Thursday, February 02, 2012

Review: Petrels, Albatrosses & Storm-Petrels of North America

The bird blogosphere has been buzzing with the release of another new field guide. One blog has already proclaimed it a strong contender for the best bird book of the year; other blogs have also been strong in their praise for the guide. This is a guide to the tubenose order, Procellariformes. This order includes storm-petrels, albatrosses, fulmars, petrels, shearwaters, and diving-petrels (the latter not covered as they occur outside the book's geographic range). Tubenoses as a group are named for the horny tubes that encase their nostrils. Since tubenoses live at sea for most of the year, they must drink saltwater to survive, and they excrete the excess salt through their nostrils.

The new field guide, Petrels, Albatrosses & Storm-Petrels of North America: A Photographic Guide, by Steve N. G. Howell, is a hefty tome. In fact, it is far larger and heavier than I expected and competes with The Crossley ID Guide as the heaviest field guide in my collection. It is so large and heavy that it is an unlikely candidate for field use. Instead, this is clearly a book best used as study guide at home in preparation for pelagic trips and a reference for identifying seabirds from notes or photographs following sightings.

While the hefty size will discourage field use, it accommodates a wealth of information. The heart of the book are the species accounts. These are grouped by family (petrels, albatrosses, and storm-petrels) and further divided into groups of similar species. (For example, petrels are grouped into shearwaters, gadfly petrels, and other petrels, each of which are subdivided further.) Each of the groups and subgroups is prefaced with an introduction laying out which features are most useful for identification and warning about identification pitfalls. The species accounts themselves are lengthy, with an emphasis on distribution and separating the species from similar species. Each account is accompanied by a range map showing the breeding and nonbreeding ranges (with arrows showing movements and numbers for what months they appear) and photographic plates. The plates are a major strength of the guide, with numerous, beautiful photographs for each species, showing a full range of variation. It must have taken a substantial effort to gather so much visual documentation.

When examining a new field guide, it is tempting to skip the introduction and turn straight to the plates. With this new tubenose guide, it is definitely worth reading the introduction unless you are already an expert at seabird identification. The introduction includes notes on the taxonomy and life histories of tubenoses, as one would expect. The book does not strictly follow the AOU Checklist, which Howell describes as "particularly anachronistic," but instead tries to present current taxonomy as represented in scientific papers. Since tubenose classification is currently in flux, the number of ordering of species in the future seems likely to differ from both the current AOU Checklist and Howell's presentation. Howell notes which taxa are the most uncertain. Advice on tubenose identification, and how it is affected by conditions at sea and molt patterns, follows the discussion of taxonomy.

The introduction also includes a primer on ocean habitats and how those affect the life histories and distribution of seabirds. This may not be obvious to the landbound birder – it was not obvious to me, anyway – but the seemingly uniform surface of the ocean conceals a variety of habitat types underneath. These habitats are affected by currents, temperature gradients, and other factors, and some are far more abundant in food sources than others. Where the best food sources are can shift from day to day, and along with them, where the most seabird diversity can be found.

Petrels, Albatrosses & Storm-Petrels of North America: A Photographic Guide, by Steve N. G. Howell is a must-have for birders with a strong interest in pelagic birding and desirable for birders living near the coast, as some tubenose species may be seen from land on occasion. Land-locked birders will probably find the guide less useful, but it will still be of interest for learning about the birds that make their living on the ocean.

Wednesday, February 01, 2012

Lesser Black-backed Gulls at Donaldson Park

Yesterday as I made my usual route around Donaldson Park, I encountered a sizable gathering of gulls spread over the artificial pond and the nearby baseball field. In the midst of the flock on the baseball field, I spotted a Lesser Black-backed Gull, which sat down on the ground as I watched it, but before I took a photo. You can see its small size and dainty features in comparison to the burly Herring Gull seated just behind it. There is some streaking on its head, but it was very light streaking, and hard to see in the photo above.

When I moved over to check out the gulls on the pond, I was surprised to see yet another Lesser Black-backed Gull, first in the water and then preening on the shore. This individual had much heavier streaking on its head than the other bird and shows a dark gray mantle and yellow legs. Again, it appears small and dainty compared to the Herring Gulls around it.

Finally, as I was finishing my route, I noticed this Lesser Black-backed Gull standing in one of the soccer fields. The gulls had reshuffled a bit in the meantime, and I suspect that this was the same bird as the first individual I saw rather than a third individual. As with the first bird, the head streaking is barely noticeable, and the red dot at the gonys is roughly the same size and shape as on the first bird. So when I entered my checklist into eBird, I entered two rather than three Lesser Black-backed Gulls.

My walk yesterday was also significant as it was the first time I heard House Finches singing this year. For me, the first House Finch song is a leading indicator of the coming spring. Yesterday was indeed a spring-like day, with a high of at least 60°F and an overall feeling of warmth.

Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Crow-killing in Germany

Hooded Crow in Berlin / Photo by pelican
A hunting group in Germany that calls itself the "Crowbusters" is trying to kill as many crows as possible.
The Crowbusters' kill rates are unusually high thanks to their military-grade equipment. During a hunt in the Upper Franconia region of Bavaria, the Crowbusters impressed local hunters by bringing down a total of 316 "crap-scratchers." Farmers, who don't like it when curious crows peck at the plastic covers on silage bales, had spread liquid manure on their fields to lure the birds.

The headline "80 Against Unlucky Raven" appeared in a Wild und Hund story describing the biggest crow hunt the publication had ever organized. The shootout in the sky took place last year in the Münsterland region of northwestern Germany, and it was broadcast live on the online forum of Wild und Hund.

By the end of the hunt, 333 crows lay dead, 80 percent of which were young birds. Six magpies also fell victim to the slaughter. In a hunt like this, says ornithologist Ulrich Mäck, it's almost impossible to avoid killing protected species, such as rooks and jackdaws. "Especially during the colder half of the year," he adds, "birds in the crow family tend to fly in mixed flocks."
The excuse for this slaughter is that crows are causing the declines of rabbits, gamebirds, and songbirds – declines that are more likely caused by the spread of agricultural practices that reduce the hedgerows and meadows that provide habitat for those birds and animals. In other words, killing large numbers of crows is unlikely to helps those birds and animals and may hurt some protected species that have the misfortune of associating with large crow flocks. The good news is that the excessive crow-killing has aroused some opposition, even among hunting organizations, but it remains to be seen whether this opposition will be able to rein in the Crowbusters.
"I've never experienced such feverish hunting of a particular species, not even when it comes to foxes," says Johann Beuke, a 56-year-old resident of Twistringen, a town in Lower Saxony, and a member of Germany's ÖJV ecological hunting association. According to Beuke, crow populations are particularly threatened by the fact that many German states have bowed to hunter pressure by virtually eliminating hunting off-seasons. In doing so, they are contravening not only an EU directive on the conservation of wild birds, but also Germany's Animal Protection Act. In an attempt to put a stop to what Beuke calls "extermination campaigns," the ÖJV has teamed up with Friends of the Earth Germany (BUND) and the Nature and Biodiversity Conservation Union (NABU).

These large-scale killing sprees are even too much for some conservative hunters. Harry Neumann, a local BUND representative, convinced Klaus Skowronek, the head of a hunting club in the western German Westerwald mountains, to no longer allow the Crowbusters to hunt in the region. "As far as we're concerned, this area is now a no-go," Skowroneky says, adding that he finds "crow pingpong distressing."

Even the conservative German Hunting Association (DJV) has recently decided that the "excesses" and "questionable images" associated with the Crowbusters' actions could hurt the image of hunting in general. In late February, the association plans to address the problem of these marauding crow killers.
Hopefully this senseless practice will end soon.

Monday, January 30, 2012

A Coughing Gull and a Hiding Sparrow

I find that songbirds are tricky to photograph since they often hide in grass and shrubs where branches and stems block the way, and there is plenty of opportunity for the autofocus to pick up something other than my intended subject. This Song Sparrow tried hiding in the phragmites, but I found it anyway. Even so, it is blocked by a reed.

This gull was walking around with its bill slightly ajar. It seemed almost as if it was trying to cough something up, or perhaps swallow something big. Either way, I never saw what went in or came out of its bill.

Birds leave evidence of their presence in any patches of fresh or dried mud around Donaldson Park. Based on the size, this appears to be the work of a Canada Goose, though I suppose one of the larger gulls could have left it.

Sunday, January 29, 2012

Nuthatches at Cheesequake

Yesterday morning I took my first bird walk at Cheesequake State Park in a few months. According to the park's website, the park reached its goal for this winter's hunting season of 100 white-tailed deer killed, so there will not be any more hunting at the park this winter. The park chose to introduce a hunting season to control the deer population, which had substantially reduced the amount and biodiversity of the understory in the park's wooded areas. How effective it will be remains to be seen, but I hope it will have some positive effects and begin the process of restoring some breeding bird diversity to the park.

Speaking of the park's breeding birds, one of the most prominent species during yesterday's walk was the White-breasted Nuthatch. There were numerous nuthatches along the trails, and many of them were very vocal, almost as if they felt spring's onset and were claiming their territories. Quite a few nuthatches were concentrated around the feeders at the nature center. It was there that I had a chance to photograph some of them at close range.





Saturday, January 28, 2012

Early Invertebrate

This has been an unusual winter in several ways, not least of which has been the persistently warm weather. A cold snap has rarely lasted longer than a day or two, and the first snow of the winter did not arrive until last weekend. One consequence of this is that the normal spring processes are running ahead of schedule. Daffodils have been sprouting over the past few weeks. Yesterday afternoon, it was warm enough for a slug to be out and active.


Friday, January 27, 2012

Loose Feathers #327

Snowy Owl at Siletz Bay NWR in Oregon / Photo by Roy W. Lowe (USFWS)
Birds and birding news
Nature blogging
Environment and biodiversity

Thursday, January 26, 2012

Mercury Poisoning Is Harming Songbirds

Wood Thrush / USFWS Photo
A new study by scientists at the Biodiversity Research Institute confirms that songbirds suffer harmful effects from ingesting methylmercury, one of the toxic chemicals produced by burning coal for energy. Despite some moves towards cleaner energy sources, coal is still the principal fuel for producing electricity through much of the Midwest and Northeast. The emissions from power plants include methylmercury in addition to carbon dioxide and other chemicals; the methylmercury is absorbed by tree leaves or falls to the ground in rainstorms and subsequently enters the food web.
The new study found dangerously high levels of mercury in several Northeastern bird species, including rusty blackbirds, saltmarsh sparrows and wood thrushes. Previous studies have shown mercury’s effects on loons and other fish-eating waterfowl, as well as bald eagles, panthers and otters. In one study, zebra finches lost the ability to hit high notes in mating songs when mercury levels rose, affecting reproduction.

“We’re seeing many other species in a much larger landscape of harm from mercury,” said the principal author, David C. Evers, who is the institute’s executive director. He called the Environmental Protection Agency’s new mercury standards, adopted last month and scheduled to take effect over the next four years, “an excellent step forward in reducing and minimizing the impact on ecosystems and improving ecological health, and therefore our own health.”
And the results of mercury poisoning were quite severe, even at fairly low levels of contamination.
Songbirds with blood mercury levels of just 0.7 parts per million generally showed a 10 percent reduction in the rate at which eggs successfully hatched. As mercury increases, reproduction decreases. At mercury levels of greater than 1.7 parts per million, the ability of eggs to hatch is reduced by more than 30 percent, according to the study.

Over all, birds in contaminated sites were found to be three times as likely to abandon their nests or exhibit abnormal incubation or feeding behavior. In some nests, the chicks seemed to have been affected most; they vocalized less and did not beg as aggressively to be fed.

Such consequences mimic the effects of mercury on humans whose primary contact with the toxin is through the consumption of fish. The contamination can be passed to children in the womb or while they are nursing, damaging their nervous systems and impairing their ability to learn.
The authors found similar effects in bats that they tested. Perhaps the new mercury regulations will reduce some of these problems over the next decade or two.