Now that John McCain has picked a running mate, Sarah Palin, it is a good time to take a look at what a Republican victory this fall might mean for birds and wildlife. 

Endangered Species

For some time now, the Republican party has not been particularly friendly to the conservation agenda. The Endangered Species Act has frequently been under attack from the current administration and has suffered a revision in 2004 that limited the impact of the law in protecting our most at-risk plants and animals (Eilperin 2004). A bright spot in the Bush administration’s dealings with endangered species was considering the listing of the polar bear.

It didn’t take Sarah Palin long to act against this positive step. In a lawsuit against the federal government, Palin’s administration argued that,

“Listing the polar bear as a threatened species [under the Endangered Species Act] will have a significant adverse impact on Alaska because. . . [it] will deter activities such as commercial fisheries, oil and gas exploration and development, transportation, and tourism.” (Rood 2008)

The Endangered Species Act has been crucial to the recovery of several bird species including the Bald Eagle and Peregrine Falcon, and the continuing success of Whooping Cranes and Kirtland’s Warblers. If Sarah Palin can’t support listing polar bears, there is no hope she would embrace using the act as it was intended, protecting endangered species from development and environment degradation. 

Climate Change

Palin discounted the most recent findings of the U.S. Geological Survey that found that polar bears are threatened by global warming and will likely be extinct before this century ends. In fact, she refuses to recognize humans role in influencing climate change. 

The effects of climate change on birds have the potential to be devastating. Changes in food availablity, precipitation amounts and loss of habitat are some of the threats that a changing climate pose to birds, according to the Smithsonian.

The WWF says that the bird groups that are most at risk are seabirds and migratory birds as well as species that require mountain, island and wetland habitats. Scientists have noted population declines of up to 90% in some species as well as a complete reproductive failure in others (WWF 2006).

Special Interests

Palin has a history for sticking up for oil, big business and special interests at the expense of animals and the environment.

Palin has strongly promoted oil and natural gas resource development in Alaska, including in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge. These areas are vital for the many species of birds that breed in the wildlife refuge and on the north slope area of Alaska. More oil drilling operations will inevitably result in more spills and environmental degradation. Palin already has a bad reputation in this area, refusing to push Exxon to pay the government for the environmental damage that occured when millions of gallons of oil were spilled into the ocean. The oil spill killed 300 Bald Eagles, 200,000 Common Murres, as well as whales, otters and many other seabirds.

Conclusion

Sarah Palin refuses to recognize several of the most severe threats facing wildlife and in particular, birds. The bottom line is that she has a history of giving priority to business interests at the expense of wildlife in almost every case. In fact, I could not find one positive thing Palin has ever done that benefitted wildlife. As  Vice President, Palin would likely continue with her record of ignoring environmental impacts and scientific studies, similar to the current administration. She may even be a step backwards for conservation as many of her positions seem more extreme than the current administrations. Sarah Palin would be a disaster for the environment and by extension, birds. Let’s hope it never comes to that.

The Sharpe’s Longclaw has an extremely restricted range, basically limited to the remaining grasslands in sw Kenya which are quickly disappearing due to development. As you can see in the range map below, the Sharpe’s Longclaw is very vulnerable to even small amounts of development in its territory.

The surveys are going to be conducted by 26-year-old Kenyan Dominic Kamau Kimani. He has been birding since he was young and has previously worked on research related to birds and wildlife conservation.

A fund called the “Small African Fellowship for Conservation” has been set up and the goal is to raise $2,000 to fund two things: a survey of suitable longclaw habitat and an educational program to take to local schools about habitat conservation for the Sharpe’s Longclaw.

If you can contribute anything to this cause, click on the widget below to easily add your dollars to a good conservation fund. A couple dollars from lots of people will help reach the goal.

Sharpe’s Longclaw- photo © Charlie Moores

Initially the birds were far off, but we hunkered down at a good vantage point on the mud flats and allowed them to get accustomed to us. They would slowly forage towards us, getting closer and allowing me to do some digiscoping.

The birds would periodically flush, flying in large circles across the water until they felt safe enough to sit down again. Sometimes they seemed to flush when a gull flew over, other times there didn’t seem to be a good reason.

The Least Sandpipers were in a wide array of plumages, ranging from the worn drab brown to bright rufous tones.

It’s particularly bad this year. At least I don’t remember noticing the large swathes of mountainside that were nearly absent of any green. While the gypsy moth caterpillar can be a real boon to birds such as cuckoos which feast on the insects, they can also cause tremendous damage to their hosts which include oaks and aspen.

According to Donald Eggen, director of the Office of Forest Pest Management for the Pennsylvania Bureau of Forestry, “Nearly 700,000 acres of Pennsylvania forests- primarily in the Poconos and central Pennsylvania- were defoliated last year because of the persistent bugs, and the infestation could be worse in 2007.”

Originally introduced accidentally around Boston in 1869, the first outbreaks began around 10 years later and it 1890 the first attempts were made to eradicate the moths. Unfortunately they were not successful and the moths still are causing problems over 100 years later. Below is the projected spread of the moths if their range continues expanding at the present rate of 21 km/year.

The effects of the gypsy moths could very well mean that only the less susceptible tree species will dominate the forest and some ecologically and economically important trees such as oaks will be lost.

Over the last 100 years over 20 insect parasitoids and predators from Europe and Asia were introduced to help control the moths with limited success. Birds feed on the insects but apparently not in quantities that affect the moths populations. More recently a virus and as well as a fungus have had good success in limiting the outbreaks. Unfortunately this year spring came so late that the fungus did not have time to have its effect before the caterpillars hatched and that is why there is a larger outbreak this year.

Moth outbreaks are currently also being controlled by direct spraying in areas that are hit under a joint program of state governments and the USDA Forest Service. If you are witnessing an outbreak on your property you should contact your extension service for more information on programs in your area.

Sources:

WBOC-TV- Gypsy Moths Leaving Their Marks on Mid-Atlantic Forests
USDA Forest Service- Gypsy Moth in North America

Below are the tracks of two Golden Eagles that were trapped this fall.

For more info on this project, click here.

Read the full article.

Snow Geese flock, originally uploaded by topherous.

Cornell Lab of Ornithology’s eBird site has just posted Bird Counting 101. For anyone who spends time out in the field watching large flocks, whether they are shorebirds, waterfowl or hawks knows that estimating flock size can be ridiculously hard. Just looking at the flock of Snow Geese above is overwhelming if you want to try and estimate the number of birds. Estimating sizes of flocks can be biologically important because it is an additional data set that can be more useful than just knowing whether a species is present or absent.

Cornell puts forth several different tips for counting in their first installment:

1. It is very important to write your observations down right away. No one can remember counts for 40+ species at a time. You will also end up second guessing yourself if you don’t write down what you see, particularly with the more common species, “Did I really see a Mourning Dove today or was that yesterdays walk?”
2. Be conservative in your estimates, making sure you are not counting birds twice.
3. For larger flocks, count a small portion of the flock and then extrapolate for the rest of the flock. For instance, count 10 birds in the flock and get a good idea of what that feels like. Then count the flock in 10 bird increments. This fall I was the counter on South Lookout at Hawk Mountain Sanctuary, PA on the morning that a flight of over 5,000 Broad-winged Hawks migrated through. I mainly counted in 5 and 10 bird increments because the birds kept coming and coming and coming.

One fascinating fact from the article was that we have a hard time estimating flocks when they are flying in 3D space. If a large blackbird flock is 100 birds wide, 100 birds long, and 100 birds deep, that is 1,000,000 blackbirds! I have a hard time imagining that.

Check out the full article.