2. Arizona
New Mexico
Flagstaff
Albuquerque
Phoenix
Tucson

3. Arizona
New Mexico

4. Methods 3-min passive survey 3-min call-broadcast survey 2021 points
115 survey routes
200m spacing h

5. Coverage and Analyses replicated 1980-83 and 1995-96 surveys
9 mountain ranges
replicated and surveys
detected 56 flycatchers
regress year vs # BBFLs for each route
meta-analysis to test Ho: trend  0

6. Estimating detection probability
p = (pvocal).(pobs)
focal bird trials (n=93)
focal nest trials (n=8)
double sampling (n=15 canyons)

7. Effects of fire on BBFL distribution
1. burned vs non-burned paired surveys
<10 year-old fires
only areas with no records of BBFLs
2. BBFL presence correlated with fire

8. Fire Index 0 - no evidence of fire 1 - low-intensity ground fire
2 - medium-intensity ground fire
3 - high-intensity ground fire
4 - high-intensity crown fire
5 - old, high-intensity crown fire

9. BBFLs have declined in 13 of 19 canyons in SE Arizona since 1995
df = 18
P = 0.04

10. Detection Probability
focal bird trials (pvocal)
92%
focal nest trials
75% at 100m
100% at 50m
double sampling
78%

11. Call broadcast increased detection probability of BBFLs by 49%
more calls, more visuals
more songs

12. But, call broadcast decreased detection probability of 97% of the co-existing birds by an average of -25%

13. Surveys may need to be longer than 6 min.

14. BBFLs detected across wide range of elevations

15. Effects of fire

16. 0 BBFL
detected
0 BBFL
detected

17. BBFLs associated with burned woodlands

18. Buff-breasted flycatchers more common in burned woodlands
P = 0.007

19. If BBFLs like burned woodlands and fire suppression = population declines, why no BBFLs in burned canyons?
lack of local recruitment?
lack of emigrants from Mexico?

20. Arizona
New Mexico