Efforts to stabilize or increase grassland bird populations require identification of suitable habitat as a first step. Although the number of studies examining grassland‐bird habitat selection has increased substantially in recent years, much uncertainty exists regarding local‐scale habitat variables that researchers should consider. We reviewed 57 studies and identified important vegetation features correlated with grassland bird abundance, density, occurrence, and nest and territory selection. Our objectives were to 1) guide future studies of grassland‐bird habitat use by providing a reduced set of relevant vegetation characteristics, 2) challenge researchers to critically think about what variables to consider, and 3) highlight the need to include consistent definitions of terms used to describe grassland bird habitat. We identified 9 variables that were important predictors of habitat use by grassland birds: coverage of bare ground (important in 50% of the instances where it was included), grass (34% of instances), dead vegetation (33% of instances), forbs (31% of instances), and litter (29% of instances), along with an index of vegetation density (39% of instances) and volume (39% of instances), litter depth (36% of instances), and vegetation height (41% of instances). Only 25% of studies provided information on effects sizes and measures of variance. Furthermore, definitions of measured habitat variables were not consistent among studies. We provide definitions of the 9 important variables and implore authors to report effect size and measures of variance. Standardization of terms and reporting of meaningful results will facilitate replication of wildlife research and enhance our ability to recognize general patterns that emerge from observational studies of habitat use.

To date, most studies of nest site selection have failed to take into account more than one source of nest loss (or have combined all sources in one analysis) when examining nest site characteristics, leaving us with an incomplete understanding of the potential trade-offs that individuals may face when selecting a nest site. Our objectives were to determine whether northern flickers (Colaptes auratus) may experience a trade-off in nest site selection in response to mammalian nest predation and nest loss to a cavity nest competitor (European starling, Sturnus vulgaris). We also document within-season temporal patterns of these two sources of nest loss with the hypothesis that flickers may also be constrained in the timing of reproduction under both predatory and competitive influence. Mammalian predators frequently depredated flicker nests that were: lower to the ground, less concealed by vegetation around the cavity entrance and at the base of the nest tree, closer to coniferous forest edges and in forest clumps with a high percentage of conifer content. Proximity to coniferous edges or coniferous trees increased the probability of nest predation, but nests near conifers were less likely to be lost to starlings. Flickers may thus face a trade-off in nest site selection with respect to safety from predators or competitors. Models suggested that peaks of nest predation and nest loss to eviction occurred at the same time, although a competing model suggested that the peak of nest loss to starlings occurred 5 days earlier than the peak of mammalian predation. Differences in peaks of mammalian predation and loss to starlings may constrain any adjustment in clutch initiation date by flickers to avoid one source of nest loss.

No abstract

The absence of a rigorous mechanism for prioritizing investment in endangered species management is a major implementation hurdle affecting recovery. Here, we present a method for prioritizing strategies for endangered species management based on the likelihood of achieving species' recovery goals per dollar invested. We demonstrate our approach for 15 species listed under Canada's Species at Risk Act that co-occur in Southwestern Saskatchewan. Without management, only two species have >50% probability of meeting recovery objectives; whereas, with management, 13 species exceed the >50% threshold with the implementation of just five complementary strategies at a cost of $126m over 20 years. The likelihood of meeting recovery objectives rarely exceeded 70% and two species failed to reach the >50% threshold. Our findings underscore the need to consider the cost, benefit, and feasibility of management strategies when developing recovery plans in order to prioritize implementation in a timely and cost-effective manner. K E Y W O R D Scomplementarity, cost-effectiveness, critical habitat, expert elicitation, multiobjective optimization, multispecies conservation, Priority Threat Management, priority-setting, recovery planning, SARA, Saskatchewan, South of the Divide, species at risk, structured decision making, triageThis is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.