Geology topics

Ian P. Riley

Publications and source records attributed to Ian P. Riley.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2021

Aural and visual detection of greater sage-grouse leks: Implications for population trend estimates

Counts of greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ) at leks have been used in harvest management, Endangered Species Act listing decisions, and land management policies for over half a century. Lek count sampling methods focus on counting male sage-grouse at known leks, primarily those observed visually from roads or vantage points, but leks are likely missed that are unknown prior to the survey and are difficult to detect while driving between known lek sites. One way to ameliorate this shortfall may be to conduct short point-count surveys at multiple stops along lek-survey routes or while driving between lek counts, thereby detecting newly established or unknown leks. To evaluate the feasibility of this approach, we estimated aural and visual detection probability of active sage-grouse leks during 1-minute point-count surveys at known distances and examined the effects of environmental factors on aural lek detection in southern Idaho, USA, 2016–2017. Our results demonstrate that field observers can aurally detect sage-grouse leks at approximately 3 times greater distances compared to detecting leks visually. The probability of hearing an active lek was highest near the peak of male and female attendance (8 Apr), within an hour of sunrise, on relatively calm and cold days, when the observer was at a higher elevation relative to the lek, and during conditions with no background noise. Detection probability declined with distance and the probability of aural detection was 0.59 at 1 km from a lek when other variables were held at their means. Hence, conducting ≥3 1-minute surveys along a lek route would be expected to detect ≥93% of all leks within 1.5 km of each survey under the average environmental conditions in our study. Our results suggest that surveys could greatly improve detection of unknown or newly established leks and can facilitate a more accurate assessment of sage-grouse population trends through lek counts. Moreover, our results demonstrate how environmental factors influence the detection of leks during surveys, and therefore which variables should be considered for inclusion in any future revisions of lek count protocols or in analyses of lek count data.

Idaho↗

USGS2021

Survival of greater Sage-Grouse broods: Survey method affects disturbance and age-specific detection probability

Investigators rely on brood surveys to estimate annual fecundity of game birds. However, investigators often do not account for factors that influence brood detection probability nor rarely document how much females and their broods are disturbed (flush rates) during surveys, which could lead to biased survival estimates. We used 45 radio-tagged female Greater Sage-Grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ) with broods to compare detection probabilities and document disturbance among four survey methods to allow future investigators to select the method that best meets their objectives. These methods included daytime flush, daytime visual, nocturnal spotlight, and fecal surveys at nocturnal roost sites, with the latter being a novel method. We used Cormack–Jolly–Seber (CJS) models to compare detection probability and daily survival estimates for visual and fecal surveys of broods 0–47 d post-hatch and a double-survey approach to compare detection probabilities among flush, fecal, and spotlight surveys ~42 d post-hatch when investigators often determine brood fate. From CJS models, detection probability for visual surveys increased with brood age (0.618–0.881), whereas detection probability for fecal surveys did not (0.748). Daily survival probability estimates increased with brood age and differed annually based on fecal surveys (2016: 0.978–1.000 and 2017: 0.839–0.998). We detected age-specific daily survival probability with visual surveys (0.956–0.997), but not annual differences. Based on the double-survey approach, detection probability was high (0.857–1.000) for all methods. We flushed ~310–750% fewer females and broods during fecal and spotlight surveys than during both types of daytime surveys. Our results highlight the need to account for detection probabilities among methods and document disturbance to hens and broods that can help investigators design surveys to minimize impacts to birds. Furthermore, our result suggest that actions to improve brood survival during the first week post-hatch may improve local recruitment.

Journal of Field Ornithology↗

USGS2020

Methods for estimating vital rates of greater sage-grouse broods: A review

Biologists use a variety of methods to estimate productivity and resource selection of birds. The effectiveness and suitability of each method depends on the study's objectives, but is also influenced by many important traits, including detection probability, disturbance of focal birds and sampling frequency. We reviewed 504 greater sage-grouse Centrocercus urophasianus papers published from 1990 to 2019 to document the most common brood survey methods used by investigators and summarized if and how they used brood survey data to estimate brood survival and detection probability. Of the 504 papers, 16.1% (n = 81) had useful information relevant to the review. The most common methods included daytime visual surveys (46.9%; n = 38), daytime flush surveys (33.3%; n = 27), nocturnal spotlight surveys (19.8%; n = 16), radio-tagged chicks (16.0%; n = 13), wing surveys (9.9%; n = 8), brood routes (4.9%; n = 4) and pointing dogs (4.9%; n = 4). Fifty-nine of the 81 papers used >1 method, only 2 of the 81 papers measured or reported detection probability, and none reported the level of disturbance caused by the method. Studies varied widely regarding the age of the brood when brood fate was confirmed (x̄ = 44.4 days post-hatch, range 14–84 days). The frequency of brood sampling visits also varied greatly among studies (range = 1.19–3.85 surveys/brood/week) and this variation complicates comparison in fecundity and survival estimates across studies. Furthermore, 35 papers used >1 maternal behavior as purported indicators of brood fate, but none of them documented how accurate their indicators were. Future studies could reduce variance in estimates of sage-grouse fecundity and brood survival by employing empirical methods to estimate detection probability, standardizing brood sampling methods and conducting trials to document the effects of hen or brood capture, handling and flushing on brood survival estimates. Moreover, the accuracy of commonly used indicators of brood fate, including maternal behaviors, flocking behavior and distance moved after flush needs verification.

Wildlife Biology↗