RAPTOR RESEARCH NEWS

A Quarterly Publication Of The Raptor Research Foundation, Inc.

Editors: Byron E. Harrell, Zoology Dept., University

of South Dakota, Vermillion, S. Dak.
Donald V. Hunter, Jr., Centerville, S. Dak.

Editors T Note . This issue is a little smaller than usual;
one major item has been held for the next issue to avoid further
delay. Please correct the January issue number to 1.

Breeding Project Information Exchange . B.P.I.E. numbers 9
and 10 were issued June T~ f 1969 . In No . 9 Jimmy White (Cypress,
Calif.) reports on 1968 experiences with Harris Hawk. Two eggs
were laid April 24 and 28, the eggs hatched May 28 and 31, and the
young left the nest July 24. He also mentions the diet of rats,
chicks, and chicken necks.

In No. 10 R. J. Hutchings (Hampshire, England) describes his
facilities for breeding a pair of British Kestrels. He describes
briefly the behavior and feeding of the two birds which should be
of reproductive age in 1969.

" Birds of Prey of Northeastern United States . " This is the
title of a new 16 mm sound color motion picture issued by the Mary-
land Department of Game and Inland Fish (State Office Building,
Annapolis, Md. 21401). Their announcement states that David J.

Smith took eight years to produce this film which shows 32 species
of raptors, some of which, however, are exotic to the region in the
title. There are sound recordings of calls as well as ultra slow
motion photography. This 35 minute film can be purchased for $250.

The Society for the Preservation of Birds of Prey. This is
the name of a society which has just sent us voT7 4~ nos. H 2 of
their newsletter. The following information was also sent:

The Society For the Preservation of Birds of Prey is a private
and independent national conservation organization. Founded in
July 1966 as a non-profit organization, the Society's main objective
is to increase knowledge, interest, and understanding of Birds of
prey .

Although the Society is not directly affiliated with any other
group, we join with other organizations in cooperating for the con-
servation of all our natural resources. Currently the Society

19

holds membership in the following organizations: National Audubon

Society; Los Angeles Audubon Society; National Wildlife Federation;
Hawk Mountain Sanctuary Association; Santa Monica Nature Club; Save
the Redwoods League; and The Wilderness Society.

The Society publishes a quarterly newsletter, The California
Condor, featuring articles of interest about birds of prey; written
by people who know and admire them, and people who want to do some-
thing to forestall the destruction of these majestic birds. The
Society also offers its members the opportunity to visit and learn
about birds of prey first hand--a series of field trips are offered
quarterly each year, and participants are taken into wilderness
areas to study and photograph the species of birds found in that
locality. In addition, films will be shown to the interest of
members, and at monthly meetings other plans and objectives of the
Society will be discussed.

The Society for the Preservation of Birds of Prey is supported
by membership dues, contributions, and bequests from individual
parties. The Society does not accept large donations over which
support the amount of mailing and publishing the newsletter, field
trips, and filming costs.

Membership Application blanks are available to interested
individuals by writing the Society T s headquarters in Pacific
Palisades, California. The Society for the Preservation of Birds
of Prey, 1429 North Amalfi Drive, Pacific Palisades, California
90272. The membership fee is $2.00.

Advertisement :

AN EXTENSIVE BIBLIOGRAPHY ON FALCONRY, EAGLES, HAWKS, FALCONS AND
OTHER DIURNAL BIRDS OF PREY. PART I: FALCONRY AND EAGLES

In the next two months notices and advertisements promoting
the sale of this handy publication will be appearing in several
major ornithological periodicals. Judging from the sales to date,
the remaining copies of the bibliography could go very quickly
once exposed to thousands of ornithologists and libraries through
the distribution of Condor, Auk, Wilson Bulletin and Bird Study .
Thus far advertisements have appeared only in Hawk Chalk and Raptor
Research News, in order that members of NAFA and RRF have first
crack at them . Since purchase of any and all parts will reserve
(until six months after all 3 parts are out) the matching numbered
copies of all 3 parts, it might be wise to purchase Part I at this
time, if you intend to obtain a set at all. When copies of any
part are sold to 1000 different people, sale to new subscribers
will cease for six months. After that time unmatched sets will be
sold.

21

Again, there are only 1000 copies and a large scale advertis-
ing campaign is beginning. Order now to assure your set is re-
served. For further information write Richard R. Olendorff, Aggie
Village 7-D, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521.

Important Raptor Books are Published . Of interest to all of
our readers will be the following books which we hope to have re-
viewed in detail in the future:

Hickey, Joseph J. (Ed.) 1969. Peregrine Falcon Populations; Their

Biology and Decline. 618 pp., 60 photographs. Madison:

Univ. of Wise. Press. $10.00

Brown, Leslie, and Dean Amadon 1969. Eagles, Hawks and Falcons

of the World. 2 vols., 946 pp . , 311 Illus. New York: McGraw-

Hill. $59.50

M Wildlif e Center Short of Space . n This newspaper article is
from County News (Md . ) , May T9, 1969:

The Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, between Laurel and
Bowie, has an ’’urgent" need for land to be used for studies of the
vanishing species of American wildlife.

In a recent release, the Department of Chesapeake Bay Affairs
said the Endangered Wildlife Research Station at the center is
short about 470 acres of land needed for experiments designed to
save the vanishing species, which include the whooping crane, bald
eagle and California condor, among others.

The land is needed for propagation and conditioning pens and
other facilities at the station, where scientists plan to hold 50
to 100 pairs of 100 or more species.

The department said that it is "vital" that the land be
acquired now, since demand for property is rapidly increasing and
prices are "skyrocketing."

The 470 acres are expected to cost $1.5 million, the depart-
ment said. "Funds are available for this, if Congress only will
act," it noted, citing a 1965 law authorizing such appropriations.

But the department also cited another federal law limiting
the acquisition funds to $750,000 in this area, without another
act of Congress.

With funds presently in view, about 180 acres adjacent to the
research area can be purchased. But Rep. Edward A. Garmatz, D-Md. ,
chairman of the House Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee, has
introduced a bill that would provide authority for the full $1.5
million.

h

22

The Department of Chesapeake Bay Affairs has asked residents
to support the bill (H.R. 8327) by writing to Garmatz at 1334 Long-
worth House Office Building, or to Rep. Larry Hogan, 1027 Longworth
House Office Building, in Washington.

Notes from KINGFISHER , Volume £, Number A_ ( March - April 1969 ) .

"Ospreys Revive. The ospreys that breed along the Westport
River, Massachusetts , had the best breeding season for years in
1968, possibly due to a State ban on DDT in the river’s watershed.
They laid 48 eggs, hatched 30 young and fledged 22 of them, the
corresponding figures for 1967 being 30, 8 and 6. (Mass. Audubon
Newsletter, November).”

"And Now the Biphenyls. A new danger to wildlife is implicit
in the news that the polychlorinated biphenyls, which are in some
ways similar to the chlorinated hydrocarbons, and are used in the
manufacture of plastics, have found their way into the tissues of
many species of wild animals in North America. There is no evidence
yet of their presence in British wildlife. It is believed that the
biphenyls may be equally responsible with DDT for the catastrophic
decline in the peregrine, osprey, bald eagle and other birds of
prey. (The Times , December 17)."

"Birds of Prey Rescued. Of 86 injured birds of prey mostly
tawny and barn owls, kestrels and buzzards, brought to Dr . L. H.
Murrell's Birds of Prey Rescue Scheme in Devon between 1963 and
1966, half were cured and successfully released back into the
wild. (Journal, Devon Trust for N. C., December)."

"Eagles in Norway. The Norwegian Government has given com-
nlete protection to both the sea eagle and the golden eagle through-
out the whole of Norway. This marks the culmination of a long cam-
paign by the Norwegian Section of ICBP to break down the traditional
opposition of the farming community to these birds."

"... and Finland. The golden eagle is steadily decreasing
in Finland. Even since protection was extended to the whole coun-
try in 1962, the population has fallen from an estimated 150-200 to
no more than about 100 pairs. The main threats to the species are
habitat destruction, the felling of forests, and direct attack by
reindeer keepers, some 200 of whom carry a legal permit to kill
golden eagles. (Suomen Luonto , No. 4, 1968)."

"Bounty Rescinded. The Western Australian Agriculture Protec-
tion Board has abolished the bounty on the wedge-tailed eagle
throughout the state, and has also lifted the declaration of vermin
of this threatened bird in the agricultural areas and part of the
pastoral areas. The wedge-tailed eagle, however, is still deprived
of legal protection in Western Australia. (W. A. Fauna Bulletin,
September) . "

NOTES ON A KANSAS GREAT HORNED OWL POPULATION

by Bruce Wolhuter

2109 Kentucky, Lawrence, Kansas 66044

This is a report of data from spring, 1968 studies of nesting
Great Horned Owls. These studies were all conducted within a 35
mile radius of Lawrence, Kansas (NE corner of Kansas), The studies
spanned a period from the end of January when the first birds were
found incubating to the end of May when the last young bird was
banded and had been fledged. Nine nests were kept under observa-
tion as frequently as possible. Anyone desiring more detailed in-
formation on these nest studies can write to the author.

I don’t think the Horned Owls in this area were as successful
as they were the last two years (spring 1966 and 1967) . No three-
egg clutches were found this year compared to the two found last
year and there was one incidence each of an infertile egg and of a
partially developed egg failing to hatch. The majority of the
young owls were banded in the nest or several days after fledging
(10 of 13 fledged). The data in tabular form are as follows:

Nest #

# eggs per
clutch

Approx, date
of hatching

Approx, date
of fledging

# fledged

1

2

24 March

? *

2

2

2

2 March

30 March

2* *

3

1

(Nest abandoned

--egg failed to

hatch)

4

2

5 April

20 May

1

5

2

9 March

8 April

1

6

2

3 March

16 April

2

7

2

18 Feb.

7 April

2

8

2

? * * *
•

27 April

2

9

2

28 March

15 May

2

TT

*Unable to locate young in area
**One young bird was removed at age 2 wks. to be hand raised
***Ca. last week in February by counting back

Data Interpretation . Using 30-32 days (majority of the litera-
ture seems to substantiate this incubation period in horned owls)
and counting back from the hatching dates, we find that laying oc-
curred from the 2nd or 3rd week of January through the 1st week of
March. There seems to be a strong median period of egg-laying
around the second week of February. The average number of eggs per
clutch was 1.88. Thirteen young owls were fledged from sixteen eggs
(81% fledging success not counting young bird taken from nest #2).
Mortality was not due to any one predominant factor and the three
deaths recorded were due to the following causes: 1) infertile egg;

2) punctured egg--embryo partially developed; 3) 4 week old young
bird caught and strangled in a knot-hole of the nest cavity.

23

"BUMBLEFOOT"

by Fran Hamerstrom

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

Plainfield, Wisconsin

Mr. Schwartz {Raptor Research News 2(l);10-25, 1968) is to be
congratulated for an experimental approach to testing cures for
foot infections. My experience has been so different from his, in
narticular his statement that he believes that a wound virtually
guarantees an infection. I have not found this to be the case.

My training is in biology with a veterinary minor, and
throughout the years I have probably flown, held, nursed or hacked
well over 100 raptors, and have seen my share of foot wounds.

First let me describe the failures I can recall: a Rough-leg with

porcupine quills, and a pole-trapped Horned Owl, had such serious
foot infections that we could not save them.

One Golden Eagle I "treated" at Morley Nelson f s suggestion.
She had some nasty-looking corns. I daily gave her a human multi-
vitamin pill and switched her from a beef heart to a varied diet.
She recovered in about ten days. My usual treatment, which has
been highly successful, has been as follows: leave the blood plug

in the wound and keep the wound away from water- -no bathing, or
exposure to rain or snow. If the wound is on the bottom of the
foot, I supply a fresh hay-bale perch. I was taught never to
operate unless indicated and this training has stood me in good
stead. It has worked.

24

RAPTOR RESEARCH FOUNDATION MEETING
WASHINGTON, D.C., MARCH 2-6, 1969

Report by Byron E. Harrell

The occasion of the North American Wildlife and Natural
Resources Conference in Washington, D.C., in March 1969 provided
an opportunity to have a concurrent meeting of the Foundation.

Outside of the chance for informal discussion and the attendance
at a National Audubon Society session on Peregrines, there were
two scheduled events .

The first event was an informal gathering in the bird collec-
tion of the U. S. National Museum from 1 to 5 o’clock on Sunday,

March 2. This session, announced as a ’’workshop,’ 1 was an oppor-
tunity for about 15 or 20 of our members to examine specimens in
the collections. Dr. Richard Zusi, Curator of. Birds, had made the
arrangements and was available for any of our needs.

The last event was a tour of Patuxent Wildlife Research Center
from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. on Thursday, March 6, especially in the divi-
sions where work on raptors is being conducted. Some of our mem-
bers had been out there earlier in the week. As it turned out,
only six persons were able to go on Thursday, but it was very
profitable for them. Richard Porter and Stanley Wiemeyer talked
to us about their pesticide work and showed us the equipment for
food preparation which for the large number of birds is a sizable
operation. From there they took us out to the pens where the pairs
of American Kestrels are kept and where some new large breeding
cages for Bald Eagles and Peregrines are being constructed. The
Rare and Endangered Species program was explained to us by Glen
Smart. Although there was some preliminary work, the program pri-
marily dates from 1966 and now consists of a staff of 22 working
in three sections. This is a Laboratory Investigation section in-
volved in basic research including a research veterinarian in the
nutrition field and a reproduction physiologist. They hope to get
involved with pathology and behavior as well. The Ecology section
is involved with field work with emphasis on habitat and determin-
ing and alleviating limiting factors. The Propagation section is
involved with captivity breeding to produce, condition, and release
species for reintroduction where now exterminated such as has now
begun with the Masked Bob-white, We visited some of their pens and
in addition to a number of non-raptors saw their Peregrines, Merlins,
and Bald Eagles. These projects are just starting and the birds are
still in temporary facilities. It was too early in the season for
the Snail Kites to be out, and the Andean Condors we only saw at a
distance. At the Bird Banding Laboratory we talked to Earl
Baysinger, Larry Hood, and Jim Ruos . Many of the problems of the
Laboratory were discussed and a tour of the offices to see the
processing procedures was undertaken. Such a visit would be very

25

26

profitable for any bander. In addition to the above, our members
had further opportunities to talk with these or other personnel on
raptor problems. Our thanks go to all those who helped out, and
especially to Stan Wiemeyer who made most of the arrangements.

In addition to our meetings of special interest to Raptor
Research Foundation members was a session on Peregrines scheduled
by the National Audubon Society for Tuesday afternoon, March 4.
Originally scheduled for 1 p.m. in a conference room which had
about twenty chairs, the session was started with standing room
only, but since there were more people outside in the hall,
arrangements were made to move to another location. Although the
acoustics were not very good, at least all of the 100 or so persons
present had a seat. The meeting itself was not anticipated to last
more than an hour or so, but it lasted several hours. Probably
most of those in attendance were members of our organization or of
the North American Falconers' Association. Your reporter attempted
to take notes on the proceedings. The comments are paraphrased
below as well as I could from these notes. Under the circumstances
I am unable to vouch for the complete accuracy, but nevertheless, I
feel that the account will give to those not present a fair idea of
the nature of the discussions.

The session had been organized by, and was opened with a few
remarks by Roland Clement, Vice President of the National Audubon
Society. The Society was stimulated to consider the status of the
Peregrine and its protection by reports last September that the
take by trapping on the coast of Texas, Florida, Maryland, and
elsewhere was anticipated to be heavy. At that time the Society
sent a memorandum requesting a moratorium on trapping until the
situation became clearer. Since that time there were many letters
and this session was planned for the North American Wildlife and
Natural Resources Conference in March 1969. The agenda with re-
quested speakers was as follows:

Tom Cade (Cornell University) -- Status of populations of
Peregrines .

Joe Hickey (University of Wisconsin) - -Background on effects
of pesticides.

Jim Enderson (Colorado College) - -concern of North American
Falconers' Association.

Allan Studholm (Fish and Wildlife Service) - -Outline of what
we face in regulation, especially the problem of regu-
lating the take of such species.

Discussion period for other comments over each of these
above topics .

Tom Cade stated that the Peregrine was a polytypic species
consisting of 20 or 22 subspecies around the world. The species
is nearly cosmopolitan, being found on all the continents except
Antarctica, but the center in the Holarctic.

27

The species has become extinct in eastern United States where
there formerly were 300 pairs. Everywhere south of Canada there
is a reduction in breeding. The range in North America formerly
found extended to the south to Tamaulipas and Baja California in
Mexico, and north to Thule in Greenland and to 73-74°N in the
Canadian arctic islands. Centers of population were in the
Appalachians (now extinct) and on the west coast from Washington
through British Columbia. In most of the interior, the species
was a rather rare breeder and in the arctic tundra region there
were good numbers which were highly migratory. The population in
the Pacific Northwest and the Aleutians (the subspecies called
Peale’s Falcon) consists of fairly large numbers. Since the 1965
Peregrine Conference there seems to be no essential change, but
those studied show high levels of pesticide in the birds and their
eggs. Likewise the eggs are thinner, which is probably part of the
same phenomenon.

Joe Hickey said that the Peregrine decline in Europe and North
America was marked by a disease. In the breeding segment of the
population in Ireland, Germany, and England, reproductive failure
starting in 1947-1948 with no further change in breeders until the
50’s when there were 4, 5, 6, or 7 years of breeding failure.

Finland has gone from a population of 1000 to extinction and
Switzerland will lose its population. The changes are first noted
when juvenile birds appear at the eyrie; confirming a prediction in
1964 in Switzerland there were no young produced in 1968. (Juvenile
birds are now at eyries in the Brooks Range in Alaska.) British
observers have noted and documented broken eggs and eating of eggs .
The Sun-Life Building Peregrines (Montreal) had broken eggs in 1947
and ate the eggs in 1948. Ratcliffe detected the thinning of egg
shells in Peregrines and European Sparrow Hawks but not Golden
Eagles. American data on Peregrines, some Bald Eagles, some Osprey
indicate thinning of egg shells taking place in 1947 in California
and Massachusetts. This effect is now known to be related to liver
condition which breaks down steroids, including sex hormones and
possibly vitamin D. This is especially an effect of DDE which con-
centrates into large quantities in higher trophic levels in the
ecosystem. Concentrations have been noted in Herring Gulls,
pelicans, Prairie Falcons, and others. Experiments with Mallard
at Patuxent showed thinning of egg shells with 3 ppm of DDE.

Jim Enderson, who has a background as both ornithologist and
falconer, spoke for N.A.F.A. The North American Falconers' Associa-
tion is the only national falconry group and has 410 members, some
of whom are avid devotees of Peregrines. These members are dis-
turbed by the long-term prognosis and are anxious about future
access to birds. There is a general feeling that as long as take
is reasonable a small hopefully insignificant portion may be taken.
The take in proportion to total production is small. N.A.F.A. is
anxious to develop machinery so take can be controlled carefully.

28

Allen Studholrii discussed some problems relative to law enforce-
ment. The public often believes the way to solve a problem is to
pass a law, but this is clearly not enough; the law must be accept-
able before it is enforceable, and there must also be a means of
control. Most of the states have laws that protect raptors,
nearly all including Peregrines . A federal law might help but
there are 6,000 or 7,000 state agents and only about 150 federal
agents. The Lacey Act makes it a federal offense if birds taken
illegally in one state are transported to another. Need more than
an idea for effectiveness, but need specifics in order to enforce;
in some areas the additional federal laws have helped. He also
brought up the problem of strong states rights sentiment might make
the passage currently very difficult.

Clement commented on the state laws, three of which protect
no hawks or owls, six others only some raptors, and about half pro-
tect all hawks. He also mentioned the New York law for falconry
regulation. John Aldrich commented on Cade's remarks and emphasized
the need to know more about the movements of these populations; for
example, are the migrants on the west coast Arctic or not; on the
east coast the birds are probably Arctic.

There were some comments on perspective in research. Clement
said there should be work on the coordination of pesticide assay
to provide control to avoid wasted effort. Someone commented on
the question of encouragement of breeding and the tricks of main-
taining the birds while the pesticide clears out, estimated at 15-
20 years. Ed Friley, a longtime Audubon member, asked about the
Audubon Society policy on pesticides. Mention was also made of an
industrial source of chlorinated hydrocarbons.

Enderson commented on the main thrust since the 1965 Peregrine
conference. The over-all picture is not at all clear. The picture
in the Latin American wintering grounds is not understood at all.
Much of the movement data from banding is based on the work of per-
sons keeping Peregrines. Hickey said Cade and he should get to-
gether and make a prediction. Data last year on Pacific
procellerif orms showed them loaded with pesticides (large amount
in oil); any Peregrine population exploiting petrels as in Baja
California is in danger. A report in the Canadian Field Naturalist
on the Queen Charlottes was thought conservative. Hickey did not
feel any optimism that chlorinated hydrocarbons will stop in time
to save the species from extermination for even with cessation of
use the northern populations will be in danger for DDT will not be
stopped for malaria farther south.

Cade also commented on pesticides and on Enderson's remarks.
Perhaps remote pairs in the west and in populations feeding on
seed eaters are safe, but he thought sea bird or shore bird feeders
were doomed. Perhaps most of DDT obtained from winter range. In
some areas DDT use is down but worldwide use is up. He is going
back to Alaska the next two summers to look at changes.

29

Charles Callison, the Executive Vice President of the National
Audubon Society, referred to an earlier question that their policy
has clearly been against the chlorinated hydrocarbons since before
Rachel Carson’s "Silent Spring" and has been expressed at hearings
of the USDA and of Congress, through editorials, and in many other
ways . Another comment was made that we should be concerned with
any pesticide that tends to cycle in the environment.

Dr. Dustman of the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center spoke on
the work of this center of importance to raptors. He requested Dr.
Porter and Mr. Wiemeyer to comment on the use of American Sparrow
Hawks as experimental animals and also on the effects of combina-
tions of DDT and dieldrin. He also mentioned work with eagles as
indication of levels. In addition there is work on captivity
breeding .

Dr. Porter spoke about experiments with heavy dosage levels
in combinations, one group with 1 ppm dieldrin and 5 ppm DDT and
the other 3 ppm dieldrin and 15 ppm DDT. The higher amounts were
close to lethal for some of the birds died; the lower is close to
a field level. The disappearance of eggs and eating of eggs were
parts of reproductive failure. A significant difference in thick-
ness of egg shells was observed, and also in second generation
birds there was mortality following hatching.

A letter from Bob Risebrough on pesticide accumulation of
marine birds was read. He did not think that pesticides would
exterminate the Peregrine but thought that the levels were high
enough to cause a stress so that they could not stand any pressure;
he therefore recommended that they should be strictly protected.

Bill Huey from New Mexico said that this was one of the states
without protection, and although after six years a bill was defeated
new ground was broken and a group of followers has developed. He is
quite concerned with the status of Prairie Falcons there; the
Peregrine is rare.

Byron Harrell, President of the Raptor Research Foundation,
spoke about the various lines of effort of this group. Since I
took no notes on my own remarks, they are not reported here, but
the regular reader of the Raptor Research News is familiar with
their general nature.

Howard Leach of the California Fish and Game Department told
about the falconry licensing in that state. In response to a
request they send an application and the rules. The license cost
$15.00. Last October there was a prohibition on take of Prairie
Falcons and Peregrines (they can be brought into the state, how-
ever). In a follow-up sent to licensed falconers, 113 replies
were received reporting 60 Prairie Falcons and 47 Peregrines (the

30

only two raptors in the original regulations) . He also commented
on the Peregrines on Moro Rock which fledged three young this year.
The local Audubon group had established a 24-hour protective watch
of the nest.

A paragraph from the Risebrough letter was read. He suggested
that all Peregrines in captivity should be marked with permanent
bands and that trapping should be allowed only at a few specific
localities to aid in regulation.

Richard Fyfe of the Canadian Wildlife Service reported some
evidence of decline in Northwest Territories . He also mentioned
the problem of isolated birds being able to maintain themselves.

He showed a graph with data from Cade, Enderson, and Fyfe that
indicated different dosages within the Arctice. Prairie Falcons
in Alberta within 50 miles of each other had sharply different
pesticide levels. In one Prairie nest the young were dead at four
weeks. In response to a question from Hickey, the differences in
the arctic dosages probably related to the food habits, those feed-
ing on Lapland Longspur , Snow Bunting, and Harris Sparrow showing
less pesticide. The high levels show up first in fish and bird
eaters .

Porter asked Hickey a question and he said that it looks like
the Peregrine populations are going all the way. In his last re-
port, Dr. Ratcliff e thought that the declines should have stopped
when dieldrin stopped but the populations are still sick. On the
other hand Golden Eagles in the highlands recovered their good
reproductions with reduction of DDT use in sheep dip.

Clement mentioned the decline in pesticide use. Although
this was general there also tended to be an increase in others (as
dieldrin). Dr. William Stickel of Patuxent said the trend in DDT
use has fallen off rather sharply until last year, but the decrease
was made up by dieldrin and toxophene . There was increase last
year, but less domestic.

Enderson returned to the numbers of falconers with Peregrines.
California was already mentioned. In Pennsylvania there are 36
licensed falconers with six Peregrines and four for scientific pur-
poses. Berry said that in Colorado with 20-30 falconers there are
less than a dozen Peregrines, some about five years old. Meng said
there were around a dozen in New York. Enderson said responsible
falconers were interested in controlled take. Clement felt some-
thing could be worked out. Someone commented we should know sex
and age when taken. Jim Rice mentioned the Maryland migrant popu-
lation the annual capture is 37; one year out of 24 taken 16 were
banded. Cleaver said that we need information on commercial trap-
ping; some kinds advertised for sale had not yet been caught.
Mention was made of a San Francisco Chronicle ad quoting $400 for

31

a Peregrine and $1100 for a Goshawk. Fyfe said there were never
more than one or two passage birds trapped per year and noted that
British Columbia was at least trying hard to control the take from
the Queen Charlottes. Hickey inquired on the age ratio at Assateague.

A local falconer said this year of 70-80 Peregrines seen on the
dunes close enough to tell there were 5.7 adults to 1 young. From
Cape May to Cape Hatteras there are about a dozen persons banding.
Someone commented that over a 10-year period, birds caught averaged
831 adult. A question about the Bird Banding Laboratory was turned
over to its Director, Earl Baysinger. He said that his office was
not in a position to do research on the material. He also said that
statements that they were anti-banding were not true, provided that
persons maintain and submit decent records. 1

Chandler Robbins commented that for most species we do not
have information from year to year and discussed the beginning of
a bird population survey. They hope to do something with winter
birds. He stressed the importance of basing the data on some sort
of random sampling.

At this point the meeting had lasted longer than the Chairman
had anticipated, but there was unanimous agreement to continue,
following a break.

Jim Enderson made some comments on behalf of N.A.F.A. Falconry
as a sport is one of small numbers. Probably below 200 fly Pere-
grines. Falconers are usually interested in the species they use.
Since N.A.F.A. has a voluntary membership, a rigid control of its
members is unlikely and since any control over non-members is impos-
sible, regulation should be outside of N.A.F.A. N.A.F.A. guidelines
for falconry regulation have been used in nearly half of the states.
New York and Colorado are considering or adopting laws. However,
states have shown little interest in Peregrines as a species. Can
48 states do anything individually meaningful on a species like
this? It is not likely except for problems such as at Moro Bay
that are well defined. How could a system be developed? It is a
question of commercialism. Apparently not important on eastern
seaboard where old falconers know what is going on. There are ads
in sporting goods magazines. Here Oklahoma has not moved but
Colorado does (there it is illegal to buy and sell) . Several other
comments were made. Cleaver questioned what to do except agitate
for laws that we want as the New York law. If no state laws, then
need federal law, but that is difficult to implement. Hickey was
not sure N.A.F.A. can't do it. A migratory species cannot be con-
trolled at a state level. Federal regulation involves bureaucracy,
not too happy a solution. Stanley Marcus, N.A.F.A. Secretary, men-
tioned a couple of problems -- lack of police power to run enforce-
ment and lack of funding to do entire research job. Many contribute
time and money but not enough funding to develop in depth. Ham

32

radio licensing might be a model. He also mentioned problem of
commercialism and shooting, the latter states cannot control.
Enderson thought not all insurmountable. Someone said certain
areas can be controlled. Northwest Territories controls the take,
but other areas not. Falconers are interested in breeding program
as a supply. Some are interested in reintroductions. Others think
should be reasons for taking, insist birds for breeding be treated
distinctly from time of taking. Jim Grier mentioned the problem
of flying to increase chance of reproduction.

Clement mentioned the work of the National Audubon Society in
the raptor field. They have always been concerned as indicated by
publishing May's book. They have also tried to increase the list
of states which protect raptors. Six years ago they became very
concerned about the future of the Bald Eagle and hope to summarize
some of this soon. The Society helped to pass the law on Golden
Eagle and are now working with sheep people to sponsor research.
Sprunt would like to do more. A registry might be possible.

Hickey said there was a broad spectrum in pen keeping a
falcon. There is a problem of the fringe of falconry. If not
the states, what kind of federal regulations can be lived with.
Peregrines are surrounded by suspicion. What can be done by
N.A.F.A.? He also talked about population recording, the need for
cooperators, and putting it on a biologically sound basis. Perhaps
areas at five-year periods in sample areas in the Canadian arctic.
Population indices can be used in the U. S. as by Rice mentioned
earlier, and Berger and Mueller on Wisconsin shores who estimated
back into the 1930's. There are changes in a five-year looping
average which does not appear in the Duluth hawk pass. Peale's
Falcons also need attention as well as birds in Baja California.

Fyfe said some estimates are based on habitat but prey
abundance varies very widely. Bathurst Inlet is a site set up for
a sampling area this year. Additional prairie areas, and an area
for Bald Eagle in northern Saskatchewan were set up. Donald Blood
and Fyfe will try to do a good survey of the Queen Charlottes.
Prairie Falcons are also receiving attention; that situation is not
bright. In response to an earlier remark there is cooperation in
the pesticide work between the Canadians and Patuxent. He also
commented that the Raptor Research Foundation has often been left
out of remarks, but all of this is their purpose.

Hickey came back to the problems of surveys. Cade commented
that money to do all that is required will take dough. There are
some old areas, but we need additions. He also said breeding
projects should be encouraged. Porter's results have been good,
a major breakthrough, for experimental birds can reproduce in small
areas equal in productivity to wild Sparrow Hawks. The step from
Sparrow Hawks to larger falcons is a big step but important

especially if pessimism is accurate. Hickey asked whether this
should be at amateur or professional level; Cade answered both.
Patuxent has a number already. Cade mentioned some individual
birds work better than others. Porter commented on conditions for
birds to avoid hurting themselves. He had little trouble with
Kestrels in pairing. Meng has had two Peregrines for five years,
which are fed fresh pigeons and also some Peale's which are fairly
tame, but no results. Henry Kendall has bred Prairie Falcons.

Last year Larry Schram in Washington state and several in Germany
did have success with Peregrines.

Clement mentioned the problem of the pet keeper and eliminating
it by licensing. He also noted the cooperation in developing the
New York law, and finally the need for more money. Meng commented
that all these studies are all right but what about chlorinated
hydrocarbons . Clement got a laugh when he said "we are underhanded"
but he quickly changed that to undermanned, not enough staff to push
it far enough.

Carl Buchheister, President Emeritus of the National Audubon
Society, also commented on the amount of chlorinated hydrocarbons
sold in the U. S., but that the Wall Street Journal had today
(March 2, 1969) a large article on Wisconsin legislation on pesti-
cides. Another person commented on the possibility of Federal
protective legislation; he also felt the states would follow suit.

A final remark was made by Marcus who said the falconers came
loaded for bear and were pleased to find such a good tone of the
meeting .

ACTIVITIES

RAPTOR
RESEARCH
FOUNDATION ,

INC.

HISTORY AND BACKGROUND

All life on the planet is, and perhaps always has been
subjected to stresses caused by environmental changes.
Our era seems to be one of accelerated changes due,
in no small part, to very rapid expansion of human
populations and influences.

That environmental modification by human activities is
seriously threatening many species of wildlife is well
recognized. High on the list of threatened species are
several of our raptors. Recognizing that most wildlife
is moving into a period of management by man and
that its future will depend upon the efficacy of that
management, a group especially interested in birds of
prey incorporated Raptor Research Foundation in 1966.

PURPOSE

The Raptor Research Foundation was formed to fulfill
a need for facts. There are relatively large areas in the
biology of birds of prey in which little or no research
has beendone.Thereisstrongevidencethatsome species
of raptors are not adjusting toenvironmental changes and
are in serious danger of extinction. It therefore seerns
imperative that the most efficacious means of quickly
gaining the necessary knowledge to avert such extinc-
tion be immediately pursued. It is thought that an or-
ganizational approach to coordination of efforts is the
best means. This approach is the immediate purpose
of the Raptor Research Foundation.

STRUCTURE

The Raptor Research Foundation is a non-profit corpora-
tion whose purpose is to stimulate, coordinate, direct,
and conduct research in the biology and management of
birds of prey, and to promote a better public under-
standing and appreciation of the value of these birds.

The business of the Foundation is conducted by a Board
of Directors with the advice of an Advisory Board. This
Advisory Board was elected by the Board of Directors
in an attempt to bring together all interests in birds of
prey. The Advisory Board includes ornithologists spec-
ializing in ecology, ethology, taxonomy, physiology,
paleontology, parasitology, etc., wildlife managers,
veterinarians, and falconers.

Activities which use the name of Raptor Research Founda-
tion must have the prior approval of the Board of Di-
rectors.

A major activity to date is the publication of RAPTOR
RESEARCH NEWS which appears quarterly. In addition
to extensive news on work with raptors, several articles
on various types of raptor research have been included.

In order to develop the work of the Foundation, com-
mittees have been set up. These are as follows:

1. EDITORIAL COMMITTEE. Editing of RAPTOR RE-
SEARCH NEWS or any other publications.

2. CAPTIVITY BREEDING COMMITTEE. Will coordinate
breeding projects of cooperators and issue the
B.P.I.E. (Breeding Project Information Exchange),
aimed at eventual development of successful breed-
ing techniques.

3. RAPTOR POPULATION COMMITTEE. Will coordinate
activities and data of cooperators in various areas
to assess changes in raptor populations.

4. RAPTOR BANDING COMMITTEE. To coordinate activi-
ties of raptor banders, aid in solution of problems
of cooperators, and maintain a liaison with the band-
ing offices.

5. BIO-TELEMETRY COMMITTEE. To exchange informa-
tion of investigators using this technique.

6. RAPTOR PATHOLOGY COMMITTEE. To assemble in-
formation on diseases and injuries and their treat-
ment in raptors.

7. PESTICIDE COMMITTEE. Monitor information on the
level of pesticides in raptors and investigate effects
of such poisoning.

8. RAPTOR ECOLOGY AND ETHOLOGY COMMITTEE.

9. RAPTOR PHYSIOLOGY and ANATOMY COMMITTEE.

10. RAPTOR TAXONOMY COMMITTEE.

11. EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION COMMITTEE.
To collect and distribute information on the preserva-
tion of raptors.

12. BIBLIOGRAPHY COMMITTEE. Recording of published
references pertinent to raptor research.

13. MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE. To contact potential mem-
bers.

14. INTERNATIONAL COORDINATION COMMITTEE.
Maintain a liaison with raptor workers on other
continents.

15. FINANCE AND INVESTMENT COMMITTEE. Work on
the financial support of the Foundation.