8 @an= © ) Wildlife @ Parks MONTANA PIPING PLOVER MANAGEMENT PLAN With aput from the Montana Piping Plover Recovery Committee Montana Fish, ) Wildlife @ Paris MONTANA PIPING PLOVER MANAGEMENT PLAN Prepared by: Shirley J. Atkinson and Amold R. Dood ‘MontanaDepatment of Fish, Wildlife and Paks 1400 $ 19% Ave, Bozeman, Montana With input from the Montana Piping Plover Recovery Committee April 2006 Suggested Citation: Atlinson, S.J. md Dood, A. 2006. Montana Piping Plover Management Plan, ‘MontanaD epartment of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Bozeman, Montana 78 pp Front Cover Photograph: MalePiping Plover (breeding plumage in fight. Courtesy: Doug Baskiund, Pere SD. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ‘The piping plover (Curatius nels) is amigratery shorebird endemic to Novth America In 1985 it was federally listed under the Endangered Species Act, Inthe listing, thre distinct populations were identified: tantic coat and Northem Great Plains populations werelicted ar threatened vile the Great Lakes birds were considered edangered. Birds nesting i Montana are pat ofthe Northem Great Paine population. Plovers breed on alkali late, slong prac rivers and on rerervoir shorelines the Norther Grest Paine Within Montana, a compler of alkaline]ake and welland site in thenortheastem part ofthe state support the greatest numbers of breeding birdein my given yew. Reservoir andniverreacher on the Miccousi [ver rom Fost Peck Recervoirto the Montana North Dakota border ac well a wetland sites at Bowdoin National Wildlife Refuge and Nelson Reservoir ace alo used when water and habitat conditions xe stable 1m order to support national recovay objectives, Montana established agoal of maintaining 120 adults 60 pairs) over atenyear running average, Whilemonitoring atfrts over the past decade suggest that the Statelhas met ite goal habitat use by ploversis dynamic, Birds tend to be opportunistic md disperse actors thelandscapein respanseto changerin water levels md habitat aralabilty. In ight of auch a dispersal responce the potential recource Montmua's alkali wetlands and reacher ofthe Missouri provide tobresding bards during years characterized by abnormal weather and water conditions deewhereie invaluable This plavrecommends spaciic management and research activities, that we Deieve we snecersay to sustain the population aswell a aid long tam recovery lft, ‘he following recommendations are discussed as amultifaeted approach to managing piping plover breeding habitat md increasing levels of productivity within the State of Montana: 4. continued mual monitoring ofplovers coupled with effort to standardizemonitoring and data collection techniques within and betvrem satesfprovincesin the Norther Great Plains integrating lmdscapelevel spproacherinto plover mmagenent continued ste speciticuse of predator mmugenent deterant and control meanires management of water lows thal restorerivarine habitats and their associated ecoaystemn procerses Si -mmuagement of vegetation mcroachment and substrate toincreasenest site aalabity fv. providing azsstanceto private andowmers mtererted in implenventing voluntary Conservation meanures that prove wetland habitat and inst hivertock distaxbmce 1. habitat and site speci investigations of factors indnencing productivity such ae predation and forage avalabiity ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ‘The Montana Piping Plover Management Plan was prepared forthe MontanaD epatmant of Fish, ‘Wilaite mud Parks by Shisley Atkinson and Amold Dood, with input from the Montana Piping Plover Recovery Comittee, Many people asited inthe compilation ofthis plan by providing data reports, smd iavaluable ight, We are grateful for the information and support provided by the fllowang: Bobby Baker LM), LouHanebuy (USFVW),Jakelvan (USFWS), Karen Krell (USFWG), Casey Kruse (USACE), Greg Pavelka (USACE), Fritz Prelit: (BLM), Nell McPhilips (USFWS), Mike Rabent xg (USFWS), Adam yba USFS), Dale Tabby (LM) and Kathy Tabby (USFS). Ourthanks ae aso certended to all who participated in surveys in Montana with the Piping Plover Recovery Comittee ad to John Ensign (MFWP), DaveFuller (MFWP), Bemie Hildebrand (MFWP), Coleen ORowke (MFWP), HagaPac (MFP), Ryan Rauscher (MFWP), Victor Riggs (MEWP) and Brad Sdumite (MFWP). This report drzvs heavily upon work from various authors and completion ofthis projet would not have ‘been porsble without the dedication and research conducted by them. Financial sppor fortis project cane rom the MontmaD epartment ofFich, Wildlife and Paks a the United States Fish and Vide Service, under Section6 of the Endangered Species Act ‘TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF APPENDICES INTRODUCTION TAXONOMY AND SYSTEMATICS SPECIES DESCRIPTION HISTORICAL AND CURRENTDISTRIEUTION Breeding Range Winter Range Distribution m Montana, HABITAT REQUIREMENTS Breeding Season Alt Weld Habit Riverine Habit Forging Hobie Artificial Nesting Hobie Migratory and Winter Habitats CRITICAL HABITAT LIFE HISTORY AND ECOLOGY Migration Reproductive Biology Population Biology ana Demography Foraging Ecology md Diet Composition POPULATION STATUS Population Status in the US. Population Status in Montana Popuition Size Produtvity ad Reproductive Success FACTORS AFFECTING CURRENT POPULATION LEVELS Habitat Alteration md Lose Vater Flow vd iver Dyers Unpredetable Wier Levels (foodng) Food soalabiity Alkali Velo Loes ud Moston aaadl 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT. Predation Livestock Human Disturbance Infections Disease Pollution and Environmental Contaminants Nesting and ReproductiveSuccese Factors Atfetng Piping Plover Productivity in Montana CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT Gamera Management Conceme and Recommended Actions SiteSpectic Recommendations within Montana Medicine ote Notional Wei Refige Noyteseter Mona Wetland Menge District Bow bis Novional Wife Refige. Nelson Reservoir nd Heuit Labe National Vai Refige _Missourt River ud Fort Pack Resevoir FutureReseach REFERENCES Tae Table? Tales Tales Tables Tanes Tae? Tables Tables LIST OF TABLES Habitat cuaractsstics fr Northem Great Plains piping plovers during the breeding season Land ovmership vuthin nut boundaries for catia piping plover habitat Montmia. Datain hectares and river slometers or (ares md river mile) ‘Adapted from: USFWS, 2002 Summary of 1991, 1996 and 2001 imtemationa piping plover breeding censuses in the Northam Gres! Plains. Adapted from: Haig etal 2005 Estimated numbers of adult piping plover im Montanabaved on mal survey rerlts, 1988-2005. Data rom unpublished repovts prepared by TheNaure Conservancy, USACE, and USFWS Estimated numbers of piping plover pairs in Montanabazed on muaal vey rents, 1989-2008. Datarom tmpubliched rep arts prepared by: TheNature Conservancy, USACE, and USFWS Estimates of piping plover reproduction on Fart Peck Reserves, 2002-2005 Datatrom USACE, G.Pavelka pers. comm. Estumates of piping plover reproduction on the ont Peck River Reach of the ‘Missouri River, 2002-2005. Data rom USACE, G. Parelka pers. comm. Combined ertanates of piping plover reproduction for Medicine Lake NWR sind Northeast Montma WMD, 1996-2005. Datairom USFWS, A. Fyba pers comm (Causes of piping plover nest failures along the Missouri Fiver, Montana, during USACE monitoing period 1993-2005, Includes Fort Peck Reservoir and Fort PeckRiverReach. Datatrom USACE, G.Pavelka pers, comm. as 4a Figure Figure? Figures Figures Figures Figures Figure? Figures Figures Figure10 Figure Figure12 Figures Figurelt Figures Figures Figure!” Appendicl Appendix? Appendix Appendict AppendixS LIST OF FIGURES Female piping ploverin breeding plumage Distribution rauge of the piping plover North America Breeding disnibution and abundance of piping plover: for Novth Amarica ‘m.2001, Adapted srom: Fed and Haig, 2002 ‘Winter disiabution and abundance of piping plovarsin 2001, Adapted from: Felmd md Haig, 2002 (Quarter atlong occurrences for piping plovers 1995-present Distribution of piping plovers in Montana bared on 1985-2004 breeding [Records Adapted srom: MontanaHfentage Program ‘Typical aka wreland habitat Critical Missouri River habitat below Culbertson, MT ‘Typical dutch of piping plover agg ‘Numbers of breeding pairs and adults recorded in Montana, based on combined uveys conducted betorem 1988 and 2005 Distribution of adult piping plovers im Montana bared on combined survey renilts between 1968 md 2005 Distribution of adult piping plovers im Montana based on combined ten-year ‘end survey reults bevveen 1996 md 2005 Presegulation hy drvgragh for Miscou River, below Fost Peck Da, Montma Post. regulation hy drograph of Missouri River, Delow Fort Peck Damn, Montma ‘Mem daily vrater temp erature (1) for Miezouri River mainstem locations 2004 Datatron MEWP, D.Fulle pers. comm, Exclosure protecting piping plover net af alkalilake Nrth Dakota. Fiping plover ana tem agnage LIST oF APPENDICES List of acronyane ‘Montmaleaet tem and piping plover work group contacts Datazheet for anual piping plover breeding bird cen in Montma, Intemational piping plover breeding casus guidelines and datasheet Citical habitat for piping ploversin Montma, INTRODUCTION ‘The piping plover (Charatius melodie a small, sand-colored, migratory shorebird that isisted as ‘threatened or endangered throughout itsramge (USFWS 1985, USFWS 1958). Breeding afults most ‘commonly nest on expansive candy beaches from Newfoundland to South Carolina md along prairie rivers or alkali vellands from central Canada to southem Nebraska (USFWF 1998, Haig 1992). Wintaring grounds indude the Atlantic mid Gulf coats ofthe southem US, noztheaster Menico and several islands in the Caribbem (Haig ad Eliot Smith 004). In Montana ploversnest on sparsdly vegetated smd and gravel bars along the Missouri River as rel ar along the edges of alkali wetlands and loughs fm thenortheactem pat of the state ‘Today, the species simp ented throughout much ofits range (USFWS 1988, Haig 1992, Ferand md Haig 2002, Hag md Eliot Smith 2004) due primualy toinceased predation, habitat alteration md human Aishubance, In theiteior US, housing and recreational development of beach habitat in the Great Lakes region ae wel at alteration of nafural iver low dynamics in the Northem Grest Plane has had a major impact on thereproductive sucezs of piping plovere, Channelization and impoundment of prairie rivers to meet navigation and flood control objectivesae altered nahural ood water regimes, leading to Aooding ofnerts, concentration of predators and asignitcant decnvein habitat aralabity. In ation, veland drainage, habitat alteration and mireased predation pressures, all arenil of naman disturbance, nwrereduced productivity at alkaline wetland ates. 11985, piping plovers were federal listed under the US. Endangered Species Act (USFWS 1985). In ‘helising, three distinct breeding populations were identified: Atlantic coast and Northem Great Plans populations were iste as threatened vhle the Great Lakes birds were considered endangered (Pismer mid Fag 2000) Infact, this species was, and sti, the only extant shorebird listed as an entire species ‘under the US. Endangered Species Act (USFWS 1985, Feand and Haig 2002) Unuikemany endangered species that have contiguous geographicranger, piping plovarsnestin many Aiterent habitats, each with atmnique st of limiting factors Browm 1986). As piping plover ecology and management requirements differ between locations the USFWS appointed two recovery tems to faghtaterecovary etfrts over this wide geographic area. In 1985, the Great Laker(Northem Great Plains Recovery Team developed arecovery plan that inchided manag ment recommendations specific to inland populations (USFINS 1989) wiule the Atlantic Coast Recovery Team produced aplan for plovers along the East Coast (USFWS 1996). The following year, two regional Cmadim recovery teams (Atlantic and Prairie) were established (Goossen eal 2002). Although the Great Lakes/Nerthem Great Plains Recovery Team was dicbanded 11996, partners, mduding may ofthe states in the Novthem Great Pains, have continued to beinvolved in piping ploverrecovery. Team from both theUS. md Canada hare aco collaborated extensively on overall recovery efor: forthe species during the past 20 years and ‘herecent formation ofthe Intemational Piping Plover Coordination Group waillkely enhance conservation effort. ‘Therecovery plan for the Great Lakes and Northam Grest Paine piping plover populations, hereinafter refered to asthe piping plover recovery plan, (USFWS 1988), deseribes amumber of actions necessary to achieverecovey of thesnland bird, which fmt, would allow dalisting to be considered, Although the plan call for essential breeding and winter habitat tobe protected, it ures population goals ar the primay aitaion for recovery (USFWS 1988, Aron 2005). Delisting of the Norther Grest Plans population vail be considered wehen 1300 pars (2600 birds) have been maintained ina specitic Aistibution for 1S years, assuming at eat three major censuses have been conducted during this peiod. Montmaha: a speciic recovery goal of 60 pars (120 bird ‘As astateMontanaprovides a diverce aray of habitats for breeding plovers, Wile the proportion of breeding birds recorded in Montanain recent years 7% in 20) has dedined rdativet states such as NorthDakota, Montana has traditionally supported a sizable segment of the US. Norther Great Plains population (15% in 1991). The peripheral nature of Montanarddatveto the overall breeding range of plovers, coupled with tremendous fuctuations in habitat availability betvrem years a thelandecape level most ikely mhtences the numberof bird that arive a breeding grounds my given year. Given such fluctuation, wre believe that Montana's wellands and reaches of the Missouri provide avitalresource topiping plovers during years characterized by abnormal weather and water conditions dleewere, ‘This plan desariber the curent stafus of the population and actions necersay to achieve and maintain the recovay goal for piping plovers breeding in theStateof Montana Expestsin sate and federal rezource agencies were conmulted to determine the status of Montana's curren population and habitats ac well a ‘hei potential forincrease. Although plovers may bexelaively fatalto amosnc of breeding stes,if local conditions decine birds respond by shlting sites. Ifhabitat conditions remain poor, adults that movemay not survivelong enough to disperse ack to their former sites (aig et 2005). Inlight ofthe species dispersal response, we believe that ten-year trend pod will provide fledhiity m planing md smanagement relative to plover biology ‘The goal ofthis plan eto manage for and maintain approximately 60 breeding pais of piping plovers, on arunning ten year average distributed in appropristehabitalsin Montana. TheUSFWS plans, however, to mdetake afivesyear status review begining in September 2006, Should the statusreviewlead to revision ofthe recovery plan, itis ikely that current goals wll be adjusted.in the future, The goal set in this plan wil, Nowever,allovusto mest the stmdards ofthe cuent recovery plan while providing support for national recovery. ‘Moreover, im preparing this plan, MontanaD epartment ofFish, Wildite and Packs (MEWP) recognizes ‘hat an integrated mull agency approach isrequired to managethis population effectively. As such, the plan attenpts to compileinto one document themeanures required fo ehmcerecovery, whether sich ations are mndertaken by the State orin collaboration wath other agencies ndfor tribal athenites. We Delievethat such an approach wall ultimately crengthen the program by building on collaborative management artivties already being undestaken, TAXONOMY AND SYSTEMATICS Omithologists have debated the taxonomic davsitiction ofthe piping plover for over acentxy, Originally considered arace ofthe common ringed plover, Curaius Matcula, (Ween and Bonaparte, no dato, the piping plover was first described 25a separate species by Ord in 1824. Revisions tothe forth edition of the American Omithelogical Union (AOU) Checist resulted in the binomial, aegis meloda Deng changed to Comins melodus (Moser1942). In addition to changes in the binomial, the acceptance of tzo subspecies, Cm. malodus (Atlantic birds) and C.meireureinetus Gland birds), has also been questioned, Infact, ance Ord's designation of piping plovers asa species, the AOU ae Suctusted Detvreen accepting and rejecting designation ofiland and Atantic subspecies (AOU 1896, 1957, Haig, amid Oring 19863). While the frst trp editions ofthe AQU Chechist recognized both taxa (AOU 1886, 1895), such designation was omitted from the third and forth editions (Ailcox 1958). In 1842, Moser published data ggesting thatthe ecent mi brightnersofDreact bands distinguished inland and ‘Atlantic breeders. These data coupled with geographic distribution pattems led the AOU to reinstate C nn crneintus as arecognized subspecies (AOU 1945) ‘Wilcox 1858), however, considered the subspecies crionciuet of dubious validity, noting the presence of avarily ofbreact band formas among piping plovers trapped on Long Island, New York. Subsequent amoxphological meanurements also failed to detect my appreciable differance in ving and tal measurements of birds with different plumage types (Wilcox 1953). Moreover, eatly dectrophoretic malyses detected ttle genetic itference betoren local or regional populations in Saskalchewamn, ‘Manitoba, Nvth Dakota Minnesota, and New Brunswick (Haig md Oring 19883). In ight ofthis eneics study, the A OU retumed tothe single species designation in 1998 (AOU 1998) Morerecantly, however, refined mitochondrial DNA analyses support subspecfic designation Haig and "Elliot Smith 2004). In particular, the Atlantic population appearseproductively isolated from the inteior populations withthe Great Laker individuals aligning more closely with thoze on theNorther. Great Plans and Canadian Prasies (Haig, pers. comm. quoted in Haig and Elliot Smith 2004). Whulethe U.S Endangered Species Actidenttes and protects mdmgered and threatened species, subspecies md populations, designations can “make or break” recovery of spaciic species because resources allocated to ‘heirzecovery re often provtized based on taxonomic status (Ryder 1986). Given recent contibutions to conservation from the emerging field of moleculax bislogy (ag 1996) further research utilizing more seustive genetic and molecilar techniques may ultimately resolve thisiemue SPECIES DESCRIPTION ‘Weighing between 46-64 grams (15.2 ounces) ndmeasuring 17 can (in) long wath aveingspan of approximately 38 on (15 in), the piping plover is a mnll relatively stocky migratory shorebird 25 m2 ‘wide Mean beach width oar also greater at occupied ster and the authors -pecuate that below a ‘resold beach width 020-my the probability f nest detection by predators may increase abruptly. Riverine Habitat Characteristic riveinenesting stesimciude reservoir beacher and lage dry, Darran md or gravel bars, within wide unobstructed river chamels (USFWS 1988). Nests areusually located after the spring and emily summer flow recede and dry areas on sandbas ae exposed, Along the Plate River, Nebraska, relatively lage smdbars, averaging 26 mlong and SS m wide appea tobe selected when avaiable (Fanner 1993). In addition, prefered vegetative cover at nest iter ie generally lor (Scheralbach 1969) ‘Although Fame: (1983) reposted vegetative cover of 25% an nesting sanabar habitat along the Platte [iver, other esearch suggests tha the optimum ramgeis much lower estimater rage rom.0-10% (Armbruster 1986). Likewise along the Missoun Fiver inSouth Dakota plover colony stes were chuaracteritically barren ox with short (10cm) sparse (<10%) vegetative caver Schoralbach 1988) u Tablel: Habitat characteristics for Norther Great laine piping plovers during the breeding searon, Habitat Habitat ‘Optimal Habitat Reference Meanmement —__Characteisticr “Alka TakeFetlact Mem beachvaidth 25m, 20m Prindivile Gaines mma Rye (1908) Vegetation ‘spasseor dumped barento sparsely vegetated Prindivile Gaines vegetation forbs orchumped distabution; amd Ryan (1988); prefaredtograss shortervegetaion (forbs) “Root and tym. e001) Substrate ‘mixed gravel md shomogmous substrtest_—'Caimes(1977) smd gard nest ste-primarly grav Prindville Gaines versie aka Tneterogenous atlarger scale and Tyan (1588) “Riverine ‘Mean channel width 295-450 meters wide (300 meters) iets eta 099 ‘Mean sandbar en Elevation (dearance ‘rom water tones) Vegetation Substrate Forage ate Astficial Seuipit Forage ate Total autace ea 048-190 hectares ‘asm 034052m “eno; 25%, gee moist sandy ibatrate <1 3}an (clint 06.796 hectares (mem=205) ‘vatable from 020-408 hectares, preferably lange lov ephemeral emdbars, high enough to provide ary ‘bare ground during nesting barrento sparsely vegetated: ‘vegetation hight short grwal substrate expanse of moist subetrate adequate prey barerdlaively dosetonest ate ‘vatable—nesting depends on walabilty of natural smdba habitat Ziewite @ a (1992) ‘Scnveabach (1988) 2 Ziewtz et al (1992) ‘Senveabach (1988) Fames (1983) iewite eta (99 Com and Amabraster 2383) Com and Amabraster (0383) Shale ma Keech (0393) ‘Vaviables auch as channel width and nest devation sboveriverreach also pest to play arolein nest selection (Schuvalbach 1985, Ziewitz eta 1992). Research conducted by Schvralbach (1988) shovwed that on average plover nests werelocated 019 m aboveriverreach range. Along thePFatteTiver, however, ness were stuated a lightly higher dlevatons (Zieuaitz eal 1992). While datagathered in these studies prechide comparisons betoren habitat characteristics and reproductive saccers,thevarabler mggest that piping plovers preferentially select nest ater that provide wide horizontal vsibty, protection rom. ttevestial predators and sulficint protection Som rising veters(Schvralbach 1988, Zievatz et 211992, ‘USFWS 2005 Feraging Habitat ‘Along prairie rivers, piping plovers are often found in cose association with interior leat tems (Storia satilaron). As such they ae often thought tohave similar habitat requirements. Despite smilantiesin nesting habitat along rivers, there closely related specer belong to dlferant feeding guildr piping plovers feed on benthic invertebrates found along themoist sand choreline whileleat tems are primary shullov water pisaivores. So, in additionto dry unconsolidated substrate for nesting and rasing young, piping plovers tend toreguie adjacent moist sandy habitat for foraging (Com and Armbruster 1983) ‘Ashabital that meets both thenesting and foraging requiramantsis essential not all potential sites are stable. Primary foraging habitat inchudes open, mic, sandy sites on river systems ac well 2¢ throughout most of the birds nesting range. Plovers feed by peching af or fut belovethe substrate autace (Cames1977, USEWS 2002, Hing md Eliot Smith 2004) and require fending grounds that wexichin surfaceinvertebrates Shatfer and Laporte 1994). While adults typically concentrate feeding etforts within Sm ofthe water's edge (Whyte1985) chicks tend to feed on firmer ground a grater distances from the shoreline (Caines 1977), ‘Authough plovers commonly foragenear the waters edge, in North Dakota birds spent 2% of thar time foraging along the shoreline md45% foraging upland gravel iter Beckerman 1986, Hing md Eliot- Smith 2004). Whilemoist substratehabitats are edremaly valuableto piping plovers,thesehabitats must Dejustaposed with other key cements. Far example Elias etal 2000) showed that on beach segments along the Atlantic coat lacking ephemeral pools and bay tidal Lats, wrack ad open vegetation can be sanportant, not only as aforage habit! but because thay provide escape cover md roosting habitat. Likewise, adults and chicksin New Jersey exhibited fecbility in ther choice of foraging habitat but generally selected areas wath few people Buuger 1994). Thus, theneed forhabitat heterogeneity surrounding thenest ste particulary in more disturbed areas, may be an important fartorin habitat selection (Nicholls and Baldassarre 19900, Elias eal 2000) Artificial Nesting Hoitat Piping plovers dearly havelitiefetility when choosing nes ites (Goossen el 2002). Prefered smudbar habitat har disappeared along many river segments in the interior US. and as arerultplovers hare been forced to exploit nev arene for nesting Sle and Kirsch 1993). Breeding birds nownest on auttcialy crested habitat nich as sand and gravel pits md isle created by dredging operations (USFWS 2002). Evidence suggests that ploversutlize atifical habitats when natural habitats limiting, however, se unclear to wehat extent they have replaced natural habitats or whether reproductive mccese 4s simular betorem habitats (Sdle and Kirsch 1993). While afial sandbar creation has provided nesting Dabita, rom a cost beusit perspective, such menrures ae expensive and tend tobe temporary innature, cerentualy eroding dueto in-off, Further, there ene are only suitableforalimited period of time after ‘hei initial creation ae vegetation eucoachmnent generally reduces habitat quality after afew years ‘More amp vtantly, however, research has chow that many of there ster fllto provide an adequate forage base (Com md Armbruster 1983). Compared to river channel ste, soilmoisture and consequently nwrartebrate dest, is lover a sandpit ater. Infact in some rene, plovers fly more than a Jalometerbetvrem smapit net site ndsiver channel foraging location. In addition, because sandpit sites arenot isolated on islands, nests aremore vulnerable to predation (National Research Council 2004), Thus, there atically created ates may providemaginal nesting and forage habitat to breeding birde (Com and Armbruster 1983) ‘Migratory nd Winter Habitats Piping plover winter habitat incudes beaches, mudlats, nd sandilats, 2: well ar barr island beacher amid spoilisimde (nig and Oring 1995, Hig 1992). Birds have also been seen on ocem beaches md sand or algal ats in protected bays (Mibinson md Spinks 1994, Drake e 12001). Drake eal (2001) Aetermined that habitat use vaied seasonally along the Tecas coastline plovers used algal ats more using fll and spring than during winter vehereas eqpored muudilate wre selected more frequently ding winter, Betoresn 1996 and 1988, both the distribution and habitat characteristics of plovers during the winter ‘were studied along the Gulf and Atlantic coastlines (Nicholls and Baldassare 1990, 19900). Analysis of Aabitat variables along the Gulf Coast showed that plover sites were characterized by greater beach width and greater percentagemmdlats than non plover sites (Nicholls and Baldassare 19900). Along the Atlantic however, piping plovers weremost often found foraging in area adjacent to ageinlets and pastes Infac, thevazation between stes led Nicholls ad Baldassare (19900) to surmise that piping plover vainter distibution may be correlated more with environmantal heterogeneity than speitic habitat festures. Devpte the dticultes encountered im developing predictive models based exciusivaly on Iabitat variable, the mthors speculate that smite and sandy mmadilate may attract thelargect concentrations of piping plovers because of prey abundance mdlor because the substrate coloration provides protection Srom aatal predators dueto chromatic matching (Grant 1973, Nicholl and Baldarsare 19900) CRITICAL HABITAT 1.2002, the USFWS offically designated citical habitat forthe Northem Great Pains breading population (USFINS 2002). Under the Endangered Species Act, cial habital refers to speatic geographic locations that contain festures erential for concerving apecies and may require 10% smd Defensive Riverbank 1w.n% ‘Alkatt Forsgang Rerevair other Flying ‘Alkativeetland >20% omer otner Plant species present (Other animal spaces prevent Evidence of predators Renae APPENDIX INTERNATIONAL PIPING PLOVER BREEDING CENSUS GUIDELINES AND DATASHEET INTERNATIONAL PIPING PLOVER COORD! {ATION GROUP 2001 INTERNATIONAL PIPING PLOVER BREEDING CENSUS SSS usta (Gen Pupose ad Hise: The esr Ps Paves Cents 5 dsgaed y the inetowal as over Coors Grup ts Hen esa tae 8 up cet al yas Poer opus os ‘ok cen aad beg proands every ve year The 00] canter came oo ores pat 10 ‘ea The pany Bc fhe ean sane ds se mdr Ea fer fp els. Saale edn anew scces of ecvery efor aad recover eras Cs dss pote ae pecs ange ade of aca lt ad an ep duce mre pues Te st temas Cents coed 991 pra » popaie ema fon th spe ssl dent or Arenck “The eng cei ll he tir of of dan 17 Sees ne Caan pwc ste Fender ofS. Pee aut Mipdoe Duna i eas ped, 82 ait Pp Povey 41 pa) Snere dace Subse te 96ers tended 913 sas (2.08 reais pss amo Unease 7 fo 191" The 1996 cena ace stg teal eae cat Sl eas eh lhe Ase Cont 320s ese sl Great als plan ds cn the US, Geet lam nde Canaan Pre The 201 iterate Ce il onplemet prs sae. Botaing an even me reine pita of te esting dsuten of pang Poses I wal al rome he ‘ype to ns les we for he pecs, Le woul he heal cess cond dna he ane owes eos Nok ‘Renal wth fe efits carom eens congeners acre Wher fps ete ea athe eas be aan eres Je 8 and June 16%, 201 (eset forthe Sian 3, which wl ens om Mav 30" thru tune 3") Has wogoue accent vee Tae we Shosceqabie We soul perce dics at ps een casted ee te yond ‘Coston The 2001 ens willbe ded Sen USGS Fost and Rangeland Ecos Seece Cee {Cals Grease on Sn He (S750. 7482. enal san. gis poe She wl en ea cextact ‘tate sober of the tame Papa Piste Coote Tea Chesen Fea (4.07390 ead buss r= alte pay courdanee fr enn See roca Coat al ori “Sma sensu eth st povoce a at rng lena prc oor al rey ‘Gray The ngenstalnes af each pg! ae one bel ced sles te 3 plete ofan an ope cnr fer xh te ‘red, Ssan ad Chern wl sarc ens fot dpb lof both he wie Sinbrerag cases ty Stam 2002 As pos eas, fs lb sete 20008 ‘mas {areca pper sbi 2 ei june {Mendel eyo coveng ech steps ney dea fee as, ‘uc ovata ordinal er tel soource pacer + GiSbaed mags a dates ped on pyepinewebates {apolar amar toa te mae 2 StateProvincinl Coordinators: wll desi censvsrs and areas to be surveyed. They wil disibe ‘census asenals to andtadual ceases duel or trough local contact persons. Fellowang the cen ‘hey voll yuan rests and ence tat ech sites mapped by ante and lend and rome a tune assessmeat ofthe casts sn th soe reson Following completion ofthe censis, Coors shoud end to Chern Ferland +All nid Census Reports aps + Stare Stuamary Steet + State Assesisent Fora ‘We ak tha thi infusion be forwarded te Cheroa Feriand by August 184, 2001. and that we be informed of any delays 2s soon 3s possible. Maps of census ss shold be raed sn wth the census sonuamay. Each site should contain reference latiude and longitude coordinates owas ad ‘ge inforanton aot neces). 3, Individual Censusers:silbe gen census gedelines an a census reper fem fr each ite they are survey. “Mluple signals ae encouraged to comctcensses together Atleast one dca enstsng exch ste shouldbe expenence in enficanon of shorebirds. Whenever posible cesses ofeach sie should be completed dang ove day. Mhple censuses ofa site ae nt encouraged unless ‘he ongaal ure i consulted fo be insecurate because of sdkerse Weather condions, ma dusurance ete Cen report sould be Bled ou 2s completely a pouble for ll ensues teach, ‘ese enuaed ro the site provincial ceordantoe by the spciied date Mops shuld ako be seruned ‘o the coordnator withthe ceass aes cleariy ake and beled, including latitude aud longitude of approsimate site center. Spectclocauous where Pipa Ploves ae cbserved a also be nica ca. naps. Census reports and maps should be returned even if no Piping Plovers were observed Cems meee: The gol ofthe census ito count both resinz pir and uapazed adits Pir sould ely laclode buds seen together. Saale Luc in the presence of ness or Young shold be lied sparsely fom otter Tapa lads hawever, ie dcounge censuses Sou seatclaus ness or voane i der stance ro breeding sites. We ae specifically not addeseing sues of reproductive succes dung tis census. We are not rovdg specific insists for coedueig nvidia eens bur cide the follows deitins and Sigpestons Sites ay encude wach wetland, ake. or tee of ver or coase aay porno of the above. Sites shouldbe ceasused by the most effecuve means posable. Care shouldbe take 1 ote whece buds have flow to ad rom inorder vod double cousiag. Ths especially nportat because paz Plover (the ort Gest Plans ad Prone) ofen foc when wtniders exter ames ea. vow! coedicong sve dunag ‘meme Weather conditions wach sot onl sess in ences cents data, bot also sneseases ke of dense 2 the bus. Surveys ae best conducted dung eaiy momng tes. although we wodersnd that config cesses to ‘hus ime pened ss ofen asealsts) Censtets sould avoid encroach on nesting tertones wher possible ae 2 all eases shou lu tne peut any size femory fo mo more than 3 mies. Please Ws Yo muusaze disturbance toe ar Census ponies: Leal, all haba scent and oe curety able fer Piping Plover should be surveyed in 2001 Die fo ick of information abo sites ce oer consti eer the gel may not be achiesable some states promnces. To mee census olectes, ve therefore siggest the fllowing pies 1) Sites that had Peng Ploers present a 1951, 1996 or ler 2) Ses that kad surmble Pipa Plover haba sn 1991 and 1996. 3) Ses dat ‘vere uanable wen censused un 1996 bt tat have been sable mocereceay. 4) Sites not ceased i 1996 but ‘atte iely to conta stable Ppaig Plover lt. 5) Sites not ceased a 1996 but wos histone records of we by Piping overs. To most accurately analyze population tends over the past en Yeas, least the fist thee ‘paonnes seed ro be me. ‘We thank you for your involvement with the 2001 International Piping Plover Census! Each cous is extremely important in alla i n INTERNATION NAL PIPING PLOVER COORDINATION GROUP. Xs 2001 INTERNATIONAL PIPING PLOVER BREEDING CENSUS Individual Census Report Pee compl this em oughly pe foc caca reed een Png Mes eal es. tach ‘up ete dest tes cessing ae a longo se ops scene) ‘ila eto ata ada exmmets These forced eet oye See roaal Conary Jas 18 301 Fer ce asin tut os Sam Pica Coouat os Che Feaed @USC SRD Fos ad FAESLSET ‘ = 1. To tpn Pipi Pe Pues aed (aa oe py omaha Puestmit__—Bedeloctedogetis_ Tardeeusce cena Purest been) ——= Toole ofaapauedsdus sthanyoug:__ soit yous sem 5 Couns again Tealanmest te Tah oy. __ sit Linge ___dog__ sn, Bie nan, ie Les Md High nag ‘eens cmon ~~ aio Peat icon) ‘nd cpend Taste me celecn) ink ict © saat cennnt tacks a 2) Body afer 1 eas 1 Pretty hax cove gs MLR Ro AbsiTabepina_"V. wal elinaeste Vinee YL Iedetial Fond — VIL Os Grebe some) " 6 Ht) Pp Pwr od ae abe destin C8 TRS} a int er) eve: ane ce ca Wye bow doersornge ton en sae” ‘eed sey ccumtaces tar te faced cris es reer condoms a dace) Boal amino: of yma bad ne Ie Se op oho aca Oa ta ee) esto apa iis oe rode Wh Siaabefpecleceaunieg Cemaves cs lanene FE mers el Saddeces (etch adn! ef ercesn) Pan a ps, Chonan teustenise Coals, OR ‘THANKS FOR YOUR HELP WITH THE 2001 INTERNATIONAL PIPING PLOVER CENSUS! 7" APPENDIXS CRITICAL HABITATFOR PIPING PLOVERS IN MONTANA. Piping Plover Critical Habitat Unit 1 (Momtana) Crit Habitat Section ‘Toweabip Beudaries ‘hitical habitat MTA Sheridan County, Montana, CCourtey: USFWS, Ecological Services. 76 Piping Plover Critical Habitat mane Mie ow ao @ he (Cuitcal Mabitat MT-2 Miceouri Fiver, Montana CCourtery: USFWS, Ecelogical Services Piping Plover Critical Habitat a Pena ceatabi (Chitical Habitat MT- Bovrdoin National Wildite Refuge, Montana CCourtery USFWS, Ecological Servicer emesatoms Ml Piping Pte = County Boun ‘Cutical Nabitat MT-3 Foot Peck Reservoir, Montana, Courtery: USFWS, Ecological Services. n {Oo epic of pul foeameat wae abled an wtnaled oot oh L437 pes copy fora ttl crt of $1437 DD which nce SLA 00 for punting and $000 fer Sth