One thought on “Siberian Grouse (Falcipennis falcipennis)”
Dear Red List Team,
I conducted fieldwork on the Siberian Grouse in two areas near Komsomolsk-na-Amure during late summer in 2014 and 2015, together with Prof. A.V. Andreev. Similar to Biserov (2011), we observed the highest densities of birds along logging roads. However, applying these densities to the species’ entire distribution range is highly problematic.
Biserov (2011) states that there was no evidence of increased concentration of spruce grouse directly on or near roads, as some individuals and broods were also recorded at varying distances from the road. However, he does not further quantify what is meant by “some individuals” or specify these “various distances.”
Based on my own field experience and discussions with Prof. Andreev, it is clear that not only is the detectability of the species higher along forest roads, but actual occupancy is also higher. Logging roads appear to be preferred by the species as they provide gravel and are often lined with raspberry bushes. Additionally, I observed the highest densities shortly after extended periods of rainfall, when the birds were drying their plumage on the road.
Biserov (2011) himself noted that densities along logging roads were seasonal, and that a transition from larch forests to dark coniferous forests occurs prior to winter. This phenomenon, also described by Hafner and Andreev (1998), indicates that Siberian Grouse occur in moving aggregations and are therefore patchily distributed, not evenly spread throughout their range.
Prof. Andreev has spent many years studying various grouse species in different forest types across Russia, including remote areas far from anthropogenic infrastructure such as logging roads. For this reason—and for the points mentioned above—I consider his reports of lower population densities across the species’ entire range to be more credible than those based on late-summer observations near forest roads.
It is also important to note that, unlike many other grouse species, the Siberian Grouse is not particularly shy and can often be observed from just a few meters away. Moreover, late summer is the time of year when population density is generally highest, as compared to spring. I assume the previously reported figure of 275,000 individuals refers to spring numbers? Before extrapolating late summer densities observed along logging roads in the Bureinsky Reserve to the species’ entire range, further research is needed—particularly studies that explicitly address Siberian Grouse occupancy and detectability at greater distances from logging roads.
Most importantly, large parts of the species’ range are severely affected by extensive clear-felling. In this context, I would also like to refer you to our publication in Ornis Fennica (Ludwig, T., Siano, R. and Andreev, A. V. 2022. Habitat selection of sympatric Siberian Grouse and Hazel Grouse in natural and exploited forests of the lower Amur region. – Ornis Fennica 98: 142–161.) as well as the monography by Hafner and Andreev (Hafner, F. & Andreev, A. V. 1998. Das Sichelhuhn – Wundervogel der Amurtaiga. Naturwissenschaftlicher Verein für Kärnten. In German with English summary).
Sincerely,
Tobias Ludwig (PhD)
Ludwig Miljömodellering
Konstdammsvägen 7
771 65 Ludvika/ SWEDEN
Dear Red List Team,
I conducted fieldwork on the Siberian Grouse in two areas near Komsomolsk-na-Amure during late summer in 2014 and 2015, together with Prof. A.V. Andreev. Similar to Biserov (2011), we observed the highest densities of birds along logging roads. However, applying these densities to the species’ entire distribution range is highly problematic.
Biserov (2011) states that there was no evidence of increased concentration of spruce grouse directly on or near roads, as some individuals and broods were also recorded at varying distances from the road. However, he does not further quantify what is meant by “some individuals” or specify these “various distances.”
Based on my own field experience and discussions with Prof. Andreev, it is clear that not only is the detectability of the species higher along forest roads, but actual occupancy is also higher. Logging roads appear to be preferred by the species as they provide gravel and are often lined with raspberry bushes. Additionally, I observed the highest densities shortly after extended periods of rainfall, when the birds were drying their plumage on the road.
Biserov (2011) himself noted that densities along logging roads were seasonal, and that a transition from larch forests to dark coniferous forests occurs prior to winter. This phenomenon, also described by Hafner and Andreev (1998), indicates that Siberian Grouse occur in moving aggregations and are therefore patchily distributed, not evenly spread throughout their range.
Prof. Andreev has spent many years studying various grouse species in different forest types across Russia, including remote areas far from anthropogenic infrastructure such as logging roads. For this reason—and for the points mentioned above—I consider his reports of lower population densities across the species’ entire range to be more credible than those based on late-summer observations near forest roads.
It is also important to note that, unlike many other grouse species, the Siberian Grouse is not particularly shy and can often be observed from just a few meters away. Moreover, late summer is the time of year when population density is generally highest, as compared to spring. I assume the previously reported figure of 275,000 individuals refers to spring numbers? Before extrapolating late summer densities observed along logging roads in the Bureinsky Reserve to the species’ entire range, further research is needed—particularly studies that explicitly address Siberian Grouse occupancy and detectability at greater distances from logging roads.
Most importantly, large parts of the species’ range are severely affected by extensive clear-felling. In this context, I would also like to refer you to our publication in Ornis Fennica (Ludwig, T., Siano, R. and Andreev, A. V. 2022. Habitat selection of sympatric Siberian Grouse and Hazel Grouse in natural and exploited forests of the lower Amur region. – Ornis Fennica 98: 142–161.) as well as the monography by Hafner and Andreev (Hafner, F. & Andreev, A. V. 1998. Das Sichelhuhn – Wundervogel der Amurtaiga. Naturwissenschaftlicher Verein für Kärnten. In German with English summary).
Sincerely,
Tobias Ludwig (PhD)
Ludwig Miljömodellering
Konstdammsvägen 7
771 65 Ludvika/ SWEDEN