Results for “Birding” — Page 32

USGS1998

History and tradition, or contemporary ornithology? Why ornithological journals should not have bird names

Ask any non-ornithologist to predict the prestige of the following journals, based on the name alone: American Birds, Auk, Bluebird, Condor, Emu, Forktail, Gerfaut, Ibis, Journal of Avian Biology, and Journal of Field Ornithology . The results always will be that the first one and the last two are placed in one category, and the blizzard of bird-named journals in another, lower category. When that same non-ornithologist is called upon to evaluate the publication records of ornithologists, those with important papers in bird-named journals likely will suffer lower rankings. If lucky, an ornithologist under review will receive support from an internationally distinguished ornithological colleague who will take explicit pains to argue that publication in The Auk is a meritorious professional accomplishment. Such arguments, however, may not counteract the damage of a single referee's sneering at the names of the journals in which a bird biologist has chosen to publish. One cannot overstate the importance of the serendipitous collection of peer reviews that determines whether ornithologists get and then keep their first academic jobs, receive tenure, are promoted, are evaluated fairly, and, most important, achieve and maintain the respect of colleagues in other biological disciplines.

The Auk↗

USGS1997

Declines in abundance and species richness of birds following a major flood on the upper Mississippi River

We examined the abundance and species richness of birds breeding in floodplain forests of the Upper Mississippi River from 1992 to 1994 to identify effects of a major flood in 1993 on the bird assemblage. Sixty-five study plots were divided into treatments and controls based on whether they were flooded in 1993. Among 84 species observed on all plots, 41 species decreased in abundance from 1992 to 1994, 13 species increased, and numbers of 5 species were unchanged. Sample sizes were inadequate to evaluate trends for 25 species. Species richness declined over the three-year period. The main effect "year" was significant in 20 of the 36 species tested. Cool, wet conditions may have contributed to poor reproductive success in 1993 and resulted in widespread declines in abundance during the year following the flood. Bird abundance increased on most unflooded plots in 1993, probably because birds were displaced from flooded plots. This pattern was most striking for Neotropical migrants, species preferring habitat edges, lower-canopy nesters, and species that forage in the air. We suggest that periodic major flooding maintains suitable floodplain habitat for Prothonotary Warblers ( Protonotaria citrea ) in the face of competition with House Wrens ( Troglodytes aedon ) for nest sites.

The Auk↗

USGS2002

Effects of management practices on grassland birds: Lesser Prairie-Chicken

Information on the habitat requirements and effects of habitat management on grassland birds were summarized from information in more than 4,000 published and unpublished papers. A range map is provided to indicate the breeding distribution of Lesser Prairie-Chicken in the United States and southern Canada. Although birds frequently are observed outside the breeding range indicated, the maps are intended to show areas where managers might concentrate their attention. It may be ineffectual to manage habitat at a site for a species that rarely occurs in an area. The species account begins with a brief capsule statement, which provides the fundamental components or keys to management for the species. A section on breeding range outlines the current breeding distribution of the species in North America. The suitable habitat section describes the breeding habitat and occasionally microhabitat characteristics of the species, especially those habitats that occur in the Great Plains. Details on habitat and microhabitat requirements often provide clues to how a species will respond to a particular management practice. A table near the end of the account complements the section on suitable habitat, and lists the specific habitat characteristics for the species by individual studies. A special section on prey habitat is included for those predatory species that have more specific prey requirements. The area requirements section provides details on territory and home range sizes, minimum area requirements, and the effects of patch size, edges, and other landscape and habitat features on abundance and productivity. It may be futile to manage a small block of suitable habitat for a species that has minimum area requirements that are larger than the area being managed. The Brown-headed Cowbird ( Molothrus ater ) is an obligate brood parasite of many grassland birds. The section on cowbird brood parasitism summarizes rates of cowbird parasitism, host responses to parasitism, and factors that influence parasitism, such as nest concealment and host density. The impact of management depends, in part, upon a species’ nesting phenology and biology. The section on breeding-season phenology and site fidelity includes details on spring arrival and fall departure for migratory populations in the Great Plains, peak breeding periods, the tendency to renest after nest failure or success, and the propensity to return to a previous breeding site. The duration and timing of breeding varies among regions and years. Species’ response to management summarizes the current knowledge and major findings in the literature on the effects of different management practices on the species. The section on management recommendations complements the previous section and summarizes specific recommendations for habitat management provided in the literature. If management recommendations differ in different portions of the species’ breeding range, recommendations are given separately by region. The literature cited contains references to published and unpublished literature on the management effects and habitat requirements of the species. This section is not meant to be a complete bibliography; a searchable, annotated bibliography of published and unpublished papers dealing with habitat needs of grassland birds and their responses to habitat management is posted at the Web site mentioned below.

Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico, Colorado↗

USGS2004

Effects of management practices on grassland birds: Golden eagle

Information on the habitat requirements and effects of habitat management on grassland birds were summarized from information in more than 4,000 published and unpublished papers. A range map is provided to the breeding, year-round, and nonbreeding ranges in the United States and southern Canada. Although birds frequently are observed outside the breeding range indicated, the maps are intended to show areas where managers might concentrate their attention. It may be ineffectual to manage habitat at a site for a species that rarely occurs in an area. The species account begins with a brief capsule statement, which provides the fundamental components or keys to management for the species. A section on breeding range outlines the current breeding distribution of the species in North America. The suitable habitat section describes the breeding habitat and occasionally microhabitat characteristics of the species, especially those habitats that occur in the Great Plains. Details on habitat and microhabitat requirements often provide clues to how a species will respond to a particular management practice. A table near the end of the account complements the section on suitable habitat, and lists the specific habitat characteristics for the species by individual studies. A special section on prey habitat is included for those predatory species that have more specific prey requirements. The area requirements section provides details on territory and home range sizes, minimum area requirements, and the effects of patch size, edges, and other landscape and habitat features on abundance and productivity. It may be futile to manage a small block of suitable habitat for a species that has minimum area requirements that are larger than the area being managed. The Brown-headed Cowbird ( Molothrus ater ) is an obligate brood parasite of many grassland birds. The section on cowbird brood parasitism summarizes rates of cowbird parasitism, host responses to parasitism, and factors that influence parasitism, such as nest concealment and host density. The impact of management depends, in part, upon a species’ nesting phenology and biology. The section on breeding-season phenology and site fidelity includes details on spring arrival and fall departure for migratory populations in the Great Plains, peak breeding periods, the tendency to renest after nest failure or success, and the propensity to return to a previous breeding site. The duration and timing of breeding varies among regions and years. Species’ response to management summarizes the current knowledge and major findings in the literature on the effects of different management practices on the species. The section on management recommendations complements the previous section and summarizes specific recommendations for habitat management provided in the literature. If management recommendations differ in different portions of the species’ breeding range, recommendations are given separately by region. The literature cited contains references to published and unpublished literature on the management effects and habitat requirements of the species. This section is not meant to be a complete bibliography; a searchable, annotated bibliography of published and unpublished papers dealing with habitat needs of grassland birds and their responses to habitat management is posted at the Web site mentioned below.

Report↗

USGS2002

Effects of management practices on wetland birds: American Avocet

Information on the habitat requirements and effects of habitat management on wetland birds were summarized from information in more than 500 published and unpublished papers. A range map is provided to indicate the relative densities of the species in North America, based on Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) data. Although the BBS may not capture the presence of elusive waterbird species, the BBS is a standardized survey and the range maps, in many cases, represent the most consistent information available on species’ distributions. Although birds frequently are observed outside the breeding range indicated, the maps are intended to show areas where managers might concentrate their attention. It may be ineffectual to manage habitat at a site for a species that rarely occurs in an area. The species account begins with a brief capsule statement, which provides the fundamental components or keys to management for the species. A section on breeding range outlines the current breeding distribution of the species in North America, including areas that could not be mapped using BBS data. The suitable habitat section describes the breeding habitat and occasionally microhabitat characteristics of the species, especially those habitats that occur in the Great Plains. Details on habitat and microhabitat requirements often provide clues to how a species will respond to a particular management practice. A table near the end of the account complements the section on suitable habitat, and lists the specific habitat characteristics for the species by individual studies. The area requirements section provides details on territory and home range sizes, minimum area requirements, and the effects of patch size, edges, and other landscape and habitat features on abundance and productivity. It may be futile to manage a small block of suitable habitat for a species that has minimum area requirements that are larger than the area being managed. The section on brood parasitism summarizes information on intra- and interspecific parasitism, host responses to parasitism, and factors that influence parasitism, such as nest concealment and host density. The impact of management depends, in part, upon a species’ nesting phenology and biology. The section on breeding-season phenology and site fidelity includes details on spring arrival and fall departure for migratory populations in the Great Plains, peak breeding periods, the tendency to renest after nest failure or success, and the propensity to return to a previous breeding site. The duration and timing of breeding varies among regions and years. Species’ response to management summarizes the current knowledge and major findings in the literature on the effects of different management practices on the species. The section on management recommendations complements the previous section and summarizes recommendations for habitat management provided in the literature. The literature cited contains references to published and unpublished literature on the management effects and habitat requirements of the species. This section is not meant to be a complete bibliography; a searchable, annotated bibliography of published and unpublished papers dealing with habitat needs of wetland birds and their responses to habitat management is posted at the Web site mentioned below.

Report↗

USGS2002

Effects of management practices on wetland birds: Yellow Rail

Information on the habitat requirements and effects of habitat management on wetland birds were summarized from information in more than 500 published and unpublished papers. A range map is provided to indicate the relative densities of the species in North America, based on Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) data. Although the BBS may not capture the presence of elusive waterbird species, the BBS is a standardized survey and the range maps, in many cases, represent the most consistent information available on species’ distributions. Although birds frequently are observed outside the breeding range indicated, the maps are intended to show areas where managers might concentrate their attention. It may be ineffectual to manage habitat at a site for a species that rarely occurs in an area. The species account begins with a brief capsule statement, which provides the fundamental components or keys to management for the species. A section on breeding range outlines the current breeding distribution of the species in North America, including areas that could not be mapped using BBS data. The suitable habitat section describes the breeding habitat and occasionally microhabitat characteristics of the species, especially those habitats that occur in the Great Plains. Details on habitat and microhabitat requirements often provide clues to how a species will respond to a particular management practice. A table near the end of the account complements the section on suitable habitat, and lists the specific habitat characteristics for the species by individual studies. The area requirements section provides details on territory and home range sizes, minimum area requirements, and the effects of patch size, edges, and other landscape and habitat features on abundance and productivity. It may be futile to manage a small block of suitable habitat for a species that has minimum area requirements that are larger than the area being managed. The section on brood parasitism summarizes information on intra- and interspecific parasitism, host responses to parasitism, and factors that influence parasitism, such as nest concealment and host density. The impact of management depends, in part, upon a species’ nesting phenology and biology. The section on breeding-season phenology and site fidelity includes details on spring arrival and fall departure for migratory populations in the Great Plains, peak breeding periods, the tendency to renest after nest failure or success, and the propensity to return to a previous breeding site. The duration and timing of breeding varies among regions and years. Species’ response to management summarizes the current knowledge and major findings in the literature on the effects of different management practices on the species. The section on management recommendations complements the previous section and summarizes recommendations for habitat management provided in the literature. The literature cited contains references to published and unpublished literature on the management effects and habitat requirements of the species. This section is not meant to be a complete bibliography; a searchable, annotated bibliography of published and unpublished papers dealing with habitat needs of wetland birds and their responses to habitat management is posted at the Web site mentioned below.

Report↗

USGS2004

Effects of management practices on grassland birds: Merlin

Information on the habitat requirements and effects of habitat management on grassland birds were summarized from information in more than 5,500 published and unpublished papers. A range map is provided to indicate the breeding, year-round, and nonbreeding ranges in the United States and southern Canada. Although birds frequently are observed outside the breeding range indicated, the maps are intended to show areas where managers might concentrate their attention. It may be ineffectual to manage habitat at a site for a species that rarely occurs in an area. The species account begins with a brief capsule statement, which provides the fundamental components or keys to management for the species. A section on breeding range outlines the current breeding distribution of the species in North America. The suitable habitat section describes the breeding habitat and occasionally microhabitat characteristics of the species, especially those habitats that occur in the Great Plains. Details on habitat and microhabitat requirements often provide clues to how a species will respond to a particular management practice. A table near the end of the account complements the section on suitable habitat, and lists the specific habitat characteristics for the species by individual studies. A special section on prey habitat is included for those predatory species that have more specific prey requirements. The area requirements section provides details on territory and home range sizes, minimum area requirements, and the effects of patch size, edges, and other landscape and habitat features on abundance and productivity. It may be futile to manage a small block of suitable habitat for a species that has minimum area requirements that are larger than the area being managed. The Brown-headed Cowbird (Molothrus ater) is an obligate brood parasite of many grassland birds. The section on cowbird brood parasitism summarizes rates of cowbird parasitism, host responses to parasitism, and factors that influence parasitism, such as nest concealment and host density. The impact of management depends, in part, upon a species’ nesting phenology and biology. The section on breeding-season phenology and site fidelity includes details on spring arrival and fall departure for migratory populations in the Great Plains, peak breeding periods, the tendency to renest after nest failure or success, and the propensity to return to a previous breeding site. The duration and timing of breeding varies among regions and years. Species’ response to management summarizes the current knowledge and major findings in the literature on the effects of different management practices on the species. The section on management recommendations complements the previous section and summarizes specific recommendations for habitat management provided in the literature. If management recommendations differ in different portions of the species’ breeding range, recommendations are given separately by region. The literature cited contains references to published and unpublished literature on the management effects and habitat requirements of the species. This section is not meant to be a complete bibliography; a searchable, annotated bibliography of published and unpublished papers dealing with habitat needs of grassland birds and their responses to habitat management is posted at the Web site mentioned below.

Report↗

USGS2002

Effects of management practices on wetland birds: Black tern

Information on the habitat requirements and effects of habitat management on wetland birds were summarized from information in more than 500 published and unpublished papers. A range map is provided to indicate the relative densities of the species in North America, based on Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) data. Although the BBS may not capture the presence of elusive waterbird species, the BBS is a standardized survey and the range maps, in many cases, represent the most consistent information available on species’ distributions. Although birds frequently are observed outside the breeding range indicated, the maps are intended to show areas where managers might concentrate their attention. It may be ineffectual to manage habitat at a site for a species that rarely occurs in an area. The species account begins with a brief capsule statement, which provides the fundamental components or keys to management for the species. A section on breeding range outlines the current breeding distribution of the species in North America, including areas that could not be mapped using BBS data. The suitable habitat section describes the breeding habitat and occasionally microhabitat characteristics of the species, especially those habitats that occur in the Great Plains. Details on habitat and microhabitat requirements often provide clues to how a species will respond to a particular management practice. A table near the end of the account complements the section on suitable habitat, and lists the specific habitat characteristics for the species by individual studies. The area requirements section provides details on territory and home range sizes, minimum area requirements, and the effects of patch size, edges, and other landscape and habitat features on abundance and productivity. It may be futile to manage a small block of suitable habitat for a species that has minimum area requirements that are larger than the area being managed. The section on brood parasitism summarizes information on intra- and interspecific parasitism, host responses to parasitism, and factors that influence parasitism, such as nest concealment and host density. The impact of management depends, in part, upon a species’ nesting phenology and biology. The section on breeding-season phenology and site fidelity includes details on spring arrival and fall departure for migratory populations in the Great Plains, peak breeding periods, the tendency to renest after nest failure or success, and the propensity to return to a previous breeding site. The duration and timing of breeding varies among regions and years. Species’ response to management summarizes the current knowledge and major findings in the literature on the effects of different management practices on the species. The section on management recommendations complements the previous section and summarizes recommendations for habitat management provided in the literature. The literature cited contains references to published and unpublished literature on the management effects and habitat requirements of the species. This section is not meant to be a complete bibliography; a searchable, annotated bibliography of published and unpublished papers dealing with habitat needs of grassland birds and their responses to habitat management is posted at the Web site mentioned below.

Report↗

USGS2002

Effects of management practices on wetland birds: Virginia rail

Information on the habitat requirements and effects of habitat management on wetland birds were summarized from information in more than 500 published and unpublished papers. A range map is provided to indicate the relative densities of the species in North America, based on Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) data. Although the BBS may not capture the presence of elusive waterbird species, the BBS is a standardized survey and the range maps, in many cases, represent the most consistent information available on species’ distributions. Although birds frequently are observed outside the breeding range indicated, the maps are intended to show areas where managers might concentrate their attention. It may be ineffectual to manage habitat at a site for a species that rarely occurs in an area. The species account begins with a brief capsule statement, which provides the fundamental components or keys to management for the species. A section on breeding range outlines the current breeding distribution of the species in North America, including areas that could not be mapped using BBS data. The suitable habitat section describes the breeding habitat and occasionally microhabitat characteristics of the species, especially those habitats that occur in the Great Plains. Details on habitat and microhabitat requirements often provide clues to how a species will respond to a particular management practice. A table near the end of the account complements the section on suitable habitat, and lists the specific habitat characteristics for the species by individual studies. The area requirements section provides details on territory and home range sizes, minimum area requirements, and the effects of patch size, edges, and other landscape and habitat features on abundance and productivity. It may be futile to manage a small block of suitable habitat for a species that has minimum area requirements that are larger than the area being managed. The section on brood parasitism summarizes information on intra- and interspecific parasitism, host responses to parasitism, and factors that influence parasitism, such as nest concealment and host density. The impact of management depends, in part, upon a species’ nesting phenology and biology. The section on breeding-season phenology and site fidelity includes details on spring arrival and fall departure for migratory populations in the Great Plains, peak breeding periods, the tendency to renest after nest failure or success, and the propensity to return to a previous breeding site. The duration and timing of breeding varies among regions and years. Species’ response to management summarizes the current knowledge and major findings in the literature on the effects of different management practices on the species. The section on management recommendations complements the previous section and summarizes recommendations for habitat management provided in the literature. The literature cited contains references to published and unpublished literature on the management effects and habitat requirements of the species. This section is not meant to be a complete bibliography; a searchable, annotated bibliography of published and unpublished papers dealing with habitat needs of wetland birds and their responses to habitat management is posted at the Web site mentioned below.

Report↗

USGS2002

Effects of management practices on wetland birds: Marsh Wren

Information on the habitat requirements and effects of habitat management on wetland birds were summarized from information in more than 500 published and unpublished papers. A range map is provided to indicate the relative densities of the species in North America, based on Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) data. Although the BBS may not capture the presence of elusive waterbird species, the BBS is a standardized survey and the range maps, in many cases, represent the most consistent information available on species’ distributions. Although birds frequently are observed outside the breeding range indicated, the maps are intended to show areas where managers might concentrate their attention. It may be ineffectual to manage habitat at a site for a species that rarely occurs in an area. The species account begins with a brief capsule statement, which provides the fundamental components or keys to management for the species. A section on breeding range outlines the current breeding distribution of the species in North America, including areas that could not be mapped using BBS data. The suitable habitat section describes the breeding habitat and occasionally microhabitat characteristics of the species, especially those habitats that occur in the Great Plains. Details on habitat and microhabitat requirements often provide clues to how a species will respond to a particular management practice. A table near the end of the account complements the section on suitable habitat, and lists the specific habitat characteristics for the species by individual studies. The area requirements section provides details on territory and home range sizes, minimum area requirements, and the effects of patch size, edges, and other landscape and habitat features on abundance and productivity. It may be futile to manage a small block of suitable habitat for a species that has minimum area requirements that are larger than the area being managed. The section on brood parasitism summarizes information on intra- and interspecific parasitism, host responses to parasitism, and factors that influence parasitism, such as nest concealment and host density. The impact of management depends, in part, upon a species’ nesting phenology and biology. The section on breeding-season phenology and site fidelity includes details on spring arrival and fall departure for migratory populations in the Great Plains, peak breeding periods, the tendency to renest after nest failure or success, and the propensity to return to a previous breeding site. The duration and timing of breeding varies among regions and years. Species’ response to management summarizes the current knowledge and major findings in the literature on the effects of different management practices on the species. The section on management recommendations complements the previous section and summarizes recommendations for habitat management provided in the literature. The literature cited contains references to published and unpublished literature on the management effects and habitat requirements of the species. This section is not meant to be a complete bibliography; a searchable, annotated bibliography of published and unpublished papers dealing with habitat needs of wetland birds and their responses to habitat management is posted at the Web site mentioned below. This report has been downloaded from the Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center WorldWide Web site, www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/literatr/grasbird/grasbird.htm. Please direct comments and suggestions to Douglas H. Johnson, Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, U.S. Geological Survey, 8711 37th Street SE, Jamestown, North Dakota 58401; telephone: 701- 253-5539; fax: 701-253-5553; e-mail: Douglas_H_Johnson@usgs.gov.

Report↗

USGS2020

Strategic Plan for the North American Breeding Bird Survey, 2020–30

The North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) has been the cornerstone of continental bird conservation and management for hundreds of North American bird species in the United States and Canada for more than 50 years. This strategic plan was developed in collaboration with key partners and stakeholders and charts the ambitious course for the BBS over the next decade (2020–30). Using this plan as a guide, the BBS program will set out to improve the breadth and depth of standardized data collection and analytical products; ensure its products are widely used and recognized as the authoritative source for long-term population change information for most birds; and secure adequate resources, internally and through partnerships, to realize the expanded vision of the BBS intended to support avian management needs through 2030.

Circular↗

USGS2021

The North American Breeding Bird Survey in Mexico, 2008 to 2018—A status report

Collection of avian population data has repeatedly been identified as a high priority for bird conservation in Mexico. To meet this need, in 2008 the North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS), a volunteer-based survey, was expanded to include northern Mexico. The BBS in Mexico (Mexican BBS) is managed by the North American Bird Conservation Initiative (NABCI), Mexico’s National Coordination Office inside the Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad (CONABIO). During 2008–18, 252 surveys were conducted along 68 routes in Mexico, with geographic coverage varying from year to year. Of these 68 routes, 36 were surveyed three or more times. Thirty-one observers conducted the surveys, and 21 of these observers conducted two or more surveys. Just two observers conducted more than one-third of the 252 surveys, and both observers were paid to conduct the surveys. The low availability of local observers who are qualified, willing, and able to volunteer their services to conduct BBS surveys may prove to be the biggest obstacle to the success of the Mexican BBS program, especially in the context of Mexico’s ongoing safety and security concerns. Apart from the amount of data collected, many surveys did not adhere to pre-established quality-control requirements, and this would result in the exclusion of a large percentage of the data from potential trend analyses. Only 31 percent of the surveys met all the quality-control criteria. Additional observer training may help resolve this issue. Of greater concern is the selection of region-specific sampling date windows during which the surveys are conducted. Observers consistently conducted surveys outside the preliminarily prescribed sampling date window, reflecting the need to re-evaluate the regional appropriateness of this date window. Regardless of the quality of the data, the quantity of data available from 2008 to 2018 is insufficient for trend analysis using methods typically employed by U.S. Geological Survey BBS analysts. Reaching minimum sample size thresholds for statistical analysis will require a substantial increase in effort. During 2008–18, no strata (defined as the intersection of State and Bird Conservation Region boundaries) reached the suggested minimum of 14 sampled routes, and most routes were not run consistently. This report provides information needed for an evaluation of the merits of continuing to invest in the Mexican BBS program in its current form. Such an evaluation should consider the likelihood of achieving the primary project goal of producing reliable long-term population trend estimates, a projected timeline for meeting this goal, and include an assessment of the potential value of any additional data products.

Baja California, Baja California Sur, Chihuahua, C↗

USGS2005

Ecology and diagnosis of introduced avian malaria in Hawaiian forest birds

Avian malaria is a disease caused by species of protozoan parasites (Plasmodium) that infect birds. Related species commonly infect reptiles, birds and mammals in tropical and temperate regions of the world. Transmitted by mosquitoes, the parasites spend part of their lives in the red blood cells of birds (Figure 1). Avian malaria is common in continental areas, but is absent from the most isolated island archipelagos where mosquitoes do not naturally occur. More than 40 different species of avian Plasmodium have been described, but only one, P. relictum, has been introduced to the Hawaiian Islands. Because they evolved without natural exposure to avian malaria, native Hawaiian honeycreepers are extremely susceptible to this disease. Malaria currently limits the geographic distribution of native species, has population level impacts on survivorship, and is limiting the recovery of threatened and endangered species of forest birds.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2010

Bird migration patterns in the arid southwest-Final report

To ensure full life-cycle conservation, we need to understand migrant behavior en route and how migrating species use stopover and migration aerohabitats. In the Southwest, birds traverse arid and mountainous landscapes in migration. Migrants are known to use riparian stopover habitats; we know less about how migrant density varies across the Southwest seasonally and annually, and how migrants use other habitat types during migratory stopover. Furthermore, we lack information about migrant flight altitudes, speeds, and directions of travel, and how these patterns vary seasonally and annually across the Southwest. Using weather surveillance radar data, we identified targets likely dominated by nocturnally migrating birds and determined their flight altitudes, speeds, directions over ground, and variations in abundance. Migrating or foraging bats likely are present across the region in some of these data, particularly in central Texas. We found that migrants flew at significantly lower altitudes and significantly higher speeds in spring than in fall. In all seasons migrants maintained seasonally appropriate directions of movement. We detected significant differences in vertical structure of migrant densities that varied both geographically within seasons and seasonally within sites. We also found that in fall there was a greater and more variable passage of migrants through the central part of the borderlands (New Mexico and west Texas); in spring there was some suggestion of greater and more variable passage of migrants in the eastern borderlands (central and south Texas). Such patterns are consistent with the existence of at least two migration systems through western North America and the use of different migration routes in spring and fall for at least some species. Using radar data and satellite land cover data, we determined the habitats with which migrants are associated during migration stopover. There were significant differences in bird densities among habitat types at all sites in at least one season. Upland forest habitat in parts of Arizona and New Mexico supported high migrant densities, especially in fall. Developed habitats in areas with little upland forest habitat also supported high migrant densities. Scrub/shrub and grassland habitats supported low to intermediate migrant densities, but because these habitat types dominate the region, they may support large numbers of migratory birds. This may be especially true for species that do not use forested habitats during migration. Target identity remains a challenge for radar-based studies. Presence of bats in the data complicates interpretation of some observations, particularly from central Texas. Based on our results it is simplistic to: (1) consider the arid west as a largely inhospitable landscape in which there are only relatively small oases of habitat that provide the resources needed by all migrants; (2) think of western riparian and upland forest habitat as supporting the majority of migrants in all cases; or (3) consider a particular habitat type unimportant migrant stopover habitat based solely on migrant densities.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2012

Summary of bird-survey and banding results at W.L. Finley National Wildlife Refuge, 1998-2008

With some of the best remaining examples of oak habitats in the Willamette Valley, the Willamette Valley National Wildlife Refuge Complex (WVNWRC) has been implementing restoration efforts to reverse the successional trend towards Douglas-fir and maple that is threatening existing oak woodlands. The restoration work has been considered a model for other public and private efforts within the Willamette Valley, and has been showcased through the Oregon Oak Communities Working Group (http://www.oregonoaks.org). Although many oak restoration projects have been initiated over the last several years, and grant recipients typically identify wildlife species that are likely to benefit from their project, measures of success have not included the actual response of wildlife, such as a change in the probability of species occurrence or abundance. Monitoring in the WVNWRC has so far been limited to vegetative and structural changes within the plant community. Hagar and Stern (2001) identified bird species occurring in Willamette Valley oak woodlands that might be expected to benefit from such restoration efforts, including an endemic subspecies of the White-breasted Nuthatch (see Appendix 1 for scientific names of bird and plant species listed in this document), and the Acorn Woodpecker, both of which are species of concern in Oregon. However, empirical data documenting responses of bird assemblages to restoration actions are needed. The goal of this study was to document the effects of a restoration project in an Oregon White Oak woodland on Pigeon Butte in the W.L. Finley National Wildlife Refuge. Restoration treatments on Pigeon Butte include the removal of shade-tolerant tree species (primarily big-leaf maple and Douglas-fir) to reduce competition with oak trees and to return the stand to a more open structure. The objectives of this ongoing study are to compare abundance, survival, and productivity of diurnal songbird species before and after application of these restoration treatments. Monitoring these vital rates will provide crucial information about the effects of management on survival and productivity (DeSante and Rosenberg, 1998). Therefore, a constant-effort mist-netting project was continued in 2007 and 2008 that had previously collected songbird demographic data at Pigeon Butte from 1998 to 2002. Point-count surveys were conducted in the woodland to build on historical data available for the site (Anderson, 1970; Hagar and Stern, 2001). The data reported here represent 5 years of point count surveys and 6 years of banding before restoration treatment, but only one post-treatment sampling season. Continued monitoring of the bird population is recommended to determine both short-term effects and long-term trends following the habitat alterations that result from restoration treatment.

Oregon↗

USGS2016

Collision and displacement vulnerability among marine birds of the California Current System associated with offshore wind energy infrastructure

With growing climate change concerns and energy constraints, there is an increasing need for renewable energy sources within the United States and globally. Looking forward, offshore wind-energy infrastructure (OWEI) has the potential to produce a significant proportion of the power needed to reach our Nation’s renewable energy goal. Offshore wind-energy sites can capitalize open areas within Federal waters that have persistent, high winds with large energy production potential. Although there are few locations in the California Current System (CCS) where it would be acceptable to build pile-mounted wind turbines in waters less than 50 m deep, the development of technology able to support deep-water OWEI (>200 m depth) could enable wind-energy production in the CCS. As with all human-use of the marine environment, understanding the potential impacts of wind-energy infrastructure on the marine ecosystem is an integral part of offshore wind-energy research and planning. Herein, we present a comprehensive database to quantify marine bird vulnerability to potential OWEI in the CCS (see https://doi.org/10.5066/F79C6VJ0 ). These data were used to quantify marine bird vulnerabilities at the population level. For 81 marine bird species present in the CCS, we created three vulnerability indices: Population Vulnerability, Collision Vulnerability, and Displacement Vulnerability. Population Vulnerability was used as a scaling factor to generate two comprehensive indicies: Population Collision Vulnerability (PCV) and Population Displacement Vulnerability (PDV). Within the CCS, pelicans, terns (Forster’s [ Sterna forsteri ], Caspian [ Hydroprogne caspia ], Elegant [ Thalasseus elegans ], and Least Tern [ Sternula antillarum ]), gulls (Western [ Larus occidentalis ] and Bonaparte’s Gull [ Chroicocephalus philadelphia ]), South Polar Skua ( Stercorarius maccormicki ), and Brandt’s Cormorant ( Phalacrocorax penicillatus ) had the greatest PCV scores. Brown Pelican ( Pelicanus occidentalis ) had the greatest overall PCV score. Some alcids (Scripps’s Murrelet [ Synthliboramphus scrippsi ], Marbled Murrelet [ Brachyramphus marmoratus ], and Tufted Puffin [ Fratercula cirrhata ]), terns (Elegant and Least Lern), and loons (Yellow-billed [ Gavia adamsii ] and Common Loon [ G. immer ]) had the greatest PDV scores. Ashy Storm-Petrel ( Oceanodroma homochroa ) had the greatest overall PDV score. To help inform decisions that will impact seabird conservation, vulnerability assessment results can now be combined with recent marine bird at-sea distribution and abundance data for the CCS to evaluate vulnerability areas where OWEI development is being considered. Lastly, it is important to note that as new information about seabird behavior and populations in the CCS becomes available, this database can be easily updated and modified.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2018

Status of selenium in south San Francisco Bay—A basis for modeling potential guidelines to meet National tissue criteria for fish and a proposed wildlife criterion for birds

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed Aquatic Life and AquaticDependent Wildlife Criteria for Selenium (Se) in California’s San Francisco Bay and Delta (Bay-Delta) in June 2016. Here we apply the same modeling methodology—Ecosystem-Scale Selenium Modeling— to an assessment of conditions and documentation of food webs of south San Francisco Bay (South Bay) as an exploratory framework in support of site-specific Se criteria development. Long-term datasets contribute to the basis for modeling, especially the 21-year collection of the clam Macoma petalum from a mudflat at the lower end of South Bay (Lower South Bay). As such, this is a working document that may serve as a basis to establish an understanding of the specifics of Se biodynamics within the estuary and reduce uncertainties about how to protect it. This approach brings together the main factors involved in toxicity: likelihood of high exposure, inherent species sensitivity, and the behavioral ecology (for example, demographics and life history) of an organism in terms of susceptibility to a reproductive toxicant. Species sensitivity is represented here by use of the EPA’s current national tissue Se criterion for fish or that proposed to protect the eggs of aquatic birds for the Bay-Delta (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2016a, 2016b, 2016c). This report also strives to bring together findings and field data across a body of literature for South Bay to provide an integrative assessment. We find an assemblage of site-specific conditions that could affect modeling: associated urban processes such as discharges from municipal wastewater treatment plants and drainage from mercury (Hg) mining and limestone extraction are sources of Se that characterize the Lower South Bay as the location of interest for Se exposure; • hydrodynamics are lagoon-like (that is, less flushing), which sustains elevated nutrients and phytoplankton blooms; • managed freshwater sources are a major hydrodynamic component; • birds, in addition to fish, are prominent predators in South Bay; • wetland restoration has recently intervened to play a significant role in ecosystem function that may include uptake of both Hg and Se; • the dietary food web of surficial-sediment to M. petalum is important because of the dominance of this clam species and its elevated Se bioaccumulation potential compared to other local food webs; and 2 • maximal Se concentrations may be limited by transitory or annually renewed food webs (for example, migratory shorebirds and decimation of clams from marshes). We also find that the constructed mechanistic model: • spatially connects to the Palo Alto mudflat site because of data availability; • accurately predicts average observed Se concentrations in M. petalum and in predator species of fish and birds; and • is able to bracket a range of potential protective water-column Se concentrations specific to predator species based on the EPA’s national Se criterion for whole-body fish tissue and a proposed site-specific criterion for bird eggs in the Bay-Delta.

California↗

USGS2008

Assessment of metals exposure and sub-lethal effects in voles and small birds captured near the DeLong Mountain Regional Transportation System Road, Cape Krusenstern National Monument, Alaska, 2006

Voles (n=6) and small ground-nesting birds (n=12) were live-captured near the DeLong Mountain Regional Transportation System haul road in Cape Krusenstern National Monument in northwest Alaska in 2006 to assess metals exposure and sub-lethal biological effects. Similar numbers of animals were captured from a reference site in southern Cape Krusenstern National Monument for comparison. Histopathological examination of selected organs, blood analysis, and analysis for aluminum, barium, cadmium, lead, and zinc concentrations in liver and blood samples were performed. Voles and small birds captured from near the haul road had about 20 times greater blood and liver lead concentrations and about 3 times greater cadmium concentrations when compared to those from the reference site. Barium and zinc tissue concentrations of animals collected from different sites were not remarkably different, and aluminum concentrations were below the reporting limits in most samples. There was no clear evidence of serious sub-lethal biological effects such as lesions in internal organs or DNA damage in blood in any of the animals. Accordingly, blood and liver lead concentrations in animals captured near the haul road generally were less than tissue concentration thresholds associated with serious biological effects reported from other studies; however, subtle effects resulting from lead exposure, such as the suppression of the activity of certain enzymes, cannot be ruled out for those animals nearest the haul road. Notably, liver lead concentrations of voles and small birds at the reference location were considerably less than those previously reported for similar animals at reference sites in other parts of the United States, Canada, and Europe. Results from this reconnaissance-level study indicate that voles and small birds inhabiting this area are not suffering serious biological effects as a result of metals exposure; however, continued monitoring of lead and other metals is recommended because of uncertainties noted and because biological effects thresholds might be approached if exposure levels were to increase.

Scientific Investigations Report↗