USGS ScienceSearch

Geology topics

Rebecca D. Rau

Publications and source records attributed to Rebecca D. Rau.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

American Woodcock singing-ground survey: Comparison of four models for trend in population size

Wildlife biologists monitor the status and trends of American woodcock Scolopax minor populations in the eastern and central United States and Canada via a singing-ground survey, conducted just after sunset along roadsides in spring. Annual analyses of the survey produce estimates of trend and annual indexes of abundance for 25 states and provinces, management regions, and survey-wide. In recent years, researchers have used a log-linear hierarchical model that defines year effects as random effects in the context of a slope parameter (the S model) to model population change. Recently, researchers have proposed alternative models suitable for analysis of singing-ground survey data. Analysis of a similar roadside survey, the North American Breeding Bird Survey, has indicated that alternative models are preferable for almost all species analyzed in the Breeding Bird Survey. Here, we use leave-one-out cross-validation to compare model fit for the present singing-ground survey model to fits of three alternative models, including a model that describes population change as the difference in expected counts between successive years (the D model) and two models that include t -distributed extra-Poisson overdispersion effects (H models) as opposed to normally distributed extra-Poisson overdispersion. Leave-one-out cross-validation results indicate that the Bayesian predictive information criterion favored the D model, but a pairwise t -test indicated that the D model was not significantly better-fitting to singing-ground survey data than the S model. The H models are not preferable to the alternatives with normally distributed overdispersion. All models provided generally similar estimates of trend and annual indexes suggesting that, within this model set, choice of model will not lead to alternative conclusions regarding population change. However, as in Breeding Bird Survey analyses, we note a tendency for S model results to provide slightly more extreme estimates of trend relative to D models. We recommend use of the D model for future singing-ground survey analyses.

Eastern and Central United States and Canada

Assessment of the American woodcock singing-ground survey zone timing and coverage

The American woodcock ( Scolopax minor ; hereafter, woodcock) Singing-Ground Survey (SGS) was developed to inform management decisions by monitoring changes in the relative abundance of woodcock. The timing of the designated survey windows was designed to count resident woodcock while minimizing counting of migrating woodcock. Since the implementation of the SGS in 1968, concerns over survey protocols that may bias data have been raised and investigated; however, the extent of survey coverage and the timing of the survey window zones have not been critically investigated. We used 3 years of data collected from male and female woodcock marked with satellite tags to assess the extent of survey coverage and the timing of the SGS survey windows relative to presence of woodcock. SGS coverage encompassed the majority of woodcock breeding-period sites (locations where marked woodcock returned to in spring) within the U.S. (n = 17, 92%) and approximately half of the breeding-period sites in Canada (n = 6, 43%). Thirteen of the 37 monitored woodcock with known breeding-period site arrival dates (35%) were migrating through a survey zone during an active survey window, all in the northernmost 4 of 5 SGS zones. Thirteen woodcock arrived at breeding-period sites after the start of surveys, and all but one of these was located in the northernmost 2 zones. The combination of migration through a SGS zone during the survey window and arrival at breeding-period sites after the beginning of the survey window in northern zones may result in the SGS weighing too heavily the contribution of routes in the southern portion of the primary breeding range, while weighing too lightly the routes in the northern portion of the primary breeding range. We suggest that additional information is necessary to evaluate whether current survey windows are sufficient, or whether they need to be changed.

Conference Paper