Just wondering what beeds in melaleucas. I'm near a creek with many of them in parkland, but they don't hollow so just pondering if a nest box would be suirtable for ?
Also, kookaburras. I'd imagine they bread in gum trees? Same reason, for nest boxes. I beleive the Wood Duck and Kingfisher share similar shaped boxes, but probably lower and closer to the water.
Anyone know what butcher birds do?
No hollows in Melaleucas that I'm aware of, jason, so nest boxes wouldn't get any acceptances I shouldn't think.
Kookaburras love hollows, especially horizontal hollows, in Eucalypts, especially River Red Gum Eucalyptus camaldulensis. They also nest in other trees, too, I believe.
Yes, for Wood Ducks & most Kingfishers the closer to water the better. Smaller holes for Kingfishers than Wood Ducks.
No nest boxes for Butcherbirds. They build their own in the forks of trees, tall shrubs.
Thanks
Ipswich Shire Eastern flanks
I have absolutely no idea, jason. I've only ever seen callistemons and leptospermums here in Tenterfield, NSW. In both these species they are a food plant rather than a nesting plant for birds. Perhaps melaleucas are the same.
Umm, jason, maybe it's just me but I don't really think nest boxes for the bigger birds is a good thing. You see, if you are near a parkland and there's ample amount of trees and flora about there's no need for nest boxes. The birds have their own means to create a nest hollow. Just take a look at the shape of beaks and how strong they look. Beaks are not just used for cracking open seeds or crunching through bones, they're also used for hollowing out tree branches and ripping off tree branches. Their beaks need to be strong and healthy at all times. Adding nest boxes just deprives them of that and weakens their beaks.
My advice though, if you really want to add a nesting box or two make them as natural as possible and make it from suitable material. Also, for arguement's sake, if a bird takes an interest in a nest box, make the opening and the inside of the nest box smaller for bigger birds that way the birds have to use their beaks to get the opening the right size and have the opportunity to hollow out the nest box to the size they want the nest to be. Give the birds something to work with, that's all. This means making the nest box more like a tree hollow than a square box. Mimic nature, that's all I'm saying.
There was a pair of Eastern Rosellas nesting a black trunked gum tree across the road for many years. They're not there anymore. But the tree has a thin trunk and somewhere 3/4 the way up it is a hollow. Can't see the hollow from the ground but I know its there and there's only one hollow. From the ground, the hollow is approximately at the same height as the power lines are above the ground. So, an Eastern Rosella will nest in a hollow 3/4 the way up a tree. Torresian Crows 3/4 to the top of a tree. Australian Magpies 3/4 the height of a tree - almost exactly 8/10ths the height of the tree. So, correct altitude placement of nest boxes suitable for each bird species is a guaranteed winner of those species using those nest boxes you might wish to add. That's if you are game enough to scale a 30-60 metre tree and nail it in place so it doesn't fall out the tree in 120km gusts of wind? Game enough to do that jason?
Me? I'm scared of heights. I'll stick with the shrub breeding bird species where I don't have to look up to see them breeding.
I'm at Tenterfield, NSW. (Formerly known as "Hyperbirds".)
Hi Jason, I watched a Grey Butcherbird building a nest in a Melaleuca just a few weeks ago. She was snapping small dead twigs from the tree to add to the nest which was in a fork about 4 metres up. Looks much like a magpie's nest, only smaller.
Kingfishers might take to a nest box. They often drill out their own nest hollows in arboreal termite mounds so it could be worth a shot. If the birds don't take to it some native mammals might make use, just keep an eye out for unwanted guests such as Common Mynahs, Starlings, rats and honeybees.
LM
Shirley, I like your idea of mimicking nature in relation to nest boxes. Way to go.
I'm not sure how long it takes for a larger hollow breeding bird to make a hollow large enough to breed in but I suspect it's quite some time. I'd be inclined to err on the side of caution & provide the nest box, particularly if there's a danger that the bird species is endangered & breeding opportunities are few or non-existant.
Yeh I can see your point Shirley. Will see what flair I can add internally to them. But generally I tend to think with the land clearing going on around me, that any port in the storm may well be a welcomed refuge. I discovered another patch of cleared land Sth of me on the weekend. I'll be making microbat, sugar glider, feather tail glider, various bird and what ever else I can get the dimetions for. Leave of Cockatoos, Galah's, brush tails, and ring tails as they are a plenty, and rainbow lorikeets as well, but I have to accept other rosellas and patrots tend to fit in the same box. I discovered an arrow in the only obvious termite nest I have found in the park, so the kingfisher won't be intrested in that one I presume.
I really see it as loss of habitate, and particularly for small birds and mamals as the real threat. Council still have not come good on my bushcare hope to thickning up parts of the creek banks. Or the Wattle thicket behind my house, or the Lomandra patch where no grass grows. They just love mowing I think. So in the mean time I'll go nest box placing instead. My mate in Land for Wildlife thinks the place could easy absorbe 15 to 20 boxes along the 700m or so of creek. I can get 6m in the air easy enough with my ladder, which covers most target species. I have a harnes and rope, so I can set up for a saftey and a belay if I could be rats. If I end up with a few boxes needing to go hire I'll hire a cherry picker for it, or a bigger ladder. Just don't mention it to the council, the ol litigation fear has them freaking out someone wants to do something. Od how I can go bushwalking along a narrow escatment on crown land which if I fell would lead to certain death, but put a nest box in a park and Noooo.
Ipswich Shire Eastern flanks
Such is the stuff of councils, jason. The phantom nest boxer must strike again if anything positive is to happen. If you can get the support of your local wildlife preservation group so much the better.
Yes mate the phantom nest boxer I think it has to be. I see the park mowers left the Wattles the phantom planter put in, seeming to be happy to follow the new and easier mow line. My bushcare mate is happy to be a phantom as well, so perhaps one day there might just be 15 phantoms have a rush of blood. Like you once said better to plead for forgivness than ask for permission.
My neighbour tells me yesterday once upon a time there were more birds than now, there were plety of turtles, Brisbane short neck or sawtooth I presume, water dragons and the like before the creek was moved and adjusted by the council, and before the weeds came. Not sure if his romancing but said it always had water, flowed better, and handled floods better. That was interesting and not that surprising. But that was 20 yeas ago and perhaps he was on the fringe of urbanisation as well. The creek was right behind our fences and was moved for a bike path aparently.
On the down side he tells me his dog killed a large water dragon the other day. Two doors down had a Red Belly in their pool this week also, but so not sure of the out come of that but hopefully just shood away. And a large carpet snake got flattened at the creek crossing also a couple days ago. So the wildlife is down there which I find promising, just has to survive humans.
Have herd a lot of frogs lately with the regular rain and cloudy days. Stripped Marsh frog I beleive. Also have heard two green frogs in the neighbours down pipes. Huh they can have them the noisy buggers. But hoping for Rocket frogs as well in the creek somewhere.
Ipswich Shire Eastern flanks
I understand where you're coming from jason. Manmade clearing of our indigenious trees (i.e. logging) is far more destructive than backyard or urban garden deforestation, I reckon. These 2 pics are just a reminder of said destruction. These are also my new neighbours - loggers. The semi is so big, it's length is as long as 2 of the 2 bedroom flats here, and blocks our view of the countryside, what there is of it. Every 2-3 days a new truck load of trees arrives, until recently when the cops were involved. The truck driver had an accident with his fully laden truck recently which resulted in him losing his bumper bar and number plate on the front of the truck. The driver had to leave the bumper bar where it got ripped off from the truck, 65km south-east of Tenterfield, as it was too heavy to move. So that's where the logging is going on and these mighty mature trees are being felled - in a state park.
Preserving what's left of our flora is next to impossible really. Logging should be outlawed nationally unless it is from tree plantations specifically grown for logging to occur.
So I understand the dilema of not enough tree hollows, and even not enough habitat for our native fauna to do their things in.
Here's my words of wisdom for ya, jason. Not only add nest hollows but vines to these said trees. People rarely look up, so make sure if they do look up they can't see anything but foliage and tree branches. Camouflage everything to make it look as natural as possible. Animals and birds like their privacy too, so just keep that in mind when adding nest boxes. And don't forget to compensate for the growth of the trees when adding these nest boxes.
I'm at Tenterfield, NSW. (Formerly known as "Hyperbirds".)
What the heck? What madman would move an entire creek just to add a bike path? I'm trying very hard not to swear here. If your local council moves an entire creek just to add a bike path then it proves that it's mentaility is to control nature by force; to bend nature to "it's" will. And I thought the Tenterfield Council was bad but now I know it's not that bad.
Infortunately nothing good can come from people who think like this because they probably believe that they are right and everyone else is wrong, including the experts. All I know is you don't move a creek without there being consequences later on down the track. A creek is where a creek is for a reason. Nature will always fight back, and ALWAYS WINS OVER EVERYTHING US HUMANS DO TO IT. It may seem we "environmental friendly folk" are losing the battle to keep our environment entact and to revegetate it but over a much longer period of time, nature fights and wins every single time, forcing us to adapt and become smarter and to think about things. Remember, that in nature, only the strongest will survive. Remember your fig tree seedling that went through so much punishment just to survive, and is still surviving? If I can remember correctly, that is, it's still surviving. Well, like seedlings we plant that just die for whatever reason, only the strongest and most adaptable individuals will survive. They will survive against all odds until something finally renders them deceased with no chance of a second life.
But if you assist nature to fight back, nature will assist your endeavours. Plants are the foundation of nature. Without them we're all up s*** creek without a paddle. Remember, we are a part of the environment too and plants know that and they react to us just as we react to other humans and other lifeforms on this planet.
I'm at Tenterfield, NSW. (Formerly known as "Hyperbirds".)
I presume someone, some where won out on compensation. The creek apparently was right beind our fences. The water still makes it to the fence consuming the bike path when big rains come, but perhaps once upon a time the water was halfway up the back yard. I have not heard that but very possible. I once watched a doco on the Americans trying to straighten a river somewhere, epic fail so they say these days.
I won't go into humans, contrrol, and nature; it brings me down. Sometimes I wish I was not born or socialised into likeing nature so much. From what largely see yes you are right, the people who do care and actually do somethng for nature are thin on the ground compared to the masses of little kings.
Hey your truck driving mate might just be a bit illegal there. 1m overhang and red flagged at that. That current overhang could easily harpoon another vehicle. But your call, his only trying to make a living and is not the one consuming the wood. probably turn those beauties into something wonderful like fence palings. I once spent a bit of time in Tassie a few years ago, in a one afternoon stint of sight seeing I counted 18 trucks with an average of 22 logs per truck. That's in less than 5 hours. They whistled through the streets of Hobart from 5am to 11pm that I saw, new years eave, new years day, and even Sundays. I spent a lot of time fighting that, probably too much but good to see Gunns have gone. So your truck is not good, but not as bad as they come either.
The fig, my poor fig. Eventually someone took the top half. After being broken at the base I had stood it up propping it straight with a stick. It was still green and healthy looking so I figured it was contributing to the roots. But I'd say who ever snapped it then took the top as a ? statement. The council mowed what had been had sprouting before I could mark it so it's looking pretty dreadful. I popped a little sign out next to it saying "happy ? its finally gone". Council never got back to me about putting a mesh enclouser around it. It will shoot again I imagine, weather the looser who keeps breaking it grows up is yet to be seen.
Ipswich Shire Eastern flanks