The fifth OSNZ National Twitchathon will be held during the month of October 2003. Last year’s event had some notable features – a new 24-hour record, more teams including school-aged children – but was very poorly supported. If the level of participation does not increase, the event will not be worth running.

The Twitchathon is a fun event. It is not hard. The rules are simple, and in essence require you to see, or hear, as many bird species as you can in any 24-hour period (of your choosing) during October. The main “prize” (a term used with care in this case!) is the Mantelpiece Monstrosity, which will go to the team that records the most species.

I imagine that the team winning the competition will need to put in some considerable effort, but it is simply not necessary to go the whole hog. I encourage OSNZers to get off their backsides and have a go at any form of the competition – how about counting species from just one location, or restricting yourself to 20 km from a start point, or RRs organizing competitions restricted to within their OSNZ Region, or doing it with a non-birding friend and having to convince them of the birds’ identities?

One consistent theme in remarks made by participants in the past has been “how much fun it was”. Due to the poor turnout last year I feel unable to approach anyone to sponsor real prizes, but remember that it should be possible to raise funds for local, or national, projects by asking for sponsorship per bird recorded.

Rules

• Teams will consist of two or more individuals
• A team may not split up beyond earshot, and continue recording
• More than one member of the team shall agree the identity of each species
• Wild, live birds count
• The judging committee’s decisions are final. (That means me!)

Please send me your lists of birds claimed by mid-November, by any means you like - email me here

SAV SAVILLE

On 16th November 2002 Colin Ogle received a phone call from Neil Corballis of 'Marangai', Kaitoke, just south of Wanganui. Neil had seen a strange teal with very young ducklings on one of his farm ponds, and thought that it might be a native brown teal. He'd seen a similar bird in the same area two years previously.

Colin visited the pond with Neil on 20th November and discovered the bird had four ducklings that were still quite small and fluffy. After hiding the ducklings in long grass bordering the pond, a single bird sat out on the water, giving excellent views. Realising the bird was not a brown teal; the closest match appeared to be chestnut teal, from Australia.

Colin then contacted Sav Saville, and together with Brent Stephenson, and Nic Peet of Department of Conservation, headed back to the pond the next day (21st November), again with the assistance of Neil. This time there were two adult birds attending the ducklings. One bird headed over the paddock and sat about 150m away, whilst the other called and paddled around the pond, allowing photos to be taken, before it took flight, returning a few minutes later.

From photographs taken and subsequently posted on the internet (http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/eco-vist/homepage.htm), the general consensus was that we were dealing with hybrid teal of some description. This was supported by the lack of a breeding plumage (or moulting) male chestnut teal. Other possibilities for hybridisation were suggested following the photos appearing on the website, and included some of the North American ducks, grey duck and brown teal. However, we feel the most likely hybrid combination, due to general colouration and plumage characteristics, is between grey teal and chestnut teal.

The bird that sat out in the paddock had a very strange colouration, being very orangey-brown around the neck and head. It also had a strange ‘jizz’, being very long-necked and round-headed. Although the bird that stayed on the dam most of the time looked more like a chestnut teal, it was felt that this was also most likely to be a hybrid. This bird had very chestnut cheeks and throat, and there were also patches of chestnut on some of the upper breast feathering, but, as mentioned by some, the feathering on the closed wing appeared too much like a grey teal. It was felt that the chestnut colouration was unlikely to be some sort of staining, as it seemed too restricted and individual patterning on feathers could be distinguished from the photos.

We all returned again on 4th December, hoping to catch the ducklings at a later stage. Neil also thought he might have seen a bird resembling a male chestnut teal at the dam. Unfortunately this bird wasn’t around, but the ducklings had grown, with what appeared to be two broods evident. There was a larger duckling resembling a grey teal, and two almost fully-grown ones, which were more like the chestnut-headed bird we had seen in the paddock on the previous visit. Several photos revealed little more than the first ones taken.

If we are in fact dealing with hybrid birds, it appears we have caught the story too late, and may now be dealing with second generation (or more) crosses. Hybrid birds will always present more questions than answers.

Where have the birds come from in the first place? It was put forward that the apparent sedentary behaviour of the birds (they appear to have bred at the same pond for at least two of the last three summers), suggested a possible captive influence. It is possible that captive chestnut teal have been released or escaped. Or, could they have originated from wild Australian birds?

Whichever is the case, this does put into question many of the chestnut teal records for the Manawatu Estuary. Since 1991, 21 records of chestnut teal (representing at least 18 individuals) have been accepted for New Zealand, 18 of these reports from the Manawatu Estuary (with at least one bird being reported every winter since 1992, except 1997). Most of these birds have appeared to be immature drake-plumaged birds, which could just as well have been hybrids.

Nevertheless, the most recent bird, seen first on 11th May 2002 (photos taken on 18 May 2002 and posted on the web), was almost certainly a full male chestnut teal. Its plumage was between eclipse and breeding plumage, and when seen several weeks later, its plumage appeared to have changed with the head having become glossier. Hybrid birds are supposedly in a perpetual state of ‘eclipse’ with changes in plumage therefore unlikely.

Following discussion of the above events, reports of chestnut teal at Waiwera (just north of Auckland), at the local effluent ponds and the adjacent wetland were made. It was suspected that several of the birds were possible hybrids, with as many as 20 being seen there regularly. Hopefully someone will keep an eye out, and try and document/photograph these birds!

Thanks to Neil Corballis for making the initial observations, and all those that replied to our requests for information and assistance in this perplexing matter.

BRENT STEPHENSON, COLIN OGLE, and SAV SAVILLE

Returning home to Waiongana from an OSNZ outing on Sunday 6th October, my wife Julie told me that she had seen an unusual bird feeding in a muddy flooded paddock about 100 metres from our house. It was with a pair of Pied Stilts, but disturbance by cattle had caused them to fly off towards the beach.

I thought I had better go and investigate in case the bird had returned. It had! The mystery bird was now with a Spur-winged Plover and two Pied Stilts. This made getting close to the bird rather difficult, but I could see that it was definitely something different. I took a detailed description and a few photos, following the bird as it flew to a pool in another paddock.

I was uncertain as to what species the bird was, but remembered reading about a Ruff in the most recent edition of Miranda Naturalists’ Trusts News. On checking that, and the Field Guide to the Birds of New Zealand, Julie and I agreed that it was probably a Ruff.
I rang Barry Hartley, but by the time Barry arrived the bird had departed.

On the following Sunday morning, I saw that the Ruff had returned to the same paddock, this time with two Lesser Knots and a Bar-tailed Godwit. I rushed home and rang Barry, who came speeding out. However, by the time Barry arrived, the bird had departed once more.

Noting a pattern, I awaited the following Sunday with trembling anticipation, but alas no Ruff.

The first batch of photos were something of a disappointment as I discovered that I had used my new zoom lens on the wrong setting of 170mm instead of 500mm. Nevertheless I submitted an unusual bird report. The convenor of the rare bird committee agreed with the identification, though he had to employ his magnifying glass.

PETER and JULIE FRYER