A New Angle on Using Mist-nets to Capture Wintering Grassland Birds
John A. Muller 1,3,4*, Erin H. Strasser2, Nuwanthika Nagode1,3, Jeremy D. Ross1,3
1 Department of Biology, University of Oklahoma, 730 Van Vleet Oval, Norman, OK, 73019
2 Bird Conservancy of the Rockies, 230 Cherry Street, Fort Collins, CO 80535
3 Oklahoma Biological Survey, University of Oklahoma, 111 East Chesapeake Street, SC Building 134, Norman, OK 73019
4 Department of Entomology, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University 360 W Campus Dr., Blacksburg, VA24061
Corresponding author. Email: jmuller51@vt.edu
ABSTRACT
Grassland birds is a guild of species that is very challenging to capture, especially during the nonbreeding season. Here we describe traditional methods for capturing small-bodied grassland birds on the wintering grounds, such as flush netting and walk in traps. We also present novel methods that we developed to target particular species and habitats such as Chestnut-collared Longspurs (Calcarius ornatus) in rocky grasslands and Sprague’s Pipits (Anthus spragueii) in Chihuahuan Desert grasslands. We hope that the novel methods that we describe will be useful to projects aimed at filling knowledge gaps for grassland birds, particularly during winter or that these methods will inspire others to develop capture techniques for similarly difficult scenarios and species
Capturing wild birds in their natural habitat is often an important and necessary element of ornithological study and has been crucial to the conservation of some species at risk (Holroyd and Banasch 2003, Bolam et al. 2020). Grassland birds as a group are challenging to capture (Martin 1969, Ward and Others 1989, Ralph et al. 2004), there is a dire need to fill knowledge gaps for this guild, particularly the nonbreeding season where data is scarce (Somershoe et al. 2018). Passive mistnetting is unproductive in grasslands in contrast to habitats where nets can be visually concealed by taller vegetation or terrain and windy conditions prevail in open habitats which increases the visibility of mist-nets as does direct sun (Martin
1969, Jenni et al. 1996). Breeding grassland birds and some nonbreeding birds are territorial will respond to conspecific playback and can be lured into mist-nets (Chin et al. 2014, Ellison et al. 2017, Polak et al. 2019), but during the winter, many species of grassland obligate songbirds are unresponsive (pers. obs.).
There are additional challenges to capturing grassland birds on the nonbreeding grounds. Grassland birds are especially cryptic on the wintering grounds; they rarely vocalize and forage on the ground among dried grasses, forbs, and sparse shrubs where they are well camouflaged, and are vigilant of human and livestock foot-traffic. The mostly solitary Baird’s Sparrow (Centronyx bairdii) and Grasshopper Sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum) avoid flushing from the ground and prefer to scurry away into dense grass or flush and quickly return to vegetation (Pulliam and Mills 1977). Other species like Sprague’s Pipit (Anthus spragueii) are generally in low densities, mostly solitary, and their abundance can vary greatly within and among winters (Macías-Duarte et al. 2011, Ferrato et al. 2021) making them difficult to locate as well as pursue especially as they often flush vertically over long distances. Flocking longspurs such as Chestnut-collared (Calcarius ornatus) and Smith’s (C. pictus) longspurs form aggregations of variable sizes (tens to hundreds) that flush easily and are reticent to return to the
ground (Dunn and Dunn 1999, Bleho et al. 2015, Briskie 2020). In open expanses of short-to-midlength grass or sparsely vegetated areas of the Chihuahuan Desert, Coastal Plains, and Great Plains, Sprague’s Pipits and Chestnut-collared Longspurs can likely detect observers from long distances making their capture especially difficult (Raitt and Pimm 1976, Grzybowski 1983, Kelly et al. 2006, Saalfeld et al. 2016, Muller et al. 2018, Strasser et al 2019, Ferrato et al. 2021).
Following initial experience targeting grassland songbirds wintering within the Chihuahuan Desert grasslands and in the mixed-grass and shortgrass prairies of Oklahoma and the Texas panhandle, we identified the need for improvement and innovation if collaborators and we were to gather meaningful data on these species. As part of investigations on winter demographics and movements we targeted grassland obligates experiencing steep population declines: Sprague’s Pipit, Chestnut-collared Longspur, Baird's Sparrow, and Grasshopper Sparrow (Macías-Duarte et al. 2017, Strasser et al. 2019, Muller et al. 2020, Perera 2023). We aimed to improve and develop capture techniques for these species while avoiding methods that could impact their behavior or survival or were possibly dangerous to the bird or observer. In this manuscript we first describe traditional methods used to capture small-bodied grassland birds on the wintering grounds and explain why they did not work or were not attempted for our target species or situations. We then present several novel methods and tools we adopted to improve captures of grassland birds on the wintering grounds.
METHODS
Review of Traditional Methods applied to Wintering Grassland Birds
Flush Netting: A commonly used method for capturing grassland birds on the nonbreeding grounds is “flush netting” which involves a coordinated group of several people (5-75) walking through grassland and shrublands towards a single or continuous line of mist-nets in order to flush targeted birds into the net array (Odum and Hight 1957). The group can flush both sides of the net
(plots of variable size) and then move the nets to a new location to start again. Studies employing mist nets have been successful using active mistnetting to capture wintering Grasshopper, Baird’s, Vesper (Pooecetes gramineus), Brewer’s (Spizella breweri), and LeConte’s (Ammospiza leconteii) sparrows among others (Odum and Hight 1957, Pulliam and Mills 1977, Gordon 2000, Lorenz 2007, Macías-Duarte et al. 2017). Baird’s and Grasshopper sparrows lend themselves well to flush netting as when they flush, they fly low over short distances before landing. Traditional flush netting is not effective for species such as Chestnut-collared Longspur and Sprague’s Pipit. When flushed from the ground these species tend to fly almost vertically for 10-15 m or higher and then continue to fly around the disturbance, high in the air until settling down far away from the disturbance. During attempts to capture these species in open-grasslands, we and others have observed that individuals or entire flocks would regularly subvert even the most concerted efforts by flying straight up, over, around, or even under the nets, with some birds achieving complete, midair stops or other impressive avoidance maneuvers (Pulliam and Mills 1977, Dunn and Dunn 1999).
Walk-in Traps and Drift Fences: Another very common method for capturing birds involves passive mechanical traps, with multiple proven configurations available, such as Funnel, Potter, and Drop traps. Walk-in traps are used for ground foraging birds and typically require bait to lure birds into the trap. This method has been effective for many shrub/savannah inhabiting species like Dark-eyed Juncos (Junco hyemalis; Rogers et al. 1994, Bauer et al. 2019) and Northern Bobwhite (Colinus virginianus; Stoddard 1931), as well as open landscape species such as Snow Buntings (Plectrophenax nivalis; Macdonald et al. 2016, Mckinnon et al. 2019), Lapland Longspurs (Calcarius lapponicus; Clabaugh 1930), and Loggerhead Shrikes (Lanius ludovicianus; Craig 1997). Walk-in traps typically require bait (e.g., seeds, mealworms) to lure individuals, which when working in large contiguous areas could be time consuming to lure individual birds to a specific area. Bait or supplemental feeding also has the
potential to alter behavior and bias studies (Kubota and Nakamura 2000) ; therefore, these should not be used in studies in which natural behavior or survival is a principal focus.
Drift Fences are a technique typically used to capture herpetofauna and small mammals (Faulhaber et al. 2005, Muller et al. 2017) as well as larger birds (e.g., grouse and wading birds; Schroeder and Braun1991, Huschle et al. 2002) but has not been widely attempted with songbirds. This involves setting up a short fence (<10m) of either sheet metal, tarp, or chicken wire with a method of capture along or at the ends of the fence (i.e., pitfall, funnel, or Sherman trap). As the organism of interest encounters the fence it is redirected toward the capture device. During springtime herpetofauna surveys using drift fences and funnel traps in southern Oklahoma, Muller et al. (2017) captured Cassin’s (Peucaea cassinii), Savannah (Passerculus sandwichensis) and Grasshopper sparrows. Efforts to use temporary drift fences and Sherman traps to target wintering Smith’s Longspurs in central Oklahoma led to several captures, although the installation and monitoring of these fences was quite laborintensive per individual captured (J. Grzybowski, pers. comm). As grassland habitats can be largely contiguous with few features to naturally direct birds toward the relatively small drift fences in the first place, an uncomfortable level of luck would be necessary to scale this to a sufficient sample of individuals. Another issue for consideration is that these methods require constant observation to minimize exposure to weather and injury from the
Novel and Modified Methods
Dusk Pushing: Wintering Chestnut-collared Longspurs roost closely together on the ground (pers. obs.) presumably for safety or thermoregulation on cold nights, as has been observed in communally roosting Golden-crowned Kinglets (Regulus satrapa; Heinrich 2003). Roosting longspurs flush relatively vertically when disturbed. However, we observed that at twilight (~30 min pre- and post-sunset) as flocks of longspurs were “settling-in” to roost, they did not flush vertically and instead tended to fly low to the ground similar
to sparrows. We were able to capture longspurs by placing nets in areas frequently used by roosting flocks. When a flock landed in the area, we would place, a line of 3-7 12-m nets in a semi-circle around the flock approximately 30 m from where the flock was currently located. Once the line of nets was in place a group (3-5) of people would then walk around the flock's location and wait until almost full dark (20 min after sunset) and walk slowly toward the flock “pushing” them towards the nets. Once complete dark sets in longspurs revert back to the behavior of flushing vertically, therefore, there is a small window of time during twilight where longspurs are unsettled enough that they are not flushing vertically, but also dark enough to where they cannot see the nets. We note that during the writing of this manuscript we noticed that Dunn and Dunn (1999), used a very similar technique to successfully capture Smith’s Longspurs in Oklahoma.
Stock Tanks: Using water as bait has been a traditional way to attract birds to nets or traps for decades (Clabaugh 1930). All four species of longspur have been observed to visit water sources such as stock tanks or puddles around leaky water lines during winter more frequently than other cooccurring winter species. J. Muller did a pilot time budget and watched a single flock of 85 Smith’s Longspur for three days and they appeared to come to a single frozen puddle about once every 45 min throughout the morning until the ice melted, and then returned to the puddle once every 1.5 hours through the early afternoon (unpublished). At Rita Blanca National Grasslands, Dallam Co., Texas, and Cimarron Co., Oklahoma, stock tanks for livestock provide water year-round for wildlife, and natural water resources are very sparse or nonexistent throughout the landscape. We noticed a near constant flow of Horned Larks (Eremophila alpestris), Chestnut-collared, Lapland and Thickbilled longspurs (Rhynchophanes mccownii) coming to a select few of these stock tanks. The busiest stock tanks were those that were overflowing onto the ground and formed a pond away from the raised tank. We set up mist-nets in a semi-circle around the edge of these ponds, but longspurs and Horned Larks immediately avoided the nets
by flying over, under or around them presumably spooked by the novel mist-nets. We then set up and left mist net poles without nets and allowed the birds several days to habituate to the vertical structures. After a few days, we placed and opened nets and occasionally an individual longspur or Horned Larks would flush after drinking and entangle in the net during a visit to drink. We left the poles in between capture sessions to habituate birds to the presence of vertical poles throughout the winter field season.
Use of Props: While flush netting winter Baird’s and Grasshopper sparrows we noticed that tossing a ball cap and jumping up and down while waving our arms influenced movements of birds in the flush net zone. In response, we began to use props like bamboo poles, flagging, and brightly colored fabric discs to reduce the number of target birds that escaped the flush net zone and improve capture rates of wintering sparrows, while minimizing lost hats. We followed a modified flush netting protocol developed with experience in the field (Macías-Duarte and Panjabi 2013, Macías-Duarte et al. 2017). Groups of four to 30 people walking in a single file line through relatively shrub free grasslands (<5% shrub cover) formed a semicircle around the periphery of one side of a straight line of 3-5 mist-nets (i.e., the flush net zone).
After we placed nets, the group walked at a leisurely but directed pace (~3km/hr) towards the nets with arms outstretched. Most people held one or two sturdy yet flexible bamboo poles (~2m long) or fallen Yucca spp. stalks often fitted with bright flagging (hereafter poles) to disturb patches of vegetation and increase our coverage of the flush net zone, especially when there were fewer people in the field. We also used poles to deter birds from flying outside of the flush net zone. In response to the elevated movement and noise, we observed that birds often redirected their flight paths towards or into the nets or returned to the ground and we resumed flushing.
To deter sparrows from flying over the nets, the two people closest to the terminal ends of the mist-nets tossed brightly-colored fabric flying discs above or behind the bird, leading the bird to redirect their
flight path into the nets or to the ground in front of the nets. The discs were challenging to direct during windy days, yet we observed that they redirected birds frequently enough for us to adopt this technique but limited throwing disks to those well-practiced in this art.
Dogs are another useful tool in conservation and have be used to assist with studies that require locating or capturing wild birds (Dahlgren et al. 2011). For two winters, we used a trained Australian Cattle Dog to flush and herd wintering sparrows towards the nets. We found that incorporating a trained dog onto the team was especially helpful when we had a small group (4-7) of people flushing. For the safety of the birds and dog, it was crucial that this dog was under voice control and was accustomed and nonreactive around mistnets and wildlife (e.g., jackrabbits).
Slow Approach for Sprague’s Pipits: We developed a flush netting technique similar to the methods described above but with modifications that employed increased vigilance and quiet communication to capture Sprague’s Pipits in the Chihuahuan Desert. Unlike for Grasshopper and Baird’s sparrows, successful capture of Sprague’s Pipits often hinged on locating a pipit before placing nets. In cases where we observed a pipit in the flush net circle during sparrow captures, we altered our technique to focus on pipits. After we located a pipit, we scanned the vicinity for conspecifics and at least one observer attempted to maintain visuals on the birds. During this time, the remainder of the group quietly and efficiently set up a line of 2-3 12-m mist-nets within 100 m and then formed a semicircle around the bird. We quietly and slowly approached the pipit and waited for it to begin walking towards the nets. We found that maintaining a visual on the bird in order to assess its behavior increased our success rates and minimized effort. For example, we stopped approaching the pipit(s) when we observed behavior that indicated that a bird was going to flush (e.g., sudden stopping and crouching, slight opening of the wings, repeated glances towards people). After the pipit visibly relaxed and began walking, we resumed our approach. If we lost
sight of the pipit in dense vegetation we waited until it emerged or slowly approached the patch of vegetation but attempted to maintain a distance of at least 15 m from the bird. When a pipit was within 10 m of the net we signaled to the crew to rapidly advance, leading the bird to flush with minimal time to avoid the net. We often tossed fabric discs as the bird flushed from the ground to ensure it did not fly over the net.
Dowsing: When flocks of longspurs are more spread out over an area or where they tend to settle in a different spot each night, preemptively setting up a line of nets is impractical. There are also many areas where the soil is extremely rocky, and poles cannot be easily anchored. Under these circumstances we developed an active mist-netting approach which we called “Dowsing”. This involves watching a flock of birds until they settle down at dusk and waiting until complete darkness, then three observers would hold a stretched mistnet parallel to the ground. One person on each side would hold a net pole while the third person would walk behind the net as the “flusher”, all three people would walk through a flock of >30 individuals. Longspurs, at night, just as in the day tend to fly straight up when flushed and not fly along the ground. Because of this they fly into the net with enough force to typically get caught with the net elevated above the ground although there were times when we would gently place the net on the ground as longspurs flushed. We did not attempt to capture longspurs on nights where the wind was greater than 24 km/hr due to the net being blown around.
Radio-telemetry Ambush: In our studies of Baird’s and Grasshopper sparrows and Sprague’s Pipits, it was necessary to recapture birds tagged with radio transmitters to exchange their devices once batteries failed. We experimented with various techniques to increase recapture rates because we observed that some “experienced” birds learned to avoid the nets or would flush before the net array was set up. One method involved surrounding and then approaching a triangulated bird from all sides with three 12-m mist-nets held up on their poles and extra people between those individuals
supporting the nets. As we approached the bird’s perceived location, we angled nets ~45̊ over the bird and made noise in attempts to flush it. To recapture individual birds that evaded capture we also approached the sparrow or pipit with a single or array of nets angled over the ground similar to the Dowsing technique used on longspurs while a group of people flushed from the opposite direction (Strasser et al. 2019).
Judas: One method that can be used in conjunction with both the Pushing and Dowsing techniques for flocking species is the use of a “Judas” bird (Taylor and Katahira 1988, Campbell and Donlan 2005). This technique worked well for longspurs because of their flocking behavior. By following individual longspurs that were radio-tagged we would wait until night, then by following the radio-tagged bird would navigate to a flock and either set up nets around the flock for Dusk Pushing or walk through the flock using the Dowsing technique.
RESULTS
Although testing the efficiency of varying capture techniques was not an objective of these projects, we believe anecdotal or rudimentary results provide context as to the performance of the novel techniques described in this manuscript.
Longspurs: Over three winters at the Wichita Mountains Wildlife Refuge we were able to capture 120 Chestnut-collared Longspurs total using multiple techniques including Dusk Pushing (15 longspurs), Dowsing (95 longspurs) and Judas (10 longspurs). During the three winters we captured zero Longspurs using traditional Flush Netting and the Stock Tank Method, even though we tried many times. For Dusk Pushing we were successful on 3 of 5 attempts and captured up to seven individuals at a time. Our most successful and efficient technique was Dowsing, which was successful on 31 of 36 attempts with a mean capture of 3.2 individuals and the highest number of 11. Three of the 36 attempts we also used Judas and were successful on all three attempts. We noticed that on nights where we were less successful (single capture) or completely unsuccessful it was typically bright, with a full or near full moon, minimal clouds as
well as calm (< 8 km/hr) winds. During these calm bright nights, we would witness the birds flushing before our nets and presumed that it was due to increased responsiveness to moving stimuli (Carr and Lima 2010) as well as their increased ability to see us approaching. Although we targeted Chestnut-collared Longspur, when we used Dowsing we had bycatch of Savannah Sparrow, LeConte’s Sparrow, Eastern (Sturnella magna) and Western (S. neglecta) meadowlarks, and Horned Larks. For one winter at Rita Blanca National Grasslands we attempted to capture Chestnutcollared Longspurs. We successfully captured 89 Chestnut-collared Longspurs during the 20 days we attempted (2 using Dowsing, 87 at Stock Tanks). Although Chestnut-collard Longspur was our target species we also captured 50 Lapland and 16 Thick-billed longspurs (all using Stock Tanks) as well as 51 Horned Larks (2 using Dowsing, 49 at Stock Tanks). At the Stock Tanks we averaged roughly 1 Chestnut-collared Longspur capture per hour but had a high capture of 10 individuals in a single hour. Chestnut-collared Longspurs were our target species and we focused most of our effort at locations where we observed the most Chestnut-collared Longspurs were seen, therefore, our sample was biased toward that species. We only attempted Dowsing once and were successful with Chestnut-collared Longspurs and Horned Lark. The Stock Tank method was unsuccessful when winds were high (> 24 km/hr) or when the stock tank was frozen over or dry. We tried the Stock Tank method at the Wichita Mountains, but because there were many available water sources, we were never successful as birds would see the nets and fly to another water source.
Baird’s and Grasshopper sparrows: Our observations suggest that capture and recapture of these species with props and modified approaches were quick and inexpensive means to increase capture rates and minimize capture attempts on a single bird. Using a modified flush netting with poles and fabric discs we captured 1368 individual Grasshopper sparrows and 846 Baird’s sparrows over seven winters at multiple sites in the Chihuahuan Desert. We had 247 within season recapture records of Baird’s sparrows and
444 recapture records for Grasshopper sparrows captured using the radio-telemetry ambush. Some birds were challenging to recapture and we stopped efforts in order to reduce undue stress to those individuals. In shrubbier grasslands we commonly had caught incidental bycatch of Vesper, Savannah, Brewer’s (Spizella breweri), Black-throated (Amphispiza bilineata), Cassin’s, and Lincoln’s (Melospiza lincolnii) Sparrows. Although abundant at many sites we captured only a few Lark Buntings (Calamospiza melanocorys). We did not quantify the efficacy of capture using poles and discs, but across four study sites we observed that Baird’s and Grasshopper Sparrows routinely responded to props by redirecting their flight paths towards the net. For both sparrows, we had better success capturing birds in nets placed perpendicular to the prevailing wind and capture success appeared to decline when the sun was high, between 1100 -1500.
Sprague’s Pipit.: We captured and banded 21 Sprague’s Pipits over five winters at four sites in the Chihuahuan Desert. We honed our capture methods with experience; we targeted and trapped 11 of these pipits in the fifth winter. We had eight recapture records of Sprague’s Pipits representing six individuals (100% of dected individuals within the study site). We did not explicitly measure pipit response to use of props or the speed at which we approached birds. We had higher success capturing pipits in lower light conditions (e.g., late afternoon, early evening).
DISCUSSION
As we observed with longspurs, Sprague’s Pipits, and Baird’s and Grasshopper sparrows, novel approaches are necessary to capture nonbreeding grassland birds and approaches may involve the use of props or tools (Potts and Sordahl 1979), cohesive group communication, familiarity with a species’ behavior (Alza et al. 2017), or efforts during nighttime. We demonstrated that the techniques we used for Chestnut-collared Longspurs were more effective than traditional line pushing methods, and had we not developed these novel capture methods we would not have been able complete other aspects of our project.
Although the Stock Tank technique was very successful at Rita Blanca National Grasslands, it may only be applicable to areas with few water sources and high densities of longspurs as we were unsuccessful at the Wichita Mountains where there are many sources of water. Longspurs showed a high aversion to vertical objects (e.g., net poles), this speaks to the species evolution in wide open environments and required days of exposure for the birds to habituate to the net poles and even after months of the poles being present, longspurs were still very averse to landing near nets. The use of poles with flagging and throwing fabric disks as well as modified approaches with mist-nets (orientation and angle) increased our efficiency in the field. This likely lowered the number of capture attempts and stress when trapping and recapturing Baird’s and Grasshopper sparrows. We also discovered an unexpected benefit to using poles during captures; when assisted by students of primary and secondary schools we noted that students seemed more engaged for longer periods when they used flagged poles. We doubled our sample size of Sprague’s Pipits after familiarizing ourselves with their behavior (e.g., locomotion and body postures prior to flushing) and approaching birds quietly and at a slower pace than used for capturing sparrows. Ultimately, we would like to emphasize that patience, experimentation, and observation are necessary to the successful capture of grassland birds on the wintering grounds. Creativeness and innovation allow for these previously unattainable studies on wild birds to now be possible. As there is a need to advance our understanding of these species’ migratory routes, stopover locations, and winter movements (Somershoe 2018) there will likely be an increase in the number of research studies that involve capturing grassland birds on their nonbreeding grounds. We hope that the information we present here can improve monitoring programs on grassland birds during the nonbreeding season and ultimately advance conservation of these species and their habitat as well as inspire the development of novel methods for other hard to capture species.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to thank to our Partners from Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León Universidad Juárez del Estado de Durango, and Sul Ross State University who helped implement captures of sparrows and pipits in Mexico and Texas. Thanks to the many students, field technicians, staff, and volunteers that helped in the field with bird captures including: Denis Pérez, Jesús Ordaz, Mariana Martínez, Fabiola Baeza, Ivy Ciaburri, Mary Emanuel, Daniel Horton, and many volunteers: Paula Cimprich, Krisangel Lopez, and Randy Soto. We would also like to thank the field sites and landowners who allowed this research to take place including the Wichita Mountains Wildlife Refuge, Rita Blanca National Grasslands, Rancho El Uno, Rancho Valle Colombia, Rancho Santa Teresa, Rancho El Regalo and the Dixon Water Foundation. Funding was provided in part through Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation-SWG grant # 10557610, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation ConocoPhillips SPIRIT of Conservation Grant and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act Awards # F14AP00617, F16AP00613, F14AP00397, F15AP01020, F16AP00608, F17AP00683, F18AP00633, F18AP00630, F19P00607), J. E. Weaver Grant, Environment and Climate Change Canada’s Canadian Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest Service International Program, Alianza WWF: Fundación Carlos Slim, the National Council for Science and Technology of Mexico (CONACYT; #CB-201301-222920), and Texas Parks and Wildlife, Service
LITERATURE CITED
Alza, L.,E. Bautista, M. Smith, N. Gutierrez-Pinto, A. Astie, and K. G. Mccracken. 2017. Capture efficiency of torrent ducks by the active mistnet method. Wildlife Society Bulletin 41:370375.
Bauer, C.M., J. L. Graham, and T. J. Greives. 2019. Corticosterone negative feedback is weaker during spring vs. autumn migration in a songbird (Junco hyemalis). General and Comparative Endocrinology 280:36-42.
Bleho, B, K. Ellison, D.P. Hill, and L.K. Gould. 2015. Chestnut-collared Longspur (Calcarius ornatus), version 2.0. Birds of the World (P. G. Rodewald, editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY.
Bolam, F.C., L. Mair, M. Angelico, T.M. Brooks, M. Burgman, C.Hermes, M.Hoffmann, R.W. Martin, P. J. K. McGowan, A.S. L. Rodrigues, C. Rondinini, J.R. S. Westrip, H. Wheatley, Y. Bedolla Guzmán, J. Calzada, M.F. Child, P. A. Cranswick, C.R. Dickman, B. Fessl, D. O. Fisher, S.T. Garnett, J.J. Groombridge, C. N. Johnson, R J. Kennerley, S.R. B. King, J.F. Lamoreaux, A.C. Lees, L. Lens, S.P. Mahood, D.P. Mallon, E. Jeijaard, F. Mendez-Sanhez, A.R. Percequillo, T.J. Regan, L.M. Renijifo, M.C. Rivers, N.S. Roac, L. Roxburgh, R.J. Safford, P. Salaman, T. Squires, E. VazquezDominguez, P. Visconti, J.C. Z. Woinarski, R. P. Young and S.H. M. Butchart. 2020. How many bird and mammal extinctions has recent conservation action prevented? Conservation Letters 14: e12762.
Briskie, J.V. 2020. Smith's Longspur (Calcarius pictus), version 1.0. Birds of the World (A. F. Poole, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY.
Campbell, K., and C.J. Donlan. 2005. Feral goat eradications on islands. Conservation Biology 19: 1362-1374.
Carr, J.M., and S.L. Lima. 2010. High wind speeds decrease the responsiveness of birds to potentially threatening moving stimuli. Animal Behaviour 80:215-220.
Chin, S., E.A. McKinnon, K.C. Fraser, J. Rotenberg, and B.J. Stutchbury. 2014. No sex bias in Wood Thrushes (Hylocichla mustelina) captured by using audio playback during the non-breeding season. Wilson Journal of Ornithology 126:599-605.
Clabaugh, E.D. 1930. Methods of trapping birds. Condor 32:53-57.
Craig, S. 1997. What goes around – gets caught!! An improved trap for shrikes. North American Bird Bander 22:124-125.
Dahlgren, D.K., R. D. Elmore, D. A. Smith, A. Hurt, E. B. Arnett, and J. W. Connelly. 2011. Use of dogs in wildlife research and management. Wildlife Techniques Manual: Research, volume 1 (seventh edition):140-153.
Dunn, E.H., and R. B. Dunn. 1999. Notes on behavior of Smith’s Longspurs wintering in Oklahoma. Bulletin of the Oklahoma Ornithological Society 32:13-20.
Ellison, K., E. Mckinnon, S. Zack, S. Olimb, R. Sparks, and E. Strasser. 2017. Migration and winter distribution of the Chestnut-collared Longspur. Animal Migration 4:37-50.
Faulhaber, C.A., N. J. Silvy, R. R. Lopez, B. A. Porter, P. A. Frank, and M. J. Peterson. 2005. From the Field: Use of drift fences to capture Lower Keys marsh rabbits. Wildlife Society Bulletin 33:1160-1163.
Ferrato, J.R., R. M. Kostecke, J. A. Veech, J. A. Muller and C. M. Reemts. 2021. Wintering habitat associations of a declining grassland bird, the Sprague’s Pipit (Anthus spragueii). Southwestern Naturalist 65:34-44.
Ginter, D.L., and M. J. Desmond. 2005. Influence of foraging and roosting behavior on home-range size and movement patterns of Savannah Sparrows wintering in south Texas. Wilson Bulletin 117:63-71.
Gordon, C.E. 2000. Movement patterns of wintering grassland sparrows in Arizona. Auk 117:748759.
Grzybowski, J.A. 1983 Patterns of space use in grassland bird communities during winter. Wilson Bulletin 95:591-602.
Heinrich, B. 2003. Overnighting of Golden-crowned Kinglets during winter. Wilson Journal of Ornithology 115:113-115.
Holroyd, G.L., and U. Banasch. 2003. The 2000 Canadian Peregrine Falcon Survey. Journal of Raptor Research 37:98-116.
Howell, A.H. 1932. Florida bird life. CowardMcCann, New York, NY.
Huschle, G.,J. E. Toepfer, W. L. J. Brininger, and D. A. Azure. 2002. Capturing adult American Bitterns. Waterbirds 25:505-508.
Jenni, L.,M. Leuenberger, and F. Rampazzi. 1996. Capture efficiency of mist nets with comments on their role in the assessment of passerine habitat use. Journal of Field Ornithology 67:263-274.
Kelly, J.F., D.L. Hawksworth, R.A. Meyer, and T. Brush. 2006. Abundance of Non-Breeding Horned Larks and Chestnut-Collared Longspurs on Grazed and Rested Semiarid Grassland. Southwestern Naturalist 51:172180.
Kubota, H., and M. Nakamura. 2000. Effects of supplemental food on intra- and inter-specific behaviour of the Varied Tit (Parus varius). Ibis142:312-319.
Lorenz, S. 2007. Site fidelity of wintering LeConte’s Sparrows in northeast Texas. North American Bird Bander 32:153-157.
Macdonald, C.A., E. A. Mckinnon, H. G. Gilchrist, and O. P Love. 2016. Cold tolerance, and not earlier arrival on breeding grounds, explains why males winter further north in an Arcticbreeding songbird. Journal of Avian Biology 47:7-15.
Macías-Duarte, A., A. O. Panjabi, D. Pool, E. Youngberg, and G. Levandoski. 2011. Wintering grassland bird density in Chihuahuan Desert grassland priority conservation areas, 2007-2011. Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory, Brighton, CO. RMBO Technical Report INEOTROPMXPLAT-10-2. 164 pp.
Macías-Duarte, A. and A. O. Panjabi. 2013. Association of habitat characteristics with winter survival of a declining grassland bird in Chihuahuan Desert grasslands of Mexico. Auk 130:141-149.
Macías-Duarte, A., A. O. Panjabi, E. H. Strasser, G. J. Levandoski, I. Ruvalcaba-Ortega, P. F. Doherty, and C. I. Ortega-Rosas. 2017. Winter survival of North American grassland birds is driven by weather and grassland condition in the Chihuahuan Desert. Journal of Field Ornithology 88:374-386
Marra, P., E. B. Cohen, S. R. Loss, J. E. Rutter, and C. M. Tonra. 2015. A call for full annual cycle research in animal ecology. Biology Letters 11: 20150552.
Martin, S.G. 1969. A technique for capturing nesting grassland birds with mist nets. Bird-Banding 40: 233-237.
Mckinnon, E.A., M.-P. Laplante, O. P. Love, K. C. Fraser, S. Mackenzie, and F. Vézina. 2019. Tracking landscape-scale movements of Snow Buntings and weather-driven changes in flock composition during the temperate winter. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 7:329.
Muller, J. A., J. A. Veech, and J. Roach. 2017. Using drift fence arrays to compare terrestrial herpetofauna diversity in three habitats at Tishomingo National Wildlife Refuge, Oklahoma. Southeastern Naturalist 16:182194.
Muller, J. A., J. A. Veech, and R. M. Kostecke. 2018. Landscape scale habitat associations of Sprague’s Pipits wintering in the southern United States. Journal of Field Ornithology 89:326-336.
Muller, J.A., N. Perera, and J. D. Ross. 2020. Winter space-use and sex-ratios of Chestnut-collared Longspurs (Calcarius ornatus) in Oklahoma. Wilson Journal of Ornithology 133:589-600.
Odum, E.P., and G. L. Hight. 1957. The use of mist nets in population studies of winter fringillids on the AEC Savannah River Area. BirdBanding 28:203-213.
Perera G.D. 2023. Spatial occupancy of passerines: relative to other individuals, relative to weather, and relative to climate change. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK.
Perez-Ordonez, D. J. 2019. Overwinter survival and habitat selection of Baird’s and Grasshopper sparrows in the Marfa Grasslands, Texas. M.S. thesis, Sul Ross State Univ. Alpine, TX.
Polak, M., M. Brambilla, and J. Jedlikowski. 2019. Habitat selection and response to playback in wintering Water Rails (Rallus aquaticus). Bird Study 66:510-518.
Potts, W.K., and T. A. Sordahl. 1979. The gong method for capturing shorebirds and other ground-roosting species. North American Bird Bander 4:106–107.
Pulliam, H.R., and G. S. Mills. 1977. The use of space by wintering sparrows. Ecology 58:1393-1399.
Raitt, R.J., and S. L. Pimm. 1976. Dynamics of bird communities in the Chihuahuan Desert, New Mexico. Condor 78:427-442.
Ralph, C.J., E. H. Dunn, W. J. Peach, and C. M. Handel. 2004. Recommendations for the use of mist nets for inventory and monitoring of bird populations. Studies in Avian Biology 29:187-196
Rogers, C.M., V. Nolan, Jr, and E. D. Ketterson. 1994. Winter fattening in the Dark-eyed Junco: plasticity and possible interaction with migration trade-offs. Oecologia 97:526-532.
Saalfeld, D.T., S. T. Saalfeld, W. C. Conway, and K. M. Hartke. 2016. Wintering grassland bird responses to vegetation structure, exotic invasive plant composition, and disturbance regime in coastal prairies of Texas Wilson Journal of Ornithology 128:290-305.
Schroeder, M.A., and C. E. Braun. 1991. Walk-in traps for capturing Greater Prairie-Chickens on leks. Journal of Field Ornithology 62:378385.
Sliwa, A., and T. W. Sherry. 1992. Surveying wintering warbler populations in Jamaica: point counts with and without broadcast vocalizations. Condor 94:924-936.
Somershoe, S.G. 2018. A full annual-cycle conservation strategy for Sprague’s Pipit, Chestnut-collared and McCown’s longspurs, and Baird’s Sparrow. US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.
Stoddard, H.L. 1931. Bobwhite quail; its habits, preservation and increase. Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, NY.
Strasser, E.H., I. Ruvalcaba-Ortega, A. Pena-Peniche, A. O. Panjabi, J. H. Martınez-Guerrero, R. Canales-del-Castillo, and M. D. Correl. 2019. Habitat and space use of wintering Sprague’s Pipits (Anthus spragueii) in northern Mexico. Wilson Journal of Ornithology 131:472-485.
Taylor, D., and L. Katahira. 1988. Radio telemetry as an aid in eradicating remnant feral goats. Wildlife Society Bulletin 16: 297-299.
Ward, A.,D. Nuttall, and R. Snyman. 1989. An evaluation of some capture techniques for grassland birds. South African Journal of Wildlife Research 19: 77-79.
Chestnut-collared Longspur
Photos by John A. Muller
Survival and Occupancy of Red-bellied Woodpeckers in a Fragmented Forested Landscape in North-Central Ohio, 1995-2005
David A. Zuwerink
Lincoln Memorial University
6965 Cumberland Gap Parkway
Harrogate, TN 37752
davidzuwerink@Imunet.edu
ABSTRACT
James S. Marshall Department of Chemical & Biological Sciences
Rockford University Rockford, IL 61108
Red-bellied Woodpeckers (Melanerpes carolinus) were sampled in 51 woodlots in north-central Ohio from 1995 to 2005. Overall apparent survival was 0.73 (0.23 SE). The best model for woodlot occupancy based on capture rates showed that distance to major riparian corridor and woodlot size influenced the presence of Red-bellied Woodpeckers. Capture rates decreased with increasing distance to a major riparian corridor while capture rates increased with increasing woodlot size. Forest cover which increases along the major riparian corridors is essential for both use and movement of Red-bellied Woodpeckers.
INTRODUCTION
The Red-bellied Woodpecker (Melanerpes carolinus) is a permanent resident bird commonly found in deciduous forests in the central and southeastern United States (Conner 1980, Shackelford and Conner 1997). They have been expanding west (Fitzgerald et al. 2018, Skurnack et al. 2023) and north of their historic range with range expansion increasing dramatically since 1950 (Fitzgerald et al. 2018). Regrowth of forests, gradual climatic warming, and increases in bird feeding have all been hypothesized as reasons the Red-bellied Woodpecker has shown growth and expansion of its range (Jackson and Davis 1998). Many individuals become quasi-nomadic during the winter (Davis 2023), and northern expansion has occurred primarily from juvenile dispersal during the winter (Davis 2023, Jackson and Davis 1998); although on rare occasions adults have been found to disperse over 200 km from their original band site (Gabrey 2019).
Range expansion is dependent on species fecundity, dispersal, and survival (Capellini et al. 2015).
Survival rates are not well documented among woodpecker species in North America (Kozma et al. 2022). Wiebe (2006) found two studies reporting survival of Red-bellied Woodpeckers and stated there is a need to publish more data on survival estimates. Habitat fragmentation has been found to impact survival (Doherty and Grubb 2002, Zuwerink 2007), pairing success (Robles et al., 2008), natal dispersal (Cox 2011, Cox and Kesler 2012), and site occupancy (Robles and Ciudad 2012).
Site occupancy is dependent on species-specific habitat requirements at both local and landscape scales. We defined occupancy in terms of whether a Red-bellied Woodpecker was captured during the period of sampling. Occupation in this sense includes both short-term foraging occurrences and long-term residents. The richness and abundance of woodpeckers has been positively correlated with woodlot patch size and negatively associated with urbanization (Myczko et al. 2014). White-back Woodpecker (Dendrocopos leucotos) occurrence has been found to relate to proportion of old growth forest and matrix quality which was hypothesized to relate to movement within the landscape (Ettwein 2024). Houloubek and Jensen (2015) found Downy Woodpecker (Picoides pubescens) occupancy was associated with lower levels of tree density and canopy cover; however, none of the habitat variables measured in their study could explain Red-bellied Woodpecker occupancy. Redbellied Woodpecker occupancy may be more affected by broader landscape characteristics than site specific characteristics. Adams (2014) found Red-bellied Woodpecker site occupancy
was dependent on habitat loss, fragmentation, and structural diversity with the strongest response related to size of woodlot patch in northwestern Ohio. They found larger woodlot areas were more likely to be occupied by woodpeckers.
The goal of this study was (1) to estimate survival in north-central Ohio Red-bellied Woodpeckers, (2) provide estimates of survival based on sex and presence of permanent feeders, and (3) to identify habitat and landscape features that influence occupation of woodlots by Red-bellied Woodpeckers.
METHODS
The study area was a 15,450-ha agricultural landscape in Crawford County, OH, and can be categorized as second growth deciduous woodlots consisting mostly of oak hickory (Quercus-Carya spp.) and two major wooded river corridors within a matrix of row crop agriculture. We banded birds at 51 sites between November and March from 1995 to 2005. Woodlot area was measured from ground-truthed 7.5-minute topographic maps (Doherty and Grubb 2002). Interior woodlots ranged in size from just under 1 ha to 32 ha. Woodlots were sampled using the protocol established by Doherty and Grubb (2002). Birds were either captured at permanent feeders near landowners’ houses or at temporary feeder traps placed within each woodlot. Temporary feeders were placed in woodlots for about one week to attract birds for trapping or mist netting under the assumption that food supplementing for this amount of time would have a negligible effect on survival. Sunflower seeds were used in the feeder traps, while suet was wired next to the feeder to attract woodpeckers. All birds were banded with a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service aluminum band.
We employed analytical strategies defined by Lebreton et al. (1992) and Burnham and Anderson (2004) in using Cormack-Jolly-Seber openpopulation capture-recapture models (Cormack 1964, Jolly 1965, Seber 1965) and extensions available in the program MARK (White and Burnham 1999). We first fit general models consisting of separate survival parameters and recapture parameters [Φ(.), p(.); Φ(.), p(t); Φ(t),
p(.);Φ(t), p(t)] where Φ represents apparent survival, p the probability of recapture, (t) time, and (.) is constant, and then we developed a set of models relating annual survival to sex of the bird (sex) and the presence of feeders (food). We developed models that included main effects in estimating survival with a constant probability of recapture [Φ(food), p(.);Φ(sex), p(.)].
For occupancy, we first fit general models consisting of separate occupation and capture parameters [ψ(.), p(.); ψ(t), p(.); ψ(.), p(t); ψ(t), p(t)] where ψ represents probability of occupation, p the probability of capture, (t) time, and (.) is constant. Using the best general model for ψ, we then assessed how the presence of feeders p(food), distance to a riparian corridor p(driver), and woodlot area p(warea) and combinations of these variables affected the occupancy and capture of Red-bellied Woodpeckers each year.
The general model Φ(t), p(t) for survival and ψ(t), p(t) for probability of occupation was assessed using a goodness-of-fit test to examine the assumptions that every marked individual present in the population at time (i) had the same probability of recapture (pi), and that every individual in the population immediately after time (i) had the same probability of surviving to time (i+1). The goodness-of-fit test probes for overdispersion to determine if ĉ, the variation inflation factor, needs to be adjusted in subsequent estimates and statistics (Burnham and Anderson 1998). If a goodness-of-fit test was significant at P < 0.20, then we calculated ĉ using the using the median ĉ method in Program Mark.
RESULTS
We captured 184 Red-bellied Woodpeckers (Figure 1) in 49 of the 51 banding sites (Figure 2) with 14 recaptures. This included 90 males (mean wing chord 130.38 mm, mean mass 82.65 g) and 94 females (mean wing chord 125.9 mm, mean mass 74.9 g). Hatching year birds made up 48% of the male captures and 49% of the female captures. Assuming constant survival and recapture rate [Φ(.)p(.)], apparent survival was 0.73 (0.23 SE) and recapture rate was 0.050 (0.046 SE). Differences in apparent survival based on sex
with constant recapture rate Φ(sex)p(.) resulted in a female survival rate of 0.54 (0.33 SE) and a male survival rate of 0.81 (0.25 SE), but these differences were not significant (t = 0.65, P = 0.52). Apparent survival estimates in the presence of permanent feeders [Φ(food)p(.)] was 0.65 (0.43 SE) and in the absence of permanent feeders 0.74 (0.24 SE), but these differences were not significant (t = 0.18, P = 0.86). Data were over dispersed (P = 0.04), so we adjusted ĉ to 4.35. The best overall apparent survival model was Φ(.)p(.) with QAICc weight of 0.53 (Table 1); however, the worst model Φ(t)p(t) was not significantly different (χ2 = 4.68, P = 0.99).
Red-bellied Woodpeckers were captured in woodlots ranging in size from 0.86 - 31.3 ha as well as riparian corridors with more contiguous habitat. Recaptures occurred in woodlots ranging in size from 4.36 - 21.13 ha or the riparian corridor with more contiguous woodland. The only recapture that changed woodlots was captured in a 6.85 ha woodlot and recaptured in a 5.97 ha woodlot. Woodlot size was significantly and positively related to the capture of Red-bellied Woodpeckers (F = 16.62, P < 0.01; Figure 3), while distance to major riparian corridor was significant and negatively related to the capture of Red-bellied Woodpeckers (F = 4.48, P = 0.04). The data was not over dispersed for capture probability (P = 0.75), so we did not adjust ĉ for occupancy models. The distance to riparian corridor and woodlot area best explained capture probability (Table 2) and was significantly better than most other models (Table 3).
DISCUSSION
While there is a lot of variation found in survival estimates in this study, the apparent survival estimates fall within the range of estimates in previous studies. Karr et al. (1990) found survival estimates of 0.66 (0.07 SE) in Redbellied Woodpeckers using Jolley-Seber models, while Martin (1995) estimated survival at 0.68 using resight data. The best model in our study suggests that there is no difference in survival related to sex and presence of feeders, but the large variation in these estimates due to a low number of recaptures makes it difficult to assess how sex
and the presence of permanent feeders influence survival. Some landowners did not consistently use suet at their feeders which could influence the survival estimates. The presence of suet has been found to increase presence or abundance of Red-bellied Woodpeckers (Horn 1999). Since apparent survival estimates are based on capturerecapture data, Red-bellied Woodpeckers that use these feeders and move on can influence survival estimates as they are not available to be recaptured.
Differences in food presented at feeders may be one reason that the presence of permanent feeders was not as important in determining the occupation of woodlots by Red-bellied Woodpeckers. The best model suggests that occupation of woodlots is primarily determined by woodlot distance from one of the two major riparian corridors and the woodlot size. Woodlot size has been found to be an important indicator of Red-bellied Woodpecker occupancy (Adams 2014, Leonard and Stout 2006, Perkins et al. 2003). Hargett et al. (2022) estimated winter home range size for Red-bellied Woodpeckers in a forested landscape between 6.58 ha (≤6 captures) and 18.85 ha (≥7 captures). Our recapture data suggests that permanent-resident Red-bellied Woodpeckers used woodlots as small as 4.36 ha with a median woodlot size of 14.03 ha. Red-bellied Woodpeckers captured in smaller woodlots may be transient birds. The riparian corridors in our study site consisted of larger and more contiguous woodland cover which may have aided the movement of nomadic adults and juvenile dispersers. These two landscape features are not completely independent, but riparian corridors can provide additional value to woodland bird movement especially in a fragmented landscape. Riparian corridors have been found to enhance movement of birds (Gillies and St. Clair 2008, Machtans et al. 1996).Groom and Grubb (2006) found corridors aided the movement of Carolina Chickadees (Poecile carolinensis), and Mosely et al. (2006) suggested that river corridors aid the movement of birds during breeding and fall migration.
Larger woodland patches and riparian corridors appear to play an important role in Red-bellied Woodpecker movement and occupancy in a
fragmented landscape. Riparian corridors may play an important role in the expansion of Red-
bellied Woodpeckers in areas where these corridors provide a means to disperse due to more contiguous forest cover.
Figure 1. Numbers of Red-bellied Woodpeckers captured in north-central Ohio.
Figure 2. Map of study area with numbers of individual Red-bellied Woodpeckers banded in north central Ohio 1995-2005. Arrows indicate the movement of individual birds in subsequent years. The map was obtained using Google® maps.
Figure 3(A): Influence of distance to riparian corridor (a) and woodlot area (b) on probability to capture Red-bellied Woodpeckers in a fragmented forested landscape in north-central Ohio 1995-2005.
Figure 3(B): See caption for 3(A)
Table 1: Comparison of models for apparent survival of the Red-bellied Woodpecker in north-central Ohio 1995-2005. Models include a constant (.), time (t), sex of the bird (sex), and presence of a permanent feeder (food).
Number QAICc
Model of Parameters AIC ΔAIC weight
Φ(.)p(.) 2 34.34 0.00 0.53
Φ(sex)p(.) 3 35.65 1.31 0.27
Φ(food)p(.) 3 36.36 2.02 0.19
Φ(.)p(t) 11 51.39 17.05 0.00
Φ(t)p(.) 11 53.07 18.73 0.00
Φ(t)p(t) 19 68.62 34.28 0.00
Table 2: Comparison of models for capture probability of Red-bellied Woodpecker in northcentral Ohio 1995-2005. Models include a constant (.), time (t), distance to riparian corridor (driver), woodlot area (warea), and presence of a feeder (food).
Number QAICc
Model of Parameters AIC ΔAIC weight
ψ(.)p(driver+warea) 4 556.53 0.00 0.59
ψ(.)p(driver+warea+food) 5 558.77 2.23 0.19
ψ(.)p(t) 11 560.72 4.19 0.07
ψ(t)p(t) 11 560.72 4.19 0.07
ψ(.)p(driver) 3 562.35 5.82 0.03
ψ(.)p(warea+food) 3 563.66 7.12 0.02
ψ(.)p(driver+food) 4 564.73 8.20 0.01
ψ(.)p(warea) 3 565.97 9.44 0.01
ψ(.)p(.) 2 571.74 15.21 0.00
ψ(t)p(.) 2 571.74 15.21 0.00
ψ(.)p(food) 3 573.28 16.75 0.00
Table 3: Comparison of models for capture probability of Red-bellied Woodpecker in northcentral Ohio 1995-2005. Models include a constant (.), time (t), distance to riparian corridor (driver), woodlot area (warea), and presence of a feeder (food).
We thank our PhD advisor Dr. Thomas Grubb, Jr. who initiated this study. We thank Paul Doherty who worked on this study for the first five years, and all individuals that assisted with collecting data. We also thank the Crawford County landowners that granted us permission to conduct our research on their land. Financial support was provided by the American Ornithologists’ Union, the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium, the Maumee Valley Audubon Society, the North American Bluebird Society, the Ohio Chapter of the Nature Conservancy, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, the Ohio State University Graduate School, and the Wilson Ornithological Society.
LITERATURE CITED
Adams, B.T. 2014. Influences of a human dominated landscape on midwestern breeding bird occupancy and diversity. M.S. thesis, Bowling Green State University,Bowling Green, OH.
Burnham, K.P., and D. R. Anderson. 1998. Model selection and inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. SpringerVerlag, New York, NY.
Burnham, K.P., and D. R. Anderson. 2004. Multimodel inference – understanding AIC and BIC in model selection. Sociological Methods & Research 33: 261-304.
Capellini, I., J. Baker, W. L. Allen, S. E. Street and C. Venditti. 2015. The role of life history traits in mammalian invasion success. Ecology Letters 18:1099-1107.
Conner, R.N. 1980. Foraging habitats of woodpeckers in southwestern Virginia. Journal of Field Ornithology 51: 119-127.
Cormack, R.M. 1964. Estimates of survival from the sighting of marked animals. Biometrika 51: 429- 438.
Cox, A.S. 2011. Natal dispersal and survival of Red-bellied Woodpeckers in a fragmented landscape. M.S. thesis, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, MO.
Cox, A.S., and D. C. Kesler. 2012. Prospecting behavior and the influence of forest cover on natal dispersal in a resident bird. Behavioral Ecology 23:1068-1077.
Davis, W.E. 2023. About the cover: Red-bellied Woodpecker. Bird Observer 26:11.
Doherty, P.F., Jr., and T.C. Grubb, Jr. 2002. Survivorship of permanent resident birds in a fragmented forested landscape. Ecology 83: 844-857.
Ettwein, A. 2024. Space use of the White-backed Woodpecker in a heterogeneous landscape: implications for forest management. Dr.sc. nat. dissertation, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Austria.
FitzGerald, A.M., N. C. Starkloff and J. J. Kirchman. 2018. Testing the predictive capabilities of ecological niche models: a case study examining Red-bellied Woodpeckers. Ecosphere 9: e02496.
Gabrey, S. 2019. Species snapshot: Red-bellied Woodpecker (Melanerpes carolinus). North American Bird Bander 44:195-197.
Gillies, C S. and C.C. St. Clair. 2008. Riparian corridors enhance movement of a forest specialist bird in fragmented tropical forest. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105:19774-19779.
Groom, J.D., and T.C. Grubb, Jr. 2006. Patch colonization dynamics in Carolina Chickadees (Poecile carolinensis) in a fragmented landscape: A manipulative study. Auk 123: 1149–1160.
Hargett, E.M., A. Lang, J. Riddle and R. P. Thiel. 2022. Over-winter trends in resident Downy, Hairy, Red-bellied woodpeckers and Whitebreasted Nuthatches in a central Wisconsin forest. North American Bird Bander 3:121129.
Holoubek, N.S. and W.E. Jensen. 2015. Avian occupancy varies with habitat structure in oak savanna of the south central United States. Journal of Wildlife Management 79:458-468.
Horn, D.J. 1999. The species richness of birds visiting a yard is influenced by the feeders/ seeds present. Journal of the Iowa Academy of Science 106:21-25.
Jackson, J.A., and W. E. Davis, Jr. 1998. Range expansionofthe Red-bellied Woodpecker. Bird Observer 26:4-11.
Jolly, G.M. 1965. Explicit estimates from capturerecapture data with both death and immigration — stochastic model. Biometrika 52:225–247.
Karr, J.R., J. D. Nichols, M. K. Klimkiewicz and J. D. Brawn. 1990. Survival rates of birds of tropical and temperate forests: will the dogma survive? American Naturalist 136:277-291.
Kozma, J.M., A. J. Kroll and K. S. Lucas. 2022. Annual survival of adult White-headed Woodpeckers (Dryobates albolarvatus) in ponderosa pine forest with a history of forest management. Wilson Journal of Ornithology 134:485-494.
Lebreton, J.D., K. P. Burnham, J. Clobert and D. R. Anderson. 1992. Modeling survival and testing biological hypotheses using marked animals: a unified approach with case studies. Ecological Monographs 62:67-118.
Leonard, D.L. and I. J. Stout. 2006. Woodpecker use of forested wetlands in central peninsular Florida. Southeastern Naturalist 5: 621-636.
Machtans, C.S., M. A. Villard and S. J. Hannon. 1996. Use of riparian buffer strips as movement corridors by forest birds. Conservation Biology 10:1366-1379.
Martin, T.E. 1995. Avian life history evolution in relation to nest sites, nest predation, and food. Ecological Monographs 65:101-127.
Mosley, E.S. B. Holmes and E. Nol. 2006. Songbird diversity and movement in upland and riparian habitats in the boreal mixedwood forest of northeastern Ontario. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 36:1149-1164.
Myczko, Ł., Z. M. Rosin, P. Skórka, and P. Tryjanowski. 2014. Urbanization level and woodland size are major drivers of woodpecker species richness and abundance. PLoS One 9(4):e94218.
Perkins, M.W., R. J. Johnson and E. E. Blankenship. 2003. Response of riparian avifauna to percentage and pattern of woody cover in an agricultural landscape. Wildlife Society Bulletin 31:642-660.
Robles, H., and C. Ciudad. 2012. Influence of habitat quality, population size, patch size, and connectivity on patch occupancy dynamics of the Middle Spotted Woodpecker. Conservation Biology 26:284-293.
Robles, H.,C. Ciudad, R. Vera, P. P. Olea and E. Matthysen, 2008. Demographic responses of Middle Spotted Woodpeckers (Dendrocopos medius) to habitat fragmentation. Auk 125: 131-139.
Seber, G.A. F. 1965. A note on the multiple recapture census. Biometrika 52:249-259.
Shackelford, C.E., and R. N. Conner. 1997. Woodpecker abundance and habitat use in three forest types in eastern Texas. Wilson Bulletin 109:614-629.
Skurnack, A.M., S. M. Cady, S. R. Loss and T. J. O’Connell. 2023. Red-bellied Woodpecker (Melanerpes carolinus) has increased in abundance at a western range margin. Wilson Journal of Ornithology 135:425-433.
White, G.C., and K. P. Burnham. 1999. Program MARK: survival estimation from populations of marked animals. Bird Study 46(sup1): S120–S139.
Wiebe, K.L. 2006. A review of adult survival rates in woodpeckers. Annales Zoologici Fennici 43: 112-117.
Zuwerink, D.A. 2007. Demographic and behavioral responses of permanent-resident cavitynesting birds to forest fragmentation and West Nile Virus. Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
Red-bellied Woodpecker
Recent Literature
Compiled by Claire Stuyck (If you would like to help review articles of interest to banders, please contact cstuyck “at” uw.edu, and feel free to mention if you have a particular journal or geographic area of interest).
Contributors to this issue:
AML= Annie M. Lindsay; AR= Axel Rutter; CMS= Claire M. Stuyck; DVP= Daniela V. Puerto; JLS= Joseph L. Saxfield; MP= Medha Pandey; MSW= Meredith S. Walker; NMC= Nolan M. Clements; PP= Peter Pyle; SKA= Steve Keith Albert
Banding History and Biographies
David F. DeSante's birds of Cabo San Lucas, fall 1968: a historic account. David F. DeSante, R.A. Erickson, G. Marron, and Peter Pyle1. 2024. Western Birds 55:28-42. The Institute for Bird Populations, Petaluma, CA, USA. 1ppyle@ birdpop.org
Dr. David DeSante founded the Monitoring Avian Productivity and Survivorship (MAPS) Program in 1989. Though MAPS was Dr. DeSante’s passion, he had a long and distinguished career in other aspects of ornithology. In preparation for his doctoral studies at Stanford University, DeSante, who passed away in 2022, spent the fall of 1968 studying migratory landbirds at Cabo San Lucas, Mexico. Although his hopes to capture numerous vagrant warblers were not met, he amassed an impressive list of distributional records for the Baja California Peninsula at a time when few ornithologists were working there. Among these were peninsular firsts for the Ring-necked Duck, Broad-billed Hummingbird, Broad-winged Hawk, Bobolink, and Painted Bunting. Another six species, and one subspecies, were found for the first time in Baja California Sur. Venturing away from the immediate confines of Cabo San Lucas, DeSante established the first peninsular record of the Gray-headed Junco and first state records
for another five species and one subspecies. Although many of these records have been reported previously, the junior authors believe it is appropriate to synthesize them more completely with current context, in Dave’s honor. In this lively and informative paper, several of DeSante’s colleagues use his notes and other information to publish for the first time the results of his trip. PP, SKA
Equipment, Techniques, and Station Reports
Global review and guidelines to avoid opportunistic predation of birds and bats in mist nets. Guilherme Wince de Moura, Karen Mustin, Fernando Antonio Silva Pinto, et al. 2023. Ecology and Evolution 13:e10390. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain, wilruoca@ hotmail.com
Mist-nets are one of the most common trap types used in research to capture wild birds and are also among the most dangerous, with predation often being the leading cause of injury when reported. This paper reviews 48 articles in four languages, plus unpublished data, totaling 216 occurrences of opportunistic predation of birds and bats in mist-nets to better understand the factors associated with predation rates, review current guidelines meant to reduce predation, and provide further suggestions for mitigating this risk.
The top reported predators of birds in nets were primates, birds of prey, and near-passerines, while those of bats were marsupials and wild and domestic cats. In North America, the predators reported were deer, turtles, falcons, snakes, and cuckoos. This study found that, for birds, the first (lowest) shelf of a mist net has proportionally higher rates of predation, making up 70.6% of records that reported mist-net shelf. Previous studies have shown that net height and the interval between checking nets were the leading factors affecting opportunistic predation rates in both birds and bats. Here, more than half (57.5%) of the predation reports on birds had intervals of over an hour, followed by 38.4% at 30-minute intervals and 4.1% at 20 minutes.
The authors present a list of suggestions for minimizing opportunistic predation rates when using mist-nets: (1) keep nets at least 50 cm above the ground and ensure that a captured animal will not touch the ground; (2) check nets every 15 minutes or less; (3) if predators are present, further reduce net checking intervals, keep a constant watch on nets, or relocate or close nets; (4) vigilantly trim vegetation away from nets; (5) remove animals caught in nets as soon as possible; (6) avoid operating mist nets with only one person to ensure smooth net operation and timely checks and extractions.
Many of these suggestions are present in existing guidelines, but none of the reports included in this review indicated that they abided by them. Despite suggestions of intervals between 15 and 45 minutes, about half of the studies reviewed that reported intervals had intervals longer than 45 minutes. The authors suggest that predation rates would have been lower if existing guidelines had been considered. They also emphasize the need to diligently record and report predation events. Their comparison of published and unpublished data suggests an underrepresentation of predation in the literature. Including information such as net height, net shelf, predator and prey species, and net-check intervals can further help inform future analyses and guidelines.
This study highlights the importance of keeping up with and implementing mist-netting best practice. Countless hours of work have been done to determine and share the safest methods of operating mist-nets and it is irresponsible to open nets without these considerations. The welfare of the animals we study is in our hands, and while it may not be possible to eliminate all risk, it is our responsibility to continually assess our work to get as close to that goal as possible. AR
Identification, Molts, Plumages, Weights, and Measurements
Molting strategies of sapsuckers (Sphyrapicus): effects of migration distance and age through the fourth and later plumage cycles. Peter Pyle and Lynn Schofield. 2023. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology 135:445–456.
Woodpeckers stand out among birds and not just for their well-known foraging habits, extralong tongues, and reinforced skulls. The family Picidae also has unusual molt patterns, replacing all primaries and rectrices during preformative and prebasic molts but retaining at least some of their primary coverts and secondaries during these molts. One twig on the North American woodpecker branch, the sapsuckers, stands out even more, in addition to constructing sap wells, these four species take this feather retention pattern even further. In a study funded by the Sierra Foothills Audubon Society and published in The Wilson Journal of Ornithology, biologists Peter Pyle and Lynn Schofield from The Institute for Bird Populations examine molt in sapsuckers (genus Sphyrapicus.) These specialized woodpeckers had been thought to replace fewer feathers during a given molt cycle than other North American woodpeckers, but these differences had not been examined in detail until this study. The researchers then discuss how the timing and extent of molt in five different species and subspecies of sapsucker may relate to migration. Pyle examined and scored molt in 675 specimens from museum collections and wing photos from sapsuckers banded as part of the MAPS program in the Boreal region of Alberta. Schofield performed statistical analyses to examine correlations between molt extents and time of year for all four species of sapsucker: Yellow-bellied (S. varius), Red-naped (S. nuchalis), Williamson’s (S. thyroideus), and Red-breasted (S. ruber)- the two subspecies of which, S. r. ruber and S. r. daggettii- were treated as separate groups due to their differing habitats and migratory strategies. The researchers found that on average, sapsuckers do indeed replace fewer feathers per molt cycle than other North American species of woodpecker. Pyle was able to describe sapsucker molt sequences in detail. “I was pleased to figure out the exact replacement sequences among the primary coverts and secondaries, both convergent from the outside of each tract inward, and terminating in the primary covert that corresponds to p6 of the primaries, and with s3 or s4 of the secondaries,” says Pyle. “Then that the next wave of replacement can begin before the first one finishes is cool.
This mimics what we call "Staffelmauser" (or stepwise molt) in the primaries, a process that results in multiple replacement waves and our ability to age large flighted birds such as eagles and condors up to four or five years or greater.” This study is the first to report the Staffelmauser pattern occurring in the primary coverts of birds but, uniquely to woodpeckers (and kingfishers), not the primaries. MSW, PP, and SKA
Molt patterns, aging, and sexing criteria for ten temperate Neotropic bird species: an important resource for bird monitoring programs. Martín E. Pérez and Pablo G. Brandolin. 2024. Journal of Field Ornithology 95(3):9.
Bird monitoring programs and conservation efforts rely on accurate and precise understanding of aging and sexing which are informed by molt patterns. In this important paper, the first descriptions of molt patterns for birds of central Argentina are presented. A standardized mist-netting protocol consisting of 1-4 efforts per month between December 2018 and February 2023 for a total of 1740 mist-net hours was conducted in the southern region of Córdoba, Argentina. Ten species with sufficient data were selected for analysis: Picui Gound Dove (Columbina picui), Small-buled Elaenia (Eleania parvirostris), White-crested Elaenia (Elaenia albiceps), Bran-colored Flycatcher (Myiophobus fasciatus), House Wren (Troglodytes aedon), Rufous-bellied Thrush (Turdus rufiventris), Creamy-bellied Thrush (Turdus amaurochalinus), Rufous-collared Sparrow (Zonotrichia capensis), Southern Yellowthroat (Geothlypis velata), and Double-collared Seedeater (Sporophila caerulescens). Analysis focused on 1) identifying prejuvenal, preformative, and prebasic molt periods; 2) assessing the extent of preformative molt; and 3) morphometrics (e.g., wing chord, tail, tarsus, and culmen) of six species to determine which measurements were most useful in sex determination. This is an exciting expansion in describing aging and sexing for several species previously not described in Argentina. The broader implications of this work will assist field ornithological studies and presents a model for future species documentation. CMS
North American Banding Results
Migratory connectivity of Blue-winged Teal: risk implications for avian influenza virus introduction to Cuba. Alejandro Rodríguez-Ochoa1, J.W. Kusack, L. Mugica, et al. 2024. Frontiers in Bird Science 3:1401625. 1rdguezochoa89@gmail.com
Research on the connectivity of Neotropical migratory species in the Caribbean is limited. This paper combines 63 years of banding records and stable hydrogen isotopes techniques to determine the links between breeding populations and migratory and wintering populations of Bluewinged Teal (BWTE, Spatula discors) in Cuba. Given the role of the species as a host of avian influenza virus (AIV), the authors also evaluated the potential risk of AIV introduction by BWTE to the country. The authors identified a phenological pattern in migratory origins. Individuals harvested in the migratory season in western Cuba were most likely from molt or natal areas in the prairies and forest regions from United States and southern Canada. Alternatively, individuals harvested in winter in central Cuba had the most likely origin in the U.S. prairie region. This suggests a diverse range of potential origins for BWTE individuals using Cuba as a wintering or stopover site en route to the rest of the Caribbean and other nonbreeding grounds. Age-related differences in migratory connectivity were also detected. Adult BWTE sampled during migration occupied molting areas further south in North America than juveniles. This has special significance given that AIV prevalence is higher in juvenile birds within wild populations. Overall, this study highlights the relevance of combining traditional and novel techniques to identify priority areas for AIV incursion or transmission along migratory flyways. This is particularly significant for underdeveloped countries where surveillance efforts are expensive and difficult to maintain in the long-term. DVP
Springing forward: Migrating songbirds catch up with the start of spring in North America. Claire E. Nemes, Peter P. Marra, Theodore J. Zenazal Jr, et al. 2024. Journal of Animal Ecology 93: 294-306 University of Maryland Center for
Environmental Science, Appalachian Laboratory, Frostburg, MD, USA. Claire.nemes@umces.edu
With advancements in avian tracking technologies, comes new possibilities to examine patterns in bird behavior and movement. In this article, the authors look at the spring migration rates of four species of songbirds in Eastern North America: Swainson’s Thrush (Catharus ustulatus), Gray-Cheeked Thrush (Catharus minimus), Northern Waterthrush (Parkesia novaeborancensis), and Ovenbird (Seiurus aurocapilla). The birds were tracked using the Motus network after they entered the southern United States and tracked until they were close to their breeding grounds in the north. These rates were then compared to two different measures of spring onset (referred to as the “green wave”).
The authors hypothesized that these four species time their migration with later phases of vegetation phenology, to take advantage of increased arthropod prey. They also hypothesized that spring onset rate would influence bird migration rate, causing them to adjust migration timing based on phenological conditions. The authors expected to find that birds would match their migration rate to trail behind the green wave at a consistent pace.
An unexpected pattern of migration compared to the green wave emerged. These four species arrived in the southern United States well after spring onset in the south, traveled at a faster rate than the green wave while migrating through North America, and caught up to the leading edge of the green wave as they approached their breeding grounds. They did not stay a consistent number of days behind the green wave as hypothesized. The authors point to the possibility that insectivores have a broad diet during migration, allowing them to remain fueled through different phenological stages.
The authors noted that they were not able to track the birds completely from non-breeding wintering grounds entirely to their breeding grounds. There may be some important factors that influence migration rate due to wintering ground conditions as the birds begin migration. This paper shows the importance of wildlife
tracking technologies in the examination of climate systems. The Motus network is expanding and will certainly lead to a more complete picture of bird migration. Additionally, as remote sensing and spatial technologies continue to advance, there will be an ever-compelling march towards a more comprehensive view of how climate affects migration. JLS
Persistent species relationships characterize migrating bird communities across stopover sites and seasons. Joely G. DeSimone1, Lucas W. DeGroote, Stuart A. MacKenzie, Jennifer C. Owen, Andrea J. Patterson, and Emily B. Cohen. 2024. PNAS 121(34): e2322063121. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2322063121 Appalachian Laboratory, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, Frostburg, Maryland, USA. 1joely.desmione@umces.edu
The data collected during bird banding operations can be valuable in analyses not envisioned when these data were initially collected. In this paper, the authors used capture time and net ID in a social network analysis to explore species associations during migratory stopover events at five long-term banding stations: Powdermill Avian Research Center in Pennsylvania, Braddock Bay Bird Observatory in New York, Burke Lake Banding Station in Michigan, and two sites at Long Point Bird Observatory in Ontario. The dataset included >500,000 banding records of 50 species that were gathered over 8 to 23 years.
This study showed positive interspecific interactions among co-migrating songbirds, which were consistent among banding stations and during both migration seasons. The associations were strongest between closely related species, those that shared similar foraging behaviors, and those with overlapping nonbreeding ranges. These species affiliations could not be explained solely by each species’ natural history, suggesting that songbirds migrate as part of a community. These heterospecific affiliations may provide opportunities for migrating birds to exchange information about habitat quality, facilitating the efficient selection of stopover habitat in which to rest and refuel. The relative lack of negative
between-species interactions indicates that migrating songbirds are not engaging in detectable interspecific competitive exclusion during stopover events at these banding sites. This paper gives strong evidence that songbirds are part of a migrating community, maintaining networks of interspecific associations at stopover events which are likely consistent throughout the migration period of the annual cycle. AML
Wildfire burn severity and stream chemistry influence aquatic invertebrate and riparian avian mercury exposure in forested ecosystems. Herring, G., L. B. Tennant, J. J. Willacker, M. Johnson, R. B. Siegel, J. S. Polasik, and C. A. Eagles-Smith. 2024. Ecotoxicology 33:1.
Environmental mercury can be dangerous for birds and other wildlife. A recent study coauthored by researchers from The U.S. Geological Survey, National Park Service, The Institute for Bird Populations, and the Nez Perce Tribe looks at mercury levels in riparian birds and aquatic insects following forest fires in California’s Sierra Nevada. When we think of mercury, many of us picture the mesmerizing silver liquid metal found in thermometers. This is pure, elemental mercury which rarely occurs naturally. Most mercury occurs in the form of chemical compounds in the Earth’s crust, such as mercury sulfide (also known as cinnabar.) It is also found in fossil fuels, in compounds such as mercuric sulfide in crude oil, and pyritic mercury in coal. It only becomes a problem for organisms when it’s released from the earth’s crust into the air or water. This occurs naturally during volcanic explosions, but since the Industrial Revolution, much more mercury has been released when fossil fuels- especially coalare burned. Mercury easily vaporizes into a gas when mercury-containing compounds are burned. Once in the atmosphere, mercury can travel and be deposited in terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, where it can form a variety of chemical compounds. The most concerning of these compounds is the neurotoxin methylmercury, which forms when microorganisms combine mercury with carbon. However, most of the emitted mercury is eventually sequestered in soil and vegetation in compounds
that are much less harmful to animals. One of the biggest reservoirs of mercury is in the soils and vegetation of coniferous forests like those in the Sierra Nevada. The field portion of the study was conducted in 2015 on the Plumas National Forest in California’s Sierra Nevada where the Moonlight and Antelope fires burned in 2007. Stream water samples, aquatic invertebrates, and blood samples from riparian songbirds were collected at 19 sites within the fires’ boundaries that had burned at varying severities. Five additional unburned sites within the forest were also sampled. Lab analyses measured methylmercury concentrations in invertebrates and total mercury in bird blood (95% of mercury in bird blood is in the form of methylmercury.) Mercury concentrations in birds and invertebrates varied widely between species and foraging guilds. Insectivores, especially flycatchers, had higher blood mercury levels than omnivorous birds. Western Wood-Pewees had the highest mercury levels of any bird species, however, study leader Herring says that even the high mercury levels found in the pewees were likely not high enough to cause physiological impairment. Overall, the relationship between fire severity and blood mercury levels in birds was inconsistent. This study illustrates some of the complex pathways mercury can take through food webs and how wildfire can alter the distribution of this often harmful element. MSW, SKA
Non-North American Banding Results
Mortality rates in the national bird ringing programme of Denmark and the Faroe Islands. Tom S. Romdal, J. J. Madsen, A. P. Tottrup, and K. Thorup1. 2024. Bird Study 71(2):154–164. Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 1kasper. thorup@sund.ku.dk.
Mark and recapture techniques remain essential to wildlife research, including avian research. Furthermore, technological advancements (in tracking equipment and molecular methodologies) that can be leveraged during bird banding (ringing) operations to yield nuanced datasets firmly entrench banding as an integral tool for future research.
Romdal et al. (2024) contribute to limited literature evaluating mortality rates during bird banding operations. This is one of only three studies aiming to quantify the safety of bird capture techniques attempted at a national scale and is the first study to include an entire national banding data set, made possible by the mandatory reporting of all causes of mortality. Mortality rates of birds were analyzed over a 20-year period from the Danish national bird-banding scheme, including Denmark and the Faroe Islands. Data included in this study encompassed various capture methods and involved an impressive 1.78 million individual birds representing 307 species.
The overall mortality rate among all birds captured was 0.16%. Most deaths were caused by predation, accounting for 55% of all mortalities, and the Eurasian Sparrowhawk (Accipiter nisus) was the most common predator. The mechanism of the capture method was the second leading cause of death, accounting for 21% of all mortalities. Hand capture was the safest method, with a mortality rate of 0.01%. Mist nets accounted for 71% of all bird captures and had the second-highest mortality rate at 0.21%, comparable to that reported in other studies. Interestingly, bird observatories, where mist nets are the dominant capture method used, accounted for only 31% of all mist-netted birds yet had a significantly higher mortality rate (0.33%, p < 0.001) than mist nets at other sites (0.12%). Many of the birds banded at observatories were banded during migration and many deaths were of young birds (hatch year, first cycle individuals) on their first migration (fall). The higher mortality rates at observatories may be driven by higher capture rates and the physiological stress of migration. This begs the question: are the mortality rates of mist-netted birds at observatories and other sites similar in the summer when the effects of migration and higher capture rates may be minimized?
The paper provides a more nuanced discussion of how age, species, seasonality, banding site (bird observatory vs. other), and trap type affect mortality rates for those interested in additional details. This study, particularly with its scale and sample size, is an excellent addition to relevant literature along with the Spotswood et al.
(2012), “How safe is mist netting?...” and Clewley et al. (2018), “Estimating mortality rates among passerines caught for ringing with mist nets using data from previously ringed birds” papers. The authors call upon bird observatories, especially those located at migratory hotspots, to further strive for lower mortality rates as they also have the most opportunity for improvement with long-term staff and years to refine station operation protocols and best practices. Bird banding remains an invaluable and “relatively” safe method of data collection that has markedly improved in its industry standards from the early days of bird banding and should continue to evolve with progressing ethical standards. MP
Long-term monitoring reveals widespread and severe declines of understory birds in a protected Neotropical forest. Henry S. Pollock, Judith D. Toms, Corey E. Tarwater, et al. 2022. Proceedings of the Nation Academy of Sciences 119(16): e2108731119.
In their paper, Pollock et al. utilize 44 years of banding data from a large plot along the famous Pipeline Road in Central Panama to assess long-term trends in the populations of 57 species of understory forest birds. From 1977 to 2020, two net lines with consistent net locations were operated, resulting in greater than 80,000 net hours and nearly 15,000 captures of 159 species. Using additive Poisson models, and adjusting for zero inflation and overdispersion where necessary, they modeled the total number of captures of unique individuals throughout time to quantify trends in local populations of species with greater than 20 captures throughout the duration of the study. They found 40 of the 57 focal species showed decreased abundance, but that this pattern was irrespective of body size, foraging guild, and original local abundance. These results are consistent with other studies from South and Central America which have similarly found declines in local tropical understory bird populations using mist netting protocols; however, one study from Costa Rica that used long-term observational data found no significant population trends. While these findings are alarming, many of the species were
captured relatively few times, had statistically but not biologically significant trends, or have strong associations with habitats that naturally disappeared from the study site but that are common at a regional scale. The authors briefly address the potential impact of net avoidance on their conclusions and use temporally consistent recapture probabilities to support their claim that net shyness did not occur; however, this could be explored more thoroughly as tropical birds have
News, Notes, Comments
long life spans and therefore also have the capacity to develop avoidant tendencies which may persist throughout time. With this in mind, these results should be interpreted cautiously. Exploration of demographic rates (capitalizing on the usefulness of the WRP ageing system in the tropics), impacts of net avoidance, and site-specific habitat change may help to better inform local population trends of tropical understory birds. NMC
A Summary of the NABB Survey Results
Last year North American Bird Bander (NABB) sent out a survey to readers togather information regarding subscribers' general interest in the publication. This included all members of the three regional banding organizations in North America –Eastern Bird Banding Association (EBBA), Inland Bird Banding Association (IBBA), and Western Bird Banding Association (WBBA). It was a simple seven question survey. The questions asked are paraphrased below:
In which organizations do you hold a primary membership?
Are you currently receiving NABB? If yes, please rate the value of NABB.
What part of NABB do you most look forward to reading?
Would you prefer to receive copies via hard copy or in digital format?
Share any comments or suggestions regarding NABB or your regional banding association.
Are you interested in contributing articles or manuscripts to NABB?
There were 223 respondents to the NABB survey. They were distributed among the three organizations as follows: EBBA – 87(39%), IBBA – 81(36.3%), WBBA – 53(23.8%). Of those 223 respondents, 211 (95%) receive NABB. The overwhelming majority find NABB to be valuable (91.9%). Of that group it is an almost even split between those who find it Moderately Valuable (40.8%) and those who find it Highly Valuable (51.1%). Interest in the contents of the journal was primarily divided between readers who like the scientific manuscripts (47.1%) versus those who most enjoy the banding station reports (36.3%). There were about 11 (4.9%) respondents who said they enjoy all parts of the journal. Twelve (5.4%) respondents, who had picked one department as their favorite, made comments indicating that they enjoy reading the entire journal but felt they had to pick one part. There were 19 respondents (8.5%) who said their favorite part of the journal was “General News.” As there is no General News department in the journal, it is assumed that this refers to the News, Notes and Comments section. The majority would like to continue to receive the publication as a hard copy (58.3%) versus those that support a digital format (41.7%). In the comments, seven people who indicated a preference for a print version stated that they understand the need/importance/ utility of going digital and would support that decision if it were made.
Ninety respondents (40.4%) included written comments. Most of those were either for or against a digital publication (16 for, 8 against). Many were complimentary of NABB or of the three organizations (23). Among the other comments, notable topics included the following: Numbers in parenthesis are how many people voiced that comment.
A section devoted to raptor banding (1)
Providing merchandise to support the three organizations (1)
Station reports should report capture rates rather than raw counts (1)
Merge the three organizations (2)
Creation of a searchable online database of NABB (2).
A resource identifying all the banders and their stations in North America (2)
More articles on banding techniques, aging/ sexing (4)
More photos (often as support for an electronic publication) (4)
Finally, the question regarding interest in publishing in NABB garnered 72 responses. Ten respondents either said no or not at this time. The remaining 62 either said yes, described content they were interested in publishing or left a contact email as requested. So, almost a third of the respondents (27.8%) are interested in publishing with NABB.
Michael Bishop
Mid-Michigan Bird Observatory
619 Gratiot Avenue Alma, MI 48801
Polydactyly in a Red-tailed Hawk
Bradley S Silfies
1525 Blue Mountain Drive
Danielsville, PA 18038 bssilfies@gmail.com
Gerald K.Lahr
3400 Church Road
Easton, PA 18045
jerrylahr@rcn.com
On 27 Apr 2023 BSS captured and banded a Second Year Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) at Little Gap raptor banding station run by GKL in Danielsville, Northampton County, PA. The bird was captured with a bow trap while ably using both feet. Upon completion of recording banding data I noticed that the right foot had a fifth toe and talon.
The fifth toe originated between the hallux and number four toe at a right angle to the normal position of the other toes and was covered in granulated skin with no scutes. It was much shorter than a normal toe with a near full sized talon. The toe was flexible but did not close when the foot of the bird was clenched. The bird appeared physically normal and was molting, replacing primaries one and two on each wing and had replaced right rectrix number one with an adult feather and corresponding covert.
In a reference search for Red-tailed Hawks with a polydactyly none could be found. Within the genus Buteo, Fox (1989) reported a Common Buzzard (Buteo buteo) with an extra digit that originated at the ankle joint. Bebe (1910) reported three cases of supernumerary toes in the Broadwinged Hawk (Buteo platypterus) with origins just above the ankle on the tibiotarsus, the lower end of the tarsometatarsus, and on the tarsometatarsus just above the hallux respectively. In the case of this Red-tailed Hawk, polydactyly appears to originate within the foot at the distal end of the tarsometatarsus.
LITERATURE \CITED
Bebe, C.W. 1910. Three cases of supernumerary digit in the Broad-winged Hawk (Buteo brachypterus). Zoologica 1:150-152. Fox, N.C. 1989. A unilateral extra digit in a wild common buzzard (Buteo buteo). Avian Pathology 18:193-196.
Eleven years and counting
Last year (24 June 2023) an unusual surprise occurred at the Stoecklin Orchard Hummingbird Festival held at Donnellson, Montgomery Co., Illinois. As I have already reported (NABB 48:2&3), a female Ruby-throated Hummingbird (J28958) that had been banded as an AHY on 14 June 2014 was captured as an old return. According to the Banding Lab’s records, she would have been then at least ten years old. Fast forward to 2024! She was caught again twice in 2024 which would make her at least eleven years old. Her history has been sporadic as well as impressive during the past ten years.
14 Jun 2014 banded as an AHY female
14 Aug 2014 captured as a repeat
24 Jun 2017 captured as a return
5 Aug 2017 captured as a repeat
3 Aug 2018 captured as a return
26 Jun 2021 captured as a return
30 Jul 2021 captured as a repeat
24 Jun 2023 captured as a return
29 Jun 2024 captured as a return
27 Jul 2024 captured as a repeat
She was not caught in 2015, 2016, 2019, 2020 and 2022. Regardless, she becomes the oldest Rubythroated Hummingbird on record (11 yr 1 mo).
Vernon Kleen, Permit 08355 1825 Clearview Drive Springfield, IL 62704 vkleen@comcast.net
Ruby-throated Hummingbird
News From the Bird Banding Lab
The Bander Portal data submission module has been live for over two years! Thank you for your patience and positive feedback during the transition as we continue to improve the Portal experience. Below is some information that may help you navigate the Bander Portal whether you are new to the Portal or have been using it since it was first released.
Subpermits
Master permit holders will need to give their subpermittee(s) permissions to access most of the Bander Portal features and tools. This also includes all subpermittee and data assistants planning to submit banding data. Access permissions can be assigned by navigating to the Tools menu and then click on “Define Access for Sub Permittees”. Select the person you wish to assign permissions to and use to the checkbox to apply the appropriate permissions. Note, the master bander may need to contact the USGS Bird Banding Lab permits office (bbl_permits@usgs.gov) to add an email to the sub’s permit, so they can create a login for the portal.
Additionally, banders can now request that data manager be added to the permit. This individual will have access to the permit’s portal features and specifically to submit banding data however they will not have any bird banding authorizations Instructions can be found under the Permits tab and click on “Request Modification”.
Adding locations with exact coordinates
When adding a new location, you can use either the drag and drop feature or search and add coordinates function. If you want to search coordinates yourself, you will still need to do Step 1, which includes choosing the country, state, and county. You can then enter the coordinates in the map search box in step 2. Coordinates can be in any format (e.g., DMS or degrees decimals). Once the location has been identified and mapped by the system, you will see the green bubble pin marking the location on the map and then you wiil need to zoom in, to a minimum zoom level of “13” and
pick up and drop the pin in the same place for the data to register in all the fields in Step 3.
Auxiliary markers
When entering banding data for auxiliary marked birds in the templates, please ensure the marker type code selected for the banding record matches the actual marker deployed on the bird. If you are unsure what auxiliary marker code to use, review your permit’s marking authorizations. The marker code will be listed in the authorization title.
Avoid slow
loading times
Once the data has been uploaded to the Bander Portal, it is time to review and clean any records with warnings or errors. You can save time by right clicking the band number on the Upload Cleaning/ Submission page and opening the banding record in a new tab or browser window. This negates the need to reload all the records in the table view page after cleaning each individual record as needed. Additionally, if all or most of the records are red, you might consider deleting the entire upload file, fixing the error in the template, and re-uploading.
Tips for resolving “warnings” on the Bander Portal’s Data Cleaning/Submission Page
1. Age/sex unlikely on this date
Double check the age and/or sex when compared with the date. Common mistakes resulting in this error are:
• Nestlings should be reported as local (L), this code includes young birds incapable of sustained flight, NOT hatch year (HY).
• Birds that cannot be micro-aged (SY, ASY) between January 1 and the appearance of the first nestlings should be reported as after hatch year (AHY), not unknown age (U).
• Young of the year, particularly locals (L), often cannot be sexed, unless you indicate a method/ technique supported by peer-review publications (e.g. DNA, or published morphometric method for sexing).
• Species for which males and females show similar plumage generally cannot be sexed outside of the breeding season, unless you indicate a method/technique supported by data (e.g. DNA, or published morphometric method for sexing).
Data accurate but still getting the warning? This doesn’t mean the age or sex is wrong. It means the designation is unusual and requires some additional documentation. Provide a detailed remark and then bypass the warning.
• Remark example for a SY-F Myrtle Warbler in September: “Symmetrically replacing rr4-6, pp6-9, ss1, ss7-9. Greater and carpal coverts completed, but the alula is unmolted and shows a molt limit between the A1 (formative) and the A2 (juvenal).”
2. Species unlikely on date or Species unlikely in state/province
Double check that the species, date, and location are correct.
You can review the filters for this warning simply by clicking the blue “?” to the right of the warning. This will provide a popup with an explanation of the warning and a link to the filter. Click the “See filter here” link for details.
Data accurate but still get a warning? Again, this doesn’t mean the species or date is wrong. It means the record is unusual and requires additional documentation. Provide a detailed remark and bypass the warning. Example remarks to include:
• “Confirmed Blue-winged Warbler.” Please write out the species name. In many cases, we see cases where four-letter alpha codes get mixed up, for example: BWWA and BAWW.
• “This bird is an early migrant for this location.” Acknowledge whether or not this bird is unusual on this date/location.
• “Photo attached.” Then attach a photo using the camera icon under the bypass warning(s) check-box. Not necessary, but we do love when you attach photos.
3. Wing chord, tail length, or weight is out of range
Double check that the species and measurement are not transcription errors. Nestlings and preflighted birds should be aged “L” for Local. Data accurate but still get a warning? Write a remark and bypass the warning. Example remarks:
• “Bird carried lots of fat.”
• “Noticeably small female.”
• “Weight is only 2 grams out of range.”
• “Tail length is within range for the updated Pyle guide.”
4. Not recommended band size
Double check that the species and band number are correct. Data accurate but still get a warning? Write a remark and bypass the warning. Example remarks:
• “Band size was determined with leg gauge.”
• “Bird had a thick leg, typical 1A band size fit too tight.”
• “Accidentally applied the wrong band size, ensure band fit okay (band was easily spun, and was not too big) prior to release.”
*Thank you for your patience as we continue to work towards updating these filters.
View my data
When viewing your data in the View My Banding Data or View My Recapture Data screen on the Bander Portal, please note you many need to explore different record sources to find your data, including the NABBP archive and submitted to NABBP but not yet reviewed. This is due to the way the NABBP reviews, processes, and stores information.
Founded 1923
We are excited to announce EBBA’s Annual Meeting is migrating south in 2025! Join us for an enriching experience amidst the picturesque landscape and stunning bird diversity of Kiawah Island along the coast of South Carolina.
Kiawah Island is a 13.5 square mile barrier island located about 45 minutes from historic downtown Charleston. Kiawah boasts a diverse landscape among vast salt marshes, dense maritime forest, and pristine beaches that support a variety of wildlife species including alligators, bobcats, and more than 315 species of birds. This meeting promises informative speaking sessions, engaging workshops, and exciting field trips with fellow bird banders.
Expert Presentations: Learn from leading experts in the field of ornithology and conservation, who will share their latest research findings and insights into avian ecology and conservation.
Workshops and Training Sessions: Enhance your bird banding skills through hands-on workshops and training sessions led by experienced banders. Learn the intricacies of bird handling, banding protocols, and data analysis methods.
Field Trips: Explore the diverse habitats of Kiawah Island on guided birding excursions and bird banding demonstrations.
Networking Opportunities: Connect with other bird banders and researchers to share experiences, exchange ideas, and foster collaborations aimed at advancing avian research and conservation efforts.
Poster Presentations: Showcase your research findings, projects, and initiatives through poster presentations. Spark discussions, receive feedback, and contribute to the collective knowledge of the bird banding community. Mark your calendars and stay tuned for more details on speakers, workshops, and registration information. Come to celebrate our shared passion for birds and contribute to their protection and conservation efforts.
To learn more about Kiawah Island, and the Kiawah Island Banding Station, please visit: https://kiawahisland.org/ https://kiawahislandbanding.blogspot.com/
2024 ATLANTIC FLYWAY REVIEW (SPRING MIGRATION)
The Atlantic Flyway Review (AFR) is divided into 4 regions: Northeast (Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York), Mid-Atlantic (Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, District of Columbia, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, West Virginia), Southeast (North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida), and Canada (Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland, Labrador).
We received reports from 4 banding stations from the Northeast, 5 from the Mid-Atlantic, and 2 from the Southeast. Across all regions, these 11 banding stations reported banding 11,599 birds and accumulating 64,083 net-hours this spring. Many stations across all regions reported fewer birds banded compared to last spring or lower numbers than their seasonal averages. In fact, a few stations reported that this spring was the lowest on record.
Weather seemed to impact many stations especially in the northeast early in the spring causing them to close down for multiple days due to rain and high winds.
If you would like to have your banding station featured in the fall or spring Atlantic Flyway Review, email Aaron Given at agiven@ kiawahisland.org. We would be happy to include your report in the next Atlantic Flyway Review.
NORTHEAST REGION
Appledore Island Migration Station (AIMS)
Appledore Island, York County, Maine
Sara Morris, sara.morris@unh.edu www.appledorebanding.org
Banders: Liz Burton, Kristen Covino, Rebecca Esch, Lindsey Herlihy, David Holmes, Sara Morris, Becky Suomala, Andy Thiede
Since 1990, the Appledore Island Migration Station (AIMS) has studied migration for most of the Nearctic-Neotropical migration on Appledore Island, Maine, in the spring. This was the 35th season that Sara Morris has served as the director/ coordinator of that work. Our nets are located in
scrub/shrub and deciduous treed habitats on the largest island in the Isles of Shoals. While our nets are in the same locations over that time period, the vegetation on the island is growing and may contribute to lower numbers of some canopydwelling species. Although we have not measured vegetation, we have had to relocate our “sunrise rock” spot twice as we can no longer see the horizon over the vegetation in either the original or relocated spot. Additionally, the environment/ weather seems to have had an impact this year with more “slow days” (fewer than 50 birds for a day) than in recent memory. Some of this was directly weather related – 13 days had weather related shortened hours - although we were able to run every day, and only two days were less than half the normal net hours. However, some of the slow days appear to have been because some migration was earlier than we started this year, and because wind conditions (particularly easterly winds) reduced the numbers of birds at our offshore location, thus resulting in low numbers of birds in the nets.
The 1,848 birds banded was well below our 20year average (mean 2,300 ± 459). Our 10-year average (2,078 ± 234) also indicated a slower than “normal” year and an overall decrease in birds annually at our site. Of particular note were the number of “slow” days this season. At our station, 50 or fewer birds in a day is considered slow in the spring. This season, 19 of our 31 days fell into that category, including six days in single digits. The ability to run nets daily and to have low numbers of birds yielded our lowest capture rate (birds/100 net-hours) in the last 20 years (52.8; 72.8 ± 14.9). Despite the low number of birds, our number of species banded was only slightly below average (68; 70.9 ± 5.0).
Because of the high level of annual variation, most species fell within their normal range. The one species that was significantly outside of the 20year mean was Carolina Wren, which was higher than the 20-year average, reflecting an increased breeding population on Appledore (10; 4.3 ± 2.7).
Although not significantly lower than the 20-year average, a number of species were lower than typical, including Yellow-bellied Flycatcher (16; 37.6 ± 32.4), Least Flycatcher (12; 20.6 ± 10.1), Blue-headed Vireo (9; 18.6 ± 9.8), Swainson’s Thrush (22; 37.9 ± 17.1), Hermit Thrush (1; 6.4 ± 4.9), White-throated Sparrow (53; 102.7 ± 72.6), Lincoln’s Sparrow (10; 26.1 ± 16.1), Swamp Sparrow (17 28.1 ± 16.4), Ovenbird (26; 68.5 ± 37.4), Northern Waterthrush (22; 43.6 ± 13.4), Nashville Warbler (3; 14.8 ± 8.1), Common Yellowthroat (345; 474.2 ± 155.9), Northern Parula (39; 75.5 ± 28.0), Black-throated Blue Warbler (34; 53.6 ± 18.3), Yellow-rumped Warbler (2; 20.6 ± 18.4), Wilson’s Warbler (5; 15.6 ± 8.4), and Scarlet Tanager (1; 6.4 ± 4.5). Only three species were captured in numbers higher than normal: Eastern Wood-Pewee (29; 19.1 ± 8.6), American Redstart (255; 182.6 ± 63.9) and Chestnut-sided Warbler (39; 31.5 ± 6.5). We did not band any new species this year. However, the first bird of the season was an Eastern Whip-poor-will, a species we had never banded in the spring, and one we had not captured since fall 1989.
Our returns (birds banded in prior years) reflect the breeding birds on the island: 1 American Goldfinch, 1 Common Grackle, 2 Song Sparrow, 2 Northern Cardinal, 4 Common Yellowthroat, 10 Yellow Warbler, and 38 Gray Catbird. Of particular note were the 5 Carolina Wrens, three of which were banded in 2023, one in 2022, and one in 2021. These returns and the number of new Carolina Wrens banded indicate an expanding breeding population on Appledore.
The Appledore Island Migration Station continues to contribute to a number of collaborative projects, both through our banding data and through the support of flight calling work. This year, the flight calling work led to a paper in collaboration with Eliot Ress, Benjamin Van Doren, and Andrew Farnsworth in Ornithology investigating variation in Magnolia Warbler flight calls. Sara Morris was the keynote speaker for New Hampshire Audubon’s annual member’s meeting, presenting an overview of the range of projects and results of
AIMS is pleased to regularly provide learning opportunities for the students at the Shoals Marine Lab, including the Field Ornithology class. We also hosted numerous Shoals’ visitors, volunteers, and staff interested in learning more about birds, bird identification, bird biology, and banding. We are extremely grateful to the very generous donors who provide financial support to operate the station and to offer the opportunity to train volunteers and collaborators. AIMS could not operate without the substantial time and energy contributed by an amazing group of volunteer banders and bandaides. We are also supported generously by the staff of the Shoals Marine Laboratory, especially the captains, engineers, and cooks who accommodate our needs and field schedules.
Joppa Flats Education Center
Plum Island Bird Banding Station
Newburyport, Essex County, Massachusetts Ben Flemer, bflemer@massaudubon.org Banders: (More than a handful)
The station opened in 1998 and operates 19 nets (17 - 12m and 2 - 6m) in April/May and September/ October. It is sited on the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge located on Plum Island, a coastal barrier island that is between the Merrimack River and the confluence of Parker and Ipswich rivers. The habitat consists of coastal dune shrub, and forest dominated by highbush blueberry, winterberry, bayberry, Japanese honeysuckle, buckthorn, pin cherry, serviceberry, gray birch, quaking aspen, and red maple.
We were able to open mist -nets on 1 April, for the first time in many years and were rewarded by 14 Golden-crowned Kinglets, a Brown Creeper, and a Hermit Thrush during the first two days of the season. In typical north shore barrier island style, we remained closed for the next five days due to the bad weather - wind, rain, and temperatures well below 4°C. Weather conditions, especially wind direction, kept daily totals low with many days in the single digits. For the month of April, we were able to open for a total of 20 days and banded 192 birds of 23 species. White-throated Sparrows
topped the list with 35 captures, followed closely by Myrtle Warblers with 31 captures. An exciting and bright spot for the month was a young male Hooded Warbler banded on the 28 April.
May got off to a cool start, but daily captures heated up with 30 on 1 May, 79 on 2 May, and 54 on 3 May. White-throated Sparrow and Myrtle Warbler made up the bulk of this early May migration run. Despite some days with unfavorable winds and below average temperatures, we were able to open for 28 days and captured 1,309 birds of 46 species in May. We had four 100+ bird days and six 50+ bird days. Common Yellowthroat, American Redstart, Magnolia Warbler, Gray Catbird, and Myrtle Warbler made up the bulk of the catch on these days, which not surprisingly top the top 10 list. On the opposite end of the spectrum, we banded a male Prothonotary Warbler on the 22 May. This was only the second record for the station with the first banded on 2 October 2001. Needless to say, we were all very excited.
We are grateful to the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge and Massachusetts Audubon Society for their support of the banding station. In addition, 47 volunteers donated 130 hours of their time to help with all aspects of running the station during the spring season.
Manomet Observatory (MBO)
Plymouth, Plymonth County, Massachusetts Evan Dalton, edalton@manomet.org. www.manomet.org
Banders: Sarah Duff, Amy Hogan, Camille Beckwith, Liam Norton
This was the 55th official year of spring banding at Manomet. After clearing the net lanes, the banding team erected our 50 nets through the coastal scrub, bluffs, and wetlands of our field station. From 15 April to 15 June, we sampled the birds migrating through the area to build upon our standardized dataset of bird migration in the northeast.
A wet April gave way to relatively favorable netting conditions in May. Early wind and rain caused frequent closures of nets resulting in a
20% reduction in total net-hours compared to spring 2023. Notable misses included Wood Thrush, Nashville Warbler, and Downy and Hairy woodpeckers. The spring 10-year averages for each species are below five, and this likely reflects the weather-related decrease in sampling effort.
Of the 73 species captured, most neotropical migrants occurred in numbers well below the previous 10-year average. The most dramatic decreases were seen in Yellow Warbler (-58%), Eastern Towhee (-53%), Wilson’s Warbler (-36%), and Common Yellowthroat (-34%).
Despite our wet start to the season, first-wave (peaking in mid-late-April) species moved through our station in high numbers. The National Phenology Network documented another unusually early spring leaf out for most migratory bird staging areas to our south, indicating another late winter/ early spring. This may help explain why we saw above average numbers of Palm Warbler (Yellow), Golden-crowned Kinglet, Hermit Thrush, Pine Warbler, and White-throated Sparrow. The 22 American Goldfinches we banded were nearly double the ten-year average, and the four young Sharp-shinned Hawks banded this season were the most we have banded in a spring since 1996.
Our three busiest days occurred on 15 May, 22 May, and 29 April, and saw 196, 146, and 109 birds captured, respectively. Notable returns to our station include a female Northern Cardinal that was banded as a hatching year bird in 2014. This cardinal was not recaptured until this year, leaving us to ask the question of whether this bird has been in the neighborhood all this time. We also captured an 8Y Blue Jay, a 7Y Song Sparrow, and a 6Y Gray Catbird. Unusual captures for this season include a Rose-breasted Grosbeak, Bank Swallow, and Eastern White-crowned Sparrow. Perhaps long overdue, the most excitement came from the banding of our first Swainson’s Warbler. The SY male was a county first and stuck around the neighborhood singing for two days after being banded.
This spring, Manomet hosted over 1,100 visiting grade-schoolers, university students, and bird club members as part of formal education programs
on site. As always, we are indebted to the many Manomet donors and volunteers as well as the Devonshire and Dorr Foundations for helping ensure the continuation of our banding operation.
Wing Island Banding Station
Barnstable, Brewster County, MA
Sue Finnegan, suefinnegan@comcast.net
Facebook: Wing Island Bird Banding Station
Instagram: wing_banders
Banders: Sue Finnegan, Andrew Single, Gretchen Putonen
The Wing Island Bird Banding Station is affiliated with the Cape Cod Museum of Natural History in Brewster, MA. It is situated on a tidal island located behind the museum. Wing Island consists of 49 ha, with 5 ha of Cape Cod Bay beach, 13 ha of upland (mainly shrubs, pitch pine, oak trees, and a 4 ha meadow), and 32 ha of tidal saltwater marshland. The banding station was opened in 2000 by Master Bander Sue Finnegan.
Our 24th spring season began on 13 April and ended on 12 June. We operated nets for 34 days. It was a cold spring, which is par for the course on Cape Cod. A range of 24-35 nets was used for a total of 4,825 net hours, and a capture rate of 20 birds/100 net-hours (netted birds).
We banded 467 new birds and recaptured 445 birds. Of the recaptures, there were 188 returns of the following species: 10Y-Song Sparrow (1); 9Y-Common Yellowthroat (1); A7YCommon Yellowthroat (2); 7Y-Song Sparrow (2), Gray Catbird (1), Common Yellowthroat (1), Black-capped Chickadee (1); A6Y-Common Yellowthroat (1); 6Y-American Goldfinch (1), Common Yellowthroat (1); A5Y-Song Sparrow (1); 5Y-Gray Catbird (4), Common Yellowthroat (4), Northern Cardinal (2), American Woodcock (1), Hermit Thrush (1), Tufted Titmouse (1), Song Sparrow (1); A4Y-Song Sparrow (1), Blue Jay (1), Northern Cardinal (1), Common Yellowthroat (1), Gray Catbird (1); 4Y: Gray Catbird (11), Common Yellowthroat (7), Black-capped Chickadee (5), American Goldfinch (5), Song Sparrow (4), Yellow-shafted Flicker (2), Yellow Warbler (2),
Northern Cardinal (1), Red-winged Blackbird (1), Carolina Wren (1); ATY: Common Yellowthroat (5), Yellow Warbler (2), Red-winged Blackbird (1), Prairie Warbler (1), Gray Catbird (1). The rest of the birds were three years or younger. While we banded more birds this season than in the past number of years, migrant numbers were down. Our best day was 14 May with 84 birds of 13 species netted. We had the highest species diversity on 21 May with 17 species recorded. We banded no new species this spring, although we had a very exciting capture! All season we heard a Clapper Rail in the marsh. One day he was very vocal and did not seem happy for us to check our marsh nets. At one point he ran up and down the net lane when I was doing a net check. I was able to get several photos of him as he didn’t seem to care that I was close by. During this time, he got caught in the net but managed to escape. After reviewing our photos, it turned out to be a King Rail!
A Cerulean Warbler was spotted above one of our nets and though he was not captured, it was only the 2nd ever recorded on Wing Island, the first one was banded in 2002. Other highlights included our first spring capture of two Marsh Wrens and our 3rd ever spring capture of Acadian Flycatcher and Indigo Bunting.
Acadian Flycatcher (1: 0.13 ± 0.68), Black-andwhite Warbler (9: 2.0 ± 4.57), Marsh Wren (2: 0.08 ± 0.82), Red-winged Blackbird (19: 4.83 ± 7.97), Swamp Sparrow (14; 3.58 ± 6.88), White-throated Sparrow (36: 8.25 ± 16.85), and Wilson’s Warbler (4; 0.83 ± 2.99) were captured in greater numbers than 2 standard deviation from the mean. We had higher numbers than the average of Gray Catbird, Ruby-throated Hummingbird, and Yellow Warbler. We had a below average numbers of Black-capped Chickadee, with only four banded.
One foreign recapture showed up in our nets, a Prairie Warbler, originally banded at Austin Banding Station at Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Sanctuary in May 2023.
We very much appreciate the Cape Cod Museum of Natural History for hosting our banding station and raising much needed funds. Many thanks to the
French Foundation and the Cape Cod Bird Club for monetary support. A big thank you to banders Andrew Single and Gretchen Putonen, and all our regular volunteers, Reenie Dwyer, Paula Pariseau, Michele Burnat, Keelin Miller (who also does all our data entry), Brandi Sikorski, Sheryl Johnson, and others who helped out for a day or two this spring season. Thanks also to Gerry Beetham and Bob Pariseau for maintaining the net lanes.
FBBO began its 27th year of banding with the spring 2024 season. The station has nets in a mix of habitats including fallow fields, second growth forests, mature woodlands and over a lake with mud flats. While the variety of habitats has remained mostly the same over the years, the edges of our fallow fields have become overgrown with saplings. In the early weeks of the season, we performed major habitat management by reducing the density of woody plants along the edges of the fields. Starting in 2024, we also reduced the number of nets used by about 20%. The increased management activity, resulting in a more open landscape, and fewer nets undoubtedly affected our captures. Additionally, we lost an unusually high number of banding days due to poor weather and our traditional peak migration window of late April and early May were short on favorable winds.
The spring total of 2,826 birds was the lowest in 20 years. Our species total of 94 was the lowest in a decade. However, our capture rate of 23.9 birds per 100 net-hours was well above average. We banded four species in record high numbers that were 2 SD above the long-term average: Sharpshinned Hawk, Pileated Woodpecker, Northern Waterthrush and Hermit Thrush. We banded only
two species in record low numbers (American Goldfinch and Ruby-throated Hummingbird) and Ruby-throated Hummingbird numbers were 2 SD below our long-term average.
The two most interesting captures of the season were both raptors. On 6 April, we netted our only foreign recapture of the season, a second year male Cooper’s Hawk that had been banded in Cape May, NJ, on 24 October 2023. On 27 April, we banded a second year Red-tailed Hawk of unknown sex. This was the 14th banded at FBBO, but the first since 2016.
Our 1,120 returns were comprised of 49 different species. There were 41 birds older than 6 years old. The two oldest birds were American Goldfinch 2680-18525 which was 10yr10mo and Redwinged Blackbird 2561-47886 which was 11 years 9 months.
A White-throated Sparrow 2821-56298 was banded at FBBO on 30 October 2019 and was reported dead near Raleigh, NC, in February 2024. The encounter location is 276 miles southwest of FBBO and the bird was 3 years 8 months old at the time it was found.
Collaborations with external partners included deploying radio tags on Eastern Towhees for Shelly Eshleman of the University of Delaware and tagging Wood Thrush as part of the continental effort by Sarah Kendrick. Our collaboration with the American Bird Conservancy to test birdfriendly glass continues.
We are most grateful to Dr. Henry F. Sears for his years of support, our Washington College interns Anna Treadway, Lauren Albert, and Farren Hauer, as well as to 7 volunteers who gave over 200 hours of their time. Lastly, our station founder Jim Gruber retired at the end of 2023, and this was our first season without him. FBBO would not have grown into our current iteration had Jim not banded that first Carolina Chickadee back in March of 1998. He has given countless hours of his time, mentored dozens of young birders and banders, and freely gave his years of knowledge and expertise to us all (while feeding us snacks from his store). We are proud to continue his legacy.
Meadowlands Bird Banding Station
Lyndhurst and North Arlington, Bergen County, New Jersey
The Meadowlands Bird Banding Station historically operated under a different banding team from 2008-2015. The station was reopened in the fall of 2019 as a migratory and MAPS banding station on roughly half the footprint of the original banding site and was expanded to include most of the original site in the summer of 2021. The full station contains saltmarsh, mudflat, and mid-successional shrub/scrub habitats, as well as a capped landfill historically used for dumping industrial waste. Only one portion of the station was utilized for banding during spring migration in 2024; it follows a narrow strip of land between a tidal marsh and an impoundment.
The Meadowlands Bird Banding Station operated 13 mist nets during the spring 2024 season on the saltmarsh site only. We operated on 13 banding days from 5 April – 13 May 2024. In total, 794 individuals of 43 species were banded, which is average. The station did not have any new species but did band our second American Tree Sparrow and Spotted Sandpiper, keeping the total species count at the station during spring migration at 51 species and total species overall at 103. Fourteen species were represented by a single banded individual this season including several species of warblers and sparrows, Brown Creeper, Eastern Phoebe, and Spotted Sandpiper.
This season’s results are mostly in line with frequency averages across spring seasons for these species though there were about double the average number of Yellow-rumped Warblers (x =150), though this is always the most common species we band in both spring and fall. There were 97 recaptures this season of which 45 were returns and 40 were repeats. The returns represented twelve species, the most common of which were Song Sparrows (n=9), Gray Catbirds (n=9), Red-winged Blackbirds (n=9), and Common Yellowthroats
(n=8), all very common species at our station. An additional two Gray Catbirds were foreign recaptures: one originally banded at Powdermill Avian Research Center in Rector, PA, in the fall of 2023 and one from Wing Island Banding Station in Barnstable, MA, originally banded in the spring of 2023.
Thank you to New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority for use of their land for the banding station and funding and to our volunteers and interns for the season, especially Michael Turso, Olivia Haas, Matthew Wolfe, Alondra Valerio, and Allison Bruzuela-Fernandez.
Potomac River NWR Complex, Occoquan Bay (OCCO)
Woodbridge, Prince William County, Virginia Suzanne Miller, suz.miller@cox.net
Banders: Janet Martin, Mary Scala, Paul Napier, Dana McCoskey, Bev Arnold, Chris Rademacher, Brian Rademacher
The bird banding station was established by Dr. Joseph Witt, refuge wildlife biologist, in 2001 on a 5 ha tract of narrow, wet and steep wooded areas along the southern shore of Marumsco Creek on the Potomac River National Wildlife Refuge. The refuge is one of the last large undeveloped grassland areas in Northern Virginia, located 32 km south of Washington, DC, at the confluence of the Potomac and Occoquan Rivers. This season was the 23rd year of spring migration bird banding.
This spring season was the worst spring season on record. We banded 328 birds, which 62% decrease of the average since 2001 (528). The capture rate (birds/100 net-hours) was the fifth lowest. The species count of 48 was the third lowest (average 56) and no new species were added to the cumulative list of 103. OCCO was open 24 of the 28 days scheduled. Our 274 visitor total was second only to the 280 we hosted in 2019.
March’s number of birds and species were normal, but there was a feeling of slowness. A Winter Wren from 2022 returning again in net 8 was nice. The oldest returns were Northern Cardinals banded in 2016 and 2018, and a Carolina Wren banded in 2018. April’s species diversity was average, but
birds banded were half of what is normal. The first two weeks in May had a hopeful bump of birds but were still below average, and the rest of May was even worse. Our biggest day of the season was 1 May with 40 birds banded (24 of which were Gray Catbirds) of 8 species. Our highest diversity was 10 May when we banded 17 species. Perhaps due to the forest fires in the north during 2023’s breeding season, there were fewer birds coming up this spring.
The rising waters of Chesapeake Bay are affecting tidal Marumsco Creek; nets 3 and 5 could only be opened about 60% of the time, and the whole swampy corner of nets 1 through 6 was negatively impacted. These have always been the most productive of the 17 nets.
Over 23 years, one year must be the best and one year the worst. I hope Spring 2024 was not the beginning of a bad run.
Powdermill Avian Research Center (PARC) Rector, Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania Annie Lindsay, LindsayA@carnegiemnh.org https://powdermillarc.org/ Facebook: @PowdermillNatureReserve Instagram: powdermillnaturereserve1956 Banders: Annie Lindsay, Mallory Sarver, Jason Kitting, Luke DeGroote, Mary Shidel
Powdermill Avian Research Center (PARC) is a long-term bird monitoring station operated and supported by the Carnegie Museum of Natural History. Powdermill operates a continuously run, year-round banding station that opened in June 1961, and spring 2024 marks the 62nd spring banding season. The spring season began on 4 April and continued through 31 May.
PARC operated 63 nets during the spring migration season. The nets are grouped together into various net lanes spread across a 10-ha banding area. The habitat is mostly early successional or transitional. There are four ponds in the net lane area, the largest of which remains full year-round and is roughly 4.5 m deep. The banding area is surrounded by forest and sits at the foot of the Laurel Ridge, bordering Forbes State Forest and other forested state land. Effort was slightly reduced in spring 2024 due to banding only five days/week rather than traditional
six days/week. The weather in early April was cold, and there were a few unseasonably hot days at the end of April and in early May. The firstof-year captures for several species set or tied Powdermill dataset records for earliest individual of that species banded. Most notably, the first Gray Catbird of the year was banded on 27 March, Powdermill’s previous earliest banding record was on April 19.
We banded 1,631 new birds and recaptured 765 of 95 species during our spring 2024 season. The season total was lower than most in recent years, primarily due to our reduced effort. We had several species with noteworthy (± 2 standard deviations) above average captures including American Woodcock (6; 0.67 ± 0.87), Carolina Wren (6; 1.96 ± 1.78), European Starling (4; 0.88 ± 1.08), Brown Thrasher (12; 5.58 ± 3.08), Baltimore Oriole (20; 6.79 ± 4.36), Cape May Warbler (3; 0.67 ± 0.76), and Bay-breasted Warbler (10; 3.13 ± 3.19). Carolina Wrens, and other species with traditionally more southern ranges, have been increasing in southwest Pennsylvania in recent years, which is a trend that is reflected in Powdermill’s banding data.
Season highlights included a piture of a leucistic Tennessee Warbler caught on 30 April, Powdermill’s 9th ever Swainson’s Warbler caught on 3 May, a season record high total for Baltimore Orioles (20), and a Red-eyed Vireo that was banded as an AHY (DCB) in spring 2018. The Tennessee Warbler’s entire head, back, and underparts were white with a faint yellowish wash, and nearly posed an identification challenge. Swainson’s Warblers seem to be expanding their range northward into southwestern Pennsylvania, with state first confirmed breeding records in 2023 and 2024, and we expect that this species will be captured at Powdermill with increased frequency in coming years.We received a report of a foreign recovery of a bird that was banded at Powdermill.
A Gray Catbird that was banded as a HY (FCF) on 28 September 2023 was recaptured at Meadowlands Bird Banding Station in Lyndhurst, New Jersey on 9 May 2024.
PARC facilitated several in-house research projects and collaborated with outside researchers during the spring 2024 migration season. Projects included deploying transmitters on Wood Thrush as part of a collaborative effort to better understand the species’ full annual cycle; collecting feathers for the Genoscape Project; and our partnership with the American Bird Conservancy to test avian perception of glass, an ongoing, multi-year project. We welcomed 392 visitors to the banding station and provided outreach programs to the public and school groups.
Many thanks to Powdermill’s banding crew, staff, and dedicated volunteers. Their help is vital to the research we do. Powdermill’s bird banding operation is funded through the generosity of the Colcom Foundation, the Laurel Foundation, and numerous private donors who have supported Powdermill Avian Research Center since its inception.
Rushton Woods Banding Station (RWBS) Newtown Square, Chester County, Pennsylvania Alison Fetterman, avf@wctrust.org https://wctrust.org/bird-banding/ Banders: Lisa Kiziuk, Alison Fetterman, Blake Goll, Michelle Eshleman, Aaron Coolman, Doris McGovern
We conducted our 14th year of spring migration songbird banding at Rushton Woods Banding Station (RWBS) this year. Sixteen nets were operated, three days a week for a total of 14 days from 9 April through 16 May 2024.
RWBS is located on a 34 ha preserve that is a matrix of mature deciduous forest, meadows, early to late successional shrub-scrub hedge rows, and six acres of organic agriculture owned and managed by Willistown Conservation Trust. Songbird migration and Northern Saw-whet Owl banding take place in the hedge rows, while a MAPS station is operated in the mature forest.
This spring we banded 202 new birds of 33 species with a capture rate of 22.24 birds/100 net hours, with an additional 52 returns and 35 repeats. The
largest single-day catch was on 7 May, with 33 new birds of 13 species. No new species were caught keeping the cumulative total to 81 species caught during spring migration. Gray Catbird, Whitethroated Sparrow, and Common Yellowthroat remained the top three captures; however, it was the lowest capture rate for Gray Catbirds and Common Yellowthroats in station history. Notably missing were Northern Waterthrush and Blue Jay. Weather conditions caused us to close early three days for rain, which is not unusual in the spring. However, we did experience the lowest overall capture rate in station history. While we operate our station only three days per week, we may miss days when migration is high. There is also natural fluctuations in bird populations from year to year, however we are seeing a decreasing trend of our capture rates over time since 2010 during spring migration.
Making up for the low numbers of new birds this spring, we had 52 returning birds of 14 species. Among the returns were a Gray Catbird originally banded as a HY in 2018, making it six years old and a male Indigo Bunting originally banded as a SY in 2019, making him four years old. Finally, while we had no new Carolina Chickadee, we had five returns. One was originally banded as a HY in 2016, making it eight years old.
We hosted more than 100 visitors to the station including classes from three universities, students from local elementary and high schools, and many members of the public. We continue to collaborate with Drexel University as a study site and University of Pennsylvania graduate research projects. Annual songbird banding reports can be found at: https://wctrust.org/research/.
Thanks to all the dedicated volunteers who gave their time, in some cases for many years, in contributing to the long-term data collection at the Rushton Woods Banding Station.
The Cape Florida Banding Station (CFBS) is in its fourth year of spring migration banding in Bill Baggs Cape Florida State Park (BBCFSP). This park is on the southern tip of a largely developed barrier island just off the coast of Miami. Mist nets are set in a restored tropical hardwood hammock that is the result of a multi-million dollar effort to return native vegetation to the park following Hurricane Andrew in 1992. Spring 2024 marks the first season that CFBS is operating as an independent non-profit, with Nasim Mahomar and Nicole Rita as the co-directors. Michelle Davis continues to provide guidance and administrative assistance remotely.
The spring banding period ran from 15 April until 16 May 2024. We used 23 regular nets and two canopy nets set in the same locations as the Fall 2023 season. A total of 533 birds of 24 species were captured, with American Redstart, Common Yellowthroat, and Black-throated Blue Warbler the top three most abundant species. No new species were banded for the station or the season. Eleven individuals banded during other seasons were recaptured. Of the returning birds, 5 were resident Northern Cardinals and the balance was made up of wintering Gray Catbirds, Blackand-White Warblers, and Ovenbirds. No foreign recoveries were captured this spring.
The spring 2024 migration in South Florida was slow, with only 3 days of over 50 captures. A wave of American Redstarts and Black-throated Blue Warblers passed through the area on 23
and 24 April, along with the highest diversity of other species. A second wave of late migrants came when 78 birds were banded on 12 May, the season’s biggest day. American Redstarts were still plentiful, but Common Yellowthroats and Northern Waterthrushes made up a greater percentage of the other captures. Six Connecticut Warblers were banded on this day! These busy dates are remarkably consistent from season to season, despite the wide variation in overall numbers we get from one spring to another. Persistent easterly or southeasterly winds can cause migrating birds to overfly our region completely.
This project would not be possible without the assistance of our dedicated volunteer extractors and banders-in training for the Spring 2024 season. Special thanks go to Robin Diaz, data entry master and all-around repository of knowledge, and to BBCFSP for continuing to support the project.
Sullivan’s Island Bird Banding Station (SIBBS)
Sullivan’s Island, Charleston County, South Carolina
Sarah Harper (Diaz), sullivansislandbirds@gmail.com https://www.facebook.com/sullivansislandbirds
The Sullivan’s Island Bird Banding Station (SIBBS) has been in operation since the spring of 2020. The station had additional seasons under a prior bander during the fall of 2015 and 2016. SIBBS is located within a 60 ha conservation easement that abuts the beach dune line. Between seven and nine 12m mist nets were opened each morning. Temperature, wind speed and wind direction dictated which nets could be opened and how long they could stay open. Flooding from rain events consistently prevented us from using three net lanes. Most of the net lanes are located in early-successional scrubland habitat with a low canopy. Dominant shrubs include wax myrtle, Carolina cherry laurel, Hercules’ club, poison ivy and Eastern red cedar. Many invasive plants are also well-established at the station, including two new net lanes in a thicket of wax myrtles directly behind the sand dunes.
The station opened for a total of 12 days between 5 March 2021 and 19 May 2024. We banded five fewer days than last spring, due to inclement weather. Five trained volunteers assisted on a weekly basis and four additional volunteers assisted on an irregular basis. We had a total of 40 visitors, including a local birding club and Earth Day festival visitors. A total of 69 birds were banded across 20 different species. One additional species, Orange-crowned warbler was a recapture that was originally banded on 3/2/2021. Highlights of this season’s captures include a Chuck-will’s-widow, a Black-whiskered Vireo, two Blackpoll Warblers, and a Northern Parula. The Chuck-will’s-widow is the first we have captured since 2016. We opened twenty minutes earlier than usual and utilized playback to lure a male that we heard singing close to the dune nets. We do not utilize auto lures in our daily protocol to capture birds; however, we decided to make an exception for this species, since it would otherwise be almost impossible to capture. The capture rate (28 birds/100 net-hours) was lower than last year (56 birds/100 net-hours). Surprisingly, only 16 Myrtle Warblers were banded
this spring, compared to 216 the previous spring. Recaptures from 2024 indicated that five species demonstrate site fidelity to wintering grounds, including Gray Catbird, Orange-crowned Warbler, Eastern Towhee, White-throated Sparrow, and Yellow-rumped Warbler. We recaptured twelve Yellow-rumped Warblers that were originally banded in the same location in prior years, including one from 2020 and two from 2021. Five Gray Catbirds were recaptured in 2024 that were banded in Fall or late-winter of prior years, including one banded in November of 2020. Our data show that some Gray Catbirds do overwinter at the station, but most of the individuals we band in the fall are likely using the area as a stopover location only.
SIBBS is a volunteer-based organization that relies on regular trained volunteers for setting up and taking down equipment, extracting birds and scribing data. We would like to thank all of our volunteers and donors that make this research possible! SIBBS is a program of the Carolina Avian Research Program, a 501c3 nonprofit.
Gray Cat Bird by George West
SPRING 2024
Summary
#
#
NORTHEAST REGION
SOUTHEAST REGION
Repeats
Returns
Foreign
Summary Statistics
#
Dates of Operation #
MID ATLANTIC REGION
Inland Regional News
Inland Bird Banding Founded
1922
Announcements and Report on the 2024 Annual Meeting
David Cimprich, IBBA President (davidcimprich@inlandbirdbanding.org)
The White-crowned Sparrows appearing at my bird feeder and cooler temperatures (finally!) remind me that fall migration is nearly done and the end of another year is fast approaching. This is also time to report on IBBA’s recent annual meeting but first I have a few announcements. To begin with, we revitalized the IBBA Facebook page this year with numerous new postings. I encourage you to look through these for news of our organization and other interesting items.
The Carpenter St. Croix Valley Nature Center in Minnesota will host our 2025 annual meeting. The Center has facilities on both sides of the Minnesota/ Wisconsin border. Staff and volunteers have been banding birds there for over 40 years. Dates for the meeting have yet to be decided, so watch our website (inlandbirdbanding.org) and Facebook page for information. In 2025, you will have the option of viewing our journal, North American Bird Bander, online instead of receiving a paper copy. Look for this when renewing your membership. If you are a Life Member and wish to switch from the paper to the digital version, please contact our treasurer, Mike Eickman (redtail15@aol.com). Do you have artistic talent? The Editors are seeking works depicting birds and banding to include in North American Bird Bander. I encourage you to submit your work for consideration. Contact me at the email at the beginning of this article if you would like to submit something. Artwork must be
suitable for reproduction in grayscale or black and white. IBBA awarded a grant of $500 to Timothy Baerwald of Eau Claire, Michigan, for his project entitled, “Monitoring raptor migration through the Keweenaw Peninsula”. This is a major land mass jutting northeastward from Michigan’s Upper Peninsula into the middle of Lake Superior.
IBBA met jointly with the Arkansas Audubon Society 25-27 October at the Airport Holiday Inn in Little Rock, AR. The theme of the meeting was “Inspiring the next generation.” Friday afternoon featured several field trips to local birding hotspots. It also featured a well-attended “Banding Hacks” event at the nearby Arkansas Audubon Center. The first half of this event consisted of presentations on banding equipment and an educational program called “Be a bander”. You can read an abstract of the “Be a Bander” presentation at the end of this article. The second half of the event was an open discussion forum on various banding topics. Much of this focused on banding in high temperatures, like those we experienced that sultry afternoon. Friday evening began with a reception followed by a spaghetti dinner. The evening ended with a talk by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biologist, Rebecca Peak, describing the “Timing and flight behavior of Golden Eagles in the Ozark Highlands.” It was a surprise for many in the audience that these eagles regularly spend the winter in the Ozarks. The project involved attracting the birds to deer carcasses, capturing them, and outfitting them with tracking devices. Most of the eagles traveled north to breeding areas in the arctic west of Hudson Bay. When a bird was near a cell tower, its location was logged several times each minute. Rebecca showed
an impressive 3-dimensional video representation of one bird’s flight path in which you could “see” it circling to gain altitude and gliding long distances along ridge lines.
Saturday morning began with more field trips, some of which included a stop at a nearby banding station. Saturday afternoon highlighted a series of presentations on topics related to banding and education. Abstracts of these are presented below. Four presentations were eligible for an award for the best presentation by a young person relatively new to the field. Congratulations to Dhruv Iyengar, a graduate student at Miami University of Ohio, on winning. Following the presentations, we held a brief membership meeting. The main item of business was the election of Sandy Bivens of Tennessee to serve a first term as an IBBA director. The Saturday evening speaker was Bill Holloman of the Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission presenting, “Ecology of the Red-cockaded Woodpecker and recovery efforts of this imperiled species in Arkansas.” Bill’s presentation drew upon his extensive experience with this species and followed its progress from the late 1970s when the population was at its lowest to the present. He illustrated management of habitat and creation of artificial nest cavities by focusing on efforts at Warren Prairie Natural Area in the southern part of the state. A particularly fascinating aspect of this work was the successful translocations of young birds from a saturated population in Louisiana to Warren Prairie. A field trip the following morning was to this site led by Bill himself.
Sunday morning included more field trips along with banding at Hendrix Creek Preserve in the nearby city of Conway. In contrast to the Saturday banding event when sunny and hot conditions produced few captures, Sunday was overcast and cool. Banders captured three times the number banded Saturday with a total of 54 birds of 18 species. The highlight was an unusually late Ovenbird.
I thank all the volunteers whose efforts led to the success of the meeting. I especially thank IBBA members Steven Gabrey, Maureen McClung, and Mike Bishop along with Audubon members Kevin
Krajcir, Lynn Foster and Cheryl Johnson for their efforts before and during the meeting.
Abstracts
Be a bander educational activity. Nancy Redman and Tony Rothering
The “Be a bander” program offered by the Lincoln Land Association of Bird Banders (LLABB)is a great way to introduce children to the science of bird-banding. Using plush bird toys, volunteers take participants through the hands-on process of extracting a bird from a mistnet, identifying it, finding the correct band size, banding the bird, taking the wing measurement, and recording their data. This includes a discussion of bird-banding as a scientific tool, what we can learn from banding, stories, information about different species as well as participant question-and-answer time. We also show the correct way to handle birds and try to get students to treat the plush birds as if they were alive. The program is geared for ages 6 and older.
Solar-powered conservation: do solar arrays create habitat for avian species? Michael Ferrara, J.D. Wilson, and Caleb Roberts
Utility-scale solar energy facilities are going to play a considerable part in building towards a future with net-zero CO2 emissions. The conversion of grassland and working lands to solar arrays is changing the habitat that declining avian species rely on. Solar companies have begun utilizing native grasses under solar arrays, which could provide habitat for avian species. We hypothesize that avian densities will be highest at the edges of the solar arrays. Point count surveys were conducted in and around six solar arrays to identify avian individuals up to 100 m from each point. Five points were selected for each solar array with one point located inside the array, two points on the edges of the arrays and two points outside the solar arrays ranging from 150 to 600 m away from the solar array. Land use land cover data were collected for each point using Dynamic World in Google Earth Engine. The data will be analyzed using an N-mixture model to assess avian densities at each location relative to the solar arrays. This research will be informative for land
developers when designing future solar facilities throughout the world. On a broader scale, the results from this research can inform managers on the impact that native grasses have on conservation actions for declining avian species.
Seasonal use of abandoned mined lands by nonbreeding birds: preliminary findings. Heather K. Burrow and Andrew D. George
During winter and migration, birds rely on habitat that provides high-energy food and protectionfrom predators and adverse weather. Abandoned mined lands (AMLs) are disturbed ecosystems that often include a mosaic of successional habitats, some of which may support diverse bird communities. Our goal is to establish a long-term banding study to investigate bird use of AMLs during the non-breeding season. We established 4 study sites in 2023 in a formerly surface-mined landscape in Crawford County, in southeast Kansas. We used constant-effort mistnetting to survey birds each month, including biweekly during fall and spring migration. Thus far, we have captured 57 species on AMLs, including 12 residents and 45 migrants, of which 24 do not breed in the study region. Analysis of seasonal demographics and body condition is ongoing. Our project emphasizes the potential conservation value of AMLs for birds during the non-breeding portions of their full annual cycle.
Drivers of Eastern Bluebird nest-box use during the non-breeding season. Shannon M. Kitchen, Vernon “Butch” Tetzlaff, and Jennifer L. Mortensen
Eastern Bluebirds have a species history of suffering periodic population fluctuations and winter mortality events. However, few studies have examined their winter activities, including overnight communal roosting. Therefore, we investigated several drivers of winter roosting decisions of Eastern Bluebirds in northwest Arkansas, focusing on how thermal properties and parasite avoidance influence nest box use and group composition. During the 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 non-breeding seasons, we used a randomized-block design to manipulate the insulative and parasitic conditions of boxes, including 3 treatment groups: clean (no insulation, no parasites), old (insulation,
parasites), and fumigated nests (insulation, no parasites). To record thermal conditions, temperature probes were installed on the inside and outside of each nest box. 59 nest boxes across 3 sites were monitored twice weekly for roosting bluebirds. If located, birds were banded with unique color combinations, measured (standard morphometrics), and inspected for parasites. Our findings indicated a strong preference for both insulated treatment groups, despite no measurable differences in box temperatures. However, we did find a positive relationship between the number of roosting individuals and the internal box temperature. Additionally, generalized linear mixed models were constructed to assess what nightly weather variables influence roosting variation, and if these weather variables interact with nest box characteristics to further mediate occupancy. Through this research, we can better understand how winter weather influences Eastern Bluebird behaviors and survival strategies during the non-breeding season, and provide guidance for future management decisions.
Bird-banding to improve understanding of raptor health and raptor rehabilitation outcomes. Travis E. Wilcoxen, Abigail Heberling, Jacques T. Nuzzo, and Jane Seitz
Wildlife rehabilitation is carried out under the assumption that it is possible to rehabilitate sick, injured, or orphaned birds to the point that they are fully functional members of the wild population of their species. Unfortunately, the “normal” values for several indicators of health are unknown for many wild species of birds of prey. Further, the degree to which diseases are responsible for illness or injury versus something that is generally tolerated in the wild population is poorly understood for birds of prey. Over the past 12 months, we have used multiple trapping methods to capture, sample, and band birds of prey in central Illinois, and have compared the blood work from those birds to birds of the same raptor species admitted to the Illinois Raptor Center during this time. Our results offer important insights into the health of birds in the local raptor population.
Developing a local Motus network to study grassland bird movements. Andrew D. George, William E. Jensen, and W. Alice Boyle
The Motus Wildlife Tracking System is an international network of automated telemetry receiver stations that offers an effective method to study movements of small animals. Birds tagged with coded radio transmitters are detected as they pass within 15 km of any station in the network, and all detections across the network are centrally stored and disseminated. The network has rapidly grown from covering regions of the northeastern USA and southeastern Canada to stations in most continents on Earth. Whereas many Motus users are interested in tracking migrant birds over continental scales, we aim to fill an urgent information gap regarding regional movements of many declining, grassland birds in Kansas. This guild of birds appears to exhibit unusual flexibility in where they breed from year to year, and even within years, but we have much yet to learn about these movements. While sparse coverage of receivers is appropriate for detecting large-scale movements, the kinds of movements we aim to understand occur over 10s to 100s of kilometers. Our goal is to place a receiver station in every county in eastern Kansas. We are targeting core grasslands, such as the Flint Hills, in addition to surrounding fragmented grasslands to understand how landscape configuration influences movements. In collaboration with many entities, Kansas now has 22 operational receivers, with commitments for several more. We share here what new scientific insights this emerging network can provide and public education opportunities that will improve local knowledge of bird movements and our local grasslands.
Applications of a global age-nomenclature system (“WRP”) in birds. Erik I. Johnson, Jared D. Wolfe, T. Brandt Ryder, Marcel Gahbauer, and Peter Pyle
Aging birds is critical for understanding demographic processes that regulate populations. Humphrey and Parkes (1959, Auk 76: 1-31) established a framework for defining standardized plumage-based nomenclature that was independent of other life history events (e.g., reproduction and seasonality), yet the banding and ornithological
community in the United States and Canada adopted a calendar-based aging nomenclature. Although useful for most birds and situations in this region, it has limitations (e.g., crossbills) and is unusable especially in tropical regions where most of the planet’s avian biodiversity is found. A universal approach for aging birds uses a plumagebased system proposed by Wolfe et al. (2010, J. Field Orn. 81: 186-194), now widely known as the“WRP” (or cycle-code) system. The revised WRP system (Pyle et al. 2022, Ornithology 139: 1-12) is flexible enough to be adapted to specific goals of programs while also providing core codes that can facilitate the comparison of avian age, molt, and plumage status on a global and evolutionary basis. For most users, 7 to 13 core and 1 adjunct code is sufficient to describe all plumages and provide molt status and ages for demographic studies or other purposes. I will discuss the application and benefits of this system using several species commonly captured in the IBBA area.
Developing a photographic bird banding manual template for Ecuador’s cloud forest species. Dhruv Iyengar
Assessing phenology in Neotropical birds poses challenges due high species diversity and apparently random molting patterns. This project focuses on developing species-specific templates for native birds banded at Un Poco del Chocó in the Chocó cloud forest of northern Ecuador, an area renowned for its endemic species and distinctive seasonality. High-quality images captured using controlled lighting, a color target, and a non-reflective white background highlight key morphological features present in plumage and soft tissues of these birds. The four templates created provide detailed images of age and sex characters for each species. These templates are critical in standardizing data collection and as educational tools for training new banders. Designed as dynamic resources, they will evolve with the collection of new data, supporting both local ecological knowledge and long-term bird population monitoring in tropical areas such as the Chocó cloud forest.
Bird capture rate by shelf using a standard 4-shelf, 12-m mist net. Tony Rothering
At the beginning of the spring 2023 banding season at our Midwest Migration Network Station (Jubilee Farm, Springfield, IL), we adopted a new net pole design to optimize the full potential capture area of a standard 4-shelf, 12-m net. This telescoping pole system allowed the nets to extend approximately 0.5 m higher than when used with our previous net poles. To investigate the productivity (capture rate) of each shelf (particularly the uppermost shelf), we also began to record the shelf within which each bird was captured. Four banding seasons of shelf productivity data (approximately 1,500 captured birds), including habitat-specific and speciesspecific comparisons, will be presented.
Inspire where you are. Donna Haynes
I work as a substitute teacher and support staff at Lawson Elementary School in Little Rock, just outside Little Rock, Arkansas. I have taken advantage of my role as recess monitor to introduce our students to birds, pollinators, other wildlife, and plants on our playground. Through the generosity of donors and grants, we have established several bird feeders and native plant gardens on the playground as well. Donors have also provided bird and nature books and binoculars for our students to use during recess. I would like to share how I, along with several teachers and other staff, have shared conservation and a love of nature and its creatures with our students and will relate some wonderful stories of how the students have accepted and grown to love all living things. We do our best to inspire a new generation of conservationists where we are and we hope to inspire others to do so as well!
How to involve middle school and older students in birding. Jackie Scott
The purpose of the presentation is to help give birders and bird organizations ways to get involved with middle school students and older students. Participants will also learn ways to help educate teachers of any grade level on how birding can be done in classrooms to help interest students. The discussion will be led by a middle school
science teacher incorporating birding practices with middle school students.
Ozark Bird Conservancy, a new research organization to serve the interior highlands. Mitchell Pruitt
The Ozark Bird Conservancy (OBC) is a new 501(c)(3) organization based in Fayetteville, Arkansas, whose mission is to conserve birds and their habitats using science and education. Our goal is to promote habitat resiliency, engage the public in the research process, and inform meaningful public and private conservation decisions. By conducting meaningful wild bird research in the Interior Highlands of Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Missouri, OBC’s vision is to 1) improve the lives of birds and people through research that informs conservation decisions, 2) bridge the disconnect between science and the public through education, outreach, and public involvement at every step of the research process, and 3) provide decision makers with science-based deliverables that result in habitat resiliency and maximized human interest in ecosystems. Our initial research interests include expanding the Arkansas Saw-whet Owl Project into the Interior Highlands Migratory Owl Project. Through this work we plan to continue to expand on10 years of Northern Saw-whet Owl research in Arkansas and establish a non-breeding research program for Long-eared Owl in the region. We also plan to establish an Urban Raptor Monitoring Initiative with the objective of studying raptors along gradients of urban to rural land use, assessing trends in co-occurrence dynamics and habitat use. Along with our research, we will integrate rigorous public participation through education, outreach, and citizen science.
Species Snapshot: Belted Kingfisher (Megaceryle alcyon)
Figure 1. Number of Belted Kingfishers banded in the United States and Canada between Jan 1960 and Mar 2024 (n = 7,889). Not shown: AK (n = 27) and YU (n = 100)
This is the 16th installment in our regular feature presenting a brief synopsis of the banding and encounter records submitted to the Bird Banding Lab for a particular species. Each installment will feature a new species; suggestions for species to be covered or data to be presented are welcome (swgabrey@gmail.com). Space limitations of NABB prohibit any in-depth analysis of the data and these notes are not meant to show any trends in population parameters such as population density or growth rate, geographic distribution, etc. and should not be viewed as a definitive analysis of the status of the species. Although the banding program began in the 1920s, the currently available
digital records for banding data include only those records from 1960 to the present (pre-1960 banding data are available in other formats, however). All encounters, including those of birds banded before 1960, are available in digital format. This summary includes only those birds banded in the United States and Canada between 1960 and March 2024 . Records of birds banded in South America, Central America, and the Caribbean (n = 39) are not included here.
Banded birds
Numbers and Age and Sex Categories.– Since 1960, 7,899 Belted Kingfishers have been banded in the United States and Canada (Table 1). Sex was
identified (either at banding or upon encounter) for 85% (n =6,724); of these, 44% were males (n = 2,964) and 56% were females(n = 3,760). Fifty-two percent of the males were aged as “first year” (HY, L, or J; n = 1,535), 42% were aged as “adult” (AHY, SY, ASY, TY, or ATY; n = 1,241), and 6% were aged as U (n = 188). [NOTE: “J” is an obsolete BBL code for “juvenile” and most likely is equivalent to HY.] Fifty-six percent of the females were aged as first year (n= 2,097), 38% were aged as adult (n = 1,427),and 6% were aged as U (n = 236). Eighty-one percent of the 1,165 kingfishers for which sex was not identified were aged as first year (n =946), 9% were aged as adult (n = 105), and 10% were aged as U (n = 114).
Geographic distribution.– Belted Kingfishers have been banded in all of the United States except for Hawaii, Delaware and Washington DC (n = 6,416) and in 10 Canadian provinces or territories (n = 1,473; Figure 1). The top 6 states (Michigan, n = 805; New York, n = 678; Maryland, n = 453; Virginia, n = 445; Pennsylvania, n = 444; and Maine, n = 438) accounted for 51% of all kingfishers banded in the United States. Ontario and Alberta together accounted for 69% (n = 1,019) of all kingfishers banded in Canada.
Seasonal distribution.– Overall, 69% of all Belted Kingfishers were banded in Summer (May-Aug; n = 5,406), 24% in Fall (Sep-Oct; n =1,914), 2% in Winter (Nov-Feb; n = 128), and 6% in Spring (Mar-Apr; n = 441; Table 2). Of the kingfishers banded in the United States, 68% were banded in Summer (n = 4,344) compared to 24% in Fall (n = 1,531), 2% in Winter (n = 126), and 6% in Spring (n = 415). Of the kingfishers banded in Canada, 72% were banded in Summer (n = 1,062), 26% in Fall (n = 383), <1% in Winter (n = 2), and 2% in Spring (n = 26).
Encounters
Numbers and Age and Sex Categories.– There have been 80 encounters representing 59 Belted Kingfishers in the United States and Canada between Jan 1960 and Mar 2024 (Table 3). After removing 4 encounters because of age or sex mismatch errors, because the encounter occurred on the same day as banding, or because the bird
was encountered more than once on a single day, 76 encounters of 56 individual kingfishers remained. Two kingfishers were encountered 6 times, two encountered 5 times, and two encountered twice; all others were encountered once. The following summary is based on the data associated with the most recent encounter unless otherwise stated. Sex was identified for 75% (n = 42) of the encountered kingfishers, of which 48% (n = 20) were males and 52% (n = 22) were females (Table 2). Forty percent of the males (n = 8) were aged as adult compared to 60% (n = 12) as first year and 0% as U. Similarly, 41% (n = 9) of the females were aged as adult compared to 50% (n = 11) as first year and 9% (n = 2) as U. All 14 of the kingfishers with no sex identified were aged as first year. Nineteen of the 56 kingfishers had a minimum age at encounter (MAE) of 1 yr 1 mo or greater, 31 had a MAE of up to 1 yr, and 6 had no MAE reported. The oldest kingfisher overall, and the oldest known male, was an ASY-M banded in Mar 2003 in Maryland and encountered in Sep 2006 at its banding location (MAE = 5 yr 3 mo). The oldest known female, and 2nd oldest overall, was an HY-F banded in Aug 2017 at the same location in Maryland as the oldest male, and encountered in Oct 2021 at its banding location (MAE = 4 yr 4 mo). The oldest encounter of a kingfisher banded as an L was an L-U banded in Jun 1980 in Quebec and encountered in Sep 1981 in New Jersey, 847 km from its banding location (MAE = 1 yr 3 mo, 15th oldest overall).
Geographic distribution.– Seventy-three percent (n = 41) of the kingfishers were encountered in the state or province in which they were banded (Table 3). Seven of the 56 encounters of Belted Kingfishers were 1,001 km or more from the banding location, 7 between 101 km and 1,000 km, 12 between 11 and 100 km, and 30 10 km or less. The greatest distance between banding and encounter locations for any kingfisher was 2,403 km for a HY-U banded in Sep 1966 in New York and encountered in Mar 1967 in Dominican Republic/Haiti. The greatest distance for a known male was 2,070 km for a HY-M banded in Jul 1966 in Ontario and encountered in Oct 1966 in Florida (2nd greatest overall). The greatest distance for a known female, and the greatest distance for a bird
banded as L, was 1,667 km for a L-F banded in Jun 2002 in Vermont and encountered in Sep 2002 in Georgia (4th greatest overall). The greatest distance for a bird banded as an adult was 1,125 km for an AHY-M banded in Apr 1981 in New Jersey and encountered in May 1981 in Prince Edward Island (6th greatest overall).
Banded birds
Encountered birds
1,5352,0979464,57812111437 HY 1,1981,6394783,315109423 L 3364564451,237221014 J 1223260000
Table 1. Number of Belted Kingfishers banded and encountered in the United States and Canada between Jan 1960 and Mar 2024by age at banding and sex (either sex at banding or sex updated upon encounter).
United States 4,3441,5311264156,416 Canada 1,0623832261,473 Total 5,4061,9141284417,889
Table 2. Number and seasonal distribution of Belted Kingfishers banded in the United States and Canada between Jan 1960 and Mar 2024. One bird banded in NY was encountered in Dominican Republic/Haiti.
Table 3. Banding region and encounter region of Belted Kingfishers banded in the United States and Canada between Jan 1960 and Mar 2024 (n = 56).
Other interesting encounters.– Twenty-seven of the 50 kingfishers that were encountered once and 3 of the kingfishers that were encountered multiple times (2 encounters, 5 encounters, 5 encounters) were encountered in the same calendar year in which they were banded. The longest time between banding and first encounter was 3 years for a HY-F banded in Aug 2017 in Maryland and encountered in Aug 2020 at its banding location. This individual, which is also the oldest known female described above, was encountered again 5 times between Aug 2021 and Oct 2021 at its banding location.
Birds banded before 1960.– Fifty-one Belted Kingfishers banded between 1923 and 1959 have been encountered. Thirty-eight were aged as first year (2 males, 3 females, 38 unknown sex), 6 were aged as adult (3 males, 1 female, and 2 unknown sex; all aged AHY), and 7 were of unknown age (2 males, 5 of unknown sex). The first kingfisher to be banded and later encountered was banded as a J-U in Jul 1923 and recaptured at its banding location in New York in Aug 1923. Thirty-six kingfishers were encountered 100 km or less from their banding location, 10 between 101 and 1,000 km, and 4 1,001 km or greater (1 Encounter Region
had no distance reported). The greatest distance between banding and encounter locations for a known male (and greatest distance over all)was 1,748 km for an U-M banded in Massachusetts in Oct 1959 and encountered in Apr 1962 in Florida. The greatest distance for a known female was 838 km for a J-F banded in New York in Jun 1949 and encountered in North Carolina in Mar 1952 (5th greatest overall). The greatest distance for an individual aged as first year was 1,529 km for a J-U banded in Jun 1924 in Indiana and encountered in Nov 1924 in Texas (2nd greatest overall). The greatest distance for an individual banded as an adult was 352 km for an AHY-U banded in Jul 1933 in Michigan and encountered in Sep 1933 in Wisconsin (7th greatest overall). Thirty-one of the
51 kingfishers had a MAE of 1 yr or less, 12 had a MAE of 1 yr 1mo or greater, and 8 had no MAE. The oldest known male was an AHY-M banded in Apr 1955 in Oregon and encountered in Oct 1957 at its banding location (MAE = 3 yr 4 mo). The oldest known female, and 2nd oldest overall, was also the greatest distance female above (MAE = 2 yr 9 mo).
Acknowledgements.– I thank the more than 750 permit holders who have banded Belted Kingfishers over the years, all the individuals who reported encounters, and staff at the Bird Banding Lab for supplying the data.
Steven Gabrey
1805 Hidden Valley Street Van Buren, AR 72956
Summary of the 2024 Western Bird Banding Association Annual Meeting
By Danielle Kaschube, WBBA president
The 2024 Western Bird Banding Association (WBBA) meeting was held 26-29 September 2024, in Tucson, AZ. We had the privilege of having a Joint Annual Meeting with the Arizona Field Ornithologists (AZFO). The four-day meeting included two mornings of expeditions (10 expeditions), seven workshops, one day of talks, several social occasions, and a banquet followed by a keynote speaker. The event was attended by 140 bird enthusiasts.
The meeting started for the WBBA board with a hybrid in-person/zoom board meeting, during which the annual reports were presented. It was announced that the bylaw updates were passed, and goals for the upcoming year were laid out. We plan to be especially focused on connecting to the membership more often and more thoroughly. Then, we headed over to Bumsted’s, a local restaurant and bar, to meet the conference attendees for the first social event of the meeting.
On Friday, 27 September, the first set of miniexpeditions organized by the AZFO began, before sunrise in many cases, and included trips to iconic Arizona locations such as Patagonia and the Borderlands Wildlife Preserve, Sweetwater Wetlands, Oracle State Park, Mt. Lemmon, and Empire Gulch - Las Cienegas National Conservation Area. It was unseasonably hot, with temperatures over 38°C, so several trips were cut
short. Friday’s agenda also incorporated several workshops, with topics including a Motus tag application workshop for banders, Autonomous Recording Units (ARU) and Bird Monitoring Technology Workshop, Introduction to Desert Thrasher and Clearance Protocol Workshop (Bendire’s Thrasher [Toxostoma bendirei] and Le Conte’s Thrasher [Toxostoma lecontei]), Volunteer Opportunities with Tucson Audubon Society, Recent research and findings of the Ferruginous Pygmy Owl (Glaucidium brasilianum), Biology and Survey Protocol Discussion, WRP Plumage and Ageing System for Banders, and a Hummingbird Equipment drop in session: Introduction to new equipment and band-making. The workshops were held at the Arizona Game and Fish Department Tucson offices and the Pima College West Campus. The evening ended at Borderlands Brewing Company, where we could enjoy both food and beer, visit with other meeting participants, and check out the tables set up by several birding organizations. Borderlands Brewing Company had brewed a special India Pale Ale called Rain Crow, which was especially canned for the meeting and included the Tucson Audubon Society, WBBA, and AZFO logos.
The Pima College West Campus was the location of Saturday’s scientific talk session. Talks included topics such as morning flight migration in Pinal County, Arizona, the MAPS and MoSI program,
banding at The Empire Ranch Banding Station, Sinaloa Mexico's habitat, hybrid hummingbirds, an exploration of bird weights, oxidative stress in urban birds, Motus research, the danger of open pipes to wildlife, the Burrowing Owls (Athene cunicularia) of Lake Havasu City and the annual summary of AZFO’s expeditions. Talk abstracts will be included in the next NABB issue so you can read more details about the individual talks. A Kahoot bird quiz challenged us to identify some Arizona birds and prepare us for the Sunday field trips. After enjoying some delectable tacos catered by a local restaurant, we enjoyed listening to Richard Fischer, PhD Chief Wildlife Biologist of the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, speak about proactive efforts across the country to monitor, manage, and conserve migratory birds in support of DoD missions on the 10.9 million hectares of military lands.
The meeting wrapped up on Sunday with another set of five mini-expeditions hosted by local experts. The locations included the Santa Cruz River with special access to a future nature preserve, a Wilcox mini-shorebird and water bird workshop, the Avra Valley, Tank Verde Wash & Agua Caliente Park, and Peppersauce Canyon. Once again, temperatures were unseasonably hot and were above 38°C reasonably early in the day, so the trips and birds were more subdued than expected. Even with the heat, classic Arizona species such as Gray Hawk (Buteo plagiatus), Gambel’s Quail (Callipepla gambelli), Greater Roadrunner (Geococcyx californianus), Gila Woodpecker (Melanerpes uropygialis), Verdin (Auriparus flaviceps), Vermillion Flycatcher (Pyrocephalus rubinus), and so many more were seen on the trips.
In case you want to join us in 2025, next year’s WBBA annual meeting will be held 29 July – 1 August in Ogden, Utah, in conjunction with the Association of Field Ornithologists. All are welcome, and we hope you will join us in this beautiful location for an amazing meeting.
Inaugural Caribbean Flyway Review
Compiled by Daniela Ventura del Puerto and Zoya E.A. Buckmire
The insular Caribbean is home to over 700 migratory and resident bird species, with 185 endemics (as of 2024 taxonomic updates; see www. birdscaribbean.org/2024/09/meet-the-caribbeanssix-new-avian-endemics/). Residents, including endemics, are incredibly understudied, and we still lack information about seemingly well-studied migrants, including information on their migration routes, stopover sites, and wintering ecology in the Caribbean.
Bird banding has long been employed as an ornithological tool to provide deeper insights into the life history and population dynamics of bird species; however, most of this work has taken place in North America and Europe. Historically, bird banding activities in the Caribbean have been sporadic, with organizations operating independently with their own protocols, schedules, and bands (including disparate band numbering systems). The majority of the long-lived banding
projects have taken place in the Greater Antilles (mainly in Cuba, Jamaica, and Puerto Rico), with the oldest running station located in Siboney, eastern Cuba—14 years and counting. Some of these stations are part of long-term programs with continuous funding, staff, and significant local training and skill-building. By contrast, in the Lesser Antilles, banding activities tend to occur on a more short-term basis tied to research projects by foreign researchers, with some, albeit limited, training of locals to continue banding. Prior to this decade, sharing of knowledge and data amongst islands in the Caribbean was also fairly limited, as there existed no platform for banders across the region to meet and exchange ideas. Fortunately, this landscape is beginning to change.
The Caribbean Bird Banding Network (CBBN) was created by the non-profit BirdsCaribbean to address several of these issues. The CBBN was officially launched in May 2021
as part of BirdsCaribbean’s Caribbean Landbird Monitoring program, funded by the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act (NMBCA) grant. The CBBN is one of three programs to monitor landbirds; the other two being standardized PROALAS surveys using eBird for data entry and the Caribbean Motus Collaboration. The first regional Caribbean Bird Banding workshop as part of the CBBN was held in The Bahamas in March 2022. The purpose of the network is threefold: to create shared resources (including bands, a banding database, datasheets, protocols) for Caribbean banders, to provide more standardized training opportunities for Caribbean biologists and local conservationists in ethical bird banding techniques, and to connect and unite banders and banding operations within the Caribbean. BirdsCaribbean has hosted three regional workshops to date, providing training to 50 participants at different skill levels from 13 countries, as well as four incountry trainings in Cuba, Puerto Rico, Jamaica, and Trinidad. In order to further build capacity, the network has so far offered six international banding internships ranging from one to six months at bird observatories with well-established banding programs in North and South America. In addition, the network has provided opportunities for North American Banding Council (NABC) certification, where there are now seven certified Banders, three of which are also now certified Trainers. This has planted the seed to expand and strengthen local-led capacity building. More information on the CBBN, including links to blogs about the workshops and internships by both compilers of this review, can be found on the CBBN webpage (www.birdscaribbean.org/landbird-monitoring/ caribbean-bird-banding-network/).
The goal of the present report is to summarize some of the ongoing long-term bird banding programs in the Caribbean, as well as short-term or species-specific research that uses bird banding as a tool. Included are reports from Cuba, Grenada, Puerto Rico, and Trinidad and Tobago, presented in alphabetical order. This list is by no means exhaustive, and exclusion of any active station from this list is not intentional. We designed and distributed a survey via Google forms
that was shared among members of the network and beyond, but participation in the survey and submission of banding data were voluntary. We also acknowledge that this report is very passerinefocused, and that there are individuals who band shorebirds and seabirds in the region as well. We aim to produce an annual report for the Caribbean going forward, and strongly encourage banders across the region to share the survey with their peers and actively contribute to future editions.
Banding Office Juan Cristóbal Gundlach
Siboney, Santiago de Cuba, Cuba
Freddy Rodríguez Santana, agundlachii@yahoo.es
Social media: @Gundlachbirdbandingstation (FB), @lagundlach (IG)
Banders: Freddy Rodríguez Santana, Carmen Plasencia, Leydis Sánchez, Arelis Mustelier, and Amaury Rapado
This station holds the record of being the oldest active station in Cuba and the Caribbean. Established on 10 Jul 2010, its staff have made possible the continuous operation of the banding program that operates every month for three consecutive days. Neither the Covid pandemic nor the passing of intense hurricanes have interrupted its work. The banding office is led and funded by BIOECO (Eastern Center for Ecosystems and Biodiversity) and the Caribbean Biological Corridor (CBC). The 22 nets are set up in a mixture of coastal and dry forest habitat at the Ecological Reserve Siboney-Juticí in southeastern Cuba. So far, more than 16,000 birds representing 60 species have been banded. October is the month with the highest capture rates, the record being 150 birds in one day. The most banded migratory species are Black-throated Blue Warbler, Cape May Warbler, and American Redstart. Meanwhile, among the resident species the records are held by Common Ground Dove, Oriente Warbler, and Cuban Vireo. The 14 years of operation have produced many highlights, like several longevity records for Cuban birds, the oldest one being for an Oriente Warbler with the same age as the station. They also reported the second record for Cuba of the Connecticut Warbler (Plasencia
et al. 2019). The station has conducted several banding demonstrations focused on students ranging from elementary to university levels. It has trained biology students and volunteers in bird banding techniques, raptor migration counts, and bird conservation. The Caribbean Endemic Bird Festival is another important regional festivity they add to their yearly calendar. The station manager and staff would like to thank the field technicians and park rangers of the Ecological Reserve, the CBC, the Cuban Ministry of Environment, Nature and Biodiversity Conservation Union Germany, and the Cornell Lab of Ornithology for their support.
Station Cabo de San Antonio, Guanahacabibes
Guanahacabibes, Pinar del Río, Cuba
Alina Pérez Hernández, alinaperez026@gmail.com
Banders: Alejandro Llanes Sosa, Alina Pérez Hernández, and Arnaldo Toledo
The westernmost banding station in Cuba is located at Cabo de San Antonio, in the Biosphere Reserve Península de Guanahacabibes. The program is led by ECOVIDA (Environmental Research and Services Center). Established in 2015, the station has run continuously except during Covid years (2020–2021). It typically operates during the autumn migration season (September to first half of November), but there are plans to expand the monitoring during next year’s winter residence period (Jan–Feb 2025). The 12 nets are operated on an average of 40 days per year in a mix of semideciduous and secondary forest, as well as sandy coast vegetation. The site is a migratory stopover of extraordinary proportions, serving as a link for birds flying through the Gulf of México towards the Yucatán peninsula. Its importance is proven by 82% of the birds banded being migratory species, the most common being the White-eyed Vireo, American Redstart, and Gray Catbird. The station has been prolific in contributing to new records to the Cuban avifauna, with several first records and rare species for Cuba such as the Vermilion and Willow Flycatchers, Wilson’s Warbler, and Yucatan Vireo, to name a few. Perhaps the most exciting foreign recaptures at this station are
an Ovenbird and an American Redstart, both originally banded by Tierra de Aves in México and recaptured in 2023. Besides traditional bird banding, during 2023 the project deployed 18 nanotags on Swainson’s Thrush to study its fullcycle migration, with some bird detections in Costa Rica and Colombia. The station manager would like to thank the dozens of volunteers of several Cuban institutions that have dedicated their time and expertise along the years. Their work has also been possible with the support of Gulf Coast Bird Observatory, Western University Canada, Institute of Ecology and Systematics, Optics for the Tropics, University Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and Pinar del Rio’s meteorological center.
Station "Odanel Almeida Abreu" Laguna de Maya, Matanzas, Cuba
Elien Domínguez Tan, eliendominguez06@gmail.com
Social media: @lagunademaya Banders: Adrian Yanes Dominguez, Liorna Medina Marcos, and Elien Domínguez Tan
This station was established on 19 Feb 2019, as a partnership between the Flora and Fauna government enterprise and the Caribbean Biological Corridor. The goal was to expand the use of bird banding in Cuba to monitor migration and population dynamics of resident species. Located on the north coast of Matanzas province, at the Wildlife Refuge “Laguna de Maya”, it is well-positioned as a stopover for birds using the Atlantic migratory flyway. The station operates throughout the year, with a schedule of two days per month. The plan is to extend their operation days for the next autumn migration season. The total captures to date is just over 2,000 birds. The habitat of mangrove and coastal forest is ideal for migrants such as Gray Catbird, Ovenbird, and Northern Waterthrush. Some individuals are frequent visitors year after year, like a Northern Waterthrush first banded in 2019 and recaptured last in 2022. The station has also reported some rarities, like a hatching year Canada Warbler captured back in 2019, a species with less than twenty observations in eBird for the country. Another exciting report from the station is not of
a bird caught in a mist net, but of a nearby rescue. On 6 Nov 2023, Adrián Yanes found an exhausted American Redstart resting on the coastline near the banding station. In relocating the bird to a safe place to recover, he noticed that it was already banded, the first and only foreign recap to date. He immediately reported the encounter to the Bird Banding Lab office, and while the mystery of where the bird was banded is still unsolved, fortunately the young bird recovered and continued its migration. The staff of the station is very committed to environmental education and outreach, focusing on the kids from nearby rural communities. They have conducted several banding demonstrations and recently created a Young Bird Watcher’s Club “Los Laguneritos”.
Station Playa Juan Francisco Encrucijada, Villa Clara, Cuba
This recently established station focuses mainly on the ecology and population dynamics of one of the most charismatic Cuban endemics, the Oriente Warbler. But soon after the onset of the project in Jan 2023, the team discovered that the site could offer so much more. Located at the north coast of Villa Clara province in central Cuba, the mixture of mangrove, coastal, and secondary forest offers a haven for migratory species, among which the Prairie Warbler stands out. This species has been recently treated as one of conservation concern in many parts of its range. That is why the prospect of extending the permanence of the monitoring at the site looks promising. The station operates on a monthly schedule, two days per month, with a maximum of six nets per day. So far they have captured 26 species, but only seven have been banded (migrants and the focal species). Jan and Nov 2023 hold the records of most captures. The station is the result of a collaboration between the Center for Environmental Studies and Services of Villa Clara, the enterprise for the Protection of Flora and Fauna and the Villa Clara’s Botanical Garden. Its work has also been made possible
with the support of BirdsCaribbean’s David S. Lee Fund for the Conservation of Caribbean Birds, Caribbean Biological Corridor, Banding Office Juan Cristobal Gundlach, and the staff of the protected area Fauna Refuge “Lanzanillo-PajonalFragoso”.
National Botanical Garden
Havana, Cuba
Daniela Ventura del Puerto, dvpuerto19@gmail.com
Social media: @grupoecologiadeavesuh
Banders: Daniela Ventura, Laura Arañaburo, Ana Laura Hidalgo Gato, Rachel Hernández, Cinthya Pérez, Jean Michel de Jongh, and Karen Cornelio
Banding stations located in urban environments are not very widespread in the Caribbean. The National Botanical Garden’s (NBG) banding station established in Jan 2023 aims to shed some light into the role that urban green areas play to conserve resident and migrant bird populations. The project is led by the Bird Ecology Group of the University of Havana. The NBG, located in the south of Havana, includes a mixture of open grasslands, planted forest, a temporal creek, and several patches of the original vegetation, that offers a variety of resources for 128 bird species. The station operates monthly, banding three days in a row, with a maximum of 8 nets. So far, 48 individuals belonging to 41 species have been banded and nearly 50% of the captures are Neotropical migrants. The Red-legged Thrush accounts for 26% of the total captures, followed by Ovenbirds and Palm Warblers. One of the most interesting results is the 10 individuals of Swainson’s Warbler, a species considered rare for the site. Sixty percent of the birds recaptured are Neotropical migrants, which show the important role of the sites during the winter residence period. Twelve individuals have been recaptured in subsequent seasons, adding data of the extremely high winter fidelity for species such as Ovenbirds, Northern Parula, Common Yellowthroats, and American Redstarts. In the case of this last species, we have a particularly curious story. An adult male was captured in Feb 2022 as part of pilot surveys before setting up the
station. On 17 Jan 2023, the inauguration day, it was captured again as an auspicious start. This individual, affectionately nicknamed “Pau-pau”, has been continually recaptured every month of the winter residence period (Oct–Apr), sometimes more than once per day. The NBG also has one of the two active Motus towers in the country, and the team has deployed 83 nanotags on 18 species. The station staff would like to thank the dozens of volunteers that have made the work possible, mainly students and professors of the school of Biology of the University of Havana. Their work has also been possible with the support of Environment and Climate Change Canada, Western University, BirdsCaribbean’s David S. Lee Fund for the Conservation of Caribbean Birds, the National Botanical Garden, University of Havana, The Institute for Bird Populations, and Mantiqueira Bird Observatory.
Havana’s Botanical Garden “Quinta de los Molinos”
Havana, Cuba
Daniela Ventura del Puerto, dvpuerto19@gmail.com
Social media: @grupoecologiadeavesuh
Banders: Daniela Ventura, Laura Arañaburo, Ana Laura Hidalgo Gato, Rachel Hernández, Cinthya Pérez, Jean Michel de Jongh, and Karen Cornelio
Due to the early success of the National Botanical Garden station, the team at Bird Ecology Group of Havana University decided to establish a second constant-effort banding station. It is located at the heart of the city, close to the university headquarters, and the north coast of Havana. Quinta de los Molinos is an urban green area of nearly 5 ha, and was also the first botanical garden of the city during the nineteenth century. Started in Apr 2023, the station has a similar protocol to her sister station. The only difference is that the three days are spaced out throughout the month. In spite of its small size, the place is an oasis for birds, and especially for migrants that arrive after cold fronts. A total of 498 birds representing 41 species have been banded to date, including 12 new records for the site. Noteworthy is the importance of the place for migratory thrushes during autumn
migration. All three species of Catharus (Veery, Swainson’s, Gray-cheeked thrush) and Wood Thrush used the place as a stopover site. The most interesting capture at the station was the second documented record of the Hermit Thrush for Cuba. Other highlights for the station are Hooded Warbler, Kentucky Warbler, and Summer Tanager. Among the residents, Caribbean endemics such as the Red-legged Thrush, Cuban Blackbird, and Greater Antillean Grackle are the most frequent captures. The location of the station at a popular and accessible park makes it ideal for banding demonstrations and teaching the public on issues regarding bird conservation. The team has conducted several World Migratory Bird Day and Caribbean Endemic Bird Festival activities as part of their normal operation. The Bird Ecology Group is grateful to the staff of the Quinta de los Molinos, BirdsCaribbean’s David S. Lee Fund for the Conservation of Caribbean Birds, Western University Canada, and the dozens of volunteers that have supported and contributed their time.
Social media: 3KCBirding Adventures (YT), @3KCbirding
Banders: Dr. Kenrith Carter
Established in 2022, this mobile station operates in a mix of mountainous rainforest, mangroves, grasslands, and urban habitats. The station operates with 5 nets one to two times per week during set periods, with the mangroves and other migratory hotspots prioritized during migration. To date, there have been 925 birds representing 41 species captured and banded, both passerines and shorebirds. The most-captured species include Bananaquit, Spectacled Thrush, Blackfaced Grassquit, Lesser Antillean Bullfinch, Prothonotary Warbler, and Northern Waterthrush, a mix of residents and migrants. There have been 60 total recaptures, all from the station, and the oldest recapture was a Spectacled Thrush banded in Jan 2023 and recaptured Feb 2024. Even more interesting was a recaptured Northern Waterthrush, banded in Jan 2023, who returned in November of
that same year, illustrating migratory site fidelity. This station is open to visitors, both kids and adults, and is self-funded by Dr. Carter; he also extends his thanks to the Government of Grenada for the banding permit.
Conservation Ecology of the Puerto Rican Oriole
Hacienda La Esperanza, Cañón de San Cristóbal, Puerto Rico
Michael Ocasio, m313@umbc.edu
Banders: Kevin Omland, Michelle Moyer, and Michael Ocasio
Expert Collaborators: Adrianne Tossas, Alcides Morales-Peréz, Noelia Nieves-Colón, Alberic Ponce de León Laguna, and Miguel CostasSabatier
This short-term research project on the Puerto Rican Oriole began in Jan 2023. The goal was to better understand and address the plights of this single-island endemic. The team combines banding and tagging with nest monitoring and point counts to assess landscape level effects on populations. The banding takes place from mid-Jan to mid-May (an average of 20 days per year) in a variety of habitats including grassland, deciduous and secondary forest, and suburban habitat. A stacked set-up of 2–3 mist nets was used for target netting of known oriole pairs using song and call playback. The team has banded 59 individuals to date and have also deployed 18 Motus compatible Lotek radio transmitters to track oriole movements, assess territoriality, and monitor apparent survival. All non-target species are released unbanded, totaling over 150 birds, but there have been 2 foreign recaptures of Bananaquits. The Puerto Rican Oriole Project wishes to thank Para la Naturaleza for their support and expertise, as well as granting land access. Financial backing from organizations, including BirdsCaribbean, the Florida Ornithological Society, the American Ornithological Society, and the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, has been instrumental in facilitating this vital research.
Boneo Brasso Seco Station, Trinidad and Tobago Bird Observatory and Research Centre
Brasso Seco, Trinidad, Trinidad and Tobago
Boneo Brasso Seco Station, Trinidad and Tobago Bird Observatory and Research Centre
Brasso Seco, Trinidad, Trinidad and Tobago Giselle Ragoonanan, giselleragoo1@gmail.com
Social media: @ttboresearch
Banders: Che Ragoonanan, Giselle Ragoonanan
This relatively new station, started in Feb 2024 with aims to become a constant effort station as part of the new Trinidad and Tobago Bird Observatory (TTBO), is run by Che and Giselle Ragoonanan. They band in the Brasso Seco rainforest an average of 24 days a year, with 10 nets. To date, they have banded 351 birds of 55 species, not including over 60 unbanded releases that are mainly hummingbirds caught in the early mornings. The most commonly captured species are Golden-headed Manakin, Bananaquit, Whitenecked Thrush, Violaceous Euphonia, Whitebearded Manakin, Ochre-bellied Flycatcher, Plainbrown Woodcreeper, and Green Honeycreeper. The Golden-headed Manakin holds the record as the most-captured species as well for the oldest recap, as it was recaptured seven years after first banding, which took place during previous informal banding efforts at the site. There have been 32 additional recaptures, of which three were foreign recaps. The station is open to visitors, often hosting banding demonstrations for community members and university groups. These activities consist of an interactive session with a primary lead, designated to interact with the public, where the participants are guided to our closest 'public demonstration' mist net, receive an introduction to banding and the station, and observe the banding operations. The Ragoonanans thank the teams at BirdsCaribbean, Klamath Bird Observatory, Institute of Bird Populations, Environment for the Americas, and the rest of the TTBO team: Daveka, Shivam, and Alexis.
Niplig Trail and Blue Copper Trail Banding Stations, Trinidad and Tobago Bird Observatory and Research Centre
Tobago Main Ridge Forest Reserve, Tobago, Trinidad and Tobago
Daveka Boodram boodramdaveka@gmail.com
Social media: @ttboresearch
Bander: Daveka Boodram
On neighboring Tobago, Daveka Boodram runs two stations along trails in the Tobago Main Ridge Forest Reserve, as part of the Trinidad and Tobago Bird Observatory. Since Mar 2023, she has banded every Saturday (weather permitting) in a secondary forest habitat, using 10 mist nets. To date, she has banded 216 birds and released 99 more, 91 of which were hummingbirds. A highlight from earlier this year was the capture of 8 White-tailed Sabrewings in one day, which is the most captured species overall. Other common species are Golden-olive Woodpecker, Blue-backed Manakin, Yellow-legged Thrush, White-throated Spadebill, and Red-legged Honeycreeper, among 30 total species. There have been 37 recaptures and no foreign recaptures. The station is also included in outreach activities for local groups and has hosted three groups of high school students between May and Jun 2024. Daveka thanks the Tobago House of Assembly for their support.
Other
The Institute of Bird Population’s MoSI program (Monitoring Overwinter Survival) also operates through partners in the Caribbean. The MoSI protocol involves constant effort netting every month during the migratory period (November to March) or optionally year-round, in a variety of habitats. Past and present stations in the region include four in Cuba, and one each in Jamaica, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Trinidad, and Tobago. Over the years, Caribbean collaborators have banded several thousands of birds of over 100 species. More information on MoSI in the Caribbean can be found at birdpop.org.
With no data to report, we would also like to mention several more planned banding stations by CBBN members, who hope to start operating in late 2024 or early 2025. These include the University of The Bahamas North field station, on Grand Bahama, by Ancilleno Davis; three in Puerto Rico: Hacienda La Esperanza Nature Reserve by Alcides Morales-Pérez, Hacienda Margarita Natural Protected Area by Omar Monzón (both managed by Para La Naturaleza), and Julio Enrique Monagas National Park by
Dayamiris Candelario-Maysonet; one in Antigua and Barbuda run by the Environmental Awareness Group; and another field station in Grenada by Zoya Buckmire. The latter two will continue to add to capacity-building efforts by BirdsCaribbean and the CBBN, which held its third regional bird banding workshop in Grenada in 2024 and is planning local workshops in both Antigua and Grenada for early 2025.
Looking ahead for the CBBN
As this report has shown, bird banding in the Caribbean is vibrant and active, with a promising future guided by the brand-new CBBN. As the network is still in its early phase, we appreciate and encourage collaboration from all banders and ornithologists working in the Caribbean, regardless of origin country and background. The objective is to create partnerships and continue to raise local capacity that will ensure long-term conservation of our birds. Birds connect our world in profound ways, and if we aim to protect them, we must embrace the lessons they offer.
Some of the future goals of the CBBN include:
• defining Caribbean-specific banding protocols, for both year-round banding that focuses on resident bird phenology and migratory season banding.
• synchronous banding period during migration season to allow comparison of community composition across sites/islands (similar to the coordinated regional Caribbean Waterbird Census).
• standardization of morphology data collected to compare resident populations among islands.
• compilation of molt extent and phenology for resident birds, starting with common species or genera present on most or all islands.
• regular reports on birds banded throughout the region (similar to this NABB report).
In conclusion, we would like to thank all the stations and project managers that kindly responded to our survey and made this first Caribbean report possible. We hope that for future issues, we can highlight even more incredible projects. The compilers of this report also thank CBBN Coordinator Holly Garrod, and NABB editors Claire Stuyck and Walter Sakai, for their helpful comments that improved this review.
Revisión inaugural de la ruta migratoria del Caribe
Por: Daniela Ventura del Puerto y Zoya E.A. Buckmire
El Caribe insular alberga más de 700 especies de aves migratorias y residentes, incluidas 185 endémicas (según las actualizaciones taxonómicas de 2024; véase www.birdscaribbean.org/2024/09/ meet-the-caribbeans-six-new-avian-endemics/).
Las especies residentes están increíblemente poco estudiadas, y aún carecemos de información sobre especies migratorias aparentemente bien conocidas, por ejemplo, datos sobre sus rutas de migración, sitios de parada y de su ecología de invernada en el Caribe.
El anillamiento de aves se utiliza desde hace mucho tiempo como herramienta ornitológica para profundizar en la historia vital y la dinámica poblacional de las especies de aves; sin embargo, la mayor parte de este trabajo se ha llevado a cabo en Norteamérica y Europa. Históricamente, las actividades de anillamiento de aves en el Caribe han sido esporádicas, con organizaciones que operan independientemente con sus propios protocolos, calendarios y anillos (incluyendo sistemas dispares de numeración de anillos). La mayoría de los proyectos de anillamiento de larga duración han tenido lugar en las Antillas Mayores (principalmente en Cuba, Jamaica y Puerto Rico), con la estación en funcionamiento más antigua situada en Siboney, al este de Cuba, con 14 años de trabajo, y contando. Algunas de estas estaciones forman parte de programas a largo plazo con financiación continua, personal y una importante formación y capacitación local. Por el contrario, en las Antillas Menores, las actividades de anillamiento tienden a producirse sobre una base más a corto plazo vinculada a proyectos de investigación de investigadores extranjeros, e incluyen solo alguna formación, aunque limitada, de los lugareños para continuar el anillamiento. Antes de esta década, el intercambio de conocimientos y datos entre las islas del Caribe también era bastante limitado, ya que no existía ninguna plataforma para que los anilladores de toda la región se reunieran e intercambiaran ideas. Afortunadamente, este panorama está empezando a cambiar.
La Red de Anillamiento de Aves del Caribe (CBBN, por sus siglas en inglés) fue creada por la organización sin ánimo de lucro BirdsCaribbean para abordar varios de estos problemas. La CBBN fue lanzada oficialmente en mayo de 2021 como parte del programa de Monitoreo de Aves Terrestres del Caribe de BirdsCaribbean, financiado por la subvención de la Ley de Conservación de Aves Migratorias Neotropicales (NMBCA, por sus siglas en inglés). La CBBN es uno de los tres programas del Monitoreo de Aves Terrestres; los otros dos son los conteos estandarizados PROALAS que utilizan eBird para la entrada de datos y la Colaboración Motus del Caribe. El primer taller regional de Anillamiento de Aves del Caribe como parte de la CBBN se celebró en Las Bahamas en marzo de 2022. El propósito de la red es triple: crear recursos compartidos (incluyendo anillos, una base de datos de anillamiento, hojas de datos, protocolos) para los anilladores del Caribe, proporcionar oportunidades de capacitación más estandarizadas para los conservacionistas locales en técnicas éticas de anillamiento de aves, y conectar y unir a los anilladores y las operaciones de anillamiento dentro del Caribe. Hasta ahora, BirdsCaribbean ha organizado tres talleres regionales anuales, en los que se ha formado a 50 participantes de 13 países con diferentes niveles de conocimientos, así como cuatro cursos nacionales en Cuba, Puerto Rico, Jamaica y Trinidad. Para seguir desarrollando capacidades, la red ha ofrecido seis pasantías internacionales de anillamiento de entre uno y seis meses en observatorios de aves con programas de anillamiento bien establecidos en Norteamérica y Sudamérica. Además, la red ha proporcionado oportunidades para la certificación del Consejo Norteamericano de Anillamiento (NABC, por sus siglas en inglés), y como resultado ya se cuenta con siete anilladores certificados, tres de los cuales son también entrenadores certificados. Todo esto ha plantado la semilla para ampliar y reforzar la creación de capacidad a nivel local. Para más información sobre la CBBN, incluidos los enlaces a los blogs sobre la experiencia en los
talleres y las pasantías de las dos compiladoras de este reporte, consulte la página web de la CBBN (www.birdscaribbean.org/landbird-monitoring/ caribbean-bird-banding-network/).
El objetivo del presente informe es presentar algunos de los programas de anillamiento de aves a largo plazo que se están llevando a cabo en el Caribe, así como investigaciones a corto plazo o con alguna especie focal, que utilizan el anillamiento de aves como herramienta. Se incluyen informes de Cuba, Granada, Puerto Rico y Trinidad y Tobago, presentados por orden alfabético. Esta lista no es de ninguna manera exhaustiva, y la exclusión de cualquier estación activa no es intencional. Hemos diseñado y distribuido una encuesta a través de formularios de Google que se compartió entre los miembros de la red y por otras vías, pero la participación en la encuesta y la presentación de los datos de anillamiento fueron voluntarias. También reconocemos que este informe está muy centrado en el grupo de aves paseriformes, y conocemos que existen organizaciones e individuos que también anillan aves playeras y marinas en la región. Nuestro objetivo es producir un informe anual para el Caribe en el futuro, y animamos a los anilladores de toda la región a compartir la encuesta con sus colegas y contribuir activamente a futuras ediciones.
Anilladores: Freddy Rodríguez Santana, Carmen Plasencia, Leydis Sánchez, Arelis Mustelier y Amaury Rapado
Esta estación ostenta el récord de ser la estación activa más antigua de Cuba y el Caribe. Establecida el 10 de julio de 2010, su personal ha hecho posible el funcionamiento continuo del programa de anillamiento, que opera todos los meses durante tres días consecutivos. Ni la pandemia de Covid ni el paso de intensos huracanes han interrumpido su labor. La oficina de anillamiento está dirigida
y financiada por BIOECO (Centro Oriental de Ecosistemas y Biodiversidad) y el Corredor Biológico del Caribe (CBC). Las 22 redes se instalan en una mezcla de hábitat xeromorfo costero y de bosque seco en la Reserva Ecológica Siboney-Juticí, en el sureste de Cuba. Hasta ahora se han anillado más de 16 000 aves pertenecientes a 60 especies. El mes de octubre posee las tasas de captura más elevadas, con un récord de 150 aves en un solo día. Las especies migratorias más anilladas son Setophaga caerulescens, S. tigrina y S. ruticilla. Entre las especies residentes, los récords los ostentan Columbina passerina, Teretistris fornsi y Vireo gundlachii. Los 14 años de funcionamiento han producido muchos hitos, como varios récords de longevidad para aves cubanas, siendo el más antiguo el de un individuo de Teretistris fornsi que tiene la misma edad que la estación. También reportaron el segundo récord para Cuba de Oporornis agilis. La estación ha llevado a cabo varias demostraciones de anillamiento enfocadas en estudiantes desde niveles elementales hasta universitarios. Además, ha formado a estudiantes de biología y voluntarios en técnicas de anillamiento de aves, conteos de migración de rapaces y conservación de aves. El Festival de Aves Endémicas del Caribe es otra importante festividad regional que añaden a su calendario anual. El colectivo de la estación desea agradecer su apoyo a los técnicos de campo y guardaparques de la Reserva Ecológica, al CBC, al Ministerio de Medio Ambiente de Cuba, a NABU Alemania y al Laboratorio de Ornitología de Cornell.
Estación Cabo de San Antonio, Guanahacabibes
Guanahacabibes, Pinar del Río, Cuba
Alina Pérez Hernández, alinaperez026@gmail.com
Anilladores: Alejandro Llanes Sosa, Alina Pérez Hernández y Arnaldo Toledo
La estación de anillamiento más occidental de Cuba se encuentra en el Cabo de San Antonio, en la Reserva de la Biosfera Península de Guanahacabibes. El programa está dirigido por ECOVIDA (Centro de Investigación y Servicios
Ambientales de Pinar del Río). Establecida en 2015, la estación ha funcionado ininterrumpidamente excepto durante los años de la pandemia de Covid (2020-2021). Normalmente funciona durante la temporada de migración otoñal (de septiembre a la primera quincena de noviembre), pero hay planes para ampliar el monitoreo durante el periodo de residencia invernal del próximo año (enerofebrero de 2025). Las 12 redes funcionan una media de 40 días al año en un hábitat mixto de bosque semicaducifolio y secundario, así como de vegetación costera arenosa. El sitio constituye una escala migratoria de proporciones extraordinarias, que sirve de enlace para las aves que vuelan a través del Golfo de México hacia la península de Yucatán. Su importancia queda demostrada por el hecho de que el 82 % de las aves anilladas son especies migratorias, siendo las más comunes Vireo griseus, Setophaga ruticilla y Dumetella carolinensis. La estación ha sido prolífica en la contribución de nuevos registros a la avifauna cubana, con varios primeros registros y especies raras para Cuba como Pyrocephalus rubinus, Empidonax traillii, Cardellina pusilla y Vireo magister, por nombrar algunos. Quizás las recapturas extranjeras más emocionantes en esta estación son un individuo de Seiurus aurocapilla y otro de Setophaga ruticilla, ambos originalmente anillados por Tierra de Aves en México y recapturados en 2023. Además del anillamiento tradicional de aves, durante 2023 el proyecto marcó con 18 nanotags a individuos de Catharus ustulatus para estudiar su migración de ciclo completo, y se han obtenido detecciones de aves en Costa Rica y Colombia. La coordinadora de la estación quiere agradecer a las decenas de voluntarios de varias instituciones cubanas que han dedicado su tiempo y experiencia a lo largo de los años. El trabajo de la estación también ha sido posible gracias al apoyo de Gulf Coast Bird Observatory, Western University Canada, Institute of Ecology and Systematics, Optics for the Tropics, University Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, y el centro meteorológico de Pinar del Río.
Estación “Odanel Almeida Abreu”
Laguna de Maya, Matanzas, Cuba
Elien Domínguez Tan, eliendominguez06@gmail.com
Redes sociales: @lagunademaya
Anilladores: Adrian Yanes Dominguez, Liorna Medina Marcos y Elien Domínguez Tan
Esta estación se estableció el 19 de febrero de 2019, como una asociación entre la empresa gubernamental Flora y Fauna y el Corredor Biológico del Caribe. El objetivo fue ampliar el uso del anillamiento de aves en Cuba para monitorear la migración y la dinámica poblacional de las especies residentes. Situada en la costa norte de la provincia de Matanzas, en el Refugio de Vida Silvestre Laguna de Maya, el sitio constituye una escala para las aves que utilizan la ruta migratoria atlántica. La estación funciona durante todo el año, con una frecuencia de dos días cada mes. El plan es ampliar sus días de funcionamiento durante la próxima temporada migratoria de otoño. El total capturado hasta la fecha supera ligeramente las 2000 aves. El hábitat de manglares y bosques costeros es ideal para aves migratorias como Dumetella carolinensis, Seiurus aurocapilla y Parkesia noveboracensis. Algunos individuos son visitantes frecuentes año tras año, como uno de Parkesia noveboracensis anillado por primera vez en 2019 y recapturado por última vez en 2022. La estación también ha reportado algunas rarezas, como un individuo juvenil de Cardellina canadensis capturado en 2019, una especie con menos de veinte observaciones en eBird para el país. Otro evento emocionante para la estación no fue el de un ave atrapada en una red de niebla, sino un rescate ocurrido en las cercanías. El 6 de noviembre de 2023, Adrián Yanes encontró un individuo juvenil de Setophaga ruticilla, muy exhausto, que se encontraba descansando en la costa cerca de la estación de anillamiento. Al reubicar al ave en un lugar seguro para que pudiera recuperarse, se dio cuenta de que ya estaba anillada: la primera y única recaptura extranjera hasta la fecha. Inmediatamente informó del encuentro a la oficina del Laboratorio de Anillamiento de Aves de Norteamérica y, aunque el misterio de dónde se anilló el ave sigue sin resolverse, afortunadamente esta se recuperó y continuó su migración. El
personal de la estación está muy comprometido con la educación ambiental y la divulgación, centrándose en los niños de las comunidades rurales cercanas. Han realizado varias demostraciones de anillamiento y recientemente han creado un Club de Jóvenes Observadores de Aves “Los Laguneritos”.
Esta estación de reciente creación se centra en el estudio de la ecología y la dinámica poblacional de uno de los endémicos cubanos más carismáticos, Teretistris fornsi. Pero poco después del inicio del proyecto, en enero de 2023, el equipo descubrió que el lugar podía ofrecer mucho más. Situado en la costa norte de la provincia de Villa Clara, en el centro de Cuba, la mezcla de manglares, bosques costeros y secundarios ofrece un refugio para las especies migratorias, entre las que destaca Setophaga discolor. Esta especie ha sido tratada recientemente como de interés para la conservación en muchas partes de su área de distribución. Por ello, la perspectiva de ampliar la permanencia de la estación de anillamiento en el lugar parece prometedora. La estación funciona con un calendario mensual, dos días al mes, con un máximo de seis redes al día. Hasta ahora se han capturado 26 especies, pero sólo se han anillado siete (algunas migratorias y la especie focal). Los meses de enero y noviembre de 2023 ostentan los récords de mayor número de capturas. La estación es el resultado de una colaboración entre el Centro de Estudios y Servicios Ambientales de Villa Clara, la empresa para la Protección de la Flora y la Fauna y el Jardín Botánico de Villa Clara. Su labor también ha sido posible gracias al apoyo del Fondo David S. Lee para la Conservación de las Aves del Caribe de BirdsCaribbean, el Corredor Biológico del Caribe, la Oficina de Anillamiento Juan Cristóbal Gundlach y el personal del área protegida Refugio de Fauna Lanzanillo-PajonalFragoso.
Estación Jardín Botánico Nacional de Cuba
La Habana, Cuba
Daniela Ventura del Puerto, dvpuerto19@gmail.com
Redes sociales: @grupoecologiadeavesuh Anilladores: Daniela Ventura, Laura Arañaburo, Ana Laura Hidalgo Gato, Rachel Hernández, Cinthya Pérez, Jean Michel de Jongh y Karen Cornelio
Las estaciones de anillamiento situadas en entornos urbanos no están muy extendidas en el Caribe. La estación de anillamiento del Jardín Botánico Nacional (JBN), establecida en enero de 2023, pretende generar información sobre el papel que desempeñan las zonas verdes urbanas en la conservación de las poblaciones de aves residentes y migratorias. El proyecto está dirigido por el Grupo de Ecología de las Aves de la Universidad de La Habana. El JBN, situado en el sur de La Habana, incluye una mezcla de zonas abiertas, colecciones ex situ de flora internacional, un arroyo temporal y varios parches de la vegetación original, que ofrece una variedad de recursos para 128 especies de aves. La estación funciona mensualmente, anillando tres días seguidos, con un máximo de ocho redes. Hasta ahora se han anillado 478 individuos pertenecientes a 43 especies y casi el 50% de las capturas son migrantes neotropicales. Turdus plumbeus representa el 26% del total de capturas, seguido de Seiurus aurocapilla y Setophaga palmarum. Uno de los resultados más interesantes son los 13 individuos anillados de Limnothlypis swainsonii, una especie considerada rara para el lugar. El 60% de las aves recapturadas son migrantes neotropicales, lo que demuestra el importante papel de los sitios verdes urbanos durante el periodo de residencia invernal. Además, doce individuos migratorios han sido recapturados en temporadas posteriores a su primera captura, lo que añade datos de la altísima fidelidad invernal de especies como Seiurus aurocapilla, Setophaga americana, Geothlypis trichas y Setophaga ruticilla. En el caso de esta última especie, tenemos una historia especialmente curiosa. Un macho adulto fue capturado en febrero de 2022 como parte de los estudios piloto previos a la instalación de la estación. El 17 de enero de 2023, día de la inauguración, fue recapturado,
representando así un auspicioso comienzo para la estación. Este individuo, cariñosamente apodado “Pau-pau”, ha sido recapturado continuamente todos los meses del periodo de residencia invernal (octubre-abril), en ocasiones más de una vez al día. El JBN también cuenta con una de las dos torres Motus activas del país, y el equipo ha colocado 83 radiotransmidores en 18 especies. El personal de la estación quiere agradecer a las decenas de voluntarios que han hecho posible el trabajo, principalmente estudiantes y profesores de la facultad de Biología de la Universidad de La Habana. Su trabajo también ha sido posible gracias al apoyo de Environment and Climate Change Canada, Western University, BirdsCaribbean’s
David S. Lee Fund for the Conservation of Caribbean Birds, el Jardín Botánico Nacional, la Universidad de La Habana, el Instituto para las Poblaciones de Aves y el Observatorio de Aves de Mantiqueira.
Jardín Botánico de La Habana “Quinta de los Molinos”
La Habana, Cuba
Daniela Ventura del Puerto, dvpuerto19@gmail.com
Redes sociales: @grupoecologiadeavesuh
Anilladores: Daniela Ventura, Laura Arañaburo, Ana Laura Hidalgo Gato, Rachel Hernández, Cinthya Pérez, Jean Michel de Jongh y Karen Cornelio
Debido al éxito inicial de la estación del Jardín Botánico Nacional, el equipo del Grupo de Ecología de las Aves de la Universidad de La Habana decidió establecer una segunda estación de anillamiento de esfuerzo constante. En esta ocasión, está situada en el corazón de la ciudad, cerca de la sede de la universidad y de la costa norte de La Habana. La Quinta de los Molinos es un parque urbano de apenas 5 ha, y fue también el primer jardín botánico de la ciudad durante el siglo XIX. Puesta en marcha en abril de 2023, la estación tiene un protocolo similar al de su estación hermana. La única diferencia es que los tres días de monitoreo se distribuyen a lo largo del mes. A pesar de su pequeño tamaño, el lugar es un oasis para las aves,
y especialmente para los migrantes que llegan tras los frentes fríos. Hasta la fecha se han anillado 547 aves que representan a 41 especies, incluidos 12 nuevos registros para el lugar. Cabe destacar la importancia del lugar para los zorzales migratorios durante la migración otoñal. Las tres especies del género Catharus (C. fuscescens, C. ustulatus, C. minimus) y Hylocichla mustelina utilizaron el lugar como sitio de parada. La captura más interesante de la estación fue el segundo registro documentado del Catharus guttatus para Cuba. Otras especies destacadas de la estación son Setophaga citrina, Geothlypis formosa y Piranga rubra. Entre los residentes, los endémicos caribeños como Turdus plumbeus, Ptiloxena atroviolacea y Quiscalus niger son las capturas más frecuentes. La ubicación de la estación en un parque abierto al público y accesible la hace ideal para demostraciones de anillamiento y para educar a la población habanera sobre cuestiones relativas a la conservación de las aves. El equipo ha llevado a cabo varias actividades del Día Mundial de las Aves Migratorias y del Festival de Aves Endémicas del Caribe como parte de su funcionamiento habitual. El Grupo de Ecología de las Aves agradece al personal de la Quinta de los Molinos, al Fondo David S. Lee para la Conservación de las Aves del Caribe de BirdsCaribbean, a Western University Canada, a la Universidad de La Habana y a las docenas de voluntarios que han apoyado y contribuido con su tiempo.
Establecida en 2022, esta estación móvil opera en una mezcla de selva tropical montañosa, manglares, praderas y hábitats urbanos. La estación opera con cinco redes una o dos veces por semana durante periodos establecidos, dando prioridad a los manglares y otros puntos claves durante la migración. Hasta la fecha se han capturado y anillado 925 aves de 41 especies, tanto
paseriformes como playeras. Entre las especies más capturadas figuran Coereba flaveola, Turdus nudigenis, Melanospiza bicolor, Loxigilla noctis, Protonotaria citrea y Parkesia noveboracensis, una mezcla de residentes y migrantes. Ha habido 60 recapturas en total, todas de aves anilladas en la estación, y la recaptura más antigua fue la de un individuo de Turdus nudigenis anillado en enero de 2023 y recapturado en febrero de 2024. Aún más interesante fue la recaptura de un individuo de Parkesia noveboracensis, anillado en enero de 2023, que regresó en noviembre de ese mismo año, lo que ilustra la fidelidad migratoria al lugar. Esta estación está abierta a los visitantes, tanto niños como adultos, y está autofinanciada por el Dr. Carter; también expresa su agradecimiento al Gobierno de Granada por el permiso de anillamiento.
Ecología de la Conservación de Icterus portoricensis
Hacienda La Esperanza, Cañón de San Cristóbal, Puerto Rico
Michael Ocasio, m313@umbc.edu
Anilladores: Kevin Omland, Michelle Moyer y Michael Ocasio
Colaboradores expertos: Adrianne Tossas, Alcides Morales-Peréz, Noelia Nieves-Colón, Alberic Ponce de León Laguna y Miguel CostasSabatier
Este proyecto de investigación a corto plazo sobre Icterus portoricensis comenzó en enero de 2023. El objetivo es comprender y abordar mejor la difícil situación de conservación de esta especie endémica de Puerto Rico. El equipo combina el anillamiento, el marcaje con radiotransmisores y el seguimiento de nidos e individuos para evaluar los efectos a nivel de paisaje sobre las poblaciones. El anillamiento tiene lugar desde mediados de enero a mediados de mayo (una media de 20 días al año) en diversos hábitats, como praderas, bosques caducifolios y secundarios y hábitats suburbanos. Se utilizó una configuración apilada de entre dos a tres redes de niebla, atrayendo a los individuos mediante el canto y la reproducción de llamadas de la especie. El equipo ha anillado 59 aves hasta la fecha y también ha colocado 18 radiotransmisores
Lotek compatibles con Motus para seguir los movimientos de los individuos, evaluar su territorialidad y su supervivencia aparente. El resto de las especies que caen en las redes se liberan sin anillar. Hasta el momento han capturado más de 150 aves, incluidas dos recapturas foráneas de Coereba flaveola. El Proyecto Oriole de Puerto Rico desea agradecer a Para la Naturaleza su apoyo y experiencia, así como los permisos de acceso a los sitios de muestreo. El apoyo financiero de organizaciones como BirdsCaribbean, la Sociedad Ornitológica de Florida, la Sociedad Ornitológica Americana y la Universidad de Maryland, Baltimore County, ha sido también fundamental para facilitar esta investigación.
Estación Boneo Brasso Seco, Observatorio de Aves y Centro de Investigación de Trinidad y Tobago
Esta estación relativamente nueva, iniciada en febrero de 2024 con el objetivo de convertirse en una estación de esfuerzo constante como parte del nuevo Observatorio de Aves de Trinidad y Tobago (TTBO, por sus siglas en inglés), está dirigida por Che y Giselle Ragoonanan. Ellos anillan en la selva tropical de Brasso Seco una media de 24 días al año, con 10 redes. Hasta la fecha, han anillado 351 aves de 55 especies, además de 60 ejemplares no anillados, principalmente colibríes capturados en las primeras horas de la mañana. Las especies más capturadas son Ceratopipra erythrocephala, Coereba flaveola, Turdus albicollis, Euphonia violacea, Manacus manacus, Mionectes oleagineus, Dendrocincla fuliginosa y Chlorophanes spiza. La especie Ceratopipra erythrocephala ostenta el récord de ser la más capturada, así como el de la recaptura más antigua, ya que un individuo fue recapturado siete años después del primer anillamiento, que tuvo lugar durante anteriores esfuerzos informales de anillamiento en el lugar. Además, han habido otras 32 recapturas, de las cuales tres han sido extranjeras. La estación está abierta a los visitantes y a menudo organiza
demostraciones de anillamiento para miembros de la comunidad y grupos universitarios. Estas actividades consisten en una sesión interactiva con un líder principal, designado para interactuar con el público, donde los participantes son guiados a la red de niebla más cercana, reciben una introducción al anillamiento y a la estación, y observan las operaciones de anillamiento. Los Ragoonanans agradecen a los equipos de BirdsCaribbean, Klamath Bird Observatory, Institute of Bird Populations, Environment for the Americas, y al resto del equipo de TTBO: Daveka, Shivam y Alexis.
Estaciones Niplig Trail y Blue Copper Trail, Observatorio de Aves y Centro de Investigación de Trinidad y Tobago
Tobago Main Ridge Forest Reserve, Tobago, Trinidad y Tobago
Daveka Boodram, boodramdaveka@gmail.com
Redes sociales: @ttboresearch
Anilladora: Daveka Boodram
En la vecina isla de Tobago, Daveka Boodram dirige dos estaciones a lo largo de senderos en la Reserva Forestal de Tobago Main Ridge, como parte del Observatorio de Aves de Trinidad y Tobago (TTBO). Desde marzo de 2023, Daveka anilla todos los sábados (si las condiciones del tiempo lo permiten) en un hábitat forestal secundario, utilizando 10 redes de niebla. Hasta la fecha, ha anillado 216 aves y liberado otras 99, de las cuales 91 pertenecen a especies de colibríes. A principios de año se capturaron 8 individuos de Campylopterus ensipennis en un solo día, la especie con el mayor número de capturas. Otras especies comunes son Colaptes rubiginosus, Chiroxiphia pareola, Turdus flavipes, Platyrinchus mystaceus y Cyanerpes cyaneus, para un total de 30 especies. Hasta el momento han tenido 37 recapturas y ninguna extranjera. Las estaciones también participan en actividades de divulgación para grupos locales y han acogido a tres grupos de estudiantes de secundaria entre mayo y junio de 2024. Daveka agradece a la Asamblea de Tobago su apoyo.
Otros
El programa MoSI (Monitoreo de Supervivencia Invernal) del Instituto de Poblaciones de Aves (IBP, por sus siglas en inglés) también opera a través de colaboraciones con organizaciones en el Caribe. El protocolo MoSI implica el uso de redes de esfuerzo constante cada mes durante el periodo de residencia invernal (de noviembre a marzo) u opcionalmente durante todo el año, en una variedad de hábitats. Las estaciones pasadas y presentes que han operado en la región incluyen cuatro en Cuba, y una en Jamaica, Puerto Rico, las Islas Vírgenes de Estados Unidos, Trinidad y Tobago. A lo largo de los años, los colaboradores caribeños han anillado varios miles de aves de más de 100 especies. Puede encontrar más información sobre el programa MoSI en el Caribe en el sitio birdpop.org.
Por último, también nos gustaría mencionar varias estaciones de anillamiento planificadas por miembros de la CBBN, que esperan empezar a funcionar a finales de 2024 o principios de 2025. Entre ellas se incluyen la estación de campo de la Universidad de las Bahamas Norte, en Gran Bahama, a cargo del Dr. Ancilleno Davis; tres en Puerto Rico: la Reserva Natural Hacienda La Esperanza por Alcides Morales-Pérez, el Área Natural Protegida Hacienda Margarita por Omar Monzón (ambas gestionadas por Para La Naturaleza), y el Parque Nacional Julio Enrique Monagas por Dayamiris Candelario-Maysonet; una en Antigua y Barbuda dirigida por el Grupo de Concientización Ambiental; y otra estación de campo en Granada por Zoya Buckmire. Estas dos últimas estaciones seguirán sumándose a los esfuerzos de capacitación de BirdsCaribbean y la CBBN, que celebró su tercer taller regional de anillamiento de aves en Granada en 2024 y está planeando otros talleres locales tanto en Antigua como en Granada para principios de 2025.
El futuro de la CBBN
Como este informe ha demostrado, el anillamiento de aves en el Caribe está vibrante y activo, con un futuro prometedor guiado por la reciente
Red de Anilladores del Caribe (CBBN). Dado que la red se encuentra aún en su fase inicial, agradecemos y alentamos la colaboración de todos los anilladores y ornitólogos que trabajan en el Caribe, independientemente de su país de origen y procedencia. El objetivo es crear colaboraciones y seguir aumentando la capacidad local que garantice la conservación a largo plazo de nuestras aves. Las aves conectan nuestro mundo de manera profunda y, si queremos protegerlas, debemos aprovechar las lecciones que nos ofrecen.
Algunos de los objetivos futuros de la CBBN incluyen:
La definición de protocolos de anillamiento específicos para el Caribe, tanto para el anillamiento durante todo el año, centrado en la fenología de las aves residentes, como para el anillamiento durante los periodos migratorios.
La sincronización del periodo de anillamiento durante la estación migratoria para permitir la comparación de la composición de la comunidad entre sitios/islas (similar al censo regional de aves acuáticas del Caribe).
La estandarización de los datos morfológicos recopilados para comparar las poblaciones residentes entre islas.
La recopilación de datos sobre la extensión y fenología de la muda de las aves residentes, empezando por las especies o géneros comunes presentes en la mayoría o en todas las islas.
La creación de informes periódicos que resuman el esfuerzo de anillamiento anual en la región (similares a este informe de la NABB).
A manera de conclusión, nos gustaría dar las gracias a todas las estaciones y gestores de proyectos que amablemente respondieron a nuestra encuesta e hicieron posible este primer informe sobre el anillamiento de aves en el Caribe. Esperamos que en futuras ediciones podamos destacar proyectos aún más increíbles. Los compiladores de este informe agradecen también a la coordinadora de la CBBN, Holly Garrod, y a los editores de la NABB, Claire Stuyck y Walter Sakai, por sus acertados comentarios que han mejorado considerablemente la calidad de este reporte.
President Ariane Giudicelli
email:
Secretary email:
Officers
1st V.Pres
email: Arianeg01@hotmail.
Maren Gimpel maren.gimpel@gmail.com
Treasurer Andy Thiede email: easternbirdbanding@gmail.com
Membership & Back issue Elaine Mease email: measede@enter.net
2nd V.Pres
Aaron Given
Councilors
Laura-Marie Koitsch
David Brinker
Margaret Rohde
Alison Van Keuren agiven@kiawahisland.com
Annie Lindsay
Rebecca Esch
Todd Alleger
Alison Fetterman
Nick Liadis
3rd V.Pres
email: clifford.berek@gmail.com
LindsayA@carnegiemnh.org
CliffordBerek
email:
Terms Exp. 2025
Terms Exp. 2026
Gigi Gerben
Cailin O'Connor
Maggie MacNeil
Robin Schweikart
Terms Exp. 2027
Imm. Past Presidents:
Lisa Kiziuk
Please visit our website or contact the Membership Coordinator for rates and application form
www.easternbirdbanding.org
Officers
President David Cimprich email: vireo7@yahoo.com
Secretary Steven Gabrey email: swgabrey@gmail.com
Treasurer Mike Eickman & Memb.Sec. email:
redtail15@aol.com
1st V.Pres. Paula Cimprich email: paula.Cimprich@gmail.com
2nd V.Pres. Anthony Roting email: tony.rothering@llc
Board of Directors (PastPres.)Veron"Butch"Tezlaff Erik Johnson (2021)
Roger Everhart (2023)2nd term
Mike Bishop (2021)
Amy Wilms (2024)1st term
Linda Tossing (2022)2nd term
Robert Placier (2022)1st term
Back Issues: Steven Gabrey swgabrey@gmail.com
Please visit our website or contact the Membership Coordinator for rates and application form www.Inlandbirdbanding.org
President & Treasurer
Danielle Kaschube
Officers
1st V.Pres C.J. Ralph
email: cjralph@humboldtl.
2nd V. Pres. Vacant
email:
dkaschube@ birdpop.org
Secretary Cyndi Smith
email: cyndi.smith9@gmail.com
Membership Coordinator
email:
Julie Hovis jahovis711@gmail.com
Please visit our website or contact the Membership Coordinator for rates and application form
www.westernbirdbanding.org
Immediate Past Pres. Holly Garrod email: hmgarrod26@gmail.com
Members at Large Board Mmbers
Adam Hannuksela ahannuk@gmail.com
Jason Kitting jason1991.bnow@gmail.com
Allison R. P. Nelson nelson.allison@gmail.com
Tania Romero t41romero@gmail.com
Claire Stuyck clairestuyck@gmail.com
Colin Woolley colin.woolley@birdconservancy.
Geographic coverage of Eastern, Inland, and Western Bird Banding Associations is shown on the map at left. Send membership applications, subscription inquiries, and manuscripts to the association representing your geographic area.
CHANGE OF ADDRESS? Inform the Treasurer or Membership Chairperson of your association (EBBA, IBBA, WBBA) as soon as possible or at least six weeks in advance of a planned change of address. Delivery of North American Bird Bander cannot be guaranteed unless changes of address are received promptly.
93 A New Angle on Using Mist-nets to Capture Wintering Grassland Birds. John A. Muller, Erin H. Strasser, Nuwanthika Nagode, Jeremy D. Ross
103 Survival and Occupancy of Red-bellied Woopeckers in a Fragmented Forested Landscape in North-Central Ohio, 1995-2005. David A. Zuwerink, James S. Marshall
