September 2019 Volume 86, No. 3

The Audubon Society of Missouri Missouri’s Ornithological Society Since 1901 The Audubon Society of Missouri

Officers Regional Directors

Bill Eddleman*+, President (2020); Charles Burwick+ (2020) 608 Teton Lane, Cape Girardeau, MO Springfield (417) 860-9505 63701, (573) 579-7978 Lottie Bushmann+ (2018) [email protected] Columbia (573) 445-3942 (Vice Presidency— vacant) Jeff Cantrell+ (2020) Phil Wire*+, Secretary (2020) Neosho (471) 476-3311 1245 Boone St., Troy, MO 63379-2471 Mike Doyen+ (2020) (314) 960-0370 Rolla (573) 364-0020 [email protected] Sherry Leonardo+ (2018) Pat Lueders*+, Treasurer (2018) Grandview (816) 763-1393 1147 Hawken Pl., St. Louis, MO 63119; (314) 222-1711 Brent Galliart+ (2018) [email protected] St. Joseph (816) 232-6038

Honorary Directors Greg Leonard+ (2019) Richard A. Anderson, St. Louis** Columbia (573) 443-8263 Nathan Fay, Ozark** Terry McNeely+ (2019) Leo Galloway, St. Joseph** Jameson (660) 828-4215 Jim Jackson, Marthasville Lisle Jeffrey, Columbia** Mike Grant+ (2019) Floyd Lawhon, St. Joseph** Chesterfield (314) 779-8032 Patrick Mahnkey, Forsyth** Rebecca Matthews, Springfield** Chairs Sydney Wade, Jefferson City** Bill Clark, Historian Dave Witten, Columbia** 3906 Grace Ellen Dr. John Wylie, Jefferson City** Columbia, MO 65202 Brad Jacobs, 2016 Recipient of the (573) 474-4510

Rudolf Bennitt Award

Jim Jackson, 2012 Recipient of the Kevin Wehner, Membership

Rudolf Bennitt Award 510 Ridgeway Ave. Columbia, MO 65203 Dr. David Easterla, 2006 Recipient (573) 815-0352 of the Rudolf Bennitt Award [email protected] Paul E. Bauer, 2004 Recipient of the

Rudolf Bennitt Award + Board Position * Executive Committee Member **Deceased

Page i THE BLUEBIRD The Bluebird

The Bluebird Editor: Allen Gathman*+, 3148 Hwy. C, Pocahontas, MO 63779, (573) 579-5464, [email protected] Christmas Bird Count Compiler: Randy Korotev, 800 Oakbrook Lane, St. Louis, MO 63132, (314) 884-2189, [email protected] Communication Services: Kevin Wehner+, Webmaster, http://mobirds.org, Susan Hazelwood and David Scheu, Co-owners Listserve, [email protected],edu ASM Scholarship Committee: Sue Gustafson, Chair, 429 Belleview Ave., Webster Groves, MO 63119 (314) 882-8006, [email protected] MO Bird Records Committee: Brad Jacobs+—Chair, 11300 Vemers Ford Road, Columbia, MO 65201, (573) 874-3904, [email protected] Bill Rowe—Secretary, 7414 Kenrick Valley Drive, St Louis, MO 63119- 5726 (314) 962-0544, [email protected] Seasonal Survey Editors: Spring: Lisa Berger, 1947 South Kings Avenue, Springfield, MO 65807- 2733, (417) 860-9108, [email protected] Summer: Allen Gathman, PO Box 1, Pocahontas, MO 63779, (573) 579- 5464, [email protected] Fall: Mary Nemecek, 7807 N. Merimac Ct, Kansas City MO 64151, (816) 210-5148; [email protected] Winter: Pete Monacell, 2324 West Main Street, Jefferson City MO 65109., (573) 289-8116; [email protected]

* Executive Committee Member + Board Position

Deadlines for submission of material for publication in The Bluebird Manuscripts for The Bluebird—to the editor by: Feb. 1 for March issue; May 1 for June issue; Aug. 1 for Sept. issue; Nov. 1 for Dec. issue Deadlines for submissions to the Seasonal Survey Editors Winter (Dec. 1-Feb. 28)—to Mary Nemecek by Mar. 10 Spring (Mar. 1-May 31)—to Lisa Berger by June 10 Summer (June 1-July. 31)—to Paul McKenzie by Aug 10 Fall (Aug. 1-Nov. 30)—to Joe Eades by Dec. 10

Page ii THE BLUEBIRD Table of Contents

September 2019 Volume 86, No. 3

93 President’s Corner—Bill Eddleman 95 Fall Meeting Returns to Camp Clover Point 96 Subscribe to the MOBIRDS list 97 Bylaws Changes to be Voted on at the Fall 2019 Meeting 99 We Welcome Our New ASM Members! — Kevin Wehner 100 We Found a Ruff—Pete Monacell 110 Missouri River Academy– Katie Hathaway and Kristen Schulte 115 The Biggest Year in Missouri— Kendell Loyd 119 Protecting a Heron Rookery in St. Louis —Maureen Thomas-Murphy 122 Peer-Reviewed Paper: Comments on Winter Shrike Identification in Missouri — Mary Nemecek and Marquette Mutchler 131 Peer-Reviewed Paper: Light Pollution and Immunosuppression: Determining the role of artificial lighting in coccidiosis in non- migratory birds — Jake Thoenen, Dana Ripper, and Ethan Duke 141 Fall 2018 Seasonal Report — Joseph W. Eades 147 Winter 2018-2019 Seasonal Report — Mary Nemecek 155 A Birders’ Guide to Missouri Public Lands — Allen Gathman and Mark Haas

Front Cover— Dickcissel, Palmetto Area, Greene, 17 May 2019. Photo Paul McKenzie

Black-bellied Whistling- Duck, Delaney Lake CA Mississippi, 12 July 2019 Photo Mark Haas

THE BLUEBIRD is published quarterly by The Audubon Society of Missouri. The submission of articles, photographs, and artwork is welcomed and encouraged. The views and opinions ex- pressed in this journal are those of each contributing writer and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of The Audubon Society of Missouri or its officers, Board of Directors, or editors. Send address corrections to ASM, 2101 W. Broadway, PMB 122, Columbia, MO 65203-1261.

Page iii THE BLUEBIRD President’s Corner—Bill Eddleman

Well, the majority of those who voted have agreed to a name change for our organization, and the name selected is “Missouri Birding Society.” The last step to voting on this change is to approve changes to the name in our Bylaws. This will occur at the Fall Meeting on Saturday night, and the changes must be approved by 2/3 of those attending the Fall Meeting, which will be at Camp Clover Point on September 27- 29.

It’s already been an interesting fall migration. I was lucky enough to see the American Fla- mingo in New Madrid County in July, and there are other interesting sightings popping up as I write this. A number of the species are what we used to consider “southern” species, and are things that were practically unheard of in Missouri during my early days of birding: whistling ducks, waders, and others.

If the Records Committee accepts the flamingo as a valid wild bird, that will be my 597th species for North America. I lack three that I should have seen in Missouri, so with a little effort, I’ll hit 600 in the near future. Thanks to some trips to the tropics, my world list recently surpassed 1000 (and counting!).

Also as I write this, the news at the national level for rare species conservation is bleak. It has always been tough fighting for endangered species conservation, precisely because many of the factors that result in species becoming endangered are activities of extrac- tive industries and other powerful lobbies. The proposal is to forego conservation activities if they interfere with economic interests. If this actually happens, we can expect to lose more species.

Page 93 THE BLUEBIRD Perhaps even more concerning are attacks on migratory bird conservation. These rules and regulations are not “new” things—the Mi- gratory Bird Treaty Act and implementing rules date back 101 years—to 1918. Often when I point out things that are illegal under this law (examples include possession of feathers of non-hunted species, taking nestling birds into captivity, and disturbing nests), many people act like this is a new "guv-ment” restriction. Nope, it’s been that way for 100 years.

All of this boils down to living in interesting (and disturbing) times. We all are in this for birding and appreciating birds, but without conservation efforts, we won’t have nearly as many birds to watch. Our organization is trying to do what we can for conservation activities.

So, come to the fall meeting and hear about ASM efforts on behalf of bird conservation. You’ll be happy to hear about what we have done with the resources we have! Sincerely, Bill Eddleman, ASM President

Summer Tanager 6 Jun 2019 Photo Bill Palmer

Page 94 THE BLUEBIRD

Fall Meeting Returns to Camp Clover Point

Join us on September 27-29 at Camp Clover Point for the Fall ASM Meeting! Besides voting on the Bylaws changes that will implement our name change, we will have a full weekend of birding and pro- grams.

Once again, $75 will cover two nights’ lodging, six meals, and your registration fee. Alternatively, there are several nearby motels for those who prefer not to “camp.” As always, you can register only, and pay for individual meals if you desire.

The weekend begins with Friday evening presentations by graduate students working on birds at Missouri universities. Have some great bird images to share? Bring them on a flash drive and we will have an “open projector” to share them.

Saturday will start with trips to local favorite areas after breakfast. Be sure and let Bill know if you want to lead a trip to a local site. The ASM Board will meet just after lunch. This year’s mid-afternoon workshop will be another ever-popular identification challenge presentation by the Missouri Bird Records Committee’s Secretary, Bill Rowe.

For those who know little about ASM’s “birding with a purpose” and conservation efforts, President Bill Eddleman will be presenting an overview a progress report on the things our expertise as birders have accomplished. Most of the members probably know little about these efforts, so this should be an eye-opener for many. Following the program, we will have the presentation of the Top Ten Birds of last year, our business meeting, and a vote on the Bylaws changes.

Sunday we will have more trips, including a hawk watch if the weather cooperates. Lunch will be back at Camp Clover Point, followed by the tally of bird species seen.

Page 95 THE BLUEBIRD

Registration will be open soon, so be sure to sign up early! Registra- tion deadline is September 16. Details may be found at: https:// mobirds.org/

Hope to see everyone there!

Subscribe to the MOBIRDS Listserv

If you are curious about what birds are being seen around Missouri, have a question about a bird, enjoy sharing your birding experiences, want to know what field trips are coming up, or want to meet other birders online, the ASM sponsored MOBIRDS listserv is for you. Join the active Missouri birding community by subscribing. Instructions for subscribing: mobirds.org/Listserve/ListserveHelp.pdf

Please note that ASM members are NOT automatically subscribed to the listserv. You must subscribe yourself by following the instructions linked above.

Also, all listserv posts are retained in a searchable archive: po.missouri.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=MOBIRDS-L

Page 96 THE BLUEBIRD Bylaws Changes to be Voted on at the Fall 2019 Meeting

We will be voting on changing the organization’s name in the bylaws at the Fall Meeting, as well as two other proposed changes. Article VI of the bylaws provides for amending the document as follows:

“These Bylaws may be amended, altered or repealed at any annual fall meeting of the membership by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of members present and voting, provided that written notice of the meeting and the substance of the action proposed shall be mailed or other- wise provided to each member at least three (3) weeks prior to such meeting.” Printing these proposed changes constitutes that notice. The current bylaws may be viewed at: https://mobirds.org/ Documents/ASMBy-laws.pdf

PROPOSED CHANGES

Heading

Old: BYLAWS OF THE AUDUBON SOCIETY OF MISSOURI New: BYLAWS OF THE MISSOURI BIRDING SOCIETY

Adoption Date

Old: Adopted September 2004 New: Adopted September 2019

ARTICLE I. MEMBERSHIP, Letter “A,” Eligibility

Old: A. Eligibility. Any individual, organization, or institution in accord with the objectives of The Audubon Society of Missouri as set forth in its Articles of Association shall be eligible for membership in the Society.

Page 97 THE BLUEBIRD New: A. Eligibility. Any individual, organization, or institution in accord with the objectives of The Missouri Birding Society as set forth in its Articles of Association shall be eligible for membership in the Society.

[Rationale: The proposal to change the name has been voted upon electronically, with all members have the opportunity to vote. The proposed new name garnered more votes than the other two proposed names.] ARTICLE II. B. Nominations.

New: B. Nominating Committee. The President shall appoint no fewer than three members snd no more than five members to serve as a Nominating Committee. This committee will identify and secure commitments from individuals who will be candidates for the offices of Vice President, Secretary, and Treasurer.

This change also changes the letters assigned to subsequent sections as follows: C. Nominations. D. Election and Term. E. Duties of Officers. F. Executive Committee. [Rationale: Obtaining individuals to serve as officers has fallen mostly on the President in recent years. No individual can know all possible candidates for offices from around the state, so a committee comprised of diverse individuals can do a better job of finding candidates.] ARTICLE II. D. Duties of Officers. 2. Vice President.

New: [Add after “The Vice President shall”] “serve as President- Elect and”

[Rationale: This action adds language that has become standard practice in the last 15 years.]

Page 98 THE BLUEBIRD

WE WELCOME OUR NEW ASM MEMBERS! Kevin Wehner

Remember, new members are our future. If a new member lives near you, say, “Howdy and welcome to ASM.” In addition, recruit another new member. Welcome to these 16 new ASM members in the 3rd quarter of 2019!

Bill Blackledge Plattsburg, MO John Bollin Leavenworth, KS Sonya Brandt Linn, MO Cathy & Jim Huckins Columbia, MO Sandra Kubal Fayette, MO Dawn Loehr University City, MO Kendell Loyd Springfield, MO Qingping Li & Jim Umen St. Louis, MO Kelly, Jason, Hailey, Matthew, & Ryan Smith O'Fallon, MO Wendy Williams Kirkwood, MO

Page 99 THE BLUEBIRD We Found A Ruff

By Pete Monacell

At 7am on Tuesday, May 21, 2019, I met my friend Diane Bricmont in a parking lot just east of the small village of McBaine, which is itself just north of Eagle Bluffs Conservation Area in Boone County, Missouri. It was good to see Diane, who had woken up very early to drive to the middle of our state from her St. Louis suburb. After we greeted one another, Diane explained that because of the wet weather, she was wearing metal hummingbird-shaped earrings instead of choosing from among her sizeable assortment of bird-shaped earrings made of paper. We were both concerned that rain might start up again; it had soaked the ground the night before, and a lot of moisture still thickened the air. I put my binoculars around my neck and transferred my spotting scope and DSLR camera, with a long lens attached, into Diane’s SUV; then, she drove us towards Eagle Bluffs. Before long, we were reminiscing about events that had occurred at the Missouri Audubon Society meeting a few weeks prior.

Diane and I entered Eagle Bluffs and soon found birding to be relatively slow along the main access road, which runs south, following the supply channel that transports treated wastewater to wetland pools and, ultimately, the Missouri River. (This large conservation area is an astounding feat of both civil engagement and civil engi- neering.) Canada Geese, Great Blue Herons, Great Egrets, and a few Blue-winged Teal occupied some of the pools. The highlight of our drive was hearing a Wilson’s Warbler sounding its wobbly trills from a willow stand—a sign that land bird migration had not ended yet. And of course, many of Eagle Bluffs’ breeding residents were singing as well: Dickcissels, Indigo Buntings, Yellow Warblers, Com- mon Yellowthroats, Orchard Orioles, a Song Sparrow, a Yellow- breasted Chat, and more. As we approached the southern end of the channel, we noticed a couple of Double-crested Cormorants in the deeper water, and then a large pale mass in the middle of shallower stretch. This mass turned out to be a flock of more than forty closely packed American White Pelicans.

Despite having observed all of these species, we were hoping for

Page 100 THE BLUEBIRD even more excitement. Eagle Bluffs is one of the richest sites in all of Missouri birding, which is why many birders visit again and again, often spending several hours there each time. Living in Jefferson City, which is only forty-five minutes away from Eagle Bluffs, I’ve gone there once a month or more since I began seriously birding in the spring of 2017. Understandably, birders like Diane, who can only visit a handful of times per year, want to pack a season’s worth of sightings into a single Eagle Bluffs outing. I was happy to help her to do this and felt, perhaps, a little responsible that we weren’t seeing a greater variety of species. The main reason for our disappoint- ment was that high water levels had deprived the area of almost all of its mudflats, and we hadn’t observed any shorebirds at all on the drive in. Nevertheless, I knew that a number of good birders had recently reported shorebirds in a location that had been little searched in the past. I mentioned to Diane that we might find some interesting species at that particular site, which is near the southwestern corner of Eagle Bluffs and can only be reached by foot.

We parked as close as possible to this location and, with our gear in hand, began to walk along several hundred yards of muddy levee. Immediately, Diane noticed some white terns flying in from the north. As they drew overhead, we were able to identify them by their thick red bills, large size, and short tails: five Caspians. The rest of our walk was also eventful. A Sora whinnied; then, we heard the slow, soft hooting of a Least Bittern, and then, the rhythmic cackle of a Common Gallinule, which eventually stepped out from cattails and showed us the orange-red “shield” running from its bill up to its forehead. I took many photos of this secretive bird, which is not one that either of us usually sees up close. As we traveled atop the levee, we noticed thousands of swallows feeding over the water to our south. Scraggly trees growing from the shorelines seemed covered with Bank and Cliff Swallows. When we finally arrived at the eastern edge of the levee, we looked south, towards new mudflats that the high water levels had created at the base of a small knoll. It was then that an adult Black-crowned Night Heron squawked and took off from the shoreline. As it flew into a tree on the other side of the water, we could see its white body contrasting against strikingly black flight feathers. A startled Wood Duck soon cried out and followed the heron across the water.

Page 101 THE BLUEBIRD I set up my spotting scope and began to scan the new mudflats for shorebirds, which I really enjoy seeing. I like how difficult they can be to identify; to a beginning birder, as I was just a short time ago, they can “all look the same.” Learning the fine subtleties in their shapes and plumages during study at home is engaging enough— but being able to apply that knowledge in the field is truly exhilarat- ing. Although I will always be learning, I can say for certain that with time and effort, a birder can pick out, say, a Semipalmated Sandpiper among a flock of Least Sandpiper. It happened that both of these small shorebird species were present during my outing with Diane, along with slightly larger White-rumped Sandpipers, identifi- able in part by the long wing feathers that extend past their tails when they’re standing, and Spotted Sandpipers, which bob their back ends up and down compulsively. I noticed a number of Pectoral Sandpipers, too, in the grassier areas rising above the mudflats. Some of the male Pecs, which are significantly larger than females, had begun to develop black breeding patches on their breasts. I had only seen these shorebirds in such transitional plumage a few times before.

Then my scope landed on a shorebird that I did not recognize. Much like the Pectoral Sandpipers, it was walking in the grass and jab- bing its bill down to feed on invertebrates under the surface. It bore a superficial resemblance to the Pecs; however, it was larger overall, with a longer, thicker neck, and a more rotund chest. The bird looked “scaly” on its back, which was darker than a Pec’s back. It had orange legs, not the yellow legs of a Pec. Its bill was all dark and nearly straight, lacking the yellow base and marked downward curve of a Pec. The breast showed a dark splotchiness beyond anything that a even male Pec would develop in the spring. I took inven- tory of these characteristics, then took a deep breath and tried to keep my vision trained through the scope. I still didn’t know what I was seeing, but I liked the feeling that I had. Birders, I think, seek out this kind of confusion, as long as it isn’t permanent. After all, if the birds that we see always fit the preconceived images that we have in our heads, we’ll have a very hard time ever seeing anything new.

The next few moments went like this:

Page 102 THE BLUEBIRD

With an eye still on the scope, and chuckling a little under my breath, I asked, “Diane, what the —— is that?” This got her atten- tion. I fixed the trajectory of my scope using adjustment knobs on my tri- pod and invited her to take a look. And while she did so, I said aloud, to my own amazement, “I think it’s a Ruff.” Diane studied the bird through the scope for thirty seconds or so, then turned to me. “Pete, I think it’s a Ruff,” she said. “We have to get pictures,” I said.

Experiences leading up to this point had, at least in part, prepared us both. Diane had seen a Ruff before—a “Reeve,” actually, which is what a female Ruff is often called— in 2017 during an Illinois Ornitho- logical Society event. That was her “lifer” Ruff, the first time she had ever seen one. My own experiences with Ruffs, if I can even call them that, consisted of two misses, or “dips,” as birders say. The first of these occurred in May 2018, when I was assisting two very accomplished lifelong birders, my friends Brad Jacobs and Paul McKenzie, with a breeding bird survey of Eagle Bluffs and sur- rounding areas. Typically, we had split up to cover more ground: I was birding the swamp near the Missouri River, while Paul was driving areas to the east, and Brad was scoping shorebirds on a large mudflat at the southern end of Eagle Bluffs. A few hours into our morning, Brad called me on his mobile phone to say that he had “one of those European sandpipers” in his scope. Quickly, I found myself running, splashing though mud, dodging large trees, and tearing my pants on thorns. I reached my truck and drove hastily over gravel roads, then onto a two-track path that the area manager had given us permission to drive for the day. But when I ran up to Brad at last, he informed me that the bird, identified as a Ruff, had just flown off of the mudflat and towards the river.

Page 103 THE BLUEBIRD

My second dip on a Ruff was less dramatic. Almost one month prior to my Eagle Bluffs outing with Diane, I had traveled with Brad and Paul all the way to Four Rivers Conservation Area in southwestern Missouri to chase a Ruff first located by Reggie Swartzentruber and Ricky Hostetler, two birders known for their talent both within their Mennonite community and outside of it. I remember Ricky calling me with the news: “I’ve got a Ruff,” he said. One and a half days later, Brad, Paul, and I were able to chase the bird, an effort that required more than three hours of driving each way. Although we did- n’t relocate Reggie and Ricky’s Ruff, we did observe more than two thousand Greater Yellowlegs in the wetland where they found it— an extraordinary shorebird concentration in Missouri.

Moreover, I now know that the studying I did in preparation for this particular chase, as well as my conversations with Brad and Paul, would prove invaluable to me weeks later. Ruffs can be “chicken- like” in shape, Brad said from the driver’s seat. He and Paul quizzed me on the various leg colors and plumages that a Ruff can have. They asked me about body size, bill shape, and more. Because I had studied photos and read descriptions, I was able to answer some of their questions. In particular, I had focused on telling Reeves and nonbreeding male Ruffs apart from Pectoral Sandpipers, with which they often associate after straying to North America from their typical range in Africa and Eurasia. During the breeding season, almost all male Ruffs sport their namesake feature, a broad collar of shaggy feathers that they use to impress females while displaying at leks, or communal breeding sites. Reeves and nonbreeding males are much plainer, showing many of the characteristics that I’ve already mentioned. Brad and Paul were good teachers, and both had found Ruffs in Missouri before. By the end of our day in the southwest of our state, I still had not.

Weeks later in Mid-Missouri, Diane and I were fairly sure of what we were looking at on a mudflat a couple hundred yards to our south. We wanted documentation, but the long distance and over- cast skies made photography difficult, and I had trouble getting my long lens focused on the bird. Nevertheless, after some struggle and concern that the Ruff would take off, I came away with grainy images showing several important characteristics. Diane, using her super -zoom camera, managed similar photos. After magnifying the bird on the backs of our cameras, we were able to see further identifying features, such as the white ring at the base of the bill and the

Page 104 THE BLUEBIRD “floppy,” boldly barred tertial feathers that ruffled up above the bird’s tail with any gust of wind. We gathered additional evidence when I was able to check these and other features against the illustrations provided in a couple of smartphone applications.

Funny, though: we were still uncertain; or, perhaps it’s more accu- rate to say that we were in disbelief at what we were watching so far away and in such poor light. To complicate our situation, the appropriate action to take after locating a bird of this rarity would be to inform the birding community. After all, many U.S. birders would like to see a Ruff, even if they’ve observed one before and especially if the bird is present in their home state. Reporting the occurrence of a Ruff is a big deal, and when it might still be seen by additional observers—is “chaseable,” as birders say—that’s an even bigger deal. Such a report will be important to others, and some will take time out of their lives and travel various distances to try to see the rare bird. Consequently, there is and was no room for uncertainty.

“We need to call Brad and Paul,” I said. It was convenient, then, that they were already birding together when Diane phoned Brad with the news. Although I understood that they had left for Eagle Bluffs immediately upon hearing from Diane, waiting for Brad and Paul to arrive was nerve-wracking. The large, dark shorebird across the channel might have flown away at any time. What’s more, it re- peatedly passed out of sight, sometimes for several minutes, by walking behind a rise on the weedy spit of land on which it had been feeding. Above all, I worried that we, or at least I, had misidentified the bird.

Finally, we saw a green Toyota SUV pull up in the distance. Brad and Paul got out, loaded their spotting scopes onto their shoulders, and walked down the levee towards us. The weather was cold enough that Paul was wearing his Louisiana State sweatshirt, in addition to his purple LSU ballcap. Brad, in his camouflage muck boots and a fuzzy blue fleece, seemed to saunter next to him. If you were to ask me at the time, both of them were moving too slowly, given the urgency I felt. But in due course, they arrived at our location, just as I thought I had the Ruff centered in my scope. However, whenever either Brad or Paul looked through it, they couldn’t see what I had seen. The bird kept walking out of view. This was very frustrating! After a short while, Brad set up his own scope to look for himself.

Page 105 THE BLUEBIRD But before Paul could do the same, I focused my scope on what I be- lieved to be the target bird and invited him to look through once more. He did, and declared, “That’s a Pectoral Sandpiper.” I felt a jolt of devastation and began to protest, with Diane joining me, by listing the characteristics of the bird we had tentatively identified as a Ruff. I must have known in my gut that Paul hadn’t seen this bird: either it had walked out of view again, or in my excitement, I had mistakenly focused on a big male Pec.

Either way, my feeling was short-lived. After Diane had instructed Brad just where to point his scope, he suddenly said, “I think you may be right.” Brad quickly began using his smartphone to capture images through the eyepiece. Then, after Paul had set up his own scope and I had suggested where he might direct it, he said one of the best things I’ve ever heard: “Oh, I didn’t see that bird.” Without another word, Paul started taking photos with his super-zoom camera. Following this burst of documentation, he turned his head to nod at Diane and me: “It’s a Ruff,” Paul said with a broad smile. Brad voiced his agreement. Diane and I locked eyes and smiled our- selves. We gave each other, then Paul, a high five. Four people standing in the mud on a cloudy, damp morning could hardly have been more elated.

“You found a Code 3 bird!” Diane said, referring to the American Birding Association code that indicates rarity in the ABA area. I suppose that’s true in a way, but this version of events is character- istically generous, and it’s only part of the story. I had “found” the bird only in the sense of spotting it first and suggesting a name. Di- ane had also studied the bird closely and had patiently and meticu- lously worked to document the observation and to firm up a tenta- tive identification. For their own part, Brad and Paul had dropped everything to do the same. Only after the four of us agreed on the species we were seeing did I begin to feel that the bird had truly been “found.” And only then did I relax and let the joy of what had happened sink in, while surrounded by some of my favorite company, including my two birding mentors. Hearing Brad and Paul’s con- gratulations felt rewarding then, and it still does now.

Our newfound certainty meant that we needed to spread the word. First, I used my smartphone to post a message to the MOBirds-L listserv, which Missouri’s birding community uses to share unusual species occurrences. Then, I submitted an observation checklist to the eBird website, so that news of the sighting would go out even more widely. Individuals who access eBird regularly or who receive

Page 106 THE BLUEBIRD hourly rare bird reports via email would be informed. Diane and I also called a few people who might not have received these messages in a timely way. It was particularly fun to call Ricky, who understandably decided not to chase the bird, since he had found his own Ruff a few weeks prior. Regardless, I appreciated his excitement.

Additional birders began to arrive as soon as forty minutes after my first posting. I felt very gratified that others could share in the experience. In time, a sizable group of birders was standing on the levee and happily helping the newcomers to see what they had traveled to see. Among the growing crowd were a number of my friends, as well as birders whom I would meet for the first time on that day. In ret- rospect, the cooperation and mutual concern that we all demonstrated seems utopian to me, as though we had created, in miniature, a perfect society. Brad found it difficult to pull away from the excitement but had to leave for an appointment after almost two hours on the levee. For more than an hour after Brad left, Paul, Diane, and I watched the Ruff and assisted others in doing the same. Ultimately, as noon came and went, we needed to eat lunch and move on with our lives.

During our hours-long observation, the Ruff had stayed in place—for the most part. Twice, the bird flew, along with the shorebirds around it. However, both times we were able to keep the bird in our binoculars, and both times, it returned to the original mudflat. Be- cause it was so big and dark, the Ruff stood out in the sky, even at a distance. The first time it flew, all of the shorebirds made a wide circle to the east and then, to our great relief, came back down where they had started. The second time the Ruff flew was more complicated: it split off from its companions and descended into in a large wetland pool immediately to our south. Many observers walked down the levee to try to relocate it, and soon, I was able to spot the Ruff among distant corn stubble. For the second time that day, I uncharacteristically cursed: “Holy ——, I’ve got the bird!” But before others could see it in the new location, the Ruff again decided that it preferred the previous spot and flew back once more. At that point, the bird settled down near the crest of the knoll, where it was eventually joined by both Black-bellied and Semipalmated Plovers. I hadn’t noticed a predator in the air and will never know exactly what made the shorebirds fly.

Ultimately, at least twenty-five people saw the Eagle Bluffs Ruff on May 21, 2019, including four birders who drove all the way from southwest Missouri and arrived in the late afternoon. To my

Page 107 THE BLUEBIRD knowledge, every person who tried to see this rare bird on that day was able to do so, even though rain recommenced in the evening. (And in fact, the rain that Diane and I had feared might start up again may have been what grounded the Ruff in the first place, and what kept it grounded as the sun began to set.) For some birders, like me, the Ruff was a lifer. For a smaller number of others, it became a valuable new bird to add to their lists of species seen in Mis- souri. In multiple ways, everyone who observed the Ruff on that day “found” this individual bird. They found it in binoculars, spotting scopes, and cameras; they found it in a particular place, moment, and company; and, they found its meaning in the contexts of their own lives.

I’m don’t think I’m finished articulating that meaning for myself, although I can start to do so. In practical terms, the Ruff taught me that it was time to have more confidence in my bird identifications. But in a more philosophical sense, the Ruff revealed a broader ca- pacity for how I might relate to the world. For me, every bird that I see or hear is like a radar “ping” confirming that I occupy a unique position in space. The Ruff sounded much louder than an average “ping,” though; it was like a blast wave that reverberated all the way through my body, and lingered for a while. The Ruff was so strange, so far beyond my realm of experience, that as I observed it, I felt as present and alive in the world as I ever have. Such a height- ened response seems fitting when glimpsing the extent to which our surroundings are large and various and full of wonder.

On the morning of May 22, 2019, I received word via the MOBirds-L listserv that the Ruff was absent from the location where we had found it. And as it happened, the bird could not be relocated over the course of that day, or any day that followed. I’m aware that additional birders had already traveled to Eagle Bluffs, or might have done so, in hopes of seeing the bird, and I wish that the Ruff had continued for an even longer stay.

In truth, however, it was never a Ruff to begin with. It was actually—to play a minor word game here—a Reeve, according to an ex- pert to whom Brad would subsequently send our photos. But this is no problem, of course: the common name for the species is “Ruff,” meaning that a Reeve is a Ruff, and a Ruff is a Reeve half the time.

As I finish writing this, I’m wondering about all of the forces that brought the 2019 Reeve to Mid-Missouri, and I’m feeling grateful to this beautiful bird, wherever it might be found.

Page 108 THE BLUEBIRD

*** This essay is dedicated to Diane Bricmont, Brad Jacobs, Paul McKenzie, and all of the birders who have helped me to feel so welcome in Missouri’s wonderful birding community.

***

Photos by Bill Palmer.

***

See p.96 of this issue for how to subscribe to MOBirds-L.

Page 109 THE BLUEBIRD Missouri River Academy

By Katie Hathaway and Kristen Schulte

It’s hard to believe another Missouri River Academy has come to an end. Every year is unique and incredibly special, but this year was really one for the books. The lessons learned and friendships made will not be soon forgotten. Neither will the generous support of the Audubon Society of Missouri (ASM) Partnership Funding. ASM funding allowed Missouri River Relief to keep our program registration fee for Missouri River Academy at an affordable rate for Missouri families. Our registration rate was created in 2016, and due to the rising cost of room and board and marketing, the current rate does not cover the actual cost of the Missouri River Academy. ASM Partnership Funding allows us to keep the affordable rate of $400 per student for families and donors vs. $485 per student. The reasonable program registration fee has helped make our “sponsor a student” program attractive to individual contributors. Under this program, many of the students that attend Missouri River Academy receive a partial or full financial aid award. To give you a better idea of how the impact of this funding, here is a day-by-day breakdown of the students’ experiences. Please note that due to flooding we were not able to go on the Missouri River. Sunday, July 7th – Welcome to Missouri River Academy Twenty-one eager campers arrived at Camp Trinity and were welcomed to the 2019 Missouri River Academy. The first day of camp was focused on getting to know one another and gearing up for the next four days of learning about the Missouri River. An Academy staple, the Missouri River Olympics, kicked off and four fierce Olympic Teams were formed. Children of Lupa, Below Sea Level, Better than Kampbell, and GELEC competed in a series of games and activities throughout the week for a chance to win a special prize. The day finished with a night scavenger hunt hike, where students got to know each other better and learn about the stars. Monday, July 8th – Connecting to the Missouri River

With the question “How do I explore my connection to the Missouri

Page 110 THE BLUEBIRD River?” in mind, the second day of Academy included getting to know the history behind the Big Muddy, and learning about how it functions. The day started at Pinckney’s Bed & Breakfast on a beautiful over- look above the Missouri River, where we learned about the history of the river and some of the extinct wildlife that once roamed the wa- tershed by examining fossilized teeth. We then headed to the riverfront in downtown New Haven and learned about sedimentation of the Missouri River. While along the waterfront, we broke out the blue trash bags and did a river clean up, Missouri River Relief style. Students picked up trash and also looked for their own trash treasure, which they could use for their creative art project later in the week. In the afternoon, students participated in an 8-mile bike ride along the Katy Trail, stopping along the way at Peers Store to learn about the history of the area. After a day out in the sun, the pool at Camp Trinity was a favorite hangout spot for most students during community time. Later in the day we explored a nearby stream and met wildlife along the way. Student caught many toads, grasshoppers, and other insects. During Missouri River Olympics the competition was fierce, but Be- low Sea Level took the lead after winning a couple rounds of a tag game called Keeper of the Castle. The night ended with an astronomy and night sky lesson, where students learned more about what’s beyond Earth. They even saw the rings of Saturn. Tuesday, July 9th – Behind the Scenes of the Missouri River During the third day of Academy, we explored the ecology of the Missouri River. Students focused on the question, “What compo- nents make up the Missouri River ecosystem?”

Page 111 THE BLUEBIRD We started the day off at Shaw Nature Reserve for some serious birding with Missouri River Bird Observatory. We saw and heard 17 different bird species, including an Indigo Bunting, a Summer Tana- ger, and a Great Blue Heron. The fun continued as we did some nature journaling with artist and outdoor educator Angie Jungbluth. To prepare us for capturing the natural world on paper, Angie challenged us all to rethink how we draw with various sketching techniques, such as blind sketching and gesture drawings. We even learned how to draw a bird song. She also led a watercolor lesson, where students painted the forest at Shaw Nature Reserve. River Academy wouldn’t be complete without a little time on the water. We headed to the Mera- mec River, where we participated in some fisheries activities with Sarah Pepers and her staff from Missouri Department of Conservation. We caught fish using nets and through electro- fishing. The Missouri Depart- ment of Conservation folks were kind enough to educate us on what fish species we caught as well. We caught a wide variety of fish, two of which were the Stoneroller and Brook Silverside.

After spending some time out on the river, we came back to Camp Trinity, where Darby Niswonger and a couple of other wonderful folks from MDC had a fish fillet demonstration waiting for us. Many students got to test their hands at preparing catfish to be fried, while others had the opportunity to enjoy fishing. Missouri River Olympics were tough. All teams played their hearts out in a game of Capture the Flag, but after solving a tough riddle, Better Than Kampbell took the lead. Day three of Missouri River Academy ended on the best note possible- with an ice cream social at New Haven Ice Cream Shoppe.

Wednesday, July 10th – Forces that Shape the Missouri River

Page 112 THE BLUEBIRD From learning about wastewater treatment along the river, to hearing stories from those who have paddled the river, to discovering how life has developed in a historic river town, we dove into a number of activities to get the kids thinking about the question, “What is the relationship between humans and the Missouri River?” We kicked off the day touring the wastewater plant in New Haven and got the chance to learn about the importance of treating water, as well as the challenges that go with it. We learned about the hard- ships various flushed products impose on the wastewater treatment process. We then visited Astral Glass Studio in downtown New Haven, where Lance Stroheke and Gary Rice demonstrated glass blowing, creating a bluebird and a sea turtle right before our eyes. Afterward, they talked to us about their experience paddling 1,300 miles on the Missouri River. The kids also really enjoyed hanging out with their shop dogs. While downtown, we stopped by Avant Garden, and Charissa Coyle talked to us about the importance of supporting local agriculture, as well as how this year’s flooding and heavy rain has impacted growing produce in the Missouri River Valley. Using ingredients from Avant Gardens, we made fresh salsa together and celebrated with tacos for lunch. After lunch, we headed to Deutschheim State Historic Site in Her- mann and traveled back in time to explore Hermann’s German roots while touring historic family homes. After a day of activities, we headed back to Camp Trinity, where students were introduced to the Creative Art Project. Campers part- nered up, chose an issue relating to the Missouri River, and began thinking about how to develop their projects. The Olympic Games were intense, but after winning the “Face the Cookie” challenge, and solving the most riddles, Below Sea Level took first place again.

Page 113 THE BLUEBIRD We finished the evening making s’mores around a campfire together --the best way to end a day at camp. Thursday, July 11th – Connecting Others to the Missouri River The last day of Missouri River Academy was spent reflecting on the past week and thinking about how to take what was learned beyond New Haven, Missouri. Students focused on the question “How do we deepen a sense of responsibility to the care of the Missouri River?” We kicked off the day with the final round of Missouri River Olym- pics. The kids participated in a relay race. It was neck and neck, but after a tie-breaker ring toss between Below Sea Level and GELEC, Below Sea Level took the prize this year. Each member of the team received a handmade petrified wood necklace, crafted by Gale John- son. After saying goodbye to Camp Trinity, we all headed to the New Ha- ven Old School House and the kids constructed their Missouri River Creative Art Projects. They made trash sculptures, paintings, po- ems, and bumper stickers to raise awareness about specific issues related to the Missouri River. Before student presentations began and parents and guardians arrived, we all participated in an appreciation activity where we were able to express gratitude to one another. During “Pass the Feather”, we all reflected on our highlights of the week. What was mentioned most was how special it was that we were all able to connect so quickly with one another. During student presentations, campers were able to show off their creative art projects to friends and family. It was amazing to see the kids talk so passionately about the issues they researched and to call their audience to action. The day ended with a bittersweet closing ceremony. Every camper received a certificate for completing Academy, and many heartfelt goodbyes were said to both new and old friends.

Page 114 THE BLUEBIRD The Biggest Year in Missouri

Kendell Loyd

Birds have always been a part of my life, though I have only been carefully recording the species I see since around 2013. I moved from Reynolds Co. to Springfield, Missouri in 2011 as I entered my freshman year at Missouri State University (MSU) to major in biology. Eventually, I entered graduate school at MSU for biology and then the science education program, and now I am a biology teacher at Logan Rogersville High School. In 2012, a good friend of mine at Missouri Western University in St. Joseph invited me up to visit Loess Bluffs National Wildlife Refuge (previously Squaw Creek NWR). As we stepped out of the vehicle at the observation deck on the edge of Eagle Pool, we were met with the roar of more than a million Snow Geese. The energy in the air from this flock left me with a feeling of joy I couldn’t explain, but it was this moment when I knew I wanted to further experience birds. In the spring semester, I took my first ornithology class with Dr. Janice Greene. That class put me on a path to becoming an actual birder. It was in her class I began to document the species I saw on each outing, and soon I discovered how much easier eBird made that process. I started birding on my own. By fall, I was using eBird to locate where I might find new life birds around Springfield. I began working with Dr. Greene at a banding station in Taney Co. in 2014, and soon became involved with the Greater Ozarks Audubon Socie- ty. In 2017, without making much of an attempt to chase any particular species, I had seen around 200 species in Missouri. Almost all of these species were in the Springfield area, including Red-throated Loon and Long-tailed Duck on Fellows Lake and Rufous Humming- bird on our Christmas Bird Count. I wanted to try to do better in 2018: a personal record. I figured by making more of an effort and traveling a bit, I could probably break 250 species. As most know, a Big Year is a personal challenge to encounter as many bird species as possible within a defined geographical region within a single calendar year. The Missouri Big Year record was set at 314 species by Tim Barksdale in 1991. I had not considered this

Page 115 THE BLUEBIRD number a possibility at the time, knowing many had tried to break it in the 26 years it stood. I planned to stay above an average of a new bird per day for as long as possible, and I did this until November 12. The number of vagrant species in 2018 was exceptional. I ended up seeing 58 rare, casual, and accidental species. My year began with Long-tailed Duck and Short-eared Owl in Greene Co. I birded almost exclusively in southwest Missouri, and by the end of January, I had seen 111 species. At the beginning of February, with the encouragement of Tim Barksdale—and my now fiancée Abigail—, I began aggressively pur- suing the Big Year record. I realized I had a good start, and if I did not attempt to break the record now, I would likely not have the chance again. I could not afford to wait for another year. So, after a very cold night in my vehicle, I saw Evening Grosbeak in Boone Co., then Common Redpoll in Jackson Co. I picked up Snowy Owl and Sandhill Crane in Saline Co., followed by Iceland, Lesser Black-backed, and Glaucous Gulls in St. Charles Co. March began with Golden- crowned Sparrow and continued with a trip after teaching to the St. Louis area to see Northern Shrike and White-winged Scoter. The month ended with three Yellow Rail, Schell-Osage CA Vernon male Surf Scoter on Lions 29 Apr 2018. Photo Kendell Loyd Lake and a Bewick’s Wren near Camdenton. April delivered Burrowing Owl, Pacific Loon, and Green-tailed Tow- hee. While listening to my tire deflate, I identified a Glossy Ibis in Vernon Co. A nice man in Schell City helped me to change my tire. May began with an overnight dash from a Cape May Warbler in St. Louis City to a Lazuli Bunting at Loess Bluffs NWR and then southeast to Scott Co. for Black-bellied Whistling-Duck. May ended with Mottled Duck back at Loess Bluffs. Though I birded almost every

Page 116 THE BLUEBIRD day, June and July resulted in no new birds, until a Cave Swallow in Bates Co.; this was my 300th species. August began at dawn with Anhinga in Dunklin Co. and White Ibis in Stoddard Co. Roseate Spoonbill (Wayne Co.) was followed by Red- necked Phalarope (Boone Co.) and Rufous Hummingbird (Dade Co.) I finished October with 313 species. A Black Scoter at Smithville Dam on November 18 was my 315th bird, breaking Tim Barksdale’s 1991 record. On November 24, Greg Swick and I located 5 species of grebe on Ta- ble Rock Reservoir (Stone Co.): Pied-billed, Horned, Eared, Western, and Red-necked. The following day produced a Prairie Falcon (Dade Co.). December 1 began with a Mountain Bluebird in St. Clair Co. I located a Snow Bunting on the rocky shores of Mozingo Lake in Nodaway Co., and after spending Christmas with my family in Reynolds Co., I finished my year watching a Golden Eagle fly majestically over the Mississippi River Valley in Pike Co.: species 324. Throughout 2018, I birded 255 days of the year, with over three weeks of my time being spent outside of the state due to prior commitments and one week of June working at a camp. I taught full- time from January to May without pay (student teachers cannot be paid) and again from August to December, confining most of my birding to evenings and weekends. I spent about 30 nights in my vehicle or a tent, never in a hotel, enduring both icy and steamy conditions. I was forced to constantly improve my skills through studying diligently and seeking advice from more experienced birders. I began the year determined to test myself and grow my skills. I ended the year confident and satisfied that I had endured physical, emotional, and occupational difficulties and had remained ethical and honest even when it cost me to do so. I sought a better under- standing of birds and hoped my journey would inspire and motivate the people around me. I shared my story with my students, my family, my friends, and my colleagues and they supported me through the entire year. My students, especially, kept me going, as they asked nearly every day if I had found another bird. I was conscious of what more established birders would think of someone younger attempting to challenge the Big Year record. However, I put in my time in order to be worthy of this accomplishment. I realized if

Page 117 THE BLUEBIRD there were negative feelings among birders, they were only from a small minority. The exceptionality of 2018 for rare birds cannot go unmentioned, nor can the advantage of eBird for receiving reports and online maps for aerial views when searching for habitats. However, I think the greatest contributor to the success of the year was the involvement of the birding community as a whole. In January, I thought a Big Year was a personal adventure that would change who I was as a person and as a birder. While it did have these effects, in December I knew a Big Year was a community endeavor that could not be done without the help of people across the state. Guidance and advice from Greg Swick and Tim Barksdale especially, grew me as a birder and into what I needed to be to accomplish this Big Year. Also, the friendly competition from Steve & Debbie Martin and Brad Jacobs spurred us all on toward a higher total. I realized a Big Year can never, and should never, be a solo act. It is a journey that should draw people together and evoke excitement among birders and non- birders alike. I ended the year with a never-before-seen 324 species for the state of Missouri—breaking the previous record by 10 birds. While that is novel in itself, the people I met, the places I saw, and the experiences I had hold the true spirit of the year. In the end, the number is secondary because it does not accomplish anything of importance. The inspiration and excitement my journey provided others and myself: that holds the real worth. Currently, as well as throughout 2018, I serve on the board of the Greater Ozarks Audubon Society, I am the co-director of Green Leadership Academy for Diverse Ecosystems (GLADE), and I oper- ate the banding station at Missouri State’s Bull Shoals Field Station with Dr. Janice Greene. I cannot wait to see where birding takes me next. For my entire Missouri Big Year list and links to rationale of each counted species, visit: https://po.missouri.edu/cgi-bin/wa? A2=ind1901B&L=MOBIRDS-L&P=3357

Page 118 THE BLUEBIRD Protecting a Heron Rookery in St. Louis

Maureen Thomas-Murphy

As Pat Lueders said, “It took a village” to protect a rookery--at least it did when the birds moved smack dab into the middle of the village. As of this writing, it is still taking a village to rear the displaced herons and to protect the rookery. The village is a quiet, urban, predominantly African American- occupied apartment complex with a lush stand of ash, pine, and basswood (or linden) trees just one block north and west of the St Louis University campus, called The Westminster Place Apart- ments. Most of the nesting occurs on the 3900-4000 block of Olive. The intrigue began with a friend of a friend of a friend telling a birder about an unusual group of birds in the middle of the city. Once the word was out on the listserv, the birding was on. My first visit to the site was on June 29. I conned my SOB husband into going along by promising him ice cream at The Fountain on Lo- cust (best hot fudge in town) and we went after dinner when the shadows are long, around 7pm. Almost immediately, we saw big birds in the air—Little Blue Herons and Great Egrets, to be precise. As we watched, more and more birds flew in. Little blues and chicks were visible in the trees next to the apartments. Great Egrets were building nests in a tall tree on an adjacent property. After watching for over an hour and seeing Snowy Egrets and Black-crowned Her- ons flying in and on nests, we headed back to the car as the sun set. As we left, something must have startled the birds, because suddenly, more than 50 birds rose up out of the roost trees, swirled around and then settled back in. During that first visit, I noted with dismay that many trees were marked with red Xs, but even fly-by-night arborists know that you don’t cut trees until the weather turns cold….. On July 4th, after spending several hours weeding, a quick pass at my email sent me into a panic. Rad Widmer had posted that they were cutting down trees at the rookery—trees with chicks! Without a second thought, I grabbed my husband for moral support (and bail, if it came to that) and we headed for the rookery. As we drove up Olive from Vandeventer, I saw big trees on the ground. We parked

Page 119 THE BLUEBIRD near a recently toppled pine, and there lay a branch with 4 chicks still in the nest. No one else was around and, having a dumb phone (as opposed to a smart one), all I could do was start making phone calls. The police told me to call wild animal rescue, where all I got was voicemail. No other birders were answering. I was not leaving the chicks. After 15 minutes of sheer panic, other birders started to arrive, including Rad who told me that he had emailed the property manager and she had told the tree guys to stop cutting. Soon, the tree guys returned, the police sent an officer who was a hobbyist fal- coner to make sure everything remained civil, and a St Louis Today reporter started taking notes (with a notepad and a pencil, no-less). There were some tense moments, but civility pre- vailed and everyone focused on the welfare of the nestlings. Bryan Prather and Joe Hoffman of Wild Bird Rehabilitation ar- ranged for the chicks to be raised there. As Bryan and Lisa Saffell collected and transported the chicks to Rehab, I followed with or- ders to buy and deliver Little Blue Heron chicks at minnows. Wild Bird Rehabilitation, 22 July 2019 Photo Maureen Thomas-Murphy On Fri, July 5, Mitch Leachman, spokesman for St Louis Audubon, along with a Missouri Deparment of Conservation representative, met with Vickie, the apartment manager at the rookery. Mitch and MDC volunteered to provide her with letters for the owners describing the situation and the issues involved, as well as information about the birds and their habits. Vickie was sympathetic to the plight of the birds, frustrated by not being able to find anyone to advise her about them until now, and horrified that she had potentially harmed them. She requested that St. Louis Audubon do a survey of the trees on Westminster property and mark the trees with nests. Meanwhile MO birders were discussing and emphatically supporting the creation of a new nest for the displaced chicks--to be placed in a suitable rookery tree with the hopes that the parents would re-

Page 120 THE BLUEBIRD turn to raise them. Joe came to survey the site and decided that would be a worthy effort. At this time, it was assumed that the chicks were Black-crowned Night Herons. So around 2pm on July 5, Joe climbed a tree and hoisted up a mesh basket holding nesting materials and the 4 chicks. Then the watching and waiting began, and so did the debate as to what species these chicks belonged. Many of us visited the site over the next 24 hours, but saw no adult birds approach the nest. So Joe, with the help of a local fire department truck ladder attempted to find nests with Black-crowned Night Heron chicks in which to place the birds. Since none were found, he took the chicks back to Rehab, where they have been ever since. It was exciting and inspiring to see a community so engaged. An active consultation with some heron experts in Florida revealed that the displaced chicks were, in fact, Little Blue Herons. Meanwhile, Lisa Saffell spearheaded the initiative to survey the trees, and had the help of 21 birders. In a three hour venture on Sun, July 7, they located and marked 84 trees on the Westminster property, containing 175 active nests. Of this number, 129 hosted little blues, 8 had snowies, 5 Great Egrets, 24 black-crowned and 9 unidentified. Trees with nests on adjacent properties were also noted, adding another 35 Great Egret nests and 18 little blues. And that did not include birds that were still building. Now… The trees are marked, more nestlings peeping, the residents keep their umbrellas handy and the sky is alive with herons and egrets gliding in. And at Wild Bird Rehab, the little blue chicks are greedily gobbling minnows and growing fast. Joe says that they still want to be in the nest. After he takes them out to feed them, they climb back up into it. He hopes to release them at an appropriate site once they have started flapping around. This is the end of the article but, by no means, the end of the story. Will the apartment owners let all nesting finish before proceeding? Will the chicks in rehab thrive and make it back to the wild again? To be continued...

Page 121 THE BLUEBIRD Peer-Reviewed Article:

Comments on Winter Shrike Identification in Missouri Mary Nemecek and Marquette Mutchler

During the winter months, Missouri has the benefit of the presence of both Loggerhead and Northern Shrikes. The two species are similar in their appearance, and both prefer open areas with scattered bushes and trees. These similarities warrant a deeper discussion of the differentiating features that allow the observer to make an accu- rate field identification.

Missouri Occurrence

Loggerhead Shrikes are not only year-round breeding residents, but migratory populations also move through each spring and fall, and some will overwinter in the state. Loggerhead Shrikes have "the highest densities in the Osage Plains and Mississippi Lowlands" during winter, although "during severe winters fewer are present in the north."(Robbins, 2018) A noticeable migration occurs from late September to mid-November, peaking in October. One juvenile Log- gerhead Shrike banded in Saskatchewan on July 31, 1953 was re- covered a few months later, on September 23, at Cross Timbers in Hickory County, Missouri – 1953 miles away. By late March, Log- gerhead Shrikes are back on their breeding territories in Northwest- ern, West Central and the Southeast corner of Missouri (Robbins, 2018).

Northern Shrikes arrive at the end of October into November, with the earliest Missouri arrival date being October 24. Most have left the state by mid-March, with April 8 being the latest date for a Northern Shrike in Missouri. During non-irruption years, Northern Shrikes are found in low numbers north of the Missouri River and in the Osage Plains region, with rare occurrences south to Barton County in the western part of the state (Robbins 2018). During irruption years they have been documented as far south as the Arkan-

Page 122 THE BLUEBIRD sas border and even in the "bootheel" (Eades 2008). However, the species is still listed as accidental in the Ozarks and the extreme southeast. Thus, documentation is still needed in those regions of the state. In all other parts of the state it is listed as only rare and does not require documentation to the Missouri Bird Records Com- mittee (MBRC), although eBird will prompt the observer to enter details or photographs. The Loggerhead Shrike Working Group cites a 76% decline in population since 1966, resulting in a priority listing on more than two- thirds of State Wildlife Action Plans. Breeding Bird Survey data indicate an 8.9% annual decline from 2003-2013 (Robbins 2018). As a result, Loggerhead Shrikes are a Species of Conservation Concern in Missouri. Often the two species are presumed to be easily differentiated in the field; however, they can present a variety of ID challenges that observers should be prepared for. A careful assessment of field marks can help when identification is not immediately apparent.

Profile Most often an observer notices the profile of a shrike first (figure 1). Loggerhead Shrikes are named for their blocky heads that seem large in comparison to their slim bodies, while Northern Shrikes have an overall rounder, proportional shape with the size of the head corresponding neatly to the rest of the body, as well as the appearance of a noticeably longer tail.

Mask One of the field marks most relied upon for differentiating the two species is the black mask (figures 2 and 3). Loggerhead Shrikes have a wider, continuous, mask extending above and behind the eye and usually above the bill, while Northern Shrikes typically do not have any black on the forehead and exhibit a narrow white arch over the base of the bill (Pittaway and King 2014). Some caution is urged, as it is possible for a Loggerhead to lack black over the bill or for a Northern to have black in this region. Furthermore, the mask of a Northern Shrike is typically much narrower and does not encompass the entire eye, leaving the upper curve of the eye extending in a

“bubble” above the mask. The white supercilium is not only broader

Page 123 THE BLUEBIRD

Figure 1: Each shrike species can exhibit a “typical” profile, especially during winter months. While these profiles may be typical of each species to a certain point, the species profiles can overlap, and this mark should be used with extreme caution. Loggerhead Shrike (top): Often a slimmer, smaller-bodied look with a larger blocky head. Northern Shrike (bottom): A common profile exhibiting a round or “puffed-up” body where the flanks can often obscure the coverts. Note the shape of the head, more proportional to the body, along with the somewhat raised tail.

Page 124 THE BLUEBIRD in Northern Shrikes, but extends well beyond the eye as compared to the supercilium of a Loggerhead Shrike, which extends just bare- ly beyond the eye. Pale lores, white below the eye, and white nasal tufts also point to Northern.

Bill The bill is also often referred to as a key identification feature (figures 2 and 3). Northern Shrikes have a longer, narrower bill with a prominent hook. This can be a difficult field mark to observe, especially at a distance. A pale base to the bill is also often thought to signal Northern. Again, caution should be used, as some immature Loggerheads may have a pale base to the mandible into late fall and winter, while Northern Shrikes may have pale areas extending to the upper mandible. Both species can transition to all dark bills in spring as they obtain their breeding plumage.

Figure 2. A Loggerhead Shrike that at first view has some features that may steer the observer toward a Northern Shrike. Bird shows a pale base to the mandible and while indeterminate, it appears to lack black over bill. Both features could signal a Northern Shrike; however, the white supercilium ends just above/past the eye.

Page 125 THE BLUEBIRD

Figure 3: The most conclusive identification marks for distinguishing the two species are often the bill and the facial markings. Loggerhead Shrike (top): Note a wide, dark mask which often bridg- es over the top of the bill across the forehead. Occasionally the black does not fully cross over (as pictured). Loggerheads can also show a white band across the forehead and to the eyes, but maintaining an even width. The bill is shorter and more rounded than in Northern, but can sometimes show a pale base (as pictured). Northern Shrike (bottom): Northern Shrikes can show a large variation in the amount of white present in the face, but they almost always show an incursion of white under and often in front of the eye, while Loggerhead will never show a white lower eyering. The bill is slightly longer and slimmer, and can show a more pronounced hook, but hook length is variable in both species.

Page 126 THE BLUEBIRD

Chest A barred (vermiculated) chest is typically noted as a prominent field mark for identifying Northern Shrikes. However, Loggerheads in fall and early winter may show some barring, though never as extensive as in a Northern (Figure 4). Specimens from the collection of the University of Kansas (KU) collected from late October through May were examined, and Northern Shrikes were determined to have significantly more prominent and extensive ventral barring (Robbins, personal observation, 8 February 2019). A lesser amount or complete lack of barring is not conclusive evidence that the bird is a Loggerhead, but distinct barring is another field mark suggesting Northern. Caution is again advised, as by late winter and early spring the barring can be absent from both species.

Back and Rump Loggerhead Shrikes have darker gray upperparts, with the darkest

Figure 4. In this photo of a Loggerhead Shrike, the shadow and underexpo- sure bring out faint barring on the chest. This would be much more pronounced on a Northern Shrike.

Page 127 THE BLUEBIRD hue on the crown. This provides a clear distinction between the breast and top of the head. This contrast is much less noticeable in Northern Shrikes, which are said to have a 'French grey' shade on their backs. The KU Collection showed the back in Loggerheads was always much darker gray than in Northerns (Robbins, personal observation, 8 February 2019). Determining the shade of gray in the field can be difficult depending on lighting conditions, i.e., bright sunlight and angles, making this field mark unreliable.

A white rump can suggest a Northern and a gray rump can suggest a Loggerhead, but other confirming field marks need to be evaluat- ed. Further complicating identification, Loggerheads that breed in the western and upper Great Plains are paler dorsally in comparison to resident and eastern Loggerheads, and exhibit white on upper tail -coverts and scapulars. The banded Saskatchewan bird previously mentioned was of the Great Plains subspecies.

Additional Considerations Sibley (2010) reviewed an interesting shrike on Long Island, New

Figure 5. Loggerhead Shrikes retain their juvenile greater coverts until one year of age. Loggerhead Shrikes can be definitively identified and aged by the buffy edges on the greater coverts.

Page 128 THE BLUEBIRD York. The ultimate confirming feature was pale tips on the juvenile greater coverts. Loggerheads reliably maintain their juvenile greater-primary coverts, showing buffy edges despite wear, until they are replaced at a year of age. The age of a Loggerhead Shrike can be reliably determined by retention of the juvenile greater coverts (Yosef, 1996). However, this can be exceedingly difficult to observe under field conditions.

Identification Summary When differentiating shrikes in the field check for the following field marks that would indicate the bird is a Loggerhead Shrike:  Overall profile shows a head that appears too large in proportion to a body that is thin or small, with an unremarkable appearance of tail length.  A wide mask that extends above the eye and over the bill, but at least in some individuals this can be difficult to see just above the maxilla (upper part of bill).  Some immature Loggerheads may have slight barring on the breast, but it is never as extensive and bold as that in North- erns.  Darker upper parts, especially on the head, that clearly stand out against the pale breast. Bright sunlight and angle can give Loggerheads the appearance of a light dorsum.

Northern Shrikes have a greater presence in irruption years, when they may be found statewide. Watch for:  Overall profile shows head proportional to a body that has a more compact, rounded appearance with a longer tail.  A narrow mask that does not fully enclose the eye.  A relatively wide, white supercilium that extends beyond the eye and over the base of the bill.  Diagnostic pale lores and white under the eye.  Noticeable, relatively bold barring on the chest.

Beware, as many of these field marks can point to one species but not necessarily rule out the other one. Consideration should be

Page 129 THE BLUEBIRD made of multiple field marks when making a conclusive identification, and quality photos are helpful to document your observation and further assist with identification.

Acknowledgments: A special thank you to MBRC members Mark Robbins, Bill Rowe and Joshua Uffman, as well as Kristi Mayo and Mark McKellar, for their review and comments, which greatly improved this manuscript. Literature Cited: Eades, J. 2008, A Historic Northern Shrike Winter Invasion; 2007- 2008. Bluebird 75(4); 41-49 Pittaway, R. & King, M. 2014l Loggerhead and Northern Shrike ID, First published in Ontario Field Ornithologists News 17(1): 6-7 Feb- ruary 2014.

Robbins, M.B. 2018. The Status and Distribution of Birds in Mis- souri, University of Kansas Libraries, Lawrence, KS.

Sibley, D. 2010. A Perplexing Shrike, Sibley Guides, 3 December 2010 https://www.sibleyguides.com/2010/12/a-perplexing-shrike/ Yosef, R. (1996). Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), version 2.0. In The Birds of North America (A. F. Poole and F. B. Gill, Edi- tors). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https:// doi.org/10.2173/bna.231

Illustrations by Marquette Mutchler Photos by Debbie and Steve Martin

Page 130 THE BLUEBIRD Peer-Reviewed Paper: Light Pollution and Immunosuppression: Determining the role of artificial lighting in coccidiosis in non-migratory birds

Jake Thoenen, Dana Ripper, Ethan Duke

Abstract

Light pollution is a result of artificial light at night (ALAN), which inhibits many natural cycles of living organisms. Birds and other animals, including humans, are affected through hormonal discrep- ancies and circadian disruption. However, the effects of light pollution on an animal’s immune response to pathogens have not been adequately investigated. For this study non-migratory birds were chosen to determine the impact of light pollution within a certain area--urban, suburban, and rural. Fecal samples were taken from non-migratory bird species in areas that were classified based on sky quality meter readings measured in magnitude/arc second2. All fecal samples were analyzed for the presence of coccidia, a parasite usually found in avian species. A correlation was then made between the number of coccidia-infected individuals and the nocturnal light intensity at each location. Results demonstrated that non-migratory birds were significantly (p < 0.05) more susceptible to contracting coccidiosis when exposed to a greater intensity of light pollution. This supports the hypothesis that light pollution causes negative ecological and economic impacts by disrupting natural cycles and instigating immunosuppression. This could potentially result in lower product yield and an increase in the need for pharmaceuticals for poultry farmers because the ALAN used at farms throughout the duration of the night may cause infection and inhibition of natural cycles of poultry. Introduction

Light Pollution Light pollution is an anthropogenic pollutant found in the environment that has the potential to harm animal populations (Raap 2017). It has been demonstrated to inhibit circadian cycles, repro- duction, and hormonal activity (Dominoni 2015; Dominoni et al. Page 131 THE BLUEBIRD 2013; Chepesiuk 2009). However, there are very few studies that examine the relationship between light intensity and the immune response of animals (Kernbach et al. 2018). There is evidence that light pollution can increase the amount of time that a bird main- tains the threshold level of a disease while still allowing the pathogen to transfer among other individuals (Kernbach et al. 2018). This may imply that light pollution could have substantial consequences on animal populations. Ecological Implications of Light Pollution Species have evolved to use the presence of light to regulate their circadian rhythms as well as other natural cycles and activities. However, the increase of light pollution worldwide has potentially harmful consequences, including implications on navigation, repro- duction, predator-prey relationships, and communication (Davies et al. 2014). Previous research has demonstrated that light pollution is caused by urban development (Song & Li 2017), and with the growth of urbanization, light pollution is constantly increasing. This adds to the severity of the ecological impact that light pollution has on ter- restrial species. The decrease in nighttime darkness poses a potentially significant threat for wildlife and biodiversity (Raap 2017). Artificial light at night (ALAN) causes increased mortality in seabirds, which are considered to be one of the most endangered groups of birds globally (Rodríguez et al. 2017). Without conservation efforts, light pollution would have caused the death of at least 200,000 seabirds globally (Rodríguez et al. 2017). ALAN also erodes the ben- efits of nighttime activities and alters natural cycles which have been reliable for millennia (Gaston & Holt 2018). It has been suggested that light pollution causes reduction in melatonin levels in some songbirds and corvid species (Rapp et al. 2017; Chepesiuk 2009). Furthermore, ALAN causes alterations in temporal aspects of behavior and physiology of avian species (Dominoni 2015). Coccidiosis Coccidia are single-celled protozoan parasites found in various domesticated and wild animal species, including a wide variety of birds (Taylor et al. 2018; Kennedy 2007). Infection with coccidia, or coccidiosis, presents a variety of symptoms, including weakness, acute weight loss, dehydration, diarrhea, and even death (Keeton & Na- varre 2018; Bera et al. 2018). The prevention of coccidiosis is pre-

Page 132 THE BLUEBIRD ferred to treatment due to its cost and potential detrimental animal welfare implications (Keeton & Navarre 2018). Prevention options include minimizing stress, optimizing nutrition, sanitation of feeding and watering equipment, minimal amounts of overcrowding, and the reduction of feeding on the ground (Keeton & Navarre 2018). Although the disease is widespread, it only affects immunocompromised individuals, making it a perfect candidate for studying immunosuppression. Economic Implications of Coccidiosis Coccidia are prevalent globally, and have been found to have a significant impact, especially economically, on the poultry industry (Bera et al. 2010). It is estimated that 95.61% of the total economic loss in the commercial broiler chicken industry in India is caused by coccidiosis (Bera et al. 2010). Coccidiosis is systemic in areas outside of the poultry industry. Because of this, coccidiosis potentially cre- ates negative effects on the agricultural industry as a whole; for ex- ample, coccidiosis has also been found to be contracted by cattle. Coccidiosis in bovines is most commonly found in calves between 3 weeks and 6 months in age (Kennedy 2007). By negatively impact- ing one of the most profitable industries, the agricultural industry, coccidiosis can significantly reduce profits and cause a variety of problems (Constable 2018; Bera et al. 2010). This study aims at providing evidence of how light pollution may cause immunosuppression among non-migratory birds. Further- more, this could initiate further study of birds in a laboratory setting to control all extraneous factors, as well as analyzing migratory birds. And by investigating how nocturnal light contributes to immunosuppression, disease exposure within farms could be limited by preventing excessive ALAN, increasing product yield and profit. Methodology Collaborators Due to the fact native birds were sampled for the purpose of this study, the Missouri Department of Conservation’s (MDC) state orni- thologist, Sara Kendrick, was contacted because of her knowledge of federal and state laws regarding native birds. Mist nets, bird banding, and native bird handling require extensive training. She recom- mended either only sampling house sparrows (Passer domesticus), because they are not protected by federal or state law, or contacting

Page 133 THE BLUEBIRD professional bird banders to assist in sampling. For this reason, the Missouri River Bird Observatory was contacted to assist in sampling. Meredith Kernbach, from the University of South Florida, was contacted because of her previous research pertaining to light pollution, house sparrows (Passer domesticus), and West Nile Virus. It was determined that testing for coccidiosis would be more efficient than sampling for other diseases that require extensive testing, for exam- ple blood or cloacal samples. Fecal samples could also be collected without being in contact with a bird, which decreases potential harm or stress and is more efficient. Due to federal restrictions on bird banding activities, professional and licensed bird banders were contacted from the Missouri River Bird Observatory (MRBO) to assist in collecting fecal samples from non-migratory birds. Furthermore, birds were not specifically netted for this study, but samples were collected during already scheduled mist-nettings by the MRBO. Sampled birds were handled by professional bird banders, significantly reducing the likelihood of injuring a bird. Dr. Westenberg, a microbiologist at The University of Science and Technology, assisted in the preservation of coccidia in a micro test tube, and maintaining fecal samples to enable testing at the Lake Ozark Animal Hospital. The samples taken were kept in a 40°F environment for one week and then transferred to the veterinary lab to be tested. Because coccidiosis is a Bio Safety Lab II (BSL-II) disease, samples were tested at the Lake Ozark Animal Hospital (LOAH), in Linn Creek, Missouri. Data Collection and Techniques Sampled Species Non-migratory birds were sampled due to their likely more con- sistent exposure to light pollution. The species sampled included Black-capped Chickadee (Poecile atricapillus), Tufted Titmouse (Baeolophus bicolor), Carolina Wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus), Downy Woodpecker (Picoides pubescens), House Finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), House Sparrow (Passer domesticus), Northern Cardinal

(Cardinalis cardinalis), and Carolina Chickadee (Poecile caro-

Page 134 THE BLUEBIRD linensis).

Collection of Fecal Samples Fecal samples were collected from transport bags of birds to be banded, swabbed by a sterile swab for 15 seconds, then placed in a micro test tube containing sterile deionized water. Each test tube was labeled with the date, species, and the last 5 digits of the band number. Finally, it was taken to the LOAH and tested for coccidiosis. Testing Fecal Samples All fecal samples were examined for coccidiosis by veterinary techni- cians, supervised by a licensed veterinarian. The veterinary techni- cians pipetted a portion of a sample onto a slide to inspect the feces through a microscope, the direct coccidiosis test. Coccidiosis is detected by analyzing the sample for coccidia oocysts. Although direct coccidiosis is rarely found, it was still tested as a precaution. The remaining feces was then placed in a larger test tube, a sterile sugar solution was added, and the tube was centrifuged at 1300 rpm for 10 minutes. Next, a portion of the sample was examined microscopical- ly for oocysts. This method is known as analyzing for float coccidia. All samples taken were tested for both direct and float coccidia; however, all the positive coccidiosis results were detected through the float coccidia method. Sky Quality Meter (SQM) Readings Sky Quality Meter (SQM) readings were sourced from lightpollu- tionmaps.info which combines Visible Infared Imaging Radiometer Suite (VIIRS) and Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) data derived from the Earth Observation Group and the National Geophysical Data Center to display SQM readings (Stare 2018). SQM readings were used to classify each banding site as follows: urban: 19 mag./arc sec2 and under, suburban: 19.01 to 21 mag./arc sec2, and rural: 21.01 mag./arc sec2 and above. Research Protocol Control of Variables There were other extraneous variables that could not be fully con- trolled, which could have played a role in the frequency of coccidiosis. These factors include various types of pollution, muscle scarring, age, access to food, amount of fat, ecto-parasites, quality of habitat,

Page 135 THE BLUEBIRD nutrition, stress levels, as well as others. Although it is impossible to control all extraneous variables in field studies, a concerted effort was made during this study to exclude as many of these variables as possible. Similar seed and feeders were used at each banding site to address nutrition and food availability. A noise pollution map, created by the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), displayed the decibel level of noise pollution caused by transportation (includes aviation, railways, highways, roads, interstates, etc.). Dec- ibel levels were compared using map data. A correlation analysis was conducted between decibel levels and coccidiosis diagnoses and was determined to be non-significant (p > 0.05). Further, results of fat analysis (not shown) indicated no difference between all three study groups. The lack of variation in fat levels is expected, given non-migratory birds’ reduced movement and need for long-term energy reserves. Food sources for non-migratory birds are generally available year-round, reducing their need to travel vast distances. Statistical Analysis Data were analyzed through a point-biserial correlation, which ana- lyzes the relationship between a dichotomous variable, in this case coccidiosis diagnosis (positive or negative), and a continuous variable, SQM readings (Varma, n. d.; Brown, 2001). An alpha level of 0.05 was predetermined to establish significance. A point-biserial correlation between the light intensity (SQM) and presence of coccidiosis was conducted to indicate immunosuppression. Values of light pollution recorded as follows: 17.85 mag./arc sec2 (Anita B. Gorman Conservation Discovery Center, Kansas City, MO), 18.91 mag./arc sec2 (residential building, St. Louis, MO), 19.4 mag./arc sec2 (Birds I View, Jefferson City, MO), 19.42 mag./arc sec2 (Burr Oak Woods Conservation Center, Blue Springs, MO), 19.48 mag./ arc sec2 (Burroughs Audubon Library, Blue Springs, MO), and 21.74 mag./arc sec2 (Missouri River Bird Observatory, Arrow Rock, MO).

Page 136 THE BLUEBIRD

Results Of a total of 45 birds sampled, 5 were diagnosed with coccidiosis. The results demonstrated a significance with a p-value of -0.0135 (Fig. 1).

Figure 1: Point-Biserial Correlation between SQM Readings and the Frequency of Coccidiosis Diagnoses

Conclusions Analysis of the data indicates that there was a significant (p < 0.05) negative correlation between coccidiosis diagnoses and light pollution levels. The correlation supports that when light pollution levels increase, there is a greater chance that a non-migratory bird will acquire coccidiosis. Coccidiosis was chosen because of its presence in multiple species, both wild and domestic. Despite the focus on one pathogen for avian species, it is conceivable that other illnesses may respond to the stress caused by light pollution as well. Future Studies Light pollution has been observed to cause numerous negative ecological effects; however, the effect of light pollution on the immune response of animals, including humans, is understudied. This study suggests that avian immune systems are potentially compromised by light pollution. The ultimate goal is to determine what role light

Page 137 THE BLUEBIRD pollution plays in compromising the immune response of both wild and domesticated animals as well as humans. After investigating the effects of light pollution on the immune response of non-migratory birds, analyzing the effects of ALAN on migratory birds may be of interest. Although migratory birds live in varying amounts of light pollution when migrating, with the increase of light pollution as a result of urbanization there may be a correlation as well. Non-migratory bird immunosuppression through light pollution could be further investigated by conducting research in a laboratory setting, allowing control over factors considered to be extraneous in the natural environment. By researching in a laboratory setting, the results would be considered a cause rather than a correlation, and could result in further testing among other species as well. Other groups of animals, specifically agricultural species, could also become immunocompromised by ALAN. Some farms use excessive amounts of artificial light throughout the entire night, resulting in a potential increase in disease infection rates, which may cause a loss in product yield, a potential increase in the need of pharmaceuticals to treat pathogens, and ultimately leading to a loss in profit. The economic implications of light pollution would not only affect yield, but could cause an increase in prices among agricultural goods, which may affect the agricultural industry as a whole and consum- ers as well. Research on ALAN-related immunosuppression may suggest practical economic applications in addition to the wildlife conservation applications noted here. Acknowledgments We would like to thank The Bluebird in their efforts of peer reviewing this paper, as well as Chris Reeves for the countless hours he spent teaching and the encouragement he gave throughout experi- mentation. Bibliography Bera, A. K., Bhattacharya, D., Pan, D., Dhara, A., & Das, S. K. (2010). Evaluation of Economic Losses due to Coccidiosis in Poultry Industry in India. Agricultural Economics Research Re- view, 23, 91-96.

Brown, J. D. (2001). Point-Biserial Correlation Coefficients. Re-

Page 138 THE BLUEBIRD trieved from http://hosted.jalt.org/test/bro_12.htm

Chepesiuk, R. (2009). Missing the Dark: Health Effects of Light Pol- lution. Environmental Health Perspectives,117(1). Constable, P. D. (2018). Overview of Coccidiosis. Merck Veterinary Manual. Davies, T., Duffy, J., Bennie, J., & Gaston, K. (2014). The nature, extent, and ecological implications of marine light pollution. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 12:347-355. Dominoni, D. M. (2015). The effects of light pollution on biological rhythms of birds: An integrated, mechanistic perspective. Jour- nal of Ornithology,156(S1), 409-418. Dominoni, D. M., Goymann, W., Helm, B., & Partecke, J. (2013). Ur- ban-like night illumination reduces melatonin release in Euro- pean blackbirds (Turdus merula): Implications of city life for biological time-keeping of songbirds. Frontiers in Zoology,10(1), 60. Gaston, K. J., & Holt, L. A. (2018). Nature, extent and ecological implications of night-time light from road vehicles. Journal of Ap- plied Ecology,55(5), 2296-2307. Keeton, S. T., & Navarre, C. B. (2018). Coccidiosis in Large and Small Ruminants. Veterinary Clinics of North America: Food Animal Practice, 34(1), 201-208. Kennedy, M. J. (2007). Coccidiosis in cattle. Edmonton, Alta.: Alber- ta Agriculture. Kernbach, M. E., Miller, J. M., Hall, R. J., Unnasch, T. R., Burkett- Cadena, N. D., & Martin, L. B. (2018). Light Pollution Increases West Nile Virus Competence in a Ubiquitous Passerine Reser- voir Species. National Transportation Noise Map - Road and Aviation Noise in the United States. (n.d.). Retrieved from https:// maps.bts.dot.gov/arcgis/apps/webappviewer/index.html? id=a303ff5924c9474790464cc0e9d5c9fb Raap, T., Sun, J., Pinxten, R., & Eens, M. (2017). Disruptive effects of light pollution on sleep in free-living birds: Season and/or light intensity-dependent? Behavioural Processes,144, 13-19 . Rodríguez, A., Holmes, N. D., Ryan, P. G., Wilson, K., Faulquier, L., Murillo, Y., Corre, M. L. (2017). Seabird mortality induced by Page 139 THE BLUEBIRD land-based artificial lights. Conservation Biology,31(5), 986- 1001. Song, Z., & Li, X. (2017). Hazards, Causes and Legal Governance of China's Urban Light Pollution. Nature Environment and Pollu- tion Technology, 16(3), 975-980. Stare, J. (n.d.). Light pollution map. Retrieved from https:// www.lightpollutionmap.info/ Taylor, H. S., Morgan, K. J., Pomroy, W. E., Mcinnes, K., & Lopez- Villalobos, N. (2018). The circadian variation of oocyst shedding of Eimeria spp. affecting brown kiwi (Apteryx mantelli). Parasit- ology Research,117(9), 2997-3001. Varma, S. (n.d.). Preliminary Item Statistics Using Point-Biserial Correlation and P-values. Retrieved from https:// jcesom.marshall.edu/media/24104/Item-Stats-Point-Biserial.pdf

Jake Thoenen examining slides for coccidia

Page 140 THE BLUEBIRD Fall 2018 Seasonal Report

Joseph W. Eades

Fall weather was mixed, with temperature and precipitation trends reversing from warmer and dryer than average to cooler and wetter. The first half of August was warmer than normal, and the U.S. Drought Monitor showed 83% of Missouri in drought in mid-August. Wetter weather then commenced, and statewide precipitation was 1.8 inches above the long-term average for the month. Above normal temperatures persisted during September and into the first nine days of October, followed by a notable pattern change to cooler, below average conditions. October was wet, the wettest in four years, with the statewide precipitation total 1.69 inches above the long-term average. By the end of October drought conditions had significantly improved statewide.

Freezing weather was reported across the northern two-thirds of Missouri in mid-October and most of the state during the latter half of the October. The cold weather pattern persisted into November. Preliminary data indicate it was the coldest November since 1976. The average statewide temperature was 37.3°F, 6.5 degrees below the long-term average. It was Missouri’s 4th coldest November on record. The cold November conditions brought snow with it. It was one of the snowiest Novembers in decades. Five separate snow events impacted parts of the state and monthly accumulations of 5- 10 inches were common across the northern two-thirds of Missouri.

Avian highlights of the season included three Red Phalaropes, Po- marine Jaeger, two Swallow-tailed Kites, Rock Wren, and Mountain Bluebird. It seems strange that Black-bellied Whis- tling Duck and Roseate Spoonbill don’t even make the list due to increasing occurrence. Among irruptive species, no Northern Gos- hawks or Snowy Owls were reported. Red-breasted Nuthatch- es staged a significant invasion, crossbills went unreported, but Pine Siskins were widespread. The third successful nesting of Trumpeter Swans in modern times was confirmed. New early arrival dates were established for Tundra Swan, Surf Scoter, Northern Shrike (tied previous), and Cape May Warbler. New late departure dates were set (or tied) for Swallow-tailed Kite, Broad-winged Hawk (tied previous), Acadian Flycatcher, Least Flycatcher , Worm-eating Warbler, Cape May Warbler, Prairie Warbler and Scarlet Tanager (tied previous). David Easterla re-

Page 141 THE BLUEBIRD ported there was never a peak of water birds at the Maryville Sew- age Lagoons prior to freeze-up, which was very unusual. He reported it was the worst autumn for water birds there since he started checking in 1972!

ABBREVIATIONS *-documentation required but not received by MBRC. acc.-accepted. Documentation received, and record accepted by MBRC. ad.-adult CA-Conservation Area. f.-female imm.-immature. juv.-juvenile L-Lake. m.-male. m.ob.-many observers. NWR-National Wildlife Refuge. P-Park. ph.-photograph. R-River. Res-Reservoir. RMBS-Riverlands Migratory Bird Sanctuary. SF-State Forest. SP-State Park. Counties are in italics.

DUCKS THROUGH FALCONS

Trumpeter Swans Sullivan August 2018. Photo Missouri Department of Conservation

Black-bellied Whistling Ducks were reported from three locations: 2 on private property Johnson 1 September (LO, TP, ph.), 15 continuing birds 3 August in Scott (MH, ph.), and 4 in the Dunklin Rice Fields 18 August (KF, ph.). The third successful nesting of Trumpeter Swans in modern times was confirmed with the sighting of adults with 3 cygnets in Sullivan in Au-

Page 142 THE BLUEBIRD gust 2018 (MMc, fide MN). A conservative estimate of 400 Trumpeters was made at Loess Bluffs NWR Holt on 16 November (TN). A new early arrival date for Tundra Swan was established with a single individual with Trum- peters at RMBS St. Charles 23 October (MT, acc., ph), and a seasonal record high count was set for the species there with 80 on 26 November (BR, TPa). Two f./imm. type Surf Scoters at Macon L Macon 4 October (BJ, acc., ph., PMc, PM) and an ad. m. at Long Branch L Macon on the same date (PMc) established new earliest fall records. Surf was the most widely reported scoter, with reports of singles and small groups from five other areas. White-winged Scoters were reported from two locations: Swan Lake NWR Chariton 15 October (BJ), and 2 at Binder L Cole 10 November (CBa). Black Scoters were also reported from two locations, with up to 2 birds 19- 21 November at Smithville L Clay and up to 3 birds 24-25 November in Boone (RG). Single Long-tailed Ducks were observed at two locations in east-central Missouri: 16-30 November at RMBS St. Charles (CMc, AR, KL, DM, SM, BR) and Creve Coeur L St. Louis (DMa, MMa, DH, CA). Single Red-necked Grebes were observed at two locations on 24 November: Smithville L Clay (SN, MN) and Table Rock L Stone (KL, GSw). In the latter instance, the observers had something of a grebe “Grand Slam”, recording Eared Grebe and Western Grebe along with the rarer Red-necked and the common Pied-billed and Horned Grebes. A White-winged Dove was observed 28 August—1 September in Dunklin (KF). A late Yel- low-billed Cuckoo was observed 28 October at Black Island CA Pemiscot (MH). Single Rufous Hummingbirds were reported from two locations (Cole, Dade) between 29 August and 4 September (KL, BJ, DW). A Virgin- ia Rail near Redford Reynolds 22 November (KL, acc., ph.) provided a latest fall record outside the known wintering site in Boone. Sandhill Cranes were reported from 8 locations 2 August—21 November, with a high of 26 at Loess Bluffs NWR Holt 11 November (KL). Two color-banded Whooping Cranes reported near Chaffee, Scott 19-21 November were from the non- essential experimental population (RF, KL, ph.). Single Piping Plovers were reported from two locations: Mark Twain L Monroe 29 August, and the Aldrich arm of Stockton L Polk 4-5 September (DM, SM). A late Baird’s Sandpiper was at RMBS St. Charles 17-23 Nov (BR, ph. CMC., AR), 5 Pectoral Sandpipers were there 19-23 Nov (BR, ph.), and 1 lingered until 25 Nov (CMc, AR). A cold snap then froze the shallow habitat and pushed the shorebirds out. A White-rumped Sandpiper was photographed 26 August in Pemiscot (TJ, ph.). A Marbled Godwit observed almost daily at RMBS St. Charles 15-28 September (DR, AS, ph. m.ob.) lingered long enough to establish a 2nd-latest date. Single Red-necked Phal- aropes were reported from two locations 24 August—9 September from Boone (BJ, m.ob.) and St. Charles (DR). An unusual number of Red Phala- ropes were observed this fall: one, 19 September, Mark Twain L Monroe (BJ acc., PMc, PM), an imm., 19-20 October, Swan Lake NWR Chariton (SM, DM, PMc, KL, acc., ph.) and a third, also an imm., 3 November at RMBS (MR, JM, acc., ph., BR, CMc, AR, m.ob.). An imm. Pomarine Jae- ger was an exciting find 14-15 October, Swan Lake NWR Chariton (BJ,

TMc, acc., ph., EW acc., DF, BG, DMc). This established the fourteenth record. A Sabine’s Gull observed at Thomas Hill Res Macon 23-24 October

Page 143 THE BLUEBIRD (BJ, KL, PMc) passed through a bit later than usual. A juv. Little Gull observed 5 October at RMBS St. Charles (MT, acc., ph.) moved the species to “rare”, but documentation is still requested for all observations. An imm. Laughing Gull, surprisingly the only eBird report of the season, was at Thomas Hill Res Randoplh 26 September (BJ, ph., PM, PMc). Single imm. Iceland Gulls of the Thayeri type were observed at two locations: RMBS St. Charles 29 October—23 November (BJ, ph., m.ob.) and Thomas Hill Res Macon (BJ, ph., PMc). Single ad. Lesser Black-backed Gulls were observed at two locations: RMBS St. Charles 16 September—13 October (BP, LS, ph., DM, MMa, TPa, m.ob.) and Stockton L Dade 23 October (CB, GSw, ph.). A group of 50 Caspian Terns at L Contrary Buchanan on 6 Septem- ber was a nice high count (TN). Common Terns were reported from 8 locations 4-24 September, most with photos, with a maximum of 7 at Mark Twain L Monroe 8 September (BJ, ph., PMc). A Red-throated Loon 16 November at Smithville L Clay (PM, ph.) was the only report in eBird. Sin- gle Pacific Loons were reported from Smithville L Clay 4 November (RDH, MN) and Long Branch L Macon 17-21 November (DM, SM, JU, m.ob., ph.). An Anhinga continued from the summer season in Dunklin until 2 August (DB, AG, TJ, KL, WW). Two late Snowy Egrets were observed 29 October at L Contrary Buchanan (TN). White Ibis was reported from three locations in southeast Missouri, 1-3 continuing birds at Duck Creek CA Wayne 2-3 August (LW, KL, BJ, PM), a single juv. 10 August in Pemiscot (TJ), and 2, a mostly white 1st year and a typical juv. at Otter Slough CA Stoddard 3 September (KL). Roseate Spoon- bills were reported from two locations: one 9-10 August at Mingo NWR Wayne (AG, BJ, KL, PM, DM, SM) Wayne and 5 in Missis- sippi 27 August (TK). The range expansion of Black Vulture con- tinues to be robust, with 5 reported 15 October from Weldon Spring CA St. Charles (BR, TPa). Other seasonal records sketched the current regular northern edge of their range from Stockton L Polk, Tru- man Dam Benton, Bagnell Dam Miller, Rolla Phelps, Meramec SP Franklin, Don Robinson SP Jeffer- son, West Tyson P St. Louis and Klondike P St. Charles. A remark- Anhinga, Levee Road Dunklin 2 Aug 2018 able 63 were tallied at Bagnell Photo Allen Gathman Dam 3 October (BC, BM, EW). A Swallow-tailed Kite observed 4 August in Eureka St. Louis (SF, acc.) provided the fifteenth modern record. This moves the species' status to "rare," and thus it will no longer require documentation except in the case of an extreme date, such as one observed 9 September at Loess Bluffs NWR (GS, acc., ph., JR, TS), which established a latest fall record. An ad. Broad- winged Hawk 24 October at Bradford Farm Boone (PMc acc., ph.), tied the

Page 144 THE BLUEBIRD latest fall record and was supported with a photograph. An imm. Swain- son’s Hawk was observed crossing over the Mississippi R into Pemiscot Missouri from Lake Tennessee 25 August (RS, ph.). Single Prairie Fal- cons were reported from three southwest Missouri locations 15 October—25 November (JC, KL, MW).

FLYCATCHERS THROUGH GROSBEAKS A late Eastern Wood Pewee was observed at RMBS St. Charles 21 Octo- ber (BR). An Acadian Flycatcher heard on 2 October, Tywappity Commu- nity L, Scott (MH, acc.) established a latest fall record. The identification was based on well-described song in an area where the species is a common breeding bird. A Least Flycatcher at Ben Cash Memorial CA Dunklin 21 October (KF, acc., ph.) also established a latest fall record. The photographs eliminated other species of Empidonax. A Say’s Phoebe was discovered at Peck Ranch CA Carter 10 September (JRu, ph) and a f. Vermilion Fly- catcher observed at Hornersville Swamp CA Dunklin 2 October (TJ, ph. acc.) established the tenth state record. An ad. Northern Shrike on 24 October, Worth County Community L Worth (ThJ, acc., ph.) tied the earliest fall record and is supported with a photograph. Two other Northern Shrikes were reported from northwest Missouri. A Rock Wren visited near Buffalo Dallas from 31 October to 2 November (PM, KL, acc., ph., CH, CB, DM, SM, GSw, BJ, PMc), this marked the eleventh record for spring and fall transients. A m. Mountain Bluebird discovered 28 November lingered through the end of the season in and near Wah-Kon-Tah Prairie St. Clair (PW, PM, KL, acc., ph., EO, BJ, PM, DM, SM, ZH, JH, KB), and marked the seventeenth record. Sprague’s Pipit showed up in eBird just once during the season: a single bird 2 November at Prairie SP Barton (KL). Smith’s Longspurs were observed from three locations along the western edge of Missouri 1-10 November (BJ, PM, CN, EO). Single Spotted Towhees were observed from four locations along the state’s western edge 18 October—30 November (SH, DM, SM, MW, EZ, JZ). A Lark Sparrow at Columbia Bot- tom CA St. Louis 5 November established a 2nd-latest record (BR, TPa). Nelson’s Sparrows were reported from 5 locations 23 September—13 Oc- tober, with a maximum of 6 at Eagle Bluffs CA Boone (BJ, PMc). A late Yellow-breasted Chat was observed 4 October at Bridger Urban CA Jack- son (MB). An ad. m. Yellow-headed Blackbird was observed at RMBS St. Charles 21-22 October (DM, MMa, BR) and another was detected amongst a very large flock of mixed blackbirds at Weldon Spring CA St. Charles 16 November (BR). A late Orchard Oriole was observed 13 September at Black Island CA Pemiscot (MH, AG). A Worm-eating Warbler on 12 Octo- ber, near Kennett, Dunklin (KF) provided a latest fall record and a Tennes- see Warbler at Delaney L CA Mississippi 24 November (MH) tied the 2nd- latest date. A f. Cape May Warbler observed 22 August at Claire Da- vidson Memorial CA St. Louis (MT) established a new earliest fall record. A Blackpoll Warbler was well-described from Tower Grove P St. Louis City 16 September (SA, MW, acc., ph.) and another *Blackpoll Warbler was reported from Sunklands CA Shannon 6 October (JRu). Single Black- throated Blue Warblers were reported from three locations: 6-9 Septem- ber Carondolet P, St. Louis City (CMc, AR, ph.), 16 September Dunklin (KF)

Page 145 THE BLUEBIRD and 27 September Parkville Nature Sanctuary Platte. An imm. Prairie Warbler at Tower Grove Park, St. Louis City 27 September (CMc, acc., AR, ph.) provided the latest fall record until an adult male was observed 29 Sep- tember in Kennet, Dunklin (KF). A *Summer Tanager showed up in Pe- culiar Cass on November 8th and stayed through the end of the season (KS, fide MN); photographs exist. A Scarlet Tanager observed 18 October at Rotary L Cape Girardeau (MH) tied the previous latest date. Finally, a late Rose-breasted Grosbeak was observed 26 October at Donaldson Point CA New Madrid (MH).

OBSERVERS Shanin Abreu (SA), Connie Alwood (CA), Chris Barrigar (CBa), Mike Beck (MB), Klee Bruce (KB), Charley Burwick (CB), Jeff Cantrell (JC), Tom Car- away (TC), Bill Clark (BC), David Easterla, Doris Fitchett (DF), Robert Francis (RF), Sharee Foerster (SF), Kent Freeman (KF), Brent Galliart (BG), Allen Gathman (AG), Reed Gerdes (RG), Mark Haas (MH), David Haenni (DH), Zach Haring (ZH), Shari Hayden (SH), Jill Hays (JH), Ra Del Hinckley (RDH), Cheston Hostetler (CH), Brad Jacobs (BJ), Thomas Jones (ThJ), Timothy Jones (TJ), Tim Kavan (TK), Kendell Loyd (KL), Jim Malone (JM), David Marjamaa (DMa), Mary Ann Marjamaa (MMa), Debbie Martin (DM), Steve Martin (SM), Dan McCann (DMc), Chrissy McClarren (CMc), Mike McClure (MM), Paul McKenzie (PMc), Terry McNeely (TMc), Bill Mees (BM), Pete Monacell (PM), Tom Nagle (TN), Mary Nemecek (MN), Susan Nixon (SN), Colby Neuman (CN), Larry Olpin (LO), Erik Ost (EO), Tom Parmeter (TPa), Tim Pinkston (TP), Bryan Prather (BP), Andy Reago (AR), Janet Rebant (JR), Dave Rogles (DR), Bill Rowe (BR), Matt Rowe (MR), Jethro Runco (JRu), Lisa Saffell (LS), Greg Scott (GS), Tammy Shoe- maker (TS), Al Smith (AS), Karen Smith (KS), Ruben Stoll (RS), Greg Swick (GSw), Mike Thelen (MT), Edge Wade (EW), Doug Waggoner (DW), Mike Wease (MW), Luke Wehmhoff (LW), Wendy Williams (WW), Matthew Winks (MW), Paige Witek (PW), Ellen Zellmer (EZ), James Zellmer (JZ).

REFERENCES Guinon, P. Missouri Climate Center. Retrieved from http://climate.missouri.edu/, 2019.

Robbins, M.B. The Status and Distribution of Birds in Missouri. University of Kansas Biodiversity Institute, Lawrence Kansas. 2018.

Sullivan, B.L., C.L. Wood, M.J. Iliff, R.E. Bonney, D. Fink, and S. Kelling. 2009. eBird: a citizen-based bird observation network in the biological sci- ences. Biological Conservation 142: 2282-2292. Retrieved May 2019.

Page 146 THE BLUEBIRD

Winter 2018-2019 Seasonal Report Mary Nemecek

Following an unexpectedly cold November, December 2018 began a mild pattern on December 10 and lasting the rest of the month. Be- fore milder conditions set in, a severe weather event in the south spawned 7 documented tornados. December ended 3.4 degrees and 1.37” of precipitation above the long-term averages. Overall, the year ended at 0.6 degrees and 2.14” of precipitation above the long- term averages. Drought now only lingered in a small area in the southwestern part of the state.

In what the University of Missouri Climate Center called “whiplash weather,” January brought a memorable snowstorm January 11-13, leaving 20” of snow in parts of Central Missouri. Traffic delays piled up, with some travelers spending 15 hours or more in their cars on I- 44, and 1/3 of the trees on campus at the University of Missouri in Columbia damaged. The drought was officially over state-wide. The polar vortex dipped low into the Midwest, resulting in temps across the northern part of the state as low as -20F during the last few days of the month. Still, January ended 0.7 degrees above the long- term average, and the wettest start to the year since 2013 had precipitation levels, at the month end, a little more than an inch above the long-term average.

The polar vortex continued its impact into early February, dividing the state with extreme lows in the north and average to above average temperatures in the south. Kirksville experienced a low of -8F on 1 Feb, whereas Osage Beach enjoyed a high temperature of 76F just four days later. Wet weather continued, with the Northwest corner of the state leading snowfall totals with 15”. Although Febru- ary ended 2 degrees below the long-term average, the three-month period came in 1 degree above the long-term average, and it was the wettest winter in 35 years.

The cold, early start to winter impacted diversity in the northern parts of the state, pushing waterfowl south to look for open water.

Page 147 THE BLUEBIRD On the LBNWR CBC many participants noted a decrease in sparrow and songbird diversity along with very low waterfowl numbers. Taking advantage of the ice and low temperatures, rare gulls had a good showing in the west, with SL and LvL both hosting single Cali- fornia Gulls and multiple Glaucous Gulls, as well as a beautiful, photographed Great Black-back Gull at LvL. There was a Summer Tanager at a feeder on both the far east and the far west side of the state at the same time. Chaseable rarities included a Mountain Bluebird that came in late Nov and stayed for the winter, St. Clair, and a Black-and-white Warbler testing his cold temperature resolve for a few days during mid-December at Carondelet Park, St. Louis City. eBird data and seasonal reports submitted from observers around the state remain a primary source for this report. Missouri bird watchers are encouraged to submit their observations through eBird and are equally encouraged to submit notes to the seasonal editors, as these can often provide more information and perspective than an eBird list. Please note this winter report spans December 1- Febru- ary 28. The Missouri Bird Records Committee defines winter as De- cember 14- February 20. The author is grateful to Joshua Uffman, Pete Monacell, and Allen Gathman for reviewing this document. Their comments and suggestions greatly enhanced the quality of the report.

Note: Records marked with an asterisk (*) require documentation, but no documentation has yet been received by the Missouri Bird Records Commit- tee (MBRC). Observers involved with such sightings are encouraged to submit documentation. The MBRC has received documentation of those records marked with a dagger (†), and those marked (acc.) have been accepted.

WATERFOWL Greater White-fronted Geese were noted to have big numbers hanging around RMBS (BR), with an all-time high count of 4,500 present 2 Feb (Lane Richter). Cackling Geese, less expected in the east, were present in several counties, mostly along the Mississippi R. including RMBS throughout the period, where the highest number reported was 25, 10 Jan (Stacey Jo Pryor). The previous state high-count for Trumpeter Swans was almost doubled at RMBS 1 Feb with 2,332 (BJ, PMc, PM). The Tundra Swan season high of 60 came from RMBS 5 Feb (PL), which was lower than previous years. Now expected, Wood Ducks spent another winter in Forest Park, St.

Page 148 THE BLUEBIRD Louis, with numbers peaking at 60, 10 Dec (Matt Schamberger). The limited open water from frigid temperatures around the state kept many waterfowl numbers low and within their expected range. Rare state-wide for the season, two Blue-winged Teal were at OSCA 28 Dec (MH). Seven counties, Cedar, Dade, Henry, Jackson, St. Charles, Scott and Stoddard, had a single Long-tailed Duck from one to several days with the exception of one that lingered at Brenda Kay Sand Pit, Scott, from 22 Dec (Michael Taylor, TK) through the end of the period (MH, m.ob). Clearwater Lake, Reynolds, hosted new all-time season high counts of Red-breasted Mergansers with 48, 7 Dec (JRu). GREBES THROUGH GULLS A single Horned Grebe, casual in the north, made a one day stop at LBNWR 21 Dec (*PMc) and SL 26 Jan (Chris Barrigar, Brenda Morris). One stayed longer 21 Dec- 1 Jan, at LvL (KD, m.ob). The only Eared Grebe was 11 Dec during the Table Rock Lake Pelagic, Stone, (DM, SM, BJ, PMc, Austin Hess, GSw). A Western Grebe spent 1-11 Dec at Table Rock Lake Stone (DM, SM, BJ, Austin Hess, Becky Swearingen, GSw, m.ob). A West- ern/Clark’s Grebe (acc.) was at Fellows Lake Greene 15 Dec (†David Cat- lin, †Bo Brown). A White-winged Dove (acc.) was at a private residence in Kennett, Dunklin 5-22 Feb with 2 present 18 Feb (†Kent Feeman). Sandhill Cranes were reported in 4 counties: 1 at EBCA 16 and 21 Jan (Josh Mosteller); 6 at LBNWR 10 Dec (Tim Taysen); 10 at Stockton Lake Polk 6 Jan (Patricia Ayres); 5-16 Grand Pass CA, Saline, 27 Jan through the end of the period (Chris Barrigar, Brenda Morris, m.ob). Rare in winter, Least Sandpipers were seen in 4 counties: 8-27 Dunklin 13 Dec- 15 Feb (TJ); 1-5 in Polk, 1-30 Dec (JB, CH, MR); 1 RMBS 9 Dec (Bryan Prather); 1 HFRCA 17 Dec (JB, MR). A Spotted Sandpiper was at Montrose CA, Henry 1 Dec (JB, CH, MR) and Mark Twain National Forest, Stone, 19 Dec (acc., †SM, †DM, ph.). Wilson's Snipe observations came from 13 counties around St. Louis and in the south with a notable number of 105 at OSCA 10 Jan (KF). Five Lesser Yellowlegs showed up early in Pemiscot, 27 Feb (TK). The sole Greater Yellowlegs report came from Hornersville Swamp CA, Dunklin, 11 Jan with 55 birds (TJ). A first-cycle Black- legged Kittiwake spent a few hours on the morning of 8 Dec at RMBS, found independently by Matt Rowe and David Becher. It was briefly seen again in the afternoon on the Illinois side. A lone Franklin’s Gull was in Benton, 25 Feb (Erik Ost, Paige Witek). Two (acc.) reports of Cal- ifornia Gull were of individuals at SL, 1-2 Jan (ph., †MN, †DM, †SM) and at LvL 13 Feb (†KD, California Gull, LvL Jackson 13 Feb 2019 ph.). Six counties had single Ice- Photo Karen Davis

Page 149 THE BLUEBIRD land Gulls with kumlieni identified at Lvl 16-25 Feb (ph., KD, EW) and 1 at Thomas Hill Reservoir, Macon, 13 Feb (BJ, PMc, PM). Single thayeri were reported in four locations: 12 Dec, SL (MM, Mark Mutchler); LvL 1 Jan (KD), 29 Jan-3 Feb (KD, PM, ph.), 2-4 Feb (Karen Stair, Sherry Leonar- do, m.ob), 9 Feb Clarksville Lock and Dam 24, Pike (Jack Foreman, Shirley Foreman, Becky Lutz); RMBS 26 Jan and 9 Feb (CM, JM), 21 Feb (DH). Birds not identified to subspecies were all singles: 3 Feb SL (MN); and 16 Jan Stockton Lake, Polk (DM, SM). Lesser Black-backed Gulls stayed primarily on the western side of the state with the exception being along the Mississippi R. in St. Charles, where all observations were of a single bird (m.ob). Bill Rowe noted, “in some years this species is seen frequently and in multiples there, (RMBS) but was relatively scarce this year.” In the west observations of a single bird came from SL, Warsaw Benton, and Stockton Lake, in the all three counties the lake covers; Dade, Cedar and Polk. Stockton also had 2 birds present on 16 Jan, Polk (CBu, DM, SM) and 23 Jan (BJ, PM, PMc). Other reports of 2 birds came from LvL, 13 Feb (Sherry Leonardo, Aaron Mitchell, Karen Stair); Hold- en City Lake, Johnson, 13 Feb (Dan Cowell). Glaucous Gulls followed this pattern with most reports coming from the west: 1, Lvl 23 Dec, 6 and 29 Jan (KD), 1-4 birds present 2-22 Feb (KD, Sherry Leonardo, Ellen Zellmer, Ka- ren Stair, James Zellmer, Great Black-backed Gull LvL Jackson 3 Feb 2019 m.ob); 1 Lake Jacomo, Jack- Photo Karen Davis son, 15 Feb (Joseph Mosley); 1-3 at SL 19-23 Jan (Kristi Mayo, MN, Yvonne Nixon, PK, Steve Bingham, ph.); single bird at Aldrich Arm of Stockton Lake, Polk, 14 Jan (Merle Wenger), 16 Jan (CBu, DM, SM), 26 Jan (DBl); and in the East, one individual 13 Feb, Thomas Hill Reser- voir, Macon (BJ, PM, PMc) and 1 at Long Branch Lake and SP, Macon, 19 Feb (PK, ph.). An adult Great Black-backed Gull (acc.) was an early morning treat 3 Feb, LvL (†KD). Bill Rowe noted it was not a good winter for unusual gulls at RMBS even with the cold fronts and arctic periods.

LOONS THROUGH FALCONS Stockton Lake Cedar hosted a Red-throated Loon (acc.) 30 Dec (†KL), 5 Jan (Merle Wenger), 6 Jan (KL, Patricia Ayres). It was also the location of an unexpected Pacific Loon (acc.),27 Jan (†GSw) and 2 Feb (†KL). A pair of Great Egrets, a rare winter visitor, were at Dresser Island, St. Charles, 10 Dec (BR, TP) and a lone bird was reported in two additional locations;

Page 150 THE BLUEBIRD RMBS 4 Dec (Brent Schindewolf) and 7 Dec (Cornelius Alwood); Edward Jones Confluence SP, St Charles, 18 Dec (DH) and in Forest Park, St. Louis City, 5 Dec – 18 Feb (Nicholas Renz, m.ob). Black-crowned Night Herons continued another year of overwintering at Forest Park, St. Louis City, with 1-7 birds (m.ob). A single Turkey Vulture (acc.) ventured north, 15 Dec to Sunbridge CA, Buchanan (†Peggy Voltz). Single Golden Eagles were reported in six counties and most were photographed: 28 Dec, OSCA (MH, David Haas); 7 Jan in St. Clair (SM, DM); 14 Feb, EBCA (Carol Weston); Wah’Kon-Tah prairie, Cedar, 8 Jan (Dan Cowell); Pike, Louisiana, 28 Dec (KL) and CCNWR 7 Dec (CMc, AR); Reynolds, Current R., 7 Feb (JRu) and 13 Feb (Rob Francis) . A Snowy Owl was photographed by park worker Mitch McQueen, on Christmas Eve morning at SL. Merlin reports came from 28 counties, all single birds, except 2 at both St. Clair; 7 Jan Wah’kon- tah Prairie (TE), and 8 Feb Taberville Prairie CA, (BJ, PM, PMc). One that was definitively the prairie subspecies, richarsonii, was near RMBS on Red School Road, 2 Feb (BR). Prairie Falcons were in two counties: Barton, Shawnee Trail CA 11 Dec (Jeff Cantrell, A. Wild, Kim Banner, Clyde Ep- pard); St. Clair, Taberville, 14 Jan (DM, SM), 8 Feb (BJ, PM, PMc), Wah’kon-tah 6 Jan (Merle Wenger) and 10 Jan Schell City (Mike Grant). FLYCATCHERS THROUGH SWALLOWS Eastern Phoebe was found in 28 counties, primarily in the south, where it is now commonly found in the winter. The more northern report came from 1, BK Leach, Lincoln, 20 Dec (David Haenni). A lone Say's Phoebe was in Greene 13-22 Feb (KL, m.ob). Single Northern Shrikes were present in 8 counties with the furthest south at Shawnee Trail CA, Barton, 12-15 Dec (MR, JB, m.ob). Accidental in winter, a lone Blue-headed Vireo (acc.) was reported 6 Jan, Lester’s Landing, Dunklin (†TJ). Fish Crows returned to southern areas in late Feb except for one outlier, 18 Jan, Tywappity Com- munity Lake, Scott (MH). Noteworthy reports of Tree Swallows came from: 3 at CCNWR 9-22 Dec (*AR, CMc, Kyran Leeker), 9 (acc.) at BK Leach CA Lincoln 14 Dec (†Bruce Schuette). Two ventured north during milder weather to Browning Lake, Buchanan, 14 Dec (acc., †Brent Galliart). Early spring arrivals were 5 at Duck Creek CA, Stoddard, 24 Feb (Joe Sue- me, Michelle Randecker). NUTHATCHES THROUGH DICKCISSEL Red-breasted Nuthatch reports came from a whopping 58 counties and spanned the period, including a bird that spent the entire period at Sugar Creek Subdivision, Adair, (PK, ph.) and five more at Gen. Watkins CA, Scott (MH). Lester R. Davis State Forest, Barton, had the high for the year with 8, 16 Jan (DBl). Single House Wrens, rare in the south, were found at four sites across the bootheel: 1 Dec, Dunklin (KF); 17 Dec Ten Mile Pond, Mississippi (Bill Eddleman); Donaldson Point CA New Madrid 28 Jan (KF); and Hayti Bar Pits, Pemiscot 6 Jan (TJ). Rare in the North, Winter Wrens

Page 151 THE BLUEBIRD were once again counted in late Dec at LBNWR with 1-3 present 21 Dec (MR, MM, Joseph Mos- ley). Sedge Wrens had a report of a single bird coming from north of the Missouri R. at Bk Leach CA, Lincoln, 10 Dec (BJ, PMc) and two birds (acc.) present 1 Jan, Cora Island, Big Muddy NWR, St. Charles (†Janet Hoyne, †PL, †Dick Palmer). South of the river, Shawnee Trail CA, Barton had 1-2, often vocal birds 11-21 Dec (Jeff Cantrell, A. Wild, Kim Banner, m.ob). The number there peaked 16 Jan with 5 RBNU, Jackson, Cape Girardeau 11 Jan 2019 (DBl), and 1 lingering 2 Feb (Jeff Photo Mark Haas Cantrell). Additional observations were 2 on 1 Jan at Big Muddy NWR, St. Charles (PL, Janey Hoyne) and 1 at Bushwhacker Lake CA, Vernon, 9 Feb (BBl, DBl). Marsh Wrens spent part of the winter in seven counties with the seasonal high of 7 at LBNWR 21 Dec (MR, Joseph Mosley). A male Mountain Bluebird (acc.) was first reported at the end of Nov and continued through the winter period, St. Clair (found 11/29 by †Paige Witek and Eric Ost,† PMc,† KL, m.ob.). American Pipits were in 12 counties, primarily in the south, with a high of 32 in the Palmetto Area, Greene, 15 Feb (GSw). Over half of the counties in Missouri experienced Purple Finches with the greatest number once again being at Sugar Creek Subdivision, Adair, with 104, 24 Feb (PK). The only Snow Bunting was heard vocalizing before being flushed from the shores of Mozingo Lake CA, Nodaway, 2 Dec (KL). Single Chipping Sparrows showed up with 1-3 birds in 13 counties (m.ob.), with the only report coming from north of the Missouri R. was 1, Ray 22-29 Dec and 14 Feb (Steve Dil- linger). One Fox Sparrow, rare in the north, was at LBNWR, 21 Dec (MR, Joseph Mosley). Bill Rowe noted Dark-eyed “Oregon” Juncos were around in some numbers as at least 10 reports came from around the St. Louis area, almost all with photographs. An apparent Oregon x Pink- sided Dark-eyed Junco was photographed by DH in his St. Louis yard, 21 Jan (fide Tony Leukering and Steve Mlodinow). An unexpected Yellow- headed Blackbird was in a mixed flock 26 Jan, Buchanan (Tom Nagel). A Great-tailed Grackle was photographed at a feedlot on Church and See- burger Rds., St. Charles, where BR, TP had 7 on 10 Dec. Bill Rowe comments this is now the only reliable site in the St. Louis area, where number from 1-8 were seen throughout the season (m.ob). A female Black-and- white Warbler (acc.) was photographed at Carondelet Park, St. Louis City,

Page 152 THE BLUEBIRD 13-15 Dec (†CMc, AR). Single Orange-crowned Warblers were found in 4 counties: Creve Coeur Lake and County Park, St. Louis, 10 Dec (Bryan Prather); OSCA, 28 Dec (MH, David Haas), 10 Jan (KF), 4 Feb (KF); St. Louis, 31 Dec (AR, CMc) and 11 Feb (Laura Schweitzer). A lone Nashville Warbler (acc.) was a one day wonder 15 Dec, Greene (†Natalie Re- kittke). A single Palm Warbler was in Carter on 14 Dec (JRu, Shannon Ehlers) and Little River Yellow-headed Blackbird Buchanan 26 Jan CA, Pemiscot 27 Feb (TK). A sur- prise Summer Tanager (acc.) was feeding at a private residence on the east side of the state, St. Louis, 13 Jan (†DBr, Peg Houston), while a male continued from Nov at Karen Smith’s residence, Peculiar, Cass through 18 Jan (ph). An Indigo Bunting made a one-day visit at Ozark National Scenic Riverways, Carter, 14 Dec (JRu, Shannon Ehlers).

CORRIGENDUM: The record printed in the 2017-18 winter report of a Blue -headed Vireo in Dunklin County on 24 January (documented by Tim Jones and accepted) should have appeared in the previous winter report for 2016- 17, as the bird was found 24 January 2017. Observers: Barbara Blevins (BBl), David Blevins (DBl), John Bollin (JB), Diane Bricmont (DBr), Charles Burwick (CBu), Karen Davis (KD), Tony Elliott (TE), Kent Freeman (KF), Mark Haas (MH), Chris Hobbs (CH), Doug Hommert (DH), Brad Jacobs (BJ), Tim Jones (TJ), Tim Kavan (TK), Steve Kinder (SK), Peter Kondrashov(PK), Kendell Loyd (KL), Pat Lueders (PL), Chrissy McClarren (CMc), Debbie Martin (DM), Steve Martin (SM), Paul McKenzie (PMc), Pete Monacell (PM), Marky Mutchler (MM), Mary Nemecek (MN), Mark Robbins (MR), Andy Reago (AR), Bill Rowe (BR), Jethro Runco (JRu),Greg Swick (GSw). Key * = Documentation needed for MBRC review but not yet received † = Documentation received by MBRC acc. = Record accepted by MBRC Abbreviations CA-Conservation Area CBC-Christmas Bird Count Co-County DNR- Department of Natural Resources. Imm.- Immature m.ob- Multiple observations

Page 153 THE BLUEBIRD NWR- National Wildlife Refuge MBRC-Missouri Bird Records Committee ph.- Photographed R.- River SP-State Park

Location Abbreviations (counties are in italics) CBCA-Columbia Bottom Conservation Area, St. Louis County CCNWR-Clarence Cannon National Wildlife Refuge, Pike County CSP-Confluence State Park, St. Charles County DCCA-Duck Creek Conservation Area, Bollinger/Stoddard County EBCA-Eagle Bluffs Conservation Area, Boone County HFRCA-Horton-Four Rivers Conservation Area, Vernon County LBNWR- Loess Bluffs National Wildlife Refuge, Holt- formerly SCNWR-Squaw Creek National Wildlife Refuge, Holt County LBL-Long Branch Lake, Macon LvL- Longview Lake, Jackson MLCA- Montrose Lake Conservation Area, Henry County MNWR-Mingo National Wildlife Refuge, Stoddard/Wayne County MPD-Melvin Price Lock and Dam #26 (IL), on the Illinois side of the Riverlands area and contiguous with the "Riverlands Migratory Bird Sanctuary" (MO) eBird hotspot OSCA-Otter Slough Conservation Area, Stoddard County RMBS-Riverlands Migratory Bird Sanctuary, St. Charles County SLNWR-Swan Lake National Wildlife Refuge, Chariton County SL-Smithville Lake, Clay County STJ- St. Joseph

References: eBird.2018/2019. eBird: An online database of bird distribution and abun- dance [web application]. eBird, Ithaca, New York. Available: http:// www.ebird.org. Guinan, P. (March 2019). Dec 2018-Feb 2019 Weather and Its Impacts on Missouri. Missouri Climate Center. Retrieved from: http:// climate.missouri.edu

Page 154 THE BLUEBIRD

A Birder’s Guide to Missouri Public Lands

MAINTZ WILDLIFE PRESERVE Allen Gathman and Mark Haas, July 2019 804 acres. Cape Girardeau Co. DeLorme 58, D-2 GPS: 37.4874874649,-89.8034724008 MDC owned; for more information call 573-290-5730 or see web site: https:// nature.mdc.mo.gov/discover-nature/places/maintz-wildlife-preserve

Directions: Northwest of Jackson, take Route B north, then County Road 472 west 1.5 miles, or Route BB west 1.9 miles. County Road 471 runs through the preserve, intersecting both County Road 472 and Route BB.

When to Visit/Species to Expect: Spring and fall migrations for passerines. Woodpeckers, raptors, and sparrows year-round, but easiest to view in winter. Occasional waterfowl on larger ponds. Best for woodland, shrub, and grassland species.

Features of interest to birders: Maintz comprises land that was originally a number of small farms, starting from a 250-acre donation by the late Ty Maintz of Oak Ridge. You can impress the locals by pronouncing it “Mantz,” the way Mr. Maintz’s relatives do. It is managed by the MDC for hunting, particularly for Northern Bobwhite and Mourning Dove. There are extensive grassland areas and some cropland that provides wildlife feed. Approxi- mately 1/3 of the land is wooded. There are several ponds stocked for fishing in the preserve, as well as numerous unstocked “water holes”. A good way to bird Maintz is to start from the parking lot on State Highway BB, marked lot #6 on the MDC map. Just east of the lot is a shallow seasonal wetland which often has some waders and waterfowl in season. A berm leads along the south side of that wetland and then turns north by more wetlands, and is normally mowed and easy to walk. The area is good for warblers during migration. A gravel road leads east from the parking lot and uphill to a fishing pond (#3); if you approach quietly you may sur- prise waterfowl here as well. On the way, there are some trees and open grassland with typical species. To the north of the pond you’ll see a barn owl nesting box like a big white mailbox on a post; please keep your distance to avoid disturbing the residents in the spring and summer.

From lot #6, proceed a short distance west to CR 473, and turn right. This takes you through a little private land to lot #7, which gives access to some wildlife feed fields and shrubby grassland. Continuing north to CR 472, you

Page 155 THE BLUEBIRD

Maintz CA wetlands near parking lot #6 turn right to lots #8 and #9. A small pond (#5) is accessible from lot #8. Proceed east on CR 472 and turn right on CR 471, where you will find lot #3 and the archery range. Do not enter trail if archers are present. Technically the range is closed to all uses except archery. If no archers are present, as is often the case, you can walk the archery range trail through a forested area. The trail is good for typical woodland species such as Kentucky War- bler, Acadian Flycatcher, and tanagers in the summer; Yellow-Rumped Warbler and Golden-crowned Kinglet in winter, as well as migratory species in spring and fall. Continuing south on CR 471 you’ll come to lot #4. Park and check the creek bed south of the lot, then walk the gravel road uphill to the west. At the top of the rise to your right is a clearing where the old barn has been torn down, and far to the north you’ll see another Barn Owl nesting box. Again, observe only at a distance. Continue westward to the large pond (#2). The dam above the pond is the best spot in the area for American Woodcocks, which can usually be heard and seen displaying before sunrise or after sun- set from late winter into spring. If you continue across the dam and up a rise, there is a large grassland area to the south that is good for sparrows; the woods to the north harbor a good population of woodpeckers, especially Red-Headed Woodpecker, as well as Great Horned, Barred, and occasionally Eastern Screech Owls. Another parking area further south on CR 471 (#5) gives access to more similar habitat and another fishing pond (#1) that is remarkably devoid of birds in my experience. However, the trail between the parking lot and

Page 156 THE BLUEBIRD pond #1, and other mowed trails in the field to the south, are some of the best on the area for fox sparrows, towhees, and other sparrows. If you go back north to CR 472 and turn right, park at lot #2 and cross the road to walk north into some shrubby fields, which are also excellent sparrow habitat. Once you pass an area planted in wildlife crops, there are fields of native wildflowers that are worth a visit in their own right. Continuing east on CR 472, there are a couple of small pull-outs that aren’t marked on the MDC map. It is usually possible to walk in on a mowed path to pond #4. The open fields on the way frequently yield Eastern Meadow- lark and Bell’s Vireo; the brushy area at the upper end of the pond is worth a look. Continuing east on CR 472 you can get back to State Highway B.

Toilets: None

Camping: Camping is permitted near the archery range at the intersection of County Roads 471 and 472 (parking area #3.

Hazards/Limitations: In tall grass and wooded areas, ticks and chiggers are abundant in the summer.

The area is hunted, so wear orange in season. Avoid the opening of dove season on September 1.

Nearby Birding Sites: Apple Creek CA, Trail of Tears SP, Seventy-Six CA, Lake Girardeau CA, Perry County Community Lake.

Page 157 THE BLUEBIRD

Page 158 THE BLUEBIRD The Bluebird

Awards Committee: The ASM Executive Committee

Webmaster: Kevin Wehner

Executive Committee: Bill Eddleman, Phil Wire, Pat Lueders, and Allen Gathman

Missouri Bird Conservation Initiative: Susan Hazelwood

Conservation Partnership Coordinator: Edge Wade

Grassland Bird Coordinator: Mike Doyen

Missouri Bird Records Committee: Chair: Brad Jacobs Secretary: Bill Rowe Voting Members: Lisa Berger, Joe Eades, Brad Jacobs, Paul McKenzie, Mary Nemecek, Mark Robbins, Josh Uffman —————————————————————————————————

ADDRESS CHANGES

If you move to a new address or you register a temporary address with the post office, please let ASM know. For an address change, just send me an email with your new address, or mail me a note. If it is a temporary address, do the same thing, but also let me know the date of your return and whether you want THE BLUEBIRD sent to your temporary address or held and sent after you return home. You can also change your address anytime on your own by logging into your profile at MOBIRDS.ORG. Thank you!

Kevin Wehner ASM Membership Chair 2101 W. Broadway, PMB 122 Columbia, MO 65203-1261 (573) 815-0352 [email protected]

————————————————————————————————— ——- JOIN

The Audubon Society of Missouri Membership Brings You The Bluebird—quarterly journal of the ASM Birding Fellowship Spring and Fall Birding Weekends Organized Input into Conservation Issues Birding Education Go to www.mobirds.org and pay using PayPal, or by mail: Application for ASM Membership Name: ______Address: ______City / State / Zip: ______Preferred Phone: ______Email Address: ______Do NOT Publish My Phone Number in the ASM Membership Directory

_____ Do NOT Publish ANY of My Information in the ASM Membership Directory ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ **Indicate whether this is a NEW membership or a RENEWAL** _____ New _____ Renewal **Please check the Membership Category that applies and your BLUEBIRD choice** _____ Individual—$20.00 _____ Contributing—$50.00 _____ Family—$25.00 _____ Benefactor—$150.00 _____ Student—$15.00 _____ Life—$250.00 _____ Mail paper BLUEBIRD—$5.00 per year (FREE for Life members) _____ I’ll read the BLUEBIRD online at MOBIRDS.ORG—FREE!

$______Total Enclosed

Send checks (payable to Audubon Society of Missouri) to: The Audubon Society of Missouri 2101 W. Broadway, PMB 122 Columbia, MO 65203-1261

THE BLUEBIRD The voice of ASM since 1934