Conservation Challenges of Patagonia's Burrowing Parrots (Cyanoliseus Patagonus)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SOCO Paper – Burrowing Parrots Dylan MacArthur-Waltz, 10/16/2016 Conservation Challenges of Patagonia’s Burrowing Parrots (Cyanoliseus patagonus) Introduction Burrowing Parrots (Cyanoliseus patagonus) are a colonially nesting parrot species native to Northern Argentinian and Chilean Patagonia, where they live in semi-arid environments (Masello 2012: 73). Burrowing parrots are one of only two Psittaciform species native to Patagonia, and have a colonial, pair-bonding nesting ecology and socially and genetically monogamous mating system (Masello 2002 (a): 100-101; Image 1). Burrowing parrots get their name from the burrows that adult nesting pairs dig into cliff faces, where they will raise 2-5 chicks per year together (Masello 2002 (b): 577). Because of this unique ecology, burrowing parrot nesting is restricted to sites with appropriate sandstone, earth, or limestone cliffs (Masello 2006 (b): 69). Because parrots needs such a specific location to create their nests, particular cliffs are very important to this species: one colony stretching along 12km of sandstone cliff on the Atlantic coast (the El Condor colony) houses 92% of all known nesting pairs of burrowing parrots (Masello 2006(b): 73). 1 Image 1: The austral parakeet, the only Psittaciform species other than the burrowing parrot native to Patagonia; Torres del Paine National Park, Chile. Photo by Dylan MacArthur-Waltz. Like many Psittaciform species, burrowing parrots feed primarily on seeds and fruits (Masello 2012: 76). Bucher (1987: 107) found that burrowing parrots feed primarily on the seeds and fruits of native Patagonian species, including: Geoffroea decorticans (chañar), Prosopis caldenia (caldén), P. chilensis (white carob tree) and P. flexuosa (black locust). Like all tested parrots in the Neotropics, burrowing parrots have a curious lack of internal parasites, contrasted by abundant bloodsucking ectoparasites (Masello 2006 (a): 522). This lack of internal parasites is potentially explained by these pathogens’ origins in the Old World and failure to have migrated as far as Patagonia (Masello 2006 (a): 522). It is however curious that the burrowing parrots have a large sexually selected red belly-patch without serious internal parasite load, often cited as the 2 reason for such sexually selected signals (Masello 2006 (a): 519-522). Predation of both adults and chicks seems to be relatively uncommon; peregrine falcons occasionally kill adults while the inaccessibility of the cliff burrows protects chicks (Masello 2012: 83). Although burrowing parrots’ migratory behavior is not perfectly understood, significant parts of the population are known to migrate yearly between their breeding ground (usually further south near an appropriate cliff site) and a wintering ground farther north, towards the pampas (Bucher 1986: 303-304; Figure 1). In all parts of their range, burrowing parrots seem to prefer shrubby steppe or similar habitat, where most of their usual food species are found (Masello 2002 (b): 575; Masello 2012: 74). Interestingly, at least part of the burrowing parrots’ migratory ecology seems to be determined by availability of this preferred habitat. Masello (2012: 79) reported seeing more parrots remaining at the major breeding colony year round, and theorize that these newly permanent residents may be related to habitat conversion in their migratory winter range. 3 Figure 1: A map of the year-round and non-breeding range of the burrowing parrot. Map from Cornell University Neotropical Birds Online: Burrowing Parakeet. Historically, burrowing parrots have been studied relatively little – only one research team has conducted extensive work with this species, and only since the 1990’s (Juan Masello et al., now of Universitat Giessen). As such, no historical population data is available for this species, but comparison of historical and present range shows a clear range contraction since the late 1800’s; see Figure 2 (Masello 2012: 74). 4 74 MASELLO Y QUILLFELDT Hornero 27(1) anuales promedio por sobre los 8 °C (Tambussi Sclater 1897, Dabbene 1910, Hudson 1923, et al. 2007). Allí, las colonias más grandes de Pereyra 1923, Wetmore 1926, Stone 1927, Cas- la especie están principalmente asociadas a la tellanos 1932, Barros 1934, Bucher y Rinaldi Provincia Fitogeográfica del Monte (véase 1986, Di Iorio et al. 2010, Grilli et al. 2012). Esta Fig. S1 en Masello et al. 2011). Algunas pobla- retracción se debe a un conjunto de factores: ciones argentinas se encuentran asociadas, en (1) la intensa captura para el mercado de bajos números, a la Estepa Patagónica, el mascotas (Masello et al. 2006b, Rojas Martínez Espinal, la Pampa y el Chaco Seco (Cabrera 2008, Grilli et al. 2012), (2) la rápida pérdida y 1971, Masello et al. 2011). El Monte es una degradación de su hábitat natural a conse- estepa arbustiva (Cabrera 1971) que se extien- cuencia de profundos cambios en el uso de la de desde el noroeste de Argentina hasta la tierra (Pezzola et al. 2004, Rojas Martínez 2008), Patagonia y que está caracteriZada por una alta y (3) la persecución que sufre al ser injusti- biodiversidad (e.g., Roig-Juñent et al. 2001). ficadamente considerada plaga de la agricul- Este ecosistema se encuentra en peligro en la tura (Dabbene 1935, Failla et al. 2008, Rojas actualidad, con una tasa promedio anual de Martínez 2008, Grilli et al. 2012). Debido a esta pérdida de biomasa de 3.7% (Pezzola et al. presión humana, pero también a sus requeri- 2004). A modo de comparación, esta tasa es 10 mientos específicos de sitios de nidificación, veces más alta que la pérdida que experimen- la distribución actual del Loro Barranquero es tan en promedio las selvas tropicales del fragmentada y su abundancia altamente varia- mundo (Balmford et al. 2003). En Chile, las ble (Bucher y Rinaldi 1986, Masello et al. 2011). poblaciones del Loro Tricahue (la subespecie Cyanoliseus patagonus bloxami) se distribuyen por el centro del país, principalmente asocia- das a la ecorregión del Matorral, adaptado a las condiciones generalmente secas de las zonas de clima tipo mediterráneo (Darrieu 1980, Badano et al. 2005, López et al. 2006, Rojas Martínez 2008). Han sido propuestas cuatro subespecies de Loro Barranquero, tres de las cuales están pre- sentes en Argentina: Cyanoliseus patagonus patagonus en el sur, Cyanoliseus patagonus andinus en el noroeste y Cyanoliseus patagonus conlara en el centro (Darrieu 1980, Nores e Yzurieta 1983, Bucher y Rinaldi 1986, Di Iorio et al. 2010, Masello et al. 2011; Fig. 1). La subespecie Cyanoliseus patagonus bloxami se distribuye por el centro de Chile, principal- mente en ambientes cordilleranos (Darrieu 1980, Rojas Martínez 2008; Fig. 1). Las subespe- cies Cyanoliseus patagonus andinus, Cyanoliseus patagonus patagonus y Cyanoliseus patagonus bloxami se distinguen claramente por caracte- rísticas de su morfología, mientras que Darrieu (1980), Bucher y Rinaldi (1986) y Masello et al. (2011) consideran que Cyanoliseus patagonus conlara es un híbrido entre Cyanoliseus patago- nus patagonus y Cyanoliseus patagonus andinus. El Loro Barranquero ha sufrido una clara Figure 2: Historical to present range contraction of the burrowing parrot; filled areas represent present retracción en su área de distribución desde distributionFigura and 1.hashed Distribución areas represent past distribution;histórica colors y show actual subspecies de (Masello las 2012: 74). subespecies de Loro Barranquero (Loro Tricahue principios del siglo XIX (Fig. 1), particular- Despiteen Chile)a lack of deepCyanoliseus understanding patagonus of this species, patagonus we can investigate, Cyano- some possible mente en Chile, en la Región Pampeana, en liseus patagonus andinus y Cyanoliseus patagonus Córdoba y en el sur de la Patagonia (Gibson causesbloxami of this .range Para contraction. la clasificación Due to the reliance de las of this subespecies species on specialized 1879, 1880, White 1882, Barrows 1884, Lane y colonialmorfológicas nesting sites, andse insiguió particular a Darrieuof the El Condor (1980). colony (where more than 90% of 5 all burrowing parrots nest; Masello 2006 (b): 70), we can productively begin by looking at threats to the El Condor colony. El Condor Colony Historically, the human population of Patagonia has approached burrowing parrots primarily as a nuisance (burrowing parrots are quite noisy), and as a pest (burrowing parrots are known to eat agricultural crops in certain cases) (Masello 2003: 13). This attitude perhaps helps to explain some of the events that have happened at the El Condor colony. The El Condor colony still lacks any form of legal protection, and local residents are only starting to view this unique site (the largest parrot colony in the world!) as an asset rather than a liability, in part due to the educational efforts of Juan Masello and his team (Masello 2003: 13). The El Condor colony has been subjected to a number of (both deliberate and incidental) damages since the 1980’s. A “population control” program consisting of spraying DDT directly on the sandstone cliff face, in an attempt to poison both adults and chicks, ended in the 1980’s (Masello 2003: 13). More recently, chick poaching has been a sporadic issue at the colony. While harvesting wild parrot chicks for the exotic bird trade is prohibited nationally in Argentina, the lack of specific protection at the El Condor colony site makes it extremely vulnerable to chick poaching. The most recent incident occurred in December 2002, when poachers took an estimated 1,200 chicks from the colony, leaving other chicks and adults dead littered around the cliffs (Masello 2004 (a): 7). Although chick poaching at El Condor has decreased in recent years, it remains a 6 concern in other parts of the burrowing parrots’ range, especially in Chile where there is even less legal protection against the exotic bird trade (Masello 2012: 77). The 12km or sandstone cliffs of the El Condor colony face a beach that is used recreationally by both locals and tourists. About 10,000 tourists travel to El Condor on weekends during the summer (burrowing parrot breeding season), mostly to recreate on the beach (Masello 2003: 13).