Download PROCEEDINGS STREAKED HORNED LARK WORKSHOP 2007

PROCEEDINGS
STREAKED HORNED LARK WORKSHOP 2007
The Clark Center, Washington State University Vancouver
14204 NE Salmon Creek Avenue
Vancouver, Washington 98686
Friday, September 28, 2007
“The Service, at least the ecological services folks from Portland and Washington were energized
by the speakers and the interest in the room. We can't wait to get rolling on lark conservation.”
Jodi Bush, USFWS
Sponsored by
Organizing partners
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
Introductory/Status Presentations
Streaked Horned Lark: Then and Now
Streaked Horned Lark Conservation Genetics
Policy Related Presentations
Endangered in Washington: the Process and Implications
of State Listing
Benton County Habitat Conservation Plan
Streaked Horned Lark Conservation and Recovery Planning
In Canada
Streaked Horned Lark and the USFWS
Habitat and Threat Presentations
Breeding Habitat Selection and Threats
Oregon Breeding and Winter Ecology and Distribution
Streaked Horned Lark Demographic Analysis
Population Monitoring and Reproductive Success
Conservation Presentations
Streaked Horned Lark Conservation in South Puget Sound
Streaked Horned Lark at the mid-Willamette Valley
National Wildlife Refuges
If we Build it, Will They Come?
Conservation Strategy: A Path to Recovery
Breakout Session Discussion Questions
Breakout Session Notes
Agriculture
Airports and Roadsides
Coastal Beaches
Lower Columbia River and Islands
Native Prairie – Oregon
Native Prairie – Washington
Supplemental Information
STHL Range Map
STHL Literature List
Workshop Attendee Contact Information
3-5
6-10
6-8
9-10
11-19
11-12
13-14
15-17
18-19
20-35
20-26
27-31
31-33
34-35
35-50
35-39
40-41
42-43
44-50
51
52-58
52
53
54
55
56
57
58-62
58
59-60
61-62
2
Executive Summary
The Streaked Horned Lark workshop, held at WSU Vancouver, Sept 28th, 2007 was a success at
transmitting information on a variety of topics to a range of key folks working throughout the historic
range of the species. The breakout sessions helped generate discussion about the species, define
obstacles as well as concrete conservation actions for the disparate sites/areas where the lark occurs.
Below is a brief summary of each presentation session, breakout groups, and workshop outcomes. The
pages following provide abstracts, speaker biographies, and the power point presentations themselves.
Status
The workshop opened with introductory presentations of the Lark, focusing on the general historic and
current status of the bird, followed by information about its genetics. Historically, in the core breeding
areas of the Willamette Valley and Puget Sound, the Lark was considered an abundant and common
breeder even up until the 1950s. Since that time, the range has contracted considerably, with the bird
becoming extirpated from the northern and southern extents of its range. Historic habitats included
native prairie in the South Sound and Willamette Valley as well as beach and fore dune accretion flats
along the Washington coast and Columbia River. Current occupied sites include remnant prairie sites,
airports, Washington coast, dredge material islands on the Columbia, fallow fields, agricultural fields
of many types, and agricultural roadsides. Threats to the Lark have also changed considerably through
time, moving from primarily “natural” balanced levels of predation to a variety of human-induced
threats. Genetics work has shown that the Streaked Horned Lark has remarkably low genetic diversity
that is consistent with a bottleneck hypothesis. Any recovery strategy written for the Streaked Horned
Lark should address this important issue.
Policy
The 2nd workshop session focused on policy-related presentations including a summary of State,
Provincial, and Federal policies. The Streaked Horned Lark is a US Federal Candidate for listing
under the ESA. It is listed as Endangered in Canada under SARA, Red Listed in British Columbia,
State-Endangered in Washington, and an Oregon Species of Concern. Representatives from State and
Federal agencies gave brief overviews of their listing processes and protection offered from those
policies. The Lark is also an included species of the Benton County Habitat Conservation Plan
currently in production in Oregon.
Habitat and Threats
This session focused on habitat and threats, first looking at breeding populations in the northern
portion of the current range. In the Puget Lowlands, WA Coast, and lower Columbia islands, research
has shown that the Lark is selecting very large (>300 acres), tree- and shrub-less landscapes dominated
by grasses and forbs. Within those landscapes the Lark selects sparsely-vegetated areas with a high
percent cover of bare ground. Through experimentation it has been shown that Larks respond
positively to areas that have been burned. A summary of threats to the disparate site types including
Airports, Prairies, Coast, and Columbia River Islands was presented. Several threats are pervasive
across site types including habitat loss, change in ecological processes, invasive vegetation, and human
activities. The threat of dredge material deposition on the islands of the Columbia River may present a
potential win-win situation, as within a few years the dredge material can become suitable Lark
habitat. The major threat is presented when dredge material is deposited directly on, or adjacent to
Lark territories and nest sites.
In the Willamette Valley, wintering and breeding Larks are closely associated with agricultural
habitats, as well as airports. Threats at airports are similar as in the north. Threats to agricultural sites
include changes in agricultural management practices and land-use patterns. Because there is very
little historic information about the wintering ecology of Streaked Horned Larks, including where they
3
spend their winter, non-breeding ecology has recently been a topic of research and a hurdle for
restoration efforts. Other research needs in the Willamette include sound population and distribution
estimates as well as habitat-specific reproductive successes and associated variables.
Demographics
A demographic analysis comparing Streaked Horned Larks (E. a. strigata) to its northern relative (E.
a. articola), showed that Washington Streaked Horned Lark populations are declining and that juvenile
and adult survival are important factors driving population growth. Further, annual fecundity is lower
in Washington than in B.C. and may be due to smaller clutch size, reduced hatching success, lower
nest survival, and longer re-nesting intervals.
Streaked Horned Lark reproductive success in Washington has been quantified as 21-33% of eggs
hatching and fledging from the nest. Predation was the primary source of nest failure. Documented
predators include American crow, garter snake, northern harrier, killdeer, and western meadowlark.
Managing habitat structure to preclude predators may be an important strategy for conservation.
Research has shown that adult Larks exhibit very high site fidelity, returning to the same breeding
grounds each year. Data from banded birds has yielded information that 1st year birds may disperse to
new sites.
Conservation
The last presentation session focused on conservation work occurring throughout the range of the
subspecies. In South Puget Sound the Streaked Horned Lark is included in several large-scale
conservation efforts including the Army Compatible Use Buffer Program and a multi-partner
Candidate Conservation Agreement. Larks in Wildlife Refuges in the Willamette Valley have been
survey targets for the last 2 years. Refuge management may provide a model for Lark restoration in an
agricultural landscape. In north Portland, an interesting multi-partner project is occurring on the prized
heavy industrial landscape. Development is scheduled to occur where the Larks breed. Partners are
moving sand onto the nearby St. John’s Landfill to mimic existing habitat and hopefully attract the
birds to a more secure location. Finally, a comprehensive look at conservation and recovery across the
range of the sub-species is presented in the form of a flow chart. The chart is designed to guide
research and on-the-ground work by breaking down overall conservation objectives within and among
each geographic region where the Lark occurs. It provides an up-to-date snapshot of where we are on
the recovery path, and what key actions need to occur still.
Discussion Sessions
Following the presentations, a series of discussion sessions ensued. Workshop participants broke into
6 groups, each aimed at a certain habitat site type: airports & roadsides, agriculture, coastal beaches,
Columbia River islands, native prairie-Oregon, and native prairie-Washington. A series of discussion
questions were presented to provide participants with a guiding hand, although the groups were by no
means held to the questions only. Discussions varied over a wide range of topics including threats,
opportunities, listing, education, alternative sites, restoration, multi-species management, and
translocation. See pages (51-57) for the list of discussion questions as well as detailed notes from the
group moderators about their sessions.
The agricultural group focused on key actions including filling in knowledge gaps, development of
best management practices for agricultural lands, incorporating Lark management into agricultural
production goals, prairie restoration, and multiple species conservation efforts, outreach to private
landowners, and work with NRCS for better use of incentives.
The airport session identified that airports are 1 of 2 critical habitats for existing Lark populations. The
group identified several major threats including airport development, direct bird/aircraft impacts, and
bird control efforts. They also identified opportunities for multi-use management such as the
4
adjustment of mowing regime and timing as well as managing the airport to be unattractive to problem
species such as geese.
The coastal beach group had several primary research questions such as: what are coastal predators, is
the food source limited, why are eggs not hatching? However, even in the absence of answers, there
are real opportunities for multi-species conservation synergy. The snowy plover and Streaked Horned
Lark occupy similar habitats and their distributions often overlap. The group identified the Willapa
Nat’l Wildlife Refuge and Ledbetter Point state park as a “best hope” for populations in WA.
The group for the lower Columbia River Islands identified the development of best management
practices and maintenance of dredge material islands/sites as a priority. They also suggested the
exploration of other potential sites, such as the dredge material sites at the mouth of the Toutle and
Cowlitz rivers.
Because Larks are more abundant in Oregon than in Washington, the native prairie-Oregon group felt
that the need to further understand the ecology was of primary importance. They discussed the need to
learn more about site selection, reproductive success, what is driving distribution in the Valley. For
restoration efforts they identified the need to learn the effects of management strategies and to take a
broad-scale, long-term view. The Valley refuges could serve as core area of restoration work because
the Larks are already present.
Finally, the native prairie Washington group focused their discussion around habitat management.
They suggested the restoration of fringe sites surrounding occupied sites, as well as targeting heavily
degraded sites for Lark management. The use of fire and grazing was suggested as habitat restoration
strategies. They also brought up the issues of translocation and recruitment as it is not understood how
to entice Larks to use habitat once it is restored/created.
Outcomes The workshop was has jump-started combined efforts to recover this rare species.
Biologists, researchers, land managers, and funding/regulatory agency representatives were updated on
the status of the species and have identified what actions they can implement. The workshop helped
define a common direction for recovery within and among regions. Several key actions that resulted
from discussions in the workshop were to increase and enhance work at airports, including the
inclusion of the FAA, identify habitat requirements in relation to Lark distribution in the Willamette
Valley, and examine highly degraded sites in WA and OR as potentials for restoration.
In addition to discussions and informative presentations, the workshop generated interest in the
formation of a Streaked Horned Lark working group that will follow up with practitioners across the
range and track the status of the species as well as associated research and conservation. The US Fish
and Wildlife Service announced they are creating an Action Plan that will outline the next several
priority actions that should be undertaken to conserve and recover the species. The Service will use
this action plan as a tool to help them decide where to direct their available funds and resources. The
first impromptu meeting of the working group was held in the weeks following the workshop to
answer this call to action, and the draft Action Plan has been generated. The Plan is a fluid document
that will be updated regularly as new information is secured. Additional meetings of the working
group are to come, and it is hoped that people from all reaches of the Lark’s historic range will be
represented to work together on Lark conservation.
5
Introductory/Status Presentations
Streaked Horned Lark: Then and Now
Presented by:
Bob Altman
American Bird Conservancy
This introductory talk briefly outlines what we know and don’t know about the historic and current
status and ecology of Streaked Horned Lark as a framework for the talks that will follow. The historic
versus current condition in terms of the species distribution, abundance, population size, habitat, and
threats are compared.
Bob Altman works for the American Bird Conservancy as the Northern Pacific Rainforest Bird
Conservation Region Coordinator. He also is a Science Coordinator for the Pacific Coast Joint
Venture. In these roles, he works with all the bird initiatives and numerous other partners from
northern California to western Alaska to advance bird and habitat conservation through a variety of
activities. Bob has been active in the Partners in Flight Initiative for land bird conservation for 15
years, and initiated recent interest in the status of Streaked Horned Lark with work in the mid 1990s in
the Willamette Valley.
6
7
8
Streaked Horned Lark Conservation Genetics
Presented by:
Scott Pearson
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
This talk focuses on genetic distinctiveness and evidence of low genetic diversity.
Scott Pearson received his Ph.D. in Wildlife Science from the University of Washington, B.S. and M.S.
from the University of Michigan. His current positions include; Western Washington Wildlife Research
Team Leader for Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Affiliate Assistant Professor at the
University of Washington, Museum Research Associate at The Burke Museum of Natural History and
Culture in Seattle. His current research focuses on habitat use, habitat selection and diet in rare bird
species.
Scott also oversees Washington's at-sea marbled murrelet monitoring, coordinates and conducts
Washington's snowy plover monitoring and research examining the role of diet in limiting marine bird
populations in the Puget Sound, and is assessing the status of the tufted puffin in Washington.
His lark research has been ongoing for the past six years and included examination of a number of
questions associated with the Streaked Horned Lark including studies of genetic diversity and
distinctiveness, habitat selection, response of larks to fire, factors influencing reproductive success,
and other factors contributing to lark rarity.
9
Policy Related Presentations
10
Endangered in Washington: The Process and Implications of State Listing
Presented by:
Derek Stinson
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Derek Stinson is a Wildlife Biologist in the T & E Section of WDFW's Wildlife Program. He writes
status reports and recovery plans for wildlife species, and works on other aspects of listing and
recovery planning. He wrote the status report for the Streaked Horned Lark.
11
Benton County Habitat Conservation Plan
Presented by:
Carolyn Menke
Institute for Applied Ecology
The presentation provides a brief introduction to what a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) is, and then
discusses the goals of the Benton County HCP, the status of the project, and how the Streaked Horned
Lark fits in to conservation in Benton County.
12
Carolyn Menke is the Habitat Conservation Plan Coordinator & Plant Ecologist for the Institute for
Applied Ecology (IAE), Corvallis, OR. IAE is a non-profit organization whose mission is to conserve
native ecosystems through restoration, research and education.
13
14
Streaked Horned Lark Conservation and Recovery Planning in Canada
Presented by:
Kevin Fort
Canadian Wildlife Service
This presentation gives a brief overview of the current conservation status of the Streaked Horned Lark
in Canada. It also describes the listing and recovery planning process under the federal Species at Risk
Act, both in general terms but also as it pertains to our specific approach to the Streaked Horned Lark.
Kevin’s educational background is not typical of the ‘average’ conservation biologist. He started with
a Bachelor’s in English and Philosophy at York University in Toronto, Ontario, then completed a
Master’s in Philosophy at University of British Columbia in Vancouver, BC. After spending a summer
as a research assistant for a songbird community project on Vancouver Island, he returned to UBC to
do undergraduate courses in ecology until he was accepted into the graduate program at University of
Northern British Columbia in Prince George BC, where he studied the impacts of habitat disturbance
on the reproductive success and behavior of black-capped chickadees. Kevin has been working as a
program biologist for the Canadian Wildlife Service since 2003, primarily in the Species at Risk
section.
15
16
17
Streaked Horned Lark and the Service:
What we did, What we are doing, and Why we are doing it
Presented by:
Jodi Bush
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Jodi Bush is the Manager of the Division of Listing and Recovery for the USFWS Western WA, Fish
and Wildlife Office.
18
19
Habitat and Threats
Breeding Habitat Selection and Threats
Presented by:
Scott Pearson
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
This presentation discusses which habitats and specific habitat features are selected at the territory and
nest site scale in the Puget lowlands, Washington coast and lower Columbia River. It also outlines
observed threats at these same sites.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Streaked Horned Larks in Oregon:
Breeding and Wintering Ecology and Distribution
Presented by:
Randy Moore
Oregon State University
This presentation discusses results of three seasons of the study to determine winter range and winter
habitat as well as what is known of breeding season distribution, abundance and reproductive ecology
in Oregon.
After studying birds all across the U.S. and in several other countries, Randy Moore recently settled
down and received his Ph.D. in avian conservation biology from OSU's Dept. of Fisheries and
Wildlife. He's been studying Streaked Horned Lark ecology and conservation for 3 years after a grad
school project on their winter distribution piqued his interest.
27
28
29
30
31
Streaked Horned Lark Demographic Analysis
Presented by:
Alaine Camfield
University of British Columbia
We examined a suite of demographic variables for two subspecies of horned larks in Washington State
(Eremophila alpestris strigata) and British Columbia (E. a. articola) and estimated population growth
rates for both subspecies. We then evaluated which demographic variables contributed the most to
changes in population growth (juvenile survival, adult survival or annual fecundity). Annual fecundity
is lower in Washington than in British Columbia and may be due to smaller clutch size, reduced
hatching success, lower nest survival and longer re-nesting intervals. We found that horned larks in
Washington are declining while those in British Columbia are increasing and that juvenile and adult
survival are important factors driving population growth in Streaked Horned Larks.
In the interim between the workshop and the distribution of these proceedings, results from this study
have changed slightly, although the overall message remains the same. For updated information,
contact Alaine Camfield.
Alaine Camfield is a PhD candidate at the University of British Columbia.
32
33
Population Monitoring and Reproductive Success
Presented by:
Scott Pearson
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
This talk examines patterns of reproductive success spatially and over time. It also provides some
information on population trends and discusses site fidelity.
34
35
Conservation
Streaked Horned Lark Conservation in the South Puget Sound
Presented by:
Hannah Anderson
The Nature Conservancy
This presentation gives a brief description of programs and projects that incorporate conservation work
for the streaked horned lark in the South Puget Sound including: The Army Compatible Use Buffer
(ACUB) program, the multi-partner and multi-species Candidate Conservation Agreement (CCA), and
the status of a habitat enhancement experiment on Fort Lewis.
Hannah Anderson is the Rare Species Project Manager with The Nature Conservancy of Washington,
South Puget Sound Program. She holds a Master’s degree in Environmental Studies. Her thesis work
focused on the Streaked Horned Lark, examining the effects of internal edge and Scotch broom on nest
predation. Hannah’s work with The Nature Conservancy is aimed at promoting the regional recovery
of federal candidate species occurring on the grasslands of the Willamette Valley / Puget Trough /
Georgia Basin eco-region. Her project promotes this agenda by working beyond political and
geographic barriers and with all organizations and individuals who can assist in the recovery process.
This regional cooperative approach provides the best chance for proactive, successful conservation,
restoration, and recovery of target species and habitats.
36
37
38
39
Looking Beyond the Geese: Streaked Horned Lark Conservation
at the mid-Willamette Valley National Wildlife Refuges
Presented by:
Randy Moore
Oregon State University
This talk discusses the abundance on the three big goose refuges in the mid-valley and their potential
for contributing to Streaked Horned Lark recovery.
40
41
If we build it, will they come?
Presented by:
Elaine Stewart
Metro Parks and Greenspaces, Portland OR
Horned larks nest on sandy dredge spoils in the Rivergate Industrial District of North Portland. This
habitat is prized heavy industrial land and is rapidly being developed. Metro and the Port of Portland
are moving sand onto the nearby St. Johns Landfill to mimic the larks' existing habitat and attract them
to a more secure location.
Elaine Stewart is a Natural Resources Scientist with Metro Parks and Greenspaces. After receiving
her M.S. from the University of Missouri, Elaine worked for the Oregon Department of Fish and
Wildlife for about 15 years before her move to Metro 10 years ago. As part of Metro's Science and
Stewardship team, Elaine manages wildlife habitat on a variety of public lands in the Portland
metropolitan area.
42
43
Conservation Strategy: A Path to Recovery
Presented by:
Hannah Anderson
The Nature Conservancy
To conserve and recover rare species is both complex and difficult. The Streaked Horned Lark is no
exception. Due to time limitations at the workshop this talk was not presented. However, the
following is the content of the presentation, displaying a conservation action chart that outlines a
recovery strategy. The chart is designed to guide research and on-the-ground work by breaking down
overall conservation objectives within and among each geographic region where the lark occurs. It
provides an up-to-date snapshot of where we are on the recovery path, and what key actions need to
occur still.
44
45
46
47
48
A
49
50
STREAKED HORNED LARK WORKSHOP 2007
Breakout Session Discussion Questions
1) What are the concrete, feasible actions that could occur in your area of interest to benefit
the streaked horned lark, and what are the challenges to implementing those actions?
2) What are the land uses/threats that conflict with streaked horned lark conservation in your
area of interest?
3) Are there spatial and/or temporal shifts in land use that could be beneficial to the larks
without being detrimental to the primary land use? What steps need to be undertaken to
ensure that shift could occur?
4) Are there other species of concern that may inhibit and/or enhance conservation efforts
for streaked horned larks in your area of interest?
5) What funding or other resources could potentially be directed toward streaked horned
lark conservation in your area of interest?
6) Who are the potential partners to enact conservation actions for streaked horned larks in
your area of interest?
7) Is there a particular site in your area of interest that has the potential to be moved towards
a conservation emphasis for streaked horned lark?
8) Would federal listing of streaked horned larks as endangered or threatened contribute/be
detrimental to their recovery in your area of interest and why?
9) Are there education/outreach products that should be produced to support streaked
horned lark conservation in your area of interest?
51
NOTES FROM BREAKOUT SESSIONS
Agriculture
Moderator: Peg Boulay, Oregon Dept. of Fish & Wildlife
This break-out session focused on key actions.
1) Fill in gaps in knowledge
What people need to manage?
 impacts – positive/negative
 basic biological needs
 management prescriptions
 non-habitat contributions to population declines
 sink vs. source dynamics
 landscape needs
 population estimate and systematic surveys
2) Develop best management practices for
a. Agriculture – crop types, row spacing, “weedy” farming, seed mixes by seed size
b. Vegetation management – fire, flooding, grazing, mowing, tilling, etc.
c. Native prairies
3) How do you incorporate STHL conservation into land management objectives?
e.g., agriculture production goals, prairie restoration, or multiple species conservation
4) Outreach to land owners: to public land owners, to public
5) Work with NRCS better use of existing incentives
 Recognition that farming community is key to this species’ conservation.
 Building partnerships around fire and grass management.
6) Identify and address constraints to management
e.g., barriers to using prescribed fire; regulatory concerns by private landowners
7. Blocking actions for landscape approach
 Building partnerships across boundaries
 Prioritizing landscapes and populations
 Determine if a site has the right landscape characteristics (e.g., is it worth protecting in
my area?).
Some Conclusions and Other Thoughts:
1. Need to determine what is currently underway (e.g., some data gaps are being addressed) to
prioritize actions.
2. Share information through working group, venues like this.
3. Need multiple-partner action plan.
4. Listing under the ESA would be counter-productive, even harmful, to conserving a species
this dependent on very early successional habitat on private land.
52
Airports and Roadsides
Moderator: Tara Chestnut, Washington State Dept. of Transportation
1) Threats
 Building/development – expanding infrastructure of airports and other existing sites –
speed of development is it happening so fast that it is too late?
 Vegetation management – pesticides and mowing
 Bird strikes
 Operations and management – runway repairs
2) Opportunities
 Disturbance focused management regimes to maintain habitat
 Selling larks as a non-problematic bird species
 Mowing – shifting/timing
 What motivates the interest for airport managers to want to be
pro-active about management?
 State wildlife action plan
 But seriously, eco roofs?
3) Management
 Airports being managed for airports – this land use is what is attractive to larks
 Making habitat unattractive to “problem” species e.g. geese, raptors
 Airports on historic prairies but they appear to persist because of management
prescription
 Bird control on airfields - does the use of falcons/dogs make larks more vulnerable to
bird strikes by flushing them?
 Work towards making airports less critical for species survival
 Longterm regional planning
4) Issues
 Bird strikes – costs (harm to people, damage to property)
 Internal policies –shifting attitudes
 Currently no strong political will for conservation
 Airports are 1 of 2 critical habitats identified for existing STHL populations
 Runway maintenance can only occur during summer months/bad timing for STHL
53
Coastal Beaches
Moderator: Lisa Lantz, Washington State Parks
1) Needs
 If we had money –what would our priorities be?
 What info would we need?
Would like to have the following before prioritizing:
 Why don’t eggs hatch?
 Role of predation in coastal habitats?
 What food to they eat? Is food a limiting factor?
 Is habitat a limiting factor?
2) Questions
Ideally, would answer basic biology questions before investing big $ in restoration, but need to
start now before information.
At coast, can work on restoration to benefit other species (e.g. snowy plover), then measure
benefits to larks. Real opportunity for multi-species synergy.

Historically speaking – what was the habitat? Consider a gap analysis?


Coastal species – e.g. processes erosion of sand on beaches
Reasonably manage? Not really - scale too big?
Best hope in WA – Willapa National Wildlife Refuge and Leadbetter Point State Park.
However, since population is so low, need to look at a coast-wide plan to minimize risk of
catastrophic losses.
Number of staff needed to monitor and enforce and educate?
Listing –potential benefit = additional money available.
54
Lower Columbia River and Islands
Moderator: Mike Green, US Fish & Wildlife Service
1) Conservation Actions
 Develop Best Management Practices for development and maintenance of dredge
material islands/sites
o Management of existing disposal sites (islands & non-islands)
o Recommendations for developing new sites (e.g. dredge materials at Rivergate)
o Vegetation management on mature sites
o Optimum timing of actions, when possible, to maximize STHOLA reproductive
success
 Establish long-term acreage goals for islands (by island?), e.g. X ac/year in Y condition.
 Institutionalize BMPs within mgmt of island/site owners
2) Explore potential of other sites
 Non-island dredge material sites on Toutle and Cowlitz rivers --Ownership?
 The soon to close Centralia coalmine -- Ownership?
 Are there other sites like Rivergate along Columbia?
 Survey Ridgefield site and nearby lowland agriculture sites
o Can we increase suitability for STHL?
o Explore potential for hosting breeding STHOLA
3) Partners: ACOE, FWS, WDFW, WDNR, Port of PDX, OR Div SL, ODFW, TNC, Land
trusts, etc
4) Potential conflicts/threats with STHOLA mgmt on/near Columbia River
 Columbia white tail deer
 Nesting waterfowl
 Caspian terns – like similar habitat, but ACOE hazes currently
 Hazing of CATE by ACOE?
5) Research tasks and questions
 Breeding & wintering birds
o Where are they?
o Where are there other potential sites?
 What is the timing of vegetation succession on dredge material islands?
 Establish population and habitat goals?
 Location and habitat characteristics of wintering sites?
 Institutionalize monitoring during spring and winter.
55
Native Prairies – Oregon
Moderator: Jonathan Soll, The Nature Conservancy
1) Needs
 More information about lark biology & ecology, site selection and success
 What is driving distribution in places?
 Willamette Valley has more larks than WA so not as desperate to institute actions
Learn effects of management strategies
Refuges serve as core area of the work because birds there already
Restoration trials – use short species
Recognizing that prairie restoration may resolve over time – not instantly, longterm review,
situations, fences, etc something look good but that will ruin it (scale and context dependent)
2) Threats
 Growth and development
 A lack of large tracks of prairie, there is no shortage of large tracts of grass fields
Conflict with other rare species exist, but can be managed by working carefully and keeping
scale in mind
Scale dependent – lupine and burned area: A large area could be burned and smaller lupine areas
protected
All grassland bird species
Opportunity to work with farm bureau and NRCS
Working with prison lab – managed as experimental area
Listing bad idea because importance of private lands – loss of cooperation because of fear
Don’t know enough about the lark to do broad education with the public but targeted education
efforts to airports, farms etc… is necessary
56
Native Prairies – Washington
Moderator: Mason McKinley, The Nature Conservancy
1)Threats
Invasive vegetation, predators, low populations, human activities, competing land values, other
species, not enough space
2) Questions
 Diet
 How to translocate/recruitment? How do you get them to use it even if you create it?
 Survey for other possible Washington populations – do we really know where all the
larks are?
 Identify former/remnant sites
 Fine-tune our understanding of habitat requirements
3) Actions
 Restore unoccupied, degraded and “fringe” sites (ag, landfills adjacent sites to existing
population)
 Develop/implement site enhancement stategies - don’t need a high quality prairie
 Effective methods to affordably develop “poor quality” sites into lark habitat – survey to
find appropriate sites
 Opportunities to layer rare species management
 Opportunities to use grazing as a habitat management tool (geese)
 Educate public about the lark and about the importance of fire as a habitat management
tool.
4) Ideas for potential suitable habitat (not enough available habitat to support all we want to do):
 San Juan islands
 ports
 landfills
 degraded sites
57
STREAKED HORNED LARK RANGE MAP
figure from
2005.
Drovetski et al.
58
STREAKED HORNED LARK LITERATURE
Altman, B. 1997. Distribution, abundance, and habitat associations of declining and state sensitive bird species
breeding in the Willamette Valley Grasslands. Prepared by Avifauna Northwest for the Oregon Department
of Fish and Wildlife.
Altman, B. 1999. Status and conservation of state sensitive grassland bird species in the Willamette Valley.
Prepared by Avifauna Northwest for Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Altman, B. 2003. Horned lark. Pp. 425-428 in D.B. Marshall, M.G. Hunter and A.L. Contreras (eds.). Birds of
Oregon: a General Reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon. 768 pp.
Anderson, H.E. 2005. Streaked horned lark (Eremophila alpestris strigata) nest predation on lowland Puget prairie
remnants, Washington State – the effects of internal edges and Scot’s broom (Cytisus scoparious). Masters
thesis. The Evergreen State College. Olympia, WA.
Beauchesne, S. & J. Cooper. 2003. COSEWIC status report on the Horned Lark Strigata Subspecies Eremophila
alpestris strigata. Status report prepared for the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in
Canada.
COSEWIC Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario.
Bowles, J.H. 1898. Notes on the streaked horned lark. Osprey 3:53-54.
Drovetski, S.V., S.F. Pearson, and S. Rohwer. 2005. Streaked horned lark (Eremophila alpestris strigata) has
distinct mitochondrial DNA. Conservation Genetics 6: 875-883.
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Review of Plant and Animal Species That Are Candidates or
Proposed for Listing as Endangered or Threatened, Annual Notice of Findings on Recycled Petitions, and
Annual Description of Progress on Listing Actions; Proposed Rule. October 30, 2001. Retrieved from the
Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov], Volume 66, Number 210, Department of
the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, 50 CFR, Part 17, p. 54808.
Environment Canada. 2007. Recovery Strategy for the Horned Lark strigata subspecies (Eremophila alpestris
strigata) with consideration for the Vesper Sparrow affinis subspecies (Pooecetes gramineus affinis) in
Canada [Proposed]. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series. Environment Canada, Ottawa. Vii +
30pp.
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2006. Oregon Conservation Strategy. Oregon Department of Fish and
Wildlife, Salem, OR.
Pearson, S.F. 2003. Breeding Phenology, nesting success, habitat selection, and census methods for the streaked
horned lark in the Puget lowlands of Washington. Natural Areas Program Report 2003-2. Washington
Department of Natural Resources. Olympia, WA.
Pearson, S.F., and B. Altman. 2005. Range-wide Streaked Horned Lark (Eremophila alpestris strigata) assessment
and preliminary conservation strategy. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA.
Pearson, S.F., and M. Hopey. 2004. Streaked Horned Lark inventory, nesting success and habitat selection in the
Puget lowlands of Washington. Natural Areas Program Report 2004-1. Washington Department of
Natural Resources, Olympia, WA.
Pearson, S.F., and M. Hopey. 2005. Streaked Horned Lark nest success, habitat selection, and habitat enhancement
experiments for the Puget lowlands, coastal Washington and Columbia River Islands. Natural Areas
Program Report 2005-1. Washington Dept. of Natural Resources. Olympia, WA.
Pearson, S.F., H. Anderson, and M. Hopey. 2005a. Streaked horned lark monitoring, habitat manipulations and
conspecific attraction experiment. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia.
Pearson, S.F., M. Hopey, W. D. Robinson, R. Moore. 2005b. Range, abundance and movement patterns of
wintering Streaked Horned Larks in Oregon and Washington. Natural Areas Program Report 2005-2.
Washington Dept. of Natural Resources. Olympia, WA.
59
Robinson, W.D. & R.P. Moore. 2004. Range, abundance, and habitat associations of streaked horned lark
(Eremophila alpestris strigata) during winter. Department of Fisheries and Wildlife and Oak Creek Lab of
Biology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon. 5 pp.
Rogers, R.E. 2000. The status and microhabitat selection of streaked horned lark, western bluebird, Oregon vesper
sparrow, and western meadowlark in western Washington. Masters Thesis, The Evergreen State College,
Olympia, WA.
Stinson, D. W. 2005. Draft Washington State Status Report for the Mazama Pocket Gopher, Streaked Horned Lark,
and Taylor’s Checkerspot. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia.138+ xii pp.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2005. Washington’s Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation
Strategy. Final Draft.
-- for copies of these documents, visit
www.southsoundprairies.org/documents.htm or contact Hannah
Anderson at [email protected] --
60
Workshop Participant Contact Information
NAME
ORGANIZATION
EMAIL
PHONE
Altman, Bob
American Bird Conservancy - Corvallis, OR
[email protected]
541-745-5339
Alverson, Ed
The Nature Conservancy - Eugene, OR
[email protected]
541-343-1010
Anderson, David
Anderson,
Hannah
WA Dept. of Fish & Wildlife - Trout Lake, WA
[email protected]
509-395-2232
The Nature Conservancy - Olympia, WA
[email protected]
360-701-8803
Barnes, Susan
OR Department of Fish & Wildlife - Clackamas, OR
[email protected]
971-673-6010
Beall, Jock
USFWS, Willamette Valley NWRC - Corvallis, OR
[email protected]
541-757-7236
Boulay, Peg
OR Dept. of Fish & Wildlife - Salem, OR
[email protected]
503-947-6316
Brennan, Kirsten
Willapa National Wildlife Refuge - Ilwaco, WA
[email protected]
360-484-3482
Bresson, Barb
USDA Forest Service/USDI BLM - Sandy, OR
[email protected]
503-668-1414
Brown, Cat
US Fish & Wildlife Service - Portland, OR
[email protected]
503-231-6179
Burke, Kelli
WA State Parks - Olympia, WA
[email protected]
360-956-4804
Bush, Jodi
US Fish & Wildlife Service - Lacey, WA
[email protected]
360.753.6046
Camfield, Alaine
University of British Columbia - Vancouver, BC
[email protected]
604-822-9368
Chaney, Marty
USDA - NRCS - Olympia, WA
[email protected]
360-704-7751
Chapman, Cliff
The Nature Conservancy - Olympia, WA
[email protected]
360-280-4610
Chestnut, Tara
WSDOT - Olympic Region - Olympia, WA
[email protected]
360-570-6739
Danver, Sue
Black Hills Audubon Society/Friends of Prairies
[email protected]
360-705-9247
Davis, Chris
National Park Service – San Juan Island NHP
[email protected]
360-378-2240
Dorsey, Geoff
US Army Corps of Engineers - Portland, OR
[email protected]
503-808-4769
Dunn, Pat
The Nature Conservancy - Olympia, WA
[email protected]
360-956-9713
Elliott, Valerie
McChord Air Force Base, WA
[email protected]
253-982-6216
Engler, Joseph
US Fish & Wildlife Service - Ridgefield, WA
[email protected]
360-887-3883 ext 12
Flores, Bob
USFWS, Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, Ridgefield, WA
[email protected]
360-887-4106
Flotlin, Kim
US Fish & Wildlife Service - Lacey, WA
[email protected]
360-753-5838
Fort, Kevin
Environment Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service, Delta, BC
[email protected]
604-940-4678
Foster, Jeff
Fort Lewis, WA
[email protected]
253-966-6446
Fursman, Victoria
WSDOT - Headquarters - Olympia, WA
[email protected]
360-705-6963
Gahr, John
USFWS, Willamette Valley NWRC - Corvallis, OR
Gilbert, Rod
Fort Lewis Fish & Wildlife, Ft. Lewis, WA
[email protected]
253-966-6472
Gilgert, Wendell
USDA-NRCS-West Nat'l Technical Support Cntr, Portland, OR
[email protected]
503-273-2426
Green, Mike
US Fish & Wildlife Service - Portland, OR
[email protected]
503-872-2707
Helzer, Dave
Port of Portland, Portland, OR
[email protected]
503-460-4879
Houk, Jim
USFWS, Willamette Valley NWRC - Corvallis, OR
Jancaitis, Jean
The Nature Conservancy - Eugene, OR
[email protected]
541-343-1010
Kreager, Ann
OR Dept. of Fish & Wildlife - Corvallis, OR
[email protected]
541-757-4186 ext. 255
Lantz, Lisa
WA State Parks - Olympia, WA
[email protected]
360-956-4803
Linders, Mary
WDFW - Olympia, WA
[email protected]
360-902-8135
Lynch, Jim
Fort Lewis Fish and Wildlife, Ft. Lewis, WA
[email protected]
253-966-6440
McAllister, Kelly
WSDOT -Headquarters - Olympia, WA
[email protected]
360-705-7426
McKinley, Mason
The Nature Conservancy - Olympia, WA
[email protected]
360-584-2538
Menke, Carolyn
Institute for Applied Ecology - Corvallis, OR
[email protected]
541-753-3099
Miller, Patrick
WA Dept. of Fish & Wildlife - Longview, WA
[email protected]
360-577-0672
Mitchell, Therese
Portland Metro, Portland, OR
[email protected]
503-572-9374
Monroe, Molly
USFWS, Willamette Valley NWRC, Corvallis, OR
Moore, Randy
Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR
[email protected]
541-760-5542
Morgan, Jim
Metro Regional Parks and Greenspaces - Portland, OR
[email protected]
503-797-1727
Nuckols, Jason
The Nature Conservancy - Eugene, OR
[email protected]
541-343-1010
Pearson, Scott
Pendergrass,
Kathy
WDFW - Olympia, WA
[email protected]
360-902-2524
USDA,NRCS - Portland, OR
[email protected]
503-414-3266
61
NAME
ORGANIZATION
EMAIL
PHONE
Pope, Michael
OR Dept. of Fish & Wildlife - Salem, OR
[email protected]
503-947-6086
Popper, Ken
The Nature Conservancy - Portland, OR
[email protected]
503-802-8100
Purdom,Hans
WSDOT - Olympic Region - Olympia, WA
[email protected]
360-570-6737
Schirato, Greg
WA Dept. Fish & Wildlife - Shelton, WA
[email protected]
360-490-0781
Schultz, Cheryl
WSU Vancouver, Vancouver, WA
[email protected]
360-546-9525
Smith, Ted
WA State Parks - Olympia, WA
[email protected]
360-902-8639
Soll, Jonathan
The Nature Conservancy - Portland , OR
[email protected]
503-802-8100
Stewart, Elaine
Metro Parks and Greenspaces - Portland, OR
[email protected]
503-797-1515
Stinson, Derek
WDFW - Olympia, WA
[email protected]
360-902-2475
Tirhi, Michelle
WA Dept. of Fish & Wildlife - Olympia, WA
[email protected]
253-813-8906
Vandenberg, Paul
Portland Metro, Portland, OR
[email protected]
503-797-1695
Vasquez, Matt
WSDOT - Headquarters, Olympia, WA
[email protected]
360-705-7449
Walker, Mike
WA Dept. of Fish & Wildlife - Olympia, WA
[email protected]
253-230-9687
62