A Plan for Monitoring Shorebirds During the Non-breeding Season in
Shorebird Monitoring Region Massachusetts – BCR 30
Prepared by: ***
Version *.*
Date
1
Table of Contents
Summary ............................................................................................................................ 3
Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 3
Methods .............................................................................................................................. 4
Results - Shorebirds .......................................................................................................... 6
Site Descriptions ............................................................................................................. 7
Parker and Merrimac River systems ........................................................................... 7
Nahant ......................................................................................................................... 9
Scituate...................................................................................................................... 10
Plymouth Duxbury Kingston Bay............................................................................. 11
Nauset Bay ................................................................................................................ 13
Monomoy and South Beach ...................................................................................... 15
2
Summary
Introduction
The bird conservation initiatives - waterbirds, waterfowl, shorebirds, and landbirds - are
cooperating to design a comprehensive “integrated bird monitoring” (IBM) program for Canada
and the United States. The conceptual framework for IBM (Fig. 1) includes strong emphasis on
detecting species at risk and helping to protect them. These broad goals are achieved by
estimating population trends and defining requirements for viable populations. These objectives,
in turn, are accomplished by population modeling based on population levels, demographic rates
and habitat information. Population trends are estimated by surveying breeding populations
whenever possible, and by surveying the species for which this is not feasible at other times of
year. Surveys of all species are made throughout the year to help identify, and monitor use of,
suitable habitat.
Fig. 1. Conceptual framework for integrated bird monitoring.
3
Most surveys in upland habitats are designed at a large spatial scale (e.g., southern
Canada and the United States) and do not require detailed information at the local level. Surveys
of wetland habitats, in contrast, must be carefully designed to insure that the habitat is well
covered, and different methods may be needed in different environments. A series of “regional
assessments” is thus being prepared to help design the wetland surveys. Regions were formed by
intersecting a Bird Conservation Region (BCR) map with a Province and State map, deleting
small polygons, and smoothing the borders (Fig. 2). The resulting “Bird Monitoring Regions”
can be used to scale up results to either BCRs or Provinces and States.
Fig. 2. Bird monitoring regions in Canada and the United States.
The regional assessments summarize current information about wetland bird distribution,
abundance, habitat relationships and timing of use within the Region, and they identify
information needed to design reliable monitoring programs. These “needed pilot studies” are
then prioritized by people concerned with monitoring birds in the region and a plan is developed
to carry out the work. Carrying out the pilot studies is expected to take 1-3 years. Long-term
surveys will then be implemented. Additional details are provided in “Guidelines for
Developing Comprehensive Bird Monitoring Programs” available at http://amap.wr.usgs.gov
(not there yet).
Methods
Focal wetland species were first identified. The initial list included all wetland species
that are common or abundant at any time of year within the Region according to Brian
Harrington. Sites within which any of the focal species are common or abundant at any time of
year were then identified using a list prepared for this project supplemented by information
4
provided by birding guides and ornithologists and birders knowledgeable about the Region.
Most sites were single areas, such as a National Wildlife Refuge, but dispersed sites, such as
“lakes >10 ha”, could also be identified.
Maps showing land ownership, roads, and wetlands were prepared for the region. Maps
of each site were also prepared and information useful in designing surveys for the focal species
was presented. The survey objective was assumed to be estimating the average number of birds,
of each focal species, present within the site during a specified interval. Up to three types of
habitat were described for each focal species. Type 1 habitat included the regularly used areas
that should be sampled using a well-defined sampling plan. Type 2 habitat included areas used
sparingly by the focal species. Type 2 habitat is not surveyed as often or with rigorously defined
methods, but is surveyed less formally every few years to document continued low use by the
focal species. Type 3 habitat receives virtually no use by the focal species during the study
period and is not surveyed as part of the monitoring program. Requests, however, are circulated
for any records of the focal species occurring in substantial numbers in these areas.
A description of each site was prepared with the following headings:
Boundaries and ownership
Focal species using the site and timing of use
Location of type 1 and 2 habitat within the site
Access to the type 1 and 2 habitat and visibility of the birds
Past and current surveys
Potential survey methods
Description
Selection bias
Measurement error and bias
Needed pilot studies
We assume, for any survey, that the study area and study period (within years) have been
defined. The goal of the survey was assumed to be estimating the trend, across several years, in
the average number of birds present during the study period. Bias means a long-term trend in
the ratio (number recorded)/(average number present). Selection bias is bias due to some of the
Type 1 habitat being excluded from the sampled population, usually due to access or visibility
problems. Exclusion of some Type 1 habitat does not necessarily cause selection bias because
trends in the sampled areas might be the same as trends in the non-sampled areas. Anytime some
Type 1 areas could not be included in the sampled population the potential for selection bias, and
ways to reduce it, were discussed. Measurement error means not detecting all birds present in
the surveyed area at the time of the survey. Measurement bias is a long-term trend in the
proportion of birds present at the time of the survey that are detected on the survey.
Measurement error does not necessarily cause measurement bias because the proportion of birds
detected might not change through time. Anytime measurement error was probable its
magnitude and probable stability through time were discussed along with ways to reduce the
proportion of birds missed on the surveys.
5
Results - Shorebirds
Table 1. Focal shorebird species for BCR 30
CODE
SPECIES
BBPL
Black-bellied Plover
SEPL
Semipalmated Plover
AMOY
American Oystercatcher
GRYE
Greater Yellowlegs
LEYE
Lesser Yellowlegs
SOSA
Solitary Sandpiper
WHIM
Whimbrel
RUTU
Ruddy Turnstone
REKN
Red Knot
SAND
Sanderling
SESA
Semipalmated Sandpiper
LESA
Least Sandpiper
WRSA
White-rump Sandpiper
DUNL
Dunlin
SBDO
Short-billed Dowitcher
6
Site Descriptions
Parker and Merrimac River systems
Description: The Parker River and Merrimac River system contains estuaries and beaches.
There are a substantial number of BBPL (800), SEPL (500), GRYE (6), LEYE (100), SESA
(950), LESA (130), SBDO (52), DUNL (1000). Crane Beach which is a 4 ½ mile long barrier
beach in Castle Neck is property of The Trustees of Reservations. The northern end of Plum
Island is a developed area with houses. Most of the southern section of Plum Island is part of the
Parker River National Wildlife Refuge while Sandy Point on the southern tip is a state
reservation under the Department of Environmental Management. All of the Type 1 habitat is
easily accessible from beach parking lots or wildlife refuge entrances. All of the areas also have
excellent visibility.
Survey Method: Ground surveys at Crane Beach in Castle Neck can be done by foot or truck.
A truck can provide cover from the birds. In peak season a survey will take approximately 4
hours for one person. The average is 2-3 hours depending on distance covered and the birds.
Surveys should be done at high tide.
7
Selection Bias: NA because all areas are accessible.
Measurement error: Negligible
Measurement bias: NA
Local Contacts:
Richard Heil
Franz Inglefinger
Deborah Melvin
Jim Berry
8
Nahant
Description: Marshes, tidal flats, and beach areas northeast of Boston managed by the
Massachusett Metropolitan District Commission. The three major survey sites, Lynn Beach,
Point of Pines, and Rumney Marsh can all be reached by car with final access by foot. Lynn
Beach has substantial numbers of SAND (61), SESA (320), BBPL (28), DUNL (110), SEPL
(96), WRSA (x). Point of Pines has Lynn Beach species plus SBDO (40). Rumney Marsh has
substantial numbers of BBPL (x), SEPL (x), SESA (x), and SBDO (x). All sites are easily
accessible and have excellent visibility.
Survey Method: Ground surveys for all three sites. Census Lynn Beach at mid-tide by walking
along the beach. Lynn Beach should take 1-2 hours to census. Census Point of Pines 4 hours
before and after high tide by walking along beach and also walk out into mud flat. Point of Pines
should take about 1-4 hours if you also drive . Census Rumney Marsh 2 hours before high tide
to 4 hours after high tide. Walk out on the marsh about a quarter mile for the salt pan and the
roost along the Pines River is almost visible from the car, census should take about 1-2 hours.
Selection Bias: NA all areas are accessible
Measurement error: Negligible
Measurement bias: NA
Local Contacts:
Soheil Zendeh
9
Scituate
Description: Estuary system with tidal flats. Major species are RUTU (200), REKN (2800),
SESA (5000), DUNL (2750), LESA (1000), SEPL (1081), GRYE (30), LEYE (8). All three
Type 1 areas are accessible by foot or car with good visibility.
Survey Method: Ground surveys. Census Type 1 areas with ground surveys within two hours
of high tide.
Selection Bias: NA because all areas accessible.
Measurement error: Negligible
Measurement bias: NA
Local Contacts:
10
Plymouth Duxbury Kingston Bay
Description: Beaches and tidal flats with major species of BBPL (975), SEPL (1205), GRYE
(110), LEYE (9), RUTU (650), REKN (950), SAND (2500), SESA (7612), DUNL (3685),
SBDO (390). Both Type 1 areas have good visibility and area accessible by foot or 4 wheel
drive vehicle.
Survey Method: Ground surveys. Census Plymouth and Duxbury Beaches within two hours of
high tide.
Selection Bias: NA because all areas accessible.
Measurement error: Negligible
Measurement bias: NA
11
Local Contacts:
12
Nauset Bay
Description: Estuary and beach areas. Type 1 habitat are located at Nauset Bay at the north end
of the estuary below the Coast Guard Beach parking lot and on the south end of Coast Guard
Beach. The area is primarily federal property with patches of town and private lands on the
border of the site. Major species are BBPL (585), SEPL (400), GRYE (30), LEYE (51), SAND
(700), SESA (2500), LESA (400), DUNL (500), SBDO (530). Nauset Bay and Coast Guard
Beach are easily accessible from paths, bike trails, or parking lots. Both sites have excellent
visibility.
Survey Method: Ground surveys. Census Nauset Bay from a stationary point on the rising tide
about 1-3 hours before the Boston high tide depending upon the height of the tide. Census Coast
Guard Beach at high tide by walking along the beach. Censuses should take about 1-2 hours for
each area depending on number of birds present.
Selection Bias: NA because all areas are accessible.
Measurement error: Negligible
13
Measurement bias: NA
Local Contacts:
Blair Nikula
Richard Heil
14
Monomoy Island and South Beach
Description: Monomoy Island and South Beach are part of Monomoy National Wildlife
Refuge. The islands have extensive beaches and mud flats with substantial numbers of BBPL
(5000), SEPL (2000), AMOY (150), GRYE (500), LEYE (300), RUTU (500), REKN (3000),
SAND (5000), SESA (8000), DUNL (4000), SBDO (4500), WHIM (585). All three Type 1
areas are accessible by boat and have good visibility.
Survey Method: Census Type 1 areas by ground surveys within one hour of high tide.
Selection Bias: NA because all areas are accessible.
Measurement error: Negligible
Measurement bias: NA
15
Local Contacts:
16