Abstract
Conservationists spend considerable resources to create and enhance wildlife habitat. Monitoring how species respond to these efforts helps managers allocate limited resources. However, monitoring efforts often encounter logistical challenges that are exacerbated as geographic extent increases. We used autonomous recording units (ARUs) and automated acoustic classification to mitigate the challenges of assessing Eastern Whip-poor-will (Antrostomus vociferus) response to forest management across the eastern USA. We deployed 1263 ARUs in forests with varying degrees of management intensity. Recordings were processed using an automated classifier and the resulting detection data were used to assess occupancy. Whip-poor-wills were detected at 401 survey locations. Across our study region, whip-poor-will occupancy decreased with latitude and elevation. At the landscape scale, occupancy decreased with the amount of impervious cover, increased with herbaceous cover and oak and evergreen forests, and exhibited a quadratic relationship with the amount of shrub-scrub cover. At the site-level, occupancy was negatively associated with basal area and brambles (Rubus spp.) and exhibited a quadratic relationship with woody stem density. Implementation of practices that create and sustain a mosaic of forest age classes and a diverse range of canopy closure within oak (Quercus spp.) dominated landscapes will have the highest probability of hosting whip-poor-wills. The use of ARUs and a machine learning classifier helped overcome challenges associated with monitoring a nocturnal species with a short survey window across a large spatial extent. Future monitoring efforts that combine ARU-based protocols and mappable fine-resolution structural vegetation data would likely further advance our understanding of whip-poor-will response to forest management.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 121786 |
| Journal | Journal of Environmental Management |
| Volume | 366 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Aug 2024 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2024 Elsevier Ltd
Funding
This project was primarily funded by the United States Department of Agriculture - Natural Resource Conservation Service ‘Conservation Effects Assessment Project’ (CEAP) grant (NR203A750023C016). Additionally, we are grateful for support from the Department of Interior Northeast Climate Adaptation Science Center, McIntyre-Stenns Capacity Grant #KY009043, Department of Biological Sciences at the University of Pittsburgh, the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, and National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (0407.19.066268, 0407.19.066207, 0407.20.070428). Our funding sources did not require a review of our manuscript prior to publication, nor did they affect our data collection, results, or interpretation of analyses in any way.We would like to thank The Nature Conservancy, the many private landowners, and field technicians that made this work possible. We appreciate the many public agencies that allowed us access to their lands: Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, Pennsylvania Game Commission, Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, New Jersey Fish and Wildlife, Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation, New Hampshire Fish and Game, Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, United States Forest Service, and United States Fish and Wildlife Service. We are grateful for the support of the bridges2 supercomputing cluster (psc.edu/resources/bridges-2/user-guide). Finally, we are thankful for the revisions made by the two anonymous reviewers during the publication process. This project was funded by the United States Department of Agriculture-Natural Resource Conservation Service Conservation Effects Assessment Project grant NR203A750023C016, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation grants 0407.19.066268, 0407.19.066207, and 0407.20.070428, Department of Biological Sciences at the University of Pittsburgh, the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and the Department of Interior Northeast Climate Adaptation Science Center. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the U.S. Government or the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and its funding sources. This project was primarily funded by the United States Department of Agriculture - Natural Resource Conservation Service ‘Conservation Effects Assessment Project’ (CEAP) grant (NR203A750023C016). Additionally, we are grateful for support from the Department of Interior Northeast Climate Adaptation Science Center, Department of Biological Sciences at the University of Pittsburgh, the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, and National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (0407.19.066268, 0407.19.066207, 0407.20.070428). Our funding sources did not require a review of our manuscript prior to publication, nor did they affect our data collection, results, or interpretation of analyses in any way. We would like to thank The Nature Conservancy, the many private landowners, and field technicians that made this work possible. We appreciate the many public agencies that allowed us access to their lands: Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, Pennsylvania Game Commission, Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, New Jersey Fish and Wildlife, Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation, New Hampshire Fish and Game, Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, United States Forest Service, and United States Fish and Wildlife Service. We are grateful for the support of the bridges2 supercomputing cluster (psc.edu/resources/bridges-2/user-guide). Finally, we are thankful for the revisions made by the two anonymous reviewers during the publication process. This project was funded by the United States Department of Agriculture-Natural Resource Conservation Service Conservation Effects Assessment Project grant NR203A750023C016, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation grants 0407.19.066268, 0407.19.066207, and 0407.20.070428, Department of Biological Sciences at the University of Pittsburgh, the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and the Department of Interior Northeast Climate Adaptation Science Center. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the U.S. Government or the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and its funding sources.
| Funders | Funder number |
|---|---|
| United States Department of Agriculture - Natural Resource Conservation Service ‘Conservation Effects Assessment Project | |
| Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation, New Hampshire Fish and Game | |
| Nature Conservancy | |
| U.S. Dept. of Agriculture Forest Service | |
| Department of Interior Northeast Climate Adaptation Science Center | |
| Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife | |
| U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service | |
| University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh | |
| Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries | |
| Department of Biological Sciences, University of Cincinnati | |
| Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, New Jersey Fish and Wildlife | |
| CEAP | |
| Massachusetts MassWildlife Division of Fisheries and Wildlife | |
| Pennsylvania Game Commission | |
| Department of Interior Northeast Climate Adaptation Science Center | |
| Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation | |
| United States Department of Agriculture - Natural Resource Conservation Service ‘Conservation Effects Assessment Project | NR203A750023C016 |
| National Fish and Wildlife Foundation | 0407.19.066207, 0407.19.066268, 0407.20.070428 |
Keywords
- Forest management
- Machine learning classifier
- Nightjar
- Oak
- Passive acoustic monitoring
- Private lands conservation
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Environmental Engineering
- Waste Management and Disposal
- Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law