title: Pains and Penalties Bill 1820

text: Under examination by the Solicitor General for England and Wales, John Singleton Copley, Majocchi testified that Caroline and Pergami ate breakfast together, had adjoining bedrooms, and had kissed each other on the lips. He said Pergami's bed was not always slept in, and he had seen Pergami visit the Queen wearing only underwear and a dressing gown. He said that they had slept in the same tent during a trip around the Mediterranean, and that Pergami had attended the Queen, alone, while she was having a bath. The following day, his astonishing testimony continued with the revelation that when Caroline and Pergami were travelling together in a carriage, Pergami kept a bottle with him so he could relieve himself without having to step down from the coach. The situation in the House became more absurd, as the Solicitor General asked Majocchi about a male exotic dancer employed by Caroline, after which Majocchi demonstrated a dance by pulling up his trousers, extending his arms, clicking his fingers, and shouting "vima dima!", while moving his body up and down in a suggestive fashion. The Times newspaper was disgusted and informed its readers that it regretted being "obliged" to report "filth of this kind". During Brougham's cross-examination, Majocchi replied "Non mi ricordo" ("I don't recall") more than two hundred times. The phrase was repeated so often, it became a national joke, and featured in cartoons and parodies. Majocchi's credibility as a witness was destroyed.


title: Pains and Penalties Bill 1820

text: The next witness was ship's mate Gaetano Paturzo, who claimed that he had seen Caroline sitting on Pergami's lap, but nothing more, while on a Mediterranean cruise. Ship's master Vincenzo Garguilo testified that Caroline and Pergami had shared a tent on deck and had kissed. Under cross-examination, he admitted that he had been paid to give evidence, but said that the payment was lower in value than the business he had lost through coming to England. Captain Thomas Briggs of HMS Leviathan, another vessel used by Caroline and Pergami during their journey, was also called as a prosecution witness. He said that the two had adjoining cabins on board and he had seen them arm-in-arm. Unlike the Italian witnesses, as an Englishman of some substance, the Lords considered Captain Briggs to be a more credible witness. After the conclusion of the cross-examination, however, Lord Ellenborough rose and asked Briggs directly, "Did the witness see any improper familiarity between the Princess and Pergami? Had you any reason to suspect any improper freedom or familiarity between them?" "No", replied Briggs.


title: Pains and Penalties Bill 1820

text: The defence opened on 3 October, with a speech from Brougham. His speech was considered the "most magnificent display of argument and oratory that has been heard in years", "one of the most powerful orations that ever proceeded from human lips", and "one of the most magnificent speeches ever made in this or any other country". According to Thomas Creevey, it astonished and shook the aristocracy. In it, Brougham threatened to reveal facts about George's own life, even if they damaged the country, if it was the only way to ensure justice for his client. He attacked the character of the prosecution witnesses, and claimed that Italian witnesses could be purchased like a commodity. He read from a letter from an Italian correspondent, "There is nothing at Naples so notorious as the free and public sale of false evidence. Their ordinary tariff is three or four ducats." He reminded the Lords that Majocchi was forgetful, that Demont was a liar, and that Cuchi was a lecherous wretch who spied on his female guests through a keyhole. He produced a letter from George to Caroline written in 1796, which became known as the "letter of licence". It appeared to forgive any transgressions on either Caroline or his part, and allow them to lead separate lives. "Our inclinations are not in our power," George had written, "nor should either of us be held accountable to the other."


title: Pains and Penalties Bill 1820

text: The defence witnesses included Lord Guilford, Lord Glenbervie, Lady Charlotte Lindsay, Lord Landaff, The Hon. Keppel Craven, Sir William Gell, Henry Holland, Colonel Alessandro Olivieri, and Carlo Vassalli, all of whom swore that there was nothing unusual about Caroline's behaviour. The King was incensed; "I never thought that I should have lived to witness so much prevarication, so much lying, and so much wilful and convenient forgetfulness", he wrote. Under cross-examination, Lord Guilford was unable to recall leaving a handsome Greek servant alone with Caroline for three-quarters of an hour, and Lady Charlotte had on occasion said "I do not recollect", but without the same disdain that had met Majocchi's constant refrain of non mi ricordo. British servants who had been in Caroline's household, including Keppel's valet John Whitcomb, also testified in Caroline's favour. Whitcomb admitted that he had slept with Demont, who was already known to have slept with the coachman Sacchi, thus further ruining Demont's tarnished reputation. A French milliner, Fanchette Martigner, further testified that Demont had told her that Caroline was innocent, and the charges against her "were nothing but calumnies invented by her enemies in order to ruin her".


title: Pains and Penalties Bill 1820

text: The trial seemed to be going Caroline's way, especially after Sacchi's testimony was refuted by the nephew of the Duchess of Torlonia, Carlo Forti. Forti claimed that the Countess Oldi (Pergami's sister) sat between Caroline and Pergami in the carriage, which was also shared with Victorine (Pergami's daughter), and so there could have been no intimacy between them. However, the cross-examination of two of the witnesses damaged Caroline's case. Lieutenant John Flynn and Joseph Hownam had both been on the same Mediterranean cruise with Caroline and Pergami. Flynn said nothing incriminating but during the course of the cross-examination, he fainted, which left a bad impression. Pressed by Gifford, Hownam admitted that Caroline and Pergami had both slept in the same tent on deck because, he claimed, Caroline was afraid of pirates, and wanted a guard in the tent with her. In an attempt to regain ground, Brougham produced two Italian witnesses, Giuseppe Giroline and Filippo Pomi, who revealed that the prosecution witnesses had been paid 40 francs each, and given free food and board. The Whigs now claimed that the trial was tainted as there was prima facie evidence of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice by paying witnesses for their testimony. Lord Liverpool countered Whig demands to abandon the bill by saying that there was other evidence, from non-Italian witnesses, that could be relied upon.


title: Pains and Penalties Bill 1820

text: The vote was held on 6 November 1820, three years to the day since Caroline's only daughter, Princess Charlotte Augusta of Wales, had died. Each peer rose and said either "content", indicating support for the bill, or "not content", to oppose it. The vote was 123–95 in favour. Though the majority was 28, it was considered a narrow victory. Eleven "content" votes were from the bishops who sat in the House of Lords, while many "not content" votes were from the richest and most powerful peers. As seats in the House of Commons were often controlled by rich and powerful landowners, it meant that the Commons were almost certain to reject the bill. Consequently, over the next few days the Lords debated dropping the divorce clause, but the Whigs had spotted a tactical opportunity. Lord Grey now spoke in favour of retaining the divorce clause, since by doing so it made the bill more likely to fail in the Commons. On 10 November, a final reading of the bill took place, and a further vote was held. The bill passed by 108–99, with a majority of 9.


title: Richardson extrapolation

text: Richardson extrapolation is a process that finds a better approximation of A ∗ {\displaystyle A^{*}} by changing the error formula from A ∗ = A 0 ( h ) + O ( h k 0 ) {\displaystyle A^{*}=A_{0}(h)+O(h^{k_{0}})} to A ∗ = A 1 ( h ) + O ( h k 1 ) . {\displaystyle A^{*}=A_{1}(h)+O(h^{k_{1}}).} Therefore, by replacing A 0 ( h ) {\displaystyle A_{0}(h)} with A 1 ( h ) {\displaystyle A_{1}(h)} the truncation error has reduced from O ( h k 0 ) {\displaystyle O(h^{k_{0}})} to O ( h k 1 ) {\displaystyle O(h^{k_{1}})} for the same step size h {\displaystyle h} . The general pattern occurs in which A i ( h ) {\displaystyle A_{i}(h)} is a more accurate estimate than A j ( h ) {\displaystyle A_{j}(h)} when i > j {\displaystyle i>j} . By this process, we have achieved a better approximation of A ∗ {\displaystyle A^{*}} by subtracting the largest term in the error which was O ( h k 0 ) {\displaystyle O(h^{k_{0}})} . This process can be repeated to remove more error terms to get even better approximations.


title: Richardson extrapolation

text: To improve our approximation from O ( h k 0 ) {\displaystyle O(h^{k_{0}})} to O ( h k 1 ) {\displaystyle O(h^{k_{1}})} by removing the first error term, we multiply equation 2 by t k 0 {\displaystyle t^{k_{0}}} and subtract equation 1 to give us ( t k 0 − 1 ) A ∗ = [ t k 0 A 0 ( h t ) − A 0 ( h ) ] + ( t k 0 a 1 ( h t ) k 1 − a 1 h k 1 ) + ( t k 0 a 2 ( h t ) k 2 − a 2 h k 2 ) + O ( h k 3 ) . {\displaystyle (t^{k_{0}}-1)A^{*}={\bigg }+{\bigg (}t^{k_{0}}a_{1}{\bigg (}{\frac {h}{t}}{\bigg )}^{k_{1}}-a_{1}h^{k_{1}}{\bigg )}+{\bigg (}t^{k_{0}}a_{2}{\bigg (}{\frac {h}{t}}{\bigg )}^{k_{2}}-a_{2}h^{k_{2}}{\bigg )}+O(h^{k_{3}}).} This multiplication and subtraction was performed because [ t k 0 A 0 ( h t ) − A 0 ( h ) ] {\textstyle {\big }} is an O ( h k 1 ) {\displaystyle O(h^{k_{1}})} approximation of ( t k 0 − 1 ) A ∗ {\displaystyle (t^{k_{0}}-1)A^{*}} . We can solve our current formula for A ∗ {\displaystyle A^{*}} to give A ∗ = [ t k 0 A 0 ( h t ) − A 0 ( h ) ] t k 0 − 1 + ( t k 0 a 1 ( h t ) k 1 − a 1 h k 1 ) t k 0 − 1 + ( t k 0 a 2 ( h t ) k 2 − a 2 h k 2 ) t k 0 − 1 + O ( h k 3 ) {\displaystyle A^{*}={\frac {{\bigg }}{t^{k_{0}}-1}}+{\frac {{\bigg (}t^{k_{0}}a_{1}{\bigg (}{\frac {h}{t}}{\bigg )}^{k_{1}}-a_{1}h^{k_{1}}{\bigg )}}{t^{k_{0}}-1}}+{\frac {{\bigg (}t^{k_{0}}a_{2}{\bigg (}{\frac {h}{t}}{\bigg )}^{k_{2}}-a_{2}h^{k_{2}}{\bigg )}}{t^{k_{0}}-1}}+O(h^{k_{3}})} which can be written as A ∗ = A 1 ( h ) + O ( h k 1 ) {\displaystyle A^{*}=A_{1}(h)+O(h^{k_{1}})} by setting A 1 ( h ) = t k 0 A 0 ( h t ) − A 0 ( h ) t k 0 − 1 . {\displaystyle A_{1}(h)={\frac {t^{k_{0}}A_{0}\left({\frac {h}{t}}\right)-A_{0}(h)}{t^{k_{0}}-1}}.}


title: Richardson extrapolation

text: Additionally, the general formula can be used to estimate k 0 {\displaystyle k_{0}} (leading order step size behavior of Truncation error) when neither its value nor A ∗ {\displaystyle A^{*}} is known a priori. Such a technique can be useful for quantifying an unknown rate of convergence. Given approximations of A ∗ {\displaystyle A^{*}} from three distinct step sizes h {\displaystyle h} , h / t {\displaystyle h/t} , and h / s {\displaystyle h/s} , the exact relationship A ∗ = t k 0 A i ( h t ) − A i ( h ) t k 0 − 1 + O ( h k 1 ) = s k 0 A i ( h s ) − A i ( h ) s k 0 − 1 + O ( h k 1 ) {\displaystyle A^{*}={\frac {t^{k_{0}}A_{i}\left({\frac {h}{t}}\right)-A_{i}(h)}{t^{k_{0}}-1}}+O(h^{k_{1}})={\frac {s^{k_{0}}A_{i}\left({\frac {h}{s}}\right)-A_{i}(h)}{s^{k_{0}}-1}}+O(h^{k_{1}})} yields an approximate relationship (please note that the notation here may cause a bit of confusion, the two O appearing in the equation above only indicates the leading order step size behavior but their explicit forms are different and hence cancelling out of the two O terms is only approximately valid) A i ( h t ) + A i ( h t ) − A i ( h ) t k 0 − 1 ≈ A i ( h s ) + A i ( h s ) − A i ( h ) s k 0 − 1 {\displaystyle A_{i}\left({\frac {h}{t}}\right)+{\frac {A_{i}\left({\frac {h}{t}}\right)-A_{i}(h)}{t^{k_{0}}-1}}\approx A_{i}\left({\frac {h}{s}}\right)+{\frac {A_{i}\left({\frac {h}{s}}\right)-A_{i}(h)}{s^{k_{0}}-1}}} which can be solved numerically to estimate k 0 {\displaystyle k_{0}} for some arbitrary valid choices of h {\displaystyle h} , s {\displaystyle s} , and t {\displaystyle t} .


title: Richardson extrapolation

text: The following pseudocode in MATLAB style demonstrates Richardson extrapolation to help solve the ODE y ′ ( t ) = − y 2 {\displaystyle y'(t)=-y^{2}} , y ( 0 ) = 1 {\displaystyle y(0)=1} with the Trapezoidal method. In this example we halve the step size h {\displaystyle h} each iteration and so in the discussion above we'd have that t = 2 {\displaystyle t=2} . The error of the Trapezoidal method can be expressed in terms of odd powers so that the error over multiple steps can be expressed in even powers; this leads us to raise t {\displaystyle t} to the second power and to take powers of 4 = 2 2 = t 2 {\displaystyle 4=2^{2}=t^{2}} in the pseudocode. We want to find the value of y ( 5 ) {\displaystyle y(5)} , which has the exact solution of 1 5 + 1 = 1 6 = 0.1666... {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{5+1}}={\frac {1}{6}}=0.1666...} since the exact solution of the ODE is y ( t ) = 1 1 + t {\displaystyle y(t)={\frac {1}{1+t}}} . This pseudocode assumes that a function called Trapezoidal(f, tStart, tEnd, h, y0) exists which attempts to compute y(tEnd) by performing the trapezoidal method on the function f, with starting point y0 and tStart and step size h.


title: Anopheles

text: Like all mosquitoes, adult Anopheles species have slender bodies with three sections: head, thorax and abdomen. The head is specialized for acquiring sensory information and for feeding. It contains the eyes and a pair of long, many-segmented antennae. The antennae are important for detecting host odours, as well as of breeding sites where females lay eggs. Female mosquitoes carrying Plasmodium parasites, the causative agents of malaria, are significantly more attracted to human breath and odours than uninfected mosquitoes. The head has an elongated, forward-projecting proboscis used for feeding, and two maxillary palps. These palps carry the receptors for carbon dioxide, a major attractant that enables the mosquito to locate its host. The thorax is specialized for locomotion. Three pairs of legs and a pair of wings are attached to the thorax. The abdomen is specialized for food digestion and egg development. This segmented body part expands considerably when a female takes a blood meal. The blood is digested over time, serving as a source of protein for the production of eggs, which gradually fill the abdomen.


title: Carol Schwartz

text: In 2002, Schwartz decided not to run officially in the Republican primary for mayor, but said she would consider running in general election if she won the write-in vote in the primary election. Schwartz attacked Williams' record as mayor, saying that his "stewardship has been marred by ethical lapses, questionable judgment and a cold lack of compassion for our poorest and most helpless citizens." With no individual's name on the ballot for mayor in the Republican primary, Republican voters could only write-in a candidate's name for mayor. Williams was forced into a write-in campaign in the Democratic primary after many of his petitions to run on the Democratic ballot were found to be invalid. Williams ended up winning not only the Democratic primary as a write-in candidate, but he also won the Republican primary as a write-in candidate, receiving 1,707 votes compared to Schwartz's 999. The District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics declared Williams the winner of the Democratic primary, but it also declared that there was no winner in the Republican primary. The Board allowed the Republican committee to choose a Republican nominee for mayor in the general election, and the committee chose Schwartz. Schwartz accepted the Republican nomination, officially entering the election for mayor for the fourth time. Schwartz received 34% of the vote in the general election while Williams received 61%.


title: Carol Schwartz

text: In 2007 and 2008, Schwartz shepherded the Accrued Sick and Safe Leave Act through the Council. The law, which was adopted in March 2008, requires District employers to give their workers paid time off to address their health needs or those of a family member. The bill faced significant opposition from the District's business community, as well as from several of Schwartz's colleagues on the Council. The law made the District the second jurisdiction in the U.S. to create a mandated sick leave requirement, following San Francisco. The D.C. law represents the first time a paid sick days requirement was adopted by a city- or state-level legislative body in the U.S.; the San Francisco law was adopted as a ballot initiative. The D.C. law also represents the first law to require employers to offer time paid time off to victims of stalking, sexual assault, or domestic violence who need time off to seek medical care, shelter, counseling, a court order, or other services related to the domestic violence. The San Francisco law does not require paid leave for this purpose.


title: Ali (graffiti artist)

text: A cynical social observer with a quick wit, ALI coined the term "Zoo York" to describe the absurdity displayed in the attitudes of New Yorkers during what he called the Sick Seventies. It was the name he gave to a subway tunnel being built underneath the Central Park Zoo at the time, which became a haunt of graffiti writers in the early 1970s. The tunnel's naming occurred one night in early 1973, after several members of The Underground (UND), ALI, FINE and CRUNCH attended a showing of National Lampoon Lemmings, a new musical-comedy review at the Village Gate in downtown Manhattan. The show (which starred future comic notables John Belushi, Chevy Chase and Christopher Guest) lampooned the Woodstock Festival that had taken place in upstate New York four years earlier, calling it "Woodchuck" and equating the entire hippie generation with lemmings bent on self-destruction. The crew of teenagers made similar comparisons between themselves and the residents of the nearby city zoo. Noting the perversities of contemporary urban psychology, ALI proclaimed New York City itself "not new, but a zoo!"


title: Ali (graffiti artist)

text: In 1981, as street hip hop and rapping mainstreamed to popular music, ALI formed a band he named J. Walter Negro and the Loose Jointz, featuring himself as frontman J. Walter Negro, "The Playin' Brown Rapper" (songwriter, vocals), Pablo Calogero (composer of the music of "Shoot The Pump", alto and baritone saxophone, flute) Arturo O'Farrill on keyboards (Fender Rhodes, Hammond Organ, Steinway grand piano), Leonard K. Seeley (guitar, vocals), Tomás Doncker (guitar, vocals), Lonnie D. Hillyer (bass guitar, vocals), H.B. Bennett (drums, vocals). Their first single, "Shoot the Pump," was released first under John Hammond's "Zoo York" imprint, and was later produced overseas on Island Records. A conglomeration of rap, hip hop, Latin funk and disco rock, the song features ALI as "Negro" rap-vocalizing about opening a fire hydrant with a monkey wrench and directing the water blast with a can to soak passing cars and pedestrians by "shooting the pump" at them. Police arrive, see him reaching for something and "shoot the punk"; they then close the hydrant and flee the scene of the crime. But crafty Negro survives thanks to a bullet-proof vest, and he heads off to "shoot the pump" again. The act opened for Talking Heads, Blondie and Kid Creole at The Peppermint Lounge and The Mudd Club in downtown Manhattan. The Loose Jointz had an occasional celebrity guest in Jean-Michel Basquiat, a friend of ALI's well before earning fame; "Shoot the Pump" co-writer Pablo Calogero went on to record music for the soundtrack of Basquiat's New York Beat Movie, Downtown 81.


title: Toronto Metropolitan University

text: The university operates three student residences with approximately 1,144 beds on campus including the Daphne Cockwell Complex, the International Living & Learning Centre, and Pitman Hall. The International Learning Centre was built in 1987 and is oldest student residence, housing approximately 256 residences. Pitman Hall was completed in 1991 and holds 565 rooms. The Daphne Cockwell Complex was completed in 2019, and holds 332 rooms. The latter building is a multi-purpose structure, with the lower levels of the Daphne Cockwell Complex holding academic facilities; whereas its residential component is housed in its upper levels. The majority of university students do not live on campus, with only 5.2 per cent of students having lived on campus during the 2017–18 academic year. However, approximately 17.9 per cent of the university's first year students lived on campus. The university operates themed-residence floors in an effort to complement the academic studies of residents; such as the "fashion floor," a themed-residential floor reserved for students of Toronto Metropolitan University's school of fashion.


title: Toronto Metropolitan University

text: Alumni of Toronto Metropolitan University have assumed notable roles in a wide range of fields and specialties. Alumni that were in prominent positions in business includes Patrick Dovigi, founder and CEO of GFL Environmental; Tony Gagliano, chairman and CEO of St. Joseph Communications; John Galt, president and CEO of Husky Injection Molding Systems; Isadore Sharp, founder and chairman of Four Seasons Hotels and Resorts; and Klaus Woerner, founder and CEO of ATS Automation Tooling Systems. A number of alumni have also found success in the arts, including photographer Edward Burtynsky. Notable actors and film professionals that have attended the university includes Nina Dobrev, Daniel Louis, Mena Massoud, Eric McCormack, Hannah Simone, Nia Vardalos, and Jacqueline MacInnes Wood. Notable alumni in the literary arts includes Louise Penny and Robert J. Sawyer. Amira Abdelrasoul, a chemical engineer, was also a doctoral student at the university. Another notable alumnus is Don Andrews, white supremacist and perennial candidate for Mayor of Toronto.


title: Erismatopterus

text: Shoaling behavior has been ascribed to Erismatopterus levatus based on a 570 mm × 375 mm (22.4 in × 14.8 in) shale slab specimen, FPDM-V8206 in the Fukui Prefectural Dinosaur Museum, Japan, which was detailed by Nobuaki Mizumoto, Shinya Miyata, and Stephen C. Pratt . The slab preserves a total of 259 fish, 257 of which are grouped in a nearly unidirectional elliptical cluster where all but 8 of them face the same direction. Based on the small size range of the fish, between 10.57–23.54 mm (0.416–0.927 in), the authors suggest the shoal was of juvenile fish, as the type specimen for the species is larger at 65 mm (2.6 in) long. The specimen was compared to two other mass mortality slabs from the Green River Formation to determine if the inferred clustering was truly behavior related. The other two slabs were of 35 Gosiutichthys and a mixed group of 276 Knightia accompanied by two Diplomystus, and four Mioplosus. Neither of the other slabs showed the distinct directionality or positioning between fish that is seen with the FPDM-V8206 specimen. Given the positioning of the E. levatus fry Mizumoto et al inferred the behavior was likely a form of group predator avoidance. This is supported by the presence in the same formation of fossil catfish, gar, and Diplomystus all of which would have been possible predators of the young fish. Grande posited that E. levatus was possibly an insectivore, planktivore, combination of the two, or possibly an omnivore combing one or both of the mentioned diets with herbivory on algaes or plants.


title: Naan Ungal Rasigan

text: Subramani, a villager, is an obsessive fan of Ranjani, an actress based in Madras. When the village elder speaks ill of Ranjani, Subramani murders him. Subramani moves to Madras, and after persistently stalking Ranjani without her knowledge, he eventually becomes her driver. Ranjani eventually becomes aware of Subramani's lust for her and rebuffs him. Later when Subramani enters Ranjani's room, he finds her slain corpse. He is startled, and while trying to hide her corpse, he accidentally kills a visiting press photographer, and intentionally murders Ranjani's manager when he sees the corpse. When Ranjani's younger sister Vidya and her daughter arrive, Subramani hides. Afterwards he hides Ranjani's corpse in the trunk of a car but Vidya finds it. She later tells her husband, a police inspector, that Subramani is behind the murders of Ranjani, her manager and the photographer. Subramani holds the couple's daughter hostage, but is outsmarted by the couple. He fights the inspector but is defeated, and dies near Ranjani's corpse.


title: Domestic Abuse Restraining Order

text: In Wisconsin there are similar processes for obtaining a domestic violence or harassment restraining order. The first step is ordinarily for the woman — the Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence generally refers to petitioners as female as most are women — to file an initial petition with the court. It is free of charge to file a petition for a domestic abuse restraining order. The harassment restraining order sometimes requires a fee but this is waived if the abuse also qualifies as domestic abuse, which it often does. The matter is considered a civil, not a criminal, case and the petitioner has no automatic right to an attorney, although she can retain an attorney if she can afford one. The woman often begins the process under extreme stress and overwhelmed with emotion. She must provide a detailed written statement of the facts supporting the granting of the order. She may request that a temporary restraining order be granted for a period of up to 14 days. The temporary restraining order may be granted ex parte without the abuser having the opportunity to appear in court. Unlike in some states, in Wisconsin an ex parte order can be granted on the basis of past abuse, with no further evidence of the likelihood of future abuse being needed.


title: Domestic Abuse Restraining Order

text: The temporary restraining order does not go into effect until it is served to the person being restrained. Serving the restraining order is the responsibility of the petitioner. Service can be carried out by the Sheriff's Department of the county where the harasser lives or works, or by any adult who is not a party named in the case. Judges are assigned to restraining order hearings on a rotating basis, with each judge handling restraining order hearings for one week every few months. At the full hearing, petitioners are seated on one side of the courtroom, and respondents on the other side. The hearing usually lasts about 15–30 minutes. At the hearing, both parties will have an opportunity to testify and present evidence, and the judge will make a decision. The permanent restraining order, if granted, may be in effect for up to four years, and the judge must, if granting it, grant it for as long as the petitioner requests up to four years. The order may also be granted, or extended, up to ten years if there is a substantial risk that the respondent may commit homicide or sexual assault against the petitioner. Respondents are supposed to be held by the bailiff for 15 minutes after the hearing ends to allow petitioners to leave safely, but this rule is not always followed.


title: Domestic Abuse Restraining Order

text: Wisconsin considered requiring GPS monitoring for all persons subject to a harassment or domestic abuse restraining order. In fiscal years 2014 and 2015, a pilot program was proposed to provide funds for testing such a program in some counties before it was to be implemented statewide. The governor proposed a budget of up to $2 million a year for the program. Once implemented, the program would have made Wisconsin the only state in the country to order GPS monitoring for those who are under, but who have not violated, a restraining order. The program has not yet been implemented by the Wisconsin Department of Justice (DOJ), however. The DOJ claims that current law does not permit judges to order GPS tracking for those who have not violated a restraining order. The governor's office pledged to tweak the language in a future budget so the program can go ahead. For offenders who violate a restraining order, as opposed to merely being subject to such an order, GPS monitoring is authorized by law.


title: Domestic Abuse Restraining Order

text: Federal restrictions on firearms may also apply. The NCIC entry will include a "Brady indicator" indicating whether the restrained person is prohibited from owning firearms under federal law, with a "Y" indicating yes (the restrictions do apply), "N" for no, and "U" for unknown. Generally the Brady indicator will be set to "Y" only if certain relationships exist between the parties, such as a sexual/romantic relationship or a parent/child relationship. If the restraining order does not specify the relationship, an attempt is made to determine the relationship from other available data before setting it to "U". The federal Brady indicator restrictions, which are automatic if, and only if, certain conditions apply are distinct from possible state restrictions on HRO or DARO respondents possessing firearms. For an HRO, a state restriction on the respondent possessing firearms will depend on whether the judge, at his or her discretion, feels the respondent is a risk to use a firearm to harm others, but it is not automatic.


title: Domestic Abuse Restraining Order

text: The petitioner will sometimes have a choice as to whether to file a domestic abuse or harassment restraining order. The differences between the two orders have grown less over the years. In the past the penalties were less for violating a harassment restraining order, and a full no contact order could not be issued in a harassment restraining order hearing. A petitioner whose request for a temporary restraining order was denied was formerly entitled to a later injunction hearing only for domestic abuse restraining orders. If the respondent and petitioner shared a residence, the respondent could, in the past, not be ordered to avoid that residence under a harassment restraining order. These differences have been significantly reduced. Harassment and domestic abuse restraining orders now have the same penalties for violation, and a full no contact order can now be made in either case. The respondent can now be ordered to avoid the petitioner's residence in either case. A full hearing will now be granted in either case even if the temporary order is denied provided that, in the case of a harassment restraining order, the harassment also meets the definition of domestic abuse. The significant difference between the two types of orders that remains is the fact that the domestic abuse order carries an automatic firearms ban, while the harassment order does not. Sometimes petitioners who are eligible for both will opt for the harassment order because they do not want to force the respondents to give up their firearms. This can carry significant risks for petitioners, as guns are the most common cause of domestic abuse homicides in Wisconsin. Between 2000 and 2010, there were 213 domestic abuse murders in Wisconsin by guns, more than the 194 murders by knives, other weapons, or other means combined. As such, a petitioner stipulating to a harassment restraining order rather than a domestic abuse order must be questioned to the judge as to whether she entered into the stipulation voluntarily and understands the differences between the two types of orders. The petitioner must be fully informed of the consequences of opting for a harassment restraining order.


title: Domestic Abuse Restraining Order

text: Threat management experts are often suspicious of restraining orders, believing they may escalate or enrage stalkers. In his 1997 book The Gift Of Fear, well-known American security specialist Gavin de Becker characterized restraining orders as "homework assignments police give to women to prove they're really committed to getting away from their pursuers" and said they "clearly serve police and prosecutors" but "they do not always serve victims". De Becker also observed that restraining orders are most effective when the emotional involvement is lowest, for example when used following a brief, unsatisfactory, dating relationship as opposed to with an ex-spouse. In the case of stalking, de Becker advised that restraining orders are most effective if the woman rejects once, and then obtains the restraining order immediately following any further unwanted contact. If she continues to allow contact for an extended period after an initial firm rejection, any eventual restraining order may be less effective.


title: Vieta's formulas

text: Let a 2 , a 1 {\displaystyle {a_{2}},{a_{1}}} be coefficients of the quadratic and a 0 {\displaystyle a_{0}} be the constant term. Similarly, let r 1 , r 2 {\displaystyle {r_{1}},{r_{2}}} be the roots of the quadratic: a 2 x 2 + a 1 x + a 0 = a 2 ( x − r 1 ) ( x − r 2 ) {\displaystyle {a_{2}x^{2}}+{a_{1}x}+a_{0}={a_{2}}{(x-r_{1})(x-r_{2})}} Expand the right side using distributive property: a 2 x 2 + a 1 x + a 0 = a 2 ( x 2 − r 1 x − r 2 x + r 1 r 2 ) {\displaystyle {a_{2}x^{2}}+{a_{1}x}+a_{0}={a_{2}}{({x^{2}}-{r_{1}x}-{r_{2}x}+{r_{1}}{r_{2}})}} Collect like terms: a 2 x 2 + a 1 x + a 0 = a 2 ( x 2 − ( r 1 + r 2 ) x + r 1 r 2 ) {\displaystyle {a_{2}x^{2}}+{a_{1}x}+a_{0}={a_{2}}{({x^{2}}-{({r_{1}}+{r_{2}}){x}}+{r_{1}}{r_{2}})}} Apply distributive property again: a 2 x 2 + a 1 x + a 0 = a 2 x 2 − a 2 ( r 1 + r 2 ) x + a 2 ( r 1 r 2 ) {\displaystyle {a_{2}x^{2}}+{a_{1}x}+a_{0}={{a_{2}}{x^{2}}-{{a_{2}}({r_{1}}+{r_{2}}){x}}+{a_{2}}{({r_{1}}{r_{2}})}}} The inductive hypothesis has now been proven true for n = 2 {\displaystyle n=2} .


title: Vieta's formulas

text: Assuming the inductive hypothesis holds true for all n ⩾ 2 {\displaystyle n\geqslant 2} , it must be true for all n + 1 {\displaystyle n+1} . P ( x ) = a n + 1 x n + 1 + a n x n + ⋯ + a 1 x + a 0 {\displaystyle {P(x)}={a_{n+1}}{x^{n+1}}+{{a_{n}}{x^{n}}}+{\cdots }+{{a_{1}}{x}}+{{a}_{0}}} By the factor theorem, ( x − r n + 1 ) {\displaystyle {(x-r_{n+1})}} can be factored out of P ( x ) {\displaystyle P(x)} leaving a 0 remainder. Note that the roots of the polynomial in the square brackets are r 1 , r 2 , ⋯ , r n {\displaystyle r_{1},r_{2},\cdots ,r_{n}} : P ( x ) = ( x − r n + 1 ) [ a n + 1 x n + 1 + a n x n + ⋯ + a 1 x + a 0 x − r n + 1 ] {\displaystyle {P(x)}={(x-r_{n+1})}{}} Factor out a n + 1 {\displaystyle a_{n+1}} , the leading coefficient P ( x ) {\displaystyle P(x)} , from the polynomial in the square brackets: P ( x ) = ( a n + 1 ) ( x − r n + 1 ) [ x n + 1 + a n x n ( a n + 1 ) + ⋯ + a 1 ( a n + 1 ) x + a 0 ( a n + 1 ) x − r n + 1 ] {\displaystyle {P(x)}={(a_{n+{1}})}{(x-r_{n+1})}{}} For simplicity sake, allow the coefficients and constant of polynomial be denoted as ζ {\displaystyle \zeta } : P ( x ) = ( a n + 1 ) ( x − r n + 1 ) [ x n + ζ n − 1 x n − 1 + ⋯ + ζ 0 ] {\displaystyle P(x)={(a_{n+1})}{(x-r_{n+1})}{}} Using the inductive hypothesis, the polynomial in the square brackets can be rewritten as: P ( x ) = ( a n + 1 ) ( x − r n + 1 ) [ x n − ( r 1 + r 2 + ⋯ + r n ) x n − 1 + ⋯ + ( − 1 ) n ( r 1 r 2 ⋯ r n ) ] {\displaystyle P(x)={(a_{n+1})}{(x-r_{n+1})}{}} Using distributive property: P ( x ) = ( a n + 1 ) ( x [ x n − ( r 1 + r 2 + ⋯ + r n ) x n − 1 + ⋯ + ( − 1 ) n ( r 1 r 2 ⋯ r n ) ] − r n + 1 [ x n − ( r 1 + r 2 + ⋯ + r n ) x n − 1 + ⋯ + ( − 1 ) n ( r 1 r 2 ⋯ r n ) ] ) {\displaystyle P(x)={(a_{n+1})}{({x}{}{-r_{n+1}}{})}} After expanding and collecting like terms: P ( x ) = a n + 1 x n + 1 − a n + 1 ( r 1 + r 2 + ⋯ + r n + r n + 1 ) x n + ⋯ + ( − 1 ) n + 1 ( r 1 r 2 ⋯ r n r n + 1 ) {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}{P(x)}={{a_{n+1}}{x^{n+1}}}-{a_{n+1}}{({r_{1}}+{r_{2}}+{\cdots }+{r_{n}}+{r_{n+1}}){x^{n}}}+{\cdots }+{{(-1)^{n+1}}{({r_{1}}{r_{2}}{\cdots }{r_{n}}{r_{n+1}})}}\\\end{aligned}}} The inductive hypothesis holds true for n + 1 {\displaystyle n+1} , therefore it must be true ∀ n ∈ N {\displaystyle \forall n\in \mathbb {N} }


title: Ivan Mackerle

text: With former colleague Michal Brumlik he began investigating allegedly haunted castles throughout Czechoslovakia. For his expeditions, he purchased a German amphibious jeep (the Volkswagen 166 Schwimmwagen) dating from World War II and refitted it to suit his work. He used this vehicle for his explorations in Transylvania, in search of Count Dracula's castle. At 27, he made special efforts to get permission from the government of Czechoslovakia, at the time behind the Iron Curtain, to go Scotland to investigate the Loch Ness Monster. In his brief visit, he met another Loch Ness investigator, Robert H. Rines, and was impressed by his use of underwater photography and ultrasound. In the 1980s, he developed a reputation in Czechoslovakia for his lectures and audiovisual performances; of particular note was his Beautiful Mysteries of Our Planet. Sale of his popular book the Cesty za příšerami a dobrodružstvím ("Quests for Monsters and Adventure"), in addition to his lectures and columns in newspapers and journals, helped him to raise funds.


title: Calliostoma echinatum

text: (Original description by W.H. Dall) The size of the shell varies between 5 mm and 10 mm. The small, white shell has an acute-conical shape, in general resembling Calliostoma sapidum, but less stout and solid and with a wholly different sculpture. The six whorls are somewhat appressed toward the apex. The nucleus is smooth, semi-transparent, inflated, and shining, and the remainder of the shell is opaque white with the following sculpture. On the upper whorls, four revolving ribs with smaller inconspicuous ones between them, crossed by faint plications (more evident on the smaller whorls). These produce nodosities which, on the four principal ribs, and especially on the third one, counting from the suture toward the base, rise to acutely pointed projections separated by an incurved scallop of about twice the width of the projections. Toward the aperture, the ribs and nodosities become more equal in size. The base of the shell is flattened, impervious, and sculptured with some fifteen close set flattened revolving ribs crossed by impressed radiating lines of growth. The aperture is nearly rectangular. The columella is straight, stout, and not projecting, without a callus. The margin is thin, and a little crenulated by the sculpture.


title: Civic engagement in Central and Wan Chai harbourfront development

text: The Harbourfront Enhancement Committee ("HEC") was established in May 2004, which aims at safeguarding public enjoyment of the harbour through public participation guided by principles of sustainable development. The HEC was considered an innovative institution for a number of reasons. Firstly, it was no longer led by a government official, with Professor Chack-fan Lee, a senior engineering scholar from the University of Hong Kong being the chairperson. In addition, the composition of HEC entails government officials, the private sector, and civil society organisations, with organisations being invited to directly nominate their representatives to the Committee. Both the SPH and CE@H had appointed their representatives, while other corporate members are major professional groups and environmental groups. In essence, most of the important stakeholders of harbour protection have been included. Further, all meetings would proceed in an open manner with the minutes available to the public on the internet.


text: First, there is a strong civil society. The civil society was led by professional and expertise who provided solid and knowledge based discourse to counter government proposed policy. They offered an alternative policy that could have less reclamation. The civic engagement was indeed a direct result of societal mobilization and civil society activism played a strong role in shaping engagement process. For instance, the illegitimate government policies due to the judicial review forced the government to engage the public. Also, SPH organised the "Blue Ribbon Movement" in 2004 which attracted more than 10,000 citizens to participate. This showed the government that citizens were determined to protect the harbour. The use of cultural symbols and collective identity impressed the public to participate in the harbour protection movement and convert the issue into majoritarian politics. The concept of civic engagement was introduced by the CE@H to the government. Later on, the model of civic engagement CE@H adopted became the blueprint for the government future civic engagement process.


title: Richard S. Ross

text: Ross became associated with Helen Taussig, a renowned pediatric cardiologist, who along with the surgeon Alfred Blalock and laboratory technician Vivien Thomas perfected the "blue baby" operation that established the field of cardiac surgery. Along with Taussig, he cared for adults with congenital heart disease who were coming from all across the world because of her renown. He also joined her in studying pulmonary hypertension in the young patents who had undergone the "blue baby" operation. Beginning his research in 1960, he developed and introduced an X-ray movie technique — coronary cineangiography — for diagnosing and studying methods to treat coronary artery and vascular heart disease. This technique has resulted in making it possible for cardiologists to obtain precise information on the structure of the heart arteries in living people. He became a staunch advocate of preventive medicine in forestalling heart disease. He urged physicians to counsel their patients in the three risk factors associated with heart disease: hypertension, cigarette smoking, and high cholesterol levels.


title: Snowy owl

text: The snowy owl was one of the many bird species originally described by Carl Linnaeus in his landmark 1758 10th edition of Systema Naturae, where it was given the binomial name Strix scandiaca. The genus name Bubo is Latin for "horned owl" and scandiacus is Neo-Latin for "of Scandinavia". The former generic name Nyctea is derived from Greek meaning "night". Linnaeus originally described the different plumages of this owl as separate species, with the male specimens of snowy owls being considered Strix scandiaca and the likely females considered as Strix nyctea. Until recently, the snowy owl was regarded as the sole member of a distinct genus, as Nyctea scandiaca, but mtDNA cytochrome b sequence data shows that it is very closely related to the horned owls in the genus Bubo and the species is now thusly often considered inclusive with that genus. However, some authorities debate this classification, still preferring Nyctea. Often authorities are motivated to retain the separate genus on the grounds of osteological distinctions.


title: Snowy owl

text: Genetic testing revealed a reasonably distinct genetic makeup for snowy owls, being about 8% genetically distinct from other Bubo owls, perhaps giving credence to those who count the species as separate under Nyctea. However, a fairly recent shared origin in evolutionary history has been illustrated through a combination of genetic study and fossil review and there is little, other than osteology of the tarsometatarsus, to outright distinguish the snowy owl from other modern species like the Eurasian eagle-owl (Bubo bubo). Genetic testing has indicated that the snowy owl may have diverged from related species at around 4 million years ago. Furthermore, it has determined that the living species genetically most closely related to the snowy owl is the great horned owl (Bubo virginianus). On a broader scale, owls in general have, through genetic materials, been determined to be a highly distinct group, with outwardly similar groups such as Caprimulgiformes revealed to not be at all closely related. Within the owl order, typical owls are highly divergent from barn-owls. Furthermore, the Bubo genus likely clustered at some point during the evolutionary process with other largish owls, such as Strix, Pulsatrix and Ciccaba, based on broad similarities in their voice, reproductive behaviors (i.e. hooting postures) and a similar number and structure of chromosomes and autosomes. A number, but not all, of extant typical owls seem to have evolved from an ancient shared common ancestor with the Bubo owls. In addition to the question of relationship of the traditional Bubo owls to the snowy owls, ongoing ambiguity of the relationship of other similarly large-sized owls has been persistent. These have sometimes either been included in the genus or within separate genera, i.e. the Ketupu or fish owls and the Scotopelia or fishing owls. Despite the adaptive distinctions, the grouping of these large owls (i.e. Bubo, snowy, fish and perhaps fishing owls) appears to be borne out via research of karyotypes.


title: Snowy owl

text: The fossil history of snowy owls is fairly well documented despite some early confusion on how to distinguish the skeletal structure of the snowy owls from eagle-owls. It was determined that the snowy owl once was distributed much more widely and far farther to the south during the Quaternary glaciation when much of the Northern Hemisphere was in the midst of an ice age. Fossil records shows that snowy owls once could be found in Austria, Azerbaijan, Czechoslovakia, England, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Sardinia and Spain as well as in the Americas in Cape Prince of Wales, Little Kiska Island, St. Lawrence Island, and in Illinois. In the Late Pleistocene the range expanded southward even more so to Bulgaria (80,000–16,000 years, Kozarnika Cave, W Bulgaria). and much of the Italian Peninsula. Pleistocene era fossils from France, i.e. B. s. gallica, showed that the snowy owls of the time were somewhat bulkier (though still notably smaller than contemporary eagle-owls of the times, which were larger than the eagle-owls of today) and osteologically more sexually dimorphic in size than the modern form (9.9% dimorphism in favor of females in the fossils against 4.8% in the same features today). There are no subspecific or other geographical variations reported in the modern snowy owls, with individuals of vastly different origins breeding together readily due to their nomadic habits. Despite apparent variations in body size, environmental conditions are the likely variant rather than genetics. No evidence could be found of phylogeographic variation in snowy owls upon testing. Furthermore, the snowy owl appears to have a similar level of genetic diversity as other European owls.


title: Snowy owl

text: The snowy owl is mostly white. They are purer white than predatory mammals like polar bears (Ursus maritimus) and Arctic fox (Vulpes lagopus). Often when seen in the field, these owls can resemble a pale rock or a lump of snow on the ground. It usually appears to lack ear tufts but very short (and probably vestigial) tufts can be erected in some situations, perhaps most frequently by the female when she is sitting on the nest. The ear tufts measure about 20 to 25 mm (0.79 to 0.98 in) and consist of about 10 small feathers. The snowy owl has bright yellow eyes. The head is relatively small and, even for the relatively simply adapted hearing mechanism of a Bubo owl, the facial disc is shallow and the ear is uncomplicated. 1 male had ear slits of merely 21 mm × 14 mm (0.83 in × 0.55 in) on left and 21 mm × 14.5 mm (0.83 in × 0.57 in) on the right. Females are almost invariably more duskily patterned than like-age males. In mature males, the upper parts are plain white with usually a few dark spots on the miniature ear-tufts, about the head and the tips of some primaries and secondaries whilst the underside is often pure white. Despite their reputation for being purely white, only 3 out of 129 Russian museum specimens of adult males showed an almost complete absence of darker spots. The adult female is usually considerably more spotted and often slightly barred with dark brown on the crown and the underparts. Her flight and tail feathers are faintly barred brown while the underparts are white in base color with brown spotting and barring on the flanks and upper breast. In confusingly plumaged snowy owls, the sex can be determined by the shape of wing markings, which manifest as bars more so in females and spots in males. However, the very darkest males and the lightest females are nearly indistinguishable by plumage. On rare occasion, a female can appear almost pure white, as has been recorded in both the field and in captivity. There is some evidence that some of the species grow paler with age after maturity. One study's conclusions were that males were usually but not always lighter and that correctly aging is extremely difficult, sometimes individuals either get lighter, darker or do not change their appearance with age. On the other hand, with close study, it is possible to visually identify even individual snowy owls using the pattern of markings on the wing, which can be somewhat unique in each individual. After a fresh moult, some adult females that previously appeared relatively pale newly evidenced dark, heavy markings. On the contrary, some banded individuals over at least four years were observed to have been almost entirely unchanged in the extent of their markings. In another very pale owl, the barn owl (Tyto alba), the sexual dimorphism of spotting appears to be driven by genetics while, in snowy owls, environment may be the dictating factor instead.


title: Snowy owl

text: The chicks are initially grayish white but quickly transition to dark gray-brown in the mesoptile plumage. This type of plumage camouflages effectively against the variously colored lichens that dot the tundra ground. This is gradually replaced by plumage showing dark barring on white. At the point of fledging, the plumage often becomes irregularly mottled or blotched with dark and is mostly solidly dark gray-brown above with white eyebrows and other areas of the face white. Recently fledged young can already be sexed to a semi-reliable degree by the dark marking patterns about their wings. The juvenile plumage resembles that of adult females but averages slightly darker on average. By their second moult fewer or more broken bars are usually evidenced on the wing. The extent of white and composition of wing patterns become more dimorphic by sex with each juvenile moult, culminating in the 4th or 5th pre-basic moult, wherein the owls are hard to distinguish from mature adults. Moults usually occur from July and September, non-breeding birds moulting later and more extensively, and are never extensive enough to render the owls flightless. Evidence indicates that snowy owls may attain adult plumage at 3 to 4 years of age, but fragmentary information suggests that some males are not fully mature and/or as fully white in plumage that they can attain until the 9th or 10th year. Generally speaking, moults of snowy owls occur more quickly than do those of Eurasian eagle-owls.


title: Snowy owl

text: The snowy owl is a very large owl. They are the largest avian predator of the High Arctic and one of the largest owls in the world. Snowy owls are about the sixth or seventh heaviest living owl on average, around the fifth longest and perhaps the third longest winged. This species is the heaviest and longest winged owl (as well as the second longest) in North America, the second heaviest and longest winged owl in Europe (and third longest) but is outsized in bulk by about 3 to 4 other species in Asia. Despite being sometimes described as of similar size, the snowy owl is somewhat larger in all aspects of average size than the great horned owl while the similarly specialized taiga-dwelling great grey owl (Strix nebulosa), is longer in total length and of similar dimensions in standard measurements, but is shorter winged and much less heavy than the snowy owl. In Eurasia, the Eurasian eagle-owl is larger in all standards of measurements than the snowy owl not to mention two additional species each from Africa and Asia that are slightly to considerably heavier on average than the snowy owl. Like most birds of prey, the snowy owl shows reverse sexual dimorphism relative to most non-raptorial birds in that females are larger than males. Sexual dimorphism that favors the female may have some correlation with being able to more effectively withstand food shortages such as during brooding as well as the rigors associated with incubating and brooding. Females are sometimes described as "giant" whereas males appear relatively "neat and compact". However, the sexual dimorphism is relatively less pronounced compared to some other Bubo species.


title: Snowy owl

text: Male snowy owls have been known to measure from 52.5 to 64 cm (20.7 to 25.2 in) in total length, with an average from four large samples of 58.7 cm (23.1 in) and a maximum length, perhaps in need of verification, of reportedly 70.7 cm (27.8 in). In wingspan, males may range from 116 to 165.6 cm (3 ft 10 in to 5 ft 5 in), with a mean of 146.6 cm (4 ft 10 in). In females, total length has been known to range from 54 to 71 cm (21 to 28 in), with a mean of 63.7 cm (25.1 in) and an unverified maximum length of perhaps 76.7 cm (30.2 in) (if so they would have the second longest maximum length of any living owl, after only the great grey owl). Female wingspans have reportedly measured from 146 to 183 cm (4 ft 9 in to 6 ft 0 in), with a mean of 159 cm (5 ft 3 in). Despite one study claiming that snowy owl had the highest wing loading (i.e. grams per square cm of wing area) of any of 15 well-known owl species, more extensive sampling demonstratively illustrated that the wing loading of snowy owls is notably lower than Eurasian eagle- and great horned owls. The conspicuously long-winged profile of a flying snowy owl compared to these related species may cause some to compare their flight profile to a bulkier version of an enormous Buteo or a large falcon. Body mass in males can average from 1,465 to 1,808.3 g (3.230 to 3.987 lb), with a median of 1,658.2 g (3.656 lb) and a full weight range of 1,300 to 2,500 g (2.9 to 5.5 lb) from six sources. Body mass in females can average from 1,706.7 to 2,426 g (3.763 to 5.348 lb), with a median of 2,101.8 g (4.634 lb) and a full weight range of 1,330 to 2,951 g (2.932 to 6.506 lb). Larger than the aforementioned body mass studies, a massive pooled dataset at six wintering sites in North America showed that 995 males averaged at 1,636 g (3.607 lb) while 1,189 females were found to average 2,109 g (4.650 lb). Reported weights of down to 710 g (1.57 lb) for males and of 780 to 1,185 g (1.720 to 2.612 lb) for females are probably in reference to owls in a state of starvation. Such emaciated individuals are known to highly impaired and starvation deaths are probably not infrequent in winters with poor food accesses.


title: Snowy owl

text: Standard measurements have been even more widely reported than length and wingspan. The wing chord of males can vary from 351 to 439 mm (13.8 to 17.3 in), averaging from 380.1 to 412 mm (14.96 to 16.22 in) with a median of 402.8 mm (15.86 in). The wing chord of females can vary from 380 to 477.3 mm (14.96 to 18.79 in), averaging from 416.2 to 445 mm (16.39 to 17.52 in) with a median of 435.5 mm (17.15 in). The tail length of males can vary on average from 209.6 to 235.4 mm (8.25 to 9.27 in), with a full range of 188 to 261 mm (7.4 to 10.3 in) and a median of 227 mm (8.9 in). The tail length of females can average from 228.5 to 254.4 mm (9.00 to 10.02 in), with a full range of 205 to 288 mm (8.1 to 11.3 in) and a median of 244.4 mm (9.62 in). Data indicates that slightly longer wing chord and tail lengths were reported on average in Russian data than in American research, however the weights were not significantly different in the two regions. Less widely taken measurements include the culmen, which can measure from 24.6 to 29 mm (0.97 to 1.14 in) with a median average of 26.3 mm (1.04 in) in males and 27.9 mm (1.10 in) in females, and the total bill length which is from 25 to 42 mm (0.98 to 1.65 in), with an average in both sexes of 35.6 mm (1.40 in). Tarsal length in males averages about 63.6 mm (2.50 in), with a range of 53 to 72 mm (2.1 to 2.8 in), and averages about 66 mm (2.6 in), with a range of 54 to 75 mm (2.1 to 3.0 in), in females.


title: Snowy owl

text: The snowy owl is certainly one of the most unmistakable owls (or perhaps even animals) in the world. No other species attains the signature white stippled sparsely with black-brown color of these birds, a coloring which renders their bright yellow eyes all the more detectable, nor possesses their obvious extremely long feathering. The only other owl to breed in the High Arctic is the short-eared owl (Asio flammeus). Both species inhabit open country, overlap in range and are often seen by day, but the short-eared is much smaller and more tan or straw-colored in coloration, with streaked brown on chest. Even the palest short-eared owls conspicuously differ and are darker than the snowy owl; additionally the short-eared most often hunts in extended flights. More similar owls such as the Eurasian eagle-owl and the great horned owl attain a fairly pale, sometimes white-washed look in their northernmost races. These species do not normally breed nearly as far north as snowy owls but overlaps certainly do occur when snowy owls when the latter owl sometimes comes south in winter. However, even the most pale great horned and Eurasian eagle-owls are still considerably more heavily marked with darker base colors than snowy owls (the whitest eagle-owls are paler than the whitest great horned owls), possess much larger and more conspicuous ear tufts and lack the bicolored appearance of the darkest snowy owls. While the great horned owl has yellow eyes like the snowy owl, the Eurasian eagle-owl tends to have bright orange eyes. The open terrain habitats normally used by wintering snowy owls are also distinct from the typical edge and rocky habitats usually favored by the great horned and Eurasian eagle-owls, respectively.


title: Snowy owl

text: The snowy owl differ in their calls from other Bubo owls, with a much more barking quality to their version of a hooting song. Perhaps as many as 15 different calls by mature snowy owls have been documented. The main vocalization is a monotonous sequence that normally contains 2–6 (but occasionally more), rough notes similar to the rhythm of a barking dog: krooh krooh krooh krooh... The call may end with an emphatic aaoow, which is somewhat reminiscent of the deep alarm call of a great black-backed gull (Larus marinus). They will call mainly from a perch but also sometimes do so in flight. The krooh call of the male snowy owl may perform multiple functions such as competitive exclusion of other males and advertising to females. The calls of this species may carry exceptionally far in the thin air of Arctic, certainly over more than 3 km (1.9 mi), and maybe even to as much 10 to 11 km (6.2 to 6.8 mi) away. The female has a similar call to male but can be higher-pitched and/or more guttural as well as single notes which are often disyllabic, khuso. Female snowy owls have also been known to utter chirps and high screaming notes, similar to those of the nestlings. Both sexes may at times give a series of clucking, squeals, grunts, hisses and cackles, perhaps such as in circumstances when they are excited. The alarm call is a loud, grating, hoarse keeea. Another raspier bark is recorded, sometimes called a "watchman's rattle" call, and may be transcribed as rick, rick, rick, ha, how, quack, quock or kre, kre, kre, kre, kre. A female attacking to protect her nest was recorded to let out a crowed ca-ca-oh call, whilst other owls attacking to protect the nest did a loud version of the typical call while circling before dropping down. They may also clap their beak in response to threats or annoyances. While called clapping, it is believed this sound may actually be a clicking of the tongue, not the beak. Though largely only vocal in the breeding season, leading to some erroneous older accounts describing the snowy owl as completely silent, some vocalizations have been recorded in winter in the northern United States. Initially, the young of the snowy owl have a high pitched and soft begging call which develops into a strong, wheezy scream at around 2 weeks. At the point when the young owls leave the nest around 3 weeks, the shrill squeals they emit may allow the mothers to locate them.


title: Snowy owl

text: In North America, the breeding range has been known in modern times to include the Aleutians (i.e. Buldir and Attu) and much of northern Alaska, most frequently from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to Utqiaġvik, and more sporadically down along the coastal-western parts such as through Nome, Hooper Bay, the Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge, and rarely even south to the Shumagin Islands. The snowy owl may breed extensively in northern Canada, largely making its home in the Arctic Archipelago. Their Canadian breeding range can include broadly Ellesmere Island up to Cape Sheridan, north coastal Labrador, the northern Hudson Bay, perhaps all of Nunavut (especially the Kivalliq Region), northeastern Manitoba, most of northern mainland and insular Northwest Territories (including the delta of the Mackenzie River) and northern Yukon Territory (where breeding is mostly confined to Herschel Island). Since breeding and distribution is very small, local and inconsistent in northern Europe, northern Canada and northern Alaska represent the core part of the breeding range for snowy owls along with several parts of northern and northeastern/coastal Russia.


title: Snowy owl

text: During the winter months, many snowy owls leave the dark Arctic to migrate to regions further south. Southern limits of the regular winter range are difficult to delineate given the inconsistency of appearances south of the Arctic. Furthermore, not infrequently, many snowy owls will overwinter somewhere in the Arctic through the winter, though seldom appear to do so in the same sites where they have bred. Due in no small part to the difficulty and hazardousness of observation for biologists during these harsh times, there is very limited data on overwintering snowy owls in the tundra, including how many occur, where they winter and what their ecology is at this season. The regular wintering range has at times been thought to include Iceland, Ireland and Scotland and across northern Eurasia such as southern Scandinavia, the Baltics, central Russia, southwestern Siberia, Sakhalin southern Kamchatka and, rarely, north China and sometimes the Altai Republic. In North America, they occasionally regularly winter in the Aleutian island chain and do so broadly and with a fair amount of consistency in much of southern Canada, from British Columbia to Labrador. Recent research has indicated that snowy owls regularly winter in several of the northern seas during wintertime, following the leads of sea ice as perching sites and presumably hunting mostly seabirds in polynyas. In February 1886, a snowy owl landed on the rigging of the Nova Scotia steamship Ulunda on the edge of the Grand Banks of Newfoundland, over 800 km (31,000,000 in) from the nearest land. It was captured and later preserved at the Nova Scotia Museum. Surprisingly, some studies have determined that after a high lemming year in North America, a higher percentage of snowy owls were using marine environments rather than inland ones.


title: Snowy owl

text: Large winter irruptions at temperate latitudes are thought to be due to good breeding conditions resulting in more juvenile migrants. These result in irruptions occurring further south than the typical snowy owl range in some years. They have been reported, as well as in all northerly states in the contiguous states, as far south as the Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, nearly all the Gulf Coast of the United States, Colorado, Nevada, Texas, Utah, California and even Hawaii. In January 2009, a snowy owl appeared in Spring Hill, Tennessee, the first reported sighting in the state since 1987. Also notable is the mass southern migration in the winter of 2011/2012, when thousands of snowy owls were spotted in various locations across the United States. This was then followed by an even larger mass southern migration in 2013/2014 with the first snowy owls seen in Florida for decades. The nature of irruptions is less well-documented in Eurasia, in part due to the paucity of this owl in the European side, but accidental occurrence, presumably during irruptions, has been described in the Mediterranean area, France, Crimea, the Caspian part of Iran, Kazakhstan, northern Pakistan, northwestern India, Korea and Japan. Stragglers may too turn up as far south as the Azores and Bermuda.


title: Snowy owl

text: In no fewer than 24 winters between 1882 and 1988, large numbers have occurred in Canada and the United States. These were irruption years. Record breeding irruptive years were recorded in the winters of 2011–2012 and 2014–2015. In the 1940s, it was calculated that the mean gape in time between large irruptions was 3.9 years. Southbound movements as such are much more conspicuous after peak vole years, once thought to be separated by periods of around 3–7 years. However, more extensive research has weakened the argument that irruptions are entirely food-based and the data indicates that irruptive movements are far from predictable. This is because a statewide survey in Alaska found no statewide synchrony in lemming numbers. Therefore, rather than decline of lemmings, it is the successful productivity of several pairs that plays the role, resulting in a large number of young owls that then irrupt. However, the snowy owls cannot breed in high numbers unless lemmings are widely available on the tundra. This connection of irruptions to high years of productivity was confirmed in a study by Robillard et al. . About 90% of the snowy owls seen in irruptive years from 1991 to 2016 that were ageable were identified as juveniles.


title: Snowy owl

text: The snowy owl is primarily a hunter of mammals. Most especially, they often live off of the northerly lemmings. Sometimes other similar rodents like voles and mice can also be found frequently in the snowy owl's foods. It is R-selected, meaning that it is an opportunistic breeder capable of taking advantage of increases in prey numbers and diversity, despite its apparent specialization. Birds are commonly taken as well, and may regularly include passerines, northern seabirds, ptarmigan and ducks, among others. Sometimes infrequent consumption of other prey such as beetles, crustaceans and occasionally amphibians and fish is reported (of these only fish are known to have been identified to prey species). It also takes carrion outside the breeding season. All told, more than 200 prey species have been known to be taken by snowy owls around the world. Generally, like other large owls (including even bigger owls like the Eurasian eagle-owl), prey selection tends toward quite small prey, usually small mammals, but they can alternate freely with prey that is much larger than typical given the opportunity or even bigger than themselves, including relatively large mammals and several types of large bird of almost any age. One study estimated for the biomes of Alaska and Canada, mean prey sizes for snowy owls were 49.1 g (1.73 oz), in western North America, the mean prey size was 506 g (1.116 lb) and in eastern North America was 59.7 g (2.11 oz), while the mean prey size in northern Fennoscandia was similar (at 55.4 g (1.95 oz)). The mean number of prey species for snowy owls per biome ranged from 12 to 28. The opportunistic nature of snowy owls has long been known during their primarily winter observed feeding habits (leading to their unpopular nature and frequent persecution well into the 20th century).


title: Snowy owl

text: The snowy owl's biology is closely tied to the availability of lemmings. These herbivorous rodents are largish members of the vole clan that are the predominant mammal of the tundra ecosystem alongside the reindeer and probably make up the majority of the mammalian biomass of the ecosystem. Lemmings are key architects of the soil, microtopography and plant life of the entire tundra. In the American lower Arctic areas, brown lemming of the Lemmus genus are predominant and tend to be found in lower, wetter habitats (feeding by preference on grasses sedges and mosses) while collared lemmings of the Dicrostonyx genus were in more arid, often higher elevation habitats with heathland and ate by preference willow leaves and forbs. The southerly brown lemmings behave differently than more northern collared lemming type, increasing almost limitlessly within preferred habitat whereas the collared type tends to spread to suboptimal habitats and therefore does not appear reach the high regional densities of the brown. Authorities now generally agree that there appears to be no synchrony between the brown and collared lemmings and the feeding access of snowy owls is irregular as a result, but snowy owls can likely alternate between the two lemming types as one or the other increases as they nomadically use different parts of the Arctic. It is possible that the rare coincidental mutual peak of both lemming types within a year results in the erratic high productivity that results in irruptions. Within individual Arctic lemming species, historically, populations can vary in rough 4- to 5-year trends. As a result, in areas such as Banks Island, the breeding rate of snowy owls can vary within a decade by about tenfold. Weights of lemmings taken can range from 30 to 95 g (1.1 to 3.4 oz) on Baffin Island, while those taken in Utqiaġvik averaged 70.3 and 77.8 g (2.48 and 2.74 oz) in female and male lemming, respectively. It was estimated based on captive daily food intake that a snowy owl may consume about 326 g (11.5 oz) of lemmings a day, though other estimates using voles show a daily need for about 145 to 150 g (5.1 to 5.3 oz). On Southampton Island, 97% of the diet was lemmings. A very similar number of lemmings (nearly 100%) were found over 25 years of study in Utqiaġvik, amongst 42,177 cumulative prey items. Of 76 lemmings that could be identified to sex at a cache, male lemmings were found in the cache twice as often as female lemmings. While initial findings indicated on Wrangel Island that female lemmings outnumbered males in prey remains, to the contrary osteology indicated that, like Utqiaġvik, males were more often taken. However, the slightly larger, slower-moving females may be preferred when available.


title: Snowy owl

text: In some areas, snowy owls can breed where lemmings are uncommon to essentially absent. Even in Utqiaġvik, where the diet is quite homogenously based in lemmings, the hatching of passerines, shorebirds, seabirds and waterfowl can provide a key resource when lemmings are not found regularly and may be the only means by which the young can survive at such lean times. In the Nome, Alaska area, the locally nesting snowy owls reportedly switched from lemmings to ptarmigans when the latter's chicks hatched. A somewhat varying diet was also reported in Prince of Wales Island, Nunavut where 78.3% of the biomass was lemmings, with 17.8% from waterfowl, 3.3% from weasel and about 1% from other birds. In Fennoscandia, among 2,700 prey items only a third were Norway lemmings (Lemmus lemmus) and a majority were voles at 50.6%, probably largely the tundra vole (Microtus oeconomus). A more detailed glance at Finnish Lapland showed that amongst 2,062 prey items, 32.5% of the foods were Norway lemmings (though in some years the balance could range up to 58.1%), 28% were grey red-backed voles (Myodes rufocanus) and 12.6% were tundra voles, with birds constituting a very small amount of the prey balance (1.1%). In northern Sweden, a more homogenous diet was found with the Norway lemming constituting about 90% of the foods. In the Yamal Peninsula, 40% of the diet was collared lemmings, 34% were Siberian brown lemming (Lemmus sibiricus), 13% were Microtus voles and ptarmigan and ducks both constituting 8% and with other birds making up much of the remaining balance. In some parts of the tundra, snowy owls may opportunistically prey upon Arctic ground squirrels (Spermophilus parryii). In the Hooper Bay area (much farther south than they usually nest), various rodents, in highland areas, and waterfowl, in marshland, were taken while breeding. When historically breeding on Fetlar in Shetland, the main prey for snowy owls was European rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus), Eurasian oystercatcher (Haematopus ostralegus), parasitic jaegers (Stercorarius parasiticus) and Eurasian whimbrel (Numenius phaeopus), in roughly that order, followed by other bird species with most (rabbits and secondary birds) prey taken as adults but for the oystercatchers and jaegers which were taken largely as fully grown but only recently fledged juveniles. 22–26% of oystercatcher and jaeger young in the island were estimated to be taken by snowy owls.


title: Snowy owl

text: Bird predation by nesting snowy owls is highly opportunistic. Willow (Lagopus lagopus) and rock ptarmigan (Lagopus muta) of any age are often fairly regular in the diet of breeding snowy owls but they cannot be said to particularly specialize on these. Evidence was found in the Yamal Peninsula that the snowy owls became the primary predator of willow ptarmigan and that the predation was so frequent, it may have been the cause of the change of their habitat usage to willow thickets by the local ptarmigan. The reliance on ptarmigan has caused some conservation trickle-down concern for the owls because ptarmigan are hunted in large numbers, with the hunters of Norway permitted to cull up to 30% of the regional population. In North America, avian prey on the breeding ground regularly varies from small passerines like snow buntings (Plectrophenax nivalis) and Lapland longspurs (Calcarius lapponicus) to large waterfowl like king (Somateria spectabilis) and common eider (Somateria mollissima) and usually the goslings but also occasionally adults of geese such as brants (Branta bernicla), snow geese (Anser caerulescens) and cackling geese (Branta hutchinsii). Drake eiders of often similar size to the owls themselves are not infrequently the largest prey amongst remains around the nest mound. One nest had the bodies of all eiders that attempting to nest in the vicinity around it. The threatened and declining Steller's eider (Polysticta stelleri) when nesting in the Utqiaġvik area would appear to avoid the vicinity of snowy owl nests when selecting their own nesting sites due to the predation risk. Intermediately sized seabirds are often focused on in lieu of available lemmings. Foods were studied intensively in Iceland. Among 257 prey items found with a total prey mass of 73.6 kg (162 lb), birds made up 95% of the diet. The leading prey were adult rock ptarmigan, at 29.6% by number and 55.4% by biomass and adult European golden plover (Pluvialis apricaria), at 10.5% by number and 7.2% biomass. The rest of the balance was largely other shorebirds, which were taken slightly more often as chicks than adults. Pink-footed geese (Anser fabalis) were taken in equal number as goslings and adults, with respectively estimated average weights at these ages of 800 and 2,470 g (1.76 and 5.45 lb). On the isle of Agattu, the diet consisted entirely of birds, as there are no mammals found there. The much favored food in Agattu was the ancient murrelet (Synthliboramphus antiquus), at 68.4% of the biomass and 46% by number, while the secondary prey were followed numerically by smaller Leach's storm-petrels (Oceanodroma leucorhoa) (20.8%) and Lapland longspurs (10%) and in biomass by smallish ducks, the green-winged teal (Anas carolinensis) and harlequin duck (Histrionicus histrionicus) (13.4% biomass collectively). In the Murman Coast of Russia, also in the absence of lemmings, seabirds formed the largest part of the diet.


title: Snowy owl

text: On the wintering grounds, mammals often predominate in the snowy owl's food inland doing so less in coastal areas. Overall wintering snowy owls eat more diverse foods they do whilst breeding, furthermore coastal wintering snowy owls had more diverse diets than inland ones. As in summer, moderately sized water birds such as teal, northern pintail (Anas acuta) and numerous alcids and the like are often focused on when hunting birds. The diet in 62 pellets, amongst at least 75 prey items, from coastal Oregon showed the main foods as black rat (Rattus rattus) (at an estimated 40%), red phalarope (Phalaropus fulicarius) (31%) and bufflehead (Bucephala albeola) (19%). Witnessed attacks were mostly upon buffleheads in Oregon. In coastal southwestern British Columbia, the diet among 139 prey items was 100% avian. The predominant prey were water birds, mostly snatched directly from surface of the water and largely weighing 400 to 800 g (0.88 to 1.76 lb), i.e. buffleheads (at 24% by number and 17.4% by biomass of foods) and horned grebes (Podiceps auritus) (at 34.9% by number and 24.6% by biomass), followed by variously other water birds, often the slightly larger species of glaucous-winged gull (Larus glaucescens) and the American wigeon (Mareca americana). A different study of this area also showed the predominance of ducks and other water birds to wintering snowy owls here, although Townsend's vole (Microtus townsendii ) (10.65%) and snowshoe hare (Lepus americanus) (5.7%) were also notably in a sample of 122 prey items.


title: Snowy owl

text: On the isle of St. Kilda, 24 pellets were found for non-breeding snowy owls that stayed through the early summer. Of 46 prey items, the St Kilda field mouse (Apodemus sylvaticus hirtensis) was predominant by number at 69.6% but constituted 16.8% of biomass while adult Atlantic puffin (Fratercula arctica) constituted 63.5% of the prey biomass and 26% by number (rest of the balance being juvenile puffins and great skuas (Stercorarius skua)). The main subspecies of wood mouse was similarly dominant in the diet within County Mayo, Ireland and were presumably snatched at night due to their strict nocturnality. In Knockando, the winter diet was led by European rabbits (40.1%), red grouse (Lagopus lagopus scotica) (26.4%) and adult mountain hare (Lepus timidus) (20.9%) (in 156 pellets); in Ben Macdui, the diet was led by rock ptarmigan (72.3%), field voles (Microtus agrestis) and juvenile mountain hare (8.5%) (33 pellets); in Cabrach, the diet was led by red grouse (40%), mountain hare (20%) and European rabbit (15%) (16 pellets). Among 110 prey items found for snowy owls found wintering during irruption in southern Finland, all but 1 prey item were field voles (the only other prey being a single long-tailed duck (Clangula hyemalis)). Far to the east, wintering owls in the Irkutsky District were found to subsist mostly on narrow-headed voles (Microtus gregalis). In a wintering population in Kurgaldga Nature Reserve of Kazakhstan, the main foods were grey red-backed voles at 47.4%, winter white dwarf hamster (Phodopus sungorus) at 18.4%, steppe pika (Ochotona pusilla) at 7.9%, muskrat at 7.9%, Eurasian skylark (Alauda arvensis) at 7.9%, grey partridge at 5.3%, and both steppe polecat (Mustela eversmanii) and yellowhammer (Emberiza citrinella) at 2.6%. On the Kuril Islands, wintering snowy owls' main foods were reported as tundra voles, brown rats, ermines, and whimbrel, in roughly that order.


title: Snowy owl

text: While most of the prey species are relatively small, snowy owls can prey on a fairly diverse size of birds and mammals. Data from the Logan Airport in over 6,000 pellets shows that meadow vole and brown rats predominated the diet in the area, supplanted by assorted birds both small and large. American black ducks were primarily taken among bird species with other birds taken here including relatively large and diverse species up to the size of Canada geese (Branta canadensis) and great blue herons (Ardea herodias) along with brants, American herring gulls (Larus argentatus), double-crested cormorants (Phalacrocorax auritus). Additionally, other birds as large as western capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) (of both sexes), greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus), yellow-billed loons (Gavia adamsii) and cygnets of Bewick's swans (Cygnus columbianus bewickii) can be taken by snowy owl. Among large mammalian prey species, snowy owls prey on both young and adults of large leporids such as Arctic hare (Lepus arcticus), Alaskan hare (Lepus othus), mountain hare and white-tailed jackrabbits (Lepus townsendii). At the other end of the scale, the snowy owl has been known to take birds down to the size of 19.5 g (0.69 oz) dark-eyed juncos (Junco hyemalis) and mammals down the size of 8.1 g (0.29 oz) common shrews (Sorex araneus). Fish are rarely taken anywhere but the snowy owl has been known to prey upon Arctic char (Salvelinus alpinus) and lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush).


title: Snowy owl

text: The snowy owl is in many ways a very unique owl and differs from other species of owl in its ecological niche. Only one other owl, the short-eared owl, is known to breed in the High Arctic. However, the snowy owl shares its primary prey, the brown and collared lemmings, with a number of other avian predators. In sometimes differing parts of the Arctic, competing predators for lemmings are, in addition to short-eared owls, pomarine jaegers (Stercorarius pomarinus), long-tailed jaegers (Stercorarius longicaudus), rough-legged buzzards (Buteo lagopus), hen harriers (Circus cyaenus), northern harriers (Circus hudsonius) and generally less specialized gyrfalcons (Falco rusticollis), peregrine falcons (Falco peregrinus), glaucous gulls (Larus hypoboreus) and common ravens (Corvus corax). Certain carnivorous mammals, especially the Arctic fox and, in this region, the ermine, are also specialized to hunt lemmings. Most of the lemming predators are intolerant of the competition given the scattered nature of lemming populations and will displace and/or kill one another given the chance. However, given the need to conserve energy in the extreme environment, the predators may react passively to one another. When unusually breeding south in the Subarctic such as western Alaska, Scandinavia and central Russia, the number of predators with which the snowy owls are obligated to share prey and compete with may be too numerous to name. The taking of the young and eggs of snowy owls has been committed by a large number of predators: hawks and eagles, the northern jaegers, peregrine and gyrfalcons, glaucous gulls, common ravens, Arctic wolves (Canis lupus arctos), polar bears, brown bears (Ursus arctos), wolverines (Gulo gulo) and perhaps especially the Arctic fox. Adult snowy owls on the breeding grounds are far less vulnerable and can be justifiably qualified as an apex predator. Instances of the killing of adult snowy owls on the breeding grounds have been witnessed to be committed by a pair of pomarine jaegers on an incubating adult female snowy owl (possibly merely a competitive attack as she was left uneaten) and by an Arctic fox that killed an adult male snowy owl.


title: Snowy owl

text: When it goes south to winter outside of the Arctic, the snowy owl has the potential to interact with a number of additional predators. By necessity, it shares its wintertime diverse prey with a number of formidable predators. These are known to include their cousins, the great horned owl and the Eurasian eagle-owl. They are relieved of heavy competition from the related species by differing temporal activity, i.e. being more likely to actively hunt in the daytime, and by habitat, using rather more open (quite often nearly treeless) habitats than them. During a study of wintering snowy owls in Saskatchewan, the authors indicated that the snowy owls may avoid areas inhabited and defended by great horned owls. Although they usually occurred here outside of an 800 m (2,600 ft) radius of central great horned owl ranges, they did not avoid the 1,600 m (5,200 ft) radius and different habitat usage may be a dictating factor. Given their mildly slighter size, it is unlikely that great horned owls (unlike the larger eagle-owl) would regularly dominate snowy owls in interactions and either species may give way to others depending on the size and disposition of the owls involved. Little study has been undertaken into the trophic competition of snowy owls with other predators during winter and, due to their scarcity, few predators are likely to expel much energy on competitive interactions with them, although many other predators will engage in anti-predator mobbing of snowy owls. Largely in winter, snowy owls have been the victim of a number of larger avian predators, though attacks are likely to be singular and rare. Instances of predation on snowy owls are known to have been committed several times in winter only by Eurasian eagle-owls. Additionally, golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) have been known to prey on snowy owls as well as all northern sea eagles: the bald (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), white-tailed (Haliaeetus albicilla) and Steller's sea eagles (Haliaeetus pelagicus). Snowy owls are also sometimes killed by birds that are mobbing them. In one instance, a peregrine falcon killed a snowy owl in a stoop after the owl had killed a fledgling falcon. Anecdotal reports indicate predation by gyrfalcons (on snowy owls of unknown age and condition) but it was possibly also an act of mobbing. In another, a huge throng of Arctic terns (Sterna paradisaea) relentlessly swarmed and attacked a snowy owl until it met its demise.


title: Snowy owl

text: Almost certainly more often than being a victim of other predators, snowy owls are known to dominate, kill and feed on a large diversity of other predators. Snowy owls, much like other Bubo owls, will opportunistically kill other birds of prey and predators. Although they will readily plunder the nests of other raptorial birds given the opportunity, most predations are on full-grown raptorial birds during winter due to the scarcity of raptor nests in the open tundra. In addition, most competing predators of the Arctic, except the very large mammals, are probably vulnerable to a hungry snowy owl. In data from the Logan Airport alone over different winters, the snowy owls were observed to have preyed upon an impressive diversity of other raptorial birds: rough-legged buzzards, American kestrels (Falco sparverius), peregrine falcons, barn owls, other snowy owls, barred owls (Strix varia), northern saw-whet owls (Aegolius acadicus) and short-eared owls. While owls are likely encountered during corresponding hunting times, it is likely that the swift falcons are usually ambushed at night (much as other Bubo owls will do). In both the tundra and the wintering ground, there are several accounts of predation by snowy owls on short-eared owls. In addition, snowy owls have been known to prey on northern harriers, northern goshawks (Accipiter gentilis) and gyrfalcons. Snowy owls are also capable of taking large mammalian carnivores. Both juvenile and adult Arctic foxes have been known to fall prey to snowy owls, while predation by snowy owls on red foxes was reported in the Irkutsky District of Russia. A wintering snowy owl in Saskatchewan was observed to have preyed on an adult red fox (Vulpes vulpes) weighing around 6 kg (13 lb) which may be the largest known prey known for snowy owls. Other relatively large carnivoran prey include adult house cat (felis catus), American mink (Mustela vision), and striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis). Also, several members of the weasel family, both small and relatively large, are known to be opportunistically hunted by snowy owls. As a result of its potential predator status, the snowy owl is frequently mobbed at all times of the year by other predatory birds, including fierce dive-bombing by several of the northern falcons on the wintering grounds, including even by the relatively tiny but fierce and very agile merlin (Falco columbarius). The much bulkier snowy owls cannot match the speed and flight ability of a falcon and may be almost relentlessly tormented by some birds such as peregrines.


title: Snowy owl

text: Most individuals arrive at the nest site by April or May with a few overwintering arctic exceptions. Males advertises potential nest sites to his mate by scratching the ground and spreading his wings over it. The nest is usually a shallow depression on a windswept eminence in the open tundra. There seems to be a variety of qualifiers for appropriate nest sites. The nest site is typically snow-free and dry relative to the surrounding environment, usually with a good view of the surrounding landscape. The nest may be made of ridges, elevated mounds, high polygons, hummocks, hills, human-made mounds and occasionally rocky outcrops. If covered with vegetation, taller plants that may obstruct view are plucked away sometimes. The nest sites are often long-established and naturally created by the freeze-thaw process of the tundra. Gravel bars may be used as well. The female may take the most active role in the nest's condition of any owl species. No owl build their own nests but female snowy owls take about three days constructing a scrape, digging with her claws and rotating until a fairly circular bowl is formed. She will still not construct or add foreign materials to the nest (despite some circumstantial evidence of moss and grass from outside the nest mound being found). In two separate cases in Utqiaġvik, two separate females dug out a second scrape to the side and below the main nests and appeared to have called all chicks to the more secluded nest to ride out severe weather until the skies cleared. The Utqiaġvik nest scrapes averaged 47.7 cm × 44 cm (18.8 in × 17.3 in) in 91 with a mean depth of 9.8 cm (3.9 in) while the scrapes were smaller in Hooper Bay, reportedly 25 to 33 cm (9.8 to 13.0 in) diameter and 4 to 9 cm (1.6 to 3.5 in) in depth. Occasionally, in the lower tundra, snowy owls may too use old nests of rough-legged buzzards as well as abandoned eagle nests. Unlike other northerly breeding raptorial birds, the snowy owl is not known to nest on cliffs and the like, so do not enter into direct competition with eagles, falcons, ravens or other Bubo owls when nesting to the relative south. The area of nest mound often has a relatively rich plant life which attract the lemmings, which may tunnel right under and around the owl's nest. Geese, ducks and shorebirds of several species known to gain incidental protection by nesting close to snowy owls. Conversely, the snowy owls will sometimes kill and eat both young and adults of these birds, which implies a trade-off in the benefits.


title: Snowy owl

text: Egg-laying normally begins during early May to the first 10 days of June. Late thaws are harmful to them since they allow too little time for the full breeding process, with particularly importance given to good food supply in May for adults, even more so apparently than food supply in July when young are being fed. Late nests are possible cases of inexperienced pairs, low food supplies, bigamy or even replacement clutches. The clutch is extremely variable in size averaging around 7–9, with up to 15 or 16 eggs recorded in extreme cases. The clutch size very large relative to related species. Mean clutch sizes were 7.5 in a sample of 24 in Hooper Bay (range of 5–11); 6.7 in a sample of seven from Utqiaġvik (4–9); 9 in a sample of a sample of 5 in Baffin Island; 9.8 on Victoria Island; 8.4 (in a sample of 14) on Elsemere Island; 7.4 on Wrangel Island and 7.74 in Finnish Lapland. The average clutch size was 9.8 in a good year in Victoria Island while in a good year in Utqiaġvik the mean was 6.5. The clutch is laid directly to the ground and are pure, glossy white. An average egg is around 56.4 mm × 44.7 mm (2.22 in × 1.76 in) with a range of heights from 50 to 70.2 mm (1.97 to 2.76 in) and diameter of 41 to 49.3 mm (1.61 to 1.94 in). Egg weights are around 47.5 to 68 g (1.68 to 2.40 oz), the median or average being 53 and 60.3 g (1.87 and 2.13 oz) in different datasets. The average egg size is relatively small, about 20% smaller than Eurasian eagle-owl eggs and 8% smaller than great horned owl eggs. Laying intervals are normally 2 days (41–50 hours mostly). The laying intervals can range up to 3–5 days in inclement weather. The laying of a clutch of 11 eggs can take 20–30 days, while a more typical nest of around 8 takes about up to 16 days. The interval between the 8th and 9th eggs can be up to about 4 days. Incubation begins with the first egg and is by female alone, while she is fed by her mate.


title: Snowy owl

text: Food is brought to the nest by males and surplus food is stored nearby. Females in breeding season often develop a very extensive brood patch which in this species is a fairly enormous, high vascularized featherless area of pink belly skin. Incubation lasts 31.8–33 days (unconfirmed and possibly dubious reports from as little as 27 to as much as 38-day incubations). The female alone broods the young, often while simultaneously incubating still unhatched eggs. Sometimes older chicks incidentally brood their younger siblings and females may shelter the young under her wings during inclement weather. When first feeding the young, the female may dismantle prey to feed the young only the softer body parts then gradually ramping up the size of proportions until they eat a whole prey item. Aggressive encounters with parent snowy owls are said to be "genuinely dangerous" and one resource claimed the snowy owl to be the bird species with the most formidable nest defense displays towards humans. The usual response to sighted humans near the nest is mild but continued approach begins to increasingly irritate the parents. At times, humans are forcefully dive-bombed upon, while other potential threats are dealt with in a "forward-threat" where the male walks towards the intruders, engaging in impressive feather-raising and fanning out of half-spread wings until they run forward and slash with both their feet and bill. Fairly serious injuries have been sustained in the worst of snowy owl defensive attacks, including cranial trauma, requiring researchers to make the long trek back to medical care, although human fatalities are not known. Snowy owl parents have been seen to aggressively attacked glaucous gulls, arctic fox and dogs in breeding ground in Utqiaġvik. Non-predatory animals like caribou in Utqiaġvik and sheep (Ovis aries) in Fetlar are attacked as well, possibly to avoid potential trampling of the eggs or the young. Males are said to do the majority of nest defense but the female will also often become involved as well. Analysis showed in Lapland, Sweden, that females in nest defense against people engaged in vocal displays (warning and mewing calls) and that males did not engage in mewing but did engage in most hooting calls, many warning calls and almost all physical attacks. In other instances, distraction displays are engaged in against predators, with a "broken-wing act" including high, thin squeals interspersed with weird squeaks, often taking flight only to quickly fall from the sky and imitate a struggle. One author recorded a male to draw him about 2 km (1.2 mi) from the nest before ceasing. 77% of 45 distraction displays in Lapland, Sweden were by females.


title: Snowy owl

text: Hatching intervals are generally from 1 to 3 days, quite often within 37–45 hours apart. New chicks are semi-altricial (i.e. typically helpless and blind), initially being white and rather wet but dry by the end of the first day. The weight of 7 hatchlings was 35 to 55 g (1.2 to 1.9 oz), with an average of 46 g (1.6 oz) while 3 were 44.7 g (1.58 oz). Due to the pronounced asynchrony of the egg-laying and hatching, the size difference between siblings can be enormous and in some cases when the smallest chick weighs only 20 to 50 g (0.71 to 1.76 oz), the biggest chick already has attained a weight of around 350 to 380 g (12 to 13 oz). When the oldest chick is about 3 weeks, the female will start to hunt as well as the male and both may directly feed the young although in some cases they may not need hunt very much if lemmings are particularly numerous. Caches of lemmings around a nest may include more than 80 lemmings that can support the family. Unlike many owls, the chicks of snowy owls are not known to behave aggressively toward one another or to engage in siblicide, perhaps in part due to the need for energy conservance. Some cases of cannibalism of chicks by the family group were thought to be cases where chicks die from other causes. When they are about 2 weeks, the chicks may begin to walk around the nest site which they leave by 18–28 days, although they are still unable to fly and may find safety in nooks and crannies of vegetation and rocks usually only about 1 to 2 m (3.3 to 6.6 ft) from the nest mound, as well as via their parents defense. Leaving the nest is thought to likely be an anti-predator strategy. The male snowy owl may drop fresh prey deliveries directly on the ground near the wandering young. After about three weeks of age, the young may wander fairly widely, rarely to 1 km (0.62 mi), but usually stay within 500 m (1,600 ft) of the nest mound. Threat postures by young in reaction to researchers were first noticeable at about 20–25 days of age and common at about 28 days and the chicks can be impressively quick and agile-footed. The first fledgling occurs at around 35–50 days, and by 50–60 days the young can fly well and hunt on their own. The total care period is for 2–3.5 months, increasing in length with increased size of the brood. Although independence was once thought to be sought by late August or early September but is more likely by late September to October when migration season for the species begins. The nesting cycle is similar in length to the Arctic short-eared owls and faster than Eurasian eagle-owls by up to 2 months.