Progne problem?

Mon Feb 4 16:10:42 EST 2008

	Dave:

	I'm not sure Black-and-white Warbler is really greatly in
trouble.  I don't think it ever was a really common breeder in the
southern third of the state.  Red-headed Woodpecker is a totally
different story, however.  As you may know, I county list the entire
state.  I use the original breeding bird atlas publication as a guide to
finding birds in summer.  Red-headed Woodpecker and Purple Martin are
the two most different in their 1980s and their current distributions.
Both have obviously declined greatly.  Two other which have also greatly
declined (although not as much) are Henslow's Sparrow and Ruffed Grouse.

	Steve Santner 

-----Original Message-----
From: mich-chat-bounces at envirolink.org
[mailto:mich-chat-bounces at envirolink.org] On Behalf Of Dave Slager
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 3:14 PM
To: Mich Chat
Subject: Progne problem?

During summer 2006, I surveyed nearly all the Breeding Bird Atlas
priority blocks in Kent and Montcalm counties (about 40 blocks).  Many
of these blocks contained prime sites for martin colonies, such as
inland lakes surrounded by residential areas.  Most lakes had one or
more lakeside residences with apparently suitably-mounted martin housing
installed.  I put in reasonable effort to document martins during my
surveys by scanning existing martin housing on accessible lakes, and
listening for their flight calls overhead at all survey points.

Although I lack knowledge of historical martin populations in the
regions I surveyed, what I observed was pretty bleak.  I only recall
observing martins in around 5 of the 40 priority blocks I surveyed in
these two counties.  All but 1 of the active colonies I found seemed to
be minimally maintained, with lots of House Sparrows around, etc.

While we're on the subject, I also am quite concerned about Red-headed
Woodpeckers and Black-and-white Warblers, based on my survey results for
Kent and Montcalm counties.  I recall finding them in approximately 8
and 1 block(s) out of the 40, respectively.

We'll have to wait until the 2nd Atlas is published to get real
quantitative data for the entire state and all observers.  By the way,
does anyone know the projected publication date?

Dave Slager
Grand Rapids, MI

On 2/4/08, Russell Emmons <birdeland at pasty.net> wrote:
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: John Tautin
> To: fkaluza at sbcglobal.net ; birders at umich.edu ; birdeland at pasty.net ; 
> MDietrich at senate.michigan.gov ; jnelson at getbolt.com
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 1:09 PM
> Subject: FW: "Michigan Purple Martin Conservation Related"
>
> Hello, to All,
>
> Thanks for your interest and concern for Michigan martins.
>
> Considering that they cover 70,000+ birds, mammals, amphibians, etc., 
> and deal with all sorts of population information, NatureServe does a 
> pretty good job with species status designations, particularly at
large scales .
> But they are not perfect, and their Secure (Common, widespread, and 
> abundant in the nation or state/province) designation for Purple 
> Martins in Michigan - and some other states - should probably be  
> Apparently Secure (Uncommon but not rare; some cause for long-term 
> concern due to declines or other
> factors.)  See
> http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/ranking.htm for more information 
> on NatureServe's ranking system.
>
> Regardless of NatureServe's, or for that matter, anyone else's 
> official designations, where we know from other information that a 
> species has an existing or emerging, population problem in a region, 
> it should not be ignored.  Essentially this is what we were saying in 
> the next to last paragraph of our article in the last Update.
>
> In our next article, we'll talk about some things that might be done 
> in regions where martins are in decline, emphasizing the importance of

> forming local and regional working groups modeled on the Western 
> Purple Martin Working Group that has had some success in restoring 
> Purple Martins in the Pacific Northwest.  Some positive developments 
> have already occurred.  Last November we went to Minnesota to 
> encourage the formation of a Minnesota martin working group.  We are 
> pleased to report that one formed in January, and it includes 
> important conservation partners like the state DNR and the state 
> Audubon office .  This month we are going to Texas to the Partners In 
> Flight conference to talk about the need to address regional declines 
> in Purple Martins.  The Partners conference draws a large attendance
from across the spectrum of agencies and ngos involved with bird
conservation.
> In March, we are going to Massachusetts to encourage the formation of 
> a New England martin working group.
>
> Meanwhile, martins in Michigan need some attention through an
organized
> effort.   I would encourage all of you to consider forming a working
group.
> It would seem that with Mark's Michigan Purple Martins project you 
> already have a good platform for one. You already are doing some 
> important, fundamental things like documenting the location of martin 
> colonies.  PMCA would be happy to be a member of a Michigan working 
> group if one forms, although practical considerations like travel 
> would limit our direct, on-the-ground involvement.
>
> Thanks again for your interest.  Let's keep thinking and talking.
>
> John Tautin
> Purple Martin Conservation Association Tom Ridge Environmental Center
> 301 Peninsula Drive, Ste. 6
> Erie, PA 16505
>
> jtautin at purplemartin.org
> 814-833-7656
>
>
> ------ Forwarded Message
> From: Tara Dodge <tara at purplemartin.org>
> Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 11:14:08 -0500
> To: John Tautin <jtautin at purplemartin.org>
> Subject: Fwd: "Michigan Purple Martin Conservation Related"
>
>
>
> ------
> Tara Dodge
> Purple Martin Conservation Association Tom Ridge Environmental Center
> 301 Peninsula Dr Ste 6
> Erie, PA 16505
>
> www.purplemartin.org
> tara at purplemartin.org
> 814-833-7656
>
>
>
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: "Fred Kaluza" <fkaluza at sbcglobal.net>
> Date: February 4, 2008 8:26:45 AM EST
> To: <birders at umich.edu>, "'Russell Emmons'" <birdeland at pasty.net>, 
> "'Mark Dietrich'" <MDietrich at senate.michigan.gov>, 
> <jnelson at getbolt.com>, <info at purplemartin.org>
> Subject: "Michigan Purple Martin Conservation Related"
>
>
> I recently received the latest edition of the "Purple Martin Update"
> magazine from the P.M.C.A.  Lately the organization has been exploring

> the conservation status of Purple Martins in their breeding range.
>
> I know some of the people I'm addressing this letter to are active 
> Martin colony managers (or are trying to become one).  In this most 
> recent edition, John Tautin has amassed a boat-load of data from 
> different sources and I'm particularly noticing how in the opening 
> figure, the shading applied to Michigan is a dark-green color 
> indicating "secure".  There are 8 ranges including Presumed 
> Extirpated, Possibly Extirpated, Critically Imperiled, Imperiled, 
> Vulnerable, Apparently Secure, Secure and Not Ranked/Under Review.
>
> The map is said to have been formed from "NatureServe" data and it's 
> later stated that this data comes largely from Breeding Bird Atlas 
> surveys in the area.  Based on the observations and personal 
> experiences of the majority of experienced landlords in Michigan and 
> Mark Dietrich's efforts, I hardly believe this designation represents 
> our actual conditions in the state.  After all, a picture is worth a 
> thousand words and If we're to get any help in understanding and/or 
> resolving our situation here, we'd better not be painting a rosy image
when none is believed to exist.
>
> I realize that the article goes on to make a comment about declining 
> populations in areas of the Midwest but compared to known levels in 
> years past, I hardly think our state deserves a secure status, 
> especially when people in perfectly suitable habitat have not so much 
> as seen let alone attract nesting pairs in many years.  Perhaps Russ 
> can educate us on how people performing the BBA surveys have decided 
> all is well and good regarding Martin populations in the state.
>
> Additionally, does anyone know who was given credit for documenting 
> our "new" and "only" Martin roost at the Pointe Mouille game area?  I 
> made a few trips there attempting to confirm what the NEXRAD RADAR 
> indicated but was never able to positively identify any flocks with 
> thousands or tens-of-thousands of Purple Martins yet we're credited in

> the "update" with a roost now.  Comments?  Fred Kaluza in Warren
>
>
>
> In the end, we will conserve only what we love.
> We will love only what we understand.
> We will understand only what we are taught.
> -Baba Dioum (Senegalese Ecologist)
>
>
>
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.19/1256 - Release Date: 
> 2/2/2008 1:50 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------ End of Forwarded Message
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mich-chat mailing list
> Mich-chat at envirolink.org
> You can unsubscribe or change your options at:
> http://lists.envirolink.org/mailman/listinfo/mich-chat
> this message was delivered to:
> dave.slager at gmail.com
>
_______________________________________________
Mich-chat mailing list
Mich-chat at envirolink.org
You can unsubscribe or change your options at:
http://lists.envirolink.org/mailman/listinfo/mich-chat
this message was delivered to:
santners at karmanos.org