Bird Feeders Attract Bird Eaters, Too

Some predators are attracted to the food in bird feeders, and end up targeting nestlings, too. Jason G. Goldman reports. 

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

More than half of U.S. households provide food for birds. It's a billion dollar industry. Now a study asks whether the same feeders that attract birds also attract predators that eat the eggs and newly hatched nestlings of those birds. 

“We imagined that the food resource on the landscape could have a couple different effects on relationships between nest predators and their prey.” Ohio State University researcher Jennifer Malpass.

“On the one hand, you could see that the food might be attracting predators to certain areas, and that could increase nest predation risk. However, predators may be exploiting these food resources, and if you've got a good, predictable food resource on the landscape that's easy for predators to access, you could imagine that they could switch to those anthropogenic, or those human-provided foods, like bird feeders. And that could perhaps lessen nest predation risk.”


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Which could also be a problem, because predators help control the population.

Malpass and her team looked at the nests of American robins and Northern Cardinals in seven Ohio neighborhoods. They noted the presence or absence of feeders and recorded potential nest predators, like squirrels, domestic cats, and other birds. Over the four-year study, they observed more than 15,000 day-active predators across 19 species, but only brown-headed cowbirds and American crows were associated with bird feeders. The results were published in the journal The Condor. [Jennifer S. Malpass, Amanda D. Rodewald, and Stephen N. Matthews, Species-dependent effects of bird feeders on nest predators and nest survival of urban American Robins and Northern Cardinals]

The survival of Northern Cardinal nestlings did not seem to be related to the presence of these nest predators or even to bird feeders. But the American robins tell a different story.

“In areas that had both many crows and many bird feeders, American robin nest survival was the lowest.”

So the effect of bird feeders on urban wildlife communities differs from species to species, neighborhood to neighborhood.

“At least some predators seem to be attracted by bird feeders and the food resource they provide, and in some cases this can lead to increased nest predation risk for native backyard breeding birds.”

But that doesn't necessarily mean that we should get rid of all the bird feeders.

“There are some great ecological and social benefits from this practice. We see them as nature's ambassadors. They're a point of connection to nature and the outside world and our native wildlife.”

Homeowners have been feeding wild birds for a long time, but only now are scientists finally beginning to understand just how that affects urban ecosystems. And the upshot, of course, is: it's complicated.

—Jason G. Goldman

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Jason G. Goldman is a science journalist based in Los Angeles. He has written about animal behavior, wildlife biology, conservation, and ecology for Scientific American, Los Angeles magazine, the Washington Post, the Guardian, the BBC, Conservation magazine, and elsewhere. He contributes to Scientific American's "60-Second Science" podcast, and is co-editor of Science Blogging: The Essential Guide (Yale University Press). He enjoys sharing his wildlife knowledge on television and on the radio, and often speaks to the public about wildlife and science communication.

More by Jason G. Goldman

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe