DOCSLIB.ORG

The Marsh Wren Braddock Bay Bird Observatory

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Marsh Wren Braddock Bay Bird Observatory Fall 2016 www.bbbo.org The Marsh Wren Braddock Bay Bird Observatory A non-profit organization dedicated to ornithological research, education, and conservation. Feather by Feather ave you ever wondered what our banders are molt begins in the nest, and for others it takes place weeks looking at when they peer so intently at a bird’s tail to months after fledging. While the flight feathers of the or wing, smoothing the feathers or fanning them wing and tail are typically not replaced during this molt, Hout for a better view? The simple answer is . molt! the body plumage is replaced with feathers much closer in appearance to adult feathers. All About Molt At the end of the breeding season, adult passerines in North America undergo a complete molt of all body and flight In addition to determining a bird’s appearance, feathers feathers, resulting in a uniform coat of feathers termed the serve many important functions including insulation from “basic plumage”. Some species have an additional molt - the elements and flight control. Feathers wear out over time, typically in the spring - to prepare for the breeding season. and so all birds replace their feathers in predictable patterns This molt, called the “prelternate molt”, is typically not on an annual cycle. The process of feather replacement is complete and may involve only a few feathers on the body called “molt.” and wing. Birds like ducks and geese are covered with fuzzy downy feathers when they hatch, but passerines hatch essentially Juvenal Feathers Tell the Tale featherless. They have, or may acquire, a sparse coat of natal down but these wispy feathers are quickly replaced Juvenal feathers are different than their adult counterparts. by the bird’s juvenal plumage. This plumage tends to be They are often thin and narrow, they are more loosely loosely textured and is often quite different in appearance textured, they wear and fade more quickly, and they may from that of the adults. have a different color or shape. Because most passerines retain at least some juvenal feathers for an entire year, we The juvenal body plumage is typically short-lived in are often able to tell that birds are young by confirming passerines. All North American passerines replace some or presence of those feathers. So - when we are peering over all of their juvenal plumage within the first year of life in a a bird’s wing and tail, we are searching for evidence of molt called the “preformative molt”. For some species, this juvenal plumage! Progression of molt in a Yellow Warbler. The far left photo shows a bird in juvenal plumage. Photo 2 shows the start of the preformative molt with a few pinfeathers on the wing. Photos 3 and 4 show the preformative molt progressing along the face, wing and breast. Molt Limits The photo on the opposite page top left is the wing of a second year Magnolia Warbler. The bird has gone through its prejuvenal, preformative, and prealternate molt - and the wing shows feathers from all three generations! The fluffy white secondary wing coverts close to the bird’s body are alternate feathers; the blackish secondary wing coverts and the small rounded alula feather are formative feathers, and the brownish primary coverts, two pointy alula feathers, and all the primaries and secondaries are juvenal feathers. When we look at a wing, we are often looking for contrasts in feather generations - especially between juvenal and formative feathers - called “molt limits.” When we call a bird a hatch year or second year by molt limit, you’ll know we’re looking at a wing like this! Feather Shape The two photos on the top and middle right of this page show two Lincoln’s Sparrow tails. Both birds were captured on the same fall day, but the top tail shows juvenal feathers belonging to a hatch year bird and the bottom tail shows basic feathers belonging to an after hatch year bird. Notice how the young (juvenal) feathers are more narrow and pointed than the adult (basic) feathers. Sometimes the contrast is subtle, and the shape differences we are looking for can vary from species to species . but when we fan the tail we are usually looking for evidence of pointy, narrow juvenal feathers. Feather Wear The photo to the immediate right shows two Chipping Sparrows captured in the summer, just before their prebasic molt. Both birds are adults, but because of the condition of the feathers of the two birds, we can tell that the bird on the left is younger than the bird on the right. The bird on the left still has juvenal feathers which have become extremely faded, worn, chipped and nicked over time. The bird on the right’s feathers, by contrast, are still lustrous and in fairly decent condition with minimal fading and wear. These differences show up in the wing and tail, and they are often great clues to the age of the bird. Progression of molt in a Yellow Warbler. The far left photo shows a bird in juvenal plumage. Photo 2 shows the start of the preformative molt with a few Photo 5 shows a bird in formative plumage with just a few remaining juvenal feathers, and photo 6 shows an adult bird in the spring after undergoing a pinfeathers on the wing. Photos 3 and 4 show the preformative molt progressing along the face, wing and breast. prelternate molt. All photos on this page by Andrea Patterson, except for Yellow Warbler photos 2 and 4 which were taken by Samantha Gonzales. Common Grackle in its 8th year; a Blue Jay in its 7th year; a Common Grackle in its 6th year; and two American Fall Banding Redstarts, one American Robin, one Gray Catbird, one Red-eyed Vireo, and one Yellow Warbler all in their 5th years. The 8th-year Common Grackle was originally 2015 banded by Emily Runnels in 2009 and the 7th-year Blue Jay by Leanna Twohig in 2010. he thirtieth consecutive year of fall migration There were record-high numbers banded of 12 species monitoring at the Kaiser-Manitou Beach Banding including 24 Downy Woodpecker (previous record high Station was carried out for 96 days between 20 Jul 21), 14 Blue-gray Gnatcatcher (8), 33 Veery (28), 17 Tand 20 Nov 2015. We lost two days in September and Wood Thrush (11), 363 Gray Catbird (290), 34 Northern two in October due to inclement weather. 4609 birds Waterthrush (29), 150 American Redstart (107), 23 of 87 species and one hybrid form were banded, falling Northern Parula (8), 8 Scarlet Tanager (3), 2 Brown- short of Fall 2014’s total by 169 birds. Four Ruby-throated headed Cowbird (1), 18 Baltimore Oriole (13), and 19 Hummingbirds were banded, and an additional 32 Ruby- Common Redpoll (12). European Starling was missing for throated Hummingbirds were released unbanded. There the first time since 2006, after being banded in 19 of the Fall 2015Fall Banding Report were no new species for the fall list; the fall cumulative past 29 seasons, Eastern Towhee was also missing after total remains at 125 species of 129 forms. A total of being banded in 19 of the last 29 seasons (including every 17,114 net hours of banding resulted in a capture rate of year from 1999-2013), and House Finch was missing after 26.9 birds per 100 net hours, compared with 28.9 birds being banded in 23 of the last 29 years. per 100 net hours in Fall 2014 and 29.5 birds per 100 net hours in Fall 2013. Recoveries of Banded Birds The busiest day was 27 Oct when 178 birds of 13 species A Sharp-shinned Hawk banded on 9 May 2007 as an SY-M were banded in 174 net hours (102.3 b/100nh). On that was captured and released alive on 14 Oct 2015 by David day, 42.1% of the birds banded were Pine Siskins and Okines at Prince Edward Point, located on the north shore 41.0% were American Goldfinches. The second busiest of Lake Ontario. A Cooper’s Hawk banded on 18 Oct day was 23 Oct when 154 birds of 16 species were banded. 2012 as a HY-M was captured and released alive on 8 Jan The predominant species on that day was Pine Siskin at 2015 by BBRR bander Tim Willis, 3.1 miles ENE of Hilton. 93 bands, representing 60.4% of the birds banded. There were a total of 11 days on which 100+ birds were banded. The greatest species diversity occurred on 14 Sep when Education and Events 31 species were banded. 97.0% of the newly banded birds Delaina LeBlanc (Thibodoux, LA), Neil Multack (San were able to be aged more specifically than “unknown”; of Pedro, CA), and Jed Pitre (Thibodoux, LA) participated in those, 86.5% were hatch-year birds. our first summer Advanced Bander Workshop. Marygrace We recaptured 1494 previously banded birds. Of these Barber (Jamaica Plain, MA), Andrea Centola (Rochester, recaptures, 63 returned from a previous season at the main NY), Emily Pierce (Syracuse, NY), Krista Rozanski Kaiser-Manitou Beach banding station or the K-MB MAPS (Manlius, NY), Andy Thiede (Berlin, CT), and Heather station. Most birds that return from previous seasons are Williams (Amherst, NY) all completed our Fall 2015 local birds that summer or winter in the area. This year, bander training class. Michael Armstrong (Endwell, NY) the returns represented sixteen locally breeding species completed a summer independent-study banding course, including White-breasted Nuthatch and Carolina Wren. and Maddie Sutton and Joe Sanders (Hobart and William 44% of the returning birds had originally been banded as Smith Colleges, Geneva, NY) completed one in the fall.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Supplemental Information for the Marian's Marsh Wren Biological
    Supplemental Information for the Marian’s Marsh Wren Biological Status Review Report The following pages contain peer reviews received from selected peer reviewers, comments received during the public comment period, and the draft report that was reviewed before the final report was completed March 31, 2011 Table of Contents Peer review #1 from Tylan Dean ................................................................................... 3 Peer review #2 from Paul Sykes.................................................................................... 4 Peer review #3 from Sally Jue ....................................................................................... 5 Peer review #4 from Don Kroodsman ........................................................................... 9 Peer review #5 from Craig Parenteau ........................................................................ 10 Copy of the Marian’s Marsh Wren BSR draft report that was sent out for peer review ........................................................................................................................... 11 Supplemental Information for the Marian’s Marsh Wren 2 Peer review #1 from Tylan Dean From: [email protected] To: Imperiled Cc: Delany, Michael Subject: Re: FW: Marian"s marsh wren BSR report Date: Thursday, January 27, 2011 10:38:25 PM Attachments: 20110126 Dean Peer Review of Draft Worthington"s Marsh Wren Biological Status Review.docx 20110126 Dean Peer Review of Draft Marian"s Marsh Wren Biological Status Review.docx Here are both of my
    [Show full text]
  • B a N I S T E R I A
    B A N I S T E R I A A JOURNAL DEVOTED TO THE NATURAL HISTORY OF VIRGINIA ISSN 1066-0712 Published by the Virginia Natural History Society The Virginia Natural History Society (VNHS) is a nonprofit organization dedicated to the dissemination of scientific information on all aspects of natural history in the Commonwealth of Virginia, including botany, zoology, ecology, archaeology, anthropology, paleontology, geology, geography, and climatology. The society’s periodical Banisteria is a peer-reviewed, open access, online-only journal. Submitted manuscripts are published individually immediately after acceptance. A single volume is compiled at the end of each year and published online. The Editor will consider manuscripts on any aspect of natural history in Virginia or neighboring states if the information concerns a species native to Virginia or if the topic is directly related to regional natural history (as defined above). Biographies and historical accounts of relevance to natural history in Virginia also are suitable for publication in Banisteria. Membership dues and inquiries about back issues should be directed to the Co-Treasurers, and correspondence regarding Banisteria to the Editor. For additional information regarding the VNHS, including other membership categories, annual meetings, field events, pdf copies of papers from past issues of Banisteria, and instructions for prospective authors visit http://virginianaturalhistorysociety.com/ Editorial Staff: Banisteria Editor Todd Fredericksen, Ferrum College 215 Ferrum Mountain Road Ferrum, Virginia 24088 Associate Editors Philip Coulling, Nature Camp Incorporated Clyde Kessler, Virginia Tech Nancy Moncrief, Virginia Museum of Natural History Karen Powers, Radford University Stephen Powers, Roanoke College C. L. Staines, Smithsonian Environmental Research Center Copy Editor Kal Ivanov, Virginia Museum of Natural History Copyright held by the author(s).
    [Show full text]
  • Breeding Biology of the Long-Billed Marsh Wren
    Vol. 67 BREEDING BIOLOGY OF THE LONG-BILLED MARSH WREN BY JARED VERNER Although much of the life history of the Long-billed Marsh Wren (Telmatodytes pulustris) has been described (see especially Welter, 1935 ; Bent, 1948; and Kale, MS), most aspects have not been quantified adequately to permit analysis of geo- graphical variation between populations, Such variation often leads to insights into the ecology of a species which would otherwise be impossible. This paper presents comparative data on birds from two populations in Washington State, one (T. p. paludicola) at Seattle, the other (T. p. plesius) at Turnbull National Wildlife Refuge, 15 miles south of Spokane and 22.5 miles due east of Seattle (fig. 1). Other aspects of this study are treated elsewhere (Verner, 1964; also MS, 1963). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS It is a pleasure to acknowledge the numerous helpful suggestions and criticisms of Drs. Frank Richardson and Gordon H. Orians throughout the course of this study. Dr. R. C. Snyder kindly read the manuscript. Many colleagues assisted with field work and were helpful in discussions of the data; in this regard I would especially like to thank T. H. Frazzetta, M. E. Kriebel, K. P. Mauzey, E. R. Pianka, C. C. Smith, L. W. Spring, and M. F. Willson. My wife, Marlene, processed many of the raw field data and was responsible for lettering most of the figures. Working facilities were provided by the Department of Zoology, University of Washington, and financial assistance was provided by National Science Foundation predoctoral fellowships (1960-1963). STUDY AREAS At Seattle, two marshes (Red, 6.3 acres, and Blue, 3.3 acres) in the University of Washington Arboretum were studied in 1961.
    [Show full text]
  • Comprehensive Report Species - Cistothorus Platensis Page I of 19
    Comprehensive Report Species - Cistothorus platensis Page I of 19 NatureServe () EXPLORER • '•rr•K•;7",,v2' <-~~~ •••'F"'< •j • ':'•k• N :;}• <"• Seach bot. the Dat -Abou-U Cot Chana eCrite «<Previous I Next»> Cistothorusplatensis - (Latham, 1790) Google, Sedge Wren Search for Images on Google Spanish Common Names: Chivirin Sabanero, Chercan de las Vegas French Common Names: Troglodyte & bec court Other Common Names: Curruira-do-Campo Unique Identifier: ELEMENTGLOBAL.2.105322 Element Code: ABPBG10010 Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Birds - Perching Birds Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus Animalia Craniata Aves Passeriformes Troglodytidae Cistothorus Genus Size: B - Very small genus (2-5 species) Check this box to expand all report sections: Concept Reference 0 Concept Reference: American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1998. Check-list of North American birds. Seventh edition. American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, DC. 829 pp. Concept Reference Code: B98AOU01NAUS Name Used in Concept Reference: Cistothorusplatensis Taxonomic Comments: Formerly known as Short-billed Marsh-Wren. Composed of three groups: STELLARIS (Sedge Wren), PLATENSIS (Western Grass-Wren), and POLYGLOTTUS (Eastern Grass-Wren) (AOU 1998). Constitutes a superspecies with C. MERIDAE and C. APOLINARI (AOU 1998). Conservation Status 0 NatureServe Status Global Status: G5 Global Status Last Reviewed: 03Dec1996 Global Status Last Changed: 03Dec1996 Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure Nation: United States National Status: N4B,N5N Nation: Canada National Status:N5B
    [Show full text]
  • Marsh Wren Cistothorus Palustris
    Appendix A: Birds Marsh Wren Cistothorus palustris Federal Listing N/A State Listing N/A Global Rank G5 State Rank S3 Regional Status High Photo by Pamela Hunt Justification (Reason for Concern in NH) Secretive marsh birds like the Marsh Wren have generally been considered conservation priorities because of known losses of wetland habitats, combined with often poor data on species’ distribution, abundance, and trend. In the case of the Marsh Wren, repeated Breeding Bird Atlases in the Northeast have consistently documented stable or increasing range occupancy (Cadman et al. 2007, McGowan and Corwin 2008, Renfrew 2013, MassAudubon 2014). The Breeding Bird Survey does a better job of estimating trends for Marsh Wren than other wetland birds, and based on BBS data populations are generally increasing or stable, although most data are from the West and Midwest (Sauer et al. 2014). Data for the Northeast are more equivocal, with declines in some areas, increases in others, and few significant trends. There are no data on trends in New Hampshire, although there is some evidence for local extirpations related to changes in habitat. Distribution Breeds across southern Canada and the northern and western United States, and along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. There is also an isolated population in central Mexico (Kroodsma and Verner 2014). Winters in the western and coastal portions of the breeding range, and also in much of Mexico and the southwestern U.S. In New Hampshire, most breeding season records are from two general areas: the Connecticut River valley and Great Bay/Seacoast, with scattered records elsewhere inland where suitable habitat is present.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Assessment for Sedge Wren
    Species Status Assessment Class: Birds Family: Troglodytidae Scientific Name: Cistothorus platensis Common Name: Sedge wren Species synopsis: Previously known as the short-billed marsh wren, the sedge wren is an inhabitant of wet meadows, hay fields, and marshes. This wren’s use of ephemeral habitats drives its tendency to abandon areas as they become too wet or too dry and move to new areas. Within a season, sedge wrens may raise one brood in May and June and then move to a southern or northeastern part of the range to raise a second brood in July and August. This pattern can make detection and monitoring by traditional methods unreliable. Little is known of the life history or demographics of this species. In the Prairie Pothole region, where sedge wren is most abundant, Breeding Bird Survey data show increasing long-term and short-term trends: 5.6% increase per year from 1966 to 2010 and 1.0% increase per year from 2000 to 2010. Significant declining trends were noted in the Northeast beginning in the 1950s due to destruction of wetlands. In response to this decline, sedge wren is now listed as Endangered in Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Vermont. It is listed as Threatened in New York. In New York, where it is at the far eastern edge of its range, sedge wren was historically a sparse nester and it remains so today. Since the mid-1980s, sedge wren occupancy in New York has increased by 26% as documented by the second Breeding Bird Atlas, though McGowan (2008) cautions that this species may have been overlooked during the first Atlas.
    [Show full text]
  • Two Species of Marsh Wren (Cistothorus Palustris) in Nebraska
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Nebraska Bird Review Nebraska Ornithologists' Union 6-1988 Two Species of Marsh Wren (Cistothorus palustris) in Nebraska Donald E. Kroodsma University of Massachusetts - Amherst, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nebbirdrev Part of the Poultry or Avian Science Commons, and the Zoology Commons Kroodsma, Donald E., "Two Species of Marsh Wren (Cistothorus palustris) in Nebraska" (1988). Nebraska Bird Review. 274. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nebbirdrev/274 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Nebraska Ornithologists' Union at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Nebraska Bird Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Kroodsma, "Two Species of Marsh Wren (Cistothorus palustris) in Nebraska," from Nebraska Bird Review (June 1988) 56(2). Copyright 1988, Nebraska Orntihologists' Union. Used by permission. 40 Nebraska Bird Review TWO SPECIES OF MARSH WREN (Cistothorus palustris) IN NEBRASKA? The consequences of a grand evolutionary experiment are evident throughout Nebraska. During the Pleistocene. many taxa were apparently separated into eastern and western populations. Today many of these eastern and western counterparts meet in the Great Plains. especially in Nebraska. Some pairs now hybridize freely (towhees. orioles. flickers). while others do not (buntings. grosbeaks. meadowlarks) (see Rising 1983). The Marsh Wren is still another. previously unrecognized. taxon that consists of an eastern and western counterpart. Data from Nebraska and elsewhere in North America suggest that there are two forms of the Marsh Wren. perhaps as vocally different from each other as are the two Sternella mea­ dowlarks.
    [Show full text]
  • Destruction of Nests by the Short-Billed Marsh Wren
    Condor, 82:176-179 0 The Cooper Ornithological Society 1980 DESTRUCTION OF NESTS BY THE SHORT-BILLED MARSH WREN JAROSLAV PICMAN AND ANNA K. PICMAN ABSTRACT.-Short-billed Marsh Wrens (Cistothorus platensis) examined experimentally offered nests of Red-winged Blackbirds, Yellow-headed Blackbirds, Long-billed Marsh Wrens, and conspecifics. They also pecked eggs of Zebra Finches, Long-billed Marsh Wrens, Red-winged Blackbirds, and Cinnamon Teal, and once a male wren also pecked nestling Red-winged Blackbirds. Marsh wrens broke all small eggs, but the largest (teal) eggs sur- vived the wrens ’ attacks. Results suggested that Short-billed Marsh Wrens attack eggs regardless of their size and color, but can destroy only small eggs. These wrens probably have a significant impact on nesting success of other small sympatric birds, including conspecifics. By destroying nests, Short- billed Marsh Wrens probably exclude other birds from the vicinity of their activity centers and thereby reduce interference from them. Among all temperate zone passerines, giana), and Song Sparrows (Melospiza mel- marsh-nesting birds suffer the highest nest odia; Walkinshaw 1935, Bent 1948, mortality rates, mainly through predation Kroodsma and Verner 1978, this study). (Ricklefs 1969). Predators include raccoons, Nest destruction by this wren, therefore, mink, hawks, owls, jays, crows, and water might present an important factor reducing snakes (Allen 1914, Bent 1958, Robertson reproductive success of these and possibly 1972). Other studies have shown that one of other marsh-nesting birds. the most important predators destroying The questions we asked during this study nests of marsh-dwelling passerines in North were: (1) Do Short-billed Marsh Wrens nor- America is the Long-billed Marsh Wren mally destroy nests? (2) What kinds of nests (Cistothorus palustris; Allen 1914, Orians and eggs will these wrens attack? (3) Do and Willson 1964, Burt 1970, Verner 1975, they attack nestlings? (4) Do affected Picman 1977a, 1980).
    [Show full text]
  • Attempted Nest Parasitism of the Marsh Wren by a Brown-Headed Cowbird ’
    SHORT COMMUNICATIONS 381 The Condor 88:381-382 0 The Cooper Ornithological Society 1986 ATTEMPTED NEST PARASITISM OF THE MARSH WREN BY A BROWN-HEADED COWBIRD ’ JAROSLAVPICMAN Department of Biology, Universityof Ottawa, 30 SomersetE., Ottawa, ON KIN 6N5, Canada Key words: Brown-headedCowbird; Molothrus ater; nestsare domed with a small entrance that prevents cow- Marsh Wren; Cistothoruspalustris; nestparasitism. birds from entering them and, perhapseven more impor- tantly, this domed shape concealsthe nest contents (suc- The Brown-headed Cowbird, Molothrus ater, is a brood cessfulparasitism requires that a female cowbird lay an parasite known to have laid in nests of 220 host species egg in the host nest at an appropriate time; Clark and (Friedmann et al. 1977. Friedmann and Kiff 1985). The Robertson 1981, Burgham 1985). This proposition is sup- Brown-headed Cowbird is a generalistthat tends to par- ported by generally rare reports of cowbird parasitism of asitize passerinesbuilding open nests, although relatively small hole-nesting passerinessuch as the Tree Swallow rare casesof parasitism of hole-nestingspecies such as the Tachycinetabicolor, Black-capped Chickadee Parus atri- House Wren, Troglodytesaedon, have been reported capi&, Carolina ChickadeeP&us carolinensis,and Brown (Friedmann et al. 1977). The purpose of this note is to Creever Certhia familiaris (seeFriedmann and Kiff 1985). describethe first caseof cowbird parasitism of the Marsh Second, Marsh *Wrensmay benefit from the presence of Wren, Cistothoruspalustris, and hence add this passerine Red-winged Blackbirds,Agelaius phoeniceus, which also to the list of the cowbird hosts. inhabit marshesand whosecolonial nestingand high level The Marsh Wren is a small (about 12 g) passerinebreed- of aggressionmay provide effective defense against cow- ing in marshes across temperate North America.
    [Show full text]
  • Calumet Marsh Bird Monitoring 2015-2016
    | 1 Calumet Marsh Bird Monitoring 2015-2016 Calumet Marsh Bird Monitoring 2015-2016 Prepared by Caleb Putnam, Walter Marcisz, and Nat Miller Calumet marsh bird monitors: Roberta Asher, Peter Avis, Thomas Barnes, Erin Grey, Libby Keyes, Paul Labus, Linda Magyar, Walter Marcisz, Nat Miller, Jessica Rico, Axel Rutter, Caleb Putnam, Teri Radke, Dan Spencer, Byron Tsang. Scientific advisors: Courtney Conway, Nicole Michel, Mike Monfils, Charles O’Leary, Doug Stotz, Gary Sullivan, Mike Ward, and Chad Wilsey. This project is funded in part under the Coastal Zone Management Act, by NOAA’s Office for Coastal Management in conjunction with the Illinois Department of Natural Resources’ Coastal Management Program. Indiana monitoring was funded by the Indiana Department of Natural Resources. The Calumet wetland working group consists of: The Forest Preserves of Cook County, The Chicago Park District, Illinois Department of Natural Resources, Audubon Great Lakes, The Wetlands Initiative, The Field Museum, The Nature Conservancy, Illinois Natural His- tory Survey and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This report was prepared by the Forest Preserve District of Cook County and Audubon Great Lakes using Federal Funds under award number NA14NOS4190081 from NOAA’s Office for Coastal Management, U.S. Department of Commerce. The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of NOAA’s Office for Coastal Management or the U.S. Department of Commerce. Cover: American Coot. Photo: Alan Murphy CALUMET WETLANDS BIRD MONITORING Introduction The Calumet wetland working group is an informal coalition of land managers, scientists, and conservation- ists working together to restore the valuable wetlands of the Millennium Reserve in northeast Illinois.
    [Show full text]
  • Metal Concentrations in Three Species of Passerine Birds Breeding in the Hackensack Meadowlands of New Jersey
    ARTICLE IN PRESS Environmental Research 107 (2008) 218–228 www.elsevier.com/locate/envres Metal concentrations in three species of passerine birds breeding in the Hackensack Meadowlands of New Jersey Nellie Tsipouraa, Joanna Burgerb,c,Ã, Ross Feltesd, Janet Yacabuccia, David Mizrahie, Christian Jeitnerc, Michael Gochfeldc aNew Jersey Audubon Society, 11 Hardscrabble Road, Bernardsville, NJ 07924, USA bDivision of Life Sciences, Rutgers University, Nelson Labs, 604 Allison Road, Piscataway, NJ 08854-8082, USA cEnvironmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA dThe New Jersey Meadowlands Commission, One DeKorte Park Plaza, Lyndhurst, NJ 07071-3707, USA eNew Jersey Audubon Society, 600 Route 47 North, Cape May Court House, NJ 08210, USA Received 25 June 2007; received in revised form 7 November 2007; accepted 19 November 2007 Available online 14 January 2008 Abstract The New Jersey Meadowlands is an important natural area, a diverse mosaic of wetland habitats positioned within the heavily urbanized NY City Metropolitan area and the NY/NJ Harbor. Persistent contaminants may pose threats to wildlife inhabiting these habitats, affecting reproduction, egg hatchability, nestling survivorship, and neurobehavioral development. Metals of concern in the Meadowlands include arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, and mercury. These metals were analyzed in feathers and blood of three passerine birds breeding in wetland habitats, including red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus), marsh wrens (Cistothorus palustris), and tree swallow (Tachycineta bicolor), as well as eggs of the first two species. These widespread species are abundant in wetland habitats across the Meadowlands District, and eat insects and other invertebrates. Lead levels were low in eggs, higher in feathers and very elevated in blood in all species compared to those that have been reported for other bird species.
    [Show full text]
  • (Lythrum Salicaria) on Wetland Bird Abundances Author(S): Brian G
    The Impact of Exotic Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) on Wetland Bird Abundances Author(s): Brian G. Tavernia and J. Michael Reed Source: The American Midland Naturalist, 168(2):352-363. 2012. Published By: University of Notre Dame URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1674/0003-0031-168.2.352 BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. Am. Midl. Nat. (2012) 168:352–363 The Impact of Exotic Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) on Wetland Bird Abundances 1 BRIAN G. TAVERNIA AND J. MICHAEL REED Biology Department, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts 02155 ABSTRACT.—The exotic invasive wetland plant purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) is often considered to have negative impacts on native plant and animal species, but this is debated. Clarifying its influence would provide insight into appropriate management actions following invasion. We investigated the influence of L.
    [Show full text]