Kennedy re-states that the goal of her 1997 paper was to evaluate the petitioner's (who petitioned the USFWS to list the goshawk) claim that "goshawk populations have suffered significant declines." She treated this statement like a hypothesis and proceeded to test it with available evidence. She states that "diagnosing a cause of decline is irrelevant if there is no evidence that a decline has occurred," and takes a similar approach to the USFWS when they evaluate listing petitions.

Kennedy used both available survey method data and demographic data to evaluate goshawk population trends. Surprisingly, neither author [Smallwood 1998 or Crocker-Bedford 1998] thought any of the demographic response variables she chose to evaluate trends were useful for determining goshawk population status! Her critics state that "population density, fecundity, survival, and rate of population change all lack scientifically defensible relationships with range-wide abundance". She disagrees with this statement, and still adheres to these methods she describes as "basic tenets of conservation biology."

Her critics also reject density studies as appropriate response variables to assess goshawk populations. Her response is that this problem could be solved by estimating population size using Jolly-Seber models. She responds to criticism of her meta-analysis approach by stating that "meta-analysis should not be used in lieu of proper sampling. However, it is an underutilized tool that con be used to analyze data from multiple, well-designed, coordinated studies which are unlikely to estimate population trends individually due to the rarity of the species."

Regarding migration counts being used as population indices, she states: "Since goshawk migrations are characterized by irruptive invasions, migration counts of this species are more likely to reflect residency patterns than changes in abundance (Bednarz et al. 1990, Titus and Fuller 1990).

Habitat Variables
She agrees with Smallwood and Crocker-Bedford that habitat variables should be included in a goshawk monitoring program, however, "habitat monitoring should be used to augment demographic studies, not replace them." Currently, relationships between migratory counts, information on habitat availability and contiguity, and goshawk status are not currently well- documented or well-defined.

"Once goshawk habitat is well-defined and demographic data are available..I'd recommend we begin development of a model (or models) that predicts the relationships between suitable nesting and winter habitat and population trends and/or performance.

Also suggests "on-site experiments designed to measure goshawk responses to silvicultural treatments". "Monitoring pre-and post-treatment movements of even a few pairs of birds would provide us with fascinating qualitative insights into goshawk responses to harvest and could be the basis for designing additional experiments." This contrasts Crocker-Bedford's statement that "Scientists should explicitly recognize that goshawk field studies are correlative".

Some criticisms of Crocker-Bedford's controversial 1990 paper
We do not know if he (Crocker-Bedford 1990) used standard search effort techniques for treatment and control locales. Search effort is the major factor influencing estimation of occupancy rates. To illustrate this, mean distances to alternative nests range anywhere from 273 meters (m) to 489m (ranges 21-3410m).

C-B's most controversial statement: "the goshawk population on the North Kaibab Ranger District declined 'from an estimated 260 nesting pairs in 1972 to approximately 60 pairs in 1988.'" She states, "I think this statement is an example of inappropriate inference given his data set. He did not provide an analysis of the limitations of his calculations nor did he provide alternative explanations for his results." She states this type of work is considered "inappropriate inference by the scientific community."

Population Viability Analysis (PVA)
She quotes the Maguire and Call (1992) PVA analysis on the same population Crocker-Bedford studied. They found, "the range of variability in parameter estimates, particularly for mortality rates, was so great that our simulation results produced populations that ranged from rapidly increasing to rapidly declining. We are unable to conclude from these results whether the North Kaibab Ranger District stable, increasing, or decreasing."

Summary
After criticisms of her 1997 paper [Crocker-Bedford (1998) and Smallwood (1998)], she still holds to her claim that there is no evidence for a decline in the North American goshawk population. She clarifies that the purpose of her paper was not to conduct a status review for the goshawk, but to evaluate a claim made by petitioners that "goshawk populations are declining" using current data. She believes that a meta-analysis of several studies would be a useful tool to evaluate population status for the goshawk; and she still holds to the basic tenets of conservation biology that population density, fecundity, survival, and rate of population change all have significant relationships with range-wide abundance. She also gives a review of Crocker-Bedford's (1990) controversial paper. His paper does not state what search effort techniques he used, nor does he provide an analysis of the limitations of his calculations, which makes his statement that "from an estimated 260 nesting pairs in 1972 to approximately 60 pairs in 1988" questionable. She recommends on-site silvicultural experiments to determine how goshawks react to timber harvest. She agrees with the Maguire and Call (1992) population viability analysis study, which concludes that since we still do not have adequate demographic data on the goshawk, we cannot make conclusions as to the status of this population; basing population status on migration counts and habitat studies alone is also inadequate for status assessments.