Short-eared Owl (Asio flammeus) Surveys in the North American Intermountain West: An Innovative Approach using Citizen Science to Conduct Long-term Monitoring
Robert A. Miller Intermountain Bird ObservatoryNeil Paprocki Hawkwatch InternationalMatt Stuber U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceColleen Moulton Idaho Department of Fish and GameJay D. Carlisle Intermountain Bird Observatory
SEOW Problem Statement (Booms et al. 2014)
Status: Long-term, range-wide, substantial decline
Weight of evidence convincing
Magnitude unclear
Better survey information needed
Conservation Priorities
Better define & protect important habitats
Improve population monitoring
Better understanding owl movements
Re-evaluate NatureServe conservation designations
Classify raptors as Migratory Birds in Canada
Develop management plans and tools
The Idaho Bird Conservation Partnership (IBCP): A Coordination Point for Bird
Conservation in Idaho
Jay Carlisle, Coordinator
IBCP is designed to contribute to the management, science delivery, outreach, and conservation of birds and their habitats in Idaho.
Initial IBCP SEOW ObjectivesPerform baseline population assessment of SEOW within the
state of Idaho
Identify abundance, distribution, and habitat associations
Develop long-term monitoring program to evaluate trends in the population
Do it inexpensively (no dedicated funding available)
Expanded Scope• Trial surveys extended into Utah by Hawkwatch
International (to expand in 2016)
• Analysis expanded to accommodate state-level stratification to provide an example of a west-wide or range-wide monitoring solution
Why Citizen ScienceLarge networks of willing volunteers
East-Cascade Audubon has successfully utilized for general winter raptor surveys
Intermountain Bird Observatory has used citizen science successfully on other projects – e.g., White-faced Ibis
Protocol is within reach of citizen scientistsRoad surveys, single species, low investment per survey, charismatic
Protocol: Larson and Holt 2014
Broad geography necessitates geographically dispersed team
Inexpensive, but definitely not free
Survey Selection Process10km by 10km grid across region
Stratify by assumed SEOW habitat
Landfire Data - Shrubland, Grassland, and Agriculture
70% of grid must fall with stratified habitat
Evaluated selection with historical eBird data
Result:
628 grids in Idaho ~ 5,589,200ha
529 grids in Utah ~ 4,549,400ha
Perform Spatially Balanced Draw of survey grids (GRTS) within each state
Visually inspect for presence of secondary roads
Idaho: 628 Suitable Grids Utah: 529 Suitable Grids
ExampleSpatially
Balanced Draw(GRTS)
100 Grids
Survey ProtocolRoad survey protocol – Owl Research Institute (Larson and Holt 2014)
Volunteer chooses own route (within guidelines)
2 visits – one in March, one in April
90 minute survey approaching civil twilight
8 to 11 points separated by 800m along secondary roads
5 minute, minute-by-minute protocol
Basic habitat assessment
Wiggins et al. 2006
Sampled Area – 1km radius ~ 1750ha
AnalysesMulti-scale occupancy models (Nichols et al. 2008, Pavlacky et al. 2012)
Imperfect detection, “replacement” design
p – probability of detection1
ϴ - probability that point is occupied given grid is occupied
Ψ – probability that grid is occupied
Multi-scale abundance models (Chandler et al. 2011, Sparks et al. In Review)
Modified, open population, N-mixture model w/ Poisson distribution. Imperfect detection, “removal” design
p – probability of detection1
Φ – availability/coverage probability (bird’s territory overlaps sampling unit)
Λ – abundance1 Different definitions
VariablesOccupancy/Abundance
GIS Data
Availability
Surveyor collected
Detection
Surveyor collected
State Stratum1
% Sagebrush w/in 1km
% Steppe w/in 1km
% Grassland w/in 1km
% Cropland w/in 1km
% Savanna w/in 1km
% Scrubland w/in 1km
% Shrubland w/in 1km
% Ruderal w/in 1km
% Shrub
% Grass
% Marsh
% Ag Green
% Ag Dirt
% Ag Stubble
% Ag Fallow
minutes before civil twilight
day-of-year
wind
temperature
1 Included in all models (no selection)
Model SelectionWe used a sequential, parameter-wise model
building (Lebreton et al. 1992, Doherty et al. 2010)
We ranked models using AIC (Burnham and
Anderson 2002).
The result is a single best model for occupancy and a single best model for abundance (i.e., no model averaging).
2015 Results128 volunteers participated!
1477 volunteer hours
17,900 volunteer miles travelled
Volunteer value: $37,500!
75 grids surveyed in Idaho (71 surveyed twice)
SEOW detected on:
21 grids round one, 26 grids in round two, 27 grids total.
9 grids surveyed in Utah (9 surveyed twice)
SEOW detected on:
0 grids round one, 1 grid in round two, 1 grid total.
Multi-scale OccupancyTop Model:
Ψ(~State) ϴ(~fallow + dirt) p(~day-of-year)
Estimate 95% CI
Ψ 0.36 0.26 – 0.47
ϴ 0.140.11 – 0.18
p 0.490.43 – 0.56
p – Day-of-Year
ϴ - Fallow Agriculture
ϴ - Plowed Dirt Agriculture
Multi-scale AbundanceTop Model:
Λ(~ LFsavanna + State) Φ(~fallow) p(~time)
Estimate95% CI
ΨIdaho 0.93 0.59 – 2.08
ΨUtah 0.46 0.33 – 1.33
Φ 0.100.06 – 0.16
p 0.250.14 – 0.42
p – Time (minutes before civil twilight)
Φ – Fallow Ag Cover
Ψ – Savanna
Abundance – State Stratum [w/ 80% CI]
Potential Sources of Bias
Survey timing of second visit too late – possibly counted offspring instead of only adults (bias ▲)
Volunteer skill (bias ▲)
Routes chosen in best habitat within grids (bias ▲)
Survey on roads versus random on landscape (bias ▲▼)
Birds detected > 1km (bias ▲)
Suitable habitat not included in stratum (bias ▼)
Abundance model uses Poisson distribution even though data is zero-inflated and over-dispersed (bias ▲▼)
First-year Learnings
Indications suggest that most volunteer quality met or exceeded professionals
Coordination effort higher than expected
Non-connected volunteers required significantly more investment
It worked!
Birders and birding groups are awesome!
Adjustments Going ForwardContinue to scale multi-state solution
Secure funding for 2016 and beyond (survey design, layout, coordination, analysis)
Refine habitat model
Move surveys earlier to avoid sampling family groups
Consider single visit survey structure (power analysis)
Assign survey routes / points (GPS)
Increase base technical requirements of volunteers (GPS/Smart phone, online data entry)
FundingLocal grant applications in Idaho and Utah for 2016
Pursuing State Wildlife Grant funding for 2017+
Lead: Pacific Flyway Nongame Technical Committee (Colleen Moulton [Idaho Dept. F & G])
Interest: Central Flyway Nongame Technical Committee
General Structure:
Centrally managed: survey design, recruiting materials, training materials, GIS, data entry portal, analysis, and reporting.
State managed: volunteer recruiting and coordination
ConclusionsEffectively deployed first multi-state survey of
Short-eared Owls utilizing citizen-science volunteers
Established initial population estimates for Idaho and Utah to provide baseline for future monitoring
Habitat associations may require refinement
Overall project design and quality exceeded expectations and will only require minor modifications going forward
Acknowledgements - Volunteer AffiliationsBirding/Nature GroupsAmerican Birding AssociationGolden Eagle Audubon SocietyIdaho Birders Linked Electronically (email)Idaho Birding (Facebook)Idaho Master NaturalistsIdaho Master Naturalists - McCall Chap.Idaho Master Naturalists - Upper Snake Chap.National Audubon SocietyPortneuf Valley Audubon SocietyPrairie Falcon Audubon ChapterSnake River Audubon SocietySouthwest Idaho Birders
Idaho StateIdaho Department of Fish and GameIdaho Department of Parks and RecreationIdaho Museum of Natural History
Non-Profit OrganizationsBoise State UniversityFriends of Deer Flat Wildlife RefugeHawkWatch InternationalIdaho Bird Conservation PartnershipIntermountain Bird Observatory
Federal Agencies/TribesBLM - Bruneau Field OfficeBLM - Owyhee Field Office Gonzales-Stoller SurveillanceIdaho National LaboratoryNational Park Service – City of RocksShoshone Bannock TribesUS Fish and Wildlife ServiceUS Forest Service Sawtooth NF
AcknowledgementsCitizen Science Volunteers!
Travis Booms - Motivation, consultation, linkages
Matt Larson, Denver Holt, Owl Research Institute - Protocol, reviews, consultation, illustration
Rob Sparks, David Pavlacky (Bird Conservancy of the Rockies) – statistical consultation
Agency partners: Idaho Department of Fish and Game and US Fish and Wildlife Service
2015 Funding (in-kind): Intermountain Bird Observatory and Hawkwatch International
Photographs: Zak Pohlen, Shae Warnick, Don Weber, Sherri Weber, Paul Bannick, Rob Miller, Neil Paprocki
Top Related