**Program for Regional and International**

**Shorebird Monitoring (PRISM)**

version 0.7

January 26, 2002

Jonathan Bart, Brad Andres, Stephen Brown, Garry Donaldson, Brian
Harrington, Heather Johnson, Vicky Johnston, Stephanie Jones, R. I. G.
Morrison, Michel Sallaberry, Susan K. Skagen, and Nils Warnock

**Contents**

[Abstract 3](#abstract)

[Introduction 4](#introduction)

[Arctic and Boreal Breeding Surveys
10](#arctic-and-boreal-breeding-surveys)

[Continental Survey 10](#continental-survey)

[Regular Surveys at Permanent Sites
12](#regular-surveys-at-permanent-sites)

[A Checklist Program 12](#a-checklist-program)

[Boreal Regions 12](#boreal-regions)

[Other Projects in Support of the Northern Surveys
13](#other-projects-in-support-of-the-northern-surveys)

[Temperate Breeding Surveys 15](#temperate-breeding-surveys)

[Temperate Nonbreeding Surveys 17](#temperate-nonbreeding-surveys)

[Current and Emerging Programs 19](#current-and-emerging-programs)

[Neotropical Surveys 22](#neotropical-surveys)

[Assistance to Local Managers 24](#assistance-to-local-managers)

[Acknowledgments 25](#acknowledgments)

[Literature Cited 25](#literature-cited)

[Appendix: Shorebird Taxa 27](#appendix-shorebird-taxa)

#  Abstract

This report describes the "Program for Regional and International
Shorebird Monitoring" (PRISM). PRISM is being implemented by a
Canada-U.S. Shorebird Monitoring and Assessment Committee formed in 2001
by the Canadian Shorebird Working Group and the U.S. Shorebird Council.
PRISM is based on the shorebird conservation plans recently completed in
Canada and the U.S. and provides a single blueprint for implementing
both of these plans. The goals PRISM are to (1) estimate the size of
breeding populations of 74 shorebird taxa in North America; (2) describe
shorebirds' distribution, abundance, and habitat relationships; (3)
monitor trends in shorebird population size; (4) monitor shorebird
numbers at stopover locations, and; (5) assist local managers in meeting
their shorebird conservation goals. It has three main components: arctic
and boreal breeding surveys, temperate breeding surveys, temperate
non-breeding surveys, and neotropical surveys. Progress on, and action
items for, each major component are described. We believe that the most
important major tasks for immediate action are formulating a plan to
carry out the northern surveys, evaluating aerial photographic surveys
for migration and winter counts, and carrying out several regional
analyses to design the program of migration counts. The Summary and
Recommendations section contains a brief justification for these
conclusions along with a list of the other actions needed to implement
PRISM.

# Introduction

This document describes the Program for Regional and International
Shorebird Monitoring (PRISM). PRISM is a single blueprint for monitoring
shorebirds in Canada and the United States and is based on the Canadian
and U.S. shorebird conservation plans (Brown 2001, Donaldson 2001). The
goals of PRISM are to:

1\. Estimate the size of breeding populations of shorebirds in North
America.

> 2\. Describe shorebirds' distribution, abundance, and habitat
> relationships.
>
> 3\. Monitor trends in shorebird population size.
>
> 4\. Monitor shorebird numbers at stopover locations.
>
> 5\. Assist local managers in meeting their shorebird conservation
> goals.

Most of this report is focused on the goal of estimating trend in
population size because we believe that is technically the most
difficult goal. Bart and Francis (2001) have proposed goals and
standards for comprehensive avian monitoring programs. Their general
goal, building on earlier work by Butcher et al. (1993), is 80% power to
detect a 50% decline occurring during 20 years, using a two-tailed test
with the significance level set at 0.15 and acknowledging effects of
potential bias. They analyze existing and feasible levels of accuracy
for shorebirds and show that relatively few species meet the proposed
standard at present but that if the Canadian and U.S. bird conservation
initiatives are implemented, the standard will probably be met for most
shorebird species breeding regularly in North America. We adopt their
proposed standard for this draft of the PRISM description, while
acknowledging that their proposal will need review and perhaps revision
by the ornithological community.

A four-part approach for estimating trends in population size has been
developed:

> 1\. Arctic and boreal breeding surveys.
>
> 2\. Temperate breeding surveys.
>
> 3\. Temperate non-breeding surveys.
>
> 4\. Neotropical surveys.

The rationale underlying this scenario is that trends in population size
can best be studied during the breeding season, on the breeding grounds.
At this time, populations are stable rather than mobile, surveys are
relatively straightforward because the birds are dispersed, and
extrapolation from sampled plots to the entire population can be made
using standard methods from classical sampling theory. This approach
works well in temperate latitudes. In northern areas, where gaining
access is difficult and costly, we propose an initial survey on the
breeding grounds, to obtain estimates of population size, and then
opportunistic data collection from these areas and a comprehensive
program of surveys in staging, migration, and wintering areas at lower
latitudes, where access is reasonably easy, to provide indications of
population declines. When such warning signs appear, or at intervals of
10-20 years, the breeding ground surveys can be repeated to get updated
population sizes and thus estimates of change in population size. This
approach avoids the high cost of annual surveys in remote northern areas
but also avoids complete reliance on trend estimates from migration when
several sources of bias are possible.

The U.S. Plan suggested that selected subspecies and distinct
populations, in addition to all species that breed regularly in the U.S.
and Canada, should be included in the monitoring and assessment program.
The rationale for this suggestion was that many subspecies, and a few
populations, have such different breeding and/or non-breeding ranges
that separate management efforts would be needed if they declined. For
example, the three subspecies of dunlins in North America winter in
different parts of the world, and evidence exists that one (C*alidris
alpina arcticola*) of them may be declining whereas this is not true for
the other two. Computing a single species-wide trend for dunlins does
not provide managers the information they need. Furthermore, it is
relatively straightforward to calculate separate trends for the three
subspecies since they spend both the breeding and non-breeding periods
in almost completely non-overlapping areas. The same rationale holds for
a few distinct populations. For example, small populations of marbled
godwits breed near James Bay and in western Alaska. They are separated
from the main population by hundreds of kilometers, and certainly each
warrant population-specific conservation actions by managers. It thus
seems appropriate to identify them as separate taxa in monitoring and
assessment program.

The U.S. shorebird plan identified 72 species, subspecies, or distinct
populations that warrant separate monitoring and assessment efforts.
With slight modifications following review by Canadian shorebird
specialists, this list now covers 74 taxa including 49 species (Table 1;
Appendix One).

Table 1. Focal taxa that warrant long-term population monitoring and
proposed approaches yet to be evaluated. Existing surveys are identified
by acronym^1^ and targeted protocols (in Appendix 3 of Brown et al.
2001) for one or a few species are identified by protocol number.
Existing surveys in parentheses require improvement and re-evaluation
for adequate monitoring of species; protocol numbers in parentheses
indicate surveys for which the species or subspecies is secondary.

+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Species    | Species or        | Cons | Bree | Bre   | M    | Wi   |
| (common    | subspecies^2^     | erva | ding | eding | igra | nter |
| name)      | (scientific name) | tion | Sur  | Su    | tion | Su   |
|            |                   | Cate | veys | rveys | and  | rvey |
|            |                   | gory | in   | in    | Sta  | s^1^ |
|            |                   | (U   | T    | A     | ging |      |
|            |                   | SSCP | empe | rctic | Su   |      |
|            |                   | )^3^ | rate | and   | rvey |      |
|            |                   |      | Re   | B     | s^1^ |      |
|            |                   |      | gion | oreal |      |      |
|            |                   |      | s^1^ | Regio |      |      |
|            |                   |      |      | ns^1^ |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Bla        | *Pluvialis        | 4    |      | ABBS  | (    |      |
| ck-bellied | squatarola        |      |      |       | P16) |      |
| plover     | squatarola*       |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *P. s. cynosurae* | 3    |      | ABBS  | MS   |      |
|            |                   |      |      |       | (    |      |
|            |                   |      |      |       | P19) |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| American   | *Pluvialis        | 4    |      | ABBS  | MS   |      |
| gol        | dominica*         |      |      | (P13) |      |      |
| den-plover |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Pacific    | *Pluvialis fulva* | 4    |      | ABBS  | (    | P3   |
| gol        |                   |      |      | (P13) | P16) |      |
| den-plover |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Snowy      | *Charadrius       | 5    | P1   |       |      | (    |
| plover     | alexandrinus      |      |      |       |      | P22) |
|            | nivosus* (Pacific |      |      |       |      |      |
|            | coast)            |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *C. a. nivosus*   | 4    | P1   |       |      | (I   |
|            | (interior and     |      | (I   |       |      | PPC) |
|            | Atlantic)         |      | PPC) |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *C. a.            | 5    | P1   |       |      | (I   |
|            | tenuirostris*     |      | (I   |       |      | PPC) |
|            |                   |      | PPC) |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Wilson's   | *Charadrius       | 4    | P4   |       |      | (I   |
| plover     | wilsonia*         |      | (I   |       |      | PPC) |
|            |                   |      | PPC) |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Se         | *Charadrius       | 2    |      |       | MS   |      |
| mipalmated | semipalmatus*     |      |      |       |      |      |
| plover     |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Piping     | *Charadrius       | 5    | IPPC |       |      | IPPC |
| plover     | melodus melodus*  |      | (    |       |      |      |
|            |                   |      | P10) |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *C. m.            | 5    | IPPC |       |      | IPPC |
|            | circumcinctus*    |      |      |       |      |      |
|            |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
|            | Great Lakes       |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *C. m.            | 5    | IPPC |       |      | IPPC |
|            | circumcinctus*    |      |      |       |      |      |
|            |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
|            | Great Plains      |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Killdeer   | *Charadrius       | 3    | BBS  |       | MS   |      |
|            | vociferus*        |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Mountain   | *Charadrius       | 5    | P5   |       |      | X^4^ |
| plover     | montanus*         |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| American   | *Haematopus       | 4    | (    |       | MS   | P6   |
| oys        | palliatus         |      | P10) |       |      |      |
| tercatcher | palliatus*        |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *H. p. frazari*   | 4    |      |       | MS   |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Black      | *Haematopus       | 4    | P7   |       |      | P7   |
| oys        | bachmani*         |      |      |       |      | B    |
| tercatcher |                   |      |      |       |      | CCWS |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Table 1.   |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
| Continued. |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Species    | Species           | Cons | Bree | Bre   | M    | Wi   |
| (common    | (scientific name) | erva | ding | eding | igra | nter |
| name)      |                   | tion | Sur  | Su    | tion | Su   |
|            |                   | Cate | veys | rveys | and  | rvey |
|            |                   | gory | in   | in    | Sta  | s^2^ |
|            |                   | (U   | T    | A     | ging |      |
|            |                   | SSCP | empe | rctic | Su   |      |
|            |                   | )^1^ | rate | and   | rvey |      |
|            |                   |      | Re   | B     | s^1^ |      |
|            |                   |      | gion | oreal |      |      |
|            |                   |      | s^1^ | Regio |      |      |
|            |                   |      |      | ns^1^ |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Bl         | *Himantopus       | 3    | P8   |       | MS   |      |
| ack-necked | mexicanus         |      |      |       | (P9) |      |
| stilt      | mexicanus*        |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *H. m. knudseni*  | 4    | P8   |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| American   | *Recurvirostra    | 3    | (    |       | MS   |      |
| avocet     | americana*        |      | BBS) |       | P9   |      |
|            |                   |      | P8   |       | (    |      |
|            |                   |      |      |       | P25) |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Greater    | *Tringa           | 3    |      | ABBS  | MS   |      |
| yellowlegs | melanoleuca*      |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Lesser     | *Tringa flavipes* | 3    |      | ABBS  | MS   |      |
| yellowlegs |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Solitary   | *Tringa solitaria | 2    |      | ABBS  | MS   |      |
| sandpiper  | solitara*         |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *T. s.            | 3    |      | ABBS  | MS   |      |
|            | cinnamomea*       |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Willet     | *Catoptrophorus   | 3    | BBS  |       | MS   |      |
|            | semipalmatus      |      | P10  |       | (    |      |
|            | semipalmatus*     |      |      |       | P19) |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *C. s. inornatus* | 3    | BBS  |       | MS   | P11  |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Wandering  | *Heteroscelus     |      |      |       | P12  |      |
| tattler    | incanus*          |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Spotted    | *Actitis          | 2    | (    | ABBS  | MS   |      |
| sandpiper  | macularia*        |      | BBS) |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Upland     | *Bartramia        | 4    | BBS  | ABBS  | MS   |      |
| sandpiper  | longicauda*       |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Brist      | *Numenius         | 4    |      | ABBS  |      |      |
| le-thighed | tahitiensis*      |      |      | P13   |      |      |
| curlew     |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Whimbrel   | *Numenius         | 5    |      | ABBS  | MS   |      |
|            | phaeopus          |      |      |       | P14  |      |
|            | hudsonicus*       |      |      |       | (    |      |
|            |                   |      |      |       | P19) |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *N. p.            | 3    |      | ABBS  | MS   |      |
|            | rufiventris*      |      |      | (P13) |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| L          | *Numenius         | 5    | (    |       |      | (    |
| ong-billed | americanus        |      | BBS) |       |      | P11) |
| curlew     | americanus*       |      | P15  |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *N. a. parvus*    | 5    | (    |       |      |      |
|            |                   |      | BBS) |       |      |      |
|            |                   |      | P15  |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Hudsonian  | *Limosa           | 4    |      | ABBS  | MS   | P17  |
| godwit     | haemastica        |      |      |       |      |      |
|            | (*Alaska*)*       |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *Limosa           | 4    |      | ABBS  | MS   | P17  |
|            | haemastica        |      |      |       |      |      |
|            | (*Canada*)*       |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Bar-tailed | *Limosa limosa    | 4    |      | ABBS  | P16  |      |
| godwit     | baueri*           |      |      | (P13) |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Marbled    | *Limosa fedoa     | 4    | (    |       | (P9) | P11  |
| godwit     | fedoa* (Great     |      | BBS) |       |      | (P6) |
|            | Plains)           |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *L. f. fedoa*     | 4    |      | ABBS  | MS   |      |
|            | (Hudson Bay)      |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *L. f. beringiae* | 4    |      | ABBS  | MS   | P11  |
|            |                   |      |      |       | (    |      |
|            |                   |      |      |       | P16) |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Table 1.   |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
| Continued. |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Species    | Species           | Cons | Bree | Bre   | M    | Wi   |
| (common    | (scientific name) | erva | ding | eding | igra | nter |
| name)      |                   | tion | Sur  | Su    | tion | Su   |
|            |                   | Cate | veys | rveys | and  | rvey |
|            |                   | gory | in   | in    | Sta  | s^2^ |
|            |                   | (U   | T    | A     | ging |      |
|            |                   | SSCP | empe | rctic | Su   |      |
|            |                   | )^1^ | rate | and   | rvey |      |
|            |                   |      | Re   | B     | s^1^ |      |
|            |                   |      | gion | oreal |      |      |
|            |                   |      | s^1^ | Regio |      |      |
|            |                   |      |      | ns^1^ |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Ruddy      | *Arenaria         | 3    |      | ABBS  |      |      |
| turnstone  | interpres         |      |      |       |      |      |
|            | interpres*        |      |      |       |      |      |
|            | (Alaska)          |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *A. i. interpres* | 3    |      | ABBS  |      |      |
|            | (high arctic      |      |      |       |      |      |
|            | Canada)           |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | ###### A          | 4    |      | ABBS  | MS   |      |
|            | . i. morinella (l |      |      |       | P19  |      |
|            | ow arctic Canada) |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Black      | *Arenaria         | 4    |      | P18   | MS   | B    |
| turnstone  | melanocephala*    |      |      |       | (P12 | CCWS |
|            |                   |      |      |       | ,20) |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Surfbird   | *Aphriza virgata* | 4    |      |       | MS   | B    |
|            |                   |      |      |       | P20  | CCWS |
|            |                   |      |      |       | (    |      |
|            |                   |      |      |       | P12) |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Red knot   | *Calidris canutus | 4    |      | ABBS  | MS   | (P6  |
|            | rufa*             |      |      |       | P19  | ,17) |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *C. c. islandica* | 3    |      | ABBS  |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *C. c. roselarri* | 3    |      |       | MS   |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Rock       | *Calidris         | 4    |      |       | MS   | B    |
| sandpiper  | ptilocnemis       |      |      |       | P21  | CCWS |
|            | tschuktschorum*   |      |      |       | (    |      |
|            |                   |      |      |       | P16) |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *C. p.            | 4    |      | ABBS  |      | P21  |
|            | ptilocnemis*      |      |      | P21   |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *C. p. cousei*    | 4    |      | ABBS  |      |      |
|            |                   |      |      | P21   |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Sanderling | *Calidris alba*   | 4    |      | ABBS  | MS   | P22  |
|            |                   |      |      |       | P19  |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Se         | *Calidris         | 3    |      | ABBS  | MS   |      |
| mipalmated | pusilla*          |      |      | (P18) | (    |      |
| sandpiper  |                   |      |      |       | P19) |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Western    | *Calidris mauri*  | 4    |      | ABBS  | MS   |      |
| sandpiper  |                   |      |      |       | P23  |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Least      | *Calidris         | 3    |      | ABBS  | MS   | (    |
| sandpiper  | minutilla*        |      |      |       |      | P11) |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Wh         | *Calidris         | 2    |      | ABBS  | MS   | (    |
| ite-rumped | fuscicollis*      |      |      |       |      | P17) |
| sandpiper  |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Baird's    | *Calidris         | 2    |      | ABBS  | MS   |      |
| sandpiper  | bairdii*          |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Pectoral   | *Calidris         | 2    |      | ABBS  | MS   |      |
| sandpiper  | melanotos*        |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Purple     | *Calidris         | 4    |      | ABBS  |      | (    |
| sandpiper  | maritima          |      |      |       |      | CBC) |
|            | maritima*         |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *C. m. belcheri*  | 4    |      | ABBS  | MS   | CBC  |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Dunlin     | *Calidris alpina  | 4    |      | ABBS  | MS   | P11  |
|            | pacifica*         |      |      | (P18) | (    | B    |
|            |                   |      |      |       | P16, | CCWS |
|            |                   |      |      |       | P23) |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *C. a. arcticola* | 5    |      | ABBS  |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *C. a. hudsonia*  | 3    |      | ABBS  | MS   | CBC  |
|            |                   |      |      |       |      | (P6) |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Table 1.   |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
| Continued. |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Species    | Species           | Cons | Bree | Bre   | M    | Wi   |
| (common    | (scientific name) | erva | ding | eding | igra | nter |
| name)      |                   | tion | Sur  | Su    | tion | Su   |
|            |                   | Cate | veys | rveys | and  | rvey |
|            |                   | gory | in   | in    | Sta  | s^2^ |
|            |                   | (U   | T    | A     | ging |      |
|            |                   | SSCP | empe | rctic | Su   |      |
|            |                   | )^1^ | rate | and   | rvey |      |
|            |                   |      | Re   | B     | s^1^ |      |
|            |                   |      | gion | oreal |      |      |
|            |                   |      | s^1^ | Regio |      |      |
|            |                   |      |      | ns^1^ |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Stilt      | *Calidris         | 3    |      | ABBS  | MS   |      |
| sandpiper  | himantopus*       |      |      |       |      |      |
|            |                   | 4    |      | ABBS  | MS   |      |
| Buf        | *Tryngites        |      |      |       |      |      |
| f-breasted | subruficollis*    |      |      |       |      |      |
| sandpiper. |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Sh         | *Limnodromus      | 4    |      | ABBS  | MS   | (P6) |
| ort-billed | griseus griseus*  |      |      |       |      |      |
| dowitcher  |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *L. g.            | 4    |      | ABBS  | MS   |      |
|            | hendersoni*       |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
|            | *L. g. caurinus*  | 3    |      | ABBS  | MS   | (    |
|            |                   |      |      |       | (    | P11) |
|            |                   |      |      |       | P23) |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| L          | *Limnodromus      | 2    |      | ABBS  | MS   | (    |
| ong-billed | scolopaceus*      |      |      |       |      | P11) |
| dowitcher  |                   |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Common     | *Gallinago        | 3    | BBS  | ABBS  |      |      |
| snipe      | gallinago*        |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| American   | *Scolopax minor*  | 4    | A    |       |      |      |
| woodcock   |                   |      | WSGS |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Wilson's   | *Phalaropus       | 4    | (P8) |       | MS   |      |
| phalarope  | tricolor*         |      |      |       | P25  |      |
|            |                   |      |      |       | (P9) |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Red-necked | *Phalaropus       | 3    |      | ABBS  | MS   |      |
| phalarope  | lobatus*          |      |      | (P18) | P26  |      |
|            |                   |      |      |       | (P9) |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+
| Red        | *Phalaropus       | 3    |      | ABBS  | P26  |      |
| phalarope  | fulicaria*        |      |      |       |      |      |
+------------+-------------------+------+------+-------+------+------+

^1^ Existing surveys are listed by acronyms. BBS - Breeding Bird Survey;
ABBS - Arctic and Boreal Breeding Survey; MS - a combination of
migration surveys, including the International Shorebird Survey, the
Maritimes Shorebird Survey, the Western Shorebird Survey, surveys by the
Canadian Wildlife Survey and the British Columbia Coastal Waterbird
Survey, and the South Atlantic Migratory Bird Initiative; CBC -
Christmas Bird Count; IPPC - International Piping Plover Census; AWSGS -
North American Woodcock Singing-ground Survey; and BCCWS - British
Columbia Coastal Waterbird Survey as it pertains to winter surveys (also
included in MS).

^2^ See Appendix One for more information on subspecies and geographic
regions.

^3^ Conservation categories are as follows: 1 - species not at risk, 2 -
species of low concern, 3 - species of moderate concern, 4 - species of
high concern, 5 - highly imperiled.

^4^ Protocol not yet in place.

# Arctic and Boreal Breeding Surveys 

A substantial amount of work has been carried out recently to develop
breeding surveys for shorebirds in remote areas in the arctic and boreal
regions. The current proposal has three components: (1) an extensive
survey, to be carried out at 10-20 year intervals, using random sampling
and methods that permit estimating abundance (not just an index to it)
across all arctic and boreal regions of North America; (2) annual or
semi-annual surveys at 10-20 non-randomly selected permanent shorebird
sites using either index or density methods; and (3) collection of
checklist data, using a standard protocol, at as many sites and as often
as possible.

This program is based on the assumption that reliable information on
breeding populations, as has been collected on waterfowl for many years,
is also needed for shorebirds. Unlike waterfowl, breeding shorebirds
cannot be counted by aerial surveys, and annual surveys on the ground of
all or a large portion of northern North America would be prohibitively
expensive. Thus, periodic surveys, to be carried out at an interval of
10-20 years, are proposed to provide reliable information on population
size. This program will be augmented by surveys every 1 to 5 years at a
series of sites selected non-randomly on the basis of practical issues
such as high quality habitat, frequent visitation by shorebird
biologists, and easy access. We expect to define a variety of protocols
that would differ in methods, cost, and precision of estimates. The
third component is a checklist program. A protocol is being developed
that can be used any time qualified observers visit shorebird breeding
areas. This component of the program will yield information from many
more areas than the regular surveys. Taken together, these components
will provide annual data from numerous, but non-randomly selected, sites
and periodic comprehensive surveys that will provide essentially
unbiased estimates of actual population size and thus of change in size
since the last major survey. The program will provide information of
value in many ways other than monitoring. For example, new information
on distribution and local abundance will be collected as will
information on how weather affects shorebird distribution and nesting
activity. Providing regular reports on these topics will help ensure
continued funding. The three major components of this approach are each
described in more detail below.

## Continental Survey

The continental surveys use a combination of GIS methods to select plots
and a technique known as double sampling to collect the bird
information. In much of the arctic, shorebirds are concentrated in
irregularly shaped patches that cover only a small fraction of the
landscape. Stratified sampling is therefore used to separate the good
and less good habitat so that sampling effort can be concentrated in the
higher quality areas. Patch borders are usually irregular so plot
boundaries follow the natural borders. Thus, plots are of unequal size.

Double sampling, which is being used to estimate bird abundance on the
sample plots, is a standard statistical method from the survey sampling
literature (Cochran 1977, Thompson 1992). When used to estimate bird
density, the method involves one sample surveyed using a rapid method
such as area searches, point counts, or variable circular plots counts,
and a second subsample of these plots on which actual density is
determined through intensive methods. The ratio of the result using the
rapid method to actual density is used to adjust the results from the
large sample of plots. The method yields unbiased estimates of density
-- and thus of trend in density -- if the subsample is selected randomly
and the intensive methods provide accurate counts. No assumptions are
required about how the index ratio in the initial surveys varies with
observer, time of day, habitat or other factors. Thus detection rates
may vary, even considerably, with these factors. In addition to
providing unbiased estimates of density, and thus trend in density,
double sampling has several other advantages: (1) the rapid method can
be changed as new methods become available, (2) domains can be compared
even if detection rates differ (though separate estimates of the
detection rates are then needed), (3) total population size can be
estimated, and (4) valuable ancillary information (e.g., nest success)
can be obtained on intensive plots with little additional effort. Double
sampling has been used to survey waterfowl for many years (e.g.,
Eberhardt and Simmons 1987, Prenzlow and Lovvorn 1996) and has also been
used occasionally in other wildlife studies (Handel and Gill 1992,
Anthony et al. 1999). See Bart and Earnst (2002) for additional
description of the method in bird surveys.

Results from the plot surveys are used to build regression models that
predict the number of birds that would be recorded on rapid surveys
covering each plot in the study area. The sum of these numbers is the
estimated number that would be recorded if the entire study area were
surveyed using the rapid method. This number is divided by the detection
rate obtained from the intensive plots to produce an unbiased estimate
of population size. For more details of the approach see "2001 Annual
Report for the PRISM arctic shorebird surveys" on the PRISM web page
([http://wss.wr.usgs.gov](http://wss.wr.usgs.gov/)). Fig. 1 shows
locations surveyed in 2001 and potential sites for 2002.

Fig. 1. Sites where the comprehensive surveys

have been tested and plans for 2002.

![](media/image1.png){width="3.6104166666666666in" height="2.825in"}

## Regular Surveys at Permanent Sites

These surveys will permit more intensive monitoring in a sample of areas
that are of known importance to shorebirds. There are often sharp
differences in spring weather from year to year at a given site, and
surveys in consecutive years will help avoid erroneous conclusions
caused by erratic weather conditions. Preference should be given to
sites that are easy to access, or that host ongoing, long-term research
programs and facilities, and that have high-quality shorebird habitat.
Some sites should also be contained within existing protected areas
(where there is reasonable certainty that sites will not be disturbed,
and where wildlife-oriented habitat classifications of satellite data
often exist). Possible sites for these surveys in arctic regions of
Canada include Cambridge Bay, Victoria Island; East Bay Bird Sanctuary,
Southampton Island; Polar Bear Pass National Wildlife Area, Bathurst
Island; Truelove Lowland, Devon Island; Prince Charles Island, Foxe
Basin; Coats Island; Dewey-Soper Bird Sanctuary, Baffin Island; Creswell
Bay, Somerset Island; and Bathurst Inlet. In Alaska, possible sites in
the arctic include the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Prudhoe Bay, the
Colville River Delta, Barrow, Wainwright, and one or more locations in
each of the six National Wildlife Refuges (Selawik, Yukon Delta, Togiak,
Alaska Peninsula, Izembek, Alaska Maritimes) in western Alaska.

Potential sites in boreal regions have not yet been identified.

## A Checklist Program 

In 2001, the Canadian Wildlife Service started work on a network of
arctic locations where the NWT/Nunavut Bird Checklist Survey will be
conducted each year. Special consideration will be given to shorebirds
in site selection. Checklist Survey data can be used to identify annual
variation in shorebird distribution, breeding locations and breeding
phenology, and over time it can provide a general indication of trends
in distribution and abundance. Surveys are easy so the network of survey
locations can be extended to other jurisdictions.

## Boreal Regions 

Seven shorebird species breed extensively (and in four cases largely) in
boreal zones. It is not clear what method of monitoring will be most
appropriate for boreal North America; different surveys may be needed
for different species. In the Northwest Territories the Canadian
Wildlife Service will test the use of "mini-BBS" routes (walking routes
that will replace conventional driving routes in roadless portions of
the Territory) to monitor population trends of boreal-nesting shorebirds
such as common snipe and lesser yellowlegs. River BBS routes in Alaska
have high encounter rates of boreal-breeding shorebirds. It may be
possible to extend the double-sampling survey methodology south of the
treeline. Aerial surveys to identify staging lakes might be coupled with
breeding ground surveys to identify important areas within the boreal
region. More planning is needed before a boreal shorebird monitoring
program is implemented. This effort should be coordinated with planning
for boreal songbird monitoring as it is desirable to combine monitoring
efforts for these two groups of birds.

## Other Projects in Support of the Northern Surveys 

An extensive literature review is being conducted to capture and
summarize all existing information on the distribution and abundance of
shorebirds nesting in boreal and arctic regions of North America. A
considerable proportion of arctic shorebird data resides in unpublished
government and industry reports that are not widely accessible. The
literature review will make this information available for such purposes
as selecting survey sites and estimating historical and recent
population size. A map showing distribution and abundance for each
species is being prepared from this database (Fig. 2). The database
contains the following information: (1) location data (place name,
geographic coordinates, habitat type); (2) species presence/absence; (3)
species breeding status and general abundance; (4) species densities;
and (5) literature citation.

Fig. 2. Example of the maps being prepared from the literature review of
northern surveys. This map shows white-rumped sandpiper distribution.
Red dots indicate locations with the species (large = abundant, medium =
common, small = uncommon); yellow dots = species not recorded.

![](media/image2.png){width="4.249305555555556in"
height="2.8152777777777778in"}

Natural history information of use to field surveyors in deciding how
many individuals are nesting on plots they have surveyed is being
compiled for each of the northern-nesting species. These "Survey Tips"
are being prepared by species specialists following uniform guidelines
prepared for this project. All accounts will be posted on a web site,
and shorebird specialists will be invited to contribute their own
observations to the accounts, which will be updated frequently.

An \"Atlas of Beringian Shorebirds\" is being created to increase access
to the large amount of information collected on shorebird distribution,
abundance, biology and migration in Beringia (western Alaska, eastern
Siberia and nearby areas) over the past two decades. Beringia is the
most significant center of shorebird diversity within the Holarctic
region. Numerous species, such as western sandpipers, Baird\'s
sandpipers, pectoral sandpipers, and rock sandpipers, occur in both the
Alaskan and Russian parts of Beringia. Several Beringian endemics have
relatively small ranges in Russia (e.g., great knot) or Alaska (e.g.,
black turnstone) and several nesting species are rare and may require
special protective measures (e.g., bristle-thighed curlew, spoonbill
sandpiper). In addition, some species that nest in Northeast Asia
migrate through Alaska enroute to wintering grounds in Central and South
America. The Atlas and accompanying electronic database will be used to
assess the status of specific shorebird populations in the region and
identify future needs for management, research, and conservation.

# Temperate Breeding Surveys 

The breeding ranges of 17 shorebird species are mainly confined to the
central, temperate region of North America, in the areas of Canada and
the U.S. generally accessible by roads (Table 1). This group includes
three species (spotted sandpiper, upland sandpiper, common snipe) where
more than 2/3 of the breeding range also extends into northern areas
considered inaccessible by road, and these species will also be
monitored by the northern surveys. Priority for monitoring these 17
species mainly depends on the adequacy of their coverage under existing
surveys, and their conservation needs and status. One species (piping
plover) is listed as threatened under the ESA and covered by the
International Piping Plover Census (Plissner and Haig 1997); another
(mountain plover) is a Candidate 1 species under the ESA and will
require a targeted single species survey developed by the recovery team,
if it is listed. The American woodcock is presently being monitored by
the North American Woodcock Singing-ground Survey (Tautin et al. 1983).

The Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) may adequately monitor four additional
species. Species are considered adequately monitored by the BBS if the
standard error of the estimated rangewide trend, expressed as a percent,
is less than 0.9 and there is no reason to believe that bias (e.g.,
roadside bias) is especially large (Bart and Francis 2001). The SE
criterion is met for killdeer, willet, upland sandpiper, and common
snipe (Table 1), and is nearly met for spotted sandpiper (SE = 1.0)
(Sauer et al. 2001, Bart and Francis 2001). An evaluation is needed to
assess whether roadside or other bias is particularly large for these
five species. Coverage under the BBS for these species, as well as for
the American avocet and marbled godwit, could be improved by increasing
in the number of routes and/or by reducing potential survey biases, and
these options may be worth exploring. SEs for all other species, except
the long-billed curlew, are \>1.50 suggesting that even with substantial
improvement, the BBS will not provide adequate coverage for them.
Regardless, the ability of the BBS to monitor breeding shorebirds needs
to be considered carefully for species with prioritization scores of 3
or less in the U.S. and Canadian shorebird plans.

High priority species, such as the long-billed curlew, will require
specially designed monitoring programs. The U.S. and Canadian shorebird
plans presently contain survey protocols for all these species on their
breeding grounds, although these protocols have not been prioritized,
analyzed for possible combinations, or subjected to peer review. The
next step should be a formal peer review and analysis of the suggested
protocols by people most familiar with or interested in the particular
species. Priorities for surveys should be given to species with high
conservation concerns (e.g. scores of 4 or 5) under the U.S. and
Canadian shorebird plans and to combining species with similar ranges
and natural histories. Of the species not adequately covered by existing
surveys, three are highly imperiled (Snowy Plover, Mountain Plover,
Long-billed Curlew) and six are species of high conservation concern
(Wilson\'s Plover, American Oystercatcher, Black Oystercatcher, Marbled
Godwit, Wilson\'s Phalarope) (Brown et al. 2001). Each

Table 1. Standard errors (SEs) for annual rates of change (expressed as
a percent) for shorebird species breeding in accessible areas calculated
from BBS data (Sauer et al. 2000).

  ------------------- ---------- --------------- --------------- ----------
  Species             SE \< 0.90 SE 0.91 to 1.30 SE 1.31 to 1.86 SE \> 1.86

  Killdeer            0.23                                       

  Mountain plover                                                4.51

  Black-necked stilt                                             2.00

  American avocet                                1.36            

  Willet              0.80                                       

  Spotted sandpiper              0.97                            

  Upland sandpiper    0.58                                       

  Long-billed curlew             1.10                            

  Marbled godwit                                 1.38            

  Common snipe        0.42                                       

  American woodcock                                              2.13

  Wilson\'s phalarope                            1.57            
  ------------------- ---------- --------------- --------------- ----------

protocol should include a description of recommendations in the U.S. and
Canadian shorebird plans, results of consultation with species
specialists to consider alternative methods, and recommended approaches
that warrant detailed design, peer review, and field evaluations, with
eventual implementation. Species with lower conservation scores could be
combined in surveys of the species of high concern.

One aspect that should be considered in the design and review of these
new protocols is the use of \'direct\' or \'unbiased\' counts. Many
specialists in avian population biology recommend that, whenever
possible, new monitoring programs use methods that yield \'direct\', or
\'essentially unbiased\' estimates of population density (e.g., counts
when all birds are visible), rather than relying on indirect, or index,
methods (Nichols et al. 2000, Bart and Francis 2001). The rationale for
this recommendation is that too many sources of bias exist with index
methods for high confidence in the trend estimates that they produce. An
additional advantage is that they also yield essentially unbiased
estimates of population size, and thus achieve the first PRISM goal. We
believe that this recommendation should be followed whenever possible in
designing new breeding surveys for accessible species of special
concern, although this criterion is not met in existing surveys (e.g.
BBS).

Currently, six species are adequately monitored by existing surveys (if
bias is not a serious problem), and four other species might be
adequately monitored by the BBS with increased effort. The remaining
high priority species will require special programs. Highest priority
should be given to those species considered highly imperiled or of high
conservation concern (priority number 5 or 4 according to the U.S. and
Canadian shorebird plans).

# Temperate Nonbreeding Surveys 

Surveys during the nonbreeding period will monitor use at stopover
locations, elucidate habitat relationships during this period, and help
local managers meet their shorebird management goals. There is some
debate at present over whether nonbreeding counts can also provide
useful information about population trend, some people believing this is
possible for most species, others feeling the potential inaccuracies are
so great that such surveys might be misleading too often to be of any
value. Most people seem to be agreed that counts during the nonbreeding
period in the foreseeable future will not provide sufficient reliability
to be the only basis for trend estimation, and will, at a minimum, have
to be supplemented by the breeding surveys discussed above. Because
nonbreeding surveys will be carried out in many areas for other
purposes, and because many people feel that they do have considerable
potential as trend estimators, we believe that the issues should be
explored in detail by identifying potential problems, designing a
comprehensive survey to minimize them, and carrying out a careful
assessment of reliability of the resulting program. This section
discusses ways to implement this approach.

The rationale, and challenge, in using nonbreeding surveys to estimate
trends in population size may be explained as follows. Suppose that each
year about the same fraction of birds is in the study area during the
study period, apart from random year effects, and that the survey
provides a good estimate of this number. In this case, trend in the
survey result will be a good estimate of trend in population size. On
the other hand, suppose that the ratio of the survey result to
population size gradually falls from 0.10 to 0.05 during several years.
Then the survey result will suggest a 50% decline even if the population
is actually stable. The key issue in designing and evaluating
nonbreeding surveys is thus whether a long-term trend is likely in the
ratio of the survey result to population size (the "index ratio"). Low
precision of the survey result is also a possible problem, but
investigation of this issue (Bart et al. 2002) shows that large enough
samples can probably be obtained that sampling error will be relatively
small (e.g., CVs \< 0.15). The potential for bias is thus the major
problem to be solved in designing the nonbreeding surveys.

We have identified three potential problems -- referred to below as
frame bias, selection bias, and measurement bias - that would cause a
long-term trend in the index ratio, and thus cause bias in the trend
estimate. The conditions under which each problem *could* arise are
first identified below; then the conditions under which the problem
*does* occur are identified. Frame bias is only possible if the study
area does not include all the areas used by birds during the study
period. Failure of the study area to include all birds does not
necessarily cause bias but it does if there is a long-term trend in the
proportion of the population that is in the study area during the study
period. For example, if an average of 10% of the population is in the
study area during the study period at the start of the monitoring
program, but this fraction gradually falls to 5%, then the trend
estimate will tend to suggest a 50% decline even if the population is
stable. Selection bias is only possible when some parts of the study
area cannot be surveyed, usually due to access problems. The existence
of non-surveyable areas does not necessarily cause bias but it does if
any long-term trend exists in the proportion of birds that are in the
non-surveyable areas. For example, if 50% of the birds are in
non-surveyable portions of the study area initially but this fraction
gradually falls to 25%, then the trend estimate will tend to suggest an
increase even if the number of birds in the study area during the study
period is actually stable. Selection bias could be combined with frame
bias by *defining* the study area to be only the surveyable areas but we
believe it is helpful to distinguish these potential problems and
discuss them separately. Measurement bias is only possible when some of
the birds in the surveyed areas are not recorded or more generally when
the ratio of number recorded to number present does not equal 1.0.
Ratios other than 1.0 do not necessarily cause bias but do if they
exhibit a long-term trend. For example, if 50% of the birds are missed
in the early years of the survey because they are hidden by vegetation,
but this fraction falls to 25% because of changes in vegetation or
survey methods, then the survey will tend to indicate an increase even
if the number of birds present in the surveyed areas is stable.

Quantitative expressions for frame, selection, and measurement bias can
be derived as follows (those not inclined towards mathematical
presentations are urged to skip this paragraph). Assume the study area
is subdivided into strata, that${\overline{y}}_{\text{jk}}$is the mean
for stratum *k*, and that the survey result in year *j*,
${\overline{y}}_{j}$, is the sum of the stratum-specific results,
${\overline{y}}_{j}$ = ∑${\overline{y}}_{\text{jk}}$. Consider the
following:

$$\begin{array}{r}
\sum_{}^{}{{\overline{y}}_{\text{ij}} = \sum_{}^{}{{\overline{y}}_{\text{ij}}\left( \frac{X_{j}^{}}{X_{j}^{}}\frac{\sum_{}^{}{\overline{X}}_{\text{jk}}}{\sum_{}^{}{\overline{X}}_{\text{jk}}}\frac{\sum_{}^{}{\overline{\hat{X}}}_{\text{jk}}}{\sum_{}^{}{\overline{\hat{X}}}_{\text{jk}}} \right)}} \\
\  = X_{j}^{}\left( \frac{\sum_{}^{}{\overline{X}}_{\text{jk}}}{X_{j}^{}}\frac{\sum_{}^{}{\overline{\hat{X}}}_{\text{jk}}}{\sum_{}^{}{\overline{X}}_{\text{jk}}}\frac{\sum_{}^{}{\overline{y}}_{\text{jk}}}{\sum_{}^{}{\overline{\hat{X}}}_{\text{jk}}} \right) \\
\  = X_{j}^{}R_{\text{Fj}}R_{\text{Sj}}R_{\text{Mj}}
\end{array}$$

The first line is a tautology, the second line is a re-arrangement of
the first line, and the third line simply defines new terms. Thus the
expression above is true regardless of how the terms are defined. The
terms can be defined, however, so that R~Fj~, R~Sj~, and R~Mj~ may be
interpreted as sources of frame, selection, and measurement bias
respectively. Let ${\overline{X}}_{\text{jk}}$**=** the average number
that would be recorded in stratum *k* with complete coverage during the
study period in year *j* and let ${\overline{\hat{X}}}_{\text{jk}}$**=**
the estimate of ${\overline{X}}_{\text{jk}}$ from the survey. *R~Fj~* is
then the average proportion of the population, in year *j*, that is in
the study area during the study period (the average is taken across all
times in the study period within year *j*). *R~Sj~* is the ratio of the
estimated number that would be recorded with complete coverage (i.e.,
all locations being surveyed at all times) to the number that would
actually be recorded with complete coverage. *R~Sj~* would differ from
1.0 if some areas cannot be surveyed and estimates of the number that
would be recorded there are inaccurate. *R~Mj~* is the ratio of number
recorded in surveyed areas to number present there. We define the
difference between number recorded and number present as measurement
error. Measurement error does not necessarily cause any bias. Any
long-term trend in *R~Fj~*, *R~Sj~*, or *R~Mj~* (or more accurately a
long-term trend in their product), however, does cause bias. We refer to
the trends (possibly zero) in *R~Fj~*, *R~Sj~*, and *R~Mj~* as frame,
selection, and measurement bias respectively.

A detailed procedure has been developed to design the temperate,
nonbreeding surveys. "Shorebird monitoring regions" were defined by
intersecting a States and Provinces map with a Bird Conservation Regions
map and eliminating small polygons. A separate sampling plan must be
developed for each region that

> \(1\) is based on all existing information on shorebird distribution
> and timing of use in the region,
>
> \(2\) designates a survey period, usually 6-8 weeks in late summer and
> early fall, based on when shorebirds are present in the region,
>
> \(3\) subdivides the region into (a) "Type 1" habitat that is
> regularly used by shorebirds and will be surveyed (usually by
> sampling) 3-6 times annually; (b) "Type 2" habitat that contains few,
> but some, shorebirds and will be surveyed every several years to
> document continued low use, and (c) "Type 3" habitat which is assumed
> to have virtually no shorebirds and will not be surveyed, and
>
> \(4\) describes the monitoring plan including maps and detailed
> descriptions of areas to be surveyed along with survey protocols.

The potential for measurement error, measurement bias, and selection
bias at the site, stratum, and regionwide level is also discussed, and
pilot studies needed before the sampling plan can be completed are
identified. The procedures for conducting these assessments, and
examples of the products produced during the assessment, are available
on the PRISM website, [http://wss.wr.usgs.gov](http://wss.wr.usgs.gov/).

An assessment has been nearly completed for western Utah and is underway
for western Oregon. Several groups around the country have volunteered
to undertake assessment given guidance. There is thus a critical need
for trained PRISM personnel to guide these efforts. One person has been
hired to work Boise, Idaho, and the shorebird committee identified
hiring a second person, to be stationed at Manomet, as one of the top
priorities for 2002.

## Current and Emerging Programs

Several programs exist at present to survey shorebirds during migration.
The International Shorebird Survey (ISS) was started in 1974 by the
Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences. Sites are visited every 10
days by volunteers during spring and fall. The ISS data files contain
results from more than 35,000 surveys of approximately 1,700 sites
widely distributed across the Western Hemisphere. About 1,300 surveys
are added each year. ISS data helped spark the formation of the Western
Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network (WHSRN) and have been used to
identify sites in North and South America that qualify for WHSRN site
designation. ISS data have also been used to chart migration timing at
key sites, and to develop a shorebird atlas. The ISS also sponsors
workshops around the country that show managers how to maximize
management returns by integrating the needs of wildlife species such as
shorebirds and waterfowl.

The Maritimes Shorebird Survey (MSS) was started in 1974 by the Canadian
Wildlife Service, and involves a network of volunteer observers who
count shorebirds at a local study area once every two weeks during the
spring and fall migration periods. The objective of the MSS was
initially to provide information on the distribution, numbers and
phenology of shorebirds passing through the Atlantic Provinces of Canada
(NS, NB, PEI and NF), but the data have also proved valuable in
assessing population trends. Overall nearly 400 sites have been covered
at least once, with about 50 having been covered in 5 or more years.
Data from the MSS and ISS have recently been combined, allowing for a
more powerful analysis of trends.

The Western Shorebird Survey (WSS) was initiated in 2000 by the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Geological Survey to enhance
shorebird monitoring during the non-breeding period, especially in the
western United States where at present no comprehensive monitoring
program exists. The program includes about 200 sites and is implementing
many of the ideas described in the rest of this section.

Monitoring of shorebirds by the Canadian Wildlife Service in British
Columbia has largely been in association with on-going research
programs. The numbers of migrant western and least sandpipers on the
south coast of British Columbia have been tallied since 1992. These
censuses are made on the Fraser River delta and Sidney Island. Periodic
surveys have been made of dunlin on the Fraser River delta and of black
oystercatchers during seabird surveys of the coast. In addition, the
volunteer-based British Columbia Coastal Waterbird Survey was initiated
in 1999 by Bird Studies Canada and the Canadian Wildlife Service to
assess the annual and long-term changes in population size and
distribution of coastal waterbirds in British Columbia. More than 200
sites are included in the program. The program will provide data on
wintering shorebird populations, such as dunlin, black oystercatchers
and other rocky intertidal species.

Monitoring of shorebirds on the Canadian prairies (Alberta, Saskatchewan
and Manitoba) by the Canadian Wildlife Service in partnership with the
Saskatchewan Wetlands Conservation Corporation and Ducks Unlimited, has
occurred over the past 15 years. This monitoring has primarily been in
short term field studies directed at identifying potential WHSRN sites
on specific wetlands or groups of wetlands. Planning is underway to
develop a stronger monitoring effort on the prairies of important
shorebird wetlands and lakes including WHSRN sites (designated and
potential) by a partnership of wildlife agencies and volunteers.
Currently, 25 selected wetlands have been surveyed extensively during
the spring and fall migration periods each for a period of two years.
Observations are also submitted by volunteers on a few key wetlands
across the prairies, but as yet, no consistent monitoring by a volunteer
network is in place.

The South Atlantic Migratory Bird Initiative (SAMBI) Shorebird Survey
was started in 1999. Presently 40 sites along the south Atlantic coast
have committed to monitor shorebird migration. Shorebird numbers during
migration (and wintering data at some sites) are collected using the ISS
data format. Data are collected on or near the dates prescribed by the
Southeastern Coastal Plains-Caribbean Regional Shorebird Plan, to allow
for more direct intra- (and possibly inter-) regional comparison of
shorebird movements. Survey numbers are entered via an internet site
(<http://samb.fws.gov/ref/index.html> ). Presently this site is only
available to USFWS but will be available to all participants and the
public in 2001. Survey data will be forwarded to the ISS. One of the
primary objectives of this site is to allow coordinated management of
impoundments for shorebird migration. Impoundment managers can view
shorebird numbers at all the monitoring sites and fine tune their
drawdown initiation to better coincide with shorebird migration.
Beginning this spring the website will also allow USFWS managers to
enter information on 1) the acres of impoundments being managed for
shorebirds , 2) drawdown initiation dates and 3) the period the
impoundments are available as shorebird habitat. Managers will be able
to see the current \"managed habitat goals\" for their region, for the
current migration period. (These goals for acres of impoundment habitat
were developed in the Southeastern Coastal Plains-Caribbean Regional
Shorebird Plan.) On the website, the acres of impoundments that other
managers have planned for shorebird management will be contrasted with
the goal. This will give managers a sense of how far away or close to
the goal they are, influencing their water management plans for that
migration period. At present, 15 National Wildlife Refuges are
participating in the initial habitat management effort. The number of
participants in the monitoring surveys and the habitat management
surveys will increase once the website is made available to all SAMBI
participants. SAMBI is a joint effort sponsored by the Atlantic Coast
Joint Venture. Partners are USFWS, USFS, NPS, DU, TNC, Private
Landowners and the states of Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North
Carolina and Virginia.

An effort is being made to integrate the ISS, MSS, and WSS, as well as
any other programs interested in collaboration. The individual programs
will continue but we hope to standardize approaches to site selection
and data collection, develop a common data base, and increase efficiency
by having each program take on certain responsibilities for the group.

# Neotropical Surveys 

There is clearly a need to evaluate the efficacy of surveys in Central
and South America. Winter surveys may be especially valuable for species
that primarily winter in southern South America (e.g., buff-breasted
sandpiper, American golden-plover, Baird's sandpiper), for species which
pose special problems during breeding and migration surveys (yellowlegs
and some *Calidris* species), and for species which appear to be
concentrated in certain areas in winter (black-bellied plover, ruddy
turnstone, whimbrel; Morrison and Ross 1989). Aerial surveys of South
America (Morrison and Ross 1989), Panama (Morrison et al. 1998), Central
America (Morrison et al., in prep), and Mexico (Morrison et al., in
prep.) identified major shorebird concentration areas along these
coastlines. Additional information is available from some sites in the
Caribbean. These sites could be included in the sampling frame for
selection of monitoring sites. Specific issues of site access and survey
timing would need to be developed for each survey site.

Surveys along the coasts of South America would sample several North
American breeding species, such as the Hudsonian godwit; however, some
shorebirds are dispersed among inland wetlands and grasslands. These
areas also support austral shorebird migrants (e.g., rufous-chested
dotterel), resident shorebirds (e.g., South American painted snipe), and
other rare, endemic birds (e.g., ochre-breasted pipit). Approaches to
estimate densities of wintering migrant shorebirds and residents could
be adapted from methods developed for accessible, temperate breeding
grounds. An initial step would be to identify sites in South America.

Cooperative shorebird projects are already underway in many parts of
Latin America and the Caribbean (e.g., red knot project, WHSRN sites,
western sandpiper project, Pan American Shorebird Project,
identification of major sites in Baja, Mexico by the Point Reyes Bird
Observatory). In addition, NABCI (North American Bird Conservation
Initiative) emphasizes that bird conservation must be addressed
internationally and linkages with other countries should be encouraged.
We fully realize that monitoring is but one tool that can be used to
accomplish the hemispheric conservation of shorebirds. We hope to use
these projects and their underlying philosophies as a foundation to
build a comprehensive monitoring strategy for shorebirds across the
western hemisphere.

Many of the theoretical approaches previously outlined in this document
are equally applicable to areas south of the U.S.- Mexico border. Close
collaboration among colleagues in North, Central, and South America and
the Caribbean is crucial to realistically assess the feasibility of
implementing monitoring approaches at sites in Latin America and the
Caribbean. Although numerous, effective partnerships currently exist, a
wider network of shorebird enthusiasts needs to be encouraged.
Conversely, knowledge of programs in other countries needs to be more
widely distributed among shorebird workers in the U.S.

Among the recent recommendations of a Western Hemisphere Perspective
Committee to the U.S. Shorebird Planning Council is a suggestion that
shorebird monitoring protocols be \"coordinated and compatible across
the Western Hemisphere\" and that we invite \"participation of Latin
Americans in development of these protocols.\"

# Assistance to Local Managers 

Providing assistance to local managers in meeting their shorebird
conservation goals is one of the PRISM goals. Little work has been done
on this goal to date because the monitoring program is not yet in place.
A few examples, however, are beginning to emerge that illustrate ways in
which the monitoring infrastructure can be of use to managers concerned
about shorebirds. The South Atlantic Migratory Bird Initiative (see
"Surveys During Migration and Staging in North America- Current and
Emerging Programs" above) provides one excellent example. Another
example is provided by The Point Reyes Bird Observatory which has hired
a shorebird conservation specialist to work with local managers in
implementing the Southern Pacific Regional Shorebird Conservation Plan.
The Western Shorebird Survey developed an arrangement with the State of
Utah to provide analytic assistance for their water bird survey in
exchange for assistance in identifying shorebird survey sites and
preparing survey protocols. The International Shorebird Survey has a
long history of working with local managers on their conservation issues
through holding workshops and providing direct technical assistance.
Thus, a few cases exist in which people with monitoring and management
expertise have joined forces. We hope that many more such collaborative
efforts will occur during the next few years; promoting such efforts
should be a major goal of the PRISM.

# Acknowledgments

We appreciate the comments of Gerry Beyersbergen, Brian Collins, Stephen
Dinsmore, Chris Elphick, Lew Oring, Bruce Peterjohn, and Evgeny
Syroechkovski, Jr.

# Literature Cited

Anthony, R. G., M. G. Garrett, and F. B. Isaacs. 1999. Double-survey
estimates of bald eagle populations in Oregon. Journal of Wildlife
Management 63:794-802.

Bart, J., S. Brown, B. Harrington, R. I. G. Morrison, and S. K. Skagen.
2001. An analysis of shorebird migration monitoring as a method for
estimating trend in population size. Manuscript.

Bart, J. and C. Francis. 2001. Quantitative Goals for Avian Monitoring
Programs. Manuscript.

Bart, J. and S. L. Earnst. *In press*. Double-sampling to estimate
density and population trends in birds. Auk.

Bart, J., M. A. Fligner, and W. I. Notz. 1998. Sampling and statistical
methods for behavioral ecologists. Cambridge Univ. Press.

Brown, S., C. Hickey, B. Harrington, and R. Gill (eds.). 2000. United
States Shorebird Conservation Plan. Manomet Center for Conservation
Sciences, Manomet, Massachusetts. 70 pp.

Butcher, G. S., B. G. Peterjohn, and C. J. Ralph. 1993. Overview of
national bird population monitoring programs and databases. Pages
192-203 in D.M. Finch and P.W. Stangel, editors. Status and management
of Neotropical migratory birds: Proceedings of the 1992 Partners in
Flight National Training Workshop, 21-25 September, Estes Park,
Colorado. U.S. Forest Service Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station General Technical Report RM-229.

Cochran, W.G. 1977. Sampling Techniques. J. Wiley & Sons, New York, New
Yor, U.S.A.

Donaldson, G., C. Hyslop, R. I. G. Morrison, I. Davidson. In Press.
Canadian Shorebird Conservation Plan, Special Publication, Canadian
Wildlife Service, Ottawa.

Eberhardt, L. L., and M. A. Simmons. 1987. Calibrating population
indices by double sampling. J. Wildl. Manage. 51(3): 665-675.

Handel, C. M. and R. E. Gill, Jr. 1992. Breeding distribution of the
black turnstone. Wilson Bulletin 104:122-135.

Howe, M. A., P. H. Geissler, and B. A. Harrington. 1989. Population
trends of North American shorebirds based on the International Shorebird
Survey. Biol. Conserv. 49:185-199.

Morrison, R. I. G., and R. K. Ross. 1989. Atlas of Nearctic shorebirds
on the coast of South America, Volume 1,2. Canadian Wildlife Service
Special Publication, Ottawa, Ontario. 325pp.

Morrison, R. I. G., R. W. Butler, F. S. Delgado, and R. K. Ross. 1998.
Atlas of Nearctic shorebirds and other waterbirds on the coast of
Panama. Canadian Wildlife Service Special Publication, Ottawa, Ontario.
112pp.

Nichols, J. D., J. E. Hines, J. R. Sauer, F. W. Fallon, J. E. Fallon,
and P. J. Heglund. 2000. A double-observer approach for estimating
detection probability and abundance from point counts. Auk 117:393-408.

Plissner, J. H. and S. M. Haig. 1997. 1996 International piping Plover
census. Reprot to U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division,
Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, Corvallis, OR.

Prenzlow, D. M., and J. R. Lovvorn. 1996. Evaluation of visibility
correction factors for waterfowl surveys in Wyoming. J. Wildl. Manage.
60(2): 286-297.

Tautin, J., P. H. Geissler, R. E. Munro, and R. S. Pospahala. 1983.
Monitoring the population size of the American woodcock. Transactions of
the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 48:376-388.

Thompson, S. K. 1992. Sampling. J. Wiley & Sons, New York, N.Y.

# Appendix: Shorebird Taxa 

For further information, see Brown et al. 2001.

  ------------------------ ----------------- ---------------- ------------
  Species                  Breeding Area     Wintering Area   Flyway(s)
                                                              Used

  **American                                                  
  Oystercatcher**                                             

  *Haematopus palliatus    Atlantic and Gulf Atlantic and     Central,
  palliatus*               coasts            Gulf coasts      Atlantic

  *H. p. frazari*          Formerly Channel  Formerly Channel Pacific
                           Islands south     Islands south    
                           into Baja         into Baja,       
                                             Mexico           

  **Black-bellied Plover**                                    

  *Pluvialis squatarola    Alaska            Pacific coast    Pacific
  squatarola*                                and south        

  *P. s. cynosurae*        N. Canada         Atlantic and     Central,
                                             Gulf coasts and  Atlantic
                                             south            

  **Snowy Plover**                                            

  *Charadrius alexandrinus Pacific coastal   California to    Pacific
  nivosus*                 (Washington to    Baja             
                           Baja)                              

  *C. a. nivosus*          All other         Southern USA and Pacific,
                           interior breeding Mexico and       Central, and
                           birds and         Caribbean        Atlantic?
                           Atlantic coast                     
                           birds                              

  *C. a. tenuirostris*     Gulf coast east   Caribbean, Cuba, Central,
                           of LA and Mexico  Bahamas          Atlantic

  **Piping Plover**                                           

  *Charadrius melodus      Atlantic coast    Atlantic and     Central?,
  melodus*                                   Gulf coasts,     Atlantic
                                             West Indies      

  *C. m. circumcinctus*    Great Lakes       Atlantic and     Central,
                                             Gulf coasts?     Atlantic?

  *C. m. circumcinctus*    Great Plains      Atlantic and     Central,
                                             Gulf coasts?     Atlantic?

                                                              

                                                              

                                                              

                                                              

                                                              

                                                              

  Species                  Breeding Area     Wintering Area   Flyway(s)
                                                              Used

                                                              

  **Black-necked Stilt**                                      

  *Himantopus mexicanus    Continental USA   Coastal and      Pacific,
  mexicanus*                                 interior sites   Central,
                                             along Pacific,   Atlantic
                                             Atlantic and     
                                             Gulf coasts      

  *H. m. knudseni*         Hawaii            Hawaii           resident

  **Willet**                                                  

  *Catoptrophorus          Atlantic and Gulf Central and      Atlantic
  semipalmatus             coasts            northern South   
  semipalmatus*                              America          

  *C. s. inornatus*        Northern Prairies Pacific coast    Pacific,
                           and Great Basin   into Mexico,     Central and
                                             Gulf coast and   Atlantic?
                                             perhaps Atlantic 
                                             coast            

  **Solitary Sandpiper**                                      

  *Tringa solitara         British Columbia  Atlantic and     Central,
  solitara*                to e. Canada      Gulf coasts      Atlantic

  *T. s. cinnamomea*       Alaska to         Mexico to South  Pacific
                           Mackenzie Delta   America          

  **Long-billed Curlew**                                      

  *Numenius americanus     Southern Great    Pacific, Gulf    Pacific,
  americanus*              Plains from nw.   and Atlantic     Central,
                           Nevada into south coasts, Mexico   Atlantic
                           central Texas                      

  *N. a. parvus*           Northern Great    Pacific and w.   Pacific,
                           Plains to Dakotas Gulf states,     Central
                           and n. Great      Mexico           
                           Basin to ne.                       
                           California                         

  **Whimbrel**                                                

  *Numenius phaeopus       South and west    Atlantic and     Central,
  hudsonicus*              coast of Hudson   Gulf coasts?     Atlantic
                           Bay                                

  *N. p. rufiventris*      Alaska west to    Pacific coast of Pacific?
                           Melville Hills in USA south?       
                           NW Terr.                           

                                                              

                                                              

                                                              

  Species                  Breeding Area     Wintering Area   Flyway(s)
                                                              Used

  **Marbled Godwit**                                          

  *Limosa fedoa fedoa*     Great Plains      West coast into  Pacific,
                                             Mexico, Gulf     Central
                                             coast            

  *L. f. fedoa*            Hudson Bay        se. U.S. coasts? Atlantic?

  *L. f. beringiae*        Alaska            Washington,      Pacific
                                             Oregon and       
                                             central          
                                             California       
                                             coasts?          

  **Hudsonian Godwit**                                        

  *Limosa haemastica*      Western and       ?                Pacific,
                           southern Alaska/                   Central
                           Mackenzie Delta                    

  *Limosa haemastica*      Hudson Bay        ?                Central,
                                                              Atlantic

  **Ruddy Turnstone**                                         

  *Arenaria interpres      Alaska            Pacific islands  Pacific
  interpres*                                 and locally from 
                                             California into  
                                             Mexico           

  *A. i. interpres*        High arctic       Western Europe   Atlantic
                           Canada                             

  *A. i. morinella*        Low arctic Canada Atlantic and     Central?,
                                             Gulf coasts      Atlantic

  **Rock Sandpiper**                                          

  *Calidris ptilocnemis    Mainland Alaska,  SE Alaska into   
  tschuktschorum*          St. Lawrence and  BC-WA            
                           Nunivak islands                    

  *C. p. ptilocnemis*      Pribilofs, St.    Cook Inlet, AK   
                           Matthew and Hall                   
                           islands                            

  *C. p. cousei*           Attu Island,      Aleutians and    
                           Aleutians         Alaska Peninsula 

  **Purple Sandpiper**                                        

  *Calidris maritima       N. Canada, except Europe           Atlantic
  maritima*                east coast Hudson                  
                           Bay                                

  *C. m. belcheri*         east coast Hudson E. Canada and    Atlantic
                           Bay               ne. USA          

                                                              

  Species                  Breeding Area     Wintering Area   Flyway(s)
                                                              Used

  **Red Knot**                                                

  *Calidris canutus rufa*  Low arctic Canada Southern South   Atlantic
                                             America          

  *C. c. islandica*        High arctic       Western Europe   
                           Canada                             

  *C. c. roselarri*        Alaska and        California south Pacific,
                           Wrangel Island    to Atlantic and  Central?,
                                             Gulf coasts      Atlantic?

  **Dunlin**                                                  

  *Calidris alpina         Western Alaska    Pacific coast to Pacific
  pacifica*                                  Mexico           

  *C. a. arcticola*        Northern Alaska   Asia             Pacific?

  *C. a. hudsonia*         Central Canada    Atlantic and     Central,
                                             Gulf coasts      Atlantic

  **Short-billed                                              
  Dowitcher**                                                 

  *Limnodromus griseus     Hudson Bay east   Central and      Central?,
  griseus*                 to Ungava Bay     South America    Atlantic

  *L. g. hendersoni*       Canada, west of   Atlantic and     Central,
                           Hudson Bay        Gulf coasts,     Atlantic
                                             perhaps to n.    
                                             South America    

  *L. g. caurinus*         Southern Alaska   Pacific coast    Pacific
                                             North America    
  ------------------------ ----------------- ---------------- ------------