Register      Login
Wildlife Research Wildlife Research Society
Ecology, management and conservation in natural and modified habitats
Shopping Cart: ( empty )
You are here: Home > Journals > WR > WR24140
RESEARCH ARTICLE (Open Access)
Contents Vol 52(5)

Call broadcast surveys monitor owls with more precision than passive surveys by citizen scientists or acoustic recording units

V. F. Sperring https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2952-971X A B * , M. Wilson C , B. Isaac B , N. A. Macgregor https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7995-0230 D E and R. H. Clarke B
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University, Hawkesbury, NSW, Australia.

B School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Vic, Australia.

C Norfolk Island National Park, Norfolk Island, Australia.

D Parks Australia, Canberra, ACT, Australia.

E Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology (DICE), University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.

* Correspondence to: f.sperring@westernsydney.edu.au

Handling Editor: Shannon Dundas

Wildlife Research 52, WR24140 https://doi.org/10.1071/WR24140
Submitted: 16 September 2024  Accepted: 5 April 2025  Published: 5 May 2025

© 2025 The Author(s) (or their employer(s)). Published by CSIRO Publishing. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)

Abstract

Context

Population monitoring that effectively detects population changes is an important component of threatened species management. Call broadcast surveys are regularly used for robust monitoring of vocal or territorial species; however, they can be resource intensive. Passive monitoring approaches involving citizen scientists and acoustic recording units may be less costly, and consequently these methods are increasingly being advocated.

Aims

This study investigated the utility of three different monitoring approaches to detect population trends in the Critically Endangered Norfolk Island morepork Ninox novaeseelandiae undulata. It compared the effectiveness of call broadcast with that of passive citizen scientist and acoustic recording surveys.

Methods

Between November and December 2020, we trialled each technique on Norfolk Island. The coefficient of variation in the number of moreporks heard per survey, and the mean detectability at each site were calculated as the core metrics for each technique. The statistical power of each technique to detect population trends over time was also calculated to compare efficacy. An extensive island-wide call broadcast survey, roost searching, and GPS tracking program were used to establish an independent population estimate.

Key results

We established a population estimate of 25 individuals. The call broadcast approach had the highest precision and highest site detectability. This approach was also assessed as being capable of detecting a change of just two or three moreporks per year, after three years of monitoring. By contrast, approaches using passive citizen science surveys and acoustic recording units would require at least ten years of monitoring to detect similar population trends.

Conclusions

Call broadcast surveys had a greater capacity to achieve high detectability and precise monitoring, relative to the passive approaches.

Implications

The high precision of call broadcast appears to justify the higher resource requirements relative to other methods examined in this study, where the target species is territorial and extremely rare. Call broadcast surveys are recommended for long-term monitoring of Norfolk Island moreporks.

Keywords: call broadcast, citizen scientists, passive acoustic recording units, population monitoring, threatened species.

References

Adler FR, Green AM, Şekercioğlu ÇH (2020) Citizen science in ecology: a place for humans in nature. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1469(1), 52-64.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Allen T, Finkbeiner SL, Johnson DH (2004) Comparison of detection rates of breeding marsh birds in passive and playback surveys at Lacreek National Wildlife Refuge, South Dakota. Waterbirds 27(3), 277-281.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Appleby BM, Yamaguchi N, Johnson PJ, Macdonald DW (1999) Sex-specific territorial responses in Tawny Owls Strix aluco. Ibis 141(1), 91-99.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Au WW, Cajas-Salazar N, Salama S (1998) Factors contributing to discrepancies in population monitoring studies. Mutation Research/Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis 400(1-2), 467-478.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Beirne C, Lambin X (2013) Understanding the determinants of volunteer retention through capture–recapture analysis: answering social science questions using a wildlife ecology toolkit. Conservation Letters 6(6), 391-401.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Benshemesh J, Southwell D, Barker R, McCarthy M (2020) Citizen scientists reveal nationwide trends and drivers in the breeding activity of a threatened bird, the malleefowl (Leipoa ocellata). Biological Conservation 246, 108573.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Blanco G, Sergio F, Sanchéz-Zapata JA, Pérez-García JM, Botella F, Martínez F, Zuberogoitia I, Frías O, Roviralta F, Martínez JE, Hiraldo F (2012) Safety in numbers? Supplanting data quality with fanciful models in wildlife monitoring and conservation. Biodiversity and Conservation 21, 3269-3276.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Bonney R, Phillips TB, Ballard HL, Enck JW (2016) Can citizen science enhance public understanding of science? Public Understanding of Science 25(1), 2-16.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Brighten A (2015) Vocalisations of the New Zealand Morepork (Ninox novaeseelandiae) on Ponui Island. Master of Science (M.Sc.) Masters Thesis, Massey University, New Zealand.

Chandler M, See L, Copas K, Bonde AMZ, López BC, Danielsen F, Legind JK, Masinde S, Miller-Rushing AJ, Newman G, Rosemartin A, Turak E (2017) Contribution of citizen science towards international biodiversity monitoring. Biological Conservation 213, 280-294.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Chrenková M, Dobrý M, Šálek M (2017) Further evidence of large-scale population decline and range contraction of the little owl Athene noctua in Central Europe. Folia Zoologica 66(2), 106-116.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Clarke RH, Oliver DL, Boulton RL, Cassey P, Clarke MF (2003) Assessing programs for monitoring threatened species – a tale of three honeyeaters (Meliphagidae). Wildlife Research 30, 427-435.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Clink DJ, Klinck H (2021) Unsupervised acoustic classification of individual gibbon females and the implications for passive acoustic monitoring. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 12(2), 328-341.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Commonwealth of Australia (2024) Norfolk Island region threatened species recovery plan 2022–2032 In draft. Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, Canberra.

Conrad CC, Hilchey KG (2011) A review of citizen science and community-based environmental monitoring: issues and opportunities. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 176(1-4), 273-291.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Conway CJ, Gibbs JP (2005) Effectiveness of call-broadcast surveys for monitoring marsh birds. The Auk 122(1), 26-35.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Cooke R, Grant H, Ebsworth I, Rendall AR, Isaac B, White JG (2017) Can owls be used to monitor the impacts of urbanisation? A cautionary tale of variable detection. Wildlife Research 44(7), 573-581.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Director of National Parks (2010) Norfolk region threatened species recovery plan. Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment, Canberra.

Duchac LS, Lesmeister DB, Dugger KM, Ruff ZJ, Davis RJ (2020) Passive acoustic monitoring effectively detects Northern Spotted Owls and Barred Owls over a range of forest conditions. The Condor 122(3), duaa017.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Eglington SM, Davis SE, Joys AC, Chamberlain DE, Noble DG (2010) The effect of observer experience on English Breeding Bird Survey population trends. Bird Study 57(2), 129-141.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Einolf C (2018) Evidence-based volunteer management: a review of the literature. Voluntary Sector Review 9(2), 153-176.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Elliot NB, Bett A, Chege M, Sankan K, de Souza N, Kariuki L, Broekhuis F, Omondi P, Ngene S, Gopalaswamy AM (2020) The importance of reliable monitoring methods for the management of small, isolated populations. Conservation Science and Practice 2(7), e217.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Fair JM, Paul E, Jones J, Clark AB, Davie C, Kaiser G (2010) ‘Guidelines to the use of Wild Birds in Research.’ 3rd edn. (The Ornithological Council: Washington, D.C, USA)

Farhadinia MS, Moll RJ, Montgomery RA, Ashrafi S, Johnson PJ, Hunter LTB, Macdonald DW (2018) Citizen science data facilitate monitoring of rare large carnivores in remote montane landscapes. Ecological Indicators 94, 283-291.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Farmer RG, Leonard ML, Mills Flemming JE, Anderson SC (2014) Observer aging and long-term avian survey data quality. Ecology and Evolution 4(12), 2563-2576.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Gibb R, Browning E, Glover-Kapfer P, Jones KE (2019) Emerging opportunities and challenges for passive acoustics in ecological assessment and monitoring. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 10(2), 169-185.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Gibbs JP (2001) MONITOR Vol. 2023. Available at https://www.mbr-pwrc.usgs.gov/software/monitor/help_overview.html

Gibbs JP, Droege S, Eagle P (1998) Monitoring populations of plants and animals. BioScience 48(11), 935-940.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Gregory RD, Gibbons DW, Donald PF (2004) Bird census and survey techniques. In ‘Bird ecology and conservation: a handbook of techniques’. (Eds WJ Sutherland, I Newton, R Green) pp. 17–56. (Oxford University Press: Oxford, England) 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198520863.003.0002

Hambler C, Newing J, Hambler K (1993) Population monitoring for the flightless rail Dryolimnas cuvieri aldabranus. Bird Conservation International 3(4), 307-318.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Harris JBC, Haskell DG (2013) Simulated birdwatchers’ playback affects the behavior of two tropical birds. PLoS ONE 8(10), e77902.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Hauser CE, Pople AR, Possingham HP (2006) Should managed populations be monitored every year? Ecological Applications 16(2), 807-819.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Hill AP, Prince P, Piña Covarrubias E, Doncaster CP, Snaddon JL, Rogers A (2018) AudioMoth: evaluation of a smart open acoustic device for monitoring biodiversity and the environment. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 9(5), 1199-1211.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Jaramillo-Legorreta A, Cardenas-Hinojosa G, Nieto-Garcia E, Rojas-Bracho L, Ver Hoef J, Moore J, Tregenza N, Barlow J, Gerrodette T, Thomas L, Taylor B (2017) Passive acoustic monitoring of the decline of Mexico’s Critically Endangered vaquita. Conservation Biology 31(1), 183-191.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Jiguet F (2009) Method learning caused a first-time observer effect in a newly started breeding bird survey. Bird Study 56(2), 253-258.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Kamp J, Oppel S, Heldbjerg H, Nyegaard T, Donald PF (2016) Unstructured citizen science data fail to detect long-term population declines of common birds in Denmark. Diversity and Distributions 22(10), 1024-1035.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Kosmala M, Wiggins A, Swanson A, Simmons B (2016) Assessing data quality in citizen science. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 14(10), 551-560.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Kotila M, Suominen KM, Vasko VV, Blomberg AS, Lehikoinen A, Andersson T, Aspi J, Cederberg T, Hänninen J, Inkinen J (2023) Large-scale long-term passive-acoustic monitoring reveals spatio-temporal activity patterns of boreal bats. Ecography 2023, e06617.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Legge S, Robinson N, Lindenmayer D, Scheele B, Southwell D, Wintle B (2018) Introduction: making it count. In ‘Monitoring threatened species and ecological communities’. (Eds S Legge, D Lindenmayer, N Robinson, B Scheele, D Southwell, B Wintle, JC Woinarski, E Bayraktarov) pp. 1–10. (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne, Australia) 10.1071/9781486307722

Lewandowski E, Specht H (2015) Influence of volunteer and project characteristics on data quality of biological surveys. Conservation Biology 29(3), 713-723.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Lindenmayer D, Likens G (2018) ‘Effective ecological monitoring.’ (CSIRO publishing: Melbourne, Australia) 10.1071/9781486308934

Lindenmayer DB, Gibbons P, Bourke M, Burgman M, Dickman CR, Ferrier S, Fitzsimons J, Freudenberger D, Garnett ST, Groves C, Hobbs RJ, Kingsford RT, Krebs C, Legge S, Lowe AJ, Mclean R, Montambault J, Possingham H, Radford J, Robinson D, Smallbone L, Thomas D, Varcoe T, Vardon M, Wardle G, Woinarski J, Zerger A (2012) Improving biodiversity monitoring. Austral Ecology 37(3), 285-294.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Lindenmayer D, Michael D, Crane M, Florance D (2018) Ten lessons in 20 years: insights from monitoring fauna and temperate woodland revegetation. Ecological Management & Restoration 19, 36-43.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Lor S, Malecki RA (2002) Call-response surveys to monitor marsh bird population trends. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30, 1195-1201.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Marion WR, O’Meara TE, Maehr DS (1981) Use of playback recordings in sampling elusive or secretive birds. Studies in Avian Biology 6, 81-85.
| Google Scholar |

Marques TA, Thomas L, Martin SW, Mellinger DK, Ward JA, Moretti DJ, Harris D, Tyack PL (2013) Estimating animal population density using passive acoustics. Biological Reviews 88(2), 287-309.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Marsland S, Priyadarshani N, Juodakis J, Castro I (2019) AVIANZ: a future-proofed program for annotation and recognition of animal sounds in long-time field recordings. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 10(8), 1189-1195.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Mielke A, Zuberbühler K (2013) A method for automated individual, species and call type recognition in free-ranging animals. Animal Behaviour 86(2), 475-482.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Molnár C, Kaplan F, Roy P, Pachet F, Pongrácz P, Dóka A, Miklósi Á (2008) Classification of dog barks: a machine learning approach. Animal Cognition 11, 389-400.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Nisbet E (2007) Cinderella science. Nature 450(7171), 789-790.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Olsen J, Hayes G (2002) Vocalisations used by Southern Boobooks (Ninox novaeseelandiae) in the Australian Capital Territory. In ‘Ecology and conservation of owls’. (Eds I Newton, R Kavanagh, J Olsen, I Taylor) p. 305. (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne, Australia) 10.1071/9780643069886

Pérez-Granados C, Schuchmann K-L (2021) Passive acoustic monitoring of Chaco Chachalaca (Ortalis canicollis) over a year: vocal activity pattern and monitoring recommendations. Tropical Conservation Science 14, 19400829211058295.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Prince P, Hill A, Piña Covarrubias E, Doncaster P, Snaddon JL, Rogers A (2019) Deploying acoustic detection algorithms on low-cost, open-source acoustic sensors for environmental monitoring. Sensors 19(3), 553.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Pryde MA, Greene TC (2016) Determining the spacing of acoustic call count stations for monitoring a widespread forest owl. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 40(1), 100-107.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Pryde MA, Mortimer JAJ, Greene TC, Thygesen HH (2020) Optimising monitoring times for surveys of rūrū (Ninox novaeseelandiae novaeseelandiae). New Zealand Journal of Ecology 44(1), 3401.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

R Core Team (2023) R: a language and environment for statistical computing (4.2.2). R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at https://www.r-project.org/

Ribeiro JW, Jr., Sugai LSM, Campos-Cerqueira M (2017) Passive acoustic monitoring as a complementary strategy to assess biodiversity in the Brazilian Amazonia. Biodiversity and Conservation 26(12), 2999-3002.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Rohner C (1997) Non-territorial ‘floaters’ in Great Horned Owls: space use during a cyclic peak of Snowshoe Hares. Animal Behaviour 53(5), 901-912.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Severinghaus LL (2000) Territoriality and the significance of calling in the Lanyu Scops Owl Otus elegans botelensis. Ibis 142(2), 297-304.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Shonfield J, Bayne EM (2017) Autonomous recording units in avian ecological research: current use and future applications. Avian Conservation and Ecology 12(1), 14.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Sorrell KJ, Clarke RH, Holmberg R, McIntosh RR (2019) Remotely piloted aircraft improve precision of capture–mark–resight population estimates of Australian fur seals. Ecosphere 10(8), e02812.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Southwell DM, Smart A, Merson SD, Selwood KE, Macgregor NA (2024) Using power analysis and spatial prioritization to evaluate the design of a forest bird monitoring programme. Oryx 58, 522-531.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Sperring V, Brown S, Macgregor N, Olsen P, Clarke R, Wilson M, Greenup N, Weeks A, Ward R, Greenwood D, Christian M, Garnett S (2021) Norfolk Island Morepork Ninox novaeseelandiae undulata. In ‘The action plan for Australian birds 2020’. (Eds S Garnett, G Baker) pp. 360–363. (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne) 10.1071/9781486311910

Sperring VF, Bradsworth N, Isaac B, Brown S, Wilson M, Macgregor NA, Clarke RH (2024a) Habitat requirements of a Critically Endangered Ninox hawk-owl: implications for island-wide restoration. Restoration Ecology 32, e14284.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Sperring VF, Weeks AR, Webster W, Macgregor NA, Wilson M, Isaac B, Clarke RH (2024b) Diet breadth of a critically endangered owl presents challenges for invasive rodent management: a conservation conundrum. Emu - Austral Ornithology 124, 187-198.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Sugai LSM, Silva TSF, Ribeiro JW, Jr, Llusia D (2019) Terrestrial passive acoustic monitoring: review and perspectives. BioScience 69, 15-25.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Viola BM, Sorrell KJ, Clarke RH, Corney SP, Vaughan PM (2022) Amateurs can be experts: a new perspective on collaborations with citizen scientists. Biological Conservation 274, 109739.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Vrezec A, Bertoncelj I (2018) Territory monitoring of Tawny Owls Strix aluco using playback calls is a reliable population monitoring method. Bird Study 65(sup1), S52-S62.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Watson DM, Znidersic E, Craig MD (2019) Ethical birding call playback and conservation. Conservation Biology 33(2), 469-471.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Westgate MJ, Scheele BC, Ikin K, Hoefer AM, Beaty RM, Evans M, Osborne W, Hunter D, Rayner L, Driscoll DA (2015) Citizen science program shows urban areas have lower occurrence of frog species, but not accelerated declines. PLoS ONE 10(11), e0140973.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Wickham H, François R, Henry L, Müller K, Vaughan D (2023) dplyr: a grammar of data manipulation, R package version 1.1.4. Available at https://github.com/tidyverse/dplyr

Wolfgang A, Haines A (2016) Testing automated call-recognition software for winter bird vocalizations. Northeastern Naturalist 23(2), 249-258.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Wood CM, Gutiérrez RJ, Keane JJ, Peery MZ (2020) Early detection of rapid Barred Owl population growth within the range of the California Spotted Owl advises the Precautionary Principle. The Condor 122(1), duz058.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Yoccoz NG, Nichols JD, Boulinier T (2001) Monitoring of biological diversity in space and time. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 16(8), 446-453.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Zuberogoitia I, Zabala J, Martínez JE (2011) Bias in little owl population estimates using playback techniques during surveys. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 34(2), 395-400.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Zuberogoitia I, Martínez JE, González-Oreja JA, de Buitrago CG, Belamendia G, Zabala J, Laso M, Pagaldai N, Jiménez-Franco MV (2020) Maximizing detection probability for effective large-scale nocturnal bird monitoring. Diversity and Distribution 26, 1034-1050.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Zwerts JA, Stephenson PJ, Maisels F, Rowcliffe M, Astaras C, Jansen PA, van der Waarde J, Sterck LEHM, Verweij PA, Bruce T, Brittain S, van Kuijk M (2021) Methods for wildlife monitoring in tropical forests: comparing human observations, camera traps, and passive acoustic sensors. Conservation Science and Practice 3(12), e568.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |