DOCSLIB.ORG

Long-Eared Owl Nesting Phenology and Habitat in Central Alberta

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

LONG-EARED OWL NESTING PHENOLOGY AND HABITAT IN CENTRAL ALBERTA LISA TAKATS PRIESTLEY1 , CHUCK PRIESTLEY2 1 Beaverhill Bird Observatory 2 STRIX Ecological Consulting The Long-eared Owl (Asio initiated by Alberta Environment otus) is a secretive nocturnal and Sustainable Resource owl found in open and sparsely Development (Alberta ESRD) to forested habitats across North encourage raptor banders and America and Eurasia between 30° researchers to collect additional and 65°N latitude.12 In Alberta, information on nest locations and it is found in the Boreal Forest, breeding habitat use of birds of Foothills, Grassland, Parkland, prey. This program developed and Rocky Mountain Natural into the Prairie Nest Record Regions, where they prefer Scheme and Alberta Raptor Nest fragmented habitats containing Card Programs. The Alberta dense woodlands or shelterbelts Raptor Nest Card data are stored for nesting and roosting and with Beaverhill Bird Observatory open areas for hunting.7 It is and data are submitted to Alberta a year round-resident, but it's ESRD and the national NestWatch overwintering ecology is relatively Program run by Bird Studies unknown.2,7 The Long-eared Owl is considered `Secure` in Alberta,1 although information on populations, trends, specific habitat use and even distribution are poorly understood.9,12 Banding data from Saskatchewan suggest there is inconclusive evidence for population declines, and that populations are cyclical.10 The first step in managing wildlife populations is having knowledge of distribution and abundance.14 Owls are elusive, which makes them difficult to study and monitor.8 In 1988, a volunteer raptor nest card program was 124 Blue Jay Canada. The Beaverhill Bird flight feathers developing into their Observatory has been analyzing second week with vanes erupting the phenology of a variety of as they are ready to leave the raptor species from data collected nest in the third week. All data in the nest card program.16,17,18,19 was entered into Microsoft Excel This paper addresses the timing for analysis. of nesting and breeding habitat of Long-eared Owls nesting in The estimated date of Long- central Alberta, based on nest eared Owl hatching was calculated banding data collected between by subtracting the age (in days) of 1987 and 2011. the oldest-aged young from the date of banding. Laying date Methods was estimated by subtracting The study area was located in the number of days required for o central Alberta (latitudes 52.5 to incubation from the estimated o o o 54.6 , longitudes 110.5 to 114.2 ), hatch date. Fledging date was surrounding the city of Edmonton. estimated by adding the number Nests were located in the Aspen of days required for fledging to Parkland and Boreal Natural the estimated hatch date. The Regions. Nests were found by time required for incubation and one or more of: 1) visiting known fledging was determined as the nesting sites of other species largest number of days reported that build the stick nests; 2) in published literature. The looking for birds on territory in the estimated number of days needed spring; or 3) through contact with for incubation and fledging used landowners who found pairs or for this paper were 28 and 21 days nests on their land. For each nest, respectively.6,12,23 banders collected information on nest type (natural or man- Results and Discussion made), nest height, tree height, There were 59 nest records nest habitat, surrounding land submitted for Long-eared Owls. use, and banding data including The average laying date was an estimate of the age (in days) May 7 (range Apr. 11 to June 11) of the young at the banding (Figure 1), the average hatching time.3,20 The age at banding date was June 4 (range May 9 to was determined by experienced July 9), and the average fledging banders using descriptions of date was June 25 (range May 30 growth and development.20,23 to July 30) (Figure 2). In Idaho, Developmental changes include, first clutches were usually laid eyes open at five days, second between mid-March and mid- natal down at two weeks, and May.11 71 (3) September 2013 125 126 Alberta 1987to2010. central Figure 1.Estimatedegg layingdatesoftheLong-earedOwlin 6 4 2 Number of Nests 0 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- 05- 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- 04- 09- 14- Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr May May May May May May Jun Jun Jun Date Blue Jay Of the 59 nests, 6 failed (no There were habitat data young fledged) and 53 were available for 57 Long-eared Owl considered successful (one or nests. Fifty-four nests were more young were ready to fledge stick nests and three were man- at banding time). Egg counts made platforms. Twenty-six were present for 25 nests, and stick nests were described in averaged 4.9 eggs per nest (range further detail as being originally 3 to 7, SD=0.93). Murray (1976) built by American Crow (Corvus found the average clutch size for brachyrhynchos) (6), Black-billed Long-eared Owls in North America Magpie (Pica pica) (16), Cooper`s was 4.5 eggs per nest (range Hawk (Accipiter cooperii) (2), 2-10), and number increased Sharp-shinned Hawk (Accipiter as you went north and west. striatus) (1), and squirrel (1). Of the successful nests (n=52) Most (44%) nests were found in the average brood size was willow, and the average height of 3.7 young per nest (range 1-6). nests was 14.8 feet (range 7 to Average number of young fledged 36 feet, SD=7.04). Nests were per successful nest reported found most often in Grassland/ ranged from 3 to 4.5 in the United Shrubland (Table 2), and were States.5,12 usually in isolated groups of trees or shrubs surrounded by Table 1. Long-eared Owl nest-tree types in central Alberta. Nest Tree -type Number of Nests (%) Black Spruce (Live) 11 (19) Maple (Live) 1 (2) Trembling Aspen (Live) 6 (11) White Spruce (Live) 14 (25) willow (Dead) 2 (4) willow (Live) 23 (40) Table 2. Habitat-types surrounding Long-eared Owl nests in central Alberta. Habitat-type Number of Nests (%) Coniferous Forest 6 (11) Forest (type not specified) 2 (4) Grassland/Shrubland 28 (49) Mixedwood Forest 14 (25) Parkland 5 (9) Urban Treed/Shrub 2 (4) 71 (3) September 2013 127 crops. Other habitats described vegetation.11,23 They are capable nearby included horse pasture, of short flights at 35 days and overgrown fields, unoccupied and are fed by parents for up to 11 occupied farmsteads. Many nests weeks.22 Therefore, occupied were found in the same woodlots Long-eared Owl nests and the for multiple years, and on the rare adjacent habitat should not be occasion the same nest was used cleared from mid-April through in multiple years. mid-August in central Alberta. Throughout their North American Acknowledgements breeding range, Long-eared Owls Funding from Alberta Ecotrust, have been found nesting in dense Alberta Conservation Association, or brushy vegetation amidst open Alberta Sustainable Resource habitats.12 They used hedgerows Development, Alberta Sport, along farm fields in Montana (D. Recreation, Parks and Wildlife Holt pers. comm. 2010). Typically Foundation, Community Spirit stick nests were used and of Program, AGLC, Nature Canada 130 nests found in southwestern Charles Labatiuk Fund and Idaho, 91 were built by Black-billed Beaverhill Bird Observatory is Magpie, 38 by American Crow, greatly appreciated. The new and one in a cliff cavity.13 Long- raptor nest card template was eared Owls also commonly use produced in cooperation with nests built by Common Ravens Alberta Sustainable Resource (Corvus corax), Cooper’s Hawks, Development, Canadian and various Buteo spp.3,4,21 Wildlife Service, Federation of Alberta Naturalists, and Population declines of Long-eared Bird Studies Canada and is Owls have been caused by habitat available on Beaverhill Bird alteration, forest succession, Observatory’s website at http:// urbanization, competition with www.beaverhillbirds.com/ Great Horned Owls (Bubo bboraptorsnests.htm. We thank virginianus), loss of habitat for prey Ray Cromie, Al DeGroot, Hardy species, rodenticides, shooting, Pletz, Violet Pletz, and Beaverhill and habitat loss.9,12 If habitat Bird Observatory for their data alteration is to occur, occupied contributions. The continuing nest sites need to be protected. cooperation of landowners is Although young Long-eared Owls of great value to this program. leave the nest at about 21 days, We thank the editors and an they are still flightless (branching anonymous reviewer for their stage), and reside in surrounding comments on an earlier draft of this paper. 128 Blue Jay References General Technical Report NC- 1. Alberta Sustainable 190, St. Paul, MN. Resource Development (2010) The general status 3. Bent AC (1938) Life histories of of Alberta wild species 2010. North American birds of prey, pt. Alberta Sustainable Resource 2. U.S. Natl. Mus. Bull. No. 170. Development, Edmonton, AB. On-line at: http://www.srd.alberta. 4. Bloom PH (1994) The biology ca/FishWildlife/SpeciesAtRisk/ and current status of the Long- eralStatusOfAlbertaWildSpecies/ eared Owl in coastal southern tatusOfAlbertaWildSpecies2010/ California. Bull. S. Ca. Acad. Sci. SearchForWildSpeciesStatus. 93:1-12. aspx 5. Bull EL, Wright AL, Henjum MG 2. Beck BH, Beck JA Jr (1997) (1989) Nesting and diet of Long- Winter owl surveying in central eared Owls in conifer forests, Alberta. Page 518 in J. R. Duncan, Oregon. Condor 91:908-912. D. H. Johnson, and T. H. Nicholls (eds.) , Biology and conservation of owls of the Northern Hemisphere: 6. Cramp S (1985) The birds of the 2nd International Symposium, western Palearctic. Vol. 4. Oxford February 5-9 1997, Winnipeg, Univ. Press, Oxford.
Recommended publications
  • Key Points for Sustainable Management of Northern Great Plains Grasslands

    Key Points for Sustainable Management of Northern Great Plains Grasslands

    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange South Dakota State University Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange Natural Resource Management Faculty Publications Department of Natural Resource Management 2019 Looking to the Future: Key Points for Sustainable Management of Northern Great Plains Grasslands Lora B. Perkins Marissa Ahlering Diane L. Larson Follow this and additional works at: https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/nrm_pubs Part of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, and the Environmental Sciences Commons REVIEW ARTICLE Looking to the future: key points for sustainable management of northern Great Plains grasslands Lora B. Perkins1,2 , Marissa Ahlering3, Diane L. Larson4 The grasslands of the northern Great Plains (NGP) region of North America are considered endangered ecosystems and priority conservation areas yet have great ecological and economic importance. Grasslands in the NGP are no longer self-regulating adaptive systems. The challenges to these grasslands are widespread and serious (e.g. climate change, invasive species, fragmentation, altered disturbance regimes, and anthropogenic chemical loads). Because the challenges facing the region are dynamic, complex, and persistent, a paradigm shift in how we approach restoration and management of the grasslands in the NGP is imperative. The goal of this article is to highlight four key points for land managers and restoration practitioners to consider when planning management or restoration actions. First, we discuss the appropriateness of using historical fidelity as a restoration or management target because of changing climate, widespread pervasiveness of invasive species, the high level of fragmentation, and altered disturbance regimes.
  • Conservation Status of Birds of Prey and Owls in Norway

    Conservation Status of Birds of Prey and Owls in Norway

    Conservation status of birds of prey and owls in Norway Oddvar Heggøy & Ingar Jostein Øien Norsk Ornitologisk Forening 2014 NOF-BirdLife Norway – Report 1-2014 © NOF-BirdLife Norway E-mail: [email protected] Publication type: Digital document (pdf)/75 printed copies January 2014 Front cover: Boreal owl at breeding site in Nord-Trøndelag. © Ingar Jostein Øien Editor: Ingar Jostein Øien Recommended citation: Heggøy, O. & Øien, I. J. (2014) Conservation status of birds of prey and owls in Norway. NOF/BirdLife Norway - Report 1-2014. 129 pp. ISSN: 0805-4932 ISBN: 978-82-78-52092-5 Some amendments and addenda have been made to this PDF document compared to the 75 printed copies: Page 25: Picture of snowy owl and photo caption added Page 27: Picture of white-tailed eagle and photo caption added Page 36: Picture of eagle owl and photo caption added Page 58: Table 4 - hen harrier - “Total population” corrected from 26-147 pairs to 26-137 pairs Page 60: Table 5 - northern goshawk –“Total population” corrected from 1434 – 2036 pairs to 1405 – 2036 pairs Page 80: Table 8 - Eurasian hobby - “Total population” corrected from 119-190 pairs to 142-190 pairs Page 85: Table 10 - peregrine falcon – Population estimate for Hedmark corrected from 6-7 pairs to 12-13 pairs and “Total population” corrected from 700-1017 pairs to 707-1023 pairs Page 78: Photo caption changed Page 87: Last paragraph under “Relevant studies” added. Table text increased NOF-BirdLife Norway – Report 1-2014 NOF-BirdLife Norway – Report 1-2014 SUMMARY Many of the migratory birds of prey species in the African-Eurasian region have undergone rapid long-term declines in recent years.
  • Native Or Suitable Plants City of Mccall

    Native Or Suitable Plants City of Mccall

    Native or Suitable Plants City of McCall The following list of plants is presented to assist the developer, business owner, or homeowner in selecting plants for landscaping. The list is by no means complete, but is a recommended selection of plants which are either native or have been successfully introduced to our area. Successful landscaping, however, requires much more than just the selection of plants. Unless you have some experience, it is suggested than you employ the services of a trained or otherwise experienced landscaper, arborist, or forester. For best results it is recommended that careful consideration be made in purchasing the plants from the local nurseries (i.e. Cascade, McCall, and New Meadows). Plants brought in from the Treasure Valley may not survive our local weather conditions, microsites, and higher elevations. Timing can also be a serious consideration as the plants may have already broken dormancy and can be damaged by our late frosts. Appendix B SELECTED IDAHO NATIVE PLANTS SUITABLE FOR VALLEY COUNTY GROWING CONDITIONS Trees & Shrubs Acer circinatum (Vine Maple). Shrub or small tree 15-20' tall, Pacific Northwest native. Bright scarlet-orange fall foliage. Excellent ornamental. Alnus incana (Mountain Alder). A large shrub, useful for mid to high elevation riparian plantings. Good plant for stream bank shelter and stabilization. Nitrogen fixing root system. Alnus sinuata (Sitka Alder). A shrub, 6-1 5' tall. Grows well on moist slopes or stream banks. Excellent shrub for erosion control and riparian restoration. Nitrogen fixing root system. Amelanchier alnifolia (Serviceberry). One of the earlier shrubs to blossom out in the spring.
  • Area Requirements and Landscape-Level Factors Influencing

    Area Requirements and Landscape-Level Factors Influencing

    The Journal of Wildlife Management 81(7):1298–1307; 2017; DOI: 10.1002/jwmg.21286 Research Article Area Requirements and Landscape-Level Factors Influencing Shrubland Birds H. PATRICK ROBERTS,1 Department of Environmental Conservation, University of Massachusetts, 204 Holdsworth Hall, Amherst, MA 01003, USA DAVID I. KING, U.S. Forest Service Northern Research Station, University of Massachusetts, 201 Holdsworth Hall, Amherst, MA 01003, USA ABSTRACT Declines in populations of birds that breed in disturbance-dependent early-successional forest have largely been ascribed to habitat loss. Clearcutting is an efficient and effective means for creating early- successional vegetation; however, negative public perceptions of clearcutting and the small parcel size typical of private forested land in much of the eastern United States make this practice impractical in many situations. Group selection harvests, where groups of adjacent trees are removed from a mature forest matrix, may be more acceptable to the public and could provide habitat for shrubland birds. Although some shrubland bird species that occupy clearcuts are scarce or absent from smaller patches created by group selection, some of these smaller patches support shrubland species of conservation concern. The specific factors affecting shrubland bird occupancy of these smaller patches, such as habitat structure, patch area, and landscape context, are poorly understood. We sampled birds in forest openings ranging 0.02–1.29 ha to identify species-specific minimum-area habitat requirements and other factors affecting shrubland birds. We modeled bird occurrence in relation to microhabitat-, patch-, and landscape-level variables using occupancy models. The minimum-area requirements for black-and-white warblers (Mniotilta varia), common yellowthroats (Geothlypis trichas), chestnut-sided warblers (Setophaga pensylvanica), eastern towhees (Pipilo erythrophthalmus), and gray catbirds (Dumetella carolinensis)were0.23 ha, whereas indigo buntings (Passerina cyanea) and prairie warblers (S.
  • 7. Shrubland and Young Forest Habitat Management

    7. Shrubland and Young Forest Habitat Management

    7. SHRUBLAND AND YOUNG FOREST HABITAT MANAGEMENT hrublands” and “Young Forest” are terms that apply to areas Shrubland habitat and that are transitioning to mature forest and are dominated by young forest differ in “Sseedlings, saplings, and shrubs with interspersed grasses and forbs (herbaceous plants). While some sites such as wetlands, sandy sites vegetation types and and ledge areas can support a relatively stable shrub cover, most shrub communities in the northeast are successional and change rapidly to food and cover they mature forest if left unmanaged. Shrub and young forest habitats in Vermont provide important habitat provide, as well as functions for a variety of wildlife including shrubland birds, butterflies and bees, black bear, deer, moose, snowshoe hare, bobcat, as well as a where and how they variety of reptiles and amphibians. Many shrubland species are in decline due to loss of habitat. Shrubland bird species in Vermont include common are maintained on the species such as chestnut-sided warbler, white-throated sparrow, ruffed grouse, Eastern towhee, American woodcock, brown thrasher, Nashville landscape. warbler, and rarer species such as prairie warbler and golden-winged warbler. These habitat types are used by 29 Vermont Species of Greatest Conservation Need. While small areas of shrub and young forest habitat can be important to some wildlife, managing large patches of 5 acres or more provides much greater benefit to the wildlife that rely on the associated habitat conditions to meet their life requirements. Birds such as the chestnut- sided warbler will use smaller areas of young forest, but less common species such as golden-winged warbler require areas of 25 acres or more.
  • A Prairie Ecosystem the Kansas Grassland Biome Is Divided Into Tallgrass, Mixed-Grass, and Shortgrass Prairies

    A Prairie Ecosystem the Kansas Grassland Biome Is Divided Into Tallgrass, Mixed-Grass, and Shortgrass Prairies

    A Prairie Ecosystem The Kansas grassland biome is divided into tallgrass, mixed-grass, and shortgrass prairies. ​ ​Emporia, KS is located in the Tallgrass prairie ecosystem. Before settlement, the tallgrass prairie occupied a north-south strip which encompassed the eastern third of Kansas. The tallgrass prairie exists today since much the land is not farmable due to terrain (slope, rock layers, soil depth, etc.). The grasses can grow in excess of six feet tall during moist years if they reside in deep soils. The annual precipitation, or rainfall, in this region exceeds 30 inches. The original tallgrass prairie spanned almost 250 million acres. Today, about four percent remains with the largest areas being the Flint Hills of Kansas and the Osage Hills of Oklahoma. Examples of grasses found in tallgrass prairies include big bluestem, indian grass, switchgrass, and eastern gamagrass. The sun is the main source of energy for every living thing on earth. An organism that makes its own food from the sun is called a ​producer​. Examples of producers in the prairie are grasses and wildflowers because they use the sun to make their own food through a process called photosynthesis. An organism that depends on others for food is called a ​consumer​. Examples of consumers in the prairie include coyotes, snakes, mice and prairie chickens because they hunt or scavenge for their food. An organism that breaks down materials in dead organisms is called a decomposer​. Examples of decomposers in the prairie are worms. Recycling happens in the prairie through decomposition. Recycling means to reuse something once it has died or has been thrown away.
  • Great Plains Ecosystems: Past, Present, and Future

    Great Plains Ecosystems: Past, Present, and Future

    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln USGS Staff -- Published Research US Geological Survey 2004 Great Plains Ecosystems: Past, Present, and Future Fred B. Samson United States Forest Service Fritz L. Knopf United States Geological Survey Biological Resources Division Wayne Ostlie The Nature Conservancy, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub Part of the Earth Sciences Commons Samson, Fred B.; Knopf, Fritz L.; and Ostlie, Wayne, "Great Plains Ecosystems: Past, Present, and Future" (2004). USGS Staff -- Published Research. 45. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub/45 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Geological Survey at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in USGS Staff -- Published Research by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Great Plains Ecosystems: Past, Present, and Future Fred B. Samson, Fritz L. Knopf, & Wayne R. Ostlie 6 SPECIALCOVERAGE ...eat Plains ecosystems: _ _ t, present, and future HH[[~dIed B. Samson, Fritz L. Knopf, and e R. Ostlie sts that the main bodies of North American prairie (i.e., the tall- grass, mixed, and shortgrass) are among the most endangered resources on the con- tinent. The purpose of this paper is to provide a past and present biological base- line by which to understand North American prairies and to provide a platform for future conservation. Events both immediate to the end of the Pleistocene and his- toric suggest that the present grassland conditions are different from those within which most of the grassland organisms evolved.
  • Where Are Shortgrass Prairies in Wyoming? Basically, Shortgrass Prairie Is Found in the Eastern One-Third of Wyoming, in the Rain Shadow of the Rocky Mountains

    Where Are Shortgrass Prairies in Wyoming? Basically, Shortgrass Prairie Is Found in the Eastern One-Third of Wyoming, in the Rain Shadow of the Rocky Mountains

    Shortgrass Prairie Ecosystem Flashcards Shortgrass Prairie What is a shortgrass prairie? Short grass prairie habitat is flat to rolling terrain dominated by short grasses that form a nearly continuous carpet across the landscape. Grama grass and buffalo grass make up 70% to 90% of the plants growing on the short grass prairie. A few mid-grasses and forbs also grow there. Short grass prairie s is the westernmost and driest of the true North American grasslands. Average annual precipitation is 10 to 12 inches. Why are shortgrass prairies important? Shortgrass prairies provide essential habitat for many species of wildlife that live nowhere else. Grazing buffalo, deer, and pronghorn as well as burrowing mammals are the iconic animals of this landscape. However, the grasses are the real star of this ecosystem. They can withstand the harsh climate better than any other plants and help to protect the essential topsoil. Without the grasses, we’d have no plant or animal life, just dust. Where are shortgrass prairies in Wyoming? Basically, shortgrass prairie is found in the eastern one-third of Wyoming, in the rain shadow of the Rocky Mountains. It becomes and replaced by sagebrush grasslands and foothills shrub land as the terrain rises westward toward the Rocky Mountains. rockies.audubon.org plt.wyomingplt.org Shortgrass Prairie Ecosystem Flashcards American Badger Black-tailed Jackrabbit Swift Fox Northern Pocket Gopher Ferruginous Hawk Short-eared Owl Page 1 A rockies.audubon.org plt.wyomingplt.org Shortgrass Prairie Ecosystem Flashcards Western
  • Factors Affecting Survival in Mediterranean Populations of the Eurasian Eagle Owl

    Factors Affecting Survival in Mediterranean Populations of the Eurasian Eagle Owl

    Factors affecting survival in Mediterranean populations of the Eurasian eagle owl Mario León-Ortega, María del Mar Delgado, José E. Martínez, Vincenzo Penteriani & José F. Calvo European Journal of Wildlife Research ISSN 1612-4642 Volume 62 Number 6 Eur J Wildl Res (2016) 62:643-651 DOI 10.1007/s10344-016-1036-7 1 23 Your article is protected by copyright and all rights are held exclusively by Springer- Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. This e-offprint is for personal use only and shall not be self- archived in electronic repositories. If you wish to self-archive your article, please use the accepted manuscript version for posting on your own website. You may further deposit the accepted manuscript version in any repository, provided it is only made publicly available 12 months after official publication or later and provided acknowledgement is given to the original source of publication and a link is inserted to the published article on Springer's website. The link must be accompanied by the following text: "The final publication is available at link.springer.com”. 1 23 Author's personal copy Eur J Wildl Res (2016) 62:643–651 DOI 10.1007/s10344-016-1036-7 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Factors affecting survival in Mediterranean populations of the Eurasian eagle owl Mario León-Ortega1 & María del Mar Delgado2 & José E. Martínez1,3 & Vincenzo Penteriani 2,4 & José F. Calvo1 Received: 21 March 2016 /Revised: 6 July 2016 /Accepted: 27 July 2016 /Published online: 12 August 2016 # Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016 Abstract The survival rate is a key parameter for population significantly between the two populations, gunshot being the management and the monitoring of populations.
  • DIET CHANGES in BREEDING TAWNY OWLS &Lpar;<I>Strix Aluco</I>&Rpar;

    DIET CHANGES in BREEDING TAWNY OWLS &Lpar;<I>Strix Aluco</I>&Rpar;

    j Raptor Res. 26(4):239-242 ¸ 1992 The Raptor ResearchFoundation, Inc. DIET CHANGES IN BREEDING TAWNY OWLS (Strix aluco) DAVID A. KIRK 1 Departmentof Zoology,2 TillydroneAvenue, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen,Scotland, U.K. AB9 2TN ABSTVO,CT.--I examinedthe contentsof Tawny Owl (Strix alucosylvatica) pellets, between April 1977 and February 1978, in mixed woodlandand gardensin northeastSuffolk, England. Six mammal, 14 bird and 5 invertebratespecies were recordedin a sample of 105 pellets. Overall, the Wood Mouse (Apodemussylvaticus) was the most frequently taken mammal prey and the House Sparrow (Passer domesticus)was the mostfrequently identified bird prey. Two typesof seasonaldiet changewere found; first, a shift from mammal prey in winter to bird prey in the breedingseason, and second,a shift from smallprey in the winter to medium-sized(> 30 g) prey in the breedingseason. Contrary to somefindings elsewherein England, birds, rather than mammals, contributedsignificantly to Tawny Owl diet during the breedingseason. Cambiosen la dieta de bfihosde la especieStrix alucodurante el periodode reproduccibn EXTRACTO.--Heexaminado el contenidode egagrbpilasdel bfiho de la especieStrix alucosylvatica, entre abril de 1977 y febrerode 1978, en florestasy huertosdel norestede Suffolk, Inglaterra. Seismamlferos, catorceaves y cincoespecies invertebradas fueron registradosen una muestrade 105 egagrbpilas.En el total, entre los mamlferos,el roedorApodemus sylvaticus fue el que conmils frecuenciafue presade estos bfihos;y entre las aves,la presaidentificada con mils frecuenciafue el gorribnPasser domesticus. Dos tipos de cambib en la dieta estacionalfueron observados:primero, un cambib de clase de presa: de mamlferosen invierno a la de avesen la estacibnreproductora; y segundo,un cambiben el tamafio de las presas:de pequefiasen el inviernoa medianas(>30 g) en la estacibnreproductora.
  • Ketupa Zeylonensis) Released More Than a Decade After Admission to a Wildlife Rescue Centre in Hong Kong SAR China

    Ketupa Zeylonensis) Released More Than a Decade After Admission to a Wildlife Rescue Centre in Hong Kong SAR China

    Survivorship and dispersal ability of a rehabilitated Brown Fish Owl (Ketupa zeylonensis) released more than a decade after admission to a wildlife rescue centre in Hong Kong SAR China The Brown Fish Owl, Sam, in captivity at Kadoorie Farm and Botanic Garden April 2008 Kadoorie Farm and Botanic Garden Publication Series: No 3 Survivorship and dispersal ability of a rehabilitated Brown Fish Owl (Ketupa zeylonensis) released more than a decade after admission to a wildlife rescue centre in Hong Kong SAR China Authors Rupert Griffiths¹ and Gary Ades ¹Present Address: The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, West Hatch Wildlife Centre, Taunton, Somerset, TA 35RT, United Kingdom Citation Kadoorie Farm and Botanic Garden. 2008. Survivorship and dispersal ability of a rehabilitated Brown Fish Owl (Ketupa zeylonensis) released more than a decade after admission to a wildlife rescue centre in Hong Kong SAR China. Kadoorie Farm and Botanic Garden Publication Series No.3. Kadoorie Farm and Botanic Garden, Hong Kong Special Adminstrative Region. Copyright © Kadoorie Farm and Botanic Garden Corporation Lam Kam Road, Tai Po, N.T. Hong Kong Special Adminstrative Region April 2008 ii CONTENTS Page Execuitve Summary 1 Introduction 2 Methodology 3 Results 4 Discussion 4 Acknowledgments 5 References 5 Table 7 Figures 8 iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A Brown Fish Owl (Ketupa zeylonensis) which had been maintained in captivity at Kadoorie Farm & Botanic Garden, for 11 years following its rescue, was released at a site in Sai Kung in Hong Kong on 28th November 2003. Post-release monitoring was carried out and the bird was confirmed to have survived for at least 3 months before the radio-transmitter was dropped.
  • CALIFORNIA SPOTTED OWL (Strix Occidentalis Occidentalis) Jeff N

    CALIFORNIA SPOTTED OWL (Strix Occidentalis Occidentalis) Jeff N

    II SPECIES ACCOUNTS Andy Birch PDF of California Spotted Owl account from: Shuford, W. D., and Gardali, T., editors. 2008. California Bird Species of Special Concern: A ranked assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of immediate conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds 1. Western Field Ornithologists, Camarillo, California, and California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento. California Bird Species of Special Concern CALIFORNIA SPOTTED OWL (Strix occidentalis occidentalis) Jeff N. Davis and Gordon I. Gould Jr. Criteria Scores Population Trend 10 Range Trend 0 Population Size 7.5 Range Size 5 Endemism 10 Population Concentration 0 Threats 15 Year-round Range Winter-only Range County Boundaries Water Bodies Kilometers 100 50 0 100 Year-round range of the California Spotted Owl in California. Essentially resident, though in winter some birds in the Sierra Nevada descend to lower elevations, where, at least to the south, small numbers of owls also occur year round. Outline of overall range stable but numbers have declined. California Spotted Owl Studies of Western Birds 1:227–233, 2008 227 Studies of Western Birds No. 1 SPECIAL CONCERN PRIORITY occurrence: one along the west slope of the Sierra Nevada from eastern Tehama County south to Currently considered a Bird Species of Special Tulare County, the other in the mountains of Concern (year round), priority 2. Included on southern California from Santa Barbara, Ventura, the special concern list since its inception, either and southwestern Kern counties southeast to together with S. o. caurina (Remsen 1978, 2nd central San Diego County. Elevations of known priority) or by itself (CDFG 1992).