Anne & Roger Green wrote:
>
> While I agree in principle with your sentiments, there is
> justification
> for a more tolerant viewpoint.
> 1. The ID was not certain when the RFI was sent.
> 2. Some-one relatively new to birding, as I think the sender must be,
> deserves encouragement and a more informative reply, not a knock-back.
> 3. Info on rearing young birds is somewhat generic, so practise gained
> with a sparrow (which, arguably is expendable) may one day be useful
> for
> a native bird in trouble.
> 4. Birds and other creatures in trouble elicit, in many of us, a
> protective, nurturing instinct which, even if sometimes mis-directed,
> is, I feel, better encouraged than discouraged.
> 5. One sparrow, more or less, in an area where they already exist,
> isn't
> going to make any difference to the balance of nature.
> Regards, Anne
> (PS I did reply directly to the sender of the original message, but
> we've just changed computers and I don't know if my message got sent.
> If
> not, I apologise. If you contact me again I'll be happy to give you
> info
> on rearing young birds.)
> --
> Atriplex Services-Environmental Consultants, Landscapers, Educators
> and
> Growers of Native Australian Plants.
>
> http://www.riverland.net.au//~atriplex
> Mailto:
I entirely agree with Anne of Atriplex - the impulse to care for injured
or orphaned creatures should never be dismissed lightly or callously.
(Though these days I might draw the line at Indian Mynahs).
The few birds I ever reared (SongThrush, Willy Wagtails) taught me a
great deal about bird development - and how hard their parents work.
Anthea Fleming in Melbourne
|
