John Himes for Naomi Avissar – FSA Survey /FSD Updates
- www.flshorebirdalliance.com
o Steward resources for beaches
§ Outreach: updated rules and regulations, beach driving and beach raking BMPs
§ New this season: Audubon Steward Manual, photography brochure
o Steward resources for rooftops
§ Outreach: signs and posts, handouts
§ Chick-checking manual
§ New this season: postcards
- Minimum expectations for surveys: follow the protocols, use data sheets, survey your routes and check your rooftops during the 6 count windows, report nesting sites ASAP to managers and enter in database, record presence/absence. Even better: weekly count at each nest site, record optional data.
- Key concepts:
o Routes: path with start/end point, can be on land/water, established by partnerships/individual, a route survey is when you search your route.
o Site: shorebird nest, seabird colony, or rooftop
o Site visit: when you check on a site and conduct counts [you can visit sites along a route or check on sites independently (rooftop)]
o Rooftop sites (not on routes): check during count windows (report if absent), solitary and colonial species at same site, DON’T GO ON ROOF (observe from ground or taller vantage point)
- Site status categories (REDEFINED)
1. Pre-nesting/potential nesting: mating, courtship feeding, digging nest scrapes, and/or territorial behavior.
2. Active
§ Solitary shorebirds: nest with eggs/nestlings, adult incubating, broken wing
§ Colonial shorebirds: nests present, chicks/young in sight, broken wing
§ Rooftop: any birds on the roof
3. No longer active:
§ Solitary shorebirds: no viable eggs/nestlings, adults not incubating, no broken wing, no chicks
§ Colonial: no nests, chicks, or young in sight.
§ Rooftop: no birds on roof.
§ If a pair re-nests, create a new site.
§ This category will ask for a follow-up reason for no longer being active.
4. No nesting yet: rooftops only
- Specific form depends on where nest/individual is seen: solitary nest, roving chick, colony nest, etc…
- New FSD Features
o Hide maps option
o Searchable data in Explore Data tab
o If you add an observer to your site visit/route survey, automatically loaded to MyData Page
o All nest and colony sites automatically loaded to nearby routes.
- Additional Training
o Introductory training course (live): March 14 from 10AM-noon
o Recorded webinar online soon
o Short tutorial videos online (resources tab).
- Naomi Avissar contact information: or 863-370-6305
Alyson Webber: Human Disturbance and Stage-Specific Habitat Requirements Influence Snowy Plover Site Occupancy during the Breeding Season
- Snowy Plover: threatened species due to coastal habitat loss/degradation and frequent human interaction
- Objectives: determine what drives SNPL occupancy during different breeding stages
o Assess if SNPL move over the course of the breeding season
o Indentify attributes that are positively or negatively associated with SNPL presence
§ Hypotheses: disturbance, landform (topography), or land cover (debris, vegetation, etc)
- 304 sites, 200 m of shoreline, sites extended perpendicular to shore, distance from the shore varied by site, sites on protected beaches (e.g., states parks, AFB) and neighboring developed areas
- Methods
o Stages: Jan-March (pre-breeding), March-May (nesting), May-July (brood rearing)
o At each site, visited for 3 consecutive days in each of the 3 stages (9 days at each site).
- Specific variables for each hypothesis:
o Disturbance: measured in tracks/m/hr. Recorded animal and people tracks/evidence. Vehicles were dropped from analysis because hard to determine correct number (drove in same tracks). Dog and crab tracks not validated.
o Landform: beach width (high tide to toe of dune), beach slope (measured in 4 different places), dune slope (top of the dune to toe), elevation (from sea level to dune toe – used a barometric altimeter), dune height/length, bay access (presence/absence, would a chick be able to cross to bay side easily, i.e., no impediments such as dense vegetation, development, and/or busy roads)
o Land cover: vegetation in interdunal areas (3 levels: high, medium, and low; in analysis medium and low were lumped together), debris (e.g., shells, rocks, driftwood, asphalt, anything larger than 1cm), sand color, size, and sorting (e.g., light sand vs. dark sand).
- Analysis: used Information Theoretic approach to compare several multi-season occupancy models. This allowed for imperfect detection and movement between seasons.
o Intra-seasonal movement of SNPL – looked for the lowest change in AIC to determine best model.
- Hypotheses Comparison
o Top model: disturbance + land cover + landform (all inclusive model had the lowest AIC, weight was the highest).
- Results
o SNPL are moving around between the three breeding stages.
o Variables negatively associated with SNPL:
§ Disturbance: humans – for all breeding stages
§ Landform: dune slope, dune length, elevation
§ Land cover: dense vegetation
o Variables positively associated with SNPL
§ Disturbance: none
§ Landform: dune height, dune slope, bay access
§ Land cover: debris
o As human disturbance increases, initial occupancy of sites and probability of colonization decreases and the probability of extinction increases.
o With presence of bay access, SNPL may withstand more human disturbance.
o There was a higher probability of colonization in the brooding stage with sparse vegetation regardless of human disturbance (although high densities of humans can eventually negatively impact SNPL).
- Conclusions
o SNPL may make intra-seasonal movements based on reproductive stage and seasonal response to humans.
o SNPL have a strong correlation to human disturbance.
o High vegetation density is negatively associated with SNPL.
o Debris is positively associated with SNPL.
o Bay access and narrow high dunes positively associated with SNPL.
Paper Discussion:
- Need a matrix of habitats. Some of these habitat requirements may not be ideal for other species of shorebirds/seabirds and beach mice.
Group Discussion: Winter shorebird censuses
- Surveying twice/month is recommended (Patty).
- Important to record data locally and when possible should be put into state databases (can be valuable when at hand: disaster relief, posting events, etc.).
- Not having statewide winter database could result in overlooking important wintering/loafing areas that need protection.
- Potential need for a wider winter surveying window. One solution: work with local groups to avoid re-surveying birds and may be able to tweak window.
Janell Brush: 2013 AMOY Range wide Survey
- Conducted at the beginning of the year through the AMOY Working Group (http://amoywg.com)
- AMOY selected as a Keystone Species by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation in 2008
- Business Plan calls for 10-year effort to increase Atlantic Coast AMOY by 30%
- Surveying 10 years ago resulted in a population estimate of 10,971 (± 298) AMOY wintering in NJ and south TX.
o Only complete count we have for AMOY, need a new benchmark to track population change
- Methods
o Aerial survey conducted within 2 hours of high tide (birds are most likely to be roosting)
o Coordinate with ground crews
o Primary objective of the ground/boat based surveys is to obtain a complete count of a subset of roosting flocks to compare with aerial survey
o Ground crews were focused in areas where they had documented AMOY on the last survey and where resources are available.
- Coverage in Florida
o Atlantic Coast: FL/GA border to Merritt Island NWR
o Gulf Coast: St. Joe SP to 10,000 Islands
o 33 partners covered 28 routes and 32 key sites
o Panhandle sites: Bald Point, All Harbor, Phipps Preserve, Lanark Reef, St. Vincent NWR, St. Vincent Sound, Flagg Island, St. George, Goose Island. Two sites on the cusp: Oyster Bay, Little St. George
§ Ground count 2013: 258
§ Aerial 2008: 103
§ Aerial 2003: 43
- Top 10 ground count sites in Florida: Cedar Key (778), Barge Canal (357), Horseshoe Beach (328), Shell Mound (290), Nassau (166), Shired Island (150), Hillsborough Bay (135), Lanark Reef (128), Crystal River (67), and St. Vincent Sound (51).
§ Preliminary total for ground counts: 2,702.
- Banded Birds
o Lanark Reef = 3 (VA, MA, FL) and Goose Island = 2 (FL)
o Caveat: possible that they were not re-sighted.
- Conclusions
o Will allow team to map population distribution, document winter roost site habitat, and track changes in habitat use and availability since previous survey.
o Will also allow team to estimate adult/juvenile ration with flocks and determine age structure.
o Many juveniles in the Big Bend area. Raya: All banded birds that were sighted overwintered at St. George. There were 2 confirmed fledglings in past 2 years (would not expect many juveniles in that area).
o Color of bands can effect detection probability (NJ=orange, hard to see). Currently, teams are in the process of changing to the same band color, but with different codes.
Group Discussion: NRDA nesting shorebird habitat management/protection project and predator control project implementation
- In November FWC, DEP, and others drafted a NRDA proposal to manage/protect shorebirds and their habitats. In March, Audubon won the bid and got the contract.
- Contract includes 5 seasons (including this season) and covers 19 sites from Phipps to Perdido Key. Many of these sites are on state park lands but also include TNC, NERR, Eglin, and Tyndall.
o At these sites, 4 classes of activities are planned (vary by time of year)
§ Posting
§ Monitoring/surveillance (e.g., fencing status, maintenance, evidence of predation and trespass)
§ Formal shorebird/seabird surveys within FSD windows
§ Stewardship (posting with volunteers educating beachgoers). Compliance increases by 9x when person is present. Some sites will have non-traditional stewardship (signs, kayak clubs, angling groups, etc.).
o 4 member team
§ Bonnie Samuelson – stewardship (volunteers, training, etc.)
§ Beth Wright: working mostly with eastern sites.
§ Julie Bullock: working mostly with western sites through Tyndall.
§ John Murphy
- Mark Nicholas (NPS - Gulf Islands National Seashore): was awarded ~$200,000/year of NRDA funds for 5 years (split between Florida and Mississippi). Monica Hardin will most likely be the team lead with 1-2 seasonal techs to perform surveying, monitoring, and posting of shorebirds and habitat (21 miles of habitat in GINS).
o Recently, a full time law enforcement person was hired by GINS to help with enforcing regulations and speed limits between Pickens and Santa Rosa. Speed reductions will begin April 1.
o Speed humps will replace bumps and will be widened.
o Posting area will double around Pickens to now cover 3 miles.
o Was also funded for asphalt/gravel removal (deposited from Hurricane Ivan) off of the island - should be happening within the next year.
o At present, GINS is receiving no NRDA money for predator control but will work with USDA Wildlife Services following allocation of monies.
- Patty Kelly: St. Vincent and Bon Secour NWR also benefitting from NRDA monies.
- Tony Duffiney (USDA Wildlife Services): The position vacated by John Dunlap is currently not being filled. Since October, USDA has been trapping at 6 sites however funding is starting to run short. Expressed the need to fast track the NRDA monies and that funding is supposed to be additive, not replace current strategies.
o Had questions about access/permission agreements. It may be beneficial to go on neighboring properties of parks to remove animals. A big landholding next to the beach could be targeted directly rather than trying to trap on the beach boundary.
§ John: NRDA monies cannot be used on private lands.
§ Wendy: One solution may be able to use NRDA monies for state lands and then use organization monies for private lands.
o USDA has 36 employees throughout the state but some are currently not working year-round. Therefore, sites in the Panhandle could potentially get multiple field agents during the trapping periods. USDA will have 10-14 day trap-intensive period at each of the sites on a rotation. In addition to mammalian predators, avian predators and ghost crabs will also be looked at for removal.
o Will work with FWC to get a blanket steel trap permit that would cover all sites as well as developing a special permit to cover dog-proof raccoon traps.
o The National Wildlife Research Center will research carcasses of various species captured (parasites, samples, stomach contents, etc).
o Will use GIS to map locations of sites which will enable land managers to relate predator control measures to shorebird productivity.
- Land managers need to confirm if they are on the list for NRDA monies for predator control (contact John)
- Julie: Predator control efforts need to be amplified, not maintained, at most sites.
- Wendy: land managers need to continue to pursue predator control monies and not just depend on Audubon for management. Collaboration is needed.
- St. George Island Causeway, Phipps, and Flagg Island may need avian predator control. Raya: red-winged blackbirds will poke holes in the eggs in high vegetation areas.
Patty: The impact of free-ranging domestic cats on wildlife of the United States (Scott Loss, Tom Will & Peter Marra)
§ Free-ranging cats caused or contributed to 14% of the modern bird, mammal, and reptile extinctions recorded by ICUN Red List
§ To date, no science-driven estimate of mortality on birds from cat predation, strictly speculative, none on mammals.
§ Based on data driven systematic review of studies across all contiguous US States
o Free ranging cats kill 1.4 - 3.7 billion birds annually
o Un-owned cats cause the majority of this mortality (about 70%)
o Impacts may exceed all other sources of anthropogenic mortality of US birds and mammals
o Native species make up the majority (67%) of birds preyed upon by cats
o Population declines expected for many of the “land birds” those most affected by cat kills (NA land birds estimate of populations at 10-20 billion)
§ May kill ~6.9-20.7 billion mammals, ~258-822 million reptiles, and ~95-299 million amphibians annually
Julie Wraithmell: RESTORE Act implementation (oil spill funding process)
§ CWA fines w/o congressional action would have gone into government coffers for extraneous projects - now RESTORE act gives 80% back to Gulf States
§ Decisions will be made at local/county level particularly in Panhandle (most affected), state, and also a council of representative from each states and key federal agencies.