National marsh bird monitoring methods pilot study and where we go from here 16 january 2013
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 31

National Marsh Bird Monitoring: Methods, Pilot Study, and Where We Go From Here 16 January 2013 PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 110 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

National Marsh Bird Monitoring: Methods, Pilot Study, and Where We Go From Here 16 January 2013. Mark Seamans U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Lakewood, CO. Webinar Outline. Background History of Marsh Bird Monitoring Survey Protocol and Sampling Design Pilot Study Methods Results

Download Presentation

National Marsh Bird Monitoring: Methods, Pilot Study, and Where We Go From Here 16 January 2013

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


National marsh bird monitoring methods pilot study and where we go from here 16 january 2013

National Marsh Bird Monitoring:Methods, Pilot Study, and Where We Go From Here16 January 2013

Mark Seamans

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Lakewood, CO


Webinar outline

Webinar Outline

  • Background

    • History of Marsh Bird Monitoring

    • Survey Protocol and Sampling Design

  • Pilot Study

    • Methods

    • Results

  • Transition from Pilot to Operational Program


Target species

Target Species

  • Rallidae: clapper rail, black rail, king rail, sora, Virginia rail, and yellow rail, common moorhen, purple gallinule, American Coot, purple swamphen

  • Ardeidae: American bittern, least bittern

  • Aramidae: limpkin

  • Podicipedidae: pied-billed grebe

  • Scolopacidae: Wilson’s snipe


Background

Background

  • Workshops

    • 1998, 2006, 2011

  • King Rail Conservation Plan 2006

  • WaterbirdConservation for the Americas (Waterbirds Initiative) 2006 Assessment

  • AFWA-Webless Funding Priorities Report 2008

  • Independent research


Background continued

Background Continued

  • Survey Protocol

    • Courtney Conway

    • http://www.cals.arizona.edu/research/azfwru/NationalMarshBird/

    • Details of Protocol

  • Study Design

    • Johnson, D. H., J. P. Gibbs, M. Herzog, S. Lor, N. D. Niemuth, C. A. Ribic, M. Seamans, T. L. Shaffer, W. G. Shriver, S. V. Stehman, and W. L. Thompson. 2009. A sampling design framework for monitoring secretive marshbirds. Waterbirds 32:230-215.


Example of hexagon selection

Example of Hexagon Selection


Example of point selection in hexes

Example of Point Selection in Hexes


Pilot study

Pilot Study

  • Wisconsin 2008

  • Idaho 2009 – 2010

  • Kentucky 2009

  • New York 2009

  • Florida 2010

  • Michigan 2010

  • Ohio 2011


National marsh bird monitoring methods pilot study and where we go from here 16 january 2013

HQ


Objectives of pilot

Objectives of Pilot

  • Do protocol and design work together

  • Sampling effort to achieve certain levels of precision for abundance or trend estimates. This included thoughts on how to stratify

  • As pilot progressed shifted focus to work under a new paradigm

    • How to use monitoring to address management issues

    • Can monitoring meet information needs for species of greatest concern


Methods

Methods

  • The Data

    • repeat visits within & among years, strata

    • Individuals identified (counted) each survey

    • Distance to individual estimated

    • Two-stage sample (variance estimator)

    • Covariates related to detection and abundance

  • Analysis

    • Binomial Mixture Model with Horvitz-Thompson Estimator

      • Detection related to distance done first

    • Zero-inflated Poisson model with Bayesian Framework

    • Abundance (& Occupancy) estimated by strata & year


Results

RESULTS


Pilot results abundance

Pilot Results: Abundance


Pilot results abundance1

Pilot Results: Abundance


Pilot results occupancy

Pilot Results: Occupancy

Florida Clapper Rail

2010: φ = 0.81 (0.70-0.92) 95% CI

2011: φ = 0.90 (0.80-0.97)

Idaho Sora

High Quality Stratum

2009: φ = 0.76 (0.63-0.83)

2010:φ = 0.86 (0.76-0.95)

General Stratum

2009: φ = 0.38 (0.18-0.76)

2010: φ = 0.21 (0.10-0.39)

Wisconsin Sora

2009: φ = 0.59 (0.50-0.70)

2010: φ = 0.49 (0.38-0.64)

2011: φ = 0.35 (0.25-0.54)


Clapper rail detection probability

Clapper Rail Detection Probability


Detection probability of american bittern in idaho a and the upper midwest b

Detection Probability of American Bittern in Idaho (A) and the Upper Midwest (B)


Precision of n as function of psus surveyed

Precision of N as Function of % PSUs Surveyed


Precision of n as function of psus surveyed1

Precision of N as Function of # PSUs Surveyed


Partitioning variance

Partitioning Variance


Inferences from pilot

Inferences from Pilot

  • There are a lot of some species on the landscape

  • Rare species are an issue

  • Omnibus approach to monitoring and what we did during the Pilot


Inferences cont

Inferences Cont.

  • What can omnibus approach give us?

    • Inform harvest management, except for KIRA

    • Inform state conservation plans? Depends.

    • May reveal general habitat affinities

  • What omnibus approach cannot give us.

    • An assessment of KIRA or BLRA populations

    • Why they are declining and what to do about it

    • How any species responds to habitat management

      • Water levels, burning, invasive management, etc.


Proposed way forward

Proposed Way Forward

  • Mix of omnibus and “management monitoring”

  • Mix of two would give us:

    • Experimental comparisons

    • Efficient way to meet needs of multi-species survey


King rail management

King Rail Management


Data can be used to

Data can be used to:

  • Nwrp = abundance from treatment areas

  • Ngen = abundance from general whole area

  • H0: Dwrp=Dgen

  • Ntotal = Nwrp+Ngen(a status assessment)


Marsh bird conservation program

Marsh Bird Conservation Program

Steps to Conserving & Managing Marsh Birds

  • Define Conservation Issues

  • Develop Hypotheses or Management Objectives

  • Develop & Implement Management Actions

  • Monitor

  • Learn and repeat as necessary


  • Login