Studies of evolution in wild populations often find that the heritable phenotypic traits of individuals producing the most offspring do not increase proportionally in the population. This paradox may arise when phenotypic traits influence both fecundity and viability and when there is a tradeoff between these fitness components, leading to opposing selection. Such tradeoffs are the foundation of life history theory, but they are rarely investigated in selection studies. Timing of breeding is a classic example of a heritable trait under directional selection that does not result in an evolutionary response. Using a 22-y study of a tropical parrot, we show that opposing viability and fecundity selection on the timing of breeding is common and affects optimal breeding date, defined by maximization of fitness. After accounting for sampling error, the directions of viability (positive) and fecundity (negative) selection were consistent, but the magnitude of selection fluctuated among years. Environmental conditions (rainfall and breeding density) primarily and breeding experience secondarily modified selection, shifting optimal timing among individuals and years. In contrast to other studies, viability selection was as strong as fecundity selection, late-born juveniles had greater survival than early-born juveniles, and breeding later in the year increased fitness under opposing selection. Our findings provide support for life history tradeoffs influencing selection on phenotypic traits, highlight the need to unify selection and life history theory, and illustrate the importance of monitoring survival as well as reproduction for understanding phenological responses to climate change.reproductive success | juvenile survival | adult survival | Forpus passerinus M eta-analyses of selection often report strong and consistent directional selection on heritable traits without accompanying changes in the trait means over generations (1-4). A variety of alternative hypotheses have been suggested to explain this paradox, such as selection on correlated traits, fluctuating selection caused by environment, low genetic variance, and interactions between environment and genetics (2-6). Another possibility, advanced from theory but rarely shown, is that opposing selection may inhibit directional changes (2, 4, 5). Opposing fecundity and viability (adult survival) selection is predicted to arise from tradeoffs between fitness components, which life history theory suggests should be common (5). The tension on a trait imposed by opposing selection should weaken and constrain directional selection by pushing and pulling the trait in different directions, but few studies examine multiple fitness components (2,4,7,8).Opposing selection has primarily been shown on sexually selected traits, over single selection episodes, or across different life history stages (8-9). These studies often assume that opposing selection does not fluctuate in time and space. However, variation in environmental conditions or individual phenotypes may result i...