Use of video probe does not affect burrowing owl reproductive parameters or return rates

Journal of Wildlife Management

Volumn 73, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 154-157

  Garcia, Victoria ^a   Conway, Courtney J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

Author keywords

Athene cunicularia; Burrowing owl; Cavity nest; Disturbance; Eastern washington; Fiberscope; Infrared video probe

Indexed keywords

BREEDING SEASON; ENVIRONMENTAL DISTURBANCE; RAPTOR; RECRUITMENT (POPULATION DYNAMICS); REPRODUCTION; VIDEOGRAPHY;

ATHENE CUNICULARIA; SPEOTYTO CUNICULARIA; STRIGIFORMES;

EID: 58449109707     PISSN: 0022541X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2193/2008-112     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Berentsen, A. R., and T. P. Salmon. 2001. The structure of California ground squirrel burrows: control implications. Transactions of the Western Section of The Wildlife Society 37:66-70.
2. Blackwood, J. D. 1997. Eastside draft environmental impact statement. U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Bureau of Land Management BLM-OR-WA-PL-96-037+1792, Walla Walla, Washington, USA.
3. Blem, C. R., L. B. Blem, and C. I. Barrientos. 1999. Relationships of clutch size and hatching success to age of female prothonotary warblers. Wilson Bulletin 111:577-581.
4. Carlisle, J. D., and R. L. Holberton. 2006. Relative efficiency of fecal versus regurgitated samples for assessing diet and the deleterious effects of a tartar emetic on migratory birds. Journal of Field Ornithology 77:126-135.
5. Conway, C. J., and J. C. Simon. 2003. Comparison of detection probability associated with burrowing owl survey methods. Journal of Wildlife Management 67:501-511.
6. Enkerlin-Hoeflich, E. C., J. M. Packard, and J. J. Gonzalez-Elizondo. 1999. Safe field techniques for nest inspections and nestling crop sampling of parrots. Journal of Field Ornithology 70:8-17.
7. Flath, D. L., and R. L. Rauscher. 1998. Evaluation of the "peeper" video probe to examine burrows and subsurface activity of burrowing mammals. Intermountain Journal of Sciences 4:93.
8. Griebel, R. L. 2007. Factors influencing burrowing owl reproductive performance in contiguous shortgrass prairie. Journal of Raptor Research 41:212-221.
9. Hamilton, S. 2000. How precise and accurate are data obtained using an infra-red scope on burrow-nesting sooty shearwaters Puffinus griseus? Marine Ornithology 28:1-6.
10. Hensler, G. L., and J. D. Nichols. 1981. The Mayfield method of estimating nesting success: a model, estimators and simulation results. Wilson Bulletin 93:42-53.
11. Koenig, W. D., R. L. Mumme, M. T. Stanback, and F. A. Pitelka. 1995. Patterns and consequences of egg destruction among joint-nesting acorn woodpeckers. Animal Behaviour 50:607-621.
12. Korpimaki, E. 1984. Clutch size and breeding success of Tengmalm's owl Aegolius funereus in natural cavities and nest-boxes. Ornis Fennica 61:80-83.
13. Mayfield, H. F. 1961. Nesting success calculated from exposure. Wilson Bulletin 73:255-261.
14. Mayfield, H. F. 1975. Suggestions for calculating nest success. Wilson Bulletin 87:456-466.
15. McGee, B. K., M. J. Butler, M. C. Wallace, W. B. Ballard, and K. L. Nicholson. 2005. A comparison of survey techniques for swift fox pups. Wildlife Society Bulletin 33:1169-1173.
16. Møller, A. P. 1989. Parasites, predators and nest boxes: facts and artefacts in nest box studies of birds? Oikos 56:421-423.
17. Nilsson, S. G. 1975. Clutch size and breeding success of birds in nest boxes and natural cavities. Vår Fågelvärld 34:207-211.
18. Priest, J. E. 1997. Age identification of nestling burrowing owls. Journal of Raptor Research Report 9:125-127.
19. Proudfoot, G. A. 2002. Two optic systems assist removal of nestlings from nest cavities. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30:956-959.
20. Purcell, K. L., J. Verner, and L. W. Oring. 1997. A comparison of the breeding ecology of birds nesting in boxes and tree cavities. Auk 114:646-656.
21. Reillo, P. R., S. Durand, and K. A. McGovern. 1999. First sighting of eggs and chicks of the red-necked Amazon parrot (Amazona arausiaca) using an intra-cavity video probe. Zoo Biology 18:63-70.
22. Richardson, D. M., J. W. Bradford, P. G. Range, and J. Christensen. 1999. A video probe system to inspect red-cockaded woodpecker cavities. Wildlife Society Bulletin 27:353-356.
23. Rosier, J. R., N. A. Ronan, and D. K. Rosenberg. 2006. Post-breeding dispersal of burrowing owls in an extensive California grassland. American Midland Naturalist 155:162-167.
24. Seabloom, E. W., O. J. Reichman, and E. J. Gabet. 2000. The effect of hillslope angle on pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae) burrow geometry. Oecologia 125:26-34.
25. Semonsen, V. J. 1998. Ambystoma californiense (California tiger salamander). Survey technique. Herpetological Review 29:96.
26. Smith, B. W., and J. R. Belthoff. 2001. Effects of nest dimensions on use of artificial burrow systems by burrowing owls. Journal of Wildlife Management 65:318-326.
27. Smith, M. D., and C. J. Conway. 2007. Use of mammal manure by nesting burrowing owls: a test of four functional hypotheses. Animal Behaviour 73:65-73.
28. Steenhof, K. 1987. Assessing raptor reproductive success and productivity. Pages 157-170 in B. A. Giron-Pendleton, B. A. Millsap, K. W. Cline, and D. M. Bird, editors. Raptor management techniques manual. National Wildlife Federation Scientific and Technical Series 10, Washington, D.C., USA.
29. VerCauteren, K., M. J. Pipas, and J. Bourassa. 2002. A camera and hook system for viewing and retrieving rodent carcasses from burrows. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30:1057-1061.