Geology topics

Mark T. Bidwell

Publications and source records attributed to Mark T. Bidwell.

8 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2024

Flexible migration and habitat use strategies of an endangered waterbird during hydrological drought

Wildlife species confront threats from climate and land use change, exacerbating the influence of extreme climatic events on populations and biodiversity. Migratory waterbirds are especially vulnerable to hydrological drought via reduced availability of surface water habitats. We assessed how whooping cranes ( Grus americana ) modified habitat use and migration strategies during drought to evaluate their resilience to changing conditions and adaptive capacity. We categorized >8000 night-roost sites used by 146 cranes from 2010 to 2022 and examined relative use during non-drought, moderate drought, and extreme drought conditions. We found cultivated and uncultivated palustrine and lacustrine wetlands were generally used less during droughts than non-drought conditions. Conversely, impounded palustrine and lacustrine systems and rivers served more frequently as drought refugia (i.e., used more during drought than non-drought conditions). Night roosts occurred primarily on private lands (86% overall); public land use decreased with latitude and increased with drought severity, with greatest use (56%) occurring during severe autumn drought in the southern Great Plains. Quantifying use of identified critical habitats in the United States indicated that Cheyenne Bottoms State Waterfowl Management Area and Quivira National Wildlife Refuge were used less during drought, and the Central Platte River and Salt Plains National Wildlife Refuge received similar use during drought compared to non-drought conditions. Our findings provide insights into compensatory use of habitats, where impounded surface water may function in a complementary fashion with natural wetlands. Collectively, these and other types of wetlands distributed across the migration corridor provided a reliable network of habitat available across the Great Plains. A diversity of wetlands available during variable environmental conditions would be useful in supporting continued recovery of whooping cranes and likely have benefits for a wide array of migratory birds.

Conservation Science and Practice↗

USGS2022

Balancing future renewable energy infrastructure siting and associated habitat loss for migrating whooping cranes

The expansion of human infrastructure has contributed to novel risks and disturbance regimes in most ecosystems, leading to considerable uncertainty about how species will respond to altered landscapes. A recent assessment revealed that whooping cranes ( Grus americana ), an endangered migratory waterbird species, avoid wind-energy infrastructure during migration. However, uncertainties regarding collective impacts of other types of human infrastructure, such as power lines on migration, variable drought conditions, and continued construction of wind energy infrastructure may compromise ongoing recovery efforts for whooping cranes. Droughts are increasing in frequency and severity throughout the whooping crane migration corridor, and the impacts of drought on stopover habitat use are largely unknown. Moreover, decision-based analyses are increasingly advocated to guide recovery planning for endangered species, yet applications remain rare. Using GPS locations from 57 whooping cranes from 2010 through 2016 in the United States Great Plains, we assessed habitat selection and avoidance of potential disturbances during migration relative to drought conditions, and we used these results in an optimization analysis to select potential sites for new wind energy developments that minimize relative habitat loss for whooping cranes and maximize wind energy potential. Drought occurrence and severity varied spatially and temporally across the migration corridor during our study period. Whooping cranes rarely used areas <5 km from human settlements and wind energy infrastructure under both drought and non-drought conditions, and <2 km from power lines during non-drought conditions, with the lowest likelihood of use near wind energy infrastructure. Whooping cranes differed in their selection of wetland and cropland land cover types depending on drought or non-drought conditions. We identified scenarios for wind energy expansion across the migration corridor and in select states, which are robust to uncertain drought conditions, where future loss of highly selected stopover habitats could be minimized under a common strategy. Our approach was to estimate functional habitat loss while integrating current disturbances, potential future disturbances, and uncertainty in drought conditions. Therefore, dynamic models describing potential costs associated with risk-averse behaviors resulting from future developments can inform proactive conservation before population impacts occur.

Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dak↗

USGS2022

Space use and site fidelity of wintering whooping cranes on the Texas Gulf Coast

The Aransas-Wood Buffalo population (the only non-reintroduced, migratory population) of endangered whooping cranes ( Grus americana ) overwinters along the Texas Gulf Coast, USA. Understanding whooping crane space use on the wintering grounds reveals essential aspects of this species' ecology, which subsequently assists with conservation. Using global positioning system telemetry data from marked whooping cranes during 2009–2017, we fit continuous-time stochastic process models to describe movement and home range using autocorrelated kernel density estimation (AKDE) and explored variation in home range size in relation to age, sex, reproductive status, and drought conditions. We used the Bhattacharyya coefficient of overlap and distance between home range centroids to quantify site fidelity. We examined the effects of time between winter home ranges and the sex of the crane on site fidelity using Bayesian mixed-effects beta regression. Winter whooping crane 95% AKDE home range size averaged 30.1 ± 45.2 (SD) km 2 (median = 14.3, range = 1.1–308.6). Home ranges of sub-adult females were approximately 2 times larger than those of sub-adult males or families. As drought worsened, home ranges typically expanded. Between consecutive years, the home ranges of an adult crane exhibited 68 ± 31% overlap (site fidelity), but fidelity to winter sites declined in subsequent winters. The overlap of adult home ranges with the nearest unrelated family averaged 33 ± 28%. As a whooping crane aged, overlap with its winter home range as a juvenile declined, regardless of sex. By 4 years of age, a whooping crane had approximately 14 ± 28% overlap with its juvenile winter home range. Limited evidence suggested male whooping cranes return to within 2 km of their juvenile home range by their fifth winter. Previous data obtained from aerial surveys led ecologists to assume that whooping crane families normally used small areas (~2 km 2 ) and expressed persistent site fidelity. Our analyses showed <8% of families had home ranges ≤2 km 2 , with the average area 15 times greater, and waning site fidelity over time. Our work represents an analysis of whooping crane home ranges for this population, identifying past misconceptions of winter space use and resulting in better estimates of space requirements for future conservation efforts.

Texas↗

USGS2021

Migrating whooping cranes avoid wind-energy infrastructure when selecting stopover habitat

Electricity generation from renewable-energy sources has increased dramatically worldwide in recent decades. Risks associated with wind-energy infrastructure are not well understood for endangered whooping cranes or other vulnerable crane populations. From 2010 to 2016, we monitored 57 whooping cranes with remote-telemetry devices in the United States Great Plains to determine potential changes in migration distribution (i.e., avoidance) caused by presence of wind-energy infrastructure. During our study, the number of wind towers tripled in the whooping crane migration corridor and quadrupled in the corridor’s center. Median distance of whooping crane locations from nearest wind tower was 52.1 km, and 99% of locations were >4.3 km from wind towers. A habitat selection analysis revealed that whooping cranes used areas ≤5.0 km (95% CI = 4.8–5.4) from towers less than expected (i.e., zone of influence) and that whooping cranes were 20 times (95% CI: 14–64) more likely to use areas outside compared to adjacent to towers. Eighty percent of whooping crane locations and 20% of wind towers were located in areas with the highest relative probability of whooping crane use based on our model, which comprised 20% of the study area. Whooping cranes selected for these places, whereas developers constructed wind infrastructure at random relative to desirable whooping crane habitat. As of early 2020, 4.6% of the study area and 5.0% of the highest-selected whooping crane habitat were within the collective zone of influence. The affected area equates to habitat loss ascribed to wind-energy infrastructure; losses from other disturbances have not been quantified. Continued growth of the whooping crane population during this period of wind infrastructure construction suggests no immediate population-level consequences. Chronic or lag effects of habitat loss are unknown but possible for long-lived species. Preferentially constructing future wind infrastructure outside of the migration corridor or inside of the corridor at sites with low probability of whooping crane use would allow for continued wind-energy development in the Great Plains with minimal additional risk to highly selected habitat that supports recovery of this endangered species.

Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma,↗

USGS2020

Heterogeneity in migration strategies of the whooping crane

Migratory birds use numerous strategies to successfully complete twice-annual movements between breeding and wintering sites. Context for conservation and management can be provided by characterizing these strategies. Variations in strategy among and within individuals support population persistence in response to changes in land use and climate. We used location data from 58 marked Whooping Cranes (Grus americana) from 2010–2016 to characterize migration strategies in the U.S. Great Plains and Canadian Prairies and southern boreal region, and to explore sources of heterogeneity in their migration strategy, including space use, timing, and performance. Whooping Cranes completed approximately 3,900-km migrations that averaged 29 days during spring and 45 days during autumn, while making 11–12 nighttime stops. At the scale of our analysis, individual Whooping Cranes showed little consistency in stopover sites used among migration seasons (i.e., low site fidelity). In contrast, individuals expressed a measure of consistency in timing, especially migration initiation date. Whooping Cranes migrated at different times based on age and reproductive status, where adults with young initiated autumn migration after other birds, and adults with and without young initiated spring migration before subadult birds. Time spent at stopover sites was associated with migration bout length and time spent at previous stopover sites, suggesting Whooping Cranes acquired energy resources at some stopover sites that they used to fuel migration. Whooping Cranes were faithful to a defined migration corridor but showed less fidelity in their selection of nighttime stopover sites; hence, spatial targeting of conservation actions may be better informed by associations with landscape and habitat features rather than documented past use at specific locations. The preservation of variation in migration strategies existing within this species that experienced a severe population bottleneck suggests that Whooping Cranes have maintained a capacity to adjust strategies when confronted with future changes in land use and climate.

Great Plains, Canadian Prairies↗

USGS2019

Mortality in Aransas-Wood Buffalo Whooping Cranes: Timing, location, and causes

For long-lived species with low fecundity rates, population growth rate can be sensitive to changes in annual survival. Understanding where, when, and why animals die provides useful information for prioritizing conservation practices designed to increase survival. As part of a satellite tracking study, we identified 19 confirmed and suspected deaths of Whooping Cranes of various ages from the Aransas-Wood Buffalo Population. Of these, more occurred during winter (∼45%), compared with summer (∼40%) or migration (∼15%). Summer mortalities occurred exclusively within Wood Buffalo National Park, and all winter mortalities occurred on the primary wintering grounds along the Texas Gulf Coast. Predation was the most common cause identified; proximate cause of mortality was not known for most of the birds. Previous assessments of mortality, based on assumptions and some supporting data, speculated that most mortality occurred during migration. Although preliminary, our results are based on stronger evidence and provide a different perspective. Migration may be less risky than previously assumed and of similar risk to other seasons; thus, conservation or management efforts to reduce mortality may have greater effect when focused during breeding and wintering periods, although feasibility and efficacy of these actions will need to be determined.

Book chapter↗

USGS2018

Delineating and identifying long-term changes in the whooping crane (Grus americana) migration corridor

Defining and identifying changes to seasonal ranges of migratory species is required for effective conservation. Historic sightings of migrating whooping cranes ( Grus americana ) have served as sole source of information to define a migration corridor in the Great Plains of North America (i.e., Canadian Prairies and United States Great Plains) for this endangered species. We updated this effort using past opportunistic sightings from 1942–2016 ( n = 5,055) and more recent (2010–2016) location data from 58 telemetered birds ( n = 4,423) to delineate migration corridors that included 50%, 75%, and 95% core areas. All migration corridors were well defined and relatively compact, with the 95% core corridor averaging 294 km wide, although it varied approximately ±40% in width from 170 km in central Texas to 407 km at the international border of the United States and Canada. Based on historic sightings and telemetry locations, we detected easterly movements in locations over time, primarily due to locations west of the median shifting east. This shift occurred from northern Oklahoma to central Saskatchewan at an average rate of 1.2 km/year (0.3–2.8 km/year). Associated with this directional shift was a decrease in distance of locations from the median in the same region averaging -0.7 km/year (-0.3–-1.3 km/year), suggesting a modest narrowing of the migration corridor. Changes in the corridor over the past 8 decades suggest that agencies and organizations interested in recovery of this species may need to modify where conservation and recovery actions occur. Whooping cranes showed apparent plasticity in their migratory behavior, which likely has been necessary for persistence of a wetland-dependent species migrating through the drought-prone Great Plains. Behavioral flexibility will be useful for whooping cranes to continue recovery in a future of uncertain climate and land use changes throughout their annual range.

PLoS ONE↗

USGS2015

Data from the 2011 International Piping Plover Census

This report provides results from the 2011 International Census of Piping Plovers ( Charadrius melodus ). Distribution and abundance data for wintering and breeding Piping Plovers are summarized in tabular format. An appendix provides census data for every site surveyed in every state, province, and island. The 2011 winter census resulted in the observation of 3,973 Piping Plovers. Expanded coverage outside of the United States led to the discovery of more than 1,000 Piping Plovers wintering in the Bahamas. The breeding census detected 2,771 birds in Atlantic Canada and the Plains, Prairies, and Great Lakes regions of the United States and Canada. Combining the census count with the U.S. Atlantic “window census” provides a total minimum estimate of 5,723 breeding birds for the species.

Data Series↗