 |
|
|
|
|
BIRDCHAT for Thursday, May 1, 2008
[ Prev Day
| Next Day
| Calendar Month
| BIRDCHAT Info
]
|
|
To use email addresses replace '(AT)' with '@'.
This is done to confuse the spam 'bots.
|
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Motmots finished
From: "John Murray Penhallurick" <jpenhall(AT)bigpond.net.au>
Date: 1 May 2008 1:08am
Dear Friends,
I am glad to say that I have completely finished the Motmots, family
Momotidae,on my website. I have rejected Peters’ unargued and unexplained
lump of what all ornithologists before Peters, including such excellent ones
as Ridgway, Hellmayr, Cory and Chapman, had considered separate species into
a single species Blue-crowned Motmot Momotus momota. (incidentally, the name
Blue-crowned Motmot really should apply the the endemic Momotus coeruliceps
of Mexico, which is the only one of the group to boast an all-blue crown!).
As usual, I have given reasons, emphasising plumage and voice, under
Citations,Notes and Synonyms. This means new endemics for Mexico and
Trinidad! As always, comments welcomed.
Enjoy! It’s free!
John Penhallurick
86 Bingley Crescent
FRASER, A.C.T. 2615
AUSTRALIA
S 35° 11' 40.2"
E 149° 03' 26.2"
Home Telephone: (61 2) 6258 5428
Mobile 0408 585428
Please visit my website http://worldbirdinfo.net <http://worldbirdinfo.net/>
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: RE: CANADIAN ATTITUDE TO CORMORANTS.
From: "Barry K. MacKay" <mimus(AT)sympatico.ca>
Date: 1 May 2008 6:03am
> -----Original Message-----
> From: National Birding Hotline Cooperative (Chat Line)
> [mailto:BIRDCHAT(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of The RIDERS
> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 6:03 PM
> To: BIRDCHAT(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
> Subject: [BIRDCHAT] CANADIAN ATTITUDE TO CORMORANTS.
>
> Hi Chatters.
> I totally support the suggestion that
> the DOUBLE-CRESTED CORMORANTS be culled on Middle Island in Lake Erie.
> Reason--They will destroy what is left of the Carolinian
> ecosystem on Middle Island.
That seems to suggest that cormorants are not part of the Carolinian
ecosystem. The most endangered plant on Middle Island is the Red Mulberry.
It is endangered because of hybridization with the non-native (invasive)
White Mulberry -- both White Mulberries and the hybrids outnumber native Red
Mulberries on Middle Island; Parks Canada's response is not to remove the
White Mulberry, but to kill cormorants.
There are places in nature where species belong, and places they don't.
None of the plants on Middle Island (including Red Mulberry) is rare, only
rare in Canada, not only because that is where their ranges end, but because
of the wholesale destruction of mainland woodlands in the 19th Century...the
same time cormorants and so many other species were being reduced or
eliminated in the same region. To say plants belong where they don't grow
strikes me as, with all due respect, absurd. We don't think Kentucky
Coffee-Trees should grow in boreal forest (it's too cold) so why should they
grow in cormorant colony (it's too acidic). In both instances the limiting
factors (cold and the properties of cormorant excrement respectively) are
natural, part of what defines the nature of the environment.
Cormorants really ARE natural, they really do nest on islands in lakes.
>
> The same 'tree huggers' were against any WHITE-TAILED DEER
> culls in Ontario which have been proved to be very successful
> in restoring habitat, conserving the gene pool in the soil,
> the health of the forest and improved the size and health of
> the deer themselves. Now they are not half starved at the
> beginning of the winter, and none are starving locally now.
But you are wrong. Of the two people who testified in court on behalf of
the cormorants, Doug McRae and Rob Laidlaw, I can tell you from personal
conversation that Doug firmly supported the culling of White-tailed Deer at
Presqu'ile Provincial Park, and Rob, to the best of my knowledge (it's not
something I recall discussing with him) has never worked against a deer
cull, although he (and I, and the local naturalist club) all worked against
the culling of mustangs (wild horses) in a military prairie reserve in
Alberta, many years ago, on the grounds that the horses performed the
ecological function (grazing) left unfulfilled by the reduction of
elimination of native grazers (bison, pronghorns, and, of course, the
post-ice age extinction of native horses and other grazing species).
But speaking of Presqu'ile, while it is true deer are regularly culled, it
is not true that the habitat has been restored...it has been greatly altered
by the presence of non-native plants, especially the ubiquitous Garlic
Mustard (also to be found on Middle Island, BTW -- it is a species that
toxifies the soil leading to the slow death of trees, even in the absence of
cormorants...and it is being ignored) and there may have been a subsequent
reduction in some ground nesting bird species at Presqu'ile, such as
Ovenbirds. It's the same with the woodlot nearest to where I live, where
deer do not live. Incidentally, I remember the great blow-down at
Presqu'ile that opened up so much of the forest, "destroying" habitat for
woodland ground-nesters. Too bad one can't cull the wind.
How do you feel about culling Tree Swallows? In spring, when there is a
late frost, many starve. Should we shoot them to reduce competition, thus
starvation? What about humans? With the current food shortage it is clear
that there are too many of us, and yet who among us is willing to be culled
for the sake of our species?
Speaking of deer, whenever I visit the Florida Keys I enjoy the sight of the
diminutive Key West Deer...a distinct taxon that would never, ever have
evolved had it been "managed" as you seem to think deer should be. Natural
selection chose for smaller animals in a resource-limited environment --
that's how nature works...it is not static, but a continuing, evolving
dynamic situation that continues to change and accommodate in the absence of
human values. No animal will adapt, through evolution, to the changing
conditions of its environment if we prevent it from doing so.
>
> We most likely will not re-introduce GRAY WOLVES into the
> deer areas of Ontario to control the deer population. So
> culls have to be done.
In fact, much of the range of the White-tailed Deer and many other
ecologically similar Cervid species exist outside the range of the Gray
Wolf, and I don't think it can be argued that wolves are the limiting factor
in deer populations, or that their presence prevents deer from starving in
deep snow. Culls "have" to be done to meet what some humans think is right,
and it seems that humans forever want to be in control...a situation I'd be
more optimistic about if I were unaware of the huge damage we have done to
the environment in our self-defined "wisdom".
>
> When BALD EAGLES re-establish a territory on Middle Island,
> it is possible that the problem of Cormorants will be solved.
They are there, although not yet nesting, however, there are lots of Bald
Eagles in northern Ontario, along with lots of cormorants and, um, White
Pelicans (probably next on the "hit list", or maybe egrets...a species that
is growing in Ontario, and eats the endangered Lake Erie Watersnake, as well
as competes with it for frogs....um, which are also in decline, which fact
may be responsible for a twenty year decline in our Great Blue Herons...oh,
but wait...they are increasing on Middle Island, it appears...even as the
cormorants are, and did not start nesting at Presqu'ile until after
cormorants arrived...so, is that good...or maybe with frogs in decline we
should be culling frog-eaters, or at least rejoice in the decline in Great
Blue Herons....Playing God gets to be so confusing). Eagles and cormorants
both are good indicators of a healing environment in southern Ontario.
If we dig out the historic records, we find that in naturally evolved
predator-prey relationships, contrary to what seems to some people, like
you, to be a given, in fact both predator and prey are abundant. Thus,
there are areas either in space or in history where there are lots of both
cormorants and eagles...deer and wolves...fish and seals.
The cormorant-haters try to convince us that eastern North America's
"carrying capacity" for cormorants is greater now than it was in
pre-Colonial times, because of fish farms, and because of relatively
recently arrived non-native Alewives (a perfect size for cormorants, and
their spawning habits make them most available when cormorants are feeding
young). But you can only think that by ignoring all the historical evidence
to the contrary, which would indicate that the primal fish biomass in the
Great Lakes and elsewhere in the cormorant's range was comparatively immense
before it was reduced by over-fishing, toxic run-off, dredging of
fish-nesting habitat, siltation, introduction of zebra mussels and all the
other impositions that derive from industrialized society.
>
> Until then---
>
> Down with Cormorants- Here is to success by the Eagles or
> Gunners, whichever comes first!
The gunners are there, and cormorants are dying, so you got your wish. But
I'll stick to defending the cormorants anyway.
>
> Enjoy your Birding.
I will if there are birds around to enjoy.
>
> Alf.
>
> PS. It is also time for a MUTE SWAN cull too. As taxpayers we have
> supported the re-introduction of TRUMPETER SWANS into Ontario
> which are a native species, and yet the Ontario Government
> protects the destructive and agressive alien MUTES. Is it
> because they are
> alleged to be unable to speak for themselves? Actually they can and
> one was vocalising loudly on Kettle Point eight weeks ago!
In fact, the "proof" that Trumpeter Swans nested in this region is far, far
more tenuous than the proof that cormorants did, and what the "re"introduced
Trumpeters are doing is simply replacing the Mutes. So, instead of a large,
white, silent swan in urban areas we have a large white noisy swan in urban
areas. I have nothing against Trumpeters...but they were recovering on
their own (even as hunters are being allowed to shoot them while others are
working to increase their numbers, in the west) and would, like Bald Eagles
and Double-crested Cormorants, recover naturally if the causes of their
original declines were eliminated.
>
> My joy is that Kettle Point being a Chippewa Reserve, comes
> under the Federal Government and so--- Mute Swan for
> Christmas. If the Queen can have one, why not us?
Go for it, if it makes you happy. I prefer my birds alive; I like to see
nature left natural.
Cheers,
Barry
Barry Kent MacKay
Markham, Ontario, Canada
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.7/1409 - Release Date: 5/1/2008
8:39 AM
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Anti birds and birders...
From: "Barry K. MacKay" <mimus(AT)sympatico.ca>
Date: 1 May 2008 9:35am
While I envy those who see things in simplistic, black and white terms, and
who believe what "authorities" tell them, I think that the cull of
cormorants at Point Pelee National Park's Middle Island is not only
biologically unjustified, it is really symptomatic of a larger issue, best
defined, if one must resort to a single word, as "mismanagement", although I
think "incompetence" works just well.
Latest indicator, beyond the slaughter of nesting birds, is the cutback in
the tram operating service, that so assists birders there at this time of
year.There will by only one tram, with two cars, running, thus no back-up,
as there has been in the past, to extra assist birders, especially on
weekends. That means more waiting and less birding. It won't stop at the
half way mark, as it used to, so birders could get on or off, thus
concentrating birders at the tip and making it harder for many of them to
access other habitats. And after May 20th, the tram won't leave the visitor
centre until 10 a.m. Oh well, who cares about early mornings or late
migrants.
All of this because of lack of funding, while who knows how many tens, if
not hundreds, of thousands of dollars are being spent killing birds on an
island where they are trying to nest.
But the tram situation is only part of the issue. In June, 2006, all the
precious "Carolinian" vegetation that they claim to want to protect were
destroyed along a 2.7 km (that's about a mile) stretch of the North Dike,
just as it was starting to take a forest-like appearance. All the
vegetation on the north side of the dike was removed while on the Park side
(it's southern slope) much but not all was removed and some tall trees
damaged . The top of the dike was trenched, and the fill was dumped on the
Park's side (south slope), with some of it going directly into the marsh,
including the ironically named Sanctuary Pond. Muck removed from the bottom
of the ditch was placed into the new trench on top of the dike.
The law requires a full environmental assessment (under the National Parks
Act) but as we found with the cormorants, the law really means nothing...the
courts rule that the Park can do what it determines fulfills its mandate.
The law also demands that all species protected as threatened under
SARA...the Species at Risk Act...be protected on federal lands, and and yet
no environmental assessment was done notwithstanding that the wetlands
contain Blanding's Turtles (SARA - threatened); Least Bittern (SARA -
threatened); Five-lined Skink (SARA special concern); Map Turtle (SARA -
Special Concern) and Swamp Rose-Mallow (SARA - special concern).
Indeed, even if the land were not federal, the law says you can't just
damage habitat that contains threatened species (such as the Least Bittern
and Blanding's Turtle). But apparently the law is only applied to
cormorants; punishment - death.
Well known birder Alan Wormington wrote on September 21, 2006, "I am very
familiar with the breeding birds of North Dike, and in fact during 2005 I
conducted an extensive breeding bird survey of PPNP for Parks Canada. North
Dike was surveyed during this project. About 30 - 35 species of birds nest
(or did nest) on this section of North Dike. Based on what is (was)
present, it is conceivable that in excess of 500 non-fledged birds were
possibly destroyed (killed) by the destruction and complete removal of
vegetation. Example species that nest along here (or did nest) include the
following: Willow Flycatcher, Eastern Kingbird, Northern Cardinal,
Yellow-billed Cuckoo, Orchard Oriole, Baltimore Oriole, Indigo Bunting,
Mourning Dove, Yellow Warbler, American Robin, Gray Catbird. The site is
also heavily used by migrating birds during both spring and fall migrations.
On occasion there have been concentrations of owls here during the winter
months, specifically both Short-eared Owls and Long-eared Owls." How ironic
that several of those bird species are classically "Carolinian".
Alan said that when he called the Chief Park Warden of Point Pelee, the
warden told him he knew nothing about the Migratory Birds Convention Act,
and at any rate thought most birds would be finished nesting by the third
week in June. There were the usual excuses (for example, the work had to be
done in June because the weather would be wetter later on...although the
opposite it true.)
This park is very important to birds and to birders, but I believe that it
is being mis-managed and that the advice of those most knowledgeable it
ignored or ridiculed by people who, quite frankly, fail to display the level
of competence I think we Canadian taxpayers, and all birders, deserve!
Whether or not birders boycott Point Pelee National Park this spring, I'd
urge wearing the black arm bands that will be handed out by Peaceful Parks
Coalition (of which I am not a member). My fear is that the more the parks
managers are allowed to get away with, the more they will. I watched, in
horror, as the wonderful beach at Presqu'ile Provincial Park, where, as a
child, I saw so many "life" shorebirds, was degraded by similar levels of
arrogant mismanagement with complete disdain for those who actually knew
what they were talking about (my good friend, Doug McRae, tells how one park
official scoffed at the idea that sandpipers who dipped into the linear
spring ponds on the beach were feeding, saying they were just washing their
faces; that habitat is apparently pretty well ruined) and I think that as
much as we may wish otherwise, birders have to be diligent and not assume
that park status, laws or mandates mean much in the absence of competent
management by knowledgeable people or in the absence of the manifestation of
concern by those of us who care.
Barry
Barry Kent MacKay
Markham, Ontario, Canada
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.7/1409 - Release Date: 5/1/2008
8:39 AM
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Editorial in PENNSYLVANIA BIRDS on state
journals
From: "Bill Murphy" <billmurphy8(AT)sbcglobal.net>
Date: 1 May 2008 10:32am
Regarding the accessibility of 'journaled' data, I un-volunteered to produce
season reports for the Indiana Audubon Quarterly after compiling the data for
two season reports. It took me about three months to complete each one, and all
the while I was asking myself, "Who, if anyone, is going to read this?" and "Is
there any remote possibility that I've captured most of the useful data?" I'm
still wondering about it. Few observers sent in their data, either by postal
service or email. Of those who mailed it, some send it handwritten. Some sent
in simple date/species lists. Others sent in reams of paper containing data
dumps from Avisys or other programs. There was no consistency to anything,
which made for an exhaustive amount of work at the compiler's end. Searching
the Indiana listserv seemed crucial to me, and that took a very long time, too.
In the end the reports looked authoritative, but I knew from conversations that
a lot of data hadn't been captured. It was somewhat depressing to think that
the reports covered what was going to be ancient history by the time it appeared
in print, although other state journals are much farther behind than is
Indiana. Like most birders, I found that I preferred using my time birding
rather than deciphering handwriting, transcribing data, and trying to obtain
information.
Moreover, as I looked at the journal, I wondered who, if anyone, would ever use
the pages and pages of tiny, nearly indecipherable raw numbers in reports about
Christmas Bird Counts, May Big Days, and Breeding Bird Surveys. The data would
have to be hand-transcribed to be of any use to anyone. Because of the tiny
print size, it certainly couldn't be captured using optical character
recognition. I think it would be far more useful for such data only to be
referenced in the journal while maintained in a downloadable format on the
Internet, where researchers could access it rather effortlessly. Moreover, the
number of pages used for such data sometimes takes up a large portion of an
issue, which I see as ecologically unacceptable, besides being dull beyond
words.
Many organizations, such as some of the chapters of National Audubon in Indiana,
have either drastically reduced or entirely stopped distributing hardcopy
versions of their formerly paper-based newsletters. One clear advantage to
that, besides greatly reducing printing, publication, and postage costs, is that
online versions can use unlimited color, which generally is prohibitively
expensive in hardcopy. I'd like to see this practice extended, at least to some
extent, to state journals. I support the idea of scanning and uploading past
issues of journals, after a certain period of time to allow current members the
perk of viewing the latest issue.
Like Phil Davis has done, I availed myself of the wonderful collection of state
periodicals at the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center while I lived in Maryland.
I now live in Indiana, and because those journals aren't available online, my
only option if I want to consult them, is to drive all the way to Maryland.
Let's keep this thread alive. I'd like to hear from anyone who has undertaken
the scanning, OCR'ing, indexing, and uploading of a journal. Perhaps we can use
this forum to develop a set of instructions for those of us who would like to
volunteer to cover a state's birding journal. I know I would!
Bill Murphy
Fishers, Indiana
www.TrinidadBirding.com
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Duckling crossing (link)
From: Devorah Bennu <birdologist(AT)yahoo.com>
Date: 1 May 2008 1:38pm
hello everyone,
here is a wonderful feel-good story that happened this past monday in the
seattle area;
http://scienceblogs.com/grrlscientist/2008/05/duckling_crossing.php
i called the lakewood police department and spoke with them about this event,
and learned that they are trying to set up an award for Officer Carrell.
GrrlScientist
Devorah
http://scienceblogs.com/grrlscientist/
Roosting high up a tree somewhere in Central Park, NYC
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: ANTI BIRDS and BIRDERS.
From: The RIDERS <rider(AT)xcelco.on.ca>
Date: 1 May 2008 2:01pm
Hi Chatters.
My impression was that it was the CONSERVATION
AUTHOURITY that lead the work on the dyke and not the Park?
Anyone from that area who can advise as to the truth of this matter?
Good Birding.
Alf.
Forest.
Ont.
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
|
|
|
|
BIRDxxxx
BIRDCHAT
ID-FRONTIERS
US:NewEngland