Dianne and Amy et al,

I think Pacific-slope Flycatchers are one of many species that breed
in forested environments all around Seattle but probably don't breed
in the city any more, except perhaps in our most spacious parks. We
badly need continued censuses of birds in the city parks, just to see
if I'm right. I'm certainly right about my yard and the well-wooded
Thornton Creek ravine behind it, where I have never before detected a
PSFL in the summer in 17 years of living here.

The city is losing birds, particularly migrant birds, especially
those that migrate to the tropics. These are birds that have to
arrive in migration and set up territories anew every spring. It is
fairly well known that cities can be POPULATION SINKS, places where
populations would decline, because mortality exceeds natality
(production of young), if it weren't for continuing immigration from
the surrounding natural habitats (which are POPULATION SOURCES). As
we develop and expand the suburbs around the city more and more, we
are essentially pushing the population sources farther and farther
away, to the point at which certain species disappear completely from
the city, even though there are appropriate habitats here and there.
This really seems to affect migrants more than residents, which can
make do with reduced habitat quality. One reason they do, I suppose,
is because so many of the resident species are aided and abetted by
bird feeders. Not so with Pacific-slope Flycatchers.

In some species, individual male birds continue to come into what
seem like acceptable habitats in the city, sing their little hearts
out, but fail to attract a female. Perhaps the females are better at
assessing the value of habitats. If I were a female, I would
certainly try to find the very best breeding habitat when I arrived
from a winter in Mexico, and it wouldn't be a 10-acre patch of
woodland in a city park surrounded by development.

We also need a lot more research on, for example, the density of
insects available to an insect-eating bird in a wooded city park as
opposed to a similar forest outside the city. I suspect there will be
a substantial difference. Having wooded parks and green belts in a
city is a great idea, and a wonderful amenity for both humans and
some subset of wildlife, but we are kidding ourselves if we think
these habitats will support the same biodiversity as the expanse of
natural forest that used to be here.

Dennis


> Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 10:37:10 -0700
> From: Diann MacRae <tvulture at vei.net>
> Subject: RE: [Tweeters] very late migrant?
> To: amy schillinger <schillingera at hotmail.com>
> Cc: Tweeters at u.washington.edu
> Message-ID: <6.2.5.6.2.20080616103421.023c3620 at vei.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hi Tweets, Amy, and Dennis
>
> I have lived in a very forested area of Bothell for over twenty
> years. I have Pacific-slope flycatchers all summer, every year. They
> are pretty vocal. I'm not sure why they would stay all summer and not
> nest, especially when it goes on every year.
>
> Cheers, Diann
>
> Diann MacRae
> Olympic Vulture Study
> 22622 - 53rd Avenue S.E.
> Bothell, WA 98021
> tvulture at vei.net

-----
Dennis Paulson
1724 NE 98 St.
Seattle, WA 98115
206-528-1382
dennispaulson at comcast.net



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/pipermail/tweeters/attachments/20080617/876609b2/attachment.htm