Action

Action Synopsis: Bird Conservation About Actions

Can supplementary feeding increase predation or parasitism?

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    not assessed
  • Certainty
    not assessed
  • Harms
    not assessed

Source countries

Key messages

  • A replicated, controlled study in the USA found that providing seeds in predictable areas did not increase predation on seven species of songbird.
  • A replicated and controlled trial in Spain found higher levels of potentially dangerous gut microflora when fed on livestock carrion, compared to those fed on wild rabbits. A replicated study in Spain found higher levels of predation on artificial nests close to carcasses provided for vultures.

 

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A replicated, controlled study at two pairs of mixed habitat sites in Kansas, USA, in the winters 2000-1 and 2001-2 (Rogers & Heath-Coss 2003) found that predation rates on seven species of songbird by Cooper’s hawk Accipiter cooperi and sharp-shinned hawk A. striatus were no higher in an area supplied with supplementary food, compared with control (unfed) sites (two attacks in fed sites vs. no attacks in control sites). Supplementary feeding ran from early December until early March and consisted of four sunflower seed feeders and a 6 x 3 m area beneath them sprinkled with mixed seed. The species studied were dark-eyed junco Junco hyemalis, Harris’s sparrow Zonotrichia querula, song sparrow Melospiza melodia, American tree sparrow Spizella arborea, northern cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis, black-capped chickadee Parus atricapillus (also known as Poecile atricapillus) and tufted titmouse Parus bicolor. The effects of feeding on songbird body condition are discussed in ‘Provide supplementary food to increase adult survival’.

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A replicated, controlled trial in 2004 in Castile and Leon and Madrid, Spain (Blanco et al. 2006), found that red kites Milvus milvus that fed on carrion from stabled livestock had higher levels of potentially harmful gut microflora, compared to birds fed largely on wild rabbits (potentially dangerous Salmonella serotypes found in 25% of 80 faecal samples from colonies fed with livestock vs. 3% of 33 samples from colonies fed on wild rabbits). More generally, gut flora were more similar between the two colonies supplied with livestock, than either were with wild-fed birds. Livestock consisted mainly of domestic pigs Sus scrofa, but also cows, sheep, poultry and domestic rabbits.

    Study and other actions tested
  3. A replicated study in dry scrubland on Fuerteventura, Canary Islands, Spain, in spring 1996 Cortés-Avizanda et al. 2009), found that artificial nests were more likely to be predated when they were within 200 m of a carcase (both naturally-occurring and supplied to a vulture ‘restaurant’), compared to more distant nests. A total of 312 nests were laid in 12 lines. Nest predation occurred in 67% of lines, with a maximum of 92% of nests on a line being predated. The restaurant was supplied with approximately 200 kg/week of goat and pig carcasses whilst naturally occurring carcasses consisted of one goat and one yellow-legged gull Larus michaellis. Nests imitated either those of lesser short-toed larks Calandrella refescens or cream-coloured coursers Cursorius cursor and contained two Japanese quail Cortunix japonica eggs.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Williams, D.R., Child, M.F., Dicks, L.V., Ockendon, N., Pople, R.G., Showler, D.A., Walsh, J.C., zu Ermgassen, E.K.H.J. & Sutherland, W.J. (2019) Bird Conservation. Pages 141-290 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, N. Ockendon, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2019. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.

 

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Bird Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Bird Conservation

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, terrestrial mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 17

Go to the CE Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust