harvesting on avian populations that take into account forest succession and accompanying cumulative effects of landscape change.

Temporal aggregation of migration counts can improve accuracy and precision of trends

Temporal replicate counts are often aggregated to improve model fit by reducing zero-inflation and count variability, and in the case of migration counts collected hourly throughout a migration, allows one to ignore nonindependence. However, aggregation can represent a loss of potentially useful information on the hourly or seasonal distribution of counts, which might impact our ability to estimate reliable trends. We simulated 20-year hourly raptor migration count datasets with known rate of change to test the effect of aggregating hourly counts to daily or annual totals on our ability to recover known trend. We simulated data for three types of species, to test whether results varied with species abundance or migration strategy: a commonly detected species, e.g., Northern Harrier, Circus cyaneus; a rarely detected species, e.g., Peregrine Falcon, Falco peregrinus; and a species typically counted in large aggregations with overdispersed counts, e.g., Broad-winged Hawk, Buteo platypterus. We compared accuracy and precision of estimated trends across species and count types (hourly/daily/annual) using hierarchical models that assumed a Poisson, negative binomial (NB) or zero-inflated negative binomial (ZINB) count distribution. We found little benefit of modeling zero-inflation or of modeling the hourly distribution of migration counts. For the rare species, trends analyzed using daily totals and an NB or ZINB data distribution resulted in a higher probability of detecting an accurate and precise trend. In contrast, trends of the common and overdispersed species benefited from aggregation to annual totals, and for the overdispersed species in particular, trends estimating using annual totals were more precise, and resulted in lower probabilities of estimating a trend (1) in the wrong direction, or (2) with credible intervals that excluded the true trend, as compared with hourly and daily counts.