USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · ofr20221082

Distribution and demography of Southwestern Willow Flycatchers in San Diego County, 2015–19

Abstract

We surveyed for Southwestern Willow Flycatchers ( Empidonax traillii extimus ; flycatcher) at 33 locations along multiple drainages in San Diego County, including portions of Agua Hedionda Creek, Cottonwood Creek, Escondido Creek, Los Penasquitos Creek, Otay River, San Diego River, San Dieguito River, San Luis Rey River, Sweetwater River, and Tijuana River. Resident flycatchers were only found on two drainages in San Diego County, at San Dieguito and San Luis Rey Rivers, with 99 percent occurring on the San Luis Rey River. Resident flycatchers were detected at 18 percent of survey locations (Bonsall, Cleveland National Forest, Rey River Ranch, San Dieguito, and Vista Irrigation District [VID], and VID Lake Henshaw). Resident flycatchers were documented for the first time at Lake Henshaw, the only new location surveyed that supported flycatchers. We detected a minimum of 80 resident flycatchers from 2015 to 2019, most of these were upstream and downstream from Lake Henshaw. Transient flycatchers were found at 42 percent of survey locations; 38 transient individuals were detected at Agua Hedionda Creek, Otay River, San Diego River, San Dieguito River, and the San Luis Rey River. Over the course of this study, 11 locations historically occupied by resident flycatchers were resurveyed; only 5 were found to have resident flycatchers: (1) Bonsall, (2) Cleveland National Forest, (3) Rey River Ranch, (4) San Dieguito, and (5) Vista Irrigation District. The number of resident flycatchers declined from previous high counts at all five locations. Collectively, the number of resident flycatcher territories within the historically occupied area of the upper San Luis Rey River downstream from Lake Henshaw (Cleveland National Forest, Rey River Ranch, and Vista Irrigation District) declined 71 percent between 1999 (48) and 2019 (14); 42 percent of the decline occurred between 1999 and 2016, with an additional decline (50 percent) occurring between 2016 and 2019. In 2016, the distribution of flycatcher territories at the historically occupied area of the upper San Luis Rey River changed relative to the distribution in 1999: the proportion of territories at Cleveland National Forest and Rey River Ranch decreased to 36 percent each, while Vista Irrigation District increased to 29 percent, creating a more equal distribution of territories across the historically occupied area. By 2019, the distribution changed relative to 2016, with most of the territories spread equally between Cleveland National Forest and Rey River Ranch (43 percent each), while the proportion of territories at Vista Irrigation District declined to 14 percent. During countywide surveys, we documented the dispersal of two natal banded flycatchers; both were females that were originally banded as nestlings at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton and were seen for the first time as breeding adults. One of the females dispersed to San Dieguito, a distance of 41 kilometers, and a second female dispersed to Cleveland National Forest, a distance of 55 kilometers. We also documented the within-season movement of a uniquely banded male that was seen at the beginning of the 2017 breeding season at Bonsall and was later documented at San Dieguito, a movement distance of 31 kilometers. We completed nest monitoring activities along the upper San Luis Rey River near Lake Henshaw in Santa Ysabel, California from 2016 to 2019. Monitoring occurred at three locations: (1) Cleveland National Forest, (2) Rey River Ranch, and (3) Vista Irrigation District, collectively the upper San Luis Rey River monitoring area. The number of flycatcher territories monitored each year ranged from 14 to 27. We observed polygynous pairings (one male paired with multiple females) in all years, with the lowest rate of polygyny (number of polygynous pairs/total number of pairs) observed in 2016 (10 percent) and the highest in 2017 (70 percent). The proportion of paired males that were polygynous ranged from 5 to 54 percent between 2016 and 2019. We monitored the nesting activity of 14–27 pairs annually during the course of the study. Most of the first nesting attempts were initiated during late May and early June. We monitored 18–41 Southwestern Willow Flycatcher nests per year from 2016 to 2019. Apparent nest success ranged from 11 to 37 percent and differed significantly by year, with higher success in 2016 and 2017 compared to 2018 and 2019. Predation was the presumed to be the primary source of nest failure, with 63–84 percent of failures annually attributed to predation. Although none of the failures were attributed to Brown-headed cowbird ( Molothrus ater ) parasitism, 4–27 percent of nests were parasitized annually from 2016 to 2019, with increased parasitism rates observed in 2018 and 2019 compared to 2016 and 2017. We “rescued” 11 parasitized nests between 2016 and 2019 by removing cowbird eggs; if those nests had been allowed to fail, apparent nest success would have been up to 45 percent lower annually. Flycatcher egg clutch size ranged from 2.8±0.8 to 3.1±0.8 annually and did not vary significantly between years. The number of fledglings per pair ranged from 0.5±1.0 to 1.6±1.5 annually from 2016 to 2019. There was a significant difference in the number of young fledged per pair between years, with pairs in 2016 producing more than three times the number of fledglings compared to 2019. The percent of pairs fledging at least one young ranged from 18 to 62 percent annually but did not vary significantly by year. Analysis of flycatcher daily nest survival rates suggested that both early and late winter precipitation influenced nest survival, with increases in early winter precipitation positively influencing nest survival and later winter precipitation negatively influencing nest survival. The second-best supported model included year, with the lowest daily nest survival occurring in 2018 and 2019. A total of 119 flycatchers were newly banded over the course of this study; 36 adult flycatchers were banded with a unique color combination, and 83 nestlings (57 of which survived to fledging) were banded with a single band on the left or right leg. In addition, two adults that were banded before 2015 were observed in the monitoring area. Between 2015 and 2019, we accumulated 94 resights of 49 individual color-banded adult flycatchers that ranged in age from 1 to 8 years old. Banding allowed us to examine differences in annual survivorship among flycatchers of different ages and sexes. We estimated annual survivorship of adult males to be 69±7 percent, which is higher than estimates of female survivorship (45±10 percent). Annual survivorship of first-year flycatchers ranged from 24 to 41 percent, which is roughly half the estimates calculated for adult flycatchers (52–75 percent). We found no evidence that precipitation in the previous breeding year had an effect on flycatcher survival. We were also able to observe dispersal and movement among adults and first-year flycatchers. Average first-year dispersal distance was 3.1±2.6 kilometers, with the longest dispersal (8.5 kilometers) by a natal female dispersing from the monitoring area to Lake Henshaw. Of the first-year flycatchers, 65 percent returned to the monitoring area to establish an adult breeding territory, while the remaining 35 percent dispersed to Lake Henshaw. Territory fidelity among adult flycatchers was high with 69±13 percent of returning adults occupying the same territory (or within 100 meters) from the previous year. There was no significant difference in territory fidelity between males and females, or across years. Nesting success in the previous year appeared to be a strong driver of territory fidelity, with adults more likely to return to the same territory following years when they successfully fledged young. The average between-year movement for returning adult flycatchers was 0.5±0.8 km. We documented the movement of two adult males from the monitoring area to Lake Henshaw. Between-year movement distances did not differ by sex or year. Resident flycatchers in the upper San Luis Rey River monitoring area used five habitat types from 2016 to 2019: (1) willow-oak, (2) willow-ash, (3) oak-sycamore, (4) mixed willow riparian, and (5) willow-sycamore, with willow-oak the most commonly used habitat type. The most commonly recorded dominant species at flycatcher territories included coast live oak ( Quercus agrifolia ), red or arroyo willow ( Salix laevigata or Salix lasiolepis ), California sycamore ( Platanus racemosa ), and velvet ash ( Fraxinus velutina ). In 2018, we anecdotally began to observe dead and dying oaks in the monitoring area, which we believe to be the result of goldspotted oak borer ( Agrilus auroguttatus ) infestation. At the conclusion of this study, we investigated the overall change in normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) in flycatcher territories within the monitoring area. The greatest negative change in NDVI occurred in territories closest to Lake Henshaw, and many of the affected territories were no longer occupied in the later years of the study. Flycatchers used 13 plant species for nesting at the monitoring area from 2016 to 2019; 70 percent of all nests were placed in coast live oak. None of the nest characteristics including host height, nest height, distance to the edge of the host, or distance to the edge of the vegetation clump where the nest was placed differed between years. In 2016, successful nests were placed higher than unsuccessful nests; no other within-year differences were observed.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 32.493491667261026° to 33.481188795657516° latitude; -117.57666896119845° to -116.14905258547724° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Scarlett L. Howell, Barbara E. Kus, Shannon M. Mendia. 2022-11-16. Distribution and demography of Southwestern Willow Flycatchers in San Diego County, 2015–19. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20221082

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona