National Park Service 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Natural Resource Program Center 

Methods for Monitoring Migratory and Wintering 

Shorebirds in Southeast Coast Network Parks

Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR—2009/107 
ON THE COVER 

Clockwise from top left: piping plover (Photograph by MDF, 2008), Red Knot, (Photograph by Jan Van de Kam, 2006), Wilson’s 

plover, (Photograph by Pascal Aleixandre, 2007), American oystercatcher (Photograph by Al Wilson, 2006). 
Methods for Monitoring Migratory and Wintering 

Shorebirds in Southeast Coast Network Parks

Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR—2009/107 

Michael W Byrne and Jessica M. Maxfield 

Southeast Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network 

Cumberland Island National Seashore 

PO Box 806 

Saint Marys, GA 31558 

Joe DeVivo, Christina J. Wright, and Emma Thompson 

Southeast Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network 

National Park Service 

100 Alabama St., SW 

Atlanta, GA 30303 

May 2009 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

National Park Service 

Natural Resource Program Center 

Fort Collins, Colorado 
ii 

The Natural Resource Publication series addresses natural resource topics that are of interest and 

applicability to a broad readership in the National Park Service and to others in the management 

of natural resources, including the scientific community, the public, and the NPS conservation 

and environmental constituencies. Manuscripts are peer-reviewed to ensure that the information 

is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, 

and is designed and published in a professional manner. 

Natural Resource Reports are the designated medium for disseminating high priority, current 

natural resource management information with managerial application. The series targets a 

general, diverse audience, and may contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues 

of management applicability. Examples of the diverse array of reports published in this series 

include vital signs monitoring plans; monitoring protocols; "how to" resource management 

papers; proceedings of resource management workshops or conferences; annual reports of 

resource programs or divisions of the Natural Resource Program Center; resource action plans; 

fact sheets; and regularly-published newsletters. 

Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations and data in this report are solely 

those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the U.S. Department of 

the Interior, NPS. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute 

endorsement or recommendation for use by the National Park Service. 

This report is available from the Southeast Coast Network and the Natural Resource Publications 

Management website (http://www.nature.nps.gov/publications/NRPM). 

Please cite this publication as: 

Byrne, M. W., J. C. DeVivo, J. M. Maxfield, C. J. Wright, and E. Thompson. 2009. Methods for 

monitoring migratory and wintering shorebirds in Southeast Coast Network Parks. Natural 

Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR—2009/107. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. 

NPS 100007, May 2009 
iii 

Contents 

Page 

Background and Objectives ............................................................................................................ 2

Overview ............................................................................................................................. 2

Shorebirds in SECN Parks .................................................................................................. 3

Justification for Monitoring ................................................................................................ 5

Measurable Objectives ........................................................................................................ 6

Sampling Design ............................................................................................................................. 8

Monitored Population ......................................................................................................... 8

Site Selection ...................................................................................................................... 8

Sampling Frequency and Replication ............................................................................... 15

Rationale for Selecting this Sampling Design .................................................................. 18

Field Methods ............................................................................................................................... 20

Field Season Preparations and Equipment Setup .............................................................. 20

Conducting the Line Transect Survey ............................................................................... 20

Data Management ......................................................................................................................... 22

Overview of Database Design .......................................................................................... 22

Data Entry ......................................................................................................................... 22

Analysis and Reporting ................................................................................................................. 24

Database Summaries and Reports ..................................................................................... 24

Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 25

Reporting........................................................................................................................... 30

Personnel Requirements and Training .......................................................................................... 32

Roles and Responsibilities ................................................................................................ 32
iv 

Qualifications and Training .............................................................................................. 32

Operational Requirements ............................................................................................................ 34

Annual Workload and Field Schedule .............................................................................. 34

Facility and Equipment needs ........................................................................................... 34

Startup Costs and Budget Considerations ......................................................................... 34

Procedures for Revising the Protocol ............................................................................... 34

Literature Cited ............................................................................................................................. 36

Standard Operating Procedure 1 Season Preparation, Equipment, and Training ......................... 40

Sampling Locations .......................................................................................................... 40

Sampling Schedule............................................................................................................ 42

Equipment ......................................................................................................................... 42

Training ............................................................................................................................. 43

Standard Operating Procedure 2 Conducting a Line Transect Survey ......................................... 46

Procedures ......................................................................................................................... 46

Sequence of Events during Field Season .......................................................................... 51

Standard Operating Procedure 3 Data Entry and Management .................................................... 58

Data Entry ......................................................................................................................... 58

Reporting........................................................................................................................... 66

Database Support .............................................................................................................. 80

Standard Operating Procedure 4 Data Analysis ........................................................................... 82

Database Summaries and Reports ..................................................................................... 82

Analyses from Database Exports ...................................................................................... 90

Standard Operating Procedure 5 Reporting .................................................................................. 98

Report Format ................................................................................................................... 98

Review Procedure ............................................................................................................. 98
v 

Distribution Procedure ...................................................................................................... 99 
1 
2 

Background and Objectives 

Overview 

Shorebirds play a vital role in the trophic dynamics of our coastal ecosystems (Moreira 1997, 

Leguerrier et al 2003) and are indicators of the conditions of those systems (Morrison 1986). 

Because many shorebird species are highly specialized predators, the diversity of species present 

and their duration of stay in a location is often a good indication of the condition of that location. 

Shorebirds also contribute to many people’s general enjoyment of the outdoors, are the focus for 

many wildlife watchers, and consequently, have a significant positive impact on state and local 

economies (Leonard 2008). In a recent study of the economic impact of wildlife watching, 

Florida ranked 2nd, North Carolina ranked 8th, and Georgia 17th in the number of people involved 

in wildlife-watching activities, with 4.2, 2,6, and 1.9 million documented participants, 

respectively (Leonard 2008). Of these states, Florida ranked 2nd, Georgia 4th, and North Carolina 

14th in total annual salaries, wages, and business income to the state resulting from wildlifewatching activities, at just under two billion, one billion, and a half a billion dollars, respectively 

(Leonard 2008). 

Despite this quantifiable interest, and subsequent positive financial impact, many shorebird 

populations have exhibited substantial population declines (Donaldson et al. 2000, Brown et al. 

2001). Approximately half of all shorebird species are considered at risk (Brown et al 2001), 

many of which use the National Parks in Southeast Coast Network (SECN) at some time during 

the year (Figure 1). Among these species are piping plover (Charadrius melodus), red knot 

(Calidris canutus), American oystercatcher (Haematopus palliates), and Wilson’s plover 

(Charadrius wilsonia), henceforth collectively referred to as “focal shorebirds.” 

Habitat loss and degradation is the primary threat to shorebirds. Many shorebirds often migrate 

substantial distances between their breeding and wintering ranges, and are dependent upon the 

availability of adequate resources throughout the migratory range. While shorebirds in SECN 

parks exhibit short-, medium, and long-range migrations, migrations of any distance require a 

substantial amount of energy to sustain. Slight perturbations in any part of their respective 

ranges can have significant negative impacts on survival and reproduction (Davidson and 

Piersma 2000, Sandberg and Moore 1996, Piersma and Baker 2000, Bêty et al. 2003). 

The importance of protected areas, such as National Parks, that provide adequate resources is 

paramount, as many shorebird species use these areas year-round. Consequently, well-designed 

and scientifically sound monitoring protocols will further our understanding of shorebird 

population status and trends, and provide the information necessary to aid land managers in 

decisions regarding shorebird species. 

Because of their high mobility, use of multiple habitat types including dense vegetation, cryptic 

coloration, and frequently low detectability, shorebirds present many challenges to effective 

monitoring and abundance estimation. No single technique is completely effective, and several 

techniques (e.g., air surveys, boat surveys, point counts, driving counts) are typically utilized to 
3 

collect count data and generate indices of abundance, or occasionally calculate abundance 

estimates. 

Shorebirds in SECN Parks 

Coastal barrier island ecosystems represent one of six primary ecosystems present in the SECN 

(DeVivo et al., 2009). The Southeast supports over 200 individual barrier islands (Bellis and 

Keough 1995), several of which are contained (or partially contained) within five parks in the 

SECN: Cape Hatteras National Seashore, Cape Lookout National Seashore, Cumberland Island 

National Seashore, Fort Matanzas National Monument, and Canaveral National Seashore (Figure 

1). Migratory and wintering piping plover in the SECN consist of the threatened Atlantic Coast 

and Great Plains populations and the endangered Great Lakes population; which are protected 

under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (as amended in 1982). 

Figure 1. Location of parks within the Southeast Coast Network. Parks where the wintering and migratory 

shorebird monitoring protocol would be applicable are indicated with blue circles. 

[

[

[

[ [

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

Ocmulgee NM

Congaree NP

Canaveral NS

Moores Creek NB

Fort Pulaski NM

Cape Lookout NS

Fort Raleigh NHS

Fort Matanzas NM

Cape Hatteras NS

Horseshoe 

Bend NMP

Fort Caroline NMEM

Charles Pinckney NHS

Cumberland Island NS

Kennesaw 

Mountain NBP

Wright Brothers NMEM

Chattahoochee 

River NRA

Castillo de San Marcos NM

Fort Sumter NM

Timucuan EHP

Fort Frederica NM
4 

The natural ecosystems of these islands are diverse and dynamic, resulting from system drivers 

such as climate, geomorphology, local sediment deposition, and the forces of ocean currents, 

tides, wind, salt spray, erosion, and violent ocean storms (Figure 2) (Bellis 1992, Stalter and 

Odum 1993, Bellis and Keough 1995). 

Figure 2. Conceptual ecosystem model of relationships among focal shorebird species, habitats, and factors 

that affect management efforts. 

In addition to system drivers, the shorebird populations and their habitats are further affected by 

predation from invasive species (red foxes, feral cats), disturbance from humans (including offroad vehicles, pedestrians, and dogs). Resource management efforts are implemented at each 

park to then mitigate those effects (Figure 2). Data on human-induced mortality (either directly 

or indirectly) is critical for NPS managers to minimize human impacts on native animals, 

populations, and communities in general (NPS Natural Resource Management Policy 4.4.1). 

Migratory and wintering shorebirds are typically found within a set of clearly-definable habitat 

types; however information regarding habitat use of shorebirds during the migratory and 

wintering period at many National Parks remains limited (Figure 3). Observational data 

collected under this protocol can be used in conjunction with other information available (i.e., 

habitat distribution) to facilitate habitat-based management and inform management decisions. 
5 

Figure 3. Conceptual diagram of general juxtaposition of habitat types identified in SECN Migratory, 

Wintering, and Beached Shorebird Monitoring Protocol. 

Justification for Monitoring 

The National Park Service strives to understand, maintain, restore, and protect the natural 

resources, processes, systems, and values of the parks while providing meaningful and 

appropriate opportunities to enjoy them. This protocol is designed to inform park managers of 

the distribution of wintering and migratory shorebirds throughout park units, the habitats in 

which shorebirds are commonly observed, the times of day/year in which those observations 

occur, and the presence or absence of local and system drivers that are known or expected to 

affect shorebirds. However, consistently and systematically collected data on trends in presence, 

timing, and habitat use for do not exist for wintering and migratory shorebirds that occur in 

SECN parks. 

Specifically, park managers need information regarding areas of active and consistent shorebird 

use to guide multiple management decisions. The ability to predict areas of use by shorebirds, 

many of which are protected through one or more statutes or regulations, will allow NPS 

managers to make decisions regarding seasonal access restrictions and the type and intensity of 

visitor access. Identification and inventories of habitat types are critical to park managers for 

managing designated critical habitat, essential habitat, and recovery areas to maintain and 

enhance their value for the recovery of threatened and endangered species (NPS Natural 

Resource Management Policies 4.4.1.1 and 4.4.2.3). 

Additionally, 

• The Recovery Plans for all three piping plover populations highlight the limited current 

knowledge on migratory and wintering patterns and emphasize the need for more 

information (USFWS 1988, USFWS 1996, USFWS 2003). 

• A standardized systematic monitoring protocol presents an opportunity for acrossgovernmental agency and non-governmental organization cooperation and data-sharing 

as shorebirds migrate and winter across many jurisdictional boundaries and are 
6 

systematically monitored in many locations (e.g., Cape Cod National Seashore, Great 

Lakes). 

• Data are limited regarding frequency and duration of habitat use by the aforementioned 

shorebirds and relative abundance of wintering populations. 

Measurable Objectives 

This protocol has three objectives: 

1. Determine the status and trends in migratory and wintering shorebirds in SECN parks 

using normalized observations. 

2. Determine the trends in migratory and wintering shorebirds in areas open and closed to 

vehicles in SECN parks using normalized observations. 

3. Determine the habitat types used by migratory and wintering shorebirds in SECN parks 

and if these patterns change over time. 

This protocol is designed to ensure 90% certainty that we can detect a 20% change in the annual 

number of shorebirds using normalized observations (i.e., observations / unit of effort) with a 5% 

chance of obtaining a false-change error (i.e., α = 0.05, β = 0.20). 

In addition to the monitoring objectives above, the protocol is designed to provide park managers 

with scientifically defensible data upon which to make day-to-day management decisions. This 

protocol is intended to provide information that can be interpreted in conjunction with other data 

being collected by SECN Vital Signs Monitoring Program (DeVivo et al., 2009) or by the 

individual parks in which wintering and migratory shorebirds are collected (such as habitat type 

maps). 
7 
8 

Sampling Design 

Although shorebirds use a multitude of habitat types, this protocol focuses on a single-survey 

technique (i.e., line transects) to survey shorebird habitat types associated with beach and dune 

communities. Compared to densely-vegetated communities, beach and dune communities have 

the highest likelihood of detection (i.e., moderate to good detectability), relative ease of access, 

and also exhibit strong recreational pressures. Unlike monitoring efforts implemented to date 

within SECN parks such as the International Shorebird Survey (ISS) and volunteer bird watching 

efforts, this protocol utilizes a systematic approach, standardized effort, and a data management 

system that allows for a rapid feedback loop between data-collection efforts and informationproduct dissemination to park managers. We have, however, designed the protocol such that data 

collected following the methods presented herein are consistent with and can be reported to the 

ISS. We have presented a sampling design for monitoring all shorebirds at Cape Hatteras 

National Seashore (CAHA) for illustrative purposes; sampling designs for other coastal parks in 

the SECN are not presented. 

Monitored Population 

The populations of interest for this protocol are shorebirds that migrate through or winter in 

SECN coastal parks. The migratory component of this protocol is defined as August – October 

and February – April. The wintering component was defined as November – December. 

Site Selection 

All accessible coastal beachfront areas in SECN parks deemed as potential shorebird migratory 

or wintering habitat are included in the sampling design and are defined as the sampling frame. 

The sampling units used for this protocol should be based on an existing park-mile or parkkilometer structure (used consistently throughout any given park). Wherever possible, sampling 

units should be established such that they correspond with existing monitoring zones. For 

example at CAHA the sampling units were chosen such that they are co-located with sea turtle 

management or monitoring zones (Figures 4-8). This shared sampling unit among monitoring 

programs might further increase the utility of these data in assisting with management decisions 

and contributing to larger-scale monitoring efforts. 

Because shorebird habitat types are often not evenly distributed in barrier-island systems, special 

consideration should be given to the selection of an appropriate sampling frame, and should be 

directly reflective of the monitoring objectives. For example, if the objectives focus on arrival 

and departure phenology or characterizing differential use across a location (e.g., determining 

high-use areas), a spatially broad design is warranted. If a specific location is of interest due to 

management concerns (e.g., development or recreational pressures), focus should be placed in 

these areas. Shorebirds, as a whole, use a variety of different habitat types. The selection of a 

sampling frame based solely upon the proportion of a specific habitat type known to be used by 

some shorebird species might bias the results for a many other shorebird species; as those 

habitats more frequently used will not be adequately characterized. Subsets of any given 

location (e.g., the sampling frame includes only accreted areas) might reduce sampling effort, but 

sacrifice location-wide inference of the results and might result in data that do not reflect true 
9 

patterns in abundance, arrival and departure phenology, and duration of stay. Consequently, 

knowledge of the biology of the species included in the objective also plays a role in determining 

the sampling frame. Further, because the definition of shorebirds varies (i.e., many families in 

Ciconiiformes, “sea ducks” in Anseriformes), and their use of habitat types varies, a definition of 

shorebirds that reflects the location-specific monitoring goals and objectives will also facilitate 

determination of areas to be included in the sampling frame. 

In locations where sampling frames are long, linear, remote, or have inherent access issues (like 

many parks in the SECN), realistic sampling designs that facilitate reasonable and useful spatial 

and temporal levels of inference are challenging to develop; particularly when the subsequent 

data are necessary for near-real time decision support or used in an adaptive management 

context. If travel distances are large between sampling units, the sampling frame should be 

divided into sub-units where daily samples can be aggregated, sample size increased, and travel 

times between sampling units reduced. Each sub-unit should have an approximately equal 

number of sampling units and a relatively equal distribution of high- and low-intensity sampling 

units (Figures 4-8). This design includes all sampling units across the park, where the units are 

sampled on a rotating basis but at differing sampling frequencies (i.e., intensities). 
10 

Shorebird Monitoring Protocol

Sampling Sub-units

.

1:482,706

0 4 8 12 16 2 Miles

Cape Hatteras National Seashore

Southeast Coast Network

National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

Park Sub-unit

Bodie

Middle Hatteras

South Hatteras

Ocracoke

Pamlico

Sound

Atlantic

Ocean

Study Area

VA

NC

Map Extent

Figure 2

Figure 5

Figure 4

Figure 3 Ocracoke

South

Hatteras

Middle

Hatteras

Bodie

Figure 4. Geographic location of Cape Hatteras National Seashore, the four sub-units identified in this 

protocol, and the park miles used as sampling units. 
11 

PM 00

PM 01

PM 02

PM 03

PM 18

PM 19

PM 20

PM 21

PM 22

PM 23

PM 24

PM 25

PM 26

PM 27

PM 28

PM 04 (s, i, o)

Shorebird Monitoring Protocol:

 Bodie Sub-unit

.

1:250,033

01234 0.5 Miles

Cape Hatteras National Seashore

Southeast Coast Network

National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

Pamlico

Sound

Atlantic

Ocean

Low Intensity Sampling

 Site / Park Mile

High-intensity

Sampling Site

Figure 5. Bodie sub-unit at Cape Hatteras National Seashore. [PM – Park Mile; s – Soundside; i – Interior; o - 

Oceanside]. 
12 

PM 29

PM 30

PM 31

PM 32

PM 33

PM 34

PM 35

PM 36

PM 37

PM 38

PM 39

PM 42

PM 43

PM 44

PM 45 (s, i, e)

Shorebird Monitoring Protocol:

 Middle Hatteras Sub-unit

.

1:162,324

01234 0.5 Miles

Cape Hatteras National Seashore

Southeast Coast Network

National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

Pamlico

Sound

Atlantic

Ocean

Low Intensity Sampling

 Site / Park Mile

High-intensity

Sampling Site

Figure 6. Middle Hatteras sub-unit at Cape Hatteras National Seashore. [PM – Park Mile; s – Soundside; i – 

Interior; o - Oceanside]. 
13 

PM 40

PM 41

P

M

46

PM 47

P

M

4

8

P

M

4

9

P

M

50

PM

51

PM

52

PM

53

PM

54

PM

55

PM

56

PM

PM 58 (s, i, o) 57

Shorebird Monitoring Protocol:

 South Hatteras Sub-unit

.

1:156,128

01234 0.5 Miles

Cape Hatteras National Seashore

Southeast Coast Network

National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

Pamlico

Sound

Atlantic

Ocean

Low Intensity Sampling

 Site / Park Mile

High-intensity

Sampling Site

Figure 7. South Hatteras sub-unit at Cape Hatteras National Seashore. [PM – Park Mile; s – Soundside; i – 

Interior; o - Oceanside]. 
14 

PM

60

PM

61

PM

62

PM

63

PM

64

PM

65

PM

66

PM

67

PM

68

PM 6

PM

9

7

PM

0

7

P

1

M 7

P

2

M 7

P

3

M 74

PM 59 (s, i, o)

PM 75 (s, i, o)

Shorebird Monitoring Protocol:

 Ocracoke Sub-unit

.

1:131,709

01234 0.5 Miles

Cape Hatteras National Seashore

Southeast Coast Network

National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

Pamlico

Sound

Atlantic

Ocean

Low Intensity Sampling

 Site / Park Mile

High-intensity

Sampling Site

Figure 8. Ocracoke sub-unit at Cape Hatteras National Seashore. [PM – Park Mile; s – Soundside; i – 

Interior; o - Oceanside]. 
15 

Sampling Frequency and Replication 

The revisit design for this protocol consists of a two-tiered approach for sampling shorebirds; 

with sampling panels varying by sampling frequency at a combination of high- and low-intensity 

sampling units. The high-intensity units are typically accreted areas such as spits and points, 

bayside or oceanside overwash areas, or other areas with known shorebird presence (anecdotal or 

previously measured). Low-intensity units are all other oceanside / beachfront areas. This 

revisit design consists of a split-panel design, where revisits are weekly for the high-intensity 

units and once every four weeks for the low-intensity units (i.e., a [1-0, 1-3] panel) (Table 1). 

Each park is divided into subunits (park subunit) that contain one high-intensity sampling unit 

and several low-intensity sampling units that provide an adequate sub-sample of the remainder of 

the sub-unit (Figure 4). The units selected as the high-intensity sampling units are one of known 

occurrences of the element of interest (e.g., shorebirds) or are one of particular management 

interest (e.g., units with higher recreational pressure than other units within the sampling frame). 

Each time the park subunit is visited, the high-intensity unit within the sub-unit is sampled along 

with a subset of low-intensity units; the number of low-intensity units sampled is dependent upon 

the amount of effort available). 

The order in which high- and low-intensity sampling units are sampled is randomly assigned 

using any random number generator. Sampling units should not be sampled at intervals less than 

four days to avoid any potential across-day observer influence on focal-shorebird presence and 

maintain independence of observations. Table 2 outlines the sampling schedule for high- and 

low-intensity units at CAHA. This order in which sites are sampled is repeated throughout the 

sampling season to ensure that at any given time, a spatially and temporally balanced sample is 

collected within the sampling frame. 

In locations that are subject to predictable and short-term cyclic processes (e.g., tides) that may 

affect detectability, movement, habitat use, etc., of the element of interest, stratification by 

certain ranges of the cyclic process is the most common solution to insure equal distribution, or 

intentionally biased representation, of the sampling events. Because the diel cycle (24 hours) is 

not exactly divisible by the tidal cycle (6.21 hours), sampling at the same time each day will 

ensure an equal distribution of samples during all portions of the tidal cycle. 

In the high-intensity sampling regime, all subunits are sampled in their entirety during each 

sampling event. The observer begins observations of the unit (oceanside, soundside, or interior) 

closest to the access point for the site to avoid observer influence on birds prior to measurement. 

No sampling unit is sampled at an interval of less than four days to avoid any potential acrossday observer influence on focal-shorebird presence and maintain independence of observations. 

Table 1 outlines an example sampling schedule for high- and low-intensity units and is designed 

to be conducted on a five-day work week, beginning Wednesday of each week with Mondays 

and Tuesdays off. The sampling order of high- and low-intensity sampling units is randomly 

determined. The migratory component of this protocol is defined as August – October and 

February – April. The wintering component was defined as November – December. 

 
16 

Table 1. 

Split panel revisit design [1-0, 1-3] for migratory and wintering shorebird monitoring. Note: all high-intensity 

units at the Park are sampled once every four days and all low-intensity units are sampled every 16 days.. 

Panel Sampling Day 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

High Intensity 

Ocracoke X X X X 

South Hatteras X X X X 

Middle Hatteras X X X X 

Bodie X X X X 

Low Intensity 

Ocracoke 1 X 

Ocracoke 2 X 

Ocracoke 3 X 

Ocracoke 4 X 

South Hatteras 1 X 

South Hatteras 2 X 

South Hatteras 3 X 

South Hatteras 4 X 

Middle Hatteras 1 X 

Middle Hatteras 2 X 

Middle Hatteras 3 X 

Middle Hatteras 4 X 

Bodie 1 X 

Bodie 2 X 

Bodie 3 X 

Bodie 4 X 
17 

Table 2. 

Sixteen-day Implementation schedule for monitoring wintering and migratory shorebirds at sampling highand low-intensity sites at Cape Hatteras National Seashore. The schedule assumes that sampling will only 

be conducted four days per week; if more frequent sampling is possible, sites are to be sampled in the same 

order. [PM – Park Mile; s – Soundside; i – Interior; o - Oceanside]. 

WEEK 1 Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 

Morning PM 60 (NE Oracoke) PM 58 (Hatteras Isl Spit) PM 46 (Cape Point) PM 4 (Bodie Western Inlet) 

 PM 74 (Ocracoke Isl Spit) PM 5 (Bodie Central Oceanside) 

 

Afternoon PM 63 PM 47 PM 32 PM 0 

 PM 98 PM 50 PM 36 PM 3 

 PM 72 PM 55 PM 38 PM 19 

 

WEEK 2 Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 

Morning PM 60 (NE Oracoke) PM 58 (Hatteras Isl Spit) PM 46 (Cape Point) PM 4 (Bodie Western Inlet) 

 PM 74 (Ocracoke Isl Spit) PM 5 (Bodie Central Oceanside) 

 

Afternoon PM 64 PM 44 PM 35 PM 2 

 PM 65 PM 48 PM 37 PM 20 

 PM 71 PM 49 PM 41 PM 23 

 PM 53 

 

WEEK 3 Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 

Morning PM 60 (NE Oracoke) PM 58 (Hatteras Isl Spit) PM 46 (Cape Point) PM 4 (Bodie Western Inlet) 

 PM 74 (Ocracoke Isl Spit) PM 5 (Bodie Central Oceanside) 

 

Afternoon PM 62 PM 43 PM 29 PM 21 

 PM 66 PM 52 PM 33 PM 22 

 PM 67 PM 56 PM 34 PM 25 

 PM 59 PM 40 PM 27 

 

WEEK 4 Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 

Morning PM 60 (NE Oracoke) PM 58 (Hatteras Isl Spit) PM 46 (Cape Point) PM 4 (Bodie Western Inlet) 

 PM 74 (Ocracoke Isl Spit) PM 5 (Bodie Central Oceanside) 

 

Afternoon PM 61 PM 42 PM 30 PM 1 

 PM 69 PM 51 PM 31 PM 24 

 PM 70 PM 54 PM 39 PM 24 

 PM 73 PM 57 PM 45 PM 28 
18 

Sampling Unit Setup 

Within any sampling unit, monitoring is conducted along at least one transect. Generally, highintensity sampling units will require several transects/ subsamples due to their larger size and to 

ensure adequately sampling within the entire area. Data are collected from all sub-sample 

transects during each sampling event. Sub-sample transects should be spaced far enough apart to 

avoid counting the same individuals, but close enough to adequately characterize species 

occurrences. Transect spacing for this protocol was determined by collecting distance-sampling 

data during pilot implementation, and calculating the effective strip width (i.e., 300 meters) 

(Buckland et al. 2001). General beachfront sampling units (i.e., low-intensity units) typically 

warrant only one transect. 

Rationale for Selecting this Sampling Design 

This sampling design was selected for several reasons: 

1. This design allows for park-wide inference 

2. More emphasis is placed in sampling units of known shorebird presence 

3. Analysis of data from pilot-year implementation indicate good to excellent power to 

detect small 10-20% changes in counts (Byrne et al. 2009) 
19 
20 

Field Methods 

Field Season Preparations and Equipment Setup 

Methods for monitoring shorebirds are a general adaptation of those developed for Cape Cod 

National Seashore (Erwin et al. 2003). Shorebird observations are made along line transects, and 

the transect locations must be determined prior to the field season or after significant storm 

events that alter the sampling units. All transects start points must be confirmed in the field. The 

sampling order of all sites must also be determined through a simple randomization process. 

Quarterly surveys, or after significant storm events, should be implemented of all beachfront 

areas not included in the spatial sampling design of this protocol to determine if potential key 

habitat types occur in areas other than the accreted areas and should subsequently be included in 

the high-intensity sampling regime. 

All equipment should be organized, tested, and assembled several weeks prior to the field season 

to determine if gear needs to be repaired (e.g., new batteries for the range finder) or new 

equipment ordered (Table 1-1). The provided list is for one field person; if additional personnel 

are used, then addition gear will need to be assembled. Additional discussion can be found in 

Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) #1 “Season Preparation, Equipment, and Training.” 

Conducting the Line Transect Survey 

The technique for quantifying shorebird observations consists of time-constrained transect-based 

surveys within the entire sampling frame in the allotted time. The survey technique is an 

adaptation of a line-transect survey with distance-to-bird sampling (Anderson 1979, Buckland et 

al. 2001). Line transects surveys are generally most effective in open vegetation community 

types where the target species are mobile and flush easily, occur in low densities, and are easily 

identified. 

Transect length is dependent upon the sampling frame, or the existing infrastructure used as 

sampling-unit boundaries (e.g., beach miles or kilometers) and is sampled for 30 minutes. It is 

important to note that sampling units must be of approximately equal size throughout the 

sampling frame, such that equal amounts of time are spent surveying equal amounts of area. 

The observer walks a straight line, as indicated from a location and compass bearing identified in 

SOP #1 “Season Preparation, Equipment, and Training”, along the beach on a trajectory that 

parallels the surf zone and maximizes observability across the entire beach. If the entire beach 

cannot be observed in one pass (i.e., with one transect), another transect, parallel to the initial 

one, is conducted; this should be determined as part of the season preparation described in SOP 

#1. If multiple transects are necessary, transects should be > 300m apart (see Byrne et al. 2009). 

In situations that require an additional parallel transect(s), the transect closest to the access point 

is always measured first to prevent the bias associated with traveling through a site, that is 

planned to be measured, prior to collecting measurements. In sites with multiple transects, all 

within-site transects are measured consecutively to minimize the likelihood of bird movements 

and possible double-counting. This is discussed further in SOP #2 “Conducting a Line Transect 

Survey.” 
21 
22 

Data Management 

Overview of Database Design 

The SECN Shorebird Monitoring Database consists of a SQL Server 2005 database, InfoPath 

2007 forms, a SharePoint site, and a help file, “Help.doc”. The InfoPath forms are stored on the 

SharePoint site and can be accessed by anyone with adequate permissions. The database can be 

used by multiple users at a time. 

Data Entry 

To navigate to the SECN SharePoint website, type ‘SECN’ in the address bar of an Internet 

Explorer window and press Enter (Figure 3-1). Then Click on the Explore Data tab in the upperright of the window to enter the data-entry and reporting portal (Figure 3-1). Click on the 

Shorebird link under Protocols (Figure 5-2), and then click on the Data Entry link (Figure 3-3). 

From the Shorebird Data Entry Forms window, all available data entry and editing forms are 

presented (Figure 3-4). This window may also be accessed by typing of copying the following 

link into the address bar of an internet browser: 

http://inpserosecn2/DataReports/Shorebird/Lists/Shorebird%20Data%20Entry%20Forms
23 
24 

Analysis and Reporting 

Two forms of analyses and reports exist as part of this protocol, those conducted by the database 

and those necessitating data export and use of other software packages. Each protocol objective 

is addressed through a specific database output, except for statistical evaluation of trends. Data 

summaries and analysis are further described, including examples, in SOP # 4 “Data Analysis”. 

Summaries and reports available from the SECN Shorebird Monitoring Database used for this 

protocol are available on the SECN SharePoint site 

(http://inpserosecn2/DataReports/Lists/Shorebird%20Reports/AllItems.aspx). Summaries and 

reports generated by the database are: 

• International Shorebird Survey (ISS) reporting form 

• North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) shorebird reporting form 

• Total observations chart 

• Total observations by habitat chart 

• Closure observations chart 

• Vehicle, people, and dog count charts 

• High counts export 

Database exports requiring further analysis include: 

• Power analysis output 

• Distance sampling raw data export 

• Beached/Dead bird raw data output 

• Walking transects with distance sampling raw data output 

• Walking transects without distance sampling raw data output 

Database Summaries and Reports 

• ISS Reporting Form – This report allows you to auto-populate an International Shorebird 

Survey form, suitable for printing and submission, based upon a user-defined query of the 

Park, site(s) within a Park, and date range. 

• NCWRC Shorebird Reporting Form – This report allows you to auto-populate a North 

Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) shorebird reporting form, suitable 
25 

for printing and submission, with piping plover observations. Currently, this report is 

only designed to report piping plover observations. 

• Total Observations Chart – This function depicts the number of normalized observations 

by Park, Site, Species, and Date Range. Normalized (i.e., counts controlled for by effort) 

and non-normalized outputs are available. 

• Total Observations by Habitat Chart – This function depicts the proportion of total 

observations by habitat type as defined by Park, Site, Species, and Date Range, as a pie 

chart. These data are available in bar charts as total number of observations in each 

habitat. 

• Closure Observations Chart – This function depicts the number of normalized 

observations “Inside” and “Outside” closures by Park, Site, Species, and Date Range. 

Normalized and non-normalized outputs are available. 

• Car, People, and Dog count Charts – This function depicts normalized counts of cars, 

people, and dogs by Park, Site, and Date Range. Normalized and non-normalized outputs 

are available. 

• High Counts Export – This function depicts the three highest counts of a selected species 

by Park, Site, and Date Range. 

Data Analysis 

Raw data or summarized data outputs are available through the database to facilitate the 

following data analyses to be conducted in external software packages. 

Power Analysis 

The accompanying database will export the information necessary for a monthly and annual 

power analysis. The power analysis is not performed in the database. 

Although sampling designs may vary from location to location, particularly in regard to the 

sampling frame, following is an example of a park-wide sampling frame, encompassing 60 

sampling units, with a nine-month sampling period, and implemented by one person. This 

sampling design is described in more detail in Byrne et al. (2009), and was implemented as part 

of this protocol’s pilot year’s protocol evaluation. 

In summary, it consists of a park-wide sampling frame that includes all beachfront areas and is 

sampled for nine months per year. To estimate statistical power under this design, means and 

variability from pilot data were used, and an average-monthly sample size was used. Our 

sampling objective remains the same as above, to secure 90% assurance (i.e., power) that we can 

detect an annual change of 20% in the mean of normalized counts (i.e., minimum detectable 

change) with a 5% chance of a false-change error (i.e., detecting a change when one does not 

actually exist). Data are evaluated on the ability to detect annual and monthly trends. Further, 

sensitivity to changes in normalized counts is also evaluated in three seasonal groups, 1) fall 

migrants, 2) wintering birds, and 3) spring migrants, where monthly data are pooled. The power 
26 

to detect trend is calculated with the equation for permanent plots without the finite population 

factor (Elzinga et al. 1998). 

This power analysis was based on a) our pilot data variability, and b) a proposed design to 

sample 60 sites in a randomly assigned order (i.e., averaging 70 total samples per month). As 

with the previous power analysis example, we do not achieve adequate power to detect even 

large monthly trends. We do meet our sampling objective in our expected ability to detect a 20% 

change in normalized counts annually with 92% power (Figure 9). Fall and spring improved 

over the previous example, where we expect 92% power to detect a 30% change in the fall group 

(Figure 10), and we expect 80% power to detect a 20% change in the spring group (Figure 11). 

We expect excellent power (i.e., 99%) to detect even small changes (10%) in normalized counts 

of the wintering group (Figure 12). From a purely statistical-power perspective, this type of 

design is far superior in terms of its ability to detect trend, but depends upon a technician 

dedicated to this monitoring protocol for 3⁄4 of the year (i.e., 0.75 FTE). 

An example of a power analysis of a sampling design with fewer sampling units and samples 

collected s presented in SOP #5 “Data Analysis.” 

Figure 9. Predicted power across groups to detect annual trends in normalized counts, where x = 0.5533, s

= 0.5902, n = 630. 
27 

Figure 10. Predicted power to detect annual trends in normalized counts for the fall group, where x = 0.9838, 

s = 0.9049, n = 210. 

Figure 11. Predicted power to detect annual trends in normalized counts for the spring group, where x = 

0.4569, s = 0.3362, n = 210. 
28 

Figure 12. Predicted power to detect annual trends in normalized counts for the winter group, where x = 

0.2192, s = 0.0471, n = 210. 

Abundance Estimation 

If the distance sampling results in the required number of distance measurements (i.e., > 80 

statistically independent samples), abundance estimates of the wintering population can be made. 

Program DISTANCE is used to calculate a detection function and abundance estimates (see 

Buckland et al. 2001). The database exports observation data where distance estimates were 

collected for this analysis. 

Index Validity 

Due to the expected small population size of wintering focal shorebirds, it is not expected that a 

valid abundance estimate for focal-shorebird wintering populations will be generated using 

distance-sampling methods. Abundance estimation of the migratory population of focal 

shorebirds is not possible because these populations violate a basic assumption of abundance 

estimation in that they are considered “open” (i.e., the population is subject to births, deaths, 

immigration, or emigration). 

Shorebird count data collected under this protocol results in a constant-proportion population 

index E(C) = βN, where E (C) = the expected count, β = probability of detection, and N = the 

actual population size. The primary assumption of this index is that performance remains 

constant for varying values of N (i.e., it is linearly correlated), and this protocol is not designed 

to address this assumption or the efficacy of the index. As is frequently the case with population 

indices, difficulty exists in establishing the true relationship between index performance (i.e., 

validity) and true population abundance. Further implementation of the distance sampling 

component, however, will serve as a preliminary means to address the validity of the index by 
29 

determining if detectability remains constant over time. For example, if the index reveals two 

counts that are substantially different at the same site between time year 1 and year 2 but 

detectability also varies between the two sampling events, it is more likely the differing counts 

reflect differences in detectability rather than differences in true population size. Other potential 

ways to assess index validity are: 1) if the monitoring effort has moderate to good power (i.e., β

< 0.2), this increases the confidence in index performance, 2) if distance sampling does result in 

a valid detection function and subsequent abundance estimate, the relationship between these 

two values can be explored, 3) the proportion of banded birds in a sample over time may also 

serve as a means to evaluate index validity (i.e., a mark/recapture – re-sight study); which can be 

done easily as part of this protocol, 4) implement a double-sampling approach, or 5) since the 

wintering piping plover population assumed to be small, coordinated simultaneous counts 

repeated over several days would result in a timelier estimate with an associated confidence 

interval, however detectability will not be accounted for using this technique. It is important to 

note that inferences of abundance based on an index that has not been validated can result in 

incorrect conclusions and assumptions. 

It is unknown if normalized counts generated form data collected under this protocol are 

proportional to abundance. Therefore, normalized counts should not be used to infer patterns in 

abundance unless the aforementioned index-validity procedures are conducted. 

Relationships Among Variables 

Frequency of focal shorebird detections by habitat type can be explored with contingency tables 

(Zar 1999). A Pearson correlation can be used to explore the relationship between potential 

sources of disturbance (e.g., cars, people, unleashed dogs) and the number of focal shorebird 

observations (Zar 1999). The relationship of the proportion of observations in each habitat type 

to tidal stage can be explored with a Spearman correlation (Zar 1999). As monitoring continues 

and the number of observations increases, the null hypothesis of no relationship among tidal 

stage and habitat use can be tested with log-linear models; with detection/non-detection (i.e., the 

observation) as the response variable and tidal stage, habitat type, and weather variables as 

explanatory variables (i.e., included if these variables are not correlated) (Zar 1999). 

Key Area Use 

Normalized counts (i.e., observations / unit effort) of migratory and wintering shorebirds from 

pilot-year implementation were not normally distributed with equal variance, nor was normality 

achieved through transformations. If future data are normally distributed, two-sample t tests can 

be used to test the null hypothesis of no difference between sites (Zar 1999). For non-normally 

distributed data, a Mann-Whitney test should be used for comparisons among sampling units to 

test the null (Zar 1999). 

Trend analysis 

Time-series analysis will provide us information regarding the pattern of observations over time 

and facilitate forecasting and prediction. Based upon data from pilot implementation of this 

protocol, the authors assume the data will rarely be normally distributed with equal variance. 

Therefore, a non-parametric test will be used for trend analysis. A Kendall trend test (Hirsh et al. 

1982) will be used to evaluate trends in normalized counts of migratory and wintering 

shorebirds. This technique accounts for seasonal variation by allowing data to be grouped 
30 

according to a predefined season. Defined analysis groups for this analysis are 1) fall migrants, 

2) wintering birds, and 3) spring migrants. The analysis groups, or “seasons”, used for the 

Kendall trend test can be adjusted slightly (i.e., +/- one month) to account for inter-annual 

variability in migratory phenology. Migrants are split into two separate groups in an effort to 

account for the influence that variability in over-winter survival could have on trends in an 

aggregate of migration groups. For example, a specific shorebird population exhibits high 

productivity in a given breeding season and subsequently high recruitment into the fall/migrating 

population, but over-winter survival is low resulting in fewer returning spring migrants. Pooled 

values across the two migratory periods would exhibit high variability, but mean values would 

likely mask true changes, result in misleading conclusions, reduce the ability to associate 

changes with a particular period; and decrease our ability to potentially mitigate these effects 

with management actions. 

Reporting 

This is discussed further in SOP #5 “Reporting”. In order to facilitate integration of data 

collected under this protocol with those collected under other shorebird monitoring efforts (e.g., 

ISS), several reporting functions have been built into the database. Further, the reporting 

requirements outlined in Appendix I of the Piping Plover Recovery Plan (1996) guide key 

components of monitoring data collected in the field and included in reporting functions (except 

for those regarding banded-bird observations). For example, state agencies typically have the 

responsibility of acquiring and submitting relevant data to the USFWS. North Carolina Wildlife 

Resources Commission data forms are incorporated into the database and auto-populated based 

upon user-defined date ranges. ISS reporting forms are also an output option from the database. 

See SOP #3 “Data Entry and Management” and SOP #4 “Data Analysis” for more information 

on canned reports and analysis options. 

The authors recommend an annual reporting cycle to summarize observed patterns in monitored 

shorebirds. Because the shorebird migratory and wintering period does not correspond with a 

typical end-of-the-calendar year reporting schedule, reports should be produced by the end of 

fiscal year. Reports should include standard outputs from the database in addition to export 

analyses (e.g., distance analysis, across-year comparisons). Interpretation and recommendations 

should be included in this document. These documents should be peer- and park-reviewed and 

distributed to interested parties. Formatting recommendations are provided in SOP #5. 
31 
32 

Personnel Requirements and Training 

Roles and Responsibilities 

The Park’s resource staff, or equivalent, hires, supervises, and trains personnel for protocol 

implementation. The intern / field technician is responsible for collecting all data, data entry, 

and database backup. The Southeast Coast Network (SECN) staff with assist with training, 

analyses not included in the database, or other purposes as requested and time permitting. 

Qualifications and Training 

This is discussed further in SOP #2 “Season Preparation, Equipment, and Training”. The 

number of species to be included in this monitoring effort should be a function of the ability of 

the intern / field technician to accurately identify the species, and the objectives of the Park 

implementing the protocol. By keeping the number of monitored species small, this protocol 

was designed to be implemented by personnel with limited or no bird-monitoring experience; 

however field personnel must be able to consistently properly identify the chosen species. The 

minimum requirement for field personnel is a Bachelor’s Degree in a natural-resource field. The 

selected person must also be motivated to learn, walk long distances, deal with adverse weather 

conditions, and put in long hours during sampling days. If multiple observers are to be used, 

Interobserver reliability testing should be conducted to ensure data collected are compatible. 
33 
34 

Operational Requirements 

Annual Workload and Field Schedule 

This protocol is implemented 5-days per week from 1 August to 30 April of each year, with an 

expected annual FTE expenditure of ca. 0.80 FTE (this includes time for data entry and 

summary). 

Facility and Equipment needs 

If a Student Conservation Association 12-month intern is used to conduct this protocol, housing 

will be necessary. An equipment list is included in SOP #1, Season Preparation, Equipment, and 

Training. A 4WD vehicle will also be necessary for protocol implementation. 

Startup Costs and Budget Considerations 

Startup costs consist of equipment (see SOP #1, Season Preparation, Equipment, and Training), 

much of which the park currently owns. Further costs include a Student Conservation 

Association 12-month intern at an estimated cost of $26,000.00 annually. 

Procedures for Revising the Protocol 

Over time, revisions to both the Protocol Narrative and to specific SOPs are to be expected. 

Careful documentation of changes to the protocol and a library of previous protocol versions are 

essential for maintaining consistency in data collection and for appropriate treatment of the data 

during data summary and analysis. The Microsoft Access database for each monitoring 

component contains a field that identifies which version of the protocol was being used when the 

data were collected. 

The rationale for dividing a sampling protocol into a Protocol Narrative with supporting SOPs is 

based on the following: 

• The Protocol Narrative is a general overview of the protocol that gives the history and 

justification for doing the work and an overview of the sampling methods, but that does 

not provide all of the methodological details. The Protocol Narrative will only be revised 

if major changes are made to the protocol. 

• The SOPs, in contrast, are very specific step-by-step instructions for performing a given 

task. They are expected to be revised more frequently than the protocol narrative. 

• When a SOP is revised, in most cases, it is not necessary to revise the Protocol Narrative 

to reflect the specific changes made to the SOP. 

• All versions of the Protocol Narrative and SOPs will be archived in a Protocol Library. 
35 
36 

Literature Cited 

Anderson, D. R., J. L. Laake, B. R. Crain, and K. P. Burnham. 1979. Guidelines for line transect 

sampling of biological populations. Journal of Wildlife Management 43:70-78. 

Bêty, J., G. Gauthier, and J. F. Giroux. 2003. Body condition, migration, and timing of 

reproduction in snow geese: a test of the condition-dependent model of optimal clutch size. 

American Naturalist 162:110–121. 

Brown, S., C. Hickey, B. Harrington, and R. Gill. 2001. The United States shorebird 

conservation plan, 2nd ed. Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences. Manomet, 

Massachusetts, USA. 

Buckland, S. T., D. R. Anderson, K. P. Burnham, J. L. Laake, D. L. Borchers, and L. Thomas. 

2001. Introduction to Distance Sampling: Estimating Abundance of Biological Populations. 

Oxford University Press. 432 pp. 

Byrne, M. W., J. M. Maxfield, and J. C. DeVivo. 2009. Migratory and wintering shorebird 

monitoring at Cape Hatteras National Seashore, 2006/2007. Natural Resource Report 

NPS/SECN/NRTR—2009/001. National Park Service, Fort Collins Colorado, USA. 

Cohen, J. B., S. M. Karpanty, D. H. Catlin, J. D. Fraser, and R. A. Fischer. 2008. Winter ecology 

of piping plovers at Oregon Inlet, North Carolina. Waterbirds 31:472-479. 

Cohen, J. B. 2005. Management and protection protocols for the threatened piping plover 

(Charadrius melodus) on Cape Hatteras National Seashore, North Carolina. U.S. Geological 

Survey. 

Cooper, S. 1990. Notes on piping plovers nesting at Cape Hatteras National Seashore during 

1987. Chat 54:1-6. 

Coutu, S., J. D. Fraser, J. McOnnaughey, and J. Loegering. 1990. Piping plover distribution and 

reproductive success on Cape Hatteras National Seashore. Dept. of Fisheries and Wildlife 

Sciences, Virginia Tech University, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA. 

Davidson, and T. Piersma. 1992. The migration of knots: Conservation needs and implications. 

Wader Study Group Bulletin 64 Supplement:198-209. 

Davis, M. B., T. R. Simons, M. J. Groom, J. L. Weaver, and J. R. Cordes. 2001. The breeding 

status of the American oystercatcher on the east coast of North America and breeding success 

in North Carolina. Waterbirds 24(2):195-202. 

Donaldson, G. M., C. Hyslop, R. I. G. Morrison, H. L. Dickson, and I. Davidson. 2000. Canadian 

Shorebird Conservation Plan. Canadian Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Canada. 

Elzinga, C. L., D. W. Salzer, and J. W. Willoughby. 1998. Measuring and monitoring plant 

populations. BLM Technical Reference 1730-1, Denver, Colorado, USA. 
37 

Erwin, R. M., C. J. Conway, S. W. Hadden, J. S. Hatfield, and S. M. Melvin. 2003. Waterbird 

monitoring protocol for Cape Cod National Seashore and other coastal parks, a protocol for 

the long-term coastal ecosystem monitoring program at Cape Cod National Seashore. Longterm Coastal Ecosystem Monitoring Program, Cape Cod National Seashore, Wellfleet, 

Massachusetts, USA. 

Federal Register. 2001. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants: Final determinations of 

critical habitat for wintering Piping Plovers; final rule. Federal Register 50 CFR, Part 17, 

pages 36037-36038. 

Goss-Custard, J. D., R. T. Clarke, S. E. A. Le V. Dit Durell, R. W. G. Caldow, and B. J. Ens. 

1996. Population consequences of winter habitat loss in a migratory shorebird. II: Model 

predictions. Journal of Applied Ecology 32:337-351. 

Harrington, B. A., J. P. Meyers, and J. S Grear. 1989. Coastal refueling sites for global migrants. 

Pages 4293-4307 in Proceedings of the Sixth Symposium on Coastal and Ocean 

Management, O.T. Magoon, H. Converse, D. Miner, L.T. Tobin, and D. Clark, editors. 

American Society of Civil Engineers, Salem, Massachusetts, USA. 

Harrington, B. A. 2001. Red knot (Calidris canutus). Pages 1-32 in A. Poole and F. Gill, editors. 

The Birds of North America. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 

USA. 

Hoopes, E. M. 1994. Breeding ecology of piping plovers nesting at Cape Cod National Seashore. 

National Park Service, South Wellfleet, Massachusetts, USA. 

Kuklinski, M. L., L. M. Houghton, and J. D. Fraser. 1996. Piping plover breeding ecology on 

Cape Hatteras National Seashore with special reference to the effect of temperature on 

productivity. Dept. of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences, Virginia Tech University, 

Blacksburg, Virginia, USA. 

Lafferty, K. D. 2001. Disturbance to wintering western snowy plovers. Biological Conservation 

101:315-325. 

Leguerrier, D., N. Niquil, N. Boileau, J. Rzeznik-Orignac, P. G. Sauriau, O. Le Moine, and C. 

Bacher. 2003. Numerical analysis of the food web of an intertidal mudflat ecosystem on the 

Atlantic coast of France. Marine Ecology Progress Series 246:17-37. 

Leonard, J. 2008. Wildlife watching in the U.S.: The economic impacts on state and national 

economies in 2006. Addendum to the 2006 national survey of fishing, hunting, and wildlifeassociated recreation. Report no. 2006-1. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arlington, 

Virginia, USA. 

Loegering, J. P. 1992. Piping plover breeding biology, foraging ecology, and behavior on 

Assateague Island National Seashore, Maryland. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State 

University, M.S. Thesis, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA. 
38 

Moreira, F. 1997. The importance of shorebirds to energy fluxes in a food web of a south 

European estuary. Estuary, Coastal and Shelf Ecology 41:67-78. 

Morrison, M. 1986. Birds as indicators of environmental change. Current Ornithology 3:485-

490. 

Meyers, J. M. 2005. Management, monitoring, and protection protocols for American 

Oystercatchers at Cape Hatteras National Seashore, North Carolina. U.S. Geological Survey, 

Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, Maryland, USA. 

Nol, E., and R. C. Humphrey. 1994. American Oystercatcher (Haematopus palliates). In A. Pool 

and F. Gill, editors. The Birds of North America, Number 82, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 

USA. 

Piersma, T. and A. J. Baker. 2000. Life history characteristics and the conservation of migratory 

shorebirds. Pages 105-124 in L. M. Gosling and W. J. Sutherland, editors. Behaviour and 

Conservation. Cambridge University Press, UK. 

Sandberg, R. and F.R. Moore. 1996. Fat stores and arrival on the breeding grounds: reproductive 

consequences for passerine migrants. Oikos 77:577–581. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1988. Great Lakes and Northern Great Plains Piping Plover 

Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C, USA. 160 pp. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus), Atlantic Coast 

Population, Revised Recovery Plan. Hadley, MA. 258 pp. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003. Recovery Plan for the Great Lakes Piping Plover 

(Charadrius melodus), Ft. Snelling, Minnesota, USA. 149 pp. 

Zar, J. H. 1999. Biostatistical Analysis. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, USA. 
39 
40 

Standard Operating Procedure 1 

Season Preparation, Equipment, and Training 

This Standard Operating Procedure explains the activities involved in season preparation. This 

SOP gives a brief overview of the duties involved, including reconnaissance of the accreted areas 

included in the sampling design, organizing field equipment, and implementing training of field 

personnel. Establishing transect assume the user has some familiarity with ArcGIS software, as 

this software is the preferred method for transect establishment. 

Sampling Locations 

If the sampling frame includes beachfront sites, these sampling units can generally be covered by 

one transect. Since shorebird habitat types are often not evenly distributed in barrier-island 

systems, special consideration should be given to the selection of an appropriate sampling frame, 

and should be directly reflective of the monitoring objectives. For example, if the objectives 

focus on arrival and departure phenology or characterizing differential use across a location (e.g., 

determining high-use areas), a spatially broad design is warranted. Byrne et al. (2009) provides 

an example of this protocol’s implementation with a park-wide systematic random sampling 

design. If a specific location is of interest due to management concerns (e.g., development or 

recreational pressures), focus should be placed in these areas. Shorebirds, as a whole, use a 

variety of different habitat types. The selection of a sampling frame based solely upon the 

proportion of a specific habitat type known to be used by some shorebird species, may bias the 

results for a many other shorebird species; as those habitats more frequently used will not be 

adequately characterized. Subsets of any given location (e.g., the sampling frame includes only 

accreted areas) may reduce sampling effort, but sacrifice location-wide inference of the results 

and may result in data that do not reflect true patterns in abundance, arrival and departure 

phenology, and duration of stay. Consequently, knowledge of the biology of the species 

included in the objective also plays a role in determining the sampling frame. Further, because 

the definition of shorebirds varies (i.e., many families in Ciconiiformes, “sea ducks” in 

Anseriformes), and their use of habitat types varies, a definition that reflects the location-specific 

monitoring goals and objectives will also facilitate determination of areas to be included in the 

sampling frame. 

Due to the dynamic nature of barrier island ecosystems (e.g., erosion and accretion), areas within 

the sampling frame should be re-evaluated prior to each sampling season in order to determine 

transect placement within these sampling sites. ArcGIS is the most effective, and recommended 

way, to conduct this process. Transect establishment is dependent upon the sampling frame 

chosen as part of the sampling design. If the sampling frame includes accreted areas, these areas 

are generally wide and warrant multiple transects to be placed as sub-samples of the sampling 

unit or site. 

Begin with aerial imagery if available. If available, use a mile- or kilometer-marker coverage as 

the boundary for these areas and as a means to delineate the sampling units into sites of 

approximate equal length. A sampling unit warrants more than one transect if it is >300m wide. 

In order to cover each sampling site in its entirety, transect placement within these units is 

systematic. The initial transect is placed at the mean-high tide line along the oceanside of an 
41 

accreted area and each subsequent transect is systematically placed 300m apart on a linear line 

that traverses the unit (Figure 1-1). Via heads-up digitizing, draw the first line (transect) 

adjacent to the wrack line. Ensure the line covers the entire length of the area designated to be 

sampled. It is important to note that sampling units must be of approximately equal size 

throughout the sampling frame, such that equal amounts of time are spent surveying equal 

amounts of area. Measure the length and azimuth of the line and record these in the attribute 

table of the shapefile. Additional lines (transects) should be added as necessary to cover the unit 

completely, and should be no less than 300 meters apart. All transects should be parallel to one 

another, if possible. Distance between transects was determined by calculating an effective strip 

width from distance-sampling data collected during the first year of protocol implementation (see 

Byrne et al. 2009). All efforts should be exerted to have transects of equal length across the 

sampling frame; as this protocol uses a time-constrained sampling methodology. If transects are 

of different length, it significantly complicates the analysis, data recording, and the monitoring 

activities themselves. If transects must be curved or bent to fit into a designated area, then the 

300-meter minimum distance between transects must be maintained; however all effort should be 

exerted to avoid this. Number transects in increasing order, in the predominant direction of the 

unit, from north to south and east to west. For example, in Figure 1-1, the easternmost transect 

would parallel the mean high-tide line and be numbered “1”, and the transect immediately to 

west of number “1” would be numbered “2”. Record the azimuth of each transect and the startpoint GPS coordinate of each transect. Ground-truth all transect locations in the field prior to 

fieldwork as part of the reconnaissance activities. Maps of each sampling unit, or logical 

aggregates of sampling units, should be made for reference while in the field. Maps should 

include the origin GPS coordinate and azimuth of the transect, so the starting point can be 

navigated to correctly and the transect can be followed precisely. Laminate maps if possible. 

In addition, quarterly surveys, or after significant storm events, should be implemented of all 

beachfront areas not included in the spatial sampling design of this protocol to determine if 

potential key habitat types occur in areas other than the accreted areas and should subsequently 

be included in the sampling regime. 
42 

Milemarker

Monitoring transect

Linear distance

Figure 1-1. Example of pre-season transect placement in an accreted area. 

Sampling Schedule 

Once all sampling locations and transects have been determined, a random order is assigned (via 

the command RANDOM in Microsoft Excel), and sampling occurs in this order throughout the 

season. All sites should be sampled in one day to control for inter-site movement of birds. 

Migratory and wintering shorebird monitoring should begin on 1 August and conclude on 30 

April. Special exceptions of the sampling duration can be made such that sampling activities do 

not disturb birds initiating nests, incubating eggs, or brooding, or other wildlife activities. 

Equipment 

All equipment should be organized, tested, and assembled several weeks prior to the field season 

to determine if gear needs to be repaired (e.g., new batteries for the range finder) or new 

equipment ordered (Table 1-1). The provided list is for one field person; if additional personnel 

are used, then addition gear will need to be assembled. 
43 

Table 1-1. 

Field equipment, amount, and general purpose necessary for protocol implementation. 

Amount Item General Purpose 

1 4WD vehicle Site access 

1 8-10X binoculars Bird ID at short to medium distances 

1 Spotting scope Bird ID at long distances 

1 Range finder (1000-yd range) Calculate distance to detected birds 

1 Field guide and other bird-identification materials Proper bird identification 

5 Map of each sampling unit(s), access areas, and 

park miles 

Site access and orientation 

15 Data sheets Recording data 

3 Pencils Recording data 

1 Habitat descriptions and other code definitions Habitat ID and recording data 

1 Compass with adjustable declinationa Determining azimuth of transect and 

azimuth to detected birds 

1 Field thermometer Recording temperature 

1 Watch with stopwatch function Timing transect sampling 

1 Daypack For equipment storage 

1 Communications (e.g., radio, cell phone) For emergencies 

1 Personal protective gear (e.g., sunscreen, first 

aid, insect repellent) 

Always maintain personal safety 

a The proper declination can be acquired from the declination information on the bottom border of a 

standard 7.5-minute quadrangle. 

Recommended bird identification sources: 

• National Geographic. 2002. Field Guide to Birds of North America, 4th Edition. 

National Geographic, Washington, D.C. 480 pages. 

• Sibley, D.A. 2000. The Sibley guide to birds. Alfred A. Knopf, New York, NY. 544 

pages. 

• Sibley, D.A. 2002. Sibley’s birding basics. 154 pages. 

Training 

Training occurs prior to data collection and the amount of training time necessary is dependent 

upon the experience and skill level of field personnel. Training is implemented by park staff 

with support from the Network staff as necessary. Training involves a protocol overview, targetspecies identification, proper implementation of line-transect methodology, use of the range 

finder, habitat-type identification, data entry and data management procedures, Park operations, 

and general safety guidance (e.g., emergency-contact procedures, vehicle operation). 
44 

It is imperative that trainers are confident that field personnel can properly and consistently 

identify all target species prior to initiating data collection. Misidentification of birds is a serious 

issue and inconsistent or incorrect identification should preclude sampling efforts. By keeping 

the number of target species small, this protocol is designed to be implemented by personnel 

with minimal experience (i.e., interns, technicians). It is recommended that if personnel with 

minimal birding-experience are chosen to implement this protocol, that only a few species are 

selected to be monitored and the number of species is increased as experience and confidence 

increases. Trainers should directly evaluate field personnel through field trials (e.g., 

simultaneous counts made by the trainer and the trainee) prior to official data collection. If 

distance sampling is implemented, distances are measured and not estimated; therefore training 

is limited to proper use of the range finder. The range finder’s accompanying user’s guide 

should be read to ensure proper operation. 

General reconnaissance of the monitoring site should be conducted by field personnel to further 

increase the familiarity of the Park and sampling sites by field personnel and the associated 

logistical issues involved with site access. These opportunities should also be used to review the 

habitat types identified in this protocol and their associated general locations and characteristics. 

Proper identification of habitat types should also be evaluated during the field trials. 
45 
46 

Standard Operating Procedure 2 

Conducting a Line Transect Survey 

This Standard Operating Procedure explains the implementation of a line-transect survey, 

distance sampling, and determining habitat type. This protocol consists of two components, the 

Migratory and Wintering Component and the Beached Bird Component. Beached bird sampling 

is typically opportunistic, unless specific events occur (e.g., oil spill), and data are collected 

along with of the migratory and wintering activities as beached, dead, or moribund birds are 

encountered. This SOP also includes a sequence of events and datasheets.

Procedures 

Methods Overview 

The technique for quantifying shorebird observations consists of time-constrained transect-based 

surveys of accreted areas within the entire sampling frame in the allotted time. The survey 

technique is an adaptation of a line transect survey (Anderson 1979, Buckland et al. 2001). Line 

transects surveys are generally most effective in open vegetation community types where the 

target species are mobile and flush easily, occur in low densities, and are easily identified. 

Transect length is dependent upon the sampling frame, or the existing infrastructure used as 

sampling-unit boundaries (e.g., beach miles or kilometers) and takes 30 minutes to survey. It is 

important to note that sampling units must be of approximately equal size throughout the 

sampling frame, such that equal amounts of time are spent surveying equal amounts of area. 

The observer walks a straight line, as indicated from a location and compass bearing identified in 

SOP #2 “Season Preparation, Equipment, and Training”, along the beach on a trajectory that 

parallels the surf zone and maximizes observability across the entire beach. If the entire beach 

cannot be observed in one pass (i.e., with one transect), another transect, parallel to the initial 

one, is conducted; this should be determined as part of the season preparation described in SOP 

#2. If multiple transects are necessary, transects should be > 300m apart (see Byrne et al. 2009). 

In situations that require an additional parallel transect(s), the transect closest to the access point 

is always measured first to prevent the bias associated with traveling through a site, that is 

planned to be measured, prior to collecting measurements. In sites with multiple transects, all 

within-site transects are measured consecutively to minimize the likelihood of bird movements 

and possible double-counting. 

Migratory and Wintering Component 

All observations of target shorebirds are recorded on the data form and all fields on the form 

must be completed while measuring the sampling unit. SECN Form 2.1 is used when distance 

sampling is not being implemented and SECN Form 2.2 when distance sampling is implemented. 

Wind direction is determined with a compass with appropriate declination set, wind speed is 

estimated according to Beaufort wind speed code (Table 2-1), precipitation is estimated 

according to Table 2-2, and temperature is recorded from a field thermometer in degrees 

Fahrenheit. The status of ORV access in the sampling unit is recorded and if there is “No” or 

“Partial” ORV access, the primary reason for full or partial closure should be noted in the 

Comments section as “Cultural Resource” (e.g., recently discovered artifacts), “Natural 
47 

Resource” (e.g., turtle nests), “Safety” (e.g., erosion), or “Other”. Tide is recorded to verify 

predicted tides and document wind tides or flooding. Tidal stage is one of 11 categories, most of 

which are adapted from the International Shorebird Survey (ISS) (Table 2-3). If the site is unsampleable (e.g., area flooded, dangerous weather conditions), then the associated reason(s) for 

this determination is also recorded in the Comments section. The number of cars, people and 

unleashed dogs is also recorded during the sampling event by placing has marks in the space 

provided and totaling these marks upon transect completion. 

Table 2-1. 

Beaufort wind-speed codes for SECN Migratory, Wintering, and Beached Shorebird Monitoring Protocol. 

Data are not collected under Wind Code 6. 

Wind Code Explanation 

0 Calm (<1mph), smoke rises vertically 

1 Light Air (1-3 mph), smoke drifts, weather vane inactive 

2 Light Breeze (4-7 mph), leaves rustle, can feel wind on face 

3 Gentle Breeze (8-12 mph), leaves and twigs move around, small flags extend 

4 Moderate Breeze (13-18 mph), moves thin branches, raises loose papers 

5 Fresh Breeze (19-24 mph), small trees begin to sway 

6 Strong Breeze (> 24 mph), large branches moving, wind whistling 

Table 2-2. 

Precipitation codes for SECN Migratory, Wintering, and Beached Shorebird Monitoring Protocol. 

Precipitation Code Explanation

0 No rain 

1 Mist or fog 

2 Light drizzle

3 Light rain 

4 Heavy rain 

5 Snow 
48 

Table 2-3. 

Tide codes for SECN Migratory, Wintering, and Beached Shorebird Monitoring Protocol. These are adapted 

from the tidal categories identified by the International Shorebird Surveys (ISS) and the Program for Regional 

and International Shorebird Monitoring (PRISM) protocol. 

Tide Code Explanation 

1 High (~1 hour before to ~1 hour after peak) 

2 Almost high, and rising (~1.5 hours before high tide) 

3 Almost high, and falling (~1.5 hours after high tide) 

4 Half tide, rising (~2.5 hours before high tide) 

5 Half tide, falling (2.5 hours after high tide) 

6 Almost low, rising (~1.5 hours after low tide) 

7 Almost low, falling (~1.5 hours before low tide) 

8 Low (~1 hour before to 1 hour after peak) 

9 Not observed, not applicable, or observations made during more than one of these periods. 

10 Tidal anomaly – wind 

11 Tidal anomaly – flood 

Observations begin at one end of the unit closest to the access point. Observers should plan their 

line though each unit such that the entire unit is observed once and maximize unit observation. 

Observer pace should be consistent as possible throughout unit (ca 2 mph) such that the unit is 

sampled in its entirety during the allotted sampling time. Each unit is observed for 30 minutes 

and a stopwatch is used to monitor amount of time observed. 

When focal shorebirds are observed, time, species code, count, activity type, habitat, and 

location relative to a closure (i.e., inside or outside) are recorded. Habitat types are described in 

Table 2-4 and conceptually represented in Figure 2-1. If suspected breeding behaviors are 

observed, an attempt is made to identify behavior as scratching or territoriality / defense and this 

information is recorded in the Comments section and communicated to Park personnel for 

confirmation. If a breeding display / potential breeding display is observed, also enter this 

information in the Comments section of the datasheet and in the appropriate section of the 

database. Consistent observations of breeding displays / potential breeding displays in any given 

area will trigger a focal shorebird nesting monitoring protocol currently under development. If 

brood-rearing birds are observed, record this information in the comments section. If the bird is 

banded, make note of band observation but do not devote time to determining band information 

as this time will detract from unit-observation time. Any other relevant information is recorded 

in the Comments section as necessary. If the optional distance-sampling component is used, 

record the azimuth of the transect, and the azimuth and distance to all birds detected on the data 

form that includes distance. 

All observations are made with binoculars. Use a spotting scope only if necessary as the time 

involved in setting the scope up potentially reduces the amount of time the observer has to 

observe other birds along the remainder of the transect. Observers should use extra efforts to 

minimize disturbance to birds. 
49 

Definitions of the term “habitat type” follow that proposed by Daubenmire (1968), despite the 

fact these communities are disturbed to such an extent that successional vegetative processes 

occur on a very limited scale. See Table 2-4 for descriptions of the shorebird habitat types used 

in this study. 

Table 2-4. 

Habitat-type classifications and descriptions for SECN Migratory, Wintering, and Beached Shorebird 

Monitoring Protocol (Bloom 1998, Hoffman and Shroyer 2004, Komar 1998, Leatherman 1979, York, L., SERO 

Coastal Geomorphologist, SERO, NPS). 

Habitat Type Data-form 

Abbreviation 

Habitat Type Description 

Backdune BD The dune farthest from the beach 

Backshore BS Beach zone landward of the berm crest and the normal high-tide line; this zone is subject 

to wave action only during storm or extreme high tide conditions 

Blowout BL A flat or bowl-shaped area in the primary dune line where dune sand has been eroded 

away by wind; the bowl in this area may accumulate water or be eroded to the water 

table 

Foreshore FS The intertidal area that lies seaward of the berm crest 

Inland freshwater pond FP Freshwater wetland resource with > 50% open water 

Inland freshwater 

wetland 

FW Freshwater wetland resource with < 50% open water 

Intradunal swale IS Low-lying areas between primary dune and backdune; may have wetland / wetland 

fringe vegetation of short hydroperiod 

Mud flat / Algal flat MF Area of minimal wave action and exposed at low tide; predominantly devoid of 

vegetation; substrate typically composed of sand, silt, and clay; areas occasionally have 

thin algal layer; commonly located between barrier islands and mainland; can have 

moderate to large amounts if organic material in sand 

Overwash OW A breach in the primary dune line resulting from swash uprush during storms or extreme 

high tides; often produces a fan-like feature as sand is deposited inland beyond the dune 

system(s) 

Primary dune PD The dune closest to the beach; land feature formed from an accumulation of windblown 

sand; these features are often covered with vegetation 

Salt marsh / Tidal creek / 

Brackish Marsh 

SM Area dominated by non-woody, halophytic plant species and tidally influenced 

Sand flat SF Accretion zone from downdrift of offshore sediment transport with minimal vegetative 

cover and slight elevation above sea level (e.g., a spit); occasionally has ponded water; 

exposed at low tide; has little or no organic material in sand 

Secondary dune, tertiary 

dune, etc. 

SD Dune between primary dune and backdune, increasing with distance from beach; land 

feature formed from an accumulation of windblown sand; these features are often 

covered with vegetation 

Surf zone / Open water SZ Area immediately seaward of the foreshore 

Wrack line WL Beach zone where marine debris (natural and artificial) is deposited; often indicates 

high-tide line 
50 

Figure 2-2. Conceptual diagram of general juxtaposition of habitat types identified in SECN Migratory, 

Wintering, and Beached Shorebird Monitoring Protocol. 

Beached Bird Component 

Beached and dead bird surveys are often used to document mortality associated with chemical 

spills (Van Pelt and Piatt 1995), however these surveys may also be used to document mortalities 

associated with other events (e.g., hurricanes, recreation, etc.). Methods are an adaptation of 

those presented in Erwin et al. (2003). 

This component of the protocol is conducted simultaneously with the migratory and wintering 

component; however, due to the infrequency of beached birds, the datasheet only needs to be 

filled out when a beached or moribund bird is detected. All observations of beached birds are 

recorded on the data form (SECN Form 2.3) and all fields on the form must be completed while 

measuring the sampling unit. If a dead or moribund bird is encountered, do not handle the 

animal to avoid potential zoonoses. If only partial remains are discovered, the structures used for 

identification should be recorded in the comment section of the data form. If species 

identification of remains is uncertain in the field, a specimen should be collected for expert 

consultation in accordance with Park collection guidelines (e.g., Law Enforcement) and if the 

observer has appropriate federal and state permits. The observer records the condition of the 

carcass and any evident signs of mortality. After evaluating each beached bird and recording 

pertinent information, record any notes necessary to avoid counting he bird if it persists until the 

next sampling event. If the carcass is radiomarked or banded, record device / band information, 

enter in Comments section of datasheet and immediately contact Park staff to determine if 

collection procedures are necessary. 

This protocol component may also be conducted without the migratory / wintering component in 

the event of an extreme weather event, chemical spill, or other catastrophic event to evaluate 

beached / dead birds to aid in management decisions. 
51 

Sequence of Events during Field Season 

This protocol is designed such that it can be conducted by one person. In general, procedures are 

as follows: 

1. Prepare necessary field gear 

2. Refer to table to determine sampling unit / park mile 

3. Refer to map to familiarize self with spatial distribution of site, landmarks, and park-mile 

signage if available 

4. Once at the site, fill out all of the sampling event information at the top of the datasheet 

(i.e., name, location, weather, tide, etc.) 

5. Do not record data under sever weather conditions (e.g., high winds/waves, lightning) 

6. If the site unsampleable, explain the reason in the “Comments” section (e.g., tide too 

high) 

7. Record the status of ORV access and if there is “No” or “Partial” ORV access, explain 

the reason in the Comments section as “Cultural Resource” (e.g., recently discovered 

artifacts), “Natural Resource” (e.g., turtle nests), “Safety” (e.g., erosion), or “Other”. 

8. Set stopwatch / timer for 30 minutes 

9. Do not travel through site before sampling event measurements (i.e., the top of the 

datasheet, except the car, unleashed dogs, and people sections) are recorded 

10. Begin measurement by walking from the one end of the park mile to the other end along 

a straight line transect (if possible) at approximately 2mph. The duration of each transect 

should be 30 minutes. 

11. Record all pertinent information about each focal shorebird observation (i.e., time, 

species, count, inside/outside a closure, activity, habitat, and breeding display / potential 

breeding display) 

12. If the distance-sampling option is used, record the azimuth of the transect, and the 

azimuth and distance to all birds detected 

13. Count all cars, unleashed dogs, and people along the park mile by making hash marks on 

the datasheet to total upon transect completion 

14. Make sure that all fields on the datasheet are populated, handwriting is legible, and tallies 

are summed with totals circled 

15. Travel to next site and repeat above steps 
52 

16. At the end of the day’s sampling, return to the office and enter the data from the 

datasheets into the database. 
SECN Form 2.1. Migratory / Wintering Bird Monitoring Field Data Form – Walking transects without distance sampling. 

Date Wind Direction N NE E SE S SW W NW Temperature4 Location Wind Speed2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 ORV Access 5 Y N P Observer Precipitation3 0 1 2 3 4 5 Unsampleable6 Y N Tide1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Comments 

Military 

Time 

Species 

Code Count Closure Y / N Activity8 Habitat9 Breeding10 Oth

 M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S (1) – Tide, see Table on back 

(2) – Wind Speed, see Table on back 

(3) – Precipitation, see Table on back 

(4) – Degrees Fahrenheit 

(5) – If No or Partial, record reason in comments section (Cultural Res., Natural Res., Safety, Other) (6) – Inability to sample the site because of unforeseen or uncontrollable factors; describe in Comments 

(7) – Count only unleashed dogs 

(8) – Activity, M = Moving, F = Flying, S = Sedentary 

(9) – Habitat, see Table on back 

(10) – Breeding Behavior Observed (Check if observed and describe) 

Data entered into database bDate: 
SECN Form 2.2. Migratory / Wintering Bird Monitoring Field Data Form – Walking transects with distance sampling. 

Date Wind Direction N NE E SE S SW W NW Temperature4 Location Wind Speed2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 ORV Access 5 Y N P Observer Precipitation3 0 1 2 3 4 5 Unsampleable6 Y N Tide1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Comments Military 

Time 

Species 

Code Count Closure Y / N Azimuth traveling Azimuth to bird Distance to bird Activity8 Habitat9 Breeding10 

 M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S  M F S (1) – Tide, see Table on back 

(2) – Wind Speed, see Table on back 

(3) – Precipitation, see Table on back 

(4) – Degrees Fahrenheit 

(5) – If No or Partial, record reason in comments section (Cultural Res., Natural Res., Safety, Other) (6) – Inability to sample the site because of unforeseen or uncontrollable factors; describe in Comments 

(7) – Count only unleashed dogs 

(8) – Activity, M = Moving, F = Flying, S = Sedentary 

(9) – Habitat, see Table on back 

(10) – Breeding Behavior Observed (Check if observed and describe) 

Data entered into database bDate: 
SECN Form 2.3. Beached / Dead Bird Monitoring Data Form. 

Date Wind Direction N NE E SE S SW W NW Temperature4 Location Wind Speed2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 ORV Access 5 Y N P Observer Precipitation3 0 1 2 3 4 5 Unsampleable6 Y N Tide1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Comments 

Military 

Time 

Species 

Code Count Closure Y / N Habitat8 Condition9 Signs10 

 DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V  DF DD M P O P S V (1) – Tide, see Table on back 

(2) – Wind Speed, see Table on back 

(3) – Precipitation, see Table on back 

(4) – Degrees Fahrenheit 

(5) – If No or Partial, record reason in comments section (Cultural Res., Natural Res., Safety, Other) (6) – Inability to sample the site because of unforeseen or uncontrollable factors; describe in Comments 

(7) – Count only unleashed dogs 

(8) – Habitat, see Table on back 

(9) – Condition, DF = Dead fresh, DD = Dead decayed, M = Moribund (dying), P = Partial carcass 

(10) – Signs, O = Oiled, P = Predated (blood evidence), S = Scavenged, V = Vehicle-related 

Data entered into database bDate: 
Tide codes. Adapted from tidal categories identified by the International Shorebird Surveys (ISS) and the Program for 

Regional and International Shorebird Monitoring (PRISM) protocol. 

Tide Code Explanation 

1 High (~1 hour before to ~1 hour after peak) 

2 Almost high, and rising (~1.5 hours before high tide) 

3 Almost high, and falling (~1.5 hours after high tide) 

4 Half tide, rising (~2.5 hours before high tide) 

5 Half tide, falling (2.5 hours after high tide) 

6 Almost low, rising (~1.5 hours after low tide) 

7 Almost low, falling (~1.5 hours before low tide) 

8 Low (~1 hour before to 1 hour after peak) 

9 Not observed, not applicable, or observations made during more than one of these periods. 

10 Tidal anomaly – wind 

11 Tidal anomaly – flood 

Beaufort wind-speed codes. Data are not collected under Wind Code 6 Precipitation codes. 

Wind Code Explanation Precipitation Code Explanation 

0 Calm (<1mph), smoke rises vertically 0 No rain 

1 Light Air (1-3 mph), smoke drifts, weather vane inactive 1 Mist or fog 

2 Light Breeze (4-7 mph), leaves rustle, can feel wind on face 2 Light drizzle 

3 Gentle Breeze (8-12 mph), leaves and twigs move around, small flags extend 3 Light rain 

4 Moderate Breeze (13-18 mph), moves thin branches, raises loose papers 4 Heavy rain 

5 Fresh Breeze (19-24 mph), small trees begin to sway 5 Snow 

6 Strong Breeze (> 24 mph), large branches moving, wind whistling 

Habitat-type classifications, codes, and descriptions. 

Habitat Habitat Code Habitat Description 

Backdune BD The dune farthest from the beach 

Backshore BS Beach zone landward of the berm crest and the normal high-tide line; this zone is subject to wave action 

only during storm or extreme high tide conditions 

Blowout BL A flat or bowl-shaped area in the primary dune line where dune sand has been eroded away by wind; the 

bowl in this area may accumulate water or be eroded to the water table 

Foreshore FS The intertidal area that lies seaward of the berm crest 

Inland freshwater pond FP Freshwater wetland resource with > 50% open water 

Inland freshwater 

wetland 

FW Freshwater wetland resource with < 50% open water 

Intradunal swale IS Low-lying areas between primary dune and backdune; may have wetland / wetland fringe vegetation of 

short hydroperiod 

Mud flat / Algal flat 

MF Area of minimal wave action and exposed at low tide; predominantly devoid of vegetation; substrate 

typically composed of sand, silt, and clay; areas occasionally have thin algal layer; commonly located 

between barrier islands and mainland; 

Overwash OW A breach in the primary dune line resulting from swash uprush during storms or extreme high tides; often 

produces a fan-like feature as sand is deposited inland beyond the dune system(s) 

Primary dune PD The dune closest to the beach; land feature formed from an accumulation of windblown sand; these 

features are often covered with vegetation 

Salt marsh / Tidal creek 

/ Brackish Marsh 

SM Area dominated by non-woody, halophytic plant species and tidally influenced 

Sand flat SF Accretion zone from downdrift of offshore sediment transport with minimal vegetative cover and slight 

elevation above sea level (e.g., a spit); occasionally has ponded water; exposed at low tide 

Secondary dune, 

tertiary dune, etc. 

SD Dune between primary dune and backdune, increasing with distance from beach; land feature formed from 

an accumulation of windblown sand; these features are often covered with vegetation 

Surf zone / Open water SZ Area immediately seaward of the foreshore 

Wrack line WL Beach zone where marine debris (natural and artificial) is deposited; often indicates high-tide line 
57 
58 

Standard Operating Procedure 3 

Data Entry and Management 

This Standard Operating Procedure explains the process for data entry into the accompanying 

database and the data-management procedures of this protocol. The SECN Shorebird 

Monitoring Database consists of a SQL Server 2005 database, InfoPath 2007 forms, a SharePoint 

site, and a help file, “Help.doc”. The InfoPath forms are stored on the SharePoint site and can be 

accessed by anyone with adequate permissions. The database can be used by multiple users at a 

time. 

Data Entry 

To navigate to the SECN SharePoint website, type ‘SECN’ in the address bar of an Internet 

Explorer window and press Enter (Figure 3-1). Then Click on the Explore Data tab in the upperright of the window to enter the data-entry and reporting portal (Figure 3-1). Click on the 

Shorebird link under Protocols (Figure 3-2), and then click on the Data Entry link (Figure 3-3). 

From the Shorebird Data Entry Forms window, all available data entry and editing forms are 

presented (Figure 3-4). This window may also be accessed by typing of copying the following 

link into the address bar of an internet browser: 

http://inpserosecn2/DataReports/Shorebird/Lists/Shorebird%20Data%20Entry%20Forms

Figure 3-1. SECN SharePoint website. 

Figure 3-2. SECN SharePoint data-entry portal. 
59 

Figure 3-3. SECN Migratory, Wintering, and Beached Shorebird Monitoring data-entry link. 

Figure 3-3. Data entry and editing forms available as part of the Migratory and Wintering Shorebird Protocol. 

Input / Edit Staff and Observer Information 

To enter a new staff member or to edit existing staff member data, click on the Add Contact 

Form and the form below will open listing all personnel currently in the database (Figure 3-5). 

To add a new entry at the bottom of the list, click the Insert Staff link at the bottom left 

(indicated by the blue circle) and populate all fields. Once completed, press the Submit button 

(indicated by the green circle) to add the entry to the database. To add an entry elsewhere, click 

the arrow next to a row and press either the Insert Contacts before or the Insert Contacts after 

link (indicated by the red circle). After populating the fields, press the Submit button to save 

your entry in the database. Each name added will now be available as a potential observer when 

entering field data. To edit previously entered data, simply make your changes and press the 

Submit button to save your changes in the database. Data will not be added and changes will not 

be saved unless the Submit button is pressed. Be sure to check all fields for accuracy before 

pressing the Submit button. 
60 

Figure 3-5. Input / Edit Staff and Observers window. 

Input / Edit Location Information 

This function is used to add or remove a Transect and edit existing Transect information. To 

enter/edit location information, click on the Edit Location Form and the form will open listing all 

sampling-location information currently in the database (Figure 3-6). 

Location information is nested and new location entries must follow this structure. To add a new 

transect, select the Park, Site, and Park Mile you would like to add the new transect to. Verify 

that any new transect is not currently listed on the Transect list, and then click the Add Transect 

button (indicated by the red circle). The row highlighted in yellow will then appear at the 

bottom, and needs to be populated with the new transect information. After populating the 

fields, press the Submit button (indicated by the green circle) to save your entry in the database. 

To delete a transect, select the Park, Site, Park Mile, and Transect to be deleted and press the 

Remove Transect button (indicated by the red circle). 
61 

Figure 3-6. Input / Edit Sampling Location Information window. 

Input Field Data 

To enter a new sampling event, click on either the Sampling Field Data Form link or the Beached 

Dead Bird Form link (depending upon which data were collected) to open a new data entry form. 

Sampling Event information (e.g., location, weather variables) appear at the top of the form, and 

are identical for both the Sampling Field Data and Beached Dead Bird forms; therefore the 

following instructions apply to both forms. 

The forms contain basic sampling event information that must be populated prior to entering the 

bird-observation data (Figure 3-7). All required fields are marked with an asterisk (*). If the site 

is unsampleable due to safety, weather, or other reasons, check the Unsampleable box circled in 

green and indicate why in the comments section; this function was added to maintain a record of 

sampling attempts that were unsuccessful due to various reason and beyond the control of 

personnel implementing the protocol. Examples of issues that would warrant an unsampleable 

determination include: extreme weather, erosion at the sampling location, and any situation that 

compromises the safety of the observer. 

If you wish to view the descriptions of the codes available in some of the drop-down fields, press 

the View Codes button (identified by a yellow circle) (Figure 3-7) and a page opens that 
62 

describes each of the codes (Figure 3-8). The user can press the Back button at the top of the 

page to return to the form and continue populating data fields. 

Prior to each sampling activity, the species surveyed must be identified and selected in the area 

on the form identified by a red circle (Figure 3-7). Select species surveyed individually. After 

the first species is selected, press the Add Species link immediately below the Species Surveyed 

field; which will add another field to select the next species. Continue this process until all 

species surveyed are selected. This function allows for auto-population of zero values for that 

sampling event and makes these species selectable options when entering observation data; 

without these zeros, as a minimum value at least, all subsequent database outputs and 

reports/analyses will be incorrect (i.e., values will be overestimated). It is also imperative, 

however, that non-zero values are changed to reflect actual values if birds were indeed detected. 

Please do not be tempted simply to change a row that has been auto-populated with a zero to a 

species that was actually detected, as this will eliminate this zero from the database; knowing a 

species was surveyed for and not detected is equally important to detecting a species. 

Once all of the sampling-event information has been populated and if the Unsampleable box is 

not checked, press the Add Field Data button (indicated by a blue circle) (Figure 3-7) and a birdobservation sub-form will appear in this screen (Figure 3-9). If the Unsampleable box is 

checked, the Add Field Data button is disabled, while the Submit button is enabled so that the 

user can submit the data after all the required sampling-event fields have been populated. 
63 

Figure 3-7. Sampling-event information on data forms. 
64 

Figure 3-8. Code-description window for Migratory and Wintering Shorebird Monitoring Protocol. 

The Add Field Data sub-from allows for all observation-specific information to be entered 

(Figure 3-9). All of the species selected under the Species Surveyed option will be included in 

the sub-form, in addition to one blank row. Each row is for each unique observation of either 

one individual or a group of individuals. If more than one observation of a surveyed bird occurs 

(i.e., at a different time during the sampling window of this transect), another row needs to be 

inserted to identify this unique data point. An additional row is added by moving the mouse over 

a row until an inverted arrow appears, and selecting Add New Row from the two available 

options (indicated by a red circle in Figure 3-9). Order of rows is irrelevant and new rows can be 

added anywhere in the list. If the last (i.e., blank) row is unnecessary and not used, it must be 

deleted prior to form submission or it will return an error message (i.e., the fields in this row are 

required). It can be deleted the same way a new row is added. 
65 

In the example presented in Figure 3-9, the observer is surveying for PIPL, AMOY, and WIPL; 

the default value of zero was auto-populated in the corresponding fields for Count and changed 

to the actual value; unless the actual value is zero. 

Populate all fields in each row, as incomplete data will severely impair accurate reporting. Once 

completed, check the form for accuracy and then press Submit at the top of the form and the data 

will be incorporated into the database. If an error is made, or you wish to restart, or you wish to 

enter a new form after submission you may press the Back button at the top of your browser to 

start over. If the form is closed without pressing Submit, the data entered into the data fields will 

not be incorporated into the database. 

Figure 3-9. Add Field Data sub-form and example data. 
66 

Edit Field Data 

To edit data that has been previously entered, click on either the Edit Sampling Event Form link 

or the Edit Beached Dead Bird Form link (Figure 3-4) to open a new form for editing (Figure 3-

10). 

Figure 3-10. Edit data form. 

The form opens with the Delete, Submit, and Search buttons disabled. This search utility does 

not allow for coarse search commands, but rather specific searches of known sampling events in 

need of review and possible editing. Once all fields are populated, press the Search button. If a 

matching entry is located in the database, the Delete and Submit buttons are enabled; otherwise 

they remain grayed out until a matching entry is found. After an entry is located, you may either 

delete the entry by pressing the Delete button or making changes as necessary and pressing the 

Submit button once completed. Pressing the Back button or closing the browser window will 

result in changes not being saved. 

Reporting 

To navigate to the SECN SharePoint website, type ‘SECN’ in the address bar of an Internet 

Explorer window and press Enter (Figure 3-1). Then Click on the Explore Data tab in the upperright of the window to enter the data-entry and reporting portal (Figure 3-1). Click on the 

Shorebird link under Protocols (Figure 3-2), and then click on the Reports link (Figure 3-11). 

From the Shorebird Reports window, all available reports are presented (Figure 3-12). This 

window may also be accessed by typing of copying the following link into the address bar of an 

internet browser: 

http://inpserosecn2/DataReports/Lists/Shorebird%20Reports/AllItems.aspx
67 

Figure 3-11. SECN Migratory, Wintering, and Beached Shorebird Monitoring reporting link. 

Figure 3-12. Available reports of the SECN Migratory, Wintering, and Beached Shorebird Monitoring 

protocol. 
68 

International Shorebird Survey Reporting Form 

This report allows you to auto-populate an International Shorebird Survey (ISS) form, suitable 

for printing and submission, based upon a user-defined query of the Park, site(s) within a Park, 

and date range (Figure 3-13). 

1. Enter the Start and End Dates. If the form will be printed, make sure that all data are 

viewable on the form. If it is not, limit the amount of data by using a shorter time frame. 

Perform a trial run initially to ensure all desired data are included on the form, and then 

adjust date range accordingly. 

2. Select the Park value 

3. Select the Site value 

4. Press the Apply button (identified by a red circle) 

The output form appears with observation values populated. The form must be exported to 

complete the heading information. From the top left-hand side of the output window, select 

Actions > Export > Excel to export the report. Open the form in Excel, complete the heading 

information (circled in red, Figure 3-14), and form is ready for submission. 

Figure 3-13. Query interface for International Shorebird Survey form output from SECN Migratory and 

Wintering Shorebird Monitoring protocol data. 
69 

Figure 3-14. View of the ISS form export from MS Excel where the heading information is populated to 

complete the form. 
70 

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Shorebird Reporting Form 

This report allows you to auto-populate a North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 

(NCWRC) shorebird reporting form, suitable for printing and submission, with piping plover 

observations (Figure 3-15). All sampling events where piping plover were surveyed, but none 

were detected (i.e., zeros), are also included. To export the report, select Actions > Export > 

Excel, as indicated by the red circle. The report includes all sampling events and detections, 

therefore the report should be edited in MS Excel to only include the desired date range link to 

view the report. 

Figure 3-15. View of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission shorebird reporting form output 

from SECN Migratory and Wintering Shorebird Monitoring protocol data. 

Distance Sampling Raw Data Output 

This function allows export of data for use in Program DISTANCE. Once the report is 

generated, select Actions > Export > Excel, from the top left-hand side of the output window, to 

export the report. 
71 

Total Observations 

Non Normalized Counts. This function depicts the number of observations (i.e., nonnormalized) by Park, Site, Species, and Date Range (Figure 3-16). Once the query is run, the 

number of sampling events upon which the analysis is based is depicted above the chart. Unless 

sampling effort is equal, comparison of non-normalized counts are typically not valid and will 

potentially lead to incorrect conclusions. 

Steps: 

1. Enter the Start and End Dates 

2. Select the Species value 

3. Select the Park value 

4. Select the Site value; to query the entire park, select “ALL” 

5. Press the Apply button, in the bottom right-hand corner of the window, to view the report 

6. To export the data in the report, click Actions > Export, and the format you prefer. 

Figure 3-16. Non-normalized count data report interface, SECN Migratory and Wintering Shorebird 

Monitoring protocol. 
72 

Normalized Counts. This function depicts the number of normalized observations by Park, 

Site, Species, and Date Range (Figure 3-17). Normalized observations are the number of 

elements detected as a function of sampling effort. Once the query is run, the number of 

sampling events upon which the analysis is based is depicted below the chart. For example, if 

six birds were detected at Site A during two visits and six birds were detected at Site B during 

ten visits, these values are not comparable as they represent a different amount of sampling 

effort. If the counts are controlled for effort, however, (Site A = 6/2, Site B = 6/10) then the 

values are now Site A = 3 and Site B = 0.6, comparisons can be made and, in this example, Site 

A has a higher frequency of detection (more samples are necessary for statements regarding the 

actual number of birds or relative importance of those areas). 

Steps: 

1. Enter the Start and End Dates 

2. Select the Species value 

3. Select the Park value 

4. Select the Site value; to query the entire park, select “ALL” 

5. Press the Apply button, in the bottom right-hand corner of the window, to view the report 

6. To export the data in the report, click Actions > Export, and the format you prefer. 

Figure 3-17. Normalized count data report interface, SECN Migratory and Wintering Shorebird Monitoring 

protocol. 
73 

Total Observations by Habitat 

This function depicts the proportion of total observations by habitat type as defined by Park, Site, 

Species, and Date Range (Figure 3-18). Once the query is run, the number of sampling events 

upon which the analysis is based is depicted below the chart and the number of observations 

within each habitat type is also depicted. 

Steps: 

1. Enter the Start and End Dates 

2. Select the Species value 

3. Select the Park value 

4. Select the Site value; to query the entire park, select “ALL” 

5. Select a Tide value. You may query all tides by selecting “ALL”. You may also select 

multiple tide values by checking the boxes next to the values. 

6. Press the Apply button, in the bottom right-hand corner of the window, to view the report 

7. To export the data in the report, click Actions > Export, and the format you prefer. 

Figure 3-18. Non-normalized count data by habitat report interface, SECN Migratory and Wintering Shorebird 

Monitoring protocol. 
74 

Closure Observations 

Non-normalized Counts. This function depicts the number of observations “Inside” and 

“Outside” closures by Park, Site, Species, and Date Range (Figure 3-19).

Steps: 

1. Select the Month value 

2. Enter the Year 

3. Select the Species value 

4. Select the Park value 

5. Select the Site value; to query the entire park, select “ALL” 

6. Press the Apply button, in the bottom right-hand corner of the window, to view the report 

7. To export the data in the report, click Actions > Export, and the format you prefer. 

Figure 3-19. Non-normalized count data by closure report interface, SECN Migratory and Wintering 

Shorebird Monitoring protocol. 

Normalized Counts. This function depicts the number of normalized observations “Inside” and 

“Outside” closures by Park, Site, Species, and Date Range (Figure 3-20). 

Steps: 

1. Select the Month value 

2. Enter the Year 

3. Select the Species value 

4. Select the Park value 

5. Select the Site value; to query the entire park, select “ALL” 
75 

6. Press the Apply button, in the bottom right-hand corner of the window, to view the report 

7. To export the data in the report, click Actions > Export, and the format you prefer. 

Figure 3-20. Normalized count data by closure report interface, SECN Migratory and Wintering Shorebird 

Monitoring protocol.2.7. Car, People, and Dog Counts 

Car, People, and Dog Count 

Non-normalized Counts. This function depicts the car, people, and dog counts by Park, Site, 

and Date Range (Figure 3-21). 

Steps: 

1. Enter the Start and End Dates 

2. Select the Park value 

3. Press the Apply button, in the bottom right-hand corner of the window, to view the report 

4. To export the data in the report, click Actions > Export, and the format you prefer. 

Figure 3-21. Non-normalized car, people, and dog count data report interface, SECN Migratory and Wintering 

Shorebird Monitoring protocol. 
76 

Normalized Counts. This function depicts the car, people, and dog counts by Park, Site, and 

Date Range (Figure 3-22). 

Steps: 

1. Enter the Start and End Dates 

2. Select the Park value 

3. Press the Apply button, in the bottom right-hand corner of the window, to view the report 

4. To export the data in the report, click Actions > Export, and the format you prefer. 

Figure 3-22. Normalized car, people, and dog count data report interface, SECN Migratory and Wintering 

Shorebird Monitoring protocol. 
77 

High Counts 

This function depicts the three highest counts of a selected species by Park, Site, and Date Range 

(Figure 3-23). 

Steps: 

1. Enter the Start and End Dates 

2. Select the Species value 

3. Select the Park value 

4. Select the Site value; to query the entire park, select “ALL” 

5. Press the Apply button, in the bottom right-hand corner of the window, to view the report 

6. To export the data in the report, click Actions > Export, and the format you prefer. 

Figure 3-23. High count report interface, SECN Migratory and Wintering Shorebird Monitoring protocol. 
78 

Power Analysis Output 

Monthly. This function exports the information necessary for a power analysis of monthly data 

(Figure 3-24). The power analysis is not performed in the database. 

Steps: 

1. Select the Start Month 

2. Enter the Start Year 

3. Select the End Month 

4. Enter the End Year 

5. Select a Species value 

6. Press the Apply button to view the report 

7. To export the data in the report, click Actions > Export, and the format you prefer. 

Figure 3-24. Power analysis raw data report, annual values, SECN Migratory and Wintering Shorebird 

Monitoring protocol. 
79 

Annually. This function exports the information necessary for a power analysis of annual data 

(Figure 3-25). The power analysis is not performed in the database. 

Steps: 

1. Select the Start Month 

2. Enter the Start Year 

3. Select a Species value 

4. Press the Apply button to view the report 

5. To export the data in the report, click Actions > Export, and the format you prefer 

Figure 3-25. Power analysis raw data report, monthly values, SECN Migratory and Wintering Shorebird 

Monitoring protocol. 
80 

Beached/Dead Bird Raw Data Output 

This function outputs all beached/dead bird data contained in the database. After clicking on the 

link to view the report, click on Actions > Export, and the format you prefer. 

Walking Transects without Distance Raw Data Output 

This function exports all data collected with distance data. After clicking on the link to view the 

report, click on Actions > Export, and the format you prefer. 

Walking Transects with Distance Raw Data Output 

This function exports all data collected without distance data. After clicking on the link to view 

the report, click on Actions > Export, and the format you prefer. 

Database Support 

Any and all problems, including redundancy or other odd quirks, with the database should be 

reported to the SECN Terrestrial Ecologist (Michael_W_Byrne@nps.gov) as soon as possible. 

Periodic changes will be made to the database after enough problems have been discovered to 

warrant the Database Programmer’s time, or if the database’s functionality is severely impaired. 

When errors are discovered, please create a window snapshot of the error message, as the actual 

error code and message are important clues in determining the exact problem. The authors’ 

recommended way to document error messages is to create a screenshot by simultaneously 

pressing the CTRL and Print Screen keys, opening a blank MS Word document and 

simultaneously pressing the CTRL and V keys to paste the screen capture into the document. If 

an error pops up, please press the OK or End buttons (if they are available) and document the 

exact steps you undertook prior to the issue, even those one may think trivial or irrelevant. 

Include this information on the MS Word document with the screen capture and email it to the 

above email address. The information provided us is then used to replicate the issue. 
81 
82 

Standard Operating Procedure 4 

Data Analysis 

This Standard Operating Procedure explains some of the data summaries and analyses possible 

with data collected under this protocol. Two forms of reports and data summaries exist as part of 

this protocol; those conducted by the SECN Shorebird Monitoring Database and those 

necessitating raw- or summary-data export from the database for further analysis in other 

software packages. 

Database Summaries and Reports 

Summaries and reports available from the SECN Shorebird Monitoring Database used for this 

protocol are available on the SECN SharePoint site 

(http://inpserosecn2/DataReports/Lists/Shorebird%20Reports/AllItems.aspx). Summaries and 

reports generated by the database are: 

• International Shorebird Survey (ISS) reporting form 

• North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) shorebird reporting form 

• Total observations chart 

• Total observations by habitat chart 

• Closure observations chart 

• Car, people, and dog count charts 

• High counts export 

Database exports requiring further analysis include: 

• Power analysis output 

• Distance sampling raw data export 

• Beached/Dead bird raw data output 

• Walking transects with distance sampling raw data output 

• Walking transects without distance sampling raw data output 

ISS Reporting Form 

This report allows you to auto-populate an International Shorebird Survey form, suitable for 

printing and submission, based upon a user-defined query of the Park, site(s) within a Park, and 

date range (Figure 4-1). 
83 

Figure 4-1. International Shorebird Survey reporting form export from SECN Migratory and Wintering 

Shorebird Monitoring protocol data. 
84 

NCWRC Shorebird Reporting Form 

This report allows you to auto-populate a North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 

(NCWRC) shorebird reporting form, suitable for printing and submission, with piping plover 

observations (Figure 4-2). Currently, this report is only designed to report piping plover 

observations. 

Figure 4-2. North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission shorebird reporting form output from SECN 

Migratory and Wintering Shorebird Monitoring protocol data. 
85 

Total Observations Chart 

This function depicts the number of normalized observations by Park, Site, Species, and Date 

Range (Figure 4-3). Normalized counts are presented, but non-normalized output is also 

available. 

Figure 4-3. Total normalized count export, SECN Migratory and Wintering Shorebird Monitoring protocol. 
86 

Total Observations by Habitat Chart 

This function depicts the proportion of total observations by habitat type as defined by Park, Site, 

Species, and Date Range (Figure 4-4). These data are also available in bar charts as total number 

of observations in each habitat. 

Figure 4-4. Proportion of total observations by habitat type export, SECN Migratory and Wintering Shorebird 

Monitoring protocol. 
87 

Closure Observations Chart 

This function depicts the number of normalized observations “Inside” and “Outside” closures by 

Park, Site, Species, and Date Range (Figure 4-5). Normalized counts are presented, but nonnormalized output is also available. 

Figure 4-5. Normalized counts relative to closures and habitat type of observation, SECN Migratory and 

Wintering Shorebird Monitoring protocol. 
88 

Car, People, and Dog count Charts 

This function depicts normalized counts of cars, people, and dogs by Park, Site, and Date Range 

(Figure 4-6). Normalized counts are presented, but non-normalized output is also available. 

Figure 4-6. Normalized car, people, and dog counts, SECN Migratory and Wintering Shorebird Monitoring 

protocol. 
89 

High Counts Export 

This function depicts the three highest counts of a selected species by Park, Site, and Date Range 

(Figure 4-7). 

Figure 4-7. Three highest count export, SECN Migratory and Wintering Shorebird Monitoring protocol. 
90 

Analyses from Database Exports 

Raw data or summarized data outputs are available through the database to facilitate the 

following data analyses to be conducted in external software packages. 

Power Analysis 

The accompanying database will export the information necessary for a monthly and annual 

power analysis. The power analysis is not performed in the database. 

Power Example 1 – Accreted Sampling Units only at CAHA. The sampling design described 

in SOP # 1 “Protocol application to piping plover at CAHA". Generally, this design consists of 

five sampling units sampled three times per month. To estimate statistical power under this 

design, means and variability from pilot data were used, but sample size was adjusted to reflect 

the sampling effort of the new design. Our sampling objective is to secure 90% assurance (i.e., 

power) that we can detect an annual change of 20% in the mean of normalized counts (i.e., 

minimum detectable change) with a 5% chance of a false-change error (i.e., detecting a change 

when one does not actually exist). Data are evaluated on the ability to detect annual and monthly 

trends. Further, sensitivity to changes in normalized counts is also evaluated in three seasonal 

groups, 1) fall migrants, 2) wintering birds, and 3) spring migrants, where monthly data are 

pooled. The power to detect trend is calculated with the equation for permanent plots without 

the finite population factor (Elzinga et al. 1998). 

This power analysis was based on a) our pilot data variability, and b) a proposed design to 

sample five sites three times per month (i.e., totaling 45 samples per month). We do not expect 

to have adequate power to detect monthly trends in normalized counts. We expect good power 

(approximately 90%) to detect large changes (i.e., 40%) changes annually (Figure 4-8). Due to 

the high variability in counts during the migratory period, we only expect the power to detect 

large annual changes for the fall (i.e., 86% to detect a 60% change) and spring (i.e., 90% power 

to detect a 50% change) migrant groups (Figures 4-9 and 4-10, respectively). The results of the 

power analysis of the wintering group exceeded our sampling objective, as we expect good 

power (i.e., 90%) to detect a 15% change in the wintering group (Figure 4-11). If the acrossgroup and spring and fall groups exhibit patterns in variability similar to that which we observed 

during the pilot year of protocol implementation, we recommend increasing the number of 

samples collected to improve power. For example, if the variability collected during our pilot 

year is an adequate representation of variability in shorebird count data, collecting one additional 

sample at each site per month would increase provide approximately 80% power to detect a 30% 

change annually. One additional sample would also provide adequate power to detect 40% 

changes in normalized counts. 
91 

Figure 4-8. Predicted power across groups to detect annual trends in normalized counts, where x = 0.5533, 

s = 0.5902, n = 135. 

Figure 4-9. Predicted power to detect annual trends in normalized counts for the fall group, where x = 

0.9838, s = 0.9049, n = 45. 
92 

Figure 4-10. Predicted power to detect annual trends in normalized counts for the spring group, where x = 

0.4569, s = 0.3362, n = 45. 

Figure 4-11. Predicted power to detect annual trends in normalized counts for the winter group, where x = 

0.2192, s = 0.0471, n = 45. 
93 

Power Example 2 – Park-wide Sampling Design of 60 Sampling Units. This sampling design 

is described in Byrne et al. 2009. In summary, it consists of a park-wide sampling frame that 

includes all beachfront areas and is sampled for nine months per year. To estimate statistical 

power under this design, means and variability from pilot data were used, and an averagemonthly sample size was used. Our sampling objective remains the same as above, to secure 

90% assurance (i.e., power) that we can detect an annual change of 20% in the mean of 

normalized counts (i.e., minimum detectable change) with a 5% chance of a false-change error 

(i.e., detecting a change when one does not actually exist). Data are evaluated on the ability to 

detect annual and monthly trends. Further, sensitivity to changes in normalized counts is also 

evaluated in three seasonal groups, 1) fall migrants, 2) wintering birds, and 3) spring migrants, 

where monthly data are pooled. The power to detect trend is calculated with the equation for 

permanent plots without the finite population factor (Elzinga et al. 1998). 

This power analysis was based on a) our pilot data variability, and b) a proposed design to 

sample 60 sites in a randomly assigned order (i.e., averaging 70 total samples per month). As 

with the previous power analysis example, we do not achieve adequate power to detect even 

large monthly trends. We do meet our sampling objective in our expected ability to detect a 20% 

change in normalized counts annually with 92% power (Figure 4-12). Fall and spring improved 

over the previous example, where we expect 92% power to detect a 30% change in the fall group 

(Figure 4-13), and we expect 80% power to detect a 20% change in the spring group (Figure 4-

14). We expect excellent power (i.e., 99%) to detect even small changes (10%) in normalized 

counts of the wintering group (Figure 4-15). From a purely statistical-power perspective, this 

type of design is far superior in terms of its ability to detect trend, but involves a significant 

tradeoff between power to detect trend and a substantial increase in the monitoring workload. 

Figure 4-12. Predicted power across groups to detect annual trends in normalized counts, where x = 0.5533, 

s = 0.5902, n = 630. 
94 

Figure 4-13. Predicted power to detect annual trends in normalized counts for the fall group, where x = 

0.9838, s = 0.9049, n = 210. 

Figure 4-14. Predicted power to detect annual trends in normalized counts for the spring group, where x = 

0.4569, s = 0.3362, n = 210. 
95 

Figure 4-15. Predicted power to detect annual trends in normalized counts for the winter group, where x = 

0.2192, s = 0.0471, n = 210. 

Abundance Estimation 

If the distance sampling results in the required number of distance measurements (i.e., > 80 

statistically independent samples), abundance estimates of the wintering population can be made. 

Program DISTANCE is used to calculate a detection function and abundance estimates (see 

Buckland et al. 2001). The database exports observation data where distance estimates were 

collected for this analysis. 

Index Validity 

Due to the expected small population size of wintering focal shorebirds, it is not expected that a 

valid abundance estimate for focal-shorebird wintering populations will be generated using 

distance-sampling methods. Abundance estimation of the migratory population of focal 

shorebirds is not possible because these populations violate a basic assumption of abundance 

estimation in that they are considered “open” (i.e., the population is subject to births, deaths, 

immigration, or emigration). 

Shorebird count data collected under this protocol results in a constant-proportion population 

index E(C) = βN, where E (C) = the expected count, β = probability of detection, and N = the 

actual population size. The primary assumption of this index is that performance remains 

constant for varying values of N (i.e., it is linearly correlated), and this protocol is not designed 

to address this assumption or the efficacy of the index. As is frequently the case with population 

indices, difficulty exists in establishing the true relationship between index performance (i.e., 

validity) and true population abundance. Further implementation of the distance sampling 

component, however, will serve as a preliminary means to address the validity of the index by 

determining if detectability remains constant over time. For example, if the index reveals two 

counts that are substantially different at the same site between time year 1 and year 2 but 
96 

detectability also varies between the two sampling events, it is more likely the differing counts 

reflect differences in detectability rather than differences in true population size. Other potential 

ways to assess index validity are: 1) if the monitoring effort has moderate to good power (i.e., β

< 0.2), this increases the confidence in index performance, 2) if distance sampling does result in 

a valid detection function and subsequent abundance estimate, the relationship between these 

two values can be explored, 3) the proportion of banded birds in a sample over time may also 

serve as a means to evaluate index validity (i.e., a mark/recapture – re-sight study); which can be 

done easily as part of this protocol, 4) implement a double-sampling approach, or 5) since the 

wintering piping plover population assumed to be small, coordinated simultaneous counts 

repeated over several days would result in a timelier estimate with an associated confidence 

interval, however detectability will not be accounted for using this technique. It is important to 

note that inferences of abundance based on an index that has not been validated can result in 

incorrect conclusions and assumptions. 

It is unknown if normalized counts generated form data collected under this protocol are 

proportional to abundance. Therefore, normalized counts should not be used to infer patterns in 

abundance unless the aforementioned index-validity procedures are conducted. 

Relationships Among Variables 

Frequency of focal shorebird detections by habitat type can be explored with contingency tables 

(Zar 1999). A Pearson correlation can be used to explore the relationship between potential 

sources of disturbance (e.g., cars, people, unleashed dogs) and the number of focal shorebird 

observations (Zar 1999). The relationship of the proportion of observations in each habitat type 

to tidal stage can be explored with a Spearman correlation (Zar 1999). As monitoring continues 

and the number of observations increases, the null hypothesis of no relationship among tidal 

stage and habitat use can be tested with log-linear models; with detection/non-detection (i.e., the 

observation) as the response variable and tidal stage, habitat type, and weather variables as 

explanatory variables (i.e., included if these variables are not correlated) (Zar 1999). 

Key Area Use 

Normalized counts (i.e., observations / unit effort) of migratory and wintering shorebirds from 

pilot-year implementation were not normally distributed with equal variance, nor was normality 

achieved through transformations. If future data are normally distributed, 2-sample t tests can be 

used to test the null hypothesis of no difference between sites (Zar 1999). For non-normally 

distributed data, a Mann-Whitney test should be used for comparisons among sampling units to 

test the null (Zar 1999). 

Trend Analysis 

Time-series analysis will provide us information regarding the pattern of observations over time 

and facilitate forecasting and prediction. Based upon data from pilot implementation of this 

protocol, the authors assume the data will rarely be normally distributed with equal variance. 

Therefore, a non-parametric test will be used for trend analysis. A Kendall trend test (Hirsh et al. 

1982) will be used to evaluate trends in normalized counts of migratory and wintering 

shorebirds. This technique accounts for seasonal variation by allowing data to be grouped 

according to a predefined season. Defined analysis groups for this analysis are 1) fall migrants, 

2) wintering birds, and 3) spring migrants. The analysis groups, or “seasons”, used for the 
97 

Kendall trend test can be adjusted slightly (i.e., +/- one month) to account for inter-annual 

variability in migratory phenology. Migrants are split into two separate groups in an effort to 

account for the influence that variability in over-winter survival could have on trends in an 

aggregate of migration groups. For example, a specific shorebird population exhibits high 

productivity in a given breeding season and subsequently high recruitment into the fall/migrating 

population, but over-winter survival is low resulting in fewer returning spring migrants. Pooled 

values across the two migratory periods would exhibit high variability, but mean values would 

likely mask true changes, result in misleading conclusions, reduce the ability to associate 

changes with a particular period; and decrease our ability to potentially mitigate these effects 

with management actions. 
98 

Standard Operating Procedure 5 

Reporting 

This Standard Operating Procedure explains the report format, review, and distribution process 

and schedule for data collected under this protocol. This SOP was adapted from: 

Pietz, D. G., S. G Fancy, L. P Thomas, G. A. Rowell, and M. D. DeBacker. 2004. Bird 

Monitoring Protocol for Agate Fossil Beds National Monument, Nebraska and Tallgrass Prairie 

National Preserve, Kansas , version 1.01. USDI National Park Service, Fort Collins, CO, USA.

Report Format 

In order to facilitate integration of data collected under this protocol with those collected under 

other protocols (e.g., ISS), several reporting functions have been built into the database. Further, 

the reporting requirements outlined in Appendix I of the Piping Plover Recovery Plan (1996) 

guide key components of monitoring data collected in the field and included in reporting 

functions (except for those regarding banded-bird observations). For example, state agencies 

typically have the responsibility of acquiring and submitting relevant data to the USFWS. North 

Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission data forms are incorporated into the database and autopopulated based upon user-defined date ranges. ISS reporting forms are also an output option 

from the database. 

The accompanying SECN shorebird data management system allows for near-real time reporting 

and can be produced by anyone with access to SECN SharePoint website 

(http://inpserosecn2/default.aspx). Written reports or data summaries should be produced as 

necessary. The authors recommend an annual reporting cycle to summarize observed patterns in 

monitored shorebirds. Because the shorebird migratory and wintering period does not 

correspond with a typical end-of-the-calendar year reporting schedule, reports should be 

produced by the end of fiscal year. Reports should include standard outputs from the database in 

addition to export analyses (e.g., distance analysis, across-year comparisons). Interpretation and 

recommendations should be included in this document. These documents should be peer- and 

park-reviewed, published in the NPS Technical Report Series, and distributed to interested 

parties. 

Review Procedure 

Internal Review 

One or more reviews for grammatical soundness should be conducted prior to submitting the 

report for review by staff in the park(s) where monitoring occurred and before external review. 

Internal review by person(s) skilled in technical writing for clarity and directness should fulfill 

this review requirement. Internal reviews will be conducted by SECN staff or persons sought out 

for their language skills.

Park Review 

Park staff can supply details about management actives that may influence findings presented in 

a report and should be consulted as necessary. Further, the management recommendations 
99 

directly affect park staff and therefore should be discussed for relevance and practicality; 

therefore, review by park staff is vital to the interpretation of findings and the assessment of 

proposed management implications. Review by park staff should be conducted before a report is 

submitted for external review. 

External Review 

External review by two or more experts in shorebird monitoring should be sought for the first 

report in a series of annual reports. In addition, analytical methods employed on data presented 

in the report need to be reviewed by one or more statisticians or quantitative ecologists. External 

review is not necessary if a report updates a previously reviewed and distributed report. 

However, external reviews must be sought for new reports or those that deviate significantly 

from previously reviewed and distributed reports. In order to conserve reviewer time, external 

reviews must follow the internal and park review process. 

Distribution Procedure 

Audience 

The primary audience for reports based on shorebird monitoring efforts is the Park Service staff 

at Cape Hatteras National Seashore (CAHA). Additional audiences include the National Park 

Service’s SECN, the NCWRC, the USFWS, and the Program for Regional and International 

Shorebird Monitoring (PRISM). Potential audiences include other state and federal wildlife 

agencies, universities, and the general public. 

Distributing Reports 

All database outputs and export analyses will be aggregated into a report on an annual basis 

before the end of each calendar year. The Southeast Coast Network (SECN) Wildlife Ecologist 

will provide support for report production. Annual reports will be provided to CAHA, NCWRC, 

and USFWS. Additionally, a copy will be kept on file with the SECN Cumberland Island 

National Seashore Office, Saint Marys, Georgia, and made available to all interested parties upon 

request (e.g., individual parties, Freedom of Information Act). 

The reporting schedule for the automated outputs from the accompanying database for the 

International Shorebird Survey (ISS) and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 

should be identified and included in this SOP. Further, reporting requirements for the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service (USFWS) have not yet been established, but should also be identified here. 
The Department of the Interior protects and manages the nation’s natural resources and cultural heritage; provides scientific and 

other information about those resources; and honors its special responsibilities to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and 

affiliated Island Communities. 

NPS 100007, May 2009 
National Park Service 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Natural Resource Program Center 

1201 Oakridge Drive, Suite 150 

Fort Collins, CO 80525 

www.nature.nps.gov 

EXPERIENCE YOUR AMERICA TM