Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Ya know I hadn't really noticed it but your right. We used to have giant flocks of those things here on so cal when I was young but now just a few here and there.Very nice.
I remember Starlings being much more common 'when I were a lad', admittedly some time ago. I rarely see one nowadays.
Cheers
Steve
Very nice.
I remember Starlings being much more common 'when I were a lad', admittedly some time ago. I rarely see one nowadays.
Cheers
Steve
You both are correct.Ya know I hadn't really noticed it but your right. We used to have giant flocks of those things here on so cal when I was young but now just a few here and there.
If I had to take a guess as to why I would say the discontinuation of Ddt use.
With the Kestral and Coopers hawk when ddt was being used and for a while even after its use was stopped Kestrals drastically outnumbered Coopers hawks as there diet doesn't consist of animals that build up as much ddt( which weekens egg shells). Once ddt was eliminated, at least for the most part, the Coopers hawk population bounced back and outcompeeted the Kestral population.
Now you see Coopers hawks everywhere and just the occasional Kestral, the exact opposite of what it used to be.
Just an guess that the same thing is going on with the Starlings and there natural competitors.
a website said starling numbers have been reduced by 80%, i was shocked
It might actually be a good thing in a way. No one wants to see the numbers of a delightful bird like the Starling decline. However, if it's elevated numbers of the 70s and 80s were a result of it better being able to tolerate ddt or other pollutants than it's competitors, like the Kestral over the Coopers hawk in the example I gave abouve then the decline in numbers reciently could just be a reversion to more normal numbers( like the Kestral) as the pollutants have been cleaned up( at least compared to what they used to be) and competing species that were more sensitive to the pollutants have bounced back and are again using a larger share of available resources.That I did not know. I'm shocked too.
It is appalling that what was once a common visitor to most gardens should be in such dire straits. I knew I saw Starlings far less frequently but had no idea that it was as bad as that.
Cheers
Steve
Shirley you jest, the aptly named Sturnus Vulgaris is an invasive species introduced into the US in 1890 when Eugene Schieffelin enamored with the plays of Shakespeare released 60 pairs into New York's Central park. The idiot wanted to bring to America all the birds mentioned in Shakespeare's plays.delightful bird like the Starling decline
Hmmmmm..........maybe not so delightful after all. Must admit my knowledge of Starlings is/was limited to that there kinda cute little buggers. I knew they were an invasive species and some people didn't like them because they had crowded out some native species( which seems to have largely abated now as Starling numbers are way down) which is why I said it may actually be a good thing there numbers have receded but I was unaware of how destructive they were.Shirley you jest, the aptly named Sturnus Vulgaris is an invasive species introduced into the US in 1890 when Eugene Schieffelin enamored with the plays of Shakespeare released 60 pairs into New York's Central park. The idiot wanted to bring to America all the birds mentioned in Shakespeare's plays.
Starlings alone cause an estimated $800 million in crop damage per year.
Starlings selectively eat the high-protein supplements that are often added to livestock rations.
Starlings may also be responsible for transferring disease from one livestock facility to another. Tests have shown that the transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGE) can pass through the digestive tract of a starling and be infectious in the starling feces. They may also be involved in the spread of other livestock diseases, their role in transmission of these diseases is not yet understood.
Starlings consume cultivated fruits such as grapes, peaches, blueberries, strawberries, figs, apples, and cherries. They were recently found to damage ripening corn. In some areas starlings pull sprouting grains, particularly winter wheat, and eat the planted seed.
Starlings damage the turf on golf courses as they probe for grubs.
Large roosts that occur in buildings, industrial structures, or in trees near homes are a problem in both rural and urban sites because of health concerns, filth, noise, and odor. In addition, slippery accumulations of droppings pose safety hazards at industrial structures, and the acidity of droppings is corrosive.
Starling roosts located near airports pose an aircraft safety hazard because of the potential for birds to be ingested into jet engines, resulting in aircraft damage or loss and, at times, in human injuries. In 1960, an Electra aircraft in Boston collided with a flock of starlings soon after takeoff, resulting in a crash landing and 62 fatalities.
One of the more serious health concerns is the fungal respiratory disease histoplasmosis. The fungus Histoplasma capsulatum may grow in the soils beneath bird roosts, and spores become airborne in dry weather, particularly when the site is disturbed.
Starlings also compete with native cavity-nesting birds such as bluebirds, flickers, and other woodpeckers, purple martins, and wood ducks for nest sites. Where nest cavities were limited, starlings had severe impacts on local populations of native cavity-nesting species.
They are just a Louisiana yard dog.
yeah Steve.That I did not know. I'm shocked too.
It is appalling that what was once a common visitor to most gardens should be in such dire straits. I knew I saw Starlings far less frequently but had no idea that it was as bad as that.
Cheers
Steve