We tested factors associated with predation near forest-field edge and with the ecological trap hypothesis using artificial bird nests containing Japanese quail (Coturnix japonica) eggs. Predation rates were determined for 759 nests placed in a systematic pattern within plots perpendicular to a forest-field ecotone created by commercial timber harvest in northern Idaho. One plot contained an abrupt edge and 1 contained a wide feathered edge of partial timber removal. Nests of 2 diameters (80 and 100 mm) were located on the ground and above ground in shrubs, and were placed in high(20 nests/ha) and low-density (9 nests/ha) patterns. No difference was detected for predation rate with respect to nest location or size. Nests placed in a low-density pattern received higher percent predation than nests in a high-density pattern. The highdensity plot had greater shrub cover, which may.have restricted predator effectiveness. Predation rates were >4 x higher in forest plots than field plots; these results may reflect relatively infrequent use of field subplots by avian predators requiring perch sites. Our data do not support the ecological trap hypothesis; we found no relationship between distance from edge and predation rate. However, our abrupt-edge subplots had higher predation than the feathered-edge subplots. These data support earlier hypotheses that birds are poorly adapted to abrupt, artificial-edge habitats, and that these habitats may have a barrier effect and create a travel lane for predators. J. WILDL. MANAGE. 52(3):484-491 The edge concept is a firmly established maxim in ecology (Leopold 1933:131, Emlen 1973: 394, Smith 1977:160). Species diversity and density increase at community junctions (Odum 1971:157). Numerous ornithological studies have supported the edge effect concept (Lay 1938, Kendeigh 1946, Johnston 1947, Johnston and Odum 1956, Hagar 1960, Marten 1960, Hogstad 1967, Johnston 1970, Gates and Gysel 1978). Edge effect results from vegetative heterogeneity created by the junction or juxtaposition of 2 uniform habitats, and is correlated with increased avian diversity and density (MacArthur and MacArthur 1961, Willson 1974, Roth 1976). However, several recent reports suggest that increased avian density and species richness are not universal characteristics of edges (Laudenslayer and Balda 1976, Ferris 1979, O'Meara et al. 1981, Morgan and Gates 1982). Gates and Gysel (1978) and Chasko and Gates (1982) reported that nests within edge zones had greater predation and lower fledging success than nests in zones more distant from the edge. Gates and Gysel (1978) proposed the ecological trap hypothesis; i.e., that passerines are attracted to the vegetative diversity of edge habitats but experience greater predator activity at the edge. They further postulated that abrupt-edge habitats are associated with relatively recent environmental perturbations by man, and that birds are poorly adapted to predation near artificial edge zones. Increased predator activity at edges is assumed to be the combined result of increased prey density (Johnston and Odum 1956) and the natural travel lane created by the abrupt change in vertical vegetational structure (Bider 1968). Yahner and Wright (1985) and Angelstam (1 86) measured predation rates on artificial nests in plots near edge zones. Neither study revealed an edge effect consistent with the ecological trap ypothesis. O r objectives were to examine several questions related to predation near the edge zone and the ecological trap hypothesis: (1) do predation rates differ between forest and field habitats, (2) does nest density influence predation te, (3) does nest predation vary with distance from the edge zone, and (4) does nest predation vary with edge structure (edge zone width)? We acknowledge J. W. Thomas for suggesting this research topic. We thank B. M. Janosik and J. J. Parker for assistance with data collection. J. Besser and E. Scott provided quail eggs. H. L. Osborne helped delineate the study area. J. A. Blakesley, J. Linman, and J. Nelson assisted with data analysis. E. O. Garton, J. E. Gates, B. D. Griffith, J. M. Scott, J. Verner, and R. H. Yahner reviewed the manuscript and provided helpful comments. This project was funded