Friday, July 14, 2023

The Population of Ivory-billed Woodpeckers before Anthropogenic Effects with a Comparison to Imperial Woodpeckers


draft 7/10/23 then 7/15 7/17


Abstract. The formal literature on the Ivory-billed Woodpecker, Campephilus principalis, was reviewed and analyzed to establish an estimate of total population before anthropogenic effects for the species.

Exploring past population dynamics of Ivory-bills provides more information on natural trophic processes and niches that can be economically important to forestry and silviculture. The potential value of the species has been ignored which lessened, and lessens the management response by federal,  state and local governmental departments.  

Ivory-billed Woodpeckers were estimated to have a population of 57,696 animals 18,000 years ago (YA). Taking the above number of pairs, 28,848, potentially producing 2.11 fledglings per year per pair (Tanner 1942) gives 60,869 fledglings estimated in an assumed average year.

Total hypothetical maximum population after an average breeding season is estimated by combining adults and fledglings; 57,696 adults plus 60,869 fledglings, equals 118,565 Ivory-bills post breeding, 18,000 YA.  The population of all species of birds drops post breeding due to predation disease, age, food resources etc.    

Introduction

The formal Ivory-billed Woodpecker, Campephilus principalis literature concentrates on the specie's range, description, specimen records, interactions with other species including people, life history based mainly on the Singer Tract, LA and modern presentations of sightings and evidence. In an extensive literature review few details on the total population of the species from any date or time scale other than the 1930's (Tanner, 1942) was located. Minimal information can be found about the numbers of these large woodpeckers before anthropogenic effects began in the southeast United States.

The only detailed study of Ivory-billed Woodpeckers. (Tanner 1942) 



The Ivory-billed Woodpecker, if at carrying capacity, is a keystone species of significant ecological importance. Primary cavity nesters, such as woodpeckers, support community biodiversity and especially secondary cavity nesters. Picidae are an integral component of forest ecology. 

The species past or possible economic importance is potentially substantial, but ignored; sustainable forestry was mostly unknown in prior centuries or deemed unimportant since forests were erroneously assumed to be impeding agriculture or a source of infinite firewood, fence posts, board feet, game animals, etc.

Ivory-bills with their unique and powerful bill and body morphology begin the pivotal "Tree to Soil" cycle ~ 24 months or more before any other Picidae can remove bark from a senescent tree exposing the cambium and heart wood. An intact Ivory-billed population can hypothetically increase long term productivity by up to 5% in some southeastern US forests as primary productivity, natural decomposition and silviculture regeneration rates are accelerated. 


NBP's artist D. Tattoli draws Ivory-bills unique bill. Green lines indicate that the IBWO has its eyes positionally lower on head than the Pileated Woodpecker

Ivory-billed Woodpeckers are relatively efficient within the Picidae at physically removing the hard bark covering of stressed or dead trees speeding up forest cycles, while converting wood boring insects into avian biomass. The ancestor species of the three northern clade species likley had  


C. principalis has been noted to eat small beetle larvae (Dendroctonus spp.) prevalent under bark of recently stressed or dead pine trees. These beetles are considered one of the most important causes of economic loss in forestry (Ungerer 1999). Ivory-bills are a natural control on forest boring insects but the USDA, US Forest Service and the USFWS are confronted with fragmented, managed forest blocks and policies that immediately default to costly pesticides, or tree removal to address insect outbreaks. A balanced approach that included Ivory-billed management over the last 60 years may have resulted in a better integrated, efficient and effective result if coordinated governmental forestry and wildlife goals are properly merged. Department wide and interdepartmental MOAs united in a sustainable goal could have greatly lessened the large costs of pesticides and increased forest output while retaining biodiversity. 

The most efficient ecosystems for converting solar energy into plant material and vertebrate biomass are the complex assemblage of biodiversity in East Africa.

"The combination of volcanic soils combined with the ecological impact of the migration results in one of the most productive ecosystems on earth, sustaining the largest number of ungulates and the highest concentration of large predators in the world." Source: UNESCO--Productivity of the Serengeti
The Serengeti produces a much greater biomass of plants and animals than anthropogenically managed open spaces. The assemblage of animals there accelerates basal rates of primary production and regenerative cycles. The Ivory-billed efficiently contributed to forest regeneration for possibly a million years. The Ivory-billed is a relatively large, understudied, forest bird; a keystone species that likely can increase economic output of some US forests if properly managed.    

The US Department of the Interior, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, etc., have not properly valued the potential irreversible economic impact if the species is perpetually lost. Government entities have historically and recently underfunded the research, management for, and protection of, this valuable natural resource despite being mandated to preserve economic, recreational and natural resources for present and future American generations. 

Exploring past population dynamics of Ivory-bills provides more information on natural forest processes that can be economically important to forestry and silviculture; Ivory-bills are an important resource but of course being critically endangered their beneficial impact is now miniscule.  

Using the data and constructs detailed here an estimate is calculated for the total Ivory-billed population circa 18,000 years ago (18K YA) before many people (Pre-Clovis or Clovis) had arrived in the SE USA. By the 19th century there were certainly less birds than 18 K YA as anthropogenic effects were substantial; habitat destruction combined with increasing and more efficient direct taking of birds had and was accelerating.   

Tanner (1942, p.31) said this about recent historical times:

None of the earlier accounts of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker contained accurate or definite statements as to the abundance of the bird. Judging from the interest that naturalists and collectors had in the Ivory-bill, and the accounts they wrote, it was never common. Most writers mentioned the Ivory-bill as being a rare bird, or an uncommon one, and some heightened the difficulties they had in securing specimens. 

And:

Audubon usually described the big woodpecker as being quite rare.

As an example in North America, there have been estimates of the American Bison population number that are derived from descriptions and direct field observations related to the size of large herds. From such recollections and accounts, historians, anthropologists, and zoologists have estimated the original or pre-settlement population size for the species. 

For the Ivory-billed, a forest interior species, we will never have an answer on historical numbers meeting today's standards of modern wildlife research, which demands random or systematic sampling and replication. But the estimates that have been made for the American Bison and other species show us how numbers are deduced.

Any estimate of a derivative of a dynamic complex ecosystem will have uncertainties. For example, it is not realistic to presume that before the Pre-Clovis and Clovis cultures reached the southeast United States that the Ivory-billed population was stable. Floods, droughts, large ice or log jams, beavers, insect outbreaks and fire regimes caused landscape scale ecological impacts pertinent to the Ivory-billed population demographics.

Riparian forest aerial, a small portion of the Ivory-bills possible habitat today; the remaining acres are greatly reduced and of lower quality and heterogeneity.  


 

Methods

Three approaches have traditionally been used to estimate animal population sizes: direct observations, estimates of numbers killed, and estimates based on carrying capacity. There is enough Ivory-billed observations to deduce a total population estimate since in its simplest form it equals the species entire range (breeding range) times the number of birds per area as reported from the field. 

Some animals are relatively simple to count



For the Ivory-billed, historical observations inclusive of birds killed are used as base line data yielding animals per area. Tanner and others have examined these basic densities. Ecological interpretations on what was the likely total range of the species such as typical impacts of latitude, ocean currents, plains effect, etc., on climate and carrying capacity are utilized here. 

On age demographics, including the ratio of non-breeding adults to breeding in the few historical metapopulations studied, there is little data. Conclusions on age structure, with veracity, could be made by examining A. T. Wayne's extensive field notes and papers which were not available online (personal communications, 10/2022). They can be accessed by a visit to the Charleston Museum of Natural History. Combining Wayne's info et al. with a coordinated examination of most or all skins, noting plumage details, age, molt, etc. would provide some information on the numbers of animals in respective age cohorts of the species. 

Here this work rationalizes, or perhaps idealizes, the following unknowns: The pertinent field studies' birds, at Wacissa and California Swamps, which were counted as breeding adults, may not have all been adults. This research, roughly negates or nets out two drivers as following:  the number of adult birds that were missed in the verbal population estimates of the time equals the number of birds that were actually fledglings, but counted as adults.

Undercounting actual numbers via field encounters and number of birds shot is very likely even in formal field studies since detection rates are needed (Buckland, et al., 2010).  A. T. Wayne was collecting rather than studying the birds; this makes Tanner's research work important in the context of the subject of demographics. 

The temporal point chosen for this estimate, 18,000 YA, accomplishes three things that are required to increase the population estimate accuracy of a naturally functioning system with no anthropogenic in puts but is still similar to the 19th century's climatic conditions when the most pertinent field data used was gathered.   

Three Requirements   

1) 18,000 YA, is ~ 2,500 years after the accepted date for the glacial maximum, assumed in this research to be an interglacial period with climate somewhat similar to the 19th century with annual and seasonally ice-free land mass available to the Ivory-billed approximately the same 

2) 18,000 YA is before more than negligible anthropogenic effects on Ivory-billed numbers developed 

3) 18,000 YA meets prerequisites 1) and 2) and is as close as possible to 19th century condtions when the main population data was gathered

The temporal point, 18,000 YA is assumed to have had a similar climate, ocean level and seasonally ice-free summer land mass available to the Ivory-billed as was in the 19th century. By choosing 18,000 YA we matched as closely as possible the forest conditions of the three most significant studies of Ivory-billed population density. In general, these three forested areas were considered to have late seral forests with old growth characteristics similar to the habitat of 18,000 YA. Tanner, 1942 used "primitive" to describe these areas. 

Congaree National Park, NBP performed point surveys in over 30 locations



The compilation and analysis of direct observations and individual counts or surveys in determining population age structures and demographic trends is frequently used by land managers to address issues. This type of data is a basis for conservation and policy decisions hopefully leading to field management for the recovery of this federally endangered species. Rarely has the USFWS or its predecessors acted on reliable Ivory-billed sightings over 100 years; many seemingly plausible field reports were often rationalized into short visits to the site days or weeks later or inaction. Some detections caused J. Jackson, Mississippi State University (1970-99), P. Sykes, USGS or others to be dispatched or voluntarily get in the field but the design and effectiveness of their methods are questionable. Jackson and Sykes received tens of thousands of public dollars decades ago but there seems to be no publicly available reporting detailing methods and results. Jackson has anecdotal stories of possible Ivory-billed encounters but nothing detailing effective survey science; Sykes similarly hiked and boated around.   

Unfortunately, Ivory-bills do not aggregate in thermals, fall out spots, migratory stopovers or roosting sites. These phenomena have been used to help determine population size and the age structure demographics of birds with large but scattered metapopulations that are difficult to monitor. 

For species like the Ivory-billed the probability of detecting single birds or groups of birds by means of audio point surveys or visual surveys may be asymmetrical due to the specie's range of behaviors and/or habitat and topographic heterogeneity. To assess these potential biases, it is necessary to compare results obtained from various surveys with estimates derived from population models or idealized, comparative matrixes. These are possible future research topics.

To date, only four, liberally called surveys or population studies have been performed, due to the inherent difficulty in obtaining long-term population data for this and other long-lived vertebrate populations. These studies, Tanner, 1942, Cornell Univ./USFWS Arkansas Effort 2004 to 2006, Cornell Mobile Team ~ 2006 to 2008, and Virrazzi, National Biodiversity Parks, Inc. 2022 all detected small numbers of Ivory-bills.

Typical Point Survey Conditions 



These studies occurred after the Ivory-billed had suffered not only habitat destruction but also direct shooting for various reasons. C. principalis numbers were greatly reduced by the 20th and 21st centuries. These 21st century studies do give some limited, nuanced information about facultative habitat occupancy of the Ivory-billed 18,000 YA. National Biodiversity Parks, Inc (NBP) detected Ivory-bills in a variety of USDA forest types in three states. NBP by finding birds in different USDA defined ecological communities influences this research to assume occupancy in a variety of states and forest types of 18,000 YA. The Ivory-billed was likely not obligate to either conifer or deciduous forests; its modern preference for wet, seasonally flooded riparian habitats is a response to human predation of the Anthropocene which began ~ 15,000 YA.

Here are articles on some of NBP's field research:

SUMMARY NBP'S IBWO FIELD WORK

NBP IBWO STUDIES in CONGAREE NP

Obviously there were no surveys of any type done 18,000 YA; reliance on the various data gathered much later is temporally adjusted 180 centuries.     
  
This research may provide insight into how modern landscape-level simulations might eventually replace the historical estimates with more granular based ranges of possible Ivory-billed population sizes.

These maps or similar can be used to model improved granular population densities depending on variables such as forest type which each can be assigned, with ecological analysis, different population densities.


This map closely represents the amount of forest that may have existed 18,000 Years Ago

 
USDA forest type information can improve population estimate for the Ivory-billed



In this research the small number of studies together with anecdotal information strongly supported that C. principalis density had a north to south gradient which is to be expected for a species with nestlings that are obligate insectivores. This enforces known ecological drivers on population demographics of many species related to latitudinal, climate related clines (Hut, 2013) with actual observations of Ivory-billed population density. This supports the method of having two different bird densities based on the many biotic and abiotic characteristics latitudinal clines encompass, to more accurately model the Ivory-billed Woodpeckers' population.

The following estimated acres list is based on NBP's internal range map for each significant state's respective area that contained breeding or likely contained breeding IBWO's. It is assumed that 18,000 YA was an interglacial period similar to the 19th century today.  M equals a million acres in the list below. 

Included are several million acres of breeding habitat outside of Tanner's generally accepted historical breeding range map as the target time here is 18,000 YA. The geographical breeding range here is also influenced by writings of P. Kalm (IBWO seasonal to SW New Jersey in the 1700s inferring MD for this analysis), J. J. Audubon (states to Maryland in the 1800s, inferring NC and VA), T. Jefferson (places the species in Virginia inferring VA and NC) and Hasbrouck (historical range into central coast of NC).

Various references indicate that even in 1600 the Ivory-bills range was larger than this depiction.



The contemplation of range treatment here is subjectively weighed by the ecological impact and moderation of the eastern coastal plain's climate by the Atlantic Ocean's Gulf Stream compared to the cold winters of the Ohio Valley and other mid-west areas due to the plains affect.

MD 1 M 

VA 2 M

NC 5 M

SC 10 M 

GA 10 M

FL 40 M

AL 20 M

MS 15 M 

LA 30 M

TX 30

AR 15 M 

OK 10 M     

MO 5 M

TN 5 M

IL 2 M 

IN 1 M 

KY 3 M  

TOTAL 203 million acres


To estimate the carrying capacity for these two equally sized cohorts, north and south, we started with Tanner's summary (Tanner, 1942, pg 32) which is based on actual field work by himself and A. T. Wayne in the 19th and 20th centuries.

"This gives us three estimates of the abundance or density of Ivory-bills in primitive areas: in Louisiana, seven pairs in 120 square miles or one pair per seventeen square miles; in California swamp in northern Florida, about six pairs in sixty square miles or one pair per ten square miles; in Wacissa swamps in northern Florida, about twelve pairs in seventy-five square miles or one pair per six and a quarter square miles."

Two separate estimates of the Ivory-bills abundance or population density, one for the northern half of the total range acreage and one for the southern half are summated to obtain a total population number.



Conclusions

Tanner's and J.J. Kuhn's Singer Tract observations and density results is used for the N half of the Ivory-bills range. One pair per seventeen square miles is the estimated density for the N half of the IB's range. Each pair occupied 10,880 acres. The N half of the Ivory-bills range is modeled at 101,500,000 acres. 101,500,000 acres divided by 10,880 acres/pair = 9,329 pairs.

This equals 9,329 pairs x 2 = 18,658 birds

For the S half the two densities Tanner deduced from A. T. Wayne's field notes are averaged for the Ivory-bill from the two Florida areas; this results in one pair per 8.125 square miles. 

This equals 19,519 pairs x 2 birds/pair = 39,038 birds

Total = 18,658 birds + 39,038 birds  = 57,696 Ivory-billed Woodpeckers, estimated 18,000 years ago. 


The Imperial Woodpecker (IMWO) has a maximum historical population estimate of 8,000 according to the article: Status and conservation of old-growth forests and endemic birds in the pine-oak zone of the Sierra Madre occidental Mexico (1996). This reference reports the total species range for the IMWO was 39,920 square miles and each individual needed 13 square Km. Imperial Woodpecker Population Estimate

Considering the two congeners and adjusting for respective total species range in square miles yields:

IBWO   317,187 square miles

IMWO   39,920 square miles 

The range of the IBWO is 7.9 times that of the IMWO and the two species respective total population estimates are 57,696 vs 8,000.  The IBWO has 7.2 times the population of the IMWO in 7.9 times the area. This infers that carrying capacity of the two species per area is somewhat similar with the Ivory-billed needing about 10% more area per pair. 

The world's largest woodpecker is the likely extinct Imperial Woodpecker, which averaged 58 cm (23 inches) in length and is estimated to weigh over 600 g (1.3 lb). The Ivory-billed Woodpecker is  smaller, with a length of 50 cm (20 inches) and a weight of 500 g (1.1 lb).

C. imperialis is estimated to weigh on average ~18% more than an C. principalis inferring, an Imperial should need more area per pair if all other variables, besides weight, are idealized to be equal. An Imperial pair should need more area than an Ivory-billed pair.

Ecological success and species abundance is a correlate of a species' ability to persist through time and is driven by multiple factors that cause differential survival and reproduction. The abundance and density of congeners can be considered as a measure of ecological success between species.

The Imperial had pragmatically no large Picidae competitor as does the Ivory-billed in the Pileated. The Pale-billed Woodpecker was only marginally sympatric with the Imperial in Mexico. The trophic niche of the C. imperialis was therefore larger than C. principalis'; it has been observed to feed on fallen logs even at a time when sizable areas of large dbh trees were still found in Mexico. Horizontal, prone logs were a part of the forest strata they utilized. This microhabitat alone can account for a substantial increase for the Sierra Madre's forest's carrying capacity for a large and efficient Campephilus

A careful Bayesian analysis considering several major ecological differences would likely establish that the Ivory-billed may have had a density per area similar to the larger Imperial. The literature and examination of the ecology of the respective species is consistent with population estimates deduced here.  

As said the Imperial seems to have had a broader niche than the Ivory-billed. W. L. Rhien observed Imperials foraging on fallen logs in comparison to Ivory-bills (Tanner, 1964). This niche is dominated by Pileated Woodpeckers in the southeast United States.

Population estimates of 57,696 for IBWO and 8,000 for IMWO are not in opposition but confirmatory.

NBP during modern Ivory-billed studies employing advanced attraction techniques, accumulating data over 650 points from many locations. In a few forests, and from year to year, these locations supported the pair range estimate in this paper; NBP found that a pair of Ivory-bills could have a range of ~ 10,000 acres.  

Post-breeding population estimate for Ivory-billed Woodpecker:

Obviously total population of all species of birds is maximal right after the breeding season. Populations can literally double or more in a few months; the increase is due to eggs hatching and fledglings leaving the nests.

At the Singer Tract, Tanner and Kuhn reported observing 6 Ivory-billed nests which had 9 broods from 1931-39 (Tanner, 1942 p. 81). The Ivory-bill had 19 young leave the nest from 9 broods; this is 2.11 fledglings/brood. Three broods failed. This is direct Ivory-billed field data on success of their breeding phenology. This is a small location sample size (n = 1) however the data was accumulated over several years with several nesting pairs.  

Taking the above total pair number for the SE USA 18,000 YA we have 28,848 pairs potentially producing 2.11 fledglings per year per pair. This equals 60,869 fledglings.

Total population after breeding season is estimated at 57,696 adults plus 60,869 fledglings which equals 118,565 Ivory-bills.

On average these young birds will have a high mortality rate in their first year, while the adults will have a lower mortality rate. After the birds are fledged the total Ivory-bill population would have dropped until the next years breeding season due to natural mortality.


Ivory-billed nestling about 8 days before fledging 


 

Discussion

Modeling ecological characteristics of several different forest types in relation to an abundance or population density, could provide a more accurate estimate of the past IBWO population. There are five different major USDA forest types in the Ivory-bills habitat (see maps). The literature ranges within being adequate, uneven, silent or nonspecific on the relative carrying capacity and occupancy by IBWOs in these different forest types; however inferences can be made.

But better estimates are not a pressing conservation issue for the modern Ivory-billed; any additional justified variables will retain assumptions on the species demographic response to different woodland communities since raw data varies or does not exist for forests. The management of the Ivory-billed needs more attention.

Objectively, from the totality of the C. principalis reports, more southerly populations within the range were specifically highlighted for their relative abundance compared to all other areas (Tanner, 1942). This enforces known ecological drivers on population demographics of many species related to latitudinal, climate related clines (Hut, 2013) with actual observations of Ivory-billed population density. This supports the method of having two different bird densities based on the many biotic and abiotic characteristics latitudinal clines encompass, to more accurately model the Ivory-billed Woodpeckers' population.

Two separate estimates of the Ivory-bills abundance or population density, one for the northern half of the IBs range and one for the southern half of the total range are summated to obtain a total population number in those acres.

Tanner, used his own observations and others (J.J .Audubon, A. T. Wayne, et al.) to relate that the peninsular Florida, Gulf regions of the Suwanee River such as California Swamp, Wacissa wetlands, and Buffalo Bayou (present Houston. Tx area) had a relative abundance of Ivory-bills. These three areas are all in the southern half of the Ivory-billed's range as defined in this research:



Location --------------Latitude (S to N)


Buffalo Bayou-------29.7400373,-95.357490


California Swamp---29.7612452,-83.054545XXXX


Wacissa Swamps---30.237583,--83.984288

Singer Tract--------- 32.3016241,-91.9054949 

 


Tanner and his Cornell professors overestimated the amount of virgin forest in the Singer Tract; this infers the same forest, 18,000 years ago, may have supported more IBs than J. J Kuhn's Singer. For the N half of the IB's range the winters are colder and trophic resources available would have been reduced and less varied comparatively to the S half of the range. Intraspecific carrying capacity proportionally drops for more northerly latitudes for many semi-tropical and temperate taxa.

The two prior inputs or factors, one, underestimating the maximum carrying capacity of the Singer Tract by Cornell's/Tanner and, two, the decreasing carrying capacity with more N latitudes, are assumed to offset each other's carrying capacity impact for the N half of the IB's range. Further research into the differences in carrying capacity in relationship to latitude in a semi-tropical zone of North America will likely result in a better estimate of carrying capacity and population but any adjustments to the final estimated numbers should be minimal.   

Ivory-billed Woodpecker in cavity. Copyright to Academy of Natural Science VIREO




References 

Buckland, S. T., Studeny, A., Magurran, A. E., and Newson, S. E. (2010). “Biodiversity monitoring: the relevance of detectability,” in Biological Diversity: Frontiers in Measurement and Assessment, eds A. Magurran and B. McGill (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 25–36.

Matthew J. Ungerer & Matthew P. Ayres & María J. Lombardero (1999). "Climate and the northern distribution limits of Dendroctonus frontalis Zimmermann (Coleoptera: Scolytidae)" (PDF). Journal of Biogeography.

Boyer W. D. (1990). Pinus palustris Mill. Longleaf Pine, Pinaceae -- Pine family  Boyer

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 200x. Recovery Plan for the Ivory-billed Woodpecker (Campephilus principalis). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia. 156 pp.

Hut R. A. (2013) 

Latitudinal clines: an evolutionary view on biological rhythms


https://royalsocietypublishing.org › doi › rspb.2013.0433


Lammertink. Status and conservation of old-growth forests and endemic birds in the pine-oak zone of the Sierra Madre occidental Mexico (1996). This reference reports the total species range for the IMWO was 39,920 square miles and each individual needed 13 square Km. Imperial Woodpecker Population Estimate



by · Cited by 239 — We review literature with respect to latitudinal clines



end of virrazzi  paper 

Pesticide

Pesticide




Raw Data 

Beavers---to Fv  trapping significant before 1800



Probably because of their feeding and breeding dependence on large old trees, great slaty woodpeckers are most common in primary forests and show density reductions of over 80% in logged forests.[6] The global population is in decline because of the loss of forest cover and logging of old-growth forest throughout its range, with habitat loss being particularly rapid in Myanmar, Cambodia and Indonesia which are the countries that still hold the majority of the global population. In 2010, the great slaty woodpecker was included in the IUCN Red List in the Vulnerable category.[1]




We conclude, first, that spatial scale has indeed had an important effect on the characterization of the Panama bird community. The intrinsically patchy distributions of most forest-dwelling bird species raise the need for large-scale censuses. Second, the Panama community, compared with the two Amazonian sites, has a fundamentally different organization; it hosts nearly twice as many individual birds and is distinctly less dominated by rarity. Similar patterns of community structure appear to be present within tree and mammal communities as well. Therefore, results from the Amazonian studies cannot be generalized to all lowland Neotropical communities. We attribute differences in community structure primarily to differing biogeographic histories. The lower species richness and the greater number of total birds present in Panama appear to derive, at least in part, from two important factors: an area effect linked to the location of Panama on a narrow isthmus, and the repeated history of disturbance on multiple temporal scales in Panama.

FB 9/12/22


Modern Carrying Capacity--Why the Low numbers-Critical Topic
Someone asserted there may have been 500,000 IBWO at one time. This is a high number, only possible if we do not agree on the probable or actual niche then. An unrealistic broad niche, drastically exaggerates derivatives like pre-contact, 1930's, and modern population numbers and carrying capacity. My early draft pre-contact number is 150,000 birds. (Today there may be 1.9 million PIWOS and their peak could have been 25 million birds).

PIWO may have 150 times the popalation of IBWO at one time; in the SE USA the ratio would been much less elevated.
Since this is a critically endangered species, actual niche and modern carrying capacity should be carefully discussed. Taking acres of land from 1800 via time tunnel and doing a simple acre to acre extrapolation, with today's low quality forest, small linear patches, and loss of genetic viability is the raw material that leads to an unrealistic, unfounded and likely erroneous modern carrying capacity numbers.
Today we have a somewhat stabilized acreage number in some areas of very slowly increasing DBH forests. Good ecological news seems to end there. Linear shaped acreage linking these areas is under pressure and these greenways are slowly to quickly, being destroyed.
Historically we have a small fraction of the original acres this species occupied, remaining forest is mainly mid-seral, fragmented habitat, greenways being attrited, global warming causing unknown and known ecological asynchronicities (diseases spread/mutate faster, invasive species in the hundreds. unprecedented destruction in the batture forest, light pollution adversely affecting coleopteran biomass, feral pigs driving snakes into canopy eating birds/eggs, known inbreeding by 1905 and much more).
Field reports are basically disappointing. The preprint paper reporting on 3 birds in LA 2019 dropping to one or two birds that dozens of people have encountered over 15 years in the same general spot. It's a small number of birds seen infrequently in a large area that have been reported over and over.
Older references point to IBs reaching highest numbers in large scale, forest mosaics of upland pines (prone to burn) with interdigitized forest bottoms (do not burn; low food for nestlings, but good for nest location due to water at base of tree). This optimal habitat landscape is basically gone in the SE USA, without basic management.
The IBWO's niche likely was and is forest areas with the highest 2-3 year post senescent standing deadwood. Fires, hurricanes, beaver, etc provided that. As the concentration of this age cohort of substrate drops carrying capacity drops below support level, as is the case in most modern areas. As the species was forced back into more inaccessible areas (forest swamps, bottoms, batture forests) it's faced with foraging in forests that have less 2 year dead wood than it needs to consistently fledge even 1 bird/year let alone 3.
Its forced to excavate (time consuming, increased time from nest) rather than the more efficient scaling; it has a morphological and behavioral advantage and predilection to scale recently dead wood.

Behaviorally the modern IBWO is not the same as the precontact animal. Due to nominal microevolution caused by severe and persistent anthropogenic taking of the least wary bird (subsistence, museum, and curiosity hunting) the bird now instinctively is "hard-wired" to prefer the most secluded section of forest which may be far from quality feeding areas for themselves or nestlings. Today the habitat landscape is dominated by short to longer, narrow river forests. The IBWO being instinctively fearful of people results in it foraging away from habitat patch/forest edge as you would if you instinctively were programmed to avoid, for example lions, which are in the fields and shade of the forest edge and they will kill you. So the aerial of a 10 mile long and 1 mile wide river forest habitat may seem to be 10 sq miles but an IBWO may perceive it as only 5 sq miles further reducing carrying capacity.

Finally the IB was already showing a loss of genetic variability before 1900. It's likely that there is some increase in embryological or hatchling mortality via various genetically based mechanisms that have increased the chances of homogygosity of deleterious alleles.
Our science based surveys lasting months camping located several birds over many years. However in only one high DBH forest did we surmise the density of a pair in ~ 6K acres. Overall we encountered only 0 to 1 bird every 30K acres covered at locations that some would call good habitat by basic assessment, but not necessarily one we agree is optimal without management or fire (to increase deadwood/concentrating beetle larvae reducing nest predation).
Tanner stated pg 32 or 33 that the maximum IBWO abundance was one pair in 6 sq miles (4,000 acres). This max estimate were from forests long gone; replaced with houses, or at best substantially lower quality habitats in many, many ways. Mid seral or even older forest likely do not have enough substrate for a strong species recovery and maybe any recovery. Management may be the only hope. This is independent of how many pictures we have or do not have.

Regardless ecology is complex; the IBWO has somehow persited, microevolution is rapid and things can by definition change rapidly for the better.

 A few years later, James Tanner began a study of Ivory-bills as part of his Ph.D. dissertation and eventually wrote an in-depth report, funded by the National Audubon Society, that was later published as The Ivory-billed Woodpecker. His report estimated that only 22 to 24 of the birds remained in the United States.    

Population number
According to the IUCN Red List, the total Ivory-billed woodpecker population size is fewer than 50 individuals and mature individuals.

This picture has been disputed by Noel Snyder, who contended that hunting rather than habitat loss had been the primary cause of the population decline. He argued that Tanner's population estimates were made of an already depleted population, and the home range needs were significantly smaller.[48]


Records exist of the ivory-billed woodpecker farther north along the Atlantic Coast; Thomas Jefferson included it as a bird of Virginia in Notes on the State of Virginia, where it is listed as the "White bill woodpecker" with the designation of Picus principalis.[41][42] Audubon reported the bird could occasionally be found as far north as Maryland.[43] Pehr Kalm reported it was present seasonally in Swedesboro, New Jersey in the mid-18th century.[44] Farther inland, Wilson reported shooting an ivory-bill west of Winchester, Virginia.[39] Bones recovered from the Etowah Mounds in Georgia are generally believed to come from birds hunted locally.[35] Within its range, the ivory-billed woodpecker is not smoothly distributed, but highly locally concentrated in areas where the habitat is suitable and where large quantities of appropriate food may be found.[28]

 An internet post on Facebook (4/29/22 below) guessed that there was 500,000 IBWOs at one time or perhaps circa 1800.  

George DeBusk

Tanner found home ranges of 1500 to 3000 acres in the Singer Tract, versus 40-50 for a Pileated pair in good habitat. It could be the Singer Tract birds were way below carrying capacity and therefore had large ranges, or it could be they really need that much space as they are, during breeding season, pretty much a specialist on boring (generally Cerambicid) beetle larvae and that is a pretty scarce resource (maybe patchy is a better descriptor than scarce). The Pileated, being more of a generalist and able to eat a wider variety of foods can subsist on a smaller territory (I have seen huge dead pines nearly cut in half by Pileateds searching for carpenter ants, for instance).
There are about 11,000 acres of old growth (not necessarily Virgin, just old growth) in Congaree NP. That would, in theory, support 3-6 breeding pairs. That is just the largest area of old growth. A place like the Choctahatchee or the Apalachicola bottoms in the FL panhandle might not have as much “old growth” forest, but still would have the type of dead and dying trees that provide food for the IBWO. There are probably close to 100,000 acres of older secondary forest in those two river systems. If they had territories at the higher end there you could easily accommodate 15-25 pairs if at capacity. White River NWR in AR has 160,000 acres, much of it very advanced second growth if not old growth. What would capacity be there? Maybe 40 or more pairs? There are dozens of other places with large enough areas of older growth to support one pair or multiple pairs - the lower Santee, the Savannah, the Altamaha, Okeefenokee and environs, the Green Swamp of FL, the Pearl, the Achafalaya, Tensas NWR, Big Thicket, etc. if they survive and can persist in second growth forests, there are probably well over a million acres of potential habitat. Carrying capacity? Who knows, maybe 200-300 pairs?
Compare that to the days of Wilson or Audubon when just the Mississippi Valley had tens of millions of acres of old growth. I would guess the original population, particularly if it sustained the kind of trophy hunting described by Audubon and Wilson, must have been at least in the 500,000 range (that is just a guess without any calculations behind it!).


Wednesday, November 9, 2022

Correlated Ivory-billed Woodpecker Molt and Breeding Phenology; Florida 1968, More Evidence that Ivory-billed Woodpecker Survived Post Singer Tract

Correlated Ivory-billed Woodpecker Molt and Breeding Phenology; Florida 1968, More Evidence that Ivory-billed Woodpecker Survived Post Singer Tract  


Draft 11-10-22



Molt is commonly used by bird banders and ornithologists to gauge a bird's health and age, and aid in specie's identification. The observed molt phenology can be determinate in identification between even closely related species. After recently discovering a synchronous molt on the Ivory-billed Woodpecker in Louisiana (M. Collins, 2008 video, Virrazzi, 2022), I examined the circumstances of the 1968 Ivory-billed feather from Florida associated with those published sightings. 

A correlated molt and breeding phenology was deduced to research the subject feather (see table below). The exact date the specific fresh, secondary feather was found is consistent with the breeding and normal molt phenology for Ivory-billed and not a Pileated Woodpecker.




Change of season or daylight hours stimulates molting, migrating, and breeding. Other factors that influence the timing of the molt include temperature and available nutrition, as well as the bird's general health and reproductive state. In this article the season and date factors only are examined to see if they correlate with the expected date for a normal Ivory-billed Woodpecker molt for the specific feather found.




H. Norton Agey and George M. Heinzman reported eleven detections, including sightings of Ivory-billed Woodpeckers in central Florida from 1967 to 1969 by several people. The sighters became aware of the birds after an inexperienced youngster described a large woodpecker with field marks that only fit an Ivorybill.

Several capable people subsequently saw or heard these birds and identified them as Ivory-billed Woodpeckers. A feather discovered near a fallen nest tree was professionally identified as an Ivory-billed feather. Other feathers from a very young bird were found attached to splinters in the cavity. This was not a one day, one observer event, or one without physical evidence, quite the contrary. The years of evidence were described and published in The Florida Naturalist, 1971.






 

The Ivory-bills were reported from a large cattle ranch with locked gates west of U.S. Route 27 in Hardee and Highlands Counties, north of Highlands Hammock State Park (P. Sykes, 2016). The authors had permission to be on the ranch and the landowner was aware of the Ivory-billed Woodpeckers presence for ~ 10 years prior. Ivory-bills were seen in Highland Hammock State Park several times per reports of multiple witnesses in the 1960's. Birds were reported in the area in the 1930's.


 

Gradually during the multi-year Bald Eagle census for Florida Audubon they began to accumulate insight into the wary birds' movements while hiking this seasonally flooded forest. Ivory-bills are documented to often breed in locations that are flooded (Tanner, 1942). They noticed Ivory-billed sized, fresh tree holes in the general area and bark scaling in certain trees. They heard various Ivory-billed like calls and strong knocks

In 1968 a tree they suspected as recently having a nest was blown down, breaking at the cavity hole. The pertinent tree sections were collected and measured; the hole was comparable to an Ivory-billed nest hole and not Pileated.

Three feathers found at the broken tree were collected and sent to Alexander Wetmore, PhD, ornithologist and Secretary at The Smithsonian Institute. Several taxa of birds have been named in Wetmore's honor. Nothing indicating the feathers or nest hole were not collected in the field on the stated date was noted. The largest feather was identified as the innermost secondary (S8) of an Ivory-billed Woodpecker by Wetmore. Jerome Jackson confirmed prior to 1995 that the feather was indeed an S8 of an Ivory-billed Woodpecker (P. Sykes, 2016).

During a confidential conversation with a professional who had spoken to J. Jackson, Jackson could not recall any details about which Ivory-billed specimen was missing secondary 8. He had not taken or had lost the notes. The professional went to the subject museum and could not find any Ivory-billed specimen missing S8. There was a very old, damaged specimen that Wetmore should have certainly noted the feather condition had he ever seen a feather from that skin.      



 
In this article the molting phenology of Ivory-billed Woodpeckers is examined to see if it coincides with the date this exact secondary feather was found. Feathers are partially consumed in days by bacteria, other animals and other processes.  

 
Top L Dorsal IBWO, Top R Ventral IBWO, 
Bottom L Dorsal PIWO, Bottom R Ventral PIWO, Note that the IBWO wing is not properly 
"laid out" compared to the PIWO's 

NBP-Florida woodpecker holes



The 1971 article was silent on whether the innermost secondary (S8) they found at a fallen Ivory-billed nesting hole in April, 1968 coincided with the proper timing for an Ivory-billed to drop that particular secondary. The feather had been formally identified as an Ivory-billed by an ornithologist as mentioned. Neither the authors nor the ornithologist may have found a reference on the IBWO molting sequence since no summary likely existed in 1968. They may have not realized molt timing can contribute to species identification between the two larger species of SE USA Picidae; regardless they had the S8 feather of an Ivory-billed.


For the first time the 1968 feather is looked at with the benefit of modern literature on the molt timing of Ivory-billeds. The 2008 Ivory-billed video (Pearl River, LA Collins) was found to have a synchronously molting bird.



The molting sequence of Ivory-bills was determined by examining up to 204 specimens; this established that the innermost primary (P1) is dropped soon after the breeding season ends and then innermost secondary (S8) is shed soon after P1 or P2. In this video from March 29, 2008 primary 1 in both wings is missing and that matches well with the expected specific molt sequence as proposed by J. Jackson.


Study Results of Ivory-billed specimens



Highland Hamock State Park details of study 

This was the first announcement of the sightings and proceeded the paper in the Florida Naturalist soon after.  


 



Most North American Picidae also start their flight feather molt right after the breeding season. Pileateds breeding season ends approximately 2 months later than Ivory-bills; for a respective calendar day an Ivory-billed should not have the same feather or feathers molted vis-a vis a Pileated. The same is actually true for molts of other species; the Ivory-billed molts flight feathers earlier than many North American bird species.


The Pearl River, LA 2008 Ivory-billed had both P1s missing on March 29, 2008 (see video showing that above). The S8 Florida feather was found on April 21, 1968.

Both dates are respectively consistent with the known Ivory-billed molt phenology for P1 and S8. This is further and new evidence supporting that the exact feather found in Florida, S8, coincides with the literature for that feather's temporal molt.

The only observed date for Ivory-bills mating is on November 29, 2019. Ivory-bills first clutch eggs have been found in January, February and March.

Note that Heinzman's name is apparently misspelled throughout The Florida Naturalist article, (1971). (Heinzmann [sic] and Agey, 1971; Heinzman’s name is misspelled throughout the article per P. Sykes, 2016)



Ivory-billed Woodpeckers in Florida











Conclusions: Examining evidence of  Ivory-bills should include comparing the observations with the molt and breeding phenology of the species. Molt and breeding phenology can be used to assist in confirming or questioning reports of Ivory-bills.

On April 21, 1968, a secondary 8 feather (S8) of an Ivory-billed Woodpecker was found at Highland Hammocks State Park, Florida by multiple people. April 21 is temporally consistent with the phenology of a normal molt of S8 feather for an Ivory-billed and not a Pileated Woodpecker or many other species.

The presence of feathers from a very young bird and an older Ivory-billed on April 21, 1968, is consistent with the known breeding cycle of Ivory-billeds.   

The feathers found in 1968 are consistent with two separate complex biological cycles which statistically is strong bivariate evidence of Ivory-bills. The feathers' discovery date coincides with the molting and breeding phenology of the species. This adds to the evidence that the Ivory-billed Woodpecker survived well past 1944 in the United States.
 
A synchronous molt of P1 on the Ivory-billed Woodpecker videoed in Louisiana (M. Collins, 2008 video, Virrazzi, 2022), is consistent with the phenology of a normal molt of these feathers for an Ivory-billed and not a Pileated Woodpecker or many other species.  

Both the 1968 (FL) and 2008 (LA) Ivory-billed reports, supported by correlation with breeding and molt phenology are strong evidence that the Ivory-billed Woodpecker survived well past 1944 in the United States. 

Some Reference Excerpts:


Spring--At what time the winter groups of ivorybills break up and spring activities commence is rather difficult to state, for there seems to be considerable irregularity to the breeding season. Judged from published records of its nests, the period of greatest activity would seem to be late March and early April. According to Audubon, (1842): "The ivory-billed woodpecker nestles earlier in spring than any other species of its tribe. I have observed it boring a hole for that purpose in the beginning of March." Scott (1881) reports taking an incubating female in Florida on January 20, 1880, and (1888) of finding a nest containing one young female about one third grown on March 17, 1887. Ridgway (1898) likewise speaks of shooting a male that left its nest hole February 15, 1898, and Hoyt (1905) states that "in Florida they begin building the latter part of January, and if undisturbed the eggs are laid by February 10th."

In 1937 James Tanner discovered a nest in Louisiana from which the fledgling left on March 30, fully 2 months earlier than any previous records from the same locality, and in 1938 apparently the same pair of birds had young the last week in February. In contrast to these dates we find 10 records of April nesting, 5 for May, and 1 (Beyer, 1900) of a young bird just out of the nest in July. The latter records might well constitute second attempts at nesting. The Florida birds, in general, start earlier than those in Louisiana, but at best there seems to be less regularity to the commencement of the nesting period than is found with most of our North American woodpeckers. In this, the ivorybill may register its affinity with tropical birds in general, the ivorybill being the most northern representative of an otherwise tropical or semitropical genus. There is some evidence for believing that ivorybills wander over considerably larger territories in winter than those to which they confine their activities in the spring, but little definite information has thus far been recorded on any of their before and after breeding activities.
Courtship--Nothing seems to have been written on the courtship of the ivorybill except the observations of Allen and Kellogg (1937):

Our only observations were made in Florida about 6 a. m., on April 13, 1924. We had discovered this pair of Ivorybills at about the same time the preceding morning when they came out of the cypress swamp and preened their feathers and called a few times from the top of a dead pine before going off together to feed. They had made such a long flight the previous day that we were unable to find them again, but that night, still traveling together, they had returned to the same group of medium-sized cypress trees which they had apparently left in the morning and In which there was one fresh hole In addition to four or five other old ones In the near vicinity. On the morning of the 13th, they called as they left these cypress trees and flew to the top of a dead pine at the edge of the swamp, where they called and preened. Finally the female climbed up directly below the male and when she approached him closely he bent his head downward and clasped bills with her. The next instant they both flew out on to the "burn," where we followed their feeding operations for about an hour.

Nesting--As before stated, while there are a few records of February nesting, the most definite records are for March, April, and early May, as follows:
April 6, ____. M. Thompson, Okefinokee swamp, Georgia. Laying.
April 9, 1892. E. A. Mcllhenny, Avery swamp, Louisiana. Three fresh eggs.
April 10, ____. Dr. S. W. Wilson, Altamaha swamp, Georgia. Four eggs.
April 15, 1893. A. Wayne, Florida. A young female about 2 weeks out of the nest.
April 19, 1893. Ralph Collection, Lafayette County, Fla. Three eggs.
May 2, 1892. E. A. Mcllhenny, Avery swamp, Louisiana. Three eggs.
May 19, 1892. E. A. Mcllhenny, Avery swamp, Louisiana. Four eggs, a second laying.
May (early) 1894. E. A. Mcllhenny, Avery swamp., Louisiana. Five young, 3 days old.
May 3, 1885. Capt. B. F. Goss, Jasper County, Tex. Three eggs.
July 1897. George G. Beyer, Franklln Parish, La.
March 4, 1904. Brown brothers (Hoyt), feeding young.
March 16, 1904. H. D. Hoyt, Taylor County, Fla. Large young.
March 4, 1905. H. D. Hoyt, Claremont County, Fla. Two eggs, incubation advanced.
March 24, 1905. R. D. Hoyt, Claremont County, Fla. Two eggs slightly Incubated (second laying of the preceding).
April 13, 1924. A. A. Allen, Taylor Creek, Fla. Nest completed. Incubation not yet started.
April (early) 1931. J. J. Kuhn, northern Louisiana. Incubating.
May 13, 1934. J. 3. Kuhn, northern Louisiana. Probably small young.
April 6, 1935. A. A. Allen and P. P. Kellogg, northern Louisiana. Incubating.
April 9, 1935. A. A. Allen and P. P. Kellogg, northern LouIsiana. Building.
April 25, 1935. A. A. Allen and P. P. Kellogg, northern Louisiana. Incubating.
May 10, 1935. A. A. Allen and P. P. Kellogg, northern Louisiana. Small young.Again quoting from the report of Allen and Kellogg (1937):

The site of the Ivorybill's nest seems to vary considerably. Audubon states: "The hole is, I believe, always made in the trunk of a live tree, generally an ash or a hackberry, and is at a great height." There are, however, records of their nesting in live cypress, partially dead oaks, a dead royal-palm stub,"an old and nearly rotten white elm stump," etc., indicating about as great a variety as shown by the pileated woodpecker. The lowest authentic nest of which we have found a record, was that described by Beyer (1900) "about 25 feet up in a living over-cup oak," although Scott (1881) mentions what he considered "an old nest evidently of this species," in a palmetto stub only fifteen feet from the ground. The nest which we discovered in Florida, in 1924, was about thirty feet up in a live cypress and there were other holes in the vicinity in similar trees that had apparently been used in years past. The bark had healed over in some cases and scar tissue was apparently trying to close the wounds. Of the four nests examined in Louisiana, three were in oaks and one in a swamp maple. The maple, seven and a half feet in circumference (breast high), was partially alive, but the top where the nest was located, 43 feet from the ground, was dead and pithy. Of those in oak trees, one was in a dead pin-oak stub about ten feet in circumference and about fifty feet high, standing in more or less of a clearing. The nest was 47 feet 8 inches from the ground. The other two were not measured accurately but were certainly over forty feet from the ground. About the middle of May when it was determined that the first two trees had been deserted, they were cut down, careful measurements taken, and the contents of the holes preserved. The hole in the maple was 5 inches in vertical diameter and 4 1/8 inches laterally, and was slightly irregular at the bottom, as shown in the photographs; that in the oak was more symmetrical with a similar vertical diameter of 5 inches and a transverse diameter of 4 inches. The depth of the maple nest from the top of the entrance hole was 19 1/8 inches, of which 3 inches was filled with chips and "sawdust." This nest cavity was 8 1/8 inches in diameter at the egg level, and the tree itself 18 1/2 inches in diameter at the level of the hole. The nest cavity in the oak was 20 inches from top to bottom with a diameter of 8 1/4 inches at the egg level. The entrance hole went in 3 inches before it turned abruptly downward; the tree at this point was 22 inches in diameter. There was a stub just above the hole in the maple about 4 inches long representing a branch that had apparently died and been broken off years before and started to heal over. The oak was perfectly smooth at the entrance hole, not on either side, slightly above, were the bases of two large branches that could not have given the opening any protection from the weather. The opening in the maple faced north, two of those in the oaks east, and one west. Audubon states: 'The birds pay great regard to the particular situation of the tree and the inclination of the trunk; first, because they prefer retirement, and, again, because they are anxious to secure the aperture against the access of water during beating rains. To prevent such a calamity the hole is generally dug immediately under the juncture of a large branch with the trunk." None of the nests examined by us showed this desire for protection from rain, and the chips at the bottom of the cavity were perfectly dry, though we had had some very heavy rains shortly before they were examined.

Audubon further states: "The average diameter of the different nests which I examined was about 7 inches within, although the entrance, which is perfectly round, is only just large enough to admit the bird." Beyer (1900) says: "The entrance measures exactly 4 1/2 inches in height and 3 7/8 inches in width," and McIlhenny (Bendire, 1895) gives the measurements of a typical hole as "oval and measures 4 1/8 by 5 3/4 inches," and Scott (1888) as "3 1/2 inches wide and 4 1/2 inches high." The corresponding measurements of the nests of Pileated Woodpeckers are given by Bendire (1895) as follows: "The entrance measures from 3 to 3 1/2 inches in diameter, and it often goes 5 inches straight into the trunk before it is worked downward." The additional one to two inches in diameter of the nest hole should he kept in mind when searching for reasons why the Ivorybill has proven less successful than the Pileated Woodpecker in its struggle for existence. Thompson (1885) states: "The depth of the hole varies from three to seven feet, as a rule, but I found one that was nearly nine feet deep and another that was less than two." He also claims that they are always jug-shaped at the lower end.

Of two nests discovered by Hoyt (1905) in Claremont County, Fla., one was 58 feet up in a live cypress about 20 yards from a nest discovered in 1904 by the Brown brothers; the second nest built by the same pair after the first eggs had been taken was in a cypress stub about 70 yards distant from the first and 47 feet from the ground. The opening of the first nest was 6 3/4 inches by 3 1/4 inches, with the trunk of the tree 15 inches in diameter at the nest cavity, which was 14 inches deep. The second nest hole measured 6 by 3 3/4 inches and was likewise 14 inches deep. "The opening in both nests was uneven and rough, and just inside the hollow was much enlarged, being 9 inches across, and unlike the nests of other woodpeckers, was smaller at the bottom than at the top. * * * * One marked feature of the nest tree of which I have seen no mention made is that the outer bark of those I have examined was torn to shreds from a point some distance below the nest site to 15 or 20 feet above it. This made the nest tree noticeable for quite a distance. The last nest taken this season had little of this work done."