|
Welcome to
The Bluebird Box
since 1995 |
Nestbox (Large Holes/Entrances)In addition to Messages that have appeared in the Bluebird Mailing Lists on this topic, the following are on the Audubon Society of Omaha website: Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 20:13:15 -0700 Linda Violett - Yorba Linda, Calif. The caption under the photo of the box with the Bermudez hole states: "The width of the front panel of this bluebird nest box is a fraction over six inches." Interesting. Six inches is the width I've used with good success on my
suburban trails (sparrow-infested neighborhoods). Wonder what would happen if
you combined the Bermudez (sparrow-resistant) hole with a "sparrow resistant"
(tiny) box such as the 3.5" Gilbertson tube. "susan"at"changeswithin.com" wrote: ... From: "emcooper" emcooper"at"bayou.com I will have to say when reading this article and I turned the page and saw the three babies all at the opening with their heads sticking out, my first gut feeling was that they were going to fall out. I think I have too many Jays, Hawks and other birds that might be too happy with that situation. It probably would not be feasible where I am. Evelyn Cooper ----- Original Message ----- ... From: "Keith & Sandy Kridler" kridler"at"1starnet.com Keith Kridler Mt. Pleasant Texas Historically before the "scientists" came up with the various sized entrance holes designed to protect the various cavity nesting species for nestboxes Grackles and Jays routinely raided nestboxes in the Northeastern States. Remember the article I quoted from the 1920's with the "large holed' bluebird boxes where House sparrows tended to evict robin's more than bluebirds using these boxes? If large holed boxes had worked we would all have been using them 50 years ago. NABS paid for the original "House Sparrow" research on this nestbox and then the board voted unanimously NOT to publish this in Sialia during my term. I have had a wood duck nest in a box with a 2&1/2X2&3/4" hole! This is about half the size they are supposed to be able to use! You might notice in this article that when House Sparrows built in some of these 15 nestboxes the first year they MOVED the boxes to try to evict or discourage them! If they moved boxes and removed nests then what else was done to discourage the House Sparrows for the sake of this test. I had House Sparrows nest in a box with a 4" round hole only 38" off the ground last year. I have had sparrows repeatedly use a standard nestbox with the entrance hole only 27" above the ground! We have to realize that House Sparrows WILL nest in any box, mounted anywhere, at any height, that a bluebird will use. I called the barred owls into the yard last night for a hooting contest. These magnificent owls and cooper hawks have learned that Martin colonies will feed their young. They reach up into these types of compartments & even super gourds with their long legs and strip out the birds. IF we all installed this nestbox that was first tested while I was on the board of Directors at NABS years ago then we would find that flying predators would decimate the birds that will use these boxes. We size entrance holes on nestboxes for a REASON to exclude larger birds whether they want to nest in these boxes or not! Great Horned owls eat barred and barn owls when they can enter the smaller owls nestboxes. Barred and barn owls eat screech owls when these birds build in large holed cavities. Red headed woodpeckers feed their young other young birds. To test this box in your yard build the box and place an old nest in it and then begin placing the House Sparrow eggs you remove into this nestbox! See how long it takes predators to begin using this as a feeder! Once they learn that food is obtainable in this box then they will try reaching into your other nestboxes! Just as we now commonly see finches that have learned to feed in the meal worm feeders with holes in the sides start entering nestboxes searching for food. If you are squeamish STOP reading NOW!!! :-((((( From: "paul kilduff" plkldf"at"hotmail.com Paul Kilduff, Baltimore MD So, what do we want, snakes or sparrows? D'ohhh! Interesting to me that the sparrows have enough sense not to build so close to the ground if the hole is that big, while the blues do not.... Fortunately for them, they have us humans to install Noel guards. Fortunately on our trail we have only a few HOSP-afflicted boxes.... Still this would be great if it works on a wide-spread basis. No more
trapping, yes? From: susan"at"changeswithin.com ... From: "Fawzi P. Emad femad <at> fpemad <dot> com I have seen this article and I would *NOT* use the 2.75" hole. I have starlings that investigate every hole and place they see. They will raid the box immediately, and if there are BB babies, they will eat them. I think anyone who wants to test this box should be aware of the fact some BB may be lost to predators and larger birds. Another similarly large box, but with two openings (1.5" each) is being researched by Linda Violett. Not only is it safe from Starlings and large birds, it is also apparently helping the Bluebirds get to keep the box with the House Sparrow around. I am testing this box, and will continue to test it for several coming seasons. Fawzi Fawzi Emad in Laytonsville, Maryland ----- Original Message ----- .. Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 20:32:44 -0700 Linda Violett - Yorba Linda, Calif. To their credit, the authors of the article point out many shortcomings and specific qualifications for using the box successfully. Personally, I could never try using the box because of the avian predators in my area. The hole-to-floor drop is only 4.75 inches--almost 2 inches shorter than the average hole-to-floor. The testers of this design had raccoon problems, added a Noel Guard . . . but then had to extend the Noel Guard by an EXTRA 2 inches. So I'm wondering why they don't just add back the 2" to the box hole-to-floor drop rather than modifying the Noel Guard to make up the 2" shortcoming. The article also states " . . . House Sparrows and European Starlings have demonstrated minimal interest in nesting in boxes with enlarged entrance holes IF the boxes are positioned at heights no greater than 5.5 feet above ground." (That statement disqualifies my hanging box trail right off the bat.) This quote tickled my funny bone: We have to worry about how the box height "appears" to sparrows because there was sparrow activity when " . . . boxes positioned along embankments appeared to be or were higher above immediate foreground than the other boxes." :) I really enjoyed reading the information contained in this NABS issue, but
the box itself would not be practical on my particular trail. Each of us has to
weigh possible benefits of a design against the probable risks. paul kilduff wrote: ... From: "susan"at"changeswithin.com" changes"at"sunlink.net Thanks everyone, for your input regarding this research article. Personally, if I ever use this type of nestbox (and I'm not saying that I would) I would do so in HOSP and EUST areas where they have taken over (like on an abandoned trail). The problem *there* would be that ... not only could the occassional native birds possibly use them (and probability would be high that it would be their last nesting season) ... one would not be able to use any of the in-box traps to trap the HOSP and EUST. I was suprised to see this article published and suprised to see that NABS (at least in part) funded it. I'll wait for more 'research' with numbers of boxes much higher than just over 20 and all in one place. To me, this research is *still very preliminary and even though the article stated it was research done over a "10 year period" ... the data presented only showed 3 years worth. I've seen a great many ideas here on this list that would make more sense (to me) as qualifying for a viable research project ... such as Linda's two hole mansions (repeated in various places across the country)... or boxes with a 'rear window' ... or ... well, lots of other things! Then again, I've only been bluebirding for 3 years ... and that has been in a very small way ... just a few boxes, not all slated for bluebirds. Thanks again for responding! From: "paul kilduff" plkldf"at"hotmail.com Paul Kilduff, Baltimore "susan"at"changeswithin.com" changes"at"sunlink.net WROTE:
Why is that? ... one would not be Wait! IF the 2.75" hole works to keep EUST and HOSP from nesting in the box,
why is it necessary to trap them -- if they're not unfairly competing My own concern is that it seems to work only at 5.5 feet above ground or
less, too low IMO for effective snake prevention. With all respect, I think I read the same article and to me it seemed a quite well thought-out and well researched idea and trial of the idea. I'll wait for more 'research' I myself think it was research, and not quote-unquote 'research'. What I seem to see is putting down a new idea because it's a new idea. I believe that people with HOSP problems who cannot or will not trap their way out of the problem will start using this new hole size around the continent (the next step) and we'll get much larger samples of data to look at. Meantime, I think the article is creative and laudable! Another point of view, From: "paul kilduff" plkldf"at"hotmail.com Paul Kilduff, Baltimore Sorry to say I just read Digest 100 after having read Digest 102, which is
definitely the wrong order!, and missed KK's and Fawzi's comments, among others,
indicating that the 2.75" hole creates owl feeders, starling feeders, etc. Sorry
I didn't do my homework before responding to Susan's However, his fledge rates were comparable to other boxes, and given that they
were in high-sparrow areas, seems they would be higher than could be expected in
high-sparrow location. Indicating that in that particular location at least, the
boxes did NOT serve as places for larger birds to eat I wrote: Let me please add to discussion of the 2.75" hole: "susan"at"changeswithin.com" changes"at"sunlink.net WROTE:
Why is that? Sorry.... Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 14:03:57 -0400 Where might one read the article that is the subject of this thread? Best regards, Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 22:36:16 -0500 Where might one read the article that is the subject of this thread? ... http://www.nabluebirdsociety.org Ann Wick From: Afinechef"at"aol.com [mailto:Afinechef"at"aol.com] Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 4:07 PM I have two sets of instructions for building a bluebird house. One from www.rosebudm.com and the other from www.npwrc.usgs.gov. The first one says to make the front opening hole 1 1/2" and the second one says to make it 2 1/4". Which is correct and best? Can you help me? Karen From: Cher [mailto:BluebirdNut"at"a-znet.com] Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 4:30 PM Subject: Re: Bluebird Houses Karen, - 1 1/2 is the correct dimension for a round hole for Eastern Bluebirds. The 2 1/4 is probably referring to an oval hole. - (1.375 X 2.250) Cher From: agriffee [mailto:agriffee"at"adelphia.net] Have narrowed down to two designs and need to decide whether to use round hole or Peterson elongated hole. any opinions? From: Bruce Burdett [mailto:blueburd"at"verizon.net] Arnold, From: danhan7"at"sbcglobal.net [mailto:danhan7"at"sbcglobal.net] Arnold, From: John Schuster [mailto:wildwingco"at"earthlink.net] Dear Arnold, The Peterson nest boxes have been around for a very long time and has a good track record. However, I do not recommend the elongated entry hole and on Bluebird L would back me up. European Starlings can squeeze through, so with a round entry holes. Your Bluebirds will thank you. Forstner bits can be had at the follow web site: MLCS ...John Schuster From: Paul Kilduff [mailto:pkilduff"at"usconnex.net] Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2005 8:22 AM Subject: RE: BB House plans I agree with John: the elongated hole may be more welcoming, but it invites disaster. You won't find unanimous agreement on that though. Assuming it's true that starlings will get into an oval hole but not a 1-1/2" or 1-9/16" round hole, nevertheles they can get their head in through a 1-1/2" round hole, and that's enough to let them pick off eggs or nestlings, especially the ones near the hole. For that you need a starling guard (basically a piece of 2x4, elongating the hole) -- that will keep them from feeding on the contents. Here's a reference to a longer discussion about the oval hole: http://www.bestofbbml.audubon-omaha.org/boxesoval.htm There are also links on that page to lots of other details about nestbox construction, such as roofs, pairing, mounting.... Might want to check out the Kingston snake/racoon guard at http://audubon-omaha.org/bbbox/nabs/rk1.htm Paul Kilduff Baltimore MD PS: don't use pressure treated wood.... Like I did the first time :o) |
BEST OF BLUEBIRD_L CLASSIFIEDS HOME | Audubon Society of Omaha | The Bluebird Box | Bluebird FAQs | Search | Contact meAll material was originally posted on the Bluebird_L or Bluebird mailing list, and has been reposted here with slight modifications to make the posts more readable in an HTML format. In cases in which quoted material has been deleted to save space, this is indicated by an ellipsis (...)For more information about Bluebird_L, check out http://www.cit.corn.edu/cit-pubs/email/using-lists/index.htm. If you wish to contact the author of a post, you will need to edit the e-mail address, replacing "at" with the "at" symbol (above the number 2 on your keyboard). (This change was made to discourage spammers.)If you are the author of a posting and would like to see a particular post (or posts) removed from these web pages, please contact me with the web page address, title of post, and date and time of the post(s), and I will remove whatever material you like. If you have a different opinion from one posted here, you need not contact me, as often I will have a different opinion too. The intent is to try and provide both sides to the issues facing bluebirders, and to do so in an impartial and objective manner.If you have problems, encounter broken links (unless they are within an e-mail thread, as I do not maintain those links), or have suggestions on how the site can be improved to make it more useful, please contact the Best of Bluebird-L Classifieds webmaster.Website design by
Chimalis
|
