Download September 2015 - Friends of Goose Pond

Friends of Goose Pond
Third Quarter Newsletter
September 2015
Founding Friends
Margaret Harger-Allen
Grace Chapman
Tom & Nancy Ciskowski
Chuck Davidson
Susie Dewey
Brad Feaster
Marilyn Flanders
Tammy Galm
Dawn E. Hewitt
Paul D. Hoernig
Kip O. Hoffer
Joan Ten Hoor
Sandra S. Miles
Mac Moulden
William R. Powers, MD
Nyle Riegle
Deborah Shonk
LuAnne Kohler Shonk
Sherrell G. Shonk
Timothy Shonk
Barbara Simpson
George R. Sly
The Wabash Valley
Audubon Society
Barbara Steele
Don Steward
Lee Sterrenburg
Cam H. Trampke
Peggy Wolfe
Becky Yung
Farewell and a Big Thank You
to Board Member Peggy Wolfe.
The Friends of Goose Pond
organization is losing a valuable
member of our team. Peggy will soon
be making a move to Washington
state. We will miss her tireless and
enthusiastic work on behalf of the
Friends, GPFWA, and the Marsh
Madness Sandhill Crane Festival.
However, we share her delight in being
able to see her daughter and
granddaughter much more often in the
future.
Peggy was elected to the board in 2009
and became board secretary. She also
served as secretary of the Marsh Madness Planning Committee.
Peggy was a major contributor to the planning and success of the
Marsh Madness Festival. She spent countless hours in procuring
items for the silent and live auctions which take place during the
festival kick-off banquet. A retired registered nurse, Peggy has lived
near water in several parts of the country. Observing the life of these
aquatic ecosystems infused her with a love of nature. Supporting
GPFWA, through membership in the Friends of Goose Pond, was
thus a natural for her. Spending time simply gazing into our local
wetland treasure is a pastime that Peggy has treasured. Our sincere
thanks Peggy. Enjoy your new adventure.
New Construction at Goose Pond FWA
The Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife reports that the
construction of the new regional office and visitor's center at Goose
Pond FWA is coming along nicely. The footers have been poured
and the building is starting to take shape.
___________________________________________________
A GOOSE POND FWA WATERFOWL UPDATE
by Lee Sterrenburg (DNR bird monitoring
volunteer Goose Pond FWA)
On Friday August 21 2015 Kathy McClain and I did a tour of
the east levee of Main Pool West. Our waterfowl totals were:
CANADA GOOSE 109
WOOD DUCK 115
MALLARD 40
BLUE-WINGED TEAL 10
GREEN-WINGED TEAL 11
On Saturday August 22 Jim Brown of Bloomington recorded
76 BLUE-WINGED TEAL while visiting two Units. Looks
like Teal are starting to arrive.
___________________________________________
A Few Owls of Goose Pond
by Suzie Ronk
(Grade 7 - Linton-Stockton Jr. H.S.)
Probably, while you were outside at dusk near a forest, you've heard
the haunting cry of an owl. Owls are the midnight hunters of the
North American woods. Four common species of owls live in our
own Goose Pond: Barred owls, great - horned owls, screech owls,
and short eared owls.
Barred Owls
Barred owls are a fairly common species of owl. They have a
highly recognizable hoot, "who cooks for you? Who cooks for you
all?", and have been known to answer humans imitating them, even
though they know the people aren't other owls. Their scientific name
is Strix varia. They range from 43 to 60 cm in length. They have
brown eyes and a barred pattern (hence the name) across their chest,
with streaks lengthwise across their bellies and white spots on their
back. They usually hunt at night or evening, although they
sometimes hunt during the day. They usually feed on squirrels,
chipmunks, mice, voles, rabbits, other birds (up to grouse sized)
amphibians, reptiles, and invertebrates. You will find the creatures in
woodlands, wooded river bottoms, and wooded swamps from
Canada (east of the Rockies) to Honduras. Barred owl populations
have gone up 1.7% per year between 1966 and 2010.
Great horned owls
Great horned owls (Bubo virginianus), or "Cat owls", are very
distinctive looking owls. They are big, ranging from 43-60 cm. They
have ear tufts, or "horns". They are heavily barred beneath, with a
white throat bib. When they are in flight, they appear to have a large
head with no neck. When clenched, great horned owls talons require
a orce of 28 pounds to open; they use these talons for hunting. They
have the most diverse diet of all North American raptors. The size of
this bird’s prey ranges from tiny rodents and scorpions to hares,
skunks, geese, and raptors. They mainly eat mammals and other
birds. These birds make their homes in forests, woodlands, thickets,
streamsides, and open country from the tree limit to Tierra del Fuego
(southernmost Chile). Partners in Flight estimates global breeding
population to be at 6 million with 45% in the US.
Screech owls
Screech owls are the only small eastern owl with ear tufts. At 18-25
cm, these guys are pretty small. They have two color phases: redbrown and gray. Screech owls get their name because of their
trademark mournful wail, descending in pitch, which sounds like a
screech. They dine on small animals, birds, mammals, invertebrates,
and insects. They live in woodlands, farm groves, and shade trees
from southernmost Canada to northernmost Mexico.
Short eared owls
The short eared owl, or Asio flammeus, is a medium sized bird
with large rounded wings with dark brown wing tips. Its face is
darker and lightish with lemon yellow eyes. Their belly is whitish
streaked with brown. Females and young birds are darker and buffer.
They are 34-43 cm long. Their diets consist mainly of rodents, small
squirrels, shrews, rats, moles, bats, muskrats, and insects. They live
about twelve years in the wild, They live across North and South
America.
I hope you have learned a thing or two about four of the midnight
hunters of North America (and beyond).
The Friends of Goose Pond’s own Lee Sterrenburg was
recently profiled in the Outdoor Indiana magazine. The article
about Lee’s work at GPFWA is reprinted here courtesy of
Outdoor Indiana magazine. Thanks to OI’s Jessica Sparger for
facilitating this reprint.
LEE STERRENBURG
Merging forces for wetlands conservation
By Nick Werner, OI staff
Photo by John Maxwell, OI staff
Lee Sterrenburg has spent so much time in wetlands he has
become like one. Wetlands connect the aquatic and
terrestrial worlds. They link waterfowl, shore birds, marsh
birds and the
raptors that prey
on them. And
their beauty and
biological
abundance bring
together diverse
people. They are
nature’s
intermediary.
Sterrenburg, a lifelong birder and volunteer
conservationist, is another.
For more than 30 years, he has united citizen groups
and government agencies, bird watchers and bird hunters,
nature lovers and business people. He even bridged the English
and science disciplines at Indiana University. “I like connecting
things, apparently,” Sterrenburg said. He lives in the countryside
east of Bloomington. Wetland science, bird biology and habitat
conservation have almost always been his avocation. From 1970
to 2006 he was a professor of English and Victorian studies at IU.
Occasionally during that stint, he merged his personal and
professional interests. For example, he co-taught an
environmental ethics course with a wetland ecology professor
for three years.
In March, he earned a Sagamore of the Wabash, an
honorary award bestowed by the governor. It recognized a
lifetime of volunteering, especially Sterrenburg’s work with
various groups to develop, study and promote Goose Pond Fish &
Wildlife Area in Linton. Robert Kissel, a member and past
president of Sassafras Audubon Society (SAS), nominated his
longtime fellow SAS member. “Lee saw a value to putting in that
kind of effort, to lead other volunteers, to assist other
stakeholders to attain what has turned out to be an incredibly
biodiverse property,” Kissel said.
Goose Pond comprises 8,000 acres of restored wetlands
and prairie. The DNR opened the area in 2005. It has become a
birding and waterfowl hunting destination. About 12,000 wildlife
watchers visit each year. There are about 3,500 annual hunting
efforts (one hunter visit for one day). More than 370 bird species
have been recorded there. They include rare or locally rare
birds—roseate spoonbill, spotted redshank, and a hooded crane
believed to have flown from Asia.
Sterrenburg first visited the future site in 1999, on an
SAS birding trip. The area was private farm ground, loaded with
geese, ducks and cranes. He and other SAS members monitored
birds there and compiled spreadsheets. The data helped convince
the DNR to buy the property, according to Brad Feaster, south region
supervisor for the DNR Division of Fish & Wildlife, who managed
Goose Pond from 2005 to 2013.
Once the property opened, Sterrenburg continued
monitoring, conducting formal surveys for the DNR on shore
birds, marsh birds, sedge wrens, Henslow’s sparrows, and
waterfowl. The waterfowl surveys help hunters determine when
to hunt. “His dedication was like no other,” Feaster said. “He
would sleep here in the barn. Nobody was paying him other than
with a hat that said ‘DNR Volunteer’ and free room and board in
an old barn.”
Goose Pond earned designation as a Globally Important
Birding Area through the Audubon Society in 2006. Sterrenburg
spent countless hours talking up the place with locals. He spoke
with Audubon Society and Ducks Unlimited chapters, politicians,
school groups, civic groups, the local chamber of commerce and
more, Feaster said. “Lee built relationships,” Feaster said. “There
was a lot of work to be done locally to build support and explain
our desire to be a good neighbor.” One result was formation of
the Friends of Goose Pond, some of whom are Greene County
business people who understand the economic importance of the
Fish & Wildlife Area to surrounding communities.
Currently, Sterrenburg is co-administrator of the Friends of
Goose Pond Facebook page and a coordinator of Marsh Madness, an
annual festival that celebrates Goose Pond and crane migration. He
continues to conduct the waterfowl surveys, although the shore
bird and marsh bird surveys have been handed over to DNR
officials.
Sterrenburg’s passion for birds stretches to his youth in San
Diego. He had relatives who encouraged him to bird watch.
Between grades 4 and 6, Sterrenburg attended classes at the San
Diego Museum of Natural History. He read bird guides at the public
library. As a teen he joined the San Diego Audubon Society.
“It was a great place to start birding, with mountains and desert
and seashore,” he said. “It made me aware of diversity of habitat. I
watched some of that habitat disappear under my nose into
condos and suburbs, and I think that’s how I got my start in
conservation.”
Sterrenburg traces his affinity for wetlands to summers
spent at a Wisconsin youth camp surrounded by lakes and
marshes. He became heavily involved in Indiana birding in 1981,
when he achieved tenure and gained more leeway to combine his
vocation and his birding avocation. He soon started teaching
courses on wetlands and Charles Darwin. He was a “citizen
scientist” long before the term entered the Oxford English
Dictionary in 2014. “Among about the first five things I did with
the DNR was volunteering to go on weekly waterfowl surveys
with (Monroe Lake wildlife specialist) Rex Watters,” Sterrenburg
said. “Twenty-two miles on a metal johnboat for hours on end. It
was freezing.”
One of his biggest concerns now is how to fund
improvements and habitat management at Goose Pond and other
vital bird areas. Unlike hunting, bird-watching does not generate
conservation dollars. Hunters buy licenses, and manufacturers of
hunting equipment and ammunition that hunters use pay federal
taxes on the gear. The tax money is appropriated to states in part
on the number of certified hunters. The funds can only be used for
restoration, conservation and management of wild birds,
mammals and their habitat; provide public use and access to
wildlife resources; and provide for hunter education and
development of shooting ranges. Birders are not required to buy
licenses, and their binoculars, scopes and cameras are taxed
differently from hunting gear. Sterrenburg hunted ducks once in
his life, more than 40 years ago on the Olympic Peninsula in
Washington State. “I shot two drake mallards and missed one.”
Sterrenburg said. “Then I retired forever.” But he is a strong
defender of hunting. “It really is hunting interests that conserve
bird habitats,” he said. Sterrenburg encourages birders to buy
the state’s hunting and fishing combination license, even if they
never plan to hold a gun or a rod, and to buy a federal duck
hunting stamp.
Part of the appeal of wetlands is variety. Hundreds of
bird species come and go. The landscape changes as water levels
rise and fall. This is where the analogy between Sterrenburg’s life
and a wetland diverge. While conditions fluctuate at Goose Pond
and other marshy areas, Sterrenburg’s devotion won’t.
His passion for that soggy landscape will never run dry.
Critter Corner No. 12
The Coyote
by
George Sly
I must say, this is the first edition of Critter Corner I have had to
begin by offering a disclaimer. But the fact is that few other
animals generate the polarized love or hate sentiments
engendered by Canis latrans. So, I have to begin by professing a
degree of sympathy and admiration for this much maligned
predator. Others will not feel so kindly toward the coyote. But, as
always, the opinions expressed in Critter Corner are mine and
not the Friends of Goose Pond, the DNR. or any other entity.
Hopefully I can shed some light on how I find admirable qualities
in a mammal with such a generally poor reputation among the
public.
Contrary to stories I often hear, the coyote was not
introduced into Indiana (the DNR is the usual culprit in these
tales). In fact coyotes were present in Indiana when it was first
settled. At that time, they inhabited primarily the western
portions of the state where extensions of the prairie encroached
into the vast eastern deciduous forest. Many 19th century reports
of coyotes referred to them as “prairie wolves”.
The first time I can recall actually hearing of a coyote in
our area was, I believe, the late 1960’s. An article in a local
newspaper showed a coyote that had been shot. The headlines
referred to it as a “50 pound female timber wolf”. I did the prep
on that specimen while at Indiana State University and it was
indeed a coyote. Confusion between these two canids is common;
they do bear a superficial resemblance. Up close, the greater size
of the gray wolf is very apparent. Coyotes weigh 24-46 lbs. while
Canis lupus females weigh around 60 lbs. and males go well over
100 lbs. It has been suggested that eastern coyotes have, in the
past, hybridized with gray wolves. As a result eastern coyote
individuals tend to be somewhat larger than their western
brethren. Typically height at the shoulder for a coyote is around
24 inches while a gray wolf can be closer to three feet. Upon
seeing a gray wolf in a zoo, where a close approach is possible,
one is astounded by just how big they really are. This size
disparity is an evolutionary adaptation to diet. Coyotes do not
generally tackle the large mammalian prey (bison, moose, elk)
taken by gray wolves. This is also why the latter are pack
hunters.
Coyote numbers began to increase markedly in Indiana
at about the time I heard news of that first one. The 1970’s found
their populations really starting to take off. Now they are found
throughout the state. Not only that, they have extended their
range into all of the eastern states as well. In fact, as this image
(Natl. Museum of Nat. Hist.) shows, coyotes today have one of the
most
extensive geographic ranges
of any
large American predator.
One of the secrets to
the
success of the coyote is that
they
are supreme generalists.
Such
animals are those that can
utilize
a wide variety of habitats
and
foods. This opens up
exceedingly large areas in
which they may live. We might compare this with an animal that
is a specialist. The giant panda would be one example. With a
diet comprised of essentially one type of plant (bamboo), this
species is restricted to one small area of Asia where this
particular sustenance and the habitat that supports it are found.
Coyotes can, of course, utilize a huge variety of habitat
types. Originally they were, as noted, animals of the western
prairies. But they are equally at home in desert environments,
deciduous and mixed forests, edge habitats, agricultural lands,
and suburban landscapes. It is not unusual to hear news of
coyotes roaming urban areas. An article about coyotes in the July
17th issue of The Week magazine mentioned New York City,
Chicago, Washington D.C., Pittsburgh, and Atlanta as cities with
populations of coyotes.
Like their ability to utilize a wide variety of habitats, the
capacity to eat an equally broad diversity of foods is a key in the
immense biological success of the coyote. They eat a wide
assortment of animals, mostly mammals. Voles are a major
component of their diet. The eastern cottontail is also a favored
prey item. J. O. Whitaker, in his Mammals of Indiana, reports that
Voles, other mice species, and cottontails make up over 70% of
the coyote’s diet. Carrion is often consumed and of course
complicates the issue of whether livestock eaten by a coyote was
preyed upon or scavenged. Coyotes will also consume insects,
fruits, berries, and grasses.
Concern has been expressed that coyote predation on
white-tailed deer fawns may significantly decrease deer
populations. Studies have shown that predation by coyotes is a
significant factor in deer fawn mortality 1,2. However other
studies have shown that the impact on deer populations is not
detrimental in the long run3, particularly if doe harvest quotas
are taken into account.
As a result of coyote predation on deer, rabbits, and other
game species, many attempts at population control have been
undertaken. In fact, I am hard pressed to think of an animal that
has been more persecuted than this species. Historically they
have been trapped, shot, and poisoned at every opportunity. In
spite of this, the coyote has shown its remarkable ability to not
just survive but to thrive. Recent studies have shown that coyote
populations subjected to culling pressure actually produce more
offspring. Given their intelligence, adaptability, and reproductive
potential it seems a safe bet that coyotes are here to stay.
Around homes coyotes can be a danger to pets. A 2009
study done in Tucson, Arizona found that domestic cats made up
42% of the diet of urban coyotes. Are coyotes a danger to
humans also? In reality, attacks on humans are quite rare. In the
U.S., since 1976, there have been 160 instances of coyotes
targeting people. There have been two recorded deaths resulting
from coyote attack4. In perspective, we might compare this with
the 5,581domestic dog attacks suffered just by postal workers in
a single year – 20135. In 2015, 42 people were killed in this
country as a result of dog attack6. As tragic as any of these
attacks may be, it seems clear wherein lies the greater danger.
We humans have historically had a tension filled
coexistence with predators. Could it be that we have an
embedded, primordial fear of predators? One would assume that,
during our early evolutionary history, large predators made no
distinction between a meal of Australopithecus or one of gazelle.
Certainly, for our American ancestors living on the frontier, the
loss of a cow or herd of swine to predators could be a life
threatening event. It seems to me that the coyote, even today,
bears the brunt of an innate human anxiety regarding predators.
But perhaps we should take a moment to consider that
even the coyote has its good side. Its heavy predation on voles
and deer mice helps to maintain nature’s balance. In some areas
they predate the eggs and young of Canada geese, itself a species
whose numbers may often test the limits of human tolerance.
Ironically, coyotes may benefit ground nesting birds, such as
turkeys, by preying upon smaller carnivores which might
consume turkey eggs or young7. And, while some may deplore
the killing of fawns by coyotes, we must recognize the damage
that over-browsing by too many deer may cause in our
woodlands.
(photo courtesy of Wikimedia)
I suggest that we take a fresh look at the coyote. Let us
forgo our old prejudices and consider Canis latrans for what it is
– a survivor. The La Brea Tar Pits have yielded a fossil of this
species 46,000 years old8. Through the generations the coyote
has endured everything both nature and humans have thrown at
it. Surely this resiliency and endurance is worthy of a little
respect on our part. Camilla Fox of California’s Project Coyote has
well characterized both the coyote and our relationship with this
remarkable mammal. “The reality is, coyotes are incredibly
adaptable, intelligent, resilient animals, and they have learned
how to coexist with us. But we’re still trying to figure out how to
coexist with them.”9
Aldo Leopold (1887-1948) is considered by many the
father of wildlife conservation and management. His
understanding of the role of predators within ecosystems was
light years ahead of its time. Thus, in concluding my ruminations
upon the coyote, I find it fitting to reflect upon his words.
“Harmony with the land,” he said, “is like harmony with a friend.
You cannot cherish his right hand and chop off his left. That is to say
you cannot have game and hate predators. The land is one
organism.”10
Resources
1. Whittaker, Donald G. and Frederick G. Lindzey. 1999. Effect of
Coyote Predation on Early Fawn Survival in Sympatric Deer
Species. Wildlife Society Bulletin Vol. 27, No. 2.. 256-262
2. Ballard, Warren B., Heather A. Whitlaw, Steven J. Young, Roger
A. Jenkins and Graham J. Forbes. 1999. Predation and Survival of
White-Tailed Deer Fawns in Northcentral New Brunswick. The
Journal of Wildlife Management. Vol. 63, No. 2 . 574-579
3. Mulhollem, Jeff . 2014. Research indicates coyote predation on
deer in East manageable.
http://news.psu.edu/story/315340/2014/05/09/research/researchindicates-coyote-predation-deer-east-manageable
4. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coyote attacks on humans
5. www.americanhumane.org/about-us/newsroom/newsreleases/national-dog-bite-prevention-week.html.).
6. www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-fatalities-2014.php
7. Bottom, Christopher. 2014. Habitat Overlap Among
Mesocarnivores and Wild Turkeys in an Agricultural Landscape.
Thesis abstract. Southern Illinois Universtiy.
8. /www.tarpits.org/la-brea-tar-pits/faqs
9. The Week Magazine. July 17, 2015.
10. Leopold, Aldo. 1966. Round River, Oxford University Press,
New York, 1993, pp. 145-146.