DOCSLIB.ORG

As Part of a Wetland Enhancement Project, Tule L<Lke National

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
As Part of a Wetland Enhancement Project, Tule L<Lke National A. HIGHLIGHTS f B. CLIMATIC CONDITIONS C. LAND ACQUISITION 1. Fee Title 2. Easements 3. Other 4. Farmers Home Administration Conservation Easements D.PLANNING 1. Master Plan 2. Management Plan 3. Public Participation 4. Compliance with Environmental/Cultural Resource Mandates 5. Research and Investigations Results of Water Quality Monitoring in Sump l(B) as part of a Wetland Enhancement Project, Tule L<lke National Wildlife Refuge, 2004. David M. Mauser, Ph.D, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuges, 4009 Hill Road, Tulelake, CA 96134 John Beckstrand, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuges, 4009 Hill Road, Tulelake, CA 96134 Dani Thomson, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuges, 4009 Hill Road, Tulelake, CA 96134 The following is a summary of the 2004 Report: Introduction. 2004 was the fifth year of implementation of the Sump 1(B) Wetland Enhancement Project, a plan to establish desired emergent vegetation within Sump l(B) on Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge (TLNWR). In brief, the 1 project seeks to transform Sump l(B), previously an open water impoundment, into a permanently flooded emergent wetland by promoting germination of desired vegetation through timed water removals and replacements during an initial seasonal wetland cycle. For the first time since project implementation, Sump l(B) was maintained as a year round flooded wetland. Since water was not removed from Sump l(B) and pumped into Sump l(A) as occurred in previous years, water quality was not monitored in Sump l(A). Because two species of federally-listed endangered species, the shortnose sucker (Chasmistes brevirostris) and Lost River sucker (Deltistes luxatus), may utilize Sump l(B) in the future and these fish are dependent on minimum water quality standards for their survival, it was necessary to monitor water quality within Sump l(B) in 2004. This report summarizes results of dissolved oxygen (DO) and temperature monitoring conducted in 2004 with comparisons to previous years. Methods. In 2004, we again made instantaneous measurements of DO and temperature but sampled at two new sites in Sump l(B). No sampling occurred in Sump l(A). Samples were collected from 3 June to 24 September, 2004 at the Sump l(B) side of the metal pipes at the "English Channel" and at the outlet structure located on the north levee on Sump l(B) (Fig. 1). We recorded DO in mg/I and temperature (0 C) approximately 1 foot above the sediment between the hours of 0645 and 0900, a time of day when DO is generally near its lowest point. Figure 1. Water Quality Monitoring Sites, Tule Lake NWR, 2004. L__ _ PumpC II • ~ Sump 1(8) Meters 0 1000 2000 300 2 Results. Results of each sampling date are depicted in Table 1. The lowest DO measurement was recorded on 12 August at the outlet channel of Sump l(B) (0.98 mg/l). This particular reading was low relative to other readings from 2004 which otherwise ranged from 4.01 mg/l to 11.38 mg/l. Temperature readings ranged from 13.47 °c (24 September) to 22.52 °c (1 2 August) . Table 1. Instantaneous dissolved oxygen readings for sample sites in Sump l(B) at the English Channel and the outlet structure on the north levee at Tule Lake NWR, June~ September 2004. 1(B) Side Between English Channel and Sump 1(B) North Side Outlet Drift Sump 1(8) DO drift DO DO Date Time Temp. (° C) Date Time Temp. (°C) from (mg/L) (mg/L) 100% 3-Jun 815 9.56 17.45 3-Jun 825 7.74 17.87 -0.9% 18-Jun 815 8.7 20.34 18-Jun 822 9.4 19.76 -3.9% 2-Jul 808 11 .38 21.66 2-Jul 816 9.34 20.48 -5.0% 15-Jul 917 9.86 19.91 15-Jul 925 5.66 20.28 -2.0% 30-Jul 849 8.35 22.01 30-Jul 857 6.73 22.22 -3. 8% 12-Aug 835 10.95 22.52 12-Aug 845 0.98 21.4 1.3% 27-Aug 900 9.36 17.06 27-Aug 908 7.03 16.93 -4.7% 13-Sep 915 4.01 17.1 13-Sep 925 7.2 16.53 -2.3% 24-Sep 812 9.35 13.92 24-Sep 820 5.85 13.47 -3.5% Discussion Comparison with water quality data collected in previous years is difficult for several reasons. First, with the exception of 1999, most water quality data has been collected from Sump l(A). Secondly, continuous readings were replaced with instantaneous readings in 2001, and third, sample sites in 2004 were changed from those used in Sump l(B) in 2004. In 1999, samples were collected in two sites within Sump l(B) with both sites located near the center of the unit. Of 7 sample periods over two sites in 1999, minimum DO ranged from 2.3 mg/l to 10.5 mg/l (mean = 5.9 mg/l). In 2004, DO ranged from 0.98 mg.fl to 11.38 mg/l (mean = 7 .34 mg/l). Although the mean appears larger in 2004, the small number of samples and changes in methodology and sample sites between years makes interpretation and conclusions from this data difficult. Conclusion Although data comparisons with previous years are djfficult, there is some indication that DO levels have improved compared to pre-project years. Additional studies conducted in 2006 and beyond should be more definitive in documenting whether water quality and/or sucker movement patterns and distribution has changed as a result of this habitat enhancement project 3 Abundance, Distribution, and Phenology of Nongame Waterbirds in the Klamath Basin of Oregon and California in 2004 (pending). W. David Shuford, PRBO Conservation Science, 4990 Shoreline Highway, Stinson Beach, CA 94970 Dani Thomson, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuges, 4009 Hill Road, Tulelake, CA 96134 David M. Mauser, Ph.D, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuges, 4009 Hill Road, Tulelake, CA 96134 John Beckstrand, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuges, 4009 Hill Road, Tulelake, CA 96134 The 2004 Report is pending. The abstract from the 2003 Report and a summary of data collected on Tule Lake NWR in 2004 follows: Abstract (2003): With a tightening water supply in the Klamath Basin, against a backdrop of extensive historic habitat loss, there is a crucial need for current biological knowledge to assess how future water allocation scenarios might effect the Basin's waterbird resources, which are among the most important in the lntermountain West. To provide such information, we conducted surveys of nongame waterbirds in the Klamath Basin in 2003 with a particular focus on Lower Klamath and Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuges. We tallied a total of 49 species of nongame waterbirds on three comprehensive surveys of the Basin's wetlands. Estimated totals for all species combined were 62,561 individuals in early May, 59,392 in mid-June, and 87,727 in mid-August. Given lirllits to visibility, these one-time counts provide minimum estimates for most species, particularly during migratory periods when many individuals passed through the Basin both before and after our counts. Though their importance varied seasonally, grebes, pelicans and cormorants, wading birds (bitterns, herons, egrets, ibis), shorebirds, and gulls and terns were the groups accounting for the bulk of all individuals on each survey. Species or species groups with basin wide populations of >5000 individuals were the Eared Grebe (May and June), American White Pelican (August), White-faced Ibis (June and August), Black-necked Stilt (August), Western and Least sandpipers (May and August), Long-billed Dowitcher (August), and Ring-billed Gull (all seasons). Eleven other species exceeded 1000 individuals in at least one season. Species varied considerably in their patterns of seasonal use from spring through fall, demonstrating the importance of having a large amount of suitable wetland habitat throughout the year to accommodate birds during various parts of their annual cycles. Although many species were distributed over a wide array of wetlands, many others were concentrated at relatively few. Certain wetlands or large water bodies stood out in supplying breeding or foraging habitat for large numbers of particular species or species groups, hosting species of very limited distribution within the Klamath Basin, or supporting populations that are of regional or continental importance. Among these key sites were Clear Lake NWR, Klamath Marsh NWR, Lower Klamath NWR, Sycan Marsh, Tule Lake NWR, and Upper Klamath Lake. Other wetlands were important for supporting large colonies of one or two species or particular at-risk species. The Klamath Basin is of regional or continental importance to breeding populations of colonial (Eared, Western, and Clark's grebes, American White Pelican, Double-crested Cormorant, Great Egret, White-faced Ibis, Ring-billed Gull, and Caspian, Forster's, and Black terns) or other waterbirds (Yellow Rail, Sandhill Crane, Black-necked Stilt) and to migrant Sandhill Cranes, shorebirds, and Black Terns. It also hosts several breeding waterbird species (Red­ necked Grebe, Snowy Egret, Yellow Rail, Franklin's Gull) with disjunct populations or that reach the limit of their range in the area. 4 Figure 2. 2004 Waterbird Survey Areas, Tule Lake NWR. 2004 Water-bird Survey Areas Tule bake NWR '/ /, '.;:'. ,~,/ KEY: C:::J Open Water 1m-a:m-1m111mllill:i;::z:::a:11ma1111811i________ I [:::::J Seasonal Wetland ~ Waterbfrd Survey Area 5 Table 2. Birds Observed on Ttile Lake NWR during 2004 Comprehensive Waterbird Surveys. May 3rd June 9th -10111 August 11th common loon 0 0 0 pied-billed grebe 23 31 374 horned grebe 0 0 0 red-necked grebe 0 0 0 eared grebe 5,021 4,340 2,335 western grebe 97 119 51 Clark's grebe 3 10 2 western/Clark's grebe 1,293 949 1,158 American white pelican 383 529 120 double-crested cormorant 30 38 28 American bittern 0 1 0 great blue heron 0 0 4 great egret 54 46 40 snowy egret 3 1 5 green heron 0 0 0 black-crowned night heron 8 31 9 white-faced ibis 58 327 76 Virginia rail 0 0 1 sora 0 0 18 sandhill crane 1 2 0 black-bellied plover 5 0 0 snowy plover 0 0 0 semipalmated plover 0 0 0 killdeer 13 28 5 black-necked stilt 79 230 28 American avocet 20 188 2 greater yellowlegs 0 0 0 lesser yellowlegs 0 0 0 yellowlegs spp.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Using Chick Down Feathers to Estimate Mercury Concentrations In
    Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009, 43, 2166–2172 toxicity thresholds potentially could be refined to incorporate Integrating Toxicity Risk in Bird mercury’s in ovo effects on both eggs and chicks. Eggs and Chicks: Using Chick Down After an egg hatches, chicks may still be vulnerable to the effects of residual in ovo mercury exposure, especially shortly Feathers To Estimate Mercury after hatching, when maternally deposited mercury levels are still relatively high. Thereafter, barring especially high Concentrations in Eggs levels of mercury in their diet, chick mercury concentrations rapidly decline as chicks age and dilute their body burden of mercury through growth and depuration of mercury into JOSHUA T. ACKERMAN* AND - COLLIN A. EAGLES-SMITH growing feathers (21 23). Chick mortality associated with mercury contamination often occurs within the first week U.S. Geological Survey, Western Ecological Research Center, after hatching (15-17), indicating that in ovo mercury Davis Field Station, One Shields Avenue, University of California, Davis, California 95616 exposure can influence posthatch survival. Incorporating this early chick mortality into egg toxicity thresholds is hampered by our inability to translate mercury concentrations in chicks Received November 7, 2008. Revised manuscript received to what the equivalent concentrations were in eggs. January 9, 2009. Accepted January 20, 2009. Down feathers of newly hatched chicks are potentially useful tools for estimating mercury concentrations in the eggs from which they hatched. Down feathers are grown in The concentration of mercury (Hg) in eggs that causes ovo during the embryonic phase and, in some species, can contain about 38% of the total body burden of mercury in reduced hatching success is regarded as a critical end point newly hatched chicks (24, 25).
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Assessment for Red-Shouldered Hawk (Buteo Lineatus) National Forests of North Central States
    Conservation Assessment for Red-shouldered Hawk (Buteo lineatus) National Forests of North Central States USDA Forest Service Eastern Region December 2002 Prepared by: John P. Jacobs 2373 Libal St, Green Bay, WI 54301 E-mail: [email protected] jacobs_rs Eugene A. Jacobs Linwood Springs Research Station 1601 Brown Deer Lane, Stevens Point, Wisconsin 54481 E-mail: [email protected] This Conservation Assessment was prepared to compile the published and unpublished information on Red-shouldered Hawks. It does not represent a management decision by the U.S. Forest Service. A Conservation Approach will be developed later and conservation measures incorporated into Forest Plans; public involvement will occur via the NEPA process. Although the best scientific information available was used and subject experts were consulted in the preparation of this document, it is expected that new information will arise. In the spirit of continuous learning and adaptive management, if you have information that will assist in conserving this species, please contact the Eastern Region of the Forest Service Threatened and Endangered Species Program at 310 Wisconsin Avenue, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53203. Conservation Assessment for Red-shouldered Hawk (Buteo lineatus) 2 Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary ……………………………………………………………. 6 2. Introduction ....................................……………………………………. 7 3. Acknowledgements ................................................................................. 8 4. Nomenclature and Taxonomy ……………………………………………. 8 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Breeding Hand-Reeding Hooded Parrots
    Notes on Breeding and Hand-reeding Hooded Parrots by Fred andLyrae Perry Corona, California The hooded parrot (Psephotus chrysopterygius dissimilisJ) is one of the most outstandingly beautiful member ofthe Psephotus genus. This little bird is actually a subspecies ofthe golden- houldered parrot (Psephotus chrysopterygiusJ. The range of the hooded parrot is quite restricted; from the Macarthur River, west to the Apairofgolden-shoulderedparakeets(Psephotus c. chrysopterygius). This is the nominate species ofwhich the hoodedparakeetis a sub-species. The golden-shouldered is seldom if Arnham Land plateau in the orthern everfound in aviculture. Territory of Australia. The wild popu­ lation is on the decline mo t probably adult female is a oft blue-green overall, this article. In our experience, these due to illegal trapping and variou other with the wing and tail feather being methods have greatly improved the sur­ man-made and natural disasters. For olive green, the central tail feathers are vival rate ofbaby hooded parrots. these reasons, hoodedparrots are quite also tipped in white, and the vent Hooded parrots in the wild nest in rare in collections today. feathers are a lighter shade of red, or termite mounds from May through The adult male i turquoise blue over salmonpink. The young birds resemble January. The babies hatch with a light mo t of the body, rump and cheeks. the females in coloration. down feather, which wear offquickly, The feathers are highly irridescent, The hooded parrot available to leaving them quite naked. A heavy giving the male a jewel-like appearance. aviculturists today are domestically down feathering would actually be a The wingpatches are bright yellow.
    [Show full text]
  • Birds and Mammals)
    6-3.1 Compare the characteristic structures of invertebrate animals... and vertebrate animals (...birds and mammals). Also covers: 6-1.1, 6-1.2, 6-1.5, 6-3.2, 6-3.3 Birds and Mammals sections More Alike than Not! Birds and mammals have adaptations that 1 Birds allow them to live on every continent and in 2 Mammals every ocean. Some of these animals have Lab Mammal Footprints adapted to withstand the coldest or hottest Lab Bird Counts conditions. These adaptations help to make Virtual Lab How are birds these animal groups successful. adapted to their habitat? Science Journal List similar characteristics of a mammal and a bird. What characteristics are different? 254 Theo Allofs/CORBIS Start-Up Activities Birds and Mammals Make the following Foldable to help you organize information about the Bird Gizzards behaviors of birds and mammals. You may have observed a variety of animals in your neighborhood. Maybe you have STEP 1 Fold one piece of paper widthwise into thirds. watched birds at a bird feeder. Birds don’t chew their food because they don’t have teeth. Instead, many birds swallow small pebbles, bits of eggshells, and other hard materials that go into the gizzard—a mus- STEP 2 Fold down 2.5 cm cular digestive organ. Inside the gizzard, they from the top. (Hint: help grind up the seeds. The lab below mod- From the tip of your els the action of a gizzard. index finger to your middle knuckle is about 2.5 cm.) 1. Place some cracked corn, sunflower seeds, nuts or other seeds, and some gravel in an STEP 3 Fold the rest into fifths.
    [Show full text]
  • Learn About Texas Birds Activity Book
    Learn about . A Learning and Activity Book Color your own guide to the birds that wing their way across the plains, hills, forests, deserts and mountains of Texas. Text Mark W. Lockwood Conservation Biologist, Natural Resource Program Editorial Direction Georg Zappler Art Director Elena T. Ivy Educational Consultants Juliann Pool Beverly Morrell © 1997 Texas Parks and Wildlife 4200 Smith School Road Austin, Texas 78744 PWD BK P4000-038 10/97 All rights reserved. No part of this work covered by the copyright hereon may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means – graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping, or information storage and retrieval systems – without written permission of the publisher. Another "Learn about Texas" publication from TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE PRESS ISBN- 1-885696-17-5 Key to the Cover 4 8 1 2 5 9 3 6 7 14 16 10 13 20 19 15 11 12 17 18 19 21 24 23 20 22 26 28 31 25 29 27 30 ©TPWPress 1997 1 Great Kiskadee 16 Blue Jay 2 Carolina Wren 17 Pyrrhuloxia 3 Carolina Chickadee 18 Pyrrhuloxia 4 Altamira Oriole 19 Northern Cardinal 5 Black-capped Vireo 20 Ovenbird 6 Black-capped Vireo 21 Brown Thrasher 7Tufted Titmouse 22 Belted Kingfisher 8 Painted Bunting 23 Belted Kingfisher 9 Indigo Bunting 24 Scissor-tailed Flycatcher 10 Green Jay 25 Wood Thrush 11 Green Kingfisher 26 Ruddy Turnstone 12 Green Kingfisher 27 Long-billed Thrasher 13 Vermillion Flycatcher 28 Killdeer 14 Vermillion Flycatcher 29 Olive Sparrow 15 Blue Jay 30 Olive Sparrow 31 Great Horned Owl =female =male Texas Birds More kinds of birds have been found in Texas than any other state in the United States: just over 600 species.
    [Show full text]
  • BIRDS and FEATHERS
    Birds BIRDS and FEATHERS Feathers- insulation, flight (air foils), sexual display and attraction- competition and of course protection and water proofing Contour or flight feathers Red shoulder hawk tail feather, note the 2 halves of the vane are not symmetrical Vane with its solid Shaft hollow Quill or or Rachis Calamus Vane with Barbs & Barbules solid Shaft or Rachis above Sup. Umb. Superior (Distal) Umbilicus – note tufts of insulational barbs around this opening Quill or Calamus (hollow) Inferior (Proximal) Umbilicus 2 views of opposing barbules with Hooklets (arrows) that hold them together – if ripped apart ‘preening’ with the bill can re-hook them again Hollow quill / calamus Barb (radius) Barbules hooks Filoplumes Avian chromatophores in overdrive - display plumes of male: PEACOCK Keratin sheath seen Barbs grow around young feathers off of new during molt rachis Follicle forms with invagination of Rachis epidermis forms off one end of collar collar Dermis down feather Epidermis of bird skin Follicle of feather in cross section Adipose rich Dermis – chicken fat – insulation & energy reserve Follicle of feather in cross section Feather muscle Feather sheath Chromatophores invading rows of rachis cells each of which becomes a barb with their own barbules & hooks barbs Barbules with hooklets, if displaced are preened back barbs barbs Rachis – shaft Epidermal sheath pulp rows of rachis cells – become barbs Follicle Dermis Epidermal sheath Epidermis Pulp of Rachis Chromatophores invading rows of rachis cells each of which becomes a barb
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 42 – Birds
    CHAPTER 42 BBIRDSIRDS Young birds, such as this owl, depend on their parents for food and protection. SECTION 1 Origin and Evolution of Birds For project ideas from SECTION 2 Characteristics of Birds Scientific American, visit go.hrw.com and type in SECTION 3 Classification the keyword HM6SAK. 840 CHAPTER 42 Copyright © by Holt, Rinehart and Winston. All rights reserved. SECTION 1 ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION OBJECTIVES ● Identify and describe seven major characteristics of birds. OF BIRDS ● List three similarities between birds and dinosaurs. Birds belong to the class Aves, which, with nearly 10,000 species, ● Describe the characteristics of Archaeopteryx. is the largest class of terrestrial vertebrates. Birds are also the ● Summarize the two main most recently evolved group of vertebrates, having appeared hypotheses for the evolution only about 150 million years ago. Among living vertebrates, of flight. only birds and bats can fly. The bodies of most birds are well V OCABULARY adapted to flight. furcula CHARACTERISTICS Although there are many kinds of birds, birds are so distinctive that it is difficult to mistake one for any other kind of vertebrate. All birds—even those that cannot fly—share the seven important characteristics described below. • Feathers—Feathers are unique to birds, and all birds have them. Like hair, feathers are composed mainly of the versatile protein keratin. Feathers are essential for flight, and they insulate a bird’s body against heat loss. • Wings—A bird’s forelimbs are modified into a pair of wings. Feathers cover most of the surface area of the wing. • Lightweight, rigid skeleton—The skeleton of a bird reflects the requirements of flight.
    [Show full text]
  • 41 the Moult of the Bullfinch Pyrrhula Pyrrhula I
    1966 I. NEWTON : THE MOULT OF THE BULLFINCH PYRRHULA PYRRBULA 41 THE MOULT OF THE BULLFINCH PYRRHULA PYRRHULA I. NEWTON Received on 13 October 1964 INTRODUCTION Few detailed field studies have yet been carried out on the moult in any bird species. This paper describes some observations on the moult of the Bullfinch Pyrrhula pyrrhula nesa (Carduelinae), and its timing in relation to the breeding season and food-supply in the woodland of Wytham Estate, near Oxford (58" 80'N.). The Bullfinch is a common resident in the area, mainly in the woodland, but also in gardens, orchards, and hedge- rows. It nests in dense shrubs and hedges, and feeds for most of the year mainly on various seeds, and in spring on buds, including those of various fruit trees (Newton 1964, 1964 a). Details of moult and weight were obtained from 133 individuals in 1962, from 283 in 1963, and from 247 in 1964; many of these were handled more than once during a single moult.* They were caught in mist nets placed more or less at random in the woodland or at feeding places such as patches of Meadowsweet Filipendula ulmaria and various docks Rumex spp. Netting was restricted to two areas, the Great Wood and Marley, which have been described by Southern (1954) and Gibb (1954) respectively. The Great Wood comprises some 400 acres of deciduous trees, dominated by Oak Quercus robur, Ash Fraxinus excelsior and Sycamore Acer pseudo-platanus, and about 150 acres of conifers. Marley is an open scrubby area of 66 acres, which is dominated by Oak and Hazel Corylus avellana, with large patches of hawthorns Crataegus spp.
    [Show full text]
  • The Incubation Patch of Passerine Birds
    THE CONDOR VOLUME 54 MAY-JUNE, 1952 NUMBFR 3 THE INCUBATION PATCH OF PASSERINE BIRDS By ROBERT E. BAILEY Shortly before incubation in most groups of birds the down feathers of one or more areas of the ventral surface are molted and the skin of these areas becomes thickened and richly supplied with blood vessels. This adaptation facilitates the transfer of heat from the body of the incubating bird to the eggs; thus these areas are called incubation patches. Incubation patches were first described at length by Friedrich Faber (1826) in his book on water birds of northern Europe. He named them “Brutflecke” and rightly ascribed to them the function of permitting a more intimate contact between the incu- bating birds and their eggs. The absence of feathers was considered by him to be the main criterion of an incubation patch and he thought that the feathers were either pulled out by the birds or were lost partly because of the abrasive action of the nest and eggs and partly because of the “greater animal heat that is concentrated in the abdomen during incubation” [translated]. Barkow (1830) was the first to examine the micro- scopic structure of the incubation patch and compare it with normal skin. His work was done on the European Coot, grebes of the genus Podiceps [=Colymbus], and chick- ens. A lack of feathers and greatly increased vascularity were described by him as the main features of the structure. Little work on the incubation patch was done, except for occasional references to its occurrence, until the first of the twentieth century.
    [Show full text]
  • Llinois Common Birds Poster
    IllinoisIllinois commoncommon American Redstart Setophaga ruticilla © Rob Curtis/The Early Birder BIRDSBIRDS Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura © Richard Day/Daybreak Imagery Eastern Kingbird Tyrannus tyrannus © Richard Day/Daybreak Imagery Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina © Rob Curtis/The Early Birder Yellow-rumped Warbler Dendroica coronata Eastern Meadowlark Sturnella magna Ruby-throated Hummingbird Archilochus colubris © Richard Day/Daybreak Imagery © Rob Curtis/The Early Birder © Richard Day/Daybreak Imagery Common Nighthawk Chordeiles minor © Richard Day/Daybreak Imagery Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus © Richard Day/Daybreak Imagery Belted Kingfisher Ceryle alcyon © Richard Day/Daybreak Imagery White-throated Sparrow Zonotrichia albicollis © Richard Day/Daybreak Imagery Greater Yellowlegs Tringa melanoleuca Red-tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis Green Heron Butorides virescens © Richard Day/Daybreak Imagery © Richard Day/Daybreak Imagery © Richard Day/Daybreak Imagery Eastern Towhee Pipilo erythrophthalmus © Richard Day/Daybreak Imagery Common Loon Gavia immer © Rob Curtis/The Early Birder Red-bellied Woodpecker Melanerpes carolinus American Coot Fulica americana Ring-billed Gull Larus delawarensis © Richard Day/Daybreak Imagery © Richard Day/Daybreak Imagery © Richard Day/Daybreak Imagery Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus © Richard Day/Daybreak Imagery Ruby-crowned Kinglet Regulus calendula © Rob Curtis/The Early Birder Indigo Bunting Passerina cyanea © Richard Day/Daybreak Imagery Orchard Oriole Icterus spurius © Rob
    [Show full text]
  • What Makes a Bird a Bird?
    SUGGESTED GRADE LEVEL: 4 NEXT GENERATION SCIENCE STANDARDS: 4-LS1-1 TEACHER’S SKILLS/PROCESSES: observation, classification OBJECTIVE: Students will be able to identify the three GUIDE characteristics by which birds are defined. UNIT 1 LESSON 1 What Makes a Bird a Bird? BACKGROUND barbules (see diagram on page 2). The contour feathers There are more than 9,000 species of birds in the on the tail and wings have been modified for flight. Down world, with about 800 found in North America. More than feathers are small and lie under the contour feathers. The 400 species have been recorded in Illinois, and more purpose of these feathers is to insulate the bird from the than 200 bird species have been recorded as nesting in cold and protect against sunburn. the state. Birds must take care of their feathers so they can con- Birds evolved from small reptiles more than 160 million tinue to fly and remain warm. Preening feathers years ago. They still share some characteristics with spreads oils over the feathers and "re-hooks" the bar- reptiles, such as laying eggs and having scales on their bules. Even though they are kept clean, feathers legs and feet. Development of the ability to fly required become worn and are usually replaced at least once a not only feathers and wings but good eyesight, a sense year. This process is called molting. of balance and fine muscle coordination. HARD-SHELLED EGGS: Birds lay hard-shelled eggs Like mammals, birds are warm-blooded vertebrates, made mostly of calcium carbonate. The hard shell meaning their internal body temperature is maintained keeps an egg from dehydrating and allows parents to at a constant level regardless of external conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Prime Parts National Wildlife Federation, Copyright 1989
    from: Ranger Rick Magazine's Naturescope: Birds, Birds, Birds! Prime Parts National Wildlife Federation, copyright 1989 Demonstrate how irds are unique. They have differentparts of a bird's special body parts that set body work using a them apart from all other variety everydayof m objects. animals. In this demonstra- tion/activity, your kids can learn about Objectives: some of these specialavian featuresas you DeKribe how birds are discuss each one. adaptedfor flight. Com­ pare bird adaptations to those ofothe r animals. DEMONSTRATION#1: FOWL BALL Ages: Ask the group if they think birds have Primaryand good vision. Then draw an outline of a Intermediate bird's head on the boardor on a largepiece Materials (part1 ): of easel paper. Ask if a bird's eyes are • chalkboardor easel locatedmore on the sides of the head or on paper the front of the head. (In most birds, the • elasticbands eyes are on the side. But in some owls and • blackconstruction hawks, the eyes face forward.) Then have paper • soccerbaU someone come up and draw in the bird's Materials(part 2): eyes. • differentkinds of seeds Next have each personlook at his or her • smaU stones neighbor to see where human eyes are • mortara nd pestle located. (They face forward.) Explain that • a chicken gizzard (optional) people have binocular vision, which means Materials(part 3): both eyes focus on the same image. Most • baby oil or petroleum birds have monocular vision most of the distance better than those withmonocular jelly time because each eye focuses on a dif­ vision.) • cotton doth( about one ferent image.
    [Show full text]