What Do Grassland Birds Need for Migratory Habitat?

A new study sheds (a little) light on a slice of grassland bird life we know very little about.

We know a lot about grassland birds.  Sure, there’s a lot we don’t know too – but we certainly know a lot more about grassland birds than we do about leafhoppers, nematodes, or most other groups of grassland species.  So how is it possible that we know almost nothing about what kinds of habitat grassland birds need during migration?

Do lark sparrows look for the same habitat during migration as they use for nesting? We really have no idea.

I’ve wondered about this for a long time – ever since I did my graduate work on grassland birds back in the 1990’s.  At that time, I was one of a growing number of researchers investigating the importance of the size and shape of prairie habitats to grassland birds.  We now know that prairie size and shape are very important, and more recent studies are even showing that the amount of grassland in the neighborhood around a particular prairie influences whether or not grassland birds will nest there or not.  As we continue to refine our understanding of breeding habitat needs, however, we’ve made no significant progress at all on what grassland birds need for habitat during migration – even though we know that migration is an incredibly stressful part of a bird’s life cycle.  It’s reasonable to wonder, in fact, if population declines in many grassland bird species could be more strongly tied to migratory and winter habitat than to breeding habitat.

For more than a decade, the only available published information on habitat use by grassland birds outside of their breeding areas has been a very nice study of winter habitat use in south Texas from 1999.  That research found grassland birds using a much broader array of habitat types than expected, including brushy and even woodland habitats.  The authors, however, were quick to point out that just because birds were using particular habitats doesn’t mean that those habitats were preferred, and there is no data on how well birds were doing in those habitats.  Still, it’s intriguing to think that bird species that are so picky about finding big open grasslands for nesting might not hang around in the same habitat types at other times of the year.

Just last week, I talked to one of the authors (Patrick Doran, The Nature Conservancy – Michigan) of a new paper that gives us our first real peek into the migratory needs of grassland birds.  Bruce Robertson, Doran, and others conducted a study of how grassland birds utilize grassland and biomass crops as migratory habitat as part of a larger project to assess biomass crops and their potential impact on birds in Michigan.  Their data on bird use of switchgrass fields and prairies during migration showed that obligate grassland birds (species that rely solely on grasslands for breeding habitat) were positively tied to large grassland patches and tended to stay away from wooded areas.  In addition to those two variables, obligate grassland birds also tended to use grasslands with patchy vegetation structure (a mixture of tall and short structure) more than uniformly tall/dense grass.

Large prairies with heterogeneous vegetation structure may be favored by migratory grassland birds. In August and September, as many grassland birds are moving south, both seeds and insects are abundant in many prairies. Is one food source more important than the other? Is either important? Or are birds simply looking for a safe place to rest before continuing south?

This project was a great first step, but like all good research projects, it left us with more questions than answers.  What are those grassland birds using the habitat for?  Are they feeding significantly while there or just resting?  If they’re feeding, are they eating insects or seeds – or both?  Do grassland birds look for the same habitat structure (e.g., tall/dense or short/sparse, etc.) when choosing migratory stopover habitat as they do when choosing breeding habitat?  Knowing the answers to those questions would sure be helpful as we think about how to manage prairies.  For example, assuming habitat structure is important to grassland migrants, decisions whether to burn a prairie in the fall, early spring, or late spring could have very big implications for migratory birds.

One of the most interesting findings in the study by Robertson and his colleagues is the suggestion that grassland patch size might be important for migratory grassland birds.  Woodland migrants have been more extensively studied than grassland birds, and while the picture is not yet clear, it doesn’t appear that birds that require large woodlands for breeding habitat necessarily require the same for migratory stopover habitats.  As an example, a study in eastern South Dakota found that neotropical migrants seemed to use small farmstead woodlots and large Missouri River woodlands interchangeably.  Again, there are still lots of questions still to answer (e.g., are there differences in stress levels or weight loss between habitat types?) but that apparent ability for woodland birds to feed and roost in small woodland habitat during migration has important implications for conservation.  If larger woodlands were required for migratory stopover sites, our challenge to provide appropriate habitat would be much more difficult – especially in landscapes like those in North America’s Great Plains.  It looks like we might not get off so lightly in the case of grassland birds.  If this recent study is representative, the future of grassland bird populations may hinge on our capacity to increase the number of large (how large is large enough??) grassland habitat patches in our most fragmented landscapes.

I’m hoping that the study by Robertson and his colleagues will spawn others like it.  However, studying migratory grassland birds is difficult.  How many of you are comfortable identifying little brown grassland birds when they don’t sing – and when your only look at them comes as they are darting away from you and diving back into the grass?  Regardless of the difficulty, though, we really need the information, and that information doesn’t have to come soley from academic research.  Any birdwatcher or prairie manager could add critical information to what we know by simply keeping track of the grassland bird species they see during spring and fall migration, and noting any habitat characteristics they can (e.g., prairie size, distance from trees, habitat structure – tall, short, dense, sparse).  At worst, sharing field notes with each other might give us at least something to go on as we think about management, and at best could provide pilot data to help design more effective research projects than could be designed by starting from wild guesses.

It seems reasonable to expect that late summer haying reduces the quality of prairies for migrating grassland birds. On the other hand, maybe not?

Our Platte River Prairies are located just to the south of an incredible grassland landscape – the 12 million acre Nebraska Sandhills.  I sometimes wonder about the birds that nest there.  They aren’t lacking for breeding habitat quantity or quality, as far as we know, but they’re only in those big sandhill prairies for a small proportion of their year.  In order to survive to the next breeding season, those birds have to make their way south through some very fragmented landscapes, survive the winter in what can be perilous southern habitats, and then work back north through those fragmented landscapes again.  Our Platte River Prairies are probably among their first stops heading south and their last stops heading north.  Are there management practices that we’re doing that are contributing positively or negatively to the success of those migratory birds?  We really have no idea.  That makes me uncomfortable.

I imagine the birds are a little nervous too.

A Measure of Ecological Resilience in a Restored (Reconstructed) Prairie

Back in May of this year, I wrote about ecological resilience in prairies.  In Part 2 of that double post, I gave an example of a 1995 prairie seeding and talked about how it appears to be maintaining its plant community integrity – through wet and dry years, fire, and grazing.  Since that time, I’ve collected and analyzed more data from that same prairie seeding, and wanted to flesh out that earlier story.

With regard to prairie restoration, my objective is to use high-diversity seedings to expand and reconnect fragmented prairies and thus increase the viability of prairie species and communities.  Because of that, I don’t measure success by whether a prairie seeding looks like any particular remnant prairie.  Instead, I’m trying to establish as many native plant species as I can, let them sort themselves into communities that are adapted to today’s conditions, and use management techniques such as fire and grazing to maintain that plant diversity.  I’m assuming that by providing that plant diversity, I’m also providing the habitat needed by the animals in adjacent remnant prairies, and that those animals will move into – and through – prairie seedings, thus increasing animal population size and viability.  I’m beginning to test those assumptions, and will be ramping up that effort during the next several years.

In the meantime, I’ve been tracking the plant communities within our prairie seedings to look at how many plant species establish and maintain themselves.  More importantly, I’m tracking the long-term trajectory of those plant communities using plotwise floristic quality analysis (you can read more about that technique here).  If the prairie seedings are ecologically resilient, one measure of that resilience should be that populations of individual plant species, and overall species diversity, are stable over time – even through stress.   The 1995 seeding, for which I’m presenting data here, is located in our Platte River Prairies, south of Wood River, Nebraska, and it has certainly undergone stress.  Since it was hand-planted in 1995 by the Prairie Plains Resource Institute with approximately 120-150 plant species, it has seen both very wet years and a long severe drought (7 years), and has been managed with patch-burn grazing since 2002.  Over the years, I’ve accumulated a total plant species list of 164 species for the 45 acre seeding, which I’m very pleased with.  However, the real question is whether or not the seeding will be able to maintain its ecological integrity over time.  Below is a series of photos and graphs that tell that story – at least the story up to this point.

This is what the 1995 seeding looked like in its 5th growing season. Species such as prairie clovers, perennial sunflowers, and other "matrix prairie plants" were abundant. Management to this point in time consisted of a couple of prescribed fires.

.

During the drought years between 1999 and 2006, there were times that the combination of intensive grazing and drought really stressed the plant community. This July photo shows warm-season grasses that have gone dormant, but also shows plant species such as rosinweed and prairie clover that were still green and growing - and largely ungrazed.

.

Within our patch-burn grazing system, a new portion of the prairie is burned each year, and intensive grazing tracks those burned areas across the site. Once a new patch is burned, the previous burn patch begins to recover from intensive grazing. This photo shows a burned patch the year after it was burned. The combination of drought and grazing made it look like a young prairie seeding again because of the abundance of short-lived weedy plants that were able to take advantage of the weakened grasses.

.

A burned patch in June, showing grazing impacts focused mainly on grasses, leaving many forbs ungrazed.

.

Under a light to moderate stocking rate, cattle display their selectivity (choosing to graze grass over forbs) - resulting in a very patchy prairie with short grasses and tall wildflowers.

.

In unburned patches, very little grazing occurs - providing rest for the plant community. This photo was actually taken this week, in a portion of the prairie seeding we fenced out this year to provide complete rest from grazing. We're beginning to include some periods of complete cattle exclusion into our patch-burn systems to ensure that no plant species is grazed every year. This growing season was very wet, so the rested prairie grew very tall - even though it had been grazed fairly hard in 2010.

.

This graph shows the mean floristic quality of the prairie seeding between 2002 and 2011. These data are collected from approximately 100 1m plots each year. Floristic quality is calculated within each 1m plot and averaged across the site. Error bars indicate 95% confidence intervals. Mean floristic quality has remained stable during the entire sampling period.

.

While the mean floristic quality of the prairie has remained stable, the frequency of some individual plant species (% of plots the species occurs in) has varied from year to year. This graph shows frequency (from top to bottom of the legend) of marestail, foxtails, annual brome, black medick, and curly dock - all opportunistic (weedy) species that would be expected to act in just this way.

.

More variability in the frequency of plant species between years. This graph shows (from top to bottom) stiff goldenrod, Canada goldenrod, heath aster, western ragweed, daisy fleabane, and hoary vervain. Interestingly, the species don't seem to track with each other - indicating that each is driven by its own unique set of factors.

.

In contrast to the two earlier graphs, these data show that perennial native grass species have relatively consistent frequencies between years - even though they were subjected to periodic years of severe drought/fire/grazing. From top to bottom, this graph shows data for big bluestem, Canada wildrye, indiangrass, little bluestem, prairie cordgrass, and switchgrass.

.

Similar to the perennial native grasses, many long-lived prairie wildflowers are also maintaining stable frequencies between years. Species that were common in 2002 are still common now, and species that were uncommon remain the same. Though I'm only showing a subset of species in these graphs, I've not seen any plant species disappear from this prairie.

.

Like others who restore prairies, I’m still experimenting with techniques for both establishing and maintaining diverse prairie plant communities.  However, data like these help me feel more comfortable that I’m being relatively successful to this point – and I see similar patterns in other seedings we’ve done.  I’m also more and more impressed with the toughness of prairies and prairie plants.  I tried to include photos that showed the kinds of variable stresses this prairie has endured during its 17 growing seasons.  Watching this and other prairies survive what they’ve survived helps keep me from worrying so much about whether the coming year will be dry or wet, or whether we’ve got the right number of cattle in the prairie each year. 

As I said earlier, there is still much to learn about how animals (vertebrates and invertebrates) are using our seedings, but that is a separate avenue of exploration.  Building resilient plant communities around and between those remnants is the first step to better prairie viability. 

So far, so good.