Nomadic species are globally threatened by anthropogenic habitat change, but management options to address their decline are limited. Their unpredictable settlement patterns pose major challenges for conservation because identifying where to implement action is difficult. We address this challenge by pre‐empting settlement patterns in a nomadic species using data from a long‐term study of the critically endangered, cavity‐nesting swift parrot (Lathamus discolor) and by taking action at the sites identified. We detected flower bud growth (the primary settlement cue) and deployed artificial nests at 3 predicted breeding sites before the birds arrived. At the broad breeding‐range scale, swift parrots settled wherever bud abundance was highest, including the study area. Within the study area, artificial nest occupancy was greatest at the site with abundant historical natural nesting sites. At the local scale, we found significant effects of study site and distance to forest edges on nest box occupancy by swift parrots. Despite significant differences in thermal properties between artificial and natural nests, we found no differences in clutch size, brood size, or body condition of swift parrots in each. Monitoring settlement patterns and future food availability of nomadic wildlife can empower conservation managers to make predictions about breeding and target ecologically relevant times and locations when deploying conservation resources. Our study is an example of how conservation challenges posed by nomadic species can be overcome, and demonstrates that with effective monitoring, practical action can be targeted to address acute conservation needs and augment habitat availability. © 2018 The Wildlife Society.

No abstract

No abstract

Nest boxes are a crucial tool for wildlife conservation. Although boxes are often safer from predators than natural nests, if predator and prey are of similar body size survival in boxes may become unacceptably low. Protecting boxes from small predators may be critical to the aims of a project, but no available tools can be reliably deployed for long periods in the field. We trial automated light sensitive mechanical doors on nest boxes to protect birds nesting in boxes from a small nocturnal predator. At three sites we deployed arrays of nest boxes, and fitted a subset (treatment group) with automated doors, while others were left unprotected. Box occupancy by the target species, clutch size and nest fate (successful/failed) were monitored using motion activated cameras and by manual checking. Birds in nest boxes fitted with automated doors had a significantly lower risk of nest failure 0.25 (±0.11 se) compared to 0.81 (± 0.07 se) in the control group. No nests in the treatment group failed due to predation, whereas all nest failures in the control group were attributable to predation. The treatment group did not differ significantly from controls in clutch size. Automated doors operated for a 3 month breeding season reliably, with minimal maintenance (but battery charge should be monitored). We provide a useful new tool for protecting nest boxes from nocturnal predators, and automated doors did not have any deleterious reproductive consequences on the nests they protected. The automated doors offer practical conservation solutions for nest box conservation programs that (1) are conducted in remote locations with limited accessibility, (2) require protection measures to be deployed for long periods, (3) minimize behavioural/physiological impacts on target species, (4) require targeted protection against nocturnal predators against which more conventional approaches are ineffective or inappropriate.

No abstract