LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 15.0

Help for MOU-NET Archives


MOU-NET Archives

MOU-NET Archives


View:

Next Message | Previous Message
Next in Topic | Previous in Topic
Next by Same Author | Previous by Same Author
Chronologically | Most Recent First
Proportional Font | Monospaced Font

Options:

Join or Leave MOU-NET
Reply | Post New Message
Search Archives


Subject:Re: My Request Reply
From:Bill Penning <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:Bill Penning <[log in to unmask]>
Date:Thu, 3 Nov 2011 18:52:06 -0500
Content-Type:text/plain

I don't usually jump into these things but this time I feel compelled to. I
would offer the following for your consideration in no particular order:

1) I believe that what constitutes disturbance is somewhat arbitrary. If a
bird looks at you is it disturbed? If it flies to the next power pole is it
disturbed? I'm not sure what disturbance is when its not nesting season.
When it comes right down to it only the bird "knows" when its been
disturbed.

2) Ethics are a personal thing. We have guidelines and I fully support them
but some things are in a gray area. I think baiting owls is one of them. In
this thread we have had assertions that disturbing owls causes an energetic
drain that could result in death AND the argument that feeding owls is
wrong. If the energetics argument is true wouldn't baiting be a good thing?
Is it ok for banders to use bait but not photographers? If so why? Is
banding somehow a more noble purpose? I respect Mike's personal sense of
ethics when it comes to baiting but personally I'm much more ambiguous on
the subject.

I think we run into problems when we try to impose our personal ethics on
others in gray areas. In my opinion that's what the Great Whooping Crane
Debate was all about. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying there should be no
rules and I think egregious violations should be sanctioned through peer
pressure.

3) Some people have no sense of ethics and will violate what others
consider ethical without remorse. I think it diminishes us all if we quit
cooperating with each other for the benefit of the many because of the
behavior of the few.

4) Minnesota has always had a strong cadre of dedicated expert birders who
willingly share information. I've had birders from other states
specifically point that out to me with envy. I hear tales of secretiveness,
cliques, unfriendly competition, hard feelings and even vengeance. Lets not
go there.

5) As a wildlife biologist I'm trained to think that population level
affects are where we should be concerned. I flat out reject the animal
rights argument which is what we're dangerously close to here. Frankly, I
have a hard time getting worked up if an individual bird is disturbed
(whatever that is). I think that the educational potential, camaraderie and
sense of a friendly and cooperative community are more important than a
theoretical disturbance to an individual bird. I also think that in the
long run its better on the population level because happy birders are
politically active birders (or should be). Voting in support of actions
that protects and improves habitat is far more important in the end.

6) Personally I'd rather not know about a rare bird if the directions given
are so vague that there's no hope of finding it. It just frustrates me and
I'd rather read about it in the Loon in six months. To post or not post is
your decision but I'd rather not be teased.

To paraphrase what Mike said after offering his opinions on a controversial
topic last winter: "let the flaming e-mails begin".

Bill


On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Michael Hendrickson <mlhendrickson@yahoo.com
> wrote:

> Spent the day at NRRI listening to 6
> hours of power point discussions on a various topics related to applying
> herbicides and fertilizers on turf and landscape areas.  I sat and listen
> to a half hour power point
> discussion on how to choose the right pair of rubber gloves!  So while
> listening to these fantastic
> presentations I was able to read a lot of replies to my posting I made on
> the
> MOU listserv regarding giving out exact owl locations on the net.
> First lets be very clear about one
> major item, I never made one comment about NOT posting owls on the MOU
> listserv. I made a request to MOU listserv subscribers of refraining to not
> post exact locations where that owl was seen.  If you see a wintering owl
> post the county, township or what park it was
> located but refrain from giving GPS coordinates or mileages or where on the
> trail you saw the owl.  Again I never
> asked anyone to stop sharing owl sightings in your posts to the MOU
> listserv.
>
> I read replies about “what about rare
> bird sightings” and how it’s a double standard by me or birders in general
> to
> one but not the other.  This is a
> ridiculous statement!  First of all,
> accidental birds found in Minnesota are mostly found in residential yards,
> lands
> under management, state parks, sewage ponds or on large lakes.  These
> places are in controlled environments.  Meaning the home owner has set up
> guidelines
> for birders/photographers to follow on their property and the same goes for
> parks, managed properties and sewage ponds.  Accidental birds found on
> lakes have very little disturbance from the
> birders because these birds are seen from shore.  Also in the last week
> there were several good
> species found and like most accidental sightings these birds moved on very
> quickly.  Tropical/Couche’s Kingbird was
> sighted for about 8-10 minutes tops and only two observers, Scissor-tailed
> Flycatcher was seen on private land but viewable from a public road and
> that
> bird was seen 5 times in two days and the Scott’s Oriole was found in the
> Grand
> Marais neighborhood and that bird was seen for 30-40 minutes by 15 people
> or
> so.  Majority of accidental/casual bird
> sightings in Minnesota are found in controlled locations where
> birders/photographers have to follow guideline set up by the homeowner and
> property
> managers.
>
>
> The Northern Saw Whet Owl found by
> Paul Egeland in his yard was in a controlled environment where
> photographers
> and birders kept a good distance from the owl as to not scare it off his
> property and I am sure Paul had some guideline as to where to walk and
> approach
> the owl in his yard.  This does not happen
> in Sax-Zim Bog nor other locations in northern Minnesota.
>
> I assume correctly that the MOU
> electronic committee who over sees the MOU listserv request to all MOU
> listserv
> subscribers to NOT post roosting owl locations and Bob Russell explained
> reasons for that in his post today.  Also
> Jim Ryan is dead on for my reason as to why I am asking this request.
> Thanks Jim for the great reply!
>
>
> Then I read about the Whooping Crane
> in relation about sharing rare bird sightings on the MOU listserv. Yes the
> crane was reported on the listserv and the original post tells people
> where to
> find the exact field it was foraging in and everyone was happy until some
> photographer was seen in the field despite posting about guidelines on how
> to
> approach the crane.  Regardless if the
> person knew or did not know about the rarity or the guidelines the bird
> was approached
> in a fashion that went against the wills of Crane Foundations in S. Dakota
> and
> Wisconsin.  I made a request that in the
> future that all Whooping Crane sightings be omitted ( like nest sites or
> roosting sites topics ) from the listserv and all observations should
> instead
> be sent to one of these foundations and people sent in links on how to find
> them.
>
> So back to winter owl postings and
> locations, I have reasons and one of these reason is this (
> http://www.naturescapes.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=207189&fb_source=message)
> This owl photographed by a regular contributor
> to the MOU website “Showcase” mentioned he baited this owl to achieve that
> photo.  There is no laws against baiting
> but it’s a controversial topic.  Some
> photographers bait and others do not.  This owl was photographed last year
> in Sax-Zim Bog as stated.  This owl was baited numerous times by many
> photographers. I got a report from a friend who gotten some information
> from good sources that in one afternoon sitting some photographers threw
> out 50 mice to this particular Northern Hawk Owl to achieve many flight
> photos or perched shots. This owl was reported to
> me many times on how tolerant and habituated it was towards people.  I
> myself  noticed on how this particular Northern Hawk Owl would consistently
> follow me and my group of birders on a path in the bog.  This not only
> happen to me but I got emails
> from people saying this owl was acting very domesticated.  This owl did
> not need to be baited because it was easily approachable without all the
> baiting it received all winter season.  This is what happens when owls are
> continuously
> baited by overzealous photographers.  Ok
> I expect to hear this “well what is the difference between setting up bird
> feeders to
> feed songbirds and tossing mice to owls?”  Well IF there was not an issue
> with feeding owls live mice then why doesn’t
> Wild Bird Store or Wild Birds Unlimited Stores offer hopper feeders that
> can
> hold mice. That way you can buy that hopper feeder and load it with live
> mice
> to feed the owls!  This sounds ridiculous
> because comparing baiting owls to backyard feeding is ridiculous! There are
> some photographers who toss fish on the ice to attract Bald Eagles.
> Should we now develop along with the new  hopper owl
> feeder some new fish tossing equipment to feed eagles too? In my opinion
> baiting owls
> is just plain wrong and tossing fish on ice to attract eagles is also
> wrong as well.
>
>
> Also Jim Ryan was correct in his post there are
> many lurkers who do not share the same values as we do about owls or about
> birds in general.  They are using MOU
> subscribers like hunting dogs.. we find the subject they are looking for
> and we
> announce where exactly they can find it and off they go with mice in the
> cages,
> fake mice lures and fishing poles, axes and hand saws to make perches.  I
> experience it and witness this a few times
> and I am not going to share my owl exact locations on the MOU listserv. The
> unknown is out there and I am not going to take risks.  Yes it would be
> nice if birders could police
> ourselves and photographers do the same amongst their peers but it is not
> happening and bad stuff happens when no one is looking.
>
> Well I said enough about this topic.
> Do what you want because I know what I am not doing.
>
> Good birding all
>
> Mike
>
> Mike Hendrickson
> Duluth, Minnesota
>
>
> ----
> Join or Leave mou-net: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=mou-net
> Archives: http://lists.umn.edu/archives/mou-net.html
>

----
Join or Leave mou-net: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=mou-net
Archives: http://lists.umn.edu/archives/mou-net.html

Back to: Top of Message | Previous Page | Main MOU-NET Page



LISTS.UMN.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager