<div dir="ltr">Thanks, Stephen. Adding to the confusion,<a href="https://wdfw.wa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/01287/wdfw01287.pdf"> this 2005 document</a>, which WDFW links on its WTPT page, distinguishes the North Cascades and South Cascades population as follows: "N. White-tailed Ptarmigan, <i>L. l. leucurus</i>, in n. Cascades and Mt. Rainier White-tailed Ptarmigan, <i>rainierensis</i>, in the s.Cascades." The document also notes that the species is "widespread and locally fairly common in the Cascades of Washington." This text is inconsistent with the claim on the FB group thread that <i>rainierensis</i> is the only subspecies is WA's Cascade mountains.<div><div><br></div><div>It seems possible that WDFW's "1,000 individuals" claim applies only to the <i>rainierensis </i>population and that the WTPT individuals north of I-90 are not included in the 1,000 number.</div><div><br></div><div>Steve Loitz</div><div>Ellensburg<br><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Jul 3, 2024 at 3:16 PM Stephen Chase <<a href="mailto:schase@cornerstoneschool.us">schase@cornerstoneschool.us</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>Appreciate the discussion, Steve.</div><div><br></div>A second point of confusion is that <a href="https://wdfw.wa.gov/species-habitats/species/lagopus-leucurus-saxatilis#resources" target="_blank">WDFW lists</a> "our" White-tailed Ptarmigan as <i>Lagopus leucurus saxatilis</i>. As far as I can tell, <i>saxatilis</i> is the subspecies endemic to Vancouver Island. I wondered if it once used to be conspecific with the Mt. Rainier White-tailed Ptarmigan (<i>L.l.rainierensis</i>), but I don't see any evidence to corroborate that guess. Oddly, on the same page, WDFW references a thorough resource on White-tailed Ptarmigan that clearly describes
<i>rainierensis</i> as the subspecies of White-tailed Ptarmigan across the Cascades, to the Canadian border (pgs 21-25 of <a href="https://ecos.fws.gov/ServCat/DownloadFile/202270" target="_blank">this document</a>).<div><br></div><div>Stephen Chase</div><div>Everson</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Jul 3, 2024 at 2:40 PM Steve Loitz via Tweeters <<a href="mailto:tweeters@u.washington.edu" target="_blank">tweeters@u.washington.edu</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><font color="#000000">I seek to clear up confusion re WDFW's statements re White-tailed Ptarmigan, the Mt. Rainier subspecies of which has recently received enhanced ESA protection, which is a good thing.</font><div><font color="#000000"><br></font></div><div><font color="#000000"><a href="https://wdfw.wa.gov/species-habitats/species/lagopus-leucurus-saxatilis#desc-range" target="_blank">WDFW's webpage</a> re the WTPT re the WTPT seems to make inconsistent claims-- </font><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0)">WDFW claims that "[t]</span><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);background-color:rgb(254,254,254);font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif">he Washington population may be about 1,000 individuals"</span></div><div><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);background-color:rgb(254,254,254);font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif"><br></span></div><div><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);background-color:rgb(254,254,254);font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif">-- but in the immediately preceding paragraph, WDFW states that </span><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;background-color:rgb(254,254,254)">the species is "common in areas further north, such as the Pasayten Wilderness." </span></div><div><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;background-color:rgb(254,254,254)"><br></span></div><div><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;background-color:rgb(254,254,254)">How can a bird with only 1,000 individuals state-wide be deemed "common" in a relatively small geographic subset of the state?</span></div><div><span style="font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;background-color:rgb(254,254,254)"><font color="#000000"><br></font></span></div><div><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;background-color:rgb(254,254,254)">Furthermore, the "1,000 individuals" claim is contrary to my experience, which I acknowledge to be</span><span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><span style="font-family:"Segoe UI Historic","Segoe UI",Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif"> anecdotal, but nonetheless relevant. I've been mountaineering and birding in the WA Cascades for 40 years, have seen hundreds of WTPT and, although I do acknowledge the long-term threat of climate change, I have not noted any material decline in the numbers of WTPT north of I-90. WTPTs are a common sight in the NCNP on both sides of SR20, e.g., Pickets, Steattle Ridge, Isolation Traverse, Bacon/Hagan/Blum area, Ragged Ridge, Mt. Logan massif, and also in the Glacier Peak WA, Chelan/Sawtooths, Pasayten WA and other areas.</span><span style="font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif"> </span></span></font></div><div><span style="background-color:rgb(254,254,254);font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif"><font color="#000000"><br></font></span></div><div><font color="#000000"><span style="background-color:rgb(254,254,254);font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif">WDFW acknowledges that [t]h</span><span style="background-color:rgb(254,254,254);font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif">ere has been little work done with [the species in WA]." </span></font></div><div><span style="background-color:rgb(254,254,254);font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif"><font color="#000000"><br></font></span></div><div><span style="background-color:rgb(254,254,254);font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif"><font color="#000000">What's going on here? WDFW's claim is not qualified by subspecies and, AFAIK, the Mt. Rainier subspecies is the only WTPT subspecies in the WA Cascades.</font></span></div><div><span style="background-color:rgb(254,254,254);font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif"><font color="#000000"><br></font></span></div><div><font color="#000000" face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif"><span style="background-color:rgb(254,254,254)">On what sampling does WDFW rely for the "1,000 individuals" claim? Many, very possibly most, WTPT reside in areas which see little human traffic and, based on my considerable experience mountaineering in WA's WTPT habitat, those areas very likely get virtually zero eBirders. </span></font></div><div><font color="#000000" face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif"><span style="background-color:rgb(254,254,254)"><br></span></font></div><div><font color="#000000" face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif"><span style="background-color:rgb(254,254,254)">This is not the first time I've been addled by claimed data which reflects the very small overlap of birders and deep wilderness travelers, but it's the most mindboggling.</span></font></div><div><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></span></div><div><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0)">Steve Loitz</span></div><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">
<div><font color="#000000">Ellensburg, WA</font></div>
<div><a href="mailto:steveloitz@gmail.com" target="_blank"><font color="#000000">steveloitz@gmail.com</font></a> </div></div></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Tweeters mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Tweeters@u.washington.edu" target="_blank">Tweeters@u.washington.edu</a><br>
<a href="http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all"><div><br></div><span class="gmail_signature_prefix">-- </span><br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div>Steve Loitz</div>
<div>Ellensburg, WA</div>
<div><a href="mailto:steveloitz@gmail.com" target="_blank">steveloitz@gmail.com</a> </div></div></div></div>