Canadian Peregrine Foundation -- Etobicoke Archives: Jan/Feb 2000

The Canadian Peregrine Foundation

ETOBICOKE HOME PAGE ARCHIVES

January - February 2000

Sunday February 27, 2000
Tom Moreau reports: At 1640, I heard vocalizing and found Angel in the east slot of the nest building. I verified that there was no band on the left leg; the right leg was obscured. At 1649, an adult flew to the nest box. At 1650, there was a fly-by back to the box. At 1652, Angel dove off, southbound. At 1701, there was another fly-by and at 1702, a falcon arrived at the right-most southeast slot with a black bird in its talons. The prey was likely a starling or small crow. Soon after, feathers began to fly as the meal was prepared. From the few glimpses I saw, I believed this was Angel, based on the malar stripe and wing feathers. At 1715, she flew off, vocalizing.

Monday February 14, 2000
Marcel Gahbauer reports: It appears that one or more of our local peregrines has been on the attack again! On Saturday afternoon, Mark Nash received a phone call from the Kingsway-on-the-Park that a peregrine had come down and was injured. Mark rushed out there with his heart in his throat, and was relieved to find when he arrived that the bird in question was in fact an adult male red-tailed hawk. It had wounds on the back of its head, as well as its right wing, and appeared very dazed and quite unresponsive. Mark picked the bird up, and drove it to the University of Guelph's Wild Bird Clinic for treatment.

Although nobody has reported seeing the attack take place, the evidence suggests that what happened was that the hawk came too close to the peregrine nest, and was attacked by one or more peregrines. Our guess is that it was probably Angel, asserting her territoriality - but if Alberta happens to be around at the moment, she could be the culprit, and we could all understand her wanting to take her frustrations out on something. There's an outside possibility that it was Toby, but he has in the past not been too aggressive toward intruders, preferring to let his mate do the dirty work. However, he may have participated to some extent.

Wednesday February 2, 2000
Marcel Gahbauer reports: If possible, the Etobicoke situation has just become less clear! Mark Nash and I spent the entire afternoon today in Etobicoke, watching the ledge via the monitors in the Falcon Watch Centre. During this time, we were able to observe both Angel and Toby on the nest for extended periods of time singly - and even together briefly.

Here's the confusion: Angel looks remarkably like Alberta! When I arrived, Angel was on the nest box, and it took me almost ten minutes to convince myself that it was in fact Angel and not Alberta. Actually, until I had a good look at her legs and saw clearly that there were no bands, I still had a lingering doubt. It became painfully obvious that if it is that difficult to distinguish between the two on a large television screen, our ability to identify the two females on the small webcam picture is likely to be limited.

So what does this mean? Well, it's possible that some or all of the reports over the past month or two referring to Alberta could be erroneous - it may have been Angel all along. That being said, last winter Alberta definitely did make periodic appearances, so perhaps that is the case again this year.

Having watched Angel closely for a few hours yesterday, certain features did become apparent. I still feel Angel's head is slightly more rounded than Alberta's, although the difference is not as pronounced as I had originally thought. Perhaps the most significant difference (which I only noticed when Angel finally turned away from the camera) is that Angel's back is a slate-gray colour, very similar in tone to Toby's back, and quite a bit paler than Alberta's dark gray, almost black back. Angel is also paler on the breast than Alberta - closer to Toby's white than Alberta's beige. The final distinguishing feature, if you look closely (and if the bird cooperates by posing nicely...) is that Angel's malar stripe (the dark mark under the eye) is more ragged, while Alberta's is quite smooth-edged. This is particularly evident in the light patch behind the malar stripe, which is quite indistinct on Angel. But this can be variable depending on the position of the bird, and is not likely to be a reliable identification tool - colour is much better in this case.

To top it all off, we did see a couple of brief courtship flights between Toby and Angel, so romance is in the air. Who knows what will develop here....

Monday January 31, 2000
Marcel Gahbauer reports: Last week I noticed a female (presumably Angel) scraping the gravel in the nest a couple of times. Today, Liz Biss was watching the Etobicoke webcam and alerted me to the fact that a bird was in the nest scraping; this time it looks like it was probably Toby, with Angel (or Alberta?) watching from the edge of the ledge (see the photo gallery for a few recent snapshots from the camera). This behaviour is significant, since the gravel scraping is often a prelude to courtship.

Sunday January 23, 2000
Tom Moreau and Diane Brockman report: At exactly 15:23 today, the interloper arrived at one of the northeast slots of the nest building. It stayed there preening intermittently for almost two hours. It then proceeded down to the other end of the slot. At exactly 17:23 it flew off, heading west on Aberfoyle. Daylight was fading.

Saturday January 22, 2000
Tom Moreau and Diane Brockman report: At about 12:20 we observed an adult Peregrine at the nest ledge. We went to the monitor and saw the interloper. By the time we got there, she was on the south corner of the nest box, preening herself. Her plumage was lighter than either Toby or Alberta. We were able to compare her left malar stripe to a photo of Alberta in the Falcon Watch Centre. They are decidedly different. By 12:33, she turned and flew off. We were briefly able to see that there were no bands.

Tuesday January 11, 2000
Marcel Gahbauer reports: Around 11 am, Norma Pennells alerted me to the fact that the unbanded female was again on the nest. I was able to watch the bird via the camera for the next hour or so, during which time it unfortunately remained rather still on the box. At least I've had a very good look at her back and head!

Knowing that this bird has no bands, we of course accept that we can never positively identify it. However, we have learned from experience that individuals can be told apart (with reasonable success) by their facial patterns - especially the size and shape of the malar stripe, and any light patches that appear on the crown or neck.

After the mystery bird left the nest today, I went back to look at the photos I took of Angel last winter. On the surface the current visitor looks quite different, since it is an adult, while Angel had immature plumage. But by now, Angel would of course be an adult, as she is now almost two years old. The facial pattern is remarkably similar for Angel and the present visitor. More significantly perhaps, one of the identifying characteristics of Angel was that she had a more 'rounded' head than average, as did the bird on the nest this morning.

Physical appearance therefore suggests that Angel may have returned. This theory also makes sense for other reasons. The arrival of Angel in December 1998 was a rare event in itself. Peregrines are still very rare in this area, so for any to show up at a given location is a very unlikely occurrence. It was particularly surprising because this was an occupied territory, which few peregrines would dare try to invade. Now, just over a year later, the same scenario is unfolding again. I believe it would be quite an extraordinary coincidence for two separate females to invade this same territory in two consecutive winters. I suspect that despite the fact Alberta vigorously chased her out of the area last spring, it is in fact Angel who has returned.

Saturday January 8, 2000
Tom Moreau and Diane Brockman report: At 10:45, we observed two adult Peregrines in the northeast slots on the nest building. Each was in a slot of its own, preening. One was a male, we assumed to be Toby. The other was a female, initially assumed to be Alberta. Through the binoculars, we were able to see the bird stretching its legs and wings. It became obvious that there were no leg bands on either leg. There was much movement of the legs, so we are sure that the bands did not get hung up in the the leg feathers. There seemed to be a brownish tone to the head, not black like Toby's. The back was the same slate grey colour that we see in Toby. She's not Alberta but who ...? At 15:45, we heard a peregrine but could not see it.

Thursday January 6, 2000
Marcel Gahbauer reports: The Etobicoke nest ledge continues to be very busy - for the past week webcam viewers have seen a lot of activity at the nest. Most of the time it's Toby standing there, but it does appear that there are two females as well. This morning around 7:30 am, Norma Pennells saw an unbanded female on the nest (perhaps Angel?). Then just after 10:00 am, I checked the camera and found Alberta standing on the nest in a defensive/aggressive posture, with her beak open and vocalizing. Unfortunately I had to be away for a few minutes, and when I came back she was gone from view. But perhaps this was the beginning of a confrontation between the females. Both Alberta and Toby spent long periods on the nest (separately) in the late morning and early afternoon (maybe defending the site in case the intruder returned).

| Archive Index | Previous month | Next month |

RETURN TO COMPLETE SITE INDEX
(or choose from selected popular links below)