DOCSLIB.ORG

An Apparent Dunlin X White-Rumped Sandpiper Hybrid

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Apparent Dunlin X White-Rumped Sandpiper Hybrid 8 An Apparent Dunlin x White-rumped Sandpiper Hybrid Kevin A. McLaughlin and Alan Wormington Near Point Pelee National Park, was a White-rumped Sandpiper (C. Ontario, at about 1600h on 18 May juscicollis), feeling that he had been 1994, McLaughlin approached a deceived by the bird's very close group of birders who were intently proximity of only 5 to 7 metres. studying a small group of Dunlin However, this assessment as to the (Calidris alpina) at Hillman Marsh, bird's identity still seemed some­ Essex County. The birds were feeding what wrong. The bill was clearly along the shore of a water body just more Dunlin-like in structure, and several feet from the main trail of in colour was entirely shiny black Hillman Marsh Conservation Area. right to its base. The base of the bill The object of scrutiny was an lacked any trace of yellow-brown unusual looking sandpiper that, at colour that would be characteristic first glance, was thought to be a of a White-rumped Sandpiper. Dunlin in prealternate molt. Furthermore, the upperparts However, several features were seemed wrong for a White-rumped, incorrect for that species. The bill, with too much rust edging to all of while resembling a Dunlin's in over­ the scapulars and tertials. The struc­ all structure, was much too short for ture of the bird was also odd for a a typical individual of that species. White-rumped, as it had rather The upperpart feathers were clearly short wings, a plump body, and legs alternate type, but were quite unlike that seemed too long for that those of a Dunlin as they lacked the species. extensive orange-red scapulars; While exclaiming "What the hell instead, these feathers were slate­ is this thing?" the truth was becoming centred with rusty sides and grayish clear to McLaughlin. Aware of the tips. The underparts were heavily bird's intermediate characters, he streaked on the breast, but the char­ stated in a somewhat incredulous acteristic large black belly patch of tone ofvoice: "This is a hybrid Dunlin an alternate-plumaged Dunlin was x White-rumped Sandpiper!" completely missing. Puzzled, and The apparent hybrid sandpiper being queried by several observers was observed regularly at the as to the bird's identity, McLaughlin Hillman Marsh location from 18 to then saw the bird raise its wings to 20 May inclusive, although occa­ reveal what appeared to be a white sionally it could not be found dur­ rump. He then stated that the bird ing this period. When present, the ONTARIO BIRDS APRIL 2000 9 Figure 1: Apparent Dunlin x White-rumped Sandpiper at Hillman Marsh, Essex County, 18 May 1994. Photo by Alan Wormington. bird was always with a flock of the tip. The bill was thick at the feeding Dunlins numbering about base, but tapered to a rather fine 10-15 birds. When feeding, the bird tip. It was about the length of the tenaciously defended a 5 metre bird's head, or perhaps two to two strip of shoreline from all intruding and a half times the loral distance, Dunlins. The proximity of the bird compared to that of a Dunlin's bill to a main trail, and its exceptional of three to three and a half times tameness, allowed it to be easily the loral distance. viewed and photographed by many observers, including Wormington. Head: The head had a steep fore­ head and a rounded crown. The DESCRIPTION crown was a mix of blackish and Bill: The bill was black. It was whitish streaks with a brown cast, slightly downcurved at its tip, particularly in the lateral crown recalling that of a Dunlin, but was area. There were fine black streaks perhaps only two-thirds the length on a whitish ground colour to the of that species' bill. The culmen was top of the bill. There was a broad, fairly straight, while the lower poorly defined white eyebrow with mandible was a bit downcurved at fine black streaks throughout. The VOLUME 18 UMBER 1 10 eyebrow broadened in the rear and (poorly defined) blackish bar ended at the nape. The lares were extending up the centre. white-based, with a heavy concen­ tration of fine black streaks and a Underparts: The underparts were bit of chestnut-brown near the bill white-based. The chin and throat base. The eyes were small and had fine black streaking. The breast appeared black. Quite striking were was heavily streaked/spotted black oval-shaped chestnut-brown patch­ with a number of black chevrons es behind and below the eyes in the extending down the side of the auriculars. The nape was a mix of belly to about the level of the legs. black and brown streaks. Some fine black streaks extended down the flanks to the undertail Upperparts: The mantle consisted coverts. There was no evidence of a of small black feather centres with black belly patch, the entire belly broad grayish edges. There were being white. two vague broad buff-white mantle lines. The forward-most upper Legs and Feet: These were a shiny scapulars were chestnut with small black, with the leg length perhaps a black centres. All of the remaining bit shorter than a Dunlin's. scapulars and tertials had solid black or dark brown centres with Size: In direct comparison to adja­ rusty sides to the feathers and cent Dunlins, the bird's overall abraded, broad, grayish-white tips. body size was slightly smaller. The exposed wing coverts appeared worn and were a dull brownish­ Vocalizations: Calls were heard on gray. The visible primaries appeared a number of occasions by faded brown. The primary tips Wormington. These consisted of a seemed to fall a few millimetres slightly raspy "chip" and an almost short of the tip of the tail. A thin squeal-like "creeep". These calls white wingstripe was evident when thus resembled one of the assumed the bird extended its wings, perhaps parent types, or a combination a bit narrower than that of a thereof. Dunlin. Age Determination: The faded Tail: The rectrices appeared slaty in brown colour on the visible folded colour, with a thin white fringe on primaries suggests that the bird was the outer edges and tip. The upper­ in first alternate plumage, with tail coverts were nearly all white recently acquired alternate scapu­ (resembling a White-rumped lars, mantle feathers and tertials Sandpiper) except for a few thin contrasting with worn nine month black streaks on the sides and a thin old primaries. ONTARIO BIRDS APRIL 2000 11 DISCUSSION sumed Baird's (c. bairdii) x Buff­ At the time of observation, the breasted (Tryngites subruficollis) authors were well aware of the Sandpiper in Massachusetts (Laux extreme rarity of hybrid shorebirds. 1994), an apparent Dunlin x Purple However, had it not been for the (C. maritima) Sandpiper in Great extreme tameness of this so-called Britain (Millington 1994), and a bird "Hillman Sandpiper" and its pres­ in Newfoundland thought to be a ence along a heavily-used trail, it is Pectoral x White-rumped Sandpiper quite probable that this bird would (Bain and Shanahan 1999). have gone undetected. Based on Armed now with the knowl­ this assumption, one could argue edge that hybrid shorebirds are that hybrid shorebirds in general produced occasionally, it seems might be going unnoticed on a reg­ likely that experienced shorebird ular basis. Only recently has it come observers will soon detect addition­ to light that the possibility of al examples of suspected hybrids encountering a hybrid shorebird is involving new combinations of more likely than once believed. adult types. There are, of course, several accounts describing the "Cox's Acknowledgements Sandpiper" in Australia (for exam­ Our thanks go to Ron Pittaway and ple, see Parker 1982), which has been Ron Tozer, who provided refer­ shown by Christidis et a1. (1996) on ences and made comments on a the basis of molecular analysis to be draft of the manuscript. a hybrid between Curlew Sandpiper (C. ferruginea) and Pectoral Literature Cited Sandpiper (c. melanotos). There is a American Ornithologists' Union. 1998. photographic record involving a sup­ Check-list of North American Birds. 7th edition. American Ornithologists' Union, posed juvenile Cox's Sandpiper from Washington, D.C. Massachusetts (Kasprzyk et a1. 1987, Bain, M. and D. Shanahan. 1999. Cross Vickery et a1. 1987), which has since Canada round-Up: August and September been disputed (Monroe 1991, 1999. Birders Journal 8: 210-228. Christidis, L., K. Davies, M. Westerman, P.D. American Ornithologists' Union Christian, and R. Schodde. 1996. Molecular 1998). "Cooper's Sandpiper," known assessment of the taxonomic status of from the unique type specimen Cox's Sandpiper. Condor 98: 459-463. taken in 1833 on Long Island, New Cox, J.B. 1989. Notes on the affinities of Cooper's and Cox's Sandpiper. South York, is believed to be a Curlew Australian Ornithologist 30: 169-18l. Sandpiper x Sharp-tailed Sandpiper Cox, J.B. 1990. The enigmatic Cooper's and (C. acuminata) hybrid (Cox 1989, Cox's Sandpipers. Dutch Birding 12: 53-64. 1990; Monroe 1991). Additional new Kasprzyk, M.J., R.A. Foster, and B.A. Harrington. 1987. First Northern or suspected hybrids to appear Hemisphere record and first juvenile recently on the scene include a pre- plumage description of the Cox's VOLUME 18 NUMBER 1 12 Sandpiper (Calidris paramelanotos). Parker, S.A. 1982. A new sandpiper of the American Birds 41: 1359-1364. genus Calidris. South Australian Naturalist Laux, E.V. 1994. Mystery sandpiper. Birding 56: 63. 26: 66-68. Vickery, P.D., D.W. Finch, and P.K. Donahue. Millington, R.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Table 7: Species Changing IUCN Red List Status (2014-2015)
    IUCN Red List version 2015.4: Table 7 Last Updated: 19 November 2015 Table 7: Species changing IUCN Red List Status (2014-2015) Published listings of a species' status may change for a variety of reasons (genuine improvement or deterioration in status; new information being available that was not known at the time of the previous assessment; taxonomic changes; corrections to mistakes made in previous assessments, etc. To help Red List users interpret the changes between the Red List updates, a summary of species that have changed category between 2014 (IUCN Red List version 2014.3) and 2015 (IUCN Red List version 2015-4) and the reasons for these changes is provided in the table below. IUCN Red List Categories: EX - Extinct, EW - Extinct in the Wild, CR - Critically Endangered, EN - Endangered, VU - Vulnerable, LR/cd - Lower Risk/conservation dependent, NT - Near Threatened (includes LR/nt - Lower Risk/near threatened), DD - Data Deficient, LC - Least Concern (includes LR/lc - Lower Risk, least concern). Reasons for change: G - Genuine status change (genuine improvement or deterioration in the species' status); N - Non-genuine status change (i.e., status changes due to new information, improved knowledge of the criteria, incorrect data used previously, taxonomic revision, etc.); E - Previous listing was an Error. IUCN Red List IUCN Red Reason for Red List Scientific name Common name (2014) List (2015) change version Category Category MAMMALS Aonyx capensis African Clawless Otter LC NT N 2015-2 Ailurus fulgens Red Panda VU EN N 2015-4
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Version Target Shorebird Species List
    Draft Version Target Shorebird Species List The target species list (species to be surveyed) should not change over the course of the study, therefore determining the target species list is an important project design task. Because waterbirds, including shorebirds, can occur in very high numbers in a census area, it is often not possible to count all species without compromising the quality of the survey data. For the basic shorebird census program (protocol 1), we recommend counting all shorebirds (sub-Order Charadrii), all raptors (hawks, falcons, owls, etc.), Common Ravens, and American Crows. This list of species is available on our field data forms, which can be downloaded from this site, and as a drop-down list on our online data entry form. If a very rare species occurs on a shorebird area survey, the species will need to be submitted with good documentation as a narrative note with the survey data. Project goals that could preclude counting all species include surveys designed to search for color-marked birds or post- breeding season counts of age-classed bird to obtain age ratios for a species. When conducting a census, you should identify as many of the shorebirds as possible to species; sometimes, however, this is not possible. For example, dowitchers often cannot be separated under censuses conditions, and at a distance or under poor lighting, it may not be possible to distinguish some species such as small Calidris sandpipers. We have provided codes for species combinations that commonly are reported on censuses. Combined codes are still species-specific and you should use the code that provides as much information as possible about the potential species combination you designate.
    [Show full text]
  • Bird Species Check List
    Birds Description Date Location Terns & Black Skimmer Rynchops niger Black Skimmer Sterna caspia Caspian Tern Stema forsteri Forester's Tern Sterna antillarum Least Tern Sterna maxima Royal Tern Gulls Larus philadelphia Bonaparte's Gull Larus marinus Great Black‐backed Gull Larus argentatus Herring Gull Larus atricilla Laughing Gull Larus delawarensis Ring‐billed Gull Boobies & Gannets Morus bassanus Northern Gannet Pelicans Pelecanus occidentalis Brown Pelican Cormorants Phalacrocorax auritus Double‐Crested Cormorant Anhinga Anhinga anhinga Anhinga Loons Gavia immer Common Loon Gavia stellata Red‐throated Loon Grebes PodilymbusPodil ymbus popodicepsdiceps PiPieded‐billbilleded GrebeGrebe Ducks Anas rubripes American Black Duck Anas americana American Wigeon Anas discors Blue‐winged Teal Branta canadensis Canada Goose Mergus merganser Common Merganser Anas strepera Gadwall Aythya marila Greater Scaup Anas crecca Green‐winged Teal Lophodytes cucullatus Hooded Merganser Anas platyrhynchos Mallard Anas fulvigula Mottled Duck Anas clypeata Northern Shoveler Mergus serrator Red‐breasted Merganser Aythya collaris Ring‐Necked Duck Aix sponsa Wood Duck Birds Description Date Location Rails & Northern Jacana Fulica americana American Coot Rallus longirostris Clapper Rail Gallinula chloropus Common Moorhen Rallus elegans King Rail Porzana carolina Sora Long‐legged Waders Nycticorax nycticorax Black‐crowned Night‐Heron Bubulcus ibis Cattle Egret Plegadis falcinellus Glossy Ibis Ardea herodias Great Blue Heron Casmerodius albus Great Egret Butorides
    [Show full text]
  • Reproduction and Survival in a Declining Population of The
    Reproductionand Survivalin a Declining Population of the Southern Dunlin Calidris alpina schinzii Paul Eric J6nsson J6nsson,P.E. 1991.Reproduction and Survival in a DecliningPopulation of theSouthern Dunlin Calidrisalpina schinzii. Wader Study Group Bulletin 61, Supplement: 56-68. Reproductivesuccess and survival was studied in a declining population of theSouthern Dunlin in SW Sk,Sne,SSweden, in 1981-1986.Hatching success was low; on average only 30% of clutches hatched, dueto intense nest-predation from mainly Crows, Foxes and mustelids. Some nests (8%) were also lostby tramplingfrom grazing animals. Within a season,there was no significantdifference in hatchingsuccess between early and late clutches, but the overall annual hatching success was higher in yearswith an early onset of breeding.On average,the Dunlins yearly produced 0.3 - 0.4 hatched young/adult.Fledging success was estimated at36% and survival from fledging tothe age of one year at56%. Adult survival, estimated from rerum rates, averaged 89% in males and 77% in females (83% of thesexes combined). The sex-relateddifference in return-ratesbelieved to reflecta loweractuai survivalrate in females, assuggested bythe male-skewed sex-ratio inthe population. The average life expectancyfor an adult Dunlin is estimated at5.4 years and the mean longevity at7.4 years. Survival tendedto decrease with increasing age (up to 5 yearsafter ringing). The oldest bird recorded in the studywas 17 yearsold. The observed reproductive rate was found to be insufficientto maintaina stablepopulation and unless nest-predation issignificantly reduced, the Dunlin will become extinct in SW Sl•ne within20 to 30 years. PaulE. J6nsson,Dept. of Ecology, Ecology Building, University of Lund, 223 62 Lund, Sweden.
    [Show full text]
  • Breeding Schedule and Primary Moult in Dunlins <I>Calidris Alpina</I> Of
    29 Breeding scheduleand primary moult in Dunlins Calidris alpina of the Far East Panel S. Tomkoich Tomkovich,P.S. 1998. Breedingschedule and primarymoult in Dunlins Calidris alpina of the Far East. WaderStudy Group Bull. 85:29-34 On Chukotka,the breedinggrounds of the subspeciessakhalina, the primarymoult of Dunlin Calidrisalpina startsin mid-June,at the beginningof theincubation period, and birds migrate southward from thebeginning of August,when the moultis almostcomplete. On Kamchatka(kistchinski) and Sakhalin(actites), where breeding takes place earlier, primary moult startsin July,in the chick rearing period,or evenlater. Thesedifferences between northern and southern populations are similarto thosefound previously in Alaska (Holmes1971). The timing of theseevents is not strictlyrelated to latitude; it is thoughtthat, with localvariations, latitudinal differencesin datesof breedingand primary moult are brought about through subspecific characteristics. Knowledge of subspecific breedingschedules and primary moult periods can be usedtogether with biometricsto assignFar EasternDunlins to different populationsin the post-breedingperiod. P S. Tomkovich,Zoological Museum, Moscow Lomonosov State University,Bolshaya Nikitskaya Street 6, Moscow103009, Russia. INTRODUCTION Far East are comparedin this study. Two new subspeciesof Dunlin from the Far East, Calidris alpina kistchinski(Tornkovich 1986) and C.a. actites(Nechaev STUDY AREAS AND METHODS & Tornkovich1987, 1988), were describedrecently, in The main data were collectedduring expeditions
    [Show full text]
  • The World's First Known Juvenile Cox's Sandpiper
    British Birds VOLUME 81 NUMBER 6 JUNE 1988 The World's first known juvenile Cox's Sandpiper P. A. Buckley or once, the North Americans have beaten the British by being first Fto find a spectacular vagrant Asiatic shorebird away from the Alaskan out-islands.1 This time we outdid everyone, producing a juvenile Cox's Sandpiper Calidris paramelanotos in Massachusetts. This individual, depicted in colour in plate 145, is not only the first of this recently described species from the Western Hemisphere, but also only the second away from its Australian wintering grounds (an adult was reported from Hong Kong in spring 1987: Brit. Birds 80: 391). The firsts continue, however, for, until this individual, Cox's juvenile plumage was unde- scribed, and, until this photograph, there have been, to my knowledge, no published colour photographs of Cox's Sandpiper in any plumage, let alone that of a juvenile. I am exceedingly grateful to the bird's discoverer, Mark Kasprzyk, for much background information, and to Simon Perkins, for permission to reproduce here his splendid colour photograph. This bird was first mist-netted at night, on 15th September 1987, at Duxbury Beach, a long barrier spit separating Plymouth Bay (where the Mayflower Pilgrims landed in 1620) from Cape Cod Bay/Atlantic Ocean waters. It was ringed as a Pectoral Sandpiper C. melanotos (understandable, at 03.00 hours), but photographed in the hand nonetheless, carefully measured, and then released. Nagging identification doubts soon set in, and efforts to relocate the bird were successful by daylight on 15th. Several observers examined it at close range over the next few days, and it went on the Massachusetts rare bird telephone-tape, finally, as an adult 1 This is actually not the first, truth to tell.
    [Show full text]
  • Peeps and Related Sandpipers Peeps Are a Group of Diminutive Sandpipers That Are Notoriously Hard to Tell Apart
    Peeps and Related Sandpipers Peeps are a group of diminutive sandpipers that are notoriously hard to tell apart. They belong to a subfamily of subarctic and arctic nesting sandpipers known as the Calidridinae (in the sandpiper family, Scolopacidae). During their migrations, when most residents of North America have the opportunity to watch them, mixed flocks of calidridine sandpipers scurry about on mudflats, feeding at the edge of the retreating tide, or swarm aloft, twisting and turning like a dense school of fish. These traits, in a group of birds that look so much alike to start with, give bird watchers nightmares. Fortunately for Alaskans and visitors to our state, Alaska is an excellent location to view and identify calidridine sandpipers. The early summer breeding season is the easiest time of the year to distinguish the various species, not only because they are in breeding plumage and are more approachable than at other times of the year, but also because each species performs a characteristic courtship display with unique vocalizations. For the avid birder, Alaska has the additional attraction of being one of the best places in North America to view exotic Eurasian species. General description: Three peeps are abundant summer residents and breeders in Alaska—the least, semipalmated, and western sandpipers (Calidris minutilla, C. pusilla, and C. mauri) [all lists in order by size]. Another four species from Eurasia may also be seen—the little, rufous-necked, Temminck's, and long-toed stints (“stint” is the British equivalent for peep) (C. minuta, C. ruficollis, C. temminckii, C. subminuta). These seven species range from 5 to 6½ inches (15-17 cm) in length, and weigh from 2/3 to 1½ ounces (17-33 g).
    [Show full text]
  • Pilbara Shorebirds and Seabirds
    Shorebirds and seabirds OF THE PILBARA COAST AND ISLANDS Montebello Islands Pilbara Region Dampier Barrow Sholl Island Karratha Island PERTH Thevenard Island Serrurier Island South Muiron Island COASTAL HIGHWAY Onslow Pannawonica NORTH WEST Exmouth Cover: Greater sand plover. This page: Great knot. Photos – Grant Griffin/DBCA Photos – Grant page: Great knot. This Greater sand plover. Cover: Shorebirds and seabirds of the Pilbara coast and islands The Pilbara coast and islands, including the Exmouth Gulf, provide important refuge for a number of shorebird and seabird species. For migratory shorebirds, sandy spits, sandbars, rocky shores, sandy beaches, salt marshes, intertidal flats and mangroves are important feeding and resting habitat during spring and summer, when the birds escape the harsh winter of their northern hemisphere breeding grounds. Seabirds, including terns and shearwaters, use the islands for nesting. For resident shorebirds, including oystercatchers and beach stone-curlews, the islands provide all the food, shelter and undisturbed nesting areas they need. What is a shorebird? Shorebirds, also known as ‘waders’, are a diverse group of birds mostly associated with wetland and coastal habitats where they wade in shallow water and feed along the shore. This group includes plovers, sandpipers, stints, curlews, knots, godwits and oystercatchers. Some shorebirds spend their entire lives in Australia (resident), while others travel long distances between their feeding and breeding grounds each year (migratory). TYPES OF SHOREBIRDS Roseate terns. Photo – Grant Griffin/DBCA Photo – Grant Roseate terns. Eastern curlew Whimbrel Godwit Plover Turnstone Sandpiper Sanderling Diagram – adapted with permission from Ted A Morris Jr. Above: LONG-DISTANCE TRAVELLERS To never experience the cold of winter sounds like a good life, however migratory shorebirds put a lot of effort in achieving their endless summer.
    [Show full text]
  • Seven Deadly Stints and Their Friends an Introduction to Calidris Sandpipers – Part 1 Jon L
    Seven Deadly Stints and their Friends An Introduction to Calidris Sandpipers – Part 1 Jon L. Dunn Larry Sansone photos 13 October 2020 Los Angeles Birders Genus Calidris – Composed of 23 species the largest genus within the large family (94 species worldwide, 66 in North America) of Scolopacidae (Sandpipers). – All 23 species in the genus Calidris have been found in North America, 19 of which have occurred in California. – Only Great Knot, Broad-billed Sandpiper, Temminck’s Stint, and Spoon-billed Sandpiper have not been recorded in the state, and as for Great Knot, well half of one turned up! Genus Calidris – The genus was described by Marrem in 1804 (type by tautonymy, Red Knot, 1758 Linnaeus). – Until 1934, the genus was composed only of the Red Knot and Great Knot. – This genus is composed of small to moderate sized sandpipers and use a variety of foraging styles from probing in water to picking at the shore’s edge, or even away from water on mud or the vegetated border of the mud. – As within so many families or large genre behavior offers important clues to species identification. Genus Calidris – Most, but not all, species migrate south in their alternate (breeding) or juvenal plumage, molting largely once they reach their more southerly wintering grounds. – Most species nest in the arctic, some farther north than others. Some species breed primarily in Eurasia, some in North America. Some are Holarctic. – The majority of species are monotypic (no additional recognized subspecies). Genus Calidris – In learning these species one
    [Show full text]
  • Hybrid Sandpipers Pectoral Sandpiper Calidris Melanotus
    The Australian Bird Guide Species accounts CURLEW SANDPIPER Curlew Sandpiper Calidris ferruginea undertail-coverts clean white, occasionally with sparse incon- Juv worn, Oct–Nov spicuous dark streaks (Sharp-tailed has distinct streaking on Wing 126–136 mm Bill 34–44 mm Wt 55–93 g undertail-coverts, often a helpful ID cue from behind). long-winged: tips of white rump and Smallish, slim sandpiper with long blackish legs. Long, fine- ♂ ~10% taller than ♀. All plumages quite similar to one primaries usually project wing-bar tipped, down-curved black bill (~15% longer in ♀). In flight, beyond tail-tip our only regularly occurring small sandpiper with white another, unlike Sharp-tailed Sandpiper in which Ad br and rump-patch. Ad br mainly chestnut. Confusion only possible Juv plumages distinctive. In flight rarely separable from with larger, stockier, short-billed Ad br Red Knot. Ad non-br Sharp-tailed except on call, but has brown (not white) shafts paler grey above than most Aus shorebirds, with clear white to inner primaries. Ad br bright rufous edges to upperparts feathers, strongly marked breast; little yellow at base of bill. Juv fresh, supercilium; white below; grey-brown streaking on sides of Sep–Oct breast varies but paler and less extensive than Sharp-tailed. Ad non-br bare parts brighter than Ad br, but plumage duller mainly plain pale grey rufous Juv peach-buff wash across breast when fresh, and white- with lighter breast streaking; rufous edging to feathers of upperparts Ad br worn scalloped upperparts with anchor-shaped markings within upperparts much reduced or absent.
    [Show full text]
  • Shorebirds and Horseshoe Crabs in Jamaica Bay: 2014 Update
    Shorebirds and Horseshoe Crabs in Jamaica Bay: 2014 Update credit: Don Riepe Debra Kriensky, New York City Audubon Harbor Herons Working Group Annual Meeting –Dec. 11‐12, 2014 Photo Credit: coastaloutdooradventures.com Sanderling Ruddy Turnstone Red Knot Shorebird Migration Semipalmated Sandpiper Dunlin http://fossilcollector.wordpress.com/ Photo Credit: marinebio.org www.allposters.com Jamaica Bay JBWR Big Egg Marsh Plumb Beach Dead Horse Bay Bay Dunes Shorebird monitoring sites Horseshoe crab monitoring sites CITIZEN SCIENCE Horseshoe Crab Monitoring 2009‐2014 Average # of HSC Counted per Sampling Night 350 Note: Different sampling methods 300 used at PBW & DHB in 2014 Night 250 Sampling per 200 Plumb Beach Dead Horse Bay Counted 150 Big Egg Marsh HSC Plumb Beach West of # 100 Average 50 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Year Plumb Beach June 2012 vs. November 2012 Shorebird Monitoring 2009‐2014 Maximum Count per Species ‐ Jamaica Bay Wildlife Refuge 3000 2500 American Oystercatcher Black‐bellied Plover 2000 Dunlin Least Sandpiper Red Knot 1500 Ruddy Turnstone Sanderling Semipalmated Plover 1000 Semipalmated Sandpiper Short‐billed Dowitcher White‐rumped Sandpiper 500 Willet 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Shorebird Monitoring 2009‐2014 Maximum Count per Species ‐ Plumb Beach 3500 3000 American Oystercatcher Black‐bellied Plover 2500 Dunlin Least Sandpiper Red Knot 2000 Ruddy Turnstone Sanderling 1500 Semipalmated Plover Semipalmated Sandpiper Short‐billed Dowitcher 1000 White‐rumped Sandpiper Willet 500 TOTAL HSC 0 2009 2010 2011 2012
    [Show full text]
  • Red List of Bangladesh 2015
    Red List of Bangladesh Volume 1: Summary Chief National Technical Expert Mohammad Ali Reza Khan Technical Coordinator Mohammad Shahad Mahabub Chowdhury IUCN, International Union for Conservation of Nature Bangladesh Country Office 2015 i The designation of geographical entitles in this book and the presentation of the material, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IUCN, International Union for Conservation of Nature concerning the legal status of any country, territory, administration, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The biodiversity database and views expressed in this publication are not necessarily reflect those of IUCN, Bangladesh Forest Department and The World Bank. This publication has been made possible because of the funding received from The World Bank through Bangladesh Forest Department to implement the subproject entitled ‘Updating Species Red List of Bangladesh’ under the ‘Strengthening Regional Cooperation for Wildlife Protection (SRCWP)’ Project. Published by: IUCN Bangladesh Country Office Copyright: © 2015 Bangladesh Forest Department and IUCN, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written permission from the copyright holders, provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holders. Citation: Of this volume IUCN Bangladesh. 2015. Red List of Bangladesh Volume 1: Summary. IUCN, International Union for Conservation of Nature, Bangladesh Country Office, Dhaka, Bangladesh, pp. xvi+122. ISBN: 978-984-34-0733-7 Publication Assistant: Sheikh Asaduzzaman Design and Printed by: Progressive Printers Pvt.
    [Show full text]