Breeding Grounds Research and Monitoring:

Facilitator: Beverly Stencel, University of Wisconsin Extension

Recorder: Lesley Bulluck, University of Tennessee

Reporter: Ron Canterbury, SW West Virginia Bird Research Center

Participants:

INSERT LIST HERE

The following key questions were discussed during this working group session (in order) and the participants listed items that they thought were relevant for each specific question.

1)Identify the key factors limiting populations on the breeding grounds?

2)List information gaps that will limit our ability to manage for this species?

3)What are the monitoring needs to monitor progress toward conservation goals?

4)What individual research projects might address these research gaps?

5)Prioritize this research and monitoring?

6)Which specific projects require coordinated/regional efforts?

From these questions, the group brainstormed, and proposed and discussed possible responses. The responses were then clumped based on their logical connectivity into a series of topics related to research and monitoring information needs and projects to address those needs.

Research Topics: from questions 1,2, and 4

1. Demography(24)

2. Habitat issues (21)

3. Genetics and stable isotopes(13)

4. Manipulative studies (13)

5. Studies on BWWA (11)

6. Modeling – habitat and population (5)

7. Climate change (5)

8. Food availability (0)

Monitoring Topics: Monitoring progress for reaching conservation goals

1. Detection and population estimates (25)

2. Coordinate monitoring strategies in each region (managed versus unmanaged) (24)

3. Data, sample and information (newsletter) sharing (16)

4. Multi-scale assessment – standards for habitat types (12)

5. Embrace adaptive management – need for monitoring program to be adaptive (8)

6. Work with citizens/industry and outreach…. (7)

It was difficult to prioritize such broad topics, but teams that form around each topic will discuss the details of each. The group decided to keep our focus broad and applicable to the entire range, even though people and money are distributed geographically. Regional projects may emerge as appropriate for certain topics.

Based on the deliberations of the group to identify the priority research topics, we brainstormed again to identify individual research projects to address the needs identified above. From this effort, four top priorities emerged for immediate pursuit. The group did not prioritize these projects further but felt progress is needed on all of these fronts to provide needed information for conservation. Details for each project will be developed into a proposal by teams of individuals interested in working on that project.

  1. Defining and Managing Habitat Quality for Golden-winged Warblers

Team Leader- Scott Lutz- University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Team Members- Karl Martin, John Loegering, Dave Buehler, John Confer, Ron Canterbury.

  1. Range-wide application with a focus on the core of the range (WI/MN).

NOTE: Although much of this effort will be focused on WI/MN, the importance of maintaining the collection of similar data from the Appalachian study sites (NY, WV, and TN) was recognized. The strategy is to add WI/MN to the list of sites that are being regularly monitored to allow for rangewide comparisons of demographic and habitat data.

  1. Detailed analysis of clearcut size, residual trees, moisture, etc. associated with GWWA habitat use, density and demographics in MN/WI.
  2. Mines versus old fields in Southern Appalachians
  3. Prescribed fire and forest management and large scale severe weather events (natural and anthropogenic disturbance) and the relative effects on GWWA
  4. Using data from regions and across range to model probability of population persistence over time
  5. Experimental habitat study (stratified over region where species is increasing, decreasing, stationary, no BW, BW) and do habitat manipulations. Can habitat manipulations affect GWWA density, etc. Nesting success/demographics in core of range and the leading edge of expansion (more than one year of data is necessary) and places where no data has yet been collected (i.e. Manitoba). Which habitats are sources (habitat quality). Lack of population dynamics in core of range by habitat type. Test our understanding of what we think we know. Go beyond habitat associations.)
  6. Compare demographics in areas of sympatry and allopatry and various stages of secondary contact. Pairing success and female survivorship (are females limiting). Effects of competition and hybridization.
  1. Developing a Genetic Atlas and Isotope Atlas for Golden-winged Warblers

Team Leader- Rachel Fraser- Queen’s University,

Team Members- Loren Reed, John Confer, Sara Barker.

  1. Collect and map genetic data rangewide toidentify areas with pure GWWA populations for priority conservation and document the range and scope of hybridization.
  2. Collect and map stable isotope data rangewide to tie breeding populations with wintering areas in Central and South America.
  1. Expanding the Golden-winged Warbler Atlas for Monitoring Populations and Habitats

Team Leader- Sara Barker

Team Members- state atlas coordinators, Dave Buehler

  1. Genetic atlas and isotope atlas
  2. Detection probability and population estimates
  3. Monitor priority sites that will help to drive active management
  4. Expand GOWAP stratified habitat sampling to other parts of range. Multi-scale distribution and habitat study
  5. Get input from working group for GOWAP direction and management**
  6. Get Manitoba and other understudied areas caught up – basic habitat and density inventory as well as arrival/settlement times, pairing success before nesting success
  7. Tie GWWA management into suite of species that would benefit
  8. Get students/community involved in GOWAP and other research projects
  9. Develop resources for public to communicate basic needs of GWWA that incorporates our research findings, etc.
  10. Information sharing
  1. Developing a Standardized Habitat Classification for Golden-winged Warblers

Team Leader- John Confer

Team Members- other research group members doing habitat work

  1. Can we use an already standardized scheme to classify GWWA habitat (TNC)?
  2. Can we develop a remotely-sensed habitat classification track GWWA habitat?

Time Frame for Project Development

DeadlineAction

Aug 2005ID project and teams; identify project funding opportunities

Sep-Oct 2005Develop project design

Nov 2005Develop proposals

May 2006Fieldwork begins