Bird Point Counts at Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge, Summer of 2004

Principal Investigator:  Bret Geisler

 

Anabat Survey Report

Principal Investigator:  Kim Livengood

 

Integrated Monitoring of Soils, Hydrology, and Vegetation Across a Landscape During Prairie Reconstruction.

Investigators: Cynthia Cambardella1, Pauline Drobney2, Keith Schilling3, Mark Tomer1, Peter Jacobson4

 

Effects of Channel Incision on Riparian Zone Hydrology and Sedge Meadow Reconstruction

Principal Investigator:  Keith E. Schilling, Iowa Geological Survey, 109 Trowbridge Hall, Iowa City, IA and Pauline M. Drobney, Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge, P.O. Box 399, Prairie City, IA

 

Oak savanna research at Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge:  Hydrologic Response of Degraded Oak Savannas to Restoration Treatments

Principal Investigator: Heidi Asbjornsen, Iowa State University

 

 Agroecosystem Restoration Research at Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge:

        Integration of Water, Nutrient and Carbon Cycling Under Diverse Annual-perennial Plant

        Communities in Agricultural Landscapes

        Principal Investigator:  Heidi Asbjornsen, Iowa State University

 

        Effects of grazing mammals on tallgrass prairie restorations

Principal Investigator:  Brian Wilsey; Graduate Research Assistant:  Leanne Martin, Department of Ecology, Evolution and Organismal Biology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA

 

        Water Sampling at Walnut Creek National Wildlife Refuge

Principal Investigator:  Keith E. Schilling Surface, Iowa Geological Survey, 109 Trowbridge Hall, Iowa City, IA

Quantifying the Role of Riparian Land Use on Stream Bank Erosion and Nutrient Pollution

Principal Investigators: Thomas Isenhart and Richard Schultz, Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Iowa State University, Ames; Keith Schilling, Iowa Geological Survey, Iowa City, Iowa

 

Beyond site-specific assembly rules: species traits as predictors of the frequency of occurrence of Lepidoptera in restored tallgrass prairies

Principal Investigator:  Keith S. Summerville, Ph. D., Department of Environmental Science and Policy, Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa

 

Monarch butterfly activity at Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge: summer and fall 2004

Principal Investigator:  Robert D. Woodward, Ellis and Nelle Levitt Professor, Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa  

 

The Reintroduction of a Declining Insect Associated with an Endangered Ecosystem: A Case Study with Speyeria idalia (Regal Fritillary) in a Reconstructed Prairie in Central Iowa

Principal Investigators:  Diane M. Debinski  and Stephanie Shepherd, Ecology, Evolution and Organismal Biology, 353 Bessey Hall, Iowa State University, Ames, IA

 

Evaluation of isolated and integrated prairie reconstructions as habitat for prairie butterflies

Principal Investigators:  Stephanie Shepherd and Diane M. Debinski, Ecology Evolution, and Organismal Biology, 353 Bessey Hall, Iowa State University, Ames, IA

 

        Arthropod collecting at the Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge

        Principal Investigator: Steve M. Spangler, Ph.D, CCA, 9468 Indian Hills Drive, Clive, IA

 

        Survey of Mycorrhizal Symbioses at Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge

        Principal Investigator:  Inger Lamb

 

            Evaluation of methods for Canada thistle-free habitat restoration

            Brd Principal Contact: Diane Larson, Research Wildlife Biologist

             Affiliation:  Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center

 

        Publications Resulting from Research Conducted at NSM this Year:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bird Point Counts at Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge, Summer of 2004

Principal Investigator:  Bret Geisler

 

This is the eleventh year of the bird counts at Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge (NSNWR) near Prairie City, Iowa.  Liessa Thomas began the bird counts as part of the work for her Master’s Thesis in 1994.  She reported that very little documentation existed quantifying the changes of avifauna over time on large-scale prairie restoration projects.  The NSNWR is a large-scale prairie restoration area with hundreds of acres of primarily crop fields having been seeded with native tallgrass prairie plantings.  A savanna area is being developed and for the most part, the remnant grass areas, woody areas, and riparian areas have been left undisturbed.

 

The methods used to do the counts were established during Liessa’s thesis work and are listed in her thesis (Thomas et al).  There have been a few modifications to the methods over the years.  Up until and including the year 1999, 3 counts were done for each point.  It was determined that very little was statistically gained by doing each count 3 times so currently each point is visited once. 

 

An AOU code was created for unknown meadowlarks (UNME).  When no birds were recorded at a point within the 10 minute recording time, the 4 character code NONE was entered and NA (not applicable) was entered under the “GUILD” field on the Excel database.  Also a period or dot at the end of the AOU code on the data sheet means the birds were recorded in the second 5 minutes of the count or T2.

 

The counts were done between June 5th and July 13th.   The bison confinement counts were done June 22rd, 28th, and 30th.  Only one count (point 40) in the bison confinement was shortened to 6 minutes as the result of approaching bison.

 

As a result of crop fields being seeded to prairie plants, crop field points have declined.  Six new crop points were added this year to keep the number of crop points comparable to the other 3 habitat types of this project.  The new crop points are 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, and 197.   There were 6 crop points from last year that were either planted to prairie or left fallow and thus became herbaceous fields this year.  Those 6 points are 53, 57, 134, 186, 188, and 189.

 

There were a total of 113 point counts with 59 species in 678 entered data records and 1098 individual birds being counted, compared to last year’s 69 species and 1300 individuals.  See the breakdown for all the species identified in the 2003 bird counts on Table 1.

 

 

 

2003 Breeding Bird Count Results – Table 1

 

COMMON NAME

SPECIES

# POINTS OBS.

TOTAL #

Red-Winged Blackbird

RWBL

48

177

Common Yellowthroat

COYE

44

72

American Goldfinch

AMGO

39

68

Gray Catbird

GRCA

36

67

House Wren

HOWR

35

63

American Robin

AMRO

30

43

Brown-Headed Cowbird

BHCO

23

36

Song Sparrow

SOSP

25

36

Northern Cardinal

NOCA

25

32

Barn Swallow

BARS

19

30

Mourning Dove

MODO

19

27

Dickcissel

DICK

17

26

Killdeer

KILL

15

26

Indigo Bunting

INBU

17

21

Vesper Sparrow

VESP

15

21

Willow Flycatcher

WIFL

16

20

Cliff Swallow

CLSW

6

19

Rose-Breasted Grosbeak

RBGR

16

19

Bobolink

BOBO

3

17

Downy Woodpecker

DOWO

16

17

White-Breasted Nuthatch

WBNU

11

17

Red-Bellied Woodpecker

RBWO

12

16

Horned Lark

HOLA

9

15

Sedge Wren

SEWR

10

14

Eastern Kingbird

EAKI

12

13

Blue Jay

BLJA

9

12

Field Sparrow

FISP

10

12

Great-Crested Flycatcher

GCFL

8

12

Black-Capped Chickadee

BCCH

6

11

Eastern Bluebird

EABL

5

11

Northern Oriole

NOOR

11

11

Eastern Wood-Peewee

EAWP

9

10

Yellow Warbler

YWAR

10

10

Common Grackle

COGR

8

9

Hairy Woodpecker

HAWO

9

9

Brown Thrasher

BRTH

7

7

Eastern Meadowlark

EAME

7

7

Grasshopper Sparrow

GRSP

6

7

Henslow's Sparrow

HESP

5

7

Rufous-Sided Towhee

RSTO

7

7

Yellow-Billed Cuckoo

YBCU

6

6

Northern Flicker

NOFL

5

5

European Starling

EUST

2

3

House Finch

HOFI

3

3

Lark Sparrow

LASP

2

3

Red-Eyed Vireo

REVI

3

3

Unknown Meadowlark

UNME

3

3

Cerulean Warbler

CERW

2

2

Orchard Oriole

OROR

2

2

Red-Headed Woodpecker

RHWO

1

2

Ring-Necked Pheasant

RNPH

2

2

Tree Swallow

TRES

2

2

Bank Swallow

BANS

1

1

Great-Horned Owl

GHOW

1

1

Loggerhead Shrike

LOSH

1

1

Pileated Woodpecker

PIWO

1

1

Purple Martin

PUMA

1

1

Red-Tailed Hawk

RTHA

1

1

Western Meadowlark

WEME

1

1

Wood Thrush

WOTH

1

1

 

 

 

There were 23 crop points, 32 herbaceous points, 30 riparian points, and 28 wood points.  Only 2 of the 113 points had no birds (NONE) recorded in the 10-minute period.  These were points 103 herbaceous, and 139 crop.   Also, there were four instances where counts were discontinued due to the weather, three times because of rain and once because of high winds exceeding 12 mph. 

 

The month of June was extremely wet which may have contributed to the fewer records.  Groups of juvenile red-winged blackbirds didn’t start showing up until very late June and early July.  Last year, these large groups of fledged blackbirds were obvious by mid-June.  The Henslow’s sparrow (HESP) numbers were also down from last year, appearing on 5 points as opposed to last year’s 10 points.  The points were in the northern third of the Refuge with one point (point 40) from within the bison confinement.  On the 13th of July, while walking out of a field near point 12, I observed 2 separate groups of fledged Henslow’s sparrows.  The first group was 3 fledglings with an adult and the second was 2 fledglings with an adult. 

 

Upland sandpipers (UPSA), another grassland bird of special interest, were not recorded this year although individuals were identified in fields near Highway 163 while traveling between points.

 

Broods of ring-necked pheasants were small and much scarcer than last year.  The heavy rains of late May and early June had an impact on their reproduction as well.  However, several adult hens and roosters were observed and so one can expect the hens to make a second or even third attempt at laying another clutch.

 

There was one new species to have been recorded on the counts this year, the Pileated woodpecker (PIWO).  Also notable is the increase in Eastern bluebirds (EABL) on the Refuge.  Several broods were recorded or observed this summer.  In the case of point 36, the fledglings were still sitting with both adults on the branch near the nesting cavity.

 

The wet weather was likely the main contributor to the decrease in bird numbers this year as opposed to last year’s dry summer.

 

        REFERENCE:

Thomas, Liessa H., E. E. Klaas.  Breeding Birds of a Large-Scale Tallgrass Prairie Restoration in Iowa:  Monitoring Abundance and Frequency of Occurrence.  Master’s Thesis, Iowa State University, Ames. 1999.

 

 

Top

 

 

 

 

 

Anabat Survey Report

Principal Investigator:  Kim Livengood

In early May 2004, one evening of active bat monitoring on the Neal Smith NWR was conducted using Anabat bat detectors.  This limited survey of a savanna area revealed a species assemblage including Eastern Red bats Lasiurus borealis, Big Brown bats Eptesicus fuscus and many recordings of 40 kHz Myotis.  In central Iowa, the endangered Indiana bat and the Little Brown bat are two Myotis species that are difficult to distinguish acoustically.  For this reason, calls of these two species are sometimes grouped together and referred to as 40 kHz Myotis calls.  According to surveys conducted in 1997 by the Refuge staff, reproductively active Indiana bats are known from the Neal Smith NWR (Photo 1).  This survey used active monitoring which means that bat calls were recorded while observations of behavior were made visually.  The combination of visual cues and acoustic records improves the chance of identifying bats such as these, which are hard to identify acoustically. A careful analysis of the recorded calls, in the context of the visual observations, led us to conclude that at least some of the 40 kHz Myotis we recorded were Indiana bats.   Further acoustic recordings, and preferably trapping, would be necessary to confirm their presence. 

 

The use of bat detectors in this brief survey illustrates the usefulness of this technology (Photo 2).  Bat detectors give land managers a cost effective tool to survey bats which are otherwise extremely labor intensive to monitor.  They also allow managers to confirm the presence of a bat species without physical interference.  This is particularly valuable in areas where maternity colonies are present since care must be taken not to disturb the roosts or stress the females. 

 

Bat detectors can be used in a variety of ways.  Active monitoring is the most effective method for species identification, when conducted by a skilled observer.  Using this method, observations of bat behavior can be used in conjunction with characteristics of recorded calls to identify a higher percent of calls and to increase the certainty of identification. 

 

Passive monitoring is conducted by leaving bat detectors out in the field to automatically record and store bat calls. This method can be used to record for just a few hours, or all night, every night for years, depending on the objectives.  Long-term passive recording has the advantage that the sampling effort can be vastly greater for much less human resource commitment than is possible using active monitoring. This increases the possibility of detecting rare or difficult-to-identify species by increasing the likelihood that distinctive calls from those species will be detected. In addition, the long term record can provide insights into spatial and temporal heterogeneity which are unattainable through other means. This approach is relatively new and there is a great deal yet to be learned about how to get the most out of passively recorded datasets, but the technology has proven effective and relatively inexpensive. If used appropriately, a small network of passive monitoring stations could provide useful baseline data, and provide the means to assess the long-term impacts of land management decisions on bat faunas.

 

 

Top

 

Integrated Monitoring of Soils, Hydrology, and Vegetation Across a Landscape During Prairie Reconstruction.

Investigators: Cynthia Cambardella1, Pauline Drobney2, Keith Schilling3, Mark Tomer1, Peter Jacobson4

1-     Soil Scientists, USDA/ARS NSTL, 2150 Pammel Dr. Ames IA

2-     USDI/FWS NSNWR, Prairie City IA

3-     IDNR/GSB, Iowa City IA

4-     Dept of Biology, Grinnell College, Grinnell IA

 

This was the establishment year of a long-term project that will evaluate changes in soils and hydrology during the development of a community of native prairie vegetation. Current work is focused on linking landscape-scale C and hydrologic cycles to groundwater nitrate-N and DOC for a small (12 ha) hydrologic catchment area within a new prairie reconstruction site which was seeded in the fall of 2003. The area was surveyed with a differential GPS system to obtain detailed topographic data, which were used to construct a 2-m digital elevation model of the site. Terrain analyses were performed to evaluate hydrologic flowpaths, slopes, and contributing areas across the site. This information was used to locate a series of 15 monitoring transects along hillslopes, plus two more across runoff drainageways. Neutron-probe access tubes were installed along these transects to allow repeated measurements of soil moist