Eastern Wood-pewee (Contopus virens): management plan [proposed] 2023

Official title: Management plan for the Eastern Wood-pewee (Contopus virens) in Canada [proposed]

Species at Risk Act
Management Plan Series

Proposed

2023

Preface

The federal, provincial, and territorial government signatories under the Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk (1996) ^Footnote2 and the Cooperation Agreement for the Protection and Recovery of Species at Risk in Quebec  (PDF) ^Footnote3 agreed to establish complementary legislation and programs that provide for effective protection of species at risk throughout Canada. Under the Species at Risk Act (S.C. 2002, c.29) (SARA), the federal competent ministers are responsible for the preparation of management plans for listed species of special concern and are required to report on progress within five years after the publication of the final document on the SAR Public Registry.

The Minister of Environment and Climate Change and Minister responsible for the Parks Canada Agency is the competent minister under SARA for the Eastern Wood-pewee and has prepared this management plan, as per section 65 of SARA. To the extent possible, it has been prepared in cooperation with the Parks Canada Agency, the Department of National Defense, and the provinces of Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Nova Scotia as per section 66(1) of SARA.

Success in the conservation of this species depends on the commitment and cooperation of many different constituencies that will be involved in implementing the directions set out in this plan and will not be achieved by Environment and Climate Change Canada and the Parks Canada Agency, or any other jurisdiction alone. All Canadians are invited to join in supporting and implementing this plan for the benefit of the Eastern Wood-pewee and Canadian society as a whole.

Implementation of this management plan is subject to appropriations, priorities, and budgetary constraints of the participating jurisdictions and organizations.

Acknowledgments

This document was prepared by Amelia R. Cox, Samantha Jarvis, Marc-André Cyr (Environment and Climate Change Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service [ECCC-CWS] – National Capital Region). Drafts were reviewed and helpful insight provided by numerous people: Amanda Barnabay (Mi'gmawei Mawiomi Secretariat), Nicholas Bayly (SELVA, Colombia), Donald Bouchard (Conseil de la Première Nation Essipit), John Brett, Juliana Galvis-Amaya, and Rich Russell (ECCC-CWS Ontario Region), LidiaCapece, P. Homenick, Franck Sirieix and K. Vint (Department of National Defense), Leah de Forest (Parks Canada Agency), Claudie Desroches and Isabelle Gauthier (Quebec), Bruno Drolet (ECCC-CWS Quebec Region), Ian Fife (Birds Canada), Garry Gregory (Prince Edward Island), Sarah Kendrick (Missouri Department of Conservation), Benoit Laliberté, Angela Barakat and Gina Schalk (ECCC-CWS – National Capital Region), M. McGarrigle (Nova Scotia), Kathy St. Laurent and Peter Thomas (ECCC-CWS Atlantic Region), Maureen Toner (New Brunswick), Steve Van Wilgenburg (ECCC-CWS Prairie Region), and staff from Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks.

Thanks are extended to Dwayne Lepitzki (Wildlife Systems Research) for facilitating the Eastern Wood-pewee IUCN-CMP threat assessment, to Lee Voisin (ECCC-CWS Ontario Region) and Holly Bickerton (Consulting Ecologist) who coordinated the threat assessment conference, and to experts who participated in this assessment: Bruno Drolet (ECCC-CWS Quebec Region), Ian Fife and Jon McCracken (Birds Canada), Judith Girard and Rich Russell (ECCC-CWS Ontario Region), Tara Stehelin (Yukon College), Kathy St. Laurent (ECCC-CWS Atlantic Region), Don Sutherland (Natural Resources and Forestry Ontario), Maureen Toner (New Brunswick Forest Planning and Stewardship).

Executive summary

The Eastern Wood-pewee (Contopus virens) is a small songbird in the flycatcher family, which forages by flying out from a perch to catch flying insects. The species breeds in woodland and forest across central and eastern North America. In Canada, its range extends from southeastern Saskatchewan, along the southern stretches of Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec, to the Maritimes. The species migrates through Central America and winters in tropical lowland forests in northwestern South America.

The species was assessed as Special Concern by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) in 2012 and listed under Schedule 1 of the Species at Risk Act in 2017. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List ranks the Eastern Wood-pewee as Least Concern. The Eastern Wood-pewee is protected under the Migratory Bird Convention Act, 1994 in Canada and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act in the U.S.

Of the 6.5 million Eastern Wood-pewees that make up the global population, 5.5% (360,000) breed in Canada. The species has declined by 63% since 1970 and was stable during the 2009–2019 period. The extent of the decline varies regionally; populations declined the most in the Maritimes, the northeastern portion of the species' range. Other birds that forage on flying insects are also declining across North America, often with similar patterns of strong declines in the northeast.

The causes for Eastern Wood-pewee and other avian aerial insectivore declines are unclear, but the common diet of this bird group points towards reduced availability or quality of insect prey. A combination of factors may explain this reduction of insect prey, including widespread insecticide use, climate change, and/or lingering effects of acid rain. The Eastern Wood-pewee may be threatened by loss of wooded habitat and degradation caused by conversion to crops or pastures, particularly on its non-breeding grounds. Additional threats include non-native tree insects and diseases, urban development, and White-tailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus) over-browsing.

The management objectives for the Eastern Wood-pewee in Canada are to achieve a stable or increasing population trend in the short-term (by 2032), maintain, at a minimum, a stable population trend in the long-term (beyond 2032), and maintain a stable or increased geographic distribution, as shown in Figure 1. The North American Breeding Bird Survey provides reliable population trends, both nationally and regionally, that will be used to measure progress towards the management objective.

The broad strategies outlined in this management plan aim to better understand the species’ habitat use during the non-breeding season and to determine the threats associated with the species decline. Since much of the species’ habitat and population is outside of Canada, developing partnerships with organizations on the bulk of its breeding and non-breeding ranges should play a key role in Canada’s conservation strategies for the species.

1. COSEWIC* species assessment information

Date of assessment: November 2012

Common name (population): Eastern Wood-pewee

Scientific name: Contopus virens

COSEWIC status: Special Concern

Reason for designation: This species is one of the most common and widespread songbirds associated with North America’s eastern forests. While the species is apparently resilient to many kinds of habitat changes, like most other long-distance migrants that specialize on a diet of flying insects, it has experienced persistent declines over the past 40 years both in Canada and the United States. The 10-year rate of decline (25%) comes close to satisfying the criteria for Threatened. The causes of the decline are not understood but might be linked to habitat loss or degradation on its wintering grounds in South America or changes in availability of insect prey. If the population declines continue to persist, the species may become Threatened in the foreseeable future.

Canadian occurrence: Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia

COSEWIC status history: Designated Special Concern in November 2012.

* COSEWIC (Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada)

2. Species status information

An estimated 5.5% of the global Eastern Wood-pewee (Contopus virens) population breeds in Canada (Partners in Flight 2019). In Canada, the species was assessed as Special Concern by COSEWIC in 2012 and listed as Special Concern under Schedule 1 of the Species at Risk Act in 2017. Provincially, the Eastern Wood-pewee was classified as Vulnerable under the Nova Scotia Endangered Species Act in 2013, as Special Concern under the New Brunswick Species at Risk Act in 2013, and as Special Concern under the Endangered Species Act in Ontario in 2014. The species is either unlisted or classified as secure in all other provinces. The Eastern Wood-pewee is not listed under the United States’ Endangered Species Act. The species has been identified as a priority species in three of the twelve Bird Conservation Regions^Footnote4.

The global NatureServe rank is G5 - Secure (reviewed in 2016; NatureServe 2021; see Table 1 for additional sub rankings). In 2004, the IUCN Red List classified the species as Least Concern (BirdLife International 2016). The Eastern Wood-pewee is protected under the Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994, which protects individuals of the species as well as its nest and eggs on federal and non-federal lands.

National (N) and Subnational (S) NatureServe alphanumerical ranking: 1 - Critically Imperiled, 2 - Imperiled, 3 - Vulnerable, 4 - Apparently Secure, 5 - Secure, NR - Unranked, NA - Not Applicable. Occurrence definitions: B - Breeding, M - Migrant.

3. Species information

3.1. Species description

The Eastern Wood-pewee is a small songbird in the flycatcher family (Tyrannidae) that weighs about 14 grams (Watt et al. 2017). Adults have olive-grey plumage and a pale breast, belly, and wing-bars; they lack an eye ring, which helps distinguish them from the visually similar Acadian Flycatcher (Empidonax virescens). Juvenile plumage is darker and browner with yellower underparts. Though almost identical in appearance to the Western Wood-pewee (Contopus sordidulus), the two species hardly overlap on their breeding range and the Eastern Wood-pewee can be distinguished by its distinctive pee-a-wee song. Like other flycatchers, the Eastern Wood-pewee forages on flying insects by hawking^Footnote5 out from a perch in the canopy.

3.2. Species population and distribution

Distribution

The Eastern Wood-pewee is a common bird that breeds throughout central and eastern North America. Its breeding range extends from southeastern Saskatchewan to southeastern Texas in the west and from northern Florida to Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island in the east (Figure 1; Watt et al. 2017). In Canada, the species is found in southeastern Saskatchewan, along the southern portions of Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec, and throughout New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Nova Scotia (COSEWIC 2012). The highest Canadian densities are in Ontario (Figure 2).

Figure 1. Breeding, migrating and wintering distribution of Eastern Wood-pewee (adapted from BirdLife International 2016).

Figure 2. Predicted average number of Eastern Wood-pewees that could be observed in 2.5 hours on Breeding Bird Survey routes, from 2011 to 2015. Source: U.S. Geological Survey.

The Eastern Wood-pewee migrates through eastern and central U.S. and south through Central America. Sometimes, they also fly across the Caribbean. The species follows the same southbound and northbound migration routes. Surveys of Neotropical migrants in Central America and northern Colombia during spring and fall migrations found that the Eastern Wood-pewee was most abundant along the Caribbean slope and lowlands of Panama and Costa Rica (Neotropical Flyways Project; N. Bayly, pers. comm. 2020). The species winters in the tropical broadleaf forests of northwestern South America, from the western portion of the Amazonian forest in Brazil to the eastern slope of the Andes in Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia (Figure 1; Watt et al. 2017).

Population size and trends

The Eastern Wood-pewee population is estimated at 6.5 million birds in North America (Partners in Flight Science Committee 2020). The breeding population of the Eastern Wood-pewee in Canada, based on Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) results, is estimated at 360,000 individuals (95% confidence intervals^Footnote6 [CI]: 223,000–566,000), of which approximately 56% breed in Ontario, 14% in Quebec, 13% in Manitoba, 11% in Nova Scotia, 6% in New Brunswick, and 1% in Prince Edward Island (Partners in Flight Science Committee 2020). The Boreal Avian Modelling (BAM) Project estimates the breeding population at 1.25 million males (CI: 1.18-1.33 million) or 2.5 million individuals^Footnote7 in Canada (Boreal Avian Modelling Project, 2020). The BAM models predict the highest densities of the species in the southern portions of Ontario, which closely corresponds to the predicted detection rate on BBS routes and the Partners in Flight (PIF) population estimates (Figure 2).

PIF and BAM use different methods to estimate population size. The BAM Project provides population estimates based on models of species density in relation to environmental variables. PIF relies exclusively on BBS data while BAM includes both BBS and provincial Breeding Bird Atlas data, likely improving the reliability of the BAM population estimate. The higher population estimate derived from the BAM Project compared to the PIF estimate should not be seen as a population increase.

In Canada, the Eastern Wood-pewee population has shown a 2.0% annual decline in abundance between 1970 and 2019 based on BBS data (Table 2). Nationally, the population has been stable from 2009 to 2019, following a slowing rate of decline since the early 2000’s (Figure 3; Smith et al. 2020). Since 1970 there have been significant long-term declines in most provinces, but short-term trends are not statistically significant in any province (Table 2). The degree of long-term decline varies moderately across the Canadian range, with the strongest declines in Manitoba and New Brunswick (Table 2). The BBS is thought to be one of the best methods of quantifying the population trend because the Eastern Wood-pewee’s distinctive pee-a-wee call makes them easily identified by volunteers and the BBS covers most of their range (COSEWIC 2012).

Figure 3. Annual percent change by 10 year periods of the Eastern Wood-pewee population in Canada. The most recent 10 year trend period ending in 2019 represents a 0.86% population increase over ten years. The orange and red horizontal lines represent 10 year population declines of 30 and 50 percent, respectively. Ten-year population declines of 30 and 50 percent correspond respectively to thresholds for threatened and endangered designations by COSEWIC. Light and dark vertical bars represent 50% and 95% confidence intervals, respectively. Trends are based on Breeding Bird Survey data.

Source: Smith et al. 2020.

Data collected for the provincial Breeding Bird Atlases (see Appendix B), the Ontario Forest Bird Monitoring Program (FBMP), and the Étude des populations des oiseaux du Quebec (ÉPOQ) generally show declining populations.

The Maritimes Breeding Bird Atlas shows that between the first atlas in 1986-1990 and the second in 2006-2010 (Figure B5), the Eastern Wood-pewee’s distribution across the Maritimes has remained stable but their abundance has declined (Peckford 2015; Figure B1).

The Quebec Breeding Bird Atlas also suggests that the occurrence of Eastern Wood-pewees in the province has declined between the first (1984-1989) and second (2010-2014) (Figure B4) atlas, particularly in the northern portion of the range (Hachey 2019). ÉPOQ show declining populations in Quebec (COSEWIC 2012).

The Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas shows that between the first atlas in 1981-1985 and the second atlas in 2001-2005 (Figure B3), the species’ range has expanded northward and the probability of observation has declined in the south (McLaren 2007). As a result of this range shift and in contrast to the BBS, the Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas shows no net loss of Eastern Wood-pewees in Ontario. FBMP shows declining populations provincially (COSEWIC 2012). Comparisons between these data sources should be interpreted cautiously as differences may be largely driven by different biases in sampling and data analysis methods (COSEWIC 2012). Generally, when results differ, the BBS is thought to be the most reliable data source for this species (COSEWIC 2012).

The Monitoring of Avian Productivity and Survival (MAPS) program is a capture-mark-recapture survey conducted every year during the nesting season in Canada and the United States. The Eastern Wood-pewee was well represented in the data collected from 1992 to 2006^Footnote8 in the United States during the MAPS program (DeSante et al. 2015). Though included in the analyses, data from Canada was much sparser. The 1992-2006 MAPS data showed high adult apparent survival, but very low productivity for the Eastern Wood-pewee that is likely not sufficient to maintain the population (DeSante et al. 2015). Because productivity is uniformly low, annual variation in adult survival drove changes in population size. Population density was negatively correlated with adult survival and productivity, suggesting that young and adult birds may be competing on the non-breeding grounds, which may carry over into the breeding season and result in low productivity (DeSante et al. 2015). A more recent analysis of the 1992-2017 MAPS data again found high adult apparent survival and relatively low productivity for the species (Saracco et al. 2020). However, an overall positive trend was observed at MAPs stations. Results suggest that high adult survival has played an important role in explaining the overall increasing trend, and that recruitment was relatively important in explaining years of greatest increase (Saracco et al. 2020). This more recent analyses did not include data from Canada but coincides with increasing trends observed from the Canadian BBS data from approximately 2002 onwards.

The Eastern Wood-pewee is one of many avian aerial insectivores^Footnote9 that have shown population declines across North America. These declines appear to have begun in the 1980s for most species, and declines are strongest in the northeast (Nebel et al. 2010; Shutler et al. 2012; Smith et al. 2015, but see Michel et al. 2016). However, within the broader avian aerial insectivore guild, there seems to be a distinction between flycatchers, like the Eastern Wood-pewee, and other species (Smith et al. 2015). Declines in flycatcher species began in the 1970s in the American Midwest, the 1980s in eastern Canada, and the 1990s in the Prairies. Unlike most other avian aerial insectivores, flycatcher populations were increasing in the east during the 1970s. In the west, flycatchers experienced a brief population increase in the 1990s-2000s but have been declining since approximately 2009 (Smith et al. 2015).

3.3. Needs of the Eastern Wood-pewee

Diet

As a flycatcher, the Eastern Wood-pewee primarily forages by hawking (Johnston 1971; Fitzpatrick 1980; Hartung and Brawn 2005). The species may also sally, where they fly out from their perch to catch a perched insect without returning to a perch, particularly when the canopy is dense (Hartung and Brawn 2005). The Eastern Wood-pewee forages in the lower 0-15 m of the canopy, but it may avoid the shrub layer if it is too dense (Johnston 1971; Hartung and Brawn 2005). Though not well characterized, their diet mainly consists of small flying insects that are less than 15 mm in length, often including Diptera (flies), Coleoptera (beetles), Hemiptera (true bugs), and Hymenoptera (ants, bees and wasps) (Johnston 1971; Watt et al. 2017).

Breeding habitat

In Canada, the Eastern Wood-pewee lives in most forest types across its range, most commonly deciduous and mixed forests (Hespenheide 1971), and nests in a wide variety of deciduous tree species. The species is usually more abundant in larger forest patches but can be found in patches as small as one hectare (Friesen et al. 1995; Keller and Yahner 2006, 2007; Keller et al. 2009; but see Ambuel and Temple 1983; Blake and Karr 1987). The species preferentially inhabits open forest with a tall canopy or forest habitat near clearings or the forest edge (Hespenheide 1971; Conner et al. 2004; Falconer 2010; Reidy et al. 2014). Foraging in the mid-canopy, the Eastern Wood-pewee likely chooses these open areas because they provide a clear line of sight for aerial foraging and maneuvering. In southern Ontario, the Eastern Wood-pewee show no preference for natural deciduous forests over pine plantations and settle in both habitats equally (Falconer 2010). However, in Ohio, the species preferred harvested oak forests to natural oak forests (Newell and Rodewald 2012). Differences in preferences for harvested and unharvested forests likely stem from the availability of open foraging habitat in each forest. In Nova Scotia, mature upland forests, and treed swamps to a lesser extent, are important breeding habitat for the species; they were not found in regenerating forests (Brazner and MacKinnon 2020). The Eastern Wood-pewee also seems to prefer dry upland areas over lowlands, but again this preference is likely driven by the amount of open space available in each habitat type (COSEWIC 2012).

Regardless of forest type, Eastern Wood-pewee females build their nests on horizontal branches in areas of low visibility and away from tree trunks, likely to minimize predation (Falconer 2010; Kendrick et al. 2013). Mean nest height is 12.24 m (range 2.5-26.6 m) across a range of canopy closure (Kendrick et al. 2013). Both parents provision the nestlings with insects (Kendrick et al. 2014). In southern Ontario, nests fledged^Footnote10 offspring more often in natural deciduous forests than in pine plantations but nesting success^Footnote11 between natural and harvested oak forests in Ohio was equivalent; researchers attributed the differences between studies to predator abundance (Falconer 2010; Newell and Rodewald 2012). Predation is the most common cause of nest failure (96%) for this species in the Missouri Ozarks (Kendrick et al. 2013); 28-43% of nests fledged offspring (Knutson et al. 2004; Falconer 2010). There is no information on predation rates of nests from Canada. In cases of nest failure, the pair usually renests if there is still time left in the season and it is common that they do so more than once (Kendrick et al. 2014). While not as common as renesting after a nest failure, 21% of Eastern Wood-pewee females will attempt a second nest after a successful first nest (Newell et al. 2013; Kendrick et al. 2014). Males are usually monogamous but 6-20% are polygynous (Newell et al. 2013).

Migration and wintering habitats

The Eastern Wood-pewee migrates primarily at night, although there have been daytime migration sightings (Watt et al. 2017). As during the breeding season, the species uses wooded habitats during migration and over the winter. Migrants in Pennsylvania relied on mature forest interior, edge, or suburban woodlots, and avoided young forests (Rodewald and Brittingham 2004). Although the species often forages in forest edges, fall migrants in South Carolina preferentially choose oak forest fragments at least 1.29 hectares in size (Somershoe and Chandler 2004). In Central America, the Eastern Wood-pewee uses a variety of forest habitats on migration, including clearings, scrub forest, cloud forest, early-successional forest, and both primary and secondary forest edge, which includes both dry and wet forests (Leck 1972; Watt et al. 2017). This species chooses stopover sites during migration based on the vegetation and forest structure, not insect abundance (Wolfe et al. 2014).

Over the winter, the Eastern Wood-pewee is widespread in various forest types found below 1,300 metres above sea level (Watt et al. 2017). The species inhabits wooded and shrubby habitats, often foraging in either edges or clearings (Fitzpatrick 1980; Stotz et al. 1992; Watt et al. 2017). The Eastern Wood-pewee winters in tropical lowland forest, with overlap with tropical montane forests (Armenteras et al. 2017).

4. Threats

4.1. Threat assessment

The Eastern Wood-pewee threat assessment is based on the IUCN-CMP (World Conservation Union–Conservation Measures Partnership, version 2.0) unified threats classification system. For purposes of threat assessment, only present and future threats are considered. Threats are defined as the proximate activities or processes that have caused, are causing, or may cause in the future the destruction, degradation, and/or impairment of the entity being assessed (population, species, community, or ecosystem) in the area of interest (global, national, or subnational). Limiting factors are not considered during this assessment process. Historical threats, indirect or cumulative effects of the threats, or any other relevant information that would help understand the nature of the threats are presented in the Description of Threats section.

The threats included in the COSEWIC status report pre-date COSEWIC’s use of the IUCN-CMP unified threats classification system, so an expert panel reviewed and updated the threats using the new threats classification system. Changes from the COSEWIC assessment include downgrading the severity of Threats 4.1, 4.2, and 5.3 from Slight to Negligible, resulting in the Impact assessment shifting from Low to Negligible. The severity of Threat 7.3 was also assessed as Moderate (previously Unknown), which increased the Impact from Unknown to Medium. The overall Canada-wide threat impact for the species is Medium.

^a Impact – The degree to which a species is observed, inferred, or suspected to be directly or indirectly threatened in the area of interest. The impact of each threat is based on Severity and Scope rating and considers only present and future threats. Threat impact reflects a reduction of a species population or decline/degradation of the area of an ecosystem. The median rate of population reduction or area decline for each combination of scope and severity corresponds to the following classes of threat impact: Very High (75% declines), High (40%), Medium (15%), and Low (3%). Unknown: used when impact cannot be determined (e.g., if values for either scope or severity are unknown); Not Calculated: impact not calculated as threat is outside the assessment timeframe (e.g., timing is insignificant/negligible or low as threat is only considered to be in the past); Negligible: when scope or severity is negligible; Not a Threat: when severity is scored as neutral or potential benefit.

^b Scope – Proportion of the species that can reasonably be expected to be affected by the threat within 10 years. Usually measured as a proportion of the species’ population in the area of interest. (Pervasive = 71–100%; Large = 31–70%; Restricted = 11–30%; Small = 1–10%; Negligible < 1%).

^c Severity – Within the scope, the level of damage to the species from the threat that can reasonably be expected to be affected by the threat within a 10-year or three-generation timeframe. Usually measured as the degree of reduction of the species’ population. (Extreme = 71–100%; Serious = 31–70%; Moderate = 11–30%; Slight = 1–10%; Negligible < 1%; Neutral or Potential Benefit ≥ 0%).

^d Timing – High = continuing; Moderate = only in the future (could happen in the short term [< 10 years or 3 generations]) or now suspended (could come back in the short term); Low = only in the future (could happen in the long term) or now suspended (could come back in the long term); Insignificant/Negligible = only in the past and unlikely to return, or no direct effect but limiting.

4.2. Description of threats

The exact causes of Eastern Wood-pewee decline are unknown, largely because there is little research focused directly on this species. However, multiple non-mutually exclusive threats emerge from a review of demographic drivers (see MAPS in section 3.2) and a review of threats to the Eastern Wood-pewee (below).

Avian aerial insectivores are declining more rapidly than any other group of birds in North America (Nebel et al. 2010; North American Bird Conservation Initiative Canada 2019). Threats to aerial insectivores include overall reductions in availability, quantity, or quality of flying insects as a result of multiple factors, including pesticide use and climate change, that operate on breeding grounds, wintering grounds and migration (Spiller and Dettmers 2019). Throughout the species’ range, agricultural intensification has resulted in extensive pesticide use, which might have pervasive effects on ecosystems (Spiller and Dettmers 2019). While long-term monitoring programs suggest very high adult survival for Eastern Wood-pewees, limited food resources can increase competition on migratory stopover sites (effect known as migratory bottleneck) and in turn reduce the breeding success of adults that return to the breeding grounds.

The Eastern Wood-pewee has very low productivity and recruitment^Footnote12, contributing to its population decline. The causes of low productivity and recruitment are unknown, but it has been hypothesized that habitat loss along the migration route may reduce breeding success (Bayly et al. 2017). Alternatively, factors on the breeding grounds may have reduced productivity (DeSante et al. 2015).

Additional potential threats to the Eastern Wood-pewee include habitat loss and degradation due to forestry practices, urban development, agricultural land conversion, and White-tailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus) over-browsing. There is still much uncertainty in identifying the threats that have the largest impact on the species. The specific threats associated with these causes of declines are described in more detail below.

IUCN threat 1.1 Housing and urban areas (low impact)

Increasing urbanization and fragmentation of forests across the Eastern Wood-pewee’s annual range may reduce habitat availability for the species, and increase window collisions. This is particularly the case in southern Canada, where most development is concentrated. However, given that there is still ample unoccupied habitat available, the impact of this threat on the population was scored as low.

On the breeding grounds, Eastern Wood-pewees are less abundant in suburban and urban-embedded wooded areas than in natural forests (Beissinger and Osborne 1982) and may be completely absent from developed areas (Amrich and Coffin 1979). Suburban and urban wooded areas typically have less complex structure, with less vegetative cover; after development, the remaining wooded area often comprises of a single canopy layer with no other vegetation at the middle and lower layers (Beissinger and Osborne 1982). This simple forest structure might not provide sufficient insect prey to be attractive habitat for the Eastern Wood-pewee.

Another impact of urbanization is habitat fragmentation. Since the Eastern Wood-pewee is an aerial insectivore that often forages in edge habitat, fragmentation of the forest may be less detrimental to the species than it is to interior forest specialists. The Eastern Wood-pewee may also be less susceptible to negative effects of forest fragmentation like brood parasitism and predator guilds of fragmented landscapes but parasitism rates vary across their breeding range (Kendrick et al. 2013). The Eastern Wood-pewee also appears to tolerate urban development and cottages surrounding their wooded habitat (Friesen et al. 1995; Mancke and Gavin 2000). However, the species is often less abundant in areas surrounded by more intense development (Friesen et al. 1995). During the spring migration, the species preferentially selects larger forest fragments as stopover sites (Keller and Yahner 2007).

Finally, glass windows constitute a collision hazard for Eastern Wood-pewees, especially in wooded residential areas (Hager et al. 2013). Although flycatchers are less vulnerable to window collisions than other bird guilds (Loss et al. 2014), Eastern Wood-pewees do infrequently strike glass windows (Hager and Craig 2014).

IUCN threat 1.2 Commercial and industrial areas (negligible impact)

Commercial and industrial areas development have been deemed a negligible threat to the Eastern Wood-pewee. While the species tolerates disturbance to a certain extent, the development of commercial and industrial areas generally results in permanent loss of habitat. As discussed under “1.1 Housing and urban areas”, urbanization, including commercial and industrial areas, may reduce Eastern Wood-pewee abundance in the immediate vicinity and surrounding forests.

Glass windows in industrial areas present similar hazards as do windows in residential areas (see IUCN threat 1.1).

IUCN threat 2.1 Annual and perennial non-timber crops (low impact)

Converting forests to agricultural cropland reduces breeding and foraging habitat for the Eastern Wood-pewee. In Canada, conversion of forest to agriculture has declined by 70% between 1990 and 2016. During that period, Canada’s forest area has been stable (Natural Resources Canada 2018). In Ontario, where most of Canada’s Eastern Wood-pewees breed, 44% of farmland was abandoned between 1931 and 2011 as farmers shifted toward high intensity, high-yield farming (Smith 2015). In northeastern North America, much of this land has since reverted to forest habitat, contributing to the net stabilization of forest acreage across the Eastern Wood-pewee’s breeding range (Latendresse et al. 2008; Ramankutty et al. 2010; Masek et al. 2011). Therefore, the current level of forest loss to agricultural land use in Canada likely does not result in substantial breeding habitat loss at the national scale, especially given the Eastern Wood-pewee’s preference for open forest.

On the species’ wintering grounds, tropical lowland forests are lost by about 0.8% annually (Armenteras et al. 2017). From 1990 to 2005, commercial and smallholder crops contributed to 16% of deforested area in South America (De Sy et al. 2015). Agricultural expansion was the most frequent driver of tropical lowland forest loss reported from 1980 to 2010 on the species’ non-breeding grounds (Armenteras et al. 2017). Despite those declines, the tropical lowland forests of Ecuador, Peru, Brazil and Bolivia remained, as of 2010, the largest forest tracts in South America (Hansen et al. 2013).

Tropical lowland forests in Central America, where most Eastern Wood-pewees concentrate during fall and spring migrations, are under threat of deforestation from conversion to croplands (Redo et al. 2012; Armenteras et al. 2017). For example, in lowland Costa Rica, forest has been extensively cleared for pineapple monoculture plantations (N. Bayly, pers. comm. 2020). Deforestation rates are relatively high in most portions of the South American wintering range, and comparatively lower through most of the migratory route through Central America (Armenteras et al. 2017).

Conversion of tropical lowland forests may negatively impact the Eastern Wood-pewee. Geography constrains migration for neotropical landbirds, including Eastern Wood-pewees, in Panama and Costa Rica, leading to significant concentrations of populations (Bayly et al. 2017). High densities of migrating birds increases competition at stopover sites (i.e. migratory bottleneck), resulting in lower survival of less experienced individuals, and can result in lower feeding rates that carry over into lower productivity in the following season (Baker et al. 2004). While Panama and Costa Rica as a whole do not have high rates of deforestation (Armenteras et al. 2017), some local areas have been identified as hot spots for deforestation resulting from conversion to croplands or pastures, which may affect migrants (Wassenaar et al. 2007).

While the Eastern Wood-pewee use the habitat interface between agricultural land and forest, ongoing encroachment of agricultural land due to conversion to croplands or pastures is expected to reduce the amount of suitable habitat for the species. The impact of annual and perennial non-timber crops on Eastern Wood-pewee populations is currently low. However, this threat could become more important as land-use changes on the non-breeding grounds, with possible disproportionate effects if important stopover areas are lost.

IUCN threat 2.3 Livestock farming and ranching (low impact)

Ranching primarily threatens the Eastern Wood-pewee when ranchers convert forest habitat into pastures. As in the case of annual and perennial non-timber crops, conversion to pastures has largely ceased in the species’ breeding range (Masek et al. 2011) but the threat is ongoing on the migration and wintering ranges (Armenteras et al. 2017). From 1990 to 2005, conversion to pastureland contributed to 71% of deforested area in South America (De Sy et al. 2015). The deforestation rate in northern South America is higher than in Central America, largely driven by Ecuador (2.19% per year) and Colombia (1.7% per year; Armenteras et al. 2017).

Pastures do not provide habitat for Eastern Wood-pewees and when pasture fragments wooded habitat, Eastern Wood-pewees preferentially use larger forest patches (Keller and Yahner 2007). Though the Eastern Wood-pewee primarily uses the edge habitat between pastures and forest, ongoing encroachment from pastures on the wintering range is expected to reduce the amount of suitable habitat for the species. Wooded pastures may be less detrimental than open rangeland, functioning more like a small woodlot that provides some habitat. In addition, deforestation to create pastures can be the first step of agricultural intensification, as pasture lands are often converted into croplands (Wassenaar et al. 2007; Gasparri and de Waroux 2015; Cohn et al. 2016). Currently, livestock farming and ranching are deemed to have a low impact on the species, given the species’ ability to move to unaffected areas. This threat could become more important as land-use changes increase on the non-breeding grounds, with possible disproportionate effects if important stopover areas are lost. More research is needed to evaluate the effect of ranching practices and land-use changes on the species’ non-breeding grounds.

IUCN threat 4.1 Roads and railroads (negligible impact)

Roads and railroads likely have a negligible impact on the Eastern Wood-pewee. Across the species’ breeding range in Canada, the road network is already well established. The species appears to be at limited risk of collisions with vehicles (Ashley and Robinson 1996; Bishop and Brogan 2013). Traffic volume might increase in some areas, but this canopy species is unlikely to collide with vehicles.

Some new road development is expected to encroach on Eastern Wood-pewee undisturbed habitat (including new forestry access roads). Regardless, Eastern Wood-pewees are likely displaced from habitats near roads (COSEWIC 2012). The species likely avoids roads because road noise may hinder songbirds’ territory defense, mate acquisition, and breeding success. The Eastern Wood-pewee’s song is innate, but they can adjust their song slightly by singing higher and shorter songs when there is lots of road noise (Gentry et al. 2018). Adjusting their song may help Eastern Wood-pewees mitigate some of the potential impacts of roads.

IUCN threat 5.3 Logging and wood harvesting (negligible impact)

The impact of logging and wood harvesting on the Eastern Wood-pewee is currently negligible; however, an important proportion (11–30%) of the population might be exposed to this threat. Canada’s forest area has been stable since 1990, with less than half of 1% being converted to non-forest (Natural Resources Canada 2020). However, despite little change in overall forest cover, loss of old forest and increases in less diverse monoculture tree plantations has resulted in breeding habitat loss for many forest bird species in eastern Canada, including Eastern Wood-pewee (Betts et al. 2021).

Depending on the stand composition and the extent of canopy removal, selective or partial harvest in hardwood or mixed wood stands may provide short-term benefits by opening the canopy and increasing foraging opportunities. These benefits disappear over time as the understory responds to the increased light and reaches a density or height that interferes with foraging activity. Forestry practices in the breeding and non-breeding ground affect Eastern Wood-pewee habitat, though most of the research into their impacts has been conducted on the breeding ground.

The Eastern Wood-pewee is absent from large clearcut areas (King and DeGraaf 2000). It has been shown that abundance was slightly elevated in smaller clearcuts compared to mature forest for the first 8 years following clearcutting and 12 years after harvest had comparable densities to mature forest (Perry et al. 2018). This is likely because in areas where a section of the forest is clearcut while other sections remain intact, Eastern Wood-pewees will perch in the wooded edges and sally out into the clearcut to catch insects (Strelke and Dickson 1980).

Shelterwood harvesting involves harvesting a portion of the mature trees, which provides light to seedlings that will provide the next harvest. The open canopy created by shelterwood harvesting temporarily allows for aerial foraging, until understory growth becomes too dense for the Eastern Wood-pewee to forage. After shelterwood harvesting, the Eastern Wood-pewee has similar nesting success at these sites compared to neighbouring unharvested forests (Newell and Rodewald 2012). The species may also be more abundant in shelterwood systems in the initial years post-harvest (Duguid et al. 2016; King and DeGraaf 2000; Perry et al. 2018). However, as shelterwood forest blocks age, the seedlings grow quickly in response to the extra light and the understory becomes dense. By 12 years into the rotation, Eastern Wood-pewee abundance is lower in shelterwood forests than in unharvested forests (Augenfeld et al. 2008).

Selective harvesting, where foresters harvest trees singly or in small groups and leave the rest of the stand untouched, attempts to mimic natural tree-fall gaps as the forest ages. As usual, the Eastern Wood-pewee’s response to selective harvesting is driven by its need for open forest for aerial foraging. For the first 5-8 years after selective harvesting, Eastern Wood-pewee abundance may be equivalent or even higher in selectively harvested compared to unharvested forests, depending on whether or not the unharvested forests was initially open and conducive to hawking or sallying (Jobes et al. 2004; Heltzel and Leberg 2006; Holmes and Pitt 2007; Perry et al. 2018). However, by 15 years after selective harvesting, densities are lower in harvested forests (Flaspohler et al. 2002; Jobes et al. 2004; Heltzel and Leberg 2006 but see Perry et al. 2018). This is likely because the extra light selective harvesting provides to the forest floor causes the understory to grow more densely.

On the breeding grounds, selective cutting, which provides suitable habitat, is the dominant harvesting method (Masek et al. 2011). However, in the Maritimes, clearcutting is common on both public and private land. Within the species' breeding range in Canada, managed forests under private tenure make up a greater proportion of available habitat than Crown-owned forests, particularly in the Maritime Provinces (National Forest Inventory 2016; CCFM-CCMF 2019). The impact of private landownership on the species depends on whether or not landowners choose to actively manage their forest and the type of harvest approach they employ, while forestry operations on Crown-owned forests must adhere to forest management plans. Provincial forest management plans, while not specific to Eastern Wood-pewee, specify wildlife habitat criteria.

On the non-breeding grounds, about 0.8% of Eastern Wood-pewee forest habitat is lost annually, which represents about half of the deforestation rate compared to other forest types (Armenteras et al. 2017). Forestry was associated with 8% of cases of deforestation in the tropical lowland forest; however, Armenteras et al. (2017) did not consider reforestation that generally follows forestry activities. While forestry occurs on the non-breeding grounds, it is not always associated with a permanent loss of habitat. Since the species is often found in shrubby habitats, edges, or clearings during the winter, it may be more tolerant of some forestry activities than other species (Fitzpatrick 1980; Stotz et al. 1992; Watt et al. 2017). Research is needed to quantify the rate of habitat change and the types of forestry practices on the Eastern Wood-pewee wintering grounds. The overall impact of the forestry sector on the Eastern Wood-pewee largely depends on whether forestry practices support suitable or unsuitable habitat for the species.

IUCN threat 7.3 Other ecosystem modifications (medium impact)

This threat category is intended to capture indirect effects of ecosystem modifications, such as invasive species affecting Eastern Wood-pewee habitat or human-caused reductions in their food resources. Direct effects of these threats to the species, such as habitat loss, would be captured under their corresponding threat categories.

Reduction of insect prey availability

The Eastern Wood-pewee is amongst other avian aerial insectivores that have collectively declined since the 1970s (Nebel et al. 2010; Smith et al. 2015; Michel et al. 2016). While it is unknown why avian aerial insectivores are declining, the temporal and spatial synchrony (ie, the similar trajectories) of the decline suggests that their reliance on flying insects puts them at risk (Nebel et al. 2010). Long-term insect data is scarce but about 40% of insect species have declined worldwide over the last 40 years; many of these declines began as early as the 1950s and continue to present day (Sánchez-Bayo and Wyckhuys 2019). Declining insect populations have almost certainly resulted in reduced food availability for birds reliant on flying insects (e.g., English et al. 2018), such as the Eastern Wood-pewee.

There are many possible—and non-mutually exclusive—causes of insect declines. Insect declines, and potential association with aerial insectivore declines, have been linked to agricultural intensification and increasing insecticide use, habitat loss, decreased resource diversity, extreme weather events, and warming climate (Benton et al. 2002; Rioux Paquette et al. 2013; Hallmann et al. 2014; Bellavance et al. 2018; Spiller and Detters 2019). For forest insectivores, insecticides used to control forest pests such as the Gypsy Moth (Lymantria dispar dispar) could have a short-term impact on prey availability (Awkerman et al. 2011), but limited or no persistent impacts (Yahner et al. 1985; Scriber 2004; Manderino et al. 2014). Another indirect driver of reduced insect prey population is urbanization, which is associated with wetland drainage, application of pesticides for mosquito control, and application of herbicides for cosmetic purposes.

On the Eastern Wood-pewee’s wintering ground and on migration, conversion of primary rainforest and former pastures (i.e., regenerating or shrubby areas) to large monocultures results in habitat loss, increased insecticide use and less rainfall (Lawrence and Vandecar 2015; Salazar et al. 2015). These consequences of agricultural intensification likely interact to reduce prey abundance. In northern Colombia, an area where Eastern Wood-pewees commonly forage before beginning their spring migration, banana plantations are sprayed extensively with pesticides (N. Bayly, pers. comm. 2020). Similarly, lowland forests of Costa Rica have been converted to pineapple monocultures, where pesticides are used to control pest species (N. Bayly, pers. comm. 2020). In stopover areas where large numbers of Eastern Wood-pewee concentrate to gather sufficient energy reserves to pursue their migration, such as the Caribbean slopes of Costa Rica, Panama and Colombia, limited food resources can have negative and disproportionate effects on the population (Bayly et al. 2017). Possible effects include increased competition for resources, lower survival rates, and lower productivity if second year birds return to breeding grounds either too late or with insufficient energetic reserves.

Climate change may also create a mismatch between peak insect abundance and food demands by Eastern Wood-pewee nestlings, as has been seen in other insectivorous birds (e.g., Visser et al. 2006; Imlay et al. 2018). Visser et al. (2006) found an increasing mismatch over 20 years between the peak date in caterpillar biomass and egg laying date of the Great Tit (Parus major) in a mixed woodland of the Netherlands. In New Brunswick, Imlay et al. (2018) found decreased reproductive success in Bank Swallows, but not in Barn, Tree and Cliff swallows, the latter having adapted egg laying dates in relation to peak insect abundance over time. In addition, rainier spring weather caused by climate change may cause food shortages during critical nesting periods, as these flying insects are not active in wet, rainy weather (Imlay et al. 2018; Cox et al. 2019). It is unknown whether the reproductive success in relation to the timing of food availability has changed over time for the Eastern Wood-pewee.

The Eastern Wood-pewee population decline might be driven by a combination of factors, including the effects of insect declines, which operate on breeding grounds, wintering grounds and migration stopovers, and through carry-over effects between those periods.

Acid rain

The effects of acid rain on the Eastern Wood-pewee have not been studied. However, forests experiencing acid rain have more dieback and lower insect abundance; as a consequence, other insectivorous birds have been found to be less common (Graveland 1998). Additionally, one side effect of acid rain is lower calcium availability in the area. Because birds use calcium to build their eggshells, acid rain and the resulting calcium deficiency in their diet lowers breeding success of some insectivorous birds (Graveland 1998).

Changes in forest structure

In the core of the Eastern Wood-pewee’s breeding range, White-tailed Deer populations have increased dramatically since the 1950s. In north-central and northeastern United States, current populations are thought to have grown to 2-4 times that of pre-European settlement populations, with average densities greater than 3 deer per km² (Russell et al. 2001). On the northeastern limit of Eastern Wood-pewee’s range in Quebec, deer densities were above 5 deer per km² in most survey areas (Huot and Lebel 2012). In Nova Scotia, less than 1% of survey locations had deer densities in excess of 8 deer per km² (M. McGarrigle, pers. comm. 2021). In other areas of the Canadian range, deer density may be lower or deer may even be absent (e.g., Prince Edward Island). In those areas, foraging habitat might become overgrown and unsuitable for the species in the absence of other natural disturbances or understory thinning. Over-browsing, particularly on seedlings and saplings, has eliminated the forest understory in some areas and slows forest succession (Russell et al. 2001). While an open understory might fulfill the Eastern Wood-pewee’s structural habitat needs in the short term, long-term decreases in understory composition and density could have negative effects (DeGraaf et al. 1991; deCalesta 1994; COSEWIC 2012). In one study where enclosures maintained a gradient of deer densities for 10 years in the Pennsylvania hardwood forest, Eastern Wood-pewee was absent from enclosures with more than 7.9 deer per km² (deCalesta 1994). Generally, birds that nest in the intermediate canopy, like the Eastern Wood-pewee, declined linearly with increasing White-tailed Deer abundance due to the removal of subcanopy foraging habitat (deCalesta 1994). Whether over-browsing affects other types of forests similarly is unclear since Eastern Wood-pewees often benefit from more open forest and little understory vegetation.

Multiple non-native pests and diseases harm Canadian forests in the Eastern Wood-pewee’s range, including Emerald Ash Borer (Agrilus planipennis), Pine Shoot Beetle (Tomicus piniperda), Hemlock Woolly Adelgid (Adelges tsugae), Beech Bark disease, Butternut Canker, and sudden oak death. Not yet present in Canada, oak wilt is a fungus disease found in U.S. states near the Canadian border. The disease causes foliage to wilt and infected trees to die (French and Stienstra 1980). Long-term declines in Eastern Wood-pewee relative abundance have been observed in areas affected by oak wilt and Dutch elm disease (Ambuel and Temple 1982). The effects on Eastern Wood-pewee populations are still unknown but as these pests and diseases affect forest cover and composition, they will likely impact bird populations. Those diseases could have reduced the suitability of the Eastern Wood-pewee’s breeding habitat if they reduce the health of canopy trees, causing the canopy to open and the understory to grow dense. However, these effects may not be all negative. For example, following Hemlock Woolly Adelgid infection, Eastern Wood-pewee densities increased in areas with high tree mortality where the dieback caused by disease opened areas for foraging (Tingley et al. 2002). These benefits are likely short-term.

Multiple contributing factors can result in ecosystem modifications that negatively affect the Eastern Wood-pewee. Cumulatively, these threats likely have a medium impact on the species, with the pervasive reduction of insect prey availability being the most important.

IUCN threat 11.5 Severe/extreme weather events (unknown impact)

Climate change increases storm severity and frequency. Severe storms are linked to migrant songbird decline, particularly for species whose migration takes them across the ocean because they cannot take shelter (Butler 2000). Although some Eastern Wood-pewees migrate across the Gulf of Mexico, most migrate overland through Central America (Watt et al. 2017).

Severe weather events, such as high winds, heavy precipitation or extreme temperatures, can disrupt the ability of aerial insectivores to forage or temporarily reduce the availability of airborne invertebrate preys (Grüebler et al. 2008; Møller 2013; Cox et al. 2019). During cold or rainy weather, aerial insectivores may need to travel longer distances during foraging bouts before returning to the nest (Turner 1980), therefore reducing on a daily basis the amount of food provided to nestlings. The impact of severe weather events on the species is unknown.

5. Management objective

The management objectives for the Eastern Wood-pewee in Canada are:

• achieve a stable^Footnote13 or increasing population trend in the short-term (by 2032)
• maintain, at a minimum, a stable population trend in the long-term (beyond 2032), and
• maintain a stable or increased geographic distribution, as shown in Figure 1

The 10-year trend was deemed appropriate to assess population changes in the Eastern Wood-pewee because it corresponds to approximately three generations (COSEWIC 2012). The management objective aligns with the COSEWIC criteria for species’ assessment that includes reviewing population change within 10 year windows, which will be due in 2032. In addition, the BBS provides reliable estimates of the Eastern Wood-pewee population trend for Canada and provinces using a 10-year timeframe.

An objective based on the population trend was selected over a population size goal given the high variability in available population estimates, compared to the higher reliability of BBS population trends. Additionally, the species’ reason for designation as Special Concern was based on declining population trend, not population size.

This management objective should be achieved while maintaining a stable or increased geographic distribution in Canada. Climate change is not expected to prevent this objective from being achievable as favourable climatic conditions for the species are likely to substantially expand the species’ breeding range in Ontario and Quebec, and possibly into Newfoundland and Labrador (Bateman et al. 2020).

This management objective recognizes that there are currently adequate numbers of individuals in Canada (360,000) to maintain a breeding population. Considering that only 5.5% of this species’ population breeds in Canada, achieving this goal will only be possible through strong collaboration with Canada’s international partners on breeding grounds, wintering grounds and migration stopover sites.

6. Broad strategies and conservation measures

6.1. Actions already completed or currently underway

In Canada, there has been little conservation work specifically targeting the Eastern Wood-pewee. The following list is not exhaustive, but is meant to illustrate the main areas where work has been completed or is already underway, to give context to the broad strategies outlined in section 6.3. Actions completed or underway include the following:

• the Institute for Bird Populations has produced estimates of demographic parameters, including recruitment, adult survival probability, productivity, and post-breeding effects, from data collected from 1992 to 2006 through the Monitoring of Avian Productivity and Survival (MAPS) program (DeSante et al. 2015). Based on those estimates, the following research and monitoring priorities are provided verbatim from DeSante et al. (2015):
  • “Determining and addressing habitat conditions on the non-breeding grounds, particularly on the South American wintering grounds, that promote higher survival of adult birds”
  • “Determining habitat types and characteristics on the breeding grounds that promote overall high productivity”; and
  • “Determining habitat types and characteristics on the non-breeding grounds that promote high first-year survival of young birds, especially in regions where low survival of young may contribute to population declines”
• international forest certification systems applied in Canada that require addressing threats to species at risk:
  • Canadian Standards Association (CSA)
  • Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), and
  • Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI)
• the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (2011) published “A land manager’s guide to conserving habitat for forest birds in southern Ontario” which recommends practices beneficial for the Eastern Wood-pewee:
  • group or single tree selection systems as preferred forest harvesting methods
  • maintenance of large tracts of intermediate aged forests, with some small clearings (See Section 3.3 Needs of the Eastern Wood-pewee)
  • managing deer densities to be less than 8 deer/km²
• Ontario’s Managed Forest Tax Incentive Program financially encourages landowners to create 10-year Managed Forest Plans for their woodlots
• Birds Canada has been engaging private and public landowners to conserve woodlots in Southwestern Ontario’s Caroli nian Forest Region to protect four endangered forest birds. These conservation efforts might indirectly benefit the Eastern Wood-pewee
• a bird-friendly building design standard (CSA A460:19) has been developed to reduce the risk of collision of birds with windows. The Standard provides bird-friendly design requirements for glazing, building-integrated structures, and overall building and site design
• Parks Canada multi-species action plans identify recovery measures specific to national parks and national heritage places where species at risk occur (for a list of current multi-species action plans including the Eastern Wood-pewee, refer to the documents section of the SAR Public Registry)

Several conservation-oriented monitoring and research projects have been implemented in Canada and the United States provide information on the Eastern Wood-pewee population. These include the following groups and/or projects:

• the Breeding Bird Survey
• the Boreal Avian Monitoring Project
• the Ontario Forest Bird Monitoring Program
• Breeding Bird Atlases (and associated rare species reports)
• eBird
• Project NestWatch, which provides information on the nesting phenology of the species (Rousseu and Drolet 2017)
• the Canadian Migration Monitoring Network
• the SOS-POP program [in French only] in Quebec

6.2. Broad strategies

The mechanisms contributing to population declines remain unclear, driving the need for investigation on the species’ migratory ecology and habitat use, especially on migration stopovers and on wintering grounds. Strategies fall under the following broad categories^Footnote14.

• Institutional Development
• Conservation Designation and Planning
• Livelihood, Economic and Moral Incentives
• Research and Monitoring

6.3. Conservation measures

^a “Priority” reflects the degree to which the measure contributes directly to the conservation of the species or is an essential precursor to a measure that contributes to the conservation of the species. High priority measures are considered those most likely to have an immediate and/or direct influence on attaining the management objective for the species. Medium priority measures may have a less immediate or less direct influence on reaching the management objective, but are still important for the management of the population. Low priority conservation measures will likely have an indirect or gradual influence on reaching the management objective. Measures are considered important contributions to the address knowledge gaps and foster habitat stewardship and citizen science.

6.4. Narrative to support conservation measures and implementation schedule

Management of the Eastern Wood-pewee will require commitment, collaboration, and cooperation among international, federal, provincial and municipal jurisdictions, Indigenous people, landowners, industry, and other interested parties. In addition, identifying key threats to the population of Eastern Wood-pewee and determining the relative importance of nonbreeding versus breeding periods of the species’ annual life-cycle are essential components of this management plan. Owing to the Eastern Wood-pewee’s widespread range, it will be important to monitor habitat conditions, population trends, and the distribution of the species so that the effectiveness of the management efforts can be evaluated and adjusted as necessary.

Institutional development and conservation designation and planning

Aerial insectivores are in decline across Canada (McCracken 2008, Nebel et al. 2010, North American Bird Conservation Initiative 2019). The current state of science indicates that multiple factors acting across the breeding and non-breeding areas could be driving the population declines of aerial insectivores (Spiller and Dettmers 2019). Given the generalized decline of aerial insectivores and the spatial synchrony of some of the declines, broad conservation measures and policies addressing common drivers of decline could be an effective approach for the conservation of Eastern Wood-pewee and other species. This will require building and maintaining strong partnerships with international partners across the species breeding and non-breeding range.

Breeding habitat is unlikely to be limiting in Canada. Nevertheless, adequate breeding habitat must be managed and protected to ensure the conservation of this species, particularly in areas where habitat is vulnerable to being lost or degraded due to human activities such as unsustainable forest management practices and urban development. These approaches are especially important in areas showing the greatest declines. In provinces where high deer densities negatively affect suitable breeding habitat, engaging with provincial wildlife management agencies to encourage deer harvest and management to promote lower deer densities could be beneficial. In addition, developing new international partnerships and maintain existing partnerships will support conservation efforts of Eastern Wood-pewee and their habitat, especially in areas with high deforestation rates.

Wintering habitat is unlikely to be limiting due to the species ecological flexibility, where large tracts of favourable habitat remain available for the Eastern Wood-pewee. In contrast, there are notable areas used by the species during migration that have undergone severe habitat loss (e.g., the Caribbean lowlands of Colombia, the Caribbean lowlands of Costa Rica and possibly the most dramatic, the Caribbean lowlands of Nicaragua). The expansion of annual and perennial non-timber crops, and logging and wood harvesting are the main drivers of deforestation in those regions. It will be critical to work with local organizations to maintain remaining forest habitat.

Livelihood, economic and moral incentives

The Eastern Wood-pewee needs open, high-canopy savannah^Footnote15, woodland, or forest habitat to thrive. As the species uses various forest types and tolerates moderate levels of disturbance, fragmentation, and wood harvest, most wooded habitat is suitable. Incentivizing private landowners to manage their woodlots in a manner that is beneficial to the species and conserving large tracts of primary forest will continue to provide forest habitat for the species.

Voluntary private sector standards and codes may help reduce some of the threats faced by the species and its prey. These include third-party sustainable forest management certification and international rating systems that recognize excellence for green building. Public lands should also adopt bird-friendly forestry practices that maintain mature trees on the breeding grounds (e.g., shelterwood or selective harvest). The ongoing provincial regulatory process offers an avenue for ensuring Eastern Wood-pewee habitat is incorporated in the management of public forests, given that the provinces are largely responsible for forestry regulation. Whenever possible, forest management should engage with Indigenous natural resource managers and communities to implement measures to preserve the species and its habitat.

Research and monitoring

It is unclear to what extent threats in Canada are affecting the overall population decline of Eastern Wood-pewee, or whether threats are occurring elsewhere during another part of the species' annual cycle. A comprehensive approach to research and monitoring (which includes all stages of the annual life cycle and the entire range of occupancy) will be required to understand the status of the species, as well as its threats and limiting factors in Canada and beyond. Based on analyses conducted from data collected through the MAPS program, the two important vital rates that were found to drive Eastern Wood-pewee population change are adult survival and productivity (see section 3.2). Further studies to understand the habitat and landscape characteristics that promote high adult survival in non-breeding areas, and high productivity in breeding areas, will help to focus conservation efforts and will help to understand the underlying threats that affect these rates.

To better understand whether maintaining, and/or restoring insect-producing habitats will significantly benefit Eastern Wood-pewee populations, it would be beneficial to understand how insect prey population dynamics are affecting aerial insectivore populations (e.g., due to their decline, a time shift in occurrence, or, weather related unavailability). The effects of forest pests and diseases, and associated control measures in North America on Eastern Wood-pewee habitat and insect prey must be better understood. Beneficial practices for managing forest pests and diseases should be informed by research into the extent of the species’ current exposure and the effects of insecticides and other pesticides on the species and their food availability.

There are no known monitoring programs established on the wintering grounds that targets the Eastern Wood-pewee or the nearly indistinguishable Western Wood-pewee. In contrast, migration routes, key stopover sites and staging regions in Central America and northern Colombia were identified from standardized monitoring conducted through the Neotropical Flyways Project. Increasing monitoring on the non-breeding grounds would provide better information on key migration and wintering areas for the Eastern Wood-pewee.

7. Measuring progress

The performance indicators presented below provide a way to measure progress towards achieving the management objectives and monitoring the implementation of the management plan.

• By 2032, the population trend of the Eastern Wood-pewee in Canada is stable or positive, as measured by the Breeding Bird Survey over the previous 30 year period (2002-2032)
• By 2032, the geographic distribution of the Eastern Wood-pewee is maintained or increased within Canada, as shown in Figure 1

The management objective will be assessed based on the 10-year population trend from the BBS for the period ending in 2032.

8. References

Ambuel, B. and S.A. Temple. 1982. Songbird populations in southern Wisconsin forests: 1954 and 1979. Journal of Field Ornithology 53:149–158.

Ambuel, B. and S.A. Temple. 1983. Area-Dependent Changes in the Bird Communities and Vegetation of Southern Wisconsin Forests. Ecology 64:1057–1068.

Amrich, J.W. and R.W. Coffin. 1979. Breeding bird populations from forest to suburbia after thirty-seven years. American Birds 34:3–7.

Armenteras, D. J.M. Espelta, N. Rodríguez, and J. Retana. 2017. Deforestation dynamics and drivers in different forest types in Latin America: Three decades of studies (1980–2010). Global Environmental Change 46:139–147.

Artuso, C. 2018. Eastern Wood-pewee in C. Artuso, A.R. Couturier, K.D. De Smet, R.F. Koes, D. Lepage, J. McCracken, R.D. Mooi, and P. Taylor (eds.). The Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Manitoba, 2010-2014, Bird Studies Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba.

Ashley, E.P. and J.T. Robinson. 1996. Road mortality of amphibians, reptiles and other wildlife on the Long Point Causeway, Lake Erie, Ontario. Canadian Field Naturalist 110:403–412.

Augenfeld, K.H. S.B. Franklin, and D.H. Snyder. 2008. Breeding bird communities of upland hardwood forest 12 years after shelterwood logging. Forest Ecology and Management 255:1271–1282.

Awkerman, J.A., M.R. Marshall, A.B. Williams, G.A. Gale, R.J. Cooper, and S. Raimondo. 2011. Assessment of indirect pesticide effects on worm-eating warbler populations in a managed forest ecosystem. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 30(8):1843–1851.

Baker, A.J. P.M. González, T. Piersma, L.J. Niles, I. de Lima Serrano do Nascimento, P.W. Atkinson, N.A. Clark, C.D.T. Minton, M.K. Peck and G. Aarts. 2004. Rapid population decline in red knots: fitness consequences of decreased refueling rates and late arrival in Delaware Bay. Proceedings of the Royal Society: B 271:875–882.

Bateman, B. L. L. Taylor, C. Wilsey, J. Wu, G. S. LeBaron and G. Langham. 2020. Risk to North American birds from climate change‐related threats. Conservation Science and Practice 2:e243.

Bayly, N.J. comm. pers. 2020. Email correspondence to M.-A. Cyr. February 2020. Migratory Species Manager, SELVA, Colombia.

Bayly, N.J. K.V. Rosenberg, W.E. Easton, C. Gómez, J. Carlisle, D.N. Ewert, A. Drake, and L. Goodrich. 2018. Major stopover regions and migratory bottlenecks for Nearctic-Neotropical landbirds within the Neotropics: a review. Bird Conservation International 28:1–26.

Beissinger, S.R. and D.R. Osborne. 1982. Effects of urbanization on avian community organization. Condor 84:75–82.

Bellavance, V. M. Bélisle, J. Savage, F. Pelletier, and D. Garant. 2018. Influence of agricultural intensification on prey availability and nestling diet in Tree Swallows (Tachycineta bicolor). Canadian Journal of Zoology 96:1053–1065.

Benton, T.G. D.M. Bryant, L. Cole, and H.Q.P. Crick. 2002. Linking agricultural practice to insect and bird populations: A historical study over three decades. Journal of Applied Ecology 39:673–687.

Betts, M., Z. Yang, A. Hadley, J. Rousseau, J. Northrup, J. Nocera, N. Gorelick and B. Gerber. 2021 (in review). Forest degradation, not loss, drives widespread avian population declines. Nature. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-686817/v1.

Bird-friendly building design. CSA A460:19. National Standard of Canada. Standards Council of Canada-Conseil canadien des normes. June 2019 (Technical Committee on Bird-Friendly Building Design).

BirdLife International. 2016. Contopus virens. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016. 7 pp.

Birds Canada. 2021 Saskatchewan Breeding Bird Atlas. Bank Swallow. Preliminary Data June 2021.

Bishop, C.A. and J.M. Brogan. 2013. Estimates of avian mortality attributed to vehicle collisions in Canada. Avian Conservation and Ecology 8:2. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ACE-00604-080202.

Blake, J.G. and J.R. Karr. 1987. Breeding birds of isolated woodlots: area and habitat relationships. Ecology 68:1724–1734.

Brazner, J. and F. MacKinnon. 2020. Relative conservation value of Nova Scotia’s forests: forested wetlands as avian diversity hotspots. Canadian Journal of Forest Reseach 50 (12). https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2020-0101

Butler, R.W. 2000. Stormy seas for some North American songbirds: Are declines related to severe storms during migration? Auk 117:518–522.

Canadian Council of Forest Ministers (CCFM) - Conseil canadien des ministres des forêts (CCMF). 2019. National Forestry Database - Base de données nationales des forêts - Canada (Version 1.0.0) [Data set]. Natural Resources Canada – Ressources naturelles Canada. Web site: http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3690046 [Accessed July 2021].

Cohn, A.S. J. Gil, T. Berger, H. Pellegrina, and C. Toledo. 2016. Patterns and processes of pasture to crop conversion in Brazil: Evidence from Mato Grosso State. Land Use Policy 55:108–120.

Conner, R.N. J.G. Dickson, J.H. Williamson, and B. Ortego. 2004. Width of forest streamside zones and breeding bird abundance in eastern Texas. Southeastern Naturalist 3:669–682.

COSEWIC. 2012. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Eastern Wood-pewee Contopus virens in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. x + 39 pp.

Cox, A.R. R.J. Robertson, Á.Z. Lendvai, K. Everitt, and F. Bonier. 2019. Rainy springs linked to poor nestling growth in a declining avian aerial insectivore. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 286:e20190018.

DeCalesta DS. 1994. Effect of White-tailed Deer on songbirds within managed forests in Pennsylvania. Journal of Wildlife Management 58:711–718.

DeGraaf, R.M. W.M. Healy, and R.T. Brooks. 1991. Effects of thinning and deer browsing on breeding birds in New England oak woodlands. Forest Ecology Management 41:179-191.

DeSante, D. F. D. R. Kaschube, and J. F. Saracco. 2015. Vital Rates of North American Landbirds. Web site: www.vitalratesofnorthamericanlandbirds.org [Accessed July 2021].

De Sy, V. M. Herold, F. Achard, R. Beuchle, J.G.P.W. Clevers, E. Lindquist, and L. Verchot. 2014. Land use patterns and related carbon losses following deforestation in South America. Environmental Research Letters 10:124004.

Duguid, M.C, E.H. Morrell, E. Goodale, and M.S. Ashton. 2016. Changes in breeding bird abundance and species composition over a 20 year chronosequence following shelterwood harvests in oak-hardwood forests. Forest Ecology and Management 376: 221-230.

English, P.A. D.J. Green, and J.J. Nocera. 2018. Stable isotopes from museum specimens may provide evidence of long-term change in the trophic ecology of a migratory aerial insectivore. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 6:14.

Falconer, C.M. 2010. Eastern wood-pewee (Contopus virens) nest survival and habitat selection in deciduous forest and pine plantations. Trent University, Peterborough, Canada. vi + 64 pp.

FAO. 2012. FRA 2015. Terms and Definitions. Food and Agriculture Organization. Forest Resources Assessment Working Paper 180. Rome. 31 pp.

Fitzpatrick, J.W. 1980. Foraging behavior of neotropical tyrant flycatchers. Condor 82:43–57.

Fink, D. T. Auer, A. Johnston, M. Strimas-Mackey, O. Robinson, S. Ligocki, B. Petersen, C. Wood, I. Davies, B. Sullivan, M. Iliff, and S. Kelling. 2020. eBird Status and Trends, Data Version: 2018; Released: 2020. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Web site: https://doi.org/10.2173/ebirdst.2018 [Accessed April 2020].

Flaspohler, D.J. C.J.F. Huckins, B.R. Bub, and P.J. Van Dusen. 2002. Temporal patterns in aquatic and avian communities following selective logging in the upper Great Lakes Region. Forest Science 48:339–349.

French, D.W. and W.C. Stienstra. 1980. Oak Wilt. Extension Folder 310 - Revised 1980. Agricultural Extension Service, University of Minnesota. 6 pp.

Friesen, L.E. P.F.J. Eagles, and R.J. Mackay. 1995. Effects of residential development on forest-dwelling Neotropical migrant songbirds. Conservation Biology 9:1408–1414.

Gasparri, N. I. and Y.L.P de Waroux. 2015. The coupling of South American soybean and cattle production frontiers: new challenges for conservation policy and land change science. Conservation Letters 8:290–298.

Gentry, K.E. M.F. McKenna, and D.A. Luther. 2018. Evidence of suboscine song plasticity in response to traffic noise fluctuations and temporary road closures. Bioacoustics 27:165–181.

Graveland, J. 1998. Effects of acid rain on bird populations. Environmental Reviews 6:41–54.

Grüebler, M. M. Morand, and B. Naefdaenzer. 2008. A predictive model of the density of airborne insects in agricultural environments. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 123:75–80. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2007.05.001.

Hachey, M.-H. 2019. Eastern Wood-pewee. Pp. 350-351. In M. Robert, M.-H. Hachey, D. Lepage and A.R. Couturier (eds.). Second Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Southern Quebec. Regroupement QuébecOiseaux, Canadian Wildlife Service (Environment and Climate Change Canada) and Bird Studies Canada, Montréal, Quebec.

Hager, S.B. B.J. Cosentino, K.J. McKay, C. Monson, W. Zuurdeeg, B. Belvins. 2013. Window area and development drive spatial variation in bird-window collisions in an urban landscape. PLOS ONE 8: e53371.

Hager, S.B. and M.E. Craig. 2014. Bird-window collisions in the summer breeding season. PeerJ 2:e460.

Hallmann, C.A. R.P.B. Foppen, C.A.M. van Turnhout, H. de Kroon, and E. Jongejans. 2014. Declines in insectivorous birds are associated with high neonicotinoid concentrations. Nature 511:341–343.

Hansen, M.C. P.V. Potapov, R. Moore, M. Hancher, S.A. Turubanova, A. Tyukavina, D. Thau, S.V. Stehman, S.J. Goetz, T.R. Loveland, A. Kommareddy, A. Egorov, L. Chini, C.O. Justice, and J.R.G Townshend. 2013. High-Resolution Global Maps of 21st-Century Forest Cover Change. Science 342:850–853.

Hartung, S.C. and J.D. Brawn. 2005. Effects of savannah restoration on the foraging ecology of insectivorous songbirds. Condor 107:879–888.

Heltzel, J.M. and P.L. Leberg. 2006. Effects of selective logging on breeding bird communities in bottomland hardwood forests in Louisiana. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:1416–1424.

Hespenheide, H.A. 1971. Flycatcher habitat selection in the eastern deciduous forest. Auk 88:61–74.

Holmes, S.B. and D.G. Pitt. 2007. Response of bird communities to selection harvesting in a northern tolerant hardwood forest. Forest Ecology and Management 238:280–292.

Huot, M. and F. Lebel. 2012. Plan de gestion du cerf de Virginie au Quebec 2010-2017, ministère des Ressources naturelles et de la Faune — Secteur Faune Québec, Direction générale de l’expertise sur la faune et ses habitats, 578 p.

Imlay, T.L. J. Mills Flemming, S. Saldanha, N.T. Wheelwright, and M.L. Leonard. 2018. Breeding phenology and performance for four swallows over 57 years: Relationships with temperature and precipitation. Ecosphere 9:e02166.

Jobes, A.P. E. Nol, and D.R. Voigt. 2004. Effects of selection cutting on bird communities in contiguous eastern hardwood forests. Journal of Wildlife Management 68:51–60.

Johnston, D.W. 1971. Niche relationships among some deciduous forest flycatchers. Auk 88:796–804.

Keller, G.S. B.D. Ross, D.S. Klute, and R.H. Yahner. 2009. Temporal changes in migratory bird use of edges during spring and fall seasons in Pennsylvania. Northeastern Naturalist 16:535–552.

Keller, G.S. and R.H. Yahner. 2006. Declines of migratory songbirds: Evidence for wintering-ground causes. Northeastern Naturalist 13:83–92.

Keller G.S. and R.H. Yahner. 2007. Seasonal forest-patch use by birds in fragmented landscapes of south-central Pennsylvania. Wilson Journal of Ornithology 119:410–418.

Kendrick, S.W. F.R. Thompson, and J.L. Reidy. 2013. Eastern Wood-pewee (Contopus virens) breeding demography across a gradient of savannah, woodland, and forest in the Missouri Ozarks. Auk 130:355–363.

Kendrick, S.W. F.R. Thompson, and J.L. Reidy. 2014. Feeding rates, double brooding, nest reuse, and seasonal fecundity of Eastern Wood-pewees in the Missouri Ozarks. Wilson Journal of Ornithology 126:128–133.

King, D.I. and R.M. DeGraaf. 2000. Bird species diversity and nesting success in mature, clearcut and shelterwood forest in northern New Hampshire, USA. Forest Ecology and Management 129:227–235.

Knutson, M.G. G.J. Niemi, W.E. Newton, and M.A. Friberg. 2004. Avian nest success in midwestern forests fragmented by agriculture. Condor 106:116–130.

Latendresse, C., B. Jobin, A. Baril, C. Maisonneuve, C. Boutin, and D. Côté. 2008. Dynamique spatiotemporelle des habitats fauniques dans l’écorégion des Basses terres du fleuve Saint-Laurent, 1950-1997. Série de rapports techniques no 494, Environnement Canada, Service canadien de la faune, région du Québec, Québec. 83 pp. + annexes.

Lawrence, D. and Vandecar, K. 2015. Effects of tropical deforestation on climate and agriculture. Nature climate change 5:27–36.

Leck, C.F. 1972. The impact of some North American migrants at fruiting trees in Panama. Auk 89:842–850.

Loss, S.R. T. Will, S.S. Loss, and P.P. Marra. 2014. Bird–building collisions in the United States: Estimates of annual mortality and species vulnerability. Condor 116:8–23.

Mancke, R.G. and T.A. Gavin. 2000. Breeding bird density in woodlots: Effects of depth and buildings at the edges. Ecological Applications 10:598–611.

Manderino, R., T.O. Crist, and K.J. Haynes. 2014. Lepidoptera-specific insecticide used to suppress gypsy moth outbreaks may benefit non-target forest Lepidoptera. Agricultural and forest entomology 16(4):359-368.

Masek, J.G. et al. 2011. Recent rates of forest harvest and conversion in North America. Journal of Geophysical Research 116:G00K03.

McCracken, J. 2008. Are aerial insectivores being “bugged out”? BirdWatch Canada 42:4-7

McGarrigle, M. pers. comm. 2021. Jurisdictional review comments. 2020. Biologist, Nova Scotia Natural Resources and Renewables, Kentville, NS.

McLaren, M.A. 2007. Eastern Wood-pewee. In Cadman, M.D. D.A. Sutherland, G.G. Beck, D. Lepage, and A.R. Couturier (eds.). Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario, 2001-2005. Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto.

Michel, N.L. A.C. Smith, R.G. Clark, C.A. Morrissey, and K.A. Hobson. 2016. Differences in spatial synchrony and interspecific concordance inform guild-level population trends for aerial insectivorous birds. Ecography 39:774–786.

Ministère des Forêts, de la Faune et des Parcs (MFFP). 2017. Intégration des enjeux écologiques dans les plans d’aménagement forestier intégré de 2018-2023, Cahier 1 – Concepts généraux liés à l’aménagement écosystémique des forêts , Québec, Gouvernement du Québec, Direction de l’aménagement et de l’environnement forestiers, 30 p. Web site : https://numerique.banq.qc.ca/patrimoine/details/52327/3686172 [accessed October 2021].

Møller, A. P. 2013. Long-term trends in wind speed, insect abundance and ecology of an insectivorous bird. Ecosphere 4:6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/ES12-00310.1

National Forest Inventory. 2016. Generate Customized Reports from the NFI. Web site: https://nfi.nfis.org/en/customized_report [accessed March 2020].

Natural Resources Canada. 2018. The State of Canada’s Forests. Annual Report 2018. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Ottawa. 80 p.

Natural Resources Canada. 2020. The State of Canada’s Forests. Annual Report 2020. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Ottawa. 88 p.

NatureServe. 2021. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Web site: http://explorer.natureserve.org [accessed July 2021].

Nebel, S. A. Mills, J.D. McCracken, and P.D. Taylor. 2010. Declines of aerial insectivores in North America follow a geographic gradient. Avian Conservation and Ecology 5:1.

Newell, F.L. A.N.K. Haiman, D.L. Narango, J.M. Elder, L.D. Leonhard, J. Philhower-Gillen, A.M. Johnson, and A.D. Rodewald. 2013. Occurrence of polygyny and double brooding in the Eastern Wood-pewee. Wilson Journal of Ornithology 125:251–259.

Newell, F.L. and A.D. Rodewald. 2012. Management for oak regeneration: Short-term effects on the bird community and suitability of shelterwood harvests for canopy songbirds. Journal of Wildlife Management 76:683–693.

North American Bird Conservation Initiative Canada. 2019. The State of Canada’s Birds. Environment and Climate Change Canada, Ottawa, Canada. 12 pp.

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 2011. A land manager’s guide to conserving habitat for forest birds in southern Ontario. Science and Information Resources Division and Trent University. Web site: https://www.ontariowoodlot.com/publications-and-links/owa-publications/landowner-guides/a-land-manager-s-guide-to-conserving-habitat-for-forest-birds-in-southern-ontario [accessed July 2021].

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF). 2017. Forest Management Planning Manual. Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 462 pp. Web site: https://files.ontario.ca/forest-management-planning-manual.pdf [accessed October 2021].

Oswalt, S. N. W. B. Smith,, P. D. Miles, et S. A. Pugh, coords. 2019. Forest Resources of the United States, 2017: a technical document supporting the Forest Service 2020 RPA Assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-97. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington Office. 223 p. https://doi.org/10.2737/WO-GTR-97.

Partners in Flight. 2019. Population estimates database, version 3.0. Web site: https://pif.birdconservancy.org/population-estimates-database/ [accessed July 2021].

Peckford, M. 2015. Eastern Wood-pewee, Pp. 310-311 in R.L.M. Stewart, K.A. Bredin, A.R. Couturier, A.G. Horn, D. Lepage, S. Makepeace, P.D. Taylor, M.-A. Villard, and R.M. Whittam (eds). Second Atlas of Breeding Birds of the Maritime Provinces. Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Natural History Society of Prince Edward Island, Nature New Brunswick, New Brunswick Department of Natural Resources, Nova Scotia Bird Society, Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, and Prince Edward Island Department of Agriculture and Forestry, Sackville.

Perry, R.W. J.M. Jenkins, R.E. Thill, and F.R. Thompson III. 2018. Long-term effects of different forest regeneration methods on mature forest birds. Forest Ecology and Management 408:183-194.

Ramankutty, N., E. Heller, and J. Rhemtulla. 2010. Prevailing myths about agricultural abandonment and forest regrowth in the United States. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 100(3):502-512.

Redo, D.J. H.R. Grau, T.M. Aide, and M.L. Clark. 2012. Asymmetric forest transition driven by the interaction of socioeconomic development and environmental heterogeneity in Central America. PNAS 109:8839–8844.

Reidy, J.L. F.R. Thompson, and S.W. Kendrick. 2014. Breeding bird response to habitat and landscape factors across a gradient of savannah, woodland, and forest in the Missouri Ozarks. Forest Ecology and Management 313:34–46.

Rioux Paquette, S. D. Garant, F. Pelletier, and M. Bélisle. 2013. Seasonal patterns in Tree Swallow prey (Diptera) abundance are affected by agricultural intensification. Ecological Applications 23:122–133.

Rodewald, P.G. and M.C. Brittingham. 2004. Stopover habitats of landbirds during fall: Use of edge-dominated and early-successional forest. Auk 121:1040–1055.

Rousseu, F. and B. Drolet. 2017. The Nesting Phenology of Birds in Canada. Canadian Wildlife Service Technical Report Series Number 533. Environment Climate Change Canada, Quebec region, Quebec, Canada xxii + 314p.

Russell, F.L. D.B. Zippin, and N.L. Fowler. 2001. Effects of White-tailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus) on plants, plant populations and communitites: A review. American Midland Naturalist 146:1–26.

Salazar, A. G. Baldi, M. Hirota, J. Syktus et C. McAlpine. (2015). Land use and land cover change impacts on the regional climate of non-Amazonian South America: A review. Global and Planetary Change 128:103-119.

Sánchez-Bayo, F. and K.A.G. Wyckhuys. 2019. Worldwide decline of the entomofauna: A review of its drivers. Biological Conservation 232:8–27.

Saracco, J.F, D.R. Kaschube, and M.-A. Cyr. 2020. Vital rates of selected bird species of conservation concern in Canada: an application of the Monitoring Avian Productivity and Survivorship (MAPS) program. The Institute for Bird Populations and Environnement and Climate Change Canada, unpublished report. May 2020. 58 pp.

Scriber, J.M. 2004. Non-target impacts of forest defoliator management options: Decision for no spraying may have worse impacts on non-target Lepidoptera than Bacillus thuringiensis insecticides. Journal of Insect Conservation 8(2): 243-263.

Smith, A.C. M-A.R. Hudson, V.I. Aponte, and C.M. Francis. 2020. North American Breeding Bird Survey – Canadian Trends Website, Data-version 2019. Environment and Climate Change Canada, Gatineau, Quebec. Web site: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Mr4kbS7cbBoORj1tiX-nBZN0RovMKMSX [accessed April 2021].

Smith, A.C. M.A.C. Hudson, C.M. Downes, and C.M. Francis. 2015. Change points in the population trends of aerial-insectivorous birds in North America: Synchronized in time across species and regions. PLoS ONE 10:1–23.

Smith, P.G.R. 2015. Long-term temporal trends in agri-environment and agricultural land use in Ontario, Canada: Transformation, transition and significance. Journal of Geography and Geology 7:32–55.

Somershoe, S.G. and C.R. Chandler. 2004. Use of oak hammocks by neotropical migrant songbirds: The role of area and habitat. Wilson Bulletin 116:56–63.

Spiller, K.J. and R. Dettmers. 2019. Evidence for multiple drivers of aerial insectivore declines in North America. The Condor 121:1-13. DOI: 10.1093/condor/duz010.

Stotz, D.F. R.O. Bierregaard, M. Cohn-Haft, P. Petermann, J. Smith, A. Whittaker, and S.V. Wilson. 1992. The status of North American migrants in central Amazonian Brazil. Condor 94:608–621.

Strelke, W.K. and J.G. Dickson. 1980. Effect of forest clear-cut edge on breeding birds in east Texas. Journal of Wildlife Management 44:559–567.

Tingley, M.W. D.A. Orwig, R. Field, and G. Motzkin. 2002. Avian response to removal of a forest dominant: Consequences of hemlock woolly adelgid infestations. Journal of Biogeography 29:1505–1516.

Turner, A.K. 1980. The use and time and energy by aerial feeding birds. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Stirling, Stirling, United Kingdom. 347 pp.

USGS. North American Breeding Bird Survey. Web site: https://www.mbr-pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs/ra2015/ra2015_red_v3.shtml [accessed January 2020].

Visser, M.E. L.J.M. Holleman, and P. Gienapp. 2006. Shifts in caterpillar biomass phenology due to climate change and its impact on the breeding biology of an insectivorous bird. Oecologia 147:164–172.

Wassenaar, T. P. Gerber, P. Verbury, M. Rosales, M. Ibrahim, and H. Steinfeld. 2007. Projecting land use changes in the Neotropics: the geography of pasture expansion into forest. Global Environmental Change17:86–104.

Watt, D.J. J.P. McCarty, S.W. Kendrick, F.L. Newell, and P. Pyle. 2017. Eastern Wood-pewee (Contopus virens), version 2.0. Page in P.G. Rodewald (ed.). The Birds of North America. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. Web site: https://birdsna.org/Species-Account/bna/species/eawpew/introduction [accessed July 2021].

Wolfe, J.D. M.D. Johnson, and C.J. Ralph. 2014. Do birds select habitat or food resources? Nearctic-Neotropic migrants in northeastern Costa Rica. PLoS ONE 9:e86221.

Yahner, R.H. J.L. Quinn, and J.W. Grimm. 1985. Effects of a nonpersistent insecticide (Alsystin®) on abundance patterns of breeding forest birds. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 34:68–74.

Appendix A: Effects on the environment and other species

A strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is conducted on all SARA recovery planning documents, in accordance with the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals^Footnote16. The purpose of a SEA is to incorporate environmental considerations into the development of public policies, plans, and program proposals to support environmentally sound decision-making and to evaluate whether the outcomes of a recovery planning document could affect any component of the environment or any of the Federal Sustainable Development Strategy’s^Footnote17 (FSDS) goals and targets.

Conservation planning is intended to benefit species at risk and biodiversity in general. However, it is recognized that implementation of management plans may also inadvertently lead to environmental effects beyond the intended benefits. The planning process based on national guidelines directly incorporates consideration of all environmental effects, with a particular focus on possible impacts upon non-target species or habitats. The results of the SEA are incorporated directly into the management plan itself but are also summarized below in this statement.

Activities that benefit the Eastern Wood-pewee likely benefit a large suite of forest fauna. In Canada, conservation measures aimed at conserving forests on the breeding grounds are expected to alleviate threats to other forest birds, particularly birds that forage in open areas. Examples include Acadian Flycatcher (Empidonax virescens), Cerulean Warbler (Setophaga cerulea), Eastern Whip-poor-will (Antrostomus vociferus), and Wood Thrush (Hylocichla mustelina). Although arguably not beneficial to the White-tailed Deer populations, their management will benefit Eastern Wood-pewee and other forest fauna. On the wintering grounds, Eastern and Western Wood-pewees ranges overlap, so the identification of habitat characteristics and threats to the Eastern Wood-pewee over winter will benefit the Western Wood-pewee as well.

Appendix B: Breeding bird atlas maps

The Breeding Bird Atlases from Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, and the Maritimes provide detailed maps of the breeding distribution of the Eastern Wood-pewee in Canada.

Figure B1: Eastern Wood-pewee breeding evidence during 2017-2020 from the Saskatchewan Breeding Bird Atlas (Birds Canada 2021).

Figure B2: Eastern Wood-pewee breeding evidence during 2010-2014 from the Second Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Manitoba (Artuso 2018).

Figure B3: Eastern Wood-pewee breeding evidence during 2001-2005 from the Second Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario (McLaren 2007).

Figure B4: Eastern Wood-pewee breeding evidence during 2010-2014 from the Second Quebec Breeding Bird Atlas (Hachey 2019).

Figure B5: Eastern Wood-pewee breeding evidence during 2006-2010 from the Second Atlas of Breeding Birds of the Maritimes Provinces (Peckford 2015).