Gcwa resighting 2014

Learning More About Our Native Texan:

The Golden-cheeked Warbler

Within the Balcones

Canyonlands Preserve

• First-in-the-nation multi-species Habitat Conservation Plan, under Section 10(a) of the Endangered Species Act; a national model

The Balcones Canyonlands Conservation Plan (BCCP) and Balcones Canyonlands Preserve (BCP)

The BCP is a 30,000-acre system of preserves established to protect and mitigate for habitat loss of 8 endangered species and 27 species of concern in western Travis County

• USFWS issued 30-year permit in 1996

• Provides a streamlined approach to

Endangered Species Act compliance

• Allows “take” of habitat and

requires replacement acres

protected within the BCP

• The Balcones Canyonlands Preserve

is the mitigation for that “take”

Strengthened by Partnership

Permit Holders: Travis County & City of Austin

Through USFWS: Private Landowners with 10(a) permits

Managing Partners: The Lower Colorado River Authority

Travis Audubon Society

The Nature Conservancy of Texas

Texas Cave Management Association

Wild Basin/St. Edwards University

Species covered by the BCCP

• Endangered Species

– Golden-cheeked warbler (“driving force” of the BCCP)

– Black-capped Vireo

– Six karst (cave) invertebrates

• Species of Concern

– 25 karst species

– 2 plant species

© John Ingram

© John Ingram

Small songbirds (5 inches long) recognized by bright yellow faces Adult male has black throat (bib), crown, eyestripe, and back.

Female has variably-mottled throat, and a streaked olive-green crown and back.

Wings and tail black with white markings, belly white.

Tweezer-like bills are typical of insectivorous birds

Breeds exclusively in mature Ashe juniper-oak woodlands from March-July

Requires Ashe Junipers for nesting and for food

Need closed-canopy woodland of both junipers and broad-leaved trees

Golden-cheeked Warbler (Setophaga chrysoparia)

They winter in pine-oak woodlands in the highlands of southern Mexico and central America

Where do Golden-cheeked Warblers Live?

These birds breed only in the juniper-oak woodlands of central Texas -- so they are all native Texans

They migrate along the Sierra Madre Oriental in coniferous forest

Photo by John Ingram

Photo: Bill Reiner

Every Golden-cheeked Warbler is born in Texas, so every one is a native Texan.

Photo by John Ingram

Travis County supports some of the best and largest blocks of habitat in the heart of the GCWA’s breeding range.

The BCCP allows development of over 70% of the GCWA’s habitat in Travis County; thus, protection and management of the habitat within the

Balcones Canyonlands Preserve is critical.

BCP Management Challenges

• Small patch size/small populations

• Habitat fragmentation/edge effects

• Edge-adapted predators/parasites

• Reduced hardwood recruitment (white-tailed deer, feral hogs, oak wilt)

• Invasive, non-native plants

• Wildfire

• Access management

• Public misperceptions of BCP

• Survival – what proportion of the birds return to breed from the wintering range

• Dispersal – do individual warblers shift locations?

Our permit requires us to protect habitat, but also to seek answers to questions about how they are doing:

• Abundance and density

• Pairing success – whether males attract mates

• Reproductive success – whether pairs successfully raise young, and how many (fecundity)

Need for Updated Status Assessment

• Frequently asked questions from the public:

– How many GCWAs are there on the Balcones Canyonlands Preserve?

– How are they doing?

Photo by John Ingram

• Taking it a step further:

− How viable are the warbler populations over the long-term

− What are the best management strategies to promote their survival and recovery?

GCWA Population Viability & Habitat Suitability Modeling Project

• 5-year contract with U.S. Forest Service to conduct population viability and habitat suitability modeling for the GCWA within the BCP

• Preliminary results for Year 1-3 (2011-2013) data collection completed, currently analyzing data

• Entering Year 4 field season

• Variety of field methods

– Color-banding

– Nest monitoring

– Intensive territory mapping

– Point counts

– Vegetation data for point counts & nests

Photo by Gil Eckrich, Fort Hood

• Intensive territory mapping – March 15-May 25, 10-20+ visits

– Nest monitoring, productivity March 15-June 15

– Typically 2 people per plot

• Color-banding – Pilot study initiated 2009; entering

6th year of banding

– Average >70% adult males banded per plot

• Resighting outside study plots needed to validate return rates and document dispersal

Intensive Monitoring Study Plots

GCWA banding/re-sighting Preliminary Results

• 162 males banded in 2011

94 males banded 2012

104 males banded in 2013

• 552 males banded since 2009

• Male return rates:

– BCP = 44% in 2010

41% in 2011

56% in 2012

46% in 2013

– Fort Hood 37-56% (8 yrs)

• 30 females banded since 2009

Photo by Amanda Aurora

Golden-cheeked Warbler Nest Monitoring

To date, we have found and

monitored:

• 109 nests in 2011

• 151 nests in 2012

• 154 nests in 2013

Photo by John Ingram

Most nests are found in Ashe

junipers, followed by live oak,

cedar elm, and other hardwoods

Nest video

Results …so far To model the viability of the population, we need at least three years of data. But we do have preliminary findings:

• Higher density of territories in larger blocs of closed-canopy woodlands

Territories on JJ&T

transitional plot in 2010

Territories on Kent Butler

prime plot in 2010

Results …so far To model the viability of the population, we need at least three years of data. But we do have preliminary findings:

Territories on JJ&T

transitional plot in 2010

Territories on Kent Butler

prime plot in 2010

• Higher density of territories in larger blocs of closed-canopy woodlands

• Older males make up more of the population in prime habitat sites

= second-year male

= after-second-year male

• About half of the males banded in 2009-2013 returned in subsequent years (44-56%) – return rates tend to be higher on plots with prime habitat

Results …so far To model the viability of the population, we need at least three years of data. But we do have preliminary findings:

No banded males returned to JJ&T plot.

About half returned to Kent Butler plot.

• About half of the males banded in 2009-2013 returned in subsequent years (44-56%) – return rates tend to be higher on plots with prime habitat

• Very little dispersal

Results …so far To model the viability of the population, we need at least three years of data. But we do have preliminary findings:

• Higher density of territories in larger blocs of closed-canopy woodlands

• Older males make up more of the population in prime habitat sites

2009

2010

2011

Resighting/Dispersal 2012 Results

7 dispersal events

• 1.2 - 16 km

• 6 SY males, 1 ASY

However, >90% of

the banded GCWAs

found in subsequent

years have returned

to the same area

• Fewer than half the males banded in 2009 returned in 2010 (45%) – but the return rate was higher on prime plots (54%)

• Very little dispersal

• Pairing success generally averages more than 90%, especially on prime plots

Results …so far To model the viability of the population, we need at least three years of data. But we do have preliminary findings:

• Higher density of territories in larger blocs of closed-canopy woodlands

• Older males make up more of the population in prime habitat sites

Photos by John Ingram

• Averaged 63-78% from 2009-2013

Results …so far

Breeding success

• Tends to be higher on prime plots and for older males

• Variable statistics, partly from difficulty of finding all young when they leave the nest.

Reproduction

• Largest patches of closed canopy woodlands have the highest reproductive output (Bull Creek, Cypress Creek, North Lake Austin macrosites)

• Study plots in smaller habitat patches (Barton Creek, West Austin) and young/recovering woodlands have the lowest reproductive output

• Lower reproduction on small, isolated patches and young/recovering woodlands

To model the viability of the population, we need at least three years of data. But we do have preliminary findings:

Relationships between landscape and GCWA density on BCP

Reidy and

Thompson

2011

…Similar results on Fort Hood

Peak and

Thompson

2013 Forest edge density (m/ha)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Proportion of forest cover in 1 km

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Den

sity (

bir

ds/h

a)

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Proportion of juniper forest in 100 m

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Proportion of mixed forest in 100 m

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Den

sity (

bir

ds/h

a)

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

GCWA density

(males/hectare)

distribution map

Predictive map

from Year 1

So… How are the Golden-cheeked Warblers doing?

Range-wide:

• Many estimates of population

• Habitat loss continues, so likely a

downward trend On the Preserve:

• Population appeared

stable through 2013, but…

• Before 2009, counting un-banded birds

• Unknown whether truly stable, or

constantly supplemented by birds

displaced by habitat loss elsewhere

• Extreme heat & drought of 2011

• Delayed effect (wet winter afterwards)

• In 2013, few birds where trees died

• Where trees survived, higher densities

of birds this year…

• …but lower reproductive success

• Endangered status based upon

loss of habitat

• Endangered Species Act has led to

protection of some habitat, but allowed

some destruction as compromise.

• Re-growing suitable old-growth

habitat will take several decades to

a century or more.

Photo: Nancy Norman

Photo: Nancy Norman

Photo: Paul Brick The more data we collect, the more we learn about:

• What are the characteristics – tree cover, types of trees, understory, etc. – of habitat where successful nests are built, and what can we do to improve those features on less-than-optimal sites

• How we can help these Native Texans continue to thrive!

• Where and which birds are having the most success raising young.

• Minimizing the threats from predators… and people.

Photo: Paul Brick

Golden-cheeked Warbler Banding/Resighting Project

2014 Project Goals

• Find Golden-cheeked Warblers that have dispersed beyond intensive study plots

• See each warbler you find in your search area well enough to confirm whether it is banded or unbanded

• Record the geographic position and banded/unbanded status of each warbler you see

R. Peak

Remember: finding unbanded birds is just as important as finding banded birds!

Identifying Golden-cheeked Warblers By Vocalizations…

A song

Identifying Golden-cheeked Warblers By Vocalizations…

B song

…and By Sight

Photos by John Ingram

about 5 inches long Both sexes have a black line through each eye,

across an otherwise immaculate yellow face.

Older males have a black

back and crown…

…and a black “bib”

Females and some young males have variable

amounts of green on the back and crown…

… and

black on

the throat

A Look (and Sound)-Alike Migrant

Black-throated Green Warblers migrate through

central Texas in spring and fall. They can look

much like female Golden-cheeks.

Adult Golden-cheeked Warblers always have

bold black eye lines, and an immaculate white

vent area.

A yellowish wash at the vent is a distinctive mark

for Black-throated Green Warblers.

The back is green and the cheeks are yellow, but

the eye line is less prominent, and there are

dusky marks on the face.

MV = mauve

BK = black

WH = white

YE = yellow

PI = pink

OR = orange

BL = blue

RD = red

DB = dark blue

GR = green

DG = dark green

upper left leg /

Basics of Reading Color Bands

NB = no band (always on upper leg)

SI = silver (always on the lower leg)

upper right leg / lower right leg

lower left leg :

Use a “?” after any band that is not certain:

DG / SI : MV? or PI? / OR

(Remember: if the bird is facing you, its left is on your right!)

Read bands as follows:

Use “?/?:?/? B” if you cannot see any of the band combo

If the bird is definitely unbanded, record “UB” both on your field

map and on the form.

MV = mauve

BK = black

WH = white

YE = yellow

PI = pink

OR = orange

BL = blue

RD = red

DB = dark blue

GR = green

DG = dark green

upper left leg /

Basics of Reading Color Bands

NB = no band (always on upper leg)

SI = silver (always on the lower leg)

upper right leg / lower right leg

lower left leg :

Use a “?” after any band that is not certain:

DG / SI : MV? or PI? / OR

(Remember: if the bird is facing you, its left is on your right!)

Read bands as follows:

If you cannot determine whether the bird is banded, record “UK”

on the map. (Do not record UK birds on the data form.)

If the bird is definitely unbanded, record “UB” both on your field

map and on the form.

If you see a banded bird….

Congratulations!!! Call us right away!!!

Bill Reiner: 512-913-3201

Lisa O’Donnell: 512-659-1761

If there is no answer, leave your name and contact info on the voicemail, then call the other project manager.

Now for A Bit of Practice

(Don’t worry, you’ll get more)

Photo: Paul Brick

General Standards for Conducting Surveys

• For each site visit, record on the field map: observer name, date, starting and stopping times, and total survey time

• Do not survey in a steady rain or thunderstorm (light drizzle OK) or if sustained winds interfere with your ability to hear singing birds (approximately 12 miles/hour or greater)

• Do not use playback of songs or calls to elicit a response

• Record weather conditions on the map or in your notebook

• Record observations of Brown-headed Cowbirds, sightings of GCWAs feeding fledgling cowbirds, GCWA interactions with potential predators

• Report recent signs of vandalism or other damage (camp sites, new trails, tree cutting, dumping, etc.)

Procedures for Conducting Surveys • Start early (about a half hour after dawn; all surveys must be finished by 3:00 p.m.

• Set your GPS to Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates.

• If you enter or exit a gate via a combination lock, please lock it again behind you.

• If you park at a Preserve gate, or on Preserve property, place the placard identifying you as a BCP volunteer on your dashboard.

• Plan your route so that you come within hearing range (about 100 meters) of all parts of your survey area.

• Each time you visit, try to use a different route, so you are in a territory at different times of day. If you only survey a territory at the end of your visit each time, you may miss a male who has gone silent late in the day.

• When you find a Golden-cheeked Warbler, follow it until you can see the legs clearly. If you lose it, wait for several minutes in that area.

• If you find two counter-singing males, choose one and follow him until you have a clear view of his legs. Then, if the other is still singing, try to follow him.

• If you find a female Golden-cheeked Warbler, check for bands on her, too. We have banded very few female warblers, but last year two of them turned up outside the plots.

Safety Issues • Some things to watch out for:

– Loose rocks and rough terrain

– Sunburn

– Poisonous animals (snakes, scorpions, bees, ticks, chiggers, mosquitos)

– Poisonous and thorny plants (poison ivy, bull-nettle, greenbriar, cacti/mesquite/bumelia)

– Feral hogs, off-leash dogs

• Protective measures: – Work as a team with a partner

– Wear long pants, long-sleeved shirt, sturdy hiking boots, hat, sunscreen

– Cell phone, GPS, first aid kit

– Take lots of water!!!

– Wildfire prevention (don’t park in tall grass, fire extinguisher in vehicle)

• Call 911 in the event of an emergency

Any Questions?

Video of GCWA nesting activities, from nest material collection (on ground) to fledging

Removing a Golden-cheeked Warbler from a mist net

Video of GCWA Color Banding