Over the past few weeks, I’ve gotten schooled in the history and current status of New England groundfish and shellfish. There are definitely some bright spots, like scallops and today’s haddock catch in Georges Bank, but there are also some problems including the economic realities of fishing for a living. I love eating seafood, but I also want to feel good about the sustainability of my dining choices and the ecosystems that provide my food. At the same time, I really love the idea that fishing can be done by individuals and small groups using traditional methods. So the challenge, in my view, is to balance the needs of fishing communities with the needs of fishing stocks, the appetites of our seafood markets with the appetites of each link in marine food webs.
This is no small order. There are so many beings involved, at times with conflicting view points, and there are quite a few variables that we are still working to understand. One concern of some scientists is that we are using a ‘shifting baseline’ as we make our decisions (Hutchings & Reynolds 2004)- we start to think of fish stocks from the past few decades as representative of historical levels and forget that those stocks may be much lower than they were 100 or 200 years ago. If we follow that path, we’re constantly settling for fewer and fewer resources.
What can we do to address these problems? Depending on how involved you want to get and where you are located, there are a wide variety of ways that you can support sustainable fisheries and the people who catch our food.
- In the grocery store and at restaurants: Choose fish whose stocks are felt to be harvested at a sustainable level and in a manner that doesn’t put other species at risk. If you’re not sure which choices are best, the Monterey Bay Aquarium has a variety of seafood guides for areas of the US as well as sushi- I carry one in my wallet, but my parents, who are more technically advanced, use the link on their smartphone. And don’t be afraid to ask where the fish is coming from and how it was caught- sometimes people won’t be able to tell you, but hopefully your question gets them thinking about it. I’ve even been thanked for asking.
- If you live near the coast: Try to find a community-supported fishery near you- it’s very similar to the box scheme for produce you can find in some areas- you buy a share of the season’s fish and you get a regular supply fresh from the fishermen- it helps them by cutting out the middleman and you know exactly where your fish is coming from. Along the East Coast, check out the Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance for CSFs near you.
- If you live away from the coast: And you want to do something that directly impacts fishing communities, consider making a donation to fishing organizations that are working to keep stocks and fishermen healthy. As I mentioned previously, the Cape Cod Commercial Hook Fisherman’s Association focuses on helping fishermen with small boats and traditional gear maintain their way of life, and there are other groups in different locations working toward similar goals.
- If you want to get out on the water yourself: There are a number of volunteer opportunities with the NOAA– you can take pH and salinity readings, count fish, observe fishing boats, and contribute to research and education in other ways (the opportunities in Hawaii make me wish I lived there)- and other organizations, some of which deal with fresh water, have volunteer programs as well (check out Trout Unlimited or your state’s Fish & Wildlife Department).
- In terms of your lifestyle: I know this may not be a popular suggestion, but I do think that we need to reassess our eating habits with regard to fish (and meat, in general)- the human population continues to expand, and that means ever-more pressure on our resources, including fisheries. I think at some point we have to ask ourselves how much of what we eat is truly a requirement and if there are other ways to sate our appetites. It was not enjoyable when I gave up eel in my sushi (because of concerns over wild populations, farming practices, and the use of horseshoe crabs as eel bait), but I felt it was the right thing to do, and there are other, similar choices I have made to limit what I eat in an attempt to support those stocks that are in trouble. (For a more detailed discussion of food choices in general, check out my suggestions in Books I love.)
Works Cited:
Hutchings, J.A. and J.D. Reynolds. 2004. Marine fish population collapses: consequences for recovery and extinction risk. BioScience 54(4): 297-309.
Photo by Tertia Cote.
Too much of a good thing?
I sat down to a feast of fresh Maine lobster on Wednesday, my second this summer, and, to be honest, I completely enjoyed it from start to finish, despite the complete mess I made on both table and clothing (I should probably have a bib at home for this…)- but I had to wonder, given the cycles of boom and bust in the history of New England fisheries, why dining on lobster is so easy on my wallet these days and whether that would continue in the future. So I did a little reading on the state of specific groundfish and shellfish today, how fishing communities have responded to management plans and concerns, and what scientists think about the future. (There is no way that I read every article and study that is out there, and I’m sure some big ones got away, but I think I’ve done a reasonable job of putting together an overview.)
As I mentioned in my last post, fishery management along the New England coast became more direct starting in the mid 1990s. In addition to reducing the number of fishing days at sea and requiring catch reports, specific areas within Georges Bank were permanently closed to fishing activity (there had been seasonal closures before)- there was particular concern over the decline of cod, haddock, and flounder stocks. Individual fishing communities also acted independently to address some of the issues they saw, so that fishing could remain a viable way of life. The Cape Cod Commercial Hook Fisherman Association, for example, started in 1991 with the goal of helping fishermen who use traditional gear (like hooks and gillnets) share a fishing quota. Because their methods for catching haddock have very low by-catch (meaning cod), they have been able to gain special access to closed areas for their members.
The bright spots amid a dark sea. Are these actions paying off? Well, there has been some definite progress in some areas. Georges Bank’s Closed Areas I and II have helped spawning-stock biomass of cod, haddock, and yellowtail flounder increase (Murawski et al. 2000). According to the NOAA Fisheries site, both yellowtail flounder and haddock have sustainable harvests on Georges Bank. Although not the original intention, the closed areas of Georges Bank have also contributed to the doubling of New Bedford’s scallop harvest between 1999 and 2005 (Environmental Entrepreneurs, 2005) and tempering of year-to-year fluctuations in the scallop harvest (Murawski et al. 2000). Researchers from UMASS at Dartmouth use regular video surveys, which are less intrusive than dredging, to assess scallop stocks, and they’re working to assess groundfish in the same manner (which is harder since groundfish, unlike scallops, move) (Miller 2012). Lobster stocks on Georges Bank and the Gulf of Maine have been at record levels of abundance and recruitment (Wilson et al. 2007), partly because the fish who would normally eat them are so few (hence, I can afford multiple lobster dinners this summer). And cooperative research plus a transparent managing process have helped build trust among the many groups interested in fisheries management (SRA-Touchstone Consulting Group 2011).
The goal is to keep these boats active, while maintaining healthy stocks.
But big concerns remain. NOAA feels the flounder harvest in the Gulf of Maine is unsustainable, and haddock stocks there, although abundant in the early 2000s, have declined since then. Although lobster in northern New England is plentiful, stocks in Connecticut, Rhode Island, and southern Massachusetts collapsed under the combined weight of a decline in settling young and shell disease (Wahle et al. 2009). Cod stocks, although recovering a little on Georges Bank, continue to be overfished on Georges Bank and the Gulf of Maine, and are not expected to meet the 2014 rebuilding goals. Several studies (Murawski et al. 1998, Hutchings & Reynolds 2004, Environmental Entrepreneurs 2005) expressed concern that limits tend to be raised at the first sign of recovery rather than later when harvest would be more sustainable. At the same time, members of the fishing industry felt that the management process was not concerned with advancing their interests (SRA-Touchstone Consulting Group 2011). And, although my bank account feels good when I buy lobster at the store, systems that have become something of a monoculture, like with lobster as their predators were reduced, have nothing to fall back on when trouble appears.
What does the future hold? Obviously, this is a difficult one to be sure about- at best recovery will be a slow but steady process. A 2005 assessment put cod on Georges Bank at 1/10 that of a healthy sustainable population (New England Fishery Management Council 2005), a prospect that is not encouraging in light of a review of 90 collapsed populations across a range of species (Hutchings & Reynolds 2004) which found that, 15 years after collapse, only 12% had made a full recovery and 40% had seen none at all- the rate of recovery depended in part on which species it was, but also whether fishing continued during recovery and how the habitat had been impacted by fishing activities. Why does recovery take so long for some species? Even when you target other species, species in decline may be by-catch. The young of some species also depend upon certain habitats to provide refuge from predators- if those habitats were on sea floors damaged by dredging, it can take up to 100 years for that habitat to recover (Environmental Entrepreneurs 2005). How does this play out for cod? As I stated before, cod have not recovered in the way that flounder and haddock have on Georges Bank, and there have also been changes in the composition of the stocks. Because mesh-size allows smaller individuals to slip through and also because the population feels stress from fishing pressure, there has been a trend toward earlier maturation and smaller size at maturity (Hutchings & Reynolds 2004). There are further concerns for cod and lobsters as ocean temperatures rise. Cod are generally not seen in waters above 12° C, and recruitment declines above 8.5° C (Drinkwater 2005); if current temperatures along the New England coast increased by 1° C, stocks on Georges Bank are predicted to decline, at 3° C that decline would spread to the Gulf of Maine, and at an increase of 4° C the stocks in Georges Bank are predicted to disappear. As of 2007, shell disease had not been seen in lobster populations above the southern Gulf of Maine (Wahle et al. 2009), but that could change with warmer water temperatures.
So, this seems like a pretty dark forecast in some respects. As someone who really enjoys seafood and plans to munch on fish and chips at the NH Highland Games this weekend, I have an interest in healthy, sustainable marine harvests. I also want to see protected marine ecosystems and productive fishing communities along our coast- all of that seems like a tall order, but I imagine that there are a variety of ways in which all of us can work toward those goals. In my next post, I’ll look into what we can do to promote fish and fishermen.
Works Cited:
Drinkwater, K.F. 2005. The response of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) to future climate change. Journal of Marine Science 62: 1327-1337.
Environmental Entrepreneurs. 2005. Restoring fisheries: a New England perspective. New York: 1-7.
Hutchings, J.A. and J.D. Reynolds. 2004. Marine fish population collapses: consequences for recovery and extinction risk. BioScience 54(4): 297-309.
Miller, N. 2012. Something’s fishy, part II: educators partner with fishermen to measure stocks on Georges Bank. SOCO August 2012: 26-30.
Murawski, S.A., Brown, R.W., Cadrin, S.X., Mayo, R.K., O’Brien, L., Overholtz, W.J., and K.A. Sosebee. 1998. New England groundfish. In: Our Living Oceans: Report on the Status of U.S. Living Marine Resources, 1998. National Marine Fisheries Service, on-line version: Feature Article 2, http://spo.nwr.noaa.gov/fa2.pdf
Murawski, S.A., Brown, R., Lai, H.-L., Rago, P.J., and L. Hendrickson. 2000. Large-scale closed areas as a fishery-management tool in temperate marine systems: the Georges Bank experience. Bulletin of Marine Science 66(3): 775-798.
New England Fishery Management Council, Groundfish Science & Stock Status, 15 Sep 2005. http://nefsc.noaa.gov/groundfish/science/reports/GroundfishAssessmentReviewMeetingII.pdf
SRA-Touchstone Consulting Group. 2011. A Review of the New England Fishery Management Process. 1-19.
Wahle, R.A., Gibson, M., and M. Fogarty. 2009. Distinguishing disease impacts from larval supply effects in a lobster fishery collapse. Marine Ecology Progress Series 376: 185-192.
Wilson, J., Yan, L., and C. Wilson. 2007. The precursors of governance in the Maine lobster fishery. PNAS 104(39): 15212-15217.
My goal was to learn about the history of marine fisheries in New England because I felt that narrowing down the geographic region would make the topic manageable- given the amount of information sloshing around in my brain, I should have narrowed more.
Bay scallops, Pecten irradians, were a hit in New York starting around 1859
I started by digging through some pretty old records for lobster and groundfish in the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank, but I found an even older commentary from 1886 on scallops from the Bay of Fundy to the Jersey Shore that, I felt, made a strong statement about our history of harvesting the oceans- according to Ingersoll (1886), in the 30 years since scallops had been introduced to the NY market, exploitation had led to a decline along the Maine and Canadian coast, and the fishery from Long Island Sound to New Jersey had been abandoned. Looking at the New England fisheries overall, there was a definite pattern of focusing on a marine species, increasing the harvest to an unsustainable level, and then a period of decline. By the early 1900s, for example, there were already conversations about how best to manage protection of lobster stocks because declines were evident (Herrick 1906).
In terms of groundfish (such as cod, haddock, and flounder), technology and the international nature of the Atlantic had a big impact on fishing pressure and the decline-recovery cycles in different areas. Cod was already a focus of the Georges Bank fishing industry by the late 1700s and, as inshore stocks declined in the 1800s, fishermen moved farther from shore and started looking at other species (Murawski et al. 1998), including halibut which was declining before 1900 and haddock which saw a big increase in catches from 1900 to 1929, held relatively stable from 1935 to 1960, and experienced a collapse between 1965 (150,400 tons harvested) and 1974 (4,300 tons harvested) (Clark et al. 1982). Why is this important? Well, switching from species to species doesn’t really deal with the underlying problem of over-fishing- you’re spreading around the pain, but not actually healing the wound. According to Murawski et al.’s (1998) estimate, even with the variety of protections in place in Georges Bank today, most species need 10 years to recover. Without those protections, recovery is slower if at all.
Decaying Atlantic salmon caught in a cod trap leader
What role has technology played? Changes in fishing technology have expanded the industry’s reach for hauls, markets, and environmental impacts. Around the turn of the 20th century, trawling became the common method for harvesting groundfish (Murawski 2005), which helped increase catches but also resulted in large discard of juvenile fish (mesh-size for the haddock fishery was not regulated until 1953 (Murawski et al. 1998) and many smaller fish were caught, injured or killed, and discarded- imagine that you have pea plants and you harvest by putting your hand loosely around the vine and sliding up- yes, you’ll get the ripe pea pods, but you’ll also pull off a lot of the little ones, too, and you won’t have as much to harvest later). Heavy equipment, such as that used for otter trawling, damaged the sea floor habitat as well, and other species could get caught in the nets.
The international crowd got involved starting in the 1960s- distant-water trawling fleets from Europe, Asia, and other parts of the world put increased pressure on fish stocks off the New England coast. These ships concentrated fishing efforts on specific species in specific locations, then switched to different species when catches fell too low (Murawski 2005), and the pressure on some stocks was too much: haddock numbers collapsed between 1965 and 1974, and cod harvests hit a peak of about 1.9 million tons in 1968 and then saw a sharp decline (Lear 1998). We responded with regular stock monitoring starting in 1963, limited/no distant-water fleet access within 200 miles of the US coast, and quotas and then indirect controls (Murawski et al. 1998), but, even with foreign fleets gone, modernization within the US fishing industry cut short moderate recoveries in the late 1970s and both haddock and flounder stocks collapsed in the second half of the 1980s. Cod stocks also declined sharply after 1989 (Lear 1998). A Canadian task force felt that fish mortality from cod fishing since 1978 on Georges Bank had been possibly three times higher than that recommended (Serchuk & Wigley 1993). Management since 1994 has been more direct (closed areas, stricter limits, etc.), and the situation in Georges Bank has improved, but efforts in the Gulf of Maine have not been as successful (Murawski et al. 1998).
There have been definite boom-and-bust cycles in New England fisheries, particularly when it comes to cod and haddock, and I imagine that what I’ve described here has played out with many species in many locations around the world as we take more from marine resources that can be sustained. I know quite a few people working to better understand the ecosystem dynamics of areas off the New England coast so that fish stocks can get the support they need and fishermen can have fairly reliable hauls. But it’s a pretty complicated issue because there are so many variables involved, some of which we are just starting to recognize. For my next post, I’ll take a look at current lines of research and what the prospects for the future seem to be- hopefully the big picture is getting clearer.
Works Cited:
Clark, S.H., Overholtz, W.J., and R.C. Hennemuth. 1982. Review and assessment of the Georges Bank and Gulf of Maine haddock fishery. Journal of Northwest Atlantic Fishery Science 3: 1-27.
Herrick, F.H. 1906. Effective protection for the lobster fishery. Science 23(591): 650-655.
Ingersoll, E. 1886. The scallop and its fishery. The American Naturalist 20(12): 1001-1006.
Lear, W.H. 1998. History of fisheries in the Northwest Atlantic: the 500-year perspective. Journal of Northwest Atlantic Fishery Science 23: 41-73.
Murawski, S.A. 2005. The New England groundfish resource: a history of population change in relation to harvesting. In Buchsbaum, R., Pederson, J. and W.E. Robinson eds., The Decline of Fisheries Resources in New England: Evaluating the Impact of Overfishing, Contamination, and Habitat Degradation. MIT Sea Grant College Program, Cambridge, MA: 11-24.
Murawski, S.A., Brown, R.W., Cadrin, S.X., Mayo, R.K., O’Brien, L., Overholtz, W.J., and K.A. Sosebee. 1998. New England groundfish. In: Our Living Oceans: Report on the Status of U.S. Living Marine Resources, 1998. National Marine Fisheries Service, on-line version: Feature Article 2, http://spo.nwr.noaa.gov/fa2.pdf
Serchuck, F.M. and S.E. Wigley. 1993. Assessment and management of the Georges Bank cod fishery: an historical review and evaluation. Journal of Northwest Atlantic Fishery Science 13: 52-52.
I love seafood.
Well, I love food in general, but seafood is a big part of that. Thankfully, I’m just two hours from the coast, and fresh seafood is something I can expect and enjoy on a regular basis (I’ve even become something of a snob about which seafood sources I’m willing to use- once you’ve had littleneck clams fresh from the ocean, you begin to wonder exactly how long it has taken that breaded fish fillet to get to your kitchen). I do wonder, however, whether my love for fish and shellfish is healthy for me and for the environment. I tend to investigate where my food comes from, looking at how it’s made and where and by whom, so that I have a better sense of how my eating habits impact me and the world around me (which, I’m sure, makes me something of annoying restaurant customer, ‘cause I like to ask questions). I’m certainly not alone in an appreciation of seafood, and I imagine that the cumulative impact of all of us piscivores is impressive.
I did some research into the sardine industry two years ago (and it was a challenge to trace some of those supply lines) for a grad school project which was informative both in terms of how humans harvest marine resources (for example, purse seining- check out the Monterey Bay Aquarium for a primer on fishing methods) and how our actions can impact other animals that use those same resources (like Cape Gannets, which were the focus of my project). I have also heard about declining fish stocks, invasive species, and worries that chemical changes in our oceans are negatively impacting sea life. It seems to me that some aquatic species, like some birds, represent a conservation challenge because they move around quite a bit, and others represent a different problem because they cannot move when things get bad.
Living in New England, I know that certain fish stocks, like cod, are not what they once were, and I know how important the seafood industry was and continues to be to our past and present economies. At the moment, I can also buy lobster at a very, very good price, which is great news for my taste buds, but I’m not sure what that situation says about the state of marine ecosystems in my backyard. So this month I’ll be looking at New England seafood (having learned from my research into migrant song birds that narrowing a topic can be helpful- I’ll probably still be inundated with information).
Over the next few weeks, I’ll be investigating the history of marine resource-use along the New England coast, how we’re gaining information on the current situation, and what that current situation looks like. I hope to be able to give you a sense of where we’ve come from and what future options lie before us. Since this is a topic that directly connects to our dining choices, I believe this is another area where well-informed people can make a huge difference- even if you’re not spending days on a fishing boat, you’re probably spending dollars on what that fishing boat has caught.
So stay tuned, as I do my best to reveal the depth and breadth of the situation.
Over the last few weeks, I’ve had the chance to look at the status of migratory song birds, some of which are doing quite well (Baltimore orioles, for example: stable population, large range, sports team), while others are facing very bleak conditions (for a sobering experience, check out Golden-cheeked warblers, or, if you want to get depressed, Bachman’s warblers). But it is clear from the histories of some species, such as Eastern Bluebirds, that people can help reverse declines and support populations.
Isabelline/Red-tailed/Rufous-tailed Shrike, an insect-eating migrant found largely in Africa and Asia
Why should I get involved? Well, to begin with, birds are beautiful to look at and their presence adds to the natural beauty around us; US Fish & Wildlife says that about 500 of the nearly 800 bird species in the US migrate across borders. But aside from aesthetic and emotional benefits, song birds play important ecosystem roles by acting as pollinators and consuming insect pests. According to the Cornell Lab of Ornithology, hummingbirds in North America have a fondness for columbine, bee balm, and honeysuckle nectar, but they also pollinate other plants and even eat insects such as gnats. Purple Martins and Scarlet Tanagers catch flying insects and Tennessee Warblers specialize in spruce budworms and other moth caterpillars. These song birds help reduce insect populations that can harm both us and the plants we depend upon for food and other resources. It seems to me a better strategy to support bird species that consume insect pests rather than relying upon pesticides.
There are many opportunities for you to help migratory song birds, ranging from writing letters to sitting outside with binoculars, just as there are many different birds that could use your help.
- From your computer- The Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act has been awaiting reauthorization from Congress since last summer- this act provides funding for hemisphere-wide projects that protect all migratory birds in all habitats. Projects must involve non-federal partners and matching money, and a specific proportion of the funding has to go to efforts outside of the US. Unfortunately, after being introduced to House committee last April and being sent back to the Senate from its committee last July, nothing has happened with this bill. You can send letters to your senators and representatives from the National Audubon Society website.
- In the grocery store- If you are a coffee drinker, consider buying shade-grown coffee. According to Greenberg et al. (1997), shade-grown coffee plantations, whether using natural forest or planted canopy, host a wide variety of birds and may act as refuges for omnivorous species, especially during the dry season.
- In your backyard- Pay attention to the birds you see and then submit those observations to ebird.org– this site uses data from volunteers all over the world to track what people are seeing and when. Analysis of this data (Hurlbert & Liang 2012) found that short-distance migrants were responding more to increases in spring temperatures than long-distance migrants. What you see outside your window is important. (For those of you who aren’t too sure about your bird ID skills, check out allaboutbirds.org– you can narrow your options by bird silhouette and then look at pictures- that’s how I learned that I had seen a white-winged crossbill.)
- In your backyard- Consider putting out feeders to help migrants along their way. The University of Southern Mississippi Migratory Bird Research Group is committed to a better understanding of the behavior and ecology of migrating birds (their radar images of migrating flocks are pretty neat!). Moore et al. (2005) found that migrating birds spend more time at stopover sites than in flight during migration, so the resources birds find on the ground are crucial. Depending on where you are, you may want to consider hummingbird feeders or platforms with seeds or blocks of suet (and, of course, you want to think about what other animals might be interested in that food- where I live, there is a fine line between helping spring migrants and feeding black bears).
- In your backyard- Consider providing additional nesting sites for song birds- the North American Bluebird Society and Purple Martin Conservation Associationhave tips and plans.
Endangered Kirtland’s Warbler (Dendroica kirtlandii)- the population has responded positively to habitat management
- Further afield- get involved with organizations that are targeting specific species- The Golden-winged Warbler Atlas Project is collecting data on habitat characteristics and population density across southern Canada and the northern US from Minnesota to New York, the Bobolink Project is active in the northeast, and many other groups across the continent and around the world are working to protect migrating songbirds.
Migrating songbirds represent a conservation challenge because their lives and needs span such a large geographical and ecosystem range. It will take the combined efforts of many people to ensure that needed habitats and stable populations persist into the future, but I truly believe that migratory bird conservation can work because there are so many ways for people to get involved. We only get to see certain birds for part of the year, so let’s work together to make sure that they return each time.
Works cited:
Greenberg, R., P. Bichier, and J. Sterling. 1997. Bird populations in rustic and planted shade coffee plantations of eastern Chiapas, Mexico. Biotropica 29(4): 501-514.
Hurlbert, A.H. and Z. Liang. 2012. Spatiotemporal variation in avian migration phenology: citizen science reveals the effects of climate change. PloS ONE 7(2): e31662.
Moore, F.R., M.S. Woodrey, J.J. Buler, S. Woltmann, and T.R. Simons. 2005. Understanding the stopover of migratory birds: a scale dependent approach. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-191.
This week I investigated three migratory song bird species to see how things were changing on a smaller scale, and while I chose these species largely because I love their plumage (I’ll admit to being shallow here and not considering the “inner-bird”), I also selected them because they represent three different scenarios: a complicated situation, a real worry, and a success story. And I have no doubt that people will have a range of attitudes toward these species depending on where they are and how they use the land around them.
Bobolink, Male, May, PA
The complicated history of Bobolinks- Bobolinks (Dolichonyx oryzivorus) represent an interesting scenario that forces us to consider our responsibilities for preserving species whose ranges we helped expand. Bobolinks are grassland birds who nest on the ground. They have a fondness for pastures and hay fields, and their tendency to consume rice during migration led McAtee (1919) to call them “the most exasperating bird pest of the United States (431).” (What do you suppose was the second most-exasperating?) Bobolinks are considered ‘Least Concern’ by the IUCN, an international group founded in 1948 to assess environmental issues and promote conservation action (I highly recommend a look at the IUCN Red List site where you can get status reports for species that interest you). Across central and eastern North America, however, consistent declines in the bobolink population have been recorded over the past few decades. Here in NH, the trend is a 2.6% decline per year (visit NH Fish and Game’s “State of the Birds” report for info on many species), in Wisconsin the average is a bit less than 2% per year according to the Wisconsin Bird Conservation Initiative, and the overall trend according to data from the Breeding Bird Survey is a 1.6% decline per year between 1966 and 1996 (Peterjohn & Sauer 1999). Part of this decline is connected to the changes in land use over the past century: as farmland is converted by development or abandoned to revert back to forest, breeding habitat is lost. Wintering habitat in South America is also being lost- according to Di Giacomo et al. (2005), the birds’ winter range has decreased by 25%; in Argentina, for example, 90% of the original grasslands have been lost to development and agriculture. Another issue facing bobolinks in their breeding grounds is earlier and more frequent harvests of hay fields- farmers now cut hay 2-3 times per summer and the first cutting is 2-3 weeks earlier than it was 70 years ago (The Bobolink Project- see below). Earlier cutting during the nesting season exposes nests to predators and can also flush chicks out of nests before they are ready. Why is this a complicated issue? Well, the general feeling is that bobolink populations increased in eastern North America as a result of human, specifically European colonist, clearing of the land for farming (although there is some debate on this- see Askins 1999). Now that much of that land is unsuitable for breeding habitat, the bobolink population is declining- so there is the question of whether this really represents a problem for the species and whether we should take action to stabilize and support these populations if their expansion was the result of our previous actions. I’m not sure where I fall in this debate in general- I have issues with human encouragement of exotic species, but I’m still figuring out how I feel about the idea of range expansion of native species. If that expansion came at the cost of another native species, that doesn’t seem right to me, but, if we caused the bobolink to become common here in the first place, don’t we have a responsibility to keep it here? While I’m still formulating my own opinions on this matter, others have taken action- the bobolink was declared threatened in New Jersey in 1979 and there are programs to conserve and recover grasslands in that state for bobolinks and other ground-nesting grassland species. The University of Connecticut and the University of Vermont have partnered for The Bobolink Project (which started at the University of Rhode Island in 2007), a program in which community members pay farmers to delay haying and use different farming practices for the benefit of bobolinks and other species.
Golden Winged Warbler
Rough times for Golden-winged Warblers- I have never seen a golden-winged warbler (Vermivora chrysoptera), unlike the other two species in this post, and with good reason: they are only occasionally found in NH, and their numbers are decreasing. They are considered ‘Near Threatened’ by the IUCN and are a Federal Species of Special Concern in the US. The immediate cause for those rankings is clear- the Golden-Winged Warbler Atlas Project estimates a 7.6% decline per year (wow!) for the northeast population, although numbers are increasing in northern and western areas. It is not definite, however, why this species is declining while blue-winged warblers are increasing. Golden-winged warblers like to nest in early successional habitat, meaning that they like abandoned farmland that is starting to get shrubby and swamps with alder thickets- when the forest starts to fill in too much, the birds move on. There is concern over loss of breeding habitat, but this doesn’t seem like a complete answer- in the state of New York, as woody vegetation in golden-winged warbler habitat increased, the birds declined, but at a faster rate than the reforestation (Confer & Knapp 1981). The golden-winged warbler decline has happened in tandem with an expansion in the range and numbers of the blue-winged warbler, and there are theories about blue-winged warblers out-competing golden-winged warblers through more aggressive behavior or greater avoidance of nest parasitism by cowbirds, but neither effect was found by Confer & Larkin (1998) and Coker & Confer (1989), respectively. If we can’t say exactly what is happening to the population, it becomes more challenging to reverse a downward trend, so a lot of the focus, for example with the Atlas Project mentioned above, is on gathering information. At the moment, it is difficult to predict what will happen to the species in the long run.
Bluebird House
There’s no place like home for eastern bluebirds- I like the idea of including information on conservation efforts that are having a positive impact, and the eastern bluebird (Sialia sialis) is a definite ray of sunshine in that respect. These birds are secondary cavity nesters- they can’t create their own nest holes, but they will use cavities created by woodpeckers and other animals (including us); they also like open habitats. As land was cleared for farming, eastern bluebird populations responded, getting an extra boost from the nest sites provided by wooden fence posts used along field edges. Between 1920 and 1970, however, things took a downward turn: wooden posts were replaced by metal ones, pastures and field borders were cleared to increase planted fields, and competition for nesting cavities with European starlings and house sparrows, two introduced species, limited nest options. Fortunately, bluebirds have a lot of friends who are willing to provide nesting boxes. With boxes manufactured to the correct specifications and then monitored for use by exotics, bluebirds made a comeback. Today in NH they are increasing, and the National Audubon Society considers their recovery across their range a true success story. Eastern bluebirds are so charismatic that a number of states, such as Maryland, have bluebird societies dedicated to their conservation- just imagine if every bird in trouble had that kind of support!
Bobolinks, golden-winged warblers, and eastern bluebirds represent three different scenarios for song birds: a) we know the population is decreasing and we know some of the reasons for it, but we’re not sure how serious it is given our historical impact; b) we’re worried about the big declines we’re seeing in some areas, but we’re not quite sure exactly what’s happening and how to counter it; and c) we saw the decline, acted to support the species, and our efforts are making a difference. Maybe you can think of a bird in your area facing one of these scenarios, or maybe you’re not quite sure what the bird community in your backyard is experiencing- next week I’ll be looking at ways you can get better informed about or even directly involved in bird conservation, so that, even if you don’t like bobolinks because they eat rice and sprouted wheat, or don’t have golden-winged warblers in your area, or have no place to put up a bluebird nesting box, you can still get in the game.
Works cited:
Askins, R.A. 1999. History of grassland birds in eastern North America. Studies in Avian Biology 19: 60-71.
Coker, D.R. and J.L. Confer. 1989. Brown-headed cowbird parasitism on golden-winged and blue-winged warblers. The Wilson Bulletin 102(3): 550-552.
Confer, J.L. and K. Knapp. 1981. Golden-winged warblers and blue-winged warblers: the relative success of a habitat specialist and a generalist. The Auk 98: 108-114.
Confer, J.L. and J.L. Larkin. 1998. Behavioral interactions between golden-winged and blue-winged warblers. The Auk 115(1): 209-214.
Di Giacomo, A.S., A.G. Di Giacomo, and J.R. Contreras. 2005. Status and conservation of the bobolink (Dolichonyx oryzivorus) in Argentina. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-191: 519-524.
McAtee, W.L. 1919. Observations on the shifting range, migration, and economic value of the bobolink. The Auk 36(3): 430-431.
Peterjohn, B.G. and J.R. Sauer. 1999. Population status of North American grassland birds from the North American Breeding Bird Survey. Studies in Avian Biology 19: 27-44.
I feel like I’ve spent the last week swimming in a very, very big lake of migration information. I think I may have made my goals for this month a little too broad given the sheer volume of data out there- maybe I should have concentrated on a specific area or genus of birds. Trying to really understand what it all means has felt almost overwhelming at times, but I feel like I’m starting to understand what migration entails and which trends have become more apparent over the last few decades.
First of all, migration is tough. There are distances to cover, predators to avoid, and all sorts of variables that can change. More than 2/3 of the breeding landbirds in temperate North America spend their winters farther south (Keast & Morton 1980), so many species have to overcome a variety of obstacles. Moore et al. (1990) found that there were 3 main sources of mortality among birds crossing the Gulf of Mexico: death during flight, starvation upon arrival at a stopover point, and predation by raptors. Many of those birds started their crossing at night, navigating in the dark. As weather conditions deteriorate, such crossings become even more difficult. Birds crossing the North and Baltic Seas off Germany tended to fly at lower altitudes in bad weather, increasing their chance of colliding with wind turbines and other man-made structures (Huppop et al. 2006). When things get really bad, it can be catastrophic: Cold temperatures and wind plus heavy snow near Lake Huron on the night of October 10, 1906 resulted in the discovery of an estimated 5,000 carcasses per mile of fall migrants along the lake shore (Saunders 1907). Oh, the avianity.
Pied Wagtail, summer migrant in some parts of Europe and Asia and year-round resident in others
Some overall trends for migrating populations have emerged, although it can be really complicated to tease out the factors contributing to those changes. In North America, there is the added complication that human impact on the landscape since European settlement doesn’t leave us with much of a baseline for long-term assessment. (Where I live in central NH, it’s largely forested today, but much more of the land was pasture and meadow 150 years ago, and before that it was forested, but not with the same structure- bird (and other) species react to those changes, but we have only general understanding of the original starting point.) Migrating bird populations in Europe and North America have seen declines, but the feeling is that there are different causes (Newton 2004): drought and desertification in the Sahara seem to be contributing to European declines, such as a drought in the Sahel which coincided with a 70% drop (ouch!) between 1968 and 1969 in the Common Whitethroat community of the UK, while birds in eastern North America that nest in forest interiors seem particularly hard hit. At the same time, North American song birds that depend on grasslands have seen significant declines over the last 35 years (Blancher 2003).
How are both grassland and forest species declining at the same time? Shouldn’t one go down as the other goes up? Well, it all goes back to changes in land-use, although the chain of events can differ. In the case of grassland-dependent birds (536 species in North America use some grassland, 42 are heavily dependent on it- Blancher 2003), loss of grassland through conversion into agricultural land and other uses (for example, housing developments, golf courses, etc.) means that there is simply less of an important resource to go around. If you are a territorial bird, that’s an even bigger issue because you may be prevented from even getting near the resources you need. And remember that these birds move around each year, so losses in wintering habitat can cause declines even when the summer habitat is holding steady (Dolman & Sutherland 1994). For birds that nest in forest interiors, there are other issues. As forests become increasingly fragmented, once again through development, you have what is known as the edge effect: the ratio of edge to interior increases. Why is this important? Nest predators such as raccoons and house cats are more common in edge habitats than in the forest interior, so those birds and their chicks are at greater risk. They are also at greater risk from nest parasites, such as Brown-headed Cowbirds which many birders love to hate, who lay eggs in other birds’ nests and whose chicks may out-compete the host-parents’ own young for food.
Chipping Sparrow in Lincoln, NH- but Mirka, you may say, I see Chipping Sparrows year-round at my house- yes, but are they the same Chipping Sparrows? These birds are short-distance migrants, so they travel, but some only go to southern North America
A further complication is provided by global climate change. With some species, researchers have noticed earlier arrival dates in breeding habitat and earlier nest initiation. (I’m not going into all of those details here, but check out Just Fascinating Stuff for a comparison of historical arrival dates for a handful of species in MN and Manitoba- some of those changes were a little scary…) Birds may start arriving in breeding locations before their food does, creating a resource mismatch that could negatively impact breeding success (Leech & Crick 2007). Species that migrate shorter distances seem to be responding more in terms of early arrival, and it’s possible that some may eventually stop migrating (Butler 2003), as has already happened with Blackcaps in the UK and White-throated Sparrows in NY’s Finger Lakes area.
So, that’s an overview of migration and the trends that have emerged within the last few decades. This big-picture stuff, and a wise person once told me not to look at the big picture for too long, lest I get overwhelmed, so next week I’ll be looking at a few specific birds. I want to know what their current situation is and what, if anything, is being done to remedy problems. If there is a particular migrating song bird that you are interested in, let me know and I’ll do my best to provide a run-down.
Works cited:
Blancher, P. 2003. Importance of North America’s grasslands to birds. North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation: Birds Studies Canada.
Butler, C.J. 2003. The disproportionate effect of global warming on the arrival dates of short-distance migratory birds in North America. Ibis 145: 484-495.
Dolman, P.M. and W.J. Sutherland. 1994. The response of bird populations to habitat loss. Ibis 137: s38-s46.
Huppop, O., J. Dierschke, K. Exo, E. Fredrich, and R. Hill. 2006. Bird migration studies and potential collision risk with offshore wind turbines. Ibis 148: 90-109.
Keast, A. and E.S. Morton. 1980. Migrants Birds in the Neotropics: Ecology, Behavior, Distribution, and Conservation. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.
Leech, D.I. and H.Q.P. Crick 2007. Influence of climate change on the abundance, distribution and phenology of woodland bird species in temperate regions. Ibis 149:128-145.
Moore, F.R., P. Kerlinger, and T.R. Simons. 1990. Stopover on a Gulf Coast barrier island by spring trans-gulf migrants. The Wilson Bulletin 102(3): 487-500.
Newton, I. 2004. Population limitation in migrants. Ibis 146: 197-226.
Saunders, W.E. 1907. A migration disaster in western Ontario. The Auk 24(1): 108-110.
I will be the first to admit that I am not an ornithologist.
Song Sparrow by the dumpster out back- is this species a new arrival, an old inhabitant, or in between?
I took an ornithology class at Antioch largely because I had no real knowledge of birds at all, apart from knowing that baby songbirds are often loud and persistent, especially the mockingbirds. Since my goal is to work in environmental conservation and many people get involved in these efforts from an interest in birds, it seemed like a good career decision to broaden my perspective on these animals. My attempts to describe birds I had seen to my professor were legendary for their lack of correct detail. (When I looked at the bird’s tail, he would ask about it’s head- if I looked at it’s head, he wanted to know about the wings- I just couldn’t win.) But I worked very hard to learn bird calls and bird shapes and the roles birds play in diverse ecosystems. The problem is that, even when you can identify the 100 most common breeding birds of NH by sight and song, there are still a lot of birds that you don’t know. And, even if you can identify a bird, someone with my level of knowledge doesn’t know if that sighting is important or not. (I was driving through Manchester one winter evening and saw at least 100 crows all flying together in the same direction- I though this was amazing; when I related this to an ornithologist friend, he said, “Yeah, they do that” in the most nonchalant manner imaginable.) I also don’t know whether the bird community outside my door is stable or changing or what- maybe something is rotten in the state of northeast birds.
One aspect of bird life that I am slightly familiar with is migration- during the summer of 2011 in Mongolia, I was there to watch birds stop in the nature reserve on their way north and then again when they started the trip south. I also know that some migrating birds are simply phenomenal in the distances they cover- I hit my limit for continuous flight after 14 hours while going from Seoul to Atlanta, I can’t imagine keeping it up for days. I have heard that an area of concern for ornithologists is migrating songbirds- certain populations are decreasing and there are lots of ideas and questions about what factors are contributing to this decline. One of the obstacles in research on migratory species is that they depend on many areas and many ecosystems to survive, so there are huge numbers of variables to investigate.
Ruby-Throated Hummingbird, one of the many migrants in NH – do you have any idea how difficult it is to get a good hummingbird picture? (Especially when there’s a dog tugging on the leash in the hand holding the camera- maybe I need a new research partner…)
I know that concerns about migrating songbirds are not confined to one section of the world or US, even if one species might be, so this is an issue that impacts a wide variety of people and that could benefit from the combined effort of those people. Fortunately, there are already organizations out there that are using information from people across the US to track population trends and encourage direct involvement in bird conservation. My goal this month is to look into how migrating songbird populations have changed since record-keeping began and which factors appear to have influenced those changes the most. I’d also like to look at the ways in which whole communities have come together to collect data and support those species that are in decline. Birds represent an interesting conservation problem because, for the most part, they are so mobile- I don’t know of any mice or spiders or frogs that range so far on a regular basis. This means that there are many opportunities for obstacles to arise, but also many opportunities for everyone to directly contribute to conservation.
Maybe you already look at the bird feeders in your yard regularly and can provide an overview of how what you see has changed, or not, over the years; maybe you haven’t been paying attention to song birds lately- either way, the next month will (hopefully) give you a crash course in what is happening out there and why.
Hopefully the past few weeks have provided some new insight into an impressive and, at least in the Northeast, common predator. Fishers aren’t abundant in all parts of their range, but they are active members of the community where I live, and information provided by Dr. Kays’ research, as I mentioned last week, indicates they are learning how to make urban areas livable- this suggests they are going to be features of the landscape for the foreseeable future.
Why is this a good thing? As I said before, fishers are generalist predators who help control porcupine populations, which is good for the timber industry. According to NH Fish and Game fishers also help limit vole and mice populations in NH, tempering prey cycles and reducing their impact on vegetation. The fact that fishers eat squirrels and other seed hoarders can be important for seed dispersal- when the animal who created the seed cache dies before eating the seeds, those seeds are left to germinate, often in areas away from the original tree. Dr. Kays (2011) noted that urban fishers ate more gray squirrels than rural fishers- that’s probably good for quite a few acorns, pine cones, and other nuts out there.
There are no fishers in my area, so how does this apply to me? One of the big things to consider about smaller carnivores is that they are gaining influence in some areas precisely because they aren’t large. As our landscapes become more fragmented by roads and housing developments and other construction, it is increasingly difficult for large carnivores, like mountains lions and bears, to continue meeting their needs in human-altered environments, and this opens up new opportunities for mesocarnivores, like fishers and foxes. The impact of these changes can be positive and/or negative depending on who you ask, but this does seem to be the trend for urban/suburban carnivore communities. I highly recommend Roemer et al. (2009) for more detail on how small carnivores contribute to ecosystems and how those roles have been changing- I’ve provided a very, very brief summary of those ideas in this posting.
What can you do?
There are a few ways that you can directly and indirectly contribute to the continued presence of fishers and other small carnivores in the ecosystems around you:
- In terms of your physical environment, NH Fish and Game recommend maintaining a diverse forest cover with openings, dense patches, and dead/dying trees- a study in California (Zielinski et al. 2004) highlighted the importance of cavities in dead and dying black oak trees for fisher nesting sites. Wild apple trees are also favored by porcupines, one of the fisher’s main prey.
- If you are interested more in the research process and the subject animal isn’t so important to you, consider contacting a local biologist about volunteering- Dr. Kays is interested in working with community members and camera traps to record mammal data, and other scientists have similar programs.
- Talk to people about the importance of small carnivores in a healthy ecosystem. I’m not suggesting that everyone should think of fishers as cuddly bundles of love- they are fierce predators. But they do play an important role in a variety of environments. Research suggests that people have more negative and fearful attitudes toward carnivores when those predators are unfamiliar or new (Hudenko et al. 2010). So, hopefully, the more people understand about how fishers contribute to a resilient ecosystem, the more willing they will be to share space with them. Factual publicity may be exactly what fishers need.
Over the past few weeks, I’ve looked at fisher research, past and present- I’m still hoping to see one in the wild, but, in the meantime, I’ll continue to work for their public image. And, even if you don’t have fishers in your area, maybe there are other mesocarnivores that could benefit from an improved reputation. 
Works cited:
Hudenko, H.W., W. F. Siemer, and D.J. Decker. 2010. “Urban carnivore conservation and management” in Urban Carnivores: Ecology, Conflict, and Conservation. S.D. Gehrt, S.P.D. Riley, and B.L. Cypher, eds. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP.
Kays, R. “Do fishers really eat cats?” The New York Times on-line Scientist at Work Blog. April 6, 2011.
Roemer, G.W., M.E. Gompper, and B. van Valkenburgh. 2009. The ecological role of the mammalian mesocarnivore. BioScience 59(2): 165-173.
Zielinski, W.J., R.L. Truex, G.A. Schmidt, F.V. Schlexer, K.N. Schmidt, and R.H. Barrett. 2004. Home range characteristics of fishers in California. Journal of Mammalogy 85(4): 649-657.
In my last post, I provided a glimpse of fisher history and ecology, talking about changes within the Northeast population, fisher diversity along the Pacific coast, and their impact on prey populations. This week I pondered the fisher-human relationship and how they react to the ways in which we’ve changed the environment around us and them. Luckily for me (and anyone who is interested), there are several researchers who have worked hard to give us a peek into the life of the suburban/urban fisher, and some of the data they’ve collected is simply amazing. To a certain extent, it also gave me a small slap to the forehead for accepting without question what people around me had been saying about fishers.
Dr. Roland Kays is a fascinating guy (when I spent a few hours with him at the New York State Museum in 2010, I got a crash course in kinkajou ecology, current motion-sensor GPS gadgets, and the debate over oil and gas extraction in New York- it was a busy morning…) who has done a lot of work with a wide variety of animals, including fishers. Now at the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences, while at the New York State Museum in Albany, he and Scott Lapoint started tracking fishers between Schenectady, Troy, and Albany and then discussing some of that work in the on-line New York Times’ “Scientist at Work” blog (this is a very neat site that I highly recommend- a variety of scientists make regular posts about their field work- it’s a great way to get a sense of work that’s being done and how researchers approach their studies). One of their goals was to understand how fishers have adapted (or not) to an urban environment- as it turns out, fishers know how to take advantage of opportunities. And they also may be taking the blame for someone else. (What I provide below is a summary of several of his posts.)
A carnivore drive-through? It sounds a little far-fetched (and this is my analogy, not the researchers), but fishers may actually have access to something similar. The animals Kays and Lapoint tracked were covering a good amount of ground as they moved from forested area to forested area, and that required crossing some very busy roads (and we’ve all seen what happens to crossers who take too long…). When one animal kept crossing the same road at the same point, they decided to do a little groundwork and found a culvert in that location- the fisher was avoiding traffic by going under the road. A little more legwork at locations around the study area and a definite pattern had emerged of fishers using culverts to avoid cars. There were even signs that fishers had used the culverts for other purposes: a rest-stop and a hunting ground (other animals, including hares and other fisher-prey, were using the culverts to cross roads as well- if you happened to time it correctly, your favorite meal might come walking toward you- granted, you’d still have to catch it, so it isn’t quite like placing an order, but it certainly would help to have your prey funneled toward you). Why is this important? One of the big issues of city-living for many animals is that forested areas are quite small and spread out, so finding enough good habitat is a challenge and getting between those sites involves a lot of risk. As carnivores who already need a large territory, fishers have to move around a lot in urban conditions to find adequate food- if they can use culverts as safer ways to get from forest patch to forest patch, they can more easily survive in urban areas (which is an interesting situation for an animal often described as needing wilderness). It’s also helpful during the reproductive period when they have to travel to find other fishers. If you check out previous posts from Dr. Kays’ blog, there are some wonderful maps showing how fishers have been moving around Albany and other areas- the one of the golf course, in particular, is a great example of an animal using forest fragments.
And what about those cats? Dr. Kays investigated fisher diets through two studies: a) with an undergraduate student he collected 24 scat and stomach samples for analysis, and b) with Lapoint he visited 25 kill sites from tracked fishers. In both cases, they found that fishers use many different food sources, but none of those sources was a cat. (Gray squirrels, on the other hand, constituted about 20% of the diet of suburban fishers.) He did mention one study in Massachusetts that listed two observations of a fisher eating a cat, but he remains skeptical of the likelihood that most missing cats were victims of a fisher. (And I found it very interesting that he mentioned he heard the “fisher got your cat” theory particularly from people in New Hampshire– what is that all about?!) So what did get the cats? It’s hard to give a blanket statement on that since the main issue with a lost cat is that you don’t ever see it again, but there is another possible culprit out there, aside from traffic and raptors (which almost got our cat one year, as evidenced by the talon-marks raked across his back and his tendency to bolt for cover every time a shadow passed over him). Coyotes are known to kill cats (Crooks & Soule 1999) and they are widely-distributed across North America; Kays feels they are a more likely reason for those missing cats than fishers.
Having done a little digging in terms of fisher ecology, I think they are pretty amazing animals. I’m quite impressed with how they have made urban environments work for them, an important skill given how cities and suburban areas continue to grow. There are bound to be areas of conflict when humans and carnivores share the same areas, but I think that a lot of that conflict comes from fear and misunderstanding of the ecology and behavior of animal. Fishers are tough and daring (would you hunt alongside I-87?), and they do play a role in regulating small animal populations (just imagine more gray squirrels out there…)- what role can we play in their future? That’s the topic I’ll tackle in my next post.
Works Cited:
Crooks, K.R. and M.E. Soule. 1999. Mesopredator release and avifaunal extinctions in a fragmented system. Nature 400: 536-566.
Kays, R. “Albany’s Urban Weasels” The New York Times Scientist at Work Blog on-line January 25, 2011.
Kays, R. “Do Fishers Really Eat Cats?” The New York Times Scientist at Work Blog on-line April 6, 2011.
Kays, R. “Tracking Urban Fishers Through Forest and Culvert” The New York Times Scientist at Work Blog on-line February 9, 2011.
Kays, R. “When a Fisher Goes Missing” The New York Times Scientist at Work Blog on-line March 3, 2011.
