2014 Summary of Landbird Projects For Boreal Partners in Flight

November 9, 2015 Individual project reports were merged and lightly edited by Gwen Baluss for Boreal Partners in Flight. If you would like more information about these studies, please contact the individual(s) noted at the end of each project summary. For more information about Boreal Partners in Flight, visit the Alaska Landbird Resource Information System to access the official website: http://alaska.usgs.gov/science/biology/bpif/index.php

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A NOTE FROM THE COMPILER ................................................................................................... IV

PROJECTS BY BIRD CONSERVATION REGION ............................................................. 1

ANNUAL UPDATE: GULF OF ALASKA AUTUMN PASSERINE MIGRATION 2014 (BCR 1) .................. 1

AVIAN PROJECTS FOR KATMAI NATIONAL PARK, ALASKA 2014 (BCR 2) ....................................... 4

POTENTIAL CHANGES IN THE ABUNDANCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF BIRDS IN THE BOREAL-ARCTIC ECOTONE OF NORTHWESTERN ALASKA (BCR 2) ......................................................................... 7

CLIFF-NESTING RAPTOR SURVEYS IN THE KILBUCK MOUNTAINS, ALASKA (BCR 2) ...................... 8

LANDBIRD UPDATE FROM THE ALASKA PENINSULA/BECHAROF NWR (BCR2) .............................. 9

NEST BOX OCCUPANCY AND NEST SUCCESS OF TREE SWALLOWS (TACHYCINETA BICOLOR) IN THE VICINITY OF KING SALMON, ALASKA, 2014 ............................................................................... 10

PILOT STUDY: ESTABLISHING BASELINE OWL SPECIES PRESENCE AND ABUNDANCE, KING SALMON, ALASKA (BCR 2) ....................................................................................................................... 10

BIOLOGICAL ACCUMULATION OF PHARMACEUTICALS AND PERSONAL CARE PRODUCTS (PPCPS) IN BIRDS AND INVERTEBRATES AT WHITEHORSE-AREA SEWAGE LAGOONS (BCR 4) ...................... 11

BEST PRACTICES FOR CONSERVING BREEDING BIRDS IN WETLAND-FOREST ECOTONES OF SOUTHERN YUKON (BCR 4) ...................................................................................................... 12

SUMMARY OF LANDBIRD WORK ON TETLIN NWR, ALASKA (BCR 4) ........................................... 13

LANDBIRD PROJECTS FOR KANUTI NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE, 2014 (BCR 4) ......................... 15

UPDATE ON THE BOREAL AVIAN MODELLING (BCR 4) ................................................................. 16

MONITORING TRENDS IN ABUNDANCE AND OCCUPANCY OF PASSERINE BIRDS IN THE NPS CENTRAL ALASKA MONITORING NETWORK (BCR4) ................................................................................ 18

MONITORING TERRITORY OCCUPANCY AND REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS OF GOLDEN EAGLES IN DENALI NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE, ALASKA (BCR4) ..................................................... 19

STRIKING GOLD IN THE EASTERN ALASKA RANGE: RESULTS OF RECENT PROSPECTING TRIPS (BCR4) ...................................................................................................................................... 20

ROAD-SYSTEM GROUSE & PTARMIGAN ABUNDANCE SURVEYS, ALASKA, 2014 UPDATE (BCR 4) ……………………………………………………………………………………………22

WILLOW AND ROCK PTARMIGAN DISTRIBUTION AND MOVEMENT STUDIES IN SOUTHCENTRAL AND INTERIOR ALASKA (BCR 4) ....................................................................................................... 23

LANDBIRD DISTRIBUTION, ABUNDANCE, AND HABITAT ASSOCIATIONS IN THE PROPOSED SUSITNA-WATANA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT AREA, INTERIOR ALASKA, SUMMARY OF 2013 RESULTS (BCR 4) ..................................................................................................................................... 24

DISTRIBUTION, ABUNDANCE AND PRODUCTIVITY OF RAPTORS AT THE PROPOSED SUSITNA-WATANA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT, INTERIOR ALASKA (BCR4) ............................................................. 28

iii

DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE OF RAPTORS IN THE UPPER BLACK RIVER, INTERIOR ALASKA (BCR 4) ..................................................................................................................................... 28

POST-CONSTRUCTION MORTALITY MONITORING FOR THE GVEA EVA CREEK WIND PROJECT, INTERIOR ALASKA (BCR 4) ....................................................................................................... 28

DISTRIBUTION-WIDE INVESTIGATION INTO RESPECTIVE DECLINES OF OLIVE-SIDED FLYCATCHERS AND WESTERN WOOD-PEWEES IN YUKON, CLIMATE AND HABITAT COVARIATES (BCR 4) ....... 29

BIRDS ‘N’ BOGS CITIZEN SCIENCE PROJECT IN THE ANCHORAGE AND MATANUSKA VALLEY AREAS, ALASKA (4) ................................................................................................................... 30

INVESTIGATING MIGRATION PATTERNS OF THE RUSTY BLACKBIRD USING LIGHT-LEVEL GEOLOCATORS AND STABLE ISOTOPES (BCR4) ........................................................................ 32

LANDBIRD MONITORING UPDATE FROM WILDLIFE DIVERSITY PROGRAM, ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME, SOUTHCENTRAL AND INTERIOR REGIONS (BCR 4) .................................... 33

REVEALING THE MIGRATORY PATH, WINTERING AREA, AND BREEDING HABITS OF OLIVE-SIDED FLYCATCHERS: FIRST RESULTS FOR ALASKA (BCR 4, 5) .......................................................... 33

TONGASS RUFOUS HUMMINGBIRD PROJECT 2014 SEASON (BCR 5).............................................. 36

2014 LANDBIRD UPDATE FROM THE TONGASS NATIONAL FOREST (BCR 5) ................................. 38

2014 LANDBIRD UPDATE FROM THE CHUGACH NATIONAL FOREST (BCR 5) ................................. 39

AN ASSESSMENT OF PERCH USE AND POSSIBLE IMPACTS OF PROPOSED HAINES HIGHWAY REALIGNMENTS ON BALD EAGLES DURING FALL AND WINTER, CHILKAT RIVER (BCR5) .......... 41

ALASKAN BEAK DEFORMITIES (STATEWIDE) ................................................................................ 41

STATEWIDE HUNTER HARVESTED GROUSE AND PTARMIGAN WING COLLECTION PROGRAM, ALASKA, 2014 UPDATE (BCR 1-5) ............................................................................................ 42

IDENTIFYING IMPORTANT BIRD AREAS ACROSS ALASKA .............................................................. 43

BLOOD PARASITES IN LANDBIRD HOSTS IN ALASKA ....................................................................... 44

2014 UPDATE ON THE ALASKA LANDBIRD MONITORING SURVEY (STATEWIDE)........................... 45

NORTH AMERICAN BREEDING BIRD SURVEY, ALASKA 2013 UPDATE ........................................... 48

iv

A NOTE FROM THE COMPILER Welcome to the 2014 Boreal Partners in Flight (BPIF) summary of new and ongoing landbird projects in Alaska and Northwestern Canada. This report highlights the important work being conducted on landbirds and is intended to stimulate communication and collaboration among researchers, managers, educators, and managers. Many thanks to each contributor and the thousands of hours of thoughtful and passionate work their summaries represent. This year’s summary contains 36 reports, some with multiple projects, detailing a range of activities including research, inventory, monitoring, environmental risk assessment, education and outreach. The majority of individual projects were affiliated with government resource agencies (28), followed by the private sector (6), academic institutions (4), and NGOs (3). Projects focused on songbirds (21), multiple groups (14), raptors (10), galliform birds (5), or hummingbirds (1). Investigations exhibited wide coverage, from Southeast Alaska to the Arctic. The most projects were conducted in Bird Conservation Region (BCR) 4 (20), followed by BCR 2 (8), and BCR 5 (5). Four were statewide. Only one project was in BCR 1. There were no landbird reports from BCR 3. Many involved both US and Canadian investigators. Additionally there was widespread participation in broad scale multi-species surveys, involving multiple partners: the Breeding Bird Survey (BBS), Alaska Landbird Monitoring System (ALMS), and Christmas Bird Count (CBC). Finally, many units celebrated International Migratory Bird Day (IMBD) as part of their outreach programs. Salient in this report were studies that focused on species previously recognized as priorities in BPIF’s Landbird Conservation Plan for Alaska Biogeographic Regions. One example was groundbreaking work on the Olive-sided flycatcher (OSFL). In Alaska, a multi-agency team continued study of migration, nesting and diet. Preliminary information from the first geolocators recovered in Anchorage suggests remarkable migration pattern. Birds took a clockwise, oval-shaped, migration, southward in the fall on the east side of the Rocky Mountains, on to wintering areas in Colombia, Ecuador and western Brazil, and returning in spring along the west coast of North America. Work in Yukon Territory is underway to describe OSFL breeding habitat, diet and phenology. Interesting results show large territory size there, and the possibility that the species may be increasing locally, in contrast to other parts of the range. Geolocator studies are planned. The study also includes the Western Wood-pewee. Comparisons between these two aerial insectivores will be illuminating. The BPIF group as whole has been discussing the challenges facing the OSFL and other aerial insectivores. Two studies focused on Tree Swallows, an accessible species of aerial insectivore for citizen science efforts. An interesting survey approach focusing on three species of aerial insectivores and the similarly at-risk Rusty blackbird was a citizen science effort “Birds n Bogs” where wetlands were inventoried for birds by citizen scientists as a baseline for continued monitoring efforts.

v

Work on the Rusty Blackbird, long recognized as a priority for BPIF, continues. New, lighter, geolocators were deployed in 2014. This, in combination with a feather isotope study will further elucidate winter habitat. Finally, it is not possible to capture all the great work happening in the boreal US and Canada in a single report. If you are involved in a landbird project, please help make future reports more complete by submitting a summary. Contact: Gwen Baluss, Tongass National Forest, 8510 Mendenhall Loop Road, Juneau, AK 99801 Phone: (907)500-2771 Email: gbaluss@gmail.com

1

PROJECTS BY BIRD CONSERVATION REGION ANNUAL UPDATE: GULF OF ALASKA AUTUMN PASSERINE MIGRATION 2014 (BCR 1) Lucas DeCicco1, Nicholas Hajdukovich1, Jim Johnson1, Steve Matsuoka1, David Tessler2, and Charles Wright1

1U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Migratory Bird Management, Anchorage, Alaska 2Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage, Alaska Overview: In 2014 we monitored autumn passerine migration for the fourth and final consecutive year on Middleton Island. Located in the Gulf of Alaska, Middleton Island is 75 km southeast of the nearest point of land (wooded Islands off Montague Island) and represents a unique site to study the extent of trans-Gulf migration in many avian taxa. We implemented this project in 2011 to investigate trans-Gulf of Alaska migration in passerines with the primary goals of: 1) documenting over-water passerine migration in the northern Gulf of Alaska, 2) determining the magnitude of migration in terms of general abundance of birds and species composition, 3) quantifying the timing of migration, and 4) determining how migration intensity relates to synoptic weather patterns. This route is unique along the Pacific Coast of North America in being the only large over-water migratory path used by passerines. Summary of 2014 season: In 2014 we operated an array of 13 mist-nets from 15 August to 14 October, following identical methods to previous years. Most data on passerine timing and numbers originated from this mist-netting effort; however, we also conducted daily surveys of passerines (and other avian taxa) in habitats representative of those available on Middleton Island. During our 34 days of banding we captured 1,997 individuals of 36 species (Table 1) including 58 individuals banded in previous years. Forty-nine of these previously banded birds were Fox Sparrows, five were Pacific Wrens, and four were Yellow Warblers. Of these 58 birds, 42 were banded in 2013, 16 in 2012, and none were recaptured from banding efforts in 2011. Eleven were originally banded as adults, 46 as young of the year, and one’s age was unknown at banding. The recapture of these individuals could be explained by fidelity to breeding location (cf. fidelity to migratory route) as all are local-breeding species and all were captured early in the season. Based on capture data and corroborated by field observations we observed notably fewer migrants this season than in 2013 and 2011, but similar numbers to 2012. Our average capture rate of 115 birds per 100 net-hours in 2014 starkly contrasted to 301 in 2013, but was similar to the 103 in 2012 (Table 1). Few major influxes of birds were observed during 2014; rather, the season was characterized by consistent nearly daily turnover. The few influxes of migrants represented relatively small numbers, especially compared to what was observed during 2013. This comparatively low migratory movement suggests to us that either productivity was low throughout Southcentral Alaska during the 2014 breeding season and/or a notably different weather regime strongly affected geographic distribution of trans-Gulf migrants. The higher proportion of adult Orange-crowned and Yellow Warblers captured (Table 1) is suggestive of lower production; however, to complicate the matter, notably different weather patterns were

2

also observed (the general lack of low pressure systems passing to the south of Middleton Island). We will be looking further in to both of these options as explanations for the lower migratory movement observed in 2014. Passerine use of a trans-Gulf of Alaska migration route: Information from banding and field surveys over the past four years provides evidence of migration of passerines across the Gulf of Alaska in autumn. Despite the slower migration observed in 2014 our data still support this conclusion. Evidence for this claim was presented in the previous year’s BPIF report. A highly diverse migratory avifauna was observed in 2014 with 193 species identified. Aiding in this exceptionally high species total (cf. 169 in 2013, 177 in 2012, and 147 in 2011) was an abnormal number of miss-oriented and far out-of-range species (e.g. Yellow-browed and Wood warblers, Pacific Swift, and Gray Catbird to name a few). The effect that a small offshore island can have in concentrating lost birds over the Gulf of Alaska was quite apparent. Future directions: We will conduct additional analyses on capture and radar data to better understand the magnitude of trans-Gulf of Alaska migration and to characterize the governing effects of weather on this unique migratory system. We plan on producing two papers on this subject: one describing the avifauna of Middleton Island which will also act as one of the best descriptions of the autumn migrant avifauna of the Gulf of Alaska and another describing the effect of synoptic weather systems on migrant passerines over the Gulf of Alaska. Acknowledgments: We thank the Federal Aviation Administration, Scott and Martha Hatch, Francisca Gutierrez (USFWS), and Alaska Air Transit for their logistical support. The field assistance provided by Jordan Buetow, Marty Reedy, Rachel Richardson, and Karen Sinclair was greatly appreciated. Contact: Lucas DeCicco, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Migratory Bird Management, 1011 E. Tudor Road, Anchorage Alaska 99503. Phone: (907) 744-6101; E-mail: lucas_decicco@fws.gov Table 1. Total number, rate, and age composition of passerines captured in a 13-net mist-net array on Middleton Island during autumns 2011-2014. Total # Rate* % Adult Species 2011 2012 2013 2014 2011 2012 2013 2014 2011 2012 2013 2014 Downy Woodpecker 3 0 1 2 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.1 33 - 0 0 Northern Flicker 7 2 2 1 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.1 29 50 0 0 Olive-sided Flycatcher 0 6 0 3 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 - 0 - 0 Western Wood-Pewee 0 7 8 1 0.0 0.3 0.6 0.1 - 0 0 0 Yellow-bellied Flycatcher 0 0 1 1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 - - 0 0 Willow Flycatcher 0 1 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 - 100 - - Alder Flycatcher 2 15 16 10 0.2 0.6 1.0 0.6 0 0 0 0 Least Flycatcher 0 3 0 0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0 - 0 - - Dusky Flycatcher 0 0 0 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 - - - 0 Northern Shrike 0 1 1 1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 - 0 0 0

3

Warbling Vireo 0 0 2 0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 - - 0 0 Red-breasted Nuthatch 3 0 1 0 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.0 66 - 0 0 Brown Creeper 20 0 0 0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 - - 0 Pacific Wren 51 31 82 86 5.2 1.2 8.6 5.0 8 19 6 6 Golden-crowned Kinglet 57 0 1 11 5.8 0.0 0.1 0.6 4 - 0 0 Ruby-crowned Kinglet 8 49 18 4 0.8 1.9 1.0 0.2 0 6 11 0 Varied Thrush 40 29 63 26 4.1 1.1 4.6 1.5 10 10 6 0 American Robin 7 14 1 3 0.7 0.6 0.1 0.2 0 0 0 0 Swainson's Thrush 2 2 5 2 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.1 0 50 40 0 Gray-cheeked Thrush 5 6 5 2 0.5 0.2 0.4 0.1 80 17 40 50 Hermit Thrush 101 149 345 127 10.3 5.9 25.4 7.3 13 11 16 6 Bohemian Waxwing 0 0 1 0 0 0 0.1 0 - - 100 - Cedar Waxwing 0 0 1 0 0 0 0.1 0 - - 0 - Orange-cr. Warbler 41 59 212 62 4.2 2.3 15.5 3.6 2 8 6 18 Tennessee Warbler 1 1 2 1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0 0 0 0 Yellow Warbler 496 432 1150 281 50.8 17.0 85.5 16.2 9 11 8 19 Chestnut-sided Warbler 0 1 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 - 0 - 0 Cape May Warbler 2 0 0 0 0.2 0 0 0 0 - - 0 Yellow-rumped Warbler 42 14 7 31 4.3 0.6 0.5 1.8 10 0 29 3 Townsend's Warbler 16 17 36 9 1.6 0.7 2.8 0.5 10 0 29 22 Blackpoll Warbler 1 1 3 1 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0 0 0 0 Northern Waterthrush 2 3 4 1 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.1 0 0 0 0 Wilson's Warbler 39 26 10 21 4.0 1.0 0.8 1.2 0 8 0 0 Western Tanager 0 0 1 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 Rose-breasted Grosbeak 0 0 1 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 American Tree Sparrow 1 1 0 0 0.1 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chipping Sparrow 1 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Savannah Sparrow 15 86 38 31 1.5 3.4 2.7 1.8 7 21 16 13 Golden-cr. Sparrow 111 177 283 178 11.4 7.0 21.2 10.3 5 2 8 8 White-throated Sparrow 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0.1 - - - 0 White-crowned Sparrow 8 11 7 4 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.2 0 0 0 0 Fox Sparrow 531 1368 1401 978 54.4 53.8 124.2 56.4 5 2 8 11 Song Sparrow 3 3 1 4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 33 0 0 0 Lincoln's Sparrow 40 46 42 26 4.1 1.8 3.2 1.5 3 0 0 8 Dark-eyed Junco 31 26 9 18 3.2 1.0 0.6 1.0 0 4 11 0 Brambling 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0.1 - - - 0 White-winged Crossbill 1 3 0 2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0 0 - 0 Common Redpoll 4 3 0 13 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.75 0 0 - 8 Pine Siskin 10 26 1 57 1.0 1.0 0.1 3.3 40 58 0 21 Totals: 1695 2612 3761 1997 175 103 301 115 * Rate presented in birds per 100 net-hours.

4

AVIAN PROJECTS FOR KATMAI NATIONAL PARK, ALASKA 2014 (BCR 2) Sherri Anderson, Wildlife Biologist, National Park Service, Katmai National Park and Preserve

Projects Winter Bird Count A winter bird count was performed on February 14th 2014 at Brooks Camp, Katmai NP. It was the first available time that a survey could be performed during the winter. Nine species were recorded with 38 individual birds observed. American Dipper Baseline Study American Dippers have been shown to be great indicators of a stream or river habitat condition. With the possibility of mining operations happening in close vicinity to KNP, the possibility of contamination to area rivers and streams exist. Having baseline data of dipper locations, population numbers, diet and current metal levels in dippers will give us vital information. The baseline information can be used to follow effects of the mining operations if they do begin and throughout the life time of the mine. This study allows KNP to be proactive and prepared to make future management decisions on protecting aquatic habitats in KNP. The specific objectives of this study are: 1.) to locate and map American Dippers found on rivers and streams of KNP and record habitat descriptions, 2.) to determine diet of the species, and 3.) to gather baseline data of metal levels in the current dipper population. In 2014, surveys were performed on the remaining streams during the week of June 2nd through the 7th. Surveys of two unnamed creeks were performed on June 3rd, Battle River was surveyed on June 4th, Nanuktuk Creek was performed on June 6th and the beginning 3 miles of the Alagnak were performed on the 7th of June. Care was taken to have as little impact on the nest and nestlings as possible. Only six birds were detected this year and no nest were discovered. Most birds were seen flying through an area but never observed foraging or nesting. Spruce Grouse Surveys Spruce Grouse surveys were again performed on the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes Road. Surveys were performed once a day during the daily valley tour with the help of park visitors. This study is looking at fluctuation patterns and if they are correlated to the number of hares seen on the road. The study was completed for 2014 Oct 1 and data has not been analyzed. Wildlife Observation Study Katmai has a citizen science program that allows visitors to document wildlife observed while visiting the park. Both visitors and staff members fill out wildlife observation forms on species seen while traveling throughout the park. These observations are made outside any other survey protocol. The Study runs in conjunction with the federal fiscal year calendar. Avian species are recorded the most often. When a rare sighting is reported natural resource staff try to verify the sighting. 2014 studies data will be analyzed this winter. BBS We performed the Breeding Bird Survey on 23 June.

5

Contact: Sherri Anderson. Wildlife Biologist. Katmai National Park. Box 7 King Salmon, Alaska 99613. Phone: 907-246-2102. Email: Sherri_anderson@nps.gov MONITORING AVIAN PRODUCTIVITY AND SURVIVORSHIP (MAPS) ON KODIAK ISLAND, ALASKA (BCR 2) Robin Corcoran1, Cindy Trussell2, and Rich MacIntosh3 1U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2Kodiak College, 3Biological Consultant The Monitoring Avian Productivity and Survivorship Program (MAPS) Program was established in 1989 to monitor spatial and temporal patterns in adult survival rates and productivity for populations of landbirds across North America. Over 1,000 MAPS stations have been established and operated, a large proportion of them providing many consecutive years of data. The MAPS program currently consists of nearly 500 monitoring stations sampled annually and the program provides estimates of adult apparent survival and recruitment rates and indices of productivity for about 150 landbird species (DeSante et al. 1995, 2004, 2007). From 2010-2014, we established and annually operated a MAPS site at the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge Headquarters on the Buskin River State Recreation Area along the Kodiak road system in Alaska. Following MAPS program guidelines the station consisted of 10 mist nets distributed over a roughly eight hectare (20 acre) area. Nets were operated one day during each of six consecutive 10-day periods between 10 June and 8 August. Nets were opened at official local sunrise and were left open exactly six hours. Habitat at the site was primarily mixed alder-willow riparian with some Sitka spruce upland. In five years of mist net operation, we captured and banded 1006 birds representing 20 species, and recaptured between years 68 individuals representing 11 species (Table 1). The four most commonly caught species were Fox Sparrow, Hermit Thrush, and Wilson’s and Yellow Warblers. In general, across all seasons, non-migratory and short to medium distance migrants had higher productivity compared to long-distance migrant warblers. One of the primary goals of the Kodiak MAPS project was communicating science and conservation to the public through bird banding. Through cooperation with the Kodiak Refuge Volunteer Coordinator we advertised the opportunity to the Kodiak community to join us each morning we banded. Volunteers were given the option of observing or participating. In order to participate, and be trained to extract birds from nets and band, volunteers had to agree to commit to most banding sessions each season. In this manner we developed a small group of volunteers who became fully trained on banding and data recording while also allowing others to come and occasionally view the field operations and learn about bird banding. The core team of trained volunteers consisted of six to eight people, depending on the year, and often included seasonal staff and volunteers with the Kodiak Refuge Biological Program and Visitor’s Center. In general we had approximately 30 volunteers each season and 60 total participants across the five years. A cumulative total of approximately 1500 hours of service was donated to the refuge by volunteer participation in the MAPS program.

6

Funding was provided by the USFWS Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge, USFWS Challenge Cost Share Program for start-up costs, Audubon Toyota Together Green Grant for trail improvement, and a University of Alaska Foundation Angus Gavin Migratory Bird Research Grant to bring an Institute for Bird Populations trainer to Kodiak.

Contact: Robin Corcoran, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Kodiak Refuge, 1390 Buskin River Road, Kodiak, AK, 99615. E-mail: robin_corcoran@fws.gov Table 1. Summary of mist net captures of birds on the Kodiak Refuge Monitoring Avian Productivity and Survivorship (MAPS) site on the Buskin River State Recreation Area, Alaska, in summer 2010 to 2014.

Year* No. Recaptured Between Years

Mean Hatch Year

to Adult Ratio

Species 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total

Fox Sparrow 46 44 33 48 58 229 17 1.2 Hermit Thrush 52 41 47 30 43 213 17 1.9 Wilson’s Warbler 76 26 29 16 29 176 10 0.2 Yellow Warbler 29 15 26 23 8 101 11 0.2 Pacific Wren 16 24 0 1 21 62 1 0.4 Black-capped Chickadee 13 5 5 10 7 40 4 2.1 Varied Thrush 3 12 9 12 2 38 2 1.2 Golden-crowned Kinglet 3 27 0 0 4 34 0.9 Pine Siskin 1 12 3 12 0 28 Pine Grosbeak 1 5 4 10 2 22 3 Orange-crowned Warbler 7 3 2 2 4 18 Red-breasted Nuthatch 2 2 2 7 1 14 1 Golden-crowned Sparrow 6 0 1 2 0 9 Brown Creeper 0 0 1 4 2 7 1 Downy Woodpecker 1 0 0 0 4 5 Myrtle Warbler 1 0 2 2 0 5 Song Sparrow 2 0 0 0 0 2 Common Redpoll 0 1 0 0 0 1 Three-toed Woodpecker 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 Red Crossbill 0 0 0 0 1 1 TOTALS 259 217 164 180 186 1006 68 Total Net Hours 371 341 358 357 347 *Yearly totals are for newly banded birds only; within- and between-season recaptures are not included.

7

POTENTIAL CHANGES IN THE ABUNDANCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF BIRDS IN THE BOREAL-ARCTIC ECOTONE OF NORTHWESTERN ALASKA (BCR 2) Colleen Handel and Lance McNew, USGS Alaska Science Center The goal of this project is to model projected changes in distribution and abundance of avian species in response to projected environmental changes associated with a shifting climate in the boreal-Arctic transition zone of Alaska. Specific objectives include: (1) evaluating the environmental correlates of distribution, abundance, and richness of landbird and shorebird species, and assessing how distribution, abundance, and community structure of birds have changed relative to changes in habitat over the last 25 years; (2) estimating productivity, recruitment and survival for a subset of species with varying life history traits at a series of sites located across an ecological gradient in the boreal-arctic transition zone; and (3) forecasting avian species, communities, habitats, and core geographic areas likely to be most vulnerable to projected climate changes, and key areas important for preserving biodiversity. Summary of Field Effort in 2014 During 1988–1992 and 2000, avian point-transect surveys were conducted during the breeding season within 34 randomly-selected 10-km × 10-km sampling blocks on the Seward Peninsula. Point-transects of variable length were created non-randomly within these blocks (number of points = 900). During the initial phase of our current study, 2012–2014, we are replicating these historic surveys to assess how bird populations have changed across the landscape relative to changes in habitat. In 2014, we conducted 531 replicated point-transect surveys for birds at 231 points within 12 sampling blocks. We conducted 10-min focal observations at each point and recorded the number of individuals of each species detected up to 250 m from the point. Each point-transect was surveyed 2–3 times during a 4-week period corresponding to territory establishment and egg-laying. We recorded air temperature, wind speed, sky condition, and snow cover immediately prior to conducting bird surveys. During late June and early July, we classified the vegetation at each bird survey site. We also collected 20 habitat measures at 10 subsample plots associated with each bird survey point, including the average height and overlapping coverage of dwarf birch, willow, alder, ericaceous shrubs, and lichens within 250 m. We measured thaw depth and took a soil temperature reading at a depth of 15–20 cm. We also measured the average proportion of bare ground, running water, and standing water and distance from the survey point to the nearest shrub in each of the 3 height categories (<50 cm, 50–100 cm, and >100 cm). We recorded elevation, slope, and aspect at each bird point. To evaluate potential food resources for breeding birds, we collected invertebrates using sweep-net sampling along 2–3 transects 25-m in length that we randomly selected within 250-m of each bird survey point. During the next 4 years, this project will focus on how demography of selected species is affected by weather, vegetation, and arthropod abundance. Funding is provided by the USGS Changing Arctic Ecosystems Research Initiative. We are grateful to Jodee Banner, Caitlin Davis, Molly McDermott, Megan Milligan, Natalie Okun, James Peterson, Rachel Richardson, and Skyler Vold for assistance in the field.

8

Contact: Colleen Handel, USGS Alaska Science Center, 4210 University Drive, Anchorage, AK 99508. Phone: 907-786-7181. Email: cmhandel@usgs.gov CLIFF-NESTING RAPTOR SURVEYS IN THE KILBUCK MOUNTAINS, ALASKA (BCR 2) Brian J. McCaffery and Kristine M. Sowl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Between 1991 and 2004, Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge conducted annual surveys of cliff-nesting raptors in the Kilbuck Mountains of western Alaska. Because of concerns about both the continental status of golden eagles and the potential impacts of a proposed energy corridor through the Kilbuck Mountains, the location’s status as an index area for coordinated statewide monitoring of cliff-nesting raptors, and the potential value of apex predators as sentinel species, we resumed those surveys in 2012. Occupancy and productivity surveys for rough-legged hawks, golden eagles, and gyrfalcons were conducted via R-44 helicopter with a single front seat observer in the first weeks of May and July, 2014, respectively. Weather was excellent during early May, so we were able to do some extensive reconnaissance of previously unexplored habitat in the Eek Mountains after completing the main survey area. Weather was not as favorable during July and we were not able to visit the new sites in the Eek Mountains due to high winds on one day and low ceiling on the second. It was a very poor year for golden eagles. In the core study area within the Kisaralik River-Quicksilver Creek corridor, 23 historical territories supported only 5 laying pairs, just half the long-term average of 10 pairs. Only one of 16 survey years between 1991 and 2013 had fewer. Over the course of three survey days, we checked 37 territories in our extended Kilbuck survey area, and only nine had birds on eggs. Additionally, two new nests were found in the Eek Mountains. Of the five nests found within the core study area, four had a total of six chicks during July. Chicks ranged in age from 6-8 weeks. It was a below average year for gyrfalcons. Ten of eighteen territories were occupied in the main Kilbuck study area. Four of these territories had chicks in July. All of the chicks that were observed were “scramblers” and not yet flighted. We found four new gyrfalcon eyries. Two of these eyries were in the Eek Mountains at nearly 3,000 feet elevation, by far the highest elevation that we have ever found them. Although Rough-legged Hawks were detected at or near 12 known nesting sites in 2013, only a single rough-legged hawk was seen in 2014 in the entire study area in our two surveys combined, and that individual was not associated with a nesting area. Additional landbird surveys conducted by Yukon Delta NWR staff: BBS: We completed the St Mary's BBS. Observations were consistent with the 2011 and 2012 surveys, but fewer birds were seen or heard than in the historical surveys in the 1990s. It may be

9

that the birds are arriving earlier than they have in the past so timing is a little off. One new species was added to the count, a Northern Goshawk. CBC: The Bethel Christmas Bird Count was sponsored by Yukon Delta staff. Bird numbers were low compared to previous years, possibly due to the mild weather and less need for birds to concentrate at feeders. We observed 10 species, including 397 ravens and had one white-throated sparrow at a feeder. Contact: Brian J. McCaffery, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge, P.O. Box 346, Bethel, AK 99559. Phone: (907) 543-1014; E-mail: brian_mccaffery@fws.gov LANDBIRD UPDATE FROM THE ALASKA PENINSULA/BECHAROF NWR (BCR2) Susan Savage, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Peninsula/Becharof NWR MONITORING: BBS Route One BBS route (King Salmon # 03-193) was completed along the Alaska Peninsula Hwy between Lake Camp (Katmai NP) and Kvichak Bay on 4 June 2014. Alaska Landbird Monitoring Survey (ALMS) and Off-Road Point-Counts (ORPC) Two ALMS blocks were completed on the Alaska Peninsula/Becharof NWR: Dog Salmon (block # 14787) and Kejulik River (block # 16506). All available points were completed on both blocks. In addition, we visited on ORPC at Kanatak Trail/Ruth Lake established in 2013, but due to high winds, lateness in the month of June, and limited schedules, a point count was not completed this year. Data were compiled and sent to the USGS Alaska Science Center for future analysis. EDUCATION/OUTREACH: International Migratory Bird Day: Refuge staff led the 17th annual King Salmon gathering of IMBD themed “Why Bird Matter” on 10 May 2014. Twenty three people turned out to participate in the North American Migration Count. We organized four teams and counted 6,742 birds of 71 species. These data were submitted to e-Bird. Christmas Bird Count: Twenty souls participated in the 28th King Salmon/Naknek CBC organized by Refuge Staff. On 21 December 2013 four teams and counts at three feeders resulted in 1,602 birds of 18 species. These data were compiled and submitted to the National CBC website.

10

PROJECTS (see following reports) Contact: Melissa Cady, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Peninsula/Becharof NWR, PO Box 277, King Salmon, AK 99613. Phone: 907-246-1215; E-mail: melissa_cady @fws.gov NEST BOX OCCUPANCY AND NEST SUCCESS OF TREE SWALLOWS (TACHYCINETA BICOLOR) IN THE VICINITY OF KING SALMON, ALASKA, 2014 Susan Savage and Jessica Howell, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Peninsula/Becharof NWR There have been significant population declines in many Neotropical migrant species over the past few decades. Aerial insectivores are declining at the fastest rates, likely because of climate change, pesticide usage, less natural habitat, and amplification of these factors by energetics of long distance migration. The Tree Swallow (Tachycineta bicolor) is a relatively common aerial insectivore that can be used as a model for other species in decline. The Alaska Peninsula (Peninsula) represents the southwestern edge of Tree Swallow breeding habitat in Alaska and the state as a whole is the northwestern edge. This study greatly expanded previously existing nest box monitoring efforts on the Peninsula. The study also examined differences in occupancy between newly set up and older boxes and differences in reproductive success in younger and older females. Slightly over 50% of 35 nest boxes were occupied, and the nest success rate was high (80.3±8%). Occupancy of older boxes was significantly greater than newer boxes (Chi square, p<0.05), but there was no clear relationship with age of female. We used two-tailed t-tests for preliminary exploration of data. Among occupied boxes, nest initiation began earlier in older boxes (t = 5.01, p < 0.001). Young females took significantly more time to build nests (t= 2.03, p=0.06), had shorter nestling periods (t= -3.23 p=0.007), and clutches had less mean mass per chick at banding (t= -2.0 p=0.07), although this may be confounded with age at banding. The differences in occupancy were perhaps due to older nest boxes being longer established as suitable habitat. The differences in building time by age likely represent female and possibly male experience. Future monitoring efforts will continue to expand our knowledge of breeding parameters and contribute to our understanding of population trends of this, and other aerial insectivores. Contact: Melissa Cady, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Peninsula/Becharof NWR, PO Box 277, King Salmon, AK 99613. Phone: 907-246-1215; E-mail: melissa_cady @fws.gov PILOT STUDY: ESTABLISHING BASELINE OWL SPECIES PRESENCE AND ABUNDANCE, KING SALMON, ALASKA (BCR 2) Susan Savage1 and Sherri Anderson2 1U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2Alaska Peninsula/Becharof NWR National Park Service

11

Katmai National Park & Preserve During the winter of 2014 we conducted our third year of road-based surveys of boreal forests owls from Lake Camp (Katmai National Park) to King Salmon. This is the third year of surveys and we continued to use the new survey protocol developed in 2013. This included a five minute silent listening period followed by playback of two species (northern saw-whet owl and boreal owl), the 10-stop route used in 2013, survey initiation 60 min after sunset, and followed survey condition recommendations of Andres (2001). Teams of two completed five surveys from 1 March to 15 May. We detected Great Horned Owls on the first four surveys, Northern Saw-whet Owls on the 30 April survey, and Boreal Owls on the 12 May survey. The final results will be presented in a progress report available from the PIs.

Andres, B. 2001. Suggestions for Breeding Owl Surveys in Alaska. Boreal Partners in Flight Working Group. Anchorage, Alaska. Contact: Melissa Cady, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Peninsula/Becharof NWR, PO Box 277, King Salmon, AK 99613. Phone: 907-246-1215; e-mail: melissa_cady @fws.gov OR Sherri Anderson, NPS, Katmai NP&P, PO Box 7, King Salmon, AK 99613; Phone: 907-246-2148 or sherri_anderson@nps.gov. BIOLOGICAL ACCUMULATION OF PHARMACEUTICALS AND PERSONAL CARE PRODUCTS (PPCPS) IN BIRDS AND INVERTEBRATES AT WHITEHORSE-AREA SEWAGE LAGOONS (BCR 4) Kathryn Aitken and Devon Yacura, School of Science, Yukon College and Dept. of Renewable Resources, University of Alberta Sewage lagoons provide important breeding and migratory stop-over habitat to bird communities, but may also be sources of contamination for breeding and foraging animals. Contaminants of particular concern are pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs), which are derived from prescription and non-prescription drugs, detergents, perfumes, cosmetics, and other domestic products. PPCPs may affect physiology, behaviour, and other processes in wildlife, either through direct ingestion or through consumption of prey. PPCPs may not be fully removed during sewage treatment, resulting in transfer to freshwater systems via effluent, and potentially to humans. The purpose of this study is to examine the occurrence of PPCPs in invertebrates and the potential for transfer to birds breeding and foraging at two northern wastewater treatment facilities (Whitehorse and Crestview sewage lagoons) that are renowned “hotspots” for local bird diversity and abundance. A pilot sampling program in 2013 confirmed that PPCPs are present in the water, sludge and invertebrates, in all stages of treatment, at the Whitehorse sewage lagoon (WSL). The goals for 2014 were to: 1) quantify the removal efficiencies of PPCPs between sewage treatment stages; 2) quantify the seasonal variation of PPCPs within treatment stages; 3) quantify the occurrence of PPCPs within invertebrates in the secondary stage of treatment; and 4) compare waterfowl and songbird breeding abundance and success between the sewage lagoons and natural wetlands. From June-Sept 2014, sampling of

12

water, sludge, and invertebrates, and monitoring of waterfowl and songbird breeding continued. Samples were sent to the Trent University Water Quality Centre for analysis (results pending). Future research will include determining whether PPCPs are present in songbirds and waterfowl breeding at the sewage lagoons, and whether the presence of PPCPs results in reduced reproductive success in comparison to natural wetlands. This project was funded by: City of Whitehorse Environmental Grant, Yukon College Faculty Research Fund, Yukon Research Centre Northern Research Endowment Fund, Environment Yukon Environmental Awareness Award, and Yukon Fish and Wildlife Enhancement Trust, and has received other support from the City of Whitehorse, Yukon Bird Club, Environment Canada-Canadian Wildlife Service, Yukon College School of Science, Yukon Wildlife Preserve, ECOFOR, and Trent University Water Quality Centre.

Contact: Dr. Kathryn Aitken, School of Science, Yukon College, 500 College Drive, P.O. Box 2799, Whitehorse, Yukon, Canada, Y1A 5K4. E-mail: kaitken@yukoncollege.yk.ca

BEST PRACTICES FOR CONSERVING BREEDING BIRDS IN WETLAND-FOREST ECOTONES OF SOUTHERN YUKON (BCR 4) Hilary A. Cooke and Lila Tauzer, Wildlife Conservation Society Canada In Yukon’s Southern Lakes ecoregion, valley-bottom wetlands and riparian areas along streams, rivers, and lakes are considered important habitat for many species, including breeding birds, wood frogs, beaver, and moose. Compared with upland areas, productive valley bottom habitats often support higher species diversity and abundance, as well as unique species and ecological values. These rich habitats are also highly valued for agriculture, forestry, and rural residential development. Most North American jurisdictions use reserve or buffer zones adjacent to streams, lakes, and wetlands to protect aquatic and terrestrial values. Recent Yukon forest management standards provide guidance on treed buffers with width prescriptions varying with type and size of waterbody or wetland, shoreline slope, and presence of fish. The goal of our project was to evaluate the utility of treed buffers for conserving habitat for boreal birds breeding in white spruce forest adjacent to wetlands and to develop best management practices for buffer zone widths. Our first objective was to determine if the composition and abundance of the boreal bird assemblage is similar or different in mature and old white spruce forest immediately adjacent to a wetland compared with upland forest. In 2014, we conducted standardized point count surveys at 16 wetland-forest sites (8 fens, 5 marshes and 3 swamps). At each site, 10 points (≥ 200m apart) were visited twice during the month of June: 5 ‘riparian’ points were located 50m from the wetland-forest edge and 5 ‘upland’ points were located 250m from the edge. Our second objective was to identify optimal widths for reserve zones to ensure breeding habitat is protected for birds using wetland-forest ecotones. To do this, we evaluated space use by breeding birds by mapping observations along 350m line transects that extended from the wetland-forest edge into the upland. This study complemented similar work done in 2012 (identical protocol and study design, and within the same geographic region) which examined breeding bird use of mature and

13

old white spruce forest adjacent to streams and rivers of varying size. In future analyses, we will use the detailed habitat data collected at each bird survey point and along the transects (quantitative data on ground, herbaceous, shrub, and tree cover, as well as dominant vegetation structural stage, canopy cover, relative soil moisture, occurrence of water, site aspect and slope, and evidence of fire or beaver activity) to examine relationships between abundances of breeding birds and habitat characteristics, including wetland features and the composition and structure of the forest. In 2014, we made 1657 observations of 52 bird species during point count surveys (radius = 100m). Species richness was higher at the wetland-forest edge (median = 14.5 species; range = 9-22) than in the upland forest (median = 9.5 species; range = 6-15). 78.8% of the common bird species (documented at > 1 site) were recorded at both the riparian and upland points. However, 7 species (Alder Flycatcher, Wilson’s Snipe, Yellow Warbler, Common Yellowthroat, Savannah Sparrow, Fox Sparrow and Red-winged Blackbird) occurred only at the riparian points, and Red Crossbill was documented solely in upland points. Five of the most common species (Yellow-Rumped Warbler, Swainson's Thrush, Dark-eyed Junco, Common Yellowthroat and Gray Jay) were detected at all 16 sites, and an additional 3 species (Chipping Sparrow, Boreal Chickadee and Lincoln’s Sparrow) were documented at 15 of 16 sites. Other common species were American Robin and Ruby-Crowned Kinglet (each at 14 sites), Blackpoll Warbler (13 sites), and Lesser Yellowlegs, Wilson’s Warbler and Orange-crowned Warbler (8 sites). Olive-sided Flycatcher, listed as Threatened by COSEWIC, and Rusty Blackbird, a Species of Concern, were documented at 4 and 6 sites, respectively. We also observed several bird species outside of their known breeding range (Western Tanager, and Swamp and Song Sparrow each at 1 site; White-throated Sparrow at 2 sites). These observations in conjunction with the high species richness and occurrence of 2 Species At Risk suggests these valley-bottom wetland forests are important breeding habitat for the boreal bird assemblage and should be priorities for conservation. The documentation of 4 species at the edge of their geographic range also highlights the need for increased coverage and survey effort in order to better understand boreal bird distribution in this region. Contact: Hilary A. Cooke, Wildlife Conservation Society Canada, 2B-508 Hanson Street, Whitehorse, Yukon, Y1A 1Z1. E-mail: hcooke@wcs.org.

SUMMARY OF LANDBIRD WORK ON TETLIN NWR, ALASKA (BCR 4)

Kristin DuBour, Nate Berg & Nicole Wells, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge

1. Spring Bird Phenology Surveys – We conduct a thrice-weekly, road-based bird survey around Tok, AK each year between late March and early June. The purpose of this survey is to detect and document phenological shifts in peak bird migration through the Upper Tanana River Valley. This year, we detected over 79,000 individuals of 154 species between 31 March and 2 June at 23 established points. Sandhill Cranes were by far the most numerous species detected (>22,000 detections). American Wigeon,

14

Lapland Longspur and Trumpeter Swan were also common, with over 3000 individuals detected of each species. Rare but interesting birds included Hudsonian Godwit, Cinnamon Teal and Gray-crowned Rosy Finch.

2. Breeding Bird Surveys (BBS) – We completed 4 road-based BBS routes this year (Tower Bluffs, Northway, Mt. Fairplay and Slana routes), June 9-13. We recorded 437 individuals of 21 species on the Tower Bluffs route, 504 individuals of 32 species on the Northway route, 476 individuals of 30 species on the Mt. Fairplay route and 637 individuals of 48 species on the Slana route.

3. Alaska Landbird Monitoring Surveys (ALMS) – We completed 4 of our 7 ALMS plots this year (Mt. Fairplay, Hidden Lake, Deeper Lake and Chisana). These plots were last completed in 2012. We plan to complete our three remaining plots during the 2015 season.

4. Raptor Nest Occupancy and Productivity Surveys – Between May and August 2014, we conducted aerial surveys of 69 bald eagle and 39 osprey nesting territories for occupancy and productivity. We did not conduct bald eagle and osprey surveys in 2013 and several nests and/or nest trees had been destroyed since our last survey in 2012. Results from 2014 indicate below average occupancy, success and productivity for bald eagles compared with the long term average (1991-2012). Occupancy was below average while success and productivity were average for ospreys during 2014. In addition, we conducted ground-based occupancy and productivity surveys of 18 peregrine falcon territories. Peregrine falcon occupancy was average, with success, productivity, and mean brood size above the long term average. The refuge will continue annual raptor monitoring with no further management actions planned.

5. Fall Landbird Migration Monitoring (Banding Station) – Tetlin has been operating a landbird banding station since 1993. This year was our 22nd year of operation. Primary objectives for the station are currently being developed but preliminary objectives include: 1) monitor migration timing for 6 target species of birds common in interior Alaska (SWTH, SCJU, WIWA, RCKI, OCWA and MYWA), 2) monitor changes in body condition (fat deposits) for target species and 3) monitor long-term trends in capture rates as an index of productivity for target species. This year we captured approximately 1300 birds of 33 species. This is about 800 captures below the long-term average. This year we also initiated a pilot effort to investigate alternative capture sites for this project. We were interested in this because we suspect problems with vegetation succession at the current site may be contributing to reduced capture rates over the past 6-7 years. To test whether an alternative capture site would increase our capture rates, we operated a second study site. This site was located on the Tok River 40 km from the original site. We chose this site because it was composed largely of early successional vegetation (willow and alder scrub), was subject to regular disturbance events (spring floods), and allowed easy access. We operated both sites simultaneously between 13 August and 12 September. Preliminary results indicate that the Tok River site did not produce desired capture rates. However, data will be analyzed in the coming months.

15

6. Olive-sided Flycatcher research – This was the first year in which the Tetlin participated in a large-scale research project studying Olive-sided Flycatchers (OSFL) in Alaska. This project is a large-scale effort spearheaded by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game Wildlife Diversity Program. The purpose of the project is to identify overwintering and staging areas of migratory OSFL, provide insight into breeding habitat requirements and potential causes for deficits in reproduction and quantify biomass of aerial arthropods on established OSFL territories. During this pilot effort, a crew of three people spent 10 days locating OSFL territories, capturing OSFL and deploying arthropod traps on Tetlin NWR. The effort was a success: we located four OSFL territories and successfully captured three males at those sites. Birds were banded, fitted with geolocators and biological samples were collected. In 2015, Tetlin plans to launch a larger effort to recapture marked birds and deploy up to 10 more geolocators.

Contact: Kristin DuBour, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge, PO Box 779, Tok, AK, 99780; 907-883-9410, kristin _dubour@fws.gov LANDBIRD PROJECTS FOR KANUTI NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE, 2014 (BCR 4)

Chris Harwood, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Kanuti National Wildlife Refuge There were 6 landbird-related projects that occurred on Kanuti NWR in 2014. 1) Breeding Bird Surveys (BBS) We completed 2 river-based BBSs (i.e., “Kanuti Canyon” and “Kanuti Lake” routes) along the Kanuti River in June. We recorded 447 individuals of 40 species on the Canyon survey, and 481 individuals of 42 species on the Lake survey. High river levels from copious rain in June both positively and negatively affected survey operations. 2) Alaska Landbird Monitoring Survey (ALMS) Kanuti NWR took advantage of the combined generosity of USFWS’s Inventory and Monitoring program (funding) and Migratory Bird Management Branch (personnel) for completion of our 2 ALMS plots. Kanuti has been doing these 2 surveys nearly every 2 years since 2005. Our Chalatna ALMS plot occurs in old growth spruce woodland, while our Minnkokut Lake plot features a mosaic of habitats in seral stages, following a 2004 wildfire. 3) Post-fire landbird survey We conducted point count and bird habitat surveys according to ALMS protocols at two post-fire sites in June: the aforementioned Minnkokut Lake site (see ALMS section) and the “half-ALMS” (i.e., 12 points vs. 25) Fish Creek Lake site. This year’s effort, now 10 years removed from the 2004 wildfire that burned a large part of the Refuge, repeated surveys first done in 2005 (Minnkokut) and 2006 (Fish Creek Lake) and explores possible changes observed since. At the Fish Creek Lake site, Kanuti NWR personnel detected 22 species during 11 formal point counts, totaling 182 individuals; an additional 11 species were observed incidentally. A complementary,

16

repeat intensive vegetation survey was also completed by a separate crew in July–August 2014. Data from the Minnkokut Lake site were not available at the time of this summary. Revisits to additional post-fire plots are planned for 2015. 4) Point count timing calibration study Kanuti NWR staff conducted weekly point count surveys from mid-May through late June. The site, located near our Kanuti Lake administration cabin, was another “half-ALMS” plot (12 count points; see project above) that had been previously surveyed according to ALMS protocols in 2004. We completed 7 weekly point count bird surveys and 1 habitat survey. The objective was to begin to explore (admittedly, at a small spatial scale!) 1) how species composition and numbers of detections may vary over the season (i.e., from the general landbird arrival period [17 May – 9 June] through the prescribed survey period [10–30 June] and 2) implications for survey results vis-à-vis survey date. 5) First detections for migrants For the sixth time in seven years, Kanuti NWR staff “sprung out” at our administrative cabin at Kanuti Lake and documented first detections for all bird species observed. We arrived pre-breakup via skiplane on 15 April, likely preceding most of the area’s migrants, and remained through 2 July, thus capturing the entire spring migratory season. Data are available for the phenologically inclined. 6) Northern Goshawk broadcast call surveys Refuge staff and volunteers conducted boat-based, broadcast call surveys for Northern Goshawks in June. Two separate crews surveyed at approximately 160 calling stations each along stretches of the Kanuti River and Jim River/South Fork Koyukuk River, respectively. This was the fourth and final year for these surveys. Contact: Chris Harwood, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Kanuti NWR, 101 12th Ave.; Room 206, Fairbanks, AK, 99701. Phone: 907-455-1836; E-mail: christopher_harwood@fws.gov

UPDATE ON THE BOREAL AVIAN MODELLING (BCR 4) Steve Matsuoka, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Migratory Bird Management The Boreal Avian Modelling Project (BAM) was founded in 2005 to compile and analyze avian point-count survey data from across boreal Canada and to use the knowledge gained to help conserve bird populations throughout this vast region (Cumming et al. 2010). In 2010, the program expanded to include boreal forest regions of Alaska, the Upper Midwest, and New England. BAM now includes data from approximately 190,000 point-count locations across North America’s boreal forest region. Analyzing these data is complicated because point-count survey protocols were not standardized across surveys throughout the region (Cumming et al. 2010, Matsuoka et al. 2014). Thus, BAM

17

has modified 2 existing models of avian detection rates—distance sampling and removal models—to estimate densities and population sizes from these heterogeneous data (Matsuoka et al. 2012, Sólymos et al. 2013). BAM has recent analyzed point-count data using these methods to (1) recommend standard protocols for conducting point-count surveys (Matsuoka et al. 2014), (2) evaluate distribution and abundance of 98 songbird species relative to current habitats and climates across boreal Canada (Cumming et al. 2014), (3) simulate the cumulative effects of land use and climate change on boreal songbirds in the oil sands region of Alberta (Mahon et al. 2014), and (4) simulate responses by 80 songbird species to future changes in climate across North America’s boreal and subarctic zone (Stralberg et al. 2015). The BAM website (www.borealbirds.ca) includes a wealth of information on avian breeding densities by habitat type, maps of avian distribution, and recommendations on conducting point-count surveys. Much of the information is focused on boreal Canada, but information specific to Alaska will become available in the coming years. Spatially explicit models of species’ distribution and abundance relative to current and future climates across the boreal are now available as maps on DataBasin (http://borealbirds.databasin.org). BAM includes the following researchers: Steering Committee: Erin Bayne, Steve Cumming, Fiona Schmiegelow, and Samantha Song Staff: Nichole Barker (PhD Candidate), Trish Fontaine (Spatial Database Manager), Diana Stralberg (PhD Candidate), and Péter Sólymos (Statistical Ecologist). Project Affiliates: Samuel Haché, Lisa Mahon, Steve Matsuoka. Technical Committee: Marcel Darveau, Jean-Luc DesGranges, André Desrochers, Pierre Drapeau, Charles Francis, Colleen Handel, Keith Hobson, Craig Machtans, Julienne Morissette, Gerald Niemi, Rob Rempel, Stuart Slattery, Phil Taylor, Steve Van Wilgenburg, Lisa Venier, Pierre Vernier, and Marc-André Villard. Contact: Steve Matsuoka, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Migratory Bird Management, 1011 East Tudor Road, Anchorage, AK, 99503. E-mail: steve_matsuoka@fws.gov Literature cited: Cumming S. G., K. L. Lefevre, E. Bayne, T. Fontaine, F. K. A. Schmiegelow, and S. J. Song.

2010. Toward conservation of Canada's boreal forest avifauna: design and application of ecological models at continental extents. Avian Conservation and Ecology 5(2):8.

Cumming S. G., D. Stralberg, K. Lefevre, P. Sólymos, E. M. Bayne, T. Fontaine, D. Mazerolle,

F. K. A. Schmiegelow, and S. J. Song. 2014. Climate and vegetation hierarchically structure patterns of songbird distribution in the Canadian boreal region. Ecography 37:137–151.

Mahon, C. L., E. M. Bayne, P. Sólymos, S. M. Matsuoka, M. Carlson, E. Dzus, F. K. A.

Schmiegelow, S. G. Cumming, and S. J. Song. 2014. Does expected future landscape condition support proposed population objectives for boreal birds? Forest Ecology and Management 312:28–39.

18

Matsuoka, S. M., E. M. Bayne, P. Sólymos, P. C. Fontaine, S. G. Cumming, F. K. A. Schmiegelow, and S. J. Song. 2012. Using binomial distance-sampling models to estimate the effective detection radius of point-count surveys across boreal Canada. Auk 129:268–282.

Matsuoka, S. M., C. L. Mahon, C. M. Handel, P. Sólymos, E. M. Bayne, P. C. Fontaine, and C.

J. Ralph. 2014. Reviving common standards in point-count surveys for broad inference across studies. The Condor: Ornithological Applications 116:599–608.

Sólymos, P., S. M. Matsuoka, E. M. Bayne, S. R. Lele, P. Fontaine, S. G. Cumming, D.

Stralberg, F. K. A. Schmiegelow, and S. J. Song. 2013. Calibrating indices of avian density from non-standardized survey data: making the most of a messy situation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 4:1047–1058.

Stralberg, D., S. M. Matsuoka, A. Hamann, E. M. Bayne, P. Sólymos, F. K. A. Schmiegelow, X.

Wang, S. G. Cumming, and S. J. Song. 2015. Projecting boreal bird responses to future climate change: signal greater than noise. Ecological Applications 24, in press.

MONITORING TRENDS IN ABUNDANCE AND OCCUPANCY OF PASSERINE BIRDS IN THE NPS CENTRAL ALASKA MONITORING NETWORK (BCR4) Carol McIntyre, Denali National Park, Jeremy Mizel, NPS Arctic Monitoring Network, and Mark Paulson, Jason Reppert and Joshua Schmidt, NPS Central Alaska Monitoring Network Passerine birds are a vital sign of the NPS Central Alaska Monitoring Network. In 2014, we continued to conduct standardized surveys in Denali National Park and Preserve (Denali) and Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve (Wrangell-St. Elias). Our work uses a repeat sampling method and is conducted on roadside survey routes along the Denali Park Road (n = 3 routes), the McCarthy Road (n = 2 routes), and the Nabesna Road (n = 1 route). Each roadside survey route contains 50 sampling points that are surveyed using a standardized 3-minute count. In 2014, we surveyed the routes 3 to 5 times between 17 April and 25 June (n = 21 repeat sampling events and 1037 survey events). The number of species detected on each route ranged from 31 to 56, with the most species detected on route 3 in Denali (n = 48 species) and route 1 along the McCarthy Road (n = 56 species). We detected 87 species across all routes, with 17 species detected on all routes. Species of interest detected on the roadside surveys included Olive-sided Flycatcher (both McCarthy Road routes and the Nabesna Road route), Tennessee Warbler (on the eastern McCarthy Road route), and Rusty Blackbird on all three routes in Wrangell-St. Elias NPP. Details about our sampling methods can be found in Schmidt, J.H., C.L. McIntyre, and M.C. MacCluskie. 2013. Accounting for incomplete detection: What are we estimating and how might it affect long-term passerine monitoring programs. Biological Conservation 160:130-139.

19

Our surveys will continue in 2015. Contact: Carol McIntyre, NPS, 4175 Geist Road, Fairbanks, AK 99709. Phone (907) 455-0671; Email: Carol_McIntyre@nps.gov MONITORING TERRITORY OCCUPANCY AND REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS OF GOLDEN EAGLES IN DENALI NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE, ALASKA (BCR4) Carol McIntyre, Denali National Park and Preserve Golden Eagles are a vital sign of the NPS Central Alaska Monitoring Network. We have monitored territory occupancy and reproductive activities of Golden Eagles at over 80 nesting territories in the northern foothills of the Alaska Range in Denali annually since 1988 using two standardized aerial surveys supplemented by additional ground surveys (McIntyre and Schmidt 2012). As in past years, we conducted the occupancy survey in late April and the production survey in mid-July using a R-44 helicopter. Of the 86 territories monitored, 80 (93%) were occupied by a territorial pair of eagles. We documented occupied nests (those where eggs were laid) in 30% (n = 24) of the occupied territories. We documented nest success for 50% (n = 12) of the occupied nests. Mean brood size was 1.0 and the number of fledglings per occupied territory was 0.15. Eagle reproduction in Denali in 2014 was low and probably due to the scarcity of snowshoe hare (McIntyre and Schmidt 2012). In 2014, we also continued our efforts to quantify: 1) the age structure of the territorial population; 2) interactions between territorial eagles and apparent floaters (eagles that are not territorial holders); 3) nest site fidelity and turnover rates at nesting territories (in cooperation with the USGS Alaska Science Center molecular genetics lab); 4) the year round movements of Denali Golden Eagles (in cooperation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service); 5) changes in wintering habitat (in cooperation with West Virginia University); and 6) efforts to protect occupied Golden Eagles nests from disturbance (Fackler et al. 2014). Our work will continue in 2015. Contact: Carol McIntyre, National Park Service, 4175 Geist Road, Fairbanks, AK 99709. Email: Carol_McIntyre@nps.gov Literature cited Fackler, P.L., K. Pacific, J. Martin, and C. McIntyre. 2014. Efficient use of information in

adaptive management with an application to managing recreation near golden eagle nesting sites. PLoS ONE 9(8): e102434. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0102434.

McIntyre, C.L., and J.H. Schmidt. 2012. Ecological and environmental correlates of territory

occupancy and breeding performance of migratory Golden Eagles Aquila chrysaetos in interior Alaska. Ibis 154: 124-135.

20

STRIKING GOLD IN THE EASTERN ALASKA RANGE: RESULTS OF RECENT PROSPECTING TRIPS (BCR4) Carol McIntyre, Denali National Park and Stephen B. Lewis, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Many Golden Eagles from interior and northern Alaska are long-distance migrants (McIntyre et al. 2008) and their migration routes and wintering ranges encompass a vast region of western North America including southwestern Canada, the western United States and northern Mexico. Landscapes across this region are rapidly changing due to increasing anthropogenic activities (e.g., Knick et al. 2003, Steenhof et al. 2014, Watson et al. 2014). Concern over this species’ conservation status has increased as threats to eagle populations become better understood (Miller et al. 2014, Watson et al. 2014). Currently, it is unknown if golden eagles have the demographic resiliency to absorb additional mortality from increasing threats (Millsap et al. 2013) or if their environment is changing at a rate that exceeds their ability to adapt. Alaska’s migratory Golden Eagles spend much of their lives outside of Alaska, and like other migratory birds are exposed during each season (breeding, migration, and winter) to conditions in different part of western North America. Long-term studies of migratory Golden Eagles breeding in Denali National Park suggest that conditions along migration routes or on the wintering grounds are the primary factor driving population trends of that population (McIntyre and Schmidt 2012). As part of our collaborative studies, we are currently documenting the year-round movements of Alaska’s migratory Golden Eagles and identifying factors that influence their reproduction and survival. Documenting the movement patterns exhibited by Golden Eagles in the western United States is a critically important aspect of evaluating and mitigating the potential risks posed by renewable energy development (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2014) and other threats. To meet our project objectives, we conducted a pilot study in 2014 to identify areas in interior Alaska where we could capture and radio-tag migrating Golden Eagles. Using historical and contemporary radio-tracking data and local observations, we identified several areas in the Mentasta Mountains in the eastern Alaska Range within Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve as potential study sites. We made reconnaissance trips to these areas in March and October 2014. In March, we traveled to potential study sites via snow machine and dog sled. In October, we traveled to potential study sites by ATV and foot travel. At each site, we made observations from a fixed point using 10 x 40 binoculars to scan across the landscape and overhead to locate migrating Golden Eagles. Our observations suggest that a substantial number of Golden Eagles migrate through the eastern Mentasta Mountains in spring and autumn. From 25 to 29 March 2014, we observed 113 migrating Golden Eagles (all adults) during 13 observation hours (8.7 eagles per hour). From 3 to 14 October 2014, we observed 1,364 migrating Golden Eagles (most adults) during 40 observation hours (34.5 eagles per hour; range = 4 – 81). The highest daily counts were made on

21

7 and 8 October (67.5 eagles per hour), right after a large winter storm moved across northern and interior Alaska. Local winds on these two days averaged 8–12 mph winds from the northeast and there was ≥40% cloud cover. Our 2014 autumn counts far exceeded our expectations and are among the highest recorded in North America. Given that these counts were conducted over a limited time period and in just one general area, we suspect that they greatly underestimate the numbers of eagles migrating through this area. We also attempted to capture migrating Golden Eagles during October. We established a temporary trapping station on a plateau on the southern slope of the Mentasta Mountains. Despite the large number of eagles migrating past our site, no eagles investigated our trapping station and we did not capture any eagles. Based on the behavior of migrants, we suspect that most of the eagles we detected in October were intent on migrating and were not searching for food. In October, many eagles migrated along or above (> 6000 feet) the ridges to our north where we could not establish a trapping station. In contrast, many of the eagles we detected in spring exhibited hunting behavior and were often flying at lower elevations. Based on our reconnaissance work in 2014, we will return to this area in March 2015 to establish temporary trapping stations and attempt to capture and radio-tag eagles. Contact: Carol McIntyre, National Park Service, 4175 Geist Road, Fairbanks, AK 99709; Email: Carol_McIntyre@nps.gov OR Stephen B. Lewis, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 3000 Vintage Blvd., Suite 201, Juneau, AK 99801; Email: Steve_B_Lewis@fws.gov Literature cited Knick, S.T., D.S. Dobkin, J.T. Rotenberry, M.A. Schroeder, W.M. Vander Haegen, and C. van

Ripper III. 2003. Teetering on the edge or too late? Conservation and research issues for avifauna of sagebrush habitats. Condor 105: 611-634.

McIntyre, C.L., D.C. Douglas, and M.W. Collopy. 2008. Movements of Golden Eagles from

interior Alaska during their first year of independence. Auk 125: 214-224. McIntyre, C.L., and J.H. Schmidt. 2012. Ecological and environmental correlates of territory

occupancy and breeding performance of migratory Golden Eagles Aquila chrysaetos in interior Alaska. Ibis 154: 124-135.

Miller, T.A., R.P Brooks, M. Lanzone, D. Brandes, J. Cooper, K. O’Malley, C. Maisonneuve, J.

Tremblay, A. Duerr, and T. Katzner. 2014. Assessing risk to birds from industrial wind energy development via paired resource selection models. Conservation Biologist

Millsap, B.A., G.S. Zimmerman, J.R. Sauer, R.M. Nielson, M. Otto, E. Bjerre, and R. Murphy.

2013. Golden eagle population trends in the western United States: 1968-2010. Journal of Wildlife Management 77:1436-1448.

22

Steenhof, K., J.L. Brown, and M.N. Kochert. 2014. Temporal and spatial changes in golden eagle reproduction in relation to increased off highway vehicle activity. DOI- 10.1002/wsb.451: Wildlife Society Bulletin, p. online.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2014. Western Golden Eagle Team, Fiscal Year 2014 Progress

Report. Unpublished report, US Fish and Wildlife Service. Watson, J.W., A.A. Duff, and R.W. Davies. 2014. Home range and resource selection by GPS-

monitored adult Golden Eagles in the Columbia Plateau Ecoregion: implications for wind power development. Journal of Wildlife Management 78: 1012-1021.

ROAD-SYSTEM GROUSE & PTARMIGAN ABUNDANCE SURVEYS, ALASKA, 2014 UPDATE (BCR 4) Richard A. Merizon and Cameron Carroll, Alaska Department of Fish and Game Springtime breeding behavior of many tetraonids allows a means to index annual abundance and the cyclic nature of grouse and ptarmigan populations. In Alaska, male ruffed, sharp-tailed, and sooty grouse, as well as willow and Rock Ptarmigan perform conspicuous, springtime, territorial displays. Male spruce grouse and White-tailed Ptarmigan also perform a springtime display, but one that is not easily located or viewed, making monitoring of population abundance through this behavior more challenging. These 2 species are monitored through wing collections, periodic site visits to areas where fall harvest occurs, and reports from Division of Wildlife Conservation (DWC) biologists, hunters, and outdoor enthusiasts. The spring breeding season for grouse and ptarmigan in Alaska occurs from mid-April through early June. Due to the geography of Alaska, limited road system, poor access off the road system in the spring, and staff limitations, the Small Game Program is restricted to species and areas in which population abundance can be assessed. Therefore, the program has focused on those populations that are either heavily exploited by hunters, within popular outdoor recreational areas, or very close to large urban areas or road-systems, and afford consistent and reliable access from year to year. Survey methods utilized for ruffed and sharp-tailed grouse and willow and Rock Ptarmigan are consistent with state and national techniques. Ruffed grouse, roadside and trail transects were established in Palmer (1992), Anderson (1993), and Delta Junction (2008), -, and surveys have been completed annually since their inception. Sharp-tailed grouse lek surveys were established in the Delta Junction Agricultural Project (DJAP) in 2000; additional leks have been located and monitored since. Sooty grouse observational data were collected for the first time beginning in spring of 2012 and will continue annually. Willow and Rock Ptarmigan survey methods use a broadcasted recording of a territorial male along established transects and record the number of males that respond within ¼ mile. Survey routes have been established along the Denali, Richardson, Parks, and Steese highways as well as locations away from road access in the

23

Alaska Range to begin monitoring less heavily exploited populations. In 2014, additional survey routes were established along the southern Kenai Peninsula and will be continued annually. Based on these surveys it appears that monitored populations are generally abundant and widespread. Interior ruffed grouse populations are increasing in abundance after recording the low in their population cycle in 2010-11. Sharp-tailed grouse populations that breed on the DJAP appear to remain at moderate densities but have been stable since 2009. Willow Ptarmigan populations statewide appear to be growing with the exception of the western Denali Highway. Spring 2014 Rock Ptarmigan breeding densities along the eastern Denali Highway were abundant; however, populations along the Steese Highway were at or near record lows. Contact: Richard A. Merizon, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Wildlife Conservation, 1800 Glenn Hwy, Suite 2, Palmer, AK 99645. Phone: 907.746.6333; E-mail: richard.merizon@alaska.gov OR Cameron Carroll, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Wildlife Conservation, 1300 College road, Fairbanks, AK. 99701. Phone: 907.459.7237; e-mail: Cameron.carroll@alaska.gov Literature Cited Carroll, C. J. and Merizon, R.A. 2014. Status of grouse, ptarmigan, and hare in Alaska, 2014.

Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Wildlife Management Report, ADF&G/DWC/WMR-2014-1. Anchorage.

WILLOW AND ROCK PTARMIGAN DISTRIBUTION AND MOVEMENT STUDIES IN SOUTHCENTRAL AND INTERIOR ALASKA (BCR 4) Alaska Department of Fish and Game Beginning in 2013, the Small Game Program initiated two separate radio collaring projects in Southcentral Alaska. A Willow Ptarmigan project has been documenting movement patterns near the proposed Watana Hydroelectric Project Site in the upper Susitna River basin. A Rock Ptarmigan study has been documenting distribution and movement in game management unit (GMU) 13B near the eastern Denali Highway. The ADF&G and University of Alaska-Fairbanks (UAF) were able to secure financial support through the Alaska Energy Authority to study Willow Ptarmigan distribution and movement near the proposed Watana Hydroelectric site as well as along the road access and transmission corridors. This project could increase access for hunters to an area that is little known relative to its value for Willow Ptarmigan breeding, nesting, brood rearing, or overwintering habitat. Beginning in May 2013, the ADF&G and a graduate student at UAF began capturing and collaring Willow Ptarmigan adults and juveniles. Collared birds have been monitored monthly to determine movement patterns and mortality. This project will continue for 1 additional field season.

24

The ADF&G began radio collaring Rock Ptarmigan in GMU 13B in May 2013 due to concerns over low abundance and hunters desire to extend the season beyond November 30. Capture and collaring locations were planned for the eastern Denali Highway and areas >10 distant from road access. However, due to the late spring in 2013 remote locations were inaccessible until after the breeding season making birds difficult to capture. In spring and summer 2014, a total of 25 collars were deployed and have been monitored bi-monthly documenting movement and mortality of this populations. This project will continue for 2-3 additional years and is expected to better inform future management decisions relative to this population of Rock Ptarmigan. Beginning in spring 2014, a third study was initiated along the Steese Highway examining the Rock Ptarmigan population near Eagle Summit. In May of 2014 staff completed an abundance survey within Robert Weeden’s former study of area from the 1960s and 1970s. Beginning in spring 2015, a more comprehensive study will begin. This study plans to estimate Rock Ptarmigan abundance as well as movement, mortality, and brood production through the use of radio necklace collars (similar to the studies above). Contact: Richard A. Merizon, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Wildlife Conservation, 1800 Glenn Hwy, Suite 2, Palmer, AK 99645. Phone: 907.746.6333; E-mail: richard.merizon@alaska.gov OR Cameron Carroll, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Wildlife Conservation, 1300 College road, Fairbanks, AK. 99701. Phone: 907.459.7237; e-mail: Cameron.carroll@alaska.gov LANDBIRD DISTRIBUTION, ABUNDANCE, AND HABITAT ASSOCIATIONS IN THE PROPOSED SUSITNA-WATANA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT AREA, INTERIOR ALASKA, SUMMARY OF 2013 RESULTS (BCR 4) Terry Schick, River Gates, Nathan Jones, Ashley Hovis, and Tawna Morgan; ABR, Inc.—Environmental Research & Services In 2013, the Alaska Energy Authority initiated a three-year study of the breeding landbirds that occur in the proposed Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project area in the middle and upper Susitna River basin. Two survey methods were employed including ground-based point-count surveys for breeding birds (focusing on landbirds and shorebirds) in all available habitats, and ground-based point-count and transect surveys focused in riverine and lacustrine habitats. The study was designed to provide data on the distribution and abundance and habitat associations for all landbird species, including species of conservation concern. We used a two-stage, stratified random/systematic sampling design, stratifying by vegetation type, to allocate transects (grids) of point-count locations in the study area. The plot allocation procedure mirrors that used by the Alaska Landbird Monitoring Survey (ALMS), but is used at a more localized scale (project level as opposed to state-wide level). ArcGIS Version 10.1 software was used for all plot allocation procedures. Program DISTANCE was used to generate preliminary density estimates for landbird species using the data collected in the first survey year (2013). Point-count Plots

25

Point-count field surveys were conducted following standard protocols for point-count surveys of breeding birds in Alaska (ALMS 2010). At each point-count plot, observers recorded the primary habitat type sampled, adjacent habitat types, and the individual habitat being used by each bird observed whenever possible. Habitat types were defined as the Alaska Vegetation Classification (AVC) Level-III, or Level-IV when possible, vegetation types of Viereck et al. (1992). In 2013, the start date for the field surveys was delayed 8 days because abnormally cold spring weather and deep snowpack in the study area resulted in the late arrival of most migratory birds. We conducted 1,364 point-counts surveys along113 transects in the study area between 23 May and 20 June 2013, for a total of 28 survey days. During the point-count surveys in 2013, researchers recorded 53 landbird species and calculated means of 6.0 ± 2.7 landbird species (range 0–15) and 9.6 ± 4.7 individual landbirds (range 0–52) per point-count plot. Most of the birds observed were assumed to be nesting in the project area, based on observations of nests or repeated observations of display activities, territorial behavior (e.g., singing), or alarm and mobbing reactions typical of nesting birds. Adequate data were available to calculate density estimates for 38 of the 53 (72%) of the landbird species recorded. Using those preliminary density estimates (corrected for detectability), Fox Sparrow was the most abundant species in the project area, followed by White-crowned Sparrow, Yellow-rumped Warbler, Ruby-crowned Kinglet, and Wilson’s Warbler. In contrast, Ruffed Grouse, Spruce Grouse, Alder Flycatcher, Black-billed Magpie, and Rusty Blackbird were all considered rare. Within the project area, Willow Ptarmigan was the most abundant game bird species, outnumbering other ptarmigan and grouse species. Varied Thrush was the most common thrush species, and Fox and White-crowned Sparrows were the most common sparrows in the project area. Ruby-crowned Kinglet (in the Old World warbler family) and Yellow-rumped Warbler were the most common warbler species. Of the two flycatchers, Olive-sided Flycatchers were more common than Alder Flycatchers. Landbirds were observed in each of the 24 habitat types sampled in the project area in 2013, including forests and woodlands; scrub (tall, low, and dwarf types); herbaceous meadows; riverine habitats; and partially vegetated and barren areas at higher elevations. Landbird abundance metrics uncorrected for detectability (average-occurrence values) were highest in Closed Mixed Forests, in which an average occurrence of 13.2 landbirds (of all species) per point-count was recorded (n = 14 plots). Mixed Woodlands, Open Needleleaf Forests, and Needleleaf Woodlands also had relatively high landbird abundance, with total average-occurrence values for landbirds of all species of 11.4, 9.5, and 9.4 (n = 14, 349, and 195 plots), respectively. Landbird species richness was highest in Open Needleleaf Forest and Needleleaf Woodland, in which 37 and 34 landbird species were observed, respectively. Of the individual species, White-crowned Sparrows were observed in the greatest number of habitat types (n = 20). Other common species of landbirds occurred in 13–18 different habitat types, whereas the species observed least frequently occurred in only 1–3 habitats each. Riverine Transects and Point-count Plots

26

Focused surveys in riverine habitats were conducted because riverine habitats are often undersampled in standard point-count surveys. During the riverine-focused surveys, observers walked along transects that followed riverine corridors, generally the larger, named tributary streams to the Susitna River and the Susitna River itself. Point-count plots were interspersed along transects to increase the number of point-counts conducted in riverine habitats. The point-counts and transect surveys in riverine corridors generally were conducted later in the sampling period (15–19 June 2013), after shorefast ice had melted and high water from spring flooding had subsided. In addition to the point-counts conducted in riverine corridors, researchers walked slowly along each stream course as they moved between point-count locations and recorded all birds observed, as well as the AVC Level-III or IV vegetation type being used at the time of observation. Bird activity in riverine waters and along stream shorelines was recorded, as well as activity in riparian and upland habitats when those habitats occurred adjacent to the sampled streams. To provide a standardized relative measure of abundance for all species recorded during the 13 riverine-focused transect surveys, the resulting data are presented as the number of observations of each species per unit time spent in transit (following methods used by Andres et al. 1999 and Boisvert and Schick 2007). In all, 692 individual birds of 44 different species were recorded during the riverine-focused surveys, including 28 landbird, 11 waterbird, 3 shorebird, and 2 raptor species. Means of 12.7 ± 4.5 species (range 7–21) and 53.2 ± 36.6 individual birds (range 7–137) were recorded per transect. Across all 13 transects, a mean of 7.9 landbirds was recorded per hour during the riverine-focused transect surveys. The most common species observed were Blackpoll Warbler, Wilson’s Warbler, Fox Sparrow, and Northern Waterthrush. These four species combined accounted for nearly 43% of all observations during the riverine-focused surveys, and each species individually accounted for at least 5% of all landbird observations. Landbirds were most frequently observed in Open Needleleaf Forest and a variety of riparian shrub habitats adjacent to riverine waterbodies. Lacustrine- focused Surveys As with riverine habitats, focused surveys in lacustrine habitats were conducted because lacustrine habitats also are often undersampled in standard point-count surveys. The lacustrine-focused surveys (n = 59) were transect surveys, which were conducted concurrently with the transect-based point-counts in all available habitats described above. Lacustrine waterbodies were surveyed when a waterbody was located within approximately 250 m of any preselected point-count location in terrestrial habitats. During the lacustrine-focused surveys, researchers walked the perimeter of each waterbody or, for small ponds, selected a vantage point from which the entire waterbody and shoreline were visible. All birds seen or heard using lacustrine habitats and adjacent vegetated habitats were recorded, as was the AVC Level-III or IV vegetation type being used at the time of observation. Overall, 435 individual birds of 50 different species were recorded during the lacustrine-focused surveys, including 21 waterbird, 11 shorebird, and 18 landbird species. Means of 2.9 ± 2.8 species (range 0–13) and 7.5 ± 10.0 individual birds (range 0–46) were recorded per survey, although 10 locations (17%) had zero detections. Waterbirds were the most abundant species

27

group observed, and comprised 55% (n = 235) of all observations. Shorebirds and landbirds were less abundant, accounting for 31% (n = 132) and 15% (n = 63) of all observations, respectively. The most abundant landbirds found near lacustrine waterbodies were American Robin, Rusty Blackbird, Bohemian Waxwing, and Savannah Sparrow, which together comprised almost half of all landbird detections on the lacustrine-focused surveys. Tree Swallows, Violet-Green Swallows, and Bank Swallows comprised 11% of all landbirds observed. Landbirds were generally found in Open Low Shrub, Closed Low Shrub, and in Open Needleleaf Forests near the shorelines of lacustrine waterbodies, but were also found foraging directly along the shorelines of ponds and lakes; swallows were often found foraging in the air directly above waterbodies. In 2014, a second year of surveys was conducted and a final year of surveys will be completed in 2015. A report on the first year of study is located on the project’s website: http://www.susitna-watanahydro.org/type/documents (see Initial Study Report, Study 10.16 Breed, Parts A, B and C). Literature Cited ALMS (Alaska Landbird Monitoring Survey). 2010. Boreal Partners in Flight: Alaska Landbird

Monitoring Survey. Available on-line at http://alaska.usgs.gov/science/biology/bpif/monitor/alms.php#information. Accessed October 2013.

Andres, B. A., D. L. Brann, and B. T. Browne. 1999. Legacy Resource Management Program:

Inventory of breeding birds on local training areas of the Alaska Army National Guard. Final report prepared for Alaska Army National Guard, Fort Richardson, Alaska, by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska.

Boisvert, J. H., and C. T. Schick. 2007. Breeding Bird Surveys, Stewart River Training Area,

Alaska, 2006. Final report prepared for Alaska Army National Guard, Fort Richardson, AK, by ABR, Inc.—Environmental Research & Services, Anchorage, AK.

Viereck, L. A., C. T. Dyrness, A. R. Batten, and K. J. Wenzlick. 1992. The Alaska Vegetation

Classification. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-286. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.

Contact: Terry Schick, ABR, Inc.—Environmental Research & Services; P.O. Box 240268, Anchorage, AK 99524; Phone: 907-344-6777 ext. 202; Email: tschick@abrinc.com

28

DISTRIBUTION, ABUNDANCE AND PRODUCTIVITY OF RAPTORS AT THE PROPOSED SUSITNA-WATANA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT, INTERIOR ALASKA (BCR4) John Shook, Joe Welch, and Robert Ritchie, ABR Inc.-Environmental Research and Services ABR continued to perform helicopter-based occupancy and productivity surveys of cliff- and tree-nesting raptor species (Bald and Golden Eagles, Peregrine Falcon, Gyrfalcon, Rough-legged Hawk, Red-tailed Hawk, Common Raven) for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project. The 2012 and 2013 reports are available to the public on the Susitna-Watana project website: http://www.susitna-watanahydro.org/. This project is scheduled to continue for one more year (2012–2015). Contact: John Shook, ABR Inc., P.O. Box 80410, Fairbanks, AK 99708; E-mail: jshook@abrinc.com DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE OF RAPTORS IN THE UPPER BLACK RIVER, INTERIOR ALASKA (BCR 4) John Shook, and Robert Ritchie, ABR Inc.–Environmental Research and Services ABR performed helicopter-based occupancy surveys of cliff-nesting raptor species (Golden Eagles, Peregrine Falcon, Gyrfalcon, Common Raven) for BLM as part of their on-going monitoring program. This project was only scheduled for one year (2014). Contact: John Shook, ABR Inc., P.O. Box 80410, Fairbanks, AK 99708; E-mail: jshook@abrinc.com POST-CONSTRUCTION MORTALITY MONITORING FOR THE GVEA EVA CREEK WIND PROJECT, INTERIOR ALASKA (BCR 4) John Shook and Robert Ritchie, ABR Inc.–Environmental Research and Services ABR continued to conduct Post-Construction Mortality Monitoring for the GVEA Eva Creek Wind Project, Healy, Alaska. They performed ground-based searches for downed birds and conducted experiments to determine scavenging and searcher efficiency rates. The 2013–2014 report is in preparation. Contact: John Shook, ABR Inc., P.O. Box 80410, Fairbanks, AK 99708; E-mail: jshook@abrinc.com

29

DISTRIBUTION-WIDE INVESTIGATION INTO RESPECTIVE DECLINES OF OLIVE-SIDED FLYCATCHERS AND WESTERN WOOD-PEWEES IN YUKON, CLIMATE AND HABITAT COVARIATES (BCR 4) Tara Stehelin and Fiona K. A. Schmiegelow, University of Alberta @ Yukon College, Whitehorse, Yukon, Canada Birds breeding in northern North America may experience one of the three greatest anthropogenic-caused temperature regime changes in the world. Long-distant and aerial insectivorous birds have been identified as some of the most vulnerable to population decline from climate change and recent habitat loss. Principle objectives of this 5-year study are to 1) determine migratory connection patterns of Olive-sided Flycatchers and Western Wood-Pewees breeding in Yukon, 2) determine if climate and habitat covariates, including changes to fire regime, predict abundance throughout the North American boreal forest using existing extensive data and ongoing modeling efforts of the Boreal Avian Modeling (BAM) project for each species 3) monitor breeding success and phenology on local pairs in s. Yukon of each species in relation to abundance of insects to determine if community mistiming is a potential mechanism for decline. This past year (2014) was the second field season in which breeding pairs were monitored for territory characteristics, breeding phenology and success, and habitat characteristics (including insect abundance) of territories in southern Yukon. Capture and deployment of a small number of geolocators (MigrateTech) for pilot was attempted on Olive-sided Flycatchers but not successful because of logistical challenges and plans were made instead to deploy them next season. Territories of local Olive-sided Flycatchers were large (9.9 ± [SE] 1.3 ha), at mid-high elevation (916 ± 29 m asl, n = 34) and “open”, sometimes in Sub-alpine Fir dominated areas near treeline. Territories of Western Wood-Pewees were smaller (1.2 ± 0.34 ha), at lower elevation (679 ± 24 m asl, n = 18), but also in open areas such as aspen-dominated parkland. Early analyses of historical abundance suggest that Olive-sided Flycatchers may be increasing in Yukon since 1985, while Western Wood-Pewees are in decline, a very different pattern from many other western regions. Early observations of feeding behavior and insect sampling suggest that large insects such as dragonflies (Odonata) may be targeted by Olive-sided Flycatchers, whereas capture was more passive in Western Wood-Pewees and flies (Diptera) were mostly consumed, reflecting availability. Hatch dates coincided with peak insect abundance (Abundance*Weight/Length*Day-1) for Western Wood-Pewees but Olive-sided Flycatchers may have shown a disjunction. Predator-prey modeling efforts currently underway will serve to investigate potential mistiming between bird and insect abundance in Yukon. Results from recent Boreal Avian Modeling project analyses conducted principally by S. Haché (2014) suggest that several climate variables (both local and indexed) and forest characteristics (cover, canopy height, and time since fire) and presence of water bodies consistently predict abundance of Olive-sided Flycatchers across the boreal region. Future modeling efforts will build upon these results and extend analyses to describe Western Wood-Pewee abundance and distribution. Linear disturbance also had a negative influence on the density of Olive-sided Flycatchers but strong evidence of a road-side bias in detection was also found, an interesting result that will be investigated in more detail.

30

This project is ongoing, but completion of objectives outlined here is scheduled for late 2016. I would like to acknowledge Yukon College, Yukon Research Centre at Yukon College, Canadian Circumpolar Institute and the University of Alberta for financial support. Kirsten Scott and several volunteers provided able field assistance in 2014. Yukon College also provided logistical support. Contact: Tara Stehelin, Yukon College, 500 College Drive, Whitehorse, Yukon, Canada, Y1A 5K4. E-mail: tstehelin@yukoncollege.yk.ca BIRDS ‘N’ BOGS CITIZEN SCIENCE PROJECT IN THE ANCHORAGE AND MATANUSKA VALLEY AREAS, ALASKA (4) Dr. Audrey Taylor1, Lindsay Hermanns1, McKenna Hanson1, Nils Warnock2 and Beth Peluso2 1University of Alaska Anchorage, 2Audubon Alaska In the spring of 2014, Audubon Alaska and the Geography and Environmental Studies Department at the University of Alaska Anchorage completed the second field season for our citizen science program called “Birds ‘n’ Bogs.” The goal of this program is to document distribution of boreal birds—primarily Lesser Yellowlegs (Tringa flavipes), Greater Yellowlegs (Tringa melanoleuca), Solitary Sandpiper (Tringa solitaria), Rusty Blackbirds (Euphagus carolinus), Olive-Sided Flycatchers (Contopus cooperi), Tree Swallows (Tachycineta bicolor) and Violet-Green Swallows (Tachycineta thalassina) —in wetland habitats of Anchorage and the Matanuska Valley. This citizen science program represents an important effort because boreal wetland birds are among North America’s most rapidly declining avifauna. The citizen science portion of the projected cooperated with a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) study by reporting resightings of banded Lesser Yellowlegs that nest the Anchorage area. Boreal ecosystems are also disappearing or changing both globally and locally, which in turn can impact the birds that utilize these habitats. Incidental evidence suggests that bog and wetland habitat within the urban Anchorage area is declining due to development. Other threats to boreal wetlands in Southcentral Alaska include extraction and development of oil and gas resources and hydropower development projects such as the Susitna Dam Project. Of additional concern for boreal bird species are the uncertain effects of climate change on breeding habitat and breeding success. The boreal forest in particular is already impacted by higher temperatures, shifting seasons, more frequent and intense forest fires, and insect outbreaks. This program relied on citizen scientists to perform a series of surveys for target species across a set of predetermined wetlands in Anchorage and the Matanuska Valley to monitor distribution and abundance of boreal birds. Our first field season in 2013 established which study sites (from a previous study by Lee Tibbitts, now with the USGS) within the Anchorage area still contained boreal bird habitat and were safely accessible by volunteers. In 2014, thirty-two participants surveyed twenty-four wetlands totaling over eighty-two person-hours. These data were then compiled using ArcGIS to create maps showing locations of the target species through time.

31

Our results showed fewer species in total and fewer individuals of each species observed this year as compared to 2013. There could be multiple reasons for this. Notably, 2014 was characterized by an unusually warm and early spring in Alaska, while the Lower 48 states (through which many boreal species migrate on their way to breeding areas in Alaska) experienced a late, cold spring. Another factor could have been the Funny River Wildfire south of Anchorage, which may have impacted surveying outcomes because of the high levels of smoke in Matanuska Valley area. Lastly, although we recruited more volunteers in 2014 than in 2013, a number of participants elected to survey a single wetland in pairs or groups thus the total number of sites surveyed was fewer in 2014; this may also have been an influential factor in the survey results. We will use this information as a baseline for future surveys, the results of which will enable us to assess preferred wetlands and distribution patterns for each species within the Anchorage Bowl. We are still assessing sites in the Matanuska Valley; habitat in this region is abundant and diverse and would require substantial additional effort to survey as thoroughly as participants accomplished in the Anchorage area. Future efforts will include recruiting more citizen scientists in the Matanuska Valley to expand coverage. A systematic survey of all wetlands in the Matanuska Valley (as was done for Anchorage) would yield valuable data on boreal species in these habitats, which could then be compared over time and with Anchorage data. This survey represented a commendable effort by all participants and we anticipate repeating and expanding the effort in 2015, with the goal of establishing a long-standing monitoring program for declining boreal bird species. Table 1. Total number of target bird species seen and heard in Greater Anchorage and Matanuska Valley wetlands May 10—June 1, 2014. LEYE = Lesser Yellowlegs, GRYE = Greater Yellowlegs, OSFL = Olive-Sided Flycatcher, RUBL = Rusty Blackbird, SOSA = Solitary Sandpiper, TRES = Tree Swallow, and VGSW = Violet-Green Swallow.

Species LEYE GRYE OSFL RUBL SOSA TRES VGSW Early-Early Period (May 10–14) Seen 108+ 47 0 0 0 16 4 Heard 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 Early Period (May 15–20) Seen 47 32 0 3 2 55 39 Heard 18+ 0 0 1 4 0 0 Middle Period (May 21–26) Seen 24 13 0 0 0 80 10 Heard 13 1 0 0 1 0 0 Late Period (May 27–June 1) Seen 47 14 0 3 5 78 49 Heard 6 0 0 7 2 0 2

Contact: Beth Peluso, Communications Manager, Audubon Alaska, 431 West Seventh Avenue, Suite 101, Anchorage, AK 99501. Phone: (907) 276-7034; E-mail: bpeluso@audubon.org; or

32

Dr. Audrey Taylor, Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Alaska Anchorage. Phone: (907) 786-6854; E-mail: artaylor@uaa.alaska.edu INVESTIGATING MIGRATION PATTERNS OF THE RUSTY BLACKBIRD USING LIGHT-LEVEL GEOLOCATORS AND STABLE ISOTOPES (BCR4) David F. Tessler1, Steven M. Matsuoka2, James A. Johnson2, Luke DiCicco2; Carol R. Foss3, Patricia J. Wohner3, and Keith A. Hobson4 1Alaska Department of Fish and Game, 2U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 3New Hampshire Audubon, Canadian Wildlife Service4 We fitted 17 Rusty Blackbirds (Euphagus carolinus) with light-level geolocators in 2009 to track migration between nest sites in Anchorage, Alaska, and wintering grounds in the conterminous United States. We recaptured three of these birds in 2010. Each took similar Central Flyway routes not previously described for this species on both southward and northward migrations, and used a series of stopover sites across the prairie region from southern Saskatchewan to Iowa on their southward migration. Wintering areas spanned South Dakota to northern Louisiana. Upon retrieval, we found the geolocator attachments had loosened and abraded away the surrounding feathers on the three birds. Despite the continuing need to understand migratory connectivity in the context of this species’ decline and the novel results from these birds, the abrasion coupled with the low return rate for instrumented birds (18%) prompted us to curtail geolocator studies until a smaller device and better harness was developed. Since then, improvements have shrunk the total instrument package by 50% to 1.0g (1.7% of blackbird mass), and added a degree of harness elasticity with a much finer material. In 2014 we deployed 10 geolocators on adult rusty blackbirds at nest sites in Anchorage, Alaska, and 11 geolocators on breeding blackbirds in Wentworth, New Hampshire. We are pairing the geolocator movement study with concurrent analyses of stable isotope (deuterium and oxygen) signatures from feathers grown in wintering grounds following prealternate molt. We will use geolocator data to calibrate isotopic signatures of feathers collected during the recapture year and will compare those to isotopic signatures from feathers collected at deployment to determine if birds wintered in the same locations in both years. This project is funded by the ADF&G Wildlife Diversity Program, USFWS Migratory Bird Management, and New Hampshire Audubon. Contact: David F. Tessler , USFWS Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office 300 Ala Moana Blvd., Suite 3-122 Honolulu, HI 96850 Phone: 808-792-9471 Email: david_tessler@fws.gov

33

LANDBIRD MONITORING UPDATE FROM WILDLIFE DIVERSITY PROGRAM, ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME, SOUTHCENTRAL AND INTERIOR REGIONS (BCR 4) David Tessler, Wildlife Diversity Program, Alaska Department of Fish and Game In June of 2014 we repeated two Alaska Landbird Monitoring Survey (ALMS) plots in Denali State Park along Kesugi Ridge and in Chugach State Park beyond Crow Pass. We also repeated five Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) routes on state lands adjacent to the Lake Louise Road, and the Glenn Highway near Sheep Mountain, along the Petersville Road, near Trappers Creek, along Burma Road near Goose Bay, and along Nancy Lakes and Hatcher Pass Roads in Willow. We intend to continue monitoring these sites and include one or two additional ALMS inventory locations per year. This project is funded by the ADF&G Wildlife Diversity Program. Contact: David F. Tessler, USFWS Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office 300 Ala Moana Blvd., Suite 3-122 Honolulu, HI 96850 Phone: 808-792-9471 Email: david_tessler@fws.gov REVEALING THE MIGRATORY PATH, WINTERING AREA, AND BREEDING HABITS OF OLIVE-SIDED FLYCATCHERS: FIRST RESULTS FOR ALASKA (BCR 4, 5)

Julie C. Hagelin1, James A. Johnson2, Steve Matsuoka2, Lucas H. DeCicco2, Nicholas R. Hajdukovich2 and Aleya R. Brinkman3 1Alaska Department of Fish and Game, 2Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 3Center for Environmental Management of Military Lands Overview: In 2013 we began a multi-year study of Olive-sided Flycatchers (Contopus cooperi) in Interior and south-central Alaska. We are using geolocators to identify key migratory corridors, stopover sites, and wintering areas for conservation efforts. Other research goals include: (1) characterizing nest chronology and success, (2) sampling aerial insects at breeding sites, as food availability is hypothesized to limit reproductive success (Altman and Sallabanks 2012), and (3) re-surveying historical breeding sites from Wright (1997) to document any changes in bird occupancy. Summary of geolocator efforts: We recaptured 3 of 4 males in Anchorage that had been fitted with geolocators in 2013. A 75% return rate for Anchorage was: (1) higher than in Fairbanks, where, for unknown reasons, no birds with geolocators returned (2 females, 2 males), and (2) higher than a previously reported estimate of 60%, based on 14 color-banded adults in Interior Alaska (Wright 1997). Recaptured birds had minor abrasions along their legs and feathers, but did not appear to be hindered or otherwise injured by the harness and geolocators. We fitted an additional 27 adults with geolocators in 2014 and look forward to comparing migration between Olive-sided Flycatchers nesting in Interior versus south central Alaska.

34

Preliminary assessment of data from the three geolocators recovered in Anchorage suggests that birds undertook a clockwise, oval-shaped, migration. In fall, birds migrated inland and down the east side of the Rocky Mountains and then on to wintering areas in Colombia. In spring, birds migrated along the west coast of North America back to Alaska. Recent analyses of eBird data suggest that this clock-wise, “looped migration” is common among many species of North America songbirds, and is associated with seasonal shifts in the availability of favorable winds (eastern and central flyways) or foods (western flyway, La Sorte et al. 2014a, b). Nest chronology: Table 1 summarizes nest data for both seasons by location. Nesting in Anchorage preceded Fairbanks by ~7–10 days for the past two seasons (Table 1). Nest chronology for Fairbanks fell within previously-reported ranges (Wright 1997). However, we suspect that late snow in spring 2013 and record rainfall during summer 2014 may have delayed breeding of Interior birds compared to Anchorage. Nest success by location: Over the past two seasons, 6 of 9 nests (66%) fledged at least one nestling in Fairbanks, compared to 5 of 8 nests (63%) in Anchorage (Table 1). One nest in Fairbanks force fledged in 2014, and we observed parents feed two chicks on the ground over a 4-day period. We noted some differences in Fairbanks nest success between the 2013 and 2014 seasons. During 2013, all four nests fledged successfully. However, in 2014 only two of five nests fledged. Three nests were depredated when chicks were ~1 week old. Given record rainfall in 2014 and reduced aerial insects in our traps (see below), we speculate that parents may have foraged away from the nest relatively frequently. Gray Jays (Perisoreus canadensis), a common nest predator, were also noted on Fairbanks breeding territories more often in 2014 than in 2013. State of Alaska Veterinarian, Dr. Kimberlee Beckmenn, conducted necropsies of 6 chicks from two nest sites (three chicks were recovered within 24hrs of death). Death of all nestlings appeared to result from head trauma similar to pecking. Chick otherwise appeared healthy and well-developed for their age. Historical site surveys, and insect data: We conducted a second season of 10-minute point counts at nine historical breeding areas in the Fairbanks area, previously studied by Wright (1997). The survey yielded no singing males, identical to 2013. Our protocol maintained a high detection probability (> 90% per point), given detection distances and singing rates reported in Wright (1997). Surveys were repeated once per week over the three week period of peak male singing and included five points per site. We estimate that our method covered a listening area of ~987 ha per site. As in 2013, we collected aerial insects with hanging malaise traps at both active and historical nest locations. Preliminary results suggest that biomass of aerial insects was noticeably reduced in Fairbanks during 2014. This probably reflects record rainfall, which may have reduced aerial insect activity or abundance. In 2014 we deployed pollinator traps in Fairbanks and Anchorage to better characterize insects that were not well represented in 2013 malaise traps (bumblebees, yellow jackets, butterflies). University of Alaska, Fairbanks Insect Collection (D. Sikes) is presently identifying our samples from both trap types.

35

Table 1: Nesting chronology of Olive-sided Flycatchers in Anchorage (n=4 nests in 2013, n= 4 nests in 2014) and Fairbanks (n=4 nests in 2013, n=5 nests in 2014). Nest Chronology

Mean Date (range)

2013 2014 Location First egg laid 3 June (28 May–14 June*) 5 June (28 May*–8 June) Anchorage 13 June (05*–18June) 12 June (01*–21* June) Fairbanks Clutch size 4.3 eggs (4–5) 4 eggs Anchorage 3 eggs (2–4) 3.4 eggs (3–4) Fairbanks Hatching 22 June (16 June–3 July) 17 June (12–17 June) Anchorage 30 June (22 June*–4 July*) 29 June (20June*–6 July*) Fairbanks Fledging 12 July (6–21 July) 5 July (1–5 July) Anchorage 20 July (12 July*–24 July) 17 July (9*–25* July) Fairbanks

*Date back-calculated based on other data, such as number of eggs in nest, estimated chick age (per Jongsomjit et al. 2007), fledge date, etc. Literature cited: Altman, B. and R. Sallabanks. 2012. Olive-sided Flycatcher (Contopus cooperi), The Birds of

North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/502

La Sorte, F. A., D. Fink, W. M. Hochachka, J. P. DeLong, and S. Kelling. 2014a. Spring

phenology of ecological productivity contributes to the use of looped migration strategies by birds. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 281: 20140984.

La Sorte, F. A., D. Fink, W. M. Hochachka, A. Farnsworth, A. D. Rodewald, K. V. Rosenberg,

B. L. Sullivan, D. W. Winkler, C. Wood, and S. Kelling. 2014b. The role of atmospheric conditions in the seasonal dynamics of North American migration flyways. Journal of Biogeography 41:1685–1696.

Jongsomjit, D., S. L. Jones, T. Gardali, G. R. Geupel, P. J. Gouse. 2007. A guide to nestling

development and aging in altricial passerines. Biological Technical Publication BTP-R6008-2007. U.S. Fish and Wildllife Service, Shepherdstown, West Virginia.

Wright, J. M. 1997. Olive-sided Flycatchers in central Alaska, 1994-1996. Final Rep. Proj. SE-3-

4. Alaska Dept. Fish and Game. Fed. Aid in Wildl. Restoration, Juneau, AK. Retrieved online: http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=librarypublications.swg

Contact: Julie C. Hagelin, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, 1300 College Rd., Fairbanks, AK 99701. Phone: (907) 459-7239; E-mail: julie.hagelin@alaska.gov

36

TONGASS RUFOUS HUMMINGBIRD PROJECT 2014 SEASON (BCR 5) Gwen Baluss and Cheryl Carrothers, U.S. Forest Service Alaska Region The Rufous Hummingbird (RUHU) breeding range is tied to northwestern temperate forests. The species has been identified by Partners in Flight as a priority for monitoring, research and management in Bird Conservation Region 5. Recent data from the Breeding Bird Survey and Alaska Landbird Monitoring System suggest possible population decline. Hummingbirds, as pollinators may be ecologically important to their habitat. Information about habitat and phenology could aid in designing forest restoration projects. The species, being both a long distance migrant and a nectivore, is intimately tied to plant phenology and thus could serve as an indicator of climate change. Because hummingbirds are conspicuous and watched by the public, research is aided by citizen science efforts and conservation education projects can easily be designed focusing on hummingbirds. Yet much remains to be learned about RUHU habits in Alaska. In 2014 we repeated effort initiated in 2013 banding hummingbirds adapting protocols developed by Rocky Point Bird Observatory (http://www.rpbo.org/hummingbirds.php) and the Hummingbird Monitoring Network (http://hummonnet.org) to Alaska's logistical challenges. We banded at two sites near Juneau Alaska: Jensen-Olson Arboretum (JOAR) and Juneau Community Garden (JCGA). Effort was repeated as close as possible to the dates and times in 2014. Sites were generally run on consecutive or within two days apart to allow comparison between the two sites. In total we safely banded 128 hummingbirds: 14 adult males 12 adult females, 7 hatch year males, and 4 hatch year females at JCGA; and 25 adult males, 45 adult females, 14 hatch year males and 7 hatch year females at JOAR. We recaptured 2 males and 5 females between the two stations ( about 7% of adults) and had one foreign capture, an adult female, at the JCGA that had been banded the previous year about ¾ mile away. There were only 6 within-season recaptures, suggesting that hummingbirds may be more numerous and transient on the breeding grounds than would be assumed with visual counts. By banding at regular intervals we documented a general outline of the season. Using the birds caught per trap hour as a relative index of abundance for adult abundance (Fig. 1) we can see that: males peaked early in the season and were sparse by early July (due to migration). Females peaked in May and June and continued to be captured until 17 July.The first young of the year were observed in late June, and we started capturing them on 1 July. Given the approximate number of days from egg to fledging in the literature (about 26 days ), this result suggests that 1) most successfully nesting females began incubating in the first 3 weeks of June and 2) double clutching is highly unlikely in this region. Young birds were observed through early Aug, but the last young birds were captured on 27 July. Morphometric data will be further examined and compared with hummingbird banding sites throughout the RUHU range. Parasites were collected for further classification.

37

We hope to repeat at least a portion of this banding effort to determine the level of inter annual variation, and to learn if the differences in gender ratio between sites will be consistent even with greater sample size and further standardization of variables such as weather. We also solicited RUHU foraging observations of hummingbirds from birdwatchers and citizen scientists in Southeast Alaska. While these reports and anecdotal and do not provide quantitative information, the information is a first step in better understanding habitat needs for hummingbirds in Alaska. Results are tabulated below (Table 1). Contact: Gwen Baluss, Juneau Ranger District, 8510 Mendenhall Loop Rd., Juneau AK 99801 Phone: (907) 789-6222 E-mail: gbaluss@fs.fed.us

Figure 1. 2014 captures of adult Rufous Hummingbirds per trap hour by date Table 1. Summary of plant use observations for Rufous Hummingbird in Southeast Alaska. Plant (Genus) Forage Use Blueberry (Vaccinium ) Nectar Fireweed (Epilobium ) Nectar Salmonberry (Rubus ) Nectar False Azalea (Menziesia) Nectar Paintbrush (Castilleja) Nectar Columbine (Aquilegia) Nectar Willows (Salix) Insect gleaning, sapsucker wells Sitka Alder (Alnus) Insect gleaning, sapsucker wells Kneeling Angelica (Angelica) Insect gleaning Western hemlock (Tsuga) Sapsucker wells

00.20.40.60.8

11.2

4/23 5/4 5/18 6/15 7/10 7/17 7/27

Male

Female

JUNEAU COMMUNITY GARDEN

0

2

4

6

4/22 5/5 5/19 6/2 6/16 7/4 7/15 7/28

Male

Female

JENSEN-OLSON ARBORETUM

38

2014 LANDBIRD UPDATE FROM THE TONGASS NATIONAL FOREST (BCR 5) Melissa Cady, Brian Logan, Cheryl Carrothers, Gwen Baluss, and Susan Oehlers, U.S. Forest Service Monitoring: BBS Routes USFS personnel continued to count routes at Yakutat, Mitkof Island, Stikine, Prince of Wales Island and Hyder. USFS coordinates when requested with volunteers, other agencies and non-profits for the remaining routes within Southeast Alaska. Alaska Landbird Monitoring Survey (ALMS) This was the twelfth year of successfully implementing the ALMS protocol. The USFS continues to be a leader in this statewide effort. Ten ALMS blocks were planned this year on the TNF as a whole. All grids were successfully accessed with point counts at most accessible points. Site localities included: Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Rangers District (RD), Gravina Island; Wrangell RD, Zarembo Island and Cleveland Peninsula; Thorne Bay RD, North Prince of Wales Island and Kosciusko Island; Petersburg RD, Mitkof Island; Juneau RD, Skagway River, Lemon Creek and Taku River alpine sites, and Admiralty Island. Record rainfall for Southeast Alaska in June (weather minimums apply to survey protocol) limited the number of survey days. Two full-time technicians, two biologists and staff from five Ranger Districts contributed. Additionally, three community volunteers and a University of Alaska student volunteer assisted as field partners. A total of 4 weeks were contributed by volunteers. All GPS points were collated into a GIS map to assist with re-locating the points in future years and conducting landscape level analysis. Photographs are also on file for each point. Point count data was compiled, entered into a Microsoft Access Database designed specifically for this project, and was sent to the USGS Alaska Science Center for data management and analysis. Education/Outreach: Juneau 4th Grade “Bio Blitz”. USFS Region 10 provided birding taxon leaders who compiled date, and aided students with bird field identification, use of binoculars and guides. International Migratory Bird Day: Juneau Ranger District offered songbird banding demonstration and bird walks in partnership with Juneau Audubon Society. Yakutat Tern Festival: The fourth annual tern festival was held on June 5-8, 2014. Initiated in 2011, the mission of the festival is “to highlight the extraordinary natural and cultural resources of Yakutat and to stimulate the local economy by hosting a festival celebrating Aleutian Terns.” In collaboration with multiple partners, a wide variety of activities were offered during the 2014 festival. Four full days of youth activities included a variety of art programs with artist Evon Zerbetz and photographer Doug Gayeton, story hour, field trips, native dance and language, mist-netting and bird banding, and Juneau Raptor Center presentations. Heather Renner, a

39

seabird biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge, delivered the keynote speech, and assisted with adult and youth field trips. Stikine River Birding Festival, Wrangell: Wrangell Ranger District contributes to the event annually to celebrate spring migration, and the local and international importance of the Stikine River Delta to people and wildlife. Alaska Hummingbird Festival, Ketchikan: Ketchikan and the USFS Southeast Alaska Discovery Center host this annual a month-long celebration with bird-themed activities that include guided bird hikes, a juried art contest, film presentations, arts and crafts workshops, and kids’ programs. Angoon School District Environment Education Program: The fourth annual event included songbird banding demonstrations open to by every student and teacher in Angoon. Materials were provided to interested teachers to include for their science curricula. Prince of Wales Island Education Programs: Forest Service personnel delivered wildlife talks and led bird walks for students, teachers, cub scouts, and other groups on Prince of Wales Island. Outfitter and Guide Fee Enhancement Program: Classes for outfitters and guides, including instruction on bird identification and accommodating birders were provided in Sitka and Juneau this year. Crystal Lake Day Camp, Juneau: Summer nature camp for school-aged kids features bird identification activities including bird banding demonstration. Mendenhall Glacier Visitor Center Fireside Lecture Series: Two presentations on Alaska’s hummingbirds by Tongass National Forest Biologist Brian Logan and Wildlife Technician Gwen Baluss. Cheryl Carrothers presented Hummingbirds of Alaska to USFS Washington Office personnel, a summary of results and other highlights from 2013 hummingbird banding projects in Juneau and Cordova. Contact: Cheryl Carrothers, Regional, Regional Wildlife Program Leader, Forest Service, 709 W. 9th Street, P.O. Box 21628, Juneau, AK 99802; Phone: (907) 586-7905; E-mail: ccarrothers@fs.fed.us _____________________________________________________________________________________ 2014 LANDBIRD UPDATE FROM THE CHUGACH NATIONAL FOREST (BCR 5) Jessica Ilse, Melissa Gabrielson, Erin Cooper, and Matt Moran, U.S. Forest Service Monitoring BBS Routes (Seward Ranger District)

40

The Hope Breeding Bird Survey route #216 was completed on the Kenai Peninsula and route #50 was completed on the Cordova RD. Alaska Landbird Monitoring Survey (ALMS) This was the 10th year of implementing this point count protocol on the Chugach NF. Two ALMS blocks were surveyed in 2014 on the Cordova Ranger District. Locations included the Alaganik and Okalee Blocks. All grids were successfully accessed and surveyed. Two full-time technicians and one biologist from the Cordova Ranger District contributed. All GPS points are stored in a database to assist with re-locating points in future years. Point count data was compiled, entered into a database and sent to the USGS Alaska Science Center for further data management and analysis. Education / Outreach International Migratory Bird Day Personnel staffed a booth to teach Binoculars 101 and how to identify birds by sounds at Potter’s Marsh during Potter’s Marsh Discovery Days. The presentations introduced youth to the basics of birding and using binoculars. Approximately 1,200 people attended, the vast majority was urban youth. Easter Birding Staff taught youth and adults about springtime migration, and how to identify migratory and resident birds by sight and sound. The presentation helped to educate forest users about the importance of our forest habitats to a wide variety of migratory birds and to increase their knowledge and enjoyment of birds so they will support migratory bird conservation. Approximately 100 people attended, of which about 70 were elementary school children. The program was conducted in partnership with the Alaska Wildlife Conservation Center at their new boardwalk. Cordova Community Owl Project: Determining Presence and Distribution of Nocturnal Owls in Southeast Prince William Sound A total of 60 points were monitored from April 7 – May 6, 2014. Ten owl detections were logged, with 3 different species represented: Western Screech Owl (n=6), Northern Saw-whet Owl (n=3), and Great Horned Owl (n=1). No Barred Owls were detected. Twenty percent of detections (2) occurred March 24-April 6, 2014. Forty percent (4) of the detections were observed during April 7- April 21, and 40% (4) of the detections were documented April 22 – May 6. Owls were detected along all three routes. Seven of the 10 detections occurred on the Copper River Highway route, followed by 2 detections on the Power Creek Road route, and 1 detection on the Whitshed/Orca route. Twenty percent of owls were detected during the silent listening period, with the remainder being detected during the broadcast portion. Additionally, 8 of 10 owl detections occurred within the time period of 1-2 hours after sunset. Two of ten were detected in the period of 2-3 hours after sunset. The Cordova Community Owl Project was not only designed to obtain owl occupancy and distribution data, but also to engage the local community in citizen science. An outreach campaign was launched to create community excitement regarding owl conservation and information, as well as to recruit volunteers interested in participating in owl surveys. Outreach included a community lecture, which was attended by approximately 25 adults and high school students. Ten local residents participated as surveyors. All volunteers completed a training

41

session on how to identify owl calls and were accompanied on each run by the survey coordinator. Volunteers were provided with recordings of calls from target owl species, along with calls of other nocturnal avian species commonly heard on the Cordova Ranger District. Contact: Mary Anne Benoit, Zone Wildlife Biologist, Chugach NF, Seward Ranger District, PO Box 390, Seward, AK 99664 Phone (907) 288-7747 Email: mbenoit@fs.fed.us OR Erin Cooper, Prince William Sound Zone Terrestrial Staff, US Forest Service, 612 2nd St, Cordova, AK 99574-0280; Phone: (907) 424-4757; E-mail: ecooper@fs.fed.us OR Melissa Gabrielson, Prince William Sound Zone Wildlife Biologist, US Forest Service, 612 2nd St, Cordova, AK 99574-0280; Phone: (907) 424-4743; E-mail: melissalgabrielson@fs.fed.us ______________________________________________________________________________ AN ASSESSMENT OF PERCH USE AND POSSIBLE IMPACTS OF PROPOSED HAINES HIGHWAY REALIGNMENTS ON BALD EAGLES DURING FALL AND WINTER, CHILKAT RIVER (BCR5) John Shook, Robert Ritchie and Sally Andersen, ABR Inc.–Environmental Research and Services ABR investigated the Bald Eagle roosting and perching habitats within the Haines Highway corridor that may be affected by the highway improvement project. Highway sections where the most common perch trees (riparian black cottonwood) occurred and Bald Eagles have been known to congregate (Council Grounds) during fall and winter were emphasized. Objectives included providing DOT&PF assistance in determining the level of impacts the project might have on these resources, as well as offering recommendations for design modifications to offset potential impacts. Contact: John Shook, ABR Inc., P.O. Box 80410, Fairbanks, AK 99708; E-mail: jshook@abrinc.com ALASKAN BEAK DEFORMITIES (STATEWIDE) Colleen M. Handel, Caroline Van Hemert, Lisa M. Pajot, and Rachel Richardson, USGS Alaska Science Center An epidemic of beak deformities in Black-capped Chickadees (Poecile atricapillus), Northwestern Crows (Corvus caurinus), and other primarily resident species has been documented in Alaska over the past decade. Our recent research on what we have termed ‘avian keratin disorder’ has focused on (1) determining the cause of this abnormal condition, (2) monitoring the temporal and spatial occurrence of this disorder, and (3) determining the

42

population-level consequences of beak deformities in terms of reproduction and survival. We just completed an assessment of environmental contaminants and found no evidence that selenium or any other inorganic element was responsible for beak deformities in chickadees, although we did find elevated levels of chromosomal damage in affected birds that was suggestive of toxic exposure to organochlorine compounds (Handel and Van Hemert, in press). We are currently collaborating with scientists at the California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco State University, and University of Minnesota to test for viruses as a possible causative agent. In another collaborative study, we found that melanin-based coloration of feathers in chickadees affected by the disorder was compromised, most likely explained by changes in feather microstructure (D’Alba et al. 2014). We are currently analyzing behavioral data collected with video cameras at nest boxes to quantify how such a physical handicap influences reproductive fitness in affected chickadees. A long-term mark-recapture study is ongoing to monitor prevalence of the disorder in chickadees in south-central Alaska and to quantify effects on survival. Contact: Colleen Handel, USGS Alaska Science Center, 4210 University Drive, Anchorage, AK 99508. Phone: 907-786-7181. Email: cmhandel@usgs.gov Literature cited: D’Alba, L., C. Van Hemert, K. A. Spencer, B. J. Heidinger, L. Gill, N. P. Evans, P. Monaghan,

C. M. Handel, and M. D. Shawkey. 2014. Melanin-based color of plumage: Role of condition and feathers’ microstructure. Integrative and Comparative Biology 54:633–644.

Handel, C. M., and C. Van Hemert. In press. Environmental contaminants and chromosomal

damage associated with beak deformities in a resident North American passerine. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry.

STATEWIDE HUNTER HARVESTED GROUSE AND PTARMIGAN WING COLLECTION PROGRAM, ALASKA, 2014 UPDATE (BCR 1-5) Alaska Department of Fish and Game In August 2011, the statewide Small Game Program within the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) initiated a voluntary statewide wing collection program from harvested grouse and ptarmigan. During the 2013 regulatory year (RY; July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014) hunters provided wings from 41 ruffed, 241 spruce, 24 sharp-tailed, and 9 sooty grouse in addition to 688 willow, 70 rock, and 57 White-tailed Ptarmigan wings statewide (Carroll and Merizon 2014). Samples were collected from 17 of the 26 game management units statewide including the Alaska Peninsula, Northwest, Southwest, and Southeast Alaska, and most of the road system from the Dalton Highway to Homer. Wing donations allow managers to better understand the harvest composition of exploited populations of tetraonids. Specifically, they allow an estimation of sex ratios, juvenile

43

production, and harvest distribution. We were also able to test an alternative means of estimating sex among Willow Ptarmigan using only a wing when the whole carcass was unavailable. This program will continue and is a permanent portion of the ADF&G Small Game Program. The ADF&G provides individual wing envelopes and free return options to encourage participation. Through September 2014 hunters have provided over 200 samples statewide. Contact: Richard A. Merizon, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Wildlife Conservation, 1800 Glenn Hwy, Suite 2, Palmer, AK 99645. Phone: 907.746.6333; E-mail: richard.merizon@alaska.gov OR Cameron Carroll, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Wildlife Conservation, 1300 College road, Fairbanks, AK. 99701. Phone: 907.459.7237; e-mail: Cameron.carroll@alaska.gov IDENTIFYING IMPORTANT BIRD AREAS ACROSS ALASKA

Melanie Smith and Nathan Walker, Audubon Alaska Audubon Alaska continued work to identify Important Bird Areas (IBAs) throughout the state. We compiled a composite Alaska Waterbird Database (Walker and Smith 2014) of primarily land and coast aerial surveys from agencies and other researchers around the state, including over 1 million bird locations recorded to species. Our work to identify marine IBAs using at-sea survey data was published in the April issue of Biological Conservation (Smith et al. 2014). Following that, we applied similar methods to identify additional IBAs in nearshore and interior areas, which are currently being nominated for global recognition through BirdLife International. These include ten new and six revised interior IBAs, with a total of over half a million birds. These IBAs identify important breeding and molting areas for 28 different waterfowl and shorebird species meeting the criteria for globally significant populations, including watch-listed bird species such as Spectacled Eiders, Yellow-billed loons, and Bar-tailed Godwits. The new and revised IBAs will facilitate further science and policy work across the state, and will create new opportunities for educational work communicating the importance of these places for Alaska’s birds. The latest map of IBAs can be found at: http://ak.audubon.org/sites/default/files/documents/alaska_ibas_ecoregions_20aug2014.pdf. Contact: Melanie Smith, Director of Conservation Science, Audubon Alaska, 431 West 7th Avenue, Suite 101, Anchorage, AK 99501; Phone: (907) 276-7034; E-mail: masmith@audubon.org Literature cited: Smith, M. A., N. J. Walker, C. M. Free, M. J. Kirchhoff, G. S. Drew, N. Warnock, and I. J.

Stenhouse. 2014. Identifying marine Important Bird Areas using at-sea survey data. Biological Conservation 172:180-189.

44

Walker, N. J., and M. A. Smith, 2014. Alaska Waterbird Database v1. Audubon Alaska, Anchorage, AK.

BLOOD PARASITES IN LANDBIRD HOSTS IN ALASKA

Caroline Van Hemert and Colleen Handel, USGS Alaska Science Center; Rick Merizon, Alaska Department of Fish and Game Prevalence and distribution of parasites in avian hosts are influenced by a variety of factors, including local environmental and climatic conditions. Vector-borne pathogens are especially responsive to temperature fluctuations and therefore provide useful models for the study of climate–pathogen interactions. The prevalence and distribution of avian blood parasites, for which blackflies, biting midges, and mosquitoes serve as vectors, are projected to expand in response to warmer temperatures and vegetation changes in Arctic and subarctic regions. However, limited information is available for Alaskan landbirds. We are conducting several studies on the prevalence, distribution, diversity, and fitness effects of blood parasites in avian hosts:

1) Passerines, Seward Peninsula: The Seward Peninsula occupies a key transitional zone between Arctic and boreal environments and is undergoing rapid ecological change associated with climate warming. Between 2012 and 2014 we collected blood samples from 750 individuals of 27 species, including trans-Beringian migrants. This study will allow us to evaluate relationships between habitat, host factors, and rates of infection and to evaluate patterns of local transmission in a changing Arctic environment. In addition, we will describe parasite diversity across a suite of passerine species with diverse migratory patterns.

2) Grouse and ptarmigan, statewide: In collaboration with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, we are analyzing muscle samples from hunter-shot specimens for blood parasites. As year-round residents, grouse and ptarmigan provide a useful model for investigating parasite diversity in Alaska. In addition, the widespread distribution of the sample collection, ranging from coastal rainforests of southeast Alaska to the Arctic coast, offers a broad latitudinal gradient across which to investigate geographic patterns of parasite distribution.

3) Black-capped Chickadees, southcentral Alaska: Little is known about the relationship

between blood parasite infection and other measures of health status in wild birds. In combination with ongoing research on beak deformities in Alaskan birds, we are investigating blood parasites in potentially immune-compromised individuals. Birds with avian keratin disorder exhibit reduced fitness and may be less resistant to other pathogens and parasites. Identifying the prevalence, seasonality, and immune response in affected and unaffected birds will provide insights about the link between individual host condition and parasite infection. Results from previous molecular analyses demonstrated that chickadees with beak deformities have higher rates of infection with Plasmodium

45

(avian malaria). Current research includes assessment of individual immune response and seasonal patterns of infection using microscopy and quantitative PCR.

Contact: Caroline Van Hemert, U.S. Geological Survey Alaska Science Center, 4210 University Drive, Anchorage, AK 99508. Phone: (907)786-7167; E-mail: cvanhemert@usgs.gov 2014 UPDATE ON THE ALASKA LANDBIRD MONITORING SURVEY (STATEWIDE) Colleen M. Handel, USGS Alaska Science Center, and multiple collaborators from Boreal Partners in Flight During 2014, biologists conducted surveys at 444 points in 27 sampling blocks statewide during the 12th year of the Alaska Landbird Monitoring Survey (ALMS) program. Survey effort has been fairly consistent over the years, with a mean annual effort of 520 points across 33 blocks since the inception of the program (Fig. 1). The current survey effort, however, is only about 60% of the target monitoring level of 50 blocks per year, or a total of 100 blocks repeated biennially. The ALMS program uses standardized distance-sampling techniques to survey breeding bird populations at 12–25 points within 10-km x 10-km blocks selected using a stratified random design of accessible areas across Alaska. The main purpose of the survey is to monitor long-term population trends of birds (primarily landbirds) in off-road areas as a complement to the roadside North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS). Biologists are also encouraged to use the same sampling grids and standardized survey techniques to gather systematic inventory data. Surveys conducted through ALMS and the roadside BBS now provide an impressive compilation of quantitative data on the abundance and distribution of birds throughout Alaska (Fig. 2). As of 2014, observers have conducted 6,243 ALMS surveys in 102 different blocks at 1,825 different points, with varying numbers of replications during the 11-year period (Fig. 3). Combined, surveys from ALMS and its predecessor, the Off-road Breeding Bird Survey, have documented about 200,000 detections of birds since 1993. We published a new analytical method to account for different aspects of detection probability (availability of birds to be detected during a 10-min point count and perceptibility of birds that are available for detection) when estimating densities of birds from ALMS and similar surveys (Amundson et al. 2014). Preliminary results from population trend analysis of roadside BBS and off-road ALMS data in Alaska were presented at the 2014 joint meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union, Cooper Ornithological Society, and Society of Canadian Ornithologists in Estes Park, CO, and at the Alaska Bird Conference in Juneau, AK (Handel et al. 2014). Highlights of this analysis indicated that: (1) we cannot rely on BBS results from current continental analyses, restricted to southern Canada and southward, to tell us reliably what's happening with Alaska populations, (2) our BBS and ALMS data are often but not always concordant, emphasizing the need to do off-road surveys, (3) BBS and ALMS results can be combined in many cases to increase our power to estimate Alaska population trends, and (4) we desperately need more, and more consistent, ALMS data from interior Alaska to tell us what is

46

happening with populations there, especially for species associated with wetlands and predominantly coniferous habitats. ALMS protocols are currently being peer-reviewed for incorporation into standardized monitoring programs for the network of National Wildlife Refuges across Alaska, and such implementation would help fulfill this geographic void. ALMS data are continuing to be analyzed in concert with avian point count data across boreal regions of Canada as part of the Boreal Avian Modelling project to project changes in distribution of landbirds that are likely to occur with changes in climate. ALMS data collected across Tongass National Forest are currently being analyzed to determine recent population trends, assess the effectiveness of monitoring Management Indicator Species, and document current patterns of landbird distribution relative to forest structure and management. ALMS data collected on Alaska Peninsula/Becharof NWR are also being analyzed with similar point-count data from an inventory of montane-nesting birds across three National Parks in the Southwest Alaska Network to develop regional landscape-level models of avian distribution. Literature cited: Amundson, C. L., J. A. Royle, and C. M. Handel. 2014. A hierarchical model combining

distance sampling and time removal to estimate detection probability during avian point counts. The Auk 131:476–494.

Handel, C. M., J. R. Sauer, C. L. Amundson, and S. M. Matsuoka. 2014. Hierarchical analysis of

Breeding Bird Survey data from roadside and remote areas to estimate population trends in Alaska. Presented at 2014 Joint Meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union, Cooper Ornithological Society, and Society of Canadian Ornithologists, 23-28 September 2014, Estes Park, CO.

Contact: Colleen Handel, USGS Alaska Science Center, 4210 University Drive, Anchorage, AK

99508. Phone: 907-786-7181. E-mail: cmhandel@usgs.gov

0

10

20

30

40

50

5 N Pacific

4 Interior

3 Arctic

2 Western

1 Bering Sea Is

47

Fig. 1. Number of ALMS blocks surveyed each year within the five Bird Conservation Regions in Alaska between 2003 and 2014.

Fig. 2. Locations of landbird surveys conducted as part of the roadside Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) and Alaska Landbird Monitoring Survey (ALMS) in Alaska through 2014.

Fig. 3. Number of ALMS blocks that have been surveyed 1–11 years between 2003 and 2014. The standard protocol is to replicate each block biennially (e.g., 5 times over a 10-year period), but some surveys have been replicated annually. Most blocks replicated during a single year represent those surveyed for inventory rather than monitoring purposes.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

# years replicated

BBS

ALMS

Num

ber

of A

LM

S su

rvey

blo

cks

48

NORTH AMERICAN BREEDING BIRD SURVEY, ALASKA 2013 UPDATE Boreal Partners in Flight The North America Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) is the longest running omnibus survey of breeding birds in Alaska. This program became operational in Alaska in 1982 and a decade later underwent a considerable expansion due to participation by the members of Boreal Partners in Flight (Fig. 1). The BBS website (Sauer et al. 2014) currently has information available on numbers of routes run up to 2013 (Fig. 1). Through the dedication of many observers, the program has now run 81 routes for ≥10 years and 33 routes for ≥20 years. Thirteen routes have been run for ≥25 years: Circle, Craig, Ketchikan, Hatcher Pass (25 years), Toklat , Zimovia Strait (26 years), Juneau, Kachemak (27 years), Seven Lakes (28 years), Anchor River, Galena (29 years), Little Salcha (30 years), and Swan Lake Road (32 consecutive years!). In 2013, BBS surveys were conducted on 59 routes, the fewest in Alaska since 1993 and well below the state-wide average of 73 routes per year since 1993 (Fig. 1). A big priority in 2015 will be to increase the statewide effort back to the 20-year average. The long-term effort in Alaska provides trends in abundance for more than 100 species breeding in Alaska. These trends are available on BBS website (http://www.pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs/results/) for the period 1980–2007 for Alaska and for the period 1966–2012 for Canada (Sauer et al. 2014, Environment Canada 2014; Table 1). The Alaska trends have not been recently updated. However, Colleen Handel is currently working with John Sauer to jointly estimate trends using the combination of data from the BBS and the Alaska Landbird Monitoring Surveys.

49

Fig. 1. Annual number of routes (y-axis) surveyed in Alaska as part of the BBS, 1968–2013. Reference line is the mean number of routes surveyed 1992–2013 ( =x 73 routes). Five species showed significant populations declines and 11 species significant population increases (P ≤ 0.15, Table 1). Declining birds include three Neotropical migrants and 2 temperate migrants: Common Merganser (-5.7% per year), Violet-green Swallow (-3.3% per year), Blackpoll Warbler (-3.0%), Lesser Yellowlegs (-2.0%), and Savannah Sparrow (-0.7%). The trends of the latter three species mirrored the survey-wide trends. The cause of these declines should be the focus of research or conservation, which might take advantage of broader initiatives focused on conserving declining aerial insectivores (Nebel et al. 2010, Shutler et al. 2012), boreal wetland birds (Austin et al. 2000, Greenberg et al. 2011), or South American migrants (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2007). The list of birds with increasing trends only includes one Neotropical migrant (Northern Waterthrush) with the remaining species either residents or temperate migrants (Table 2). In 2015, we hope to run a minimum of 70 routes and collect GPS locations for all count stops. The latter should be submitted to the national office along with the count data. The former will include filling route vacancies (http://www.pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs/results/routemaps/index.cfm). Contact: Steven M. Matsuoka, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Migratory Bird Management, 1011 E. Tudor Rd., ms 201, Anchorage, AK 99503. Phone: 907-786-3853; E-mail: steve_matsuoka@fws.gov Literature Cited:

50

Austin, J. E ., A. D. Afton, M. G. Anderson, R. G. Clark, C. M. Custer, J. S. Lawrence, J. B.

Pollard, and J. K. Ringelman. 2000. Declining scaup populations: issues, hypotheses, and research needs. Wildlife Society Bulletin 28:254–263.

Environment Canada, 2014. North American Breeding Bird Survey - Canadian Trends Website,

Data-version 2012. Environment Canada, Gatineau, Quebec. Greenberg, R., D. W. Demarest, S. M. Matsuoka, C. Mettke-Hofmann, M. L. Avery, P. J.

Blancher, D. Evers, P. B. Hamel, K. A. Hobson, J. Luscier, D. K. Niven, L. L. Powell, and D. Shaw. 2011. Understanding declines in Rusty Blackbirds. Studies in Avian Biology 41:107–125.

Nebel, S., A. Mills, J. D. McCracken, and P. D. Taylor. 2010. Declines of aerial insectivores in

North America follow a geographic gradient. Avian Conservation and Ecology 5(2): 1. [online] Available at http://www.ace-eco.org/vol5/iss2/art1.

Sauer, J. R., J. E. Hines, J. E. Fallon, K. L. Pardieck, D. J. Ziolkowski, Jr., and W. A. Link. 2014.

The North American Breeding Bird Survey, Results and Analysis 1966–2012, Version 07.03.2014. USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, Maryland. [online] Available at http://www.mbr-pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs.

Sauer, J. R., AND W. A. Link. 2011. Analysis of the North American Breeding Bird Survey

using hierarchical models. Auk 128:87–98. Shutler, D., D. J. T. Hussell, D. R. Norris, D. W. Winkler, R. J. Robertson, F. Bonier, W. B.

Rendell, M. Bélisle, R. G. Clark, R. D. Dawson, N. T. Wheelwright, M. P. Lombardo, P. A. Thorpe, M. A. Truan, R. Walsh, M. L. Leonard, A. G. Horn, C. M. Vleck, D. Vleck, A. P. Rose, L. A. Whittingham, P. O. Dunn, K. A. Hobson and M. T. Stanback. 2012. Spatiotemporal patterns in nest box occupancy by Tree Swallows across North America. Avian Conservation and Ecology 7(1):3. [online] Available at http://www.ace-eco.org/vol7/iss1/art3.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. A Conservation Action Plan for the Cerulean Warbler

(Dendroica cerulea). Revised 30 June 2007. [online] Available at http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Management/FocalSpecies/Plans/CeruleanWarbler.pdf.

51

Table 1. Trends in avian abundance (% change per year) for 108 species estimated from the North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS). Analyses differed with route regression used in Alaska and hierarchical Bayesian models used for the Canada-wide data (Environment Canada 2014). Survey-wide trends do not use data from Alaska and northern portions of Canadian provinces because the data are too sparse or do not include the long-term period of analysis.

Alaska BBS Survey-wide BBS (Canada)

1980–2007 1970–2012 Trends 2002–2012 Trends Species Trend P N R.A. Trend 95% CI N Trend 95% CI Canada Goose -0.6 0.89 42 2.70 * 10.2 (8.3, 12.3) 613 6.6 (-2.4, 20.2) American Wigeon 1.4 0.36 45 5.17 * -3.0 (-6.5, -0.4) 263 0.5 (-7.5, 9.9) Mallard 4.8 0.28 47 1.44 * -1.2 (-2.2, -0.4) 658 -0.6 (-2.7, 2.2) Northern Shoveler 2.8 0.60 17 0.59 * 2.0 (0.5, 3.6) 239 9.4 (2.3, 15.4) Northern Pintail 3.9 0.35 27 2.46 * -3.8 (-6.7, 8.3) 231 3.1 (-11.8, 18.6) Green-winged Teal 5.1 0.28 40 2.13 * 0.3 (-1.3, 2.1) 276 -0.2 (-6.2, 5.7) Ring-necked Duck 38.3 0.14 10 0.11 3.2 (1, 5.1) 244 4.3 (-2.5, 16.1) Lesser Scaup 3.3 0.55 15 0.44 * -1.3 (-4.7, 1.1) 244 8.5 (2.5, 16) Bufflehead 2.9 0.69 16 0.55 * 3.0 (0.8, 4.9) 175 3.4 (-5.3, 14.7) Common Goldeneye -5.7 0.31 18 0.51 * 0.2 (-1.7, 1.8) 249 2.6 (-3.4, 21.9) Barrow's Goldeneye 4.3 0.17 10 0.60 -0.4 (-3.5, 2) 62 -1.0 (-5.4, 3.7) Common Merganser -6.1 0.15 24 0.21 * 0.2 (-1.4, 1.7) 307 -0.1 (-3.2, 3.1) Red-breasted Merganser 0.1 0.96 19 4.04 * 3.6 (-1.8, 10.6) 25 -1.8 (-16.2, 22.8) Ring-necked Pheasant 14.9 0.04 2 0.41 -0.4 (-1.9, 1.9) 223 0.5 (-3.1, 5.2) Ruffed Grouse 3.7 0.75 9 0.16 0.1 (-1.8, 1.8) 508 -0.8 (-5.6, 4.1) Sooty Grouse -1.6 0.90 11 2.36 -1.9 (-3.7, -0.1) 49 -1.9 (-5.7, 1.9) Common Loon 0.7 0.67 28 0.26 * 1.2 (0.2, 1.9) 548 1.5 (-1.3, 5.4) Horned Grebe 8.0 0.24 9 0.11 -1.9 (-4.1, -0.1) 146 1.2 (-3.5, 7.4) Red-necked Grebe -0.5 0.90 24 0.42 * 0.9 (-0.7, 3) 138 4.9 (0.8, 11.9) Pelagic Cormorant -6.4 0.75 4 0.36 -3.3 (-8.9, 2.8) 6 -2.8 (-11.6, 14.2) Great Blue Heron -4.3 0.32 8 0.66 -0.9 (-1.7, -0.1) 569 -0.1 (-1.8, 1.9) Bald Eagle 5.1 0.03 51 1.35 * 3.3 (2, 4.7) 165 4.2 (0.3, 10.4) Northern Harrier 10.7 0.07 9 0.06 -2.2 (-2.9, -1.5) 495 -1.2 (-2.8, 0.6) Sharp-shinned Hawk 14.1 0.14 5 0.02 1.8 (-0.2, 3.7) 98 2.0 (-2.2, 5.5) Northern Goshawk 7.7 0.18 6 0.02 -1.4 (-5.2, 2.7) 25 -0.8 (-8.3, 8.9) Red-tailed Hawk -0.5 0.93 22 0.12 * 0.8 (0.2, 1.3) 572 0.5 (-0.7, 1.7) Golden Eagle 10.2 0.50 6 0.05 2.4 (-3.3, 8) 14 3.8 (-5.5, 13.7) American Kestrel 15.5 0.10 5 0.04 -1.6 (-2.2, -0.7) 618 -1.9 (-3.5, -0.1) Merlin 7.6 0.12 12 0.06 3.1 (1.7, 4.4) 364 3.6 (-0.4, 8.6) Sandhill Crane 1.4 0.58 37 1.41 * 5.7 (3.4, 7.9) 181 8.9 (1.9, 25) Killdeer 2.9 0.19 2 0.05 -3.2 (-3.7, -2.8) 698 -1.2 (-2.4, 0) Spotted Sandpiper -0.7 0.82 46 2.28 * -1.6 (-2.4, -0.6) 582 -2.8 (-6, 0) Solitary Sandpiper -3.1 0.18 27 0.57 * 0.7 (-3.1, 3.5) 68 1.3 (-4.9, 8.6) Greater Yellowlegs 1.1 0.70 38 1.40 * 1.9 (-1.1, 4.5) 61 2.1 (-4.1, 8.4) Lesser Yellowlegs -2.0 0.11 45 2.34 * -3.9 (-5.9, -1.8) 117 -0.3 (-6.4, 8.5) Upland Sandpiper -11.4 0.00 6 0.09 -0.6 (-2.8, 0.9) 238 1.8 (-0.7, 5.3) Wilson's Snipe 1.7 0.07 88 9.83 * 1.1 (0.4, 1.7) 732 1.0 (-1.6, 4.6) Herring Gull -2.3 0.58 26 0.61 * -3.5 (-6.6, -0.4) 303 -0.4 (-5.7, 7.1) Glaucous-winged Gull -0.8 0.90 36 8.27 * 0.7 (-2.6, 3.9) 26 0.3 (-7.1, 5.6) Rock Pigeon 13.7 0.03 4 3.03 0.1 (-1.4, 1.5) 545 1.1 (-2.6, 5.2) Great Horned Owl 11.1 0.25 15 0.13 * -2.3 (-3.7, -1.1) 277 -2.0 (-6.3, 2.8) Short-eared Owl 13.8 0.34 8 0.14 -5.2 (-9.2, -1.1) 73 0.4 (-14.9, 22.7) Rufous Hummingbird 2.7 0.51 18 2.18 * -1.9 (-2.7, -1) 130 -1.6 (-3.1, 0.2) Belted Kingfisher -2.3 0.32 38 0.45 * -1.5 (-2.1, -0.9) 515 -1.1 (-4, 4.5) Red-breasted Sapsucker 6.6 0.00 17 10.29 * -0.1 (-4.1, 1.9) 71 0.7 (-3.1, 5) Downy Woodpecker 19.0 0.29 19 0.06 0.7 (0, 1.4) 596 0.5 (-2.1, 2.6) Hairy Woodpecker 1.0 0.71 30 0.20 * 1.7 (1, 2.3) 678 1.8 (0.4, 3.3) Am. Three-toed Woodpecker -3.5 0.43 16 0.09 3.3 (-8.7, 9.4) 57 3.1 (-4.2, 13.4) Northern Flicker 0.8 0.78 41 0.34 * -0.4 (-0.7, 0) 817 -0.1 (-2, 1.7) Olive-sided Flycatcher -1.0 0.46 56 1.50 * -3.4 (-4.4, -2.4) 465 -3.0 (-5.1, -0.4) Western Wood-Pewee -0.4 0.94 25 0.46 * -2.1 (-3, -1.1) 274 -1.0 (-2.8, 1.4) Yellow-bellied Flycatcher 51.8 0.28 5 0.09 3.0 (1.4, 4.7) 270 3.3 (0.3, 7.2) Alder Flycatcher 0.0 0.96 79 17.94 * -1.0 (-1.6, 0.3) 723 -1.0 (-6, 4)

52

Alaska BBS Survey-wide BBS (Canada)

1980–2007 1970–2012 Trends 2002–2012 Trends Species Trend P N R.A. Trend 95% CI N Trend 95% CI Least Flycatcher 24.0 0.58 3 0.03 -1.6 (-2.1, -1.1) 770 -1.9 (-2.9, -0.8) Hammond's Flycatcher -0.9 0.77 23 2.04 * 1.4 (0.2, 3.7) 125 1.6 (-1.8, 8.4) Pacific-slope Flycatcher 1.1 0.60 16 16.45 * 0.4 (-1, 2) 94 0.0 (-4.2, 4.1) Say's Phoebe 3.6 0.76 10 0.11 3.3 (0.4, 5.7) 43 1.5 (-2.4, 5.5) Warbling Vireo 10.9 0.31 5 0.84 0.8 (-0.1, 2) 561 0.8 (-0.5, 2.9) Gray Jay 1.7 0.01 57 5.07 * -0.4 (-1.9, 0.9) 388 0.1 (-2.6, 3.5) Steller's Jay 0.2 0.88 24 3.90 * 0.3 (-0.9, 1.6) 92 0.0 (-2.9, 2.5) Black-billed Magpie 1.4 0.27 32 0.90 * -0.2 (-0.6, 0.3) 310 0.0 (-1, 1) Northwestern Crow 4.8 0.00 22 17.00 * 0.6 (-0.6, 1.8) 39 0.1 (-3, 2) Common Raven 2.9 0.13 100 4.39 * 3.1 (2.4, 3.8) 759 3.5 (1.9, 5.7) Horned Lark 12.2 0.04 4 0.14 -4.5 (-5.3, -3.7) 339 -2.5 (-4.7, -0.3) Tree Swallow 2.7 0.36 69 4.55 * -1.4 (-2, -0.8) 785 0.3 (-1.8, 3.8) Violet-green Swallow -3.3 0.10 43 1.06 * 0.1 (-1.3, 1.5) 110 0.7 (-1.9, 3.6) Bank Swallow 5.8 0.05 44 10.67 * -6.9 (-8.6, -4.4) 479 -4.0 (-9.2, 2.5) Cliff Swallow 0.6 0.86 30 3.17 * -1.1 (-4.9, 1.9) 546 -3.7 (-11.9, 2.4) Barn Swallow 0.1 0.99 12 1.12 -3.7 (-4.2, -3.4) 754 -1.9 (-2.8, -0.8) Black-capped Chickadee -0.1 0.95 56 0.96 * 0.9 (0, 1.5) 743 1.6 (0.4, 2.9) Chestnut-backed Chickadee 0.1 0.96 20 8.17 * -2.2 (-4, -0.6) 69 -2.4 (-6.7, 1.2) Boreal Chickadee 0.3 0.88 52 0.80 * 1.4 (-0.6, 3.5) 267 -0.4 (-6.6, 5.7) Red-breasted Nuthatch 19.7 0.23 19 0.08 2.9 (2.1, 3.7) 644 2.0 (0, 4.1) Brown Creeper 13.6 0.23 16 0.58 * 0.8 (-0.8, 2.2) 251 1.7 (-1.2, 4.3) Pacific Wren -0.7 0.31 23 17.18 * -1.6 (-3.6, -0.3) 120 -6.2 (-8.8, -3.5) American Dipper -26.0 0.12 4 0.02 -1.4 (-5.7, 2.4) 22 -1.5 (-10.8, 5.9) Golden-crowned Kinglet -1.2 0.52 33 1.83 * 0.7 (-0.4, 1.9) 466 0.2 (-3.8, 3.9) Ruby-crowned Kinglet 0.1 0.90 77 6.11 * 0.3 (-0.5, 1.4) 579 3.6 (-0.1, 9.2) Townsend's Solitaire 29.9 0.35 9 0.14 -1.6 (-2.9, -0.2) 82 -1.0 (-4.7, 3.3) Swainson's Thrush 0.5 0.37 82 25.42 * -0.6 (-1.4, 0.1) 641 1.7 (-0.5, 8.1) Hermit Thrush 0.2 0.75 69 6.09 * 1.5 (0.4, 2.5) 641 -0.2 (-2.6, 2.5) American Robin 1.3 0.06 100 19.51 * 0.1 (-0.1, 0.3) 870 0.4 (-0.4, 1.5) Varied Thrush 0.8 0.33 89 11.81 * -0.3 (-2.3, 3.4) 143 2.1 (-1.2, 8.4) European Starling -5.1 0.79 4 0.71 -2.5 (-3.2, -1.9) 705 -0.8 (-2.2, 1) Northern Waterthrush 2.0 0.01 72 12.37 * 1.0 (0.2, 2.4) 561 4.4 (1, 9.9) Orange-crowned Warbler -0.4 0.48 93 17.07 * 0.6 (-0.6, 2.7) 250 -0.3 (-3.4, 2.9) MacGillivray's Warbler -11.4 0.39 5 1.16 -1.2 (-2.6, -0.3) 132 -2.1 (-4.2, -0.2) Common Yellowthroat 9.9 0.01 8 0.07 -1.1 (-1.7, -0.6) 811 0.3 (-0.4, 1.1) American Redstart 14.9 0.19 3 0.45 -0.1 (-1, 2) 626 0.4 (-2.5, 3.3) Yellow Warbler -0.8 0.39 95 10.51 * -0.5 (-1.1, -0.1) 795 1.1 (-0.7, 4.5) Blackpoll Warbler -3.0 0.00 56 5.94 * -5.2 (-9.1, -1.1) 135 -1.4 (-14.4, 10.5) Yellow-rumped Warbler 0.1 0.84 82 14.02 * 1.1 (-0.9, 2.3) 667 0.2 (-1.7, 2.2) Townsend's Warbler 0.7 0.80 40 2.95 * -0.6 (-2.7, 0.7) 123 -0.8 (-3.4, 2.1) Wilson's Warbler 0.9 0.30 90 15.30 * -0.5 (-3.1, 2.5) 387 1.1 (-2.5, 4.6) Chipping Sparrow -6.2 0.35 13 0.30 -0.7 (-1.7, -0.2) 803 -2.3 (-5.3, -0.8) Savannah Sparrow -0.7 0.10 77 21.21 * -1.4 (-1.9, -0.9) 710 -1.3 (-19.9, 4.9) Fox Sparrow 2.9 0.00 95 15.59 * -0.3 (-4.9, 3.8) 143 6.8 (0.7, 15.8) Song Sparrow 0.2 0.94 31 1.02 * -1.1 (-1.6, -0.7) 793 0.0 (-0.8, 0.6) Lincoln's Sparrow 3.3 0.05 71 3.01 * -0.2 (-1.4, 0.8) 488 -0.7 (-2.7, 1.7) White-crowned Sparrow -0.5 0.49 79 28.32 * -0.9 (-4.7, 1.8) 124 4.3 (-3.9, 29.9) Dark-eyed Junco 0.0 0.94 84 23.22 * -0.8 (-1.7, 0.3) 582 0.3 (-2.1, 4) Western Tanager -12.5 0.21 5 0.31 1.2 (0.6, 1.9) 185 0.6 (-1.5, 2.3) Red-winged Blackbird -2.4 0.73 9 0.09 -1.1 (-1.5, -0.7) 786 0.9 (-0.3, 3.2) Rusty Blackbird -2.4 0.59 28 0.82 * -6.3 (-8.7, -3.8) 121 -1.1 (-7.7, 6.6) Pine Grosbeak 1.5 0.57 40 0.43 * 0.8 (-4, 5.2) 124 -1.7 (-7.6, 6.1) Red Crossbill 1.3 0.69 16 6.30 * 2.4 (-0.6, 5.8) 195 1.7 (-6.9, 11.6) White-winged Crossbill 4.2 0.18 49 3.27 * 3.4 (-2.5, 7.6) 265 10.6 (-2, 30.5) Pine Siskin -2.1 0.19 43 2.56 * -0.6 (-2.2, 1.5) 574 3.9 (-3.4, 11.1)

1 Asterisk denotes trend estimates from Alaska that have reasonable credibility due to adequate numbers of species detections (≥0.1 birds per route) and numbers of routes with species occurrence (≥14 routes, Sauer et al. 2012). N is number of routes with species detections; R.A. is average abundance per route; 95% CI is the credible interval.