New Brunswick Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey

2002 Report

Steven D’Amato

May 2003

Becky Whittam Atlantic Canada Program Manager

Atlantic Region / Région de l’Atlantique P.O. Box/B.P. 6227, Sackville, NB Canada E4L 1G6 www.bsc-eoc.org Table of Contents

Introduction ...... 2 Methods ...... 3 Random Route Selection...... 3 Scouting Routes ...... 4 Volunteer Training ...... 5 Playback equipment ...... 5 Survey protocol...... 5 Database Structure...... 6 Results ...... 6 Discussion...... 7 Changes to Protocol for 2003...... 8 Acknowledgements ...... 8 Literature Cited...... 9 Tables and Figures...... 10 Appendix A detected on each route run in 2002 ...... 15

NB Forest Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey Page 1 2002 Report Introduction

The New Brunswick Forest Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey was designed to monitor the population trends of Broad-winged Hawk and , and to gather more information on the status of Red-shouldered Hawk and Red-tailed Hawk across New Brunswick (Makepeace 2002). Northern Goshawk and Broad-winged Hawk have been identified as indicators of Old Hardwood (OHWH) in NB; they are thought to use this habitat type for nesting and hunting, often putting their nest in the first crotch of a large hardwood tree. In NB, objectives for specific amounts of OHWH have been put in place for crown land. Monitoring Goshawks and Broad-winged Hawks, along with the amount of old hardwood forest in the province, should help wildlife managers assess management strategies to maintain these in NB (Makepeace 2002).

Red-shouldered Hawk and Red-tailed Hawk have been identified as species of conservation concern by the New Brunswick Department of Natural Resources and Energy (NB-DNRE)’s Species at Risk program. The Red-shouldered Hawk is listed as May be at risk, and the Red-tailed Hawk is listed as Sensitive. The conservation concern for these species can primarily be attributed to their small population sizes and the fact that not much is known about their population trends or relative abundance in NB. The results of this monitoring program will be used to monitor and evaluate the conservation status of these hawks in New Brunswick.

Presently, forest hawks are not well monitored in New Brunswick. Red-shouldered hawks have never been observed in New Brunswick on any monitoring program such as the Breeding Survey (BBS) or Christmas Bird Count (CBC). Goshawk, Red- tailed Hawk and Broad-winged Hawk are counted on the BBS and the CBC, but are not observed in numbers high enough to be useful in evaluating changes in their abundance (Makepeace 2002). Raptors are wide-ranging and fast-moving, and they nest at low densities and are widely dispersed. They are therefore somewhat more difficult to study than many other bird species (Fuller and Mosher 1987).

Therefore, in 2002 a hawk-specific survey was developed by the DNRE and Bird Studies Canada (BSC) to evaluate forest hawk abundance (Makepeace 2002). The first year of this survey was intended to be a pilot year; playbacks of Broad-winged Hawk and Northern Goshawk calls were used by volunteers to census hawks along randomly- chosen routes passing through areas of extensive forest cover in NB. Northern Goshawks are very responsive to alarm calls when they have nestlings or fledglings (Kimmer and Yahner 1990, Watson et al. 1999, Joy et al. 1994, Kennedy and Stahlecker 1993). Broad-winged Hawks will also respond during the nesting period, although research hasn’t yet shown at which stage they are the most responsive (Makepeace 2002). Other hawk species were also expected to respond to these heterospecific calls.

An additional component of the hawk survey is to gather information on the distribution and abundance of woodpeckers in New Brunswick’s . Woodpeckers often

NB Forest Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey Page 2 2002 Report respond to the calls of hawks and owls by approaching and calling, allowing some species of woodpeckers to be surveyed during the hawk survey (Badzinski 2003). , Pileated, Downy, Hairy and Black-backed woodpecker are all considered indicators of various types of forest (based on composition and development stages) by the NB-DNRE; their population trends are therefore of interest to provincial forest managers.

The goals of the NB Forest Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey are:

1. To detect changes in the relative abundance of Broad-winged Hawk and Northern Goshawk in New Brunswick, both on crown land and on privately-owned land, through the development of a long-term volunteer-based survey; 2. To collect data on Red-tailed Hawk and Red-shouldered Hawk in to monitor and update their conservation status; 3. To use the results of the monitoring program to assess the performance of DNRE’s Old Forest Habitat supply strategy for crown lands; and 4. To collect data on woodpecker presence along survey routes, and to assess the ability of the survey to monitor woodpecker populations in New Brunswick.

This report summarizes the methods and basic results of the first year of the survey (2002).

Methods

Random route selection

Hawk survey routes were chosen by NB-DNRE staff in the same manner as were routes for the NB Nocturnal Owl Survey (Whittam 2001). Scott Makepeace (NB-DNRE) prepared a map of the province showing all roads that would be drivable in May & June (primary and secondary Department of Transportation roads, and primary forest roads), as well as the three main land bases (crown, private, federal). Maps also indicated areas of non-forest. He then overlaid a 50 x 50 km grid on this map. To be able to compare population trends on crown (provincial) and private land, he attempted to place two routes per square – one on crown land, and one on private land. The following rules were applied:

1. In order for a route to qualify as “crown” or “private”, 8/10 stops had to fall on that particular land base. It was decided ahead of time (before random numbers were chosen, see below) which roads would be acceptable for crown or private routes in each square. Some squares could only contain one type of route (i.e. because there were no roads in crown land, or private land). In these cases, two routes of the same type of land base were placed in the square.

2. Squares that were less than 1/3 covered with land were not used in the process.

NB Forest Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey Page 3 2002 Report 3. A 10 x 10 mini-grid was created on a sheet of transparency. This grid covered one 50 x 50 km square. Two random numbers from 0-10 were chosen to locate a point on the 10 x 10 grid. This point marked the vicinity of the starting point of the route. The starting point was placed on the closest road of the appropriate land base (crown or private) to that point.

4. The direction of travel was often limited (because crown land stretched only to the east, or the road ended 2 km to the north, meaning that south was the only direction left to travel), but when it wasn’t, it was randomly chosen. Once the road and direction was chosen, that road and direction were followed, if possible, for the duration of the survey. In other words, no turns were taken unless necessary (i.e. unless a t-junction was reached, or unless a turn was necessary to stay on crown or private land roads).

5. When a turn was required and it was not dictated by crown or private land, the direction was chosen randomly.

6. Routes did not have to stay within the 50 x 50 km square; these squares were used solely to determine the starting points of routes.

7. Routes could not overlap, or run parallel within 4 km of each other.

Scouting Routes

NB-DRNE and BSC staff attempted to scout most survey routes on private land before the survey period. Crown land routes were not scouted because of time restrictions (and because it was generally believed that routes on crown land were more likely to fall in forested areas compared with routes on private land). Scouting a route involved driving to the randomly chosen start location and GPSing each stop along the route. The following criteria were used to determine the suitability of each route:

1. The route should pass through mostly-forested habitat. If the route is on a road that is heavily settled with many houses or farms, it may not be suitable.

2. The road(s) followed on the route should be permanent roads, which will likely be available for surveying in future years.

3. The route should follow secondary roads with little traffic and sufficient safe points for stopping. Generally, a road that has constant traffic is not suitable for the survey, as it is neither safe nor easy to hear birds when cars and trucks are constantly passing.

Whenever possible, stops were placed 1 km apart; however, if this meant that a stop fell in a residential area or large open field, that stop was moved to the nearest available forest along the roadside. A general rule was that each stop should be about 75% forested within about a 500 m radius. Stops were not placed in areas of non-forest.

NB Forest Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey Page 4 2002 Report Each stop was described in relation to the surrounding habitat (or nearby landmarks such as 911 residential numbers or intersections) and the mileage (with respect to the start point) was noted.

For routes that could not be scouted by DNRE or BSC staff, the assigned volunteers were encouraged to scout the routes prior to conducting their surveys, and to fill out the stop description form as described above. Volunteers were also encouraged to GPS each stop if they had access to a GPS.

Volunteer Training

Volunteers received a “Guide for volunteers” describing how to conduct the survey. The guide also contained some information on hawks and woodpeckers of New Brunswick, including a description of typical vocalizations. Volunteers also received a training CD containing calls of relevant species. Volunteers were encouraged to familiarize themselves with the calls of hawks and woodpeckers in preparation for the survey.

Playback equipment

CD players (Sony CFD-S22) were already available as a result of the NB Nocturnal Owl Survey (Whittam 2001). CD players were borrowed through local DNRE offices. Volunteers were required to sign out CD players and return them within several days. Volunteers who owned a CD player were encouraged to use it, but only if it passed a simple test to determine whether or not the Broad-winged Hawk and Northern Goshawk calls on the playback CD were audible at 400 metres when played at maximum volume without causing undue distortion (under ideal conditions: in an open area with no wind or precipitation).

Survey protocol

Volunteers were encouraged to complete their route once between the period 18 May and 16 June, beginning just after sunrise. Each route consisted of a 15-km road transect, with stops every 1 km (for a total of 16 stops). At each stop, volunteers completed a 7-minute point count using a broadcast CD that alternated between hawk calls and silent listening periods. The 2002 playback protocol consisted of four 20- second Broad-winged Hawk calls interspersed with 40-second silent listening periods, followed by two 20-second Northern Goshawk calls separated by a 40-second silent listening period. The protocol ended with a 1 minute, 40-second period of silence. During the 7 minutes, volunteers recorded all forest hawks (and, if they were confident, woodpeckers) seen or heard during each playback or listening period. Volunteers also recorded the distance (in categories: (<200m, 200-500m, 500-1000m, and >1000m) and direction (N, NE, E, SE, S, SW, W, NW) to each bird when it was first seen or first began to call, and kept track of the time, odometer reading, noise level, and traffic at each stop. Volunteers also noted if they believed a bird to be the same individual as detected at a previous station.

NB Forest Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey Page 5 2002 Report One notable oversight in the 2002 survey protocol was that volunteers were not asked to note whether or not they were actually recording woodpeckers. Therefore, it was impossible to know if there really were no woodpeckers along routes where no or few woodpeckers were recorded, or if they were simply not noted on the data forms. Therefore, it is likely that woodpeckers were underrepresented on the survey in 2002.

Database Structure

I used the same database structure as that developed for the New Brunswick Nocturnal Owl Survey. I developed the following tables using the program Filemaker Pro:

• route.db - specific information on each route, including route number, name, closest town, and latitude and longitude of start point;

• hawk surveyors.db - name, address, and route assignment for each volunteer;

• stop descriptions.db - latitude & longitude, odometer reading, and general description of each stop;

• survey.db – containing information specific to the conditions of each survey, including weather at start and finish, date, start and end time, volunteer name, and type of equipment used;

• stations.db - containing information specific to each of the 16 stations per route, including time, traffic count, noise level and comments;

• hawks.db - information on each bird, including species, interval first heard calling, distance, direction, and whether or not it was believed to be a duplicate. Each bird was recorded as a separate record regardless of whether or not it was found on the same stop as another bird.

Results

Out of 86 routes, 62 were assigned and data were returned for 43. Sixty hawks of 10 species were detected, along with 424 woodpeckers of seven species (plus 102 unidentified woodpeckers; see Table 1). The most common hawk was the Northern Goshawk, followed by Broad-winged Hawk and Red-tailed Hawk (although Goshawks were somewhat less widespread than these other species, as they were found on fewer routes; Table 1). The most common woodpecker was the Yellow-bellied , followed by Northern Flicker and (Table 1). A single Red-headed Woodpecker was identified (by call) by D. Grecian on route #43, Little Pokiok Stream.

Broad-winged Hawks may have been more likely to call as a result of survey playback (Figure 1a), as 67% of all detections occurred in the periods when Broad-winged Hawk playback was being used. However, 25% of detections still occurred in the final silent listening period. Red-tailed Hawks seemed to be more likely to be calling either

NB Forest Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey Page 6 2002 Report spontaneously or in response to the Broad-winged Hawk call, as 36% of all detections occurred in the first survey period (during playback of the first Broad-winged Hawk call; Figure 1b). Northern Goshawks appeared to be more likely to respond to playback of conspecific calls as 71% of all detections occurred during or after periods of Northern Goshawk playback (Figure 1c). Most woodpecker species did not appear to show any particular patterns with respect to when they were first detected on the survey, except for Hairy Woodpeckers which had a tendency to be detected in the periods following Broad-winged Hawk playback (Figure 1d).

Appendix A gives details on number of individuals of each target species found on each route in 2002. Figures 2 and 3 illustrate the distribution and relative abundance of the four most common hawk and woodpecker species. Each direction category was reported fairly equally (Table 2), while the majority (45%) of birds were reported to fall into the “<200m” distance category (Table 3).

Discussion

Relatively few hawks were detected on the first (pilot) year of the New Brunswick Forest Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey. Prior to the survey’s implementation, a literature review of similar hawk surveys was used by Makepeace (2002) to estimate the potential detection rates of the four target hawk species in New Brunswick. Makepeace anticipated that the Northern Goshawk detection rate in New Brunswick would be 1 in 15 km, based on an average of six estimates from Joy et al. (1994) and Bosakowski and Vaugn (1996). Makepeace also anticipated that Red-shouldered detection rates in southern New Brunswick would not be as high as those reported elsewhere (1/5-6 km; Mosher et al. 1990, Badzinski et al. 2000), estimating the New Brunswick detection rate to be somewhere less than 1/30km. It was also anticipated that Broad-winged hawks, which are more abundant in New Brunswick than Red-shouldered Hawks, may be detected at a similar rate to that found in Ontario (1/20.5 km; Badzinski et al. 2000), and that numbers of Red-tailed hawks would be similar to numbers of Broad-winged Hawks. Table 4 compares the anticipated (from Makepeace 2002) and actual detection rates of these four hawk species, clearly indicating that hawk detection rates were not as high as anticipated. It is interesting to note, however, that New Brunswick had a higher detection rate of both Red-tailed Hawks and Northern Goshawks than did Ontario in 2002 (Table 4), although the detection rates for Red-shouldered and Broad- winged Hawks were much lower in New Brunswick than Ontario. The Ontario survey is conducted only in southern Ontario (Badzinski 2003), in primarily mature forest which is highly suitable for both Red-shouldered and Broad-winged hawks, and is likely not as suitable for Northern Goshawks as are the mixed forests of New Brunswick.

Woodpeckers, while not the main target of the survey, were detected in reasonable numbers in NB, peaking at 3.37 Yellow-bellied per route (0.21/stop). However, woodpecker detections were still considerably lower than those found in Ontario, where 14.4 Yellow-bellied Sapsuckers were detected per 19 km route (0.72/stop). Ontario also had more Downy (4/route), Hairy (3.0/route), and Pileated (1.8/route) woodpeckers than did New Brunswick, and considerably more Northern

NB Forest Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey Page 7 2002 Report Flickers (7.5/route; Badzinski 2003). The comparatively low numbers of woodpeckers detected in New Brunswick may be due to the fact that I did not stress to volunteers the importance of recording woodpeckers (or noting whether or not they were recording woodpeckers) in 2002; thus, routes with no or few woodpeckers may actually have had woodpeckers which were simply not recorded. (For example, only 27/43 routes had Yellow-bellied Sapsuckers; it is highly unlikely that many routes in New Brunswick would not have had this species; S. Makepeace pers. comm.).

Changes to Protocol for 2003

Based on the results of the 2002 survey, and in consultation with Scott Makepeace of the NB-DNRE, BSC has decided to change the playback protocol in 2003 to replace the calls of Broad-winged Hawk with those of Red-shouldered Hawk. The Northern Goshawk portion of the survey will remain the same. While there are generally very few Red-shouldered Hawks in New Brunswick, using calls of this species may actually lead to more detections of the target hawk species than using Broad-winged Hawk calls, based on some preliminary New Brunswick surveys conducted by Makepeace in 2001 (unpubl. data) and results in Ontario (Badzinski 2003). Red-shouldered Hawk calls also appear to be much more successful at attracting woodpeckers than are Broad-winged Hawk calls (Makepeace unpubl. data; Badzinski 2003). Furthermore, Broad-winged Hawk calls are relatively quiet and difficult to project in a playback survey; Red- shouldered Hawk calls are louder, less high-pitched, and therefore easier to project; this in itself may lead to more responses from heterospecifics to the Red-shouldered Hawk calls compared to the Broad-winged Hawk calls.

In 2003, we will also ask volunteers to indicate whether or not they are recording woodpeckers on the survey. This will allow us to better determine abundance of this group of species. Finally, we will also ask volunteers to note any Blue Jays or Gray Jays detected on surveys, as both of these species are used as indicators by the NB-DNRE, and are prone to respond to raptor calls.

Acknowledgements Thanks to Scott Makepeace and the New Brunswick Department of Natural Resources and Energy for providing the impetus for this study. Funding was provided by the NB- DNRE and UPM-Kymmene (Miramichi), as well as the NB Wildlife Trust Fund. In-kind support is provided to Bird Studies Canada (Atlantic Region) by the Canadian Wildlife Service (Atlantic Region) of Environment Canada. Many thanks to all the volunteers who helped with this survey in 2002. Not including assistants, they are: Dan Beaudette, Laurel Bernard, Bob Blake, Valmond Bourque, Mike Boyd, Jim Brown, Brian Cowan, Sheena and Trent Dougan Mosher, Aaron Fraser, Margaret Gallant Doyle, Dedreic Grecian, Tim Houlahan, Roger Jenkins, Joe Kennedy, Roy LaPointe, Jack Lavender, Mike Lushington, Don MacDougall, Andrew MacInnis, Ken Macintosh, Bruce Matson, Dorothy McFarlane, Pierrette Mercier, Gary Moore, Bill Nelson, Rod O'Connell, Nelson Poirier, Joyce Regan, Martin Roncetti, Dwayne and Mary Sabine, Marco Scichilone, Mike Sullivan, Larry Sweet, Cliff Thornley, Leon Vietinghoff, Greg Watling, Pam Watters, and Becky Whittam.

NB Forest Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey Page 8 2002 Report Literature Cited

Badzinski, D. 2003. Red-shouldered Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey, 2002 Report. Unpublished report to the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Wildlife Assessment Program by Bird Studies Canada.

Badzinski, D., C. M. Francis, and B. Whittam. 2000. Red-shouldered hawk and spring woodpecker survey, 2000 Report. Unpublished report to the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Wildlife Assessment Program by Bird Studies Canada.

Bosakowski, T. and M. E. Vaughn. 1996. Developing a practical method for surveying Northern Goshawks in managed forests of the western Washington cascades. WJAF 11(4):109-113.

Fuller, M. R. and J. A. Mosher. 1987. Raptor Survey Techniques. Pages 37-65 in B.A. Giron Pendleton, B.A. Millsap, K. W. Cline, and D. M. Bird, eds. Raptor Management Techniques Manual. Natl. Wildl. Fed., Washington, D.C.

Joy, S. M., R. T. Reynolds, and D. G. Leslie. 1994. Northern Goshawk broadcast surveys: Hawk response variables and survey cost. Studies in Avian Biology 16:24-30.

Kennedy, P. L. and D.W. Stahlecker. 1993. Responsiveness of nesting Northern Goshawks to taped broadcasts of 3 conspecific calls. Journal of Wildlife Management 57(2):249-257.

Kimmel, J.T. and R. H. Yahner. 1990. Response of Northern Goshawks to taped conspecific and Great-horned owls. Journal of Raptor Research 24(4):107-112.

Makepeace, S. 2002. Forest hawk monitoring program for New Brunswick. Unpublished report by the New Brunswick Department of Natural Resources and Energy.

Watson, J. W., D. W. Hays, and D. J. Pierce. 1999. Efficacy of Northern Goshawk broadcast surveys in Washington state. Journal of Wildlife Management 63(1):99- 106.

Whittam, B. 2001. New Brunswick Nocturnal Owl Survey 2001 Report. Unpublished report by Bird Studies Canada, Atlantic Region.

NB Forest Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey Page 9 2002 Report Table 1. The number of routes on which each species was detected, as well as the total number and average number per route of each species detected. # Routes # Individuals Birds per Species detected detected route Red-tailed Hawk 9 11 0.26 Broad-winged Hawk 9 12 0.28 Northern Goshawk 5 14 0.33 Red-shouldered Hawk 2 3 0.07 5 8 0.19 Merlin 1 1 0.02 Northern Harrier 2 2 0.05 Osprey 3 4 0.09 Sharp-shinned Hawk 1 1 0.02 Turkey Vulture 2 2 0.05 Unknown 2 2 0.05 Red-headed Woodpecker 1 1 0.02 Black-backed woodpecker 2 2 0.05 13 34 0.79 Hairy Woodpecker 23 56 1.30 Northern Flicker 21 64 1.49 12 20 0.44 Yellow-bellied sapsucker 27 145 3.37 Unknown woodpecker 22 102 2.37

Table 2. Number and percent of birds detected at varying distances from the observer. Distance data was not given for 44 birds. Distance # Birds % Birds >600 46 10.384 400-600 62 13.995 200-400 136 30.700 <200 199 44.921 Table 3. Number and percent of birds detected at varying directions from the observer. Direction data was not given for 59 birds. Direction # Birds % Birds E 61 14.489 N 47 11.164 S 59 14.014 W 82 19.477 NE 41 9.739 NW 40 9.501 SE 50 11.876 SW 41 9.739

NB Forest Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey Page 10 2002 Report

Table 4. Anticipated and actual detection rates of the four target hawk species in New Brunswick, and actual detection rates in Ontario, in 2002.

Species Anticipated NB Detection Actual NB Detection ON detection rate/km** Rate/km* Rate/km Northern Goshawk 1/15 1/45 1/475 Broad-winged hawk 1/20.5 1/53 1/17 Red-shouldered hawk 1/30 1/214 1/5.7 Red-tailed hawk 1/30 1/58 1/146 * from Makepeace 2002. ** from Badzinski 2003.

NB Forest Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey Page 11 2002 Report a

30 BWHA

25

20

15

10

Percent responses 5

0 BWHA Silence BWHA Silence BWHA Silence BWHA Silence NOGO Silence NOGO Silence

b

40 RTHA 35

30

25

20

15

Percent responses 10

5

0 BWHA Silence BWHA Silence BWHA Silence BWHA Silence NOGO Silence NOGO Silence

c 40 NOGO 35

30

25

20

15

10 Percent Responses Percent 5

0 BWHA Silence BWHA Silence BWHA Silence BWHA Silence NOGO Silence NOGO Silence

d 20 HAWO 18

16

14

12

10

8

6

Percent responses 4

2

0 BWHA Silence BWHA Silence BWHA Silence BWHA Silence NOGO Silence NOGO Silence

Figure 1. Percent of initial responses by a) Broad-winged Hawk; b) Red-tailed Hawk; c) Northern Goshawk and d) Hairy Woodpecker that occurred in the various survey intervals. Sample sizes for each species are given in Table 1.

NB Forest Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey Page 12 2002 Report Figure 2. Distribution and abundance of target hawk species in 2002. These figures do not illustrate the locations of routes which were not run in 2002.

NB Forest Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey Page 13 2002 Report

Figure 3. Distribution and abundance of target woodpecker species in 2002. These figures do not illustrate the locations of routes which were not run in 2002.

NB Forest Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey Page 14 2002 Report Appendix A. Route number, location, land base, and number of target species detected for routes which were run in 2002. Species codes are given below. Route # Latitude Longitude Land base BBWO DOWO HAWO NOFL PIWO YBSA UNKW NOGO BWHA RSHA RTHA NB01 45.9670 -65.7252 Private 0 1 1 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 NB02 45.5859 -65.3087 Provincial 0 0 4 3 0 15 0 3 1 0 0 NB03 46.3167 -66.3500 Provincial 0 1 1 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 NB05 46.2322 -65.6279 Provincial 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 NB07 46.6008 -66.6097 Private 0 0 1 3 1 23 7 0 0 0 1 NB10 47.1585 -66.7115 Provincial 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 NB12 47.7899 -67.4407 Provincial 0 3 2 1 0 1 7 0 0 0 0 NB14 45.7238 -66.6059 Private 1 0 0 0 2 0 8 4 0 2 0 NB19 47.3734 -67.3583 Private 0 1 3 7 0 4 4 0 0 0 1 NB22 46.1506 -66.8370 Provincial 0 3 0 2 0 11 0 0 2 0 0 NB23 46.6091 -67.1635 Private 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 NB24 46.6247 -67.3681 Provincial 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 NB26 47.95707 -66.3925 Provincial 0 0 1 0 0 1 7 0 0 0 0 NB31 47.6111 -65.5984 Private 0 1 3 8 1 4 4 0 0 0 0 NB33 46.8857 -65.5193 Private 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 NB34 47.3439 -65.8283 Provincial 0 16 7 7 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 NB37 46.5608 -65.0569 Provincial 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 NB39 47.8466 -66.0723 Private 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB40 47.7989 -66.1047 Provincial 0 0 2 0 2 2 16 0 0 0 0 NB41 45.8603 -66.9284 Private 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 NB42 45.79252 -66.78746 Provincial 0 0 4 3 1 3 0 0 1 0 0 NB43 45.8909 -67.2264 Private 0 3 5 3 0 6 1 0 0 1 0 NB44 45.6744 -67.4608 Provincial 0 0 0 2 1 4 1 0 0 0 0 NB45 45.8197 -65.9311 Private 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB46 45.81967 -66.4633 Federal 0 0 3 3 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 NB47 47.3422 -67.8842 Private 0 0 1 5 0 11 2 0 0 0 0 NB48 47.7845 -68.3197 Provincial 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 NB54 46.1185 -59.8869 Private 0 0 1 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 NB58 46.34545 -65.575 Private 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 NB61 45.7091 -65.7802 Private 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 NB63 47.7503 -66.5003 Provincial 0 1 0 0 2 2 10 0 0 0 0 NB64 47.0085 -65.9998 Provincial 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 NB66 45.9780 -64.9917 Private 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB68 46.6613 -67.0581 Private 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 1 Appendix A. CONTINUED Route # Latitude Longitude Land base BBWO DOWO HAWO NOFL PIWO YBSA UNKW NOGO BWHA RSHA RTHA NB70 46.6828 -67.1740 Private 0 0 1 1 0 8 2 0 1 0 0 NB71 46.2228 -66.2901 Provincial 1 0 0 1 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 NB75 46.0278 -64.3754 Private 0 0 0 2 0 4 0 3 0 0 0 NB77 47.1476 -65.5892 Provincial 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 3 NB78 46.6502 -65.7502 Provincial 0 0 3 5 0 10 6 0 0 0 0 NB79 47.4446 -68.4725 Private 0 1 4 0 0 2 3 0 1 0 0 NB81 45.3574 -66.6164 Provincial 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB83 45.4972 -67.4423 Provincial 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0

BBWO = Black-backed Woodpecker; DOWO = Downy Woodpecker; HAWO = Hairy Woodpecker; NOFL = Northern Flicker; PIWO = Pileated Woodpecker; YBSA = Yellow- bellied Sapsucker; UNKW = Unknown woodpecker; NOGO = Northern Goshawk; BWHA = Broad-winged Hawk; RSHA = Red-shouldered Hawk; RTHA = Red-tailed Hawk

NB Forest Hawk and Spring Woodpecker Survey Page 16 2002 Report