The Swift and the Swallow and the Whip Poor Will.. What is what? (1 Viewer)

[manfred0034]

Yeah. I wonder if regular birds attack falcons they same way that I see them attack hawks. Or Eagles. When you see a hawk come into an area you always see other birds, like swallows or crows start pestering it to go away. I hardly ever see falcons anyway. Except for Kestrels. And Kestrels are pretty small. I guess Gyrfalcons would be the closest in size to a hawk that I normally see but Gyrfalcons are found way up north. I wonder if Hawks have a particular scent that makes other birds just know that one is around.

Or maybe it's just because it's a bird of prey.

 

[Sangahyando]

Yeah. I wonder if regular birds attack falcons they same way that I see them attack hawks. Or Eagles. When you see a hawk come into an area you always see other birds, like swallows or crows start pestering it to go away. I hardly ever see falcons anyway. Except for Kestrels. And Kestrels are pretty small.

They do mob falcons. Less so with kestrels than larger ones; when I've seen European Kestrels harrassed by other birds, it's mostly crows. But I have seen a Kestrel mobbing a Peregrine, for example (because Peregrines eat smaller birds of prey on occasion).

I guess Gyrfalcons would be the closest in size to a hawk that I normally see but Gyrfalcons are found way up north. I wonder if Hawks have a particular scent that makes other birds just know that one is around.

Or maybe it's just because it's a bird of prey.

Gyrfalcons are actually larger than most hawks. They're pretty massive. As to the trigger for mobbing, I think it's the silhouette and the movement pattern. Most birds don't have a great sense of smell (except Turkey Vultures, petrels, and a few others), so it probably isn't that.

 

[Kirk Roth]

Well, to be even more precise, the mainstream religious organizations have no conflict with evolution, or rather they seem to side-step the issue. Creationism is a pan-religious movement; AFAIK there is even cooperation between Christian and Muslim creationist activists. But it does derive its justification from religious scripture.

Indeed it may derive justification from scripture, in the sense of an argument or defense perhaps, but the "reason" for creationism does not seem to stem from it and I would be pretty hesitant to call it any kind of religious movement. The research I've seen seems to suggest that it derives more from identity and interpretation of what those ideas mean in a "greater sense," rather than (what would be an exceptional) religious prescription. So for example, would there be no creationism if Genesis etc. did not describe acts of creation? Certainly creationism is related to religion, in a topical sense if not really a spiritual one.

Nautilus put out an interesting publication recently which describes and interprets some of this related research. I hesitate to call it an "article" - its practically written in comic book form, which some will find refreshing and approachable, others will find unprofessional. But regardless, some folks took a hard look at the reasons and motivations for creationism and I suspect several forum members will find it interesting:

http://nautil.us/issue/62/systems/d...d&utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=RSS_Syndication

Sorry for continuing WAY off the topic!

 

[Kirk Roth]

Yeah. I wonder if regular birds attack falcons they same way that I see them attack hawks. Or Eagles. When you see a hawk come into an area you always see other birds, like swallows or crows start pestering it to go away. I hardly ever see falcons anyway. Except for Kestrels. And Kestrels are pretty small. I guess Gyrfalcons would be the closest in size to a hawk that I normally see but Gyrfalcons are found way up north. I wonder if Hawks have a particular scent that makes other birds just know that one is around.

Or maybe it's just because it's a bird of prey.

Sorry if you felt "blamed" earlier, although looking at past responses I honestly don't believe people meant it that way. The forum is for the most part a pretty friendly place - so welcome aboard and I suspect you will find a lot of interesting things here.

Mobbing of larger birds by smaller ones is a learned behavior - I don't have the research handy but its been well studied. You may have noticed blackbirds etc mobbing harmless Turkey Vultures, or used a loud group of songbirds to help you find an owl. I've even seen Red-winged Blackbirds pestering flying Sandhill Cranes! The stimulus seems to be "big birds" so the songbirds seem to be even bigger taxonomic "lumpers" than your Audubon Guide!

To tie this all together - I know the guide you are talking about and it is indeed fairly old (Everglades Kite is now known as Snail Kite for instance) and also organized for similarity of birds, not relatedness (I believe the songbird tabs are organized by color if I recall correctly - but one look at the "green birds" will tell you that they are certainly not related!). There are lively debates over whether field guides should organize by the relatedness or the appearance of birds, but if you want one of the former, the most recent (7th edition) National Geographic field guides does a fairly decent job, with the caveat that our understanding of taxonomy changes literally yearly or faster and so perfection seems unattainable in printed form!

 

[MJB]

I like the idea of a jet named after a parrot

How about the Lockheed Cockatiel, the Grumman Vulturine Parrot, the McDonnell Douglas Festive Amazon or the Dassault Perroquet de Bonaparte...!:eek!::eek!::eek!:
MJB

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

Amazon/ing Mumbo Jumbo (Jet) ...

 

[manfred0034]

Achoo. I probably should have kept my mouth shut! With the technology we have today we can make any name of an animal into something beyond scary. Probably even the Aphid. I think we even have a missile called the Sparrow. I can't help but think of the movie Hunt for the Red October with the Caterpillar stealth drive. Sounds so gentle and harmless yet it was billed as the weapon to start a World War.
I miss the good ole days when they just drew a picture of whatever on the plane and that became the mascot. Like Donald Duck. The thing that weirds me out is the main name of the company that makes fast fighter jets named after birds of prey is called "Skunkworks." There has to be a big time inside humor going on.

 

[manfred0034]

I should start another thread. Because I have always been intrigued by derogatory words for animals. Like Dingos I didn't know if that is a word for a species or just something mean you call anything that is dog-like. Same with birds. Are Buzzards their own species?? You darn buzzard! That darn buzzard is flying around my chicken roost again! Shoot that darn Buzzard.. I guess it could mean just about any bird of prey? Or maybe any bird?

 

[Paul Clapham]

Please tell me that Owls are still birds of prey!

Well, yeah, owls hunt other animals so therefore they are "birds of prey". But the way people use that term, it's a fairly arbitrary thing and not particularly rooted in biology. For example: Osprey are birds of prey and they hunt fish... so why aren't penguins, which also hunt fish, not classified as birds of prey?

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

... so why aren't penguins, which also hunt fish, not classified as birds of prey?

Wow, Paul, that would certainly widen the definition!

Dippers, flycatchers, spiderhunters, etc., etc. ... simply making all, every single non-vegetatrian species "birds of prey"!

 

[manfred0034]

Thanks Paul. I am not sure if I want to keep punishing myself because of errors or at the least inconsistentcy in defining Taxonomy you see in bird books. I mean the whole concept of evolution got started with Birds. With Charles Darwin like in the 1800s. So you would think they would have time to make some books that at least in Taxonomy they are consistent.

Crows eat mice too. And seagulls eat crabs and turtles. I thought pretty much all birds eat insects or something living. I always felt like the birds of prey were the ones that were closest related to the meat eating dinosaurs. Because Eagles and Hawks have talons like Velociraptors. But apparently that has nothing to do with it. I guess what I learned from this forum is that "Raptor" doesn't necessarily mean anything. And "Birds of Prey" doesn't necessarily mean anything. But man, the media and anyone trying to market something sure love those terms. Birds of Prey (The Klingons). Oh yeah at my Zoo they have a exhibit called Raptor canyon. Which they use the term Raptor surely because of the success of the Jurassic park movies.

 

[Nutcracker]

I thought pretty much all birds eat insects or something living. I always felt like the birds of prey were the ones that were closest related to the meat eating dinosaurs. ...

And of course, vultures are birds of prey in the 'traditional' sense. But they don't eat anything living, only the dead . . . 8-P

Main conclusion: don't punish yourself. Relax and enjoy the muddle! 3

 

[manfred0034]

Oh yeah Paul. And Bald Eagles are Birds of Prey. They eat mostly Carrion! And Fish, that they STEAL from other birds. I am not sure if that makes it the most glamorous bird of prey.

I'll have to find a good Jelly fish forum to find out why Jelly Fish are called "Man of War." Good to know we are being psychologically tested with glue guns.

 

[MJB]

Thanks Paul.I mean the whole concept of evolution got started with Birds. With Charles Darwin like in the 1800s. So you would think they would have time to make some books that at least in Taxonomy they are consistent.

Actually, if you read from Darwin onwards, you should come to the conclusion that taxonomy, to be accurate, has to allow for seeming inconsistencies, and to work towards consistency with the aim of being precise, you'll find that it simply isn't possible. My mantras below metaphorically illustrate that point.:t:
MJB

 

[Sangahyando]

Crows eat mice too. And seagulls eat crabs and turtles.

Great Black-backed Gulls also eat ducks, puffins, grebes, rabbits etc. if they can catch them...

Which they use the term Raptor surely because of the success of the Jurassic park movies.

Fun fact: actual Velociraptors were much smaller than the "raptors" in those movies and they had feathers.

I'll have to find a good Jelly fish forum to find out why Jelly Fish are called "Man of War." Good to know we are being psychologically tested with glue guns.

Technically, those aren't jellyfish. They're in a separate clade of hydrozoans and actually colonial organisms (so, every "Portuguese man o' war" consists of several animals)...

 

[Kirk Roth]

Actually, if you read from Darwin onwards, you should come to the conclusion that taxonomy, to be accurate, has to allow for seeming inconsistencies, and to work towards consistency with the aim of being precise, you'll find that it simply isn't possible. My mantras below metaphorically illustrate that point.:t:
MJB

Indeed, Taxonomy is anything but consistent.


“It is not the strongest of the species that survives,
not the most intelligent that survives.
It is the one that is the most adaptable to change.”
― Charles Darwin

 

[manfred0034]

Well Geez. Who would win in a fight between a gull or Skua and a Bald Eagle if they were both the same size? The funniest comment I ever saw on youtube (funny in a sick way) was that sea gulls could probably kill a human if they could ever figure out how to work together. Gulls and Skuas to me are like the hyenas of the bird world. Even the annoying noises they make when they are fighting for food at a dump remind me of a pack of hyenas.

 

[manfred0034]

Fun fact: actual Velociraptors were much smaller than the "raptors" in those movies and they had feathers.

Yeah. But neither the Velociraptor or the Utah Raptor were as cool looking as the Dodo. Hollywood fails again! Hollywood fails twice by hitting two birds with the same stone.

 

[manfred0034]

Sorry for continuing WAY off the topic!

Well hey if Taxonomy is fiction then I don't know what off topic is! Maybe being off topic is the only way to be on topic! 8-P