2010 Nighthawk Survey Final Report
Hi
2010 Nighthawk Survey Observers-
Many thanks for all the time and effort that you put into this
fall's nighthawk survey! You did a fantastic job.
This year was particularly noteworthy in two respects. First, we set a new total count record of 11,053 nighthawks. And second, the geographic locations of the sightings were weird, the likes of which neither Jeff nor I have experienced before (at least in the last 30 years). For many of you in the north and west this year’s migration was, to say the very least, both frustrating and disappointingly with low numbers of nighthawk counts and mostly two-digit sized flocks. At the same time, we in the southeast sector of our Nighthawk Survey territory were experiencing four-digit flocks not seen since the 1960s. This is a total turnaround in what has been occurring in recent years. What happened? That’s the basic question of the day!
As
in the past, the purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the
current year's fall nighthawk migration in our survey area and what we can
learn from it. If you are sufficiently moved to want to do some analysis of
your own, please let us know and we will send you an Excel-based copy of the
complete database for this year's survey plus a summary of observations for the
prior four years to play with. If you would like to see various graphics of
this year’s results, Jeff is in the process of preparing several charts and
will post them to our Nighthawk Survey website
in the near future.
1. Overview of Survey Effort in 2010
Over the past seven years, we have seen an amazing
growth in our fall nighthawk survey effort. In 2003-4 a small group of
nighthawk observers in the SuAsCo valleys of the Merrimack basin launched a
systematic citizen science research effort into why the numbers of fall
nighthawk migrants had steadily fallen from a thousand or more on a good
night in the 1960s to a precious few by the turn of the Century. The group was
particularly concerned with exploring whether this long-term decline in
nighthawks was endemic to the SuAsCo (and points east) or was of a broader
scale and if the latter, why. A key issue in this regard was whether total numbers
of migrants in New England had been declining over the years or NE migrants had
simply been switching away from the SuAsCo valleys to alternate routes in NE.
In 2004 we decided to expand our SuAsCo fall nighthawk survey both westward and
northward to include the Nashua River and towards southern New Hampshire so
that we could begin systematically measuring changes in nighthawk flows through
the broader area over time. Several observers in the Nashua River in northern
MA began submitting reports and in 2005 additional observation sites were set
up further south near the sources of the Nashua and Blackstone rivers and
further north in NH near the Nashua's juncture with the Merrimack. Over the
next three years (2006-2008) survey coverage expanded west to the Connecticut
River and north to Concord and Hanover NH with a major growth in observation
along the way. These trends continued and indeed accelerated in 2009 as we
reached out northeastward in response to observers in the Piscataqua basin and
westward to folks on the west side of the Connecticut River in Vermont. And
this year, again in response to requests from local observers, we expanded
southeastward into the Neponset River watershed in the Boston Harbor basin
while in the far north our ultimate explorer, Lance Tanino, opened a tentative
observation site at Pittsburg NH along the headwaters of the Connecticut River
on the Canadian border.
This fall we had a total of 82 observation
sites, down from the 89 sites last year but well up from the 73 total sites in
2008. The 82
sites this year were in operation a total of 428.5 site-hours, up 15.5
site-hours from the 413 site-hours last year and up 134.5 site-hours from the
294 total site-hours in 2008. Also up slightly were total observer-hours, i.e.,
the total number of hours spent by all reported participants at this year’s 82
sites. This year we had a total of 635.5 observer-hours versus 601.5 last year
and 373.5 observer-hours in 2008.
If we divide the total observer-hours by the total site-hours for a given period such as a year or season, the resulting average number of observers per site-hour provides an interesting indicator of what is happening to our observer corps over time. Over the last several years, our average number of observers per site hour has been moving upward from 1.0 in 2003 to 1.44 in 2006 and 1.48 in 2010. Having more than one set of eyes on site at any one time is obviously important in finding nighthawks, verifying identifications and totals, and in building skills and staff for the future.
2. Overall Observation Results For 2010
Last year for the first time our final report included both the total count reported by each site and a “normalized” count that is derived by dividing the total number of nighthawks seen on a given day at a given site by the total number of hours that the observation site in question was in operation that day. The normalized number represents the average number (or density) of nighthawks per hour at a given location. This sort of data normalization is particularly useful in comparing count results at various sites where the level of observer time and effort may vary significantly and is the same sort of normalization used in the NAS Christmas Bird Counts except that the Nighthawk Survey uses site-hours as the denominator while the Christmas Bird Count uses field party-hours.
This year we have also introduced a new “Triple-Digit-Day” or “TDD” statistical measurement that will help in identifying major shifts in nighthawk densities over time within our survey area. A Triple-Digit-Day or TDD occurs when a hundred or more nighthawks are reported at a single site on a single day. This year we had 29 TDDs versus 20 in 2009 and perhaps more significantly, as discussed below, the TDDs in these two years were in very different locations in our survey area and had very different average sizes.
Our total combined count this year of 11,053 for both migrating and feeding nighthawks once again set a new record for our survey and is 31 percent above last year’s previous record high of 8,416 nighthawks. And we broke the record this year despite having seven fewer observation sites than last year! We also set records for both migrating and for feeding birds with 7,094 migrants and 3959 feeders. However, looking at this year’s total on a normalized basis, our average number of both migrating and feeding birds per site hour this year was 25.8, a distant second behind the 35.9 birds per site-hour seen in 2006.
Why did 2010 come in first in total count but a distant second to 2006 when the count data was normalized? In 2009 we ran into the same situation and in last year’s Final Report we suggested that (i) one of the earmarks of high density years were large flocks of nighthawks, (ii) in 2006 the vast majority of the 7,502 total nighthawks seen (some 87.2 percent of the total) were tightly concentrated in the upper Merrimack River Valley and (iii) the greater density of these flocks allowed observers to count far more birds than normal in each site-hour.
This year we were similarly favored by numerous large flocks of nighthawks but the flocks were almost totally located in the southeastern part of our survey area rather than the northeastern sector as in 2009. This year’s 29 TDD reports of one hundred or more birds accounted for 8,268 nighthawks or 75 percent of the 11,053 total nighthawks reported in 2010. Twenty-five of the 29 TDDs were in central or eastern MA and accounted for 7,328 nighthawks or 66.3 percent of this year’s total count of all TDD nighthawks. The composite average number of nighthawks seen per site-hour for all reports TDD reports this year was a whopping 162.1!
These numbers raise two key issues. First, how could central and southern NH have had so few nighthawk migrants this year in areas that have long been so highly productive for fall nighthawk migrants? And second, how could nighthawk migrants in eastern MA suddenly have become so abundant virtually overnight after 50 years of steady decline “to a precious few”?
This summer’s weather conditions in New England may offer some clues to one or both of these issues. Last July and August New England suffered a serious drought with high temperatures and very little rain and the drought conditions continued into the first half of August with typical low levels of nighthawk migrants not only in our survey area but throughout central and northern New England as a whole. Then on August 22 a significant hurricane that had been moving northeastward off the coast brought clouds, light rain (0.2 inches) and light SE winds to our survey area and stuck around until August 25 with reasonably steady light rain on the 23rd (0.5 inches) and 24th (0.2 inches) and light mist and NE winds on August 25. A mere 10 nighthawks were reported in 16 reports filed across our entire survey area during this four-day period!
The very next day (August 26) the first of 8 straight amazing nighthawk count days occurred with daily totals of 2,460, 1,261, 1,713, 2,584, 611, 1009, 558, and 157 nighthawks. The grand total for this 8-day splurge was 10,353 nighthawks or 93.7 percent of our total count 11,053 in 2010. Twenty-eight of the 29 TDD reports for 2010 occurred in this 8-day period and 24 of the 28 reports in this period were from MA. The latter was in sharp contrast to 2009 when 6 of the 20 TTD reports came from MA and the other 14 came from NH.
Where did the large numbers of nighthawks come from? Is it possible that they were the migrants that normally passed through NH but for some reason overflew this year and were either forced down by the storm in MA and/or were attracted by delicacies (such as flying ants) that may have resulted from the wet weather after a long dry spell? Last year Lance Tanino may have been omniscient when he commented that “I don’t know if others have noticed but nighthawk flocks seem to be found in front of approaching rain clouds or squalls”.
Norm Levey agreed that nighthawk flocks seen at Lincoln this year seemed to be storm-related but stressed that both migrating and feeding activities occurred after the rain clouds had passed and wondered if the nighthawks had been “piling up on the northern boundaries of the passing of Aug23-5 and released as a huge migrating mass after its passing. [A day or two after the storm passed I began to] observe huge emergences [of flying ants] coming from the slope of the drumlin for several days and at the same time peak numbers of nighthawks were feeding and migrating in the area. The dispersion of the migrating birds generally over the valley may indicate that the food was widely dispersed by the winds and plentiful, and the nighthawks did not need to pursue possibly sparser low-elevation insect hatches emanating from the riparian habitats and narrow river courses, as may be the case in typical migrations.
Also significant were Norm Levey’s comments in his August 26 report this year that the nighthawks seemed to be coming in high and hungry. He noted in this regard from his perch atop the drumlin at Drumlin Farm in Lincoln MA: “A spectacular two-hour movement of CONIs (1,875) was observed this evening going generally north for 20 minutes, then south until 7:45 with a kettle of feeders over W. Concord [near Henry Keutmann’s observation site]. All the birds were feeding or feeding+migrating. About 20 nighthawks moved over the drumlin but almost all passed rather high [in altitude] from the Assabet River south through Maynard, and Sudbury and WEST of the Sudbury River with only a few small flocks [flying directly over the Sudbury River where other observers were posted].”
The fact that all of the birds in a relatively wide area were actively feeding would seem to suggest that either the chow in the area was very good that evening and/or that the nighthawks had recently been involved in a long flight.
3.
Breakdowns of this Year’s Count Results By Major River Basins in Our Nighthawk
Survey Territory
As noted in last year’s final report, one of our significant advances over the
past few years has been to automate and expand the geographic segmentation
capability of our data management system to allow us to break down our
observation data electronically into a host of different geographic patterns
and segments. Four such breakdowns have proven particularly useful in assessing
overall annual and multiyear trends by (i) major
river basins (five in 2010) in our survey area, (ii) major tributary rivers
(thirteen in 2010) in those basins, (iii) the cities and towns (44 in 2010)
where our observation sites are were located, and (iv) the specific locations
or sites (81 in 2010) in the cities and towns where the observations occurred.
Each of these four levels or segments of data provide important insights into
each year's migration.
Totals for the five major basins in our survey area this year are shown in the
following table. The first number in each row is the reported total count of
nighthawks in that basin; the second number, in parentheses, is the normalized
count; and the third number, in brackets, is the number of Triple Digit Days.
Blackstone River Basin: 2,522, (21.1), [9 TDD]
Boston
Harbor Basin: 1,202, (77.5), [5 TDD]
Connecticut River Basin: 1,559, (17.2), [3 TDD]
Merrimack River Basin: 5770, (28.4), [12 TDD]
Piscataqua River Basin: 0, (0.0), [0 TDD]
Total Survey Area 11,053 (25.8) [29 TDD]
This year the total count in the Merrimack River Basin continued to soar with a total count of 5,770, exceeding 2009’s total of 4,774 by 996 or 20.9 percent, and the normalized total of 28.4 was almost double last year’s 16.6 (which in turn was almost double 2008’s normalized value of 7.7). As discussed earlier most of this year’s gain along the Merrimack as a whole came from the lower Merrimack in MA. Only two of the twenty-nine TDDs occurred in NH’s section of the Merrimack Basin. The 2006 Merrimack total of 6,549 set the current record for all river basins in our survey area.
The Connecticut River Basin’s count total this year of 1,559 was down 1,860 nighthawks or 63.7 percent from last year’s total of 2,919 nighthawks and the normalized total was 17.2 nighthawks per hour, down from 29.8 last year and 35.3 in 2008. Certainly the loss of Lance Tanino and his impressive knowledge and understanding of nighthawk to the Mid-Atlantc states early in the season was a major downer here but it was great to have Ken Klapper, Cliff Seifer, David Moon, Rob Woodward, Becky Suomala, David Steinberger, Lillian and Don Stokes, George Clark, and others pitch in and help get us back on course! Without the base of data that you provided for the Connecticut River Basin, we probably would never have fully appreciated just how abnormal the nighthawk migration was in central New England this year!
In its first year as part of our survey area, the Boston Harbor Basin set a new record among our basins for the highest normalized total with a very impressive 77.5 nighthawks per hour. The Boston Harbor Basin includes several rivers that empty into Boston Harbor. Two of these, the Charles and Neponset Rivers, flow essentially southwest to northeast and are adjacent to the Merrimack River Basin’s SuAsCo river systems. For those unfamiliar with the Boston area, Natick (with 4 TDDs this year) is officially in the Boston Harbor Basin but sits adjacent to the SuAsCo Rivers in the Merrimack Basin where much of this year’s TDD activity occurred.
The Blackstone River Basin in south central MA with headwaters near those of the Nashua River (Merrimack Basin) in central MA also had a very good year with the second highest basin total of 2,522 nighthawks (close to a quarter of all nighthawks reported in our total survey area this year) and a normalized total of 21.1 nighthawks per site-hour. The 2,522 is a record for our Blackstone counts and is almost 4 times larger than last year’s count of 642 nighthawks. Nine of the twenty-nine TDDs were at observation sites in the Blackstone Basin, suggesting that much the same nighthawk migration conditions existed in the Blackstone as further east in the Merrimack/SuAsCo and Boston Harbor/Charles River valleys. Last year’s final report noted that “the fact that the Blackstone and Merrimack have similar count patterns is not terribly surprising inasmuch as both basins run N-S with the Nashua River flowing north from the Worcester area to connect with the Merrimack at Nashua and the Blackstone River flowing south from the Worcester area through Connecticut and out into the Atlantic”. .
Finally, there were no counts reports this year from the Piscataqua River Basin this year.
4. Breakdown of 2010 Count by Major Tributaries/Watersheds and Towns.
The following table of count results shows the same three datasets (total counts, normalized average numbers per site-hour, and total TDD) for each watershed and town within the watershed where one or more observation site was in operation in 2010::
Blackstone River Basin Total: (headwaters only): 2,522, (21.1), [9 TDD]
Blackstone Watershed: 2,522, (21.1), [9 TDD]
Millbury MA: 1,080, (46.3), [4 TDD]
Sutton MA: 1,262, (17.2), [4 TDD]
Uxbridge MA: 172, (17.2], [1 TDD]
Boston Harbor Basin Total: 460, (92.0), [5 TDD]
Charles R.Watershed: 388, (97.0) [5 TDD]
Natick MA: 742, (70.7), [4 TDD]
Watertown MA: 17, (34.0)
Wellesley MA: 371, (106.0) [1 TDD]
Neponset R.Watershed: 72, (72.0)
Sharon MA: 72, ((72.0)
Connecticut River Basin Total: 1,059, (11.83), [3 TDD]
Ashuelot: Watershed: 405,
(30.0), [1 TDD]
Keene NH: 893, (74.4), [2 TDD]
Stoddard, NH: 0, (0.0)
Swanzy NH:
12, (24.0)
Chicopee Watershed: 85, (4.5)
Princeton MA: 85, (4.5)
Connecticut Watershed: 68, (2.1)
Hadley MA: 28, (56.0)
Hanover NH: 3, (0.1)
Northampton MA: 16, (32.0)
Pittsburg NH: 0, (0.0)
Walpole NH: 19, (38.0)
Westmoreland NH: 2, (4.0)
Millers Watershed: 36, (12.0)
Athol MA: 3, ((3.0)
Orange MA: 33, (16.6)
Swift Watershed: 465, (21.6), [1 TDD]
Belchertown MA: 465, (21,6), [1 TDD]
Merrimack River Basin Total: 6,512, (30.5), [12 TDD]
Contoocook Watershed: 59, (2.3)
Hancock NH: 47, (2.0)
Peterborough NH: 12, (4.8)
Merrimack Watershed: 359,
(13.8), [1 TDD]
Concord NH: 356, (14.2), [1 TDD]
Londonderry: 3, (3.0)
Nashoba Watershed: 856, (428.0), [1 TDD]
Sterling MA: 856, (428), [1 TDD]
Nashua Watershed: 859, (85.9), [3 TDD]
Clinton MA: 320, (320.0), [1 TDD]
Harvard MA 175, (70.0) [1 TDD]
Hollis NH: 350, (58.3), [1 TDD]
Mason NH: 14, (28.0)
SuAsCo Watershed: 4,379, (29.3), [7 TDD]
Boxborough MA 16, (8.0)
Chelmsford MA: 9, (9.0)
Concord MA: 123, (8.5)
Framingham MA: 11, (7.3)
Lincoln MA: 2,259, (92.2), [4 TDD]
Lowell MA: 19, 38.0
Marlborough MA: 39, (19.5)
Maynard MA: 51, (7.3)
Northborough MA: 233, (7.6), [1 TDD]
Southborough MA: 10, (3.6)
Stow MA: 18, (3.6)
Sudbury MA: 246, (12.0), [1 TDD]
Wayland MA: 109, (4.3)
Westborough MA: 494, (164.7), [1 TDD]
Piscataqua River Basin Total: 0, (0.0), [0 TDD]
Salmon Falls Watershed: 0, (0.0), [0 TDD]
Total Nighthawk Survey: 11,053, (25.8) [29 TDD]
The top 18 towns ranked in terms of total number of nighthawks in 2010 together with the top nine ranked in terms of average number of nighthawks per site-hour were as follows:
(1). Lincoln MA: 2,259 -- Ranked #5 in average number per site-hour with 92.2
(2). Sutton MA: 1,262
(3). Millbury MA: 1,088
(4). Keene NH: 893 -- Ranked #6 in average number per site-hour with 74.4
(5). Sterling MA: 856 -- Ranked #1 in average number per site-hour with 428.0
(6). Natick MA: 742 -- Ranked #7 in average number per site-hour with 70.7
(7). Westborough MA: 494 -- Ranked #3 in average number per site-hour with 164.7
(8). Belchertown MA: 465
(9). Wellesley MA: 371 -- Ranked #4 in average number per site-hour with 106.0
(10). Concord NH: 356
(11). Hollis NH: 350 -- Ranked #9 in average number per site-hour with 58.3
(12). Clinton MA: 320 -- Ranked #2 in average number per site-hour with 320.0
(13). Sudbury MA: 246
(14). Northborough MA: 233
(15). Harvard MA: 175 -- Ranked #8 in average number per site-hour with 70.0
(16). Uxbridge MA: 172
(17): Concord MA: 123
(18). Wayland MA: 109
Five towns in our survey that did not participate this year but had been productive in bygone years (2009 totals in parentheses) were Westminister MA (387), Groton MA ((151), Manchester NH (92), Rochester NH (51), and Lyme NH (47). Also sorely missing in both 2009 an 2010 is Greenfield which had a total of 100 nighthawks in 2008. On the other hand, Sterling MA was a no-show in both 2008 and 2009 but Tom Pirro and Laura Lane jointly claimed 5th place for Sterling in total count this year by playing the Pig and Peat markets and Tom got a 4th for best observation site by focusing his attention on the pig farm!
5. The Top Fourteen Observation Sites in Terms of Total 2010 Counts
Drum roll, please!
(1). MAS Drumlin Farm Lincoln MA: 2,259, (92.2) – Ranked #3 last year with 579
(2). Sutton MA, Main Street Manchaug: 1,076, (17.8)
(3). Millbury MA, The Shoppes at Blackstone Valley: 900, (45.0) – Ranked #4 last year with 554
(4). Sterling MA, (Merrill Road/old pig farm: 788, (525)
(5). Keene NH, Main Street: 500, (500.0)
(6). Westborough MA, Cedar Swamp: 482, (482.0)
(7). Natick MA: East Natick: 443, (222)
(8). Wellesley MA, Wellesley College Playing Fields: 371, (148.0)
(9). Concord NH, Capital Commons Parking Garage: 356, (14.2) – Ranked #1 last year with 789
(10). Clinton MA, Wachusetts Reservoir Gate 40: 320, (320)
(11). Hollis NH, Beaver Brook Association Wildlife Pond: 315, (57.3) – Ranked #8 last year with 401
(12). Keene NH, Court Street (north end): 237, 26.3 – Ranked #2 last year with 579
(13). Belchertown MA, Aldrich Street: 236, (11.5) – Ranked # 6 last year with 508
(14). Belchertown MA, Winsor Dam: 229, (229.0)
6. Analysis of the Timing of Peak Counts
In last year’s final report we commented as follows on what appeared to be a
shift in the timing of the buildup and decline of migrating nighthawks in our
survey area: “During the latter half of the 20th Century the buildup
and decline [of numbers of migrating nighthawks generally followed a
bell-shaped curve, at least in this area, with the peak occurring close to
August 25. Then in the early 2000s the peak began to move slowly towards the
end of August and in both 2006 and 2007 the peak for our count area as a whole
occurred on August 30 but then rebounded in 2008 to August 23. But this year
[2009] something odd occurred. The curve flattened out and three separate peaks
appeared, one centering on August 23-25, a second centering on August 30 and
the third centering on September 3. These peaks could possibly have been caused
by weather systems in the survey area. The peak of August 23-25 was preceded by
a period of unsettled weather – cold front-induced thunderstorms on August 21
and Hurricane Bill passing to the east on August 22. And the peak on August 30
followed a rain event on August 28-29. On the other hand, there was no notable
weather event preceding the September 3 peak and rain events have certainly
occurred in previous years that did produce the sorts of delays seen this
year.”
As discussed earlier, we have been asking many of the same sorts of questions this year about the impact of weather, and particularly rain, on the progression of the nighthawk fall migration. This year, like last, we had a hurricane come through our area on August 22, but unlike last year, our hurricane this year stuck around for four days. Moreover, once this year’s hurricane finally decided to leave on the 25th, we were hit with a deluge of nighthawks far beyond that seen last year. But like this year, we definitely had a better count than normal last year here in eastern MA
The following table shows the peak count dates for the past five years for the individual watersheds with sufficient observations to be meaningful.
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Blackstone Basin 8/31 8/28 8/29 9/2 8/29
Boston Harbor Basin 8/28
Connecticut
Basin
8/24
8/30
8/23 9/3 8/26
Merrimack
Basin
8/30
8/29
8/28 8/25 8/29
Total Survey
Area 8/30 8/30
8/23 8/30 8/29
The above pattern of peak dates coupled with what we know about the timing of the peaks vis-à-vis incoming storms in recent years would certainly seem to suggest that numbers of nighthawk migrants are somehow related to the timing of storm systems in our survey area.
7. Where-to in the Future? A Case Study Based on Our Experience at Drumlin Farm in Lincoln MA This Year.
This year’s most prolific observation site with a total of 2,259 nighthawks sits atop the drumlin at Drumlin Farm in Lincoln MA and has a “view to die for” if you are a nighthawk observer. The site looks out over many hundreds of acres of wetlands, lakes and streams, farms, and other protected open spaces in the Sudbury and Assabet River valleys just south of where the two rivers merge into the Concord River. The Concord, in turn, flows north into the Merrimack River. Ludlow Griscom, famous ornithologist of the last century, used to refer to this stretch of the three rivers as a major “migration highway”.
The combination of high ground for viewing and massive wet open spaces is obviously a dream come true for nighthawk observers. But it also can have some characteristics of a nightmare as well. For example at Drumlin Farm this year, the sheer numbers of nighthawks spread out over thirty to forty square miles posed major challenges and obvious difficulties, particularly when the birds were three miles or more distant from the observers. The problems here were not so much the counting per se of the main flock from several miles away but in dealing with segments of the flock that were splitting off from the main flock and heading off in different directions while at the same time other segments were joining the flock, posing the question whether those joining the flock (some 300 or more birds) were “new”, yet-to-be-counted birds or had already been counted and were simply returning to the flock. In the end Norm Levey decided to err on the conservative side and exclude those joining the flock if they came from the same direction as other birds had earlier headed.
Another common difficulty encountered was identifying the point where the birds were located when they were counted from a distance. Knowing with reasonable certainty where various sightings were located is vitally important in determining the likely trajectories that migrants are following. And in turn, knowing the likely trajectories can be very important in identifying and assessing potential additional observation sites that should be set up. What we discovered in the Lincoln area was that additional sites recently set up along projected trajectories in the area were not in fact producing significant numbers of nighthawks despite the very large flocks at the Lincoln site, leading us to reconsider our assumptions as to where the nighthawks have been headed after passing through the Lincoln Drumlin Farm observation site area as well as what sorts of changes we might make in our observation strategies to improve the accuracy and effectiveness of our survey results.
Possible changes under consideration include relocating existing observation sites and/or adding new sites along the periphery of the area within sight of the drumlin, creating new sites well beyond the periphery, exploring greater use of cell phones among observation sites in the area, creating mobile observers who could be guided to “hotspots” identified from the Lincoln drumlin, considering alternate observation modes such as canoes to cover large bodies of water, and so forth. Our sense is that change will be knocking at our door in the near future and we would very much like your thoughts and suggestions.
Again, many thanks to all of you for your efforts in carrying out this year’s nighthawk survey. It was indeed an extraordinary event!
If you have any questions or comments or would like further data, please contact us at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Hank Norwood and Jeff Slovin
Last Updated (Saturday, 11 June 2011 07:28)