Wayne Weber wrote:

>In regard to the apparent flocking of feeding Starlings, there is a
>possibility that you may not have considered-- that the apparent flock
>is not really a flock at all, but merely a loose grouping of birds,
>each of which is deciding where to feed independently, based on where
>it has had best success in finding food-- not based on whether or not
>there are other birds nearby. In other words, such a group would be a
>passive "aggregation" of birds rather than an active "congregation",
>in which the birds are attracted to other feeding birds.

Wayne made some good points, and I've been watching the starlings for a
while this morning. There aren't as many present as yesterday, but the
pair from this nest keeps flying back to the same patch of lawn, which must
be phenomenally rich in crane fly larvae and/or other juicy critters. I'll
see if more birds come in later in the day to test the hypothesis, but
Wayne's comments are convincing. It does seem odd, though, that with all
the uniform lawns block after block through the city, starlings would be in
these little aggregations, which I've seen again and again, now that I'm
watching for them. Perhaps crane fly larvae are patchy, depending on where
individual females laid their eggs. Or do they spread them out widely?

Everyone should take time off to look out their windows! Peering across
the courtyard, what did I see but a male Western Tanager fly into one of
the big magnolia trees growing around the edge! And now there's a female
Audubon's Y-r Warbler in the tree right in front of me. I hardly ever see
migrants from my office window, probably because I'm rarely standing here
looking out with binoculars in hand. I also saw another warbler fly across
the courtyard, perhaps a Yellow. Wow, and a female Western Tanager just
flew by the window. There must have been a real influx of migrants last
night. Almost like being on the Dry Tortugas....but without the Sooty
Terns.

I'll take this opportunity to add one philosophical comment. People have
remarked that starlings are "bad" because they evict other birds from their
nests or because their young make about the most unpleasant sound you can
imagine, but "good" because they eat the crane fly larvae in our lawns or
are quite handsome and interesting. I find it very hard to judge any
animal species as bad or good, as those concepts to me are firmly rooted in
human behavior and quite outside the realm of the rest of nature. *We*
introduced starlings into North America, we filled the world with the
agricultural fields and lawns where they feed, we furnished them an
abundance of crevices and holes in which to nest in our towns. I don't see
that they've done anything bad - or, for that matter, good.

And now a male Yellow Warbler just flew by the window, and there's another
Western Tanager across the courtyard - I guess I should be birding and not
philosophizing. We should all be outside!

Dennis Paulson, Director phone 253-879-3798
Slater Museum of Natural History fax 253-879-3352
University of Puget Sound e-mail dpaulson at ups.edu
Tacoma, WA 98416
http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/museum.html