Raptor Identification Guide Usually Soars for Long Periods Without Flapping Wings for Birds Commonly Seen in the Dark Brown Wings and Body
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Life History Account for Peregrine Falcon
California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Interagency Wildlife Task Group PEREGRINE FALCON Falco peregrinus Family: FALCONIDAE Order: FALCONIFORMES Class: AVES B129 Written by: C. Polite, J. Pratt Reviewed by: L. Kiff Edited by: L. Kiff DISTRIBUTION, ABUNDANCE, AND SEASONALITY Very uncommon breeding resident, and uncommon as a migrant. Active nesting sites are known along the coast north of Santa Barbara, in the Sierra Nevada, and in other mountains of northern California. In winter, found inland throughout the Central Valley, and occasionally on the Channel Islands. Migrants occur along the coast, and in the western Sierra Nevada in spring and fall. Breeds mostly in woodland, forest, and coastal habitats. Riparian areas and coastal and inland wetlands are important habitats yearlong, especially in nonbreeding seasons. Population has declined drastically in recent years (Thelander 1975,1976); 39 breeding pairs were known in California in 1981 (Monk 1981). Decline associated mostly with DDE contamination. Coastal population apparently reproducing poorly, perhaps because of heavier DDE load received from migrant prey. The State has established 2 ecological reserves to protect nesting sites. A captive rearing program has been established to augment the wild population, and numbers are increasing (Monk 1981). SPECIFIC HABITAT REQUIREMENTS Feeding: Swoops from flight onto flying prey, chases in flight, rarely hunts from a perch. Takes a variety of birds up to ducks in size; occasionally takes mammals, insects, and fish. In Utah, Porter and White (1973) reported that 19 nests averaged 5.3 km (3.3 mi) from the nearest foraging marsh, and 12.2 km (7.6 mi) from the nearest marsh over 130 ha (320 ac) in area. -
Regional Specialties Western
REGIONAL SPECIALTIES WESTERN OSPREY 21 - 26” length SOUTHERN . FERRUGINOUS . Eagle sized; clean, white body. HAWK Black wrist marks. 20 - 26” length . Glides with kink (M) in long, narrow wings. MISSISSIPPI . Largest buteo; eagle-like. KITE . Pale below with dark leggings. 13 - 15” length . Mostly white tail; 3 color morphs. Long, pointed wings; slim body. Light body; dark wings; narrow, black tail. Not to scale. Buoyant, acrobatic flight. NORTHERN HARRIER 16 - 20” length PRAIRIE FALCON 14 - 18” length . Long, narrow wings and tail; sharp dihedral. Size of Peregrine; much paler plumage. Brown above, streaked brown below – female. Narrow moustache; spotted breast; long tail. Gray above, pale below with black wing tips – male. Dark armpits and partial wing linings. WING PROFILE IMMATURE BALD EAGLE BALD EAGLE GOLDEN EAGLE . Immature birds vary GOLDEN EAGLE greatly in the amount 27 to 35” length of white spotting on body and wings. White showing on wing linings is surely a Bald Eagle. BALD EAGLE . Like large buteo, curvy wings. Head protrudes much less than tail. Slight dihedral to wing profile. NOTE: Some hawks soar and glide with their wings raised above the horizontal, called a dihedral. 27 to 35” length . Head and tail length similar. Long, flat wings. Straight leading edge to wings. 24 to 28” length This guide developed by Paul Carrier is the property of the Hawk Migration Association of North America (HMANA). HMANA is TURKey VUltUre a membership-based, non-profit organization committed to the . Dark wing linings with light flight feathers. conservation of raptors through the scientific study, enjoyment, and . Small head; long tail; sharp dihedral. -
Ferruginous Hawk Buteo Regalis
Wyoming Species Account Ferruginous Hawk Buteo regalis REGULATORY STATUS USFWS: Listing Denied; Migratory Bird USFS R2: Sensitive USFS R4: No special status Wyoming BLM: Sensitive State of Wyoming: Protected Bird CONSERVATION RANKS USFWS: Bird of Conservation Concern WGFD: NSS4 (Cb), Tier II WYNDD: G4, S4S5B/S3N Wyoming Contribution: MEDIUM IUCN: Least Concern PIF Continental Concern Score: 11 STATUS AND RANK COMMENTS Ferruginous Hawk (Buteo regalis) was petitioned for protection under the Federal Endangered Species Act in 1991 but was denied listing based on lack of evidence 1. The Wyoming Natural Diversity Database has assigned Ferruginous Hawk a state breeding conservation rank ranging from S4 (Apparently Secure) to S5 (Secure) because of uncertainty about the abundance and population trends of the species in Wyoming. Additionally, Ferruginous Hawk is assigned a different state conservation rank in the non-breeding season due to much lower abundance and proportion of area occupied in the state in the winter. NATURAL HISTORY Taxonomy: Ferruginous Hawk is monotypic. No subspecies are currently recognized 2. Description: Identification of Ferruginous Hawk is possible in the field. Ferruginous Hawk is the largest North American hawk in the genus Buteo, with a wingspan of about 142 cm and measuring 56– 69 cm from bill to tail 2, 3. Both sexes are large and heavy with broad, long, pointed wings and have a large head and bill, long gape, and robust chest; however, females are slightly larger and notably heavier than males 2. Plumage is identical between sexes but varies between light and dark morph individuals. Light morphs comprise 90% of all individuals, but dark morphs are present range-wide 2, 3. -
Estimations Relative to Birds of Prey in Captivity in the United States of America
ESTIMATIONS RELATIVE TO BIRDS OF PREY IN CAPTIVITY IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA by Roger Thacker Department of Animal Laboratories The Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio 43210 Introduction. Counts relating to birds of prey in captivity have been accomplished in some European countries; how- ever, to the knowledge of this author no such information is available in the United States of America. The following paper consistsof data related to this subject collected during 1969-1970 from surveys carried out in many different direc- tions within this country. Methods. In an attempt to obtain as clear a picture as pos- sible, counts were divided into specific areas: Research, Zoo- logical, Falconry, and Pet Holders. It became obvious as the project advanced that in some casesthere was overlap from one area to another; an example of this being a falconer working with a bird both for falconry and research purposes. In some instances such as this, the author has used his own judgment in placing birds in specific categories; in other in- stances received information has been used for this purpose. It has also become clear during this project that a count of "pets" is very difficult to obtain. Lack of interest, non-coop- eration, or no available information from animal sales firms makes the task very difficult, as unfortunately, to obtain a clear dispersal picture it is from such sourcesthat informa- tion must be gleaned. However, data related to the importa- tion of birds' of prey as recorded by the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife is included, and it is felt some observa- tions can be made from these figures. -
A Comparison of Raptor Densities and Habitat Use in Kansas Cropland and Rangeland Ecosystems
j. RaptorRes. 34(3):203-209 ¸ 2000 The Raptor ResearchFoundation, Inc. A COMPARISON OF RAPTOR DENSITIES AND HABITAT USE IN KANSAS CROPLAND AND RANGELAND ECOSYSTEMS CHRISTOPHER K. WILLIAMS Departmentof WildlifeEcology, University of Wisconsin,Russell Labs, 1630 LindenDrive, Madison, WI 53706-1598 U.S.A. ROGER D. APPLEGATE Departmentof Wildlifeand Parks,Research and SurveyOffice, P.O. Box 1525, Emporia,KS 66801-1525 U.S.A. R. SCOTT LUTZ AND DONALD H. RUSCH Departmentof WildlifeEcology, University of Wisconsin,Russell Labs, 1630 LindenDrive, Madison, WI 53706-1598 U.S.A. ABSTRACT.--Wecounted raptors on line transectsalong roads to assessdensities, species diversity, and habitat selection of winter raptors between cropland and rangeland habitats in eastern Kansas.We conductedcounts every 2 wk betweenSeptember-March 1994-98. Speciesdiversity indices did not differ between the two habitats (P -- 0.15). We calculateddensity estimates and cover type selectionfor Red- tailed Hawks (Buteojamaicensis),Northern Harriers (Circuscyaneus), and American Kestrels(Falco sparv- erius).Red-tailed Hawks and Northern Harrier densitieswere higher in cropland, while kestreldensities did not differ betweenthe two habitats.All three speciesacross both habitatshad a general preference for idleland habitat. We believe three factors could explain the higher raptor densitiesin cropland: increasedprey abundance,increased visibility of prey associatedwith harvestedagriculture fields, and/ or a higher relative amount of preferred hunting habitat. K•¾WORDS: NorthernHarri• -
Raptor Nest–Site Use in Relation to the Proximity of Coalbed–Methane Development
Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 41.2 (2018) 227 Raptor nest–site use in relation to the proximity of coalbed–methane development J. D. Carlisle, L. E. Sanders, A. D. Chalfoun, K. G. Gerow Carlisle, J. D., Sanders, L. E., Chalfoun, A. D., Gerow, K. G., 2018. Raptor nest–site use in relation to the proximity of coalbed–methane development. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation, 41.2: 227–243, https://doi. org/10.32800/abc.2018.41.0227 Abstract Raptor nest–site use in relation to the proximity of coalbed–methane development. Energy development such as coalbed–methane (CBM) extraction is a major land use with largely unknown consequences for many animal species. Some raptor species may be especially vulnerable to habitat changes due to energy development given their ecological requirements and population trajectories. Using 12,977 observations of 3,074 nests of 12 raptor species across nine years (2003–2011) in the Powder River Basin, Wyoming, USA, we evaluated relationships between raptor nest–site use and CBM development. Our objectives were to determine temporal trends in nest–use rates, and whether nest–site use was related to the proximity of CBM development. Across the study area, nest–use rates varied across species and years in a non–linear fashion. We developed a novel randomization test to assess differences in use between nests at developed and undeveloped sites, while controlling for annual variation in nest–site use. Red–tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis), burrowing owls (Athene cunicularia), and long–eared owls (Asio otus) used nests in undeveloped areas more than nests in developed areas (i.e. -
Syringeal Morphology and the Phylogeny of the Falconidae’
The Condor 96:127-140 Q The Cooper Ornithological Society 1994 SYRINGEAL MORPHOLOGY AND THE PHYLOGENY OF THE FALCONIDAE’ CAROLES.GRIFFITHS Departmentof Ornithology,American Museum of NaturalHistory and Departmentef Biology, City Collegeof City Universityof New York, Central Park West at 79th St., New York, NY 10024 Abstract. Variation in syringealmorphology was studied to resolve the relationshipsof representativesof all of the recognized genera of falcons, falconets, pygmy falcons, and caracarasin the family Falconidae. The phylogenyderived from thesedata establishesthree major cladeswithin the family: (1) the Polyborinae, containingDaptrius, Polyborus, Milvago and Phalcoboenus,the four genera of caracaras;(2) the Falconinae, consistingof the genus Falco, Polihierax (pygmy falcons),Spiziapteryx and Microhierax (falconets)and Herpetothe- res (Laughing Falcon); and (3) the genus Micrastur(forest falcons) comprising the third, basal clade. Two genera, Daptriusand Polihierax,are found to be polyphyletic. The phy- logeny inferred from these syringealdata do not support the current division of the family into two subfamilies. Key words: Falconidae;phylogeny; systematics; syrinx; falcons; caracaras. INTRODUCTION 1. The Polyborinae. This includes seven gen- Phylogenetic relationships form the basis for re- era: Daptrius, Milvago, Polyborus and Phalco- searchin comparative and evolutionary biology boenus(the caracaras),Micrastur (forest falcons), (Page1 and Harvey 1988, Gittleman and Luh Herpetotheres(Laughing Falcon) and Spiziapter- 1992). Patterns drawn from cladogramsprovide yx (Spot-winged Falconet). the blueprints for understanding biodiversity, 2. The Falconinae. This includes three genera: biogeography,behavior, and parasite-hostcospe- Falco, Polihierax (pygmy falcons) and Micro- ciation (Vane-Wright et al. 199 1, Mayden 1988, hierax (falconets). Page 1988, Coddington 1988) and are one of the Inclusion of the caracarasin the Polyborinae key ingredients for planning conservation strat- is not questioned (Sharpe 1874, Swann 1922, egies(Erwin 199 1, May 1990). -
Masters of the Air (PDF)
What are birds of prey? Birds of prey, or raptors, are amazing animals. They have large eyes that face forward, powerful talons and a hooked beak. Their food includes amphibians, birds, insects, mammals and reptiles. Scientists recognize eight major groups of birds as “birds of prey.” Buteos (large hawks) fly on wide, slow-beating wings which allow them to soar and search for prey. The short-eared owl (Asio flammeus) is endangered in They perch on tree limbs and fence or telephone posts. Illinois. It is a rare winter and summer resident in marshes, meadows, fields and parks. This owl has Accipters (true hawks) have a long tail (like a rudder) and short rounded wings. When flying, they very small ear tufts and a golden-brown body with make several quick wing beats and then glide. True hawks are aggressive and very quick. dark marks on its chest, belly and back. Dark rings circle the owl’s bright yellow eyes. It is 13-17 inches Ospreys can be recognized by wings that appear to be “bent,” or angled, when they fly. Found near long and has a wingspan of 38-44 inches. The large bodies of water, they dive feet-first to catch fishes. short-eared owl feeds on rodents, insects and Falcons have long, thin, pointed wings, a short bill and a streamlined body. They can fly very fast. small birds during the late afternoon and early evening. It is known to play dead when Eagles are larger than hawks and have longer wings. Their bill is almost as long as their head. -
Iowa Wildlife Action Plan Appendix 1
IOWA WILDLIFE ACTION PLAN APPENDIX 1 - APPENDIX 21 187 APPENDIX 1 . The IWAP - A Plan to Plan Planning Schedule The target date for a final review draft of a State Comprehensive Wildlife Plan for Iowa is June 1, 2005. Meeting this deadline will allow for adequate review and approval by the Director and the Natural Resource Commission prior to the September 20, 2005 deadline. Developing a more detailed planning schedule will be one of the first tasks of the steering committee in coordination with the plan author. Plan Contributors Plan Director – Richard Bishop – Iowa DNR Responsibilities 1) Participate in committee meetings 2) Review all drafts of the plan 3) Approve all press releases and plan marketing plans 4) Review and communicate progress to Division Administrator, Director and NRC commissioners Plan Coordinator – Terry Little, Iowa DNR Responsibilities 1) Assemble Steering Committee 2) Participate in all committees 3) Identify and contract with a meeting facilitator 4) Identify and contract with plan author 5) Coordinate review and editing of all drafts of the plan 6) Coordinate all press releases and plan marketing 7) Report progress, problems and other developments to DNR administrators Steering Committee Chair – Doug Harr, Iowa DNR Responsibilities 1) Convene and coordinate all steering committee meetings 2) Keep steering members and sub-committees focused, on task and on schedule 3) Consult with coordinator and committee members to solve problems 4) Plan, schedule and coordinate advisory committee meetings Steering Committee Members – Key representatives from Iowa’s conservation professionals 1) Dale Garner (DNR): a. 2003-04: Coordination with Federal plans (PPJV, etc.) b. -
Town of Superior Raptor Monitoring 2019 Summary
Town of Superior Raptor Monitoring 2019 Summary Sponsored by the Open Space Advisory Committee Introduction: In late 2018, the Town of Superior Open Space Advisory Committee initiated a program to monitor the presence and activity of raptors (eagles, hawks, falcons, and owls) in and near Superior. The program has several goals: determining what raptor species are present in Superior, learning what areas raptors use at different times of the year, monitoring any nesting activity, working to prevent unnecessary disturbance to raptors, identifying habitats to protect, and providing relevant education to the Town’s residents. Nine volunteer observers, all Superior residents, monitored seven general locations approximately weekly during the 2019 nesting season and identified eight species of raptors in the target areas. Some of these species use open spaces in Superior only intermittently, for hunting or migration. However, monitors determined that four species nested in or adjacent to Superior in 2019; ten nests were located and at least nine of them produced fledglings. The nesting species were Great Horned Owl, Red-tailed Hawk, Cooper’s Hawk, and American Kestrel. Background: Southeast Boulder County, and especially the prairie dog colonies along Rock Creek west of Hwy 36, historically supported significant densities of several raptor species, especially during winter. As late as the mid-1980s, winter bird counts showed that our area had one of the highest populations of Ferruginous Hawks in the entire U.S. [3,4]. With the loss of open space due to increasing development in the 1990s and the additional reduction of prairie dogs due to intermittent plague epidemics, populations of large open-country raptors in Figure 1 - Cooper's Hawk by Barbara Pennell and near Superior declined precipitously [2]. -
Ferruginous Hawk Facts
Threatened Species ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Ferruginous Hawk (Buteo regalis) State status: Threatened, 1983 Federal status: species of concern Recovery Plan: State, 1996 The ferruginous hawk is the largest North American buteo. Adults have a wingspread of 48- 56 in, with females averaging larger and heavier than males. Ferruginous hawks inhabit semi- Figure 1. Ferruginous hawk (photos, left to right, by Jim Watson, and arid, and prairie ecosystems of Jerry Liquori) western North America. Nests are built on cliffs, rock outcrops, small trees, transmission line towers, and artificial platforms. Territories often contain more than one nest, which allows the pair to relocate if disturbed early in the nesting cycle. Washington state is on the northwestern edge of the species breeding range (Bechard and Schmutz 1995). In Washington, nests have been found in steppe or shrub-steppe habitat. Franklin and Benton counties together host about 60% of the ferruginous hawk territories, and Grant, WallaWalla, Adams, and Yakima counties also have had 13 or more territories each (Richardson 1996). Population status. The ferruginous hawk population in North America is thought to be stable or to have declined somewhat in recent years. However, Alberta, which has had one of the largest concentrations of nesting ferruginous hawks listed them as endangered in 2006. Washington historically supported a substantial population (Richardson et al. 2001). Of 241 cumulative known total territories, the highest number occupied since surveys began was 69 in 1996. Increasing fragmentation of shrubsteppe habitats from agricultural conversion and residential development has been a factor contributing to the decline and listing of the ferruginous hawk as a state Threatened Species. -
Appendix 1- Species of Greatest Conservation Need Michigan’S Wildlife Action Plan 2015- 2025
Appendix 1- Species of Greatest Conservation Need Michigan’s Wildlife Action Plan 2015- 2025 Cover Photos Credits Habitat – MNFI, Yu Man Lee Cerulean Warbler – Roger Eriksson Category Common Name Scientific Name Inclusion Rationale Amphibians Blanchard’s cricket frog Acris crepitans Expert review (2005); blanchardi Technical Advisory Committee for the T&E list revision recommended this species to remain listed as Threatened (2014). There are current records across the species historical range, the southern third of the Lower Peninsula, but abundance is unknown and only historical records exist for several central counties. This species should stay listed as state threatened due to limited area of occupancy and declines. (TAC 2014) Amphibians Boreal chorus frog Pseudacris triseriata Expert review (2005); maculata Technical Advisory Committee for the T&E list revision recommended this species to remain listed as Special Concern (2014). The historical range of this species was restricted to Isle Royale; although the species appears to remain intact, abundance is unknown. Amphibians Marbled Salamander Ambystoma opacum Expert review (2005); Technical Advisory Committee for the T&E list revision recommended this species to be delisted from Endangered to Special Concern (2014). The historical range is limited to a small portion of the southwest Lower Peninsula and represents the northernmost extent of the species' range. The current distribution and abundance are not known, and no observations have been reported since the 1980s. It is unknown if this species is still present in Michigan as field research has been extremely limited in the small area of Category Common Name Scientific Name Inclusion Rationale known occupancy.