Seasonal Movements and Multiscale Habitat Selection of Whooping Crane (<i>Grus americana</i>) in Natural and Agricultural Wetlands

Pickens, Bradley A.; King, Sammy L.; Vasseur, Phillip L.; Zimorski, Sara E.; Selman, Will

doi:10.1675/063.040.0404

Cited by 12 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Artificial wetlands such as aquaculture and rice paddy fields are used by cranes both for night roosts and for foraging (Fujioka et al, 2010 ; Wood et al, 2010 ). Many crane species regularly forage in rice paddy fields, such as described for common cranes (Guzmán et al, 1999 ), sarus cranes (Aryal et al, 2009 ; Borad et al, 2001a ), red‐crowned cranes (Kim et al, 2016 ), or whooping cranes (North America: Pickens et al, 2017 ). The importance of fishponds as a roosting site during autumn staging is mentioned for common cranes in Hungary (Végvári & Barta, 2015 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Winners and losers of land use change: A systematic review of interactions between the world’s crane species (Gruidae) and the agricultural sector

Hemminger

König

Månsson

et al. 2022

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While agricultural intensification and expansion are major factors driving loss and degradation of natural habitat and species decline, some wildlife species also benefit from agriculturally managed habitats. This may lead to high population densities with impacts on both human livelihoods and wildlife conservation. Cranes are a group of 15 species worldwide, affected both negatively and positively by agricultural practices. While eleven species face critical population declines, numbers of common cranes (Grus grus) and sandhill cranes (Grus canadensis) have increased drastically in the last 40 years. Their increase is associated with higher incidences of crane foraging on agricultural crops, causing financial losses to farmers. Our aim was to synthesize scientific knowledge on the bilateral effects of land use change and crane populations. We conducted a systematic literature review of peer‐reviewed publications on agriculture‐crane interactions (n = 135) and on the importance of agricultural crops in the diet of cranes (n = 81). Agricultural crops constitute a considerable part of the diet of all crane species (average of 37%, most frequently maize (Zea mays L.) and wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)). Crop damage was identified in only 10% of all agriculture‐crane interactions, although one‐third of interactions included cranes foraging on cropland. Using a conceptual framework analysis, we identified two major pathways in agriculture‐crane interactions: (1) habitat loss with negative effects on crane species dependent on specific habitats, and (2) expanding agricultural habitats with superabundant food availability beneficial for opportunistic crane species. The degree to which crane species can adapt to agricultural land use changes may be an important factor explaining their population response. We conclude that multi‐objective management needs to combine land sparing and land sharing strategies at landscape scale. To support viable crane populations while guaranteeing sustainable agricultural production, it is necessary to include the perspectives of diverse stakeholders and streamline conservation initiatives and agricultural policy accordingly.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Winners and losers of land use change: A systematic review of interactions between the world’s crane species (Gruidae) and the agricultural sector

Hemminger

König

Månsson

et al. 2022

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…of overwintering wetlands can be protected that provide for both habitat requirements and habitat preferences of the cranes. Cranes have recently been observed overwintering in locations distant from ANWR (Wright et al, 2014), and a non‐migratory population in Louisiana has been documented using inland wetlands associated with agricultural land (Pickens et al, 2017). However, the non‐migratory population in particular uses agricultural wetlands (e.g., rice and crawfish aquaculture) (Pickens et al, 2017), while the agricultural areas around ANWR are primarily corn and cotton (USDA, 2021).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cranes have recently been observed overwintering in locations distant from ANWR (Wright et al, 2014), and a non‐migratory population in Louisiana has been documented using inland wetlands associated with agricultural land (Pickens et al, 2017). However, the non‐migratory population in particular uses agricultural wetlands (e.g., rice and crawfish aquaculture) (Pickens et al, 2017), while the agricultural areas around ANWR are primarily corn and cotton (USDA, 2021). Developed areas may also become an issue for whooping crane conservation in the future as human population densities in coastal regions are projected to increase (Neumann et al, 2015), leading to competition for available land space, directly impacting available habitat required by overwintering whooping cranes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the future, it would be useful to include a direct measure of crabs into models. We also did not include a measure of agriculture, which has been found to be important in other whooping crane studies (Pickens et al, 2017), but it has not been found to be as highly relevant for the overwintering population (Golden, 2020), except in years of extreme draught or low food availability (Butler et al, 2014). Future research should investigate the importance of inland agricultural areas for habitat provision of the AWBP cranes, especially as sea level rise causes a contraction of existing preferred areas.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Spatial and temporal predictions of whooping crane (Grus americana) habitat along the US Gulf Coast

Golden

Hemingway

Frazier

et al. 2022

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The challenge of conserving viable habitat while simultaneously predicting how land cover may geographically shift with future climate change has put pressure on ecologists and policy-makers to develop near-term (several years to a decade) ecological and geospatial predictions. This is particularly relevant for endangered species as ranges adjust to track a changing climate. The whooping crane is vulnerable to these changes, as the overwintering habitat of a small population is susceptible to climate impacts. This study mapped the historical spatial transformation of crane habitat in and around the Aransas National Wildlife Refuge. A time series of ecological niche models was developed to determine the biotic and abiotic factors correlated with crane presence and track how importance has changed over time. The results from the multitemporal models were used to predict areas along the US Gulf Coast where additional unoccupied habitat may be located for crane population expansion and model how the areas may degrade or change as sea levels rise through future climate change scenarios. Findings indicate that the percentage of emergent herbaceous wetland and water are the most important variables influencing crane presence. Sea level rise analysis indicates that potential habitat throughout the Texas-Louisiana Gulf Coast will be impacted considerably by climate change. The lack of large, continuous blocks of usable land cover could limit population expansion and future recovery efforts. However, the findings can help facilitate winter range expansion to accommodate the growing population by identifying additional areas to protect that could be used by the current wild population or experimental populations.

show abstract

“…Although empirical studies of habitat selection have been conducted within breeding (Orians and Wittenberger 1991, Mitchell et al 2001, Lee et al 2002), migration (Buler et al 2007, Mccabe and Olsen 2015, Lafleur et al 2016), and winter (Chandler and King 2011, Fraser et al 2017) periods, few species have been assessed across multiple seasons. Moreover, studies rarely use the same individuals or populations (but see Beatty et al 2014, Pickens et al 2017). As such, we know relatively little about the breadth of suitable habitats and how individuals select habitats throughout the annual cycle for migratory birds (Marra et al 2015, McGarigal et al 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seasonal variation in habitat selection for a Neotropical migratory songbird using high‐resolution GPS tracking

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Seasonal Movements and Multiscale Habitat Selection of Whooping Crane (Grus americana) in Natural and Agricultural Wetlands

Cited by 12 publications

References 32 publications

Winners and losers of land use change: A systematic review of interactions between the world’s crane species (Gruidae) and the agricultural sector

Winners and losers of land use change: A systematic review of interactions between the world’s crane species (Gruidae) and the agricultural sector

Spatial and temporal predictions of whooping crane (Grus americana) habitat along the US Gulf Coast

Seasonal variation in habitat selection for a Neotropical migratory songbird using high‐resolution GPS tracking

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About