Site Safety and Food Affect Movements of Semipalmated Sandpipers (Calidris pusilla) Migrating Through the Upper Bay of Fundy

The upper Bay of Fundy is a critical stopover site for Semipalmated Sandpipers (Calidris pusilla) during their fall migration. However, little is known about factors that influence selection of feeding and roosting sites by these birds, or the extent to which birds move between different sites during their time in the region. Using radio-telemetry, we studied movement patterns, examined habitat use, and tested hypotheses associated with factors influencing foraging and roost-site selection. Movements of radio-tagged sandpipers were tracked in the upper Bay of Fundy in August 2004 and 2005. In 2004, sandpipers from the Minas Basin, Nova Scotia and Chignecto Bay, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, were tracked, and in 2005, sandpipers were tracked only in Chignecto Bay. Sandpipers were highly mobile in both the Minas Basin 2004 and Chignecto Bay 2005, making daily movements of up to 20 km between foraging and roosting sites, although very little movement was detected in Chignecto Bay in 2004. Migrating sandpipers appeared to select foraging sites based on relative safety, as measured by distance to cover, provided that these sites offered an adequate food supply. Similarly, roosting sandpipers preferred sites that were far from nearby trees that might offer cover to predators. This preference for safe sites became more apparent later in their stay in the Bay of Fundy, when birds were heavier and, therefore, possibly more vulnerable to predation. Semipalmated Sandpipers appear to be flexible during their time in the upper Bay of Fundy, displaying year-to-year and site-to-site variability in movement and mudflat usage. Therefore, multiple, synchronized population counts should be conducted at known roost sites in order to more accurately estimate Semipalmated Sandpiper abundance in this region. Furthermore, in a highly dynamic system where food can be variable, landscape features such as distance to cover may be important factors to consider when selecting candidate sites for shorebird conservation measures.

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.