W 2

“ o

LSNi“NviNOSHiiMS ssiavaan libraries^smithsonian"'institution

- ' O Tlr'^ - - -

l\ s i /#% s § wmk. -

F m i m «' '■ •■ m ^

C/> ™ c/> E C/J —

lES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOlinillSNI NVINOSHimS S3IHVdan I

S y^'^sriTX < *' S < S <

5 fir '1?) i i i I i

o

F I i-’

2 z m 2 c/>

LSNI NVlNOSHimS S3fHVHan LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

(/) = (/? “ ^

yj fz yj ^ ><5aiC>v UJ

lES SMITHSONIANJNSTITUTION NOliniUSNI NVlNOSHilWS SBtMVaan

i I ^ i , A

t/i

ISNI NVINOSHillAlS S3 I H VH a n“”LI B R AR I ES^SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

Z ^ 2 ^ 2 .V'. ^

S m.. J|] 8 • 8 gf, .il) 8 8

S \£a££>' 5 g

i I Es‘”sMITHSONIAN^ INSTITUTION NOlinXIiSNI NVINOSHilWS S3 I a Va 8 n_

CO 5 ^ 5 vx- ^ Z

O PV>*^ » ><iUIXy>^ Q

iSNl'^NVINOSHillNS^SS I 8 n”^LI B RAR I ES^SMITHSONIAN”lNSTITUTION

03

^ H

CO

? I ES'^SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOlinillSNI NVINOSHimS S3 I B Va 9 11
g ^ z , ^ ^ ^ <

S < jfti. S ^ ^ ~

X ^^#5 o 5c o

,. o yW-a^, X ISfc. \Si/ o %•/■■ X

Z m Z S z CO

liSNI NVINOSHillNS SSiavaaiT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION
“ • <n = *" «, z

yj xCi^TiTo^ iz yj

m

O >«$> Q __ ^

iSNl“'NVmOSHilWS^S3 iavaan“'LiBRARi es^smithsonian“'institution ,

I- , z r- 2 r- z

POT

>

-

m in ^ m

1 1 ES^SMITHSONIAN^INSTITUTION^^NOlinillSNI^NVINOSHillAIS S3 I dVH 9 H
S ^ 2: , OT _ 5 S

</)

XSNI NVIN0SHXIWs‘”s3!avaan UIBRARrES^’sMlTHSONIAN INSTITUTION

w ^ ^ = OT , = «

OT

O O “ o

UES SMITHS0NIAN“*INSTITUTI0N N0finiliSNl“*NV!N0SHilIAIS^S3IHV^an
z !I ^ -

m ^ m \ z ^ c/5

IlSNrNVmOSHimS S3 I ava a n^LI B RAR I ES^SMITHSONIAN^INSTJTUTION

~ OT Z , ^ , OT Z Ni' ^

z
o

c/5
X

S > ’w^ S S 2

^lEs'^SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIXOiliSNI NVIN0SHXIWs‘^S3 I BVd B IT
to z to — to

.oy «, ^ 5 c

IXSNI~NVlN0SHillAIS_S3 I M VB B 11 “"lI B R AR I ES^SMITHSONIANjjlNSTlTUTION^

X !!! A^<v O ZZ O

W
70
>

70

^ ''.>5^' z in ^

R I ES^SMITHSONlAN*”«NSTITUT!ON^NOIinillSNl”NVmOSHiIlMS S3 I BVB 9 H

i Iwll ^ o E iC Jl I

j, 2 ‘ >• ' 2 7> ” 2

liSN! NVIN0SHilWS^S3 I bVb 9 H^LI B RAR I ES^SMITHSONIAN !NSTITUTI0N

5 \ OT ~ CO = _ CA

q: -1 07

1 >

The Florida Field Naturalist

A Semi-annual Journal of
The Florida Ornithological Society

SPRING, 1973

Vol. 1

No. 1

THE FLORIDA FIELD NATURALIST

JOURNAL OF THE FLORIDA ORNITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY
(Founded 1972)

Editor, Henry M. Stevenson, Dept, of Biological Science*

Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida 3230'6.

EDITORIAL STAFF

Betty McDonell, Managing Editor, Florida Audubon Society, Maitland.

Allan D. Cruickshank, 1925 Indian River Dr., Rockledge, Fla. 32955.

Herbert W. Kale, II, Entomological Research Center, P. O. Box 520,
Vero Beach, Fla. 32960.

Oscar T. Owre, Dept, of Zoology, University of Miami, Coral Gables,
Fla. 33124.

Glen E. Woolfenden, Dept, of Biology, University of South Florida,
Tampa, Fla. 33620.

OFFICERS (1873)

President: William B. Robertson, Jr., Everglades National Park, Home-
stead, Fla. 33030.

Vice President: John E. Edscorn, Route 3, Box 400, Lakeland, Fla. 33801.

Secretary: Curtis L. Kingsbery, 2900 N. Magnolia Ave., Pensacola, Fla.
32503.

Treasurer: Mrs. Dorothy W. Freeman, 4515 Montclair Road, Orlando,
Fla. 32806.

Articles and notes submitted for publication, as well as books and
other publications intended for review, should be sent to the Editor (see in-
side back cover). Notices of change of address, claims for undelivered or
defective copies of this journal, and requests for information about adver-
tising, subscriptions, and back numbers should be sent to the Treasurer.

Annual dues: members (also members of Florida Audubon Society),
$5.00; associate members (not members of Florida Audubon Society),
$6.00; library subscriptions, $6.00. Send dues or subscription fees to the
Treasurer or to Hal Scott, Florida Audubon Society, P.O, Drawer 7,
Maitland, Florida 32751.

Published semi-annually by the Florida Ornithological Society.

Printed by Florida Press, Inc., Orlando, 32809. Second-class
postage paid at Orlando, Fla. 32809. June, 1973.

EDITORIAL

Commencement speakers, clergymen, and other public speakers often
ask us what contributions we are making to life, and rightly so. Are our
lives selfishly pleasure-oriented, “grabbing for all the gusto” we can get, and
unmindful of the needs of others? What are we leaving to posterity?

Is it not in order to ask ourselves the same question in the more
narrow field of bird study? All of us enjoy seeing many species, especially
rarities, but should our emphasis be almost entirely on list-building? Will
ornithology be benefited by the knowledge that have seen X-number of
species in one state or within one 12-month period, or even within our
lifetime? For that matter, will we ourselves long be satisfied with purely
self-centered goals? In the hope that most of us will not, I would like to
suggest some ways in which each person may make some real contributions
to ornithology.

1. Making systematic counts. In a time when increasing emphasis
is focused on a deteriorating environment, we should not only be content
to say that certain species of birds are decreasing, but we should be able
to document what we say. To Sir Francis Galton is attributed the statement
“When in doubt, count.” Regarding avian decreases, all of us must admit
to some doubt. However well we may know our own area, we must confess
that we cannot be sure what is happening elsewhere. The only hope of
being certain before it is too late is to undertake a systematic series of
counts. There are many pitfalls in such a program, but if variables are
kept under control as much as possible, the key to obtaining a significant
set of data is to accumulate large amounts. If a given route is covered fre-
quently, under comparable conditions, some trends will probably become
apparent after a few years. Certainly what happens along any pne route
is of doubtful over-all significance for an entire species, but given enough
routes systematically covered, a true picture of declining or increasing
abundance for some species should emerge. Although observers may con-
tribute to this type of project by working out their own methods, a com-
mendable start has already been made on a nation-wide scale several years
ago. This project, of course, is the Breeding Bird Survey. For the unin-
formed, details of this survey may be obtained from Mr. Danny Bystrak,
Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, Maryland 20810.

Other organized counts, such as the Christmas Bird Count, may pro-
vide useful information over the years, as they surely have the advantage
of representing large amounts of data in a single day. The extent to which
they may be relied upon, however, is subject to much debate. The truth
is that their reliability varies greatly from case to case. Those adhering
most strictly to the rules; reporting time, distance traveled, and numbers of
birds most conscientiously; putting emphasis on accurate reporting rather
than list-building — - these are the counts that may be used with confidence
(IF we know which ones they are). But when many zealous bird watchers
are released within one 15-mile circle, some intent chiefly on seeing “good”
birds, it is very difficult, if not impossible, to control what happens. Un-
fortunately, it is often the very counts that provide the smallest amounts of
data (hours or miles) that are the most reliable, as they represenut the
work of a single competent observer (or group) covering precisely the
same route each year.

I

1, Substantiation of Unusm! Records. Proving that a given rarity has
actually occurred in Florida does not have the degree of importance,
practically or ultimately, as proving that Ospreys, for example, actually
are decreasing. However, in view of the emphasis given to faunal lists,
especially those of states, it must be admitted that proving such an occur-
rence is far more important than claiming it. Most state lists recognize
an official list of birds whose occurrence has been substantiated, plus a
Hypothetical List of those claimed, but not proven, to have occurred. It is
ironic that, as the number of observers increases, the Hypothetical List
should increase rather than decrease. There are two generally accepted
ways of proving an occurrence— by collecting and preserving the specimen
or by recognizably photographing it. Surely it is unreasonable to expect
that every species accredited to a state list be supported by a specimen.
There are some species that may not legally be collected, some places
where they may not or should not be collected, many observers whO' do not
have collecting permits, and perhaps other reasons for not collecting. In
such cases, every effort should be made to secure incontrovertible photo-
graphic evidence to support the record. However, it is not true that
photographing the bird is the better method in all cases. In this state and
others, some photographs have failed to convince experts of the accuracy
of the observation — indeed some have proven the identification to be
inaccurate. Could a photographer expect a picture of a fall Yellow-bellied
Flycatcher to show that it was not, in fact, a yellow-bellied Acadian Fly-
catcher? On the other hand, for distinctive species, photography with the
proper equipment may document records of large birds too wary to be
collected.

3. Publication of data. It is obvious that one could follow the above
suggestions and still make no contribution unless the results were made
available to others; or that others with less valuable information could
make greater contributions by putting them on record. If one is unaccus-
tomed to writing for a scientific journal, suggestions on the inside back
cover of this one provide a guide to the style expected by most editors.
The primary rule is to relate the important facts without using unnecessary
words. A contributor should not be discouraged if changes are suggested
in his manuscript; very few ever escape that fate. These changes nearly
always shorten the article, thus saving space for other notes. They also
make the report easier to understand, thus are helpful to the author, the
reader, and the journal. In general, one should simply accept them and
be thankful that his contribution can be passed along to others. The section
devoted to field notes provides an outlet for all observers who have become
proficient in identifying birds, even if many will never make detailed
studies of them.

4. Cooperation with others who contribute. Even those who do not
contribute to ornithology in any of the ways listed above may do so by
helping others in various ways. Every member of the Florida Ornithologi-
cal Society does so by the payment of dues, but there are many other ways,
most of them obvious, in which one can aid research and the publication
of its results. The extent to which our membership does so will largely
determine the success of this journal.

2

INLAND NESTING OF THE LEAST TERN
IN HIGHLANDS COUNTY, FLORIDA

Fred E. Lohrer and Charlotte E. Lohrer

Although known to Floridians as a coastal nester, the Least Tern
(Sterna albijrons) nests regularly in the interior of the United States along
major rivers. This pattern of coastal and inland nesting is shared with Eura-
sian populations (Reilly, 1968). Sprunt (1954) recorded 3 instances of
Least Terns nesting in inland Florida (June 1887, Hillsborough County,
Thonotasassa; June 1915, Seminole County, Lake Harney; May 1930,
Orange County, Orlando) and (1963) mentioned a small colony estab-
lished on an auditorium rooftop in Pensacola, Escambia County, in 1957-
58. Stevenson (1955) found a colony of 20 birds and 2, nests at Lake
Jackson, Leon County, on 1 July 1955. More recently Anderson (1972),
recorded 2 small colonies at an airport and a cleared construction site near
Orlando, Orange County, in June 1972,

On 24 June 1972 we discovered a small colony of Least Terns nest-
ing in Highlands County on bare sand between finger canals along a
canal connecting Lake Placid with Lake June-in- Winter. This colony is
about 60 miles from the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean.

By 30 June we had located 7 nests (6 with 2 eggs each, 1 with 1)
and on 8 July an additional nest (1 egg). Four of these nests produced
7 young; Nest A, 1 on 5 or 6 July, Nest B, 1 on 6 July and 1 on 7 July,
Nests C and D, 1 each on 10 July and 11 July. Based on an incubation
period of 20-21 days (Reilly op.cit.: Kay von Schmidt, pers. comm.),
these 4 clutches that produced young indicate that egg laying began dur-
ing the third week of June.

During mid- June Hurricane Agnes moved north 200 miles off Flor-
ida’s Gulf Coast. In Highlands County wind damage was minimal and
rainfall at the Archbold Biological Station (9 miles SE of the colony) was
6.8 inches for 18-20 June. The 4 clutches that produced young were
started during this storm period (2, 15-16 June; 2, 20 June). The 4 clutches
that failed were begun after the storm had passed. Since the colony is
5-10 feet above the canal water level, the effects of the storm were minimal.

Judging from the adults’ behavior, such as giving of alarm calls and
diving at and defecating on observers, none of the young survived more
than a few days. The colony was checked regularly until the end of July,
but by 15 July the colony was almost deserted. Possible predators recorded
in the area included Fish Crows (Corvus ossifragus) , which were seen at
the perimeter of the colony on almost every visit, and a fox (probably the
Gray Fox, Urocyon) whose tracks were seen in the colony once. Sandspurs
{Cenchrus sp.), a significant factor in chick survival in some Least
Tern colonies (von Schmidt, pers. comm.), were conspicuously absent.

On the first day we visited the colony, 24 June, we flushed a newly
fledged young whose flying ability had improved considerably by the next
day. On 9 July, as the terns gathered to roost at the colony, we repeatedly
counted 10 immature terns. The previous day we also counted 10, and
several times in early July we counted 3-7 immatures being fed at Lake
Placid or at the colony. The occurrence of these flying immatures at the

3

same time adults were incubating eggs indicates there were two peaks of egg
laying in this colony. The first peak was probably in early to mid-May,
assuming 20 days incubation and 17-20 days to fledging (von Schmidt,
pers. comm.), and the second peak probably occurred in mid- to late June.
After sunset on 9 July we counted 46 roosting terns, 10 of which were
immatures. As there were also some additional adults incubating or brood-
ing, the colony probably contained 36-44 adults. We checked several
other large lakes in Highlands County during June and July and found no
Least Terns. Furthermore, after the colony dispersed in late July, no Least
Terns were recorded from the lakes in the southern half of the county,
thus indicating that Highlands County is probably not on the path of south-
bound Least Terns. Thus we think it reasonable to assume that all the
terns gathered at the colony on 9 July belonged to the colony.

In mid- and late May a few adult Least Terns were seen on Lake
Placid, and in early June we saw Least Terns carrying fish back to the
colony from Lake Placid and Lake June-in- Winter 1.0 and .5 miles
respectively from the colony. Adults were also seen catching fish in the
canals adjacent to the colony. As Lake June-in- Winter lacks sandy shores,
the only loafing area we found away from the colony was along the part
of the west shore of Lake Placid closest to the colony, where the few
narrow sandy beaches exposed by low water levels were regularly used by
the terns. By the end of July summer rains had raised the level of the
lake, and the beaches were submerged. The disappearance of the terns
from the lake coincided with a rise in water level.

This may not be the first time Least Terns have nested in Highlands
County. Aerial photographs indicate the colony site was originally a marsh
and the finger canals were dredged between April 1966 and December
1970. In December 1970 the colony site was completely bare sand. In
1972 about half of the area was still bare. Thus it is possible the colony
was present for 2-3 years prior to 1972. Elsewhere in the county. Least
Terns have been noted on 9 June 1965, Lake Blue; 23 June 1966, Lake
Placid (Henry M. Stevenson, pers. comm.), and during June and July
1969 (Glen E. Woolfenden, pers. comm.) along the west shore of Lake
Jackson where low water levels had exposed sandy beaches and prevailing
winds had built up exposed sand bars. As our colony is not dependent on
changing water levels for its existence, it should persist until such time as
houses are built, or until vegetation completely covers the bare sand.

The preferred nesting habitat of Least Terns (coastal beaches and
river sand bars) are subject to annual changes in location due to wind
and changing water levels. The ability of Least Terns to respond to these
changes has apparently preadapted them to respond to man-made changes
in the environment such as our finger canal site and Anderson’s (op. cit.)
airport and construction site or even large coastal rooftops (Sprunt, op. cit.,
McGowan, 1969). Therefore, Florida observers should be alert to any
change in land use that results in large bare areas so that the speed and
manner of avian colonization could be better documented, not only for
Least Terns but other open-area nesters, such as the Common Night-
hawk, Chordeiles minor (Sutherland, 1963) and the Killdeer, Charadrius
vociferus (Kushlan and Fisk, 1972).

4

We are grateful to James N. Layne, Kay von Schmidt, and Glen E.
Woolf enden for reading an earlier draft of this note. Kay von Schmidt
kindly shared her unpublished data with us.

Archbold Biological Station, Route 2, Box 380, Lake Placid, Flor-
ida 33852.

Literature Cited

Anderson, B.H. 1972. Some uncommon avian records for central Florida.
Fla. Nat., 45: 192.

Kushlan, J. K. and E. J. Fisk 1972. Range expansion of the Killdeer in
Florida. Bird-Banding, 43: 261-263.

McGowan, A. F. 1969. Common Terns, Sterna hirundo, nesting on roof
in Pompano Beach. Fla. Nat., 42: 172.

Reilly, Jr., E. M. 1968. The Audubon Illustrated Handbook of American

Birds. New York, McGraw Hill.

Sprunt, Jr. A. 1954. Florida Bird Life, with addendum 1963. New York,
Coward-McCann.

Stevenson, H. M. 1955. Florida region. Audubon Field Notes, 9: 374.

Sutherland, C. A. 1963. Notes on the behavior of Common Nighthawks

in Southern Florida. Living Bird, 2: 31-39.

BIRD RECORDS FROM THE DRY TORTUGAS

Clive A. Petrovic and James King, Jr.

As guests of the National Park Service from 25 March to 4 April,
1967, we witnessed an early spring migration through the Dry Tortugas.
These islands are located in the Gulf of Mexico about 70 miles west of Key
West, Florida. Weather conditions during the period were unstable, being
characterized by strong, variable winds. Rain was experienced only on 28
and 30 March.

Seventy species, the majority land birds, were recorded. Specimens
obtained have been deposited in the collection of the University of Miami
(UMRC), Coral Gables, Florida. Sincere thanks are extended to Oscar
T. Owre and William B. Robertson, Jr., for reviewing the manuscript and
for verification of the records.

Gannet (Morus bassanus)—A skull (UMRC 5224) and several verte-
brae picked up on Long Key on 28 March represent only the sixth record
of occurrence at the Tortugas. A common winter resident in parts of coast-
al Florida, this species undoubtedly occurs in winter near the islands.

Red-breasted Merganser (Mergus serrator) — An individual (UMRC
5246) collected on Long Key on 28 March lends support to the suggestion

5

(Robertson and Mason, 1965:134) that this species may be a rare winter
visitor. However, only six previous records exist.

Marsh Hawk (Circus cyaneus)— Although recorded only 3 times, this
bird may be a more common migrant than the records indicate (Sprunt,
1962: 40). Our sighting on 30 March is apparently only the fourth re-
ported occurrence at the Tortugas.

Herons — Robertson and Mason (1965: 132) stated that fairly heavy
heron flights pass through the Tortugas in early spring. Our regular sight-
ings of most heron species support this conclusion. In the last week of
March we saw flocks consisting of Little Blue Herons (Florida caerulea),
Cattle Egrets (Biibulcus ibis) Snowy Egrets (Leucophoyx thula), Louisi-
ana Herons (Hydranassa tricolor), and Black-crowned Night Herons
(Nycticorax nycticorax). A total of 11 heron species was observed during
the 1 1-day period. Still, it seems odd that certain species were represented
by few records until recent times. Sprunt (1962: 39) listed several now-
common species as quite rare or uncommon at the Tortugas. This is prob-
ably best explained by a former lack of observers.

Great White Heron (Ardea occidentaUs)—Thh species is given to
wandering and regularly reaches the Tortugas (Robertson, pers comm.).
The first specimen from the Tortugas, a dried carcass, was collected on
Bush Key, 28 March. The skeleten (UMRC 5200) was preserved.

Least Bittern (Ixobrychus exillis)—A Least Bittern in adult plumage
was flushed several times from the parade ground at Ft. Jelferson on 29
March. This bird flew with seeming difficulty. On 30 March, a freshly
dead, much emaciated adult (probably the same bird) was found in a
first-floor casemate of the fort. Its stomach was empty. The skin is UMRC
5221. There are 3 previous records of this species from the Dry Tortugas
(Robertson and Mason, 1965:133).

American Bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus)-~~Th\s species has been
recorded at the Tortugas 3 times (Sprunt, 1962: 39). A lone bird, appar-
ently the fourth record, was seen on the parade ground of Fort Jefferson
on 26 March. The bird ffew with apparent difficulty.

Roseate Spoonbill (Ajaia ajaja)~-~A lone bird was photographed
flying over Garden and Bush Keys on 26 March. The only previous
records were by the tern-banding party which encountered and photo-
graphed an adult and 2 immature birds during the period 9-15 May 1964
(Robertson and Mason, 1965: 133).

American Coot (Fulica americana) — One seen on 3 April in the
moat around the fort — the fourth recorded occurrence for the islands.

Semipalmated Plover (Charadrius semi palmatus)— This plover was
seen with other shorebirds on Long Key on 28 March. Although only a

6

few records exist for this species, Robertson and Mason (1965: 132)
stated that it probably occurs more regularly than reports indicate.

Gull-billed Tern (Gelochelidon nilotica )—Spmnt (1962: 83) listed
4 records of this species from the Tortugas. Our sighting on 30 March
provides the fifth.

Mourning Dove (Zenaidura macrowraj— This species was first re-
ported to have nested successfully at the Tortugas in 1962 (Robertson and
Mason, 1965: 134). Our observations of incubating birds (25 March-4
April) represent the earliest breeding dates on Tortugas. Perhaps this
species has an extended breeding season on these islands.

Cliff Swallow (Petrochelidon pyrrhonota) — -To the 5 previous records
listed by Sprunt (1962: 131) we add an individual sighted on 29 March
on Garden Key.

Solitary Vireo (Vireo solkarius )—~RohQitson and Mason (1965: 136)
listed 4 records of this species from the Tortugas. We added a fifth on 31
March.

House Sparrow (Passer dome Stic us)— Out observations on 26 March
are of interest, since this presumably non-migratory species is not expected
to occur at the Tortugas. Summers-Smith (1963: 118) stated that although
House Sparrows in Great Britain and Europe are extremely sedentary,
they do exhibit migratory tendencies. Recently, Broun (1972) presented
evidence that House Sparrows in North America are also at least partially
migratory. The female we saw arrived concurrently with many other small
passerines, including such species as Parula Warbler (Parula americana),
Myrtle Warbler {Dendroica coronata), Prairie Warbler (Dendroica dis-
color), White-eyed Vireo (Vireo griseus) , Blue-gray Gnatcatcher (Poliop-
tila caerulea) , and Palm Warbler (Dendroica palmarum). We are inclined
to agree with Robertson and Mason (1965: 137) who suggested that
House Sparrows may become associated with foraging flocks of small
passerines and continue the association when the flocks depart on migra-
tory flights. Summers-Smith (1963: 117) also stated that House Sparrows
move with other migrants.

Savannah Sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis)—R.ohQti^on and Ma-
son (1965: 137) stated that this species winters commonly at the Tortugas
but that it is seldom found on Garden Key where little suitable habitat
exists. During our visit we considered Savannah Sparrows common on the
top of Fort Jefferson, sighting them every day while we made our rounds.
Perhaps their presence on Garden Key was a result of an unusually large
winter population at the Tortugas or the growth of suitable or marginal
habitat on top of the fort.

7

Swamp Sparrow (Melospiza georgiana) — There are 2 previous records
of this species from the Tortugas. A third was observed by us on 2 April
1967 on Bush Key. It allowed close approach and seemed oblivious to
the activity of the tern colony, much of its activities being confined to
an area close to concentrations of Brown Noddy (Anous stolidus) nests.

Literature Cited

Broun, Maurice.

1972. Apparent Migratory Behavior in the House Sparrow. Auk, 89:
187-189.

Robertson, William B., Jr., and C. Russell Mason.

1965. Additional Bird Records from the Dry Tortugas. Fla. Nat.
38(4): 131-138

Sprunt, Alexander, Jr.

1962-1963. Birds of the Dry Tortugas, 1857-1961. Fla. Nat., 35:
34-40, 82-85, 129-132; 36- 23-26, 52-53.

Summers-Smith, J. D.

1963. The House Sparow, Collins, London 269 pp.

Clive A. Petrovic, F. T. Stone Laboratory, The Ohio State University,
Put-in-Bay, Ohio 43456 (present address: 724 Camilo Ave., Coral Gables,
Fla. 33134) and James King, Jr., 13910 N.W. 5th Ave., N. Miami, Fla.
33168.

NOTES AND NEWS

The Bird Banding Laboratory is re-editing, bringing up to date, and
expanding Merrill Wood’s book, A Birdbander’s Guide to Determination
of Age and Sex of Selected Species. This will be Volume II of the Bird-
banding Manual. Component parts will be issued as they are completed,
beginning with the Fringillidae. Anyone with more recent information,
emendations to, or criticisms of, material previously published by Wood is
requested to send them to Erma J. (Mrs. Bradley) Fisk, 17101 SW 284th
St., Homestead, Fla. 33030.

The nation-wide Breeding Bird Survey will be run during May and
June, and those as far south as Florida preferably in May. Ideally each
route should be run by the same observer on about the same date each
year, but occasional changes of personnel are unavoidable. Our minimal
goal, however, should be the coverage of every Florida route. Those who
covered one or more routes in 1972 will soon be approached about the
1973 Survey. A prompt reply will greatly facilitate planning, especially if
your reply must be negative, as it may take time to find a replacement. I
feel this to be a meritorious project and encourage all qualified observers
who can do so to take part in it. If interested, please contact Mr. Chandler
S. Robbins or Mr. Danny Bystrak, Patuxent Research Refuge, Laurel,
Md. 20810. — Ed.

8

MIGRATION OF THE BLUE JAY IN THE
SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES

Henry M. Stevenson

Although many field workers are aware of the migration of the
Blue Jay (Cyanocitta cristata) in the extreme Southeastern States, few
published sources take cognizance of the fact. The AOU Check-list (1957)
made no mention of migration for the species as a whole, but stated
(p. 369) that the subspecies bromia, which breeds as far southeast as
northeastern Tennessee and south-central Virginia, “is migratory in part
in winter to southern Louisiana . . . central Alabama . . . and northeastern
Georgia.” No reference was made to migratory behavior in the other races,
and they may well be sedentary. In discussing the full species, Imhof
(1962: 372) stated that “many individual birds move southward for the
winter” and supported the statement with a map showing 10 banding and
recovery localities. Other state bird books in the Southeast (North Caro-
lina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida) ignore the subject of Blue Jay
migration.

In the fall of 1943 I began compiling monthly summaries of field
counts for all species, and it soon became apparent that Blue Jays were
much more numerous in late September and October than in other months.
Frequently small groups were seen flying from tree to tree, often in a
southward direction, but the numbers were seldom impressive and similar
behavior could be seen at other times of the year. Since that time, however,
I have compiled such field data in 8 areas in the Southeast and found that
the frequency (birds-per-hour) of this species is higher in October than
in any other month (Table I). The only exceptional month was September
at Oxford, Mississippi, but in that area the insignificantly small sample
of 11/2 hours afield was skewed toward the end of the month, at which
time larger numbers of Blue Jays would be expected. Parenthetically,
it should be added that the precise figures shown in this table must not
be taken at face value, as the significance of the various sets of data varies
greatly. In general, they range from the least significant (top) to the most
significant (bottom). Most important, though, is the extreme improbability

TABLE I: MONTHLY FLUCTUATIONS OF BLUE JAY ABUNDANCE IN EIGHT AREAS OF THE SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES

JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT, OCT. NOV. DEC. YEARS INCL.

Southwestern Virginia

1.4

1.1

1.4

2.5

1.3

2.3

0.5

1.8

2.7

3.9

1.2

2.3

Tenn. River Valley (Ala.)

1.5

0.8

2.9

3.7

2.2

3.9

3.2

2.6

3.5

7.0

1.7

Oxford, Mississippi

2.6

3.8

3.3

4.3

2.7

4.4

...

...

21.3b

5.6

2.5

3.4

Alabama Coast

4.6

3.0

3.6

3.3

3.4

3.5

4.7

3.5

6.5

6.8

3.6

3,4

Laurel Hill, Fla.

5.9

5.8

6.9

4.4

4.8

4.5

5.7

5.2

6.2

9.1

5.2

6.5

Jackson Co. , Fla.

3.6

4.8

5.4

4.5

4.5

4.6

5.2

5.3

7.3

8.0

3.8

4.1

Leon Co. , Fla.

4.6

5.7

5.2

4.4

4.6

6.4

6.1

5.9

7.9

8.4

4.6

4.1

St, Marks, Fla.

1.4

2.4

2.0

1.8

1.7

2.2

2.3

2.3

3.8

4.5

2.0

1.3

1944-46

1940-59®

1943-44

1938-72®

1959-72

1959-71

1946-72

1946-72

The monthly values represent the number of birds recorded per hour afield, rounded off to the nearest tenth.
® In intermittent years.

^ Represented by only iJj hours afield near end of month.

9

that all areas would show the highest frequencies in October (or late
September) due to chance alone.

Over the same period of years field notes pertaining to visible migra-
tions of Blue Jays were made as circumstances permitted. Such observa-
tions increased from northern to southern localities, but the increase may
also be a factor of time afield, as my first 3 years were spent much farther
north that the remaining 26. My only entry for fall in the early years was
on October 3, 1943, at Abbeville, Mississippi, “flock of 9 flying SW”, but
Imhof (pers. comm.), recorded his highest part-day count of 65 at
Birmingham, Alabama, on October 7, 1946, and added “incl. 55 flying E.”

Near the latitude of the Gulf of Mexico, occasional evidence of
migrating Blue Jays became more impressive. During a multi-party fall
bird count on the Alabama coast, October 6, 1956, about 390 Blue Jays
were recorded. Newman (1957: 33) stated, “The consensus is that these
birds were migrating, but they were already so close to the Gulf that it is
diffcult to explain where they were headed.” As is usually the case with
such large numbers, not all were moving in the same direction. On another
fall count, in Wakulla and Franklin Counties, Florida, October 21, 1961,
I was surprised to see a loose flock of about 75 jays arriving across the
harbor on Alligator Point shortly after sunrise. The event was so unusual
that it presented a temporary problem of identification. My total for that
day was about 150 Blue Jays, but at that time the resident population on
Alligator Point was very small; the total for the entire count was 530.

Two other high totals for Blue Jays on fall counts in this St. Marks-
Panacea area were 900 on October 9, 1965, and 650 on October 15, 1966.
My personal total on the former day was about 500. On both of those days
sizeable flocks milled around near the coast. The story was repeated on a
trip to St. Joseph Peninsula (Gulf Co., Fla.) on October 1, 1966, when
about 65 birds were said to be “migrating (back and forth)”. Again, as
I was canoeing on the lower St. Marks River (Wakulla Co.), where trees
are few and small and Blue Jays seldom seen, 25 were estimated “migrat-
ing E” on September 30, 1966, and other observers mentioned having
seen Blue Jays in migration on Alligator Point that day.

From two other parts of the state observers reported migrating jays
in 1972. John Edscorn wrote from Lakeland (pers. comm.), “On 10/21
I saw a migrating flock of 15 high over my home headed SW.” Mrs.
Virginia Markgraf (pers. comm.) on October 6 saw 78 “in Jacksonville
in the space of five minutes^ flying south in small groups.

The flock seen arriving on Alligator Point shortly after sunrise was
also surprising as to time of day, as I had always considered the Blue Jay
a late riser. It seems almost certain that its migration is strictly diurnal.
In my many years of nocturnal field work I have never heard a Blue Jay
note, and Stoddard and Norris (1967) did not list the species among the
birds recovered at the WCTV tower north of Tallahassee.

This same flock was also somewhat exceptional in crossing a body
of water (Alligator Harbor), although the distance was just less than one
mile. On other occasions there is abundant evidence that the Blue Jay
avoids flights across any considerable expanse of water. Those I saw

10

on the Alabama coast on October 6, 1956, were moving eastward at
Bear Point, but invariably turned back as they saw the mouth of Perdido
Bay. I have seen this behavior repeated at the western and northeastern
tips of Alligator Point and on St. Joseph Peninsula. Being of rather weak
flight, they are not always successful in turning back. On Alligator Point,
October 21, 1972, a flock of about 20 flew westward toward the tip, aided
by a strong east wind. As they approached the tip, all attempted to turn
back, but some were carried out over the water and continued toward St.
Teresa, about 2 miles to the west.

The reluctance of this species to cross large bodies of water doubt-
less accounts for its long-standing absence (or virtual absence?) on the
barrier islands of Franklin County, Florida. After many trips to Dog Island,
my first hint of one there came on October 19, 1963, when a Mockingbird
(Minus polyglottos) “gave several perfect imitations of a Blue Jay”, but
Mockingbirds also migrate, so the note may have been learned on the
mainland. However, a Blue Jay was positively recorded there on Novem-
ber 1, 1969, and the species was rather numerous there in the winter of
1972-73, some remaining until at least March 25. According to a Mr.
Millender, of Eastpoint, there has long been a resident population of jays
on St. George Island, and I found 3 there on June 16, 1972 (Ogden, 1972:
851). However, it appears that there was no certain record at any time of
the year until October 28, 1966. It may be more than coincidental that the
causeway to the island had been completed shortly before that time, as the
distance from the mainland is about 3 miles. The possibility should also be
considered that the species then gained access to Dog Island from St.
George, thus cutting the length of the overwater flight to only 2 miles. It
has occurred on St. George Island in some years since 1966, but perhaps
not in all. My early trips to St. Vincent Island also yielded no Blue Jays,
but most were made during the warmer parts of the year. By 1972 the St.
Vincent National Wildlife Refuge carried the species on its official bird list,
and Wilson Baker, Bobby Crawford, and I counted 63 there on December
14, 1972. It seems most likely that jays have long visited St. Vincent
Island, as the distance across Indian Pass is about y2-mile.

Some years ago it occurred to me that these invasions of Blue Jays
should contain, or consist of, birds from the northern population,
C. c. bromia, but the 4 specimens randomly collected in fall and winter
prior to 1972 proved to be cristata. Because of the absence of resident
birds on the islands (except as noted above), 2 specimens were collected
there. Both of these proved to be C. c. bromia-~-Si new subspecies for
Florida (St. Geo. Is., Dec. 2, 1972; Dog Is., Dec. 16, 1972).

John Edscorn (pers. comm.) called my attention to a behavioral dif-
ference in these invaders from the North. In late October, 1972, they
“literally stripped an oak in our yard of most branch tips. In getting the
tightly attached acorns they would tussle and twist until the twigs broke;
in time the yard below was solidly covered with their prunings! We’ve
never seen this before here. I feel certain that these were not our local birds
...” Baker, Crawford, and I noticed similar litter under the Live Oaks
(Quercus virginiana) on St. Vincent Island (see above) and speculated at
the time as to its cause.

11

The origin of the Blue Jays on the Florida Keys must be considered
uncertain at this time. Writing of C. c. semplei, Howell (1932) described
its range as “south to Key Wesf later adding, “They are reported to be
fairly common on Key Largo and on Key West.” As he made no refer-
ence to migration, one might infer that Blue Jays were nesting permanent
residents there, but there appeared to be no records in the breeding sea-
son until an isolated instance in 1972. On several occasions, however, the
species has visited the Keys in winter, as it has on the Gulf islands
mentioned above. It seems unlikely, though possible, that these repre-
sented the race semplei. However, the same statement does not apply to
Blue Jays in Key West in the summer of 1972. Paul Sykes (pers. comm.)
saw 5 on August 16 and stated that one “was a relatively young bird judg-
ing from development of the crest and base of the bill.” Even if this
statement does not confirm nesting there, the presence of the species in
August may be wihout precedent.

My field notes also contain a few references to the spring migration,
but never to such striking movements as in fall. Near Laurel Hill, Florida,
Frank L. Chapman counted 41 on March 20, 1966, with the comment
“migrating (some flying N high overhead).” This was the highest
count either he or I made in 74 trips to that study area at various times
of the year. A count of 31 on the Luna Plantation (10 mi. N of Talla-
hassee), during a short trip on March 22, 1967i equalled my highest count
there; “many flying E” was the entry then. It may be significant that the
other count of 31 there was almost on the same date — March 21, 1961. At
Lake Jackson, near Tallahassee, 18 birds near the end of Rollins’ Point
on April 19, 1961, behaved like migrants. In a small area in central
Wakulla County, Florida, I estimated about 50 jays on April 14, 1966,
but found none there one month later. North of Florida I find a single
reference to a spring movement: regarding 20 seen near Elizabethton,
Tennessee, on May 5, 1946, the account read “some migrating.” However,
it should be mentioned here that Blue Jays left the Vanderbilt University
campus (Nashville, Tenn.) every fall and reappeared in spring (George
Mayfield, Sr., pers. comm.), as they did during my residence there in
1940-41. The monthly compilations in the Tennessee River Valley nearby
(Table I) indicate that many jays leave there for the winter, as the values
for November-February are much lower than those for any other months.
Howell (1928: 195-196) also suspected migration in Blue Jays seen near
Muscle Shoals, Alabama, on April 23-24, 1914, not far from where some
of my quantitative field were taken.

The fact that values in other areas represented in Table I do not show
an increase in spring may in some cases reflect a migration out of those
areas. Also the apparent or real numbers are affected by such aspects of
life history as the increased frequency of calling, the activity associated
with nest-building and feeding young, the females’ incubating, and natural
attrition during the winter. Another possibility is that the spring migration
may be more attenuated than that in fall. It would be difficult to determine
how long it might go on, but on the coast of Martin County, Florida, I was
surprised to see “several moving N along the coast” on June 9, 1966.
Although I am not convinced that they were migrating on so late a date,
their actions were such that I would have thought so had the occurrence
been several weeks earlier.

12

Literature Cited

American Ornithologists’ Union. 1957. Check-list of North American
Birds. Lord Baltimore Press, Inc., Baltimore, Md. 691 pp.

Howell, Arthur H. 1928. Birds of Alabama. Dept, of Game and Fisheries,
Montgomery, Ala. 384 pp.

Howel, Arthur H. 1932. Florida Bird Life. Coward-McCann, Inc., New
York City. 579 pp.

Imhof, Thomas A. 1962. Alabama Birds. Univ. of Alabama Press,
University, Alabama. 591 pp.

Newman, Robert J. 1957. Fall migration: Central Southern Region.
Audubon Field Notes, 11: 30-34.

Ogden, John C. 1972. The nesting season: Florida Region. Amer. Birds,
26:847-852

Stoddard, Herbert L., Sr., and Robert A. Norris. 1967. Bird Casualties
at a Leon County, Florida TV Tower: an Eleven-year Study.
Tall Timbers Res. Sta. Bull. no. 8. 104 pp.

Dept, of BioL Science, Fla. State Univ., Tallahassee, Fla. 32306.

FIELD NOTES

A Great Cormorant in West Florida

On October 29, 1972, I observed an immature Great Cormorant
(Phalacrocorax carbo) on an old dock in Pensacola Bay. It had a pale
yellow face, white throat, dark breast, and clear white belly and abdomen
to the under tail coverts. It was also observed during the day with 7X
binoculars and 30X telescope by my wife, Lucy, and Mr. and Mrs. E. E.
Furnans under excellent lighting conditions. I estimated its total length at
about 40 inches. Double-crested Cormorants (Phalacrocorax auritus) in the
vicinity were available for comparison. We had just returned from a trip
to Maine, where we had seen this species for the first time. My wife took
recognizable photographs of it. To the best of my knowledge this is the
westernmost record of the bird in Florida. It reappeared at this location
briefly on the morning of October 31. An immature Great Cormorant
seen on the Alabama coast by Thomas A. Imhof in early November may
have been the same indivual.—Robert Duncan, 614 Fairpoint Drive,
Gulf Breeze, Florida 32561.

A Mockingbird and Blue Jay Seeking Shelter from Rain

No articles or notes were found in the literature on the behavior of
avian forms during various intensities of precipitation. Dawson has re-
corded the incidence of House Sparrows (Passer domesticus) killed by a
rain storm (Dawson, D.G. 1967. Roosting Sparrow (Passer domesticus)
killed by a Rainstorm, Hawke’s Bay, New Zealand, Notornis, 14: 208-
210). Hickman attributed the death of a Great Blue Heron (Ardea hero-
dias) to heavy ground fog and rain (Hickman, G. L. 1972. Dead Great
Blue Heron found at 1 1 ,000 foot Utah Elevation. Great Basin Naturalist,
32(2):112).

13

Heavy rain showers fell with varied intensity during the morning and
afternoon of 24 May 1970 in Vero Beach, Florida, following the dissipa-
tion of Hurricane Alma. I saw a Mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos) on
4 occasions (Figure 1) and a Blue Jay (Cyanocitta cristata) on 2 occa-
sions actively seeking shelter on a small branch located under a larger
limb of a Live Oak {Quercus virginiana). The shelter was occupied only
during high precipitation intensities which lasted for periods of 5 to 8
minutes. When the rainfall decreased, the bird left the shelter within sec-
onds. The crown, nape, back, scapulars, and rump feathers of both birds
appeared to be saturated.

Once, when the Mockingbird occupied the “shelter branch”, the
Blue Jay appeared but, seeing it occupied, flew down approximately 9 feet,
lighting on the outside extension of my home air conditioner. Although
the Blue Jay directed chiding vocalizations toward the Mockingbird, it did
not elicit any observable behavioral responses from the Mockingbird.

At 1706 hours on 25 June 1970, during a heavy thundershower,
I again saw a Mockingbird on the same “shelter branch.” It departed at
1723 hours coinciding with a moderation of rainfall.— Gary L. Hickman,
355 South Dixie HigWay, Vero Beach, Florida 32960.

Figure 1. A Mockingbird setting on a “shelter branch” during
high precipitation intensities.

An Early Common Scoter in Northern Florida

On the morning of October 22, 1972, I observed a Common Scoter
(Oidemia nigra) swimming in the salt-marsh area of the FenhoUoway
River, Taylor County, Florida. I watched it from my canoe at a distance
of about 40 feet through 7x50 binoculars in good light (clear sky, about 90

14

degrees from the sun). The heavy-set body and the outline of the head
and bill indicated that it was a scoter, and the presence of a large, off-white
cheek-and-gular patch on the otherwise uniformly dark-brown plumage
indicated a female or immature male Common Scoter. When it flew I
noticed an absence of wing patches, lending further support to my
identification.

Although there are records of summering scoters in Florida, there
seems to be no earlier fall arrival date for the Common Scoter.— Conrad
E. Weiser, 314 Lorene St,, Tallahassee, Florida 32304.

A Swimming Bald Eagle

While on a boat trip from Chokoloskee to Cape Sable on July 18,
1970, with Don Lilley of Macon, Georgia, I saw an adult Bald Eagle
(Haliaetus leucocephalus) force a low-flying Osprey (Pandion haliaetus) to
drop its fish into the sea some 3-5 miles offshore from the mouth of Shark
River. The eagle entered the water and floated with wings and tail “spread-
eagled” and head held high as it searched in vain for the fish. The furious
Osprey hovered just overhead (south Florida Ospreys are especially com-
bative with eagles), but not until I stopped my boat close by did the eagle
finally take off— very heavily— and head for the distant shore, with the
screaming Osprey bedeviling it all the way. Eagles sometimes briefly dip
into the water after fish, but observers with whom I have discussed this
have never seen one actually float on the surface. Comment by others
with regard to such behavior would be of interest.— John B. Edscorn,
Rt. 3, Box 400, Lakeland, Florida 33801.

Autumn Singing by Ovenbirds

On Sept. 19, 1970, Paul Fellers, Chester Shaffer, Kris Edscorn, and I
twice heard an Ovenbird (Seiurus aurocapillus) sing its typical “teeCHUR,
teeCHUR, etc.” song in Saddle Creek Park near Lakeland. Again, on Sept.
4, 5, and 6, 1972, a newly-arrived migrant Ovenbird in woods at my
home near Lakeland came to my “pssh” calling each morning, and with
head feathers raised it repeatedly sang in a ^ery “territorial” manner in
plain sight at very close range. To date I have learned of no other records
of Ovenbirds singing in Florida at any season. If any such instances are
known, I would appreciate hearing of them — ^John B. Edscorn, Rt. 3,
Box 400, Lakeland, Florida 33801.

Roy Clina Hallman

Roy Cline Hallman was a lifelong resident of Florida. He was bom
at Bartow, April 24, 1894, and passed away in Panama City on Decem-
ber 7, 1972. Roy became interested in birds as a small boy. Like many
others of that period, his interest was stimulated by collecting birds’ eggs—
a hobby he maintained all his life but practiced little after the 1930’s.

I met Roy Hallman in March, 1931. The occasion was the pub-
lication of his note on the nesting of the Black Vulture (Coragyps atratus)
in the palmetto clumps on Anastasia Island. 1 had never seen a “buzzard”
nest, which circumstance Roy generously agreed to change, and promptly

did.

15

This was the beginning of a warm and lasting friendship. My first
“expeditions” to the Kissimmee Prairie, Cape Sable, Pelican Island,
Gulf Hammock, and other such exciting places were with Roy Hallman.
Wayland Shannon was with us on several of these outings, and we fre-
quently met with Donald and Wray Nicholson and Joseph Howell, Jr.

Hallman moved from St. Augustine to Panama City in 1936, after
which I saw him much less often, though I did get afield with him there on
several occasions, a particularly memorable one being the time he showed
me my first nest of the Cuban Snowy Plover (Charadriiis alexandrinus
tenuirostris) , which he had found on a sandy island near Port St. Joe.

Hallman was quick to detect new birds, even those with subtle differ-
ences from familiar species. He was not inclined to collect birds regularly,
but did not hesitate to do so when the object was a bird not previously
recorded in the area. It was his painstaking field observation that led to his
adding such obscure birds as the Thick-billed Redwing {Agelaius phoeni-
ceus fortis) and Brewer’s Blackbird (Euphagus cynocephalus) to the
Florida list. Hallman published a fair number of his outstanding ornitholog-
ical records, but we would all be richer if he had been a less modest man.

Roy Hallman is survived by his wife, Mrs. Josephine Hallman, of
Panama City. — Samuel A. Grimes, 4627 Peachtree Circle E, Jacksonville,
Florida 32207.

Karl Zerbe

Karl Zerbe, artist and teacher, died on November 28, 1972, in Talla-
hassee. He was born in Germany in 1903, came to the United States in
1934 and to Florida in 1954. At his death he was Professor Emeritus at
Florida State University. Members of the Florida Ornithological Society
will recall his bird photography, especially his films of hummingbirds of
Central and South America. His photograph of White-fronted Geese
{Anser albijrons) on the St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge in November,
1958, provided the first proof of the species’ occurrence in Florida, and one
of the state’s first few records of the Eared Grebe (Podiceps caspicus) was
documented by his camera.

Zerbe’s interest in ornithology was also evident in a portfolio of 12
serigraphs, produced by the Le Moyne Art Foundation from a set of bird
drawings. He described these as “not species-birds, but very free trans-
lations of birds I’ve seen. — in the wild or in the zoo — anthropomorphic
birds.” This work, completed in 1970, led to a series of large bird paint-
ings, again anthropomorphic, in which he expressed his belief in the inter-
dependency of all life forms.

Professor Zerbe was a long-time member of the Florida and National
Audubon Societies and of the American Ornithologists’ Union. He is sur-
vived by his wife, Marion, a daughter, and 3 grandchildren.^ — Mrs. Frank
H. Stoutamire, 1471 Crestview Avenue, Tallahassee, Florida 32303.

16

SUGGESTIONS FOR CONTRIBUTORS

The Florida Field Naturalist welcomes articles and short notes con-
taining new information on subjects relevant to the biology of wild species
of birds or other vertebrates in or near Florida. Its emphasis is on field
biology. All articles, notes, and other materials should be submitted to the
Editor: Henry M. Stevenson, Department of Biological Science, Florida
State University, Tallahassee, Florida 32306.

All manuscripts should be submitted in duplicate. They should be
typewritten, double-spaced, on one side of numbered sheets of standard
(8 1/2x11 in.), unruled white paper, with margins of at least one inch
on all sides.

Titles should be short and descriptive, and the body of the article
should state the necessary facts without using unnecessary words. All
references should be cited in the body of the text unless there are more
than three, in which case each complete entry should be listed at the end
under “Literature Cited”, and the citation in the body should then indicate
author and year of publication (e.g.. Bond, 1961). Whenever there are
more than two authors, list the first followed by “et al” (e.g., Blair et al^
1968). Whenever pertinent, the particular page or pages should also be
indicated (Bond, 1961: 44).

The vernacular (common) names of all species mentioned”— plants or
animals, should be capitalized, and the scientific name should be added
in parentheses following the first reference except in the title. The scien-
tific name should be underscored and should follow a widely accepted
authority for the group of animals or plants involved (e.g. A.O.U.
Check-list, 1957, for birds).

Abbreviations should be used sparingly in the body of the text except
in parenthetical material: e.g. ‘‘Tallahassee (5 mi. SE).” Digits rather than
words are recommended for all numbers except one ( 1 ) . The metric sys-
tem is preferred for weights and measurements and is acceptable for such
measurements as distances. In writing dates, never use a number to refer
to a month.

Proofs will be sent to the (senior) author. The Editor must be
informed well in advance of any change in address or mechanism for
handling proofs; also of necessary changes in the manuscript before proofs
are printed. Changes in proof are expensive, so authors must not expect
to make major changes at this stage unless they are willing to bear the
cost. When proofs reach the author, he should carefully check against the
typescript and promptly return both to the Editor.

Reprints should be ordered from the Florida Press (P.O. Box 393,
Orlando, Florida 32802) on blanks sent with the proofi Any number
above 50 must be paid for by the author. The cost will be determined
by the Florida Press.

CONTENTS

Editorial Page 1

Inland Nesting of the Least Tern in Highlands County, Fla. . . Page 3

Bird Records From the Dry Tortugas Page 5

Migration of the Blue Jay in the Southeastern United States .... Page 9

Field Notes . . Page 13

Obituaries Page 15

Suggestions for Contributors

Inside Back Cover

L

CPU.

The Florida Field Naturalist

A Semi-annual Journal of
The Florida Ornithological Society

FALL, 1973

Vol. 1

No. 2

THE FLORIDA FIELD NATURALIST

JOURNAL OF THE FLORIDA ORNITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY
(Founded 1972)

Editor, Henry M» Stevenson, Dept of Biological Science,

Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida 32306

EDITORIAL STAFF

Betty McD one 11, Managing Editor, Florida Audubon Society, P.O. Drawer 7,
Maitland, Fla. 32751

Allan D. Cruickshank, 1925 Indian River Dr., Rockledge, Fla. 32955

Herbert W. Kale, II, Entomological Research Center, P.O. Box 520, Vero
Beach, Fla. 32960

Oscar T. Owre, Dept, of Zoology, University of Miami, Coral Gables,
Fla. 33124

Glen E. Woolfenden, Dept, of Biology, University of South Florida, Tampa,
Fla. 33620

OFFICERS (1973)

President: William B. Robertson, Jr., Everglades National Park, Home-
stead, Fla. 33030

Vice President: John E. Edscorn, Route 3, Box 400, Lakeland, Fla. 33801

Secretary: Curtis L. Kingsbery, 2900 N. Magnolia Ave., Pensacola, Fla.
32503

Treasurer: Mrs. Dorothy W. Freeman, 4515 Montclair Road, Orlando, Fla.
32806

Articles and notes submitted for publication, as well as books and
other publications intended for review, should be sent to the Editor (see
inside back cover). Notices of change of address, claims for undelivered
or defective copies of this journal, and requests for information about
advertising, subscriptions, and back numbers should be sent to the
Florida Audubon Society, P.O. Drawer 7, Maitland, Fla. 32751

Annual dues: members (also members of Florida Audubon Society),
$5.00; associate members (not members of Florida Audubon Society), $6.00;
Library subscriptions, $6.00. Send dues or subscription fees to the Florida
Audubon Society. P.O. Drawer 7, Maitland, Fla. 32751

Published semi-annually by the Florida Ornithological Society.
Printed by Florida Press. Inc Orlando, 32809.

COVER PAINTING OF THE EVERGLADE KITE (Rostrhamus sociabilis)
SPECIALLY EXECUTED FOR THIS JOURNAL BY JON JANOSIK.

Florida Field Naturalist, Vol. \, — Fall, 1973

EDITORIAL

Florida Field Naturalist has two main objectives, to achieve a modest
professional respectability as the journal of Florida natural history and to
enlist as contributors as many able Florida Ornithological Society members
as possible. Unless we largely realize both aims it is doubtful that the
journal can long survive, or indeed deserves to survive. Dr. Stevenson's
editorial in our first issue -stressed the need to verify new observations
with care and publish only the essential facts. It is equally necessary
that authors relate new facts they publish to the relevant facts already
known.

The journal, if it thrives, will publish much of the new information
about bird occurrence in Florida and thus become substantially responsible
for keeping the historical record straight. We can meet the responsibility
only if authors interpret their findings in the light of pertinent past informa-
tion. This means book work, distasteful to many and difficult for those
remote from good libraries. The rewards are a vastly more effective journal
and the knowledge that field bird study in Florida strives to be sound
science rather than tribal legend. This editorial offers a few guides to the
Florida ornithological literature. The sources named are found in most
college libraries and some public libraries. Authors should check as well
as they can in the library resources available to them. When no exhaustive
search is possible, they should say plainly what they consulted and ask
the assistance of the journal’s editorial staff.

The basic references for distribution and status of birds in Florida are,
of course, A.H. Howell’s “Florida Bird Life” (1932) and the revision of
that book by Alexander Sprunt, Jr., published in 1954. Howell’s species
accounts drew data from some 1500 references, essentially everything in
print about Florida birds as late as 1931. Literature survey for the 1954
revision was less comprehensive but included the more important new
material published through 1952. No author should submit bird records for
publication without having checked at least these volumes.

Unhappily, Florida bird literature of the past 20 years has not been
summarized adequately and the number of individual records published
since 1952 greatly exceeds that for all previous time. Some of this material
has serious limitations (for example, Christmas Bird Counts), and much of
it lacks detail, but in overall effect it has changed our concepts of the
occurrence of a large proportion of the birds known from Florida. Our main
bibliographic challenge is to relate new findings to this scattered recent
record.

Most of the new information of the past 20 years appeared in the
following journals, listed in approximately in the order of the amount of
such information they contain: Audubon Field Notes (now American Birds),
Florida Naturalist*, Auk*, Wilson Bulletin*, Bulletin of the Florida State

Florida Field Naturalist, Vol. 1, — Fall, 1973

Museum , Bulletin of the Tall Timbers Research Station, Bird Banding,
Condor"^, and Quarterly Journal of the Florida Academy of Sciences. Jour-
nals marked with an asterisk publish an annual index which simplifies the
search for specific information. Well over half the individual bird records,
however, appeared in Audubon Field Notes from which information can be
extracted only by a page-by-page search. Any FOS member with bookish
inclinations and bibliographic talent could do a great service to Florida
ornithology be devising a usable index to Florida material in Audubon
Field Notes regional reports or by compiling a good bibliography of the
bird papers of Florida interest published since 1952 in journals other than
Audubon Field Notes and Florida Naturalist.

So far I’ve said that aspiring authors need to examine what’s already
in print on a given subject before they publish their own observations. And,
that the unsummarized flood of records published during the past 20 years
makes this an onerous task. Having thus stressed proper homage to the
previously printed word, it is necessary also to say that the total published
record of bird occurence in Florida still omits a large amount of available
information. Two major untapped sources exist. 1) Early collections un-
known to Howell or not available to him: Howell missed almost nothing
published about Florida birds, but he clearly did not see thousands of
specimens now deposited in museums throughout the country. Most of these
date from the 1870’s to the early 1900’s, heyday of commercial and private
bird collecting in Florida, and the lot undoubtedly includes many surprises.
2) Banding data: Records of the Bird Banding Laboratory (Bureau of Sport
Fisheries and Wildlife, Laurel, Maryland) contain many tens (if not hun-
dreds) of thousands of bits of information concerning birds banded in
Florida or banded elsewhere and recovered in Florida. For the most part,
these important data are yet to be included in the published record of
Florida birds.

Unassimilated information in the above sources and several lesser
treasure troves is not of immediate concern to Florida Field Naturalist
authors but they should be aware that all our ideas about birds in Florida
are provisional in some degree until these data become a part of the pub-
lished record. Assuming that the Society survives, one of our long-range
goals should be to help in bringing better order to the ragged record of
bird occurrence in the state. Meanwhile, we ought to do our best to avoid
making matters worse.

William B. Robertson, Jr., Pres., Florida Ornithological Society..

Florida Field Naturalist, VoL 1, — Fall, 1973

A PRELIMINARY NOTE ON ORGANOCHLORINE RESIDUES IN THE
EGGS OF FISH-EATING BIRDS OF THE WEST COAST OF FLORIDA

Jeffrey L. Lincer and Deena Salkind

Although it is not our custom to publish preliminary data, especially
when the sample size is small, we believe that the subject of environ-
mental pollution is of sufficient urgency and interest to readers to do so
in this case.

After accepting a position with the Mote Marine Laboratory, but
before leaving his pesticide residue laboratory at Cornell University, the
senior author made arrangements with local Florida scientists to collect
eggs from a few representative fish-eating birds to be analyzed at the
Cornell Laboratory. These collections were made during June and July
of 1972 along the west coast of Florida (Table 1). The eggs of the Great
Blue Heron and the Snowy Egret were collected in Little Sarasota Bay
and those of the other species were collected in Charlotte Harbor. Ana-
lytical procedures for pesticides have been described by Cade et ai.
(1971) with details and slight modifications elsewhere (Lincer 1972).
Since industrial contaminants called polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB’s)
have been found in a variety of wildlife (see Peakall and Lincer, 1970,
for review) and, in particular, in a Florida estuary (Duke, et aL, 1970),
an additional residue separation procedure (Snyder and Reinert, 1971) was
necessary for these persistent chemicals.

Except for the extensive work carried out at the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency’s Gulf Breeze Laboratory (450 miles northwest of Sarasota)
very little has been reported on the pesticidal contamination of the es-
tuaries of Florida’s west coast. Although this is especially true for birds,
two notable exceptions are the enlightening studies of Schreiber and
Risebrough (1972) on Brown Pelicans and a second by Wiemeyer et ai.
(1972) on residues found in a few Florida Bald Eagle eggs. In view of
this apparent dearth of information on contaminants in fish-eating birds, a
monitoring program was initiated to help fill this gap in our knowledge.

The results of the first year’s collection (Table 1) indicate that a
wide range of DDE (the major breakdown product of DDT), PCB’s, and
dieldrin can be expectea in the eggs of estuarine birds breeding on the
west coast of Florida. It is important to understand that these egg resi-
dues, per se, are not the cause of the eggshell-thinning that one might
observe but only reflect the residues in the female at the time of laying.
That is, the organochlorine residues in the females at the time of laying
are responsible for the biochemical responses (Lincer and Peakall, 1970)
which result in reproductive failures involving eggshell-thinning and
possibly embryonic mortality.

Any attempt to interpret data pertaining to avian pesticide residues
can be foiled by the migratory behavior of the particular species and/or
population being examined. The importance of the wintering grounds as a

Florida Field Naturalist, Vol. 1, — Fall, 1973

source of contamination may be considerable. Cade et aL (1971) sug-
gested the possible contribution of the wintering grounds to the total
residue burden of Alaskan raptors, and Lincer and Sherburne (in prep.)
reported it for the American Kestrel (Falco sparverius). On the other
hand, the wintering grounds may be less contaminated than the breeding
grounds, and this was shown by Ulf strand and Sodergren (1972) for several
East African birds. The importance of this is that the residues reported
here are not, necessarily, picked up on the Florida breeding grounds and,
therefore, may not reflect local pollution levels. In order to elucidate this
local contamination, a monitoring program has been initiated which in-
volves collecting and analyzing more sedentary estuarine invertebrates
like Fiddler Crabs (Uca pugilator) and the Eastern Edible Oyster (Crasso-
strea virginica) from 35 sites along the west coast of Florida.

If, however, we address ourselves to the biological significance of
these egg residues rather than trying to interpret them as reflecting local
contamination, at least one point becomes obvious. In this small sample
at least, all species contain more DDE and more PCB's than the Brown
Pelican. The low residue level found in the one pelican egg only takes

TABLE 1. Organochlorine residue levels in egg contents of selected
Florida fish-eating birds collected in 1972.

Species

DDE,

ppm based on:
N* OD** EF^

PCB,

ppm based on;

OD EF

Dieldrin,
ppm based on:
OD EF

Snowy Egret

(Earetta thula)

1

20.9

51.0

161

392

0.9

2.2

Black Skimmer
(Rvnchoos niora)

2

4.50

12.1

2.10

5.75

0.15

0.30

Least Tern

(sterna albifrons)

2

3.17

8.65

11.6

31.9

0.07

0.23

Brown Pelican

(Pelecanus occidentalis)

1

2.46

9.31

1.30

5.00

0.10

0.40

Laughing Gull

(Larus atricilla)

3

11.70

31.70

17.2

47.7

0.61

1.59

White Ibis

(Eudocimus albus)

1

3.74

31.37

9.8

35.1

0.09

0.31

Great Egret

(Casmerodius albus)

1

10.36

30.63

7.5

22.1

0.06

0.18

Great Blue Heron
(Ardea herodias)

1

20.0

120.

29.1

174

2.18

13.1

* refers to number of nests sampled. One egg per nest was analyzed
with the exception of the Least Tern where 2 from one nest and one
from the other were sampled.

** OD refers to oven dry weight of sample.

t EF refers to extractable fat weight of sample.

Florida Field Naturalist, Vol. I, — Fall, 1973

on significance because it is similar to those reported by Schreiber and
Risebrough (1972) for a larger sample size collected during 1970 at the
same location. As those investigators pointed out, the organochlorine
levels found in Florida pelican eggs are low when compared with those
found in pelican eggs produced in California, Louisiana, Texas, and the
Carolinas. This is commensurate with the fact that Florida boasts the
only reproductively successful Brown Pelican populations in the United
States. The 9 per cent reduction in mean eggshell thickness in the Flor-
ida pelicans reported by Schreiber and Risebrough has evidently not yet
significantly affected reproductive success but gives reason for concern
for other estuarine fish-eating birds as our preliminary work indicates
that their eggs contain even higher organochlorine levels. To our know-
ledge, there are no additional residue data available on these fish-eating
birds from this area nor any information regarding their comparative sensi-
tivity to DDE in terms of eggshell thinning (Keith and Grutchy, 1972).

Because of the very real potential for sublethal effects of DDE and
other pollutants on these estuarine-inhabiting birds, a more intensive
study has begun. This effort is aimed toward monitoring the egg residues
and shell-thinning of approximately 15 species of fish-eating birds with
an emphasis on comparisons between rookeries in Tampa Bay, Sarasota
Bay, and Charlotte Harbor. With several species, reproductive success
will be compared to the residue levels of the respective population sampl-
ed. Time and funds providing, this project will be continued through the
1975 breeding season.

It should be noted that birds are extremely sensitive to environmental
perturbations. The human animal is, unfortunately, an insensitive and
often apathetic organism. If a change occurs slowly enough, he is not
likely to notice it until it is too late. Like bay-filling projects (Thompson,
1961), the loss of bird populations can be compared to balding in the
human male. A man's capital feathers (hairs) drop one at a time over a
long period. Suddenly, approaching baldness is noted with alarming
awareness and anxiety! Man has the opportunity to take heed from these
avain "bioindicators" whose obvious absence or more subtle, but measur-
able, responses to environmental degradation (e.g. eggshell-thinning and
reproductive failure) can provide a sensitive early-warning system.

We are grateful to Dr. Oliver Hewitt and Mr. William Fehring for
collecting assistance. The residue analyses were done with funds pro-
vided by N.LH. Grant ES500306, Dr. Tom J. Cade, Principal Investigator.
Thanks go to the William G. and Marie Selby Foundation for support of the
senior author during the preparation of the manuscript.

LITERATURE CITED

Cade, T.J., J.L. Lincer, C.M. White, D.G. Roseneau and L.G. Swartz.
1971. DDE residues and eggshell changes in Alaskan falcons and hawks.
Science, 172: 955-957.

Florida Field Naturalist, Vol. 1, — Fall, 1973

Duke, T.W,, J.I. Lowe, and A.J. Wilson, Jr. 1970. A polychlorinated bi-
phenyl (Aroclor 1254) in the water, sediment, and biota of Escambia Bay,
Florida. Bull. Envk. Contain, and Toxicol., 5: 171-179.

Keith, S.A. and I.M. Grutchy, 1972. Residue levels of chemical pollutants
in North American birdlife. Proceedings of the XVth International Orni-
thological Congress. The Hague. 1970. E.J. Brill, Leiden.

Lincer, J.L. 1972. The effects of organochlorines on the American Kestrel
(Falco sparverius Linn.). Doctoral Dissertation, Cornell University,
Ithaca, N.Y.

Lincer, J.L. and D.B. Peakall. 1970. Induced hepatic steriod metabolism
and increased cytoplasmic RNA by polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) in

the American Kestrel (Falco sparverius). Nature, 228 (5273): 783.

Lincer, J.L. and J.A. Sherburne, (in prep.) Source of organochlorines in
the American Kestrel: A prey species study. Submitted to the J. Wildlife
Mgmt., March 1973,

Peakall, D.B. and J.L. Lincer. 1970. Polychlorinated biphenyls, another
longlife widespread chemical in the environment. BioScience, 20 (17):
958-964.

Schreiber, R.W. and R.W. Risebrough. 1972. Studies of the Brown Pelican.
The Wilson Bull., 84: 119-135.

Snyder, D. and R. Reinert. 1971. Rapid separation of polychlorinated bi-
phenyls from DDT and analogues on silica gel. Bull. Envir. Contain.
Toxicol. 6: 385-390,

Thompson, S.H. 1961. What is happening to our estuaries? Trans. 26th.
N. Amer. Wildl. Conf.: 320-322.

Ulf strand, S. and A. Sodergren. 1972. Organochlorine residues in East
African birds. Ambio. 1(4): 150-151.

Wiemeyer, S.N., B.M. Mulher, F.J. Ligas, R.J. Hensel, J.E. Matheson,
F.C. Robards and S. Postupalsky. 1972. Residues of organochlorine
pesticides: Polychlorinated biphenyls, and mercury in bald eagle eggs and
changes in shell thickness 1969-1970. Pestic. Monit. J.. 6 (1): 50-55.

Jeffrey L. Lincer, Mote Marine Laboratory, 9501 Blind Pass Road, Sara-
sota, Florida 33581. Deena Salkind, Cornell University, Ecology and
Systematics, Research Park, Ithaca, N.Y. 14850.

BILL DEFORMITIES IN TWO FLORIDA BIRDS

Walter Kingsley Taylor

The question of whether to document in the scientific journals in-
stances of birds with abnormally crossed bills has recently been discussed
by Parkes (1969) and by Gochfeld (1972). Parkes is of the opinion that

Florida Field Naturalist, VoL 1, — Fall, 1973

Two abnormaFbilled Yellow-shafted Flickers shown with a normal

specimen,

further reports of this particular phenomenon do not merit publication in
scientific journals, especially since the cost of journal pages is so ex-
pensive. Gochfeld, on the other hand, believes that the crossed mandible
condition in birds is one example of a defect which needs closer attention,
especially at a time when widespread use of environmental contaminants
occurs. He calls attention to the fact that chemical pollutants not only
cause direct lethal effects, but also may be potential mutagenic, terato-
genic, or carcinogenic agents. Gochfeld presented data indicating that
deformed mandibles in 3 species of terns (Common, Sterna hirundo; Rose-
ate, S. dougallii; and Sooty, S. fuscata) are more prevalent today than
they were in the past few years.

In various areas of Florida, especially central, there have been
several documented cases (both published and unpublished) in the past
5 years of Brown Thrashers (To xosto/na rufum) with malformed bills
(Steffee, 1968; Stitt, 1968; Taylor, 1972). Within the past 18 months, 3 in-
stances of Common Flickers (Colaptes auratus) with elongated and crossed
bills have come to my attention. Two of the 3 specimens were found dead
in the greater Orlando area and were brought to Audubon House in Maitland
(Figure 1). The third abnormal-billed flicker was observed this past

Florida Field Naturalist, VoL 1, — Fall, 1973

spring on Merritt Island, Brevard County, Florida, by L.M. Ehrhart (pers.
comm.). In looking through the literature pertaining to Florida birds, I
have been unable to locate any records of crossed bills in the Common
Flicker.

A description of the 2 collected specimens (FTU 1131 and 1432)
follows . Bill measurements taken follow those illustrated by Baldwin,
Oberholser, and Worley (1931). The female was found dead on 6 May 1972
near Pine Hills, Orange County, Florida. Anatomical features, including
the gizzard and tongue, appear to be normal except that the bill is de-
cidedly elongated and crossed. The maxilla is decurved, and the mandible
is slightly recurved. The exposed culmen length is 53.0 mm, and the total
length of the mandible measures 49.0 mm. The maxilla extends almost 20
mm beyond the point where the mandible crosses the maxilla. An X-ray
taken shows that the extended length of the bill is due entirely to ab-
normal growth of the rhamphotheca. The bony components of the bill and
skull appear to be normal. The male flicker was found in the spring of
1973. The exact location of the carcass and the name of the person who
found it are unknown. The abnormal bill is quite unlike that of the female
mentioned above. The maxilla is normal, but the mandible is straight,
compressed, and greatly elongated. The total length of the mandible is
51.0 mm. Mean length of exposed culmen for 4 normal specimens in the
FTU Ornithological Collection is 32.8 mm; total length of mandible is
35.5 mm.

Whether these cases of malformed bills are incidental or represent a
new pathologic event cannot be assessed at this time. More data are
needed before the significance of the cross-bill abnormality in these and
other birds can be understood.

LITERATURE CITED

Baldwin, S.P., H.C. Oberholser, and L.G. Worley. 1931. Measurements of
birds. Scientific Publ, of the Cleveland Mus. NatT Hist. Vol. 11. Contribu-
tion No. 17: 1-165. Gates Mills, Ohio.

Gochfeld, M. 1972. Avian abnormalities and the scientific literature.
Amer, Birds^ 26: 705.

Parkes, K.C. 1969. On abnormally crossed mandibles in birds. Wilson
Bull, 81: 342.

Steffee, N.D. 1968. Number of deformed Brown Thrashers (Toxostoma
rufum), reported from scattered locations. Fla. Nat. 41: 126-127.

Stitt, W.T. 1968. More on deformed thrashers. Fla. Nat., 41: 171.

Taylor, W.K. 1972. Brown Thrasher (Toxostoma rufum) with a bill abnor-
mality in Seminole County, Fla. Nat., 45: 129.

Dept, of Biol. Sciences, Fla. Tech. Univ., Orlando, Fla. 32816.

Florida Field Naturalist, VoL l,—~Fall, 1973

WOOD STORK NESTING IN NORTH FLORIDA

Stephen A. Nesbitt

The number of Wood Storks (Mycteria americana) nesting in Florida
north of Marion County is poorly documented. Pearson (1892) identified
two colonies in that part of Florida, one in a cypress swamp 17 miles
southwest of Archer (Levy Co.) and the other, which contained hundreds
of birds, 20 miles from New Troy. Baynard (1913) stated that in 1906 about
1,500 pairs bred in a cypress swamp in northeastern Alachua County, but
that the colony was shot out soon thereafter. Bent (1916) listed three
north Florida nesting locations: 1) at Amelia Island, 2) in an unspecified
site on the St. Johns River, and 3) at St. Augustine. In his book, Florida
Bird Life, Howell (1932) stated, “The species was said to be breeding
commonly at Chipley, in northwestern Florida (Washington County) in
1904.” Also, in Figure 10 (page 114) he showed a breeding location near
Tallahassee, but the text made no reference to it. It is interesting that
Ogden (1971) related an observation by M. Anderson and H. Cooper as
follows: “One or more Wood Storks, May 15, flying toward the St. Marks
River (south factually southeast^ of Tallahassee) carrying nesting
material.” Perhaps a correlation exists between these two reported nest-
ing locations.

During 1972 I knew of four locations of nesting Wood Storks in Florida
north of Marion County. The most southern was on River Styx north of
Orange Lake in Alachua County (R.21 3., T. 11 S.). This colony has also
been referred to as “Micanopy” (Ogden, 1971-72). On 4 May 1972 about
200 adults were seen there, and 24 flightless young were present on 20
June. This colony has been active for several years and checked regularly
by the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission for the past 4
years.

On 21 April, twelve pairs of Wood Storks were seen building nests in
a swamp on the northeast side of Newnans Lake in Alachua County (R. 21
E., T. 9 S.). On 30 June, about 20 flightless young were present. This is
probably the first year of activity for this colony which may be a “satel-
lite” of the larger and more vigorous River Styx colony 14 miles to the
southeast.

Another Wood Stork nesting site is located between Guano and Tolo-
mato Rivers in St. Johns County, not far from St. Augustine (R. 29 E., T.
6 S.). An aerial inspection on 30 June revealed 138 birds, 25 of which
were young of the year. This possibly is the St. Augustine rookery men-
tioned by Bent. Whether or not this is the case, the colony has been active
in its present location since the early 1930’s, according to Samuel A.
Grimes (pers. comm.), who has periodically observed it for 40 years. To
his knowledge, the nesting population has not changed significantly
during that time.

The fourth Wood Stork colony, in eastern Duval County, is within 4

Florida Field Naturalist, VoL 1, — Fall, 1973

miles of Jacksonville Beach (R. 28 E., T. 3 S.). On 30 May nest construc-
tion was in the later stages, and on 16 August about 50 young were
present. This rookery has been active for approximately 15 years (Grimes,
pers. comm.).

Nests at all 4 sites were in the tops of Bald Cypress (Taxodium
distichum). In addition to the regularly associated water birds, the Dee
Dot Ranch colony was near a vulture roost used by 200 or more birds,
mostly Black Vultures (Coragyps atratus).

The total number of Wood Storks fledged in north Florida is small
compared to those in the remainder of the state - probably about 200
birds in the north compared to nearly 1,000 in the rest of Florida in '1972..
(Ogden, 1972), but there is comfort in the knowledge that this small part
of the Florida (and U.S.) Wood Stork population is far removed, at least
geographically, from the impact of civilization bearing down on the wild-
life environment in southern Florida. The state of Florida should consider
purchasing any of these colonies which are used consistently. Two of the
colonies. River Styx and Newnans Lake, are on lands owned mostly by
Owens-Illinois, Inc., and/or Franklin Lumber Company. The River Styx
colony has been designated as a Florida Audubon Society Wildlife Sanctu-
ary under the name “Micanopy Cypress." The Guano River colony exists
on land owned by Stockton, Whattley, Davin and Company of Jacksonville
but is leased by the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission for a
Game Management Area. Dee Dot Ranch is owned by J.E. Davis of
Jacksonville.

I am grateful to Lovett E. Williams, Jr. for reviewing early drafts of
this manuscript.

LITERATURE CITED

Baynard, Oscar E. 1913. Breeding birds of Alachua County, Florida. Auk.
30: 240-247.

Bent, A.C. 1926. Life Histones of North American Marsh Birds. U.S.

NatT Mus. Bull, no 135, Washington, D.C. 392pp.

Howell, A.H, 1932. Florida Bird Life. Coward-McCann, New York, 579pp.

Ogden. J.C. 1971. The nesting season: Florida Region. American Birds.
25(5): 846-851.

— . 1972. The nesting season: Florida Region. American

Birds. 26(5): 847-852.

Pearson, G.T. 1892. The ibises of Ledwith Lake, Florida. Oologist.
9(4): 99-100.

Wildlife Research Projects, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commis-
sion, 2606 N.E. 17th Terrace, Gainesville. FL 32601.

Florida Field Naturalist, VoL 1, — Fall, 1973

BLACK-CROWNED NIGHT HERON DIVING FOR PREY

James A. Kushlan

The food ecology of the Black-crowned Night Heron (Nycticorax
nycticorax), summarized by Bent (1926), and Collins (1970), is character-
ized by a highly diversified diet ranging from insects, crustaceans, and
mollusks to fish, amphibians, mammals, and birds. Diet varies in different
areas, between nearby colonies, and annually and seasonally in the same
location (Collins, 1970; Wolford and Boag, 1971).

Despite having a food ecology characterized by opportunism in the
utilization of a wide range of potential food resources, the known feeding
behavior of the Black-crowned Night Heron is limited. Five feeding
methods have been previously described for the species: Stand and Wait,
and Walk Slowly being the most common; Bill-vibrating, standing in shal-
low water while rapidly vibrating the bill at the surface, (Stone, 1937;
Drinkwater, 1958); Hovering, flying in place above the surface and catch-
ing prey without settling into the water (Meyerriecks, 1960); and Swimming-
feeding, alighting on the water and catching prey while afloat (Wetmore,
1920).

On 2 March 1969 at a pond in the Big Cypress Swamp, 1 observed the
Black-crowned Night Heron utilize another aerial feeding method, diving
from flight, a behavior which I call Plunging. At dawn (06:00), 8 night
herons were feeding in the pond; within the next 15 minutes 30 more
joined the initial group. They fed along the periphery of the pond using
Stand and Wait behavior while perched on matted-down stems of emergent
grass. Around 07:00 several birds began feeding aerially. These flew out
to the center of the pond, which was free of emergent plants, and dove into
the water head-first with wings held slightly away from the body. The
birds submerged up to their chest and then surfaced and remained there
floating or swimming. Fish caught by this method were either swallowed at
the surface or carried back to a perch. Herons also alighted on the water
and fished while swimming. Swimming-fishing and Plunging are distinct
behaviors. While there are a number of reports of Black-crowned Night
Herons Swimming-feeding, Plunging has, to my knowledge, not been de-
scribed previously.

It is to be expected that relatively short-legged herons of predomin-
antly crepuscular and nocturnal feeding habits would depend primarily
upon inactive feeding methods such as Stand and Wait, and Walk Slowly.
Certainly, in night herons active feeding behavior is relatively rare. How-
ever, in some circumstances much feeding takes place diurnally, particu-
larly in the hours immediately after sunrise, at which time the use of more
active techniques becomes more feasible. A possible factor limiting the
use of such behavior is suggested by my observations made during a
period when the water level was falling, thereby concentrating i fish in
the pond. On 2 March Black-crowned Night Herons successfully defended

Florida Field Naturalist, VoL 1, — Fall 1973

feeding territories of up to 3 m in diameter from encroachment by Louis-
iana Herons (Hydranassa tricolor) and Little Blue Herons (Florida
caerulea), but were not able to repel Great Egrets (Casmerodius albus).
As the water level continued to drop, the numbers of day herons utilizing
the pond increased until 20 days later 150 Great Egrets were feeding
there. By this time, although the food supply was greater than previously.
Black-crowned Night Herons fed in the pond only prior to dawn and left
as the day herons arrived. It is possible that the increased number of day
herons prevented the night herons from utilizing, this concentrated food
resource during the day. A result of such competition is that it would also
lessen the opportunity for Black-crowned Night Herons to employ the more
active feeding behaviors often advantageous in diurnal feeding.

LITERATURE CITED

Bent, A.C. 1926. Life Histories of North American Marsh Birds. U.S. NatT
Mus. Bull. 135.

Collins, C.T. 1970. The Black-crowned Night Heron as a predator of tern
chicks. Auk, 87: 584-586.

Drinkwater, H. 1958. Black-crowned Night Herons using bill motion to
lure prey. Wilson BulL, 70: 201-202.

Meyerriecks, A.J. 1960. Comparative breeding behavior of four species of
North American herons. Publ. No. 2, Nuttall Ornith. Club.

Palmer, R.S. (ed.) 1962. Handbook of North American Birds. Yale Univ.
Press, New Haven, Conn.

Stone, W. 1937. Bird studies at old Cape May. Delaware Valley Ornith.
Soc., Philadelphia, Vol. 1.

Wetmore, A. 1920. Observations on the habits of birds at Lake Burford,
New Mexico. Auk, 27: 221-247; 393-412.

Wolford, J.W. and D.A. Boag. 1971. Food habits of Black-crowned Night
herons in southern Alberta. Auk, 88: 435-437.

Dept, of Bioi., Univ. of Miami, Coral Gables, Fla. 33124.

FOOD HABITS OF FLORIDA BURROWING OWLS

James C. Lewis

Food habits of Florida Burrowing Owls (Speotyto cunicularia floridana
Ridgway) have been described only in general terms (Howell, Florida Bird
Life, New York, Coward-McCann, Inc. 1932). These birds live in prairie or
prairie-like habitat that has been diminishing as a result of encroachment
by industry, cities, and agriculture. An understanding of the food habits
and related habitat needs of Burrowing Owls is necessary to ensure their
preservation.

Florida Field Naturalist, VoL 1, — Fall, 1973

As part of an ecological study of Burrowing Owls, Speotyto cunicularia
(Molina), I tabulated records of stomach analyses on file at the Patuxent
Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, Maryland* Included were records for 57
Florida Burrowing 0¥/ls (21 males, 19 females, and 17 unsexed) collected
in the period 1907-1929 by C.H.M. Barrett, H.W. Beers, A,H. Howell, and
W.W* Worthington. Food items had been identified by R.C. Erickson and
Alexander Wetmore. The numbers of owls by month of collection were:
February (16), March (17), April (11), May (2), and June (11). Stomachs
contained an average of 5 cc of food.

Invertebrates constituted 82 percent of the volume, vertebrates 17 per-
cent, and miscellaneous material 1 percent (Table 1). Beetles were the

Table 1, Food habits of Florida Burrowing Owls.

Order

Family

Species

Volume

Percent

Frequency of
Occurrence

Invertebrates :

Coleoptera

Carabidae

Unidentified

S

18

Coleoptera

Carabidae

Harplus sp.

4

13

Colepptera

Carabidae

Pasimachus sp.

2

10

Coleoptera

Curculionidae

Unidentified

1

10

Coleoptera

Scarab aeidae

Unidentified

2

6

Coleoptera

Scarab aeidae

Canthon laevls

18

20

Coleoptera

Scarab aeidae

Li gyrus gibbosus

1

4

Coleoptera

Scarab aeidae

Phanaeus vindex

6

6

Coleoptera

Scarab aeidae

Strategus antaeus

IS

19

Coleoptera

Scarab aeidae

Strategus splenders

S

4

Coleoptera

Scarab aeidae

Strategus sp.

S

6

Coleoptera

Misc. families (4)

Unidentified

2

17

Hemiptera

Unidentified

Unidentified

1

4

Lepidoptera

Phalaenidae

Unidentified

2

3

Table 1. Continued

Order

Family

Species

Volume

Percent

Frequency of
Occurrence

Orthoptera

Acrididae

Unidentified

1

11

Orthoptera

Misc. families (4)

Unidentified

4

10

Hymenoptera

Formicidae

Unidentified

Tr.

5

Collembola

Aphoruridae

Anura sp.

Tr.

2

Unidentified^

Unidentified

Unidentified

Tr.

2

Mesogastropoda

Unidentified

Unidentified

Tr.

1

Opiliones

Unidentified

Unidentified

Tr.

2

Araneae

Lycos idae

Unidentified

4

11

Decapoda

As t aeidae

Cambarus sp.

1

3

Vertebrates :

Rodentia

Cricetidae

Unidentified

2

1

Roden tia

Sciuridae

Unidentified

2

1

Rodentia

Unidentified

Unidentified

1

1

Florida Field Naturalist, Vol. 1, — Fall, 1973

Lagomorpha

Leporidae

Sylvilagus sp.

Tr.

1

Passeri formes

Fringillidae

Pipilo erythrophthalmus

2

1

Passeriformes

Fringillidae

Passerherbulus sp.

2

2

Table 1. Continued

Order

Family

Species

Volume

Percent

Frequency of
Occurrence

Passeriformes

Mimidae

Dumetella carolinensis

Tr.

1

Squamata

Colubridae

Natrix sp.

1

1

Squamata

Iguanidae

Anolis carolinensis

Tr.

1

Squamata

Unidentified

Unidentified

4

4

Salienta

Bufonidae

Bufo sp.

1

5

Salienta

Hylidae

Hyla sp.

Tr.

1

Salienta

Ranidae

Ran a sp.

2

4

Miscellaneous :

Feathers ,
vegetation,
gravel

Unidentified

Unidentified

1

19

Class Diplopoda

most prevalent invertebrates by volume (66 percent) and in frequency of
occurrence in the diet. Families of Coleoptera not listed in the table but
included under Miscellaneous” were Cerambycidae, Dytiscidae, Elater-
idae, and Hydrophilidae. Miscellaneous families of Orthoptera included
Gryllidae, Locustidae, Oedipodidae, and Tettigoniidae.

Reptiles and rodents were the most abundant vertebrate food in volume
consumed, but amphibians were eaten more frequently.

Oklahoma Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, Oklahoma State Uni-
versity, Stillwater, Oklahoma.

FIELD IDENTIFICATION OF DIFFICULT BIRDS: I
SHORT- TAILED HAM

John C. Ogden

The uncommon Short-tailed Hawk (Buteo brachyurus) is often searched
for in peninsular Florida without being found. Almost certainly more would
be reported, however, if its habits were better known, and if current field
guides or other ornithological literature easily available to field workers
contained more correct and fuller descriptions of this species* plumages.
1 present here information on behavior and plumages of Short-tailed Hawks
which should aid in locating this species and in identifying it in the field.
I offer this information in the hope that increased frequency of accurate
sightings of Short-tails will occur, resulting in the accumulation of ad-
ditional data on breeding biology, habitat, and food habits of this unusual,
bird-hunting Buteo (Ogden, Auk, in press).

The Short-tailed Hawk is approximately the same size as the small
race of Red-shouldered Hawk resident in south Florida (Buteo lineatus
extimus), but differs considerably from these Red-shouldered Hawks in

Florida Field Naturalist, Vol. 1, — Fall, 1973

body proportions, A soaring Short-tail shows long, broad wings and a
relatively short, broad tail, and therefore is shaped more like the larger
Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), rather than like the slimmer-winged
and longer-tailed Red-shoulder. The tail of the Short-tailed Hawk is 6 or 7
inches long, and does not appear proportionately shorter than that of some
other buteos. Its wings, however,, are quite long and broad, and probably
have a greater surface area in relation to body size than do those of most
other buteos.

Short-tailed Hawks are most frequently seen in the air, often soaring
at great heights. They are most numerous near the edge of mature cypress,
pine or riparian hardwood stands, or over coastal mangrove forest. Their
flying often appears effortless, with individual birds performing little or no
flapping during hours of slow soaring or ‘‘hanging” on rising air currents
while searching for prey below. The wings are held flat when soaring, ex-
cept that the outer primaries are decidedly upturned, thus presenting a
different silhouette than that of the more completely flat-winged Red-
shouldered Hawk or Broad-winged Hawk (Buteo platyperus), or the dihedral
wing posture of the Swainson‘s Hawk (Buteo swainsoni). Short-tails at-
tempt to capture prey by swift, steep-angled dives, initiated from slow
soaring positions, a hunting technique that is characteristic enough of this
species to be useful for identification purposes.

Short -tailed Hawks rarely perch on exposed tree branches, utility
poles or wires, or fence posts. Instead they almost always perch at in-
conspicuous sites inside a thicket of large trees, or half hidden in leafy
uppermost branches of the tallest tree overlooking patches of woods. These
perches are used as roosts, for sunning, and for preening early and late in
the day. Although this habit of selecting hidden perches makes the birds
difficult to locate, it is sometimes possible to locate a Short-tail where
one is suspected to be roosting by watching from outside the woods, and
locating the hawk as it first leaves its hidden perch in the morning and
soars for several minutes low over the area. Short-tails often begin their
long soaring periods in summer between 0800 and 0900 hours, coincidental
with warming air and development of thermals necessary for efficient aerial
hunting.

The Short-tailed Hawk is dimorphic, with the dark color phase more
common in Florida (Moore, Stimson, and Robertson, 1953. Observations of
the Short -tailed Hawk in Florida. Auk, 70: 470-478). My observations in
Everglades National Park since 1965 have resulted in sighting of approxi-
mately 4 dark-phase birds for each white-phase bird, based on approximately
70 total sightings during these years. The mated pairs I have seen con-
sisted of these color combinations: dark male mated to white female, dark
male mated to dark female, and white male mated to white female. Fol-
lowing are descriptions of the adult and immature (first-year) plumages of
each color phase, with emphasis on useful field characters.

Adult, dark phase, A perched, dark Short-tail may appear uniformly

Florida Field Naturalist, Vol. — Fall, 1973

Ventral flight patterns of immature dark*phase (top) andwhite*phase (bottom)
Short-tailed Hawks in Florida,

black, but actually is dark brown and sooty black, darkest on the head and
underparts. The feet, legs and cere are bright yellow. There is greater
plumage contrast in flight, with the underside of the tail, the primaries,
and the secondaries light grey, palest (nearly white) at the base of the
outer primaries. The wing linings are uniformly sooty black. There are
numerous thin, dark bars across the light primaries and secondaries; a
broader terminal bar on each of these feathers creates a dark border on the
trailing edge of the spread wing. The underside of the tail shows a thin,
but pronounced, dark subterminal bar, with two thinner and broken bars
anterior to the subterminal. Feathers immediately posterior to the cere
show varying amounts of white, a small white patch forming in some birds,
a mark of little value for field identification of either color phase.

Adult, white phase. This plumage, as on dark»phase birds, is dark

brown on the upper side of the tail, wings, head, and body. Where the dark
phase is darkest, however, on the ventral body plumage and wing linings,
this plum.age is white. An occasional white-phase bird shows pale buff or
yellow-brown on the flanks and flag feathers, although this color is not
easily visible in the field.

A valuable field mark for white Short-tails is the distinctive head
pattern, produced by the sharp contrast between solid, dark head and white

Florida Field Naturalist, VoL I, — Fall, 1973

throat and underparts. Accentuating the contrast, the dark color of the
head extends uniformly to the edge of the throat and upper breast to create
the impression of a dark hood. The lower edge of this hood, at its inter-
face with the pure white breast, may be slightly reddish in tone, although
this character varies from obsolete to pronounced on different birds.

The underside of the tail, the primaries, and the secondaries are
similar to those of dark birds, although tail bars are more obscure, and
often only the narrow, dark subterminal bar is apparent. Strong sunlight
shining through the spread tail of a soaring white-phase Short-tail (and in
some dark ones) creates the illusion of a reddish-brown tail, rather than
pale grey. Seen from below, the primaries and secondaries are darker than
the white wing linings, and the narrow dark bars are less conspicuous than
in dark-phase birds.

Immatmes. Immature plumages of the two color phases are less well*
known and are inaccurately or not at all described in most field guides.
Ventral plumage patterns, of immatures, therefore, are illustrated here
(Figure 1).

The immature dark Short-tail, at .agreat distance, may be indistinguish-
able from an adult, but when overhead reveals an obviously different color
pattern. The throat, belly, under tail coverts, and wing linings are mottled
with small whitish and brownish spots, contrasting with a completely dark
breast. The amount of ventral mottling varies considerably and probably is
a function of age, feather wear, and fading. Some birds are so dark that the
contrast between the all -dark breast and the mottling is not conspicuous,
while other birds show almost equal amounts of light and dark in the mot-
tled portion of the plumage.

The other plumage difference in dark immatures is that the tail, seen
from below, shows more bars than in the adults, as is typical of many
immature Buteos. In Short -tails there are 5 narrow, dark bars, with the
outer, subterminal bar- only slightly broader than the remainder.

White-phase Short-tailed Hawks usually fledge during June, when they
are pale orange -buff on the underparts, palest on wing linings and throat,
and show no ventral markings except on a few narrow dark streaks on the
sides of the breast. The orange-buff color apparently fades during the
following months so that immatures seen in October are only faintly colored
below, and by mid -winter appear white. These mid-winter immatures look
superficially like white-phase adults, except for some light streaking on
the sides of the dark brown head. This head streaking may be particularly
concentrated at the auriculars. The tail is slightly more heavily barred
than the white-phase adult’s and is pale grey below with one narrow, dark,
subterminal bar and one or two thinner, broken bars inside the subterminal.

Division of Natural Science and Resource Management Studies, Ever-
glades National Park, Homestead, Fla. 33030

Florida Field Naturalist, Vol. 1, — Fall, 1973

A RED-HEADED WOODPECKER AT DRY TORTUGAS

William B. Robertson, Jr., and Lilia C. Below

On 5 May 1973 Mr. and Mrs. G.H. Perbix of Cincinnati and Mrs. Below,
members of the tern-banding party then at Dry Tortugas, visited Loggerhead
Key and at once noticed an adult Red-headed Woodpecker (Melanerpes ery-
throcephalus) in the large Australian Pines (Casuarina equisetifolia) near
the dock. Coast Guardsmen at Loggerhead Light Station said they had seen
the bird for several days. On 6 May Mrs. H.M. Robertson and Ann Robertson
of Tampa. Mr. Perbix, and the first author searched Loggerhead Key in the
late forenoon, finally found the woodpecker near where it was seen the day
before, and watched it for about 15 minutes. It was a typical adult and
seemed normally active as it made one long flight and several shorter moves
between feeding sites on the trunks and larger branches of live and dead
Australian Pines. The bird was silent during both observations. On 7 May
observers including Mr. Perbix spent most of the afternoon combing Log-
gerhead Key for birds. They did not find the woodpecker and saw many
fewer spring transient land birds than were there the two previous days.

We find only one other report of the Red-headed Woodpecker at Dry
Tortugas. Howell (1932:308) wrote that the species was unknown in the
Florida Keys . . except for a single occurrence on the Tortugas - a
bird seen there on a number of days early in June.’' He did not mention the
year, the observer, nor a reference citation, and, as far as we can determine,
Howell himself never visited Dry Tortugas. We failed to trace the record
but it probably was later than 1917, because the Red-headed Woodpecker
is not included in a list of Dry Tortugas birds of that date (Bartsch, 1919).
Howell’s sparsely detailed comment must have been the basis for the A.O.U.
Check-List statement (1957: 319), ”... accidental on the Dry Tortugas,
Florida.”

The Red-headed Woodpecker is not known to occur outside the United
States but the present record inevitably raises the question: Was the bird
migrating across the Gulf or was it merely a vagrant? In either case, the
record shows that the species is able to fly long distances over water. Any
bird that reaches Dry Tortugas on its own must cross a sea gap of at least
45 miles from the outer Florida Keys, and the closest credible source of
vagrant Red-headed Woodpeckers appears to be the Naples area, about 125
miles northeast of Dry Tortugas across open ocean. Records Mrs. Below
assembled indicate that a small breeding population exists around Naples,
and the recent occurrences farther south in Florida are few and erratic
(Kushlan, 1972).

Bent wrote (1939: 209), ”The migrations of the Red-headed Woodpecker
are imperfectly understood ...” His comment is particularly apt for the
deep Southeast where the species is reportedly less common in winter at
many places in Alabama (Howell, 1924; Imhof, 1962), Georgia (Burleigh,
1958), and northwestern Florida (Weston. 1965). Grimes (1972) noted that

Florida Field Naturalist, Vol. 1, — Fall, 1973

most of the local breeding population regularly leaves northeastern Florida
in late September and October and Edscorn (1972) that the species appears
to migrate north in fall out of central Florida. Much of the migration that
these reports imply may cover relatively short distances, and some of it
may be merely a seasonal shift of habitat, as from uplands into river
swamps. Various Florida records, however, suggest that Red-headed
Woodpeckers, occasionally or in small numbers, may migrate south of the
United States, These include: Mullet Key, Tampa Bay, 8-27 April 1954
and 9 April 1955 (Stevenson, 1954, 1955); Plantation Key, 15-18 April
1960, the only record from the main Florida Keys (Stevenson, 1960); and
Daytona Beach, 24 April 1972 (Kale, 1972). Especially notable are data
covering 25 years’ observation along the coast south of Tallahassee where
the species does not breed and winters only sparingly (Stevenson, pers.
comm.). These records from Gulf barrier islands (Dog Is., St. George Is. ,
St. Vincent Is.) and coastal sites most of which are woods isolated by salt
marshes (Alligator Pt., St. Marks Light, East Pt., Mashes Is.) show the
following seasonal distribution: late September to mid-November, 14 records;
mid-November to mid-April, about 17; mid-April to late May, 39. Some obser-
vations, such as five birds on Alligator Point after a cold front, 19 April
1969, strongly suggest spring migrants. It seems plain that Red-headed
Woodpeckers occur most frequently at the coast and on islands outside their
Florida breeding range during spring migration and during weather that
grounds migrants. We note, too, that at least one Red-headed Woodpecker
has figured in a fall TV tower kill in Florida (Stoddard and Norris, 1967: 57).

The available records fall far short of proof that Red-headed Wood-
peckers ever migrate south of the United States, but they suggest that the
question should be left open. It may be, as Edscorn (1972) argues, that so
conspicuous a species could not have been overlooked, but scattered,
silent individuals are not particularly conspicuous and a number of birds
that are unknown or virtually so in Cuba and Yucatan are more or less
regular migrants at Dry Tortugas. Examples are the Eastern Phoebe (Say-
ornis phoebe). Water Pipit (Anthus spinoletta), Orange-crowned Warbler
(Vermivora celata), and American Goldfinch (Spinus tristis).

We thank H.M. Stevenson for use of his unpublished records and J.B.
Edscorn for comments.

LITERATURE CITED

American Ornithologists Union. 1957. Check-List of North American Birds.
Lord Baltimore Press, Inc., Baltimore, Md. 691pp.

.Bartsch, P. 1919. The bird rookeries of the Tortugas. Smithsonian Report
for 1917, pp. 469-500.

Bent, A.C. 1939. Life Histories of North American Woodpeckers. U.S.
Natl. Mus. Bull. 174.

Burleigh, T.D. 1958. Georgia Birds. Univ. Oklahoma Press, Norman. 746pp.

Florida Field Naturalist, Vol. I, — Fall, 1973

Edscorn, J.B. Red-headed Woodpecker (Melanerpes erythrocephalus) migra-
tion in Florida. Florida Naturalist, 45: 63-64.

Grimes, S.A. 1972. Note (comments on Kushlan, 1972). Florida Naturalist,
45: 28-29.

Howell, A.H. 1924. Birds of Alabama. Dept, of Game and Fisheries of
Alabama, Montgomery. 384 pp.

Howell, A.H. 1932. Florida Bird Life. Coward-McCann, Inc., New York,
579 pp.

Imhof, T.A. 1962. Alabama Birds. Univ. Alabama Press. 591 pp.

Kale, H.W., II. 1972. Florida Region. Amer, Birds, 26: 751-754.

Kushlan, J.A.. 1972. Status of the Red-headed Woodpecker (Melanerpes
erythrocephalus) in south Florida. Florida Naturalist, 45: 27-28.

Stevenson, H.M. 1954. Florida region. Audubon Field Notes, 8: 307-309.

Stevenson, H.M. 1955. Florida region. Audubon Field Notes, 9: 326"328»

Stevenson^ H.M. 1960. Florida region. Audubon Field Notes, 14: 379-382.

Stoddard, H.L., Sr,, and R.A. Norris. 1967. Bird Casualties at a Leon
County, Florida TV Tower: an Eleven year Study. Tall Timbers Research
Station Bull. 8. 194 pp.

Weston, F.M. 1965. A Survey of the Birdlife of Northwestern Florida. Tall
Timbers Research Station Bull. 5. 147 pp.

Everglades National Park, Homestead, Fla. 33030, and P.O. Box 554,
Naples, Fla. 33940.

NOTES AND NEWS

Beginning with the present issue, the nomenclature and classification
of birds followed in the Florida Field Naturalist will incorporate the re-
visions presented in the “Thirty-second Supplement to the American Orni-
thologists’ Union Check-list of North American Birds’’ (Auk, 90:411-419).
Persons preparing notes or articles for publication in our journal are ex-
pected to utilize this information.

Participants in the Nest-record Card Program are requested to submit
any of their nesting records previously unreported. New volunteers for this
program are solicited. Those desiring information about the program should
contact Mrs. Edith Edgerton, Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, 159
Sapsucker Woods Road, Ithaca, N.Y. 14850

The Editor has a limited supply of tabulated Summer Bird Counts for
1971 and 1972. As long as the supply lasts, they are available to anyone

who sends a stamped (16^5), self-addressed envelope.

Florida Field Naturalist, VoL l,~-~Fall, 1973

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Through regrettable oversight, the generosity and skill of H. Jon
Janosik, who provided us with a very attractive cover design, were not
acknowledged. Mr. Janosik is a free-lance artist with a particular liking
for tropical birds. His address is Box 294, Independence, Oregon 97315.

FIELD NOTES

Another Inland Colony of the Least Tern

Lohrer and Lohrer (1973. Inland Nesting of the Least Tern in Florida.
Fla, Field Nat,, 1:3-5) have called attention to the rarity of inland nests
of the Least Tern (Sterna albifrons) in Florida. On 12 June 1973, Mrs. P.
A. Frank showed me a small colony of Least Terns nesting at an abandon-
ed strip mine near the intersection of Atlantic and Southside Boulevards
in Jacksonville, about 15 miles from the coast. Since the soil there is
ancient beach sand exposed by mining, the habitat strongly resembles
ocean dunes. There is a small marsh nearby where the terns feed.

On 12 June the colony contained 3 nests, each with 2 eggs. On 14
June one nest contained 2 young. Based on an incubation period of 20 or
21 days, this clutch must have been laid on 22,23, or 24 May. A fourth
nest was found on 19 June with 2 eggs. Three nests were subsequently
destroyed, probably by children. One young was seen on 21 and 24 June,
but could not be located on 29 June or 3 July. Adults were still present
and excited on 3 July, so at least one young tern may have survived.
-Robert W. Loftin, Univ. of North Florida. Box 17074, Jacksonville,
Fla. 32216.

Singing Female Orchard Orioles: A Word of Caution in Identifications

On 22 April, 1939, on the University of Alabama campus (Tusca-
loosa), I heard a song so similar to that of the Warbling Vireo (Vireo
gilvus) that I looked for that rarity with confidence. To my surprise, the
singer proved to be a female Orchard Oriole (Icterus spurius). The bird
showed no trace of the black throat patch of the one-year-old male, and
the song was quite different from that of the male, bearing some resem-
blance to that of a male Purple Finch (Carpodacus purpureas).

In recent years I have mentioned to other field workers that female
Orchard Orioles sometimes sing, but none thus far had previous knowledge
of the fact. For the most part this phenomenon has been overlooked in the
literature. Saunders (1935) did not mention it, but Bent (1958:203) stated
tersely, “. . . sometimes females sing a little.*’

The fact that I have recorded song by only 5 female Orchard Orioles
illustrates the unusual nature of the phenomenon. In the 1950’s one sang

Florida Field Naturalist, Vol. 1, — Fall, 1973

intermittently near my residence in northwest Tallahassee from spring to
mid»summer . This indicates that the practice is persistent in at least
some females. Others I have heard were at Lake Bradford (near Tallahas-
see), June 29, 1957; at St. Marks, July 4, 1959; and in northwestern Wal-
ton County, May or June, 1970. The records in late June and July raise
the question of the bird’s being a Juvenal male, but in each case the song
was typical of the female’s.

The strong similarity of the female Orchard Oriole’s song to that of
the Warbling Vireo has led me to wonder about the validity of certain
Florida records attributed to the latter species. Two of these were re-
ported on dates remarkably late for comparable latitudes farther west.
One was seen and heard singing at St. Marks on May 26, 1916 (Pennock,
1920; also cited in Florida Bird Life). E.E. Furnans, et ai., reported 2 on
a summer bird count at Pensacola, June 12,1971, but the published re-
ference (Edscorn, 1972) to one “singing male,’’ unless a typographical
error, does not agree with the actual number reported. In any case, this
record (like the one at St. Marks) was a visual as well as an auditory
one, thus tending to substantiate the identification by song. The third
record occurred in Wakulla County on the more normal migration date of
April 18, 1959 (Karl and Marion Zerbe, Mrs. F.H. Stoutamire), but in this
case the singing bird was not seen (Stevenson, 1959). Although singing
is comparatively rare in female Orchard Orioles, surely a singing Warbling
Vireo in Florida is even more unusual. Therefore observers in the breeding
range of the Orchard Oriole should be especially careful in basing their
identifications of Warbling Vireos chiefly on song.

LITERATURE CITED

Bent, A.C. 1958. Life Histories of North American Blackbirds, Orioles,

Tanagers, and Allies. Smithsonian Inst., Washington, D.C.

Edscorn, John. 1972. Florida’s 1971 summer bird count. Fla. Nat. 45.
83,99.

Pennock, Charles J. (=“John Williams’’). 1920. Notes on birds of Wakulla
County, Florida. Wilson BulL^ 32:5=21; 48»58.

Saunders, Aretas A. 1935. A Guide to Bird Songs, D. Appleton-Century
Co., New York.

Stevenson, Henry M. 1959. Spring migration: Florida Region. And. Field
Notes, 13:363-365.

Henry M. Stevenson, Dept, of Biol. Science, Fla. State Univ., Tallahassee,
Fla. 32306.

Florida Field Naturalist, VoL 1, — Fall, 1973

BE A PART OF THE ACTION

JOIN NOW

Florida Ornithological Society membership is for those
who want to know and take part in information about Florida's
Natural History. Members will have an opportunity to exchange
information with others through the semi-annual meetings and
through our journal. The Florida Field Naturalist, which is
issued in the Spring and Fall.

Regular membership $5.00

Associate membership $6.00

MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION

Name

Address

Regular Associate

Make checks payable to FLORIDA ORNITHOLOGICAL
SOCIETY, P.O. Drawer 7, Maitland, Florida 32751

SUGGESTIONS FOR CONTRIBUTORS

The Florida Field Naturalist welcomes articles and short notes con~
taining new information on subjects relevant to the biology of wild species
of birds or other vertebrates in or near Florida. Its emphasis is on field
biology. All articles, notes, and other materials should be submitted to the
Editor: Henry M. Stevenson, Department of Biological Science, Florida
State University, Tallahassee, Florida 32306.

All manuscripts should be submitted in duplicate. They should be
typewritten, double-spaced, on one side of numbered sheets of standard
(8 1/2x11 in.), unruled white paper, with margins of at least one inch
on all sides.

Titles should be short and descriptive, and the body of the article
should state the necessary facts without using unnecessary words. All
references should be cited in the body of the text unless there are more
than three, in which case each complete entry should be listed at the end
under “Literature Cited”, and the citation in the body should then indicate
author and year of publication (e.g., Bond, 1961). Whenever there are
more than two authors, Jist the first followed by ‘'et al” (e.g., Blair et al,
1968). Whenever pertinent, the particular page or pages should also be
indicated (Bond, 1961: 44).

The vernacular (common) names of all species mentioned—plants or
animals, should be capitalized, and the scientific name should be added
in parentheses following the first reference except in the title. The scien-
tific name should be underscored and should follow a widely accepted
authority for the group of animals or plants involved (e.g. A.O.U.
Check-list, 1957, for birds).

Abbreviations should be used sparingly in the body of the text except
in parenthetical material: e.g. “Tallahassee (5 mi. SE).” Digits rather than
words are recommended for all numbers except one ( 1 ) . The metric sys-
tem is preferred for weights and measurements and is acceptable for such
measurements as distances. In writing dates, never use a number to refer
to a month.

Proofs will be sent to the (senior) author. The Editor must be
informed well in advance of any change in address or mechanism for
handling proofs; also of necessary changes in the manuscript before proofs
are printed. Changes in proof are expensive, so authors must not expect
to make major changes at this stage unless they are willing to bear the
cost. When proofs reach the author, he should carefully check against the
typescript and promptly return both to the Editor.

Reprints should be ordered from the Florida Press (P.O. Box 393,
Orlando, Florida 32802) on blanks sent with the proof. Any number
above 50 must be paid for by the author. The cost will be determined
by the Florida Press.

CONTENTS

Editorial Page 1

A Preliminary Note on Organochlorine Residues in the Eggs of Eish-
Fish-eating Birds of the West Coast of Florida .................. Page 3

Bill Deformities in Two Florida Birds Page 6

Wood Stork Nesting in North Florida Page 9

Black-crowned Night Heron Diving for Prey

Food Habits of Burrowing Owls

Field Identification of Difficult Birds - Short-tailed Hawk .

A Red-headed Woodpecker at Dry Tortugas

Notes and News ............

Field Notes

Suggestions for Contributors Inside Back Cover

The Florida Field Naturalist

A Semi-annual Journal of
The Florida Ornithological Society

SPRING, 1974

Vol. 2

THE FLORIDA FIELD NATURALIST

JOURNAL OF THE FLORIDA ORNITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY
(Founded 1972)

Editor, Henry M. Stevenson, Dept of Biological Science,

Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida 32306

EDITORIAL STAFF

Betty McDonell, Managing Editor, Florida Audubon Society, P.O. Drawer 7.
Maitland, Fla. 32751

Allan D. Cruickshank, 1925 Indian River Dr., Rockledge, Fla. 32955

Herbert W. Kale, II, Entomological Research Center, P.O. Box 520, Vero
Beach, Fla. 32960

Oscar T. Owre, Dept, of Zoology, University of Miami, Coral Gables,
Fla. 33124

Glen E. Woolfenden, Dept, of Biology, University of South Florida, Tampa,
Fla, 33620

OFFICERS (1973)

President: William B. Robertson, Jr., Everglades National Park, Home-
stead, Fla. 33030

Vice President: John B. Edscorn, Route 3, Box 400, Lakeland, Fla. 33S01

Secretary: Curtis L. Kingsbery, 2900 N. Magnolia Ave., Pensacola, Fla.
32503

Treasurer: Mrs. Dorothy W. Freeman, 4515 Montclair Road, Orlando, Fla.
32806

Articles and notes submitted for publication, as well as books and
other publications intended for review, should be sent to the Editor (see
inside back cover). Notices of change of address, claims for undelivered
or defective copies of this journal, and requests for information about
advertising, subscriptions, and back numbers should be sent to the
Florida Audubon Society, P.O. Drawer 7, Maitland, Fla. 32751

Annual dues: members (also members of Florida Audubon Society),
$5.00; associate members (not members of Florida Audubon Society), $6.00;
Library subscriptions, S6.00. Send dues or subscription fees to the Florida
Audubon Society. P.O. Drawer 7, Maitland, Fla. 32751

Published semi-annually by the Florida Ornithological Society.

Printed by Florida Press, Inc. Orlando, Fla. 32809

COVER PAINTING OF THE EVERGLADE KITE (Rostrhamus sociabilis)
SPECIALLY EXECUTED FOR THIS JOURNAL BY JON JANOSIK.

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

THE FLORIDA FIELD NATURALIST
A SEMIANNUAL JOURNAL OF ¥ERTEBRATE BIOLOGY

¥ol. 2 Spring, 1974 No. 1

FIELD IDENTIFICATION OF DIFFICULT BIRDS: II
FOUR SIMILAR TERNS

Allen D. Cruickshank

Along the Atlantic Coast of the United States there are 4 rather similar
medium-sized terns in the genus Sterna that some observers find difficult to
identify. All 4 species are similar in size, depending on age, sex, and
season, and some overlap in characteristics surely occurs. An analysis of
the diagnostic field marks, however, reveals that most individuals can be
identified accurately at a reasonable range.

Arctic Tere (Sterna paradiseae) Accidental along the U.S. Atlantic
coast south of New England. Since only one positive U.S. record exists (New
Jersey) south of Long Island, Florida observers can dismiss this species
from their minds. The fact that for a brief period in autumn some Common
Terns have a pure red bill accounts for periodic, and probably erroneous,
reports of this species south of New York.

Adult: Mostly gray-white with pearl gray mantle and black cap. Grayer
than Common or Forster *s Terns, but this characteristic unreliable due
to varying effects of light. By far the best field mark is the fact that
the bill is blood^red to the tip, and usually noticeably shorter than in
similar species. In som.e lights a white streak just below the black cap
is noticeable (in Common Terns the face seems light). Since the tarsi
of the Arctic Tern are shorter, this species stands noticeably lower
than the neighboring Common Terns. The tail of the Arctic Tern is
longer, generally projecting slightly beyond the wing tips when at rest.
Voice: angry **kee-aiTrU* slightly higher pitched and less drawn out
than in Common Terns. An occasional **kee, kee** with a rising in-
flection is generally distinctive.

Immature and winter: Immature birds are virtually indistinguishable in
the field from immature Common Terns. Autumn adults are not easily
identified either, as the bill and feet become quite dusky.

Forster's Tern (Sterna forsteri) Normally this is the only truly common
(occasionally abundant) and widely distributed medium-sized tern throughout
Peninsular Florida for most of the year. At times it is common even on

1

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

lakes* ponds, and marshes in the interior. Although a few non=breeding
birds occur in summer* it is .essentially a transient and winter visitant*
mostly from July or early August to early April. Major flights are obvious
along the coasts in September and early October; less pronounced northward
flights occur during March and early April.

Adult: Very similar to Common Tern. Mostly white with pearl^gray
mantle, black cap* straw-orange bill with black tip, and straw^red
feet. The frosty wing tips (usually whiter than the mantle) are the best
field mark (Common Tern has dusky wing tips). It must be stressed
that the tail in many adult Forster’s Terns extends much farther beyond
the wing tips than it does in many Roseate Terns. Tail deeply forked,
pale gray with white margin (reverse in Common Tern)* but this margin
character is often difficult to determine in the field. Voice: a harsh
nasal '“churr,” and a rapid ''kik-kik-kik.”

Immature and winter: Normally a distinct black patch on each side of
the head through eye and ear (not joined across back of head as in
Common Tern). This and the frosty wing tips are sufficient for accurate
identification. The bill is generally blackish, the feet dusky to yellow-
ish. The dusky patch on the forepart of the wing in the immature Com-
mon Tern is absent in Forster’s, although there is generally some dusky
in the primaries in immatures.

Common Tern (Sterna hirundo) The small breeding colony on Bush Key
(Dry Tortugas), mentioned by Howell in Florida Bird Life, disappeared in
1937. Contrary to what many believe* this species is normally uncommon
over most of Florida during migrations and is rare in winter (mid-August
to mid-April). The main southward migration (small numbers beginning
early July; mostly mid-August to early November) is generally far off the
Atlantic shore and is recorded only by observers out on deep-sea fishing
boats during this period. Occasionally in migration during wild easterly
gales or hurricanes great numbers are blown onto the Florida Peninsula, and
then may appear in numbers even on inland lakes. The spring flight from
early April to mid-May is generally light, and in some years goes unrecorded. |
Adult: Very similar to Forster’s Tern, but bill carmine (not straw-
orange) with black tip. Wing tips dusky, not frosty; outer black edgings
on tail frequently obvious (reverse in Forster's). Voice: generally
sounds angry; a descending, drawn-out ''kee-arrr,” also a rapid “'kik-
kik-kik" as in Forster’s. *

Immature and winter: The black patch on each side of head through the
eye and ear continues around the back of head and joins on the nape >1
(widely separated in Forster’s), In immatures there is normally con-
siderable black on the nape, and a diagnostic black patch shows on the
forepart of the wing (absent in Forster’s). The legs are pale orange,

3

1:

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

the bill mostly blackish*

Eoseate Tern (Sterna dougallii) Audubon mentioned several small
breeding colonies on the Florida Keys* Today one small colony exists off
Key West and another colony on the Dry Tortugas, Even these birds are
absent some years, adding mystery to the situation. Elsewhere in the state
the Roseate Tern is considered an extremely rare transient along the At-
lantic coast, and is accidental in winter. All reports along the northern
Gulf coast have been questionable. It has been suggested that the scarcity
of records is because the species is primarily pelagic in migration, but it
must be remembered that the Roseate Tern is a relatively rare species in the
except around the main breeding grounds in Long Island Sound and
vicinity, (Where does that population winter?) Most Florida records come
during migrations in September, and again from mid-March to mid4!ay. The
maximum ever recorded in one day from the Brevard County shore is only 7,
The flight of this species is even lighter and more buoyant than that of
other medium* sized terns, but such a characteristic is so affected by wind
conditions as to make it unreliable on most days.

Adult: Very similar to Common Tern, but generally more slender with
longer, more deeply forked tail. At rest the tail extends far beyond the
wing tips (but this is also true in many adult Forster's). The rose
wash on the breast is rarely visible. This species has a paler, more
silvery mantle; the bill is usually uniformly black (sometimes with a
red base); the feet are dusky red. Voice: a harsh rasping **Kraak/*
lower in pitch than notes of similar terns; also a diagnostic *^cheewee**
suggesting the note of a Semi-palmated Plover.

Immature and Winter: Generally difficult to identify except at close
range. Forepart of head white; eye region, hind part of head and nape
black; crown shaded with grayish and indistinctly streaked; lesser
wing coverts brownish; bill mostly black; feet dusky orange. The pure
white tail generally has no marginal coloration, but this is usually
difficult to determine. Most Roseate Terns go south of the U.S. in
winter, and most Florida reports at that season are questionable. If
it were not for the diagnostic *®chewee'* call, this species would
generally go unidentified along the coast of Florida,

1925 Indian River Drive, Rockledge, Florida 32955

3

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

THE STATUS OF THE WHITE-TAILED KITE IN FLORIDA

Herbert W. KaleJI

Recent population increase and range expansion in North and Middle
America by the White ^;ailed Kite, Elanus caeruleus majusculus, ^ Parti-
cularly since the early 1960*s (Eisenmann, 1971; Thurber and Serrana,
1972), suggest that observers in Florida should be especially alert for the
presence of this species. Indeed since 1961 sightings in Florida have in-
creased considerably over the previous few decades.

Recent population increase and range expansion in North and Middle
America by the White-tailed Kite, Elanus caeruleus iencorus,^ particularly
since the early 1960’s (Eisenmann, 1971; Thurber and Serrana, 1972), sug°
gest that observers in Florida should be especially alert for the presence
of this species. Indeed , since 1961 sightings in Florida have increased con-
siderably over the previous few decades.

The Florida status of this ®*rare and local resident*' was summarized
in 1932 by Howell (1932: 163-164), updated in 1953 by Sprunt (1954: 93-94),
and included a total of 8 records prior to 1900 and 12 records between 1900
and 1954. Nine of these refer to collected specimens, with the most recent
specimen taken in 1920. The last known nesting in Florida, represented by
a nest without eggs, was seen on 4 February 1910 by D.J. Nicholson on the
Kissimmee Prairie (Sprunt, 1954). Only 2 additional observations were re-
ported in the 8 years following Sprunt's publication — one by S.G. lanovic
at Indian Prairie Canal on State Road (S.R.) 78 near Lake Okeechobee,
Glades County, on 4 January 1954, and one near Hialeah. Dade County, on
14 January 1954 by J.D. Thompson (Sprunt, 1963).

Eleven observations of White-tailed Kites have been reported in Flor-
ida since 1961. One was seen at Panther Point Sanctuary (Polk County)
on 14 March and 25 May 1961, and 28 October 1962 bythe Heinzmans (1963),
Jennings (1963) sighted an adult near his ranch on Rye Road W of Braden-
ton, Manatee County, on 27 February 1963. Norman Jaeger photographed a
bird at close range in the St. Johns Marsh, 2 miles SW of Melbourne in
December 1963 {fide A.D. Cruickshank). Brigham and Foster (1964) ob-
served an adult hovering over a wet meadow beside S.R. 721 and S.R. 70
near Brighton, Highlands County, on 19 February 1964. Edscorn (in litt.) de-
scribed in detail an adult kite observed closely as it flew northward across

^ I have followed the nomenclature proposed by K.C. Parke s (1958. Specific
relationships in the genus Elanus, (Condor 60: 139-140) rather than that
(Elanus leucurus) of the 5th edition of the A.O.U. Checklist.

4

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

the Tamiami Trail 2 miles W. of Carnestown, Collier County, on 1 May 1966.
The bird was watched until it passed out of view still flying to the north.
On 19 October 1966, a kite was seen by Hendrickson et al. (1967) along U.
S. 441, just south of Fort Drum, Okeechobee County. Dodd (in litt.) observed
an adult flying over a wet meadow several miles north of Myakka, Sarasota
County, near the junction of S.R. 70 and 780 on 14 November 1970. Kale
(Robertson, 1972) reported an immature kite at Vero Beach, Indian River
County, on 9 September 1971, and McGowan (Ogden, 1972) observed an adult
kite perched alongside I»75 near Lake City, Columbia County, on 1 August
1972. This bird was so tame it refused to fly even when rocks were thrown
at it (McGowan, in litt.) and is the most northerly record for the state. Fi-
gure 1 shows locations of all White^tailed Kite observations in Florida
since 1872.

The kite near Vero Beach (mentioned above) appears to be the only
observation of an immature bird, hence details of this occurrence are pre-
sented here. While driving home on the afternoon of 9 September 1971 about
3 miles south of Vero Beach, I noticed a gulWike bird slowly flying south-
ward at approximately 300»500 feet elevation and heading toward my house.
I reached home shortly before the bird arrived overhead and with 7-12x50
zoom binoculars was able to observe it for several minutes. When it reached
a point directly overhead it began circling slowly, gradually moving south-
ward. At this point I recognized it to be a kite, but unlike any I had ever
seen. The back, the dorsal surface of the wings, and the breast were brown-
ish, the undersurface of the wings and tail were white — characteristic of
the plumage of an immature White -tailed Kite.

Although records of this species have increased from a rate of 0.26
per year through the first half of the century to 0.91 per year since 1961
(1961-1973), the species must still be considered extremely rare. The Flor-
ida range appears to be the prairies of the central and west-central penin-
sula, much of which is now fenced rangeland and inaccessible to the public,
except for highways traversing the prairies (Robertson and Ogden, ms.). Part
of the increase in observations in the past decade may be the result of
more observers afield and greater mobility of observers, but the documented
increase of the species in Central America and western United States sug-
gests that we can expect more individuals to appear in Florida in the future.
Because they rarely remain for long in any one place, and since no breeding
has been reported in Florida for over 60 years, I suggest that these birds
are not local residents, but more likely accidentals or migrants from the
populations in the west or in Central America. Howell (1932) opined that
'The species seems to be on the verge of extinction in Florida.** Today,
the so-called resident population, like the breeding population of the Pere-
grine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) in the eastern United States, may indeed
be extinct.

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

Figure 1. Locations of White-tailed Kite observations in Florida 1872-1972.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am grateful to George Maxwell, John Ogden, and Bill Robertson for
critical review of this manuscript. This paper is Contribution No. 322,
Florida Medical Entomology Laboratory (formerly Entomological Research
Center), Florida Division of Health. This research was supported by NIH
Grant No. AI-06587.

LITERATURE CITED

Brigham, D., and B.S. Foster. 1964. White»tailed Kite (Elanus leucurus)
in Brighton. Florida Naturalist, 37: 90.

Eisenmann, E. 1971. Range expansion and population increase in North and
Middle America of the White-tailed Kite {Elanus leucurus). American
Birds, 25: 529-536.

6

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

Hendrickson, 0., A. Fdurdock, D. Heinzman, and G. Heinzman. 1967. White-
tailed Kite near Fort Drum. Florida Naturalist, 40: 30.

Heinzman, G., and D. Heinzman. 1963. White»tailed Kite in Polk County.
Florida Naturalist, 36: 126.

Howell, A.H, 1932. Florida Bird Life. Natl. Audubon Soc«, New York.
579 pp.

Jennings, L.K. 1963. White»tailed Kite in Manatee County. Florida Natural-
ist, 36: 89,

Ogden, J.C. 1972. The nesting season: Florida Region. American Birds,
26: 847=852.

Robertson, W,B., Jr,, 1972, The fall migration: Florida region. American
Birds, 26: 50»54.

Sprant, A,, Jr. 1954. Florida Bird Life, Coward-McCann Inc,,andNatL
Audubon Soc,, New York, 527 pp.

Sprunt, A., Jr, 1963. Addendum to Florida Bird Life. Florida Audubon Soc.,
Maitland. 24 pp.

Thurber, W.A,, and J.F, Serraria, 1972. Status of the White4ailed Kite in
El Salvador. Condor, 75: 489=491,

7

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

SPREAD OF THE ARMADILLO INTO
THE TALLAHASSEE»THOMAS¥ILLE AREA

Henry M» Stevenson and Robert L. Crawford

The Nine-banded Armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus) has occurred for
some time in the western Panhandle and Peninsular regions of Florida,
though the populations in the two areas did not have a common geographic
origin. The Peninsular population presumably resulted from one of two intro-
ductions. Bailey (1924) mentioned the release of a captive pair near Miami
in 1922, but apparently the progeny of this pair did not persist for many
generations. However, others escaped from a zoo in Cocoa about 1924^ and
it seems likely that these animals managed to establish the first permanent
population in Florida (Sherman, 1943), Following its initial establishment
in Brevard County, the armadillo spread northward and southward near the
coast and westward to the center of the Peninsula, with smaller numbers
possibly established throughout most of the remainder of the Peninsula by
1949 (Fitch et aL, 1952), By 1951 individuals had been reported as far west
as Dixie, Taylor, and western Wakulla Counties, and as far north as Hamil-
ton and Duval Counties (Neill, 1952), Many records of armadillos, however,
are known to represent recently escaped individuals, and it seems almost
certain that NeilPs record in Wakulla County could not have represented a
natural occurrence (see below).

During this period of Peninsular establishment and expansion (1922-51),
the Texas population was expanding its range northward and eastward. It
first crossed over into Louisiana in the 1920*s (Strecker, 1926; Lowery,
1943) and reached Mississippi in the 1930*s, but may not have been estab»
lished in Mississippi that early (Fitch et aL, 1953). Whether the first
records in the Florida Panhandle resulted from this population seems doubt-
ful, as an armadillo (thought to have been a gravid female) was released at
Foley, Alabama, as early as* 1937, and the species was established there
at least by 1949 (Fitch et aL, 1952). It seems likely that this introduction
led to the first records in west Florida, as Curtis Kingsbery informed us of
records around 1938-40. Burt L. Monroe, Jr., (pers. comm.) found it common
around Pensacola in the mid-1950*s. Only 40 miles farther east, however,
W.E. Shannon (pers. comm.) and H.H, Gaither (pers. comm.) did not find
them around Fort Walton Beach until about 1968. During the period 1966-68
Wolfe (1968) found armadillos widespread in the Panhandle, ranging as far
east as Holmes County, Records in Alabama lead one to suspect that the
invasion throughout the Florida Panhandle may have taken place somewhat ^
earlier, for Holliman (1963) mentioned records ** throughout the southern
tier of counties/*

8

Spring 1974 Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2

Thus by 1970 armadillos occurred throughout most of Florida except for

the Tallahassee region (that portion lying between the Apalachicola and
Aucilla Rivers). Since 1946, the senior author has spent thousands of hours
in the field in that part of the state but had never seen an armadillo nor
heard of such a record until the past few years. It seems highly improbable
that an established population of so conspicuous an animal, and so frequent
a traffic victim, could have remained undetected here. Thus we regard
Neill’s (1952) much earlier record in Wakulla County as an escaped animal.
The armadillo’s absence throughout this period in the Thomasville area is
less certain, as Colley (1962) showed records on his map in Grady and
Decatur Counties (Georgia), adding that 'These may be introduced animals.”
Wilson Baker and Roy Komarek (both pers, comm.) verified records in Grady
and Thomas Counties in the mid“1960’s, but thought they represented es-
capees. That the species was spreading in this direction from west Florida
was attested by a highway kill found by Stevenson and others one mile south
of Red Bay (Walton Co.,), Florida, on 7 June 1969 (specimen, FSU 652).
Within the next two days Mary Ann Olson (pers. comm.) found another high-
way kill near Panama City.

The first record in the Tallahassee region occurred when Jochen Wiese
(pers. comm.) found one in eastern Wakulla County in July 1972. Another
was found on the highway a few miles north of St. Marks on 25 September
1972, and a live one was seen a few miles farther east by Tom Berchem and
Randy Flowers on 25 May 1973 (Culver Gidden, pers. comm.). Road kills
at two points in Grady County, Georgia, were recorded on 26 July 1973
(Crawford, specimen, TTRS 704; H.L. Stoddard, Jr., pers. comm.). Local
inquiries yielded no record of captive or escaped armadillos.

Because the armadillo has long been present as far northwest as Taylor
and Hamilton Counties, it appears likely that the above invaders into the
Tallahassee-Thomasville area represented the Peninsular population, and
at that time none was thought to have crossed the Apalachicola River. How-
ever, a road kill found by Stevenson in Liberty County, 6 miles east of
Bristol on 18 August 1973, probably came from the nearby Panhandle popu-
lation. About 20 years ago Buchanan and Talmage (1954) predicted an even-
tual contact between the populations in Alabama and Peninsular Florida.
Apparently this prediction is now materializing in the Tallahassee area.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We are grateful to W. Wilson Baker for reading this manuscript and "to
him and D. Bruce Means for helpful suggestions.

LITERATURE CITED

Bailey, H.H. 1924. The armadillo in Florida and how it reached there. J.

Mamm,,5i 264-265.

9

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

Buchanan, G.D.. and R.V. Talmage, 1954. The geographical distribution of
the armadillo in the United States. Texas. Jour. Sci.p 6: 142-150.

Fitch, Henry S., Phil Goodrum, and Coleman Newman, 1952, The armadillo
in the southeastern United States, J. Mamm., 33: 21“37.

Golley, Frank B, 1962. Mammals of Georgia. Univ, of Georgia Press. Athens.
218 pp.

Holliman, Dan C. 1963. The mammals of Alabama. Unpubl. Ph. D, diS“
sertation, Univ. of Alabama.

Lowery, George H. 1943. Checklist of mammals of Louisiana and adjacent
waters. Occ. Papers Mus. ZooL, La. State Univ. 13:213-257.

Neill, Wildred T. 1952. The spread of the armadillo in Florida. Ecology,
33: 282-284.

Sherman, H.B. 1943. The armadillo in Florida. Fla. Entomologist, 26:
54-59.

Strecker, J.K. 1926. The extension of range of the Nine»banded Armadillo.
J. Mamm., 7: 206-210.

Wolfe, James L. 1969. Armadillo distribution in Alabama and northwest
Florida. Quart. Jour. Fla. Acad. Set, 31: 209-212.

Dept, of Biol, Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida
32306; Tall Timbers Research Station, Route 1, Box 160, Tallahassee,
Florida 32303.

Special Notice

Dr. Robert L. Fleming, of Kathmandu, Nepal, is presently completing
a book entitled Birds::of Nepal. There will be a limited first edition with
2000 copies for distribution in the U.S. In order to develop a fund to pay for
full color plates, a pre-publication price of $10.00 per copy (autographed by
the author) is being offered in 1974. In addition, you may commission an
original 9x15*' painting of your favorite Himalayan bird with a background
ofa selected Himalayan peak for $30.00. Finally, the original plates^ usbd^in
the book will be available on a first-come, firk-served basis Vor $100, $150
and $200 each, depending on detail and size. Orders placed now will place
your name high on a priority list when selections are made as the book
comes off the press. Checks may be made payable to Robert L. Fleming
and sent to Mrs. Vern Beieler. 1028 Crestwood, Wenatchee, Washington
98801 . . . Herbert W. Kale, IL

10

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

FIELD NOTES

White and Brown Pelicans Feeding Together

The two species of pelicans inhabiting Florida commonly occur to»
gether in the same coastal habitats but usually forage in very different
ways. Brown Pelicans (Felecanus occidejitaiis) normally forage by diving
from the air to capture fish at or under the water^s surface, whereas White
Pelicans fP. erythrorhynchos) forage by swimming and scooping fish up
from the water (Gunter, La. Acad, Sci,, 21: 34-39, 1958).

On 30 May 1973 at 0850 I saw a mixed flock of 40 Brown Pelicans and
7 White Pelicans feeding together at McKay Bay, Hillsborough County,
Florida. Both species of pelicans were swimming and foraging at the
water’s surface in typical White Pelican style. Judging from the definite
swallowing motions that followed nearly every bill thrust, the pelicans
were capturing food at a high rate of success. The pelicans were closely
packed and several additional Brown Pelicans flew to and Joined the flock
as I watched. The swimming direction of the flock changed several times
as if the pelicans were following a school of fish in the shallow water. The
pelicans didnot line up or ‘‘herd** their prey, nor did I see any fish shoaling
at the water’s surface. About 10 Laughing Gulls (Laras atricilla) joined
the flock and about 50 Least Terns {Sterna albifrons) foraged by plunge-
diving in the water in the immediate vicinity. After foraging for 10 minutes,
several of the Brown Pelicans flew to the nearby shore while the other
birds stopped feeding.

This record is unusual in that it shows that the two species of peli-
cans at least occasionally feed together and also because it records Brown
Pelicans foraging in a manner different from their usual plunge-diving. The
interspecific feeding flock of the two species is unique in over 75 hours of
observation I have made at McKay Bay. Ralph Schreiber, who is making a
comprehensive study of the Brown Pelican, informs me (pers. comm.) that
he has never seen the two species foraging together and, except at docks
and marinas where people feed them dead fish, he has rarely seen Brown
Pelicans foraging on the water’s surface. Both Gunter (1958) and Goss
(Auk, 5: 25-27, 1888) note that Brown Pelicans rarely forage while swim-
ming, and I have seen Brown Pelicans do so on one other occasion (11
Sept. 1973), this time without any White Pelicans being present. James J,
Dinsmore, Biology Department, University of Tampa, Florida 33606,

Seymour Byrd writes that he has now seen 30 varieties of birds in his
suburban yard and suspects that this is a record for yards of less than one
acre in size.

11

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

Recent Unprecedented Numbers of Buff-breasted Sandpipers

A decidedly rare migrant in Florida, the Buff-^breasted Sandpiper
(Tryngites subruficollis) has historically been recorded only in very small
numbers and primarily in September. Nearly all of its spring migration pas=
ses northward through Texas and the High Plains, which makes all the
more remarkable a flock of exactly 75 which were seen by about 100 Florida
Ornithological Society members on 28 April 1973 at Mullet Key near St.
Petersburg. A tornadic, northwesterly front two nights before had swept in
a myriad of trans»Gulf migrants, and many continued to arrive for two more
days, presumably from coastal points farther south where they had first
come ashore. The usually tame Buff»breasts were very flighty; at noon
they often took off and circled excitedly, by 1600 only 37 remained, and
at 1830 Henry Stevenson, Stephen Stedman, and the writer saw them fly
fly away up the coast. Two hundred miles farther north, near St. Marks
Light, Stevenson saw 3 on 30 April.

The Mullet Key number nearly equalled the two flocks combined (each
of 40+ birds) which had been present simultaneously at Zellwood and Rod-
man Reservoir between 19 August and early September, 1972, the total of
which exceeded all previous Florida records combined. Those of us who
found the Zellwood birds were surprised not only by their number, but also
by their earliness and concealment in tall grass and weeds. Since the few
past Zellwood records had involved birds seen in very open areas, and
only in September, we wondered if earlier birds had not formerly been over-
looked. Following up on this in 1973, we again found good numbers between
16 August and 15 September, and the largest number (24 on 25 August) were
again in head-high vegetation. Of interest were two of these upland birds
seen among many other shorebirds feeding in shallow water on 18 August.
Very careful coverage of various habitats probably will prove this species
to be an earlier, more regular, and a bit more common, fall migrant than
has heretofore been evident. John B, Edscorn, RL 14, Box 350, Lakeland,
Florida 33801,

Remarkable Weights Carried by Red-shouldered Hawks

In Everglades National Park on 14 November 1971 a Red-shouldered
Hawk of the small, very pale south-Florida race (Buteo lineatus extimus),
appeared from beyond a line of trees 100 meters from where, partly con-
cealed, my mother, my daughter Heidi, and I stood. It Hew straight toward
us, while carrying a Louisiana Heron (Hydranassa tricolor) of considerably
greater dimensions than itself, and lit on the ground only 3 meters away. It
began to tear into its prey which, judging by the bleeding, had just been
killed. Then it saw us and flew away screaming. We stepped off the distance

12

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

to the heron and withdrew to perhaps 100 meters. The hawk did not resume
its repast, so we drove away to assure it privacy.

On 19 January 1969 another Insular Red^shouldered Hawk crashed into
Black Mangrove (Avicennia nitida) pneumatophores beside my boat, barely
missing a Green Heron (Butorides virescens). I assumed that prey of that
size could be carried, but a big, gangly Louisiana Heron being borne through
the air by one of these buteos was astonishing. This species can make off
with prey of almost unbelievable size and weight. On 21 November 1970
Paul Fellers and I parked just 2 m from an immature Red^shouldered Hawk
in Lake County which frantically got away from us with its full-grown Gray
Squirrel (Scimus carolinensis), by dragging and actually lifting it in very
short, laborious flights. That young hawk very possibly was briefly lifting
a weight equal to its own. Perhaps even heavier was the small Opossum
(DidelpMs marsupialis) which I saw an adult Red^shoulder carry off strong-
ly on 10 March 1973 in Polk County.

Specimens at the University of Miami include south Florida Red-
shouldered-Hawks of 384, 402, .409, 424, and 584 grams, Louisiana Herons
of 265, 299, 378, 380, and 390 grams, and Gray Squirrels of 401, 410, and
499 grams. John B, Edscorn, RL 14, Box 350, Lakeland, Florida 3380L

GIos^ Ibis Nesting in Southern Florida

Although the Glossy Ibis {Plegadis falcinellus) nests commonly at
Kings Bar in Lake Okeechobee, there are only a few records, all over 30
years old, of its nesting further south in Florida, A few pairs were reported
to have nested in large mixed-species colonies of wading birds at Shark
River in 1934 and at an unnamed southwest coastal river in 1940 (Allen,
1934a, b; Baker, 1940). A few were also reported to have nested in 1940
at a colony north of Tamiami Trail (Baker, 1940). Considering the incom-
pleteness of existing information on the early history of southern Florida
wading birds, the two reports of nesting near Shark River suggest that the
Glossy Ibis probably nested there irregularly and in small numbers through-
out the 1930*s. The record from Tamiami Trail is certainly a single episode.

Despite relatively intensive coverage of wading bird colonies after
the 1930's, sponsored by the National Audubon Society, Everglades National
Park, and other agencies, there had been no additional nesting records
south of Lake Okeechobee until the spring of 1973, At that time we found
Glossy Ibis nesting in a wading bird colony located about 2.5 km south of
State Road 84 (Alligator Alley) between U.S. Highway 27 and the Miami
Canal in the Everglades of Conservation Area 3, The colony was composed
primarily of White Ibis (Eudocimus albus), Great Egrets (Casmerodius ai-
bus), Louisiana Herons (Hydranassa tricolor), and Snowy Egrets (Egretta

13

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

thula). Due to the difficulty of reaching the colony, it was not visited until
25 May. By then, young ibis of both species were able to fly but were still
in the colony. A fledgling Glossy Ibis, found injured, died in captivity on
21 June 1973. The skin is deposited in the reference collection of the
University of Miami (UMRC 7497). By the time of our visit, it was not pos»
sible to estimate the number of nesting Glossy Ibis. However, previous
counts of the number of Glossy Ibis entering and leaving the colony suggest
that there were approximately 600 nests. This tallies well with a count of
1300 Glossy Ibis which roosted on an island north of Tamiami Trail just
prior to the nesting season.

This is the first proven nesting of Glossy Ibis in the Everglades.
However, a few were seen all spring in 1972 at a White Ibis colony located
about 11 km south of the 1973 colony (Kushlan, 1973). Although no nests
or young were found in that colony, they could have been overlooked due to
its size.

We would like to thank Mr. Carl Gage of Key Largo, Florida, for
piloting the flight on which the colony was discovered. We would also like
to take this opportunity tc acknowledge our indebtedness to Michael Ardoin,
biologist, teacher, and friend,

LITERATURE CITED

Allen, R.P. 1934a. Mr. Allen in the field. Bird-Lore, 36: 213-214.

1934b. Inspection of Gulf Coast sanctuaries. Bird-Lore, 36:

338-342.

Baker, J.H. 1940. Blue shanty rookery. Bird-Lore, 42: 364.

Kushlan, J.A. 1973. White Ibis nesting in the Florida Everglades. Wilson
Bull., 85: 230-231.

James A. Kushlan, Department of Biology, Univ. of Miami, Coral Gables,
Florida 33124, and James L. Schortemeyer, Fla. Game and Fresh Water
Fish Commission, Ft. Lauderdale, Fla. 33315.

A New North Florida Wood Stork Colony

On 24 June 1973 we visited a previously unreported Wood Stork
(Mycteria americana) nesting site on Black Hammock Island in northeastern
Duval County (R. 28 E., T. 1 N. Sec. 15). Approximately 30 nests and 65
young storks, some almost able to fly, were observed. The colony was in a
two-acre Black Tupelo (Nyssa sylvatica) and Buttonbush (Cephalanthus
occidentalis) swamp. All stork nests were in Black Tupelo and were from
2 to 10 meters above 30 centimeters of standing water. Other species of
wading birds nesting in this swamp in order of their abundance were Cattle

14

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

Egret (Bubulcus ibis), Louisiana Heron (Hydranassa tricolor), Great Egret
(Casmerodius albus). Snowy Egret (Leucophoyx thula), Little Blue Heron
(Florida caerulea), White Ibis (Eudocimus albus), and Black-crowned Night
Heron (Nycticorax nycticorax).

The property on which the colony exists is owned by Haywood Smith,
who has lived there and observed storks in the area for 3 years. To his
knowledge this was the first year they nested there. It is noteworthy that
the colony was bordered on 3 sides by pasture and was only SOO meters
from two occupied house trailers, Stephen A. NesbitF Game and Fresh
Water Fish Commission, 4005 South Main Street, Gainesville^ Florida 32601^
and John H, True, Jacksonville Zoological Park, 8605 Zoo Road, Jackson
ville, Florida 32218,

Purple Gallinule Carrying Young

While fishing on Lake Jackson, Leon County, On 9 July 1967 ^.L. Cliff
Chavez and I observed an adult Purple Gallinule (Porphyrula martinica)
flying with a large, black object in its bill. As it passed we could- see that
it was carrying a downy chick by the nape or back. The bird, thus burdened,
flew about 75 meters from one patch of water lilies to another and, still
carrying the young one, walked another 50 or more meters across the lily
pads, finally disappearing into an area of emergent grass.

The distance of the observation was too great to determine the specific
identity of the chick, although the Purple Gallinule is a fairly versatile
predator, it seems probable that this individual was not engaged in an act
of predation or cannibalism since other species of rails are known to carry
their young. This behavior has been recorded in the Water Rail, Rallus
aquaticus (Zimmerman, 1937; Desfayes, 1951), Virginia Rail, Rallus limP
cola (Bent, 1927; Walkinshaw, 1937), Clapper Rail, Rallus longirostris
(Tompkins, 1937), King Rail, Rallus elegans (Johnson, 1950), and Common
Gallinule, Gallinula chloropus (Wolff, 1953).

What is perhaps noteworthy about the present instance is the relatively
great distance covered and the fact that the adult both walked and flew
while holding the chick. It is interesting to note that at least two other
species, of birds that live on, floating vegetation (the jacanas Actophilornis
africanus of Africa and Irediparra gallinacea of Australia) have developed
a rather specialized method of transporting their young under their wings
(Hopcraft, 1968; Cobcraft, 1934).

Later on the same day as the above observation, we happened to run
very suddenly in our boat upon a brood of small, downy Purple Gallinule
chicks. These readily effected their escape by expertly diving and swim^
ming under lily pads. I had previously noted that adults of this species are
capable of diving and swimming underwater (Olson, 1966), so it was inter-

15

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

esting to see that this ability was well developed in the downy chicks.

LITERATURE CITED

Bent, A.C. 'U926** (=1927). Life Histories of North American Marsh Birds.
U.S. Natl Mus, Bull 135. 490 pp.

Cobcraft, K. 1934. The jacana. Emu, 34: 47»49.

Desfayes, M. 1951. Rale d'eau transportant ses jeunes. Nos Oiseaux, 21:
129.

Hopcraft, J.B.D. 1968. Some notes on the chick-carrying behavior of the
African Jacana. Living Bird, 7: 85-88.

Johnson, R.A. 1950. King Rail carries its young. Bird-Banding, 21: 18.

Olson, S.L. 1966. Purple Gallinule survives loss of wing. Florida Nat,,
39: 117.

Tompkins, LR. 1937. Wayne’s Clapper Rail carries its young. Wilson Bull,
49: 296-297,

Walkinshaw, L.H. 1937. The Virginia Rail in Michigan. Auk, 54: 464-475.

Wolff, G. 1953. Grunfussiges Teichhuhn tragt Junge aus dem Nest. Vogel-
welt, 74: 182-183.

Zimmerman, R. 1937. Fortpflanzungsbiologische Beitrage. VIIL Zur Fort-
pflanzungsbiologie der Wasserralle, Rallus a, aquaticus L. Mitt, Ver,
Sachs, Ornith,, 5: 105-111.

Storrs L, Olson, U,S, National Museum, Washington, D,C, 20560,

Evidence for Learning to Feed in Laughing Gulls

Considerable recent information indicates that feeding ability improves
with age and experience in several genera of birds whose feeding methods
require capture of live prey - Pelecanus (Orians, Anim. Behav,, 17: 316-
319, 1969); Florida (Recher and Recher, Anim. Behav., 17: 320-322, 1969);
Sterna (Dunn, Ibis, 114: 360-366, 1972). Our note presents evidence for the
development of feeding behavior for the Laughing Gull {Larus atricilla).

On 29 July 1973 on the Gulf of Mexico beach at Manasota Key, Char-
lotte Co., Florida we cast-netted large numbers of 4 to 9 cm Scaled Sar-
dines (Harengula pensacolae). Laughing Gulls continuously cruise along
this beach, and when we threw fish into the air in front of one, it wheeled,
called, and came to the food. Within approximately 5 minutes, 15 to 20
gulls were circling and swooping over us as we tossed fish into the air.
Judging by its distinct plumage, one of the gulls was a juvenile, not more
than 3 months old. The remainder were birds in adult plumage. The adult

16

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

gulls circled with the downwind passage about 2 to 4 meters over our heads.
When we tossed a fish into the path of one, it caught the fish easily, often
performing intricate aerial maneuvers to do so. We counted only 12 misses
in 97 tosses in which we judged the adult should have caught the fish.

The juvenile, on the other hand, hovered out of the mainstream of the
flock approximately 10 to 13 meters above and to one side of us. It called
frequently, behavior rarely exhibited by the adults, and whenever we threw
a fish in its direction, it attempted to avoid rather than catch it. It ap^
peared to be curious about the other gulls’ activity but seemed unaware of
how to become involved and what to do. After several minutes of hovering
nearby, the young bird joined the flight pattern of the adults but remained
about 4 to 9 meters over our heads. We attempted to direct fish toward this
young individual and in circumstances similar to those of the adult the
juvenile caught only one of 23 fish. In four of these cases an adult stole
the fish before the young could respond. The one fish the young captured
was the last one thrown, approximately ten minutes after it joined the
flock.

Watching this bird, it was obvious to us that at first it was attracted
to the flock of gulls, and only after a period of time did it realize that food
was available. Then it required practice to learn how to catch a tossed
fish. Although this is a rather unusual feeding technique, along Florida
beaches humans commonly throw food to hovering gulls and this may be an
important supplemental food source. We believe this is an example of the
learning process involved in the feeding methods of Laughing Gulls and
perhaps shows one of the selective factors contributing to mortality of newly
independent young.

J.J. Dinsmore and F.E. Lohrer made a valuable comment on this
manuscript. Ralph W, Schreiber and Sanford N. Youngs Department of

Biology, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, 33620.

A Black-capped Petrel Specimen from Florida

The Black-capped Petrel (Pterodroma hasitata) is a rare bird anywhere
in North America (Palmer, 1962), and may exist only in small numbers
throughout the world because of habitat alteration (Wingate, 1964) and,
possibly, more recently because of high DDT body loads (Wingate and
Wurster, 1968). Of approximately 12 records from North America, most are
of individuals blown north and inland by oceanic storms. The two previous
records from Florida, both based on specimens, are from near the Indian
River Inlet, winter 1846-47 (see Sprunt, 1954), and the WCTV tower, fall of
1964 (Stoddard and Norris, 1967). The specimen here reported was found
sick on Melbourne Beach, Brevard County, on 14 June 1972, by an employee
of the Animal Control Department, and it was given to Kale by Carlton

17

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

Teate of the Florida Injured Wildlife Sanctuary* Although storm conditions
seem not to account for this occurrence, several other pelagic birds (3
Greater Shearwaters, Puffinus gravis; 1 White-tailed Tropicbird, Phaethon
lepturus; 1 Pomarine Jaeger, Stercorarius pomarinus) were found sick
along the same stretch of beach at about the same time^ suggesting some
sort of die-off (Ogden, 1972).

We are following the taxonomic decisions expressed in the Handbook
(Palmer op.cit,), in'which the Black-capped Petrel, P.h. hasitata, and the
Bermuda Petrel, P.li. cahow, are considered conspecific, except that this
work refers to the species as the Capped Petrel. All North American speci-
mens, so far as we know, are of the nominate race. Details regarding the
new Florida specimen are as follows: female, ovary 10 x 6 mm, largest ova
9.5 mm; weight 235 g, emaciated and with no fat; bill 30.5 mm; wing (arc)
302 mm; wing span 1014 mm; tail 133 rnrii; tarsus 38.5 mm. These data con-
firm that the specimen represents P.h, hasitata.

With some trepidations on our part regarding esthetic qualities, we
had the specimen prepared as a complete flat skin as opposed to the stand-
ard preparation as a round skin. Thereby we also obtained a complete
skeleton. The trachea is preserved in fluid, and most of the rhamphotheca
is with the bones. The tarsal sheath was not saved. All parts bear cata^
logue number GEW 4707. Preparation in this manner provides a complete
skeleton verifiable by its skin, of a species reportedly rare in skeleton
collections (S.L. Olson, pers. comm.), and a skin better designed for ptery-
lographic and molt studies.

Study of the bones revealed extensive arthritic-like, rough»*surfaced
ossification of the otherwise undamaged left shoulder bones — the humerus,
furcula, scapula, and especially the coracoid. The cause of sickness of
this individual remains unknown, but it seems unlikely that a bird designed
to fly in order to forage could function properly in its condition. Study of
the flat skin revealed a curious absence of most of the greater upper second-
ary coverts from the left wing only. We are unable to explain this aber-
rancy, although we note it is on the same side as the injury to the shoulder
bones. No normal molt is evident on the specimen.

LITERATURE CITED

Ogden, John C. 1972. The nesting season: Florida Region. Amer, Birds
26: 847“852.

Palmer, Ralph S. 1962. Handbook of North American birds. New Haven,
Yale Univ. Press.

Sprunt, Alexander, Jr., 1954. Florida Bird Life. Coward-McCann, New York.

18

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

Stoddard, Herbert L., Sr*, and Robert A. Norris. 1967. Bird casualties at a
Leon County, Florida TV tower: an Eleven^year Study* Tall Timbers Res,
Sta. Bull. no. 8, 104 pp.

Wingate, David B. 1964, Discovery of breeding Black-capped Petrels on
Hispaniola. Auk 81: 147-159,

Wingate, David B., and Charles F. Wurster, Jr. 1968. DDT residues and
declining reproduction in the Bermuda Petrel. Science 159: 979-981.

Glen E. Woolienden, Dept, oi Biology, University of South Florida, Tampa,
Fla, 33620, and Herbert W. Kale, H, Florida Medical Entomology Laboratory,
Florida Division of Health, PoO. Box 520, Fero Beach, Fla. 32960,

Least Terns Nest at Dry Tortugas

As late as the mid-1930*s, several hundred pairs of Least Terns
(Sterna albifrons) bred annually at Dry Tortugas. Thereafter their numbers
dwindled rapidly, despite protection, with the last known breeding (one
nest on Bush Key) reported in 1949 (see Robertson, 1964. Bull. Fla, State
Mus., 8:73-75, for history of the population). More recently, Least Terns
have become rare at Dry Tortugas in any season and most of the few seen
appear to be transients. From 1963 to date, we knov/ of 10 reports in spring
(12 ApriL25 May) by various observers and one in fall, on the late date of
12 October (Mrs. F.E. O'Brien, 1972). Except for a group of 6 on Garden
Key, 12 April 1972, all these observations were of lone adults. For the de^
cade prior to 1973, several weeks of field work annually in June and July
produced only two observations of Least Terns. On 8 June 1966, several
hours after the center of hurricane Alma crossed directly over Dry Tortugas,
C.R. Mason and N.D. Steffee saw 8 adults on Garden Key, and W.B. Robert-
son saw one there the next day. These birds may have been transported to
the area in the eye of the storm. On 3 July 1970, members of that year's
tern^banding party found 2 adult Least Terns on East Key, but saw nothing
to suggest that they were nesting. Also a long-dead Least Tern was found
on Loggerhead Key, 30 June 1970, and the skeleton preserved (G.E.W, No.
4445).

On 1 July 1973, as members of the tern»banding party landed on Middle
Key, Dry Tortugas, they saw 4 adult»plumaged Least Terns and one fledged
juvenile in the company of 8 adult-plumaged Roseate Terns* Sterna
dougalUL Search of the island, a barren sand bank with only a small area
above high tide, revealed 2 Least Tern nests, one with 2 eggs and the
other with one egg, and 4 Roseate nests, each with 2 eggs. We also found
an apparently abandoned Least Tern nest with one egg and saw about 15
Roseate eggs, presumably from nests washed out by tides, in the lines of
wrack along the beaches. At our next visit on 5 July, we did not see the

19

Florida Field Naturalist Vol 2 Spring 1974

juvenile Least Tern, but found the same number of adult-plumaged Leasts
and Roseates. The two Least Tern nests contained the same number of
eggs as before and were being closely attended by adults. One clutch of
Roseate eggs had disappeared and the other 3 nests of Roseates now held
one egg each.

We have no later information on this nesting, but it is of interest that
Least Terns have again attempted to nest at Dry Tortugas after an absence
of almost 25 years. We have deposited two photographs of the two-egg
Least Tern nest (courtesy of Marsha L, Winegarner) at Everglades National
Park to document the record. Glen E. Woolienden, DepL of Biology, Univ.
of South Florida^ Tampa, Fla, 33620, and William B, Robertson, Jr., Ever-
glades National Park, Homestead, Fla, 33030,

Lesser Black-backed Gills in Florida

The Lesser Black-backed Gull (Lams fuscus) was first reported in the
Western Hemisphere during the early 1930 's from along the coasts of the
mid-Atlantic states. Since then records of the species from North America
have increased dramatically, and now the bird is known from eastern Canada
and the Great Lakes region in the North to Texas and Florida in the South.
We obtained the first Florida specimen (GEW 4440) on 22 February 1971
along the Courtney-Campbell Causeway in Hillsborough County. It is a
male in adult plumage, weighing 938 g with moderate fat. It proved to- be of
the western European race, L.f. graeUsii, which, as far as we know, is the
only subspecies known to occur in the Western Hemisphere. Our identifica-
tion was corroborated by Eugene Eisenmann with use of specimens at the
American Museum of Natural History. All other North American records of
this species known to us also are of adult -plumaged individuals, even
though immature gulls typically wander farther than older birds. Most likely
this is the case also for the Lesser Black.-backed Gull, but immatures pro-
bably are overlooked because they are virtually indistinguishable from im-
mature Herring Gulls (Larus argentatus).

Only one sighting of the Lesser Black -backed Gullexisted for Florida
prior to the 1970's, a bird observed by Alexander Sprunt, Jr., and others at
Key West in 1938. Wisely it was relegated to the Hypothetical List in the
absence of a voucher specimen (Sprunt, ! 1954. Florida Bird Life. Coward-
McCann, Inc., New York City). Six sight records have been published since
our collection of the first specimen (American Birds, vols, 25-27): one
from McKay Bay, Tampa; 3 in the Florida Keys; one at Cape Canaveral;
and one at Marco Island. The Marco sighting occurred in early May, but all
others are from mid-October to early March, including two instances of ap-
parently the same individual remaining at the same locality all winter. To
our knowledge no great increase in experienced observers has taken place

20

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2 Spring 1974

in Florida during the past 10 to 15 years, therefore we suspect these recent
records are indicative of a real increase in this European vagrant in Florida.
Local observers have a good opportunity to document the early history of
this species in Florida, but we urge careful study before idehtifications
are decided upon. Both of us have witnessed erroneous identifications when
observers attempted to distinguish between the Lesser Black-backed Gull
and the Great Black-backed Gull (Larus marinus), which definitely is in-
creasing as a winter resident in Florida. Glen E. Woolfenden and Ralph W.
Schreiber, Department of Biology, University of South Florida, Tampa,
Florida 33620,

ERRATUM

Through inadvertence * the pages were not numbered in volume 1,
number 2, of this journal. The editorial should be numbered page 17 and
the remaining pages numbered consecutively through page 38. The page
numbers appearing in the table of contents on the outside back cover are in
error.

Fall Meeting

Fla. Ornithological Society

November 8 - 10, 1974

Gainesville

h

21

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

OBITUARY

Alexander Sprunt, Jr.

Alexander Sprunt Jr., was probably as well known ornithologically in
Florida as in his native state of South Carolina, He was born on 16 January
1898 at Rock Hill, in north-central South Carolina, but lived all except the
first two years of his life in Charleston, where he passed away on 3 Janu-
ary 1973.

Sprunt was in Florida frequently from the mid~1930’s, when he was
appointed Supervisor of Southern Sanctuaries of the National Audubon
Society, through the 1960’s. He was the first Audubon Screen Tour lec-
turer to visit our state. His enthusiasm in this work has never been excelled.
Floridians will also remember him well for his revision of Arthur Howell’s
Florida Bird Life. Sprunt was a prolific and versatile writer. He did a week-
ly nature column for many years for the Charleston News and Courier,
contributed numerous notes and articles to ornithological and other journals,
and was author of several outstanding books on birds. The principal ones
are South Carolina Bird Life (with E. Burnham Chamberlain), The Warblers
of America (with Ludlow Griscom), and North American Birds of Prey. It
was my pleasure to join with him in the publishing of An Album of Southern
Birds.

It was also my good fortune to be with Alex on several unforgetable
excursions to south Florida -- to the Keys, Lake Okeechobee, the south-
west coast, and various parts of the Everglades. Once when we hired an
old Seminole guide and had gone deep into the ‘Glades our guide stayed
away from camp and got lost, but we found him after considerable searching
in our rented jeep. On another stay in the ‘Glades we sat one afternoon with
several Indians in a chickee - a little open structure of cypress poles
with a thatched roof of palmetto fronds* The weather was warm and the
biting flies were fierce. While Alex and I were swatting in all directions, we
noticed that the Indians were not bothered at all. Later I asked Alex why
this strange situation, and he just shook his head. I don’t think Alex ever
figured it out, and neither have I.

Alex Sprunt was at his best as a story teller. This was revealed to
me first and most impressively at the 1937 AOU convention in Charleston,
where I was among guests at his home and at private gatherings of small
groups of mutual friends. The mood was always jovial when he was on hand.

Sprunt joined the American Ornithologists’ Union in 1923, became an
Elective Member in 1936, and a Fellow in 1950. In 1954 he was awarded the
honorary degree of Doctor of Science by Davidson College, having attended
that institution just short of four years before he enlisted in the U,S. Navy
in 1918.

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

Alexander Sprunt, Jr., is survived by his wife, Margaret, a daughter,
Jean, and a son, Alexander Sprunt, IV, who is following in his illustrious
father’s footsteps. “Sandy” is particularly well known to Floridians inter-
ested in ornithology and in conservation in general, having made his home
in the Keys for many years.

Conservationists in the Southeast have lost a staunch standard bearer
with the passing of Alexander Sprunt, Jr. Samuel A Grimes, 4627 Peachtree
Circle, E,, Jacksonville, Florida 32207,

23

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Spring 1974

•V'

• ■ :.e 'Is : { i

» «’.J ■

..-I

*■•' \'' ri’\
' ,> ■ " '

-■■,.•• «r.j-»->T», ■'■'» i.v,’ " r*>v ' . ' . ■

. i .4.?4 'SJ:S55tX-4;r^^ '* " , ■ ■■'''/ .^

'' - Wt'x

v '. : k ^ ■ .„

■ _ k-O':

' i/ VJ. nV’’

VUkV'-

N /...1

W';.>

■■■‘C'l

V* ■ - ^ ‘ '*■

V. . , t ?< A1

fer.-'

■' T ' '

^ v^-'- 'v^- ''■•■> i ' j^S

v:W'’.'‘ ' X' t‘': ■'• ''•’ r^'''.v*'. ■. .; I .;V'’';5--'-

';. //•ikX'T ■''■'*

■Jj /V ^kXj-'. ,

“ '^fT..-''

1,^ / M W ?

V ' --

■ ■ ■■ ' ■ ■■

■f^

’• aM’4

■ ■ ‘

. .'i_iy .- ■ ..r-<jrr^v’jV-'i^j

vV

< -lA

V'-i

A-.vV . .'•■^

■ , , ;v '':'^.'-.s/ ■" ..

■04" .,.

SUGGESTIONS FOR CONTRIBUTORS

The Florida Field Naturalist welcomes articles and short notes con°
tainingnew information on subjects relevant to the biology of wild species
of birds or other vertebrates in or near Florida. Its emphasis is on papers
dealing with the biology of birds, to which it will give publication priority
over papers on other organisms. All articles, notes, and other materials
should be submitted to the Editor: Henry M. Stevenson, Department of
Biological Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida 32306.

All manuscripts should be submitted in triplicate. They should be
typewritten, double«spaced, on one side of numbered sheets of standard
(81/2x11 in.), unruled white paper, with margins of at least one inch
on all sides.

Titles should be short and descriptive, and the body of the article
should state the necessary facts without using unnecessary words. All
references should be cited in the body of the text unless there are more
than three, in which case each complete entry should be listed at the end
under “Literature Cited”, and the citation in the body should then indicate
author and year of publication (e.g.. Bond, 1961). Whenever there are
more than two authors, list the first followed by ''et al/' (e.g., Blair et aL

1968). Whenever pertinent, the particular page or pages should also be
indicated (Bond, 1961: 44).

The vernacular (common) names of all species mentioned - plants or
animals — should be capitalized, and the scientific name should be added
in parentheses following the first reference except in the title. The scien-
tific name should be underscored and should follow a widely accepted
authority for the group of animals or plants involved (e.g. A.O.U.
Check-list, 1957, for birds).

Abbreviations should be used sparingly in the body of the text except
in parenthetical material: e.g. “Tallahassee (5 mi. SE).” Digits rather than
words are recommended for all numbers except one (1). The metric sys-
tem is preferred for weights and measurements and is acceptable for such
measurements as distances. In writing dates, never use a number to refer
to a month.

Proofs will be sent to the (senior) author. The Editor must be
informed well in advance of any change in address or mechanism for
handling proofs; also of necessary changes in the manuscript before proofs
are printed. Changes in proof are expensive, so authors must not expect
to make major changes at this stage unless they are willing to bear the
cost. When proofs reach the author, he should carefully check against the
typescript and promptly return both to the Editor.

Reprints should be ordered from the Florida Press (P.O. Box 393,
Orlando, Florida 32802) on blanks sent with the prooF Any number
above 50 must be paid for by the author. The cost will be determined
by the Florida Press.

Florida Audubon Society
P.O. Drawer 7
Maitland, Florida 32751

Return Postage Guaranteed

Non-Profit Organization
U.S. POSTAGE
PAID

Orlando, Florida
Permit #224

CONTENTS

Field Identification of Difficult Birds: II Four Similar Terns ....... 1

The Status of the White=tailed Kite in Florida . 4

Spread of the Armadillo into the Tailahassee=Thomasville Area 8

Field Notes

White and Brown Pelicans Feeding Together ... 11

Recent Unprecedented Numbers of BufDbreasted Sandpipers 12

Remarkable Weights Carried by Red-shouldered Hawks 12

Glossy Ibis Nesting in Southern Florida 13

A New North Florida Wood Stork Colony 14

Purple Gallinule Carrying Young . . * , 15

Evidence for Learning to Feed in Laughing Gulls 16

A Black-capped Petrel Specimen from Florida . 17

Least Terns Nest at Dry Tortugas 19

Lesser Black-backed Gulls in Florida 20

Erratum 21

Obituary 22

The Florida Field Naturalist

A Semi-annual Journal of
The Florida Ornithological Society

Vol. 2

FALL 1974

No. 2

THE FLORIDA FIELD NATURALIST

JOURNAL OF THE FLORIDA ORNITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY

(Founded 1972)

Editor, Henry M. Stevenson, Dept, of Biological Science,

Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida 32306

EDITORIAL STAFF

Karen Harrod, Managing Editor, Florida Audubon Society, P.O. Drawer 7, Maitland,
Fla. 32751.

Herbert W. Kale, II, Entomological Research Center, P.O. Box 520, Vero Beach,
Fla. 32960.

Oscar T. Owre, Dept, of Zoology, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Fla. 33124.

Glen E. Woolfenden, Dept, of Biology, University of South Florida, Tampa,
Fid. 33620.

i OFFICERS (1974)

President; William B. Robertson, Jr., Everglades National Park, Homestead,
Fla. 33030.

Vice President; John B. Edscorn, Route 3, Box 400, Lakeland, Fla. 33801.

Secretary; Curtis L. Kingsbery,, 2900 N. Magnolia Ave., Pensacola, Fla. 32503.

Treasurer; Mrs. Dorothy W. Freeman, 4515 Montclair Road, Orlando, Fla. 32806.

Articles and notes submitted for publication, as well as books and other publi-
cations inlended for review, should be sent to the Editor (see inside back cover).
Notices of change of address, claims for undelivered or defective copies of this
journal, and requests for information about advertising, subscriptions, and back
numbers should be sent to the Florida Audubon Society, P.O. Drawer 7, Maitland,
Fla. 32751.

Published semi einnua I ly by the Florida Ornithological Society.

Printed by Florida Press, Inc. Orlando, Fla. 32809.

COVER PAINTING OF THE EVERGLADE KITE (Rostrhamus sociobilis)

SPECIALLY EXECUTED FOR THIS JOURNAL BY JON JANOSIK.

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2 Fall 1974

THE FLORIDA FIELD NATURALIST
A SEMIANNUAL JOURNAL OF VERTEBRATE BIOLOGY

vol. 2 FALL 1974 No. / 7--

ASPECTS OF RED-SHOULDERED HAWK NESTING IN
SOUTHERN FLORIDA

John C. Ogden

The small, pale Red-shouldered Hawks (Bufeo lineafus exfimus) of
southern Florida are common breeding birds in Everglades National Park,
where they maintain a nesting density that may equal or be greater than
this species’ density in other regions. Between 1966 and 1974 I was able
to look at about 30 nests in mainland portions of the Park incidental to
other field work. Generally these nests contained clutches of two or three
eggs, with two- egg clutches being more frequent. Successful nests
fledged between one and three young; nests that fledged two young
probably were more numerous than the combined number of nests that
fledged one or three young. Food items collected by the ad ults when
feeding nestlings were small rodents, snakes, frogs and large insects.
These observations are fairly consistent with the published data on Red -
shoulder nesting (Dixon, 1928; Bent, 1937; Stewart, 1949; Craighead and
Craighead, 1956).

The high density of resident Red -shou Iders in Everglades National
Park provides an excellent situation for some much-needed field research
on population dynamics in raptors. Although 1 attempted no such study,

I do wish to report three observations which are at variance with the gen-
eral nesting pattern briefly summarized above. Presumably these three
observations will help focus attention toward aspects of raptor population
biology deserving more study.

1. Red -shouldered Hawks breed on the keys in Florida Bay much less
frequently than on the mainland, presumably because the prey they most
frequently take is relatively scarce in the Bay. I cannot remember seeing
rodents or rodent signs on the Bay keys, frogs are absent, and only two
species of snakes are known from these keys, a water snake {Matrix
fasciata) and a rattlesnake {Crotalus adamonteus). This food shortage
may result in reduced nesting success by the Red - shoulders that do nest
in the Bay, as occurred with a pair that nested on Frank Key, about two
miles south of Flamingo in western Florida Bay. Frank Key is about 1000
by 450 meters, ond therefore provides a hunting range not much different

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Fall 1974

in area from the hunting ranges of Red- shoulder pairs I measured on the
mainland (Ogden, 1974). The pair on Frank Key nested for four years
(1968-1971) in the same Buttonwood tree (Conocarpus erecta) in the inter-
ior of the key. On 2 April 1968 the nest contained a single downy young
about two weeks old; in 1969 the nest contained two eggs on 25 February,
two downy young (one twice the size of the other) on 25 March, and one
large, feathered young in late April; in 1970 a single partly- feathered
young was in the nest on 7 April; in 1971 one downy young was there on
22 March (partly feathered by early April). It is certain from these obser-
vations that no more than one young was fledged each of the four years,
a production rate probably about one- half the average for mainland nests.
Food remains examined in this nest consisted of a patch of small yellow,
feathers (Prairie Warbler, Dendroico discolor?) in 1968, nine carapace
shells of newly- hatched Diamondback Turtles (Malaclemys terrapin), a
tuft of rodent hair, a single primary from a small bird in 1969, and two
carapaces of newly - hatched Diamondback Turtles in 1970. If turtles and
small birds truly were the major food for this pair, it is no great surprise
that nesting success was relatively poor.

A different nesting attempt by Red - shou Iders on nearby Murray Key
in 1973 failed; an adult was incubating two eggs on 27 February, but the
nest was empty in mid- April.

2. On 21 March 1972 I climbed to a Red -shoulder nest in a Buttonwood
tree on the east shore of Middle Fox Lake, Cape Sable. This nest was
unusual to my experience in containing four nestlings, and apparently had
three adults in attendance. The nestlings were newly hatched, three ap-
proximately the same size and one larger; all appeared healthy. An adult
hawk flushed from brooding the nestlings, made several close passes at
me in the tree, and once struck my head. I believe this behavior to be
characteristic of a female bird. Her screams attracted two other adult
Red- shoulders that arrived within 60 seconds; both circled low over the
nest tree and called frequently. The behavior of these last two birds
suggests they were males. At one time, for a 45— second period while I
was still in the nest tree, all three adults perched within three feet of
each other in an adjacent tree and called frequently. I was unable to make
subsequent visits to this nest, so can only guess that the original pair
accepted the services of a nest helper. Picozzi and Weir (1974) reported
several instances of three adults of the Buzzard (Bufeo buteo) occupying
a single nesting territory, but they did not clearly indicate the number of
nests at each s ite.

3, On 17 February 1974 Maryanne Biggar showed me a nest 15 feet
up in a cypress tree (Taxodium ascendens) inside a one- acre cypress
head located in open ’glades. On this date the nest had an adult Red -

26

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2 Fall 1974

shou ider apparently incubating, a Ithough ! was informed that the sane nest
was used in 1973 by a pair of Barred Owls {Sfrix varia). Later that day
when we flushed a pair of Barred Owls from a Cocoplum thicket {Chryso-
balanus /coco) in the same cypress head the male Red- should er dived
upon one of the owls. The owl avoided being chased from the cypress by
performing a twisting, circular flight through the trees. On 23 March 1974
the nest was empty and unattended, but both the Red - shoulders and Barred
Owls were still present. Again when we flushed the owls from a low thick-
et, one adult hawk made a brief diving chase of one owl. During April
the nest remained empty and both birds remained in this cypress head, but
we saw no more chases. I assume that neither the owls nor the Red -
shoulders were able to nest successfully because neither pair was able to
drive the other from the site. Possibly similar in terspecific conflict
occurs regularly in the Everglades and Big Cypress regions where these
two common species maintain broadly overlapping habitats and food habits.

LITERATURE CITED

Bent, A.C. 1937. Life Flistories of North American Birds of Prey (part 1).

U.S. Natl. Mus. Bull, 167. 409 pp.

Craighead, J.J., and F .C. Cra ighead, Jr. 1956. Hawks, Owls, and Wildlife.

Stackpole Co. 443 pp. Harrisburg, Pa.

Dixon, J.B. 1928. Life History of the Red-bellied Hawk. Condor, 30:
228-236.

Ogden, J.C. 1974. The Short-tailed Hawk in Florida 1. Migration, habitat,
hunting techniques, and food habits. Auk, 91: 95-110.

Picozzi, N., and D. Weir. 1974. Breeding biology of the Buzzard in

Speyside, Brit. Birds, 67: 199-210.

Stewart, R.E. 1949. Ecology of a nesting Red- shouldered Hawk pop-
ulation. Wilson Bull., 61: 26-35.

Notional Audubon Society, 115 Indian Mound Trail, Tavernier, Fla. 33070

27

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Fall 1974

FOOD OF THE BARN OWL AT GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA

James Horner, Robert Wallace, and David W. Johnston

Food habits of the Barn Owl (Tyfo alba) in the United States are gen-
erally well known, especially from the analysis of regurgitated pellets
collected at roosting and nest sites. In most studies of continental pop-
ulations, rodents and other small mammals comprise 95% (or more) of prey
items; birds are taken less commonly (Wallace, 1948). The percentages
usually reflect local abundance of specific prey species. Especially on
islands where rats and mice are either scarce or less available. Barn Owls
prey heavily upon birds (Howell, 1920; Bonnot, 1928; Johnston, 1972).

Through the kindness of Tom Carr, we were alerted to a Barn Owl roost
adiacent to U.S. 441, four miles south of Gainesville, Alachua County,
Florida, in the winter of 1972-73. The roost, located in a partially modi-
fied mesic hammock with Live Oaks (Quercus virgi niana) and Cabbage
Palm {Sabal palmetto), was at the edge of Paynes Prairie. During the
daytime, owls were sometimes found spread over an area of at least five
acres, but they were usually clumped in a dozen or so trees. Although
five or six owls were sometimes heard calling simultaneously at night,
no more than two roosting owls were seen at one time. Tom Carr and other
residents of the area reported that in the late winter of 19 72-73, Barn
Owls nested in a hollow, dead tree approximately one-fourth of a mile from
the roosting sites. Barred Owls {Strix varia) and Great Horned Owls
(Bubo virginianus) also inhabit this same hammock, the latter species
nesting there in March-Apri I 1974. Immediately adjacent to the roosting
sites in this hammock are the broad expanses of Paynes Prairie over which
Barn Owls were seen flying many times at dusk and after dark.

Despite the widespread breeding distribution of the Barn Owl through-
out Florida, little has been published on its specific foods in the state or,
more importantly, on its ecological impact upon prey populations. To the
best of our knowledge specific foods of feral Barn Owls in Florida are
limited to the ' pubi ished accounts of Howell (1932), Wible and Parkes
(1955), and Trost and Hutchison (1963). The account by Trost and Hutch-
ison (1963) is the most thorough because these authors identified 865
vertebrate animals in ten pounds of nest debris, in that study, conducted
some 12 miles south of our Gainesville site, the owls were feeding chiefly
over a “wet habitat”, took mostly Sigmodon hispidus and Oryzomys
palustris, and preyed on relatively few birds (3.4% of the prey items).

The 59 pellets that we examined (Table 1) contained rela tively few
surprises because (1) approximately 88% of the prey items were mammals,
(2) the majority of these were rodents, and (3) only nine bird remains were
recovered. It is of interest to direct attention to the mo derately high

28

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2 Fall 1974

percentage (31%) of Neofiber alleni (Round-tailed Muskrat) in the pellets,
indicating the impact of Barn Owls on this localized rodent. Birkenholz
(1962), in his intensive investigations of Neofiber on Paynes Prairie,
noted (p. 124) that “Barn Owls also preyed on Neofiber/' although he
located no roosts of the owls. Both Howell (1932) and Schwartz (1952)
reported Neofiber in pellets of Barn Owls. Interestingly, Neo fiber was
recorded from the Okefinokee Swamp, Georgia, by the recovery of three
skulls in Barn Owl pellets (Schantz and Jenkins, 1950). These rodents
(average weight of ten specimens equals 264 g) are certainly contrastingly
large as compared with smaller prey mammals of Barn Owls, such as the
Short-tailed Shrew {Cryptotis parva; wt. equals 5 g). Most studies of Barn
Owl foods (Wallace, 1948; Trost and Hutchison, 1963; and others) have
shown that Barn Owls at a given site prey heavily on one species (70-
90%), with lesser amounts of other prey species being consumed. Presum-
ably this is because that particular species is either more abundant local-
ly or the owls can better capture that species. In our Gainesville sample
(Table 1) Neofiber, Sigmodon, and Oryzomys occurred in similar percent-
ages as prey items, even though Neofiber is by far the heaviest of the
three. Although we have no specific figures on local mammal populations
on Paynes Prairie at this time of year, we arc inclined to believe that
these three mammals were all readily accessible to the owls.

As ornithologists, we were not surprised, either, at the bird species
taken by the o\v is“-Sora, Long-billed Marsh Wren, American Robin, Red-
winged Blackbird, and two unidentified forms (probably small parulids).
All these birds would be expected on Paynes Prairie in winter.

In virtually every instance, both Sigmodon and Oryzomys were rep-
resented in individual pellets by both skull and body skeleton. The larger
Neofiber, however, appeared to require two pellets for a single prey an-
imal; one pellet usually contained either a skull or the bulk of the body
skeleton. In fact, in only one instance did we find for Neofiber both
skull and the majority of the body skeleton in one pellet. According to
Wallace (1948), 254 pellets contained from one to 8 prey animals per pel-
let, with an average of 2.7, meaning, of course, that in Wallace’s analyses
smaller-sized mammals were being eaten. Our over-all average was 1.5
mamma I s per pe 1 let.

Although Barn Owls can and do feed to some extent in the daytime
or at dusk, they use only the sense of hearing in locating prey in total
darkness (Payne, 1971). It is interesting to note in Table 1 those species
presumably located by the owls’ hearing the prey--perhaps the birds and
certainly the katydids. It seems probable to us that the birds were flushed
by the owls’ flight or simply were moving at dusk. The katydids are of
special interest because, according to Dr. Thomas J. Walker, these katy-
dids were of the species Neoconocephalus triops, and all were males. At

29

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2 Fall 1974

the time of pellet-collection (Feb«--Mar.) these male katydids were cal-
ling, their calls probably attracting the Barn Owls.

For the identification of certain prey items we appreciate the personal
assistance of Pierce Brodkorb (birds), Stephen Humphrey (mammals), and
Thomas J. Walker (insects). Reference collections of Pierce Brodkorb and
the Florida State Museum were most helpful for identification.

Table 1. Food Items identified in Barn Owl pellets
from Gainesville, Florida.

Percent Percent
of all of

12

Mar.

28

Mar.

25

Dec.

Total

prey

1 tems^

bio-

mass

Number of pellets examined

24

24

11

59

Contents :

Mammals

88.2

96.9

Neofiber alleni (264 g) ^

9

11

4

24

31.2

59.3

Sigmodnn hi spidus (123 g)

8

8

2

18

23.7

20,7

Oryzomys palustris (85 g)

11

3

7

21

27.6

16.7

Cryptotis parva (5 g)

3

1

4

5.3

0.2

Birds

11.8

3.1

Porzana Carolina (50 g)

1

1

2

2.6

0.9

Telmatody tes

palustris (10 g)

1

1

1.3

0.1

Turdus migratorius (71 g)

2

2

2.6

1.2

Phoeniceus agelaius (42 g)

1

1

2

2.6

0.8

Unidentified (Parulidae?)

1

1

2

2.6

0.1

Invertebrates

Tettlgoniidae (katydids)

5

5

o

V

Percent manmals

88.5

76.7

86.6

Percent birds

11.5

6.7

13.4

Percent invertebrates

0

16.7

0

^Less trie few, relatively unimportant insect remains.

^Mean body weights; mammals, from Florida State Museum specimens; birds,

personal records of DWJ.

30

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2 Fall 1974

LITERATURE CITED

Birkenholz, D.E. 1962. A study of the life history and ecology of the
Round bailed Muskrat {Neofiber alleni True) in North Centra! Florida.
Ph.D. dissertation^ Univ. of Flo., Gainesville. 149 pp.

B'onnot^ P. 1928. An outlaw Barn Owl. Condor 30:320.

Howell^ A.B. 1920. Habits of Oceanodroma ieucorhoa beali versu s 0.
socorroensis. Condor 22:4142.

Howell, A.H. 1932, Florida Bird Life. Fla. Dept. of Game and Fresh
Water Fish, Tallahassee. 579 pp.

Johnston, D.W. 1972. Food of the Barn Owl on Grand Cayman, B.W. I.

Quart, J. Fla, Acad. Sci, 35(4):17M72.

Payne, R.S. 1971. Acoustic location of prey by Barn Owls (Ty to alba).
X Exp. Biol. 54:535^573.

Schantz, V.S., and J.H. Jenkins, 1950. Extension of range of the Round-
tailed Muskrat, Neofiber alleni, J. Mamm. 31:460-461.

Schwartz, A. 1952. The land m-ammols of southern Florida and the upper
Florida Keys. Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 182pp.
Trost, C.H., and J.H. Hutchison. 1963. Food of the Barn Owl in Florida,
Quart, J. Fla, Acad, Sci, 26(4) :382 -384.

Wallace, G.J. 1948. The Barn Owl in Michigan. Its distribution natural
history and food habits. Mich, State College, Agric. Exp. Sta., Tech.
Bull. 208:1-61.

Wible, M., and K.C. Parkes. 1955. Barn Owls feeding on box turtles .
Fla. Nat, 28(3):74-75.

1941 NW 23 Terrace, 2381 NW 18 Place, and Department of Zoology,
University of Florida, Gainesvi! !e, Florida 32611,

31

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2 Fall 1974

POPULATION ESTIMATE OF BREEDING BIRDS ON A SPOIL ISLAND
IN THE INDIAN RIVER, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA

George R. Maxwell II and Herbert W. Kale II

Spoil islands are formed by the piling of spoil (rock, shell, and sand)
along navigable waterways during dredging operations and are common
along the length of the Indian River, a tidal bay on Floridans east coast.
Breeding bird populations on these islands change rather rapidly cor^
responding to successional changes in vegetation. Riomar Island (some-
times called Crane island) is a spoil island located in the city of Vero
Beach between the electric power plant on the west bank of the river and
a residential development on the barrier island to the easto The river
is approximately 0.75»mile wide in this area. The island was created in
the 1940*s and enlarged in the late 1950*'s when the Intracoastal Waterway
was deepened. Vegetational development has proceeded undisturbed
since then. Birds, chiefly herons, ibis, cormorants and anhingas, began
to establish nesting sites in the early 1960*s and pelicans began nesting
there in 1968. In that year less than 50 pairs of pelicans nested and they
have increased to the 1973 level of 300 pairs.

At 17th Street in Vero Beach the Florida Department of Transportation
intends to construct a highway bridge across the Indian River that will
pass within 200 feet of the southern tip of the island. This study should
enable future investigators to assess any impact of the bridge on the
island*s breeding birds.

Methods

The size of the island was determined by scaled aerial photographs
confirmed by pacing on the ground.

The vegetational survey was made by counting the vegetation in 20
quadrats (10m x 10m each) chosen at random. All shrubs and trees over
0,33m in height were counted and plants in the herbaceous layer, if present,
were categorized as common (covered more than 50% of quod), uncommon
(covered less than 50% of quad), or rare (covered less than 5% of quad).

The bird population estimate was made by counting all active nests on
7 and 8 May 1973 of the following species in each of four sections of the
heronry (See Figure 1; also Table 3 for scientific names): Brown Pelican,
Double-crested Cormorant, Anhinga, Great Egret, Black-crowned Night
Heron, and Great Blue Heron. The nests of these species were counted
accurately because they can be identified readily by their construction,
location, or the presence of adults or young. Unfortunately, this method
could not be used satisfactorily with some nests of the Snowy Egret,
Cattle Egret, Louisiana Heron, Little Blue Heron, or White Ibis. The
nests of these five species, the eggs of all but the ibis, and the newly-

32

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2 Fall 1974

hatched young of the Snowy, Cattle, and Little Blue, are similar and us-
ually cannot be distinguished. An estimate of the number of nests for
which species determination was made were counted and the proportion of
each species was calculated. Then all the nests in a particular section
were counted and proportioned accordingly among the specieso
Results and Discussion

Riomar Island is composed of limestone spoil rock, sand, organic
debris, and mollusk shells stabilized by vegetation on most of the islands
It is 393m long and 167m at its widest point. The area is 28,129 sq. m or
2.81 hectares (7 acres).

Three species of plants dominate the island with importance values
(Curtis, Ja T., and G. Cottam. 1962o Plant Ecology Workbook. Burgess
Publ. Co., Minneapolis. 193 pp.) ranging from 59„5 to 38.9 (Table 1).
These are Black Mangrove {Avicennia nitida), White Mangrove {Loguncu I-
aria rocemosoj, and the feral, exotic Australian Pine (Casuarino equiseti<^
folia)g in decreasing order of importance. Four other species were less
numerous, with importance values ranging from 19.2 to 7.4. These, in
order of decrees ing importance, were: Florida Privet (Forestiera proulosa)^
Red Mangrove (Rhizophora mangle). Button Mangrove {Conocarpus erecto),
and the feral, exotic Brazilian Pepper {Schinus terebinthefol ius). The
D/d index (observed dens ity /expected density) computed for each species
indicates that all the plants were aggregated in their d is tribution, with
the larger values indicating greater aggregation. Only one species, the
Brazilian Pepper, was randomly distributed, as indicated by the nearly
equal observed^and expected density values (See Table 1).

The herbaceous layer consisted of four species found in the following
number of quadrats: Marsh Rosemary or Sea Lavender (Limonium carolin°
ianum), ten (common), Saltwort or Pickleweed (Batis maritima)^ four (com-
mon), Woody Glasswort {Sal icornia perennis), three (uncommon), and

Saltmarsh Heliotrope {Heliofropium polyphyl lum), one (rare).

Prior to 1973 the breeding bird population was observed seasonally
by Kale since 1966. No systematic effort to census the birds was under*
taken other than rough estimates during occasional visits to the island to
band young birds and to obtain blood samples for other research. In 1971
and 1972 estimated numbers of pairs of each species for the entire season
were as follows: Cattle Egret, 2000; Snowy Egret, 1000; White Ibis, 500;
Louisiana Heron, 300; Great Egret, 100; Black -crowned Night Heron, 100;
Little Blue Heron, 25 in 1971, 70 in 1972.

Except for the increase in Little Blue Herons, the overall Impression
held by Kale is that a reduction in numbers of the other heron species has
occurred since pelicans began nesting in 1968. The figures in Table 2
show a rapid increase in numbers of breeding pairs of Brown Pelicans

33

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2 Fall 1974

between 1968 and 1970, This has stabilized since that year at around
300 nests. The increase in the nesting pelican population on Riomar
Island and on several other nesting islands to the north in Brevard County
and to the south in St. Lucie County coincides with a marked decrease in
the numbers of nesting pelicans on Pelican island National Wildlife Re»
fuge located in the Indian River 13 miles north of Vero Beach. This
decrease is attributed to periodic deterioration of the vegetative sub<=
strata of the three -acre island on which the birds nest (S. L. Wineland^
pers, comm.). Parenthetica lly^ this fairly regularly occurring phenomenon
emphasizes the importance in designating and preserving presently un »
inhabited mangrove islands that are in the vicinity of known nesting colo»
nies for future nesting sites. The discrepancies in estimated numbers of
pelican pairs between our ground estimates and the aerial survey estimates
conducted by the Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (L. E. Williams^
pers, comm.) are noteworthy. These seem caused by several factors: the
date in the nesting period on which the surveys are made (pelicans breed
on Riomar from January through September^ with nesting peaks in ApriN
July); visibility of nests from the air^ and ability to get within view of
each nest from the ground.

The total number of breeding pairs of birds on Riomar Island in early
May 1973 was calculated to be 2657 and represented two order s, five
families; and 13 species (Table 3). Two species^ the Louisiana Heron
and Snowy Egret, accounted for 66% of all breeding pairs. The Cattle
Egret and Brown Pel icon accounted for 24%, and the nine rema ining spec ies
made up 10% of the total. Although we had previously suspected possible
nesting by the Yellow-crowned Night Heron {Nyctanassa v/o/oceoj, in
the colony, 1973 was the first year that nests with eggs and young were
observed. These were in Australian Pines, 30*40 feet above the ground.

An indication of how the composition of the breeding spec res changes
seasonally was noted on subsequent visits on 7 June and on 18 and 24
July 1973 by Kale. On 7 June Louisiana Herons, Snowy Egrets, and Cattle
Egrets were present in equal numbers, approximately 500 birds each, but
by mid July fewer than 100 active nests of Louisiana Herons and 300
of Snowy Egrets existed and now nearly 1000 of Cattle Egrets. Numbers
of two other species also increased as the season progressed to an esti =
mated 300 active nests of White Ibis, and 35 nests of B lack crowned
Night Herons.

Summary

A vegetational survey and a breed ing J^ird population estimate were

made in May 1973 on Riomar Island, a spoil island in the Indian River,
Indian River County, Florida, The dominant plants were Black Mangrove,
White Mangrove and Australian Pine. The spatial distribution of these

34

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2 Fall 1974

plants was aggregated.

The breeding populations of some birds^ 'lamely Cattle Egret^ Little
Blue Heron^ White Ibis, and Brown Pelican, have been increasing since
they initially established nesting sites on the islond in the 1960*s.
Thirteen species made up the 2657 breeding pairs on the island in May
1973. The Louisiana Heron and Snowy Egret accounted for 67% of a I i the
nests. Cattle Egrets and Brown Pelicans comprised 24% of the nests^ and
9 other species occounted for the remainder. Later in the season Cattle
Egrets and W^hite Ibis became the dominant breeding species.

35

Table 1. Importance values and spatial distribution of plants on Riomar Island, Indian River County,
Florida from 20 quadrats of 100 square meters each. (Modified from Curtis and Cottam) .

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2 Fall 1974

<D

O

a ^

d 0) Q
-P S

LTN

LTN

ON

CM

iH

ON

P

P rH +

O 03

o\

d

rn

ON

vd

(ON

p

UV

LTA

CO

ft

ft

H

0)

•H -P ^

135-

'55.

'6^

'65.

'65-

P> -H Q

P

00

LfN

P

CM

p

o3 w

rH

P-

tP

p

d

p

ft

O

(U 0

Ph q

fO

OJ

I— 1

ft

no >3

0 o
> d

•H 0

'55.

'65.

'65.

'65-

'65.

-P tn

CO

rH

P

p

P

o

03 cr;

•

•

H 0 ^

P

CM

CO

ao

CO

p

0 P
pci ft)

C\J

CM

CM

D/d

ndex

on

CO

ON

CO

LTN

P

(ON

UD

P

d

d

P

CM

o

M

r— !

1 1

1— 1

CM

ft

^ ,

0 >3

p> p*

O -H ^

o

Lr\

ai

ON

(ON

CON

CM

0 M TPi

CVJ

O

ON

CM

CM

CM

CM

fit

X 0

H

r— 1

o

O

O

O

O

W P)

lUN

ft fI

OJ

1 1 — 1

Tj >3

0 p

II

LIA

Lr\

o

<0N

CM

P

CM

M W Q

.

•

•

•

■

o

•

Q

0 5=!-^

a\

uv

o

LCN

P

O

O

s

W 0

P Q

O

iH

r— 1

1 — 1

p

O

00

l>3

UN

UN

o

— ^

0 ^

'65.

'65.

'65.

'65.

'65.

CO

fp

o

Lf\

LTN

LTN

LfN

O

o^ —

p

VO

CM

CM

CM

CM

UN

0

UN

Ip

p

CftIuN

pq

II

II

0

ft

P w

P

s

o P

o3

o\

OV

ON

P

CO

P

P

UN

P

cn

o o3 S

00

O

ON

ft

oo

ft

ft

O

O P

OO

cn

ft

ft

H

0

S PM

ft

ft

— ^

P

03

W 0

P o

o3 ^

o3

P 0

ft

P P

ft

lo

o3 P

P

on

a!

LTN

LfN

UN

cn

!P

ftIcM

p! 3 O’

1 — !

■H

ft

1 LfN

P

O O ' —

0

11

o

ft

• o

ft

o

U}

s p

P

CM

o

Pi

03

ft

p

ft

0

0

0

0

0

Pi

P

>

ft

ft

>

>

•H

0

O

ft

O

o

O

PM

>

0

P

0

p

P

ft

>

bO

PM

P

bO

p!

P

O

Pi

0

Pi

a

PM

p

Pi

ft

o3

o3

•H

M

S

03

w

S

s

ft

o3

Pi

•H

p

CJ’ICM

0

05

ft

o3

Pi

ft

Pi

•H

0

P

'H

S

O

•H

ft

II

o

o

P

P

P

P

N

o3

Pi

0

o3

w

O

ft

P

P

o3

ft

ft

rH

cj

ft

0

d

P

O

ca

PQ

p

<

ft

K

ft

ft

ft

ft

36

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2 Fall 1974

ft

ft

0

§

•>

S_j

iH

h

m

m

O

H

ft

h

cd

•H

S

ft

O

0

•H

S

O

o

rh

o

oo

pn

ft-

o\

ft

F*

rH

0

1

>

O

eft

ft

U

VO

JO

m

o\

CD

O

o

ft

LA

o

Fh

o

ft

V

ft

ft

P

m

•H

O

U

Fi

ft

•H

O

o

03

ft

ft

ft

W

n

oo

ft

VO

•H

ft

ov

Oj

o

ft

0

p

Q)

o

o

U

o

ft

ft

ft

Q)

o

•H

>

•H

ft

0

ffi

ft

CO

cd

F

bD

0

oj

ft

Fi

•H

o

ft

ft

a

m

H

ft

Q)

ft

#

O

C\J

ft

0

rH

ft

CO

0\

q3

VO

VD

03

0

o\

OV

Eh

ft

ft

ft

O O O LTX

o la O OJ

00 C\J

o

o

O

lA

o

LTX

O

OV

(ft

oo

(ft

ft

W O
o

O

ft

ft

(ft

h)

ft-

ft

ft

ft

OV

OV

a\

o\

ft

ft

ft

ft

ft

37

Williams and M. Fogarty ^ Fla* Game & Fresh Water Fish Commission

Table 3. Population estimate of breeding pairs of birds on Riomar Island, Indian River County, Florida
during May, 1973.

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2

Fall 1974

tiO

a

•H cn (U

0) -H O
0) <

pq

bO

sU

■H to
fd !h
<D -H
0) d
^ Ph

O >5

!> -P

-P CO
d d 15S.
I — I QJ
0 Q
K

d H P>
H o
O < 0
EH W

-P

o

0 Q
cn

-p

o

0 o
cn

-p

o

0 m
cn

o

0 <
cn

0 o
0 >
cn Eh

38

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Fall 1974

Acknow ledgements

We wish to thank J. S. Haeger and C. W. Flansen for assistance in
plant identification; J. Angy^ W. G. Guthrie# and L. A. Webber for tech®
nica! aid; and E. J, Beidler# Indian River Mosquito Control District direc®
tor, for use of aerial photographs. Also, special thanks to Susan Maxwell
for her valuable help in the field. This research was supported by the
State University of New York and the Florida Medical Entomology Labor-
atory (formerly Entomological Research Center), Florida Division of Health
(NIH grant No. AI-06587, Contribution No. 324). —Rice Creek Biological
Field Station^ State University of New York, Oswego, New York 13126;
and Florida Medical Entomology Laboratory^ P . 0. Box 520g Vero Beach^
Florida 32960. (Present address: Fla. Audubon Society, SS-l st court SW,
Vero Beach, Florida 32960).

FLORIDA ORNITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY
SPRING MEETING
April 25-27, 1975
at

Rodeway Inn

1355 Apalachee Parkway
Tallahassee, Flo 32301
(904-877-3171)

39

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2 Fall 1974

NOCTURNAL MIGRANTS KILLED AT A CENTRAL FLORIDA
TV TOWER, AUTUMN 1972

Walter Kingsley Taylor and Bruce H. Anderson

Bird kills at the WDBO-WFTV TV tower near Bithlo, Oran ge County,
have temporarily ceased since the structure collapsed on June 8, 1973.
Prior to its collapse, it had been visited regularly during four consecutive
autumn migrations. A report of the nocturnal migrants killed during the
first three autumns (1969-1971) and a description of the tower and sur-
rounding area have been published elsewhere (Taylor and Anderson, Wilson
BulL, 85: 42 51, 1973). Data obtained from the bird kills during the fourth
year of study (1972) are presented herein.

Numbers of Birds Killed

Forty-nine species were represented in the 1347 individuals collected
during 36 trips to the facility (Table 1). Common Ye I lowthroats (Geo-
thiypis trichas), B lack -throated Blue Warblers {Dendroica caerulescens),
Ovenbirds {Seiurus aurocapi I lus), and American Redstarts {Setophoga
ruticilla) made up 72% of the total. Warblers made up 41% of the 49 spe -
cies and 89% of the 1347 individuals. These data are consistent with
those obtained from the first three years.

Birds killed during the four autumn migrations total 9130 individuals
of 89 species (Table 2). The smaller number of individuals and fewer
species killed in 1972, as compared with each of the other years, is
believed to be correlated with fewer severe frontal conditions that
reached our area. Species found in 1972 but not found during the 1969 71
kills were: one Yellow Rail {Cofurnicops noveboracensis), two Ground
Doves (Columbina passerine), one Common Nighthawk (Cordei les minor),
and one Acadian Flycatcher ( Empidonox virescens ). AM of these species
with the exception of the Acadian Flycatcher are uncommonly reported in
kills at tall lighted structures.

We thank the owners of WDBO-WFTV for allowing us to use their facil-
ities. Their cooperation and interest during the past four years have been
outstand ing.

Department of Biological Sciences, Florida Technological University,
Orlando, Florida 32816.

40

Seasonal Variation of Migrants Killed

Florida Field Naturalist Vol, 2

Fall 1974

iH CM CNl CM

I ,H LO LD CM O

mT 00

CM MO M3 rH Mf O

CM <}■ ^ MT

in mm

M MT Mf

cn

Q)

a

0)

Cu

CO

to CO
U >-i
•H O

0) rH
> rH

O -H

Q ^

-TO S

C O

3 r-i

(X

to

^ CO .

S

CO -TJ
JS 0)

U -H

^ rH

to ^ <

•rH 0)
2 H3

■IH H C

to O

CJ U CO

rH -O CO to ^

3
O O
<J m

S -r

CO C I
(U

•H <u

c o

•H 0)

^c; o H

OJ

X) H >

QJ -H

P > X)

5 QJ

O >, >, X
H J-j 0) 0)

OJ

rH U
QJ

H rH

to

S H

cO

> I CO to

I H OJ (U

-H +J I
cO 0) HO rH -H X
0) 3 O X 0)

i-lcotj}rr:co>pc;coSPiPHpq

o c
3 O
o CO
x: 3

4-1 -H
O 3
H s

P- CO

(U

rQ

U H
OJ 3
iH c?
HO

3 3
3 -H
:3 3

■H 3
3 3
3 3

41

August September October November

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2

Fall 1974

( ro og

CN ^ iH

CNI vO ro LO CM

o <r 00 cN

.H 00

<-{ m

oo ro CNi

!-i pq cd Cl
0! S cd
rH X) :2
^ 0) Td

Cl -U 0) c
cd td cc td
13 o e -H
Cl d c
Cl c
td 4-J I d
S I S .^3

^ o ^

QJ U rH U
cc cd iH cd
nS tH <u .H
O pq >( pq

4:; cd td
3

coo

t— I JD

^ c
o cd

Du 3:

u 0)

td a

- 3 -
C O o X! X)

CU Id -H <U OJ

rH 3 -H -H

43 QJ O

c X d >-1 d -H ^
(dec cd o d

3 -H Cl! d O d -H

33 O

E C

•iH -C (d o

c o Ou c c

O d CO 01 c

d cc (d

d pq gd Du cc

c cd o CO

0) o d 4d

60 d W3 Du

C X3 O

aJceQJ-iHjqcx>
>ooEdoodcd

0|z;'-)-<d3pq2:M(Vi

42

Total Individuals 22 322 14 875 80 30 4 1347

Fiorida Field Naturalist VoL 2 Fall 1974

CsJ

w

,‘-:i

H

OJ

m

'-a

u

•H

rq

<4-1

O

w

0)

•H

O

Q)

P.

CP

^•d

P

CC3

CO

tH

cd

:3

-d

>

•H

d

a

CO

QJ

d

e

p

0)

o

>

H

>

H

pq

T

o

pq

Q

cu

•u

cd

W)

•H

is:

a

I

u

a

C

P

•H

CO

0)

•H

o

0)

ex

CP

d

CO

'Ct

rH

r^

o

’H

Lfd

CJ^

m

CO

>

r-.

CM

on

tH

•H

CM

CM

CM

rH

d

a

m

LO

to

vD

Os

0'\

00

CTs

\o

O

rH

CM

o^

r^

rH

CTn

a^

cy^

r-H

rH

iH

CO

o

QJ

0)

o

o

>

H

n

0)

OJ

o

Cd

Q

Q

Q

1

1

!

1

CO

•

rH

+J

&

i.

Cd

a.

r_j

M)

W)

4J

cu

0!

d

ed

o

CP

d

C

H

43

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2 Fall 1974

FIELD NOTES

Singular Brown Pelican Feeding Behavior

On 8 September 1974 an immature Brown Pelican {Pelecanus occ/c/en-

talis) was observed swimming in a shallow freshwater pond located in
Panama City Beach, Florida. The bird appeared to be stalking prey hidden
in the flowers of the Water Lily (Nymphoea odorata).

Open flowers were cautiously approached by the bird; then, with a
lunging stab, they were engulfed by the pelican’s pouch and plucked from
their stems. The pelican proceeded to shake the flower about in its pouch,
make several obvious swallowing motions, and then expel the flower.

Prey identification was never possible, but it was fairly apparent that
food of some sort was being secured, although animal food could hardly
have been present in large amounts. This process was repeated more
than half-a^ozen times in the course of 8 to 10 minutes.

As the pelican soon flew off strongly toward the Gulf and then west-
ward along the coast, it is not likely that its singular feeding behavior
should be attributed to sickness or injury. During that day, however. Hur-
ricane Carmen had created considerable turmoil in the Gulf; quite possibly
the 3 to 5 foot waves then rolling in discouraged the pelican’s characteris-
tic plunge-diving and forced it to adopt a different feeding procedure .

Other recent observations (Dinsmore, Florida Field Natural i sf, 1974:11)
have noted that Brown Pelicans may forage while swimming in salt water.
The present record not only indicates that pelicans are adaptable enough
to utilize fresh water while feeding, but a Iso demonstrates that food sources
other than fish may comprise at least a small part of the ir diet. -Stephen
J. Stedman, 1401 Last Sixth Court, Panama City, Florida 3240h

Whip-poor-will Singing in Winter

On 31 December 1973 at dusk near the intersection of the Fellsmere
Canal and Lateral Q, Indian River County, Florida, I heard a Whip-poor-
will {Caprimulgus vociferus) give a series of four or five ‘‘whip-poor-
wills” from a strip of woods between the far side of the canal and the
ad joining pasture.

Nelson, quoted by Tyler in Bent (1940, U.S. Natl. Mus. Bull. 176:179),
said that the Whip-poor-will is not in song during the winter in central
Florida, but just before it starts northward late in March it sings for a
few evenings. Sustained singing after arrival in fall and continuing oc -

44

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2 Fall 1974

casionally as late as mid-November was reported by Robertson and Ogden
(1968, Florida region. Audubon Field Notes, 22 :29). Sprunt (1954, Florida
Bird Life, New York, Coward-McCann :259 -260) in 17 winters at Okeechobee
heard the species only twice, in the same hammock two successive years
on 31 January 1949 and 30 January 1950, both warm winters. The temper-
ature was about 83 degrees when I heard the bird sing. — Margaret Coon
Bowman, Box 783, Wabasso, Florida 32970.

Foods of the Osprey at Newnans Lake

Newnans Lake in eastern Alachua County, three miles east of Gaines-
ville, has a high Osprey (Pandion hoi iaef us) population. During the spring
and summer of 1972, Ospreys were observed with telescopes and field
glasses as they fished there, prey species were identified, and size esti®
mates made of prey.

Thirty-four captures were observed. All prey were fish, 25 (73.5%) of
which were Gizzard Shad (Dorosoma cepedianum) and Threadfin Shad
(D. pefenense). The remaining nine (26.5%) fish were sunfish (Lepom/s
sp.j, Black Crappie {Pomoxis nigromaculatus)^ Large-mouth Bass {Micro-
pterus salmoides)^ or were unidentifiable. The average length of captured
prey was about 18 cm with a range of 7.5-35 cm. At least eight (23,5%)
captures were of dead or dying fish floating near t he surface.

Fishery studies (unpublished) by the Florida Game and Fresh Water
Fish Commission revealed that shad make up 34.0% of the fish population
in the lake. Threadfin Shad comprise 32,3% and Gizzard Shad 1.7%. The
average length of Gizzard and Threadfin Shad taken from Newnans Lake in
this fishery studies was 13 and 10.3 cm. respectively.

Ospreys were preying on shad of above-average length at a rate greater
than their relative abundance would indicate (even after eliminating from
the count those shad picked up as dead or dying). A ratio of 1.1 attempts
per capture (excluding those of dead or dying fish) suggests that shad
are especially vulnerable to being captured by Ospreys. This is even more
apparent when this capture ratio for shad is compared with a ratio of four
attempts per capture on another area where the primary prey species was
sunfish, Lepom/s sp, -Stephen A, Nesbitt^ Florida Gome and Fresh Water
Fish Commissiong 4005 South Main Street^ Gainesville, Florida 32601.

1 This is a contribution of a Federal Aid Program, Florida Pittman-
Robertson Project W-41, Job VII-A-4.

45

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2 Fall 1974

A Salmonel la typhimurium Outbreak at a Bird Feeding Station

Unexplained mortality among small passerine birds is frequently re -
ported to the Wildlife Research Projects Office of the Florida Game and
Fresh Water Fish Commission® Pesticide poisoning has been suspected
in many of these incidents^ but chemical analyses have usu a I ly fa i led to
reveal pesticide levels sufficient to cause death. Investigation of mortaU
ity incidents involving small birds has revealed that at least one infectious
disease is an important factor in some die-offs.

A die°off involving birds frequenting a feeding station was reported by
Mrs. Howard Pearl at her home near Salt Springs^ Marion County^ Florida^
from 1971 through December^ 1973. Species involved were the Blue Jay
{Cyanocifto cristafa)^ Tufted Titmouse (Parus bicolor)^ Brown Thrasher
{Toxostoma rufumj^ House Sparrow {Passer clomesticus)^ Red winged
Blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus)g Common Grackle {Qui scales quiscula)g
Cardinal {Cardinalis cardinal i s)g Chipping Sparrow {Spizella passerinaj^
White4hroated Sparrow {Zonotrichia albicollis)^ and Ground Dove (Co/um°
bigallina passerina). Specimens that could not be exa mined fresh were
frozen for later examination. Heaviest mortality was observed in late
winter and early spring. Mrs. Pearl reported that^ at times^ every bird
coming to her feeder appeared to be affected to some degree. Some of the
Cardinals^ Common Grackles^ Redwvinged Blackbirds^, Chipping Sparrows^
and House Sparrows had subcutaneous lesions in the pectoral region
similar to pustular lesions previously described for Salmonella typhi°
murium infections in birds (Wobese^ G. A. and C. F, F inlayson. 1 969.
Salmonel la typhimurium infection in House Sparrows, Arch, Environ^
Healthg 19: 882«884). Cultures taken from birds with lesions and affected
birds without lesions were positive for Salmonel la typhimurium.

As a partial test of our diagnosis that an agent in or on the soil caused
the death of these wild birds, we suggested birds be discouraged from
frequenting the feeding site in large numbers and that food be elevated
and moved to another part of the yard. This was practical only to a !imi«
ted extent. A collection of individuals of most of the same passerine
species that had been infected earlier was made on 10 March 1974. All
specimens were devoid of any lesions and otherwise in good condition.
Cultures made from them were negative for Salmonel la. Possibly the de-
cline in incidence of infection was caused by the disease-induced re-
duction in the population using the feeding station.

Sol monel la typhimurium is orally communicable to man and other ani-
mals by infected feces or other contaminated sources. Birds feeding on
foods scattered on the ground or on elevated platforms that go uncleaned
for long periods of time are highly susceptible to salmonellosis. As a

46

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2 Fall 1974

matter of course^ those who feed birds regularly should avoid the use of
ground feeding stations and occasionally should clean and thoroughly
disinfect elevated platforms^ particularly if sick or dead birds are observed
in the vicinity. If feed is made available on the ground^ the site should be
changed regularly to reduce the likelihood of contact with infected feces.
The Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission^ Wildlife Research
Projects Office^ 4005 South Main Street^ Gainesville^ Florida 32601 (phone
904 “376 •=6481 ) should be contacted in the event of any unexplained bird
mortality. Fresh specimens should be wrapped in aluminum foil and frozen
as soon as possible. More specific instr\jctions will be provi ded after
notification. ““Stephen A. Nesbiftg Florida Gome and Fresh Water Fish
Commissions Wildlife Research ProjectSs 4005 S, Mo/n Streets Gainesvil lOg
Florida 32601; Franklin H, WhitOg Deportment of Veterinary Sciences
University of F lorida, Gainesvi He, Florida 32601 o

NOTICE: HAWK MIGRATION ASSOCIATION OF NORTH AMERICA

This notice will serve to introduce the Hawk Migration Association
of North America^ a newly^formed organization which will strive to in-
crease communication between hawk°watchers ^ to standardize the re»
cording and processing of hawk®migration data^, and to expand and improve
the coverage of hawk migration in North America,

For the purpose of the Association's work^ North America has been
divided into nine regions^ each with a regional representative/ed itor.
Before each spring and fall migration season^ all participating hawk-
watch and hawk-banding stations will receive^ free^ as many copies of
the HMANA Report Form as are needed. After each season^ hawk-watchers
will return completed forms to their regional representatives^ who will
write a regional report. Ail of these regional reports^ plus a continent®
wide summary, will be published twice annually, and will be sent to each
member.

The association is vitally interested not only in lookouts tha t are
manned regularly, but also in those that are covered infrequently. This
allows the exploring hawk»watcher leeway for searching out new watches
which will help to expand the coverage throughout the South. If you are
interested in learning more about the Hawk Migration Association please
contact Roberts. Kennedy, Southern Regional Representative HMANA,
Museum of Zoology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana

70803.

47

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 2 Fall 1974

Chordei les minor sennetti in FI ori da

The first record for Florida of a specimen of Chordeiles minor sennetti,
a subspecies of the Common Nighthawk, was published by Mengel (Auk,
68: 507), who “discovered” the study skin in the collections of the Uni-
versity of Michigan. This specimen had been collected in Clay Springs,
Orange County, on 21 April 1896.

Two more specimens of this subspecies were taken in Broward County
during the autumn of 1972. The first, a road kill from Ft. Lauderdale,
found on 14 October by Roger Martz, fisheries biologist, Florida Game and
Fresh Water Fish Commission, is a female now in the University of Miami
Reference Collections (UMRC 7283). A second bird (UMRC 7282 ), sex
undetermined, found injured in Pompano Beach on 16 October, died in the
custody of Mrs. Madeleine Menser. Identification of both specimens was
confirmed at the National Museum of Natural Flistory by John S. Weske.

I examined an additional and apparently unreported specimen of the
subspecies in the collections of the American Museum of Natural History
(AMNH 476887). This carries a Rothschild Museum label. Originally
identified as C, m. chapman/— wh ich it patently does not resemble— the
identification had been redesignated “C. m. sennetti?*\ No collector is
specified for this male bird taken in Hillsborough County, 24 April 1897.

C. m. sennetti breeds in the upper midwestern and northwestern areas
of the United States and adjacent portions of Canada (Checklist of North
American Birds. 1957. American Ornithologists’ Union, Baltimore, Md.).
Its Florida status, based on the records cited herein, is therefore that of
an unusual spring or fall migrant. I suggest it is possible that occurrence
maybe less unusua 1 than indicated by the records now at hand. Nighthawks
are probably less well scrutinized than most migrants and, being among
the more difficult to prepare as study skins, dead birds are no doubt less
apt to be retrieved than those of other migrants.

Casualties of Nighthawk migrants should be carefully inspected for
information concerning this, as well as other, subspecies of the Common
Nighthawk.

I thank the Bird Division of the American Museum of Natural History
for the opportunity to examine specimens of Chordei les minor.— Oscar T.
Owre, Department of Biology, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida
33 124.

SUGGESTIONS FOR CONTRIBUTORS

The Florida Field Naturalist welcomes articles and short notes con°
tainingnew information on subjects relevant to the biology of wild species
of birds or other vertebrates in or near Florida. Its emphasis is on papers
dealing with the biology of birds, to which it will give publication priority
over papers on other organisms. All articles, notes, and other materials
should be submitted to the Editor: Henry M. Stevenson, Department of
Biological Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida 32306.

All manuscripts should be submitted in triplicate. They should be
typewritten, double°spaced, on one side of numbered sheets of standard
(8 1/2 X 11 in.), unruled white paper, with margins of at least one inch
on all sides.

Titles should be short and descriptive, and the body of the article
should state the necessary facts without using unnecessary words. All
references should be cited in the body of the text unless there are more
than three, in which case each complete entry should be listed at the end
under “Literature Cited”, and the citation in the body should then indicate
author and year of publication (e.g., Bond, 1961). Whenever there are
more than two authors, list the first followed by ''et al/' (e.g., Blair et al.

1968). Whenever pertinent, the particular page or pages should also be
indicated (Bond, 1961: 44).

The vernacular (common) names of all species mentioned - plants or
animals — should be capitalized, and the scientific name should be added
in parentheses following the first reference except in the title. The scien-
tific name should be underscored and should follow a widely accepted
authority for the group of animals or plants involved (e.g. A.O.U.
Check-list, 1957, for birds).

Abbreviations should be used sparingly in the body of the text except
in parenthetical material: e.g. “Tallahassee (5 mi. SE).” Digits rather than
words are recommended for all numbers except one (1). The metric sys-
tem is preferred for weights and measurements and is acceptable for such
measurements as distances. In writing dates, never use a number to refer
to a month.

Proofs will be sent to the (senior) author. The Editor must be
informed well in advance of any change in address or mechanism for
handling proofs; also of necessary changes in the manuscript before proofs
are printed. Changes in proof are expensive, so authors must not expect
to make major changes at this stage unless they are willing to bear the
cost. When proofs reach the author, he should carefully check against the
typescript and promptly return both to the Editor.

Reprints should be ordered from the Florida Press (P.O. Box 393,
Orlando, Florida 32802) on blanks sent with the proof. Any number
above 50 must be paid for by the author. The cost will be determined
by the Florida Press.

Florida Audubon Society
P.O. Drawer 7
Maitland, Florida 32751

Return Postage Guaranteed

Non-Profit Organization
U.S. POSTAGE
PAID

Orlando, Florida
Permit #224

Storrs L Olson
Nat ' 1 Museum of Nat His
Smithsonian Institution
CONTENTS Washington, DC 205o0

ASPECTS OF RED- SHOULDERED HAWK NESTING IN SOUTHERN FLORIDA 25

FOOD OF THE BARN OWL AT GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA 28

POPUUTION ESTIMATE OF BREEDING BIRDS ON A SPOIL ISLAND IN THE
INDIAN RIVER, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA 32

NOCTURNAL MIGRANTS KILLED AT A CENTRAL FLORIDA TV TOWER,
AUTUMN 1972 40

FIELD NOTES

Singular Brown Pelican Feeding Behavior 44

Whip-poor-will Singing in Winter 44

Foods of the Osprey at Newians Lake 45

ASalmonel la typhimurium Outbreak at a Bird Feeding Station 46

NOTICE: Hawk Migration Association of North America 47

Chordeiles minor sennetti in Florida 48

The Florida Field Naturalist

SPRING 1975

Vol.3

No. 1

A Semi-annual Journal of
The Florida Ornithological Society

THE FLORIDA FIELD NATURALIST

JOURNAL OF THE FLORIDA ORNITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY

(Founded 1972)

Editor: Henry M. Stevenson, Tall Timbers Research Station,

Route 1, Box 160, Tallahassee, Florida 32303

EDITORIAL STAFF

Karen Cantrell, Managing Editor, Florida Audubon Society, P. 0. Drawer
7, Maitland, Fla. 32571.

David W. Johnston, Dept, of Zoology, University of Florida, Gainesville,
Fla. 32601.

Oscar T. Owre, Dept, of Biology, University of Miami, Coral Gables,
Fla. 33124.

William B. Robertson, Jr., Everglades National Park, Homestead, Fla.
33030.

Glen E. Woolfenden, Dept, of Biology, University of South Florida, Tampa,
Fla. 33620.

DFFICERS (1975)

President: Herbert W. Kale M, P.O. Box 520, Vero Beach, Fla. 32960.

Vice President: Ralph W. Schreiber, Seabird Research, Inc., 11008
Teegreen Dr., Tampa, Fla. 33612.

Secretary: Mrs. Margaret C. Bowman, Box 783, Wabasso, Fla. 32970.

Treasurer: Stephen J. Stedman, 1407 E. Sixth Court, Panama City, Fla.
32401.

Articles and notes submitted for publication, as well as books and
other publications intended for review, should be sent to the Editor (see
Inside back cover). Notices of change of address, claims for undelivered
or defective copies of this journal, and requests for information about
advertising, subscriptions, and back numbers should be sent to the
Florida Audubon Society, P. 0. Drawer 7, Maitland, Fla. 32751.

Published semi-annually by the Florida Ornithological Society.

Printed by Florida Press, Inc., Orlando, Fla.

CDVER PAINTING DF THE EVERGLADE KITE (Rosfrhamus sodabllis)
SPECIALLY EXECUTED FDR THIS JDURNAL BY JDN JANDSIK

EDITORIAL: FLORIDA’S NEXT STATE BIRD BOOK?

As a research fellow at Tall Timbers Research Station, beginning in
June 1975, 1 have agreed to begin preparations for a new book on Florida
birds. Everyone agrees that it is about time such a project was initiated. A
lapse of 22 years occurred between Howell and Sprunt, and 21 years have
passed since Sprunt’s book was published. The time involvement necessary
for an authentic work of this sort is sure to add several more years of
waiting, but it is not too early to determine the right direction and solicit
cooperation. In fact, I have already contacted a number of Florida orni-
thologists for their suggestions, and the response has been gratifying, but
there can hardly be too much input. Any additional suggestions will be
gratefully received.

None of the above comments should indicate that I have no ideas of
my own about this book, though admittedly those that I have may change.
My present thinking is that the book should present, as succinctly as seems
feasible, information about the status of Florida species. Other information
should be secondary in importance. Sources should include not only pub-
lished records but any unpublished information pertinent to the purpose
of the book. I hope that those in possession of such information will be
willing to share it.

One other conviction of mine should be mentioned at the outset. As a
general rule (with a few exceptions?) records of the most unusual nature
should have the corroboration of collected specimens or recognizable
photographs. Examples of such records are those of species never pre-
viously validated for Florida. It is customary to formulate a Hypothetical
List for species reported, but not proven to occur, in a given state. One
might expect that a Hypothetical List would dwindle as observers sought
to confirm sight records. However, what happens is usually just the oppo-
site. Whereas Howell’s book listed 12 such species in Florida, Sprunfs
included more than 30, even though some of Howell’s species had since
been removed from the list. My unpublished manuscript on Florida verte-
brates now contains about 45 birds on the Hypothetical List. Aside from
first state records, though, it can hardly be said that a single specimen of a
bird far out of range makes subsequent sight records of the same species
fully acceptable. And the fact that a species is common in summer does
not mean that sight records in winter must be accepted. Nor should sight
records in north Florida of species normally restricted to extreme south
Florida be accepted without proof. Thus in many ways, with more and
more amateurs reporting records, substantiation of unusual records be-
comes increasingly important.

Just as museum specimens of birds are valueless unless available to
ornithologists, so are substantiating photographs (prints or slides). I have
attempted to develop a file of photographs to support unusual records, but
presently more photographs of value are lacking than are present. By dupli-
cating the photographic evidence it can be made available to a central re-
pository as well as to the photographer himself. I would be glad to discuss
with anyone the value of such photographs in the hope of obtaining dupli-
cates of those most needed. Credit would be given to the photographer in
any case where the substantiation was referred to in a publication.
Henry M. Stevenson, Tall Timbers Research Station, Route 1, Box 160,
Tallahassee, Florida 32303.

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

1

A SUBSTANTIAL HAWK SVIIGRATION IN NORTHWEST FLORIDA

Robert and Lucy Duncan

Buteos in large numbers are often seen in Gulf Breeze (Santa Rosa
Co.), Florida, after cold frontal passage in September and October. That
Broad-winged Hawks (Biiteo platy perns) migrate along regular flyways
(Forbush and May 1955) and are coastal migrants reluctant to cross large
bodies of water (Bent 1961) is well documented.

Gulf Breeze is located at the end of a peninsula 20 miles long and
to 3 miles wide, bounded by Pensacola Bay on the north and west and
Santa Rosa Sound on the south. It is heavily wooded with Scrub Pine
(Finns clausa) and Live Oaks (Querciis virginiana) . The authors reside near
the end of this peninsula and have kept records of birds there for several
years. Migrating hawks en route to their winter quarters in Central and
South America arrive from the east, singly or in small groups, and accumu-
late in late morning, forming “kettles” in thermals and sometimes descend-
ing to treetop level. Broad-winged Hawks constitute over 90% of the
buteos, and the ratio of adults to immatures is about 1:5. Accipiters,
falcons, and kites form part of the movement but in smaller numbers.

The senior author has recorded daily weather data since 1963. Fre-
quent observations of hawks were made with 7X binoculars from 0830
until early afternoon during September and October. Because newly arriving
buteos join those present, only the maximum number seen at any one time
were recorded. A summary of hawk totals for 1972-74 appears in Table 1.
The high total for 1974 may be a result of more frequent observations
during critical weeks.

Hawk migration at Gulf Breeze was observed by Francis M. Weston
(1965: 6, 40-41) as early as 1943. A significant change in relative and
absolute numbers of Broad-winged and Red-shouldered Hawks has occurred
in recent years. Table 1 indicates that Broad-winged Hawks constituted
77-94% of the total hawk flight, whereas prior to 1965 Weston noted that
Red-shouldered Hawks were the most abundant hawks. The maximum
number of Broad- winged Hawks counted by Weston was 77 on 7 Septem-
ber 1953 whereas flocks in excess of 100 are now noted (Table 2). Flocks
in excess of 100 Red-shouldered Hawks were reported on 4 occasions by
Weston, whereas the maximum number for the 3 years listed in Table 1
was 15 in 1972.

Weston ( 1965: 40-41) observed that hawks arrived in small numbers
from the east, peaked in the forenoon, and would “break and cross the Bay
in a straggling line.” On 23 September 1974 members of the Francis M.
Weston Audubon Society established lookout stations in an attempt to
establish immediate origin and destination of the hawks. Observers 5 miles
to the east reported single Broad-winged Hawks flying westward down
the middle of the peninsula (Charles Broughton and Goldwyn Gary, pers.
comm.). A party at Ft. Pickens on Santa Rosa Island, a sand barrier
island 5 miles to the SW, had no sightings (C. W. Milmore, pers comm.),
nor did a party at Naval Air Station, Pensacola, 5 miles west (Mary Lou
Mattis, pers. comm.). Yet 212 were present over Gulf Breeze at 1100 CDT
and left at a high altitude in a westerly direction (Lucy Duncan). It is
reasonable to assume that they continue westward in their coastal migration
and form part of the great numbers of hawks observed from Texas to
Panama at this time of year (Smith 1973; Webster 1972).

2

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

Large flocks of hawks are observed elsewhere along the northern
Gulf Coast in fall along peninsulas, but in Gulf Breeze the migration is
apparently distinctive in its relation to specific weather conditions and in its
predictability. First arrivals appear 24 to 48 hours after frontal passage
and not until the wind has settled in the northeast quadrant. West and
northwest winds do not bring hawks. They continue to pass through in
diminishing numbers for as many as 3 days after frontal passage, provided
the wind remains in the northeast quadrant. Once the wind has diminished
or changed direction, hawk sightings end. Fronts arriving in northwest
Florida and the Atlantic Coast-Appalachian Slope are approximately
coincidental at this season. Although they approach northwest Florida
from the north and west, windshift is usually to the north or northeast
within a few hours after passage. Table 2 is a summary of weather data
and hawk counts. Since Broad-winged Ffawks arrive soon after frontal
passage and travel in a westerly direction, it appears that they are originat-
ing out of the northeast within a day or two of Gulf Breeze, because the
front has not moved far enough east by the time of their arrival to allow a
more northerly point of origin. This would assume a point of origin 200 to
400 miles from Gulf Breeze, allowing an average migrating speed of 25
m.p.h. (Lincoln 1950), and 8 hours’ travel a day. This suggests they may
be part of a southern population from breeding areas in eastern Alabama
and western Georgia stimulated into migration by the advancing front,
cooler, drier air masses, and favorable flying conditions. Henry M. Stev-
enson (pers. comm.) suggests they may migrate to the coast via such
river valleys as the Apalachicola.

Yet other flocks observed at peninsula locales do not indicate a
weather correlation. On 10 October 1974 Gary and Mattis (pers. comm.)
observed 3 groups totalling 60 Broad-winged Hawks between 1000 and
1200 CDT at Ft. Morgan, Ala., about 60 miles west of Gulf Breeze. On
12 October 1974 over 100 buteos were seen circling in mid-morning over
the St. Joseph Peninsula, Gulf County (Steve Stedman, pers. comm.)
and about 30 at that same time and date at Hickory Mound Impound-
ment, Taylor County, by the authors. None of these sightings were related
to recent frontal passage and the hawks seen on 12 October were on light
southerly winds. Interestingly, no large flock of hawks was seen at Gulf
Breeze after 3 October 1974 in spite of their presence along the coast both
east and west. Thus Gulf Breeze may be unique in Florida in affording
observers the opportunity to observe hawks in numbers with some degree
of predictability during fall migration.

We would like to thank the members of the Francis M. Weston Audu-
bon Society who assisted in making observations and Hal and Brooke
Beecher for their helpful suggestions on the manuscript.

LITERATURE CITED

Bent, A. C. 1961. Life Histories of North American Birds of Prey, Part

One. U. S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 167. 238 pp.

Forbush, E. H. and J. B. May. 1955, A Natural History of Birds of East-
ern and Central North America. Bramhill House. New York. 1 10 pp.

Lincoln, F. C. 1950. Migration of Birds. Fish and Wildlife Service circular

16: 102 pp.

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

3

Smith, N. 1973. Spectacular buteo migration over Panama Canal Zone.

American Birds. 27: 1,

Webster, F. S., Jr. 1972. South Texas Region. American Birds. 26: 86.

Weston, F. M. 1965. A Survey of the Birdlife of Northwestern Florida.
Tall Timbers Research Station Bull. no. 5. 147 pp.

614 Fairpoint Drive, Gulf Breeze, Florida 32561.

TABLE 1

Sumnary of Hawk Totals for 1972, 1973, 1974

’ 1972 1973 1974

no.

%

no. %

nol ¥

Mississippi Kite

(Icdnia ndsisippiensis)

6

3%

11

2%

18

2%

Sharp-shdraied Hawk

(Acdpiter striatus)

11

5%

17

4%

11

1%

Qx>per's Ha^c

(Accipiter C30operii)

3

1%

9

2%

7

1%

Bed” tailed Hasdc

(Buteo janaicensis)

3

1%

3

1%

0

0%

Red-shouldered Hasdc

(Buteo iineatusl

15

7%

1

0-1%

2

0-1%

Broad-winged Hawk

(Buteo platypterus)

163

77%

400

89%

772

94%

Merlin

(Faloo ojlunnbarius)

3

1%

4

1%

4

1%

American Kestrel

(Falco sparverius)

7

4%

6

1%

7

1%

TABLE 2

Weather and Broad-winged Hawk ]^ta for 1972, 1973

, and 1974

Year

lYontal Passage

Front Intensity

Wind KLrection

Dates of Arrival

g

S Velocity (raph)

Nimbers of Hawks

1972

September 30

Strong

NW

15-22

• • •

0

NE

10-15

October 1

10

NE

10-15

October 2

2

OctdDer 7

Moderate

N

12-18

• « •

0

NE

5-15

October 8

135

1973

Septentoer 18

Lfoderate

N

10-13

0

N

5-12

Septenber 19

300

Var.

0-10

SeptQiber 20

7

October 17

Ifc<^rate

NE

10-20

. . .

0

NE

10-18

October 18

40

NE

5-15

Oct(*er 19

8

NE

5-12

October 20

8

1974

Septenber 15

Weak

N

5-13

0

NE

4-8

Septaiber 16

20

September 21

Strong

N

13-20

. . .

0

N

13-22

Septenber 22

19

NE

12-22

Septenber 23

212

Septonber 29

Strong

N

15-20

. . .

0

N

13-23

September 30

8

NE

12-18

October 1

325

NE

15-25

October 2

50

NE

12-28

October 3

125

4

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

ADDITIONAL RECORDS OF AUTUMNAL BREEDING OF
BOAT-TAILED CRACKLES IN FLORIDA

Herbert W. Kale II

Autumnal breeding of Boat-tailed Crackles (Cassldix major) in Flor-
ida was first reported by Sclander and Nicholson (1962), who observed
breeding birds and fledglings at three lakes in Orlando, Florida, in the late
autumn of 1956, 1959, 1960, and 1961. They concluded that autumnal
breeding was limited to birds inhabiting parks surrounding lakes and resi-
dential districts where a greatly enhanced food supply was provided by
either urban horticultural practices or direct subsidies in the form of bread
and bird seed. Crackles living in agricultural and prairie lands in central
Florida did not have these food subsidies, and it was assumed they did not
make any reproductive efforts in the fall. Orions (1960) concluded that
fall breeding of Tricoiored Blackbirds (Agelaius tricolor) in the Sacremento
Valley of California was dependent upon agricultural (irrigation) and
duck hunting (wet potholes and marshes) practices, both man-influenced
phenomena. Coon et al. (1971) report the initiation of breeding by Creat-
tailed Crackles (Cassldix mexicanus) in Texas during January and Febru-
ary 1971 as a result of abnormally high temperatures during this period.
Sustained cold weather in late February terminated nest-building activities.

In the autumn of 1971, 21 active Boat-tailed Crackle nests were
observed at several widespread locations in central Florida: along the east
coast at West Palm Beach, Vero Beach, and Cocoa Beach, and at several
interior sites along the Florida Turnpike: Yeehaw Junction interchange;
Canoe Creek Service Plaza, south of St, Cloud; and Turkey Lake Service
Plaza, south of Clermont.

Evidence of breeding was first noted on 7 November at the Canoe
Creek Plaza where I observed a female grackle carrying food to a nest in
an ornamental juniper (Jimi perns sp.) located in a cluster of 16 junipers
near a small borrow pond. Another group of 8 trees, from 8 to 15 feet in
height, was present on the opposite side of the pond. Approximately 8-10
male grackles were calling and displaying to 15 to 20 females. A search
of the trees revealed 7 active nests containing eggs or young (2-3 days old),
one recently predated nest (broken egg shells in the nest and on the
ground), and 15 old nests from the previous spring (Table 1).

Grackles were observed nesting in Wax Myrtle (Myrica cerifera)
shrubs on an island in the middle of a one-half acre pond 3 miles northwest
of Vero Beach beginning in early November. On 15 November 6 nests were
observed: one contained 3 young ready to fledge, 2 nests contained 2 eggs
each, 2 nests contained 3 eggs (one of these had only 2 eggs on 9 Novem-
ber) and one nest was being built. Several young fledged from this
colony later in November and in early December.

On 17 November a check was made at several locations in central
Florida for additional evidence of breeding. A single nest in a tall juniper
was observed being attended by a female at the Yeehaw Junction inter-
change of the Florida Turnpike, but the nest was too high to determine its
contents. Ten males and 20 females were counted in the area. Nests were
again checked at Canoe Creek Service Plaza (Table 1). At Turkey Lake
Service Plaza, northwest of Orlando, fewer grackles were noted and very
little courtship activity observed. Three nests, all abandoned, were found
in a Sweet Carrissa (Carrissa sp.) hedge near a borrow pond. One con-

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

5

tained 3 cold eggs, another 2 cold eggs covered by dead leaves, and the
third was incompletely constructed. Three old nests from the previous
spring were also present. Also, there appeared to be an active nest in the
top of a Sabal Palm (Sabal palmetto) several hundred meters away, to
which a female was seen carrying something (undetermined), but this nest
was too high to be reached.

Visits were made to the three lakes in Orlando (Eola, Ivanhoe, and
Lucerne) mentioned by Selander and Nicholson (op. cit.). Several male
grackles were singing and displaying at Lake Ivanhoe, but no females were
observed being chased or carrying nesting material or food. Lake Ivanhoe
is now bridged by Interstate Flighway 4, but the “willows and cypress trees
on a boggy finger of land jutting into the lake” still exist. However, no
grackle activity was noted there. No nesting activity was found at Lake Eola
or Lucerne, or at several nearby lakes.

Selander and Nicholson reported that the total population of Boat-
tailed Grackles inhabiting Orlando in 1960 was approximately 50 indi-
viduals. The population now inhabiting the city appears to be many times
that number. Although I saw numerous males singing and displaying in
Orlando in mid-November, no evidence of fall nesting was found in 1971.
The abandoned nests and the single active nest at Turkey Lake Plaza just
northwest of Orlando, coupled with the lack of breeding in Orlando, sug-
gests that the Orlando area was the northernmost limit of fall breeding
for the Boat-tailed Grackle in Florida in 1971.

A check of potential breeding sites along State Road 60 as far west as
Tampa on 23 November 1971 failed to find any nesting colonies. Grackles
with active nests were reported in mid-November at Patrick Air Force
Base, near Cocoa Beach (fide M. C .Bowman), and fledged young were
reported at West Palm Beach in early December (C. D. Goforth, pers.
comm.). I netted and banded a female grackle in juvenal plumage under-
going a first prebasic molt at Winter Beach, a few miles north of Vero
Beach, on 24 January 1972. Grackles hatched in spring or summer com-
plete their first prebasic molt by September, hence this juvenile was un-
doubtedly a fall-hatched bird.

Selander and Nicholson (1960) summarized the probable physio-
logical basis for autumnal breeding as follows: A lengthy refractory period
that follows gonadal regression from the vernal breeding condition often
prevents response to favorable environmental conditions in the early fall
when attempted reproduction usually would not be successful. However,
during periods of prolonged mild weather extending into late fall and early
winter, gonadal recrudescence in some species continues, and, in the ab-
sence of external inhibitors (decreasing temperatures, etc.), gametogenesis
and breeding occur. The fall and winter of 1971 in Florida was one of
the warmest on record and December was the warmest in 40 years, the
second warmest on record (Nat. Weather Service 1971). In the tropics,
of course, many species of birds have protracted breeding seasons.

Although each nesting colony in 1971 was located next to a pond in
habitat developed and managed by humans, the habitats were chiefly rural
in character and no food subsidies in the form of bread or grain were
provided. Contrary to the environmental conditions found by Selander and
Nicholson in the rural central Florida area in 1960 (“the grass is brown,
many trees and shrubs lack leaves . . . ”), the countryside throughout the

6

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

autumn of 1971 was verdant and insect food was abundant. Selander and
Nicholson’s suggestion that autumnal breeding of Boat-tailed Crackles in
Florida is a strongly man-influenced phenomenon, restricted to urban areas,
is not sustained by the observations reported here. Apparently wherever
environmental conditions are favorable — that is, warm weather and suffi-
cient insect food ■ — ■ adult grackles will attempt to breed.

The fall months of 1972 and 1973 in the central Florida area were
also characterized by warm temperatures well into late November and
early December. Although no special effort was made to determine the
extent of autumnal breeding in those years, I did observe a female grackle
carrying nesting material into tall cattails (Typha sp.) at a lake in Lakeland
on 14 October 1972, and received reports of fledglings observed in No-
vember 1973 near Venice, Sarasota County.

SUMMARY

Breeding Boat-tailed Grackles were observed throughout the east-
central region of Florida from Orlando to West Palm Beach in the autumn
and early winter of 1971. Autumnal breeding is associated with warm
temperatures throughout the fall months and the concurrent abundance of

invertebrates utilized as food for nestlings.

TABLE 1.

Status of Boat-tailed Grackle nests on two dates in November 1971 at Canoe
Creek Service Plaza, Florida Turnpike.

Nest

7 November

17 November

1

2 eggs

2 eggs

2

3 eggs

3 young (2-3 days old)

3

3 eggs

3 eggs

4

3 eggs

3 eggs

5

2 eggs

3 eggs

6

2 young (3 days old)

2 young (im, If)

7

3 eggs

3 young (2m, If, 2 days old)

8

broken shells

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

7

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The assistance of James B. Angy and J. Thomas Bridges in the field,
and a critical reading of this manuscript by George R. Maxwell II are
gratefully acknowledged. This research was supported by N.I.H. Grant
No. AI“06587 and is contribution No. 342 of the Florida Medical En-
tomology Laboratory.

LITERATURE CITED

Coon, D. W., R. F. Gotie, and K. A. Arnold. 1971. Winter nesting attempts
by Great-tailed Grackles. Wilson Bull. 83: 440.

Nat. Weather Service. 1971. Climatological Data, 75: 149.

Orions, G. H. 1960. Autumnal breeding in the Tricoiored Blackbirds.
Auk, 77: 379-398.

Selander, R. K., and D. J. Nicholson. 1962. Autumnal breeding of Boat-
tailed Grackles in Florida. Condor, 64: 81 -91.

Florida Medical Entomology Laboratory, P. O. Box 520, Vero Beach,
Florida 32960. Present Address: Ornithological Research Division, Florida
Audubon Society, 35 First Court S.W., Vero Beach, Florida 32690.

FOS Fall Meeting
October 17-19, 1975
Titusville, Florida

8

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

RETURN OF REDDISH EGRETS AS BREEDING BIRDS IN
TAMPA BAY, FLORIDA

Richard T, Paul, Andrew J. Meyerriecks, and Frank M. Dunstan

One hundred years ago the Reddish Egret (Dichromanassa rufescens)
was an abundant breeding species along the west coast of Florida from
the Anclote Keys to Florida Bay (Scott 1887). Its numbers were severely
reduced in the 1880’s by plume hunters, and by 1900 the species was rare
in Florida (Bent 1926; Howell 1932). Since that time breeding has been
confined largely to the eastern part of Florida Bay. When Meyerriecks first
visited the Florida Keys in 1955, he found no signs of colonial nesting,
but instead breeding pairs uncommonly scattered in the region of Cowpens
Keys in the eastern part of Florida Bay (Meyerriecks, in Palmer 1962).

Recently the species has shown signs of a slow increase in numbers
and a breeding range extension northward along the west coast of Florida.
Egrets with brilliant soft-part coloration have been observed annually on
Frank Key in the northwestern part of Florida Bay since 1968. Nests and
newly fledged young were found there in both 1973 and 1974 (John C.
Ogden, pers. comm.). On 13 March 1970, Bancroft, Harrison, and Meyer-
riecks discovered one Reddish Egret nest on Hemp Key, Pine Island Sound,
near Fort Myers (Bancroft 1971).

Observations by Meyerriecks from 1961 through 1969 in the Tampa
Bay area indicated that Reddish Egrets were uncommon in this region,
with infrequent sightings of more than one bird per day. Most records were
made in the vicinity of Mullet and Tarpon Keys, Boca Ciega Bay. No
birds with brilliant soft-part coloration were seen (see Meyerriecks 1960,
for details of soft-part coloration and behavioral indicators of early breed-
ing season activity).

In May 1970, June 1971, and May 1972, Meyerriecks saw single
dark-phase Reddish Egrets on Mullet Key in brilliant soft-part coloration,
but no other indications of breeding were observed. On Mullet Key in
May 1973, Meyerriecks saw 2 brilliantly colored dark-phase individuals
but was unable to discover any signs of nesting. Ralph W. Schreiber (pers.
comm.) saw single dark-phase egrets with brilliant soft-part coloration on
Tarpon Key in each of the years 1970-74.

During autumn and winter 1973-74 Dunstan regularly saw up to 5
Reddish Egrets (including one white-phase bird) in the vicinity of Bird
Island, a major heronry at the mouth of the Alafia River in the north-
eastern part of Tampa Bay. In February and March egrets with breeding
coloration were regularly seen in and around nesting areas on Bird
Island. On 30 April and 2 May Dunstan saw copulation and nest-building.
The nest was 2.5 m above the substrate in a White Mangrove (Laguncu-
laria racemosa). Paul and Dunstan found a dark-phase adult incubating
3 eggs in the nest on 10 May; they found 2 downy young and one egg on
a 7 June inspection. Dunstan and Meyerriecks photographed one of the
downy young on 10 June. This nest failed: one egg did not hatch, and by
20 June both young had disappeared.

Additionally, a newly fledged, dark-phase Reddish Egret with down
on the head was seen on 2 May in the Bird Island colony. Perhaps the
same bird was seen on 10 May and again on 7 June, when it was photo-
graphed. Probably this bird was raised in the same heronry and not else-

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

9

where. Two more dark-phase fledglings were seen on 26 August. Thus we
suspect that at least 2 pairs of Reddish Egrets nested successfully on
Bird Island in 1974, and that this is not an isolated event but rather part
of a sustained reoccupation of former breeding range.

Literature Cited

Bancroft, G. 1971. Northern breeding record for Reddish Egret. Auk,
88: 429.

Bent, A. C. 1926. Life Histories of North American Marsh Birds. U. S.
Nat. Mus. Bull. 135. 392 pp.

Howell, A. H. 1932. Florida Bird Life. Florida Dept, of Game and Fresh

Water Fish, Tallahassee. 579 pp.

Meyerriecks, A. J. 1960. Comparative Breeding Behavior of Four Species
of North American Herons. Publ. Nuttall OrnithoL Club No. 2.
158 pp.

Palmer, R. S. (Ed.). 1962. Handbook of North American Birds, vol. L
Yale University Press, New Haven. 567 pp.

Scott, W. E. D. 1887. The present condition of some of the bird rookeries
of the Gulf Coast of Florida. Auk, 4: 135-144; 213-222; 273-284.

Research Department, National Audubon Society, Tavernier, Florida
33070; Department of Biology, University of Sounth Florida, Tampa, Flor-
ida 33620; National Audubon Society, Tampa Bay Sanctuaries, Rt. 1,
Box 205 ~U, Ruskin, Florida 33570.

10

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 3

Spring 1975

DIURNAL ACTIVITY OF BROWN PELICANS AT A MARINA

Nancy G. Herbert and Ralph W. Schreiber

Brown Pelicans (Pelecanus occidentalis) often visit marinas and fish
piers as part of their daily routine. Increasing urbanization disturbs the
pelicans from their “natural” loafing areas on sand bars and mangrove keys,
thus expansive roofs of marinas are an important resting site. In addition,
sport fisherman cleaning their catches provide food sources at certain times
of day. The present study investigates the diurnal pattern of utilization of one
marina. This study forms a portion of a much broader investigation into
the biology of the Brown Pelican in Florida.

METHODS

Weekly between 30 September 1973 and 22 March 1974, Herbert
visited O’NeilFs Skyway Boat Basin, on U.S. 19 just north of the Sunshine
Skyway bridge, on Boca Ciega Bay, Pinellas County, Florida. On these
24 days at hourly intervals from sunrise to sunset she counted all pelicans
present and categorized them by plumage characteristics into four age classes
(Schreiber, unpublished data). Her hourly data, based on averages for all
months combined, are illustrated by Figure 1. Her monthly data, based on
averages for each hour within each month, are illustrated by Figure 2.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Examination of Figure 1 reveals that few birds' are present in early
morning and late in the day and that numbers gradually increase to peak in
early mid-afternoon, after which a sharp decline occurs. This trend occurs
in all age classes but is most pronounced in adult birds, which compose the
majority of this assemblage.

Examination of Figure 2 discloses that the daily pattern is true for each
of the six months. The fluctuations in numbers between months and the rela-
tion of this marina to the Boca Ciega Bay pelican population are currently
under investigation.

We suspect the diurnal pattern demonstrated here indicates the abihty
of Brown Pelicans to adapt their daily feeding and resting regimes to man’s
activities. The birds probably feed normally during the morning hours and
then retire to loaf, preen, and sleep in an undisturbed area during the after-
noon hours. The boat basin provides the loafing area. Additionally, fishermen
usually return to the marina in the early to mid-afternoon, where they discard
remains into the water, often purposefully feeding the pelicans that imme-
diately gather around the fish cleaners. We suspect that this food source is
an added attractant of the marina to the birds, and one that may provide an
important food source during times of fish shortage.

These data are extracted from a senior thesis submitted to the Collegium
of Natural Science, Eckerd College, by Ms. Herbert. Glen E. Woolfenden
suggested certain changes in the manuscript.

Herbert: Department of Wildlife Ecology, University of Wisconsin, Madison,
Wise., 53706; Schreiber: Department of Biology, University of South Florida,
Tampa, 33620 (present address of Schreiber: Seabird Research, Inc., 11008
Teegreen Drive, Tampa, Florida 33612).

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

n

Figure 1. Average number of Brown Pelicans present at O’NeilTs Skyway
Boat Basin, St. Petersburg, Florida on 24 days between 30
September 1973 and 22 March 1974.

o— ■ — -o Tofol

LOCAL TIME

Figure 2. Monthly average number of Brown Pelicans present at O'NeiH's
Skyway Boat Basin, St. Petersburg, Florida between October
1973 and March 1974.

LOCAL TIME

12

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

LESSER SCAUP MORTALITY IN TAMPA BAY, FLORIDA, 1974

Ralph W. Schreiber, Frank M, Dunstan, and James J. Dinsmore

During February and March 1974 large numbers of Lesser Scaup
(Aythya affinis) were found dead or in a weakened condition on the
beaches of Hillsborough and Pinellas Counties. Mortality appeared great-
est in Hillsborough Bay but dead and dying ducks were reported throughout
the Tampa Bay region.

Following the first reports of dying ducks, we made counts of the
scaup along the east and west shores of Hillsborough Bay and on McKay
Bay. Using plumage characteristics (Bellrose et aL, 1961: 402), we
counted and sexed the ducks swimming within about 400 yards of the
beach and those sick or freshly dead on the beach (Table 1).

The proportion of males and females found dead compared to those
swimming offshore is significantly different (P 0.01). Clearly mortality
was much higher in males than in females.

Table 1. Counts of Lesser Scaup made along the east and west shores of
Hillsborough Bay and along McKay Bay, Tampa Bay, Hillsborough
County, Florida, 1974.

ALIVE DEAD

Males

Females

Males

Females

#

%

#

%

#

%

#

%

12 February

no

33

219

67

88

83

18

17

14 February

55

30

125

70

3

100

0

-

17 February

103

45

126

55

7

58

5

42

17 March

131

48

143

52

4

44

5

56

20 March

770

37

1291

63

77

71

31

29

20 March

NC^

-

NC

-

357

66

180

34

26 March

36

32

78

68

2

100

0

-

27 March

589

29

1399

70

40

66

20

33

28 March

126

50

127

50

NC

-

NC

-

29 March

123

28

323

72

NC

-

NC

-

5 April

69

19

294

81

NC

-

NC

-

10 April

90

37

151

63

0

-

0

-

3 May

38

39

60

61

NC

-

NC

-

Total

2240

34

4366

66

578

69

259

31

1 No Count.

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3 Spring 1975 13

Sanitation workers disposed of dead ducks daily during this period,
and we were unable to count the total number of scaup that died during
the period. However, we conservatively estimate that several thousand
scaup died during February and March in Tampa Bay. We roughly esti-
mated 30,000 to 50,000 scaup present on the bay on several days during
this period. On 13 February, Fickett (in litt.) flew a waterfowl inventory
survey and estimated 68,000 scaup on Tampa Bay, concentrated on Hills-
borough Bay. No data exist to document winter movements of scaup
within Florida and thus we are unable to comment on the importance of
this die-off to the entire winter population.

Published records on sex ratios of Lesser Scaup in winter and spring
all suggest that males predominate in wild populations. Mcllhenny (1940)
found 69% males and 31% females in 8,356 Lesser Scaup captured for
banding on Avery Island, Louisiana, in January and February 1934-1938.
Bellrose et al. (1961) summarized a number of spring counts from Mid-
west and Pacific Coast States and reported that males made up 69.5% of
82,564 scaup. Anderson, Ketola, and Warner (1969) reported 78% males
and 22% females among 1437 Lesser Scaup killed in an oil spill in Minne-
sota in March 1963. All three of these reports gave a sex composition
similar to what we found among dead scaup in Florida. Their counts pre-
sumably give accurate estimates of the sex composition of Lesser Scaup in
those areas for those years. We suggest two explanations of why their
counts are the reverse of our live-bird sex composition and similar to our
dead bird counts. Possibly females winter further south than males and
thus make up a larger proportion of the wintering population of scaup in
Florida than in more northern states. Another possibility is that the males
migrate north earlier than do females and thus our high proportion of
females is an artifact of this differential migration.

Although it is possible, we believe it is unlikely that the preponderance
of females in the population was brought about by excessive mortality of
the males. Females predominated even early in the die-off and this per-
centage did not change markedly throughout the die-off. Rather, we believe
that males simply were more susceptible to whatever was causing the
mortality in a population with an unbalanced sex ratio.

These data indicate the need for much additional information on the
sex ratios of wild populations of birds. Amateur ornithologists could easily
provide useful information by determining sex ratios, where possible,
of the birds they observe while “birding.”

The die-off of Lesser Scaup reported here coincided in time and loca-
tion with a red tide (Gymnodinium breve) bloom and severe fish kill in
Tampa Bay. However, to date, pathological studies by the Florida Depart-
ment of Natural Resources and the Veterinary Science Laboratory of the
University of Florida have been negative in relating the duck die-off to the
red tide (Quick and Henderson, 1974; Forrester, pers. comm.). Thus, the
cause of the Lesser Scaup mortality remains unexplained. The differential
mortality of sexes is certainly intriguing and warrants further study.

We thank S. B. Fickett, Jr., and D. J. Forrester for their unpublished
data; J. E. Quick for encouraging this study and for offering prepublication
access to his manuscript; and E. A. Schreiber for secretarial assistance.

14

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

LITERATURE CITED

Anderson, B. W., T. E. Ketola, and D. H. Warner. 1969. Spring sex and
age ratios of Lesser Scaup and Ring-necked Ducks in Minnesota.
/. Wildl Mgmt., 33: 209-212.

Bellrose, F. C., T. G. Scott, A. S. Hawkins, and J. B. Low. 1961. Sex
Ratios and Age Ratios in North American Ducks. IlL Nat. Hist. Surv.
Bull., 27: 391-474.

Quick, J. E., and G. E. Henderson. 1974. Effects of Gymnodinum breve
Red Tide on Fishes and Birds: A preliminary report on Behavior,
Anatomy, Hematology, and Histopathology. Contrib. 241, Florida
Department of Natural Resources, Marine Research Laboratory.

Mcllhenny, E. A. 1940. Sex ratios in wild birds. Auk, 57: 85-93.

Ralph W. Schreiber, Department of Biology, University of of South Florida,
Tampa, Florida 33620; Frank M. Dimstan, National Audubon Society,
Ruskin, Florida; James J. Dinsmore, Department of Biology, University of
Tampa, Tampa, Florida. Present address of RWS: Seabird Research, Inc.
11008 Teegreen Drive, Tampa, Florida 33612.

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

15

FIELD NOTES

Caspian Tern Nesting in Florida, 1973 and 1974

Prior to 1973, all Florida nesting records of Caspian Terns (Hydro-
progne caspia) were from two localized areas in Pinellas County (Schreiber
and Dinsmore 1972). In 1973 this species was reported nesting in Brevard
County on the east coast of Florida (Ogden, 1973). Also in 1973, Dins-
more found a Caspian Tern scrape containing 2 eggs on the east side of
the Pinellas Bayway within 3 meters of a nest found in 1972.

On 30 April 1974 Dunstan observed 2 adult Caspian Terns along
the shoreline at a Laughing Gull (Lams atricllla) colony on Pelican Point,
a spoil island in Hillsborough Bay, Hillsborough County. No evidence of
nesting was found at that time, but on 5 May we saw adults in the same
area and found 4 fresh scrapes, 2 containing eggs. The colony increased
in numbers until 4 June, when 16 nests contained eggs or young. The
tern colony extended along the beach ridge for approximately 20 meters.
Inland from the tern scrapes. Laughing Gulls nested in denser vegetation.
Nests of the 2 species were within one meter of each other.

Eleven nests contained 2 eggs each and 5 contained one egg each
for a total of 27 eggs laid (x = 1.7). A mean clutch size of less than 2
is suggested by Bent (1921) and Miller (1943 ) for the Caspian Tern in
Louisiana and California, respectively; but Ludwig (1965) found a mean
of 2.81 for the species in the Great Lakes region.

We found the first chick on 27 May, and 18 had hatched out by 20
June. Nestlings remained in or near the scrape until they were approx-
imately one week old. After that time they were difficult to find. On a
number of occasions, pulli took to the water to avoid capture (Chaniot
1971; Schreiber and Dinsmore 1972). Between visits to the island, 2
single-egg clutches disappeared; these eggs may have hatched and the
young moved away from the nest. One egg of a 2-egg clutch disappeared
after remaining unhatched for 36 days. Of the 18 chicks known to have
hatched by 20 June, 2 were found dead less than 3 days after hatching.

On 24-26 June, heavy rains, high winds, and tides in excess of one
meter above normal occurred in Tampa Bay, destroying 4 nests that con-
tained 6 eggs and probably drowning many chicks. Only 3 young are
known to have survived. Two days after the storm, 9 adults and 7 fresh
scrapes (without eggs) were present; however, on subsequent trips we
observed only 5 adults and the scrapes were abandoned. Our first record
of a chick able to sustain flight and avoid capture was on 4 July, 5-6
weeks after the first egg hatched. By 30 July, all Caspian Terns had left
the island.

Although Caspian Terns are not known to have nested in Hillsbor-
ough County previously, Dinsmore’s sighting on 3 August 1973 of a young
Caspian Tern, capable of flight and begging for food from an adult at
McKay Bay, suggests that Caspian Terns may have nested in Hillsborough
County in 1973,

On 20 July 1974 Schreiber found an adult and an almost fledged
Caspian Tern chick in a Laughing Gull colony on a spoil island along the
Intercoastal waterway, about 1% kilometers north of Devilfish Key in
Charlotte Harbor, Charlotte County.

16

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

It is interesting to note that the further expansion of the Caspian
Tern’s nesting range in Florida has followed the pattern suggested by
Schreiber and Dinsmore (1972), That is, all nesting took place on spoil
islands and was in association with colonies of other species of Charadrii-
formes. Except for the first nesting record for Florida in 1962 (Woolf-
enden and Meyerriecks 1963), all nesting has been with Laughing Gulls.

We thank A. J. Meyerriecks and H. W. Kale for their suggestions
regarding this manuscript.

LITERATURE CITED

Bent, A. C. 1921. Life Histories of North American Gulls and Terns.
Bull. 113, U. S. Nat. Mus. Washington, D. C.

Chaniot, C. E. 1970. Notes on color variation in downy Caspian Terns.
Condor, 72: 460-465.

Ludwig, J. P. 1965. Biology and structure of the Caspian Tern (Hydro-

progne caspia) populations of the Great Lakes from 1896-1964. Bird-
Banding, 36: 217-233.

Miller, A. H. 1943. Census of a colony of Caspian Terns. Condor, 45:
220-225.

Ogden, J. C. 1973. The nesting season: Florida Region. Amer. Birds,
27: 859-863.

Schreiber, R. W., and J. J. Dinsmore. 1972. Caspian Tern nesting records
in Florida. Fla. Nat. 45: 161.

Woolfenden, G. E., and A. J. Meyerriecks. 1963. Caspian Tern breeds in
Florida. Auk. 80: 365-366.

Frank M. Dunstan, National Audubon Society, Tampa Bay Wildlife Sanc-
tuaries, Rt. 1, Box 205-17, Ruskin, Florida 33570; Ralph W. Schreiber,
Department of Biology, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida
33620; and James J. Dinsmore, Biology Department, University of Tampa,
Tampa, Florida 33606.

Florida Field Noturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

17

Sandwich Tern Breeds on the Atlantic Coast of Florida

The A.O.U. Check-List of North American Birds (1957) gives the
United States breeding range of the Sandwich Tern (Thalasseus sandvi-
censis) as “Virginia to South Carolina” and “Southern Texas to Louisi-
ana.” Howell (1932) has pointed out that in the 19th century the species
also bred on the Gulf Coast of Florida and in the Dry Tortugas.

Stevenson (1972) found the species nesting on a small island near
Port St. Joe in July 1970. This is the first known Florida breeding of the
species in the 20th century.

On 8 June 1974 the authors were investigating the nesting colony of
Royal Terns (T. maximus) on a small sand island near Bird Island in
Nassau Sound, northern Duval County, which we have named “Little
Bird Island”. This small island is of recent origin and does not appear on
charts of the area. It is located about 1 mile NW of Bird Island. We
found 4 Sandwich Tern “nests” containing one egg each grouped together in
the Royal Tern colony which had 1250 nests on this date. A good series
of photographs of the adults tending the eggs was obtained. There were
5 “nests” with one egg each on 16 June, 3 eggs in 3 nests on 22 June,
3 eggs in 3 nests on 7 July, and no eggs on 14 July. No eggs were seen
on four subsequent trips to the colony in July and August. We are un-
sure whether the eggs hatched or were destroyed. No young Sandwich
Terns were seen, but they could easily have been overlooked among the
hundreds of Royal Tern chicks present in the colony. This is the first
breeding record of the species for the Atlantic Coast south of South
Carolina (Burleigh, 1958).

We thank William B. Robertson, Jr., for his comments on an earlier
draft of the manuscript.

LITERATURE CITED

American Ornithologists Union. 1957. Check-List of North American
Birds. Lord Baltimore Press, Inc. Baltimore, Md. 691 pp.

Burleigh, Thomas D. 1958. Georgia Birds. Univ. Oklahoma Press,
Norman. 746 pp.

Howell, A. H. 1932. Florida Bird Life. Coward-McCann, Inc., New
York. 579 pp.

Stevenson, Henry M. 1972. Recent Breeding of the Sandwich Tern (Thalas-
seus sandvicensis) in Florida. Florida Naturalist, 45: 94-95.

Robert W. Loftin, University of North Florida, Jacksonville, Florida
32216. Steve Sutton, University of North Florida, Jacksonville, Florida
32216.

18

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 3

Spring 1975

Voice Maturity in Florida Sandhill Cranes

Walkinshaw (1973. Cranes of the World. Winchester Press, New
York City) stated that Sandhill Cranes (Grus canadensis) acquire their
adult voice at age 10 to 12 months but gave no data or other basis for
the statement. Throughout the fall and winter of 1973, I observed 3 pen-
reared Florida Sandhill Cranes (G. c. pratensis) at least 3 times per week.
The birds were hatched at Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel,
Maryland, on 15 and 27 March from 2 eggs collected near Palmdale,
Glades County, Florida, and on 9 April from an egg laid by a captive
Florida bird. The 3 birds began adult calls in early January at 43 weeks,
5 days; 42 weeks, 5 days, and 40 weeks 3 days, respectively — -that is, at
less than 10 months of age for all three. Perhaps Florida cranes develop the
adult voice sooner than some other Stephen A. Nesbitt, Flor-

ida Game and Fresh Water Commission, Wildlife Research Projects Office,
4005 S. Main St., Gainesville, Florida 32601.

Red-bellied Woodpecker Removes Young From Nest

On 31 May 1974 I was observing a nest of the Red-bellied Wood-
pecker (Centurus caroliniis) in a dead-tree cavity between an apartment
complex and a heavily overgrown wooded area in Jacksonville, Florida.
I had observed the nest several times daily since 18 May, and nesting
seemed to be proceeding normally for this species.

At about 1500 EDT a male Red-bellied Woodpecker approached the
nest from the southeast. He perched and looked into the hole for several
seconds. He then put his head into the hole a number of times, as if he
were feeding young inside. Then he entered the hole entirely and emerged
within five seconds, carrying a nestling by its feet. He carried the nestling
northward into the woods and reurned within 30 seconds without it. The
process was then repeated with 2 more nestlings. All 3 young were carried
out of sight, but the third was heard falling into the undergrowth about
15 m from the nest. The adult then carried an egg northeastward from the
nest (in a different direction from the young). Because of the heavy under-
growth, I was unable to find the young bird I heard fall.

The male did not return within the next several minutes, so I left the
area. When I returned at 1700 a female Red-bellied Woodpecker flew
in from the east, landed on the nest tree, and called loudly several times.
Then she entered the nest and remained about 2 minutes. She then emerged
and remained in the vicinity about 15 minutes, flying from tree to tree
and calling repeatedly, after which she flew away to the north and did
not return. No subsequent activity has been observed in the area.

It is difficult to interpret these observations, since it is not known
whether the adult male was the parent bird. Three possibilities are sug-
gested : ( 1 ) the male parent was attempting to move the brood to another
location (2) an adult male, not the parent, was attempting to “clean out”
the cavity for his own use, (3) the male’s action was an instance of inex-
plicable, aberrant behavior.^ — T. L. Roach, 3760 University Blvd., S.,
Apt. 118, Jacksonville, Fla. 32216.

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

19

Unusually Small Egg of the Brown Pelican

Because the occurrence of runt eggs in wild birds is rare (Rothstein,
1975, Wilson Bulletin, 85: 340-342), a report of my finding a small egg is
appropriate. On 13 May 1972 in a large colony of Brown Pelicans (Pelecanus
occidentalis) on Tarpon Key, Pinellas County, Florida, I marked a nest that
was nearing completion. On 18 May this egg was still the only one present,
so 1 collected it. By 28 May the nest had disappeared. The egg measured
50.48 x 38.77 mm, weighed 41.9 g (wet weight) and contained no yolk.
During 1972 in the same colony mean external measurements of 51 other
eggs were 75.52 x48.68 mm and their initial weight was 97.82 g. The dry
shell weight of the runt egg was 5.5 g or 59% of the average shell weight of
10 other eggs collected in 1972. The thickness index (10 x weight in g/length
X breath in cm: Ratcliffe, 1967, Nature 215: 208-210) of 4.997 indicates
a thickness more than twice that of other Brown Pelican eggs as determined
by Anderson and Hickey (1970, Wilson Bulletin, 82: 14-128).

Between 1969 and 1974 in this same colony I handled 2141 eggs in
800 nests without seeing any other runt eggs. Thus, the frequency of runt eggs
is 0.05% . In addition, I have examined approximately 1000 other pelican
nests in Florida and have not found any other obviously small eggs. Hence,
the frequency reported here is probably higher than is normally the case.

Although the Brown Pelican is an endangered species that is subject to
losses from eggshell thinning in addition to other “unnatural” mortality fac-
tors, the extremely low frequency of production of runt eggs suggests that this
particular phenomenon is not a cause for additional concern.

Drs. H. W. Kale and M. F. McDiarmid made valuable comments on the
manuscript.

Ralph W. Schreiber, Department of Biology, USF, Tampa, Florida; present
address: Seabird Research, Inc. 11008 Teegreen Drive, Tampa, Florida
33612.

20

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 3

Spring 1975

A Recent Mountain Plover Specimen from Florida

A putative American Golden Plover (Pluvialis dominica) was col-
lected by my son, James, along the causeway to St. George Island
(Franklin County) on 6 December 1973. The specimen remained in a
freezer for months, after which Noel Warner and I examined it more
carefully and discovered that it was a Mountain Plover (Charadrius
montanus). It proved to be a male, and the narrow lighter edges of the
dorsal contour feathers suggested a first-year bird. The specimen is num-
ber 2821 in the collection of the Tall Timbers Research Station.

Howell (1932) cited only three records of the Mountain Plover in
Florida, all of which were supported by specimens. The earliest, collected
from a flock of about 6 at Key West on 1 December 1870 by C. J. May-
nard, is number 62907 in the Field Museum, Chicago (E. R. Blake,
pers. comm.). The most recent record, one collected by R. J. Longstreet
at Daytona Beach on 17 December 1927, was deposited in a museum
there until at least 1932 (Howell, op. cit.). There is no reason to doubt
the authenticity of these two records, but it is unfortunate that the 2 col-
lected by R. W. Williams on “James Island” (= St. James Island?) in
late July 1901 “have since been accidentally destroyed” (Howell op. cit.).
as the date is anomalous. This plover is rarely recorded so early even in
Texas at the eastern edge of its usual range. In the Dallas area, Pulich
(1961) had no record earlier than September, and Williams (1962) knew
of no fall occurrences. In the Corpus Christi area, where the species occurs
more frequently, Hagar and Packard (1952) indicated one record in late
July, but no others until mid-August. Thus the presence of 2 individuals
in Florida in late July must be considered unlikely.

LITERATURE CITED

Hagar, C. N., and F. M. Packard. 1952. Checklist of the Birds of the
Central Coast of Texas. (Publ. by authors?). 15 pp.

Howell, A. H. 1932. Florida Bird Life. Coward-McCann, Inc., New York
City. 579 pp.

Pulich, W. M. 1961. Birds of Tarrant County. (Publ. by author?) 107 pp.

Williams, S. G. 1962. Checklist of the Birds of the Upper Texas Coast.
Ornith. Group of Houston Outdoor Nature Club. 77 pp.

Henry M. Stevenson, Dept, of Biological Science, Florida State Univ.,
Tallahassee, Fla. 32306.

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

21

Lesser Black-backed Gulf Summering in Florida

On St. George Island (Franklin Co.), 9 July 1974, my attention was
drawn to a group of 3 gulls standing at the water’s edge along the cause-
way. Two were obviously Herring (5ulls, Larus argentatus, but the third
appeared different in having some dark gray feathers dorsally. Suspecting
it to be Larus juscus, the Lesser Black-backed Gull, I collected it and
later sent the museum skin (now number 3277 at the Tail Timbers Re-
search Station) to the U.S. National Museum. A paucity of comparable
specimens there resulted in my specimen’s being forwarded to the Ameri-
can Museum of Natural History, where John Farrand, Jr., confirmed my
tentative identification.

Farrand’s letter of 17 October 1974 reads (in part) : “The bird is in
its second summer, and is in the midst of its first complete postnuptial
molt . . . I . . . find close agreement in the color of the upper parts be-
tween your bird and examples of Larus fuscus graellsi. The new (second
winter) feathers of the mantle and scapulars are distinctly darker than
those of Herring Gulls in our collection and lack the clear silvery gray of
that species, being duller and more brownish in tone. On the other hand,
these feathers are not as dark as in nominate fuscus from Scandinavia and
Russia. The new primaries lack the pale tips of argentatus, and agree with
those of fuscus . . . For the record, I have also looked at specimens of the
Western Gull, L. occidentalis; this species is ruled out by, among other
things, its distinctively shaped bill.” My specimen proved to be a male,
with a total length of 610 mm and a wing chord (dried) of 361 mm.
L. /. graellsii is the only race so far recorded from the Western Hemis-
phere.

In reviewing the Florida records of this gull, Woolf enden and Schrei-
ber (Florida Field Naturalist, 2:20-21) referred to the only prior speci-
men, an adult collected in Hillsborough County on 22 February 1971.
They further indicated that all records in the Western Hemisphere had
involved adults, doubtless because of the difficulty of distinguishing first-
year birds from Herring Gulls in the same plumage. Possibly my specimen
also was overlooked in its first winter, as 3 field parties conducting a
January count on St. George Island failed to list this species. Indeed, the
older parts of its plumage at the time of collection were indistinguishable
from the plumage of first-year Herring Gulls Henry M, Stevenson,
Department of Biol, Science, Florida State Univ., Tallahassee, Fla. 32306.

22

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 3

Spring 1975

First Nesting of the House Sparrow at Dry Tortugas

To date only three land birds are known to have bred at Dry Tor-
tugas, the Mourning Dove (Zenaida macroura), Mangrove Cuckoo
{Coccyzus minor), and Mockingbird {Mimus polyglottos) (Robertson
and Mason 1965). For the latter two species, nesting was a singular and
apparently unsuccessful event. Mourning Dove nesting was suspected in
1959, confirmed in 1962, and continues to thrive.

The first record of a House Sparrow (Passer dornesticus) on Dry Tor-
tugas was in June 1941, when a single bird was seen. The second record
is of 3 individuals seen on 13 April 1953 (Robertson and Mason 1965).
Since 1963 the species has been seen there almost every year in spring,
which is when most observers frequent the area. On 10 May 1965 a
specimen was obtained and is housed at the University of South Florida.
It is a female (ovum 2 mm), 23.4 g with little fat, from Garden Key, pre-
pared by Sievert A. Rohwer (SAR 313) The high count of House Spar-
rows for any one day prior to 1974 is 4 individuals, with a great majority
of records being of females.

In 1974 on Garden Key, P. W. Sykes (in litt. to WBR) saw a lone
male 5-7 April, and O. T. Owre and students saw a male and female
together 20-21 April. Following departure from the area some of Owre’s
students reported seeing these sparrows carrying nesting material, but they
could provide few details (Owre, pers. comm.). Only 2 females were seen
23-27 April when we visited Dry Tortugas, but during our visit of 14-26
June a lone pair was first seen on 17 June, and the same day a nest was
found. Building and copulation were observed during the next several days.
The nest was about 15 feet off the ground in the lone Coconut Palm (Cocos
nucifraga) growing outside Fort Jefferson just east of the moat bridge.
The nest was tucked behind a group of coconuts and dead frond bases
with the entrance hole facing southwest. On 24 June Chet E. Winegarner
found that the nest contained 4 eggs. Unfortunately no additional nest in-
spections were made, but circumstantial evidence suggests young were
fledged despite the generally acknowledged scarcity of terrestrial inverte-
brates at Dry Tortugas.

On 24-25 September, Betty Robertson (pers. comm.) saw up to 5
House Sparrows, including one adult male, feeding together near the nest
site. On 21-23 October, at the same place, James A. and Marilyn Kushlan
(pers. comm.) could find only 2 female-plumaged House Sparrows, includ-
ing one with the yellowish mouth corners of a young bird. On 31 January
1975, David and Ruth Shea (pers. comm.) visited Garden Key for about
6 hours specifically to search for House Sparrows. They found none, and
unusually few land birds of any kind (14 individuals of 5 species).

Predation by migrating Sharp-shinned Hawks (Accipiter striatus) may
have eliminated the population of House Sparrows. Banders from the
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service who worked at Dry Tortugas 8-22 October
reported flights of “thousands” of Sharp-shins and noted that many of those
they handled were emaciated and apparently starving (James L. Rous
in litt. to Jack E. Stark, Superintendent, Everglades National Park). The
unusually large concentration of hawks greatly reduced numbers of small
land birds in the area. In late October, when fall migrant land birds
normally are abundant at Dry Tortugas, the Kushlans could locate fewer

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

23

than 25 individuals of 5 passerine species on Garden Key along with an
equal number of Sharp-shinned Hawks. It appears that the observations
reported here are an instance of successful colonization of a remote island
by a land bird, followed by natural extirpation.

For reasons discussed earlier (Robertson and Mason 1965), we sus-
pect that the House Sparrows that reach Dry Tortugas are either true mi-
grants or birds from the West Indies that accompanied north-bound
migrants of other species, rather than, for example, waifs that arrived
from the Florida Keys aboard boats. A considerable accumulation of evi-
dence, including observations of apparent migratory movements, band
recoveries, and birds killed at TV towers (Summers-Smith 1963, Broun
1972, Kendeigh (chm.) 1973, Crawford 1974), suggests that House
Sparrows may be less sedentary than is commonly supposed. If those
occurring at Dry Tortugas originate in the West Indies, the most likely
source is Cuba, where the species is said to be “widespread” (Bond 1971,
p. 223). The House Sparrow population formerly established in north-
eastern Jamaica has evidently disappeared (Spence 1973).

LITERATURE CITED

Bond, J. 1971. Birds of the West Indies. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston
256 pp.

Broun, M. 1972. Apparent migratory behavior in the House Sparrow,
Auk, 89: 187-189.

Crawford, R. L. 1974. Bird Casualties at a Leon County, Florida TV
tower: October 1966-September 1973. Bull. Tall Timbers Res. Sta.,
18: 1-27.

Kendeigh, S. C. (chm.). 1973. A symposium on the House Sparrow
(Passer domesticus) and European Tree Sparrow (F. montanus) in
North America. Ornithological Monographs No. 14 (A.O.U.).

Robertson, W. B., Jr. and C. R. Mason. 1965. Additional bird records
from the Dry Tortugas. Fla. Nat., 38: 131-138.

Spence, S. 1973. The House Sparrow in Jamaica. Gosse Bird Club
Broadsheet, 21: 8-9.

Summers-Smith, J. D. 1963. The House Sparrow. New Naturalist
Monogr. 19.

Glen E. Woolfenden, Dept, of Biology, Univ. of South Florida, Tampa,
Fla. 33620, and William B. Robertson, Jr., Everglades National Park,
Homestead, Fla. 33030.

24

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Spring 1975

SUGGESTIONS FOR CONTRIBUTORS

The Florida Field Naturalist welcomes articles and short notes con-
taining new information on subjects relevant to the biology of wild species
of birds or other vertebrates in or near Florida. Its emphasis is on papers
dealing with the biology of birds, to which it will give publication priority
over papers on other organisms. All articles, notes, and other materials
should be submitted to the Editor: Henry M. Stevenson, Tall Timbers
Research Station, Route 1, Box 160, Tallahassee, Florida 32303.

All manuscripts should be submitted in triplicate. They should be
typewritten, double-spaced, on one side of numbered sheets of standard
(8 1/2 X 11 in.), unruled white paper, with margins of at least one inch

on all sides.

Titles should be short and descriptive, and the body of the article
should state the necessary facts without using unnecessary words. All
references should be cited in the body of the text unless there are more
than three, in which case each complete entry should be listed at the end
under “Literature Cited”, and the citation in the body should then indicate
author and year of publication (e.g.. Bond 1961). Whenever there are
more than two authors, list the first followed by “et al.” (e.g. Blair et al.
1968). Whenever pertinent, the particular page or pages should also be
indicated (Bond 1961: 44).

The vernacular (common) names of all species mentioned — plants or
animals — should be capitalized, and the scientific name should be added
in parentheses following the first reference except in the title. The scien-
tific name should be underscored and should follow a widely accepted
authority for the group of animals or plants involved (e.g. A.O.U.
Check-list, 1957, for birds).

Abbreviations should be used sparingly in the body of the text except
in parenthetical material: e.g. “Tallahassee (5 mi. SE).” Digits rather than
words are recommended for all numbers except one ( 1 ) . The metric sys-
tem is preferred for weights and measurements and is acceptable for such
measurements as distances. In writing dates, never use a number to refer
to a month.

Galley proofs will be sent to the (senior) author. The Editor must be
informed well in advance of any change in address or mechanism for
handling proofs; also of necessary changes in the manuscript before proofs
are printed. Changes in proof are expensive, so authors must not expect
to make major changes at this stage unless they are willing to bear the
cost. When proofs reach the author, he should carefully check against the
typescript and promptly return both to the Editor.

Reprints should be ordered through the Florida Audubon Society,
P.O. Drawer 7, Maitland, Fla. 32751, on order forms sent with proof.

Florida Audubon Society
P.O. Drawer 7
Maitland, Florida 32751

Return Postage Guaranteed

Non-Profit Organization
U.S. POSTAGE
PAID

Orlando, Florida
Permit #224

Sborrs J.i OLstmi
Nat'l of Nab His

Siiii .1 ! i.a 1 1 Ins 1. (nibion
Wash;] ncjl on, IX 20 5 >0

CONTENTS

EDITOr.iAL: FLORIDA'S NEXT STATE BIRD BOOK? Henry M, Stevenson

A SUBSTANTIAL HAWK MIGRATION IN NORTHWEST FLORIDA

Robert and Lucy Duncan 2

ADDITIONAL RECORDS OF AUTUMNAL BREEDING OF BOAT-TAILED

GRACKLES IN FLORIDA. Herbert W. Kale II 5

RETURN OF REDDISH EGRETS AS BREEDING BIRDS IN TAMPA BAY,

FLORIDA. Richard T. Paul, Andrew J. Meyerriecks, and Frank M. Dunstan 9

DIURNAL ACTIVITY OF BROWN PELICANS AT A MARINA.

Nancy G. Herbert and Ralph W. Schreiber 1 1

LESSER SCAUP MORTALITY IN TAMPA BAY, FLORIDA, 1974. Ralph W-

Schreiber, Frank M. Dunstan, and James J. Dinsmore 13

FIELD NOTES

Caspian Tern Nesting in Florida, 1973 and 1974. Frank M. Dunstan,

Ralph W. Schreiber, and James J. Dismore 16

Sandwich Tern Breeds on the Atlantic Coast of Florida. Robert W. Loftin

and Steve Sutton 18

Voice Maturity in Florida Sandhill Cranes. Stephen A. Nesbitt 19

Red-bellied Woodpecker Removes Young from Nest. T. L. Roach 19

Unusually Small Egg of the Brown Pelican. Ralph W. Schreiber 20

A Recent Mountain Plover Specimen from Florida. Henry A4. Stevenson 21

Lesser Black-backed Gull Summering in Florida. Henry M. Stevenson 22

First Nesting of the House Sparrow at Dry Tortugas. Glen E. Woolfenden

and William B, Robertson, Jr. 23

FALL 1975

Vol. 3

No. 2

The Florida Field Naturalist

A Semi-annual Journal of
The Florida Ornithological Society

THE FLORIDA FIELD NA TURALIST
JOURNAL OF THE FLORIDA ORNITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY

(Founded 1972)

Editor: Henry M. Stevenson, Tall Timbers Research Station Route 1,
Box 160, Tallahassee, Elorida 32303

EDITORIAL STAFF

Karen Cantrell, Managing Editor, Florida Audubon Society, P.O.
Drawer 7, Maitland, Fla. 32751

David W. Johnston, Dept, of Zoology, University of Florida, Gaines-
ville, Fla. 32601

Oscar T. Owre*, Dept, of Biology, University of Miami, Coral Gables,
Fla. 33124

William B. Robertson, Jr.*, Everglades National Park, Homestead,
Fla. 33030

Glen E. Woolfenden, Dept, of Biology, University of South Florida,
Tampa, Fla. 33620
* Directors, 1975-77

OFFICERS (1975-77)

President: Herbert W. Kale II, Ornithological Research Division,
35-1 St Court SW, Vero Beach, Fla. 32960
Vice President: Ralph W. Schreiber, Seabird Research Inc., 11008
Teegreen Dr., Tampa, Fla. 33612

Secretary: Mrs. Margaret C. Bowman, Box 783, Wabasso, Fla. 32970
Treasurer: Stephen J. Stedman, P.O. Drawer 7, Maitland, Fla. 32751

DIRECTORS

C. Wesley Biggs, 6214-44th Ave., Kenneth City, Fla. 33709 (1975-

76)

John B. Edscorn, Route 14, Box 350, Lakeland, Fla. 33801 (1975-
76)

Articles and notes submitted for publication, as well as books
and other publications intended for review, should be sent to the
Editor (see inside back cover). Notices of change of address, claims
for undelivered or defective copies of this journal, and requests for
information about advertising, subscriptions, and back numbers
should be sent to the Florida Ornithological Society, P.O. Drawer
7, Maitland, Fla. 32751.

Published semi-annually by the Florida Ornithological Society

Cover Painting of the Everglade Kite [Rostrhamus sociabiHs) special-
ly executed for this journal by Jon Janosik

CARIBBEAN COOT COLLECTED IN SOUTHERN FLORIDA

Paul W. Sykes, Jr.

The range of the Caribbean Coot [FuHca caribaea) includes
northwestern Venezuela, Curacao, the Antilles (but rare in Cuba and
other islands in the western Caribbean), and probably Trinidad and
Tobago (Ridgway 1941, Bond 1971, ffrench 1973). This species is
similar in plumage and habits to the American Coot (F. americona),
which occurs regularly in the Bahamas and Greater Antilles but
sparingly in the eastern Caribbean as a migrant.

A Caribbean Coot found by Walter George among several
hundred American Coots in a flooded borrow pit in Oakland Park,
Broward County, Florida, on 28 January 1974, was the first ever
reported in the United States. Presumably it was this same bird that
was later seen by many observers, including the writer, and photo-
graphed by William J. Bolte. In carefully checking all coots in this
area through May 1974, Bolte (1974 and pers. comm.) identified
4 additional individuals as F. caribaea. Each F. caribaea tended to
remain within a given area on the borrow pit. By 9 May all but one
had left. During the same period, 2 others were discovered, one at
Hollywood, Broward County, and another at Crandon Park, Key
Biscayne, Dade County. Color photographs were taken of 7 F.
caribaea. Two of these photographs were sent to the American
Museum of Natural History and the U.S. National Museum and the
identification confirmed. No Caribbean Coots were reported from
Florida from late May through September 1974. From October
1974 through February 1975, sight records of F. caribaea have been
made at widely scattered localities in peninsular Florida, mainly by
Bolte (pers. comm.) and some by the writer, to include the fol-
lowing counties: Alachua, Brevard, Broward, Dade, Hillsborough, Mon-
roe, Orange, and Palm Beach. A total of 14 was recorded on the
1974 Christmas Bird Counts; one each at Cocoa, Lakeland, and
Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge, 3 at West Palm Beach, and
8 at Ft. Lauderdale. Whether these fall and winter sightings repre-
sent some of the same individuals seen earlier in 1974 is not known.

On 2 April 1974 at 1430 EDT I collected an immature male
F caribaea on the borrow pit at Oakland Park. This individual was
referred to by Bolte [op. cit.) as bird “No. 2” and was not photo-
graphed in the wild. The skin and partial skeleton are now no.
567252 at the U.S. National Museum. This specimen, the first taken
in the United States, was collected while It was feeding on Hydrilla
{Hydriiia verticiiiata), an introduced submergent aquatic. The coot

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Fall 1975

25

weighed 747 g and was extremely fat. The wing (unflattened)
measured 187 mm, the tarsus 62.5 mm, and the middle toe (with-
out nail) 67.9 mm. The left testis measured 10x4 mm, the right
9.5 X 5 mm. Bill and frontal shield measurements (from fresh speci-
men) were culmen, including shield, 52 mm; length of shield from
base of upper mandible to distal edge of crown, 20.5 mm; nostril to
distal edge of shield, 31 mm; width of upper mandible at base,
13 mm; and greatest width of shield at base of bill, 12.5 mm. On
June 1975 the exposed culmen, including the shield, measured
49.3 mm (Laybourne pers. comm.), indicating shrinkage of the shield
of 2.7 mm as the specimen dried. Color of frontal shield, based on
the fresh specimen examined In direct sunlight, following the Vil-
lalobos system (as depicted in Palmer 1962), was straw yellow, most
intense at distal margin and fading to white at base of the upper
mandible with some narrow blurred brownish red streaks near the
distal portion. The shield was soft and fleshy, coming to a broad
shallow point at the crown.

The shields of the coots identified as F. caribaea In Florida ex-
hibit much variability as discussed and illustrated by Bolte [op. cit.).
Gullion (1951) In his work on F. americana in California found the
frontal shield to be highly variable in shape and size among individu-
als and even in the same individual, depending upon whether it was
in breeding or non-breeding condition. Gill (1964) in his study of
F. americana peruviana and F. ardesiaca in the Andes of Peru found
mixed pairs breeding and presented other evidence that led him to
conclude that they are conspecific. The primary difference between
the two is the color of the frontal shield. Fie further suggested that
a similar situation may exist with F. americana grenadensis and F.
caribaea in the West Indies, where the relationship has not been
satisfactorily resolved, A number of coots in the southeastern part of
Florida have shields intermediate in size, shape, and amount of red-
dish markings (not a callus) between those of americana and
caribaea, suggesting possible polymorphism, if not hybridization or
introgression. It is now apparent that, with the Caribbean Coot wide-
spread in Florida, a review of its taxonomic status is needed.

The source of Caribbean Coots In Florida is not known. It seems
unlikely that the Caribbean birds would be kept in captivity, because
they are so similar to the abundant and widespread American Coot,
the latter being common in zoo and private collections and readily
available. The size, shape, color of frontal shield (white at a distance,
but straw yellow and occasionally pinkish when viewed closely in the
field or in the hand), and absence of the reddish brown callus at the
top of the shield in F. caribaea, enable one to distinguish the two

26

Florida Field Naturalist

Fall 1975

species under good viewing conditions. The growing intensity of field
work in recent years has revealed an increasing number of West
Indian strays in the State. I suspect that the Caribbean Coot has been
present in small numbers in Florida over the years but has been over-
looked.

I wish to thank William J. Bolte and Walter George for furnishing
information and assisting me in collecting the specimen; Robert D.
Johnson for making the necessary arrangements for me to collect the
bird within the municipal limits of Oakland Park; Roxie C.
Laybourne (U.S. National Museum) for having the specimen pre-
pared, sexing, measuring, furnishing information on fat condition,
and offering helpful suggestions; and Eugene Eisenmann (American
Museum of Natural History) and James Bond and Frank B. Gill
(Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia) for suggestions as to
the preparation of this note.

LITERA TURE CITED

Bolte, W.J. 1974. Caribbean Coot, FuHca carlbaea, in Florida.

Am. Birds, 28: 734-735.

Bond, J. 1971. Birds of the West Indies. Houghton Mifflin Co., Bos-
ton.

ffrench, R. 1973. A guide to the birds of Trinidad and Tobago.

Livingston Publ. Co., Wynnewood, Pa.

Gill, F.B. 1964. The shield color and relationship of certain Andean
coots. Condor, 66: 209-21 1 .

Gullion, G.W. 1951. The frontal shield of the American Coot. Wilson

Bull., 63: 157-166.

Palmer, R.S. 1962. Handbook of North American birds. Vol. 1. Yale
Univ. Press, New Haven, Conn.

Ridgway, R. 1941. The birds of North and Middle America. U. S.
Nat Mus. Bull. 50, Part 9.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center,
Delray Beach Field Station, P.O. Box 2077, Delray Beach, Florida
33444.

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Fall 1975

27

FEATHER STAINING IN FLORIDA SANDHILL CRANES

Stephen A . Nesbitt

Throughout their range Sandhill Cranes [Grus canadensis) acquire
stained feathers varying in hue from brick red to yellowish gray, de-
pending on local soil conditions (Walkinshaw 1949). Taverner (1929)
discovered this stain of the normally gray feathers to be from ferric
oxide. This color change accounts for the misnomer of Little Brown
Cranes applied to the Lesser Sandhill Crane (G. c. canadensis), as well
as for the first description of a Sandhill Crane as the “Brown and Ash
Colored Crane,” (Edwards 1750).

It was generally believed staining was the unintentional result of
preening with dirt, mud, or decaying marsh vegetation on the bill
(Walkinshaw 1949). However, Hyde (1968) suggests that adult
cranes stain as “an intentional desire to change the color of the
feathers associated with the act of pairing or connubial bliss ... or
an innate recognition that a color change would make them less con-
spicuous during nesting season.”

On several occasions I have observed Florida Sandhill Cranes
(G. c. pratensis) at the same location on Paynes Prairie, Alachua
County, Florida, applying soil to their feathers. The site, approxi-
mately 80 by 10 m, was on a drainage canal spoil bank. The stain-
ing soil was a dark reddish brown, acidic (pH 5.3), loamy fine sand.
Iron was 3.2 times more abundant, at approximately 0.7 ppm. In
the area of the staining site than in the soil of the surrounding high
ground (University of Florida, Soil Science Department, Analytical
Research Laboratory, personal contact). The area, traversed daily
by cattle, was devoid of vegetation, and the soil was generally loose.
Three pen-reared Florida Sandhill Cranes began staining within one
week after a bucket of soil from this site was placed in their pen. The
disturbed soil and slight elevation, affording good visibility, in addi-
tion to local conditions, may have contributed to the site selection
by the wild cranes.

Staining is not limited to adult cranes or to the pre-nesting
season. On 30 May 1974 a pair of cranes and one young of the year,
partially in juvenile plumage, were observed staining at the site. The
3 pen-reared cranes were also less than one year old when they began
staining. Staining commonly occurs after periods of feeding in
morning and late afternoon and seems to be most prevalent in spring
and early summer. The staining process often begins with the
feathers on the back, between the scapulars, and proceeds to the up-
per wing coverts, breast and lower neck. An examination of captured

28

Florida Field Naturalist

Fall 1975

birds and preserved skins shows that the major unstained areas are
the underwing, head, and upper neck. When staining, the bill is used
to apply small amounts of soil to individual feathers. Birds also have
been observed to trickle a bill full of soil on the back before working
it into the feathers. Though the head and upper neck are impossible
to reach directly, birds are often observed rubbing the head and neck
across their back while staining.

The only other crane known to stain is the likewise gray Euro-
pean Crane [Grus grus) (Berg 1931; Walkinshaw 1973). Walkinshaw
(pers. comm.) further states that the Sandhill and European Cranes
are much less conspicuous on the nest than white cranes and allow
much closer approach while nesting than do the other cranes, in-
cluding those that are mostly gray but do not stain. It appears from
this that staining may have cryptic value during the nesting period.
Drewian (1973) suggests that staining also has cryptic value during
periods when adults are flightless. The fact that the most conspicu-
ously colored cranes, i.e. white cranes, are the rarest would seem to
indicate that staining has survival significance, but why has this be-
havior evolved in two of the dullest-colored cranes? Staining by im-
mature, as well as by sexually mature birds, seems to indicate that
staining is not altogether related to nesting. Perhaps staining In cranes
is a form of cosmetic coloration similar to that occurring in other
birds (Vevers 1964) or the result of feather conditioning similar to
dusting in other birds (Healy and Thomas 1973). Staining behavior
warrants further investigation.

LITERA TU RE CITED

Berg, B. 1931. With the Migratory Bird to Africa. Jonathan Cape,
Toronto. 216 pp.

Drewian, R.C. 1973. Ecology of the Rocky Mountain Greater Sand-
hill Crane. Ph. D. Thesis. University of Idaho, Moscow. 80 pp.

Edwards, G. 1750. A natural history of uncommon birds, Pt. 3.
London. 157 pp.

Healy, W.M. and j.W. Thomas. 1973. Effect of dusting on plumage
of Japanese quail. Wilson Bull., 85: 442-448.

Hyde, D.O. 1968. Sandy. The Dial Press, Inc., New York. 214 pp.
Taverner, P.A. 1929. The red plumage coloration of the little brown
cxdinQ. Auk, 1(46): 228-230.

Vevers, H.G. 1964. Cosmetic coloration. In A New Dictionary of
Birds, A.L. Thompson, ed. McGraw-Hill, New York. 928 pp.
Walkinshaw, L.H. 1949. The Sandhill Cranes. Cranbrook Inst. Scl.
Bull. 29. 202 pp.

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 3

Fall 1975

29

-- — 1973. Cranes of the World, Winchester Press, New York.
370 pp.

Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Wildlife Research
Projects Office, 4005 South Main Street, Gainesville, Florida 32601.

CORFiESPONDENCE

Editor

Florida Field Naturalist

I believe I must comment on the article “Singular Brown Pelican
Feeding Behavior” {Fla. Field Nat., 2: 44), by S.J. Stedman. This is
an interesting observation but I question the interpretation. Addi-
tionally, Brown Pelicans on fresh water in Florida are not unusual.
I have spent the past six and a half years observing Brown Pelicans
in Florida and during this time have observed them on fresh water on
numerous occasions and have received several simii:u ‘jbsorvations
from other individuals. While I have not observed the specific beha-
vior described in the second paragraph of this note on fresh water,
this type of behavior is normal activity of immature birds on salt
water. In fact, for a few weeks immediately after fledging, immature
birds spend considerable time singly or in small flocks, billing each
other, grasping at and pulling branches and leaves through their
bills, dipping their bills into the water, lifting and tossing branches,
leaves, and other vegetation, making apparent swallowing motions
of the pouch and head, and generally learning to manipulate the bill
and undoubtedly developing the neural-muscular coordination neces-
sary to begin capturing fish.

I believe that the correct interpretation of this “singular feeding”
observations lies not in the fact that Brown Pelicans can utilize fresh
water for feeding and that non-fish food is eaten, neither of which is
demonstrated in this note, but merely that this was a young, in-
experienced bird still in the process of learning to behave as a pelican
should,

Ralph W. Schreiber, Seabird Research, Inc., 11008 Teegreen Dr.,
Tampa, Fla. 33612,

30

Florida Field Naturalist

Fall 1975

FOOD OF THE WHITE IBIS IN SOUTHERN FLORIDA

James A . Kush Ian and Marilyn S. Kush Ian

Little is known about the precise food of most wading birds in
southern Florida, including that of the most abundant species, the
White Ibis (Eudocimus albus). Only two food studies of White Ibis
have been conducted in Florida. Baynard (1912. Food of herons and
ibises. Wilson Bull., 24:167-169; 1914. The White Ibis. Blue Bird,
7:16-22) reported on food taken by 50 White Ibis nesting at Orange
Lake, north-central Florida. Nesbitt, Hetrick, and Williams (in press.
Foods of White Ibis from seven collection sites in Florida. Proc. SE
Assn. Game and Fish Commissioners, 28) recently reported on
stomach contents from 180 birds collected in north and central
Florida.

The present paper reports on the overall food and feeding habitat
preferences of the White Ibis in southern Florida. The food data re-
ported here are based on 199 samples, including 170 regurgitation
samples from nestlings and 29 stomach contents from adults, col-
lected from 1972 to 1974. Of these, 27 stomach samples and 86 re-
gurgitation samples were recovered from birds feeding in coastal
habitats. Samples were collected from Lake Istokpoga south to Cow-
pens Key in Florida Bay. Regurgitation samples were collected by
forcing nestlings to disgorge recent meals. Since there were no dif-
ferences between food consumed by adults and that fed to young
(Kushlan, Ecology of the White Ibis in southern Florida, a regional
study, Ph. D. diss. University of Miami, Fla.) both regurgitation and
stomach samples were combined in analysis. Samples were separated
to species if possible and then dried to constant weight. Contents
were expressed as percentages of total dry weight of food and per-
centage frequency of occurrence. The total food consumption for
White Ibis in southern Florida (last two columns in Table 1) was
determined by multiplying the food data obtained in coastal and in
inland habitats by the percentage of the southern Florida population
utilizing each habitat during nesting. The baseline used for this cal-
culation was 1973 when about 3% of the nesting population fed in
coastal habitats, and 97% fed in inland habitats.

RESULTS

Table 1 summarizes the food of White Ibis in southern Florida.
Crayfish predominated in the diet at inland habitats, accounting for
52% of the weight and occurring in 82% of the samples. Fish made

up 19% of the inland diet, with the Sailfin Molly ^ accounting for

! Scientific names appear in Table h

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3 Fall 1975

31

the greatest biomass. Dragonfly larvae, occurring in 30% of the sam-
ples, Apple Snails, water bugs, especially the Giant Water Bug (occur-
ring in 20% of the samples), and horsefly larvae were taken in inland
sites. Adult mayflies were found in only a few samples around Lake
Istokpoga but comprised most of the material found in those sam-
ples. Thus mayflies are a locally important food when available.
Newts and Pig Frogs were the only vertebrates other than fish com-
monly eaten in inland habitats.

In coastal habitats, crabs, especially Fiddler Crabs, were common
prey making up 20% of the biomass. Crayfish were also taken. Rela-
tively more fish were eaten in coastal than in inland habitats and
comprised 31% of the biomass. The Sheepshead Minnow was the
most important fish species. Poiychaetes, spiders, isopods, prawns,
Mangrove Crabs, beetles, and horsefly larvae were also important
components of the diet in coastal habitats.

Considering the total diet of White Ibis in southern Florida
(Table 1), crayfish were the most important prey, followed by fish.
Insect material occurred In 87% of the samples but accounted for
only 14% of the biomass. Dragonfly larvae, Giant Water Bugs, and
Apple Snails each comprised over 3% of the diet by weight. White
Ibis consumed at least 69 types of prey in southern Florida. Overall,
each of 9 prey items made up at least 1% of the biomass, and each
of 8 species occurred in at least 10% of the samples. Plant material
accounted for 3.5% of the total biomass and occurred in 19% of the
samples but may have been eaten incidentally. It is notable, however,
that ibis in captivity ate such non-animal food as bread, dry dog
food, corn, potatoes, and watermelon.

Because of the dependence of White Ibis on aquatic prey (Table
1 ), it is of interest to determine which aquatic habitats are used most
often by foraging ibis. During the study we noted White Ibis feeding
in such locations as muddy pools in hammocks, lawns, pastures,
golf courses, expressway margins, plowed farmland, dumps, hog
farms, manure piles, and holding areas for sewage sludge. Relative to
the yearly energy requirements of the species, the most Important
feeding locations are probably those used prior to and during this
period, although most habitats were used by at least small numbers
of White Ibis, most birds fed in only a few habitats. Table 2 shows
the percentage of foraging habitats used during the nesting season. In
this table, two types of inland habitats are distinguished because
of differences in usage. On the coast feeding was concentrated along
the edge of mangrove-lined streams, edges of ponds, and open
prairies. In the Everglades and Big Cypress feeding was concentrated
in marsh prairies, particularly along the Interface with sawgrass

32

Florida Field Naturalist

Fall 1975

marshes, and at the edges of ponds. Little use was made of sawgrass
marsh. In the lakes area pastures and lake-edge marshes were most
heavily utilized. In each area there was a tendency to use open rather
than densely vegetated areas, shallow rather than deeper areas, and
borders rather than the center of open areas.

DISCUSSION

To summarize, crustaceans and fish are apparently the most im-
portant prey of the White Ibis in southern Florida, together making
up 73% of the diet by weight. Crayfish occurred in 80% of the sam-
ples, but fish were less commonly taken and occurred in only 16%.
The Apple Snail comprised over 5% of the diet by weight. In terms
of frequency of occurrence, water bugs, water beetles and dragonfly
larvae were commonly eaten aquatic prey of ibis. Earthworms and
snails were taken from pastures. Marine prey such as crabs, isopods,
snails, and mussels were consumed along the coast.

Other studies have shown that crayfish were also the most com-
mon prey of White Ibis in other Florida locations. Crayfish made up
46% of the prey items Baynard (1912) recovered and composed
about 45% of the volume of samples from both freshwater and
marine sites reported by Nesbitt et al. (in press). The latter study also
found insects and snails to be important prey, but found that fish
made up 1 % or less of the volume of marine and freshwater samples.
They suggested that ibis may take fish only during periods of rela-
tively low water level. This proved to be the case In the present study
in which fish made up nearly 20% of the prey weight but occurred
in only 16% of the samples, all of which were taken from low water
conditions. Baynard’s (1912) finding that snakes, which he called
small moccasins, were important prey was not confirmed by either
Nesbitt et al. (in press) or the present study.

The wide range of food utilized by White Ibis suggests that the
species will consume whatever can be captured by its primarily tac-
tile foraging methods. That some prey are much more commonly
taken than others suggests that prey species differ in availability or
in the ability of ibis to catch them. Most prey types fall into one of
three broad categories: 1) terrestrial, ground-dwelling animals;
2) aquatic free-swimming and partially sessile animals; and 3) aquatic
burrowing animals. Many prey species are slow-moving or character-
istically hide in sediment or vegetation.

Ibis direct most of their foraging activity to the sediment, which
in southern Florida marshes Is composed of a loose aggregation of
floating periphytic plants, soft flocculent organic debris, and car-
bonate precipitants. This floe is inhabited by fish, aquatic in-
sects, crustaceans, and other organisms that serve as the primary prey

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Fall 1975

33

of ibises. Animals that remain close to submerged plants and to the
stems and roots of emergent plants are also taken by probing-search-
ing techniques used by ibis. On land, ibis usually take snails and
worms dwelling among plant roots or brought to the surface by rain-
fall. Free-swimming organisms are apparently taken only where they
occur In high densities.

The feeding ecology of the White Ibis seems, therefore, to be
characterized by opportunism in the utilization of a wide range of
aquatic and terrestrial prey, but constrained by a relatively simple
repertoire of feeding behavior. This results in many prey species be-
ing taken, but in relatively few species making up a large percentage
of the biomass consumed. Based on its wide range of acceptable
prey, the ibis is certainly a generalist, but, based on the energetic
contribution of various prey to the diet, it seems to be a specialist on
crustaceans. Similarly, ibis use most available feeding habitats, but
shallow, open aquatic habitats are the most heavily used. Such di-
versity of food or habitat involves both the total kinds of habitats or
food utilized and the relative use made of each kind of habitat or
food. The effect of these two factors can be measured together in the
often-used diversity index, H’ ™ -^pi In pi, where pi is simply the
proportion of an item in the sample. Dividing H’ by the maximum H’
gives an index which ranges from 0, highly specialized, to 1, highly
generalized. The diversity of habitat utilization was 0.87 for coastal
habitats, 0.83 for Everglades habitats, and 0.75 for lakes-region
habitats, indicating a generalized pattern of habitat utilization. Food
diversity was 0.66 for a coastal habitat, 0.45 for inland habitats, and
0.45 overall, suggesting that food selection is midway between
generalization and specialization.

The kind of prey taken by a predator depends on the interaction
between the morphology and behavior of the predator and the size,
behavior, and density of potential prey. The relatively stereotyped
and primarily tactile feeding behavior of the White Ibis would seem-
ingly be selective for slow-moving, sedentary, moderately sized
animals, and such prey do make up most of the prey types taken in
southern Florida. But mobile animals, such as fish and prawns^
represent an important part of the diet in areas where their density
is high. Although generalized in its use of habitat, the White Ibis
relies heavily on only a few of the many types it consumes.

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Maytag Chair of Ornithology
at the University of Miami. We thank especially O.T. Owre for en-
couragement and B.N. Burkett, E. R. Rich, W.FI. Leigh, and H.F.
Stroehecker for help in identifying prey items.

34

Florida Field Naturalist

Fall 1975

Table l.--Food of White Ibis in southern Florida.

Poly chae te , We re idae

Inland

Weight

i

Feeding Sites
Frequency

i

I

Leech, Placobdella sp.
Earthworm,

.01

Lumbricus sp.

Spiders, Arachnlda

Isopod, Ligia sp.

Prawn, Palaemonetes

.23

1.8

paludosus

Crayfish,

.09

5.3

Procambarus alleni
Fiddler crabs,

Uca sp.

Mangrove crab,

Sesanna sp.

Land crab.

Card! soma guanhumi
Mangrove Crab,

52.22

82.3

Aratus pisonil
Unidentified crabs

.03

1.8

Millipedes, Diplopoda

.03

P

Mayfly, Ephemeroptera

1.48

1.8

Dragonfly, Odonata

Mole cricket.

3.97

30.1

Gryllidae

Field cricket,

.04

P

Gryllidae

Cockroach,

Periplanita americana
Pigmy grasshopper,

.05

P

Tetrigidae

Cone-headed grasshopper

.08

P

Neoconocephalus sp.

.02

P

Earwig, Dermaptera

Water bug.

t2

P

Belostoma lutariian

Giant Water Biog,

.26

14.2

Lethocerus americanus
Water boatman.

3.37

20.4

Corixidae sp.

Water scorpion,

.03

1.8

Ranatra buenoi

Creeping water bug.

t

p

Pelocoris sp.

.16

13.3

Unidentified bugs

.30

p

Dung bettles, Carabidae

t

1.8

Coastal Feeding Sites

Total

Weight

Frequency

Weight

Frequency

i

i

I0

I0

1.15

9.3

.03

.28

.01

P

.22

1.7

1.02

9.3

.03

P

2.92

7.0

.17

P

4.41

22.1

.22

5.8

11.18

20.9

50.99

80.4

19.96

16.3

1,16

P

.79

2.3

.05

P

.52

1.2

.02

P

.52

1.2

.05

1.8

2.38

l4.0

.07

P

.07

3.5

.03

P

1.44

1.7

1.00

17.4

3.88

29.2

.04

P

.04

1.2

.05

P

.54

2.3

.02

P

.08

P

.02

P

t

P

.15

7.0

.26

i4.o

.78

10.5

3.29

20.1

.03

1.7

t

p

.01

1.2

.16

12.9

t

2.3

.29

p

1.32

1.2

.05

1.8

Fall 1975 35

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Table 1 . - -Food of White Ibis in southern Florida (Continued)

Inland Feeding Sites

Coastal Feeding Sites

Total

Weight

Frequency

Weight

Frequency

Weight

Frequency

i

I0

i

I0

I0

I0

Predacious diving

beetle, Dytiscus (adult)

.64

6.9

.26

3.5

.63

7.9

( larvae )

• 39

8.0

.04

1.2

.02

7.8

Whirligig beetle,

Gyrinidae

Water scavenger beetle,

.02

.9

.02

P

Tropisternus lateralis
Water scavenger beetle,

• 32

4.4

.44

5.8

.32

4.4

Hydrophilus insularis
Water scavenger beetle,

t

P

t

1.2

t

1.0

Enochrus perplexus

Water scavenger beetle,

t

P

.13

1.2

t

1.0

Neohydrophilus castus

t

P

.19

2.3

t

1.0

Scarab beetles,

Scarabidae

Ground beetle,

t

P

t

p

Oodes amaroides

t

1.8

t

1.7

Ground beetle.

Platynus floridanus

t

P

t

p

Ground beetle,

Dynascetus morater

t

P

.15

1.2

t

1.0

Unidentified beetles

Noctuid larvae,

.05

9.7

1.39

19.8

.09

10.0

Woctuidae

t

P

t

P

Horsefly larvae,

Tabanus sp.

Deerfly, larvae.

1.30

1.8

2.43

i4.o

1.33

2.2

Chrysops flavidus

.45

P

.44

p

Marshfly ,

Dictyapictipes sp.

Rat-tail maggot.

.19

1.2

t

p

Tub if era sp.

.22

7.0

t

P

Ant, Formic idae

t

P

t

p

Unidentified insect

Apple Snail ,

1.72

10.6

1.20

4.7

1.70

10.4

Pomacea paludosa

Pond Snail,

5.28

8.0

t

1.2

5.12

7.8

Polygj^ra, sp.

.02

P

.02

P

Orb snail, Helisoma sp.

.86

6.9

.83

6.8

Olivella, Olivella sp.

t

1.2

t

P

Cerith, Cerithidea sp.

t

1.2

t

P

Land snail, Helix sp.

t

P

t

P

Unidentified snail
Freshwater clam.

.96

4.4

t

8.1

.93

5.1

Pelecepoda

Freshwater mussel.

t

P

.06

3.5

t

1.1

Unionidae

t

P

t

P

Saltwater mussel, Mytilidae
Yellow Bullhead,

.02

1.2

t

P

Ictalurus natalis
Sheepshead Minnow,

t

P

t

P

Cyprinodon variegatus

5.03

10.5

.15

P

36

Florida Field Naturalist

Fall 1975

Table l.--Food of White Ibis in southern Florida (Continued)

Inland

Feeding Sites

Coastal Feeding Sites

Total

Weight

Frequency

Weight Frequency

Weight Frequency

i

1o

i 1o

1o 1o

Golden Topminnow,

Fundulus chrysotus

Marsh Killifish

,22

P

.21

P

Pundulms confluentus

.17

P

.33

10.5

.17

1.2

Flagfish;

Jordanella floridae
Redfin Killifish,

.16

P

.17

2.3

.16

P

Lucania goodei

Rivulus ,

t

P

t

P

Rivulus marmoratus

Least Killifish,

.15

1.2

t

P

Heterandria Formosa

t

P

.15

3.5

t

P

Mosquitofish,

Gambusia af finis

.47

2.7

1.49

7.0

.50

2.8

Sailfin Molly,

Poecilia latipinna

Blue -spotted Sunfish,

.99

6.2

3.80

16.3

1.08

6.0

Enneacanthus gloriosus
Warmouth ,

oo

UJ

p

.80

P

Lepomis gulosus

t

p

t

p

Unidentified fish

16.42

15.0

25.83

47.7

16.70

16.0

Pig Frog, Rana grylio
Peninsular Newt,

.77

8.0

t

1.2

.75

7.8

Diemyctylus viridescens

1.28

9.7

.71

4.7

1.26

9.5

Siren, Siren intermedia
Two-toed Amphiuma,

.02

P

.02

p

Amphiuma means

.03

P

.03

P

Green Anole,

Anolis carolinensis

Brown Water Snake,

.65

2.3

.02

.07

Natrix taxispilota

t

P

t

P

Plant

.29

19.5

.39

7.4

.28

19.4

Unidentified

3.45

15.0

5.81

30.2

3.53

15.4

= less than ifo of samples
= less than .01% of biomass

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3 Fall 1975 37

<D W
O

cS 4)
-P bO

n (D

fn ^

Pj 0)

-P CD
4:; P M
W 0) fQ
P O 0

o

ra ch
ffl O

hD 03
P 4)

-P P
B3 .H
03

P M
03 43

:p t

P

bD m
C

P ^

P

0)

m ^

03

M C
•H O

5 Ip

03

•H 03
M ta
m ^
p o
c2 m

>. o
o

p d
o

•H Cp
P' O
03

03 P
H 4)
03 ^

P 03
•H ^

K Oh

I O

cS ra

P P

W 03
fe -P

P c
p 0
C0 T)

P P
fh 03
P 03
p: p M
£0 03 'P
P O 03
CS3

P p t>n

bD 03
^ O 03

^ P 03

O ^ ^

H 03 'P
H 03 03

s §

W 03
C P

03
!>

g

C bD

H C

H 03

I 03 g

0) C bD
> O 'o P
O a 0) 03
P 'P

bD C P C
C -H 03 p

03

>

g

03 bD
p. p
S 05
S 03 g

03 03

'^p'S

t3 cd p

=te

Department of Biology, University of Miami, Cora! Gabies, Fia.
(present address: U. S. National Park Service, Everglades National
Park, Homestead, Fia. 33030)

38

Florida Field Naturalist

Fall 1975

IDENTIFICATION OF DIFFICULT BIRDS:

III. SEMIPALMATED AND WESTERN SANDPIPERS

Henry M. Stevenson

Whether in the field or in the laboratory, distinguishing between

Semipalmated Sandpipers {Calidris pusiHa) and Western Sandpipers
(C. mauri) can be most difficult. Ridgway (1887) and some subse-
quent writers distinguished these species only by culmen length of
the respective sexes. However, small birds collected in the non-breed-
ing season often cannot be sexed, and other specimens have almost
certainly been erroneously sexed. Since bill length in female Semi-
palmated Sandpipers may be greater than that in male Westerns, it
would be valuable to find differences between the two species un-
related to their sex. Also, because of the flexibility of scolopacid
bills, bill shape in dried museum skins is rather unreliable.

Ouellet, McNeil, and Burton (1973) described a method of
distinguishing these two peeps that is almost independent of sex,
namely the ratio of the length of the exposed culmen to the bill
width ‘*at narrowest part just behind nail” (dertrum). However,
when the various categories of age and sex were examined consider-
able overlap existed between the two species.

One method of distinguishing unsexed Semipalmated and
Western Sandpipers was pointed out by Brodkorb (1968: 338-339),
who stated that the length of the exposed culmen was greater than
that of the middle toe with its claw in mauri, but not in pusiHa. I
tested this statement by selecting from the collection at Florida State
University some of the longest-billed specimens of pusiHa and the
shortest-billed of mauri. Of the 6 specimens measured, the middle
toe tended to be not only relatively longer in the Semipalmated
(i.e., longer than the culmen), but absolutely longer than that of the
Western, although the differences were doubtless insignificant in
view of the small sample size (culmen, pi/s/7/a: 20.3-21.6; mauri:
20.1-22.5; middle toe + claw, pi/s/7/a: 20.S-20.9] mauri: 19.1-20.6).
It should be noted that, even among so few specimens, a variable
proportion of the culmen’s base was hidden by feathers. In their
study of a much larger sample, Ouellet, McNeil, and Burton (1973)
reported numerous exceptions to the culmen: middle toe rule, but
did not show their data. Ridgway (1887) had indicated no signifi-
cant difference between these species in middle-toe length.

In searching for other characters to separate individuals of these
two species, I measured other specimens of known identity. Fortu-
nately, the collection at Florida State University had a fair repre-

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 3

Fall 1975

39

sentation of these species, largely as a result of Loftin’s study (1962)
of summering shorebirds in Florida. The original identifications of
these two species of peeps were double-checked by such criteria as
bill length, amount of rust and cinnamon on upperparts, and size
of the spots on the throat and breast, but the two plumage charac-
ters are without value in fall and winter. However, only 5 of 35
specimens were collected between July and April. I concluded that
7 specimens were pusilla and 21 mauri. On a subsequent trip to the
Florida State Museum (Gainesville) I was able to add 6 more speci-
mens of the Semipalmated to bring the total up to 13, and a 14th
was collected on 16 June 1975 (TTRS 3321). Because of the dif-
ferences between the two sexes of sandpipers in bill length and other
measurements, it is important to have a fairly equal distribution of
sexes in this kind of study. Although a strong possibility always
exists of mis-sexing birds collected after the breeding season,
measurements and inspection of gonads indicated that females made
up 6 of the 11 Semipalmated and 9 of the 21 Western Sandpipers
measured. In most instances the labels correctly indicated the sex.

After the specific determination of these specimens, careful
measurements (mm) were made to determine the lengths of the bill
(from nostril), tarsus, and wing (chord). The shortest bill length in
mauri was 17.1 (male) and the longest in pusilla was 17.3 (2 fe-
males); thus there was slight overlap. Length of tarsus ranged from
20.9 to 22.8 (mean, 21.32) in pusilla and from 20.0 to 23.6 (mean,
21.97) in mauri. Since bill length is much greater in mauri (mean
of 20.12 vs. 16.00) but tarsal length only slightly greater, an almost
infallible distinction can be made on the basis of the bill/tarsus
ratio (Table 1). In pusilla this value ranged from .696 to .837 and in
mauri from .792 to 1.080. (See below for comments on the former
specimen of mauri.)

A better separation was achieved, however, by comparing bill
length to wing length. Although Brodkorb (1968) indicated virtual-
ly no difference in wing length between these two peeps, Ridgway
(1887) showed that mauri females averaged slightly shorter in wing
length than pusilla females. In my study this difference was consider-
able in both sexes (Table 1). Relatively longer wings in pusilla, in
fact, might be expected, since that species generally migrates for a
greater distance. Both species breed In the Arctic Life Zone, but
the Semipalmated winters farther south than the Western. Although
the Semipalmated Sandpiper is reported by many sources to winter
In the United States, Allan Phillips [in Htt.) states that he has ex-
amined only one or two specimens taken in that season, and those
only in extreme south Florida. The Western Sandpiper does winter

40

Florida Field Naturalist

Fall 1975

partly in the southern United States, and its southern limit in South
America does not extend so far south as that of pusiila (American
Ornithologists’ Union, 1957). My measurements indicate that when
specimens of the same sex are compared very little overlap occurs in
wing length. The longest wing in a female mauri was 96.6, and the
shortest for female pusiila was 94.7 (2 specimens).

Because bill length averages much greater in Western Sandpipers,
and wing length much greater in the Semipalmated, the bill/wing
ratio provides an absolute distinction between measured specimens
of the two species in the Florida collections (Table 1). The maxi-
mum value for this ratio in the Semipalmated is .183, and the mini-
mum value for the Western is .188. The latter specimen (FSU
2976u), however, may be misidentified, as both of its critical ratios
fall between those of all other specimens of the two species.
If this specimen is really pusiila rather than mauri, then the minimum
values for these two ratios in mauri become .200 and .830. On the
other hand, the wing length of this specimen (91.0) is typical of the
Western Sandpiper and considerably less than the wing lengths of 12
of the 14 measured specimens of the Semipalmated. Also the date of
collection (28 March) is earlier than the date the Semipalmated is
thought to arrive in the Tallahassee area. In any event, regardless of
the specific identity of this specimen, a definite distinction between
the two species can be detected by these ratios.

Despite the small number of specimens involved, the dates of col-
lection of each species may be of some significance. Field observa-
tions indicate that the Semipalmated occurs mainly in late spring,
rarely if at all in winter, and in smaller numbers than the Western in
the fall migration (also see Loftin 1962: 73). These facts are in
accord with the collection dates of 25 April (possible exception
noted above) to 16 June for all but 2 Semipalmated specimens, and
those 2 were collected in August and October. On the Mississippi
coast Burleigh (1944) found the Western Sandpiper in spring only
on 27 and 29 April, and our spring dates of specimens range from
28 March to 11 April. Fall migrants oi mauri appear very early (4
specimens on 17 and 18 June) and account for 16 of the 21 speci-
mens. Neither species was collected in winter, but my sight records
indicate that more than 99% at that season are mauri. It is not im-
plied that these species do not occur outside the date limits shown
above, but merely that they differ considerably as to the time of
greatest abundance.

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Fall 1975

41

FIELD IDENTIFICA TION

Several criteria have been given in field guides for separating
Western and Semipaimated Sandpipers, but it should be obvious that
one can hardly expect to do better with silent birds in the field than
can be done in the museum. That is to say, a male Western frequent-
!y cannot be distinguished from a female Semipaimated. in alternate
(breeding) plumage the Western tends to have broader spots on the
throat and breast and to have more rufous and cinnamon color
dorsally. Fall immatures also have more rust on the upperparts
(Ridgway 1919). In basic (winter) plumage the Western is said to
have a whiter face than the Semipaimated (Wallace 1974). The West-
ern is said to stand in the water more frequently than does the
Semipaimated and to carry its bill pointed somewhat downward.
The bill of mauri is described as thicker at the base, tapering and
drooping toward the tip. One of the mauri females at Florida State
University had a bill depth of 6.4 mm at its exposed base, compared
with 4.8 mm in a female pusilla, but the bill in both species is obvi-
ously thicker at the base than it is near the dertrum. The greater bill
depth in mauri, however, is more conspicuous by comparison with
the bill’s attenuated tip, giving this field mark more validity. Some
have considered mauri to be the larger species, but I have seen few
data on weights. Without doubt the best means of separating these
species in the field is by their vocalizations. In spring (at least) the
Semipaimated frequently gives low-pitched twittering notes unlike
anything I have ever heard from a Western. The Western Sandpiper
commonly gives a high-pitched squeak similar to that of the White-
rum ped Sandpiper (Calidris fuscicoilis).

In view of the difficulties of separating these two peeps in the
field, and the lack of winter specimens of pusilla over most of the
United States, it is urged that state and local lists no longer refer to
the Semipaimated Sandpiper as a winter resident and that compilers
of Christmas Bird Counts use extreme caution in accepting sight
records of them (especially by the hundreds or thousands!) in their
lists.

SUMMERING

Many sources refer to the summering of either or both of these

peeps far south of their breeding range. It is possible that both do

42

Florida Field Naturalist

Fall 1975

05

m

w

CD CO CD

H CD CD

O 05 CO

cq CD P

O O 00

o

0

. « .

. « ,

O lO CO

. • .

00 00 LO

M

rH

C» ^ pH

o CD cq

cq cq oq

H CO cq

00 O (35

Eh

cS

fH eq oq

05 P (35

...

cq cq cq

. . .

<

a

a

rH

PS

0

0

pR

Q

•p

is;

CQ

<32

0

eq

t— i

fi

CO

rH O rH

CO H CO

00 CO ^

o ^ ^

cq o cq

S

PS

w

. • .

. • .

00 lO H

. . .

05 lO 05

's_^

H

0

O 05

05 CO 05

H cq cq

O cq rH

l> C35 00

A

rH

rH Cq p— 1

t> C35 00

. •

cq cq cq

.

CO

1— 1

o5

Eh

S

S

Q

<13

i

CO

p

1^

00

ra

PS

'w*'

^ CO

H CO

00 o

CD cq

<

w

. .

. .

LO 00

.

05 I>

Eh

0

^ c^

CO CD

rH iH

o cq

CD t>

§

CO

X

jH r-H

05 05

. .

cq cq

. .

w

0

PS

M

o

G

Q

P

IZi

TO

CO

<3

0

/<— \

Is;

•P

CD

<3

Q

d

W

B

W

O CO 00

I> O P

CD P

CO 00 C35

Eh

pH

0

. • .

.

CD 00 l>

. . .

H CO CD

<3

d

r_j

CD l> CD

00 CD

rH rH rH

o cq H

t> 00 r>

Q

§

a

d

rH pH rH

05 05 05

...

cq cq csi

. . •

iz:

*H

a

<3

<

a

0

Pk

0

CO

HH

ra

H

§

O

w

CO

<3

lO

PS

iz;

rH LO ^

CO O 00

00 CO I>

LO ^

cq o lo

HH

m

. .

. .

m CD

. .

H 05 LO

0

CD lO

05 cq

pH rH rH

<J5 H O

t> I>

•

(H

^ rH pH

00 05 05

. .

H cq cq

.

HH

d

§

e s

•H -H s
SK! d
•H d 0

s ^ §

s s

bfi-H -H G

G G X

•H 'H d)

^ S § §

s

•H G
d

d 0)

S S

s s

•H -H S3
S3 X oS
•H 0

s s §

m

s

•H d

X rf
05 0
S §

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Fall 1975

43

so, but this fact is probably not established yet. Spring migrants of
pusiHa continue to pass through in June almost concurrent with
the arrival of the first fall migrants of mauri. Neither sight records
nor collected specimens can determine the question of whether in=
dividual birds remain throughout June, except by daily observations
of recognizable individuals. Birds dyed and banded by Loftin (1962)
disappeared for varying lengths of time, suggesting the likelihood
that they had migrated to some extent. Thus, the possibility of any
individuals remaining throughout June is a problem still to be
worked out.

/I CKNO WLEDGEMENTS

Pierce Brodkorb, Herbert W. Kale II, Oscar T. Owre, Allan R.
Phillips, and Glen E. Woolfenden deserve much credit for improve-
ments made during preparation of this paper.

LITER A TU RE CITED

American Ornithologists’ Union. 1957. Check-list of North American
Birds. Lord Baltimore Press, Inc., Baltimore, Md. 691 pp.
Brodkorb, Pierce. 1968. Part Five. Birds {In Blair, W. Frank, et al.
Vertebrates of the United States. McGraw-Hill, New York.

616 pp.)

Burleigh, Thomas D. 1944. The Bird Life of the Gulf Coast Region
of Mississippi. Occ. Paper No. 20. Mus. Zool. Louisiana State

Univ., Baton Rouge.

Loftin, Horace G. 1962. A study of Boreal shorebirds summering on
Apalachee Bay, Florida. Bird-banding, 33: 21-42.

Ouellet, Henri, Raymond McNeil, and Jean Burton. 1973. The
The Western Sandpiper in Quebec and the Maritime Provinces,
Canada. Canadian Field-Naturalist, 87: 291-300.

Ridgway, Robert. 1887. A Manual of North American Birds. J.B.
Lippincott Co., Philadelphia, Pa. 631 pp.

1919. Birds of North and Middle America, Part 8. Bull.

No. 50, U.S. Nat. Mus. 852 pp.

Wallace, D.I.M. 1974. Field identification of small species in the
genus Cal id r is. British Birds, 67: 1-17.

Tall Timbers Research Station, Route /, Box 160, Tallahassee,
Florida 32303.

44

Florida Field Naturalist

Fall 1975

FIELD NOTES

A Note on the Feeding Habits of Male Barbour’s Map Turtles

Two adult (118 and 135 mm) male Barbour’s Map Turtles {Grap-
temys barbouri) were collected in the Chipola River, 10 mi. S of
Marianna, Jackson County, Florida, on 20 August 1968 and 1 Sep-
tember 1968. They were found in 2-4 feet of water as they foraged
with numerous other individuals on submerged limestone outcrops.
The turtles were preserved immediately upon capture; later their
gastro-intestinal tracts were removed and examined for ingested food
items. Their contents revealed that the turtles were feeding almost
exclusively on small aquatic insect larvae, particularly certain tri-
chopterans— Limnephilidae, Hydropsychidae (Cheumatopsyche
sp.,), Helicopsychidae (Heiicopsyche sp.), as well as the lepidopteran
Pyralididae. Several wings of adult trichopterans, shell fragments of
aquatic gastropods (Lioplax pilsbryi, Goniobasis athearn/% and some
plant material also were recovered. The latter item may have been
secondarily ingested.

Although the gastropods made up only a small percentage of the
total diets of Graptemys barbouri, they are probably good indica-
tions of where the turtle forages. Three ecologically segregated spe-
cies of Goniobasis occur in this portion of the Chipola River. One
species, G. cf. floridensis, lives primarily in the larger tributaries, and
is perhaps utilized by map turtles living in these areas. A second
species, G. curvicostata, which inhabits shallow water and mud bars,
was not encountered in the gastro-intestinal tracts examined, even
though it was very abundant at the collection sites. Goniobasis
athearni, the only species preyed upon, occurs primarily on lime-
stone outcroppings in the major channels of the river.

Caddisfly and aquatic moth larvae abound in the fast water
where the male Graptemys were collected. The larval trichopterans
and the gastropods found in the gastro-intestinal tracts typically in-
habit the sides and bottoms of the rocks in faster portions of the
streams and rivers. The aquatic pyralidid larvae are the alga-slime
feeding type and probably inhabit similar situations. The small size
of these insects is compensated for by their numbers. The digestive
tract of the larger male contained well over a thousand insects. The
cases of the caddisflies were not digested and remained intact.

It is interesting to contrast the diet of these male turtles to their
female counterparts. The female feeds on pelecypods (Corbicula
leana and others), gastropods and crayfishes (Archie Carr, 1952.
Handbook of Turtles; personal observations). Perhaps the differences
in diets of the sexes may, in part, explain the apparent high popula-

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Fall 1975

45

tion densities of these turtles. These dietary differences may reduce
competition between the sexes, allowing larger numbers of G. bar-

bouri to inhabit an area.

David S. Lee, North Carolina State Museum of Natural History,
Post Office Box 27647, Raleigh, North Carolina, 27611; Richard
Franz, Florida State Museum, University of Florida, Gainesville,
Florida, 32611 and Roger A. Sanderson, Department of Biology,
University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, 33620.

Royal Tern Nesting on West-Coast
Peninsular Florida

Although Royal Terns (Thalasseus maxima) have been reported
nesting on the coast of the Florida Panhandle and the Florida east
coast during the past 25 years (Hallman 1952 and 1968; Stevenson
1972; Ogden 1974), the species has not nested on the peninsular
west coast since the mid- to late 1800's. There are eggs in the United
States National Museum collected from “Charlotte Harbor” by G.
Wurdemann in the 1850’s (USNM 985) and from “Clearwater” by
S.T. Walker in the 1880^s (USNM 21598). Robertson and Kushlan
(1975) comment that commercial egging probably caused the disap-
pearance of the species from the State by around 1 890.

On 13 June 1975 in Charlotte County, Florida, on a spoil island
just east of the intracoastal waterway in northern Charlotte Harbour,
three-fourths of a mile north of Devilfish Key, we found and banded
(FWS 624-69500) a Royal Tern chick about three weeks old. Two
adults flew overhead calling while we had the chick in hand, and,
when released, the chick joined the 2 adults on the beach 50 yards
from where we were working. Approximately 500 pairs of Laughing
Gulls {Larus atriciila) have nested on this island for the past three
years. It is interesting to note that in 1974 a pair of Caspian Terns
[Hydroprogne caspia) nested on the island (Dunstan, Schreiber, and
Dinsmore 1975), but no Caspian Terns were seen near the island
during this breeding season.

We thank the National Audubon Society for supporting this re-
search.

Literature Cited

Dunstan, F., R.W. Schreiber, and J.j. Dinsmore. 1 975. Caspian Tern
nesting in Florida, 1973 and 1974. Fia. Field Naturalist,^: 16-17.

46

Florida Field Naturalist

Fall 1975

Hallman, R.C. 1952. Royal Tern nesting near Port St. Joe. Fla. Nat,
25: 38-39.

1968. St. Joe island Sanctuary. Fla. Nat, 41: 86.

Ogden, J.C. 1974. Florida RQg\on. American Birds, 28: 894.
Robertson, W.B., Jr. and J. Kushlan. 1975. South Florida Avi fauna.

Memoir No. 2, Miami Geological Society, p. 446.
Stevenson, H.M. 1972. Recent breeding of the Sandwich Tern
[Thalasseus sandvicensis) in Florida. Fia. Nat, 45: 94-95.

Elizabeth Anne Schreiber and Ralph W. Schreiber, Seabird Research,

Inc. 11008 Teegreen Drive, Tampa, Florida 3361 2

Nesting of Brown Pelicans [Pelecanus occidentalis)

on the Dry Tortugas, Florida

On 14 June 1974 on Bush Key, Dry Tortugas, Florida, T. Below
and C. Winegarner found 5 Brown Pelican nests about 12 feet above
ground in the White Mangroves [Laguncularia racemosa) along the
north shore. Nineteenth-century records of pelicans breeding on the
Dry Tortugas are ambiguous: Holder (1874: 390), in 1859, reported
at least one nest with 2 chicks; Bryant (1859: 19) definitely states
that he found a few pairs breeding, but the exact dates of his visit
are unknown; Scott (1890: 307) found pelicans present but not
nesting in March and April, 1890: and Bartsch (1919) made no refer-
ence to Brown Pelicans nesting on the Tortugas. Howell (1932: 84),
possibly referring to the observations of Holder and Bryant, states
that Brown Pelicans ‘^formerly bred . . . on the Tortugas (I860).”
It thus appears that a few pairs did breed on the Tortugas in the
mid-1800's, but by late in the century none did so. Our record is the
first reported nesting of this species in the 20th century on these
ornithologically well-known islands (Robertson and Mason, 1965).

Three of the nests found in 1974 contained 2 eggs each, one nest
was empty, and the fifth was not checked. On 19 June Schreiber and
G.E. Woolfenden found one nest with 3 eggs and 4 nests with 2 eggs
each. The empty nest of 14 June now contained 2 eggs. All nests
survived a severe wind and rainstorm of 24-28 June. On 28 August,
Below banded 7 nestlings from the 5 nests. Based on bill and wing
lengths, plumage development, and weights, we estimate these
nestlings were all between 6 and 7 weeks old, and their vigorous
condition would suggest they all fledged (Schreiber, ms.). If the
Tortugas nesting followed the typical chronology of Brown Pelican
nesting, construction began in early June and all eggs were laid be-
tween 8 and 19 June. Mid-June is a late laying time for pelicans in

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Fall 1975

47

Florida (Schreiber; ms.), and especially for the Keys where most nest-
ing occurs in late winter and early spring. Nine of the birds that
nested on the Tortugas in June had dark eyes, bluish eye rings, mot-
tled brown necks, and white heads. These plumage and soft-part
features are typical of adults when they are feeding nestlings
(Schreiber, unpubl. data). The tenth nesting pelican had the rufous-
speckled head and primarily white belly of a subadult Brown Pelican
(Schreiber, unpubl. data; Williams and Joanen, 1974). We suggest that
the Tortugas nestings of Brown Pelicans were renesting attempts;
probably the adults failed elsewhere. On 21-23 October 1974, J.
Kushlan (pers. comm.) observed 5 banded birds-of-the-year on the
Tortugas, undoubtedly young that fledged there.

A cknowledgements

Glen E. Woolfenden encouraged the preparation of this note and im-
proved our syntax. The National Park Service provided transport to
the Dry Tortugas.

Literature Cited

Bryant, H. 1859. Birds observed in east Florida, south of St. Augus-
tine. Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., 7: 5-21.

Bartsch, P. 1919. The bird rookeries of the Tortugas. Smithsonian

Rep. for 1917: 469-500.

Holder, j.B. 1874. The Brown Pelican and its home. Amer. Sports-
man, 3: 390.

Howell, A.H. 1932. Florida Bird Life. Coward-McCann, Inc. New
York. 579 pp.

Robertson, W.B., jr., and C.R. Mason. 1965. Additional bird records
from the Dry Tortugas. Fia. Nat, 38: 131-138.

Scott, W.E.C. 1890. On birds observed at the Dry Tortugas, Florida,
during parts of March and April, 1890. Auk, 1: 301-314.

Williams, L.E., jr., and T. joanen. 1974. Age of first nesting in the
Brown Pelican. Wilson Bull., 86: 279-280.

Ralph W. Schreiber, Seabird Research, Inc., 11008 Teegreen Dr.,
Tampa, Fla. 33612; Ted H. Below, P.O. Box 554, Naples, Fla.
33940; and William B. Robertson, Jr., Everglades Nat. Park, Home-
stead, Fla. 33030.

48

Florida Field Naturalist

Fall 1975

Smooth-billecI Ani Nesting in Collier County^ Southwest Florida

The Smooth-billed Ani {Crotophaga ani), native to Centra! and
South America, the Bahamas, and the Greater and Lesser Antilles,
became established as a breeding species in Florida in the late 1930’s.
Until recently it was known to breed only in the Florida Keys and
southeast Florida, primarily in the area from Miami to Fort Lauder-
dale to Clewiston (Sprunt 1954, Florida Bird Life, Coward-McCann,
New York City; Robertson and Kushlan 1974, The Southern Florida
Avifauna, Memoir 2, Miami Geological Society). Although the spe-
cies is found regularly in scattered localities on the southwest coast
of Florida, primarily around Naples and on Sanibel Island (T. Below,
G. Bancroft, pers, comm.), ! find no previous record of breeding
there.

On 8-9 April 1975 in Collier County, Route 865A, about y2-mile
north of Vanderbilt Beach, I saw a flock of anis in a cut-over area,
with Wax Myrtle (Myrica cerifera), Dwarf Wax Myrtle (M. pusilia),
Rusty Lyonia {Lyonia ferruginea), and Salt Bush [Baccharis haiim-
ifoiia) the major vegetation. No anis were seen in this region during
a 3-hour search on 20-21 February or on a one-hour search on 7
April. However, on 8 April, as I left the road to enter the property,

2 anis flew about 200 m from me to the top of a Wax Myrtle,
approximately 3 m high, and called loudly and incessantly. Over
the next hour, while I watched the widely scattered members of the
flock, one or often 3-5 individuals maintained this lookout from the
highest location near the flock, I counted not more than 12 indi-
viduals: 4 large ones, the most vocal and visible; 3 or 4 middle-
sized birds that remained rather secretive but called frequently; and

3 small birds that remained hidden most of the time, called only
occasionally, and were seen primarily when they flew poorly across
an open area while moving with the flock. The flock moved a dis-
tance of about 140 m while I watched them, and members were
scattered over an area about 50 m in diameter.

On 9 April I found the flock, or rather the 2 largest birds found
me and called loudly from a lofty perch, approximately 200 m
west of where I last saw them in late afternoon on 8 April. I cap-
tured one of the small birds and, before it escaped, made the fol-
lowing observations: The basal 5 cm of all 8 fectrices were sheathed,
and the outer 5-6 cm were fully unfurled. Ail primaries and secon-
daries were sheathed basally for about 3 cm, and the body feathers
were very sparse and growing. The cufmen was not so highly arched
as it is in adults. I believe these characters dearly indicate a bird
hatched in the nearby vicinity, thus breeding is established for Col-
lier County, While in my hand the young called softly, but no older
birds gave an obvious response. The young also bit my finger without
causing any pain.

On 6-7 May I found only 2 large anis in the area, and their be-
Florida Field Naturalist VoL 3 Fall 1975 49

havior was distinctly different from that in April They called only
twice during about one hour while 1 was near them, and they re-
mained visible for only short periods and generally acted very
secretively. On 25 May I did not find any anis in the area. ! suggest
that breeding actually occurred some distance from this site and that
the birds were moving through the region when ! found them in mid-
April

Mr. A.L. Dougherty provided access to his property and gen-
erously supported these observations. G.E. Woolfenden kindly
improved the man user ipt.=“^a/p/i W. Schreiber, Department of Bi-
ology, University of South Florida, Tampa, Fla. 33620.

Ruddy Turnstones Feeding on Coconuts

On 3 April 1975, while censusing pelicans on the beach at
Naples, Florida, i observed 8 Ruddy Turnstones {Arenaria interpres)
feeding on the meat of a coconut. They were feeding from an un-
husked coconut that had been halved lengthwise. The coconut was
above the high-tide line on a section of beach frequented by people.
I assume that the coconut was left the day before, as the turnstones
were observed feeding at 0700 EDT.

When first observed, one turnstone seemed to be resting on the
coconut; then it jumped off and ran down the beach. A few seconds
later another turnstone jumped onto the coconut and pecked inside
it from 2 to 3 minutes. This procedure was repeated by 7 other turn-
stones within a span of 30 minutes. One turnstone dislodged a piece
of coconut meat about the size of a dime, hopped off the coconut,
and was chased by 2 other turnstones. The first bird then proceeded
to eat the coconut meat in my full view. Upon examining the coco-
nut I found that most of the meat was gone and that what remained
was perforated by peck marks.

Few other references to fruit-feeding by Ruddy Turnstones have
been found. Richard Rough (1951. Audubon Water Bird Guide,
Doubieday & Co,, Garden Cifv, N 5 .i stated on page 216 that “al-
though small moilusks, Crustacea, and insects are staples, turnstones
are quick to take advantage of a variety of items. In various places,
especially in the Arctic, they eat quantities of berries, climbing about
in bushes to get them.” A.C. Bent (1928. Life Histories of North
American Shorebirds, U.S. National Museum Bull 146:287) referred
to Manniche's statement that the species feeds “mainly on vegetable
food” just after arriving in Greenland. Paul Bartsch (1922. A visit to
Midway Island. Auk, 39: 481-488) found them feeding on berries
in “dense Scaevola thickets” on Midway Island in Hoy^mhef—TM.
Below, P.O. Box 554, Naples, Fla. 33490.

50

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Fall 1975

Dusting by a Red-bellied Woodpecker

According to Lawrence Kilham (Bird-Banding 46: 251-252,
1975) dusting had not been described for any member of the Order
Piciformes prior to his recent note on dirt-bathing by a Pileated
Woodpecker [Dryocopus pileatus). The lack of records of dust-
bathing by woodpeckers prompts me to note my one observation for
the Red-bel!ied Woodpecker [Centurus caroiinus).

On 28 May 1972, while visiting the Archbold Biological Station,
Highlands County, Florida, several ornithology students and I
watched a recently fledged Red-bellied Woodpecker dust bathing.
It was mid-morning on a warm, sunny day. The bird was on a sparse
lawn near the Station laboratory building in a small patch of sandy
dirt where previously I had seen Bobwhite (Coiinus virginianus)
and House Sparrows (Passer domesticus) dusting. We first saw the
young woodpecker after it had begun dusting. I noticed no dif-
ferences from the general bathing motions characteristic of passer-
ines. After we watched for a few seconds, the sun came out from be-
hind a cloud and the bird immediately began sunning. It leaned its
body to the left, thus exposing its right side to the sun, stretched out
the right wing and gaped. After a few seconds it came out of its
seeming stupor, perhaps because of our movements, and flew to a
nearby fence post.— G/e/? £. Wooifenden, Department of Bioiogy,
University of South Fiorida, Tampa, Fiorida 33620.

Sooty Tern Records Wanted

All inland and offshore Florida records of Sooty Terns that are
believed to have resulted from the recent appearance of Hurricane
Eloise are wanted. Please indicate 1) location (nearest town and
county) and date of sighting; 2) number of birds involved; 3) name
of individual(s) who made the observation; 4) age and/or sex of
birds; and 5) whether the record is supported by a preserved speci-
men. If the latter is true, where is the specimen currently housed?
Send information to Dr. Waiter K. Tayior, Department of Biological
Sciences, Florida Technological University, Orlando, Florida 32816.

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 3

Fall 1975

51

FOS

Spring 1976 Meeting
May 7-9, 1976
University of Miami
Coral Gables, Florida

ERR A TUM

In the first issue of Florida Field Naturalist I stated (p. 11) that
single Blue Jays collected on Dog and St. George Islands in December
1972 were examples of the northern race, Cyanocitta cristata bro-
mia, whose breeding range extends southward to south-central
Illinois, northeastern Tennessee, and south-central Virginia. These
identifications were based only on my measurements of the wing
chord. Recently these two specimens were sent to the National
Museum of Natural History for further examination. Only the speci-
men from St. George Island was referred to bromia by M. Ralph
Browning, who also pointed out that some ornithologists do not
recognize bromia as a valid race. The St, George Island specimen is
number 3157 In the Tall Timbers collection.— //e/?ry M. Stevenson,
Tail Timbers Research Station, Route I, Box 160, Tallahassee,
Fla. 32303.

52

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 3

Fall 1975

SUGGESTIONS FOR CONTRIBUTORS

The Florida Field Naturalist welcomes articles and short notes con-
taining new information on subjects relevant to the biology of wild species
of birds or other vertebrates in or near Florida. Its emphasis is on papers
dealing with the biology of birds, to which it will give publication priority
over papers on other organisms. All articles, notes, and other materials
should be submitted to the Editor: Henry M. Stevenson, Tall Timbers
Research Station, Route 1, Box 160, Tallahassee, Florida 32303.

All manuscripts should be submitted in triplicate. They should be
typewritten, double-spaced, on one side of numbered sheets of standard
(8 1/2 X 11 in.), unruled white paper, with margins of at least one inch
on all sides.

Titles should be short and descriptive, and the body of the article
should state the necessary facts without using unnecessary words. All
references should be cited in the body of the text unless there are more
than three, in which case each complete entry should be listed at the end
under “Literature Cited”, and the citation in the body should then indicate
author and year of publication (e.g., Bond 1961). Whenever there are
more than two authors, list the first followed by “ef al.” (e.g. Blair et al.
1968). Whenever pertinent, the particular page or pages should also be
indicated (Bond 1961: 44).

The vernacular (common) names of all species mentioned — plants or
animals — should be capitalized, and the scientific name should be added
in parentheses following the first reference except in the title. The scien-
tific name should be underscored and should follow a widely accepted
authority for the group of animals or plants involved (e.g. A.O.U.
Check-list, 1957, for birds).

Abbreviations should be used sparingly in the body of the text except
in parenthetical material: e.g. “Tallahassee (5 mi. SE).” Digits rather than
words are recommended for all numbers except one ( 1 ). The metric sys-
tem is preferred for weights and measurements and is acceptable for such
measurements as distances. In writing dates, never use a number to refer
to a month.

Galley proofs will be sent to the (senior) author. The Editor must be
informed well in advance of any change in address or mechanism for
handling proofs; also of necessary changes in the manuscript before proofs
are printed. Changes in proof are expensive, so authors must not expect
to make major changes at this stage unless they are willing to bear the
cost. When proofs reach the author, he should carelully check against the
typescript and promptly return both to the Editor.

Reprints should be ordered through the Florida Audubon Society,
P.O. Drawer 7, Maitland, Fla. 32751, on order forms sent with proof.

P, 0. DRft'NER ?

Storrs L Olson
Nat ' 1 Museurii of Nat His
Smithsonian Institution
Washington^ DC 20550

CONTENTS

CARIBBEAN COOT COLLECTED IN SOUTHERN

FL0RIDA.P(7£// Sykes, Jr. 25

FEATHER STAINING IN FLORIDA SANDHILL CRANES.

Stephen A. Nesbitt 28

CORRESPONDENCE./?^/^/? W. Schreiber 30

FOOD OF THE WHITE IBIS IN SOUTHERN FLORIDA.

James A. Kush Ian and Marilyn S. Kush! an 31

IDENTIFICATION OF DIFFICULT BIRDS: III. SEMI-
PALMATED AND WESTERN SANDPIPERS.//e?7ry
Stevenson 39

FIELD NOTES

A Note on the Feeding Habits of Male Barbour’s Map Turtles.

David S. Lee, Richard Franz, and Roger A. Sanderson 45

Royal Tern Nesting on West-Coast Peninsular Florida. Eliza-
beth A nne Schreiber and Ralph W. Schreiber 46

Nesting of Brown Pelicans (Peiecanus occidentaiis) on the Dry
Tortugas, FIorida./?£7/p/7 W. Schreiber, Ted H. Below, and
William B. Robertson, Jr. 47

Smooth-billed Ani Nesting in Collier County, Southwest Florida.

Ralph W. Schreiber 49

Ruddy Turnstones Feeding on Coconuts. T.H. Below 50

Dusting by a Red-bellied Woodpecker. Gien E. Wooifenden 51

Sooty Tern Records Wanted. 51

Erratum. Henry M. Stevenson 52

STORRS L OLSG

The Florida Field Naturalist

A Semi-annual Journal of
The Florida Ornithological Society

SPRING 1976

V0I.4

No. I

THE FLORIDA FIELD NATURALIST

JOURNAL OF THE FLORIDA ORNITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY

(Founded 1972)

Editor: Henry M. Stevenson, Tall Timbers Research Station Route 1,

Box 160, Tallahassee, Florida 32303

EDITORIAL STAFF

Karen Cantrell, Managing Editor, Florida Audubon Society, P.O.
Drawer 7, Maitland, Fla. 32751

David W. Johnston, Dept, of Zoology, University of Florida, Gaines^
ville, Fla. 32601

Oscar T. Owre*, Dept, of Biology, University of Miami, Coral Gables,
Fla. 33124

William B. Robertson, Jr.*, Everglades National Park, Homestead,
Fla. 33030

Glen E. Woolfenden, Dept, of Biology, University of South Florida,
Tampa, Fla. 33620
* Directors, 1975-77

OFFICERS (1975-77)

President: Herbert W. Kale II, Ornithological Research Division,
35-1st Court SW, Vero Beach, Fla. 32960
Vice President: Ralph W. Schreiber, Seabird Research Inc., 11008
Teegreen Dr., Tampa, Fla. 33612

Secretary: Mrs. Margaret C. Bowman, Box 783, Wabasso, Fla. 32970
Treasurer: Stephen J. Stedman, 2312 C Columbia Ct., Tallahassee,
Fla. 32304.

DIRECTORS

C, Wesley Biggs, 6214-44th Ave., Kenneth City, Fla. 33709 (1975-
76)

John B. Edscorn, Route 14, Box 350, Lakeland, Fla. 33801 (1975-
76)

Articles and notes submitted for publication, as well as books
and other publications intended for review, should be sent to the
Editor (see inside back cover). Notices of change of address, claims
for undelivered or defective copies of this journal, and requests for
information about advertising, subscriptions, and- back numbers
should be sent to the Florida Ornithological Society, P.O. Drawer
7, Maitland, Fla. 32751.

Published semi-annually by the Florida Ornithological Society

Cover Painting of the Everglade Kite (Rostrhomus sociabilis) special-
ly executed for this journal by Jon Janosik

WILLOW AND ALDER FLYCATCHER RECORDS
AT A NORTH FLORIDA TV TOWER

Robert L. Crawford
INTRODUCTION

Bird casualties at the WCTV tower in Leon County, Florida, studied
since 1955, have included several “TrailLs” Flycatchers. The recent
recognition (Stein 1963, A. O. U. 1973) of two species [Empidonax
traillii, E. ainorum) prompted a review of these records. Four sum-
maries have mentioned “TrailLs” Flycatcher kills at the tower but
none is entirely correct. Stoddard (1962), reporting the period Sep-
tember 1955-June 1961, listed 10 records but omitted one for 30
August 1959. Another record was listed on 29 September 1956 but
Stoddard’s original notes from that day list no flycatcher of any kind.
The same notes list an Acadian Flycatcher (E virescens) from the
next day (30 September) and there is an identified specimen of a
‘'Traill’s” Flycatcher labeled 29-30 September 1956 which is called
an Acadian on the original label. Apparently, the notation “Acadian”
was a tentative identification, 30 September is the correct date, and
the specimen was for some reason mislabeled 29-30 September. Stod-
dard and Norris (1967) added eight more records from July 1961-
September 1966 but listed one too many in the last third of Septem-
ber and one too few in the first third of October. Crawford (1974)
noted two additional records from October 1 966-September 1973
but gave the grand total from the 1955-1973 period as 5 instead of
21. One more occurred in each autumn of 1974 and 1975, giving a
total of 23 through 1975. Stevenson (1966) indicated that four indi-
viduals had not been saved as specimens, but only three were dis-
carded. All 20 of the specimens have been examined and 19 have
been identified to species.

SPECIES ACCOUNTS

Specimens listed below are in the Tall Timbers Research Station
collection, except that those marked by an asterisk (*) are in the
National Museum of Natural History Jn Washington, D.C. j. W. Al-
drich, A. R. Phillips, and R. C. Stein provided the identifications, and
since they have stressed different criteria such as color or measure-
ments for determining the two species (e. g., Phillips et al. 1966,
Aldrich 1951, Stein 1963) the specimens may not have been treated
uniformly. The identifications of the traiHii specimens of 20 August

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 4

Spring 1 976

1

1961 and 7 September 1962 and the alnorum specimen of 19 Sep-
tember 1962 are qualified by the notation after the names on
the labels and are thus tentative.

Willow Flycatcher: Empidonax traillii

20 Aug. 1961 (ad 8)-, 30 Aug. 1959 (sex?); 7 Sept. 1962 (9);

14 Sept. 1975 ( im sex?); 22 Sept. 1958 ( im 29-30 [»30]

Sept. 1956 (im 9)*; 30 Sept. 1957 ( im 2 Oct. 1957 {8);

4-5 Oct. 1957 {8),

Alder Flycatcher: Empidonax alnorum

6 Sept. 1973 ( im ^) ; 9 Sept. 1961 (im 9); 15 Sept. 1960 ( im 9);
19 Sept. 1962 (9); 24 Sept. 1967 (9?); 25 Sept. 1974 ( im sex?);
27 Sept. 1964 ( im cf ) ; 1 Oct. 1957 (9); 2 Oct. 1957 (9)*;

4-5 Oct. 1957 (im 9?)*.

Unidentified "Traill’s" Flycatcher: Empidonax sp.

5 Sept. 1965 (not saved); 14 Sept. 1964 (not saved); 4-5 Oct.
1957 (im ^); 17 Oct. 1964 (not saved).

DISCUSSION

The specimens show an almost equal frequency of occurrence of
the two species at the tower, with 9 and 10 individuals each. E.
traiim seems to occur earlier in the season (two August records), but
a specimen oi alnorum in the Tall Timbers collection from Baldwin
County, Alabama ( , 29 Aug. 1959), indicates that this species also
occurs early in the Southeast. The male/female ratio is 5:2 for traillii
and 2:7 for alnorum (of those that could be determined). If these
data are lumped, they do not show the 2:1 male/female ratio noted
by Phillips c7/. (1966) at Long Island, New York.

Only one WCTV specimen was aged as an adult during preparation
{traillii, 20 Aug. 1961) and it is the earliest record of either species.
The combined ratio Is 1:11 for adults and Immatures. Since adult
“Traill’s’’ Flycatchers complete their southward migration before
prebasic molt (Dwight 1900: 147, Phillips 1948) the edges of the
wing coverts (wing bars) and the tertials of adults in fail migration
appear worn. Also, immatures have a more buffy aspect to these
areas than do adults (Ridgway 1915: 342, Roberts 1955: 634). Ap-

2

Florida Field Naturalist Voi. 4

Spring 1976

plying these criteria to the unaged WCTV specimens at Tall Timbers,
all were found to be immatures. Field-collected specimens in the Tall
Timbers collection (including the Alabama alnorum noted above)
were also found to be immatures by this method. These other speci-
mens are: two traiHii] Franklin County, Florida, 24 September 1966,
unsexed; Grady County, Georgia, 2 October 1949, ^ ?; two called
“probably” alnorum, Leon County, Florida, 13 September 1956, un-
sexed; and Jefferson County, Florida, 16 October 1954, unsexed.
Thus, the WCTV specimens show a 1:18 adult/immature ratio which
becomes 1 :23 if the field-collected birds are included. This unbalanced
ratio (with the single adult the earliest migrant) agrees with Phillips
et ai. (1966) who reported 1 0 of 92 birds as adults and with Flussell
et ai. (1967) in Ontario, Sutton (1967: 344) in Oklahoma, and Ely
(1970) in Kansas who noted a differential, early migration by adults.
In contrast are data from Homestead, Florida, which listed two
adults and one immature on 1 and 2 October 1969, respectively (Og-
den and Fisk 1970), and 14 adults and 11 immatures between 24
September and 19 October 1970 (Fisk 1971). Thus the Homestead
data showed neither a conspicuously early adult migration nor a pre-
ponderance of immatures. Perhaps these discrepancies are a result of
a lack of large series of critically compared specimens from several
points in Florida. If information of this type becomes available, a
clearer picture of the migration of trailiii and alnorum through Flori-
da may well emerge.

I am grateful to the ornithologists who identified the specimens,
particularly Aldrich, who was most helpful in providing data on the
NMNH specimens. Phillips, D. W. Johnston, and H. M. Stevenson
made helpful suggestions on an earlier draft.

LITERATURE CITED

Aldrich, J.W. 1951. A review of the races of the TrailFs Flycatcher.
Wilson Bull., 63: 192-197.

American Ornithologists’ Union. 1973. Thirty-second supplement to
the American Ornithologists’ Union Check-list of North American
Birds. A£/^, 90: 411-419.

Crawford, R.L. 1974. Bird casualties at a Leon County, Florida TV
tower: October 1 966-September 1973. Bull. Tall Timbers Res.
Sta., 18: 1-27.

Dwight, jr. 1900. The sequence of plumages and moults of the
passerine birds of New York. Ann. N. Y. Acad. ScL 13: 73-360.
Ely, C.A. 1970. Migration of Least and TrailFs Flycatchers in west-
central Kansas. Bird-Banding, 198-204.

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 4

Spring 1 976

3

Fisk, E.J. 1971. Increase of fall Traill’s Flycatchers in southern Flori-
da. Bird-Banding, 42: 121.

Hussell, D.J.T., T. Davis, and R.D. Montgomerie. 1967. Differential
fall migration of adult and immature Least Flycatchers. Bird-
Banding, 38: 61 -66.

Ogden, J.C., and E.J. Fisk. 1970. Traill’s Flycatcher, a transient in
peninsular Florida. Bird-Banding , 41 : 40.

Phillips, A.R. 1948. Geographic variation in Empidonax traiili. Auk,
67: 507-514.

^,M.A. Howe, and W.E. Lanyon. 1966. Identification of the

flycatchers of Eastern North America, with special emphasis on
the genus Empidonax. Bird-Banding, 37: 153-171.

Ridgway, R. 1915. A Manual of North American Birds, 4th ed. j.B.
Lippincott Co., Philadelphia. 631 pp.

Roberts, T.S. 1955. Manual for the Identification of the Birds of
Minnesota and Neighboring States. University of Minnesota Press,
Minneapolis. {From The Birds of Minnesota, pp. 459-783.)

Stein, R.C. 1963. Isolating mechanisms between populations of
Traill’s Flycatchers. Proc. Amer. Phii. Soc., 107: 21-50.

Stevenson, H.M. 1966. The status of Traill’s Flycatcher in Florida.
Fia. Nat, 39: 151.

Stoddard, H.L. 1962. Bird casualties at a Leon County, Florida TV
tower, 1955-1961. Bull. Tall Timbers Res. Sta., 1 : 1-94.

and R.A. Norris. 1967. Bird casualties at a Leon County,

Florida TV tower: an eleven year study. Bull. Tall Timbers Res.
Sta., 8: M04.

Sutton, G.M. 1967. Oklahoma birds. Norman: University of Okla-
homa Press.

Tali Timbers Research Station, Rt 1 , Box 160, Tallahassee, Fia. 32304.

4

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 4

Spring 1976

BLUE GROSBEAK BREEDS IN THE FLORIDA EVERGLADES

William G. Genung

The Blue Grosbeak [Guiraca caerulea) is known to breed across
northern Florida (Sprunt 1954, Bent 1965, Weston 1965). Farther
south, breeding was reported once near Tarpon Springs (Sprunt 1954).
More recently the species was found in full song at Campbell City,
northern Osceola County, by Stevenson (1966) on 29 May and 17
June. No account of its nesting in southern Florida has been found.
Ogden (1969) listed the species as only an uncommon transient in
the Everglades National Park, and Greene (1946) recorded a single
transient for the lower Florida Keys. The present report documents
the nesting of a pair of Blue Grosbeaks at Belle Glade Agricultural
Research and Education Center (formerly the Everglades Experiment
Station) in western Palm Beach County, 170 miles SE and 120 miles
SSE of the Tarpon Springs and Osceola County sites, respectively.

On 28 June 1973 I found a nest somewhat smaller than that of a
Red-winged Blackbird (Ageiaius phoeniceus) or Cardinal {CardinaUs
cardinalls] in the crotch of an elderberry [Sambucus simpsonii) bush
growing on a ditch bank. The open nest attracted attention because
of a rather large cast snake skin woven into and dangling from it. It
contained a single pale bluish egg.

The egg color, without lines or marks, limited the species to only a
few possibilities, and the inclusion of a snake skin in the nest sug-
gested the Blue Grosbeak. An egg per day was added on 29 and 30
June and 1 July without a glimpse of either of the adults. (Observa-
tion time was mainly limited to the noon hour or after 1700 hours.)
The female was not observed until 2 July, which date probably was
after incubation had begun. She was glimpsed as she dove from the
nest while I was still about 40 m away. The equally shy male was
identified on 3 July with 7x, 50 binoculars. Familiarity with my
presence did not embolden either bird, although I had become a
twice-a-day visitor to their nest.

As Bent (1965) supplied few facts on incubation in the Blue Gros-
beak, our observations are of interest. Two eggs had hatched by 1200
on 12 July, the third egg by 0900 hours on 13 July, and the fourth
by 1300 hours the same day. Assuming incubation commenced with
deposition of the fourth egg, hatching required 12 to 13 days. The
male was never observed on or leaving the nest and is not believed to
have aided in incubation duties.

The adults were less shy after incubation, probably .because of
concern for their nestlings. By 18 July the young grosbeaks nearly

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 4

Spring 1 976

5

filled the nest, which was tipped about 30 degrees. All young had
their eyes open by 19 July.

On 22 July a storm with high winds and torrential rains dumped 7
inches of water on the area. On 23 July, in my absence, C. E. Seiler
checked the nest. He found the nest empty with one dead young on
the grass beneath. Several species of predators occur in the vicinity,
and any of them may have destroyed the other young. The most like-
ly predators, because of their abundance, are the Cotton Rat (Sig-
modon hispidus) and the Boat-tailed Crackle [Cassidix major). The
disturbed adults remained in the vicinity of the nest for a few days,
but they were not observed carrying food to the young, and I con-
cluded that all had perished. The male was still in the vicinity of the
nest on the 26th, after which neither bird was seen again.

My observations on the food taken to the young indicated that the
bulk of the material consisted of noctuid larvae, including particularly
the Striped Grass Looper [Mods iatipes), and of nymphs of various
acridid grasshoppers. The American Grasshopper [Schistocerca ameri-
cana), the Larger Obscure Grasshopper (5. obscura), the Southern
Olive-green Swamp Grasshopper (Paroxya clavuiiger), and the Short-
winged Green Grasshopper (Dichromorpha viridis) were plentiful
nearby. The only identifiable material in the gizzard in the one dead
nestling recovered was 3 acridid mandibles, 4 complete acridid cerci,
what appeared to be a tettigoniid ovipositor, and apparently the
complete hind femur and tibia of a flea beetle [Chrysomelidae). The
remaining material was mostly severely fragmented insect parts.

The nest was constructed mainly of coarse and fine grass blades
and small roots. The Inner lining contained many hairs apparently
from the tail brush of cattle. In addition to the characteristic cast
snake skin, 2 pieces of clear plastic and a piece of tissue-like paper
were woven into the nest’s outer layer.

The nest site was bordered by beef cattle pastures, of mainly St.
Augustine Grass [Stenotophrum secundatum), fallow fields contain-
ing a wide variety of grasses and broad-leaved plants, and by a dense
stand of elderberry of approximately 20 acres.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I thank Henry M. Stevenson for calling my attention to the Osceola
County record and Glen E. Woolfenden for reading the earlier draft
of the manuscript and making suggestions for its improvement.

6

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 4

Spring 1976

LITERATURE CITED

Bent, Arthur Cleveland. 1965. Life Histories of North American
Cardinals, Grosbeaks, Buntings, Towhees, Finches, Sparrows, and
Allies. Part 1. Dover Publications, Inc., New York. 602 pp,

Greene, Earle R. 1946, Birds of the Lower Florida Keys. Proc. Fla.
Acad. Sci,, 8(3) : 199-265. Published jointly by the Academy and
the Fla. Audubon Society.

Ogden, John C, 1969. Checklist of Birds of Everglades National Park.
Everglades Natural History Assn,

Sprunt, Alexander, Jr. 1954. Florida Bird Life. Coward-McCann, Inc.,
New York, Nat. Audubon Soc. and Fia. Game and Fresh Water
Fish Comm. 527 pp.

Stevenson, Henry M. 1966. Florida Region. Audubon Field Notes,
20: 564,

Weston, Francis M. 1965. A survey of the birdlife of northv/estern
Florida. Bull. Tall Timbers Res. Sta. , 5: 1-147.

AREQ Belie Glade Univ. of Fla. Inst of Food and Agricultural Sci-
ences, Belie Glade, Fia. 33430.

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 4

Spring 1 976

7

FIELD NOTES

An Inland Record of Wilson’s Storm-Petrel

On 25 September 1975, while birding 16 miles SW of Marianna,
Jackson County, Florida, we observed a Wilson’s Storm-Petrel
(Oceanites oceanicus) floating on a small cattle-watering pond next
to a graded road on the south side of Compass Lake. The bird was
observed briefly on the water at a distance of about 15 m. Our initial
reaction was that it resembled a small Rock Dove [Columba Uvia)
because of the shape of the head and tail. When it flushed, we ob-
served its size, manner of flight, and the shape, coloration, and mark-
ings of its wings. The pattern on the dorsal surface of the wing was
almost identical to that shown by Peterson (1947. A Field Guide to
the Birds). We observed the bird for at least 5 minutes as it glided
over the pond; it came very close to us in its maneuvers. The white
tail patch was conspicuous, and the tail was spread in flight so that
the absence of a notch was obvious. In contrast, Leach’s Storm-Petrel
[Oceanodroma leucorhoa) is identified by a forked tail and light,
bouncing flight, as opposed to the gliding flight of Wilson’s Storm-
Petrel. Harcourt’s Storm-Petrel [Oceanodroma castro), less frequent-
ly recorded in Florida, also has a slightly forked tail. The inland oc-
currence of our bird must have been a direct result of Hurricane
Eloise, which crossed this area on its inland course from Panama City
two days previously.

Although Wilson’s Storm-Petrel is a regular offshore summer resi-
dent in Florida, only one previous inland occurrence has been re-
ported. On 10 June 1948 Alexander Sprunt IV [Auk, 66: 76), in
company with J. Pittman and M. Nehrenberg, during a period of
“quite normal” weather, saw at Biven’s Arm, near Gainesville, a bird
identified as this species by its “white rump, characteristic legs and
feet.” It seems worth noting that their account did not refer to the
shape of the tail and that Leach’s Storm-Petrel is also known to
migrate northward in \une.-~Mary S. Gray, P. O, Box 50, Marianna,
Fla. 32446, and Donald P. Scott, 1106 Buena Vista, Panama City,
Fla. 32401.

8

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 4

Spring 1976

A Second Recent Royal Tern Nesting Colony
on the Gulf Coast of Florida

The Royal Tern [Thaiasseus maximus) is abundant along Florida’s
coasts throughout the year and formerly bred at many locations along
the Gulf Coast and on the Dry Tortugas. These sites were abandoned
by the early 1900’s (Howell 1932). However, in June 1951 R. C.
Hallman (1952) found Royal Tern eggs on the northern Gulf Coast
at Shell Island, off Port St. Joe. On subsequent visits Hallman located
from one to 2 nests per annum through 1 969, but in 1 970 he counted
26 Royal Tern nests (Stevenson 1972). Stevenson (1972) later in
that same nesting season saw approximately 165 Royal Tern chicks
at this locale. In 1968 a large Royal Tern nesting colony was estab-
lished on the Atlantic Coast at Bird Island in Nassau Sound, Duval
Co., and in 1970 S. A. Grimes and E. LeBaron (Ogden 1970) reported
finding 1000 nests and 200 downy young at this colony. In 1974
Steve L. Sutton (Ogden 1974) found 2100 Royal Tern nests on near-
by Little Bird Island in Nassau Sound. In 1973 Robert D. Barber and
Allan D. Cruickshank (Ogden 1973) found the species breeding on
spoil islands inside Merritt Island Refuge, Brevard Co., and in 1974
Jim Baker (Ogden 1974) found 2000 Royal Tern nests on Merritt Is-
land. In 1975 E. A. and R. W. Schreiber (1976) found a single pair of
Royal Terns nesting within a Laughing Gull [Larus atriciHa) colony
on a spoil island along the Intracoastal Waterway in Charlotte Harbor,
Charlotte Co.

On 3 July 1975 we located more than 35 old nests (identified by
broken eggshells), 12 eggs, and approximately 45 flightless Royal
Tern chicks on 2 of 13 spoil islands extending about 2 kilometers
into the Gulf of Mexico from the mouth of the Cross-Florida Barge
Canal near Yankeetown, Citrus Co. The Royal Terns were nesting
in association with approximately 450 Laughing Gulls, 250 Black
Skimmers [Rynchops niger) and 225 Least Terns (Sterna albifrons).
Also seen in the area during the nesting period, though no nests were
found, were 4 Snowy Plovers (Charadrius alexandrinus), 15 Ameri-
can Oystercatchers (Haematopus palliatus), and 21 Sandwich Terns
[Thaiasseus sandvicensis)^ approximately one third of the terns being
immatures capable of flight.

These spoil islands were constructed between 1964 and 1967 (U. S.
Army Corps of Engineers, pers, comm.) and conform to Royal Tern
colony site characteristics as described by Buckley and Buckley
(1972)— i.e. (1) absence of mammalian predators; (2) general inacces-
sibility and excellent visibility of surroundings, usually typified by
isolated spoil banks; (3) extensive areas of adjacent shallows for feed-

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 4

Spring 1 976

9

ing; and (4) location at or very near an inlet between bay and ocean.

The recent breeding by Royal Terns at scattered localities through-
out the state, particularly on newly created spoil islands, suggests
that they may be re-establishing themselves as breeders along Florida’s

coasts.

Financial support for this study was received from the U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers and the U. S. Department of Interior, Fish and
Wildlife Service.

LITERATURE CITED

Buckley, F.G. and P.A. Buckley. 1972. The breeding ecology of
Royal Terns Sterna (Thalasseus) maxima maxima. Ibis 114: 344-
359.

Hallman, R.C. 1952. Royal Tern nesting near Port St. Joe. Fla. Nat.,
25: 38-39.

Howell, Arthur H. 1932. Florida Bird Life. Coward-McCann Inc.,
New York. 579 pp.

Ogden, j.C. 1970. Florida Region. Audubon Field Notes. 24: 676.
Ogden, j.C. 1973. Florida Region. American Birds. 27: 861-862.
Ogden, j.C. 1974. Florida Region. American Birds. 28: 894.
Schreiber, E.A. and R.W. Schreiber. 1976. Royal Tern nesting on
west-coast peninsular Florida. Fla. Field Nat., 3: 46.

Stevenson, H.M. 1972. Recent breeding of the Sandwich Tern
(Thalasseus sandvicensis) in Florida. Fla. Nat., 45: 94-95.

D. Bruce Barbour, Stephen A. Nesbitt, and D. Terry Gilbert, Wild-
life Research Projects, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commis-
sion, 4005 S. Main St, Gainesville, Fla. 3260 h

Sandhill Crane Data

Dr. Lawrence H. Walkinshaw has deposited in the Archbold Bio-
logical Station Library a copy of his field notes on Sandhill Cranes in
the southeastern United States and Cuba. These field notes relate
mainly to Florida during 1 966-74, but also cover Mississippi, Georgia,
and Cuba during 1938-74. The crane data include nesting season and
habitat, nest site and construction, adult behavior at the nest, eggs,
young, nesting success, and local movements. Also included are some
census data for other birds occurring in Sandhill Crane habitat in
Florida, Mississippi, and Cuba. For further information write to:Li-
brarian, Arch bold Biological Station, Route 2, Box 180, Lake Placid,
FL 33852.

10

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 4

Spring 1976

Prevalence of Bill Abnormalities in Florida Brown Thrashers

The Brown Thrasher [Toxostoma rufum) in Florida exibits a high
rate of occurrence of an elongated sickle-bil! type of abnormality.
This observation became evident after having reviewed the literature
on the subject and after I captured an apparently healthy thrasher
with an elongated, decurved bill in north Tampa, Florida, near the
University of South Florida, on 26 April 1975. Scattered notes and
references in the literature document approximately 12 other sight-
ings of Brown Thrashers with bill abnormalities, confined largely to
centra! Florida and distributed over the last decade (Steffee 1968,
Stitt 1968, Taylor and Anderson 1972, Taylor 1973). Also, the re-
port by Cobb (1946) of a Long-billed Thrasher [T. longirostre) in
St. Petersburg almost certainly represents another sickle-billed Brown
Thrasher sighting. Recently, Taylor (pers. comm.) has metioned 2
unpublished records of specimens taken in January 1974 and March
1975 and deposited in the Florida Technological University collec-
tions. Unfortunately, only 4 of these birds were carefully examined,
measured, or preserved for scientific analysis. All, however, appear to
involve an elongated, decurved maxilla, and in most there was a par-
tial sickling and extension of the mandible as well.

The Tampa record represents the most extreme example of sickle"
bill abnormality yet measured (Fig. 1). This individual is an adult
male with normal plumage and weighing 62.0 g. The exposed culmen
measures 70 mm in length, and the maxilla, projects
35 mm beyond the tip of the mandible. The mandible has a square
tip and may have broken off recently. Taylor and Anderson (1972)
recorded the previous maximum culmen length to be 40 mm, the cul-
men length averaging about 25 mm and extending no more than 2-3
mm beyond the mandible. Therefore, the thrasher taken in Tampa
has an upper bill length almost three times that of a normal individual.

The feeding behavior of the abnormal thrasher was observed for
about 15 minutes prior to capture. It was rather tame compared to
other thrashers in the area and foraged successfully for insects on the
ground and among shrubs. Food was captured by turning the head
and bill sideways and grasping the item midway up the maxilla near
the tip of the mandible. Several leafhoppers and grasshoppers were
consumed in this manner, and the bird appeared to have efficiently
adapted its foraging technique to the extreme bill abnormality by
using lateral headturning movements.

One can only speculate as to the cause of recurring cases of the
sickle-bill elongation in Florida Brown Thrashers. The most probable
explanation would be a high incidence of certain genes in the popula-

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 4

Spring 1976

11

tion that control the growth of an elongate bill. However, there is no
evidence yet as to whether the condition is inherited. Since several
western species of thrashers normally have rather elongate, decurved
bills, mutation of certain genes to produce the condition in a short-
billed species is certainly within reason. However, because the inci-
dence of the abnormality is high in central Florida, we might also be
on the alert for possible environmental causes such as chemical pol-
lutants unique to this area, or contamination of the food eaten by
thrashers. Many more data are needed on the flight movements and
local situations within which abnormal thrashers live and forage. It
is imperative to determine where the abnormal birds were fledged, in
what areas they nest, and whether their offspring are normal or
sickle-billed. The ornithologist or bird watcher who makes careful
observations of breeding performance involving sickle-billed Brown
Thrashers could certainly shed much light on these interesting
questions of genetic inheritance or potential environmental causes
and effects.

I wish to acknowledge the able assistance of Curtis K. Brown and
L. Kristopher Brown in locating and capturing the abnormal Tampa
Brown Thrasher. This specimen is now deposited in the University

of South Florida Zoological Collections.

Figure 1. Adult male Brown Thrasher with extreme sickle-bill abnor-
mality; Tampa, Florida, 26 April 1975.

12

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 4

Spring 1976

LITERATURE CITED

Cobb, M.P. 1946. Report on spring migration. Fla. Nat., 19: 67-68.
Steffee, N.D. 1968. Numbers of deformed Brown Thrashers (Toxo-
stoma rufum), reported from scattered locations. Fla. Nat., 41 :

126-127.

Stitt, W.T. 1968. More on deformed thrashers. Fla. Nat., 41: 171.
Taylor, W.K. 1973. Bill deformities in two Florida birds. Fla. Field
Nat., 1 : 6-8.

and B.H. Anderson. 1972. Brown Thrasher [Toxostoma

rufum) with a bill abnormality in Seminole County. Fla. Nat., 45:
129.

Larry N. Brown, Dept of Biology, Univ. of South Florida, Tampa,
Fla. 33620.

Report of Fall Meeting

The 1975 fall meeting of the EOS was hosted by the Indian River
Audubon Society on 1 7-1 9 Oct. at Titusville, with 1 68 in attendance.
On Friday evening Pam Stewart of Manatee Junior College gave a
slide-lecture, “Birds in Art: History and Symbolism, “ and on Saturday
Helen Cruickshank transported the banqueters to Alaska on her magic
camera. During field trips to Merritt Island Refuge, Port Canaveral,
and offshore, 166 species were recorded, including Lapland Longspur,
Bay-breasted Warbler, and numerous accipiters and falcons. The con-
test in identifying bird skins was won by Noel Warner and Bob Bar-
ber who tied; each was awarded a copy of Robert Porter Alien's
Birds of the Caribbean.

Papers were presented by David W. Johnston, J. W. Hardy, Herbert
W. Kale II, James A. Kushlan, and John C. Ogden.

At the meeting of the Executive Board, W. B. Robertson, Jr., G. E.
Woolfenden, H. M. Stevenson, and O. T. Owre were appointed to
prepare an annotated checklist of Florida Birds. To broaden the base
of the Board (seven professionals and two non-professionals when
the Society was trying its wings), D. W. Johnston and G. E. Woolfen-
den resigned as Directors. To fill the vacancies C. W. Biggs and J. B.
Edscorn were appointed. Johnson and Woolfenden will continue to
serve on the Editorial Board. Staggered terms for Directors will be
studied. The Board looked with favor upon the recent initiation of a
Florida Rare Bird Alert by Bob Wallace, John Hintermister, and Jim
Horner.

The 1976 spring meeting will be hosted by the Tropical Audubon
Society and the University of Miami. The fall 1976 meeting will be in
Jacksonville. —Margaret C. Bowman, Secretary.

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 4

Spring 1976

13

Observation of a Bald Eagle Capturing a Cattle Egret in Flight

On 16 January 1975 at approximately 1600 hours on State Road
60, one to 2 miles east of Lake Wales, Florida, I noticed an adult Bald
Eagle (Haliaeetus ieucocepha/us) flying across the highway about 100
feet above the ground. I pulled off onto the shoulder of the road to
observe the bird. Flying rather slowly against a heavy wind, the eagle
passed over a small cattle pasture and startled one of several feeding
Cattle Egrets (Bubulcus /b/s) into flight. The egret appeared to have
difficulty flying against the wind, and immediately the eagle swooped
and made several unsuccessful passes at the egret before finally
making contact. White feathers scattered in the wind as the eagle
grasped its prey and disappeared beyond the woods bordering the
pasture. Immediately after this incident two more adult eagles passed
over the field in the opposite direction, but made no attempt to cap-
ture any of the remaining egrets,— Charles Knight^ Environmental
Protection Bureau^ Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission^
P. O. Box 1840, Vero Beach, Florida 32960.

An Offshore Sighting of Sabine’s Gull

Sabine’s Gull {Xema sabini) was first known to occur in Florida
when an oiled bird was found by Ruth T. Rogers at Daytona Beach,
Volusia County, on 1 November 1952. Identification was confirmed
by Herbert Friedmann at the U. S. National Museum (Sprunt, Alex-
ander, jr. 1954. Florida Bird Life. Coward McCann, Inc., New York
City. 527 pp.). The second record was a sighting of 2 birds at rest on
Playlinda Beach, Brevard County, on 24 September 1963 by A. E.
Ellis and j. B. Johnson during a severe northeasterly gale (Cunning-
ham, Richard L. 1964. Audubon Field Notes, 18:25).

On 4 November 1975, after 5 days of northeasterly winds up to
40 knots, we identified an immature Sabine’s Gull 18 miles E of
Cocoa Beach, Brevard County. The bird flew within 12 m of the
boat. We noticed the characteristic wing and tail patterns, grayish
brown mantle and forewing, blackish primaries contrasting with the
immaculate white triangles in the wings, and the forked white tail
with a black terminal band. On this day the wind was still NE at 20-
25 knots, and seas were hedc^y .—Robert D. Barber, 2027 Rock ledge
Drive, Rock! edge, Fla. 32955; James B. Johnson, P. O. Box 273,
Merritt Island, Fia, 32952.

14

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 4

Spring 1976

Roof Nesting by Black Skimmers

During the breeding seasons of 1974 and 1975 weekly surveys
(mid-April to mid-August) were made of a Least Tern {Sterna aibi-
from) colony nesting on the grave I -cove red rooftops of three ware-
houses belonging to the Port Everglades Authority in Fort Lauder-
dale, Broward County, Florida. (These data will be presented in a
subsequent report.) The roofs are covered with crushed limestone
over tar and are rapidly drained after heavy rainfall.

On the morning of 14 June 1975, as the survey team reached the
roof of Warehouse No. 2 (Rg. 1 ),a dozen Black Skimmers (Rynchops
niger) flew off. This was the first time skimmers had been observed
in the port area since the end of March, when a single bird was
present, although large flocks of skimmers and gulls roosted on the
warehouse roofs during the winter months. While counting the Least

Figure 1, Nest scrape and eggs of Black Skimmer on warehouse roof,
summer of 1975, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida (Photograph by
E. S. Greene).

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 4

Spring 1976

15

Tern nests and chicks, two black circles, or scrapes, each about 15 cm
in diameter were noted. One scrape contained a single Black Skim-
mer egg, the other contained 2 eggs. The adults had scraped out all
the gravel down to the tar surface. Because of this the nests were
easy to detect from a distance, unlike the Least Tern nests, which
were slight depressions in the gravel.

During the following weeks the numbers of adult skimmers, nests,
and eggs increased (see Table 1), but no successful hatching of eggs
occurred. Eggs on subsequent visits were found punctured or had
mysteriously disappeared. On the other hand, Least Terns on the
same roof were successful in hatching and fledging their young.

On 4 July about 10 Fish Crows (Corvus ossifragus) were seen fly-
ing over and landing on the roof of Warehouse No. 3, a short distance
from Warehouse No. 2. However, this was the first time we had seen
crows in the vicinity while the skimmers were nesting. (The home of
the senior author is directly opposite these warehouses, just across
the intracoastal waterway.)

Unlike skimmers nesting on beaches, which when disturbed will
fly closely around intruders and give their characteristic barking cry,
and occasionally a broken-wing display, these birds did not harass
us (although the Least Terns made a protective hat necessary!). In-
stead, they flew in ever-widening circles, and then flew off down the
waterway. Nor did the skimmers return when the survey team had

Table I. Roof nesting by Black Skimmers In summer of 1975# Ft,.
Lauderdale, Florida.

Date

No. of

Birds No. of Nests

No.

of Eggs

14 June

12

2

1

(1

nest)

2

(1

nest)

22 June

18

2

2

(2

nests )

30 June

18

0

0

12 July

45

8

1

(5

nests )

2

(2

nests )

3

(1

nest)

22 July

25

4

1

(4

nests)

2 August

20

3

1

(2

nests )

2

(1

nest)

9 August

0

0

0

Totals; 19

27

16 Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 4

Spring 1976

left the roof—again unlike the Least Terns, who promptly settled
down on their nests.

One clue to what may have happened to some of the eggs was sug-
gested when one egg in a nest of two was seen to be cracked open on
the underside— the side lying on the tar. Possibly the heat being ab-
sorbed by the tar was too great for the eggshell in contact with it.
The conspicuousness of the black circular nests, coupled with the
skimmers’ failure to protect them, suggests also that predation by
Fish Crows, or by the Boat-tailed Crackles [Cassidix major) nesting
in nearby palm trees, was occurring.

As far as we can ascertain this is the first record of Black Skim-
mers nesting on the roof of a man-made structure.

The assistance of the Broward County Audubon Society survey
team members, Edward S. Greene, Mrs. Robert Fisher, and John
Judy, without whom this study would not have been accomplished,
and the encouragement of Mrs. Erma Fisk, research associate with
National and Florida Audubon Societies, are gratefully acknowledged
—Louise L. Greene, 1957 SE 21st Ave., Ft. Lauderdale, Fla. 33316
and Herbert W. Kale 1 1, Florida Audubon Society, Ornithological
Research Division, 35 First Court SW, Vero Beach, Fla. 32960.

Third Record of the Arctic Loon from Florida

The first Arctic Loon [Gavia arctica) recorded in Florida was a dead
bird found in Palm Beach County on 2 November 1959 (Langridge,
Auk, 77: 351). The second record was a live bird collected on the
lower Wakulla River, Wakulla County, 14 December 1971 (Stevenson,
American Birds, 26: 593). On 20 April 1975 a desiccated carcass still
retaining many feathers was found on Bush Key, Dry Tortugas, Mon-
roe County. Identification as an Arctic Loon was verified by Mrs.
Roxie Laybourne of the National Museum of Natural History. The
specimen (GEW 5000) is now a skeleton housed at the University of
South Florida. The we 1 1 -feat he red condition suggests that the bird
perished not too far from the Dry Tortugas. The winter range of the
Arctic Loon on the Pacific Coast of North America includes southern
Baja California, but on the Atlantic Coast it is a rare vagrant. This is
the southernmost record for the United States.

I thank William B. Robertson, Jr., and Glen E. Woolfenden for
help in preparing this note,— Barbara C. Kittleson, 5334 Woodhaven
Drive, Lakeland, Fla. 33803.

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 4

Spring 1976

17

Tufted Titmouse Feeds Young in Fallen External Squirrel Nest

The Tufted Titmouse (Parus bicolor) normally nests in tree cavities.
A literature search led us to one exception, namely an old record by
Wayne [Auk^ 14:98-99, 1897) of a pair that laid two successive
clutches in a large mass of Spanish Moss (Tillands/a usneoides); both
nesting attempts failed when strong storm winds blew down the nests
and eggs. To this we add another attempt by the species to nest in
other than a tree cavity. These observations may prove valuable to
field observers searching for nests of the Tufted Titmouse.

On the afternoon of 1 5 April 1 975 in Temple Terrace, Hillsborough
County, Florida, Mumme discovered two adult titmice feeding nest-
lings in an external nest of a Gray Squirrel {Sciurus carolinensis) that
was lying on the ground. The nest was beneath a lone Live Oak {Quer-
cus virginiana), from which we strongly suspect it had blown down
during the severe storm that passed through the area earlier the same
day. The exact original location of the nest in the oak could not be
determined, although probably it was somewhere in the branches 6
to 10 m from the ground. The nest was a spherical mass of fairly
fresh Spanish Moss with one entrance hole, typical of local Gray
Squirrels. It was lined with finer materials, both hair and plant fibers.
The habitat is mature suburbs with numerous houses and a golf
course. Live Oaks and Longleaf Pines [Pinus paiustris) are the domi-
nant trees, and Gray Squirrels are numerous.

The nest, when found on the ground, contained 5 young about 9
days old (see Laskey, Bird-Banding, 28:135-145, 1957) and one egg.
Two adults continued to care for the nestlings, feeding them and re-
moving their fecal sacs. Attempts to relocate the nest 3 m away and
3 m up in a tree failed. During two or three minutes of observation
the adults did not go to the relocated nest but instead searched the
ground, and especially the bits of moss near where the nest had been.
After returning it to the ground, Mumme again placed the nest in the
tree, this time while the adults were nearby, and still they failed to
go to it.

With the nest returned to the ground at least one adult was seen
carrying food to the young the next day, 16 April. On 17 April, In
the afternoon, the nest was partially torn open, and the 5 young
were scattered nearby and dead. Some had punctures and we suspect
a dog killed them. The adults were not seen. The young were pre-
served as fluid specimens at the University of South ?\Qf\ddL —Ronald
L Mumme and Glen E. Woolfenden, Department of Biology, Uni-
versity of South Florida, Tampa, Florida 33620.

18

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 4

Spring 1976

Another Cory’s Shearwater Specimen from Florida

On 15 July 1974 Johnnie Johnson and Bob Barber collected a
Cory’s Shearwater 20 miles offshore of Brevard County, Florida. The
female (ovary 10x2 mm) weighed 417.0 g; there was little visible
fat. The wings and body were in molt. ! sent the skin to the National
Museum for racial determination. George B. Watson identified the
shearwater as the Mediterrean race Caionectris ("Puffinus) diomedea
diomedea. In his letter to me (dated 4 November 1975), Watson
stated that the specimen is undoubtedly a prebreeding bird since it is
well into molt in early summer. To my knowledge, the only other
records of this race for Florida are 3 specimens collected by the late
Al Pfiueger on 7 October 1961, 4 miles east of Tavernier (Stevenson
and Baker, Florida Naturalist, 43: 69-70, 1970). Prior to these
records the race was only known as a casual visitor in the Long
Island, New York, area (A.O.U., Check-List of North American
Birds, 5th Edition, 1957). The specimen is number FTU 1941 in the
bird collection at Florida Technological University.

I thank Johnnie Johnson and Bob Barber for giving the specimen
to me, to Bruce Anderson for preparing the study skin, and to John
Weske and George B. Watson of the National Museum for examining
the specimen. — Waiter Kingsley Taylor, Department of Biological
Sciences, Florida Technological University, Orlando, Fla. 32816.

Summer Records of the Marsh Flawk in Florida

On 12 July 1974 we observed a Marsh Hawk (Circus cyaneus] in
Okeechobee County along U.S. 441, 1.6 km north of the junction
with State Route 68 to the east. The bird was flying on a direct
easterly course with steady, fairly rapid wing beats at a height of 90-
120 m. The habitat in the area consisted of extensive open improved
pasture with scattered hammocks and marshes. The bird was in
brown plumage and appeared to be an adult female rather than a
juvenile, although it was not possible to determine its age with
certainty because of the distance (0.4 - 1.6 km) at which it was ob-
served and poor light conditions (overcast, light rain). Peter Cone has
informed us of a sighting of a brown-plumaged Marsh Hawk at Arch-
bold Biological Station, 12 km south of Lake Placid, Highlands
County, on 4 July 1969. He watched the bird at close range as it
flew over railroad tracks bordered by densely vegetated ditches in
an area of scrubby flatwoods.

With the exception of the above records, the extreme dates of
occurrence of Marsh Hawks recorded by one of us (J.N.L.) over a

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 4

Spring 1976

19

nine-year period (1967-1975) in the region of Highlands, Glades,

DeSoto, and Okeechobee counties are 10 September 1968 and
23 April 1975. Marsh Hawks generally do not appear in numbers in
this part of the state until October, and most have departed by the
end of March. They are more abundant in winter in the open im-
proved pasture and prairie regions of the DeSoto, Okeechobee, and
Osceola Plains than on the generally more wooded and drier Lake
Wales Ridge.

Henry M. Stevenson (In Iltt.) has provided us with a probable
record of Marsh Hawks in the north-central Florida Peninsula in July.
On 9 July 1969, just west of Lake Eton in the Ocala National Forest,
Marion County, he saw 2 large hawks flying close together In an
easterly direction at an altitude of 60-90 m. Although the only view
he had was of the ventral aspect and it was thus not possible to deter-
mine whether or not the birds had white rumps, their size, form, and
flight characteristics left little doubt of the identification. The
habitat in the vicinity was predominantly pine forest.

The only previously published record of the Marsh Hawk in Flori-
da in July appears to be the unusual report by Rand (1939) of a pair
of large hawks, said to have been later identified as Marsh Hawks by
Donald J, Nicholson, that visited a bird bath near his house in
Orlando for a week in early July. How the identification was made is
not stated. With the exception of this somewhat questionable case,
previously recorded extreme dates for the species in Florida are 16
June 1971 at Zephyrhills, Hillsborough County (Edscorn 1972) and
8 August 1969 at Mashes Island, Wakulla County (Ogden 1969).
Thirty records of Marsh Hawks in Florida during the months of May,
June, and August are cited In Audubon Field Notes/American Birds
from 1949 through 1974, Florida Naturalist from 1928 through
1973, Howell (1932), and Weston (1965). Of these, 14 are in May,
4 in June, and 12 in August. On the basis of this distribution, it
seems somewhat more likely that Marsh Hawks in Florida in July are
either summer residents or very early fall migrants rather than indi-
viduals that are unusually late in migrating north. Although the only
state breeding records of the Marsh Hawk are from northern Florida
(Howell 1932), the midsummer occurrence of individuals in the ex-
tensive prairie and improved pasture areas in the south-central part
of the state suggests the possibility that the species may eventually
be found nesting in this region.

LITERATURE CITED

Edscorn, J. 1972. Florida’s 1971 Summer Bird Count. Fia. Nat.,

45: 83,99.

20

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 4

Spring 1976

Howell, A. H. 1932. Florida Bird Life. Coward-McCann, Inc., New
York. 579 pp.

Ogden, J. C. 1969. Nesting season: Florida Region. Audubon Field
Notes, 23: 651^655.

Rand, S. 1939. Marsh Hawk uses bird bath near house. Fia. Nat, 12:
4546.

Weston, F.M. 1965. A survey of the birdlife of northwestern
Florida. Bull. Tall Timbers Res. Sta., 5: 1-147.

James N. Layne and John F. Douglass, Arch bo Id Biological Station
of The American Museum of Natural History, Rt 2, Box 180 Lake
Placid, Fia. 33852.

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 4

Spring 1976

21

Beginning with the Fall 1976 issue Florida Field Naturalist, the
editor will be Fred E. Lohrer. All material intended for publication
should be sent to him at the Archbold Biological Station, Rt. 2,
Box 180, Lake Placid, Fla. 33852.

SUGGESTIONS FOR CONTRIBUTORS

The Florida Field Naturalist welcomes articles and short notes con-
taining new information on subjects relevant to the biology of wild species
of birds or other vertebrates in or near Florida. Its emphasis is on papers
dealing with the biology of birds, to which it will give publication priority
over papers on other organisms. All articles, notes, and other materials
should be submitted to the EditoriFred E. Lohrer, Archbold Biological
station, Rt. 2, Box 180, Lake Placid, Fla. 33852.

All manuscripts should be submitted in triplicate. They should be
typewritten, double-spaced, on one side of numbered sheets of standard
(8 1/2 X 11 in.), unruled white paper, with margins of at least one inch
on all sides.

Titles should be short and descriptive, and the body of the article
should state the necessary facts without using unnecessary words. All
references should be cited in the body of the text unless there are more
than three, in which case each complete entry should be listed at the end
under “Literature Cited”, and the citation in the body should then indicate
author and year of publication (e.g., Bond 1961). Whenever there are
more than two authors, list the first followed by “e/ u/.” (e.g. Blair et ai
1968). Whenever pertinent, the particular page or pages should also be
indicated (Bond 1961: 44).

The vernacular (common) names of all species mentioned — plants or
animals — should be capitalized, and the scientific name should be added
in parentheses following the first reference except in the title. The scien-
tific name should be underscored and should follow a widely accepted
authority for the group of animals or plants involved (e.g. A.O.U.
Check-list, 1957, for birds).

Abbreviations should be used sparingly in the body of the text except
in parenthetical material: e.g. “Tallahassee (5 mi. SE).” Digits rather than
words are recommended for all numbers except one ( 1 ) . The metric sys-
tem is preferred for weights and measurements and is acceptable for such
measurements as distances. In writing dates, never use a number to refer
to a month.

Galley proofs will be sent to the (senior) author. The Editor must be
informed well in advance of any change in address or mechanism for
handling proofs; also of necessary changes in the manuscript before proofs
are printed. Changes in proof are expensive, so authors must not expect
to make major changes at this stage unless they are willing to bear the
cost. When proofs reach the author, he should carefully check against the
typescript and promptly return both to the Editor.

Reprints should be ordered through the Florida Audubon Society,
P.O. Drawer 7, Maitland, Fla. 32751, on order forms sent with proof.

FLORIDA AUDUBON SOCIETY
P. 0. DRAWER 7
MAITLAND, FLORIDA 32751

St

o-r-rs

Of

Dc

^asiivT

H

a t

f^ls

^■Ot>oQ

NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION

U. S. POSTAGE
PAID
Orlando, Florida
Permit #224

CONTENTS

WILLOW AND ALDER FLYCATCHER RECORDS AT A

NORTH FLORIDA TV TOWER. Robert L Crawford 7

BLUE GROSBEAK BREEDS IN THE FLORIDA EVER^

GLADES. William G. Genung 5

FIELD NOTES

An Inland Record of Wilson’s Storm-Petrel. Mary S. Gray and

Donald P. Scott 8

A Second Recent Royal Tern Nesting Colony on the Peninsular
Gulf Coast of Florida. D. Bruce Barbour, Stephen A. Nesbitt,
and D, Terry Gilbert 9

Sandhill Crane Data. 10

Prevalence of Bill Abnormalities in Florida Brown Thrashers.

Larry N. Brown 1 1

Observation of a Bald Eagle Capturing a Cattle Egret in Flight.

Charles Knight 14

An Offshore Sighting of Sabine’s Gull. Robert D. Barber and

James B. Johnson 14

Roof Nesting by Black Skimmers. Louise L. Greene and Herbert
W, Kale 11 15

Third Record of the Arctic Loon from Florida. Barbara C. Kittle-
son 1 7

Tufted Titmouse Feeds Young in Fallen External Squirrel Nest.

Ronald L. Mumme and Glen E. Woolfenden 18

Another Cory’s Shearwater Specimen from Florida. Walter

Kingsley Taylor 1 9

Summer Records of the Marsh Hawk in Florida. /jmes M Layne
and John F. Douglass 19

)-C

The Florida Field Naturalist

A Semi-annual Journal of
The Florida Ornithological Society

FALL 1976

V0L4

No. 2

THE FLORIDA FIELD NATURALIST
JOURNAL OF THE FLORIDA ORNITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY

(Founded 1972)

Editor: Fred E. Lohrer, Archbold Biological Station^ Route 2 Box
180, Lake Placid, Fla. 33852.

EDITORIAL STAFF

Karen Cantrell, Managing Editor, Florida Audubon Society, P.O.
Drawer 7, Maitland, Fla. 32751

David W. Johnston, Dept, of Zoology, University of Florida, Gaines-

ville, Fla. 32601

Oscar T. Owre*, Dept, of Biology, University of Miami, Coral Gables,
Fla. 33124

William B. Robertson, Jr.*, Everglades National Park, Homestead,
Fla. 33030

Glen E. Woolfenden, Dept, of Biology, University of South Florida,
Tampa, Fla. 33620
* Directors, 1975-77

OFFICERS (1975-77)

President; Herbert W. Kale II, Ornithological Research Division,
35-lst Court SW, Vero Beach, Fla. 32960
Vice President: Ralph W. Schreiber, Seabird Research Inc., 11008
Teegreen Dr., Tampa, Fla. 33612

Secretary: Mrs. Margaret C. Bowman, Box 783, Wabasso, Fla. 32970

DIRECTORS

C. Wesley Biggs, 6214-44th Ave., Kenneth City, Fla. 33709 (1975-
Frank M. Dunstan, Rt 1 , Box 205-U, Ruskin, Fla. 33570 (1976-1 978)

John B. Edscorn, Route 14, Box 350, Lakeland, Fla. 33801 (1976-

78)

Mrs. Peggy Powell, 2965 Forest Circle, Jacksonville, Fla. 32217 (1976-
78)

Articles and notes submitted for publication, as well as books
and other publications intended for review, should be sent to the
Editor (see inside back cover). Notices of change of address, claims
for undelivered or defective copies of this journal, and requests for
information about advertising, subscriptions, and back numbers
should be sent to the Florida Ornithological Society, P.O. Drawer
7, Maitland, Fla. 32751.

Published semi-annually by the Florida Ornithological Society

Cover Painting of the Everglade Kite (Rostrhamus sociabil/s) special-
ly executed for this journal by Jon Janosik

RACES OF PALM WARBLERS KILLED
AT A FLORIDA TV TOWER

David W. Johnston

It has long been believed that the Western Palm Warbler [Dendroi-
ca palmarum palmarum) far outnumbers the more eastern race, the
Yellow Palm Warbler (D. p. hypochrysea)^ in the southeastern United
States during migration and in winter. In Florida, for example,
Sprunt (1954: 412) noted thdit hypochrysea is “much less numerous
than the Western Palm Warbler {palmarum),'' Similar statements may
be found for Alabama (Imhof 1962), Georgia (Burleigh 1958), and
South Carolina (Sprunt and Chamberlain 1949). The bases for these
statements on relative abundances of the two races stem from col-
lected specimens and field observations especially of spring-plumaged
birds. Collectors, however, have probably been biased toward the yel-
lower hypochrysea. Furthermore field identification of even these
well marked races cannot always be reliable and certain, partly be-
cause intermediates exist.

A less biased “collector,” in my opinion, is the television tower,
which very likely kills birds indiscriminately during nocturnal migra-
tion. One such TV tower, WCTV tower in northern Leon County,
Florida has killed literally thousands of small migrants over the last
20 years. Thanks to the efforts initiated by Herbert L. Stoddard, Sr.
(deceased), his colleagues (chiefly Robert A. Norris) and successors
such as W. Wilson Baker and Robert Crawford, all dead birds under
the tower are picked up at dawn each morning (Stoddard and Norris
1967), and the accumulated birds have been the bases of many pub-
lished works on migration, fat deposition, morphometries, and dis-
tribution. From September 1961 through November 1966, 369
Palm Warblers were killed at the tower, frozen, and recently given to
me for analysis. Because the mass, stored in small plastic bags, had
been partially thawed then refrozen several times, determination of
sex by dissection was impossible and body weights could not be con-
sidered as accurate. So, analysis, as reported here, was limited to
racial identification, age identification (in fall only, based upon skull
ossification), and presence or absence of an obvious chestnut crown.
D. p. hypochrysea is decidedly larger than D. p, palmarum (Ridg-
way 1902), but since the deteriorated condition of the present sam-
ples prevented determination of sex, size alone was not used in sub-
specific identification. Rather, identification was based on the yellow
coloration of the entire underparts oi hypochrysea. Racial identifica-
tion was aided by reference collections of the Florida State Museum

Florida Field Naturalist ~ Vol. 4 No. 2 — Fall1976 —22

and Pierce Brodkorb, to whom acknowledgments are given. Also,
Robert Wallace assisted in important parts of the study.

Table 1 presents the chief results of analysis of these 369 speci-
mens. Of particular importance are the relative numbers of the races:
(1) in fall, 89% were D. p. palmaruiriy 6% intermediate, and 5% hy-
pochrysea; (2) in spring, these percentages were 74, 16, and 10 re-
spectively. These data certainly corroborate the statements of Sprunt
and the others cited above concerning the relative abundance of the
two races especially in Florida. In the fall specimens, skull examina-
tion showed that 60% of the 233 birds were adults. Furthermore,
for all the fall birds including both age groups, 53% had chestnut
crowns. Data in Table 1 show that chestnut vs brown crowns is not
age-related in the fall (earlier reported by Dwight 1900 and Ridgway
1902), although, parenthetically, a relationship with sex cannot be
ruled out because sex of the birds could not be determined. In the
spring, all specimens had chestnut crowns.

Table 1

Numbers

of Races of

Palm Warblers

Killed

at WCTV Tower,

1961-1966

Sept. “

Nov.

Mar . -

Apr .

crown

crown

chestnut

brown

chestnut

brown

adult

69

58

101

0

palmarum

immature

34

46

adult

6

3

21

0

intermediate

immature

4

1

adult

3

0

14

0

hypochrysea

immature

7

2

23 - Florida Field Naturalist - Vol. 4 No. 2 - Fall 1976

One might wonder to what extent these tower-killed birds, espe-
cially those killed in the fall, would be truly indicative of relative
abundances of birds ‘‘on the ground,” as it were. In a study of fat de-
posits involving D. p. pa/marum striking the WCTV tower, I reported
(Johnston 1968: 14) that some of the 34 birds . . undoubtedly
had sufficient fat stores to fly nonstop to Yucatan or Cuba, whereas
others did not; probably the latter birds would have overwintered in
Florida.” And Stevenson (1957) noted that the bulk of migration for
the Palm Warbler in spring is circum-Gulf including Florida. Finally,
it should be recalled that D. p. hypochrysea winters in the Gulf Coast
states, chiefly from Louisiana to central Florida (Griscom and Sprunt
1957; A.O.U. 1957). Thus, I believe that the TV tower samples pre-
sented in Table 1 are reasonably indicative of overwintering Palm
Warblers of both races in Florida.

LITERATURE CITED

American Ornithologists’ Union. 1957. Check-list of North American
birds. Lord Baltimore Press, Inc., Baltimore, Md. 691 pp.

Burleigh, T. D. 1958. Georgia Birds. Univ. Oklahoma Press, Norman,
Okla. 746 pp.

Dwight, J., Jr. 1900. The sequence of plumages and moults of the
passerine birds of New York. Annals N. Y. Acad. 5c/., 13: 73-360.
Griscom, L., and A, Sprunt, Jr. 1957. The Warblers of America.

Devin-Adair Co., New York, N. Y. 356 pp.

Imhof, T. A. 1962. Alabama Birds. Univ. Alabama Press, University,
Ala. 591 pp.

Johnston, D. W. 1968. Body characteristics of Palm Warblers follow-
ing an overwater flight. Auk, 85: 1 3-1 8.

Ridgway, R. 1902. The Birds of North and Middle America. U. S.
Nat. Mus. Bull. 50, Pt. 2: 834 pp.

Sprunt, A., Jr. 1954. Florida Bird Life. Coward-McCann, Inc., New
York, N. Y. 527 pp.

Sprunt, A., Jr., and E. B. Chamberlain. 1949. South Carolina Bird
Life. Univ. South Carolina Press, Columbia, S. C. 585 pp.
Stevenson, FI. M. 1957. The relative magnitude of the trans-Gulf and
circum-Gulf spring migrations. Wilson Bull., 69: 39-77.

Stoddard, FI. L., Sr., and R. A. Norris. 1967. Bird casualties at a
Leon County, Florida TV tower: an eleven-year study. Bull. Tall
Timbers Research Sta., No. 8, 104 pp.

Department of Zoology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida
3261 J.

Florida Field Naturalist - VoL 4 No. 2 - Fall1976 - 24

ROSEATE SPOONBILL NESTING IN TAMPA BAY, FLORIDA

Frank M. Dunstan

The last known nesting of Roseate Spoonbills [Ajaia ajaja) in the
Tampa Bay area was in 1912, when P.J. Pacetti reported 85 nesting
on Indian Key Reservation (Howell 1932). This was the only definite
nesting record for Tampa Bay and marks the northern breeding limit
of the Roseate Spoonbill on the west coast of Florida (Allen 1942).
During the 1900’s Florida breeding was restricted to Florida Bay,
except for a few sporadic nestings on the mainland. Although spoon-
bill breeding was limited, many immature birds traditionally arrived
along the Florida gulf coast in spring and departed the region in fall
(Allen 1942).

In the past 10 years, counts of Roseate Spoonbills at National
Audubon Sanctuaries along the eastern shoreline of Hillsborough Bay
(northeastern portion of Tampa Bay) show that the non-breeding
population fluctuates between a few to 300 birds during spring
through fall (Audubon Warden Reports, unpublished). During 1966-
1 974, first sightings of spoonbills at Bird Island (also known as Alafia
Spoil Banks), a major heronry at the mouth of the Alafia River in
Hillsborough Bay, indicate they normally arrive in the last week of
March. In 1975, spoonbills arrived at the colony during the third
week of February, approximately one month earlier than usual. Only
in 1966 were spoonbills sighted at the island in February.

On 28 February 1975, several of the 12 spoonbills present had
brighter plumage than others in the flock. These brighter birds par-
tially resembled the fourth postnatal plumage described by Allen
(1942) and lacked certain features of the definitive alternate plumage
(Palmer 1962) including the magenta ruby patch of recurved feathers
on the breast, the strong wash of buffy yellow where the bend of
the wing touches the side of the breast and the black on the dorsal
portion of the neck. In previous years the spoonbills roosting at Bird
Island and Green Key, an island located 3 km south of Bird Island,
were in the second or third postnatal plumage (Allen 1942).

On 28 April 1975, Joseph Harris and I found a Roseate Spoonbill
nest in the Bird Island colony. The nest, approximately 3 m above
the ground in a Black Mangrove {Avicennia germinans), contained 3
young about one week old. On the following day, Helen Cruickshank
photographed the nest, young and parents. She counted 6 additional
nests in the vicinity of the first nest. Her photographs confirm that
the nesting spoonbills were not in normal breeding plumage, but
rather the sub-adult plumage described above.

25 — Florida Field Naturalist — Vol. 4 No. 2 ~ Fall 1976

During April and May spoonbills entered the colony at various
locations other than the vicinity of the known nests. Counts of the
spoonbill flock (including immature plumaged birds presumably too
young to be nesting) during this period remained constant at about
40 individuals. Based on these observations, perhaps as many as 15
pairs of Roseate Spoonbills attempted to nest at Bird Island in 1975.
Seven nests were actually observed.

On 8 May, the nest found 28 April held only 2 young. On 26 May
I sighted 3 juvenile spoonbills (white plumage and heads covered
with down) in the mangrove canopy near the previously discovered
nests. Occasionally in June and July I observed young birds with
down on their heads and white body plumage feeding with older
birds on the mudflats surrounding the island; hence I assume that
some of the nesting attempts were successful. I am uncertain of the
number of young that fledged from the colony, since 1 did not dis-
turb the nests to gather those data. On 21 July I counted over 50
spoonbills at Bird Island; however this increase in flock size could
have been due to increases in the non-breeding population which
reaches its peak in summer. At Green Key a non-breeding flock of
spoonbills (fluctuating between 25 to 75 individuals) roosted during
the spring, summer and fall of 1975. The amount of intermingling
between the two groups is unknown, but birds were observed in
flight between the two islands.

Paul et al. (1975) reported that Reddish Egrets [Dichromanassa
rufescens) had returned to Tampa Bay in 1974 as a nesting species.
Reddish Egrets again nested at Bird Island in 1975 and apparently
the nesting population or the nesting success increased over the pre-
vious year. On 23 May 1975, of 13 Reddish Egrets observed at the is-
land, at least 7 were recently fledged birds.

It is interesting to note that the Roseate Spoonbill and Reddish
Egret suffered major population decreases in Florida during the late
1800’s (Bent 1926; Allen 1942). For most of the current century
both of these species have been limited to extreme south Florida
for breeding. It is encouraging that within one year of each other
they both extended their breeding range northward in Florida to
what was perhaps their former limit.

I thank A. J. Meyerriecks, R. W. Schreiber and J. A. Rodgers, Jr.
for their suggestions regarding this manuscript.

LITERATURE CITED

Allen, R.P. 1942. The Roseate Spoonbill. Nat. Aud. Soc., Res. Rep.

No. 2,142 pp.

Florida Field Naturalist — Vol. 4 No. 2 — Fall1976 — 26

Bent, A.C. 1926. Life Histories of North American Marsh Birds. U. S.
Nat. Mus. Bull. 135. 392 pp.

Howell, A.H. 1932. Florida Bird Life. Florida Dept, of Game and
Fresh Water Fish, Tallahassee. 579 pp.

Palmer, R.S, (Ed.). 1962. Handbook of North American Birds, Vol. 1.

Yale University Press, New Haven. 567 pp.

Paul, R.T., A.J. Meyerriecks, and F.M. Dunstan. 1975. Return of
Reddish Egrets as breeding birds in Tampa Bay, Florida. Fla. Field
Nat. 3: 9-10.

National Audubon Society ^ Tampa Bay Sanctuaries, Rt /, Box
205-U, Rusk in, Florida 33570,

REVIEWS

Voices of Neotropical Birds. — John William Hardy. 1975. Privately
published by j. W. and C. 1. Hardy, 1615 N.W. 14th Ave., Gainesville,
Florida 32605. 12-inch 33 RPM phonograph record. $6.00. Voices
of Neotropical Birds is a welcome addition to the slowly increasing
number of published recordings of the songs and other vocalizations
of birds of the American tropics. About fifty species are presented.
The quality of the sound is good over the full range from low to high
frequencies.

Side one, except for the last two or three species, covers birds that
are vocal and noisy but not given to uttering musical or pleasing
sounds. Side two is quite different. The birds here are all species with
highly developed syringeal equipment, and their songs are mostly
melodious, some of them intricate and involved, with notes seeming
to tumble over each other.

1 was pleased to find the commentary not only interesting and in-
formative, but that the volume level is in satisfactory relation to the
bird songs and calls — which is not the case with some bird song
records that are on the market. Dr. Hardy has done a painstaking
and commendable job in the production of this record. Samuel
A. Grimes.

27 — Florida Field Naturalist — Vol. 4 No. 2 — Fall 1976

FOODS OF THE PINE WARBLER
AND BROWN-HEADED NUTHATCH

Stephen A. Nesbitt

and

Willa Mae Hetrick

The pine woodlands of the southeastern United States are changing
rapidly under modern forestry practices and are being developed
rapidly as the human population increases. This is particularly true in
Florida. It is important, therefore, to better understand the ecology
of the indigenous wildlife of the southern pine woodlands.

As knowledge of food items is important in understanding the
ecology of any species, we have studied the diets of two passerines
typical of the southern pine woods. During 1972 and 1973 we col-
lected and analyzed the stomach contents of 21 Pine Warblers {Den-
droica pinus) and 17 Brown-headed Nuthatches {Sitta pusiHa). Speci-
mens were taken seasonally from Long-leaf Pine [Pinus palustris) and
Loblolly Pine [Pinus taeda) communities on the Dee Dot Ranch
south of Jacksonville Beach, Duval County, Florida. The specimens
were collected in connection with a pesticide monitoring program
following the application of Mirex in 1972 for control of Fire Ants
[Solenopsis spp. ). Table 1 presents collection dates and the number
of specimens taken. Identification of stomach contents was made by
the junior author and Dr. L. A. Hetrick.

TABLE 1. Collection dates and number of stomachs examined

Dates

Brown-headed

Nuthatch

Pine Warbler

29, 30 May 1972

3

4

16, 17 Aug. 1972

3

6

9, 10 Oct. 1972

2

3

11, 12 Jan. 1972

3

3

5 April 1973

3

2

11, 12 July 1973

3

3

TOTALS

17

■ 21

Florida Field Naturalist - Vol. 4 No. 2 ~ Fall1976 - 28

The diets of both the Pine Warbler and Brown-headed Nuthatch
are poorly understood. Howell (1932) described the foods of Pine
Warblers, from seven stomachs, as consisting of insects, including
grasshoppers, grouse locust, moths and their larvae, beetles, ants and
other Hymenoptera, bugs, flies and scale insects as well as spiders and
small quantities of vegetable matter. Martin et aL (1951) gave the
same animal foods and lists the fruit of pine [Pinus sp.), dogwood
(Cornus sp.), grape (V/tis sp.), sumac {Rhus sp.) and Panic-Grass
(Panicum sp.) as the principal plant foods. Weston (1957) states that
“the food consists largely of insects and spiders. In winter, the food
includes many vegetable items: Pine seeds, many kinds of wild fruits
and berries and some weed and grass seeds.”

Knowledge of the diet of the Brown-headed Nuthatch is also in-
complete. Bent (1948) described the bird as mainly insectivorous but
also fond of pine seeds. Howell (1932) reporting on 10 stomachs
from Alabama and Florida described the diet as “mainly insects, in-
cluding leaf beetles, wood-boring beetles, click beetles, roaches, bugs,
grasshoppers, moths, ants, wasps, scale insects and caterpillars. Spiders
and psuedo-scorpions and small quantities of pine seeds were also
eaten.” In Louisiana (Oberholser 1938) the diet included moths,
grasshoppers, beetles, ants, caterpillars, and scale insects, plus spiders
and pine seeds. Martin etal. (1951) described the food of the Brown-
headed Nuthatch as ants and other Hymenoptera, moth eggs, cater-
pillars and cocoons, scale insects and pine seeds.

Our analyses (Table 2) showed a high occurrence of arachnids and
Coleoptera, especially Chrysomelidae in the stomachs of both species.
Pine Warblers showed a higher occurrence of Homoptera (57.1 vs.
29.4%) especially Cicadellidae (leafhoppers) (28.3 vs. 5.9%) as well
as Lepidoptera (38.1 vs. 11.8%), Hymenoptera (57.1 vs. 11.8%) and
Diptera (19.0 vs.0%) over Brown-headed Nuthatches. Nuthatches,
however showed a higher occurrence of Orthoptera (76.5 vs. 52.4%)
especially Blattidae eggs (70.6 vs. 38.1%) and Hemiptera (47.1 vs.
28.6%) over Pine Warblers. The Blattidae eggs were principally those
of the Gem Cockroach (Agalopteryx gemma) which are usually
attached to tree trunks. Seeds and other plant materials were found
in six nuthatch stomachs (35.3%); no plant material was found in a
warbler stomach.

From the diet, the Brown-headed Nuthatch would appear to be
primarily a gleaner, doing little or no hawking. The Pine Warbler, on
the other hand apparently feeds to a much greater extent on flying
insects. This is particularly apparent within the order Hymenoptera
of which nuthatches took representatives only of the family Formi-
cidae (ants), whereas warblers took representatives of six additional
families of flying insects.

29 - Florida Field Naturalist - Vol. 4 No. 2 ~ Fall 1976

TABLE 2 Foods of Brown-headed Nuthatch and Pine Warbler

Such differences in diet of the Pine Warbler and the Brown-headed
Nuthatch are surely one factor which permits two principally insec-
tivorous species, closely related in size and habitat preference, to co-
exist as year-round residents in the same areas.

This study was in part a contribution of the Federal Aid to Wild-
life Restoration Program, Florida Pittman-Robertson Project, W-41.

<Tt Cn
Lo m

a 3
4J ^3
0<

LD cn ^

a) 0)
o o
(0

in M

E-i

o

m

m 4-> CP 4J L

rH iH &>!—!•—!

^ 3 W 3 3

+J 't 13

O «< fiC

0)

0) ®
© m ^ tc
fd (d t -H 13

(Ts (Ts
if) IT)

fe I

td fd
M sh
B B

Id 3
4J 13

If

L O
13 tP
O ©

fd 3
-P ft
O |<
B

ffl

fd fd
M 13
© -H
-P O
ft O
O CO
O di

o

n ©
- o

M 4J cn CP 4-> -P

iH rH fti tP H rH

rd 3 H W 3 3

4J ^ t -O

O fa:

^ CO

ra ft
ft 3

c © ^

(d -P
p Id
© +J
+J c
ft ©
■H ft

©

CO o ft
m O 3
fd iH 43

to 1

mm©

Id ro o

"-■ © fd t
rH H ©

OJ ^ w

fd m

t © © -H
•H Id (d 4J
•H 13 13 3
> -H -H ©
3 © ft 'O
13 i-l C -H
0) O -H C
ft O B D

00 in
• • CO

-df CP rsj

n

CP ^ -f

00 H O r-
o

CH LO (d H CD

no o ft

ffl

o

(d

2 B

pH CO LO OT

ft O rH VD

CM rH CM ft

'1 ^ ^ ° °

m 4J +j +j -P 4J +j

rH r— i iH pH rH iH r-l

fd 3 3 3 3 3 3

I S S S ^ S <

p->. M SH p—

m fd m
ft © © IH
3 a ft ©
- 13 ft ft

to o 13 ft

fd to 4-1 Id o -P

O U -P © M 3

M -H -H H ft fd

D; ft pH

X a m ft

(d fd ^ © © —

S'-' fd fd

© 13 13 ©
fd -H -H fd
13 rH 13 13

°H I — I O “H

ft © ■ ■

O 13
o Id
Pi o

©

© fd
fd 13
Id 13 -rH
Pi -H 13
© O -H
4J O 4^
ft O .ft ©
^ U U

g U <

U Pi
rd O
ft CP
P rH

IS

Florida Field Naturalist — VoL 4 No. 2 — Falll 976 — 30

Developmental Volume ml {%) Frequency (%)

on ro

-P p

o c

Eh

• m • CO CO LT) in

o • ro • . • •

CO cn ro ^ q* (Ti in

r'CNr^rHnHrMtM^Z

O Cn • (Ti CTi
r-*cri>-
in (N in m

<yi cri
in m

ro CO + ro lO CO
on' o in CM

O H CO rd rH

^ O CM p o

. . . Eh •

cn

O — dJ
U U
rC CM (d
U <-t U

O

rd CD m
POO
Eh . .

cn-P+J-P+J-P-P-P-P+J

rHiHrHr— Ir— irHrHi— Ir— IH

(Cqqqqqqqqq

-p'p'O'O'tJTO'Ori'C'ri

oc<c<d»5<t:i=c<cc<c

Eh

CO CO

0) CD

u o
rO (d
p p
Eh Eh

td q
■P TS

o <

CD O
-P C

a q
o el^
u

CD

H ^ O

cn
in m

— (D

u

iH CD q in
cn m p o

— ' 0)
CD

CM q
[iH tx^ O P

Cfi +J -P 4-1 +j P

iH iH iH H iH q

q q q q q rH

■p p r! TO TO M

O >< sC < -H

Eh ft

CD

q q

p p
CD -H

-P q

ft -P

o u
t o
-p z
ft
CD

CO ft o
r; p e

P CD
Q -P E

g q p

u o

03 S
■H ft

q q rH

in in

<u (D

q q
ri 03

m i4H
•H 'H
•H DJ +J
C C C
P (D (D

q 03 03

4J -P -P

q c c

CO D D

31

Florida Field Naturalist — VoL 4 No. 2 — Fall 1976

I

Diptera Totals NF .12 (3.4) NF 4 (19.0)

Tabanidae (horse flies) Adult NF .11 (3.1) NF 2 (9.5)

Syrphidae (syrphid flies) Adult NF .01 (0.3) NF 1 (4.8)

Unidentified Adult NF Trace (+) NF 1 (4.8)

TABLE 2 Continued

c

(1) OJ

e m
a, to
0 V
<-i in
Q)

>

O

Q

CO in • m CO CO CO CO

rHCMmrMiHtHiHr— I

cn

lO

00

HO O

OJ H CD

U — O

CO CN to rO
O O !-l O Sh

. . E-t - Eh

O

to in H
s-i o o

CD (U

u o

lO to

>-iljLi Mfcfc&HlLILCi-i

E^2E^gg22ZS

cn-P+J+J-l->4->-P4->-P

r— IrHi — IrHiHrHi — [( — |rH

tooo30od3d

CD o
in in

O' tO

(N (M

• . Eh

to

0 lO
T3 U
<

Cn

O

w

• in CO ID CO

^ . . . .

ID o H H

H CM o r\i

rn CO tn o

-P m

to C

to -P 0)

'O (U ^

cn CD tji u Sh

P CD CD -H to

C CO > iP OQ

to

CO CO

cri to

m in

CD CD

u o
to to

P M
H Eh

cn

3

o

CD

C

to

H TJ
H fi
CD to
U CO
in

Florida Field Naturalist ™ Vol. 4 No. 2 — Fall! 976 — 32

TOTALS 1.32 3.57

LITERATURE CITED

Bent, A.C. 1948. Life Histories of North American Nuthatches,
Wrens, Thrashers and theirallies. U.S. Natl. Mus. Bull. 195. 475 pp.

Howell, A.H. 1932. Florida Bird Life. Coward-McCann, Inc. New
York. 579 pp.

Martin, A.C., H.S. Zimm, and A.L. Nelson. 1951. American Wildlife
and Plants, A guide to Wildlife Food Habits. McGraw-Hill, New
York, (Reprinted Dover Publications, Inc. Ne^w York) 500 pp.

Weston, F.M. 1957. Pine Warbler, in The Warblers of North America,
L. Griscom and A. Sprunt Jr., ed. Devin-Adair, New York. 356 pp.

Oberholser, H.C. 1938. The Bird Life of Louisiana. Louisiana Dept,
of Conservation, Bull. 28. 834 pp.

Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Wildlife Research

Laboratory, 4005 5. Main St, Gainesville, Florida 32601.

33 — Florida Field Naturalist — Vol. 4 No. 2 — Fall 1976

FIELD NOTES

The Pink Pause, A Previously Undescribed Behavior
By Roseate Spoonbills

While watching Roseate Spoonbills [Ajaia ajaja) flying in and out
of a nesting colony located at Tern Key, Florida Bay, Everglades
National Park, I noticed an interesting flight behavior by the “pinks”
that has not been described (Allen 1942, The Roseate Spoonbill, Nat.
Audubon Soc., New York; Palmer 1 962, Handbook of North American
Birds. Vol. 1. Yale U. Press, New Haven). I follow the tradition of
animal behaviorists in having the privilege of naming newly described
behaviors, and call this activity “Pink Pause.”

The Pink Pause occurs as follows. Occasionally when 2 or more
spoonbills were flying together, the birds in unison would interrupt
steady, flapping flight to make a short up-glide, at the top of which
they would arch their backs, with wings stiff and angled down, head
and neck extended, and feet and tail lowered (Figure 1). The birds
would either pause in this position for less than a second without
flapping, and then resume normal flight, or they would maintain a
hover position through a shallow, stiff-winged flapping below the
body for 2 or 3 seconds before resuming regular flight.

Fig. h Roseate Spoonbill in Pink Pause hovering posture.

I observed spoonbill flight patterns at Tern Key on 11 days between
5 November 1975 and 14 January 1976. The number of birds and
time of day for all spoonbill “traffic” in and out of the colony was
recorded, as part of an effort to determine relationships between the
number of birds in flight lines and the number of active nests.

Observations of the Pink Pause were made on 8 of the 1 1 days, on
5, 12 and 26 November; 2, 9 and 23 December; and 2 and 6 January;
but not on 17 December or 8 and 14 January. All birds performing
this behavior were flying outbound from the island. Typically the
outbound flights consisted of either single birds or small groups of

Florida Field Naturalist — Vol. 4 No. 2 — Falll976 — 34

pinks that had risen from different parts of the island and came to-
gether as they headed out over water towards feeding ground about
16 to 24 km away.

All observations of the Pink Pause involved two or more birds
flying close together (often 3 or 4, once as many as 15), mostly over
water 30 to 200 m from the colony. -With 2 exceptions, all ol^serva-
tions involved single performances of this behavior during straight-
line flights away from the colony. Once 3 birds circled over the water
before doing the Pink Pause, and once 6 birds repeated the Pink
Pause 3 times at 30 to 125 m intervals.

Few birds performed the Pink Pause, as is illustrated in the follow-
ing examples. On 9 December, during 5 hours 30 minutes of obser-
vation, only 11 birds in 4 groups out of a total 493 outgoing birds
did the Pink Pause; on 23 December, during 5 hours 15 minutes, 6
birds of 676 outgoing birds did the Pink Pause; and on 2 January,
during 4 hours 5 minutes, 21 birds of 380 did the Pink Pause. This
behavior was performed at different times of day, from shortly after
sunrise (0715) to early afternoon (1300; spoonbill flight activity
is much reduced in afternoons). Adults primarily did the Pink Pause,
but at least once a group of 3 included one paler subadult.

The function of the Pink Pause remains unknown. As the frequency
of the Pink Pause seemed rather constant between early November
and early January (with many nests containing small young by mid-
December) rather than occurring more frequently earlier in the ob-
servation period, it seems unlikely that this behavior is related to
pair-formation or colony formation. However, I had no way of
knowing the stages of nesting of the birds that actually performed
the Pink Pause. Although the birds that did the Pink Pause were
usually flying within a few feet of each other, this mid-air pause
appeared to bring them more closely into a tight, flying group prior
to the long over-water flight. Conceivably the Pink Pause is a behavior
that results in tight flocking and thus more efficient flying over long
distances. Various types of formation flying apparently are aerody-
namically advantageous (Lissman and Shollenberger 1970, Science
168: 1003-1005; Gould and Heppner 1974, 91: 494-506), and

spoonbills do routinely fly in echelon formations. It did not appear
from my observations at Tern Key, however, that the Pink Pause was
quickly followed by a formation alignment. Outgoing pinks often did
work into a formation (usually further out from the colony than
where the Pink Pause was performed) whether they did the Pink
Pause or not. — John C. Ogden, National Audubon Society, Research
Department, 115 Indian Mound Trail, Tavernier, Florida 33070.

35 “ Florida Field Naturalist — Vol. 4 No. 2 — Fall 1976

Autumnal Breeding of Boat-tailed Crackles at Gainesville, Florida

The Boat-tailed Crackle [Cassidix major) is an abundant resident
in and around Gainesville, Alachua County, where they are often
seen feeding in small groups on the University of Florida campus. Al-
though several local ornithologists suspected autumnal breeding here,
such activity until now was unknown.

On 30 November 1975 at about 0930 I was observing a feeding
group in a street at the edge of a freshwater marsh west of Shand’s
Teaching Hospital when my attention was drawn to a female Boat-
tailed Crackle feeding a bob-tailed fledgling. I then noted another fe-
male with two other fledglings at the edge of the marsh that con-
tained Cattails [Typha sp.), Sweet Gum [Liquidambar styraciflua),
Red Maple (Acer rubrum), and willows (Salix sp.). These young had
markings similar to the females, but the hues were not as intense.
They could fly only short distances and could not hold their balance
when they tried to perch in swaying vegetation. The females left
their young on the ground under cover, foraged with other adult
grackles, and returned with food. The young were fed approximately
five times per hour.

On 1 December between 0800 and 0900 I observed a female with
one young about 200 yards north of the marsh. This fledgling was
fed once on the ground. It later flew to a branch of a nearby tree,
was fed again, and then flew to another tree top where it waited for
the female to return.

On 2 December at about 1330 I searched the area with David
Johnston, but we did not see any young. No nests were located, but
we suspected the young were hatched in the marsh as they were all
found nearby and the vegetation afforded excellent cover.

Assuming total incubation time and nest-life to be approximately
25-28 days, the eggs were probably laid in the first week of November,
a date comparable to that reported by Kale (1975, F/a. Field Nat. y
3: 5-8) for localities in south Florida. The present observations ex-
tend the known autumnal breeding sites of this species northward by
some 100 miles. — Kim Riddell y Department of Zoology y University
of Florida y Gainesvilley Florida 3261 h

Florida Field Naturalist — Vol. 4 No. 2 — Fall1976 — 36

Cattle Egrets Feeding at a Carcass

Although Cattle Egrets [Bubukus ibis) have been recorded picking
flies off live (Vincent 1947, Dawn 1959) and dead (Fogarty and
Hetrick 1973) cattle and rotting fish (Reynolds 1965), no one has
adequately described the feeding methods used. This note describes
how Cattle Egrets feed on flies attracted to a dead cow.

On 13 February 1976, for approximately 15 minutes, I observed
2 Cattle Egrets feeding on the flies attracted to a recently killed cow
In southern Pasco County, Florida. Three basic foraging techniques
were noted. The actual time each was used was not determined, but
it was apparent which method was used most often and which the
least.

The most frequent foraging technique employed was the walk
slowly (Meyerriecks 1960) behavior. An egret using this method
crouched with the head and neck partially extended and slowly
stalked around the carcass. When a fly was spotted, a quick strike
was made. The strikes were almost invariably preceded by neck sway-
ing (Blaker 1969, Siegfried 1971, Dinsmore 1973). The flies appeared
to be picked directly off the carcass although some may have been
captured just as they flew,

A less frequent method was the standing flycatching (Kushlan
1976) behavior. An egret using this technique stood in a crouched
position with the length of its body parallel to and approximately
0.3 m from the carcass. With neck extended away from the dead
cow, the bird waited until a fly was close at which time it began neck
swaying. Without moving its body and while swaying the neck and
head from side to side the bird followed the fly towards the cow and
captured it with a quick strike. The capture usually occurred between
5 and 10 cm from the carcass though sometimes the fly landed
before it was seized.

The least utilized method was a variation of the stand and wait
(Meyerriecks 1960) behavior. Twice, the same egret jumped onto
the carcass, paused a few seconds to allow the startled flies to alight,
made 3 or 4 quick strikes in succession, and jumped down.

Blacker (1969) and Siegfried (1971) suggested Cattle Egrets may
recognize fast prey and use the neck swaying behavior more often
with these prey items that are likely to escape, implying that neck
swaying increases foraging efficiency. Both Blacker (1969) and Dins-
more (1973) found Cattle Egrets were less successful in strikes pre-
ceded by neck swaying, though they did not differentiate between
prey types. Siegfried (1971) reported a statistically significant dif-
ference in success rates between birds using neck swaying and

37 — Florida Field Naturalist — Vol. 4 No. 2 — Fall 1976

those not using it when feeding on flies, but failed to say which
method was most efficient. Thus, it is not clear if there is an increase
in efficiency with the utilization of neck swaying when foraging on
fast prey. The inclusion of this behavior with almost every strike
during this observation however, tends to support the idea that egrets
use it most often on fast prey.

During a 2 minute timing one egret made 14 captures in 15 at-
tempts while using the walk slowly and standing flycatching be-
haviors. Although a short time period, it indicates why egrets were

feeding at the carcass. When feeding on prey larger than flies, a bird
expends relatively the same amount of energy per strike while taking
in more energy per capture. Therefore, a bird feeding on small prey
(i.e. Diptera), in order to be as energetically efficient as an individual
feeding on large prey (i.e. Odonata), would have to be more efficient
in capturing prey. The carcass apparently increased the birds’ forag-
ing efficiency either by the massive congregation of flies itself, or
because of the flies’ involvement with egg laying.

Although this is a short note, I found it difficult to briefly and
clearly relate the observation. I appreciate the reviews of William D.
Courser, James j. Dinsmore, and Fred E. Lohrer whose suggestions
made this worth printing.

Literature Cited

Blacker, D. 1969. Behaviour of the Cattle Ardeola ibis. Ostrich ^
40: 75-129.

Dawn, W. 1959. Cattle Egrets provoke cattle to move and pick flies
off bulls. ^^^,76: 97-98.

Dinsmore, j.j. 1973. Foraging success of Cattle Egrets, Bubuicus ibis.
Amer. Mid. Nat., 89: 242-246.

Fogarty, M.j., and W.M. Hetrick. 1973. Summer foods of Cattle
Egrets in north central Florida. Auk, 90: 268-280.

Kushlan, j.A. Feeding behavior of North American herons. Auk, 93:
86-94.

Meyerriecks, A.j. 1960. Comparative breeding behavior of four spe-
cies of North American herons. Publ. Nuttal Ornithol. Club 2.
Reynolds, j. 1965. Feeding habits of Cattle Egrets. Brit. Birds, 58:
509.

Siegfried, W.R. 1971. Feeding activity of the Cattle EgXQl. A rdea, 59:
38-46.

Vincent, j. 1947. Habits of Bubuicus ibis, the Cattle Egret, in Natal.
Ibis, 89: 489-491. —Euguene W. Schupp, 11707-A N. 51st.

St, Tampa, Florida 33617.

Florida Field Naturalist — Vol. 4 No. 2 — Fall1976 — 38

Black Phoebe Sighted at Dry Tortugas

On 13 April 1976 on Loggerhead Key, Dry Tortugas, I saw a
phoebe, about 15 m away, on the bare branch of an old Casuarina
tree. The phoebe moved through the branches and settled, facing me,
about 5 m above the cactus vegetation growing under the tree. The
black head, flanks, and back, and the sharp contrast of the broad
black breast with the immaculate white belly were the unmistakable
characteristics of a Black Phoebe (Sayornis nigricans). The bill and
eyes were dark. I did not observe (nor look for) the white outer
edging of the rectrices. After long minutes it changed position,
moved to another branch, and then flew off. A hard wind, blowing
for the next 5 days, kept Dr. William B. Robertson, Jr. and other
members of our Sooty Tern banding expedition from reaching Log-
gerhead Key to observe the phoebe, but when we finally returned we
could not find it.

Sprunt placed the species on the Hypothetical List for Florida
from the report of one “observed on Key Largo, Monroe County,
Dec. 28-29, 1952, by Richard C. Rosche . . . the first reported from
the state” (1954. Florida Bird Life, Coward-McCann, New York,
p. 500). Helen Cruickshank (pers. comm.) saw one 26 October 1958
“on a wire at the end of route 520, Cocoa Beach, Brevard County.”
Sidney Harrison reported one at Kissimmee, Osceola County, in
1973. “Unmistakably described was a Black Phoebe, a great rarity,
seen near Kissimmee November 4 by one well acquainted with the
bird” (Edscorn, \91A,Amer. Birds, 28: 43).

This fourth sighting and only spring record for Florida was viewed
through a 9-povv'er Zeiss binocular in good light. The species is well
known to me from observations in California and Arizona. — Erma J.
Fisk, 17101 S. W. 284th Street, Homestead, Florida 33030.

News and Notes

Nominating Committee — Chairman Steve Nesbitt, 4005 South
Main St., Gainesville, Florida 32602, would be pleased to receive
your suggestions for candidates for the new slate of officers to be
presented at the spring 1977 meeting in Lake Placid.

Spring 1977 Meeting — At the Lake Placid Holiday Inn on 22-24
April 1974. For information write Fred Lohrer, Archbold Biological
Station, Rt 2, Box 180, Lake Placid, Florida 33852.

39 — Florida Field Naturalist — Vol. 4 No. 2 — Fall 1976

A Tropical Kingbird Sighting from the Florida Panhandle

Late in the afternoon of 7 Sept. 1975, near Gulf Breeze, Santa
Rosa County, Florida, Barbara Johnson and Stedman watched a
Tropica! Kingbird [Tyrannus melancholicus) foraging from utility
wires with about 10 Eastern Kingbirds (F. tyrannus). The observers
carefully noted the deeply notched tail and absence of white on the
outer tail feathers, features that help separate the Tropical Kingbird
from the other yellow-bellied kingbirds; the Western Kingbird (F.
verticalis), a regular fall migrant, and Cassin's Kingbird (F. vociferam).

The Tropical Kingbird occurs from central Argentina north
through Central America to southeast Arizona and extreme southern
Texas (Oberholser 1974). Occasionally it wanders north and east
along the Texas Gulf coast as far as the Bolivar Peninsula, Galveston
Bay, in spring and summer (Oberholser 1974), but, until recently,
has not been recorded farther east along the Gulf coast. In Louisiana,
an adult male Tropical Kingbird was collected on 9 October 1965 in
Cameron Parish (Lowery 1974), and in Alabama, one was well
studied on 20 October 1969 at Magnolia Springs, Baldwin County
(Purrington 1970). Thus, our September record is the first from the
panhandle of Florida and is the easternmost record along the northern
Gulf of Mexico coast. These three records suggest a pattern of fall
dispersal north and east along the Gulf from the breeding range in
south Texas.

Three of the four previous Florida records of Tropical Kingbird
are from the extreme southern tip of the state; Key West, winter of
1956-1957 (Stevenson 1957, Robertson and Stevenson 1957) and 8
Sept. 1974 (Edscorn 1975), and Dry Tortugas, 9 May 1966 (Cunning-
ham 1966). The first Florida record is from the Everglades 30 miles
west of Miami along the Tamiami Trail on 14 March 1942 (Sprunt
1954). As the Tropical Kingbird is rare in the West Indies, breeding
only in the southern end of the Lesser Antilles on Grenada and on
Trinidad and Tobago (Bond 1971), these south Florida records may
be of birds that migrated east around the Gulf of Mexico in the fall,
much like the Scissor-tailed Flycatchers {Muscivora forficata) and
Western Kingbirds which winter regularly in south Florida (Robertson
and Kushlan 1975). As our first reaction was to pass this bird by as a
Western Kingbird, just as observers in Key West did during part of
the winter of 1956-1957 (Hundley and Hames 1961), it is appropri-
ate to caution all observers against cursory identification of yellow-
bellied kingbirds.

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 4 No. 2 Falll976 — 40

Literature Cited

Bond, J. 1971. Birds of the West Indies. Houghton-Mifflin Co., Bos-
ton. 256 pp.

Cunningham, R. 1966. Florida Keg\on.Aud, Field Notes ^ 20: 496-501.
Edscorn, J.B. 1975. Florida Region. A men Birds, 29: 44-48.

Flundley, M.H., and F. Names. 1961. Birdlife of the Lower Florida
Keys. Fia. Nat.,3A: 129-135, 164.

Lowery, G.H., Jr. 1974. Louisiana Birds. Louisiana State Univ. Press,
Baton Rouge, La. 651 pp.

Oberholser, H.C. 1974. The Birdlife of Texas. Univ. of Texas Press,
Austin, Texas. 1069 pp.

Purrington, R.D. 1970. Central Southern Region. Aud. Field Notes,
24: 55-61.

Robertson, W.B., jr., and j.A. Kushlan. 1975. South Florida Avi-
fauna. IN Memoir No. 2, Miami Geological Society. 452 pp.
Robertson, W.B., jr., and H.M. Stevenson. 1957. Florida Region.

Aud. Field Notes, 1 1 : 337-342.

Sprunt, A., jr. 1954. Florida Bird Life. Coward-McCann, New York.
527 pp.

Stevenson, H.M. 1957. Florida Region. Aud. Field Notes, 1 1 : 257-263.

Stephen j. Stedman, P. O. Box 195, Gulf Breeze, Florida 32561 , and
Fred E. Lohrer, Archbold Biological Station of The American Museum
of Natural History, Rt 2, Box 180, Lake Placid, Florida 33852.

Request For Information

Baynard Egg Collection — Through the generosity of the St. Peters-
burg Historical Society the University of South Florida received
about 370 sets of eggs, mostly from Florida, and apparently all from
the collection of the late Oscar E. Baynard, Most sets have dates and
catalog numbers, but no locality information. The research value of
these specimens would be much greater if full collecting data were
available. Therefore it would be appreciated greatly if anyone know-
ing the whereabouts of Mr. Baynard’s catalogues would contact me —
Glen W. Woolfenden, Department of Biology, University of South
Florida, Tampa, Florida 33620.

41 — Florida Field Naturalist — Vol. 4 No. 2 — Fall 1976

Minutes of the 1976 Spring Meeting

The 1976 spring meeting of the Florida Ornithological Society was
hosted by the University of Miami and the Tropical Audubon Society
in Coral Gables on 7-9 May 1976. Dr. Oscar T. Owre, Chairman, Local
Committee, was ably assisted by his current and former students, and
by the Tropical Audubon Society under the leadership of President
Peter Quincy. Flighlighting the convention were numerous field trips,
visits to the outstanding Bird Range of the University, and the banquet
at the campus Rathskeller.

Friday evening’s symposium on Least Terns was organized by Dr.
herbert W. Kale, II, and Erma J. Fisk who gave an introduction and
summary of Atlantic Coast colonies. Additional speakers were: Louise
L. Green, ‘‘Port Everglades Roof Colony” and Mark Trafton, Jr.,
“Miami Area Colonies.” Later the Board of Directors met and voted
to increase their number to eleven by adding two directors, making a
total of six directors, four officers, and the editor of the FFN. The
board voted to stagger terms of the six directors, three being elected
annually to serve two-year terms. Directors elected at the annual meet-
ing on Saturday were C. Wesley Biggs, St. Petersburgh, to fill an unex-
pired term ending in spring 1977; and for terms expiring in spring
1978, John B. Edscorn, Lakeland, Peggy Powell, Jacksonville, and
Frank M. Dunstan, Ruskin. The board appointed Fred E. Lohrer,
Archbold Biological Station, Lake Placid, to the editorship of the FFN,
to succeed Henry M. Stevenson.

Dr. James A. Kushlan, Everglades National Park, was Chairman of
the Saturday afternoon technical paper session, and introduced the
following speakers: Randall Breitwisch, U. of Miami, “Red-bellied
Woodpeckers in south Florida; Paige Patty, U. of Miami, “Land
birds of Isla de la Plata”; Joan Browder, U. of Florida, “Cattle Egret
ecology in South Florida and Africa”; Sue Hilsenbeck, U. of Miami,
“Competition in Gray and Eastern Kingbirds in south Florida”; Oscar
T. Owre, U. of Miami, “Exotic birds in south Florida”; Ira Joel
Abramson, Bird Bonanzas, Inc., “The Black Hawk in south Florida.”

The banquet speaker. Dr. Cesare Emiliani, Professor of Geology and
Marine Geology and Geophysics, U. of Miami, discussed recent research
on the frequency of Pleistocene glaciation and its effects on sea level
changes.

The next meeting will be held at Jacksonville Beach on 7-9 October
1976. The spring meeting will be at the Lake Placid Holiday Inn on
22-24 April, 1977. — Margaret C. Bowman, Secretary.

Florida Field Naturalist — Vol. 4 No. 2 — Fall1976 — 42

A Note of Thanks

After successfully guiding our fledgling journal through its most
difficult times, the early volumes, Dr. Henry M. Stevenson has turned
over the reins of editorship in order to devote his energies full time to
the updating of the Florida state bird book. We can all thank Dr.
Stevenson for his service to the Florida Ornithological Society by
going through our field notes, banding records and photography files
for any important information on Florida birds, and making it avail-
able by publication in the Florida Field Naturalist. ~ The Editor.

Acknowledgement — Editors of Natural History journals depend on
the help and advice of many people. It is a pleasure to acknowledge
the assistance of the following persons in the completion of this issue:
K. H. Cantrell, J. J. Dinsmore, D. W. Johnston, H. W. Kale, II, j. A.
Kushlan, J. N. Layne, C. E. Lohrer, O. T. Owre, W. B. Robertson,
R. W. Schreiber, H. M. Stevenson, W. K. Taylor, j. Thomason,
G. E. Woolfenden. - F.E.L.

43 — Florida Field Naturalist — VoL 4 No. 2

Fall 1976

-■r-'r: :( I ■
ijt"? i4''.'i-' v'

'\ •'

» ^'5-'

;n

'''1u iViil,

[4*

^v■'f '' V^r-,, -

ix \ -

W

' -U:. '

V',.

f. , f

. ^ ■ f

.A

' Vl - • >

: V' .

.»:?

tA-.

”4

■h

SUGGESTIONS FOR CONTRIBUTORS

The FLORIDA FIELD NATURALIST welcomes manuscripts contain-
ing new information on the biology of vertebrates in or near Florida,
with an emphasis on birds.

Submit all manuscripts for publication in triplicate to the Editor:
Fred E. Lohrer, Archbold Biological Station, Rt 2, Box 180, Lake
Placid, Florida 33852. They should be typewritten, double spaced, on
one side of numbered sheets on standard (81/2x11 in.) bond paper,
with at least one inch margins all around.

Titles should be short and descriptive, and the body of the article
should state the necessary facts without using unnecessary words. In
matters of form and style consult a recent issue of THE AUK or the
COUNCIL OF BIOLOGY EDITORS STYLE MANUAL, Third Edition
(AIBS 1972). All references should be cited in the body of the text
e.g. (Sprunt 1954, Florida bird life. New York, Coward-McCann) or
(Cruickshank 1974, Fla. Field Nat. 2: 1-3) ii/7/ess there are more than
5, in which case each complete entry should be listed at the end under
“Literature Cited.” Citations in the body of the text should then indi-
cate author and year of publication e.g. (Bond 1961), and whenever
there are more than two authors, list the first followed by “ef c?/.”
(e.g. Blair et ai. 1968). Whenever pertinent, the particular page or
pages should also be indicated (Bond 1961: 44).

The English names of all bird species mentioned should be capital-
ized, and the scientific name, underscored, should be added in paren-
thesis following the first reference except in the title. The scientific
name should follow a widely accepted authority for the group of ani-
mals or plants involved. For North American birds use the A.O.U.
Check-list, fifth ed. (1957), including the 32nd Supplement (1973,
Auk 90: 411-419).

Abbreviations should be used sparingly in the body of the text ex-
cept in parenthetical materials: e.g. “Lake Placid (8 mi. S).” Use digits
rather than words for all numbers except one (1). The metric system
is preferred for all measurements. Designate clock time in the 24-hour
system (07:00 or 16:45) and use the military system for dates (4 July
1976).

Galley proofs will be sent to the first author. The Editor must be
informed well in advance of any change of address or mechanism for
handling proofs; also of necessary changes in the manuscript before
proofs are printed. Changes in proofs which are expensive, will be
billed to the first author. When proofs reach the author, he should
carefully check against typescript and promptly return both to the
Editor.

Reprints should be ordered through the Treasurer, Florida Ornitho-
logical Society, P.O. Drawer 7, Maitland, Florida 32751, on order
forms sent with proof.

FLORIDA AUDUBON SOCIETY
P. 0. DRAWER 7
MAITLAND, FLORIDA 32751

NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION

U. S. POSTAGE
PAID
Orlando, Florida
Permit #224

“"'IthsSu?®' Nat His

CONTENTS

4? / ^

RACES OF PALM WARBLERS KILLED AT A FLORIDA TV

TOWER. David W. Johnston . .22

ROSEATE SPOONBILL NESTING IN TAMPA BAY, FLORIDA.

Frank M. Dunstan 25

FOODS OF THE PINE WARBLER AND BROWN-HEADED

NUTHATCH.. Stephen A. Nesbitt and Willa Mae Hetrick 28

FIELD NOTES

The Pink Pause, A Previously Undescribed Behavior By

Roseate Spoonbills, yo/?/? C Ogden. 34

Autumnal Breeding of Boat-tailed Crackles at Gainesville,

Florida. Kim Riddeil 36

Cattle Egrets Feeding at a Carcass. Euguene W. Schupp . 37

Black Phoebe Sighted at Dry Tortugas. Erma J. Fisk 39

A Tropical Kingbird Sighting from the Florida Panhandle.

Stephen j. Stedman and Fred E. Lohrer 40

Reviews 27

News and Notes 39

Request for Information . 41

Minutes of the 1976 Spring Meeting 42

The Florida Field Naturalist

A Semi-annual Journal of
The Florida Ornithological Society

Vol.5

SPRING 1977

No. I

FLORIDA ORNITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY
Officers for 1977-1979

President, David W. Johnston, Department of Zoology, University of
Florida, Gainesville, Florida 3261 1 .

Vice-President, John C. Ogden, National Audubon Society, Research

Department, 115 Indian Mound Trail, Tavernier, Florida 33070.

Secretary, Barbara Kittleson, 5334 Woodhaven Drive, Lakeland,
Florida 33803.

Treasurer, Caroline Coleman, 1701 NW 24th Street, Gainesville,
Florida 32601.

Directors

1976- 1978

Frank M. Dunstan, Rt. 1, Box 205-U, Ruskin, Florida 33570.

John B. Edscorn, Rt. 14, Box 350, Lakeland, Florida 33801.

Peggy Powell, 2965 Forest Circle, Jacksonville, Florida 32217.

1977- 1979

W. Wilson Baker, Tall Timbers Research Station, Rt. 1, Box 160,
Tallahassee, Florida 32303.

John H. Hintermister, Rt. 3, Box 384, Gainesville, Florida 32601.

Herbert W. Kale, II, Ornithological Research Division, 35-1 st Court
SW, Vero Beach, Florida 32960.

All persons interested in Florida natural history, particularly its

abundant bird life, are invited to join the Florida Ornithological
Society by writing the Treasurer. Membership dues are $5.00 per
year for regular members (those who are members of the Florida Au-
dubon Society) and $6.00 per year for associate members. All mem.-
bers receive The Florida Field Naturalist. Subscription price for insti-
tutions and non-members is $6.00 per year. Single issues are $2.50 per
copy for regular members, $3.00 per copy for associate members and
subscribers.

Manuscripts submitted for publication and books intended for re-
view should be sent to the Editor (see inside back cover). Notice of
change of address, claims for undelivered or defective copies of this
journal, and requests for information about advertising, subscrip-
tions, and back numbers should be sent to the Assistant Treasurer,
Mrs. Betty Valkenburg, Florida Ornithological Society, P.O. Drawer
7, Maitland, Florida 32751.

Published semi-annually by the Florida Ornithological Society,
Maitland, Florida 32751. Printed by Sharp Offset Printing Inc.,
Rutland, Vermont 05701.

BIRD AND MAMMAL PREDATORS ON THE
CATTLE EGRET IN FLORIDA

James N. Layne^ Fred E. Lohrer, and Chester E. Winegarner

Despite the fact that the Cattle Egret (Bubulcus Ibis) has been
established in North America for over 20 years and is now abundant
in many regions, there are surprisingly few records of its being preyed
upon by native predators. Courser and Dinsmore (1971, Auk 88: 669)
observed an adult Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) capture an
adult egret in northern Florida (Gilchrist Co.), and Knight (1976, Fla.
Field Nat. 4: 14) saw an adult Bald Eagle [Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
take one in the air near Lake Wales in central Florida (Polk Co.).
Sargeant (1975, Fla. Sportsman 6(6): 18-20) witnessed the capture
of an egret by a bobcat (Lynx rufus) in the vicinity of the Chassaho-
witzka National Wildlife Refuge along the Florida Gulf Coast (Citrus
Co.). We have obtained additional records of bird and mammal preda-
tion on Cattle Egrets in southern Florida. In the case of the avian
predators, the evidence suggests that they may be a significant source
of mortality in egret populations of the region.

On 13 December 1973, 14.5 km southeast of Palmdale, Glades
County, we watched an adult Bald Eagle capture a lone Cattle Egret
after a persistent aerial chase. When first seen, the eagle was flying at
an altitude of 70-80 m on a direct course over a broad expanse of
improved pasture with scattered cabbage palms (Saba! palmetto) and
small marshes. Shortly after, we noted the Cattle Egret approaching
at right angles to the eagle’s course and at the same altitude. When
the birds were about 30 m apart, the eagle swerved sharply toward
the egret and began to chase it. The eagle usually made shallow stoops
at the egret, but several times attacked from the same level or from
slightly below. Sometimes It slowed abruptly just before it came with-
in striking distance, but at other times it tried to seize the egret with-
out braking. The egret evaded the eagle by turning sharply at the last
moment. The egret’s flight path was erratic, but it remained at the
same altitude. After an unsuccessful pass, the eagle would swing in a
wide circle and come in for another attack. We have timed Cattle
Egrets in normal flight at 48 km/h and maximum speed is probably
greater, yet the eagle had no difficulty in catching up with the egret
after an unsuccessful stoop. Toward the end of the chase it speeded
up the tempo of its attacks. After about 10 passes, the eagle caught
the egret, appearing to seize it from below. The eagle then went into
a steep glide, leveled off just above the ground, and flew to a fence
post where it proceeded to pluck its prey. The chase lasted about 7

Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977 / 1

min and covered about 0.5 km.

On 18 December 1974 near Lake Okeechobee, Glades County,
we saw an adult eagle on the ground in a pasture feeding on a bird
that appeared to be a Cattle Egret. Cattle Egrets were abundant in
the vicinity at the time.

Two other observers have informed us of seeing eagles capturing
Cattle Egrets. On 18 September 1974 along State Route 60 approx-
imately 10 km westof Yeehaw Junction, Osceola County, in a stretch
of open prairie and improved pasture with scattered hammocks,
Woodward W. Miley M saw an egret flying erratically about 15 m
above the ground with an eagle in hot pursuit. The eagle climbed to
about 10 m above the egret, which then began to fly straighter and
faster. The eagle dove, caught the egret, hovered a moment, then
dropped to within 2 m of the ground and flew off with the bird in its
talons. The portion of the chase observed by Miley lasted about 2
min. jerry Peoples, while an employee of the Florida Game and Fresh
Water Fish Commission some years ago, saw eagles taking Cattle
Egrets on the wing on four or five separate occasions In Glades County.
He noted that when an eagle was attacking egrets in a flock, it would
concentrate on a single individual.

In the course of a study by one of us (Layne) of Audubon’s Cara-
cara (Caracara cheriway audubonii) in Florida, Cattle Egret remains
have been found in the vicinity of 7 of 12 active caracara nests in
Glades and Highlands counties examined during the period Novem-
ber - May. At one nest, a minimum number of 5 egrets had been fed
upon during a two-week period in late April - early May. Although
caracaras commonly feed on road-killed animals, we believe that egret
remains around nests represent actual captures rather than carrion, as
dead Cattle Egrets are rarely seen on roads in the areas of southcen-
tral Florida where caracaras are most abundant.

We have also obtained eyewitness reports of caracaras killing
Cattle Egrets. On two occasions Victor Landers watched a caracara
capture an egret on the wing in Highlands County. Both times the
birds “were flying along near each other when the caracara suddenly
seized the egret.” In March 1961, near Lakeport, Glades County, L.T.
Stem and Dr. Leslie Severinghaus encountered a pair of adult cara-
caras attacking an egret on the ground in an open pasture. The cara-
caras circled the egret and struck at it with their claws and beaks,
finally killing it. Mr. Stem allowed us to examine photographs taken
by Dr. Severinghaus which show the egret closely flanked by the two
caracaras.

Courser and DInsmore (1971) concluded that avian predation on
Cattle Egrets in northern Florida was rare because the buteos com-

2 / Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977

monly found in the open areas where egrets forage do not usually
take large birds and the accipiters and falcons that could potentially
take egrets were scarce in such habitats. In contrast, our data suggest
that the Cattle Egret may constitute a significant prey item of eagles
and caracaras in southcentral Florida. Several factors probably ac-
count for this difference, including the presence and relative abun-
dance of large raptors of open country habitat and versatile food
habits, high population levels of Cattle Egrets, and man-induced hab-
itat changes. Bald Eagles are Infrequent in the part of northern Flori-
da referred to by Courser and Dinsmore and caracaras occur there
only as rare stragglers. In contrast, eagles are relatively common In
the open grassland habitats of the Osceola, Okeechobee, and DeSoto
Plains in the southern part of the state and this region is also the cen-
ter of the Florida caracara population. Cattle Egrets are also abun-
dant in this part of the state because of favorable conditions pro-
vided by large cattle ranches. In midsummer and midwinter roadside
wading bird and raptor censuses conducted in this region in 1974,
1975, and 1976, we have recorded an over-all average of 2.1 Cattle
Egrets/km and counts as high as 17.4/km In prairie-improved
pasture habitats. Of those ardeids of roughly comparable size (Snowy
Egret, Louisiana Heron, Little Blue Heron, Cattle Egret, Green Heron),
Cattle Egrets comprised 87 percent of the total number of individuals
counted during the three-year period.

An additional factor contributing to eagle and caracara predation
on Cattle Egrets in south Florida may be the extensive drainage that
has occurred in the region during the past 20 years or so. The result-
ing reduction of aquatic and wetland prey species may have forced
eagles and, perhaps to a lesser degree, caracaras to shift to alternative
food sources. Available data suggest that both species prey most
heavily on Cattle Egrets during the winter and early spring months
when conditions are driest. As this is also the peak of nesting of eagles
and caracaras in the region, the high energy demands of feeding young
may generate further pressure for these raptors to prey on Cattle
Egrets during this period of the year.

In addition to caracaras and eagles, the red fox {Vulpes vulpes)
can also be listed as a predator on the Cattle Egret in southcentral
Florida. Emory Jones told us that while disking citrus groves in High-
lands County about 1 8 km south of Lake Placid he has seen red foxes
come into the grove to hunt egrets following the tractor. The typical
hunting strategy of the foxes is to lie in wait behind a tree until an
egret comes within range. Jones actually saw foxes capture 5 egrets
in one day, and the next day observed a fox catch 1 and possibly 2
birds In the same grove. The Lake Wales Ridge section in which these

Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977 / 3

groves are located is not typical Cattle Egret habitat, being more
heavily wooded. It should also be noted that the red fox is not native
to the region. The species has appeared in the area as the result of
introduction or spread from other artificially established populations
within the past 10 years.

Because of their open country habitat preferences, flocking be-
havior, and diurnal activity. Cattle Egrets are probably less vulnerable
to predation by mammals than diurnal raptors.

We thank Emory Jones, Victor Landers, Woodward W. Miley, II,
jerry Peoples, and L. T. Stem for allowing us to cite their observa-
tions and Austin L. Rand for helpful comments on the manuscript.

Arch bold Biological Station ^ Rt, 2, Box 180, Lake Placid, Florida
33852.

4 / Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977

OBSERVATIONS OF OSPREYS NESTING ON ARTIFICIAL
STRUCTURES IN CHARLOTTE HARBOR, FLORIDA.

Ralph W. Schreiber and Elizabeth Anne Schreiber

Recently reproductive success of normally reproducing popula-
tions of Osprey {Pandion haliaetus] has been described for southern
Florida (Ogden 1975, Wilson Bull. 87: 496-505) and for Chesapeake
Bay (Reese 1970, Auk 87: 747-759; and references therein). In the
Central Atlantic states, only about one third of all nests are in
“natural” situations with the remainder on artificial structures. Be-
tween 1.7 and 2.0 young were produced per successful nest and 0.64-
1 .1 6 young per active nest in Chesapeake Bay between 1 963 and 1 969.
In Florida Bay, most if not all the nests are in trees on islands and
average annual production ranges between 1. 3-2.0 young per success-
ful nest and 0.36-1 .30 young per active nest in 1 968-1 974. We cannot
find reference to Osprey nesting on artificial structures in Florida but
Ogden (pers. comm.) reports increasing nesting on utility poles, signs,
and other tall structures along U.S. 1 in the Florida Keys.

Our observations on an admittedly small sample of Osprey nests
in the vicinity of Cabbage and Useppa Keys, Lee County, Florida
west coast, invite further study. We cannot continue these observa-
tions but encourage others to do so.

During irregular visits to the Charlotte Harbor area during 1970-
1974 we recorded 3-8 Osprey present in the late winter-spring but
none in the late summer-fall. Other than the traditional water tower
nest on Cabbage Key, no nests were observed although the possibility
exists that nests were destroyed by the U.S. Coast Guard between
our visits. During monthly visits in 1975 we recorded 5-8 Osprey in
January-early August and recorded nests present on 3 intercoastal
waterway channel (LC.W.) markers 57, 67, and 69 (Nautical Chart
857-SC). None produced young and on 19 April no evidence of the
nests remained. On 15 March we observed Coast Guard personnel re-
moving the nest material from marker 69 and we suspect this disturb-
ance caused the lack of production by Osprey in 1975.

Discussions with the Commander of the 7th U. S. Coast Guard
District, Miami, Florida, in November 1975 indicated that intercoastal
waterway markers had been modified and that nests would not be
destroyed unless visibility of the markerlightor number was impaired.
The necessity of this policy is obvious to anyone who has cruised the
waterway in the dark.

During surveys every 2-3 weeks between 28 November 1975 and
24 July 1976, we recorded nests with eggs and/or young present on

Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977 / 5

I.C.W. markers 4, 58, 60, 61 , and/or 67. The latter 4 markers extend
from south to north along 2 nautical miles (nm) of the main channel
and marker 4 Is 0.5 nm to the east on a side channel. All nests are
approximately 300 m from land and 4 m above mean high tide. Our
visits were not frequent enough to record number of eggs laid or
hatching success although we know 3 eggs were laid and hatched on
markers 61 and 67; probably only 2 eggs were laid on markers 4, 58,
and 60. Marker 50 held a few sticks on 20 February but none was
present on 7 March and we suspect this was a false nest although
Ogden (pers. comm.) Indicates that sub-adult Osprey (1-4 years)
commonly build incomplete nests. Three nests (markers 58, 61,
67) received eggs between 29 January and 20 February, marker 50
received eggs between 20 February and 7 March, and marker 4 re-
ceived eggs between 12 April and 3 May. Neither of the two eggs laid
in marker 4 hatched and it was abandoned by 29 May, when a broken
egg shell remained in the nest. This nest possibly belonged to a pair
of young adults since Ogden (pers. comm.) indicates that they usually
lay late and often fail to complete incubation.

The 2 young in marker 58 fledged between 13 April and 3 May,
the 2 young in both markers 60 and 67 fledged between 3 May and
28 May, and the 2 young in marker 61 fledged between 12 June and
4 July. We neither heard nor saw any Osprey In the area on 4 July
but on 23 July one was heard calling. All nests were still Intact but
ragged on the latter date.

We know of two other active nests in this region in 1976: the
water tower nest on Cabbage Key produced two young in March; and
one on an artificial pole at the entrance to Miller's Marina, Boca
Grande Island (4 nm north of the other nests) also produced young,
one we watched fledge on 13 April, the other was gone on 3 May.

The seven nests which received eggs in 1976 thus produced 2.0
young per successful nest and 1.71 young per active nest.

While our sample size is small and for only one year, this ‘‘colony"
appears to be producing well. We have not observed Osprey nesting
elsewhere on any of the more than 300 markers along the over 130 nm
of the intercoastal waterway between Clearwater, Pinellas County,
and Sanibel Island, Lee County, that we have surveyed regularly for
the past 8 years and the presence of this small colony in Charlotte
Harbor is intriguing. One may speculate that as human “development"
has occurred along the coast the birds have been forced to nest on
the channel markers but why only In this region remains moot. Did
Osprey ever nest along this coast in past decades? If so, are they
taking more readily to artificial sites now than in the past? Ogden
(pers. comm.) suggests that Osprey often tend to clump in nesting.

6 / Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977

Pairs apparently pass by **goocl” nest sites to nest close to other pairs.
Is there some relation between actual sites used and ‘‘better’* feeding

grounds?

it is apparent that the intercoastai waterway markers provide
good nest sites for Osprey so long as the Coast Guard does not re-
move nests, a practice that should be lauded. Hopefully boaters will
not molest the birds either. Ogden (op. cit.) found that Osprey in
the Florida Keys laid in November-February with a peak in Decem-
ber-January. Our nests are slightly later in this more northern region
with the latest nest being unsuccessful. This late nest may well have
been by a young, inexperienced pair. However, the probability exists
that the summer heat is too great for successful nesting in this spe-
cies in Florida and the reason for the winter-spring nesting is to avoid
the summer heat. Or, perhaps the lack of social stimulation from
other nesting Osprey was the cause for the abandonment of our lone
late nest.

Further observations on this Osprey “colony” in coming years
should be rewarding.

Mitchell Byrd suggested we publish our observations and we
thank the National Audubon Society and especially Sandy Sprunt
for funding our research efforts on the west coast of Florida during
1975 and 1976. John Ogden’s vast knowledge of Osprey and his and
Fred Lohrer’s comments on the ms are much appreciated.

Seabird Research, Inc,, 11008 Teegreen Drive, Tampa, Florida
33612, Present Address: Natural History Museum, 900 Exposition
Bivd., Los Angeles, California 90007.

Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977 / 7

GREATER SANDHILL CRANES
WINTERING IN FLORIDA AND GEORGIA

Scott M. Melvin
Introduction

The breeding range of the eastern population of Greater Sandhill
Cranes [Grus canadensis tabida) includes parts of Wisconsin, Michi^
gan, Minnesota, and the provinces of Ontario and Manitoba (Drewien
et al. 1975, Wilson Bull. 87: 299). Less Is known about the winter
range of these birds. Walkinshaw (1973, Cranes Of The World, New
York, Winchester Press) stated that they wintered In Florida on
the Kissimmee Prairie and at Paynes Prairie near Gainesville, and
possibly in the Okefenokee Swamp of southern Georgia. At Paynes
Prairie, a peak winter population (Jan. 1970) of 1,800 Greater
Sandhill Cranes (Williams and Phillips 1972, Auk, 89: 542) has de-
clined over the past 6 years to less than 400 (Nesbitt 1 977, Fla. Field
Nat., 5:16-17).

Censuses of southward — migrating Greater Sandhill Cranes at
the jasper-Pulaski Wildlife Area, Indiana, during the fall of 1974
(Shroufe 1976, Proc. Int. Crane Workshop, 1: 51-58) indicated an
eastern population of at least 9,000 birds. Censuses at jasper-Pulaski
during October-November 1976 now suggest a population of 12,000
-15,000 (pers. observ.). The distribution of these birds on their
wintering grounds is poorly understood.

The University of Wisconsin at Stevens Point has been conduct-
ing Sandhill Crane research since 1973. Migration studies include
color-marking cranes with either white aluminum neck collars or
green, 9x2 Inch plastic wing tags with white or black numerals.
During the summer of 1976, 2 cranes from central Wisconsin were
successfully fitted with portable radio transmitters (AVM Instrument
Co., Champaigne, Illinois 61820).

The objectives of my research in Florida were: (1) to locate con-
centrations of wintering Greater Sandhill Cranes, and (2) to locate
cranes marked or radioed in Wisconsin.

Methods

I travelled over 3,000 miles in Florida and southern Georgia dur-
ing 23 December 1976 — 1 1 January 1977, contacted 25 persons be-
lieved to have information on wintering cranes, and spent 3 hours in
the air searching Paynes Prairie and much of the Kissimmee Prairie.
Equipment included 7 x 50 binoculars, a 15 x 60 spotting scope,

8 / Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977

and a portable receiver and antennas (AVM Instrument Co.).

Care was taken to distinguish between the migratory Greater
Sandhill Crane and the Florida Sandhill Crane (G. c. pratensis), a
year-round resident of Florida and southern Georgia. As the 2 sub-
species are nearly identical in appearance, they can be separated in
the field only by behavioral differences. Florida Sandhill Cranes are
observed in family groups of 2, 3 or 4 birds, while wintering Greater
Sandhill Cranes usually occur in larger flocks in which distinct pairs
and family groups are not apparent.

Results

I was able to account for over 4,500 wintering Greater Sandhill
Cranes by direct observation and through the observations and re-
ports of others (Fig. 1). The largest concentrations were in north-
central Florida and southeastern Georgia.

I found 5 Wisconsin-marked cranes at 3 locations. A crane wing-
tagged on 27 July 1976, at Buena Vista Marsh, Portage County, Wis-
consin, was observed with approximately 100 other sandhills on 7
January at Paynes Prairie. Two cranes wing-tagged in central Wiscon-
sin between 1974 and 1976 were among the 800 cranes near Weirs-
dale, as was a bird that 1 had equipped with a radio transmitter on
28 June 1976 at the Mead Wildlife Area, Marathon County, Wiscon-
sin. Another crane, marked with a white neck collar in the fall of
1973 at the Necedah National Wildlife Refuge, Juneau County, Wis-
consin, was among the 125 cranes at the Flayman Ranch, Osceola
County.

Concentrations of wintering Greater Sandhill Cranes were ob-
served in 3 habitats. In Highlands and Osceola Counties cranes were
found on the extensive improved pastures characteristic of the
Kissimmee Prairie. In north-central Florida (Alachua, Putnam, Mar-
ion, and Lake Counties) concentrations of cranes were associated
with agricultural land, green fields of oats and rye, fallow fields
where the earth had been recently disturbed, and cornfields harvested
the previous summer. In the Okefenokee Swamp, Georgia, cranes
inhabited a diverse wetland of wooded and shrub swamps interspersed
with areas of emergent and floating vegetation and open water.

Discussion

These 4,500+ wintering Greater Sandhill Cranes probably repre-
sent no more than 30-35 percent of the eastern population. Although
a good beginning, clearly other concentrations can be located. In

Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977 / 9

E rx
O 9^

u ^

E

uj yj o

. y»

El 1 •£

« s2 « o

do ® *'*

-5 -£ =

I J

o u

■M. ^

o o

.h c

Z S
wi m

O J£

5 O

Z Z S 5 Z S

m (/% m -t m ifi

= *0 °

5

Z

E I
o

E ® ^

^ X O

E S
® £
■d -o

w 5

o o

^ E

=: -S
o E
3 ®

< aa

10 / Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977

SM - Scott Melvin, WM - Wersdei! Metzen,

SN - Stephen Nesbitt, LW - Lawrence Waikinshaw,
DA - David Austin

south-central Florida it is possible that flocks of several hundred
cranes could be overlooked on the extensive prairies and pastures of
the Kissimmee Prairie and from the DeSoto Prairie west to the Sara-
sota Fruitville area. Flocks of 200 — 300 birds have been observed
in recent years at several locations in south-central Florida: on the
DD Ranch northwest of Myakka River State Park, Sarasota County,
at Indian River Marsh, Glades County, and south of Lake Istokpoga,
Flighlands County.

Most (76%) of the cranes reported here were from north-central
Florida (Alachua, Putnam, Marion, and Lake Counties), and evidence
exists of other wintering flocks in these counties. Cranes have been
reported from the vicinity of the Ocala National Forest, both near
the southeast corner (John Hartsfield, pers. comm.), and from the
Alexander Springs area (Brian Knowles, pers. comm.).

The Greater Sandhill Crane population in the Okefenokee
Swamp also needs further study. The region’s inaccessibility makes
accurate population estimates difficult, and the 600 noted here could
be an underestimate. The possibility also exists that cranes are
wintering in other parts of southern Georgia.

This was only a partial survey and continuing efforts should be
directed toward identifying wintering areas of eastern Greater
Sandhill Cranes in Florida and Georgia. Information on winter crane
concentrations and reports of observations of wing-tagged cranes
should be sent to the author in care of Dr. Lyle Nauman at the ad-
dress listed below.

Acknowledgments

I wish to thank the persons mentioned in this paper, especially
Stephen Nesbitt and Lawrence Walkinshaw, for the help and infor-
mation provided and for their interest. Thanks also goes to Fred E.
Lohrer, James N. Layne, Tim Breault, William Weber, and H.V. Flines.
I am grateful to the Florida Department of Natural Resources for
access to Paynes Prairie, and to all the private landowners who gave
me permission to work on their properties. This study was funded in
part by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.

College of Natural Resources, University of Wisconsin, Stevens
Point, Wisconsin 5448h

Florida Field Naturalist / VoL 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977/ 11

FIELD NOTES

Fourth record of the Arctic Loon from Florida. — On 12 April 1976
a sick loon found on the Gulf shore at Indian Rocks Beach, Pinellas
County, Florida, was taken to the Suncoast Seabird Sanctuary. It
was identified as an Arctic Loon [Gavia arctica) by Marie Hughes,
and after its death the same day frozen by Ralph Heath, Director. In
August, Hopkins learned of the existence of the bird and brought it
to Woolfenden who corroborated the identification and prepared it as
a study skin (G. E. W. 5024) now housed at the University of South
Florida.

Only 3 previous records of the Arctic Loon exist for Florida (Kit-
tleson 1976, Fla. Field Nat. 4: 17). These include two specimens
from the Gulf side of Florida, one of which was a dead bird found in
April. The Arctic Loon is difficult to distinguish in the field from the
Common Loon (G. immer), which is common along the east shore of
the Gulf of Mexico in winter and during migration. Though certainly
rare, the Arctic Loon may be more regular in the Gulf than presently
realized. If true, this suggests that some individuals fly overland to
and from central and western Canada, a fact as yet unestablished
(Palmer 1962, Handbook of North American birds, Vol 1; De Sante
1976, Amer. Birds 30: 685).

The specimen, a male (testes 6x2 mm), weighed 1.5 kg and had
no fat. Measurements critical for species identification include bill
from feathers 56 mm and tarsus 76 mm. The bird was undergoing
simultaneous wing molt, with all primaries new and short enough
that their greater underwing coverts extend beyond them. A few new
feathers of the Definitive Alternate or Alternate II plumage are scat-
tered over the back and mantle. -- Larry Hopkins, 538 Garland Street
N., St Petersburg, Florida 33703 and Glen E. Woolfenden, Depart-
ment of Biology, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida 33620,

Second Florida breeding record of the Ruddy Duck. On 29 May
1976 we discovered 5 Ruddy Ducks (Oxyura Jamaicensis) in water
at the bottom of a deep, abandoned rock quarry about 3 km N of
Live Oak, Columbia County, Florida, at the junction of highways
U. S. 29 and 1-10. As we studied the ducks we realized the group in-
cluded 2 birds in the typical alternate plumage of the male and 3 in
female plumage. We noted that 2 of the latter were scarcely two
thirds the size of the remaining ducks and of nearby American Coots
(Fulica americana). They also differed slightly in color from the pre-
sumed adult female Ruddy Duck.

12 / Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977

The 2 smaller ducks stayed close to, and occasionally disappeared
into, a large stand of cattails [Typhus sp.). The adult female remained
within several m of them, whereas the males ranged from about 30 to
50 m away. Whenever a male moved closer to the other ducks, the
adult female lowered her head, stretched out her neck, and swam
rapidly toward him. Based on size and behavior, we feel certain that
the smaller birds were young of the year. We found no way to ap-
proach these birds closely enough to determine whether they were
capable of flight.

Although small numbers of Ruddy Ducks probably summer in
Florida every year, only one previous unequivocal record of breeding
has been published. Mrs. H. E. Robinson and Mrs. John Stone saw a
female with 6 young near May port, Duval County, on 2 June 1964
(Stevenson 1964, Aud. Field Notes 18: 503). This identification was
later corroborated by Samuel A. Grimes. Ruddies were also suspected
of breeding near Lakeland, Polk County, in the summer of 1970,
where a pair ‘‘seemed to have a nest’' (Ogden 1970, Aud. Field Notes
24: 675). Gail E. Menk, 1128 Ocala Road, Apt. G-5, Tallahassee,
Florida 32304, and Henry M. Stevenson, Tall Timbers Research Sta-
tion, Route I, Box / 60, Tallahassee, Florida 32303.

Bathing in captive Sandhill Cranes. — Patterns of behavior, such as
bathing, are often useful as taxonomic tools (Simmons 1964, Feather
Maintenance. Pp. 278-279 in A new Dictionary of Birds [A. L.
Thomson, Ed.]. New York, McGraw Hill Book Co.). To my
knowledge, no detailed account of bathing behavior for Sandhill
Cranes (Grus canadensis) has been published. Walkinshaw briefly
describes bathing in the Sandhill Crane (Walkinshaw 1949, The Sand-
hill Cranes, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, Cranbrook Ins. of Sci. Bull.
29: 39-40) and the Sarus Crane [Grus antigone) (Walkinshaw 1973,
Cranes of the World, New York, Winchester Press, p. 200), and gives
more details of bathing in a semi-captive Whooping Crane [Grus
americana) (Walkinshaw ibid. p. 176). In view of this lack of detail,
it seems appropriate to describe the bathing sequence as observed in
captive Florida Sandhill Cranes (G. c. pratensis).

During December and January 1974, 8 two-year old Florida
Sandhill Cranes were observed bathing on several occasions. These
birds had been raised from eggs by personnel of the U. S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Patuxent Research Center, Laurel, Maryland, and
subsequently returned to Florida for attempted reintroduction. The
birds were kept at our facilities on the edge of Paynes Prairie, Alachua
County, Florida, in pens containing a concrete pool large enough to
permit 3 or 4 individuals to bathe simultaneously. Cranes were in-

Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977 / 13

duced to bathe at various times of the day by depriving them of the
opportunity to bathe for 3-5 days. When the poo! was subsequently
refilled, cranes began bathing immediately after entering the pool.

A typical bathing episode had several characteristic components
(Figure!), a) The bill and head were submerged to above the eyes,
withdrawn, and then the bill was shaken vigorously from side to side,
as in bill cleaning during probing and feeding episodes, b) The head
was returned to the water and turned to the side several times splash-
ing water on the back of the head and neck, c) The bird began bob-
bing with ankles flexed and feathers partially erected, and then the
bird collapsed to a squatting position resting on the tarsi, d) While
the bird was lying in the water, the head and neck were used to dis-
tribute water over the back, e) At this point, the crane often rolled
on its side, f) Then the wings were flapped, spreading water over the
back and sides, the body feathers fully erected, and the tail spread
and turned sideways, g) Wing flapping continued as the bird returned
to standing position. Stages d through f were often repeated, h) The
bird dried its plumage by flapping vigorously in place, erecting and
shaking its feathers, and with short hopping flights, i) Feathers were
erected and bird assumed a “spread-wing” posture, j) After bathing,
the bird preened extensively, massaging the uropygial gland between
bill tips and dressed the body feathers. The sides and back of the
head, inaccessable to the bill, were wiped across the gland.

Cranes not allowed access to the pool for bathing attempted to
bathe when given a fresh bucket of water and often tried to enter the
bucket (Fig. l,k). Typically, bucket bathing was similar to full bath-
ing, but usually proceeded only through stage f. During stage c, the
bird collapsed to the ground, with subsequent stages occurring on the
ground and not in water. The bucket bathing sequence may be re-
peated several times from the beginning, with the entire episode last-
ing up to 13 minutes. In both types of bathing, stages c through f
appear to progress automatically, and water deep enough to cover
the eyes when the bill is submerged vertically seemed to be essentia!
for eliciting bathing.

The general description of bathing behavior for the Whooping
Crane is identical to that given here for the Sandhill Crane. Walkin-
shaw (pers. comm.) has noted the difficulty of observing cranes
bathing in the wild, and I have observed it only once at a distance
too great to permit detailed observation. However, I do not think
that bathing In the wild differs significantly from what has been de-
scribed here. — Stephen A. Nesbitt, Florida Game and Fresh Water
Fish Commission, The Wildlife Research Laboratory, 4005 S. Main
Street, Gainesville, Florida 32601.

14 / Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977

Figure 1. Components of bathing behavior in captive Sandhiil Cranes.

Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977 / 15

Recent changes in winter crane use of Paynes Prairie. — William Bar-
tram visited Alachua Savannah (Paynes Prairie) in what is now Alachua
County, Florida, in 1774 when it was relatively dry. He provides an
early account of the prairie and its wildlife (Van Doren 1 928, Travels
of William Bartram, New York, Dover Press). The prairie has been de-
scribed by subsequent authors under conditions ranging from com-
plete Inundation to those of a very dry prairie (White undated, Eco-
system Analysis of Paynes Prairie, Univ. Fla. School of Forest Re-
sources and Conservation, Research Report No. 24). During drier
periods since at least the 1 7th century, the prairie has been intensively
grazed (Arnade 1965, Cattle raising in Spanish Florida, St. Augustine
Historical Society Pub. No. 21 ; White, op cit). For some years prior
to acquisition by the State of Florida In 1970, the prairie was a com-
mercial cattle ranch. The State now owns 18,000 acres, including a
majority of the prairie basin and portions of the surrounding uplands.
Private ownership accounts for about 3,000 acres of the approxi-
mately 15,000 acres of prairie basin. This private land continues to
be used for grazing and, to a lesser extent, agriculture.

The prairie has been known as a major wintering area for Greater
Sandhill Cranes [Grus canadensis tabida) in Florida (Williams and
Phillips 1972, Auk 89: 548; Walkinshaw 1 975, Cranes of the World,
New York, Winchester Press). Williams and Phillips (op. cit.) estimated
a peak wintering population of 1,000 cranes in January 1969 and
1,800 cranes in January 1970. The peak during January 1977 was
less than 400 cranes.

Winter crane use has principally been on that part of the prairie
east of Highway 441 . Cranes roosting on this part of the prairie have
been observed since fall 1971. On 17 January 1972, 252 cranes
roosted at one of the three main roost sites on the prairie. On 28
November 1973, 166 cranes went to roost at this site. One hundred
and twelve cranes roosted there 15 January 1974, 10.7% of which
arrived from feeding areas off the prairie. Previously no birds were
observed arriving from feeding areas off Paynes Prairie. On 21 Janu-
ary 1 975, of 81 cranes roosting at the site, 53.1 % arrived from off the
prairie. No observations were made during 1976, but on 1 February
1 977, 1 37 cranes roosted at two sites on this same area of the prairie,
and all of the birds had been feeding on the privately owned areas of
the prairie. Periodic roosting counts at the other two main roosting
areas on the prairie indicate a similar trend.

During this same 6-year period, there has been a dramatic in-
crease in the population of Greater Sandhill Cranes in eastern North
America (Shroufe 1976, Proc. Int. Crane Workshop 1: 51-58; Mel-
vin 1977, Fla. Field Nat. 5: 8-1 1 ). Since the winter of 1 973-1 974

16 / Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977

there has been an increase in the number of cranes wintering on agri-
cultural lands in Marion and Lake Counties. Three birds color
marked on Paynes Prairie in February 1974 and February 1976 were
subsequently observed wintering on areas in these two counties dur-
ing 1975 and 1977. Many cranes which previously wintered on
Paynes Prairie now are apparently wintering elsewhere.

Since State acquisition, land-use practices on the prairie have
changed substantially. The intensity of cattle grazing was reduced
and finally eliminated in 1975. The effects of grazing were to be re-
placed with fire and water management, but increases in vegetation
height have made much of the prairie unattractive to cranes. Some
increased crane use has resulted from controlled burning of several
hundred acres during 1976-77. About 95 cranes foraged throughout
the winter on these burned areas. However, the increased crane use
noted for the roost area during 1977 was probably the result of ex-
panded cultivation and grazing on the private land adjacent to the
state holdings. It is hoped that controlled burning can be continued
and expanded and that other positive management practices will be
implemented. It would be unfortunate If an area so uniquely suited
for Sandhill Cranes did not support an appropriate winter popula-
tion.— Stephen A. Nesbitt, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Com-
mission, Wildlife Research Laboratory, 4005 S Main Street, Gaines-
ville, Florida 32601.

Laughing Gul! breeds in northeast Florida. —Although the Laughing
Gull [Larus atricilla) is widely distributed along the Florida coast
during the breeding season, it only breeds in a few widely scattered
localities, chiefly the Tampa Bay area (Howell 1932). The species
has recently established a large breeding colony at Merritt Island,
Brevard County, which contained 1050 nests in June 1974 (Jim Baker
in Ogden 1974) and 1350 pairs in 1975 (A. E. Ellis in Ogden 1975).
In ‘‘about 1866** the species bred in “large numbers** on an island in
the Halifax River near Port Orange, Volusia County (Howell 1932).

On 30 May 1976 we found a single pair of Laughing Gulls nest-
ing on (Big) Bird Island in Nassau Sound, Duval County, Florida. The
nest contained two eggs, and we observed an adult incubating. On 8
June Loftin returned during a very high tide and found the two eggs
awash. The adults were wheeling and screaming overhead. On 10 July
the first nest was gone, but another nest, also with two eggs, was
about 10m from where the first had been. This is very late for a first
nest of this species in Florida (Dinsmore and Schreiber 1974), there-
fore it was probably a second effort by the same pair of birds. On 25
July there were two downy chicks in the nest. On 1 August no young

Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977 / 17

could be located, but they could easily have been hidden in the dense
vegetation somewhere on the island, as the adults were calling ex-
citedly overhead. No further sign of the young was seen on subse-
quent visits to the area.

This is apparently the first breeding record of Laughing Gulls in
northeastern Florida. The species does not breed in Georgia (Denton
and Hopkins 1969, Burleigh 1958). According to Sprunt and Cham-
berlain (1970), the species is “an abundant breeding bird along the
South Carolina coast.** The southernmost nesting they mention is
St. Helena Sound, Beaufort County, which is roughly 150 miles
north of our record at Bird Island.

Literature Cited

Burleigh, T. D. 1958. Georgia birds. Norman, Univ. Oklahoma Press.
Denton, J. F., and M. Hopkins, Jr. 1969. Pocket check-list of Geor-
gia birds. Georgia OrnithoL Soc.

Dinsmore, J. J., and R. W. Schreiber. 1974. Breeding and annua!
cycle of Laughing Gulls in Tampa Bay, Florida. Wilson Bull.
86: 419-427.

Howell, A. H. 1932. Florida bird life. Taliahassee, Florida Dept, of
Game and Fresh Water Fish.

Ogden, j.C, 1974. Florida region. Amer. Birds 28: 894,

Ogden, J.C. 1975, Florida region. Amer. Birds 29: 962.

Sprunt, A. H., and E. B. Chamberlain. 1970. South Carolina bird
life. Columbia, Univ. South Carolina Press.

Robert W. Loftin, University of North Florida, Box 17074, Jack-
sonville, Florida 32216, and Roger Sallas, 7944 Lafitte Drive, Jack-
sonville, Florida 32217,

A Razorbill at St. George Island, Florida. — On 1 1 April 1976, on
the north side of St. George Island, Franklin County, Florida, we
discovered an alcid swimming with several Laughing Gulls {Larus atrk
cilia] and a Common Loon {Gavia immer) near old dock pilings. The
alcid, about half the size of the loon, was observed carefully for about
15 minutes as it dove infrequently and then swam out into the sound
and eventually out of binocular range.

Later we compared sketches of the alcid with several field guides
and identified the bird as an immature Razorbill {AIca torda), based
on size, and particularly, the irregularly shaped stubby bill. We did
not see the bird on a return visit later that day.

The only previous Florida Razorbill, also an immature, was cap-

18 / Florida Field Naturalist / VoL 5. No. 1 / Spring 1977

tured along South Melbourne Beach, Brevard County, on 1 January
1967 (Cruickshank 1967, Fla. Nat. 40: 48-49). Between that date
and 1976 the southernmost Atlantic Coast record was 19 December
1967 when twelve were reported 7 miles off Tybee Island, Chatham
County, Georgia (Cooldige 1967, Oriole 33: 1).

The only other alcid records for Florida are a Common Murre
{Uria aalge) found dead near Fort Pierce, St. Lucie County, on 28
December 1971 (Stevenson 1972, Amer. Birds 26: 592-596) and
numerous Dovekie (AHe alle) records.

Our Razorbill record Is the only one for the Gulf of Mexico and
is also the first spring record of any alcid for Florida. — John R. Pat-
terson, 408 Sable Court, Tallahassee, Florida 32304 and Gail E.
Menk, / 128 Ocala Road, Apt G-5, Tallahassee, Florida 32304,

First sighting of a Thick-billed Murre for Florida. — Shortly before
sundown on 20 November 1976 at the Lake Worth Fishing Pier in
Palm Beach County, Florida, Billy Matthews, a thirteen-year old,
observed and alerted local birders to a “murrelet’’ swimming in the
Atlantic Ocean near shore. Rushing to the pier, Billy’s father, William
Matthews, Gloria Hunter, and the author saw a large alcid. Moving
to within 6 m at times and using binoculars, telescope, and a field
guide (Robbins et at 1966, Birds of North America, New York,
Golden Press, pp 148-9), we carefully identified the bird as a Thick-
billed Murre (Uria lomvia).

The optimum combination of smooth water, close approach and
leisurely study (20-30 min.) enabled the observers to be confident of
their identification based on the following field marks: size (smaller
than a loon), jet black upperparts and very white underparts, a dis-
tinct white line running across the black folded wing, and the sharp
murre bill with a white line on the lower mandible. The author is
familiar with the Razorbill (AIca torda) and Common Murre (Uria
aaige) in Canada.

The southernmost record of the Thick-billed Murre on the At-
lantic coast is from South Carolina (A.O.U. 1957, Check-list of North
American birds,5th ed.).— Howard P. Langridge, 1421 W. Ocean Ave.,
Lantana, Florida 33462.

Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977 / 19

Florida Birds in the Periodical Literature, 1976.

This new feature is designed to help Florida naturalists keep

abreast of recent articles about Florida birds not published in the

FFN. Authors are requested to send reprints of their articles to the

Editor for inclusion in this annual feature. All articles were published

in 1976 unless otherwise noted.

Abramson, I.J. The Black Hawk (Buteogallus anthracinus) In south
Florida. Amer. Birds 30: 661 “662. — Ft. Lauderdale and Dade
Co. This paper presented at the Spring 1976 FOS meeting at
Coral Gables.

Bock, C.E., and L.W. Lepthien. Population growth in the Cattle
Egret. Auk 93: 164-166. — Analysis based on Christmas Bird
Counts, many of which are from Florida.

Brown, W.H. Winter population trends in the Black and Turkey
vultures. Amer. Birds 30: 909-912. — During 1954-1973, 32.6
percent of all vultures reported on CBC’s were from Florida. This
is 13.2 percent more than the next highest state, Maryland.

Campbell, K.E., Jr. An early Pleistocene avifauna from Halle XVA,
Florida. Wilson. Bull. 88: 345-347. — Alachua Co.

Duncan, R.A. The Black-whiskered Vireo: a summary of its status
on the northern Gulf Coast. Amer. Birds 30: 658-660. ~ “Now
a rare but regular spring transient and summer visitor which may
possibly breed occasionally.” Discusses recent sightings at Gulf
Breeze, Santa Rosa Co.

Eicholz, N.F. Winter gobbling in Wild Turkeys. Proc. Ann. Conf. SE
Assoc. Game and Fish Comm. 29: 639-640. — Includes observa-
tions in north Florida.

Fisk, E.j. Winter bird population study. 38. Pineland, scrub and resi-
dential. Amer. Birds 30: 1055. — Homestead, Dade Co.

Fisk, E.j. Notes on a winter bird-population study: observation ver-
sus netting. Amer. Birds 30: 1075. — Homestead, Dade Co.

Kilham, L. Winter foraging and associated behavior of Plleated Wood-
peckers in Georgia and Florida. Auk 93: 15-24. -- Includes ob-
servations made at Archbold Biological Station, Highlands Co.

Kushlan, J.A. Feeding behavior of North American herons. Auk
93: 86-94. — Many observations summarized here made in Florida.

Kushlan, J.A. Site selection for nesting colonies by the American
White \b\s Eudocimus a/bus in Florida. Ibis 118: 590-593.

Kushlan, J.A. Feeding rhythm in nestling White Ibis. Wilson Bull. 88:
656-658. — Study of captive Florida nestlings.

Kushlan, J.A. Wading bird predation in a seasonally fluctuating pond.
Auk 93: 464-476. — Herons, White Ibis, and Wood Storks in the

20 / Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977

Big Cypress Swamp, Collier Co.

Kushlan, J.A., and M.S. Kushlan. Winter bird population study, 63.
Everglades marsh. Amer. Birds 30: 1066-1067. — Everglades
Natl. Park, Dade Co.

Moseley, L.H. Winter bird population study. 78. Suburban school
park. Amer. Birds 30: 1072-1073. — Deerfield Beach, Broward
Co,

Nesbitt, S.A., D.T. Gilbert, and D.B. Barbour. Capturing and banding
Limpkins in Florida. Bird-Banding 47: 164-165. — Marion and
Putnam Co’s., Lake Oklawaha.

Nesbitt, S.A., R.R. Roth, and W. B. Robertson, Jr. The status of the
Bald Eagle in Florida 1972-1975. Proc. Ann. Conf. SE Assoc.
Game and Fish Comm. 29: 424-428.

Ogden, j.C., J.A. Kushlan, and J.T. Tilmant. Prey selection by the
Wood Stork. Condor 78: 324-330. — Everglades Natl. Park.

Olson, C.S. Band-tailed Gull photographed in Florida. Auk 93: 176-
1 77. — On 6 June 1970 at Marco Island, Collier Co.

Owre, O.T. Bahama Woodstar in Florida: First specimen for conti-
nental North America. Auk 93: 837-838. — Specimen obtained
in Miami, Dade Co., on 31 January 1 961 , originally identified as
an unidentified species of Setop/jor^ys, recently identified as Cr?///-
phlox evelynae.

Postupalsky, S. Banded northern Bald Eagles in Florida and other
southern states. Auk. 93: 835-836. — First record of northern
subspecies in Florida. Nestling banded in Michigan 28 June 1969
found shot near Perry, Taylor Co., on 1 January 1970.

Schreiber, E.A. A new method for restraining live birds. Bird-Band-
ing 47: 165. ~ Use of a cardboard tubular food container (for
potatoe chips) does not entirely replace the Austin-Robertson-
Woolfenden liquor box method. Technique perfected on the Dry
Tortugas!

Schreiber, R.W. Movements of color marked Brown Pelicans. Bird-
Banding 47: 101-111. — Includes recoveries of nestlings banded
in Pinellas and Brevard Co’s.

Schreiber, R.W. Growth and development of nestling Brown Pelicans.
Bird-Banding 47: 19-39. — Tarpon Key, Pinellas Co.

Schreiber, R.W., and J.M. Lawrence. Organic material and calories In
Laughing Gull eggs. Auk 93: 46-52. — Eggs collected at the Bay-
way colony, Boca Ciega Bay, Pinellas Co.

Sykes, P.W. Cliff Swallow breeding in south-central Florida. Wilson
Bull. 88: 671-672. — Port Mayaca, St. Lucie Canal, Martin Co.,
June 1975.

Taylor, W.K. Wing-flashing and other behavior of a Mockingbird
Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977 / 21

towards its dead young. Wilson Bull. 88: 666. — Orlando, Orange

Co.

Taylor, W.K. Variations in the black mask of the Common Yellow^
throat. Bird-Banding 47: 72-73. ~ Based on Florida tower-kills.

Taylor, W.K. Migration of the Common Yellowthroat with an em-
phasis on Florida. Bird-Banding 47 : 319-332. — Analysis of band-
ing data and Florida specimens from TV towers near Bithio and
at Tall Timbers Research Station and from the Verticle Assem-
bly Building, Cape Kennedy, Brevard Co.

Thompson, R.L. Change in status of Red-cockaded Woodpecker
colonies. Wilson Bull. 88: 491-492. — Comparison of a 1973-74
survey of colonies in 10 southeastern states with a similar 1969-
70 survey reveals a 1 3.1 % decrease in the number of active colon-
ies. Of 271 colonies, 130 located in Florida.

White, S.C., W.B. Robertson, Jr., and R.E. Ricklefs. The effect of
hurricane Agnes on growth and survival of tern chicks in Florida.
Bird-Banding 47: 54-71 . — Sooty and Brown Noddy terns on the
Dry Tortugas, Monroe Co.

Weise, J.H. Courtship and pair formation in the Great Egret. Auk 93:
709-724. — Some observations made at St. Marks National Wild-
life Refuge and Smith Island, Waukulla Co. This paper presented
at the Spring 1975 FOS meeting at Tallahassee.

Woolfenden, G.E., S.C. White, R.L. Mumme, and W.B. Robertson, jr.
Aggression among starving Cattle Egrets. Bird-Banding 47: 48-
53. — Dry Tortugas, Monroe Co.

Woolfenden, G.E. A case of bigamy in the Florida Scrub jay. Auk
93: 443-450. — Archbold Biological Station, Highlands Co.

Woolfenden, G.E. Co-operative breeding in American birds. Proc.
16th Internatl. Ornithol. Congr. 674-684. ~ Includes observa-
tions made at the Archbold Biological Station, Highlands Co.

Baldwin, j.H. A study of the thermoregulatory capacities of four
subspecies of Sandhill Crane nestlings. Proc. Int. Crane Work-
shop 1: 291-295. — Includes data from 3 artificially hatched
Florida cranes.

Nesbitt, S.A. Capturing Sandhill Crane with oral tranquilizers. Proc.
Int. Crane Workshop 1: 296-298. — Florida and Greater Sandhill
Cranes in Alachua, Manatee, and Glades Co’s.

Nesbitt, S.A. Use of radio telemetry techniques on Florida Sandhill
Cranes. Proc. Int. Crane Workshop 1: 299-303. ~ Three adults
tracked on Payne’s Prairie, june-july 1973.

Walkinshaw, L.H. Sandhill Crane on and near the Kissimmee Prai-
rie, Florida. Proc. Int. Crane Workshop 1: 1-18. — Nesting bi-
ology and population density, 1938-1975.

22 / Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977

Report on the 1976 fall meeting. — The fall meeting of the FOS was
held attheTurtle Inn, Atlantic Beach, Florida on 8-10 October 1976.
The Duval County Audubon Society, Mary Davidson, President,
hosted the 112 registrants. We wish to thank the Society for assum-
ing the costs of the meeting as a token of their support for the FOS,
and to thank also the Local Committee Chairman, Robert W. Loftin
and his able assistants Virginia Markgraf, Peggy Powell, Joyce Wil-
liams, Steve Sutton, and especially, Sam Grimes who led two field
trips and highlighted the buffet banquet with his delightful slide
show, “Birding through the years in the Jacksonville area.” The field
trips, organized by V. Markgraf, included a pelagic trip and visits to
interesting local areas.

The convention opened Friday evening with Ted Below’s movie
about the Dry Tortugas. Later, the Board of Directors met. Mrs.
Caroline Coleman was named Treasurer to fill the unexpired term of
Steve Stedman whose resignation was accepted with regret. She re-
ported a balance of $2400. The Editor, Fred Lohrer, urged that more
birders submit field notes to the FFN. John Edscorn, Helen Cruick-
shank, and Robert Barber were appointed to a special committee to
recommend a suitable memorial to Allen D. Cruickshank, and Wes
Biggs was appointed Membership Chairman. To save postage, mem-
bership cards will be sent to new members only, and not to those
renewing unless they request one.

Saturday's afternoon program, organized by Steve Sutton, in-
cluded “Why does Florida have so few breeding birds?” by Noel
Warner, “The bird islands of Nassau Sound” by Robert W. Loftin,
and “The XIV International Ornithological Congress field trip — The
Scottish bird islands” by Ted Allen. — Margaret C. Bowman, Secre-
tary.

CORRIGENDUM

Robert D. Barber has pointed out {in l/tt,) that the description of
a Wilson^s Storm-Petrel [Ocean ites ocean icus) seen at Marianna,
Florida on 25 September 1975 (Gray and Scott 1976, Fla. Field Nat.
4: 8) might apply Instead to V\dLTcouxt's\StoTm-?QtTe\.(Oceanoclroma
castro)^ a few of which were carried inland to Tennessee by the same
hurricane. After comparing this description with other published
descriptions, illustrations, and museum specimens of both species, I
concur in that opinion. The best field characters for separating the
two (color of webbing, length of tarsus) were not observed on the
Marianna bird. Therefore, with the consent of the authors of the
note, I suggest that this bird be hereafter considered an unidentified
storm-petrel. — Henry M. Stevenson, Tall Timbers Research Station,
Route 1, Box 160, Tallahassee, Florida 32303.

Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977 / 23

News and Notes

Dr. William B. Robertson, Jr., first FOS president, honored. — On 9

November 1 976 in New Orleans at the First Conference on Scientific
Research in the National Parks, Dr. William B. Robertson, Jr., received
the Distinguished Service Award. This highest honor of the Depart-
ment of the Interior was awarded to Dr. Robertson in recognition of
his outstanding contributions to the National Park Service in the
field of ecology and natural sciences.

Nathaniel P. Reed, Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Fish
and Wildlife and Parks credited Dr. Robertson as being a major force
in the development of the National Park Service science program.

*‘This quiet but extremely dedicated man has provided an out-
standing standard of research excellence for other scientists to
measure their accomplishments by,” Reed said at the presentation of
the award, “His service to the Department during his past 21 years of
Interior service has been In the highest professional tradition.”

Dr. Robertson’s pioneering research on the ecological role of fire
in the Everglades ecosystem led to the adoption of prescribed burn-
ing practices the world over, as well as to the first use of fire to
manage the natural resources of a national park.

Request for assistance. — As part of our continuing studies of the
population dynamics of Wood Storks in Florida, we recently color-
marked 300 nestling storks at Merritt Island and Pelican Island
National Wildlife Refuges with red patagial markers on left wings.
Each rectangular marker (180mm x 50mm) Is attached with a bright
yellow button, and each has the letter “M” or “P” in black, followed
by a 3 digit number. We hope to learn the seasonal movements of
central Florida storks, and the characteristics of sub-adult plumages.
Please report observations of marked storks to John C. Ogden, Na-
tional Audubon Research Department, 115 Indian Mound Trail,
Tavernier, Florida 33070. Remember, some storks were previously
marked in south Florida with round red wing markers, so carefully
note the shape of any marker seen on a stork.

Fall 1977 Meeting. ~ At the Red Carpet Inn, Interstate 4 and Hwy
436, Altamonte Springs, on 30 September — 2 October 1977. Local
host. Orange County Audubon Society. For information write Doris
Mager, Chairman, c/o Florida Audubon Society, P.O. Drawer 7, Mait-
land, Florida 32751 .

Spring 1 978 Meeting. — Tampa. Local host, Tampa Audubon Society.

24 / Florida Field Naturalist / Vol. 5, No. 1 / Spring 1977

THE FLORIDA FIELD NATURALIST
A Semi-annual Publication of The Florida Ornithological Society

Editor: FRED E. LOHRER, Archbold Biological Station, Rt. 2,
Box 180, Lake Placid, Florida 33852.

Managing Editor: KAREN G. HARROD, Florida Audubon Society,
P.O. Drawer 7, Maitland, Florida 32751.

Editorial Advisory Board: DAVID W. JOHNSTON, Department of
Zoology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611.
OSCAR T. OWRE, Department of Biology, University of Miami,
Coral Gables, Florida 33124.

WILLIAM B. ROBERTSON, JR., Everglades National Park, Home-
stead, Florida 33030.

GLEN E. WOOLFENDEN, Department of Biology, University of
South Florida, Tampa, Florida 33620.

The Elorida Field Naturalist welcomes maunscripts containing
new information on the biology of vertebrates In or near Florida,
with an emphasis bn birds.

SUGGESTIONS FOR CONTRIBUTORS
Submit manuscripts in triplicate to the Editor. They should be
typed, double-spaced, on one side of numbered sheets of standard
(8V2 X 11 in.) bond paper, with at least one inch margins all around.
Type tables on separate sheets and use space efficiently. Submit
black-and-white photographs as unmounted glossy prints no larger
than 8/2 X 11 inches. They must be sharp and have good contrast
with no heavy writing on the back. Diagrams and line drawings
should be in black ink with lettering large enough to permit reduc-
tion.

Titles should be short and descriptive and the body of the article
concise. Follow the form and style of a recent issue of The Florida
Field Naturalist Use the COUNCIL OF BIOLOGY EDITORS STYLE
MANUAL, Third Edition (AIBS 1972) in preparing manuscripts. All
references should be cited In the body of the text and listed at the
end under “Literature Cited.” Text citations should indicate author
and year of publication, e.g. (Bond 1961 ). If there are more than two
authors list the first followed by “et al.” (e.g. Blair et al. 1968). Indi-
cate specific pages of longer works, e.g. (Bond 1 961 : 44). If there are
five or fewer references they should be cited only in the text, e.g.
(Sprunt 1954, Florida bird life, New York, Coward McCann, Inc.) or
(Cruickshank 1974, Fla. Field Nat. 2: 1-3).

Capitalize the English name of bird species, and follow the first
mention of a species in text by the scientific name, underlined, in
parentheses. Scientific names should follow a widely accepted
authority for the group of animals or plants involved. For North
American birds use the A.O.U. Checklist, fifth ed. (1957) and its
32nd Supplement (1973, Auk 90: 411-419) and 33rd Supplement
(1976, Auk 94: 875-979).

Use abbreviations sparingly in the text except parenthetically e.g.
“Lake Placid (12 km S).” The metric system is preferred for all
measurements. Use the 24-hour time system (0700 or 1645) and the
military date system (4 July 1976).

FLORIDA AUDUBON SOCIETY
P. 0. DRAWER 7
MAITLAND, FLORIDA 32751

NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION

U. S. POSTAGE
PAID
Orlando, Florida
Permit #224

CONTENTS

STORRS L OLSON
NAIM. mjS OF NAT HIST
SMTTHsmim \mi
WASHINGTON DC

20560

BIRD AND MAMMAL PREDATORS ON THE CATTLE EGRET
IN FLORIDA.

James N, Layne, Fred E. Lohrer^ and Chester E. Winegarner. . . .1
OBSERVATIONS OF OSPREYS NESTING ON ARTIFICIAL
STRUCTURES IN CHARLOTTE HARBOR, FLORIDA.

Ralph W. Schreiber and Elizabeth Anne Schreiber 5

GREATER SANDHILL CRANES WINTERING IN FLORIDA
AND GEORGIA.

Scott M. Melvin 8

FIELD NOTES

Fourth record of the Artie Loon from Florida.

Larry Hopkins and Glen E. Woolfenden 72

Second Florida breeding record of the Ruddy Duck.

Gail E. Menk and Henry M. Stevenson 12

Bathing in captive Sandhill Cranes.

Stephen A. Nesbitt 13

Recent changes in winter crane use of Payne’s Prairie.

Stephen A. Nesbitt 16

Laughing Gull breeds in northeast Florida.

Robert W. Loftin and Roger Sallas 7

A Razorbill at St. George Island, Florida.

John R. Patterson and Gail E Menk 18

First sighting of a Thick-billed Murre for Florida.

Howard P. Langridge. . .79

Florida Birds in the Periodical Literature, 1976 20

Report on the 1976 fall meeting.

Margaret C. Bowman 23

Corrigendum

Henry M. Stevenson 23

News and Notes 24

The Florida Field Naturalist

A Semi-annual Journal of
The Florida Ornithological Society

Vol. 5

FALL 1977

5-YEAR INDEX ISSUE

No. 2

FLORIDA ORNITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY

Officers for 1977=1979

President, David W. Johnston, Department of Zoology, University of
Florida, Gainesville, Florida 3261 1 .

Vice-President, John C. Ogden, National Audubon Society, Research
Department, 115 Indian Mound Trail, Tavernier, Florida 33070.

Secretary, Barbara Kittleson, 5334 Woodhaven Drive, Lakeland,

Florida 33803.

Treasurer, Caroline Coleman, 1701 NW 24th Street, Gainesville,
Florida 32601.

Directors

1976=1978

Frank M. Dunstan, Rt. 1, Box 205-U, Ruskin, Florida 33570.

John B. Edscorn, Rt. 14, Box 350, Lakeland, Florida 33801.

Peggy Powell, 2965 Forest Circle, Jacksonville, Florida 32217.
1977=1979

W. Wilson Baker, Tall Timbers Research Station, Rt. 1, Box 160,
Tallahassee, Florida 32303.

John H. HIntermister, Rt. 3, Box 384, Gainesville, Florida 32601.

Herbert W. Kale, II, Ornithological Research Division, 35=1 st Court
SW, Vero Beach, Florida 32960.

All persons interested In Florida natural history, particularly its
abundant bird life, are invited to join the Florida Ornithological
Society by writing the Treasurer. Membership dues are $5.00 per
year for regular members (those who are members of the Florida Au-
dubon Society) and $6.00 per year for associate members. All memi-
bers receive The Florida Field Naturalist. Subscription price for insti-
tutions and non-members is $6.00 per year. Single issues are $2.50 per
copy for regular members, $3.00 per copy for associate members and
subscribers.

Manuscripts submitted for publication and books intended for re-
view should be sent to the Editor (see inside back cover). Notice of
change of address, claims for undelivered or defective copies of this
journal, and requests for information about advertising, subscrip-
tions, and back numbers should be sent to the Assistant Treasurer,
Mrs. Betty Valkenburg, Florida Ornithological Society, P.O. Drawer
7, Maitland, Florida 32751.

Published semi-annually by the Florida Ornithological Society,
Maitland, Florida 32751. Printed by Sharp Offset Printing Inc.,

Rutland, Vermont 057017

NOTES ON AVOCETS AND STILTS IN TAMPA BAY, FLORIDA

James J. Dinsmore

Two members of the family Recurvirostridae are common in
suitable habitats in Florida, but other than distributional notes, little
has been written about their habits in Florida. The Black-necked Stilt
(Himantopus mexicanus), a common breeder through much of
Florida, winters in small numbers in the southern tip of the state
(Sprunt 1954, Florida bird life, New York, National Audubon Soci-
ety) while the American Avocet (Recurvirostra americana) winters
commonly and summers sparingly in a few localities (Woolfenden
and Schreiber 1 973, pp I llj-l -22 in A summary of knowledge of the
eastern Gulf of Mexico 1973, St. Petersburg, State Univ. System of
Fla. Inst. Oceanography). Over a period of 4 years I studied seasonal
cycles, behavior, and breeding biology of both species.

Methods

From 1 October 1971-23 June 1975 I visited McKay Bay in the
northeast corner of Tampa Bay, Flillsborough County, Florida, more
than 1 00 times, usually between 0800 and 1 1 00, at about 2 week in-
tervals with only a few gaps as long as a month. On each visi.t I re-
corded the number of stilts and avocets seen. During the winter of
1971-72 I studied foraging habitat and methods used by avocets, and
I was able to determine the sex of most of the birds (Hamilton 1975,
Ornithol. Monogr. 17: 1-98). During the summer I paid special atten-
tion to the nesting activities of stilts.

At McKay Bay most of my observations were made near the
Tampa incinerator plant, where stilts and especially avocets foraged
and roosted on the tidal flats east and southeast of the incinerator.
These mud flats have a thick silt bottom and are rimmed by man-
groves, mainly Laguncularia. Also, avocets foraged and roosted and
stilts foraged, roosted, and nested around an impoundment just
southeast of the incinerator. This shallow pond has a thick silt bot-
tom and serves as a settling pond for material from the incinerator. It
is rimmed with thick beds of knot grass (Paspaium vaginatum) near
the water and saltbush [Baccharis) away from the water. The shore-
line is mainly dredged material with shell rubble. Although I did not
quantitatively sample the pond’s water, it appeared to be rich with
invertebrates and dip net samples contained large numbers of
mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis). Yearly this pond attracts large, num-
bers of migrating and wintering shorebirds, waterfowl, herons, and
terns.

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

25

Results

Seasonal cycle

Avocets — At McKay Bay American Avocets occur the year
round, as I saw them on virtually every visit. Although they move
with the tide and sometimes occur in areas where it is difficult to
get a full count of all the birds present at once, my counts show con-
sistent seasonal trends which I believe indicate real population
changes. My highest count each year was in November or December
(Table 1) with a somewhat smaller number staying through the rest
of the winter. Each year of my study the Tampa Christmas Bird
Count (CBC) (Amer. Birds, Vols 26-29), which includes a full survey
of McKay Bay, has had a smaller count of avocets than my peak
count (Tablel). In most years about 100-150 could be seen daily
during the winter at McKay Bay but in 1971-72 the population was
much larger with at least 294 present on 17 April. Migration was ap-
parent by late April and by mid-May probably only the summer pop-
ulation was present. For example, in 1972 numbers dropped as fol-
lows: 17 April-294; 19 April-245; 24 April-236; 26 April-194; 1 May-
77; 8 May-62. During mid-May - July numbers stayed relatively
stable, but by late July - early August numbers gradually increased.
This may be caused by the arrival of migrants from the north or just
concentration of summering individuals from other parts of Florida.
By mid-August some migrants probably are arriving. For instance, in
1973 counts were as follows: 14 june-56; 19 june-44; 29 june-58;
6 july-70; 11 july-92; 3 August-109; 20 August-130. By October
numbers approach the yearly peak.

Stilts — Usually Black-necked Stilts are summer residents in Mc-
Kay Bay. In 3 of the 4 springs I had adequate records to indicate
their time of arrival as 1, 15, and 16 March. Most stilts arrived by
early April (e.g. 31 on 3 April 1972) and the population was fairly

Table 1. Summer and Winter Peak Counts of American Avocets at McKay Bay, Florida

1971

1972

1973

1974

1975

Summer peak

44

92

52

83

Winter peak

Christmas Bird
Count

365

(5 Dec.)

95

(12 June^)

363

(3 Nov. )

150

(11 July)

467

(2 Nov.)

300

(19 July)

231

(27 Nov.)

100

(23 June)

!_/ Date of peak

count

26

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

stable after that. In 1 972, when the breeding population was probably
the highest of the 4 years, 76 stilts were counted on 29 May. As only
20 were present 2 weeks later, that peak may have included some
very late migrants. Nesting occurred in May and June and by early
August the population began declining. On 15 and 17 August 1974
flocks of as many as 1 1 6 xyere present, apparently including migrants.
Generally the last birds were seen in late August or early September
(3, 20 August 1973; 3, 2 September 1974). On 27 November 1974 I
saw 1 stilt at McKay Bay and the Tampa CBC includes 2 on 28
December 1974. Certainly no appreciable numbers winter at McKay
Bay.

Behavior

Roosting — In early morning avocets usuallyjoost in tight flocks
on mud flats or in shallow water, each individual standing on one leg
with the head and neck over the back. During the morning these
flocks gradually break up as the birds begin to preen and then dis-
perse to forage, in contrast, stilts do not form dense roosting flocks
at McKay Bay. Generally only a few were seen roosting together,
usually on mud flats in a posture similar to that of avocets.

Foraging — I saw avocets use several foraging methods, including
the Single, Multiple, and Dabble Scythe (Hamilton 1975). On 17
days, (14 January - 19 April 1972) for all avocets whose sex I could
determine, I recorded whether they were foraging in shallow water
(below ankle), deep water (above ankle but still walking), or very
deep water (swimming). On some days I made as many as 5 separate
counts. Both sexes spent about equal time in deep water but females
spent more time in shallow water and males spent more time foraging
in very deep water (Table2). The differences are highly significant
(x2 = 58.13, p:<:.005). The amount of time spent in deep water

Table 2.

Comparison of Foraging Zones of

at McKay Bay, Florida

Male and Female American

Avocets

Foragi ng

Zone

Shallow Water

No. obs.

Deep Water

No. obs.

Very Deep Water

No. obs.

lotal obs.

Male

267 (19.3^)

656 (47.3)

464 (33.5)

1387

Femal e

354 (31.4)

501 (44.4)

274 (24.3)

1129

y Percentage

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

27

Table 3= Seasonal Chanqes in Foraainq Zones Used by American Avocets in
McKay Bay, Florida

Month

Foraqi nq

Zone

Shal 1 ow Water

No. obs.

Deep Water

No. obs.

Very Deep Water

No. obs.

Total obs.

Jan.

315 (30.4^)

485 (46.8)

237 (22.9)

1037

Feb.

159 (45.4)

168 (A8.0)

23 (6.6)

350

March

142 (16.9)

382 (45.5)

315 (37.5)

839

Apri 1

5 (1.7)

122 (42.1)

163 (56.2)

290

621 (24.7)

1157 (46.0)

738 (29.3)

2516

1/ Percentages

Stayed fairly constant over time but a noticeable seasonal change
occurred. They spent more time foraging in very deep water in late
March and April than they did earlier in the year (Table 3). This was
especially noticeable on the impoundment where tightly packed
flocks of up to 50 avocets swam together and used the Dabble Scythe
method of foraging. Hamilton (1975) found that in summer, avocets
in California showed no significant differences in the water depths
the sexes used for foraging although his figure 12 shows a slight
tendency for males to use deeper water than females. However, he
did find that the sexes used different foraging methods and thus
showed some niche segregation. Unfortunately I did not record
foraging methods by sex to see if this pattern held true among win-
tering avocets.

1 did not record in detail the foraging methods used by stilts but
most appeared to forage by Pecking (Hamilton 1975).

interspecific encounters — The only interaction ! noted between
stilts and avocets was on 9 June 1975 when a stilt landed in the
midst of a group of avocets. One avocet advanced, bill forward, and
drove the stilt away.

Several times stilts mobbed Laughing Gulls [Lams atriciHa) that
flew over a nesting area. Once, an immature White ibis [Eudocimus
albus) landed near a half-grown stilt. Two adult stilts repeatedly at-
tacked the ibis but the Ibis moved only slightly and seemingly ig-
nored them. Finally one stilt, bill extended, ran toward the ibis, flew
just before It reached the ibis, and the ibis flew away.

28

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

Reproduction

Avocets — Although avocets do not breed in Florida, some repro-
ductive behavior was seen. By late March - early April 1972, I com-
monly saw male and female avocets foraging together as if they were
paired. On 9 June 1975, 2 avocets standing together away from the
main flock head-pumped together, poked their bills at the ground
together, picked up bits of “nest’’ material and flicked them over
their backs. On 16 June some individual avocets chased others away
if they approached too closely. On 23 June ! saw no further sexual
activity nor any sign of a nest. These observations suggest that some
pairing occurs on the wintering ground (see Gibson 1971, Condor
73: 444-454).

Stilts — Black-necked Stilts nest regularly at McKay Bay. When
they first arrive, their loud “whit-whit” calls are heard as birds chase
back and forth, apparently in territorial encounters. These chases are
common in April - May. Obvious pairs stand at intervals along the
edge of the pond. The only copulation I saw was on 26 April 1974
and it was much like that described by Hamilton (1975). After the
male dismounted, the pair walked daintily in step for a few steps,
then walked faster and separated. Their bills were not crossed as
Hamilton (1975) found. I never saw stilts carrying nest material or
nest-building.

Of 10 nests I found, 7 were over water (mean depth 11.6 cm), 1
was on land near the edge of a clump of cattails (Typha sp.), and 2
were on the ground away from the water, on a small hummock near
some grass and within a clump of saltbush, respectively. Each nest
was a platform of dried vegetation and sticks, often lined with stones,
shells and, nearly always, small pieces of charred wood, apparently
from the nearby incinerator. Three of the nests over water were on
tiny islands near the shore with little cover while the others were
well-hidden in dense clumps of Paspalum vaginatum near shore.
Mean external and internal nest diameters were 21.4 and 11 cm re-
spectively (n = 5).

Of 8 nests I found before hatching, 7 had 4 eggs and one had 6
(x = 4.2). The length and width of 5 eggs averaged 45.2 and 31 .2 mm.

I can determine nesting phenology only by back dating. In 1974
I found 6 nests with eggs and 1 with one chick on 24 May and an-
other nest with eggs on 28 May. On 30 May, 2 nests had pipped eggs
and by 3 June only 2 of the 8 nests still contained eggs, the others
being empty. Stilt chicks leave the nest soon after hatching (Hamil-
ton 1975), so eggs in the empty nests probably had hatched during
the intervals between visits. On 29 May 1972 I saw 11 very small
downy chicks and on 31 May I saw 2 broods of 4 and 1 of 2 chicks
being led by an adult. Thus in 1972 and 1974 peak of hatching ap-

Florida Field Naturalist Vo!. 5

Fal! 1977

29

peared to be the last week of May. Hamilton (1975) gives the incuba-
tion period as 25 days, indicating egg-laying at McKay Bay should
have occurred during the first week of May.

After the initial observations of broods being led by an adult, the
young remained hidden much of the time and were very difficult to
see. On 23 June 1975 I saw 2 young almost adult In size and in other
years I have June, July, and August records of what were almost cer-
tainly young birds.

Adults vigorously defended nests with eggs, and especially pipped
eggs or young chicks, by circling over me and giving loud “whit-whit”
calls and by diving at me, rearing the head back and giving a harsh
“wawack” note as they passed by, often within inches of my head
(Dive-bombing Display, Hamilton 1975). Normally several pairs
would join to circle and call overhead as I approached a nest, al-
though usually only one pair would dive at me when I was close to
any given nest. Stilts also landed and gave a distraction display (Wing-
flagging Display, Hamilton 1975). Based on counts of the adults that
called over me each year, about 10-15 pairs of stilts nested near the
impoundment.

Summary

The results of this study indicate that on the central Gulf Coast
of Florida American Avocets are permanent residents but are much
less numerous in summer. Although no breeding in Florida has been
reported as yet, the evidence of pairing suggests that perhaps in the
future small numbers may breed there.

The data presented here suggest that avocets, which show sexual
dimorphism in bill shape (Hamilton 1975), divide the resources by
foraging in different water depths (Table 2). Hamilton (1975) did
not find such differences but did find sexual differences in foraging
methods.

Black-necked Stilts nest in small numbers at McKay Bay. Egg-
laying occurs in early May and the eggs hatch in late May. Nests
usually are over water and contain 4 eggs. Most stilts leave the area
by late summer and only rarely do they winter at McKay Bay.

Acknowledgment

I thank E. E. Klaas and M. R. Ryan for numerous comments
on an early draft of this paper, and F. M. Dunstan helped with the
plant identifications.

Biology Department, University of Tampa, Tampa, Florida.
Present address: Department of Animal Ecology, Iowa State Univer-
sity, Ames, Iowa 5001 1.

30

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 5

Fall 1977

SHELL THICKNESS IN BROWN PELICAN EGGS
FROM TAMPA BAY, FLORIDA

Ralph W. Schreiber
Introduction

Among birds, the Brown Pelican {Pelecanus occidentalis) has
been central in investigations of DDE, eggshell thinning, and attend-
ant population declines. The eggshell thinning and population decline
phenomena have been most severe in California (Risebrough et al.
1971), but with a decline in levels of environmental contamination
by DDE since 1972, eggshells have increased in thickness and the
California population is recovering (Anderson et ai. 1975). Blus et
al. (1975, and references therein) have extensively explored the loga-
rithmic relationship between DDE residues and amount of shell thin-
ning in South Carolina and Elorida Brown Pelican populations, pri-
marily with eggs collected in 1969 and 1970. The Florida population
appears stable (Williams and Martin 1 968, 1 970; Schreiber and Schrei-
ber 1973; S. A. Nesbitt, pers. comm.) and its level of eggshell thinning
is the lowest of any geographic area in the United States (Schreiber and
Risebrough 1972, Blus et al. 1974).

Data for the Brown Pelican provide an encouraging picture re-
garding DDE environmental contamination (Anderson et al. 1975)
and I wish to report additional encouraging information in this
regard.

Methods and Results

From 1969 through 1976 I made weekly visits during the nesting
season to the large Brown Pelican colony on Tarpon Key, Pinellas
County, Florida. In 1969 and 1970 eggs were collected for chemical
analysis and shell thickness measurements (Schreiber and Risebrough
1972). Since 1972 I have picked up shell fragments beneath nests.
Many could readily be identified as crushed, hatched (the large end
broken off), or eaten (holes in the center of the shell) by Fish Crows
(Corvus ossifragus). I measured these shells for thickness with a dial
micrometer as close to the waist of the egg as possible. Three to 5
measurements were made on each shell, and a mean calculated that
was compared to the pre-1943 shell thickness of 0.557 mm for
Brown Pelicans in Florida (Anderson and Hickey 1970). This sample
represents primarily hatched eggs that may undergo some natural
shell thinning during the incubation process and shells that broke
during various stages of Incubation. While considerable variability in

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

31

Table 1. Shell Thickness and Percent Thinning of Brown Pelican Eggs Collected
From Nests or the Ground in a Colony in Tampa Bay, Florida, Compared to a
Pre-1943 Thickness of 0.557 mm for Florida Eggs in Anderson and Hickey (1970)

Year

n

Mean thickness +

in mm

95% Confidence Limit
( Range)

Percent decrease
in shell thickness

1969

14

0.506

+

0.022

(0.55 -

0.42)

9*

1970

21

0.509

+

0.024

(0.58 -

0.39)

9*

1972

32

0.529

+

0.053

(0.62 -

0.40)

5

1973

15

0.487

+

0.065

(0.58 -

0.39)

12

1974

6

0.524

+

0.061

(0.58 -

0.44)

6

1975

31

0.533

+

0.053

(0.64 -

0.39)

4

1976

31

0.545

+

0.037

(0.62 -

0.47)

2

* published in Schreiber and Risebrougn (1972)

thickness exists within the total sample, the variability within any

one year is no greater than the total. With a sample of 1 15, I believe
these eggs provide a random sample of the eggshells laid during these
years by this breeding population.

An increase in mean shell thickness since 1973 and especially in
1975 and 1976 compared to 1969 and 1970 is obvious from these
results (Table 1). I could detect no differences between thickness of
crow-abused eggs and those that hatched.

No crushed eggs were found in 76 nests in 1969 in this colony.
In 1970 I found 4 crushed eggs In 62 nests. I found one crushed egg
in 1972, 4 in 1973, and one in 1975. The measurements of the 6
crushed eggs collected in 1972-1975 and their percent shell thinning

are as follows:

Percent

Year Thickness (mm) Thinning

1972 0.400 28.2

1973 0.390 30.0

0.402 27,8

0.415 25.5

0.422 24.2

1975 0.393 29.4

X=0. 403+0. 012 27.5

The 4 crushed eggshells found in 1973 undoubtedly account for the
low mean thickness for that year. I cannot explain why such a high
percentage of the eggshells collected that year were crushed. Addi-
tionally, in my total sample (Table 1 ), 1 1 eggs that hatched showed a
mean thickness of 0.459^ 0.019 mm (range 0.417-0.481) or a per-
cent thinning of 1 7.6 (range 1 3.7-26.8). All other eggs measured over
0.500 mm In thickness. These data demonstrate the variability in the
amount of shell thinning and in the level at which eggs are crushed.
One hatched egg is actually thinner than 2 that were crushed.

Discussion

DDE is the chemical found most overwhelmingly in pelican eggs,
it is strongly associated with all cases of pelican shell thinning thus

32

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

far investigated, and was the only residue that consistently accounted
for all or most of the shell thinning in Brown Pelican eggs in Florida
(Blus et al. 1972, 1974, 1975). The cause and effect relationship be-
tween DDE in the diet and shell thinning is established in wild popu-
lations of other species (Cooke 1973, Stickel 1975). Thus, Brown
Pelican eggshell thinning is assumed to be most closely related to
DDE. Other compounds which cause shell thinning in other species
in experimental studies are not found in pelican eggs in appreciable
amounts, if at all. Eggshell thinning and DDE show a highly signifi-
cant inverse correlation in pelican eggs: i.e., as the amount of DDE
increases the shells are thinner. It is thus valid to assume that the
level of eggshell thinning provides an accurate index to the chemical
residue burden of DDE in the female that laid the egg. Therefore, a
large sample of pelican eggs provides an index to the DDE burden of
a population and its environment.

The presence of a few extremely thin shells in my sample proba-
bly results from a few females that still have high body burdens of
DDE. However, the general increase in eggshell thickness in recent
years demonstrated here, and the thicker upper and lower limits of
the range of thickness, are indications of the decreasing level of con-
tamination by DDE of the marine fishes on which this population of
pelicans feeds.

Eggshell thickness can be measured using an inexpensive instru-
ment immediately upon obtaining eggs. These measurements give a
highly accurate index to the chemical residue burdens of DDE in the
female that laid the egg. Thus the need to perform expensive chemi-
cal analyses simply to detect DDE do not seem to be warranted in
this species, although analysis for other chemicals may be important
as monitors of potential deletrious effects on the species.

However, measuring reproductive success is the most important
population monitoring technique biologists can perform for this spe-
cies. The knowledge of reproductive performance contributes im-
portantly and relatively inexpensively to timely habitat and species
management. I suggest that any recovery plan intended for pelicans
can best be implemented by measurement of reproductive success
and other biological parameters such as use of nesting-roosting-loaf-
ing-feeding habitat. This should be accompanied with measurement
of eggshell thickness as an immediate and inexpensive index to the
body burdens of the DDT type chemicals in the reproductive seg-
ment of the population as demonstrated in this study.

Acknowledgments

D. W. Anderson, D. W. Johnston, L. F. Kiff, W. B. Robertson,
and G. E. Woolfenden made valuable comments on the manuscript. I

Florida Field Naturalist Vo 1. 5 Fall 1977 33

value their ideas and suggestions but I am, of course, responsible for

the entire content of this paper. This research has been supported by
many individuals and organizations who have been mentioned in
other papers. Pat Reynolds typed the manuscript.

Literature Cited

Anderson, D. W., and J. J. Hickey. 1970. Oological data on egg and
breeding characteristics of Brown Pelicans. Wilson Bull. 82: 1 4-28.
Anderson, D. W., and J. J, Hickey. 1972. Eggshell changes in certain
North American birds. Proc. XV Intern. Ornithol. Cong. 514-540.
Anderson, D. W., J . R. Jehl, R. W. Risebrough, L. A. Woods, Jr., L. R.
DeWeese, and W. G. Edgecomb. 1975. Brown Pelicans: Improved
reproduction off the southern California coast. Science 190:
806-808.

Blus, L. ]., A. A. Belisle, and R. M. Prouty. 1974. Relations of the
Brown Pelican to certain environmental pollutants. Pesticides
Monitoring j. 7: 181-194.

Blus, L. j., C. D. Gish, A. A. Belisle, and R. M. Prouty. 1972. Loga-
rithmic relationship of DDE residues and eggshell thinning.
Nature 235: 376-377.

Blus, L. ]., T. Joanen, A. A. Belisle, and R. M. Prouty. 1975. The
Brown Pelican and certain environmental pollutants in Louisiana.
Bull. Env. Cont. Toxic. 13: 646-655.

Cooke, A. S. 1973. Shell thinning in avian eggs by environmental pol-
lutants. Environ. Pollut. 4: 85-152.

Risebrough, R. W., F. C. Sibley, and M. N. Kirven. 1971 . Reproductive
failures of the Brown Pelican on Anacapa Island in 1969. Amer.
Birds 25: 8-9.

Schreiber, R. W., and E. A. Schreiber. 1973. Florida’s Brown Pelican
population: Christmas bird count analyses. Amer. Birds 27: 711-
715.

Schreiber, R. W., and R. W. Risebrough. 1972. Studies of the Brown
Pelican. Wilson Bull. 84: 118-135.

Stickel, W. H. 1975. Some effects of pollutants in terrestrial eco-
systems. PP 25-74. In Ecological Tocicology Research (A. D. Mc-
Intyre, and C. F. Mills, Eds.) New York, Plenum Publ. Corp.
Williams, L. E., and L. Martin. 1968. Nesting status of the Brown
Pelican in Florida in 1968. Q. j. Fla. Acad. Sci. 31 : 130-140.
Williams, L. E., and L, Martin. 1970. Nesting populations of Brown
Pelicans in Florida. Proc. 24th Ann. Conf. S. E. Assoc. Game and
Fish Comm. 154-1 69.

Ornithology Section^ Los Angeles County Museum of Natural His-
tory, 900 Exposition Boulevard, Los Angeles, California 90007.

34

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

GULLS WINTERING IN FLORIDA:
CHRISTMAS BIRD COUNT ANALYSIS

Elizabeth Anne Schreiber and Ralph W. Schreiber
Introduction

Christmas Bird Counts (CBC’s) provide a unique data source for
determining long term avian population trends over wide geographic
areas (Kadlec and Drury 1 968, Bystrak 1971 , Schreiber and Schreiber
1973, Stahlecker 1975, Anderson and Anderson 1976).

The Herring and Ring-billed Gull {Larus argentatus and L, dela-
warensis) populations of northeastern United States have increased
tremendously over the past 75 years (Drury and Kadlec 1974, Lud-
wig 1974). Many of these gulls winter in Florida, especially as imma-
tures (Southern 1974, Moore 1976, and references therein). Little is
known of the status of Laughing Gull [Larus atricilla) populations
and their movements.

In this paper we analyze the CBC’s of Florida for the past 33
years as a means of measuring the relative proportion and population
status of the three common gull species in Florida: Herring, Ring-
billed and Laughing gull.

Methods

We calculated the index of birds per 10 party hours in the Florida
CBC’s 1943 through 1975 (Aud. Field Notes: 11-23, Amer. Birds:
25-30) as in Schreiber and Schreiber (1973) with the exception that
individual counts were eliminated from analysis if the species under
consideration was not seen in a given year. Including party hours for
counts in which the species was not seen greatly reduces the index,
especially with gulls that are not seen regularly on inland counts.

The same index was calculated and graphed for many individual
count areas (St. Petersburg, Fort Myers, Sarasota, Coot Bay, Jack-
sonville, Daytona, Cocoa Beach) for comparison to each other and
the state as a whole. We do not present these results but mention
them where appropriate.

The low number of counts (5-6) in the 1940’s and early 1950’s
probablymakes these data less reliable. However, since the mid-1950’s
the number of counts is sufficient to give a reasonable indication of

the population trends of these three wintering species.

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 5

Fall 1977

35

Results

Herring Gull: The Herring Gull index (Figure 1) indicates a steady
wintering population over the years, although great fluctuations in
individual count areas exist.

The total Herring Gull population in the northeastern United
States doubled every 12H5 years from 1900 to 1940 (Kadlec and
Drury 1 968). During the eradication programs of the 1 940’s the pop-
ulation remained level (Drury and Kadlec 1974), and then began a
slow increase to the present (Drury 1973, 1974).

Ludwig (1966) reported a near doubling of the population of
breeding Herring Gulls on Lakes Huron and Michigan between 1960
and 1965, but Smith (1959) showed that few Michigan Herring Gulls
winter in Florida. Kadlec and Drury (1968) indicated that the
Florida winter population of Herring Gulls was a relatively small pro-
portion of the total number of that species in the United States.
However, the Herring Gull population of Florida apparently has not
increased as dramatically as has the species in the breeding portion of
its range. Moore (1976) showed that Great Lakes immature Herring
Gulls winter mainly in Florida, while the adults stay closer to the
breeding range, and our field data for the west coast of Florida agree
with this. Moore also found that the winter population does not
build up to a maximum in Florida until January which may contri-
bute to the large fluctuations in December when the CBC's are con-

YIAR

Figure 1. Christmas Bird Count indices of birds per ten party hours
for three species of gulls, Family Laridae, in Florida, 1943-1975.

36

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

ducted. With the few CBC's in the 1940's, data are too few to be
sure, but it appears that the gull control program in Maine during
that period may have affected the Florida winter population. How-
ever, a lack of an increase in the Florida population over the past
20 years as indexed by the CBC’s is surprising to us.

The numbers of Herring Gulls seen on the CBC’s greatly diminish
south of Sarasota on the west coast and Cocoa Beach on the east
coast. There are no trends noticeable in any of the specific count
areas. Wide fluctuations occur from year to year and no relation be-
tween count areas is apparent.

Ring-billed Gull: the Ring-billed Gull index (Figure 1) is highly vari-
able and difficult to interpret. The Great Lakes Ring-billed Gulls
concentrate in Florida during the winter (Southern 1974) and it is
safe to assume that most of them found in Florida come from the
Great Lakes colonies. From the CBC's it is tempting to suggest a
10-12 year population cycle for this species but we believe that to
be spurious. Probably the high indices of 1949 and 1950 are arti-
facts of few counts and few hours in the field. Ludwig (1974) indi-
cates a stable breeding population in Lakes Huron and Michigan be-
tween 1940 and 1960. This stability is not reflected in the Florida
CBC’s or in any of the individual count areas.

Between 1960 and 1965 Ludwig (1966, 1974) reports that the
Ring-billed Gull populations of Lakes Huron and Michigan grew from
27,000 to 90,000 breeding pairs and the fledging rates were high.
During this time and for 5 years after, the wintering populations of
Ring-bills in Florida declined. Then in the 1970’s numbers increased
somewhat.

We are unable to Interpret the wintering population fluctuations
indicated for this species in light of what is known of its breeding
status. Many fewer Ring-bills winter on the east coast of Florida than
on the west coast. Jacksonville and Cocoa Beach counts are some-
what parallel; Sarasota and Fort Myers show similar trends in a few
years; but St. Petersburg and Coot Bay counts, inexplicably are al-
most exactly parallel. A general increase on the west coast counts
from 1950 to 1961 occurred and then declined to 1969. 1969-1975
show drastic fluctuations. No trends are indicated on the Florida
east coast.

Laughing Gull: With exceptions (1945, 1946, 1956, 1961,1962), the
Laughing Gull index (Figure 1 ) is quite consistent from the 1940’s to
1966. The exceptions are due to great fluctuations in different areas,
not in any single count. After 1966 a dramatic increase occurs, more
than tripling the population by 1972 and remaining at that level for
the last four years.

Florida Field Naturalist VoL 5

Fall 1977

37

Nisbet (1971) documented the decline of Laughing Gulls in New
England from peak numbers in the late 1930’s with a steady decline
in breeding numbers through the 1940’s, 50’s, and 60’s. This decline
is reflected in the Jacksonville area counts but not in any of the
other east or west coast counts, perhaps Indicating that New England
Laughing Gulls winter south along the Atlantic coast only as far as
the Jacksonville area. No apparent change has occurred in the much
larger Laughing Gull populations of New Jersey and Virginia (P.
Buckley, pers. comm.) but few published data exist on these or other
Laughing Gull nesting areas.

Laughing Gulls were once an uncommon breeder in the south-
eastern United States (Sprunt 1954). Our data (unpublished) for
Tampa Bay and Charlotte Harbor indicate a huge increase in the nest-
ing population from the mid-1960’s to the mld-1970’s, but few other
data document this increase. The Increase has been primarily in
metropolitan count areas (St. Petersburg, Tampa, Dade County,
Naples, Cocoa Beach, Sarasota) and Coot Bay, with several counts re-
porting only a few or hundreds of Laughing Gulls in the early 1960’s
but thousands or tens of thousands in the 1970*s. Band recoveries
(unpublished) from birds we banded in Tampa Bay and Charlotte
Harbor (1972-1976) indicate that these birds are dispersing all over
peninsular west coast Florida In the winter and some go into the
Caribbean. Only 2 recoveries are from Florida’s east coast.

We suspect that an increase in the amount of food available in
garbage dumps and in use of these garbage dumps by Laughing Gulls
in Florida is related to the increase in population. If true, this Increase
would closely parallel in causes that of the Herring Gull population
in the northeast United States (Kadlec and Drury 1968). The use of
dumps by gulls in Florida deserves further study.

Analyses of individual count areas for each species do not show
shifts in population concentrations from year to year except very
sporadically. More noticeable are similar fluctuations over short peri-
ods between two areas, indicating a general rise or fall of the popu-
lation in a broad geographic area. An analysis of the total numbers of
each species counted and total hours in the field showed a steady in-
crease over the years, except in 1954-55 and 1964-68 when the num-
bers of all 3 gull species remained stable while hours in the field con-
tinued to rise.

Discussion

We find the Christmas Bird Count data for the 3 most common

gulls wintering in Florida difficult to interpret and present this analy-
sis in part as a caution to others attempting similar studies. We believe

38

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

that CBC’s can in some cases be extremely useful as an index to pop-
ulation trends of certain species (i.e., Brown Pelicans; Schreiberand
Schreiber 1973, Anderson and Anderson 1976). However, as with all
new methods, a need for caution exists in the use of CBC’s and the
means of analysis.

The potential problems are illustrated here most obviously in the

Herring and Ring-billed Gulls, species whose breeding status is well
known. The Florida CBC's, either for individual counts or for the
whole state, do not reflect the known breeding status of these spe-
cies. Perhaps this results because the species are so wide ranging. We
know that most Herring Gull immatures from the Great Lakes spend
the winter in Florida, and since Florida is a large geographic area
readily used by gulls we would expect the winter population to re-
flect the breeding status of birds. Perhaps their large numbers work
against accuracy of actual counts and reflect more clearly the count
participants' greater interest in listing numbers of species rather than
in careful counting of each species.

When analyzing CBC's it is probably impossible to take into ac-
count all factors that can influence individual counts: number of par-
ties, hours spent by each party, hours spent in suitable habitat for
the bird under study, number of people in each party, ability or in-
clination of the participants to count or estimate large flocks, organi-
zation of parties in count areas, use of boats and other vehicles,
knowledge of where gulls are found, weather conditions (both local
on count day and of a larger area as it might affect fall migration),
and if the count is done on a weekday or weekend (garbage dumps,
where gulls feed, are usually covered and inactive on weekends). Fur-
ther analyses, as well exemplified by Anderson and Anderson 1976,
must take into account some of these factors.

Count areas where one person is in charge over a period of years
are probably more reliable as trend indicators than those in areas
where the organizer changes from year to year. Analyses of individual
counts for birds like gulls, that range widely and erratically, are al-
most useless. Even in this analysis, where we used the whole state, it
is obvious that the population trends are hidden. Perhaps indices of
some bird populations cannot be obtained through a late December
census when the fall migration has not been completed. Probably the
total range of these species must be considered for accurate popula-
tion monitoring.

We believe CBC’s are a valuable resource in monitoring bird pop-
ulations and we emphasize the need for consistent, careful counts.
With bird species as large, conspicuous, and easily counted as are the
gulls, we encourage participants in the CBC’s to COUNT or estimate
populations as accurately as possible since their data are going to be
used for scientific studies of bird populations. Records of age-class

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

39

distributions of the various species would add importantly to the
value of the Christmas Bird Counts.

Acknowledgments

The participants of the Florida CBC's over the past 32 years
made this study possible. We would like to thank the supporters of
Seabird Research, Inc., Glen E. Woolfenden, the Los Angeles County
Museum of Natural History, and Pat Reynolds.

Literature Cited

Anderson, D. W,, and I. T. Anderson. 1976. Distribution and status
of Brown Pelicans in the California current. Amer. Birds 30: 3-12.
Bystrak, D. 1971, How to prepare a winter range map from Christmas
bird count data. Amer. Birds 25: 952-956.

Drury, W. H. 1973-74. Population changes in New England seabirds.

Bird-Banding 44: 267-313,45: M5.

Drury, W. H., and J. A. Kadlec. 1 974. The current status of the Her-
ring Gull population in the northeastern United States. Bird-
Banding 45: 297-306.

Kadlec, J. A., and W. H. Drury. 1968. Structure of the New England
Herring Gull population. Ecology 49: 645-676.

Ludwig, J. P. 1966. Herring and Ring-billed Gull populations of the
Great Lakes 1960-1965. Great Lakes Research Division, Univ.
Michigan, Publ. No. 15: 80-89.

Ludwig, J. P. 1974. Recent changes in the Ring-billed Gull population
and biology in the Laurentian Great Lakes. Auk 91: 575-594.
Moore, F. R. 1976. The dynamics of seasonal distribution of Great
Lakes Herring Gulls. Bird-Banding 47: 141-159.

Nisbet, L C. T. 1971. The Laughing Gull in the northeast. Amer.
Birds 25: 677-683.

Schreiber, R. W., and B. A, Schreiber. 1973. Florida’s Brown Pelican
population: Christmas bird count analyses. Amer. Birds 27:

711-715.

Smith, W. J. 1959. Movements of Michigan Herring Gulls. Bird-Band-
ing 30: 69-114.

Southern, W. E. 1974. Florida distribution of Ring-billed Gulls from
the Great Lakes region. Bird-Banding 45: 341-352.

Sprunt, A., Jr. 1954. Florida bird life. New York, Coward-McCann,

Inc.

Stahlecker, D. W. 1975. Trends in wintering diurnal raptor popula-
tions from central Colorado Christmas bird counts. Amer. Birds

29: 936-940.

Section of Ornithology, Los Angeles County Museum of Natural
History, 900 Exposition Blvd., Los Angeles, California 90007.

40

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

FIELD NOTES

White Ibis nesting in the Lower Florida Keys. — The White Ibis
[Eudocimus albus) is the most numerous wading bird in southern
Florida forming colonies that may include tens of thousands of birds
(Kushlan 1973, Wilson Bull. 58: 230-231). South of the mainland,
ibis regularly form smaller colonies on keys in upper Florida Bay, the
largest being on Frank Key near Flamingo which held 1500 nests in
1976. Although the colony is situated in the bay most birds nesting
there feed on the mainland. The number of ibis found in wading bird
colonies decreases further south, generally fewer than 50 nests occur-
ring on Porjoe and Cowpens keys near Key Largo (Kushlan and
White 1977, Fla. Sci. 40: 65-72).

In the 1940's Green (1946, Quart. J. Fla. Acad. Sci. 8: 199-265)
considered the White Ibis to be rare in the Lower Florida Keys, and
in the mid 1950’s Hundley and Hames (1960, Fla. Nat. 33: 19-94)
considered it to be a winter visitor. During the mid 1960’s it was con-
sidered uncommon in winter and occasional during the rest of the
year in the National Wildlife Refuges of the Lower Florida Keys
(U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Refuge Leaflet 1 50-R, 1967). Now it
is regularly seen in small numbers in various locations in the lower
keys. During a survey of water bird colonies in spring and summer
1976, we found 200 White Ibis nests at 5 locations in the Lower
Florida Keys (Monroe Co.). We surveyed all sites from the air in mid-
May, and counted nests from the ground in all but one colony in
early June.

The largest colony was at Don Quixote Key, a mangrove island
east of Big Pine Key. On 2 June 1976 the colony contained 107
White Ibis nests. Eggs had recently hatched in most nests and others
were hatching at the time of the census. Five Louisiana Heron (Hy~
dranassa tricolor)^ 4 little Blue Heron {Florida caeruiea), 2 Snowy
Egret (Egretta thula), and 5 Doubled-crested Cormorant {Pha/a-
crocorax auritus) nests were also found in the colony. A small colony,
on Marvin Key near the Snipe Keys, contained 3 White Ibis nests
along with one Great White Heron (Ardea herodias) and 10 cormorant
nests. Ibis also nested at 3 sites near Johnston Key. There were 68
nests on a mangrove island south of Johnston Key, 20 nests on a
mangrove island north of Johnston Key and several nests, seen only
from the air, on a small key called Pigeon Key (not the one near
U.S. 1).

Although these records might be attributed to a relatively recent
expansion of White Ibis nesting into the lower keys, it is more proba-
ble that ibis have nested there undetected in fairly small numbers for

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

41

some time. The relatively small number of birds nesting at each site
is apparently typical of southern Florida White Ibis colonies located
away from mainland feeding areas. Presumably the feeding opportun-
ities around completely marine sites are inadequate to support large
numbers of ibis. The Don Quixote site is notable for its diversity of
nesting species as well as for the number of nesting White ibis. Care-
ful watch should be maintained over birds at this and other sites of
colonial bird nesting activity, most of which fortunately are within
the boundaries of Federal Wildlife Refuges of the Lower Florida
Keys.

This survey was sponsored by the U.S, Fish and Wildlife Service,
Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, and the U.S. National Park
Service. Deborah A. White, Gary E. Davis and Marilyn S. Kushian
participated in the survey. — James A. Kushian and William B.
Robertson, Jr., U.S. National Park Service^ Everglades National Park,
Homestead, Florida 33030.

A Florida breeding record for the Greater Scaup. — On 27 August
1975, in one of the Shiloh Marsh Impoundments on the Merritt
Island National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), Brevard County, Florida,
Biologist Tommy Flines and myself were banding Florida Ducks
(Anas fulvigula) when our airboat flushed a brood of ducklings about
8 m in front of us. We ran down and captured by hand one of the
ducklings which we identified as an immature male Greater Scaup
(Aythya mariia) based on the extension of the white wing patch
about halfway out onto the primaries (Bellrose 1976 337). Cloaca!
examination revealed the presence of the immature penis (Hochbaum
1942). The bird was classified as a Class IIC duckling. Age spans for
Greater Scaup in this plumage class were not available, but approxi-
mate mid-point age for Lesser Scaup (A. affinis) in Class IIC is 38
days (Gollop and Marshall 1954).

Because the brood was encountered unexpectedly, we could not
obtain an accurate count of the ducklings present or look for an ac-
companying adult. Flowever, at least four ducklings, all of which ap-
peared to be scaup, were visible at once during the chase.

This late August record of a flightless Greater Scaup is the first
conclusive evidence of reproduction in Florida. Sprunt (1954: 78)
cites several spring records for the Greater Scaup in Florida, includ-
ing 2 specimens from St. Marks, Wakulla County, on 23 and 24 May
1913. Additional spring records from the southeastern United States
include one from '‘inland” North Carolina on 11 May (year omitted;
Wray and Davis 1959: 79), a specimen reported from Gulf Shores,
Alabama, on 13 April 1957, and a pair observed at close range on
16 June 1956 at Dauphine Island, Alabama (Imhof 1976: 116). In

42

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

South Carolina, Sprunt and Chamberlain (1949: 134) list this species
as a “rare winter resident, October 31 to April, both coastal and In-
terior sections/’

No Greater Scaup breeding records are reported for Georgia
(Burleigh 1958), South Carolina (Sprunt and Chamberlain 1949),
North Carolina (Wray and Davis 1959), or Alabama (Imhof 1976).
Also, James L. Baker (pers. comm.), Refuge Biologist, Merrit Island
NWR, is not aware of any refuge breeding records for other northern
ducks.

Literature Cited

Bellrose, F. C. 1976. Ducks, geese and swans of North America,
Second Ed. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Stackpole Books.

Burleigh, T. D. 1968. Georgia birds. Norman, Univ. Oklahoma Press.
Gollop, j. B., and W. H. Marshall. 1954. A guide for aging duck
broods in the field. Mississippi Flyway Council Tech. Sect. 14 pp.
Hochbaum, A. 1942. Sex and age identification of ducks by cloacal
examination. Trans. N. Amer. Wildlife Conf. 7: 299-307.

Imhof, T. A. 1976. Alabama birds, Second Ed. University, Ala., Univ.
Alabama Press.

Sprunt, A., jr., and E. B. Chamberlain. 1949. South Carolina bird
life. Columbia, Univ. South Carolina Press.

Sprunt, A., jr. 1954. Florida bird life. New York, Coward-McCann,
Inc.

Wray, D. L., and H. T. Davis. 1959. Birds of North Carolina. Raleigh,
Rynum Printing Co.

Frank Montalbano III, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Com-
mission, Lakeland, Florida 33807.

Reverse migration of Sharp-shinned Hawks on the west coast of
Florida. — On 23 October 1976, 2 days after a cold front passed,
I observed Sharp-shinned Hawks {Accipiter striatus) flying northward
along the northern interior portion of Gasparilla Island, Charlotte
Co., Florida, into a stiff northwest wind that I estimated at 20-25
knots. Upon reaching the Lee County Park at the south end of the
island, I observed a fairly steady movement of sharp-shins coming
north across Boca Grande Pass from the direction of Cayo Costa Is-
land at the rate of about 20 birds per hour. In all I counted 42Sharp-
shinned Hawks during 11 00-1 300.

I suspect that these birds had flown down the Florida peninsula
by one route or another, and upon reaching some point at which
they saw a large expanse of open water, turned northwestward and

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

43

flew along the Gulf coast. John Edscorn (1976, Amer. Birds 30: 54-
58) has commented upon this possibility. Along the Great Lakes,
most hawks fly parallel to the shore rather than directly across, and
this tendency is more marked in the accipiters than in the buteos
(Haugh 1974, pp. 11-15 in Proc. N. Amer. Hawk Migration Conf.
1974 (M. Harwood, Ed.), Washington Depot, Conn., Hawk Migration
Assoc, of N.A.). During fall migration there is a marked east to west
movement of hawks at Gulf Breeze, Santa Rosa Co., Elorida, which
could represent either birds that have come down the Appalachian
Mountains and drifted westward, or birds that have moved north-
northwest along the Florida Gulf coast (Kennedy 1975, Hawk Mi-
gration Assoc, of N. Amer. 1 : 30-31 ).

In Florida, reverse migrations have been reported several times on
the east coast. On 2 October 1971, 25 Sharp-shinned Hawks were
noted flying northward off Amelia Island, Duval County (Robert-
son 1972, Amer. Birds 26: 50-54), and on 8 November 1974, 400
were reported flying northeast at Indialantic Beach, Brevard County
(Edscorn 1975, Amer. Birds 29: 44-48). On 12 October 1974 “alP’
hawks were reported flying north at Marineland, Flagler County, al-
though no mention is made of species (Kennedy 1975). In the Keys,
on 12 November 1974, hawks (again no mention of species) were
observed migrating both southwest and northeast at the National
Audubon Society Research Station at Tavernier, Monroe County,
and the author speculated that “the northeast movement may have
resulted from the unwillingness of the birds to migrate over the water;
thus they may have turned around at Key West and begun moving
northward” (Kennedy 1975).

I find no recent reports of this phenomenon from the west coast
of Florida. In view of the paucity of reports from this region, ! hope
that other observers will be encouraged to watch for such occur-
rences. Reports of such movements would be welcomed by this
writer. — Malcolm M. Simons, jr., 1701 East Harbor View Road, Box
52, Charlotte Harbor, Florida 33950.

Laughing Gull colonies in extreme southern Florida. — Laughing Gulls

{Larus atricilla) are common year-round residents in Florida (Howell
1932, Florida bird life, Tallahassee, Florida Dept. Game Fresh Water
Fish). Although they have long been known to nest on keys in Florida
Bay, little effort has been made to determine the locations and sizes
of their colonies. During a 1976 survey of colonial seabirds in
southern Florida, we paid particular attention to Laughing Gull
colonies. Complete aerial surveys of Florida Bay were flown on 23
May and 23 June 1976. More restricted aerial surveys were flown on
3 May, 27 May and 21 July. Ground censuses were made on all but
one colony site.

44

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

We found 1,395 Laughing Gull nests at 15 sites in extreme
southern Florida during the summer of 1976: 13 in upper Florida
Bay; 2 in lower Florida Bay (Table 1 , Figure 1 ). All colonies were in
the interior of islands on open marl flats or among low herbaceous
plants [Batis maritimay Sesuvium portulacastrum). This tabulation in-
cludes the largest number of nests counted at each site, but as the
birds were usually not very synchronous in nesting, these numbers
are probably sightly low. The largest colony was on the Florseshoe
Keys in lower Florida Bay, where we counted 529 nests. Two fairly
large colonies in upper Florida Bay, East Key and Nest Key, together
contained about 430 nests. These 3 largest colonies contained 69 per-
cent of all nests. In all, a minimum of about 2800 Laughing Gulls
nested in extreme southern Florida in 1976.

Table 1

Sites and Number of laughing Gulls Nesting in Extreme
Southern Florida in May- June, 1976

Colony Site^

Maximum Number of
Nests Counted

Type of
Census'^

Upper Florida Bay

1. Key S. of Btioy Key

30

G

2 . Curlew Key

35

G

3. Pelican Key

75

G

4. Key E. of Pelican Key

20

A

5. Man of War Key

60

G

6. Cluett Key

30

A

7. Nest Key

250

G

8, East Key

183

G

9. Rabbit Key

30

A

10. Barnes Key

60

G

11 . Buchanan Key

1

G

12. l^per Arsnicker Key

2

G

13. Lower Arsnicker Key

30

A

Lower Florida Bay

l4, Teatable Key

60

A

15. Pforseshoe Key

529

G

^Numbers indicate location of colony site in Figure 1.
2

G=Ground, A=Aerial count of maximum number of nests.

We were unable to determine nesting success at all sites, but suc-
cess may have been low because many relatively low nest sites were
flooded by summer rains. The events on Florseshoe Key may be in-
dicative of the pattern. On 27 May 1976 we flew over the colony and
many of the estimated 175 nests contained small chicks. The nesting
area was dry and many nests were located on the ground. On 10 June
during a complete ground census, we found that the colony had in-
creased to nearly 530 nests, ranging from those containing nearly
fledged young to others still under construction. However up to 10
cm of water stood over much of the nesting area and most of the old
ground nests were submerged. The flooding had apparently occurred
after most nests had hatched, but other nests had drowned out and
the newest nests were built higher than early nests and placed on top
of the herbaceous plants. By 21 July 300 adults and fledged young

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

45

FLORIDA

Figure 1. Location of Laughing Gull colonies in extreme southern
Florida in 1976.

remained on the island but few nestlings and no new nests were seen.
While this information is insufficient to determine overall success, it
suggests that late-nesting birds may have been stressed by summer
rainfall. Most of the colonies were subject to similar flooding, but
none were found on the many high ground sites and spoil islands
along the Florida Keys.

The survey was supported by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, and the U.S. National Park Service.
Gary E. Davis, R. Bland Lawson and Marilyn S. Kushlan participated
in the survey. We thank William B. Robertson, Ralph W. Schreiber
and Frances Hames for comments. — James A. Kushlan and Deborah
A. White, US, National Park Service, Everglades National Park,
Homestead, Florida 33030. Present address of White: US. Peace
Corps, Nairobi, Kenya.

46

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

A tern prey sample. — The fact that young birds of many species re-
gurgitate when under stress provides opportunities to gather data on
food habits without the necessity of collecting the birds. During
banding operations on (Big) Bird Island, Nassau Sound, Duval
County, Florida, exactly 1699 Royal Terns [Sterna maxima) and ap-
proximately 20 Sandwich Terns (S. sandvicensis) were confined to a
wire corral on 25 July 1976 between 0700 and 1100. The chicks
ranged from about 7 days to about 20 days in age.

After banding the chicks, the area was searched and all regurgi-
tated prey items were collected and identified as nearly as possible,
given the partially digested condition of some items. A total of 243
prey items were recovered, of which 92.2% represented a single spe-
cies. In order of abundance they were: Atlantic croaker [Micropogon
undulatus) 223; Atlantic menhaden [Brevoortia tyrannus) 5; squid
[IHex ilfecebrosus) 5; Atlantic bumper (Chioroscrombus chrysurus)
3; jacks [Caranx crysos or C bartholomael) 2; striped anchovy
[Anchoa hepsetus) 2; white or brown shrimp [Penaeus setiferus or
P. aztecus) 1;shad [Ahsa sp.) 1 ; cusk eel (Ophidiidae) 1.

Of the regurgitated Atlantic croaker, 49 were intact enough to
measure and 21 still had the eyes intact and were deemed complete
enough to weigh (length x 130.8 mm, SD 11.3, 113-168; weight x
20.1 g, SD 5.0, 14.3-35.3). One-year-old fish of this species are about
152 mm long, two-year-olds about 203 mm (Migdalski 1958, Angler’s
guide to the salt water game fishes, New York, Ronald Press).

Little information on the diet of the Royal Tern has been pub-
lished. In Virginia and North Carolina (Buckley and Buckley 1972,
Ibis 114: 344-359), Royal Terns preyed on blue crabs [Callinectes
sapidus) extensively and fed them to the young. Other items re-
ported by the Buckleys were: squid (Loligo sp.), shrimps (prob.
Crangon), silversides [Menidia], killifishes (Fundulus), anchovies
(Anchovieila), menhaden [Brevoortia), toadfishes [Opsanus), pipe-
fishes [Syngnathus), jacks [Caranx), flounders (Pleuronectidae) and
eels [Anguilla).

As the Atlantic croaker is a bottom feeding species (Migdalski
1958), terns normally would have a difficult time catching large
numbers of this fish. The shrimp fleet at Mayport, Duval County,
some 2 miles south of the colony, is an active one, and Royal Terns
are often seen flying between the colony and the area where the
shrimp boats come in. The Atlantic croaker was the most abundant
fish taken in shrimp nets in this immediate area in July 1933-35
(Anderson 1968, U.S. Fish & Wild. Ser., Spec. Sci. Rept. -- Fisheries
No. 570). Therefore, it seems likely that at this colony, the terns
utilize shrimp boat dumpings extensively in feeding the young.
However, several other species reported by Anderson as comprising

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

47

a large portion of shrimp boat dumpings in July were not represented

in the prey sample.

My thanks to Ken Relyea for identification of the fishes. ~
Robert W. Loftin^ University of North Florida^ Box 17074, Jackson-
ville, Florida 322 / 6.

Chick retrieval by Black Skimmer. — On 12 June 1976, while study-
ing nesting behavior of Black Skimmers (Rynchops nigra), I observed
an adult skimmer attempt to carry its nestling back to its scrape.
Chick-carrying has been reported for various species: Clapper Rail
{Raiius longirostris) and Virginia Rail (Rallus limicola) (Pettingill
1938, Auk 55: 411-415); Montagu’s Harrier {Circus pygargus)
(Lachner 1968, Z. Tierpsychol. 25: 666-667) ; African Jacana {Acto-
philornis africanus) and the Lotus-bird (Irediparra gallinacea)
(Hopcraft 1968, Living Bird 7: 85-88). No mention of this behavior
has appeared in the literature concerning the Black Skimmer.

Observations were made at a breeding colony of skimmers located
along the western causeway of the Howard Frankland Bridge crossing
Tampa Bay, Pinellas County, Florida. While watching a feeding at-
tempt I saw the following behavior sequence. A female parent had
been sitting on its scrape with its chick, which I estimated to be less
than 5 days old, when the male parent landed beside the scrape with
a fish in its bill. The chick struggled out of the scrape, having been
prodded by the female as it climbed out, and approached the male.
The chick began to stray when the male did not relinquish the fish.
The chick was about Vi m from the scrape when the female walked
over to it and picked it up by the neck. As the female turned back
toward the scrape, it was interrupted by the aggressive advance of a
skimmer on an adjacent scrape. The female dropped the chick in re-
sponse to this attack, and retreated toward its own scrape. Soon, the
female returned and picked up the chick by the neck, but was again
blocked from returning to its scrape by the same neighbor. The fe-
male’s third attempt to pick up the chick was also rebuffed by the
same skimmer.

The chick, now about 1 m from its scrape, was joined by the
male, which first offered the fish to the chick, but then suddenly
turned away and ate the fish itself. The female, standing by its scrape,
picked up a leaf and ^‘chewed” it for a few moments before dropping
it. This leaf-chewing is a displacement behavior that I have noted
several times in skimmers that were thwarted from completing mating
or chick-feeding attempts. The chick remained crouched under a
small clump of vegetation during the remaining hour of my observa-
tion period and its eventual fate is unknown.

I have found that skimmer chicks often wander from their

48 Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5 Fall 1977

scrapes. Chick-retrieval by parents could Increase the chances of sur-
vival for nestling skimmers by protecting them from predation or ex-
posure to the sun. However, territorial defense by neighboring adults
can act to reduce any such benefits resulting from chick-retrieval
behavior.

I thank A. J. Meyerriecks and Helen E. Groves for their sugges-
tions concerning preparation of this paper. -- Fred H. Groves, De-
partment of Biology, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida
33620.

The status of the Screech Owl in the northern Florida Keys. — Howell
(1932, Florida bird life, Tallahassee, Florida Dept. Game and Fresh
Water Fish) reported the Screech Owl [Otus asio) as occurring on
the Florida Keys, Monroe County, from Key Largo, Tavernier, Upper
Matecumbe Key and Key West, without listing specimens or specific
sight records south of the mainland. Since no one else has published
a record of Screech Owls from the Florida Keys, Robertson and
Kushlan (1974, pp 414-452 in Environments of south Florida:
Present and past (P.J. Gleason, Ed.), Memoir 2, Miami Geological
Society) concluded that this owl is one of 9 species known to nest
. . south to the limit of suitable habitat on the southern mainland
and not in the Florida Keys.” They predicted, however, that the
Screech Owl may yet be found nesting in the Keys.

Actually, the Screech Owl is a fairly common bird on the larger,
northern Florida Keys, especially on Key Largo, as the following 14
previously unpublished records show.

1. About 1970: late spring. Northern Plantation Key, mile
marker 89. An adult and four fledgling Screech Owls. Sandy
Sprunt. Although Sprunt has lived in the Keys since 1957,
these were the first Screech Owls seen by him in the Keys.

2. 1973: August. Key Largo Ranger Station, between mile
markers 99-100. An owl heard calling on several nights. John
C. Ogden.

3. 1974: 7 February. Key Largo, mile marker 102. 2 gray-phase
adult owls in yard. Joanna Girardin.

4.1974: 9 March. Northern Key Largo, south of Ocean Reef.
One red-phase owl dead on road, specimen to U.M. (see below).

J.G.

5. 1975: May. Northern Key Largo, near U.S. Army radar station.
2 adult owls in woods. Clive A. Petrovic.

6. 1975: 22 October. Plantation Key, between mile markers 86-
87. One owl at dusk on utility wire. Rich T. Paul.

7. 1975: November. Key Largo Ranger Station. A bird calling
during mid-morning. J.C.O.

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

49

8. 1975“76: winter. Key Largo, Garden Cove, mile marker 106.
One or more heard calling on several nights. C.A.P.

9. 1976: April. Key Largo, mile marker 102. 2 mostly-downy
Screech Owls in gray^phase found on ground, brought to our
office, both died. J.C.O., J.G.

10. 1976: 18 May. Key Largo, between mile markers 103-104. 2

adult and 2 fledgling owls in a yard. J.C.O.

11. 1976: May. Upper Matecumbe Key, Islamorada, between
mile markers 81-82. One owl reported to S.S.

12. 1976: 11 July. Upper Matecumbe Key, Islamorada. Ayoung

owl partially downy and v/ith sheathed primaries, reported to
J.G.

13. 1976: 24-27 October. Plantation Key, mile marker 89. One

owl heard calling. J.C.O.

14. 1977: ApriLMay. Key Largo, between rnHe .markers 95-96. A
pair of owls in a nest box fledged young by mid-May. Karen
Achor.

In addition to these 14 records, Lve learned of 4 specimens of
Screech Owls from the Florida Keys, now in University collections.
The oldest, at the Florida State Museum, was a red-phase male col-
lected 25 April 1959 on Plantation Key by O.J. Austin, Jr. (UF num-
ber 7501). The other 3 are at the University of Miami, (1) UMRC
4485, a gray-phase bird found dead on Key Largo, 9 December 1 961 ,
(2) UMRC 7595, the red-phase bird picked up 9 March 1974, listed
above, and (3) UMRC 9318, a gray-phase female found dead on Key
Largo, 6 December 1974. The red-phase bird was a female with en-
larged follicles (pers. comm. O.T. Owre). No Screech Owl specimens
from the Florida Keys are in the collections at Florida State Univer-
sity or the University of South Florida (pers. comm. H.M. Stevenson
and G.E. Woolfenden).

These observations and specimens include Screech Owl records
from at least 9 different locations on Key Largo, Plantation Key and
Upper Matecumbe Key, with nesting as far south as Islamorada, on
Upper Matecumbe. Observations since 1970 indicate that Screech
Owls are now fairly numerous in the upper Keys, while the scarcity
of reports prior to the 1960s implies that Screech Owls were once
less common. No quantitative data exists, however, to support this
implication, and I know of no habitat changes on the upper Keys
that may have benefited this owl. While most observations have been
from central and northern Key Largo where the largest tracts of
native hardwood forest remains, the owls also occur in more open
woods in residential sections. It may be that more Screech Owls are
beihg reported because the number of people living in the upper
Keys the year-round has increased. Most owl observations have

50

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

occurred during spring and summer, seasons when the human popu-
lation on the Keys was once considerably lower than at present. Also,
Screech Owls are less vocal during winter, and no Screech Owl has
been recorded on Upper Keys Christmas Bird Counts since these
counts were initiated in 1955. — John CrOgd^n, National Audubon
Research Dept., 115 Indian Mound Trail, Tavernier, Florida 33070.

Orchard Oriole holding food with the feet. — Clark (1973, Bird-
Banding 44: 91-99) summarized the records of passerine birds hold-
ing food with the feet and suggested that this behavior might be use-
ful as a taxonomic character in certain families. Holding food with
the feet has been reported for less than 145 (Clark 1973) of the more
than 5000 species of passerines (Mayr 1946, Auk 65: 64-69). Of the
22 North American icterids (AOU Check-list of North American
birds, fifth ed., Baltimore, Amer. Ornithol. Union), Clark (1973) lists
6 species as holding food with the feet, including the Northern Oriole
[Icterus gaibuia) but not the Orchard Oriole (/. spurius).

On 5 October 1976 at the Archbold Biological Station, Lake
Placid, Highlands County, Florida, i saw a female Orchard Oriole
hold food with its feet. Perched among grape vines [Vitis sp.) along
the edge of a fallow field, the bird seized a grape with its bill and
transferred it to its left foot. Then, while holding the grape against
the perch, It picked at the grape with its bill several times. Unfortu-
nately I observed this behavior only once, as the bird was wary and
did not remain in view for long.

This type of food holding, “clamping ” (Clark 1 973), is the most
frequent method used by passerines holding food with the feet in-
cluding 5 of the 6 North American icterids listed by Clark (1973):
Northern Oriole, Great-tailed Crackle (Quiscaius mexicanus), Boat-
tailed Crackle [Q. major), Common Crackle [Q. quiscuia), Brown-
headed Cowbird [Molothrus ater). — Fred E. Lohrer, Arch bold Bio-
logical Station, Rt. 2, Box 180, Lake Placid, Florida 33852.

Report on the 1977 spring meeting. — The 1977 spring meeting of
the Florida Ornithological Society was hosted by the Archbold Bio-
logical Station and the Highlands County Audubon Society at the
Lake Placid Holiday Inn on 22-24 April. Co-chairmen were Fred E.
Lohrer and Miriam Beck who along with their local committee re-
ceived loud plaudits for their skilled planning and management.

Field trips (attended by 164 on Saturday and 110 on Sunday)
went to Highlands Hammock S. P., Indian Prairie, ABS, and Fisheat-

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

51

ing Creek Wildlife Management Area for regional specialties including
Scrub Jay, Swallow-tailed Kite, Caracara, Burrowing Owl, Sandhill
Crane, Short-tailed Hawk, and Bachman's Sparrow,

On Friday there was a meeting of the Dusky Seaside Sparrow Re-
covery Team, and an afternoon meeting of the FOS Board of Direc-
tors. In the evening James N. Layne, Executive Director of ABS, gave
a fine illustrated introduction to the natural history of Highlands
County. A roundup and discussion of members’ slides of hard-to-
identify species and recent rareties wound up the evening.

At the annual membership meeting the following were elected to
two year terms: President, David W. Johnston; Vice-President, John
C. Ogden; Secretary, Barbara Kittleson; Treasurer, Caroline Coleman;
Directors: W. Wilson Baker, John Hintermister, and Herbert W. Kale 11.

Glen E. Woolfenden, Chairman of the afternoon symposium on
Scrub Jay studies at ABS, introduced John Fitzpatrick on ‘‘Intra-
familial and Territorial Fighting”; Jerre A. Stallcup, “Contributions of
helpers to breeding”; Tom Bancroft, “Molt in Blue Jays and Scrub
jays”; and Bruce Barbour, “Some Aspects of the Vocal Repertory.”

Herbert W. Kale II, Chairman of the symposium on cooperative
bird distribution studies in Florida, introduced Henry M. Stevenson
who gave a progress report on his study of the quantitative distribu-
tion of breeding birds in the state; John C. Ogden on a cooperative
survey of colonial wading birds; and Gary Pesnell on serial surveys
and wading bird utilization of Lake Okeechobee marshes.

Of the 191 registrants, 158 filled the banquet room of the Holiday
Inn for the Saturday evening buffet and the interesting slide talk on
the Galapagos Islands by Ken Alvarez, Interpretive Nautralist, Florida
DNR. — Margaret C. Bowman, Secretary.

Acknowledgment.— The following 25 people generously contributed to the continuing
success of the FFN by reviewing,^manuscripts published in volume 5 : M. A. Byrd, W. D.
Courser, J. B. Edscorn, J. W. Fitzpatrick, S. A. Grimes, F. T. Hames, B. A. Harring-
ton, D. W. Johnston, B. A. Kittleson, J. L. Lincer, C. E. Lohrer, F. R. Moore, S. A.
Nesbitt, J. C. Ogden, 0. T. Owre, W. B. Robertson, Jr., J. A. Rodgers, W. E, Southern,
J. A. Stallcup, H. M. Stevenson, P. W. Sykes, Jr., W. K. Taylor, L H. Walkinshaw, S.
White-Schuler, G. E. Woolfenden. — F.E.L.

Spring 1978 IVIeeting. — At the Causeway Inn, Courtney Campbell Causeway, Tampa,
on 21-23 April. Host, Tampa Audubon Society; local committee chairman, Susan Bird,
Dept, of Biology, Univ. of South Florida, Tampa 33620.

Spring 1979 IVIeeting.— At Dauphine Island, Alabama, during late April. A joint
meeting with the Alabama Ornithological Society. For information write Robert Duncan,

614 Fairpoint, Gulf Breeze, FL 32561.

52

Florida Field Naturalist Vol. 5

Fall 1977

FIVE-YEAR INDEX
to the

FLORIDA FIELD NATURALIST

VO I umes I -5
1973-1977

compiled by Fred E. Lohrer

PART ONE, AUTHOR INDEX

A

Anderson, Bruce H., see Walter
Ki ngs I ey Tay I or and.

Anonymous, Erratum, ^-21.

B

Barber, Robert D., and James B,
Johnson, An offshore sighting
of Sab i ne’ s Gull, 4_: I 4 .

Barbour, D. Bruce, Stephen A.
Nesbitt, and D. Terry Gil-
bert, A second recent Royal
Tern nesting colony on the
Gulf coast of Florida, ^*9-
10.

Below, Lilia C. , see William B.
Robertson, Jr., and.

Below, T. H., Ruddy Turnstones
feeding on coconuts, _3:50,
see Ralph W. Schreiber, et
a I .

Bowman, Margaret Coon, Whip-

poor-will singing in winter,
44-45, Report of fall
meeting (1975), £:I3, Min-
utes of the 1976 spring meet-
ing, ^:42, Report on the 1976
fall meeting, ^:23, Report
on the 1977 spring meeting,
_5:5I-52.

Brown, Larry N., Prevalence of
bill abnormalities in Florida
Brown Thrashers, 4:11-13.

C

Crawford, Robert L., Willow and
Alder Flycatcher records at
a north Florida TV tower,
4:1-4, see Henry M. Steven-
son and.

Cruickshank, Allen D., Field

identification of difficult
birds: 2 four similar terns
2:1-3.

D

Dinsmore, James J., White and
Brown pelicans feeding to-
gether, N ^ Notes on avo-
cets and stilts in Tampa Bay
Florida, ^:25-30, see Frank
M. Dunstan et al., see Ralph
W. Schreiber et a I .

Douglass, John F., see James N.
Layne and.

Duncan, Lucy, see Robert Duncan
and .

Duncan, Robert, A Great Cormor-
ant In west Florida, J_*I3.

Duncan, Robert and Lucy Duncan,

A substantial hawk migration
in northwest Florida, ^:2-4.

Dunstan, Frank M., Roseate Spoon-
bill nesting in Tampa Bay,
Florida, £:25-26, see Richard
T. Paul et a 1 , see Ralph W.
Schreiber et a 1 .

Dunstan, Frank M., Ralph W.
Schreiber, and James J,
Dinsmore, Caspian Tern nest-
ing in Florida, 1973 and
1974, 3: 16-17.

E

Edscorn, John B, , A swimming Bald
Eagle, _I_:I5, Autumn singing
by Ovenbirds, J_:I5, Recent
unprecedented numbers of
Buff-breasted Sandpipers,
^:12, Remarkable weights
carried by Red-shouldered
Hawks, 2: 12-13.

F

Fisk, Erma J., Black Phoebe

sighted at Dry Tortugas, _4:
39.

Franz, Richard, see David S. Lee
et a I .

G

Genung, William G, , Blue Grosbeak
breeds in the Florida Ever-
glades, _4:5“7.

Gilbert, D. Terry, see D. Bruce
Barbour et a I .

Gray, Mary S., An inland record
of Wilson’s Storm-Petrel,

4:8.

Green, Louise L., and Herbert W.
Kale, M, Roof nesting by
Black Skimmers, _4H5-I7.

Grimes, Samuel A., Obituary-Roy
Cline Hallman, 1:15-16,

Ob i tuary-AI exander Sprunt,
Jr., ^:22-23, Review-Voices
of neotropical birds, 4^:27.

Groves, Fred H., Chick retrieval
by Black Skimmer, ^:48-49.

H

Hardy, John William, Voices of
neotropical birds, review
of, 4:27.

Herbert, Nancy G. , and Ralph
W. Schreiber, Diurnal
activity of Brown Pelicans
at a mar i na, _3: I I - 1 2.

Hetrick, Wllla Mae, see Stephen
A. Nesb i tt and .

Hickman, Gary L., A Mockingbird
and Blue Jay seeking
shelter from rain, 1:13.

Hopkins, Larry, and Glen E.
Woolfenden, Fourth record
of the Arctic Loon from
Florida, _5: 12.

Horner, James, Robert Wallace,
and David W. Johnston,

Food of the Barn Ow I at
Gainesville, Florida, £:28“

31 .

J

Johnson, James B., see Robert
D. Barber, and.

Johnston, David W., Races of
Palm Warblers killed at a
Florida TV tower, _4:22-24,
see James Horner et a I .

K

Kale, Herbert W., M, The

status of the White-tailed
Kite in Florida, 2^:4-7,
Additional records of
autumnal breeding of Boat-
tailed Grackles in Florida,
^:5-8, see Louis L. Green
and, see George R. Maxwell,
II, and, see Glen E. Wool-
fenden and.

King, James, Jr., see Clive A.
Petrov ic and.

Kittieson, Barbara C., Third
record of the Arctic Loon
from Florida, 4:17.

Knight, Charles, Observation of
a Bald Eagle capturing a
Cattle Egret in flight, 4_:
14. ™

Kush I an, James A., Black-

crowned Night Heron diving
for prey, j_:27-28.

Kushlan, James A., and Marilyn
S. Kushlan^ Food of the
White Ibis in southern
Florida, 3:3I™38.

Kushlan, James A., and Wiiliam
B. Robertson, Jr„, White
Ibis nesting in the Lower
Florida Keys, _5-4l“42.

Kush Ian, James A., and James
L. Shortemeyer, Glossy
Ibis nesting in southern
Florida 2:13-14.

Kush I an, James A., and Deborah
A. White, Laughing Gull
colonies in extreme south-
ern Florida, ^:44-46.

Kush i an, Marilyn S., see James
A. Kush Ian and .

L

Langridge, Howard P. , First
sighting of a Thick-billed
Murre for Florida, ^:I9.

Layne, James N., and John F.
Douglass, Summer records
of the Marsh Hawk i n
Florida, £: 19-2! .

Layne, James N., Fred E.

Lohrer, and Chester E.
Winegarner, Bird and mammal
predators on the Cattle
Egret in Florida, _5:l-4.

Lee, David S., Richard Franz,
and Roger A. Sanderson, A
note on the feeding habits
of male Barbour’s map
turtles, 45-46.

Lewis, James C. , Food habits
of Florida Burrowing Owls,
28-30.

Lincer, Jeffrey L. , and Deena
Saikind, A preliminary note
on organoch ! or i ne residues
in the eggs of fish-eating
birds of the west coast of
Florida, h 19-22.

Loft in, Robert W., Another
inlands colony of the

Least Tern, I :37, A tern
prey sample, 47-48.

Loft in, Robert W. , and Roger
Sal las. Laugh i ng Gull
breeds in northeast Flor-
ida, _5: 17-18.

Loft in, Robert W. , and Steve
Sutton, Sandwich Tern
breeds on the Atlantic coast
of Fieri da, I 8.

Lohrer, Charlotte, see Fred E.
Lohrer and.

Lohrer, Fred E. , Orchard Oriole
holding food with the feet,
^:5I, see James N. Layne
and, see Stephen J. Stedman
and .

Lohrer, Fred E. , and Charlotte
Lohrer, Inland nesting of
the Least Tern in Highlands
County, _l_:3-5.

M

Maxwell, George R. , II, and

Herbert W. Kale, II, Popu-
lation estimates of breed-
ing birds on a spoil island
in the Indian River, Indian
River County, Florida, 2_i
32-39.

f^elvin, Scott M. , Greater Sand-
hill Cranes wintering in
Florida and Georgia, 5:

8-11. ”

Menk, Gail E. , see John R.
Patterson and.

Menk, Gail E. , and Henry M.
Stevenson, Second Florida
breeding record of the
Ruddy Duck, I 2~ 1 3 .

Meyerriecks, Andrew J., see
Ri chard T. Paul et a I .

Montalbano, Frank, Ml, A

Florida breeding record for
the Greater Scaup, ^:42“43.

Mumme, Ronald L. , and Glen E.
Woolfenden, Tufted Titmouse
feeds young in fallen ex-
ternal squirrel nest, 4_:I8.

N

P

Nesbitt, Stephen A*, Wood

Storks nesting In northern
Florida, 25-26, Foods of
the Osprey at Newnans Lake,
^:45, Voice maturity in
Florida Sandhill Cranes,

_3: 19, Feather staining in
Florida Sandhill Cranes,
2^:28-30, Bathing in cap-
tive Sandhill Cranes, _5 : I 3-

15, Recent changes in
winter crane use of Paynes
Prairie, _5:I6“I7, see D.
Bruce Barbour et al.

Nesbitt, Stephen A., and Willa
Mae Hetrick, Foods of the
Pine Warbler and Brown-
headed Nuthatch, 28-33.

Nesbitt, Stephen A., and John
H. True, A new north Flor-
ida Wood Stork colony,
2:14-15.

Nesbitt, Stephen A., and Frank-
lin H. White, A Sa I mone I I a
typhimurium outbreak at a
bird feeding station, ^^46-
47.

0

Ogden, John C. , Field identi-
fication of difficult
birds: I Short-tailed Hawk,
J_: 30-36, Aspects of Red-
shouldered Hawk nesting in
southern Florida, ^;25“27,
The pink pause, a previous-
ly undescribed behavior by
the Roseate Spoonbi N , _4 :
34-35, The status of the
Screech Owl in the northern
Florida Keys, 49-51.

Olsen, Storrs L., Purple galii-
nule carrying young, 2^:15-

16.

Owre, Oscar T. , Chorde i I es

minor sennetti in Florida,

2:48.

Patterson, John R. , and Gail E.
Menk, A razorbill at St.
George Island, Florida,
_5:I8-I9.

Paul, Richard T., Andrew J.
Meyerriecks, and Frank M.
Dunstan, Return of Reddish
Egrets as breeding birds
in Tampa Bay, Florida,

9-10.

Petrovic, Clive A., and James
King, Jr., Bird records
from the Dry Tortugas, j_:
5-8.

R

Riddell, Kim, Autumnal breeding
of Boat-tailed Crackles at
Gainesville, Florida, ^:36.

Roach, T. L., Red-bellied Wood-
pecker removes young from
nest, _3: I 9.

Robertson, William B., Jr.,
Editorial, 12-18, see
James A. Kush Ian and, see
Ralph W. Schreiber et al.,
see Glen E. Woolfenden and.

Robertson, William B., Jr., and
Lilia C. Below, A Red-
headed Woodpecker at Dry
Tortugas, j_:34-36.

S

Sal kind, Deena, see Jeffrey L.

L i ncer and .

Sallas, Roger, see Robert W.
Loftin and.

Sanderson, Roger A., see David
S. Lee et a I .

Schortemeyer , James L., see
James A. Kush I an and.

Schreiber, Elizabeth Ann, and
Ralph W. Schreiber, Royal
Tern nesting on west-coast
peninsular Florida, 2*^^“
47, Gull wi nter i ng I n

Florida; Christmas Bird
Count analysis, ^:35-40,
see Ralph W. Schreiber and,

Schreiber, Ralph W., Unusually
smal I eggs of the Brown
Pel ican, ^^20, Correspond-
ence, ^:30, Smooth-bi I led
An i nesti ng in Col I ier
Co., southwest Florida,
_3:49-50, Shell thickness
in Brown Pel ican eggs from
Tampa Bay, Florida, _5:3I-
34, see Frank M, Dunstan
and, see Nancy G. Herbert
and, see Elizabeth Ann
Schreiber and, see Glen
E. Woolfenden and.

Schreiber, Ralph W,, Ted H,
Below, and William B.
Robertson, Jr., Nesting of
Brown Pelicans on the Dry
Tortugas, Florida, _3:47-48.

Schreiber, Ralph W. , Frank M.
Dunstan, and James J.
Dinsmore, Lesser Scaup
mortality in Tampa Bay,
Florida, 1974, I3~I5.

Schreiber, Ralph W., and San-
ford M. Young, Evidence for
learning to feed in Laugh-
ing Gu I I s , I 6- I 7.

Schreiber, Ralph W. , and Eliza-
beth Ann Schreiber, Obser-
vations of Ospreys nesting
on artificial structures
In Charlotte Harbor,

Florida, .

Schupp, Eugene W. , Cattle

Egrets feeding at a carcass,
4: 37-38.

Simons, Malcolm M. , Jr.,

Reverse migration of Sharp-
shinned Hawks on the west
coast of Florida, _5:43-44.

Stedman, Stephen J., Singular
Brown Pelican feeding
behavior, _2“44.

Stedman, Stephen J., and Fred
E. Lohrer, A Tropical
Kingbird sighting from the

Florida Panhandle, £:40-4l.

Stevenson, Henry M., Editorial,
2_:l-2, Migration of the
Blue Jay in the southeastern
United States, _1_:9-I3,
Singing female Orchard
Orioles: A word of caution
in identifications, _!_:37-38,
Editorial: Florida’s next
state bird book?, _3 ’ * ^

A recent Mountain Plover
specimen from Florida,

^:2I, Lesser Black-backed
Gull summering in Florida,
^:22, Identification of
difficult birds: 3 Semi-
pa I mated and Western
sandpipers, 3:39-44,

Erratum, 2*^2, Corrigendum,
^:23, see Gail E. flenk and,

Stevenson, Henry M., and

Robert L. Crawford, Spread
of the armad i 1 I o i nto
the Tal I ahassee-Thomasv i I le
area, ^:8~10.

Stoutamaire, Mrs. Frank H.,

Ob i tuary-Kar 1 Zerb, J_:16.

Sutton, Steve, see Robert W.

Loft in and.

Sykes, Paul W. , Jr., Caribbean
Coot collected in southern
Florida, 2^25-27.

T

Taylor, Walter Kingsley, Bill
deformities in two Florida
birds, J_:22-24, Another
Cory’s Shearwater speci-
men from Florida, 4:19.

Taylor, Walter Kingsley, and
Bruce H. Anderson, Noctur-
nal migrants killed at a
central Florida TV tower.
Autumn 1972, 40-43.

W

Wallace, Robert, see James
Horner and.

Weiser^ Conrad E. , An early
Common Scoter in northern
Florida, j_: 14-15.

White, Deborah A., see James
A. Kush I an and.

White, Franklin H. , see Stephen
A. Nesbitt and.

Wtnegarner, Chester A., see
James N. Layne et a I .

Woolfenden, Glen E. , Dusting

by a Red-bellied Woodpecker,
^:5I, see Larry Hopkins
and, see Ronald L. Mumme
and, see Ralph W. Schreiber
and .

Woolfenden, Glen E., and
Herbert W. Kale, II, A
Black-capped Petrel speci-
men from Florida, 17-19.

Woolfenden, Glen E. , and

William B. Robertson, Jr.,
Least Terns nest at Dry
Tortugas, 19-20, First
nesting of the House
Sparrow at Dry Tortugas,
3:23-24.

Woolfenden, Glen E., and Ralph
W. Schreiber, Lesser
Black-backed Gulls in Flor-
ida, 2:20-21 .

PART TWO, LOCALITY INDEX

A

Alabama, Baldwin Co., ^:2.
Alachua Co., h 25;2 : 28,45;3 : 25,
28;4:36;_5-9, 10,16.

B

Bay Co., _2:9.

Big Cypress Swamp, j_:27.

Brevard Co., k24;^: 3,4, 1 7;2-
5-7,25;4: I4,I9;^:42.

Broward Co., 2: I 3,48;3: 25;4: I 5.

C

Charlotte Co., I 6;^: I 6,46-47 ;
^:43.

Charlotte Harbor, J_: I 9-22 I 6;

^:5.

Ci trus Co. , 4_:9.

Collier Co. 5,3: 49-50.

Columbia Co. , ^.*5; 5: 12.

D

Dade Co . , 5 .

DeSoto Co.7 i:20;^:3.

Dry Tortugas, 5-8, 34 I 9-20;

3:23-24, 47-48;4: 17,39.

Duval Co., k25,37;2: 14;3: 18,
I9;4:28;2: 17,47.

E

Escambia Co., ^:8,44.

Everglades National Park, j_:3l;

2:12-13, 25-27;4:34.

Florida, ^:35.

Florida Bay, _5: 44-46.

Florida, southern, 2:31-38.
Franklin Co,, 3: 2 1 ,22;2:3;2: I 8.

G

Georgia, Grady Co., _4:3. Ware
Co. , 2:10-

Glades Co., 3: I 9;4: CO;^: 1 ,2,3,

I I .

Highlands Co., h5"5;2:4;3:5l ;

4: I9,20;2:2,3,9, 10, 11,51.
Hillsborough Co., 2*1*^20,48;
3:9, 13-15, 16, 25;2:25;4: I I ,
!8,25-26;2:25.

Holmes Co. , 2'®*

I

Indian River Co., 2-*5“!4;2*5,
32-37, 44 ;3:5-7.

J

Jackson Co., I :9- l3;3:45-46;4:8

Jefferson Co. ,_4 : 3.

L

Lake Co., 2: I 3; 3: 5-7 ;^:9, 1 0, 1 7 .
Lake Okeechobee, ^’13.

Lee Co. , 5,6.

Leon Co., J_:9- I3,38;4: l»3,22.

Li berty Co. , 9.

M

Mad i son Co. , I 0.

Manatee Co. 4.

Marion Co., £:46;£:20;^:9, 10, 17.

McKay Bay, 5_:25.

Merritt Island National Wildlife
Refuge, _5:42.

Monroe Co., h 5-8, 1 5,34 ;3: 23-24,
25,47-48;4: I7,39;2*4I ,44-46,
49-50.

Mu I I et Key , I 2.

0

Okaloosa Co., J_:9-I3,^:8.
Okeechobee Co., _2: 5;^: 1 9-20.
Orange Co., k24;2: 1 2,40-43;

3: 6-7,24.

Osceola Co., 3:5-7;5:2,9, 10.

P

Palm Beach Co., 2,- 5-7, 25; 4^: 5;

Pasco Co., 4_i37.

Paynes Prairie, _5:I0,I6,I7.
Pensacola Bay, J__:I3,

Pinellas Co., _2:I2;3:9,I 1-12,

13, I6,20;^:6, 12,3! ,48.

Polk Co., i:l5;2:4,l3;3:7;4: 14.
Putnam Co. , _5: 9, 1 0 .

R

Rodman Reservoir, ^'.12.

S

St. John's Co. , 1:25.

Santa Rosa Co., ^:2-4;£:40.
Sarasota Co., j_: I 9“22;^:7;_5: I I .
Sumter Co. , 10.

T

Tampa Bay, ^:9- 1 0, 13, 1 4, 1 6;
4:25-26.

Taylor Co. , j_-’ 14- I 5 .

W

Wakul la Co., h9- 1 3;2:9, 1 2.

Walton Co. , I :38;2:9.

PART THREE, SPECIES I NDEX
A

Aceipiter ooopevi^

striatuSj ^:4,23;2^:43“44 .
Agelaius phoeniceus ^ 2_: 29-30, 46.
Ajaia ojoja, j_: 6 ;£: 25-26, 34-35 .
Alca torda^ 18.

Ammodramus savannarwrij, ^:42.

Anas fulvigula^ 5_:42.

Anhinga, 32-38.

Anhinga anhinga^ 32-38.

Ani, Smooth-billed, 49-50
Anthus spinoletta, j_:35.

Ardea herodias^ J_: 20, 2_: 32-38;
^:4I .

occidentalism J_:6.

Arenaria interpres, _3:50.
armadillo, nine-banded, _2:8“I0.
Avocet, American, 25-30.

Ay thy a affinis^ 13-15.
marilarn ^*42.

B

bass. Large-mouthed, _2:45.
Bittern, American, J_:6.

Least, j_:6.

Blackbird, Red-winged, ^:29-30,
46.

Bobo I ink, ^^42.

Bobwh i te, 5 ! .

Botarius tentiginosus ^ J_‘6.

BiJjo virginianv^j _2:28.

Buhutcus ihis j J_: 6;_2 : I 5,32-38;

4: 14,37-38;^: i-4.

Bunting, Indigo, ^:42.

Buteo hraohyurus^ j_: 30-36.

lineatuSj I 2- ! 3,25-26;^:2,4.
gamaicensis s ^"4.
p latygtevus , 2- 4 .

Butorides virescenSy 2_: I 3,32-38.

C

Calidris fusoioolliSy _3‘^^*
mauriy 39-44.
gusillay 3_: 39-44.

Caloneotvis (-Puffinus) diomedea
diomedeay 4_: ! 9 .

Capvimulgus vooiferuSy 2_: 44-45.

Caracara, Audubon’s _5:2-3.

Caraoara cheviway y ^:2"3.

Card i na 1 , 46.

Cardinalis oardinaliSy ^:46.

Carpodacus purpureuSy J_:37.

Casmerodius alhuSy J_: 20,28;_2 : I 3,

I 5,32-38.

Cassidix madoVy 5-8 ;_4: 17,36.

Catb i rd , Gray , 4 ! .

Catharus fusoesoensy 2_:41.
guttatay 4 1 .
ustulatay ^*41.

Centurus oarolinuSy ^:19,5!.

Charidrius alexandrinus y ^.9.
montanuSy _3:2I.
semipalmatuSy J_:6.

Chordeiles minor y ^‘41 .
m. sennettiy ^*48.

Circus cyaneuSy J_'6; £:!9-2i.

Cis to thorns pains tr is y ^:4! .
platensis y ^:4i .

Colaptes anratuSy j_: 22-24.

Colinns virginianns y 3:51.

Colnmhigallina passerTnOy ^-46.

Colnrihina passerinoy ^:4I.

Coot, American, j_” 6;^: 4 1 ;_3: 25-
27; 2:12.

Caribbean, ^:25-27.

Coragyps atratuSy \_'26.

Cocoyzus americanuSy ^:4I.
erythropthalmuSy 2_:4I.

Cormorant, Double-crested, J_'I3,
^:32-38;_5:41 .

Great, _l_: 13.

Corvus ossifraguSy J_*5;^:I6;

3 I .

Cotnmicops novehoraoensis y

2:41 .

Crane, Florida Sandhill,

28;^:9, 13.

Greater Sandhill, _5:8-l!,16.
crappie, black, 2_:45.

Crotalns adamantuSy 2x.29 .
Crotophaga aniy 49-50.

Crow, Fish, J__: 5 I 6 3 I .

Cryptotis parvOy 29-30.

Cuckoo, Black-billed, _2:41.

Ye I I ow-b i ! I ed , 4 ! .

Cyanooitta oristatOy _l_: 9- I 3, 13-
I4;2:46.

D

Dasypns novemoinctns y ^:8-IO.
Dendroica caerules cens y ^’42.
ooronatoy ]j-2)2rA2.
discolor y 7; 2^: 26,42 .

dominicOy 2rA2.
fuscoy ^-42.
magnolia y ^:42.
palmarumy 42 22-24 .

petechiay ^:42.
pinnSy ^A2;A_:28-53.
striatay 2rA2.
tigrinay 2rA2.

Dichromanassa rufescenSy 9- I 0 .
Didelphis marsupialiSy 2r.\l>.
Dolichonyx oryzivorns y 2:^2.
Dorosoma cepedianwriy ^:45.

petenensQy 2rA9 .

Dove, Ground, ^:4I,46.
flourning,

Duck, FI ori da, ^A2,

Ruddy , _5: ! 2- I 3 .

Dumetella carolinensis y ^-41.

E

Eagle, Bald, 1: I 5;4: I 4;^: I -2.

Egret, Cattle, J_: 6;^: I 4- ! 5, 32-
38;£: ! 4 , 37-38;£: 1 -4 .

Great, 1:20, 28;2: 13,15,32-
38.

Reddish, 3_:9-10.

Snowy, 1:6, 20;1: i 3, ! 5,32-38;
1:4! .

Egvetta thula^ 1: 20;2_: i 3, 32-38;
1:4! .

Elccnus oaeruleus^ '

Empidonax dlnovim^ £:!-3.

vivescens^ 1:41.
sp 4:2.

EudooTmus alhus^ 1: 20 13,15,
32-38;3:3i-38;l:28, 41-42.

F

Fdtoo columbarius 3 1:4.

sparvarius^ 1:4.

Finch, Purple, 1:37.

Flicker, Common, 1:22-24.

Florida oaerulea^ 1:6,28;1:15,
32-38;l:4! .

Flycatcher, Acadian, 1:41.

A I der , £: 1-3.

WI I low, 4: 1-3.
fox, red, 1:3-4.

Fulioa amerioana^ 1: 6;1: 4 1 ;1: 25-
27;1: 12.

oarihaeaj 1:25-27.

G

Gallinula dhlovopus^ 1:41 .
Galllnule, Common, 1:41.

Purple, 1:15-16.

Gannet, 1:5.

Gccoia ccrotica^ £:I3;1:12.

immer^ 1:12,18.

Geothlypis tridhas^ 1:42.
Gnatcatcher, Blue-gray, 1:7.
Goldfinch, American, 1:35.
Grackle, Boat-tailed, 1:5-8;1:
17,36,

Common, 1:46.

Graptemys harhourij 1:45-46.
Grosbeak, Blue, 4:5-6.

Grus canadensis pratensis ^ 1:
19,28;1:9, 13.
c. tahida^ 5:8-11,16.

Guiraca caeruTea^ £:5“6.

Gull, Great Black-backed, 1:21.
Herring, 1:20,1:22;!: 35-38.
Laughing, 1: 20 ;1: I I , I 6- 1 7 ;1:
46-47;4:9;l: 17, 18,28,35-38,
44-46.

Lesser Black-backed, 1:20;1:22
Ring-billed, 1:35-38.

Sab i ne ’s , 1:14.

H

Haematopus palliatuSy 1:9.
Ealiaeetus leuoocephalus ^ 1:15;
£: 14;1: 1-2.

Rarengula pensacolae^ 1:16.

Hawk, Broad-winged, 1:2-4.
Cooper’s, 1:4.

Marsh, £: 6;!'. 19-21,
Red-shouldered, 1:12-13,25-27;
1:2,4.

Red-ta i 1 ed , 1:4.

Sharp-shinned, 1: 4 , 23 ;£: 43-44 .
Short-ta i 1 ed , I : 30-36 .
Helmitheros vermTvorus^ 1:41.
Heron, Black-crowned Night, 1:6,
27-28;l: I 5,32-38.

Great Blue, 1** 20 ;1: 32-38 .

Great White, 1:6;1:41.

Green, 1: 1 3,32-38.

Little Blue, 1: 6, 28;1: I 5,32-
38;1:4I .

Louisiana, 1*. 6,28;1: I 2, 1 3, 1 5,
32-38;l:4T.

Yellow-crowned Night, 1:32-38.
Himantopus mexioanus ^ 1:25-30.
Hydranassas tricolor ^ 1:6,28;!:

12,13, 15,32-38;1:4! .
Hydroprogne caspia^ 1: 16-17,46.

I

Ibis, Glossy, £: 13-14.

White, 1:20;1: i 3, I 5,32-38;
1:31-38;1:28, 41-42,

Icterus galhulo.3 1:42.

3pm>iuSj 37-38 ;2' 51 .

Ictinia mississippiensis ^
Ixohryehus exilliSj 2_‘6.

J

Jaeger^ Pomarine,

Jay, Blue, h 9- I 3 J 3- i 4;2;. 46.

K

Kestrel, American, 3:4.
Kingbird, Eastern, £:40.

T rop 1 ca I , 4_: 40-4 i .

Kinglet, Ruby-crowned, £:4I .
Kite, Mississippi, ^'4.
W'hite-tai led, 2:4-7.

L

Lotus opgentatuSs 2: 20; 3: 22;
2:35-38,

atrieillas 2* 20;^: ! f J 6~ I 7 ;
3:46-47;4:9;2. 17,18,28,35-
38,44-46.

dela^m*ensis ^ ^.56-5%,
fusous^ 2* 20;^: 22.
marinuSj ^:2I .

Lepomis sp.^ ^•^5,

Leucopkoyx thula^

Lirmothlypis swainsonii^ ^‘4!.
Loon, Arctic, 2»^2,I7.

Common , 2* ^ 2, ! 8.

M

Malaolemys terrapin^ 2-26.
Melanerpes eiythrocephalus ^
Melospisa georgianaj _L:8^^*43,
Merganser, Red-breasted, 2*5”6.
Mergus serrator^ 1:5-6.

Meri in, 2'^*

MioropteTus salmoideSj ^>45.
Mirms polyglottos ^ 2" ^3-14.
Mniotilta varia^ *
Mockingbird, 2* *3-14.

Motus hasscmus^ 2' 3 .

Murre, Thick-billed, 2’*^*
muskrat, round-tailed, ^:29-50,

f-fycteria anericana^ 2- 25-26;
2:14-15.

N

Natrix faseiata^ 2*25.

Neo fiber alleni^ 29-30.

Nighthawk, Common, 2*41 .48.
Nuthatch, Brown-headed, £: 28-33.
Nycticorax nyetieorax^ 2*5^27-28,
2:1 5,32-38,
violaceos 52-38.

0

Oeeanites ooeanieus^ 4: 8; 2: 23.
Ooecmodroma castro^ 523,

Oidemia nigra ^ 2* * 4- I 5 .
opossum, 2:13.

Oriole, Northern, 2’^2.

Orchard, 2’37-38;2:5i ,

Oryzomys palustris^ 2* 29-30 ,
Osprey, 2* * ^5 5-2.

Otus asio^ 2'^9"-5I.

Ovenbird, 2* !5;2‘42.

Ow ! , Barn , 2' 28-31 .

Barred, 2x21 ,28.

Burrow i ng , 2* 28-30 .
Great-horned, 2*28.

Screech, 2-4-9-5I.

0xyi4Ta gmnaioensis^ 2' *2-13.
Oystercatcher, American, 2-^*

P

Pmdion haliaetus^ 2** 5;2-45;
5:5-7.

ParuTa ameriGona,, 2* 2; 2'^*'

Parus hioolor^ ^A6;4:\8.

Passer domes tious , 2’ ^

23^^24,51.

Passerculus sandrichensis^ fil;
2:42.

Passerina oyanea^ 2:42.

Pelacccnus erythror^ynchos ^ •

occidentalism 2’20;2: N #32-38,
44 ;3: i 1 - I 2,20,47-48;2: 3 1 .
Pelican, Brown, 2’20;2: ** #32-38,
44;3: I i - I 2,20,47-48;2: 3 ! .

White, 2:11.

Petrel, B I ack-capped, 17-18.
Petrodhelidon pyrrhonotaj, \_:1.
Phaethon lepturus^

Phalaorooorax auritus,

32-38;2:4I .

Gccphos J_: ! 3.

Phoebe, Black, 4_:39.

Eastern, J_:35.

Phoeniaeus agelaius^ 29-30.
Pipit, Water, i :35.

Pelagadis fdl^nellus^ 2_: 13-14.
Plover, Mountain, ^'21.

Semi pa 1 mated, J_:6.

Snowy, £*.9.

Polioptila caerulea^ J_:7.

Pomoxis nigromaaulatus j _2:45.
Porphyrula martiniaaj I 5- I 6.
PoTzana copolina^ £:29-30,4l .
Protonotaria dtrea, £:4I.
Pterodroma hasitata^ £: 17-18.
Puffinus diomedea see Caloneotris
Puf firms gravis j £*I8.

Q

Quiscatus quiscula^ 2_:46.

R

Rail, Virginia, £-41.

Yel low, 2:41 .

Raltus lirrwQola^ ‘

rat, cotton, £-.29-30.

rice, £: 29-30 .

Razorb ill, _5: 1 8.

Recurvirostra cmerioanas 5_: 25-30.
Redstart, American, 2_:42.

Regulus calendula^ •

Robin, American, £:29“30.

Rynchops nigral £: 20 ; 9 , 15-17;
_5:48.

S

Sandpiper, Buff-breasted, £:12.
Sem i pa 1 mated , 3_; 39-44.

Wh i te-rumped , £:42,

Western, _3: 39-44 .

Sapsucker, Yellow-bellied, £:41 .

sardine, scaled, £H6.

Sayornis nigricans^
phoehe^

Scaup, Greater, _5: 42-43.

Lesser, £: 1 3- 1 5.

Soiurv^ oarolinensis ^ £:!3;£:!8.
Scoter, Common, J_: 14-15.

Seiurus aurooapillus ^

2:42.

novehoraoensis ^ £: 42 .

Setophaga rutioilla^ £:42.
shad, gizzard, 2_:45.

threadfin, 2_:45.

Shearwater, Cory’s, £:I9.

Greater , £: I 8 •
shrew, least, £: 29-30.

Sigmodon hispidus^ £: 29-30.

Sitta pusilla^ £: 28-33.

Skimmer, Black, j_:20;£:9, 1 5- 17;
£:48.

snake, rattle, £:25.

water, 2_:25.

Sora, £:29-30,41 .

Sparrow, Chipping, 2_:46.
Grasshopper, £:42.

House, £:7;2:46;3:23-24,51 .
Savannah, £:7;£:42.

Swamp, J_:8;£:42.

White-throated, 2:46.

Speotyto Qunicularfa^ £: 28-30.
Sphrapious variiis^ 2_:4i.

Spinus tristis^

Spizella passerina^

Spoonbill, Roseate, j_: 6,£: 25-26,
34-36.

Squirrel, grey, 2_-!3;£:l8.
Stereorarius pomarinus^

Sterna alhifrons^ £: 3-5, 20, 37;

2:1 I ,19-20;£:9,15.
dougatliis £-3J9.
forsterij £:l-2.
hirundo^ £:2.
maxima^ •
paradiseae^ ^ •
sandvioensiSj _5:47.

Stilt, Black-necked, _5:25-30.
Stork, Wood, j_:25-26;2: 14-15.
Storm-Petrel, Wilson's, £‘8;£:23.
Wi I son’s, £:8;£:23.

Harcourt's, 5:23.

Strix vccria^ 27,28.
sunf-ish, £^’45.

Swa M ow , Cliff, J_’ 7 .

T

Tern , Arct i c, i «

Gasp ian , I 6- I 7,46.

Common , _2 : 2 .

Forster’s !-2.

Gu7 !”b i I I ed, j_:7.

Least, 2.:3"5,20,37;£: I I , !9-
20;_4:9, 15.

Roseate, 3, 1 9 .

Royal, 2:~8.46”47;4:9-10;2:47.
Sandwich, _3 : I 8 ;_4 : 9 ;_5 : 47 .
Telmatodytes palustvis^ 29-30.
Thalasseus maximus^ 3_: 18,46-47;
4:9-10,

sandviohensis ^ ^■*8;£:9.
Thrasher, Brown, j_;22~24;^:46;
4:11-12.

Long-b i I I ed , £: N •

Thrush, Hermit, £:4I .

Swdinson’s, 2_:4I .

Titmouse, Tufted, 2_-46;£:l8.

To xo stoma longivostre, £• ' ^ •
irntfum, £:22-24;2:46;£: I 1-12.
Troglodytes aedon^ ^‘41.
Tropicbird, White-tailed, £:18.
Tvyngites siihruficollis ^

Turdus migratorius^ £: 29-30.
Turnstone, Ruddy, £:50.
turtle, Barbour's map, £;45-46.

diamondback, _2:26.

Tyrahnus melancholicus ^ £‘40-41 .

tyrannuSj £:40.

Tyto alha^ £:28-31.

U

Uria loomvias £‘19.

V

Veery , _2-4 ! .

Vermivora oelata^ J_-35.

Vireo, Philadelphia, £:4I.
Red-eyed , 4 ! .

Sol itary, £:'7;£’41 .

Warbl ing, £:37-38.

White-eyed, £‘7;2_:4I.

Vireo gilvus^ £: 37-38.
griseuSs J_’7;2_:4! .
olivaceuSj £:41.
philodelphicus ^ £: 4 1 .
solitarius^

Vulpes vulpes ^ ^‘^4.

Vulture, Black, £^26.

W

Warbler, Black and White, _2:41.
Blackburn ian, £:42.

Blackpol 1 , £:42.

Black-throated Blue, _2:42.

Cape May, £:42,

Mag no 1 i a , £ * 42.

Myrtle, £:7.

Northern Parula, _1_:7; £:41.
Orange-crowned, J_-35.

Palm, £:7;£:42;£:22-24.

Pine, 2:42;£:28-33.

Prairie, j_:7;2_:26,42.
Prothonotary , £:41 .

Swa i nson ’ s , £: 4 1 .

Worm-eat Ing, £' 4 I .

Yellow, £• 42 .

Ye I I ow-rumped , £:42.
Yellow-throated, £:42.
Waterthrush, Northern, 2_:42.
Whip-poor-will, £: 44-45.
V\ioodpecker , Red-be 11 i ed,£: 1 9,

51 .

Red-headed, £‘34.

Wren , House, 2_:4 I .

Long-billed Marsh, _2:29-30,4l.
Short-billed Marsh, _2:41.

X

Xema sdhinis £^ I 4 .

Y

YeMowthroat, Common, £:42.

Z

Zenaidura maoroura^ £:7.

Zonotridhia alhioollis^ £-46.

THE FLORIDA FIELD NATURALIST
A Semi-annual Publication of The Florida Ornithological Society

Editor: FRED E. LOHRER, Archbold Biological Station, Rt. 2,

Box 180, Lake Placid, Florida 33852.

Managing Editor: KAREN G. HARROD, Florida Audubon Society,
P.O. Drawer 7, Maitland, Florida 32751.

Editorial Advisory Board: DAVID W. JOHNSTON, Department of
Zoology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 3261 1.
OSCAR T. OWRE, Department of Biology, University of Miami,
Coral Gables, Florida 33124.

WILLIAM B. ROBERTSON, JR., Everglades National Park, Home-
stead, Florida 33030.

GLEN E. WOOLFENDEN, Department of Biology, University of
South Florida, Tampa, Florida 33620.

The Florida Field Naturalist welcomes maunscripts containing
new information on the biology of vertebrates in or near Florida,
with an emphasis on birds.

SUGGESTIONS FOR CONTR! BUTORS
Submit manuscripts in triplicate to the Editor. They should be
typed, double-spaced, on one side of numbered sheets of standard
(8]/2 X 11 in.) bond paper, with at least one inch margins all around.
Type tables on separate sheets and use space efficiently. Submit
black-and-white photographs as unmounted glossy prints no larger
than X 11 inches. They must be sharp and have good contrast
with no heavy writing on the back. Diagrams and line drawings
should be in black ink with lettering large enough to permit reduc-
tion.

Titles should be short and descriptive and the body of the article
concise. Follow the form and style of a recent issue of The Florida
Field Naturalist Use the COUNCIL OF BIOLOGY EDITORS STYLE
MANUAL, Third Edition (AIBS 1972) in preparing manuscripts. Ail
references should be cited in the body of the text and listed at the
end under “Literature Cited.” Text citations should indicate author
and year of publication, e.g. (Bond 1 961 ). If there are more than two
authors list the first followed by “et al.” (e.g. Blair et al. 1968). Indi-
cate specific pages of longer works, e.g. (Bond 1961 : 44). If there are
five or fewer references they should be cited only in the text, e.g.
(Sprunt 1954, Florida bird life. New York, Coward McCann, Inc.) or
(Cruickshank 1974, Fla. Field Nat. 2: 1-3).

Capitalize the English name of bird species, and follow the first
mention of a species in text by the scientific name, underlined, in
parentheses. Scientific names should follow a widely accepted
authority for the group of animals or plants involved. For North
American birds use the A.O.U. Checklist, fifth ed. (1957) and its
32nd Supplement (1973, Auk 90: 411-419) and 33rd Supplement
(1976, Auk 94: 875-979).

Use abbreviations sparingly In the text except parenthetically e.g.
“Lake Placid (12 km S).” The metric system is preferred for ail
measurements. Use the 24-hour time system (0700 or 1645) and the
military date system (4 July 1976).

STORRS L OLSON
NAT*L MUS of NAT
SMITHSONIAN INST
WASHINGTON DC

NOTES ON AVOCETS AND STILTS IN TAMPA BAY, ^

FLORIDA.

James j. Dinsmore. ................................. .25

SHELL THICKNESS IN BROWN PELICAN EGGS FROM
TAMPA BAY, FLORIDA.

Ralph W. Schreiber ................................. .57

GULLS WINTERING IN FLORIDA. CHRISTMAS BIRD
COUNT ANALYSIS

Elizabeth Anne Schreiber, Ralph W. Schreiber ............ .55

FIELD NOTES

White Ibis nesting in the Lower Florida Keys.

James A. Kush Ian, William B. Robertson, Jr. ............. .41

A Florida breeding record for the Greater Scaup.

Frank Montalbano ill ............................... .42

Reverse migration of Sharp-shinned Hawks on the west coast
of Florida.

Malcolm M. Simons, Jr. .............................. .43

Laughing Gu!i colonies in extreme southern Florida.

James A. Kush Ian, Deborah A. White ................... .44

A tern prey sample.

Robert W. Loftin. .................................. .47

Chick retrieval by Black Skimmer.

Fred H. Groves .................................... .48

The status of the Screech Owl in the northern Florida Keys.

John C Ogden. .................................... .49

Orchard Oriole holding food with the feet.

Fred E. Lohrer .................................... .51

Report on the 1977 spring meeting.

Margaret C. Bo wmnn ^ .51

HIST

2056

iON-PiOFIT ORGANIZATION

U. S. POSTAGE
PAID
Orlando, Florida
Permit #224

FLORIDA AUDUBON SOCIETY
P. 0. DRAWER 7
MAITLAND, FLORIDA 32751

CONTENTS

( ' ■'''
'f '■ "'■■■

'I '

I

LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN !NST1TUT!0N NOlinilXSNI NVINOSHilWS S3IL

- ~ ^

B g — --

l) § ^11

z '<w^ m '^«.nc:/ OT

NOlinXIiSNrNVINOSHilWS^Sa 1 avy a n\l B rTr I Es‘"sMITHSOmAN“lNSTI

“ ./ A.. *" i i ^ V

LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN^ INSTITUTION NOliniliSNI NVINOSHims S3U

c 5 Isfe .^s) 5

O «. N;^X»XS<^ Q

N0IXnXIXSNl“NVIN0SHXIINS^S3 IBVaan'^LIBRARI es^smithsonian'^insti

- i I A s

;o r-

^ " . W g n;.»va^ m ^

LI B RAR I ES^^SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION'”NOIXnXIXSNl“NVINOSHXIWS*” S3 I B

2^ '« C/I 2^

I

Z ,

s >■•

NoixnxixsNi_NviNosHxms^S3 1 ava a n\i BRAR i es'^smithsonian jnsti

I W ~ I I i

o fB 5 2 O

^ J 2 «J 2

libraries SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIXOXIXSNI NVINOSHXIWS S3 IB

^ 5 3 ^ ^ r» 2

NoixnxixsNi NviNosHxiiNS S3iavaan libraries Smithsonian insti

Z g 2 .... CO 2

> 2

LI B RAR I Es"’sMITHSONIAN INSTlTUTION%OIXnXIX*SNI NVINOSHXIINS^SB I L

^ ~ . </l

LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN^

INSTITUTION NOliniliSNI
z I

NVINOSHIIWS S3 I
z

> 2

^ LI B RAR I ES^^SMITHSONIAN
=: c/>

INSTITUTION NOliOifiSNI
in

NVINOSHillNS S3

in
lij

NOlinillSNI

in

NVINOSHillNS S3IBVBan

^ i

LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN
2 t

O

INS

H

^ ^'.W 2

“LIBRARIES Smithsonian”

Z \ g 2

^ s (fg ji °

i \w i ^

5 > XissaSS^ f

NOlinXIiSNI NVINOSHilWS S3IMVBan LIBRAR

“ in

ES SMITHSONIAN
in

>

1 ^ L I B R A R I E S^^SMITHSONIAN

in

in

2 ^ >
in * 2

INSTITUTION NOliniliSNI

^ 5

NVINOSHil^S S3
in

in