Archive for May, 2007
Hudson Reporter, NJ - Apr 15, 2007
Hudson County has experienced a housing boom in recent years. Now the area’s winged residents, whose habitats were sometimes disrupted by the construction, are seeing their own homes built.
Along the Mill Creek Marsh in Secaucus and throughout the Meadowlands region, the staff from the New Jersey Meadowlands Commission (NJMC) has installed hundreds of bird nesting boxes to welcome home its tree swallow population.
The tree swallows, which return to the Meadowlands every year at this time in an annual rite of spring, enjoy a lifestyle that many of their non-flying friends would clearly recognize.
Suburban-style birds
The tree swallow is an approximately 5.5-inch bird with a striking metallic blue upper body and a white underbody. They are indigenous to lakeshores, streams, and marshes. Tree swallows live in the holes of dead trees that were hollowed out by other birds and animals.
A decline in natural habitats for this species, largely due to development, inspired the effort to start constructing nesting boxes for these birds.
The NJMC joined this effort 10 years ago. Gabrielle Bennett-Meany, the NJMC’s outreach naturalist in the wetlands division, described how location is just as important for birds as it is with people when it comes to real estate.
“These particular nest boxes were designed to sit out over the water,” she said. “Tree swallows are one of the few birds that will nest somewhat over the water. They’re not going to go out deep, but they like just off the edge. They feel that much safer.”
NJMC workers have lined the edge of the Meadowlands marsh shoreline with hundreds of nesting boxes. Apparently, in the same way that many Secaucus residents came to town from the more crowded parts of Hudson County seeking space, tree swallows also prefer to live someplace where they can spread their wings.
“We put the boxes a couple of feet apart, because they are a little territorial,” Bennett-Meany said. “They don’t want your family too close to their family.”
Bennett-Meany also noted that while tree swallows exhibit a preference for single-family homes, one of their neighboring bird species, the purple martin, lives very differently.
“Purple martin houses are designed like an apartment building,” she said. “It’s very large, and they like living next to each other. Meanwhile, tree swallows want more exclusively waterfront property.”
Tree swallows also like to live in places where their version of fine dining is readily available.
“The water’s edge is the zone where a lot of the insect activity begins,” she said. “That’s what tree swallows mainly feed on. A family of tree swallows can consume a couple of hundred of midges [small insects] a day.”
Tree swallows challenged by competition
NJMC spokesman Jeff Fucci explained why his organization helps the tree swallows with additional housing.
“Tree swallows face a lot of competition from other species and also in finding habitats,” he said. “These nesting boxes are a wetlands biodiversity enhancement that give them a place to stop along the Atlantic flyway. Without them, life may be more difficult for them.”
Besides the occasional predatory hawk, Bennett-Meany mentioned which factors help to make competition stiff for tree swallows when they arrive in the Meadowlands.
“Woodpeckers are primary cavity nesters after they make living holes with their beaks,” she said. “Tree swallows are the secondary cavity nesters. But the following year, a squirrel, another animal, or another bird might want the hole. In this area, there has been a lot of encroachment over the last 40 years. With less and less trees available, there have been less and less habitats for the birds. But what we found was in the same way people put bird houses in their backyards to attract birds, what we call bird nesting boxes attract birds. Tree swallows readily adapt to these nest boxes, so much so that the project has grown to accepting six to eight hundred boxes from community groups that want to help.”
Community backs birds
Community groups began putting up bird nest boxes throughout the Meadowlands 20 years ago under the auspices of Don Smith, the former NJMC naturalist. Smith began by putting up 24 boxes. When Bennett-Meany began helping him 15 years ago, the number was close to 100. Now that she manages the distribution of hundreds of bird nest boxes each year, Bennett-Meany described how the job gets done.
“I always leave it up to the group to decide what they can manage, because they have to fund it themselves,” she said. “The groups bring back their finished boxes to me, then I figure out where to put them.”
The NJMC also hosts bird nest building workshops, which encourage community involvement in the spring nest box project. These groups often engage in contests to see who can come up with the best looking non-toxic nest boxes. Groups that have built nest boxes over the years have included People to People International of Secaucus, several local Boy Scout and Cub Scout troops, and Pathways to Independence, a Hudson County group for people living with disabilities.
“When the little kids do it, their box doesn’t always have a uniform look, but the birds don’t care,” Bennett-Meany said. “They aren’t going to be as choosy as you and I are when it comes to renovation. As long as they’ve got a place to live, they’re OK with it. It’s a home.”
Bennett-Meany noted that the seasonal shift makes the work being done now very important.
“The birds like to winter where we like to winter: Florida and South America,” she said. “This work we are doing is a springtime activity because we are timing the migration. If we don’t place the boxes out here now when it’s still a little cool, we’re going to miss when they start coming up from down south.”
The Meadowlands has experienced an environmental revival in recent years, with over 260 bird species now calling the area home. However, Bennett-Meany admits that one species definitely has a special home in her heart.
“We love tree swallows,” she said. “People come here to view them and to photograph them. They are special. People should come out and see them. You can get such awe and pleasure out of seeing that little bird. It’s instant gratification. You get to watch them build a home.”
May 11th, 2007
americanartifacts.com
Barn swallow colony sites are frequently destroyed when old buildings are demolished or sold to new owners, who wish to close them up. Attracting swallows to buildings where they will be allowed to nest has been simply a matter of opening a door or window, perhaps, providing nesting ledges, and leaving the rest to luck. The chances of attracting barn swallows to a specific building are about as good as attracting bats to a bat box. When a building housing a colony of swallows is to be closed, it should be done after the nesting season. Even then, chances are only fair that the colony will establish itself at a safe site the following spring. Homeowners and farmers go to great length to birdproof their garages and other outbuildings to keep out house sparrows. As old barns fall down, fewer and fewer prime swallow sites remain each year, although bridges offer adequate shelter to many colonies. One potential way to establish a new colony in a building is to transport a nest with young from a doomed site. By moving the nest very slowly, the parents will follow and continue to care for the young. When the old site is lost, it would be hoped that the parents, and perhaps, the entire colony would then nest in the new building the following year. The opportunity to test this theory arose in the summer of 1992, when the H.H.S. mail room was closed off to better control humidity.
Our swallow colony is located in the lower part of our barn in a large room (1300 sq ft). A single pair of swallows moved from the colony room to the mail room in 1990. When they could not be discouraged from nest building, I put up a shelf where I wanted the nest and they instantly switched their focus to the shelf. Previously, they were building on various tools hanging on the wall. We now had a working relationship in which I was committed to not forgetting to always leave at least one door open and to stay out of their way as much as possible, and, they seemed to agree to nest on the shelf, and not above stacks of Home Ground or other supplies or tools. In addition, I agreed to not suddenly turn on the lights at night and scare them off the nest.
The swallows and I got along quite well that summer. They had finished their nest late in the season and only raised one brood. However, in 1991, they again refused to nest with the main colony even though I was careful to keep the mailroom doors closed. Whenever I opened the large door to get out my bike, the pair of swallows would instantly enter and check out their empty nest, even though the other swallows had long since begun nesting in the colony room. So, I gave in again and opened the doors for them. They raised two broods that summer, and, although helpers would come to help feed the young, no other nest was ever begun in the mail room. At the same time, new nests were continually being built in the colony room and plenty of space was available in the large room. We apparently had a pair of “loners”. It is likely that at least one of the pair was the same individual each year.
In 1992, the mail room was going to be enclosed to better control humidity, and, the pair of swallows would not be able to nest there. In early summer, it appeared that the swallows had lost interest in the room, so the doors were left open for several days. Five days after the doors were opened a swallow was seen leaving the mail room nest and a clutch of eggs were found in the nest. At this point, I considered trying to move the nest, a little at a time, to the main colony room, but, decided this would be too disruptive to the entire colony. Also, this pair had refused to join the colony on their own for three years, always waiting for the first opportunity to enter the mail room. It was unlikely that I could force them to join the group now. Instead, I decided to move the nest to a room in the upper barn. If they took to this location, it could be theirs for years to come, with no human interference.
Since it was mid-summer, the in-transit nestlings would have to be protected from the sun while the nest was slowly moved 72 feet along the barn and then 14 feet up a ladder to the entrance of their new room. A louvered video monitor case was used for this purpose. The case was mounted on a tripod two feet from the mailroom nest and left in position for two days to allow the adults to become familiar with it.
Preparation for the move began soon after daybreak to allow as much time as possible to complete the move. A shaped piece of hardware cloth was fitted to the nest to prevent it from falling apart and a long bladed knife was gently worked between the nest and the wall to free the nest, which was then placed in the metal case. Since the nest had been built on a swallow shelf, it could be returned to the original position, if the adults didn’t accept the change.
Luckily, after 8 minutes of flying to the nest’s previous position and circling, one of the adults landed on the nest and instantly fed one of the young. Soon both adults were tending to the young as if nothing had happened. After 15 minutes, the box was lowered 2 feet so that the tripod legs rested on the floor. As before, the adults went to the previous position, flying in tight circles, and totally ignoring the nest below. This time they discovered the nest in 5 minutes. Next the box was moved three feet at a time toward the door, which was 20 feet from the original nest site. After each move, the swallows would circle the exact point of the previous location for several minutes before locating the nest.
Once outside, the nest had to be moved 42 feet along the side of the barn, around a corner, and 30 feet further to the new entrance which was 14 feet above the ground. The incremental moves went smoothly until the entrance to the main colony was reached. But, despite some confusion, we reached the corner of the barn not far behind schedule. At one point the adults were frequently perching on a lever of a walking cultivator and, also, having more trouble than usual finding the nest. On the hunch that this perch was providing a reference point for them to find the nest, I began pulling the cultivator along with each nest move, and this appeared to help them find the nest. I had to give this up when we approached the corner of the barn because of several obstacles in the path.
When the nest was moved partially around the end of the barn, the adults were not able to find it. As before, it was in plain site, but after 15 minutes with no success, I moved the nest back to it’s previous position 3 feet away. This did not work either. The adults were now returning to the mail room and flying somewhat randomly around the path we had taken. Out of desperation, I returned the nest to the entrance to the mail room, where it was discovered in 3 minutes. Then, we once again began the 32′ journey to the corner of the barn. This time, I negotiated the corner with very short moves (less than 1 foot). Once around the corner, there were no obstacles and no nearby reference points and the move progressed rapidly. The move up the ladder also went without a hitch. In fact, the swallows seemed to cope with vertical movement better than horizontal. The final step was to very gradually move the nest into the barn, where the adults had, perhaps, never before entered. This, also, went smoothly and the adults seemed to adapt quite nicely to their new room. All four young fledged and the adults had begun construction of a mud nest directly above the tripod-mounted nest. However, the swallow nesting season was winding down and it was much too late to begin a new brood, but, the beginning of a new nest was a hopeful sign that they would return to nest in this room the following year.
In 1993, no swallows were observed entering the new room. Although swallows would occasionally enter the mail room when a door was left open, it appeared that they were chasing insects and not looking for a nest site. There is still hope that one of the swallows that fledged from the new room will return to nest there in the future. While this successful move demonstrates that active swallow nests can be moved from sites in an emergency, such as planned demolition or construction, it offers no evidence that a new colony can be established by such a move.
Addendum: Since the above article was written, no swallows have shown an interest in nesting in the 2nd floor room where the nest was introduced in 1992. The old mail room has served many purposes since then - it is now becoming a woodworking shop. Swallows have been discouraged from nesting there, but they show interest every year, whenever they find the large rear door open.
• barn swallow young in nest before moving. This is a brood of the previous year. Note the small platform nailed to the beam. Providing such shelves serves two important purposes. It allows the human to select where the swallow builds its nest and it provides a safe base to prevent the nest from falling.
• The day before the move, with the moving box in place
• The nest is placed in the moving box. This created a surprisingly difficult problem for the swallows, who hovered 18″ away at the original nestsite, ignoring their nest and young even though they could see and hear the young. After 8 minutes, the new location of the nest was discovered and the young were fed as frequently as usual, the adults going directly to the moving box each time.
• The move begins
• Feeding the young, now 6 feet along on their journey
• At the 12 foot mark - note both adults on the cow skull horn
• Finally outside, the nest is protected from direct sunlight by the louvred box.
• The adults seemed to have adjusted to the enclosed box, but still had difficulty acccepting each small move of the nest.
• The ladder to the second floor opening. A small platform which hooked over the rungs of the ladder allowed incremental moves up the ladder.
• Ready to enter the new room. The box was fitted to the tripod again and moved several feet into the room, where the nesting was allowed to continue undisturbed. Several helpers eventually began to enter the new room and feed the young, just as they had in the previous location. However, when the young fledged, the new room was ignored.
May 10th, 2007
pubmedcentral.nih.gov
J. R. Green
THE swifts as a family are remarkable for certain peculiarities in the construction of their nests, fastening together the materials they use by a peculiar kind of secretion. The nest of the common swift of our own country has at -least its innermost layer so agglutinated. Collocalia faciphaga, according to Bernsteiin, fastens together in this way the whole of the structure. Perhaps the nmost interesting of the whole genus is C. nidifica, a species met with in Java and Borneo, concerning the construction of whose habitation much controversy has taken place. This species produces the so-called edible bird’s-nest, a delicacy long leld in high esteem by the Chinese and lately brought into prominence in England through the Health Exhibition at South Kensington last year. The nest is in appearance not unlike a dried flattened spongy bone such as the occipital bone.
It has a brownish or dirty white colour; is on the outside compact and hard; on the inside spongy in texture. It is brittle, breaking with conchoidal fracture, much like glue.
Three chief hypotheses have been advanced as to its construction. The first is that it is partly at least of vegetable origin consisting of pieces of alga fastened together by the bird’s saliva. The caves which the birds are found to haunt have their sides covered in places with a peculiar alga allied to Gleocapsa, the diffluent cell-walls of which would easily lend themselves to such a use. The advocates of this view suggest also as a likely material certain marine algae. In the nestbuilding season the birds are observed often to settle at the edge of the shore and to return thence directly to their caves. The nest of the nearly allied C. fuciphaga, which much resembles that of C. nidifica in -appearance, is according to Bernstein’ built up of plant stalks, stems J. R. GREEN. says that in the stomachs of the birds at the breedingr season, nothing but insects can be found, showing that they do not use in the building regurgitated vegetable matter. In a specimen’ of the nests used for soup at the late Health Exhibition, btut little structure of any kind was visible. The appearance of the nest as found in the caves has been described above. In its natural condition the material was too hard and brittle for microscopic investigation. Prolonged soaking in water or glycerine caused it however to swell up without losing any peculiarity of its form. It became soft and almost gelatinous in texture and was then easy to examine. Under a low power of the microscope it appeared to be laminated; striae were visible over its surface, parallel, or nearly so, and somewhat wavy. On teasing it with needles it readily split in two directions, one parallel with, the other at right angles to, the surface. The most careful examination with both low and high powers failed to show the presence of vegetable cells or of any debris arising from such. The only structural elements at all to be identified wvere bodies closely resembling in appearance sqtuamous epitheliuni cells. These occurred scattered about in the substance, but only on the surfaces of the laminae into which it readily split. Microchemical reagents were equally unable to show any traces of vegetable origin. The material stained pale yellow with iodine, but in adding sulphuric acid, there was no developnment of the blue colour which under such treatment demonstrates the presence of cellulose. There was considerable swelling up under the action of the strong acid, but no further structure was brought out thereby. Similar results followed the application of chlor.-zinc-iod. or Schultze’s solution, the swelling being however much slower. The application of nitric acid, followed by ammonia, produced an orange colour apparently identical with that given on similar treatment by proteid bodies. Examination of sections cut in three planes revealed no further structure. The sections stained readily with haematoxylin but not with carmine or picro-carmine. The substance reduced solution of argentic nitrate with appearance of the well-known brown colour. With both the stains that affected it, the whole of the section was Rniformly coloured. 42The microscopic investigation of the properties of the nest pointed thus to the third view of its formation quoted above. But little concerninog the chemical nature of the material has hitherto been I Kindly placed in nmy hands by Dr Sclater, FJR.S. EDIBLE BIRD’S NEST. 43These reactions, considered together with the absence of structure in the material, point evidently to its being the product of the activity of some gland in the body, and bear out the view advocated by Sir E. Home and by Bernstein. It does not appear however from them whether the gland is a peptic or a salivary one. Evidence on this point is not forthcoming so far, for the most careftil examination has failed to show any ferment-property attaching to the nest. Neither the first water in which it was soaked, nor its solution in lime water, nor the swollen up material itself, was able to convert starch into sugar, nor was any action on fibrin found to take place, whatever the reaction. It J. R. GREEN. 44Though decomposed by sulphuric acid the nest was not acted uipon in the cold by weak hydrochloric acid, 1-5o/o, or by alkalis. On boiling with NaHO it was dissolved, to a brown solution. On considering these reactions and decompositions it is impossible to avoid being struck by the resemblance which the nest substance shows to the mnuoin described by Eichwald’ as occurring in the tissues of Helix pomatia and by Obolensky as found in the secretion of submaxillary glands’. The chief differences are 1. The nest is insoluble in 5V/0 HCl and in dilute alkalis, while mucin is soluble in both. 2. Mucin in solution is precipitated by acetic acid, while the nest solution only becomes opalescent. 3. Mucin is indigestible by pepsin, while the nest substance is dissolved, though with extreme slowness. 4. Mucin in solution in NaHO yields to ether a body which is coloured green by ferric chloride1. The nest material does not. By both microscopical and chemical examination therefore the theory of vegetable origin is unsupported. The substance is an animal product, so closely allied to mucin that it may be said to be a variety of it; and it is hardly open to doubt that it is the result of the activity of the glands described by Bernstein2 as being remarkably developed in the nest-building season and as atrophyingf immediately afterwards. 1 Obolensky, loc. cit. 2 Loc. cit.
May 9th, 2007
sabah.gov.my
Laurentius N. Ambu
Deputy Director Sabah Wildlife Department Kota Kinabalu
ABSTRACT The two most economically-important swiflets are the so-called edible nest swiflets: the white-nest swiflets (Aerodramus fuciphagus) and the Black-nest swiflet (Aerodramus maximus). Both species occur in Sabah.
With the dwindling edible-nest swiflets population due to effects of increased harvesting pressure and effects of forest habitat modifications, new dimensions need to be embarked to invigorate the conservation of these swiflets population while at the same time enhance the production of the edible birds nest vis-à-vis the sustainable development of the bird nests industry in Sabah. It is therefore timely to venture new avenues towards this end. From the case studies on swiflet farming in Indonesia and Malaysia, the potential contribution of bird nests produced from swiflet farms is enormous. With the right bird houses, technology and well – manipulated environmental regimes, it is now possible to produce edible bird nests from farm houses. From the experience above, it is hoped that commercial farming of swiflet in Sabah is realised.
May 8th, 2007
suntimes.com
MAKES 2 SERVINGS
1 whole swallow nest (approximately 1.33 ounces before soaking)
2 1/4 cups fresh milk
1 egg yolk
2 egg whites
1/2 cup granulated sugar
1/4 teaspoon rice vinegar
To soak swallow nest: Immerse the nest in a bowl filled with fresh, clean water at room temperature. Soak fresh raw nest 1 to 2 hours; soak dried raw nest 4 to 5 hours.
To make milk bean curd: Parboil fresh milk until barely boiled. Transfer to small bowl. Allow to cool until a sheet of milk skin forms on the surface. Make a slit on the edge of the cooling milk; carefully drain milk leaving the milk skin on the bottom of the bowl.
Whisk egg yolk and egg whites (don’t over-whisk to form bubbles). Fold in milk. Add sugar and rice vinegar. Sir until sugar dissolves. Strain milk with sieve. Transfer to bowl with milk skin. Add swallow nest into the milk. Stir slightly. Put bowl into steaming basket. Steam for 20 minutes over medium heat. Uncover twice to obtain a smooth surface. Serve hot.
Golden Nest
May 3rd, 2007
asm.org
M Flashner, P Wang, J B Hurley and S W Tanenbaum
The routine enzyme inducer was a hot-water extract of “edible bird’s nest.” Mild acid treatment (0.05 N H2SO4) of this extract increased enzyme activity
ABSTRACT
The elective isolation of a soil microorganism, tentatively assigned to the genus Arthrobacter, which produced an extracellular neuraminidase is described. The secretion of neuraminidase from washed cells in minimal medium required the presence of sialo-containing glycoproteins, whereas free N-acetyl-neuraminic asid of N-acetylmannosamine were poor inducers. No enzyme could be dected in the induction fitrated of cells, in the absence of inducer or in the culture filtrate of cells grown in a complete medium. The routine enzyme inducer was a hot-water extract of “edible bird’s nest.” Mild acid treatment (0.05 N H2SO4) of this extract increased enzyme activity two–to threefold and the specific activity about eightfold.
Neuraminidase induction with acid-treated bird’s nest was manifested at a linear rate for 6 h without increase in cell number. No other anticipated glycohydrolase or protease activities were foud. The amount of enzyme located within the cells was barely detectable as compared to that found in the induction filtrate. Experiments with chloramphenicol or chlortetracycline indicate that de novo protein synthesis was required for neuraminidase production and that this exoenzyme was not released from a preformed pool. Neuraminidase from this source has an apparent molecular weight of 87,000, a pH optimum of 5 to 6, and an apparent Km of 2.08 mg/ml for collocalia mucoid and 3.3 X 10(-3) M for N-acetylneuraminlactose and is insensitive both to Ca2+ ions and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid. Preliminary studies indicate that the enzyme can hydrolyze alpha-2,3-, alpha-2,6-, or alph-2-8-N-acetylneuraminylglycosidic linkages. From total activity data and purification criteria, it would appear that this isolate can produce about 5 mg of enzyme per liter of induction medium.
May 2nd, 2007
.nps.gov
Learner Outcomes The learner will • Map the spread of cave swallows into the United States using a variety of historic references. • Map the winter distribution of cave swallows in the Caribbean Basin and Texas using recent data. • Interpret various reference materials. Background Cave swallows first appeared in the United States as an accidental species in the Florida Keys in 1890. The first birds were recorded in Texas in 1910 and first nested there in 1914. The first verified record and report of nesting in New Mexico was in 1930. While birds continued to appear rarely in Florida, nesting individuals first established themselves in south Florida in 1987 and have persisted as a nesting species since that time. One or two individuals occurred at a cliff swallow (Petrochelidon pyrrhonota) colony in Tucson, Arizona, from 1979 to 1987, but have not been reported since that time.
Birds (usually singles) have occurred as accidentals in the following states: Alabama, California, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Jersey, New York and North Carolina. Two Canadian provinces, Nova Scotia and Ontario have records of this species. In the Caribbean Basin, birds have been judged accidental in the Bahamas, Barbados, Cayman Islands, Curacao, St. Lucia and the Virgin Islands. There are recent records of large numbers of birds wintering in coastal areas in El Salvador. Many unverified reports exist including, but not limited to, Guatemala, Nebraska and Venezuela.
Winter distribution of the species was formerly limited to Mexico and the West Indies. Since the mid-1980s, a small portion of the Texas population (up to several hundred individuals) have wintered in parts of Texas. Materials • Supplement number 4.6 • State maps showing counties of the following states: Arizona, Florida, New Mexico and Texas • Diverse samples of journal articles detailing the records of the early occurrence of cave swallows in the states mentioned and other references that reported on status changes • Atlas to determine county names to determine exact location from journal articles • Outline map of the Caribbean Basin showing at least the following: Cuba, Dominican Republic, Mexico, Puerto Rico and Texas
Chihuahuan Desert Lab Manual: Cave Swallows – Project 4 • General atlas which includes Caribbean Basin and Texas – must show latitude and longitude • Most recent issue of the Christmas count issue of American Birds Assessments • Maps Activity #1 Researching Historical Distribution in the USA 2 class periods Procedure The teacher will • Discuss supplement number 4.6 with students, and spell out all other guidelines. • Provide students with journal articles, noting reporting locations of cave swallow occurrences. • Have students locate sites and note the dates on maps of New Mexico, Arizona, Texas and Florida. • Have students draw lines showing the northward spread of the species in 20-year increments. • Have students prepare a map showing the first nesting record. (May wish to have students indicate the first record in each of the provinces and states.) • Have students speculate as to which environmental changes have helped to facilitate this northward expansion. Activity #2 Winter Range 3 class periods
Procedure The teacher will • Review the Christmas count bird surveys with students for the following areas: Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Jamaica, Mexico, Puerto Rico, Texas and the Virgin Islands. • Instruct students to prepare a map showing the number of cave swallows per partyhour found on each count in which the species were found. Cave swallows found on count day will be noted along with party-hours and the location of the count center by longitude and latitude. All Christmas count circles in the above political units will be noted on maps. Counts with cave swallows will be marked differently along with a scale showing the relative abundance. Special Note Christmas counts do not occur in all of the above areas each year. Counts, however, do take place on an annual basis in Mexico, Puerto Rico, Texas and the Virgin Islands and usually at least two of the other political entities.
May 1st, 2007
Next Posts