more places or longer stays? (1 Viewer)

I'm convinced every temperate zone birder contemplating a trip to the American tropics should read Steven Hilty's Birds of Tropical America (1994, part of The Curious Naturalist series). Each chapter is full of revelations about the promise and challenge of tropical birding.

A critical point he (among others) makes is that a tract of tropical forest may indeed be populated by a significantly greater number of species than a temperate forest of comparable size, but that the number of individuals per species will be in most instances dramatically lower (my oversimplified paraphrasing of the concept of rarity). Walk the same trail each day in your temperate forest and after a couple of days you'll be seeing mainly the same species each time. The low densities of tropical forest birds "can be a big shock to new birders as well as a disappointment to those with only a few days to spend". However, "it also means that, even though a person may see rather few birds in any one day, new species will continue to appear for days to come".

Inspired by that notion, my friend Danny and I spent a month in southeastern Costa Rica in early 2013, and our experience certainly validated the notion that significantly more species are found during an extended stay than during a brief visit, and we were surprised by the number of species tallied only once, twice, or a very few times.

As I contemplate my first visit south of Costa Rica (to Ecuador, probably next year) I'm naturally eager to sample as many habitats in as many zones as possible (spending time in the lower tropics, upper tropics, subtropics, temperate and paramo zones). But for a number of reasons our time will not be unlimited, and in all likelihood our first visit will last just over two weeks (stretching perhaps to three).

My first pass at an itinerary allocated about three or four days each in the lower tropics of the upper Rio Napo, the upper tropics of the Loreto Road/Sumaco foothill region, the subtropical Cabanas San Isidro, the temperate region near Papallacta (perhaps Guango Lodge), and the northwestern tropics and subtropics in and around Mindo (with en route hours spent in the paramo at Paplallacta Pass and/or Antisana).

We'll be traveling independently, probably with drivers used primarily for transfer; we will retain a (local) guide for perhaps a specific day at each destination (though perhaps for a more extended period in the northwest).

The allocation of time per site is not unlike that of the formal tours offered by companies catering to birders, but it seems to me that we are compromising our birding prospects. But I may be overlooking considerations that change the equation.

Are population densities in protected reserves higher than might normally be expected in tropical forests? If not, do formal tours employ specific strategies to overcome the inherent paucity of birds likely to be found during very brief stays?

As one compromise, I'm inclined to subtract at least one destination and to allocate the allotted time between the destinations that remain. My first instinct is that we skip either San Isidro or Guango (combined time possibly five days) and spend up to five or six days in the lower tropics and the foothills. They're not far apart in terms of driving distance, but I'm assuming they are noticeably different in terms of bird species.

Any thoughts or advice from those who are either local or who have experience dealing with the same dilemma?

Gary H

gdhunter said:

Are population densities in protected reserves higher than might normally be expected in tropical forests? If not, do formal tours employ specific strategies to overcome the inherent paucity of birds likely to be found during very brief stays?

Click to expand...

Population densities of larger bird species (and mammals) are higher in protected areas - for example, large macaws, curassows, guans etc tend to be extirpated from unprotected areas due to hunting.

Leaders of commercial tours do employ specific strategies: they tend to use playback a great deal, trawling for multiple target species. They will also employ local guides where possible; these will usually know all the vocalisations they hear, and the locations of territories of key species, making them much easier to locate.

To answer your general question (i.e. devote more time to fewer sites, or cram-in as much as possible) - it's purely a matter of personal preference. In general, the more sites you visit, the more species you will see, but you also lose more time in travelling and run the risk of feeling you only scratched the surface.

The lower you go (lowland tropical forest), the more time you need.
mid-altitude is most rewarding, as it's a combination of many species + the specific rewards of flock birding + territorial birds.

The higher you go, the more birds are in flocks and so easier to get into contact with a lot of species in a short time, but you will have fewer species. The lower you go, the more birds are in specific territories and you will have to work for each species more (playback, waiting at viewpoints or fruiting trees, tracking ants, walking the same trail 5 times etc.).

You can never have enough time in the lowlands. So either you skip them, or you are aware that 3 days is not enough, 5 days is not enough, but probably 7-10 days will be enough. But for many people, it's mentally and physically hard to keep searching birds for a week or longer in the lowlands. Mid-altitude (like San Isidro), the temperatures are nicer and the birding is a little bit easier. After 3-4 days, you have the feeling that you have seen most of the birds over there, and you can move to another place...

All good points being made so far. For me, on a first trip to EC I would opt for more places than longer stays. As has been pointed out, the birding is quite different from lowlands to mid-altitude to even high altitude, and you may find one is much more enjoyable to you. The size and varied habitat of EC provides a great opportunity to sample a multitude of South American biomes much easier than in many other countries.

Unless you know that this is a once-in-a-lifetime trip, I would see as many places as possible and decide what you like. We finally went to the coast on our last trip (3rd for me, 7th for my parents), and were really surprised at how much we enjoyed the birding. A lot of low number days, but very rewarding to pick up some harder to find species.

That is just my 2 cents, but I don't think you can go wrong no matter what you choose in the end.