It could have been the nest of American Crows and they left the debris on the ground. I checked the Birds of North America online site (I can't link to it because it's a subscription site, but I hope it's OK to quote from it) - Great site, well worth joining. If you participated in the GBBC you get a free trial subscription. Apparently crows sometimes pull living twigs off trees to make their nests, and they line them with various materials including bark strips. From Birds of North America online site: "Nest Construction Both sexes build nest; no information on relative share of each sex. Although both sexes bring in nest-lining material, female does more of detailed fine-tuning of nest lining than does male (CC). Builds nest mostly between 07:00 and 11:00 (S. S. Dickey in Gross 1946); early in morning, as early as 8 min after sunrise (Reaume 1987b); likely throughout day (CC), as in Northwestern Crow (Verbeek and Butler 1999). New nest distinguishable from old one by presence of fresh, dead twigs on ground below; these twigs fall accidentally and are never retrieved (Reimann 1942). In Encino, CA, and Stillwater, OK, pulls and breaks off living twigs from trees as well as picking up twigs from ground (CC). Gathers materials from different directions around nest tree, not from nest tree itself (Reaume 1987b). Helpers in Florida (Kilham 1989), Cape Cod, MA (Chamberlain-Auger et al. 1990), and in Oklahoma (CC) participated in bringing material to the nest. With 2 adults and several helpers bringing sticks, the congestion around the nest resulted in birds having to wait for a chance to get to the nest; helpers usually left their sticks for the female to work in (Kilham 1989). Period between completion of nest and egg-laying in Florida 6Â16 d (Kilham 1989), but Emlen (1942) reported building right up to egg-laying in California. Time to complete first nests in California 13 d (range 11Â17, n = 6 nests [Emlen 1942]; 10Â14 d [CC]); 5 and 9 d in 2 nests with helpers in Florida (Kilham 1989), 10Â14 d in Oklahoma (CC). Second nests take less time to build: 9 d (Emlen 1942); 6Â8 d (Graber et al. 1987); 5Â10 d in California and Oklahoma (CC). Structure And Composition Matter Bottom and sides consist mainly of dead branches, 0.6Â3.5 cm diameter (Reimann 1942) and usually Claire

Rachel- I think you are right- I Googled some nests/Bullock Orioles. I didn't think that size bird could get into such a small pouch! Also- there must be 100 in the tree, but I only see a Bullock every few days to a week or so- I guess they must be nests from years prior. The tree is so dense that I can't see anything until fall. I don't see any babies...probably because a pair of Red Tailed Hawks have a nest each year in the same tree...I am sure the Bullock chicks become a food source for the hawks....The hawks feed their chicks tirelessly- they both hunt- while one goes out to hunt the other feeds what he/she has just caught- birds, snakes, mice- Thanks for letting me know about the Orioles nesting!

I'm still trying to get an answer as to why "non-native" birds are "trash", while humans get a free pass. Would anyone like to answer? As far as feeders go, the most signifant reason people have feeders in their yards, birders or non-birders, is for their own entertainment. I could care less how many different types of birds people "get to see" in their yards! Animals do not exist on this earth for the purpose of human entertainment. They are here for their own reasons. As far as rehabbing indivisual birds goes, I have rehabbed several birds who flew into my window and were knocked unconcsious. I do it to help out an animal that needs medical care, which I would do for any aniaml or person I saw injured, not because I want to preserve the existance of some taxonomical abstraction. Sorry but your words sound very callous and cold-hearted. You may not be specifically saying you want Starlings torutured, but your attitude towards them is what has spurned the latest craze I see in the conservation movement, which is this focus on the blaming and killing of other animals in the name of saving "native species" rather than habitiat preservation and drastically reduced consumption of resources. I don't believe it's the place of humans, the most non-native and destructive of them all, to determine which animals live and which ones die, while we do everything to ensure the life of every human is as long and pain-free as possible. It's just plain hypocritical and unethical.

Yes I can and Good point, exactly why I said it's ok to disagree and that PMrs and Bluebirders go to great lengths to protect their birds. The difference is you KNOW what bird laid the cowbird egg. Lets put it this way, you know the cowbird egg, if hatched is going to kill the host birds babies so 1 cowbird lives and 3-4-5 other babies die. That cowbird has laid many eggs in many nests we dont see ....we know this, a whole nest is not lost, that cow bird WILL have offspring. 1 egg not being allowed to hatch is much different than removing a whole nest, especially when you dont even know what bird built it. My biggest problem with this is.... a PMr should understand the challenges birds face from pesticides and loss of habitat to upity people that tear down nests because they dont want a little poop on their porch. You know as well as I do the proper thing to do would have been to ID the bird and move the nest to an appropriate place if nessary. You also know that people who know nothing about birds come in and read these posts to learn, what kind of message is Casi's post sending? I got no argument with her protecting her PMs, just with the fact she did not spend one second to try to let both nests flourish.