American Robins (<i>Turdus migratorius</i>) and Cedar Waxwings (<i>Bombycilla cedrorum</i>) vary in use of cultivated cherry orchards

Eaton, Rachael A.; Lindell, Catherine A.; Homan, H. Jeffrey; Linz, George M.; Maurer, Bill

doi:10.1676/wils-128-01-97-107.1

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Times and areas where fruit abundance is low are likely to be high-risk situations for fruit. For example, orchards with varieties of fruit that ripen early in the season will provide some of the few food sources available for fruit-eating birds, and thus be particularly susceptible to bird damage (e.g., Eaton et al [28]). Similarly, edges of fruit blocks adjacent to non-fruit landcovers will be at higher risk than edges adjacent to other fruit blocks [4].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bird Management in Blueberries and Grapes

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bird damage to fruit is a long-standing challenge for growers that imposes significant costs because of yield losses and grower efforts to manage birds. We measured bird damage in ‘Bluecrop’ blueberry fields and Pinot noir vineyards in 2012–2014 in Michigan to investigate how year, grower, and forest cover influenced the proportions of bird damage. We tested whether inflatable tubemen (2013–2014) and a methyl anthranilate spray (2015) reduced bird damage in blueberries, and tested the deterrent effect of inflatable tubemen in grapes (2014). Years when crop yield was lower tended to have a higher damage percentage; for blueberries, bird damage was highest in 2012, and in grapes, damage was highest in 2012 and 2014. Neither blueberry fields nor vineyards with inflatable tubemen showed significantly reduced bird damage, although the blueberry fields showed a non-significant trend toward lower damage in the tubemen blocks. Blueberry field halves treated with the methyl anthranilate spray had equivalent bird damage to untreated halves. Our results correspond to previous work showing that percent bird damage varies by year, which was likely because bird consumption of fruit is relatively constant over time, while fruit yield varies. Fruit growers should expect a higher proportion of bird damage in low-fruit contexts, such as low-yield years, and prepare to invest more in bird management at those times. Investigating patterns of bird damage and testing deterrent strategies remain challenges. Bird activity is spatially and temporally variable, and birds’ mobility necessitates tests at large scales.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bird Management in Blueberries and Grapes

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We conducted at least six surveys per transect between early June and mid-July. We conducted surveys before and after harvest because some cherries remain on the trees and ground following harvest (Eaton, Lindell, Homan, Linz, & Maurer, 2016). One observer conducted all surveys.…”

Section: Fruit-eating Bird Abundancesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Falcons using orchard nest boxes reduce fruit‐eating bird abundances and provide economic benefits for a fruit‐growing region

Shave

Shwiff

Elser

et al. 2018

Journal of Applied Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Suppression of pest species via a native predator is a regulating ecosystem service that has the potential to limit crop damage and produce economic benefits. American kestrels Falco sparverius are widespread, highly mobile, generalist predators that hunt in human‐dominated habitats and have the potential to provide previously undocumented ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes. We hypothesized that kestrel activity associated with nest boxes and artificial perches acts to increase perceived predation risk that, in combination with direct predation, can reduce fruit‐eating bird abundances in orchards. We used counts and observations of fruit‐eating birds from fixed‐width transect surveys to investigate variation in bird abundances and to estimate sweet cherry loss in cherry orchards with and without active kestrel boxes. We also conducted a benefit–cost analysis of nest box installation and used regional economic modelling to estimate macroeconomic impacts of increased sweet cherry production in Michigan, an important US fruit production region. Fruit‐eating bird counts were significantly lower at orchards with active kestrel boxes. Although kestrels used the perches in young orchard blocks and may benefit from them, the presence of perches did not have a significant effect on bird counts. Benefit–cost ratios for kestrel nest boxes indicated that for every dollar spent on nest boxes, $84 to $357 of sweet cherries would be saved from fruit‐eating birds. Regional economic modelling predicted that increased sweet cherry production from reduced bird damage would result in 46–50 jobs created and $2.2 million to $2.4 million in increased income for the state of Michigan over a 5‐year period. Synthesis and applications. Kestrel nest boxes in sweet cherry orchards provide a highly cost‐effective ecosystem service with potential reverberating benefits for a regional economy. Box occupancy rates will undoubtedly vary across landscapes and regions. However, costs to install and maintain boxes are small and, even if box occupancy rates are low, boxes can direct kestrel activity to particular places in agricultural landscapes where they can deter pest birds. Thus, the potential benefits for fruit crops greatly outweigh the costs of this pest management strategy.

show abstract

American Robins (Turdus migratorius) and Cedar Waxwings (Bombycilla cedrorum) vary in use of cultivated cherry orchards

Cited by 2 publications

References 37 publications

Bird Management in Blueberries and Grapes

Bird Management in Blueberries and Grapes

Falcons using orchard nest boxes reduce fruit‐eating bird abundances and provide economic benefits for a fruit‐growing region

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About