ASUNGREBEINNEWMEXICO 
had any knowledge of a Sungrebe ever hav- 
ing been kept in captivity, in part, it was be- 
lieved, because sucb a specialized species 
would be extremely difficult to care for or 
feed and would likely die quickly. Concern- 
ing exotic waterfowl generally, New Mexico 
is no stranger to exotic ducks, geese, and 
swans, with those popular in North Ameri- 
can collections being the ones most fre- 
quently encountered. In autumn 2008, for 
instance, seven Ringed Teal (Anas leu- 
cophrys), a South American species, were 
seen at El Paso, Texas, on 26 November Q- 
Kiseda, in litt.); this species follows the pat- 
tern of being especially common in zoos 
and waterfowl collections throughout 
North America and so is a likely candidate 
for escape. 
The exotic bird trade was considered as 
another potential source. One individual 
with considerable field experience with 
Mexican birds in Mexico (including Sun- 
grebe) wrote that he had had significant 
dealings in the exotic bird trade for many 
years but had never seen a Sungrebe adver- 
tised in that trade (T. Gallucci, in litt.). 
Finally, we considered the possibility 
that a live Sungrebe may have been import- 
ed into the United States for research and 
had managed to escape, even though the 
consensus of zoo curators and others that 
the species was unknown in captivity made 
this seem unlikely. This was borne out in 
correspondence with P. Houde (in litt.), 
who recently co-authored a paper on genet- 
ic relationships within the Gruiformes, 
with an emphasis on finfoots, based on 
DNA sequencing (Fain et al. 2007). He was 
unaware of Sungrebes in captivity any- 
where in the world, was unaware of any 
ever having been imported live into the 
United States for research, and had experi- 
enced great difficulty in obtaining his Sun- 
grebe samples, which came from two birds 
collected in Peru. 
In his summary of the family, Bertram 
(1996) states: “As far as is known, there is no 
finfoot in captivity anywhere in the world,” 
and that statement appears to hold true as of 
April 2009. That no zoo that contributes to 
ISIS records them, that the zoo literature 
does not report the keeping of them, and that 
others who conceivably may keep them re- 
port that they do not, together make a strong 
statement that a Sungrebe would be a decid- 
edly unlikely candidate for captivity. The 
species would be difficult to find, capture, 
and transport, its diet may be a challenge to 
duplicate in captivity, and its secretive, reclu- 
sive behavior would make it particularly un- 
suitable for display (Bertram 1996). 
Sungrebes as dispersers 
Bertram (1996) notes: “Finfoots are ... at 
borne ... in the air,” that they fly “with 
steady, fast wing beats,” and that they 
“clearly are capable of long aerial jour- 
neys.” Sungrebe’s ability to fly easily and 
strongly has been attested to by the few or- 
nithologists who have studied the species 
in the field. Of Sungrebes in southern Ver- 
acruz, Wetmore (1943) writes that “they 
flew rather quickly, being able to rise after 
four or five strokes of the feet in the water. 
The flight was quite fast.” Slud (1964), 
writing of Sungrebes in Costa Rica, notes 
that “the species undoubtedly flies suffi- 
ciently well for its needs. Indeed, a bird that 
I had inadvertently cornered . . . rose direct- 
ly from the water with the lightness of a 
dove to fly over the obstacle.” Wetmore 
(1965) writes from experiences in Panama 
that “they may rise a meter or two in the air 
and fly swiftly, like a small duck, for a hun- 
dred meters or more.” He also saw them 
take flight and fly with ducks. Sick (1993) 
observed the species in Brazil and writes 
that it “takes off with ease, flying close to 
the water’s surface, and has been known to 
fly into a wall at night, showing that it can 
undertake long flights, like the rallids.” 
Although it is generally assumed there is 
no regular migration by any of the three 
finfoot species, there is considerable evi- 
dence of these birds “moving around in 
search of new habitat in which to settle” 
(Bertram 1996). Specifically, they are quick 
to colonize newly created habitat within 
their normal ranges, including new reser- 
voirs and even seasonal roadside ditches. 
Hilty (1994), in fact, included Sungrebe 
among a “set of short-distance migrants” 
for the Manu River floodplain in Peru. The 
apparent absence of variation between 
populations of Sungrebes over the species’ 
large range also may imply movement and 
interchange among its populations. Sick’s 
(1993) observations indicate that some of 
this movement occurs at night, as with 
rails. 
In addition to movements within normal 
range, there is evidence of vagrancy by Sun- 
grebes to points beyond normal range or 
habitat. Examples include a specimen from 
the high paramo zone at 3600 m on Lagu- 
na Mucubaji, Venezuela, in October 1994 
(Hilty 2003) and another at 2600 m near 
Bogota, Colombia, on an unspecified date 
(Hilty and Brown 1986). The species is ac- 
cidental on the island of Trinidad (A.O.U. 
1998), at its closest some 20 km from the 
mainland, indicating oversea travel; the 
two specific records given by ffrench 
(1991) were one collected during the peri- 
od December 1862 through March 1863 
and a sighting in January 1966. 
Sungrebe may have spread northward in 
eastern Mexico in recent decades. Histori- 
cally known only as far north as southern 
Veracruz (e.g., Ridgway and Friedmann 
1941, this based on records of F. 
Sumichrast from the 1800s), it was first 
found north to central Veracruz (Warner 
and Mengel 1951, Lowery and Dalquest 
1951) and eastern San Luis Potosi (Lowery 
and Newman 1951) only in the early 
1940s, but whether those records repre- 
sented expansion or merely detection of 
previously unknown populations cannot 
be determined. Once found, however, the 
species continued to be reported from east- 
ern San Luis Potosi in subsequent years, 
e.g., December 1951 (Condor 54: 350), De- 
cember 1981 (Ameiican Birds 36: 769), and 
December 1990 (American Birds 45: 1007). 
To the north in Tamaulipas, however, evi- 
dence is stronger that the species may in- 
deed be a recent arrival. Beginning in the 
1930s and continuing through the 1970s, 
the state of Tamaulipas was visited by nu- 
merous ornithological expeditions (e.g., 
Sutton and Burleigh 1939, Sutton and Pet- 
tingill 1942, Eaton and Edwards 1948, 
Zimmerman 1957), including especially 
the popular Gomez Farias region and its 
Rio Sabinas, the river of the title of Sutton’s 
At a Bend in a Mexican River (1972), but 
with no record of Sungrebe during that pe- 
riod. In particular, the Gomez Farias area 
southwest of Ciudad Victoria and the Rio 
Corona area northeast of Ciudad Victoria 
were both the subject of avifaunal analyses 
in the 1970s (Webster 1974, Gehlbach et 
al. 1976), but again with no mention of 
Sungrebe. The National Audubon Society’s 
Christmas Bird Count (C.B.C.) was formal- 
ly extended into Mexico in the winter of 
1972-1973, and a count was established at 
Gomez Farias (23° 09’ N, 99° 13’ W) that 
year. Although not covered annually, it was 
not until 31 December 1987 that a Sun- 
grebe was reported (American Birds 42: 
1145) and recognized by the C.B.C. re- 
gional editor, Robert S. Ridgely, as a first for 
Tamaulipas and the northernmost ever for 
the species (American Birds 42: 562); the 
species was confirmed for the state when 
one was photographed on the Gomez 
Farias C.B.C. 1 January 1990 (G. W. Lasley 
in litt.) Even farther north, a C.B.C. was es- 
tablished at Rio Corona (23° 50’ N, 98° 50’ 
W) in the winter of 1978-1979, to include 
portions of the Rio Corona and the Rio Pu- 
rificacion. Conducted annually over the 
VOlUME 63 (2009) 
NUMBER 1 
7 
