.......
List members may be interested in the nature of the commercial trade in
Short-tailed Shearwaters in Australia. The following summary
comes from the 'Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and
Antarctic Birds' (OUP, Melbourne, 1990, pp. 633-4).
quote
Long history of exploitation. Archeological evidence suggests
Aboriginal people living on Hunter [Island], in sw [Tasmania],
took small numbers. In 1820s, sealers began trading in adults,
nestlings and eggs. By 1900, annual harvests recorded to be near
one million chicks from Furneau [Group] alone... Taking of eggs
prohibited from 1902 but taking of adult birds not until 1976.
Now only nestlings harvested commercially; industry centred on
Furneau Grp, Tas., illegal in [Victoria] and little practised
in [South Australia]. Mostly used for food. Yearly commercial
harvest >300 000 chicks from seven colonies. Estimated
non-commercial harvest of 300 000; non-commercial licences
issued with bag limits of 50/day on Bass [Strait Islands], and
15/day elsewhere...Trampling of burrows during harvest and
poaching regarded as significant cause of loss.
endquote
I hope this is of interest. Perhaps I should add that
Australian ornithologists are not especially concerned at this
level of harvest and loss from other forms of human intervention
because of the size of the 'muttonbird' population.
Al, let's hope you win the quiz!
_______________________________________________________________________________
David McDonald davidm at aic.act.crime.oz.au
Australian Institute of Criminology Phone: +61 6 274 0231
GPO Box 2944 Facsimile: +61 6 274 0201
CANBERRA ACT 2601 Home: +61 6 231 8904
AUSTRALIA
________________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 11:58:51 MST
From: "Jeff Price, NBS" <pricej at MAIL.FWS.GOV>
Subject: Re: Jan AUK (summary)
>Geographic variation in Plain Titmouse mitochondrial DNA - Cicero
Unfortunately I did not attend Carla's talk so I'm not sure what she
reported but I do have an interesting followup. I have been examining
the relationship between climate and the distribution (continentwide) of
the Paridae (to be presented at the AOU/COS/WOS meeting in Missoula).
Although I have information from throughout the range of the Plain
Titmouse, the best logistic regression model only takes into account the
coastal/California population (but does an excellent job of modeling
that distribution). Combining this model with models for projected
climate change (doubled carbon dioxide) yields a distribution very
similar to the actual distribution seen today (with some northern
extensions). This leads me to wonder if perhaps the California form may
be the parental form which spread EAST during the altithermal period and
was then separated during the subsequent cooling. Just idle speculation.
.......
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 01:57:15 -0400
From: Adam Winer <winer at HARVARD.EDU>
Subject: Possible Bicknell's Thrush: Help!
.......
BTW, I might as well summarize what Ouellet says about Bicknell's
Thrush:
Plumage differences:
Bicknell's is significantly browner dorsally than Grey-cheeked; most
Bicknell's are "olive brown", as opposed to Grey-cheeked, typically
olive (I don't know exactly what they mean by these colors).
Bicknell's almost always (98% of the time) have a chestnut tail;
about 95% of Grey-cheeked have an olive tail; a few of each
have olive-brown tails.
Bicknell's males have significantly more buff on the throat
than Grey-cheeked males, but unfortunately there is no
significant difference among females, so this is at best a
supporting character, if of any use at all.
Bicknell's are a duller white underneath than Grey-cheeked, sometimes
with a greyish wash.
Bicknell's have a yellowish basal half of the lower mandible; in
Grey-cheeked it is "flesh" or "yellowish flesh" colored; the light
area of the bill is also more extensive in Bicknell's.
There are also small differences in the color of the legs, and,
yes I'm not fooling, the _soles of the feet_. There's a great ID point...
Bicknell's are also smaller, especially in wing length; probably only
useful in the hand.
Other info:
Bicknell's have a different song, though in a way I can't describe,
never having heard Grey-cheeked sing. Bicknell's individuals only
responded to playback of Bicknell's song, and not Grey-cheeked song.
mtDNA showed substantial divergence, estimated at about 1 million
years separation.
Habitat+range:
Bicknell's Thrush is generally found in second growth, not in
old growth as generally reported, although this may be a shift
related to the lack of old growth forests because of human
activity. They tend to be in relatively high forests.
The breeding range includes all of Maine, New Hampshire, and
Vermont, as well as most of western Massachusetts, and eastern
New York. In Canada, they breed in southern Quebec, New
Brunswick, and Nova Scotia. They winter exclusively in
the Caribbean region, and has been reported from
the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Cuba, Puerto Rico, and St. Croix.
.......
------------------------------