MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT

Dear Members and Friends;

Two students were applying for a summer job at a well-known raptor center, but only one position was
available. The director of the establishment perused their resumes, which were for the center's purposes
much the same. In other words, the candidates were equally qualified for the position. Which one to choose?
Then the director noticed that while both students were members of the Raptor Research Foundation (RRF),
one had actually got involved with the organization. He had served on the local organizing committee for
an RRF conference held in his region a couple of years ago. He got the job.

Here is my point. To me, it is not enough just to be a member of an organization, i.e., pay your annual dues,
receive the journals and newsletters, and maybe attend the annual conference occasionally. To really belong
to an organization, one must get involved!

Now I know what some of you are thinking. "I don't have a Ph.D." or "I'm not a big-shot professor or
scientist!" or "I don't have any profile-- what do I have to offer?!" The fact is that you have plenty to offer:
time and energy.

Based on my experience, it is true that if one wants to get elected to the board or become an officer or, God
forbid, the president of RRF, one must have some profile. To put it in other words, you have to earn your
stripes. After all, you are trying to convince fellow members to vote for you, to have faith in you. I look for
two things when 1 am reading over the bio-sketches of RRF candidates looking for my vote. First, to what
extent have they been involved in the organization and second, what do they hope to accomplish during their
tenure? Having said that, there seems to be a general shortage of people running for board and officer
positions in any given election. Put your hat in the ring, and do not give up!

I do recognize that RRF is no longer big on committees; we used to have dozens, but most were ineffective
and non-productive. The Conferences Committee has been mainly run by Mike Kochert and myself, if only
because we have been attending RRF conferences for over two decades.

We will, however, be looking to bring in some new blood in this capacity.

For its purposes, the Resolutions Committee is not a terribly busy one and
is essentially a one-person show in the form of Dave Garcelon. The various
Awards Committees have generally been manned by members who are
well-established in their careers, who have shown good judgement in other
matters, and who are perhaps colleagues of the person the award is named
after. On the other hand, both the Koplin and Andersen Award Committees
are always looking for help. The Publications Committee consists of the
various current editors of our literature, i.e., Marc Bechard, Lenny Young,
and Daniel Varland. Pat Hall and Massimo Pandolfi comprise our
Nomination Committee, and any other members joining them should be
well-connected in the raptor world. Presently, Jim Bednarz chairs our
Conservation Committee composed of several experienced veterans in both

WINGSPAN

raptor conservation, as well as serving in other ways in RRF. This is an extremely busy committee, and
members should be willing to serve in more than name only. A blend of sage raptor biologists well-versed
in science and some neophytes who have plenty of time and energy on their hands should make this a highly
productive and effective committee. Conservation should and must become a priority for RRF, and I refer
you to an article on this subject by David Andersen and Jim Bednarz elsewhere in this issue.

Not meaning to belittle their accomplishments to date, there are three RRF committees that could possibly
use some additional energy and input: the Membership Committee headed by Dick Clark, the Education and
Rehabilitation Committee headed by Nancy Read and Betsy Hancock, and the Public Relations Committee
consisting of Walter Crawford and myself. RRF definitely needs an active Development Committee to get
an endowment fund off the ground. If you are interested, communicate with me or president-elect Mike
Kochert.

So, want to do something for RRF besides join a committee, but don't have any ideas? Here are some. First,
do attend our annual conferences and network by introducing yourself to officers and directors of the
organization. Indicate your willingness to help in some way. If there is an RRF conference in your region,
offer your assistance, whether it is stuffing envelopes, being a gofer, or sitting at a registration desk. Help
us stimulate more people to join RRF by distributing our brochures in your neck of the woods or at other
conferences. We especially need members in eastern Europe, Africa, and Latin America. Organize a
fund-raiser, e.g., bake sale, raffle, etc., for RRF or request some of our pins, decals, and/or literature from
our treasurer and sell them to raise funds for RRF. Our raffle being organized by Ed Henckel is still badly
in need of donated items, e.g., raptor books, prints, clothing, etc. If you are a financial wizard or have
connections with the wealthy, maybe you can give us some advice as to how to expand our coffers to build

(continued on page - 16 )

THE RAPTOR RESEARCH FOUNDATION, INC.
(FOUNDED 1966)

OFFICERS

PRESIDENT: David M. Bird SECRETARY: Patricia A; Hall

PRESIDENT-ELECT: Michael N. Kochert TREASURER: Jim Fitzpatrick

VICE-PRESIDENT: David E. Andersen

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

INTERNATIONAL DIRECTOR #1: Massimo Pandolfi
INTERNATIONAL DIRECTOR #2: Michael McGrady
CANADIAN DIRECTOR: Gordon S. Court
MOUNTAIN & PACIFIC DIRECTOR: Karen Steenhof
CENTRAL DIRECTOR: Robert N. Rosenfield
EASTERN DIRECTOR: Brian A. Millsap

DIRECTOR AT LARGE #1: Patricia L. Kennedy
DIRECTOR AT LARGE #2: John A. Smallwood
DIRECTOR AT LARGE #3: James C. Bednarz
DIRECTOR AT LARGE #4: Cesar Marquez Reyes
DIRECTOR AT LARGE #5: Petra Bohall Wood
DIRECTOR AT LARGE #6: Lloyd F. Kiff

Wingspan is distributed twice a year to all RRF members. It is also available to non-members for a subscription rate of
$ 1 0 per year. The Journal of Raptor Research (ISSN 0892-101 6) is published quarterly and available to individuals for
$30 per year and to libraries and institutions for $50 per year from: The Raptor Research Foundation, Inc., 12805 St.
Croix Trail, Hastings, MN 55033 USA. Add $3 for destinations outside of the continental United States.

Persons interested in predatory birds are invited to join The Raptor Research Foundation, Inc. Send requests for
information concerning membership, subscriptions, special publications, or change of address to: Jim Fitzpatrick,
Treasurer, 12805 St. Croix Trail, Hastings, MN 55033 USA.

SEPTEMBER 1997

1997 RRF MEETING FLIES SOUTH THIS FALL!

by Wendy Denton & Mary Margaret Spradlin

The Raptor Research Foundation's 1997 annual meeting will be held from October 30 to November 1 in
Savannah, Georgia. The meeting will take place at the beautiful Savannah Mariott Riverfront, with easy
access to Savannah's picturesque historic district, restaurants, and beaches. The conference will consist of
general paper sessions on various aspects of raptor ecology and biology, a special symposium on "The Status
and Biology of Kites" convened by Ken Meyer and Brian Millsap, and a poster session. Field trips, exhibits,
films, and videos will round out a stimulating conference. A call for papers has been mailed ro RRF
members. More are available upon request.

Field trips and social events will offer participants a memorable experience. Field trips are available on
Friday, October 31 for full- and halfday outings. Full-day trip options include tours of the Okeefenokee
National Wildlife Refuge and the Savannah River Ecology Lab, a birding tour of nearby coastal areas, and
a trip to Sapelo Island. Flalf-day excursions include birdwatching on the coast; squirrel hunting with a local
falconer; a trip to the new Center for Wildlife Education and the Lamar Q. Ball, Jr. Raptor Center at Georgia
Southern University; a tour of Savannah's historic and Victorian districts; and a tour of historic Fort Pulaski.
Social events include a cocktail-poster reception, a Halloween dinner social in Georgia's oldest fort, and an
informal awards banquet at the Mariott. The banquet will also feature a raffle for books and fine pieces of
art. Conference attendees will enjoy the amenities of a fabulous conference facility and rooms in a first class
hotel. Room rates begin at $85 for single or double rooms. Inexpensive lodging is available to students near
the conference location.

Registration for members is $1 10 before September 30, and $130 after that time; non-members are welcome
at $ 1 20/$ 1 40 and students at $65/$85. ATTENTION STUDENTS! YOUR RATE HAS BEEN REDUCED
FROM THAT PRINTED IN THE CALL FOR PAPERS! THIS IS THE NEW REGISTRATION FEE! IF YOU
HA. VE ALREADY MAILED YOUR REGISTRA TION, YOU WILL BE REFUNDED THIS $30 REDUCTION
All attendees will receive a commemorative conference print of a Swallow-tailed Kite, as part of their
registration packet. Field trips and social events are additional.

Allow us to assure you that Southern hospitality WILL be in abundance! For more information about the
meeting, please contact Michelle Pittman or Fran Aultman, Georgia Southern University, P.O, Box
8124, Statesboro, G A 30460-8124, phone: 912-681-5555, fax: 912-68 1-0360, e-mail: meeden@
gsvms2.cc.gasou.edu or franic@gsaix2.cc.gasou.edu.

EASTERN REGION NEWS
by Brian A. Millsap, Eastern Director

RRF work in at least my part of the Eastern Region has focused on preparations for the 1997 annual meeting
in Savannah, Georgia. The local committee and Georgia Southern University have been working hard to
ensure that this meeting will be a memorable one! I’ve toured the facilities and know much of what is in store
for us, and 1 can assure you that you don't want to miss it. As for the rest of the Eastern Region, I just want
to remind you that I am your voice on the board, and I want to serve your interests. Please feel free to contact
me anytime that I can be of service. Lean be reached via e-mail at millsab@mail. state. fl. us, or by phone
during the day at (850-488-383 1 ). 1 look forward to seeing you in Savannah!

1 3 i

WINGSPAN

FALCONRY POSITION STATEMENT

OF

THE RAPTOR RESEARCH FOUNDATION, INC.

INTRODUCTION

Birds of prey have received considerable conservation attention in recent years due to marked declines in
some populations, notably of those species vulnerable to environmental pollutants. As a result of these
declines, and because reliable data on population status were often unavailable, protection of raptor species
became a conservation priority, including strict regulation of the sport of falconry. In 1977, the Conservation
Committee of the Wilson Ornithological Society (WOS) reported on falconry in North America (Braun et
al. 1977), concluding that falconry is a legitimate art but that monitoring of raptor populations was needed.
Recommendations were made that falconry regulations be adopted by all states, that a practical marking
system be developed for permanent identification of individual raptors, that properly marked falconry birds
be allowed to be transported freely between states, and that captive bred raptors of any species be allowed
for falconry. At the time of the WOS committee report, newly promulgated federal regulations controlling
the practice of falconry were being implemented in the United States which have served as the basis, with
minor changes, for regulating the sport in 42 states. Similar rules have been promulgated by several
provinces in Canada.

Since 1977, substantial data have become available on the status of most raptor species suitable for falconry,
and depressed raptor populations have generally recovered in North America and Europe. Most of the
recommendations of the WOS Conservation Committee have been achieved in the United States and Canada,
and the contributions of falconers to raptor management and conservation education have been widely
recognized. Yet regulation of falconry still causes controversy in some countries.

The purpose of the Falconry Position Statement by the Raptor Research Foundation, Inc., is to provide
current and additional expert opinion based on available biological data on issues relating to the regulation
and practice of falconry. This statement neither affirms nor disaffirms the philosophical question of the
legitimacy of the sport of falconry. .

DEFINITION OF ISSUES

Harvest from Wild Populations, -The removal of young birds from wild populations reduces productivity
(directly, and perhaps indirectly through disturbance during the nesting season). However, raptors are a
renewable resource, and thus the game management principle of "sustainable yield" may be appropriately
applied to harvest of individuals from healthy populations.

Captive Propagation. —Captive propagation of raptors has increased dramatically in recent years, and the
release of captive-bred progeny has been valuable for reestablishing some endangered species. Captive
breeding provides birds for falconry, but may also be used to conceal illegally acquired birds unless
parentage can be proven.

Hybridization and Introductions. -The production of hybrids, especially among large falcons, has raised
questions concerning the release of such birds to the wild. Genetic theory predicts that, at normal population
levels, hybrids between sympatric or parapatric species would be eliminated by natural selection. Similarly,
non-native species from within the same super-continent (Americas, Eurasia) are unlikely to establish
themselves in the wild as introduced aliens. However, traits from hybrids between allopatric species might
establish in native stocks, and species from other super-continents might become accidentally introduced if
used in large numbers for falconry.

E

4

SEPTEMBER 1997

Identification of Individual Birds and Parentage. -To effectively enforce falconry regulations, individual
birds must be reliably identified. Leg bands which cannot be refastened after removal would be a convenient
method, but bands currently used are not entirely reliable. Alternatives include biochemical parentage tests,
which should soon be available for raptors, and foot scute patterns which are expected to provide unique
"fingerprints" for individual identification.

Regulation and Enforcement of Falconry. -Controls are desirable; however, the intensity of regulations and
their enforcement should be consonant with the risk to raptor populations.

POSITION

The position of the Raptor Research Foundation, Inc., with regard to the above stated issues relating to
falconry is:

1 . North American raptors used in falconry have stable or increasing populations throughout most
or all of their range. This is also generally true of European countries where falconry is practiced.

2. Evidence indicates that large and stable or increasing raptor populations can sustain an annual
harvest of at least 1 0% of nestlings.

3. Any harvest of raptors from small and unstable or declining populations should be evaluated, in
each instance, on a biological (e.g., population and productivity data) basis.

4. The annual harvest of wild raptors by falconers in the United States is well below 5% for any
species and below 1% for most species. Percentages are not adjusted for return to wild stocks of
released and escaped birds.

5. Final development of biochemical parentage tests and the use of foot scute patterns for individual
identification should be encouraged as tools for regulation and enforcement.

6. Escape of sympatric and parapatric species or their hybrids is unlikely to pose any significant
threat to wild populations. However, we recommend that hybrids between allopatric species should
not be bred for falconry, and that other hybrids or species at risk of accidental introduction between
super-continents should be imprinted on humans before being used in falconry.

7., Licensing individual falconers on merit is effective for regulating falconry, especially when
combined with individual markers for raptors of special management concern (e.g., endangered
species). There is little conservation justification for the administrative costs of marking common
raptors individually, and future consideration should be given to modification of this practice.

8. Many resources now being directed toward the control of falconry in the United States and
elsewhere could be redirected to raptor population monitoring, habitat conservation, education and
preventing the killing of wild raptors.

9. Government agencies should be more responsive to the changing status of species, both by
imposing protection when necessary and by removing restrictions on use when biological data
indicate such is warranted.

10. International standards for the practice and regulation of falconry are encouraged.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The Raptor Research Foundation is grateful to Jim Mosher, Jim Brett, Robert Kenward, and Ian Newton,
who formed the ad-hoc committee which drafted and revised this position statement on behalf of RRF. The
Raptor Research Foundation also thanks Dean Amadon, Clait Braun, Allen Brohm, Tom Cade, S. Kent
Carnie, Christian de Coune, Gary E. Duke, Mark Fuller, Frederick and Frances Hamerstrom, Jeffrey Lincer,
Jimmie R. Parrish, James Ruos, and James Weaver for their comments and suggestions on earlier drafts of
the statement.

{Editor's note; Expanded abstracts, including literature citations, relevant to RRF's Falconry Position
Statement will be published in The Journal of Raptor Research , Volume 3 1 , Issue No. 3.)

rrzzrz 5 q

1

WINGSPAN

RRF AND RAPTOR CONSERVATION

by David E. Andersen, Vice-President &

James C. Bednarz, Chair, Conservation Committee

Without question, members of the Raptor Research Foundation, Inc. (RRF), have had a significant and
positive influence on the conservation of raptors. From furthering scientific understanding of raptors, to
conscientiously using raptors in the ancient art of falconry, members of RRF have had wide ranging and
important impacts on raptors and the attitudes of others about raptors. Many RRF members have devoted
their professional careers to the conservation of raptors, and we suspect that most RRF members devote a
significant portion of their energy and passion to raptors. Individual members of RRF exhibit tireless efforts
toward furthering raptor conservation in both their profession and avocation, and are recognized for their
efforts both within and outside the organization.

Recently, however, we have begun to wonder whether the same can be said about RRF as an organization.
A number of very significant conservation issues involving raptors have been prominent in the recent past.
The controversies regarding Northern Spotted Owls, Mexican Spotted Owls, Apache Northern Goshawks,
Queen Charlotte Northern Goshawks, and Swainson's Hawks have all proceeded with little visible presence
of RRF, although individual RRF members have been and are significantly involved in each. While these
issues are discussed at some length at annual RRF meetings, it seems to us that RRF is largely absent in
contributing to discussions at the level of the general public and public policy; Case in point: the American
Ornithologists' Union (AOU) and The Wildlife Society (TWS) recently completed a technical review of
published management guidelines for southwestern forests and Northern Goshawks in the desert southwest.
RRF members participated in that review, but as representatives of AOU or TWS. RRF as an organization
was absent from that review. Why? The answer is that RRF was not invited to participate in the review.
Why wasn't RRF invited to participate in such a review? And, had RRF been invited to participate, would
RRF been positioned to provide a professional technical review in a timely manner?

So, we pose two additional questions. One, has RRF been absent as an organization from important and
visible raptor conservation issues? To us, the answer to that question is YES. Second, given this absence,
should RRF as an organization do something to correct that deficiency? That is a matter of policy for RRF
to address as an organization. In recent years, many members of the RRF Board have advocated that the
organization should become increasingly involved in conservation policy decisions. Also, RRF currently
has a Conservation Committee. Thus, it would seem that the membership does want to (and in our opinion
should) play a significant role in raptor conservation issues. As an organization, it may be appropriate to
coordinate RRF's participation with other scientific societies (likely through the Ornithological Council) in
technical review of raptor conservation issues in the future. However, that means that we must be willing
and prepared to participate in such projects in a timely and professional manner, which necessitates
significant contributions of time and expertise by RRF members. To date, those kinds of contributions have
been hard to come by when it comes to addressing raptor conservation issues.

That is not to imply that the Conservation Committee has been doing nothing. Activities in the past year
include:

® An active committee reviewing the proposal to delist Falco peregrimts cmatum (Brian Millsap
chairs that committee).

® Submission of a letter to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concerning the elimination of
"Categoiy 2" species as candidates for listing as endangered or threatened (RRF opposed it, see the
letter below).

0 Submission of suggestions and substantial revisions to the soon to be published "Guidelines for the
Use of Wild Birds in Research" produced by the Ornithological Council (RRF's input emphasized

1 6 G

E

1

SEPTEMBER 1997

the humane treatment of both raptors and the lure animals used in trapping raptors, and that
traditional trapping methods for raptors could he accomplished in a humane manner). We suggest
that all raptor field workers follow these guidelines when conducting research.

• Formation of an ad hoc committee to review management prescriptions for Ferruginous Hawks on
Bureau of Land Management lands in Utah (report is due soon).

• Formation of an ad hoc committee to make recommendations concerning the development of
Habitat Conservation Plans (HCP) for raptors. This is a major undertaking, and this committee may
need some assistance.

Unfortunately, the RRF Conservation Committee was unable to act on a number of other issues and crises
that arose during the past year because of the lack of time and able volunteers available to do the necessary
research that would permit RRF to provide formal written input based on solid science.

In summary, we find RRF's current participation in raptor conservation issues inadequate. Thus, we
challenge RRF to be neither satisfied with past contributions nor willing to be satisfied with the contributions
that most individual members are currently making. Rather, we believe that RRF should be the preeminent
organization regarding raptor conservation issues in the world. That will not happen unless RRF members
collectively decide to make that happen by their actions. Simply proclaiming that RRF should become
involved in conservation issues and going about business as usual will not change the status quo. Maybe
inclusion of additional people into RRF’s Conservation Committee (people with the expertise and willingness
to commit time and energy) will move a conservation agenda forward. We are convinced that innovative
progress in conservation can only be implemented by painstaking effort and significant contributions of time.
We hope that a group as eminently qualified and devoted as RRF could muster the commitment necessary
to increase our effectiveness as an organization committed to the conservation of raptors.

RRF COMMENTS ON ’’CATEGORY 2 & 3” DESIGNATIONS

1 6 October 1996

Mr. E. LaVerne Smith
Chief

Division of Endangered Species
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
1 849 C Street N.W.

Mailstop 452 ARLSQ
Washington, D.C. 20240

Dear Mr. Smith:

This letter is in response to the changes in the process by which the Fish and Wildlife Service identifies
candidates for addition to the lists of endangered and threatened wildlife and plant taxa as proposed in the
Federal Register Vol. 61(40):7596-7599 and Vol. 61 (1 8.1 ):48875-48876. The Service proposes to
discontinue the designation of Category 2 and Category 3 taxa in notices of review. Although the Service
remains concerned about Category 2 species, further biological research and field study are needed to resolve
the conservation status of these taxa. Additionally, the Service proposes that the designation of Category
2 taxa as candidates has resulted in confusion about the conservation status of these taxa.

The Raptor Research Foundation consists of more than 1200 professional biologists, conservationists,
researchers, and managers. Our organization has been an interested participant in listed species conservation

7 I

1

WINGSPAN

since the inception of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Service's decision to eliminate Category 2
and 3 taxa is of concern to The Raptor Research Foundation because it affects several species of interest to
our membership. These include the Ferruginous Hawk, Swainson's Hawk, and Northern Goshawk. Data
from some local areas suggest that populations of all of these species are in decline, but the regional or
continental extent of these declines are not known.

We urge that the Service reconsider the decision to discontinue the listing of designated Category 2 and
Category 3 taxa in notices of review. Category 2 species, by definition, have some probability to be eligible
for listing although sufficient information to justify issuance of a proposed rule is lacking. It is this
uncertainty regarding status that is of concern and must be addressed. The key to dealing with the current
uncertainty regarding the status of these taxa is further research and field study on the distribution,
abundance, habitat relationships, and population dynamics of these taxa. As noted by the Service in the
Federal Register, some of these taxa may and others may not warrant listing. Continuing to include these
taxa in future notices of review will provide a single, centralized, national list of taxa that require priority
research and field study. If no list of species of uncertain status is maintained, then monitoring may not be
done and some species may decline to extinction without receiving the protection of the ESA. This possible,
and indeed likely, result would be in direct violation of the intent of the ESA.

At this time, it is unclear how these taxa will be identified and their status evaluated if they are not listed in
future notices of review. If the Service does not acknowledge and address the uncertainty of the conservation
status of these taxa, we believe this will result in more confusion about which species are of special concern
and which require monitoring priority. The potential trade-offs of eliminating Category 2 and 3 species need
to be addressed. The intent of the ESA is to minimize the probability of extinction and to promote the
recovery of species in jeopardy. The first step in this process is to identify and acknowledge uncertainty
regarding the status of potentially declining taxa. The Category 2 designation clearly and unambiguously
recognizes this uncertainty. Continuing to include these taxa in future notices of review is a basic and
necessary step in focusing priority attention in terms of monitoring and information gathering on these taxa.

Based on this reasoning, The Raptor Research Foundation recommends that the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service continue to include Category 2 species in future notices of review. Alternatively, we
suggest publishing a list of taxa with a different label (i.e., not "Category 2") that would clearly indicate the
status of these species (e.g., "Species of Concern" or "Species of Uncertain Status").

Most Sincerely,

James C. Bednarz
Chair of Conservation Committee
The Raptor Research Foundation

(Consetvation Committee Chair's Note: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) published its final
decision on the identification of candidates for listing as endangered or threatened in the Federal Register
on December 5, 1996 (Vol. 6 1 (23 5):6448 1-64485). The final decision was to discontinue the maintenance
of a list of Category 2 species. USFWS did not respond directly to RRF nor to the specific issues raised in
our letter (see above). However, USFWS did group comments received and discussed nine issues related
to its decision. The essence of USFWS's response was that lists of sensitive species maintained by The
Nature Conservancy's Heritage system, in conjunction with other state and federal agency lists, may provide
a workable substitute for the former list of Category 2 species. Interested members should review the final
decision published in the Federal Register.)

l a ■

David Bird
President

The Raptor Research Foundation

E

SEPTEMBER 1997

PEREGRINE DE-LISTING COMMITTEE UPDATE

by Brian A. Millsap, Eastern Director

At the request of the Ornithological Council, RRF appointed a committee to evaluate the scientific evidence
regarding a proposal by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to de-list the American Peregrine Falcon ( Falco
peregrinus anatuni) in January, 1996. This committee consists of RRF members Mitchell Byrd, Gordon
Court, Jim Enderson, Pat Kennedy, Brian Millsap, and Bob Rosenfield. Committee members have been
accumulating, reviewing, and discussing the available information since that time. The committee expects
to have a draft report on its deliberations prepared in time for delivery to the RRF Officers and Board of
Directors at the 1997 business meeting in Savannah.

THE PEREGRINE FUND
RECEIVES

■ 1997 COMPUTERWORLD SMITHSONIAN AWARD

The Peregrine Fund recently received the 1997 Computerworld Smithsonian Award in the Environment,
Energy, and Agriculture category for visionaiy use of information technology in its Harpy Eagle
Conservation Program. The award recognizes The Peregrine Fund's successful integration of satellite
telemetry, global positioning system, and geographic information system technologies to further conservation
of the Harpy Eagle and its rain-forest habitat. Nominated by Digital Equipment Corporation, The Peregrine
Fund was selected by a panel of judges who sought projects that were based on innovative uses of
information technology that bring about improvements to society. The Peregrine Fund's nomination will
become part of the Smithsonian Institution's Permanent Research Collection of Information Technology
Innovation at the National Museum of American History. The Peregrine Fund's nomination, which contains
detailed information about the Harpy Eagle Conservation Program, may be viewed on the World Wide Web
at: http://innovate.si.edu/x7view. pl?nomid=97400,

1997 HAWK MOUNTAIN-ZEISS RAPTOR RESEARCH AWARDS

For the past nine years, Carl Zeiss Optical has sponsored a research grant with Hawk Mountain. The Hawk
Mountain-Zeiss Raptor Research Award is presented to candidates throughout the world who are involved
in raptor research projects. The 1997 research award will be split evenly between two recipients: Michael
Goldstein, a graduate student at Clemson University, and Todd Katzner, a graduate student at Arizona State
University. Mr. Goldstein will use his grant to study the impact of organophosphate pesticides on Swainson's
Hawks during wintering in Pampas, Argentina. In 1996, field reconnaissance disclosed four incidents of
organophosphate poisoning that killed at least 4,100 Swainson's Hawks. Goldstein will develop a risk
assessment for Swainson's Hawks and devise a management plan for the species in Argentina. His work is
part of a larger effort involving U.S., Canadian, and Argentinian wildlife biologists. The other recipient, Mr.
Katzner, will use his grant to study the raptor community at the Naurzum Zapovednik Nature Reserve in
north central Kazakhstan. Katzner will study predator-prey relationships of the four species of eagles: the
Pallas' Sea Eagle, the Imperial Eagle, the Steppe Eagle, and the Golden Eagle. He will focus on eagle habitat
use, the impact of patch dynamics on eagle feeding ecology, and reproductive success. Because the status
of raptors in the region is largely unknown, the work is of considerable conservation interest. For more
information on the Hawk Mountain-Zeiss Raptor Research Award, write to Keith L. Bildstein, Director of
Research, Hawk Mountain Sanctuary, RR2, Box 191, Kempton, PA 19529.

1 9

WINGSPAN

ANNOUNCEMENTS

UPCOMING MEETINGS

1997 ,

October 30 - November 1

RAPTOR RESEARCH FOUNDATION

Savannah, Georgia

Contact: Michelle Pittman or Fran Aultman,

Georgia Southern University, P.O. Box 8124,
Statesboro, GA 30460-8124, phone: 912-681-
5555, fax: 912-681-0360, e-mail: meeden@

gsvms2.cc.gasou.edu or franic@gsaix2.cc.gasou.
edu.

1998

April 6-12

NORTH AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGICAL

CONFERENCE

St. Louis, Missouri

Contact: Bette Loiselle, Department of Biology,
University of Missouri~St. Louis, 8001 Natural
Bridge Road, St. Louis, MO 63121-4499, phone:
314-516-6224; fax: 314-516-6233, e-mail: bird_
stl@umsl.edu.

August 4-11

FIFTH WORLD CONFERENCE ON BIRDS
OF PREY AND OWLS
Mid rand (Johannesburg), South Africa
Contact: Gerhard Verdoorn; EWT Raptor

Conservation Fund; Vulture Study Group, Raptor
Conservation Group, Poison Working Group; P.O.
Box 72155; Parkview 2122; South Africa; phone:
27-1 1-646-4629, 27-1 1-646-8617, or 27-82-446-
8946 (mobile); fax: 27-11-646-4631; e-mail:

nesher@global.co.za; or Robin Chancellor, e-
mail: WWGBP@aol.com.

September 30 - October 4 '

RAPTOR RESEARCH-FOUNDATION
Ogden, Utah

Contact: Carl Marti, Department of Zoology,
Weber State University, Ogden, UT 844Q8-2505,
phone: 801-626-6172, fax: 801-626-7445, e-

mail: cmarti@weber.edu, www: http://www.

weber.edu/rrf/.

1999

November 9-13

RAPTOR RESEARCH FOUNDATION
' La Paz, Baja California Sur, Mexico
Contact: Ricardo Rodriguez Estrella, Centro de
Investigaciones Biologicas del Noroeste> Division
de Biologia Terrestre, km 1 Carretera San Juan de
la Costa, La Paz 23000 B.C.S. MEXICO, phone:
1 12-536-33, fax: 1 12-553-43, e-mail: estrella®
cibnor.mx.

POSITIONS AVAILABLE

FALCON INTERNS We have vacancies for
interns from May to September 1998, working
with our seven permanent staff, breeding, hacking,
and training falcons. We manage about 200
falcons, also horses and sheep. We provide board,
lodging, and training. Applicants should be 1 8 or
over, non-smokers, with at least two years
experience of training raptors. Applicants should
send a resume, a photograph, and two references
to: Dr Nick Fox, Director of Falcon

Management and Research, Environmental
Research and Wildlife Development Agency
(Abu Dhabi), Penllynin Farm, College Road,
Carmarthen, Carmarthenshire SA33 5EH,
Wales, UK, phone/fax: 44-1267-233864, email:
narc@celtic.co.uk.

RESEARCH ASSISTANTS FOR FALCON
SURVEYS We require research assistants for
falcon survey work from approximately March to
July 1998 in Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
Uzbekistan, Mongolia, and China. Applicants
should be 20 or over with a background in
biological science, and able to manage under
difficult conditions in a non-English speaking
environment. The work is unpaid apart from
expenses, and entails assisting local biologists

SEPTEMBER 1997

surveying nesting Saker and Peregrine falcons.
We provide training in field techniques in the UK
before you leave. We can provide academic
supervision to include your field work as part of a
degree course. Applicants should send a resume,
a photograph, and two references to: Dr Nick
Fox, Director of Falcon Management and
Research, Environmental Research and
Wildlife Development Agency (Abu Dhabi),
Penllynin Farm, College Road, Carmarthen,
Carmarthenshire SA33 5EH, Wales, UK,
phone/fax: 44-1267-233864, email: narc@

celtic.co.uk.

PUBLICATIONS AVAILABLE

"RAPTOR RESEARCH REPORT NO. 9"
"The Burrowing Owl, Its Biology and
Management: Including the Proceedings of the
First International Burrowing Owl Symposium,"
edited by J. L. Lincer and K. Steenhof, is now
available. Printed in May 1997, the publication is
No. 9 in RRF's "Raptor Research Report" series.
Included are papers presented at the Burrowing
Owl symposium held in conjunction with the RRF
meeting in Bellevue, Washington in 1992. An
"Invited Papers" section has a paper on the
species' status in North America, a literature
overview, and a review of Burrowing Owl
taxonomy and distribution. Other major sections
include, "Population Biology and Status,"
"Genetics and Breeding Biology," "Life History
and Breeding Behavior," and "Management and
Related Subjects." The two appendices include a
Burrowing Owl bibliography and an account on
survey protocol and guidelines for mitigation. For
a copy, contact: Jim Fitzpatrick, Treasurer,
The Raptor Research Foundation, Inc., 12805
St. Croix Trail, Hastings, MN 55033. Cost is
$20 for RRF members and $25 for non-members,
plus an additional $5 for shipping and handling.

"THE PRAIRIE FALCON" This new, 171-
page book by Stanley H. Anderson and John R.
Squires covers all aspects of the Prairie Falcon's
life history from mating and rearing young to
hunting behaviors and the yearly migration cycle.
It may be purchased directly from the publisher:

l

University of Texas Press, P.O. Box 7819,
Austin, TX 78713-7819, phone: 800-252-3206,
fax: 800-687-6046.

NEWS OF MEMBERS

Isabel Bellocq will have a new address effective
October 1, 1997: Departamento de Ciencias

Biologicas; FCEN, Universidad de Buenos Aires;
Ciudad Universitaria, Pab. 2; 1428 - Buenos
Aires; Argentina; phone: 54-1-781-5021 ext. 214,
e-mail: bellocq@biolo.bg.fcen.uba.ar.

REQUESTS FOR ASSISTANCE

FINAL REQUEST . FOR RAFFLE
DONATIONS The silent auction planned for
RRF's 1997 annual meeting has been converted
into a raffle. Donations have been very slow in
arriving, and many more items are still needed.
Please consider making a donation, as this is a
fund raising event to provide the monies needed to
operate RRF and promote raptor research.
Donations should be mailed to: Center for

Wildlife Education, RRF RAFFLE, Georgia
Southern University, P.O. Box 8058,
Statesboro, GA 30460-1779. Please also notify
Ed Henckel, the raffle coordinator, at:
ednj udy@epix.net.

PLEASE UPDATE YOUR LISTING IN "THE
FLOCK"! Many membership records recently
transferred to OSNA from RRF had no historical
data to indicate what year the member joined
RRF. With no information to base this on, OSNA
used the year RRF joined OSNA to fill this field
in the directory. OSNA would like RRF members
to make OSNA aware of their actual "joined
society" dates, so that OSNA's historical
information can be more complete and accurate.
Corrections should be transmitted to: Richard
Walker, OSNA Business Manager, P.O. Box
1897, Lawrence, KS 66044-8897, phone: 785-
843-1221, fax: 785-843-1274, e-mail: rwalker@
allenpress.com.

1

1 11 i

WINGSPAN

RAPTOR DISPERSAL SYMPOSIUM

by Petra Bohall Wood, Director at Large

The Raptor Research Foundation will be hosting a symposium on "Raptor Dispersal Patterns and
Mechanisms" during the April 1998 OSNA meetings in St. Louis, Missouri. Each of six presentations will
focus on a particular species of raptor (or closely related species) and will attempt to summarize existing
information. The species represented will present a mix of dispersal strategies by including migratory and
sedentary species as well as species with delayed breeding.

RECENT THESES ON RAPTORS

Alvarez-Cordero, E. 1996. BIOLOGY AND CONSERVATION OF THE HARPY EAGLE IN
VENEZUELA AND PANAMA. Ph.D. Diss., Univ. Florida. 212pp.

From 1989 to 1996, I studied the Harpy Eagle { Harpia hctrpyjct ) in two regions at similar latitude in
Central and South America to learn more about the biology and habitat of this species and evaluate its
conservation needs. 1 collected approximately 248 records covering the whole geographic range of the Harpy
Eagle; 103 entries were collated for Venezuela, and 52 for Panama. Assisted by local people I located 10
nesting sites of these eagles in the Darien Region of Middle America, all in the emergent tree species (>40
m to the first branch) called "Cuipo" ( Cavanillesia plcmtamfolia Bombacaceae); one additional site was
found in the Atlantic Region. In the Venezuelan Guayana I mainly worked in logging concessions, and
located 29 nest sites; the eagles built their nests 25-40 m high in emergent trees, some reaching 50-52 m.
They used seven different tree species in four botanical families, mainly in the Bombacaceae and
Lecythidaceae.

In 1 995, 1 used Global Positioning System (GPS) to survey roads and trails (>2,500 km) over a 300 x 300
km study area in SE Venezuela, and map locations of nests (n=29) and other features related to forest
management. These data were integrated in a Geographic Information System (GIS) with existing
information for vegetation, drainage network, and centers of human activity. Most nests sites had some sort
of tree felling activity within 1 km, and 7 nest trees have been destroyed. While most nests in Venezuela were
close to human settlements (<20 km, n=18), measurements of nearest pair spacing (range 3-7 km) for nests
in Venezuela, Panama, and Guyana suggest that density of this raptor greatly surpasses previous estimates.
Pair dispersion ranged from 45 to 79 km 2 per pair in Venezuela and was 10-63 km 2 per pair in Panama.

Sloths ( Bradypus spp. and Choloepus spp.) predominated in the diet of the eagles studied in Venezuela,
as well as various primates and other arboreal mammals (such as kinkajou, large and small porcupines, and
opossums). The eagles also captured a few species of birds and reptiles like the Green iguana and the Tegu
lizard.

Harpy Eagles persist for years in selectively logged areas near landscapes dominated by human activity.
During this investigation I have equipped 16 eagles (only 2 were adults) with both satellite and radio
transmitters. Usually only one egg hatched after 56-58 days of incubation (average 56 d), nestlings were
ready for flight at age 160-180 days; young eagles had an extended period of post-fledgling dependency (>2
years after fledgling, n^4) before dispersal from the nest site. Shooting of eagles (including 2 of the young
birds I telemetered), and live poaching of nestlings were major threats to the local population of eagles that
I studied.

1 12 1

SEPTEMBER 1997

Bisson, I. 1996. NEST SITE SELECTION AND PRODUCTIVITY OF THE SPANISH IMPERIAL
EAGLE AQUILA ADALBERTI POPULATION OF DONANA NATIONAL PARK, SPAIN. M S.
Thesis, McGill Univ., Montreal, Quebec. 85pp.

I examined the nest site selection of the Spanish Imperial Eagle Aquila adalberti population of the
Donana National Park (SW Spain) from 1984 to 1994, in relation to the microhabitat and macrohabitat
representing vegetative composition, degree of human influence and land use. The study included 75 active
nest sites and 75 random sites. Univariate analyses and Generalized Linear Models were used. Nest sites
significantly differed from the random sites for 87% of habitat variables measured. The model correctly
classified 85.3% of the nest sites and 86.7% of the random sites. The probability of occupation of a site by
a Spanish Imperial Eagle increased with tree height, angle of aperture of the wood stand, distance to paved
roads, distance to urban centre and distance to water body.

Four productivity parameters (laying date, number of eggs, number of nestlings and number of chicks
fledged) were measured over the same 1 0-year period for 16 territories in the Donana Park. Spearman
correlation coefficient analyses (r v ) was used to test for relationships between territory habitat characteristics,
representing m icrohabitat, vegetative composition, degree of human influence and land use, and productivity.
Egg-laying was later in territories situated closer to urban centres (n - 1 6,r s = -0.529, P < 0.05) and those
with more kilometres of power lines (n = 16, r s ■= 0.518, P < 0.05). No other productivity parameter was
found to be significantly influenced by any of the territory features measured.

Garner, H. D. 1997. DYNAMICS AND STABILITY OF A POPULATION OF WINTERING RED-
TAILED HAWKS IN THE DELTA REGION OF ARKANSAS. M.S. Thesis, Arkansas State
University, State University. 73pp.

The impacts of human activities on wildlife and ultimately on the human environment are not completely
understood. I conducted a study on a winter population of Red-tailed Hawks ( Buteo jamaicensis), top
predators, which may be relatively sensitive indicators of ecosystem degradation and modification in the
Delta region of Arkansas. Specifically, the degree of stability or dynamics of individuals making up the
population was explored to determine if winter populations may be monitored effectively. During the
winters of 1994-95 and 1995-96, 10 adults and 24 immature birds were captured using bal-chatri cage traps.
Hawks were marked with binumeric leg bands from early November through mid February during both
winter seasons. A sub-sample of 15 hawks was also instrumented with radio transmitters. Biweekly surveys
revealed that red-tail numbers fluctuated throughout the winter season possibly in response to changing
weather conditions. The weather factors in combination that seemed to influence hawk numbers were wind
direction, wind speed, and temperature (7? 2 =0.40, F m 3,29, P— 0.049). Red-tailed Hawk numbers increased
slightly during periods of southerly winds and warmer temperatures, and decreased during periods of
northerly winds and colder temperatures. The majority of the Red-tailed Hawk population wintering in the
study area was found to be stable with 15 of 34 birds (44%) exhibiting a relatively long-term winter
residency strategy (staying in a defined area for at least 37 days) and 13 of 34 (38%) displaying a short-term
residency strategy (staying in a defined area for more than 5 days and less than 37 days). Most red-tails
captured during November and early December remained in the study area through early January, but were
replaced or augmented by another group of hawks that moved into the study area during late December and
January. The second group of birds remained in the study area until the spring migration period began in
March. The available cover types along the survey route were found to be used out of proportion to
availability. Observed Red-tailed Hawk numbers were higher than expected in rice fields and forests and
less than expected in bean and wheat fields. Juveniles and adults were not observed to use the various cover
types differently (2^2.22 1, P^O.528). Red-tail numbers tallied on raptor surveys were significantly
correlated to rodent numbers (r=0.6 1 8). Relative rodent abundance was found to be higher in the cover types
with higher observed hawk numbers. My data indicate that individual Red-tailed Hawks pursue one of three
alternative strategies during the winter season: 1) winter residency, 2) short-term residency, and 3)

migratory. All factors influencing an individual red -tail to pursue a specific strategy are not clear, but
changing weather and rodent availability may motivate Red-tailed Hawks to adopt a more mobile strategy.

WINGSPAN

Plumpton, D. L. 1996. ANTHROPOGENIC EFFECTS ON WINTER HABITAT USE BY
FERRUGINOUS HAWKS IN COLORADO. Ph D. Diss., University of Minnesota, St. Paul. 85pp.

Habitat loss, fragmentation, and insularization constitute the single biggest threat to global biodiversity.
Despite the magnitude of this problem, few studies have examined the response of wildlife to ongoing habitat
destruction. I studied the behavior of Ferruginous Hawks ( Buteo regalis) wintering in 2 adjacent sites in
Colorado that featured low and high anthropogenic influence and habitat fragmentation; the Rocky Mountain
Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge (RMANWR), and several Denver suburbs, respectively. Daily home
ranges were notylifferent ( P = 0.28) in size for RMANWR ( N= 25, x = 4.71 km 2 , SE = 1 .33) and suburban
hawks (N= 13, x = 2.30 km 2 , SE = 0.50). Although hawk activity levels between the sites were not different
(P = 0.146), RMANWR hawks used more pole and ground perches, of longer sum duration, and comprising
a greater proportion of the daily time budget (P < 0.05). Conversely, suburban hawks used more tree
perches, of longer sum duration, and a greater portion of the daily time budget (P < 0.00 1)._ RMANWR
hawks spent less time roosting after daylight began (x = 61 min) than did suburban hawks (x = 138 min,
P = 0.004). The principal prey [black-tailed prairie dogs {Cynomys ludovicianus )] was procured by killing
directly, kleptoparasitizing, and scavenging. Prey acquisition and competitive interactions were not different
t P > 0.05) between the sites. Relative abundance of Ferruginous Hawks differed by site and year (P <

0. 0001), and reflected availability of prairie dogs. Ferruginous Hawks modified perch use, time budgets, and
roosting habits to exploit fragmented, human-altered habitats, provided some foraging habitats with adequate
populations of suitable prey species remained.

Villarroel, M. 1996. COPULATORY BEHAVIOUR AND PATERNITY IN SOLITARY- ,AND
COLONY-NESTING KESTRELS. Ph.D. Diss., McGill Univ., Montreal, Quebec. 134pp.

In this thesis, I analysed the mating behaviour of the solitary- nesting American Kestrel (. Falco
sparverius ) in southern Quebec (Canada) and the colony-nesting Lesser Kestrel {F. naumanni) in Aragon
(Spain). DNA fingerprinting of 26 families of Lesser Kestrels revealed that 3.4% of nestlings were extra-
pair, which may have arisen through either extra-pair copulation or mate replacement. Two nestlings in two
different nests were also the result of intraspecific brood parasitism. DNA fingerprinting of 2 1 American
Kestrel families showed that all the nestlings in two nests were extra-pair (10% extra-pair young overall),
most probably due to mate replacement.

I analysed the mating behaviour of both species in two studies with a similar aim, i.e. to test why mated
pairs copulate so frequently. Sixteen pairs of wild American Kestrels and 12 pairs of "solitary" Lesser
Kestrels (1-4 nests per 0.3 km 2 ) were analysed in terms of four hypotheses that explain high frequency of
within-pair copulations both outside and during the fertile period. First the Paternity Assurance Hypothesis,

1. e. males control timing and frequency of copulations to best assure fertilization, was rejected because extra-
pair copulation attempts were low in both species (<1% of all copulations observed), within-pair copulation
frequencies did not increase with nest density in the Lesser Kestrel, and copulation and mate attendance did
not increase as the fertile period approached. Second, the Immediate Mutual Benefits Hypothesis, i.e.
females trade copulations for food, was refuted because copulation most often occurred without food
transfers. Third, the Female Mate-Guarding of Males Hypothesis, i.e. females distract their mates from other
mating opportunities by copulating frequently, was rejected because male loss was low, males and females
solicited similar amounts of copulations, and females did not differ in the timing or frequency of
solicitations. Finally, the Mate Assessment Hypothesis, i.e. assessment of mate quality is mediated by
copulation, most closely predicted the behaviour observed since within-pair copulation was high outside the
fertile period and during pair formation in both species.

Warlike, D.K. 1996. A COMPARISON OF NESTING BEHAVIOR OF BALD EAGLES BREEDING
ALONG WESTERN LAKE SUPERIOR AND ADJACENT INLAND WISCONSIN. M.S. Thesis,
Univ. Minnesota, St. Paul. 58pp.

Using a remote video recording system and direct observations we constructed quantitative time budgets
of adult and nestling Bald Eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalm ) breeding in northern Wisconsin from 7 days

1

1 .14 |

1

SEPTEMBER 1997

post hatch until fledging in 1992 and 1993. Bald Eagles breeding in north-central Wisconsin exhibit high
productivity (>1 .0 young per occupied territory), and low egg and nestling blood contaminant levels. We
quantified prey delivery rates, and nestling and adult time activity budgets at the nest on a weekly basis until
fledging. Season-long prey delivery rates to Wisconsin Bald Eagle nests averaged 5.12 items day' 1 , and
appeared related to number of nestlings in the nest, but not nestling age. Attendance by one or both adults
declined rapidly from >90% in weeks 2-4 (8-28 d post hatch) to <20% by week 8 (50-56 d). Nestlings were
inactive in weeks 2-4, lying in the nest >90% of the day. Beginning with week 5 (29-35 d), brooding dropped
below 3% of the adult time budget and nestlings sought sun and shade in the nest. Nestlings stood or sat in
the nest -30% of the time starting in week 6 (36-42 d), began to feed themselves as the amount of time adults
spent feeding nestlings declined, and their mobility in the nest increased. During weeks 9-12 (56-83 d post
hatch), nestlings stood or sat most of the day (>50%), and the proportion of their time budgets spent at active
behaviors (21%) peaked in week 9. Adult attendance at the nest was <10% of the day in weeks 9-12. In
addition to quantifying time budgets, we found that the nesting period can be divided into 3 nestling stages
for time budget comparison in different regions of the breeding range based on changes in adult and nestling
behaviors.

In 1 992 and 1 993 we conducted behavioral observations at Bald Eagle (Haiiaeetus leucocephalm) nests
on the Wisconsin Lake Superior shoreline (LSS) where productivity has historically been lower than inland
Wisconsin sites. The Lake Superior shoreline breeding Bald Eagle population was extirpated, most likely
due to anthropomorphic contaminant exposure, and has become re-established beginning in the 1980’s. We
quantified prey delivery rates and time budgets of adults and nestlings at these nests and compared them to
the prey de lively rates and time budgets quantified at inland northern Wisconsin nests (Chapter 1). The
behavioral differences recorded were most pronounced between inland and LSS nests with 2 nestlings
(LSS2). Adults at inland nests delivered an average of 4.79 prey items day' 1 , significantly more than the 2.04
items day' 1 delivered to LSS nests. Daily prey delivery rates to nestlings at LSS nests with 1 nestling (LSS1)
(2.43 deliveries nestling' 1 day" 1 ) were similar to those recorded at inland nests (3.13 deliveries nestling' 1 day"
'), and both were significantly greater than prey delivery rates to LSS2 nests (0.92 deliveries nestling' 1 day' 1 ).
Adults at inland nest sites spent significantly more time at the nest (91.7%) than did adults at LSS2 nests
(63.7%), and adult attendance at LSS1 nests (85.7%) was significantly higher than at LSS2 nests, but not
different from inland nests during weeks 2-4 post hatch. Adult attendance was higher and nestlings at inland
nests spent more time active, feeding, and upright in the nest, and less time lying in the nest compared to
nestlings at LSS2 nests in weeks 5-8. During weeks 9-12, LSS2 nestlings spent significantly less time
feeding than did nestlings at inland nests. Reduced prey deliveries and behavioral variation are consistent
with the hypothesis that Bald Eagle productivity on the Wisconsin Lake Superior shoreline is primarily
influenced by prey availability.

WINGSPAN CONTRIBUTIONS

The Raptor Research Foundation wishes to thank the following people who contributed material to this
issue of Wingspan : Eduardo Alvarez-Cordero, David Andersen, Marc Bechard, James Bednarz,
Isabel Bellocq, David Bird, Wendy Denton, Ricardo Rodriguez Estrella, Nick Fox, Robert
Kenward, Karen Lutto, Carl Marti, Helen McDonald, Brian Millsap, Simone Ross, Mary
Margaret Spradlin, Karen Steenhof, Daniel Varland, and Petra Bohall Wood.

Wingspan welcomes contributions from RRF members and others interested in raptor biology and
management. Articles and announcements should be sent, faxed, or e-mailed to the editor: Leonard
Young, 5010 Sunset Drive NW, Olympia, WA 98502-1576 USA (phone/fax: 360-866-8039; e-mail:
wingspan@msn.com). The deadline for the next issue is February 6, 1998.

WINGSPAN

SEPTEMBER 1997

(continued from page 2)

an endowment fund. If you speak other languages* offer to be a translator for our printed materials or at one
of our international conferences. If you're a writer, submit material to our newsletter or journal.

Got a project for RRF? Say, an educational poster or brochure, a workshop, etc.? Put together a proposal,
and we'll do our best to help you make it a reality. Bear in mind that we are not looking for more work to
do; if you have an idea, be prepared to help carry it to fruition.

In short, get involved! Everything you do for RRF, no matter how modest, is something achieved for raptor
conservation. Clearly that's what it is all about!

This is my last Wingspan address as your president. My term comes to a close at the end of this year, as it
is time to pass the reins over to another highly deserving soul. I have thoroughly enjoyed my tenure, and I
like to think that I have made some inroads toward the goals I defined in my election platform, e.g. bringing
RRF even closer to other parts of the world, supporting the journal and newsletter, etc. As I've said before,
not a day goes by without some RRF business to take care of via e-mail. And in retrospect, two years was
perhaps too short a term for the president of RRF. It takes about a year just to get a feel for things. I wonder
how our next president would feel if his term was for three years and not just two. Hmm ... something to
think about. In any case, I remain fully dedicated to the organization, and 1 plan to merely change hats. RRF
has come a long way since its inception, but there is certainly plenty of room for improvement.

David M. Bird

INFOEMATION/OM- 1998 KMF MEETING AVAILABLE ON WWW

Information on the 1998 RRF annual meeting, to be held in Ogden, Utah from September 30 to October
4, will be available on the World Wide Web at: http://www.weber.edu/rrfr. This site will eventually
contain information on the local environment of Ogden; the meeting schedule; a call for papers; and
information on registration, lodging, transportation, field trips, and special events.

WINGSPAN

5010 Sunset Drive NW

Olympia, WA 98502-1576 USA

1

Non-profit Organ.

u.s.

POSTAGE

PAID

Olympia,. W A
Permit No. 169