• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Acorn Woodpeckers storing deer feces (1 Viewer)

Storm-Petrel

registered dude
Where i am in the pine forests of ruidoso, NM, the most common woodpecker is the Acoen Woodpecker. I see about 5 a day. I have always wondered why they are so common if there arent any oaks around. This morning I was birding on the mountainside, and i saw 2 of the woodpeckers in a tree. I watched them for awhile, and then noticed all the bark that had fallen off the tree on the ground. All of it was hammered with woodpecker holes. I thought id look through the chunks of bark and holes to see if i could figure out what the ACWO were storing. I looked around a bit and saw tiny cones stuffed in the holes. They werent pine cones, but much smaller and softer. After I looked around some more i saw something else besides the cones: round, greenish-brown blobs. It was deer poo. I pryed one out of the woopecker hole and broke it open, and it was full of plant material. defenitely deer poop. Why would the woodpeckers be storing deer poop? did they mistake it for seeds or do they just think its a tasty food, like our junk food?
 
Can't imagine why they'd deliberately be storing it as a food source, already digested vegetable matter IMO wouldn't proided much nutrition. Maybe the birds know something we don't.
 
Well, there are a lot of deer out there, and I run into their scat quite often, so maybe the woodpeckers use it to clear their intestines out easier, because the scat is full of fiber that would move the bowels faster. But I dont see why woodpeckers would need that
 
Perhaps because it's part of their innate behaviour to store acorns, in the absence of oak trees they'll store whatever they find.
 
Thinking out loud here and no idea whether this is plausible, but could the faeces harbour grubs or larvae? Apologies if this manifests ignorance offensive to entomologists,

Graham
 
thats a good idea. Im not sure if grubs would be attracted to herbivore dung though, ive never seen it before. This is really radical idea and probably not even plausible, but what if the deer had some parasite that was befeficial to the ACWO? nah, stupid idea. But its night right now, but tommorow morning ill get my hands dirty in deer dung looking for grubs...
 
Interesting...I wonder if the Red-headed or Red-bellied woodies around here show that same behavior? Personally I like the idea that it may aid in digestion but like you I don't see why they would need it...
 
grubs could be in the dung, dung beetles lay eggs in elephant faeces. I know we're talking about different species though and maybe there's nothing that does the same with deer poo.

You'll have to observe closely to see if the woodpeckers actually eat the dung.
 
Okay. I went outside to the dead tree and pryed some deer dung out. I dug through it and didn't find anything but purreed vegetable matter. Then I dug through a fresh deer pile that wasnt stored (not very fun :-/ ). I ddint find anything there either. I watched a female for awhile but all she did was call out from the top of a ponderosa and drill more holes.
 
Here i am, back from the trip, so i imported the pics to my computer and thougth id post the poop ones here as "proof" ;) :


DSC06673.JPG

DSC06675.JPG

DSC06676.JPG

DSC06677.JPG

and the one below, the poo broken apart, with no worms or insects in sight!
 

Attachments

  • DSC06683.JPG
    DSC06683.JPG
    153.3 KB · Views: 79
That's good stuff. Great shots. We've got oodles of the birds here. My opinion is that the droppings fit and it's something for them to do. I'd be curious to see if they're replaced when acorns start to fall........nice observation
 
Warning! This thread is more than 17 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top