Archive for the Field Work Category

A Skinny on Dippers

Posted in Birds, Field Work, Migration, Mt. Rainier, Natural History, Sierra Nevadas, Washington with tags , , , , , , , , , , on November 26, 2012 by Brendan McGarry

“[H]is music is that of the streams refined and spiritualized. The deep booming notes of the falls are in it, the trills of the rapids, the gurgling of margin eddies, the low whispering of level reaches, and the sweet tinkle of separate drops oozing from the ends of mosses and falling into tranquil ponds.”

- John Muir The Mountains of California, 1894

The seasons can change quickly in the high Cascades. A day in early November, a crust of fall hung over Paradise Valley, but a few juncos, Audubon’s warblers, and varied thrushes were still about. Visiting Myrtle Falls, an American dipper rattled by, the latest I’ve ever seen one there. Three days later, a foot of snow was on the ground and Myrtle Falls was all but ice. All the birds were gone, including the dipper, back to lower reaches of the mountain. The dippers gave me pause, did they just fly downstream, or was something else going on?

Considering a constraint that appears rather limiting, being obligates of running, relatively clean water, the American dipper (Cinclus mexicanus) is an extremely versatile species. They range from Alaska to Panama, generally west of the Rocky Mountains when in North America. Migration South, for a plush winter hideout in a tropical creek isn’t part of the deal either. They are not migratorial in a latitudinal sense. Rather they are altitudinal, yet a pair will often occupy a productive territory throughout the year. So if a territorial pair stays in the same place (believe me they are territorial) and these birds exclusively inhabit rivers and streams, how does their dispersal work? Where do they go when the weather gets bad up in the mountains, assuming there’s others downstream? Being territorial, generally solitary birds, it’s not as if they gather up in winter flocks.

John Muir, among his other florid labels, would have called dippers “water ouzels.” The name dipper describes not their habit of dipping into water to find food, (for they and their three congeners are the most aquatic passerines in the world), but for their movement on land. Anyone who has spent even a few minutes watching a dipper will have seen them alight and bob their body up and down in a weird little jig. A more agitated bird will even dip more rapidly; this might be a method of display that doesn’t require them to constantly raise their voices above the torrents, although they are fairly adept at that too. Most times when I see them, I hear them first.

So back to the initial question – where are the birds nesting in places that receive snow and freeze during the winter going? Dippers are extremely hardy birds (reportedly enduring -50°C winters in Alaska) and if their stream doesn’t freeze and has food, they’ve been noted year round where they breed, relying on a low metabolism and extra thick coat of feathers to endure. Multiple pairs of dippers can occupy a single drainage, simply dividing up the waterway in parcels, and in cases where a pair above disperses seasonally, it’s surmised they may skip over a pair wintering below them. These answers are about what I expected but I always enjoy delving a bit deeper to test my ideas with research that’s been done. I’d have never known that in some places, winter densities can get quite high, including a finding of 35 birds/km along British Columbia’s Okanagan River. For a bird that will fiercely chase away interlopers during the breeding season, it’s funny to think of them in such proximity. Frozen water is only one thing forcing these birds to disperse, the underlying reasons revolve around the dipper’s exclusively animal diet.

A few years ago I had the pleasure of spending several afternoon with a family of dippers in the Sierras. Beneath the bridge that crossed a rushing creek to my summer quarters, a pair of dippers had raised their young. One afternoon in particular was spent watching a youngster being fed. The interim between parents stuffing food down its gullet the fledgling spent singing a mangled dipper slurry. It was so charming I couldn’t help but giggle at this bird that appeared to lack all self awareness at his butchered song. Had he noticed me, I suspect the reaction would have been that of a teenage caught singing boisterously off key.

After his parents had finished their job of raising him, he’d eventually disperse to another drainage nearby. But while he flew off, his parents would do something pretty astonishing, they’d molt all flight feathers simultaneously. This means that they cannot fly for a short period, fully relying on water for protection from predators. For a passerine, this is incredibly peculiar.

I’ve never seen a dipper anywhere but along running water or the occasional lakeshore or coastline but these youngsters have to disperse between drainages at some point. This means they might occasionally cross land. Some have surmised this happens at night since there are no observations of cross drainage dispersal during the day. This only sort of makes sense to me. On the one hand, traveling out of their element at night would be safer. However, you’d also think that they’d just go downstream till they found a fork and follow that elsewhere.

If I got to choose, I’d imagine them waiting till the cover of darkness, listening for the moonlit tinkle of running water as they hurry through the forest or high above on their search. A night exodus in search of the torrent.

A (Photographic) Year in Review

Posted in Bird Banding, Birding, Birds, Borneo, California, Chiang Mai, Doi Inthanon, Eastern Washington, Field Work, Fire Ecology, Indonesia, Kao Yai National Park, Malaysia, Natural History, Orangutan, Oregon, Pak Thale, Plants, Road Tripping, Science, Seattle, Southeast Asia, Spoon-billed Sandpiper, Sumatra, Thailand, United States, Washington, Western Forests with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on January 20, 2012 by Brendan McGarry

It’s been a year since I left for an adventure in Southeast Asia. With the extremely tardy completion of a small book I made for those who supported my Kickstarter campaign for the trip, I started feeling like I’d never be on the road again. Modern expectations, the realities of money, and my desire to be a part of a stable community all seemed to be working against me, pulling me down. Yet, instead of dragging myself down the anguished path of the grounded traveler, I decided that some careful reflection was in order.

This year I’ve been a lot of places, there’s no doubt. From the temperate land I call home to the Asian tropics. To the crest of the Sierras and down to the Great Basin. Consciously or subconsciously, mountains played an undeniable role in my explorations. I was in the the shrub steppe of Steens Mountain in Oregon, the forests and alpine of Mt. Lassen in California and Mt. Rainier in Washington, the elfin evergreens of Doi Inthanon in Thailand, eruption scarred Gunung Sibayak in Sumatra, and the ancient oaks and tree ferns of Gunung Kinabalu in Borneo. In my home I wound through the high desert of interior western North America, the temperate rainforest of the Pacific Northwest coast, the snow of the Cascade range, and the mosaic of forests in the Sierra Nevada. Abroad I traipsed the lowland rainforests of Borneo and clambered about the monsoonal forests of Thailand. I drove to the summit of Doi Inthanon, the tallest mountain in Thailand, and hiked halfway up to the tallest mountain in Southeast Asia, Gunung Kinabalu.

I was captivated by small natural wonders in my own backyard (literally) and stood in awe of a bull elephant thousands of miles away. Birds were held, eyes were met with Orangutans. Animal and plant life always figure highly in my explorations, communities shaped by the landscapes I learned in my wend.

That’s the key. My excitement and passion for this world result from a desire to learn. Curiosity rules my spirit, anyone reading Wingtrip will know that.

Below I’ve compiled a long (yet also very punctuated) series of images from my year in the natural world. If you are curious about the stories behind them please ask or follow a few of the links I’ve provided above (unfortunately, through a flaw in the program I upload photos to Flickr with, literally hundreds of the photos in other entries linked to above are not visible right on wingtrip though still on Flickr – when I have time to sit down to this arduous task, it’ll be fixed). There’s so much worth working to save, these images should remind us all of that.

In short, I’ve got nothing to complain about. I hope you enjoy these shots. May you all have a fruitful year of discovery.

The Art of Blending

Posted in Birding, Birds, California, Conservation, Environmentalism, Field Work, Fire Ecology, Natural History, Science, Sierra Nevadas with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on July 9, 2011 by Brendan McGarry

Two years ago this stand was all dark trunks and loose soil, dusty with soot. The canopy here seems even more diminished, sun rays more harsh on my stubbornly and blindingly untanned appendages. Some things are the same as before, when I trip and catch myself from hurdling downslope on a tree trunk, my hand comes away black, which later I unknowingly smear about my face warding off thirsty mosquitoes.

An untrained eye might have seen a ravaged, sterile hill of trees marching into darkened oblivion. The reality is that life is abundant here, with equal or greater diversity to the nearby green forest. Seasons past have sprouted shrubs and a formidable herbaceous layer, keeping my nostrils clear of aerosolized charcoal, but more importantly providing nesting habitat for a bevy of sparrows, warblers, buntings, and flycatchers. Flowers are everywhere, Calliope Hummingbirds flourish. Woodpeckers rattle about in high numbers, more flycatchers and warblers, tanagers, and grosbeaks dine on the smorgasbord of insect delights. Snags have continued to deteriorate providing homes for woodpeckers, in turn coop-ted by bluebirds, American Kestrels, and potentially a few owls. To say the least, the dawn chorus is only rivaled by that of a riparian meadow in the profusion of varied voices.

Before Europeans flooded west of the Rocky Mountains, fire, high intensity or otherwise, was the predominant form of disturbance here. Some fires were set by aboriginal peoples to their hunting and gathering advantage, some sparked without human influence. I’d hazard that all should be considered natural. Science would have to work hard to find many climax forests that haven’t felt a few blistering licks of flame at some point in their history. From conifer cones that only bare seeds with heat, to the sporadic and profuse ecological communities taking purchase on a burn, the significance of fire in the natural Western landscape cannot be denied.

A bird of particular interest to those who study burns seems to be everywhere this year, clucking and squawking about the char. I felt especially lucky at such frequency two seasons ago. I still did, standing meters from of an apparently oblivious woodpecker, chiseling murderously and pointedly into a particular charred, decayed mast. They’ve expanded to take temporary advantage of the trees that are in a slow downward spiral. Debilitating beetles are amassing to bore their wayward paths through the tree’s living layers. These beetles play their role in the stable ecosystem here, not only as a woodpecker food source, but in maintaining the fitness of unhealthy forests, making way for a new one through years of natural succession.

Black-backed Woodpeckers (Picoides arcticus) are not a common species. Here in California we are in the Southern nexus of their Black-backed range, which extends from central Alaska, throughout most of Canada and portions of the Northern and Western US. They fill a niche that many others of their ilk have only generically flocked too; they have embraced burns as primary habitat. Their main source of food are the grubs of wood-boring and bark beetles of the families Buprestidae, Cerambycidae, and Scolytidae, which means they do also occasionally show up in areas where disease has struck such as dutch elm or in particularly nasty windthrows. The birds and beetles are both after large scale disturbances in forests, the beetles to lay their eggs there and the birds to eat the larvae.  In Washington, Oregon, and Idaho Black-backed Woodpeckers are designated as sensitive species. This is because burned forest of the right qualities isn’t common either. With fire suppression and post fire salvage logging what it is, priority is often in wood production and protection not woodpeckers population.

To provide an example before such practices, in the Rockies half the forest burned every 100 years and 35% of the forest was less than 40 years old at any one point. Fires resulting in stand replacement, ones with enough intensity to kill all the trees in a given area, happened 1.5 times more frequently. Forest that is left to regenerate naturally, when salvageable wood exists, is less and less common. Just having a fire in a forest isn’t the key to the importance to the many species that are using burns. For woodpeckers it’s about the intensity, which in turn dictates the number and size of the dead or dying trees, in turn affecting the infestations of their favored food items.

All woodpeckers that are common here in the Northern Sierras use burns to some extent. Even Pileatated Woodpeckers, whose size dictates older secondary or primary stands, will use adjacent burns for the excessively rotten cavities and roosts they prefer. Burned forest offers a good source of food and softer, decayed wood for cavity excavation. Both Williamson’s and Red-breasted Sapsuckers need partially living trees for their sap wells, so they are slightly less prolific dwelling on the edges. Yet the burned forests aren’t a homogeneous spread of charred trunks and dead canopy, they are a complex mosaic. Except in extreme cases, fire doesn’t sweep through a forest leaving uniformity behind.

I don’t really know if she had a nest or not. Sidling about the top of a half dead Jeffery Pine, she was scolding a Northern Pygmy Owl that already had its fair share of excited attendants. Her odd reptilian shrieks were spouted as she bobed her head pedantically, left and then right again. Woodpeckers often seem very tense to me. Wasting twenty minutes with the other disapproving rabblerousers, even on a threat like an owl, wasn’t what I’d expect from a responsible mother. Especially one that should either have eggs to incubate or nestlings waiting for a meal. Another twenty were spent spanning a series of trees, squeaking each time she jumped to a new trunk, and chasing a male Hairy Woodpecker who dared enter her glade. At the edge of a shrub field and the edge of my transect, she disappeared downhill, presumably to shriek and eat more bark beetles. I don’t believe she had a nest. Maybe the pygmy owl ate her male.

Dusty, charcoal is the defining plumage characteristic of the Black-backed. Again, in the burns they likely evolved alongside, this helps them blend in. Other species are easy enough to find in living habitat and to be clear, you find Black-backs in live forest as well, high numbers are almost exclusively in forest that’s been burned or disturbed. If it wasn’t for their frequent vocalizations and their relative calm tolerance of people, I doubt many people would see them because of how splendidly they blend into the bark of a burnt tree. A female is mostly charcoal black with only slightly contrasting ventrally with a dingy gray (white when clean).  The white moustacial stripe, black and white barred sides, white spotting on wings, and often concealed white outer tail feathers are easily missed, they look generally black, white, and gray. The male mirrors this, yet has a golden forecrown that is often tinged with the sooty product his lifestyle. Another thing that distinguishes them from most of their congeners in the genus Picoides is that they have three toes instead of the usual four zygodactyl, (think of an X with each point being a toe). The only other woodpeckers in the genus that share this trait are Three-toed Woodpeckers (of Eurasia and North America).

You can hear them throbbing, boring, scraping, pupating, the antithesis of a heartbeat. Pulsating pestilence. The wood-boring beetles, the bark beetles, taking advantage of the weakness a burn creates, they are still a part of the system. Those wormlike tracings of inner wood one finds from time to time, on a barkless snag or on beached driftwood are the tracks of these beetle grubs. Investigate a fresh forage mark on a tree; bark is chipped away in an oval, exposing gleaming cambium, with a smaller beak sized hole in the center. A tunnel extending from any which way, will probably terminate at this excavation. The beetle, eating its way through a dead or dying tree, met an end at the awl of a Black-backed Woodpecker or maybe a cousin Hairy Woodpecker. Whether they can avoid their demise I don’t know, but with obvious strength with which a woodpecker hammers in investigation, there is little likelihood a beetle grub can do much beyond bare wood-boring jaws.

Bark beetles may seem ominous, even malicious, the gruesome death rattle of a tree going out, but nature doesn’t trade in villainy and heroism. Woodpeckers also help degrade the forest, burned or otherwise.  Foraging is destructive, but also potentially spreads fungi. Like big pollinators, woodpeckers may act as vectors of wood degrading fungus. Imagine them spreading fungus unknowingly when visiting one tree with a fungal colony and then another without; they’d unwittingly get quicker access to wood best for cavities. Those wounds in the trees allow spores easy access to still live trees. This is a stunning example of a mutually beneficial behavior, surprisingly simple, and while it is elegantly plausible, it needs more research.

Their nests aren’t very easy to find just by looking. Searching for cavities is always most effective by watching behavior, but you can find cavities by looking for the right snags. You’d have to be supremely lucky to find one just marching through the forest, particularly a Black-backed who I’ve only found in dense stands of trees. Unlike their relatives the Hairy Woodpeckers or White-headed Woodpeckers, who usually like broken topped, well decayed snags with various species preferences, a Black-backed seems less picky, a half dead or fully dead tree with a lot of bark and branches is suitable. Even though they aren’t necessarily loud, they are talkative enough and easy to track down. In a further three or four years however, Black-backed Woodpeckers will likely have moved on from the burns I traverse in favor of more recent ones, both for food and housing.

A sensitive, enigmatic species, Black-backed Woodpeckers are the focus of many studies focusing on many aspects of a healthy forest and how we live with fire in this landscape. It is all too easy to look at a burnt forest as a wound, a loss of resources, but the exact opposite may be true. There is likely room for all the things we need from forests as well as what the birds need to maintenance their populations. Comprehension of all the swirling aspects that come into play is highly complicated, fire alone is enough to fill a lifetime of work. Yet understanding how a woodpecker uses a burned forest can provide measures to help forest managers keep our best renewable resource vibrant and productive as well as protect important species. I like to preach connectedness but I can’t squeeze all those ideas into a few paragraphs so I’ll leave with this: I simply enjoy noisy, odd Black-backed Woodpeckers. Their lives as irruptive, opportunistic species, makes for exciting variety to a casual observer and evocative study species to a researcher. They are enigmatic and specialized, the fact that they are so uncommon makes them all the more enticing. Next time you see a large burned forest, maybe devastation won’t be the only thought cross your mind, maybe a Black-backed Woodpecker will sputter through squawking.

Focusing on the Owl

Posted in Birding, Birds, California, Environmentalism, Field Work, Natural History, Reading Suggestions, Sierra Nevadas with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 1, 2011 by Brendan McGarry

He’d been sitting there for twenty minutes, tooting at the young Red-tailed Hawk soaring over head.  The hawk was attempting to mind its business, but two Common Ravens were relentlessly dive bombing it,  drawing the whole forest below into a reel of uneasy glances and murmurs of displeasure. No one in the forest likes ravens or hawks.

I wasn’t bored, it was just time to start moving on and search for more cavities. Wrangling my pack, weighed down with rusty metal the pack-rat in me couldn’t resist, I slowly stood up on the old growth stump that had been my seat. Just as I was about to hop to the ground, he darted up, narrowly missing a surprise grab of a female American Robin. She turned at the last moment, spurting a single alarm and ducking away. Cowed, he landed nearby and hooted haughtily, pumping his tiny tail and flexing his oversized talons.

His intended prey didn’t think too much of him. She buzzed him once, alighting adjacent, squawking irately. Without a surprise, there wasn’t a chance to take a bird as large as himself. Silently, he flew off, the robin in tow, never relenting her display of displeasure. She was telling the whole forest about his existence. If it wasn’t for her, I might not have found where he had stooped to. In a snag to the left of his new perch, was an old woodpecker cavity. Filling its circumference was the full moon glare of a Northern Pygmy-owl, obviously disturbed from her incubation by this noisy thrush.

I’d found my first Northern Pygmy-owl nest!


Most naturalists have some intellectual struggles with society, now-a-days magnified by technology. All those gadgets ultimately create waste, distract from our need for a healthy world, and sometimes change our ways of thinking a bit too drastically. I’ve been vacillating a lot lately on this subject. There’s no arguing that I rely heavily on nature for subject matter alone. Yet there’s plenty of reasons that society needs nature around us. I never feel as alive as I do, even in capsize moments away from humanity. I’m never more focused, more creative, more jovial – more healthy.

Yet I love people and many of the interweaving cross sections of the urban, modern, technological life I live are near and dear to me. I am passionate about hip-hop culture (really an amalgam of the following), music, visual art (the greatest immersion of which is in a city), and the exchange of ideas that flows in a thriving community well cultivated in a larger populace. I’d have missed the point if I didn’t mention the internet, my personal use of a camera and a computer to convey what I find important and hope to be my lively hood. Much technology that is commonplace today I’ve never been without from adolescence on.

This pair of Northern Pygmy-owls were unveiled to me because I’m a city kid fortunate to have discovered passion for something other than video games and computer screens. Later, decompressing from a day in the field, I read an article by one of many authors I’ve been meaning to read, but haven’t yet. Richard Louv coined the phrase “nature-deficit disorder” in his popular book Last Child in the Woods. There’s a real and significant divide between many kids of the developed world and nature. The thing that struck me more than anything else, was Louv’s emphasis on focus. Time spent outside allows you to use your senses, to focus, instead of actively working to block out all the unhelpful distractions of urban life.

I didn’t bring Louv up to rally against technology or urban life, I think the benefits far outweigh the pitfalls. So as to not be misconstrued: of course the environmental impacts of technology are a problem and can be improved upon. People still need nature in their lives just as much as ever, even with the medical, educational, and creative advances all these bundles of circuits provide. Moving on.

Ruminating on what luck I’d had to come across such a rare sight, I realized it wasn’t just luck. I actively tracked down the owl because I heard it. I patiently watched it for cues and after a good wait, was rewarded. Throw in someone who spends their time glued to a screen and you would probably had different results, even if they were fit and had spent that time studying birds. As a teen I was out watching birds – my formative years gave me a gift. People can regain these sorts of deficits, but it’s likely harder to do once you’re older if you grew up devoid of them.  Just like learning a new language.  Although I’d never thought about it so directly, I am lucky to have the connection to nature, the observational, sensual skill that I have. Being able to notice, intuit, and as a direct result, enjoy nature is another thing for the laundry list of things I am grateful for. As a good friend of mine has said to me many times: “Some people don’t do anything.”

I know more now than ever what he means by that.

While I got my recording work done, the male owl watched me with an impressive impassivity. He was small, but I wasn’t going to take too many chances. I didn’t need an owl stapled to my skull. I trotted off through the lime green, post fire shrub layer, goose stepping over downed logs in search of more nests. Hearing a Hairy Woodpecker in the distance, I turned for a last glance at the fiery fluff ball and his nest. Once the coast was clear, he barreled down to make sure I hadn’t done anything irretrievably human.

I suggest you enjoy some nature every day. Einstein went for a walk in the woods everyday.


Interview: Ben Freeman and a Spine of Papua Biodiversity Pt. 2

Posted in Bird Banding, Birds, Conservation, Environmentalism, Field Work, Interview, Natural History, Papua New Guinea, Science with tags , , , , , , , , , on November 18, 2010 by Brendan McGarry

Brendan McGarry: I’m guessing that you were working hard for a short period of time and that was about it – did you have any time for recreating or was it just eat, sleep, work?

Ben Freeman: We were pretty regimented due to the amount of work we had to do. It was a busy schedule, but we took a couple days off towards the end of the trip to let workers hike back to their villages for Sunday breaks — their day of rest, church time etc — and to do laundry, sleep etc.  So it was eat, sleep, work but on a given day the work came in patches; the nets were most active in the morning and much of the midday was usually fairly relaxed; we’d all stretch out if it was sunny and make little dens of ferns to sleep on (fern stay dry and make good bedding).

BM: Did you spend any time interacting with ‘locals’?

BF: Yup. All the time. Everything we did was thanks to the hard work of our workers and porters. PNG is famous for its linguistic diversity — over 700 languages spoken on the island — but everyone uses an English-based creole language called Tok Pisin to communicate. So we tried to learn Tok Pisin and tell stories of life in America while the local guys tried to teach us Tok Pisin and tell us stories about village life and hunting trips to the bush (the “bush” being the forest, or anywhere that is not a human-dominated landscape).

BM: What were your favorite species while you were there?  Avian or otherwise.

BF: The birds of paradise were of course fantastic; I think we saw a total of seven species. But among the many many exciting and wonderful birds, I think I was most taken with the Papuan Hornbill. We first encountered this lowland bird at the 900 m camp; I heard incredibly loud wingbeats and looked up into a small sky gap to see two large elongated dark shapes pass high overhead. I don’t think I’ve ever been so confused as to what type of bird I had just seen. I was considering eagles, cranes, all sorts of crazy possibilities, when Casti — one of the head CI fieldworkers — told us they were hornbills. Wow. We later were able to watch them closely in feeding trees, in groups of a dozen or more, and I remained captivated by them. So prehistoric; a huge bird with a wingbeat audible from hundreds of meters away…

BM: Give us an idea of the diversity – what is your take on the avifauna there and the general wealth of biodiversity.  New Guinea has a reputation.

BF: Tropical humid forests contain the majority of terrestrial vertebrate diversity on Earth, and this diversity is especially pronounced in tropical mountains, as the bird communities (and plants, and mammals etc etc) completely change as you change elevation. For example, the birds we observed at 2400 m were 100% different from the birds we observed at 200 m. This kind of diversity is emotionally exciting, perhaps especially to biologists, but also I think to most people. There are just so many species, and you consistently find new species at a given site, even after two or three full days. It’s a bit like being in a candy store — the candy store is emotionally exciting because of its tremendous diversity — different candies everywhere you look! It wouldn’t be as intriguing if the whole store was just full of tootsie rolls…So I think diversity in and of itself is stimulating, certainly to biologists, and PNG is certainly home to a huge amount of biodiversity.   It’s also the biggest expanse of tropical forest left in SE Asia. PNG’s forests have numerous threats — massive logging and mining projects run by foreign multinationals – but so much of it is so remote that it seems a promising place for conservation actions that also have strong social benefits, like the YUS project.

BM: Did you see evidence impacts from climate change or other human influences in the places you visited?

BF: We were told that people could now grow coconut palms at higher elevations than they could historically. If true, this would likely be a direct result of climate change. The human influences are pretty obvious — the areas around villages are mostly cut and serve as gardens to grow food. But they also plant coffee (often shade) and cacao (for chocolate) as cash crops. Imagine the difficulties in getting product to market though! carrying 40 kg bags of dried coffee beans 3 hours by hand to a place where a small plane can take it to a central processing location!  Perhaps the most interesting human impact on the landscape for me was the existence of large montane grasslands. These grasslands have existed for (likely) thousands of years, and are a result of repeated fires set by people. People like these grasslands, as they are a good home for wild pigs, which are hunted for meat. And, more generally, people worldwide like to live in an open landscape…

BM: What were some challenges of the work?

BF: It was obviously very remote. One big challenge was finding water, and enough of it. The local guys drank very little, but I need a gallon or so of drinking water per day when I’m working in a hot, humid environment. Plus water for cooking, washing dishes and at least a little bit of bathing. Finding water was surprisingly hard — at one field camp the nearest flowing water was 45 minutes hard walk downhill! We’ll just say we went easy on the bathing at this camp… Luckily the lowland field camps generally had small rivers nearby to bathe in daily.

BM: What’s next?  Where are you now? What’s in your future?

BF: I’m now starting a Ph.D program in Ecology & Evolutionary Biology at Cornell University. Alexa finished her Ph.D. in ecology at Virginia Tech in December 2009, she’s writing grants to get a post-doc studying reproductive physiology of birds. I’m hoping to study the diversity of tropical mountains for my dissertation (possibly in PNG, possibly in the Andes); why are elevational distributions so narrow in the tropics?

Interview: Ben Freeman and a Spine of Papua Biodiversity Pt. 1

Posted in Bird Banding, Birds, Conservation, Environmentalism, Field Work, Interview, Natural History, Papua New Guinea, Science with tags , , , , on November 17, 2010 by Brendan McGarry

Just in case you didn’t snicker enough in the last interview that my initials are BM, here’s another, equally fascinating and envy inspiring conversation. A benefit of starting out young as a birder is that it’s a small world.  You inevitably meet some people who are headed amazing directions.  Ben Freeman is another ornithologically inclined acquaintance on the way to big things.  He recently returned from work in Papua New Guinea and is in his first year of graduate school at Cornell.  Surprisingly enough he has very similar interests to Ben Winger. Let’s be honest though, tropical mountains are riveting in so many ways.  Enjoy!

Brendan McGarry: First of all – where specifically did you go and what was the purpose of this trip?  Give us a little background of how you ended up in Papua New Guinea.

Ben Freeman: I went to the Huon Peninsula in Morobe Province; a nubby peninsula in NE PNG. The Huon contains the Finisterre, Saruwaged and one other mountain range, all of which contain peaks that top out at or around 4,000 m. These are all young mountain ranges — I think the main uplift has occurred in the past couple million years. The island of New Guinea has a mountainous backbone that runs down the center of the island, completely surrounded by islands. There are many outlying mountain ranges, but few as high as the ranges on the Huon. The Huon’s combination of many large, tall mountain ranges and isolation is a classic recipe for endemism; any montane species that somehow arrive to the Huon’s mountains are isolated due to the intervening lowlands and essentially on their own evolutionary trajectories. Given enough time, these forms evolve significant differences and are classified as species endemic to the Huon (but with a close relative in the Central ranges). Huon endemics include three endemic birds of paradise, an endemic bowerbird, an endemic tree kangaroo, and many others. So that is a very brief history of the Huon Peninsula and why it is cool from a zoology perspective.

 

The Tree Kangaroo Conservation Project (TKCP) headquartered at the Woodland Park Zoo (in Seattle, WA) has been working on bottom-up conservation on the Huon Peninsula for over a decade. Their efforts have led to the creation of the YUS Conservation Area, over 150,000 hectares of land set aside for conservation by local landowners. Many ethnic groups and dozens of villages exist within the YUS Conservation Area. TKCP is working on helping YUS communities in their economic development, education and access to medicine.

 

Recently, a Conservation International (CI) team headed by Dr. Bruce Beehler, a top ornithologist and conservation biologist who works in PNG, won a grant from the German-funded LifeWeb initiative to study the impacts of climate change on tropical plants and animals. The general goal is to complete detailed field surveys of plants and animals in the YUS ecosystem along an elevational gradient — from sea level to over 3,000 m — and compare the datasets these surveys generate with historical transects, to see if plants and animals have shifted their ranges to higher elevations in response to climate change. These generated datasets will also provide excellent benchmarks for future studies of plant/animal distributions in relation to climate change in the coming years/decades.

 

Alexandra Class and I were hired by Dr. Beehler to perform mist-net bird surveys at eight field camps, located between 200 m and 2400 m (approx every 350 vertical m). Future work will extend the transect to 3,100 m, and the mist-net data will be combined with Dr. Beehler’s audiovisual surveys to quantitatively estimate bird distributions along this elevational gradient.

 

BM: Describe a typical day for us, the environment, etc.

 

BF: PNG is a different world. To arrive to our field site within the YUS ecosystem, we hopped into a small “bush” plane in the city of Lae and buzzed over the mountain tops, eventually landing on the grass airstrip in Sapwanga village. The flight took only 45 minutes and traveled just 70 km, but the difference between take-off and landing was acute. Sapwanga’s only transportation is a weekly flight from Lae; the one general store is irregularly stocked at best, there is no electricity, and people eat what they grow in their “gardens” and get water from nearby streams for cooking, drinking, washing and bathing. Meals are cooked using firewood. There are footpaths that traverse the mountains, but Lae would be over a 4 day hike away.  And Sapwanga was a regional hub, the location of the valley’s school and therefore much better connected to the outside world. From Sapmanga we hiked for three hours to the village of Gomdon, local porters carrying all our supplies, including enough food to feed six people for two months (Alexa, myself and a rotating cast of four workers). After organizing in Gomdon, we bought local produce, organized porters and workers, and hiked 6 hours up to the ridgeline that formed our elevational transect, to our first field camp. Field camps consist of a central A-frame built with machetes, using saplings for support and vines to lash the structure together. Several large blue plastic tarps formed the roof — this space was our storeroom, kitchen, dining room and sleeping space for the workers, about 30 feet long by 20 feet wide by 15 feet tall… Each field camp had an outhouse and a flattened space for researchers to set up tents.

Daily chores consisted of fetching water (sometimes involved a 30 minute one-way trip to the water source!), cleaning dishes, cooking meals, and most importantly, mist-netting birds. At each site we made a 1 km trail that followed the elevational contour (e.g. the 2420 m transect stayed at or around 2420 m.a.s.l for its entirety), and set up 36 mist nets along this trail, along with a small A-frame with benches and a tarped roof for processing birds. It took one day of hard work to make the transect trail and set up nets. We used saplings for poles. We then mist-netted from dawn to dusk for three days at each site, Alexa, myself and four workers patrolling the net lines and taking out any birds that we caught. We measured, weighed and photographed the birds we caught. After three days at a site, we collected our nets, packed up our gear, and walked downhill to the next field camp.

 

We’ll conclude the interview tomorrow – there was just too much good stuff to talk about!

 

Interview: Ben Winger – On Expeditions and the Importance of Museum Collections

Posted in Birds, Collecting, Conservation, Environmentalism, Field Work, Museums, Science on November 10, 2010 by Brendan McGarry

I interviewed Ben, a fellow bird nerd and real deal Ornithologist, this fall about exciting expeditions he’s taken in the name of science.  Enjoy!

Ben Winger is a graduate student in the Committee on Evolutionary Biology at the University of Chicago and the Division of Birds of the Field Museum of Natural History.  He received his undergraduate degree from Cornell in 2007 and in 2008 embarked on an ornithological expedition to a poorly known region of Peru with two of his undergraduate colleagues (read more about this 2008 trip here).  In 2010, after finishing his first year of graduate school, he visited a different area of Peru on an expedition with colleagues from the Field Museum Division of Birds and the Centro de Ornitologia y Biodiversidad in Lima.

 

Brendan McGarry: Tell me a little about your research interests and how they tie into your recent trip.

Ben Winger: Broadly, I am interested in the speciation of birds, as well as how their geographic ranges have evolved through time.  I am currently beginning a project that I hope will provide insight into the formation of the incredible diversity of birds found in the Andes, as well how speciation in birds occurs more generally. On this trip in 2010, we set out to northern Peru to collect genetic samples for this and other projects related to bird speciation in South America. The trip was also focused on collecting specimens that will be useful for other researchers in the future.

BM: Does your research mainly consist of collecting or banding or conducting observational transects.  What is the makeup of your data collection? How did this most recent expedition compare to your previous trip in 2008? How would a typical day of work go in each trip?

BW: On the 2008 Cornell trip to Peru, our time was split between conducting species inventories through observational transects (i.e., birding or point-counts), mist-netting and audio-recording, and collecting a small number of voucher specimens that represented the most important new records for the area. A typical day would involve audio-recording in the dawn and dusk hours, observational surveys in the morning, and mist-netting throughout the day. In the slow part of the afternoon we prepared specimens if any had been collected, and made sure that our observations and audio-recordings were thoroughly logged in our notebooks.

On the 2010 trip, we were focused more on specimen collection, but I also did some audio-recording for the Macaulay Library at Cornell and our observations will be entered into eBird as well. During collection-focused trips like this, obtaining and preparing specimens is a full-time task.  Much more time is spent huddled in camp preparing the specimens and diligently keeping an eye on the collection to make sure it is not damaged by insects or humidity.  A significant amount of time is also spent keeping track of what we have collected and making decisions about which species and individuals to collect, so that we do not collect too many individuals of any species.  These decisions involve adhering to the terms of our government-issued permits, but equally important they involve calling on knowledge about the rarity or conservation status of certain species and the representation that a species may or may not have in museum collections worldwide.  Finally, we also spend time collecting the endo- and ecto-parasites on each specimen, as well as samples of pathogens like avian malaria and flu, to further knowledge of host-parasite evolution and avian diseases.

The difference between these two trips is that in 2008, the goal was to conduct the first avian inventory of a very remote region. Ornithologists had never visited this area, the Gran Pajonal of Peru, so we were gathering baseline data on the presence and absence of bird species. It was important that we covered as much ground as we could and surveyed as many different habitats as possible, so we spent less time collecting specimens and more time making observations. In 2010 we were working in an area that was relatively better known ornithologically, but still not nearly as well known as any location in North America. For example, very few tissue samples for DNA studies had been collected in this area, and the lower elevation cloud forest had scarcely been visited by ornithologists since the early 1900s.  The focus of the 2010 trip was on collecting samples that will be useful for a myriad of studies on avian evolution and ecology, as well as increasing knowledge of the distribution of Andean birds, rather than documenting all the species in a particular region as I did in 2008.  There were many similarities between both trips, however: both were in remote regions of the Andes that required several days of trekking to access, and both relied on support staff from local communities to help construct camps, cut trails and guide the teams through the mountainous jungle.

BM: Your interests are deeply rooted in biogeography, what sort of expectations do you have for your future research? Do you foresee conservation benefits or simply broadening our knowledge base on speciation, biogeography, and spatial movements? Admittedly these areas of research often do directly benefit conservation.

BW: I hope that my research will contribute to our understanding of how the astounding avian diversity we see throughout the world has evolved. Furthermore, the specimens we collect and the data we gather are not only useful for research projects like mine that are currently ongoing, but the material is available, archived in museums and databases, for any researcher or conservation worker in the future. Although it may not be superficially obvious, this type of research, and specimen collection in general, does have an influence on conservation. For example, there are many highly endemic species in the world that are actually fairly difficult to distinguish from more common, widespread species.  Without the efforts of museum workers, many of these forms would go unnoticed, undescribed and, consequently, unprotected. Our understanding of global biodiversity, even in a group of animals as well known as birds, is still far from complete. Therefore, the continued collection of baseline data on the existence of and variation within species in the form of specimen collections is an invaluable aspect of documenting and protecting life on earth. It may appear ironic that collecting birds can benefit their conservation, but the very small numbers of birds that are collected each year for scientific purposes do not have an impact on the long-term health of populations.  Rather, responsible collecting increases our knowledge of the biodiversity we are trying to protect and helps to inform conservation priorities.

BM: I’m fairly certain both you and I are convinced that museum collecting is vital for a historical knowledge of literally every area of natural history. However, what would your explanation of the importance be to someone unconvinced, particularly pertaining to you own work? Could your and others’ research be conducted without current collection efforts? Some people have questions about the necessity of banding birds, let alone something like shooting birds that they’d possibly consider archaic.

BW: As technology improves, we are increasingly able to do more and more without collecting specimens: DNA can be sequenced from blood or feather samples instead of muscle tissue; plumage variation can be captured with a photograph; audio recordings can be used to document the presence of a species in a reserve.  These practices are all valuable, positive advancements.  They allow scientists to study the genetics of highly endangered species that could be imperiled by collecting, birders to document rarities or even make taxonomic discoveries, and ornithologists to survey nature reserves where collecting is not permitted. However, these technological improvements do not cast collecting into the dark ages.  Rather, they emphasize the amount of invaluable information that can be obtained from a single specimen (skin, skeleton, fluid, spreadwing) that is catalogued in the public domain with associated data (geographical information, tissue samples, stomach contents, pathogens, parasites, and vocal recordings to name a few examples).  Photographs can deceive through distortion of light or post-processing, and blood samples collected by scientists without a voucher specimen do not need to be archived in a collection, and thus are not always available for future scientific research beyond the initial purpose of the investigator.  A specimen on the other hand, properly cared for and made accessible in a museum collection, will continue to benefit future inquiry in ways we cannot yet imagine. The specimen and the natural history collection have as much, if not more, value in science and society than they ever have. Particularly as each day habitats and the species therein are disappearing faster than we can protect them and as we discover new and innovative things that we can learn from specimens, I believe that obtaining a record of life on earth in the form of museum collections is a worthwhile human endeavor and one that is vitally important in 2010.

BM: Living in a remote field location is hard enough in a temperate climate; what are the major challenges to your health and productivity in the tropics?

BW: The tropics are a challenging but extremely rewarding place to work. Parasites, digestive tract infections, monotonous field food, biting insects and other dangerous creatures, and the constant possibility for political unrest in the host country are par for the course.  Tropical expeditions also tend to involve long, difficult overland hikes through degraded habitat to access pristine forest, or an inordinate amount of time sitting in uncomfortable river boats, and of course lots of time spent in damp clothes and molding sleeping bags. For me, the psychological and emotional challenges of missing loved ones back home is always harder to deal with than the physical, bacterial or climatic difficulties which, in retrospect, seem like mere nuisances. However, the sense of discovery that only comes in the tropics, and the possibility to explore and work in remote, untrammeled places where few have ever set foot makes it all worth it.

 

BM: When you aren’t out in the field, what are you spending your time on? When are you headed back next?

BW: These days I’m in Chicago designing a plan for my PhD thesis, and getting started in the molecular laboratory at the Field Museum. I will defend my dissertation proposal to my PhD committee in the spring, and I have plans to get back into the field in the summer of 2011.  I try to go birding on the Chicago lakefront as much as time allows (documenting my sightings in eBird, of course!), as it is a fantastic place to witness the spectacle of bird migration.  I should mention that we do not collect birds in the Chicago area, but every day during migration hundreds of birds are killed when they collide with skyscrapers and other buildings. These birds are picked up by a team of volunteers that scours the downtown area every morning during migration. Birds that are still alive are brought to an animal rehab center, and those that have died are brought to the Field Museum, where they prepared as skins or skeletons. The collection that the Field Museum has maintained of thousands of these “tower-kill” birds has not only increased our knowledge of migration patterns in the Chicago area, but it has been crucial in the documentation of the tremendous avian mortality caused by skyscrapers.  Data from this collection has been an important factor in convincing building owners around Chicago to turn out their lights at night to help reduce bird mortality.  Read more about it here.

Thanks Ben – we’ll all look forward to hearing more from you in the future!

The Museums Pt. II

Posted in Birds, Collecting, Conservation, Environmentalism, Field Work, Museums, Natural History, Science on October 19, 2010 by Brendan McGarry

An ornithological collection is not a bunch of stuffed birds. Devoid of 15-some data points, dutifully transcribed on individualized tags, they would be merely wonders of preservation. Every bird has a unique number, date of collection, a preparer, a locale, standard name (Latin name), and the list extends the more recent the specimen. From a locale you can extrapolate historical species distributions. The preparer can add clue to a historical record. The bird itself combed with tantamount outcomes.

To be fair, skins are not good for one thing; looking at size and shape. One of the unfortunate sides of preparation, not matter how skilled and careful the preparer is – a bird will not retain original shape. Think of a sock being filled with something other than a foot, it can be radically misshapen. Plumage, molt, coloration all can be duly noted but discussions of size or shape in a skin is off limits – poorly shaped skins border on comical or bizzare. Luckily skeletons are kept and collected to record size. Thankfully, wing spreads also largely retain their original conformation.

The Burke has over 100,000 birds and about 3,400 species represented. Location in mind, they have an obvious bias towards Western North America and Northern Pacific Seabirds. The most important species are from expeditions in Northern Russia that have been conducted for 12 years and from 15 years in the Solomon Islands. These represent a highly significant body of data, likely the only on bird populations in those areas. One could travel there, conduct point counts, mist net birds, and come away with data as well but field work relies on a preexisting question.

Field investigations, conducted in years to come, cannot be predicted. If someone is curious about the parasite load of Rufous Hummingbirds from the 1980s compared to the 2000′s (just a hypothetical), there’s a good chance a natural history museum would have data to help answer that question. Even a meticulous banding operation wouldn’t reveal a holistic data.

A specific case that showing the necessity of skins comes in the form of stable isotope analysis. This process takes into account the different isotopes of common elements and revealing secrets of animals lives. Isotopes can be mapped to different regions of the globe, different foods, etc. being unique to those locales or foods. Mindful analysis can help one determine the trophic level of various seabirds (basically what they are eating) or help distinguish between migratory and resident populations of Canada geese.

While collectors covet the specimens they seek out, there few who relish the act of collection. Excitement over the chase, the hunt, the exhausting and harsh work of locating specific quarry, yes. However, barring the few, killing is merely the unfortunate part of collecting. They honor the specimen through hard work to preserve it possibly for centuries to come. A few individuals shot, memorialized and useful for tantamount, for as long as they are properly cared for. Surely the objectors can oblige that? There is no massacre, a trip has a small list of birds, they seek them out and take their quota. Negligible when you take into account disease, predation, and all the trappings of modern human impact – large buildings, cars, domestic pets, and habitat destruction. In some cases we even immortalize birds we’ve ushered out of existence (birds like the Carolina Parakeet, which, if someone alive saw them in the wild, would be over 106 years old). To be fair, there is strong evidence that a flurry of specimen grabbing of the quickly disappearing Ivory-billed Woodpecker helped its demise. Alas not every person will deny covetous greed, especially when money or prestige is involved.

Birds are the most widespread and diverse vertebrates on the planet. They’ve flourished in every feasible locale. Even in the advent of fancy cameras, concentrated efforts to collect date unobtrusively, to develop hands off approaches, there are simply some birds we cannot keep proper tabs on. Albatrosses are a prime example, spending most of their lives roaming the pelagic waters, only occasionally breeding on logistically inaccessible islands. It makes sense that their molt strategies are complicated because they can’t molt the way many birds would or they’d lose their ability to efficiently harness air currents. Albatross molt is so complicated that I will admit I know little and don’t intend to delve any deeper for this piece. However, even the briefest of comprehension of molt strategies in these long living, low fecundity species, breeding on isolated, vulnerable island gives their conservation a step up. Feathers being a defining characteristic of birds, dictate a lot in their lives. Naked apes will do well to continue to master molt.

With brevity in mind, this is where the discussion ends. Possible this wasn’t convincing and you find shooting birds cruel and museums barbaric. The hope is that you’ve seen the light and realized that how we understand populations, natural history, and biodiversity can be augmented by invaluable museum collections. Simply, if we don’t know the birds, how can we expect to save them?

Please give me your thoughts negative or otherwise and check out the rest of the photos I took.

(Thanks is due to Rob Faucett for allowing me access to the collections)

Summer Ornithology

Posted in Bird Banding, Birds, Conservation, Environmentalism, Field Work, Natural History, Oregon, Plants, Science on September 7, 2010 by Simone Lupson-Cook

As the nighthawks fly with lazy yet determined wing beats I know the road to Hart Mountain is approaching. I’ve been greeted by nighthawks here before. I watch them as I turn onto Hart Mountain Road and consider them my welcome home as they wheel in the fading light.

The Warner Wetlands, at the base of Hart Mountain, host many birds and through my binoculars I see a line  of American Avocets, their heads tucked into their backs. I don’t stop long. The excitement of returning to Hart Mountain every summer never diminishes. The drive to our camp in Robinson Draw, inside the refuge, takes me past rocky outcroppings, a sea of sage, grasses and snowberry and a small, wary herd of pronghorns. Songbirds flush from the shrubs on the side of the road as my car bumps over the washboard road. The landscapes here look, from afar, as though they are perhaps devoid of life. You can see no trees as you approach Hart. But to think that this area and this habitat have nothing to offer would be a tragic assumption.

My ornithology professor, Dr. Steve G. Herman, has been bringing students here for 25 years. This place is special, even sacred. The draw, with its grove of aspens and the willows dotting the base, are home to countless birds from diminutive Brewer’s Sparrows to Long-eared Owls and Sage Grouse. Although I am a visitor in this landscape I feel a strong connection to it. Does this feeling of connection root in the fact that I have held this draw’s birds in my hands? Looked them in the eye and after close scrutiny been able to determine their age, sex, and even if they were recently warming eggs under their bellies? Perhaps this connection is because a tiny piece of the mystery of this place has been revealed in my hands. Looking into a thick wall of aspens with a spring running though it and tall, lush green grass below, I see great potential for discovery and exploration. To me the chance to explore a patch of habitat like this, in this unique wilderness holds more opportunities for excitement than most I can think of.

Perhaps what I love most about Hart is the pulse of life seemingly indifferent to the outside world. Yes, there are people here (and there used to be cows and sheep) but I imagine Hart (and other areas of southeast Oregon) as an increasingly rare example of  a place in the lower 48 that is much the same as it was 500, 1000, 2000 years ago.

As I write below a juniper on the hill overlooking the other side of Robinson Draw, a chipmunk scolds me from around the trunk. The wind blowing through the juniper branches sounds deeper, more fierce than it really is. Beaty’s Butte rises in the distance, fluffy cumulus clouds throw their shadows at her base, and the scattered Mountain Mahoganies conjure images of Africa, though I have never been.

Of what importance is a place like this? I suppose for some, there is none. But for the countless students who have come to this place to learn about it and its birds, the answers are obvious. As you hold a Pacific-slope Flycatcher in your hand, feel its heart beat, see the whiskery feathers that surround its bill, you are changed. Students may enter this classroom, with its walls of aspens and carpets of grass and daisies, knowing nothing about birds. By the end of three weeks here, if they have absorbed the cascade of information coming at them daily, they can tell you intricate details of plumage, condition, age, sex, and molt of a variety of bird species.

Here on Hart coyote song greets you in the morning. The call of a poorwill mingles with the sound of banjos and voices, becoming background to your dreams. A few lanterns glow through the aspens as dusk settles and tents are filled with laughter and the murmur of voices retelling of the discoveries of owl pellets, bird nests, and sapsucker wells.

As I sit under my juniper tree, a female Northern Harrier patrols the canopy of her sagebrush forest and the magic and beauty of Hart Mountain continues untouched and unnoticed by the majority of people.


Hart Mountain National Antelope Wildlife Refuge is located in far South Eastern Oregon. At 278,000 acres, it is one of the largest expanses of shrub steppe habitat free of domestic cattle. Dr. Steve Herman of the Evergreen State College, has been taking students here to learn to band birds, find an appreciation for the high desert, and live in a remote field camp since 1985. Simone and Brendan were both previous students and teaching assistants and are consequentially life long devotees to the landscape.

Photo Blast #3: Guess Who.

Posted in Bird Banding, Birds, Field Work, Natural History, Science, Uncategorized, United States on May 20, 2010 by Brendan McGarry

Looks can be deceiving.  If you showed me this photo of a Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus), there’s a good chance I’d say it was a female.  For all intensive purposes, it does appear to be of the fairer gender.  But there’s a hint that should give the expert pause.  The gape, as in the bit of skin at the base of the bill, looks rather prominent, suggesting a young bird.  Do you really know that it’s a female if this is a young bird?

This is a little window into how bird banding works.  You start with your presumed knowledge and then, if you’re good, try to falsify your hypothesis on species, age, sex, etc.  (To be clear, when you catch birds to band, it’s not just to hold a bird and take pictures of them, you are recording data).  It’s actually a very fun process.

As it turned out this bird was a young male.  A bit of hunting in his coverts and we found the beginnings of his “red-wing” and black feathers were pushing up through his breast plumage.  Females are significantly smaller than males also, but without thinking of wing length or weight it’d be easy to make a base assumption and go with it.   In the case of a blackbird where size is significant this would be important because a band for a female bird wouldn’t fit properly on a male, it could even be dangerous.

This photo was taken on Shelldon National Wildlife Refuge in Northwestern Nevada at a place called Badger Camp.  Although it was late July in Nevada, banding birds here was fantastic, particularly because of the creek that ran right through.  Birds came in from all over for water including Western Scrub Jays ( or this blackbird) that you wouldn’t associate with the scrub steppe or grasslands that predominated the landscape.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 147 other followers