Conservation and Management

Disturbance At Nest

Research on this species often involves nest searching and collection of blood samples from parents and nestlings to assess hybridization. Females readily desert incomplete nests and sometimes even incomplete clutches (JLC, AMR), although other observers do not detect this effect (L. P. Bulluck, pers. comm.). Abandonment of a nest may not have much of an effect on seasonal recruitment because females rapidly rebuild after deserting a nest early in the nesting cycle. Sampling blood of nestlings caused nest failure in just one of over 50 sampled nests due to premature fledging (JLC).

Telemetry Disturbance

A pilot telemetry study in Kentucky suggests that radio transmitters may adversely affect Golden-winged Warblers (PJH). Of 4 males tagged, 2 disappeared from their territories and were not observed in the study area again.

Shooting And Trapping

No specific information available. Not a significant factor.

Pesticides And Other Contaminants/Toxins

No information available on direct impact of contaminants. Herbicide spraying on conifer plantations may reduce use by Golden-winged Warblers as it has for other warblers (Lautenschlager and Sullivan 2002) and may lower habitat quality owing to high nest predation rates as documented for other songbirds (Easton and Martin 2002). Conversely, herbicide use on utility rights-of-ways helps maintain patchy habitat used by Golden-winged Warblers (JLC).

Collisions With Man-Made Objects

542 Golden-winged Warblers were reported killed at 15 of 47 surveyed communication towers. This mortality is exceptionally high relative to other species that are orders of magnitude more abundant but have only slightly higher mortality: e.g., Wood Thrush (684), Savannah Sparrow (1335), White-throated Sparrow (797) (American Bird Conservancy 2000). The impact of manmade structures on the Golden-wing population is unknown but the high mortality rate at towers suggests that further research and analyses are appropriate, especially in light of proliferating communications towers and wind turbines.

Habitat Degradation And Loss

Disturbed sites, such as abandoned farmland and aspen clearcuts and fire managed forest stands provide regionally important nesting habitat. Declines of these habitat types owing to reforestation, fire suppression, reduced timber harvest, urban sprawl, and reduced acreage of recently abandoned farmland are associated with population declines throughout most of the Golden-wing range.

Habitat loss alone does not account for the virtual extirpation of Golden-winged Warblers in many locations. For instance, Massachusetts has over 10,000 ha of utility rights-of-ways managed in a way that favors Golden-winged Warblers (JLC), yet point counts at 300 sites on these managed shrublands found only Blue-winged Warblers in the Golden-wing's former range (Confer and Pascoe 2003). In addition, there are several states in the Appalachian/Northeast portion of the range that seem to have ample habitat and no (or very few) breeding Golden-wings.

Hybridization And Competition With Blue-Winged Warblers

Golden-winged Warbler extirpations subsequent to the arrival of Blue-winged Warblers have occurred throughout much of the Golden-wing range. Blue-winged Warblers pose a double threat to Golden-winged Warblers. First, they exhibit the same life history traits, creating competition for resources such as territories, nesting materials, and food. Second, because Golden-winged and Blue-winged Warblers can hybridize and produce viable offspring, Golden-wings face genetic dilution. As Blue-winged Warblers continue to expand into the Golden-wings range, there is strong likelihood of further Golden-wing extirpation, even in areas with suitable habitat.

Climate Change Impacts On Range Shift And Habitat Loss

Predictive climate models suggest temperature increases that could alter plant composition and insect populations. Temperature change by itself, plus the ecological consequences of such change, may exclude Golden-winged Warblers from most of the lower 48 U.S. states, including all of the Upper Great Lakes states where a most of the breeding population currently breeds (Price and Root 2005). However, major range changes during the last century, which preceded significant global warming, and wide variation in the altitude of nest sites that expose the bird to wide differences in temperature, show that the species is adaptable to a considerable range of temperatures.

Breeding Habitat

(See also Distribution: Change in Historical Range)

Target Areas for Protection: One priority habitat type is wetland forest. In particular, wetlands with a high degree of shrub patchiness attract Golden-winged Warblers in North Carolina (Rossell 2003), s. New York (Confer et al. 2010) and n. New York (Rich and Post 2008), but attract few Blue-winged Warblers in sympatric portions of the range where the 2 species are sympatric (e.g., s. and n. New York). In these swamp forests, invasive Phragmites grass, which is rarely used for nesting substrate or as perches, is displacingtussock sedges, which are the principal nest sites. Efforts to eradicate Phragmites should be seriously considered in order to maintain high quality nesting habitat.

Managing For Disturbance-Dependent Habitat

Golden-winged Warblers use many types of early succession or disturbance ecosystems. Creation and maintenance of disturbance habitat may be expensive and, in some cases, unpopular. The expense of upland management can be justified and the activity popularized by emphasizing the multiple benefits for game, e.g., woodcock, deer and grouse, and non-game species. For example, management for grouse at Pennsylvania State Game Lands 176, Centre Co., also supports Golden-winged Warblers (Kubel and Yahner 2007). Creation of upland habitat in s. New York appears to have attracted nesting Golden-winged Warblers into a reproductive sink, however, owing to the sum effects of predation, nest parasitism and competition and hybridization with Blue-winged Warblers (JLC) as revealed by monitoring fecundity. Data from other such areas are needed for comparison. Overall, habitat restoration should be attempted where such negative effects are likely to be small, and results should be assessed by monitoring fecundity.

Management for Golden-winged Warblers by clear cutting is well documented (Huffman 1997, Roth and Lutz 2004, Kubel and Yahner 2007). Commercial clear cuts, especially for aspen, can enhance nesting density by retention of scattered overstory trees (Cumming 1998). In aspen cuts in nw. Minnesota, Golden-winged Warblers selected sites with 20% residual canopy and 68% shrub cover and avoided sites with 28% residual cover and with 56% shrub cover; sites > 15 yr post-cutting no longer supported Golden-winged Warblers (Huffman 1997). In Wisconsin, some early successional plots can be maintained in a large management area if adjacent aspen stands are clear cut on a 40-year rotation with a staggered 10-year entry to maintain 25% of the area in seedling to sapling size-classes (Roth and Lutz 2004).

Other forms of habitat management are being explored. Burning appears to be an effective means of postponing succession and retaining Golden-winged Warbler populations in Tennessee and north Georgia. Similarly, livestock grazing has maintained breeding habitat in West Virginia (Aldinger pers. comm.) In Pennsylvania, shearing lowland shrub communities discourages use by Golden-winged Warblers for at least 3-years post-treatment (Hanowski et. al. 1999); however strip-cutting in these communities may be attractive to the species (Larkin pers. comm.). Additional research is needed to determine optimal lowland shearing configuration and rotation length. This may become increasingly important as demand increases for bioenergy and biofuels. Also in Pennsylvania, certain sylvicultural practices, such as heavy "seed tree" and "shade tree" cuts provide suitable habitat in the Pocono region (R. Rohrbaugh, pers. comm.).

In the Upper Great Lakes Region, lowland shrub complexes and wide, sprawling alder stands along riparian zones should be protected where possible from development and degradation.

Non-Breeding Habitat

Primary and secondary forests on the wintering grounds appear to be important for Golden-winged Warblers but are under development pressure for agriculture, urbanization, and human habitation resulting in deforestation and fragmentation. Protection of remaining intact mid to high elevation forests may be critical and restoration of forests should be explored adjacent to areas currently occupied by Golden-winged Warblers. New methods and configurations for coffee and cacao plantations (e.g. shade coffee, forest reserves around plantations) offer potential for creating habitat but further study is needed.

Migratory habitat remains largely unstudied but coastal and inland habitat along the north and south shores of the Gulf of Mexico are likely important based on band returns and eBird (2008) sighting records.