http://magickcanoe.com/blog/2007/04/20/variations-and-the-return-of-the-wood-frogs/ a place where nature, photography and writing meet Fri, 05 Mar 2010 11:48:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 http://magickcanoe.com/blog/2007/04/20/variations-and-the-return-of-the-wood-frogs/comment-page-1/#comment-44279 burning silo Sun, 22 Apr 2007 13:53:21 +0000 http://magickcanoe.com/blog/2007/04/20/variations-and-the-return-of-the-wood-frogs/#comment-44279 Pamela - I'll bet that was a Wood Frog. They're rather conspicuous by their numbers (and quacking) at this time of the year! - Cathy - Thanks! Yes, it's been a little busy the last couple of days and I probably will end up being sleep deprived. We're just about to begin doing some frog call surveys -- I think the weather conditions are just about right for that. We heard some very strong choruses while out hiking yesterday and I'm expecting much the same today. - Larry - I don't think you need be concerned about qualitying for the blitz - it's really more a fun thing than anything else. Its real purpose is to get people out looking at the nature a little more closely than they otherwise might. I just checked your blog to see if the butterfly shot was there. If you can post a bit larger shot of it, I could take a look and maybe offer a guess -- I'm in a different area, so the species will be different, but you never know! Pamela – I’ll bet that was a Wood Frog. They’re rather conspicuous by their numbers (and quacking) at this time of the year!
-
Cathy – Thanks! Yes, it’s been a little busy the last couple of days and I probably will end up being sleep deprived. We’re just about to begin doing some frog call surveys — I think the weather conditions are just about right for that. We heard some very strong choruses while out hiking yesterday and I’m expecting much the same today.
-
Larry – I don’t think you need be concerned about qualitying for the blitz – it’s really more a fun thing than anything else. Its real purpose is to get people out looking at the nature a little more closely than they otherwise might. I just checked your blog to see if the butterfly shot was there. If you can post a bit larger shot of it, I could take a look and maybe offer a guess — I’m in a different area, so the species will be different, but you never know!

]]> http://magickcanoe.com/blog/2007/04/20/variations-and-the-return-of-the-wood-frogs/comment-page-1/#comment-44261 Larry Sun, 22 Apr 2007 11:04:09 +0000 http://magickcanoe.com/blog/2007/04/20/variations-and-the-return-of-the-wood-frogs/#comment-44261 I don't think I would qualify for the blitz but it sounds like fun.I couldn't even identify the butterfly that i took a photo of yesterday. I don’t think I would qualify for the blitz but it sounds like fun.I couldn’t even identify the butterfly that i took a photo of yesterday.

]]> http://magickcanoe.com/blog/2007/04/20/variations-and-the-return-of-the-wood-frogs/comment-page-1/#comment-44160 Cathy Sat, 21 Apr 2007 18:59:37 +0000 http://magickcanoe.com/blog/2007/04/20/variations-and-the-return-of-the-wood-frogs/#comment-44160 Happy blitzing, Bev! This is such a wonderful, busy time and I know you'll be sharing your joy with us, though I'll bet you'll be a bit sleep deprived. (Loved the clip! I'll be heading out to a ditch near me) Happy blitzing, Bev! This is such a wonderful, busy time and I know you’ll be sharing your joy with us, though I’ll bet you’ll be a bit sleep deprived. (Loved the clip! I’ll be heading out to a ditch near me)

]]> http://magickcanoe.com/blog/2007/04/20/variations-and-the-return-of-the-wood-frogs/comment-page-1/#comment-44104 Pamela Sat, 21 Apr 2007 12:33:05 +0000 http://magickcanoe.com/blog/2007/04/20/variations-and-the-return-of-the-wood-frogs/#comment-44104 Serendipity! I saw a frog I didn't recognize at the edge of the Stoco Fen yesterday--no mask, so I assumed not a wood frog. Now I see that perhaps it was after all. Thanks, Bev! Serendipity! I saw a frog I didn’t recognize at the edge of the Stoco Fen yesterday–no mask, so I assumed not a wood frog. Now I see that perhaps it was after all. Thanks, Bev!

]]>