Review and download Chapter 3 - Golden-winged Warbler Working ...

data deficiencies for Michigan, Wisconsin,
Minnesota, Quebec, and Manitoba, we
recommend that spatially balanced monitoring
be used in both the Appalachian and Great Lakes
regions, as well as in Canada where the density of
BBS routes is inadequate to develop robust
population trends (www.mbrpwrc.usgs.gov/bbs/reglist07.html).
Expanding the
spatially balanced monitoring design to these
new regions will require further coordination and
commitments by new partners.
Ideally each management site should become a
case history with documentation of habitat
quality before and after management, and the
response of Golden-winged Warbler, American
Woodcock, and other associated species should
be tracked before and after management
activities. At a minimum, evaluation protocols
must document the occurrence of Golden-winged
Warbler at managed sites; ideally evaluation
would document the reproductive performance
of Golden-winged Warbler population response
in the context of focal-area and regional
population goals, presence of Blue-winged
Warbler and other associated species, and
measures of genetic purity or introgression.
Evaluation protocols implemented at managed
sites should be compatible with regional and
rangewide protocols established by the Goldenwinged
Warbler Conservation Initiative to track
population response over larger areas.
Past experience with other Neotropical migrant
species tells us that measuring occurrence or
density of Golden-winged Warbler at managed
sites will be insufficient for documenting
population response to conservation actions.
Specifically, careful attention must be paid to
how our management is influencing fecundity.
Because efficient, inexpensive protocols to
measure fecundity do not currently exist, we
recommend developing several experimental
protocols, possibly including brood counts and
the collection of Breeding Bird Atlas type data in
3–86
different habitats, to create an index of
demography across sites and correlated across
habitat types. Research is necessary to determine
the effectiveness of simple protocols and to see if
they yield the type of results useful to managers.
Intensive research should continue within longterm
study sites to calibrate any new
demographic index.
Because of the real and imminent threat of
genetic swamping and competition from the
Blue-winged Warbler, populations targeted for
management should be monitored to assess
genetic integrity, to discourage management that
may favor introgression by Blue-winged Warbler,
and to measure the genetic health of Goldenwinged
Warbler populations throughout their
range. Even with a demographic index in place,
there is still the question of how much
introgression exists at each site and how this is
influencing fecundity in Golden-winged Warbler
populations. Monitoring introgression is
straightforward, using simple blood and feather
sampling protocols developed under the Goldenwinged
Warbler Conservation Initiative (Appendix
H). Newly developed DNA-assay techniques are
then performed at qualified labs; these include
existing mitochondrial DNA assays, and the
addition of nuclear DNA sampling as future
techniques improve. Biologists working at
managed and experimental sites should collect
blood as often as possible. We recommend
periodic (i.e., every 5 years) blood sampling at
permanent locations to track introgression across
the Golden-winged Warbler’s range starting in
2016 and then again in 2021. After the first
sampling period in five years, sampling could
continue in five year increments; however, this
time period should remain flexible to adjust to
new findings. Sampling and analysis of blood
samples for genetic purity can be carried out by
the Golden-winged Warbler Working Group
partners and assayed via a molecular systematics
laboratory such as the Fuller Evolutionary Biology
Program at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology.