The posting from Gunnar Engblom in Peru opens another ethical avenue for
discussion i. e. collecting (shooting/killing) new taxa. I understand
that in the era of DNA analysis samples are important, so maybe some
blood and even a few feathers, plus photos, should suffice? Perhaps the
members of this expedition are going to do just this? Somehow I think
not, but I'd be happy to be wrong.
I have problems with killing birds for specimens, though I am aware that
the US has many strong advocates for this. I have facilitated it myself
with a possible new berrypecker in PNG, and also some strange
Pygmy-parrots there, but I now regret my actions.
Examples that come to mind include the collecting of a number of
specimens of the Poo- uli from Hawaii when it was first discovered a few
years back. It was clearly a critically endangered restricted range
species, but this made no difference, specimens had to be taken. I heard
the other day that about 3 birds now survive in the wild . Another one
that annoyed the hell out of me was the shooting of the first N.
American Lesser White-fronted Goose on one of their northern islands (
?Attu). Why ? To prove it had occurred, despite photos and field
descriptions a specimen was seen as necessary. To justify this, it was
of course a lost vagrant and would not have bred anyway, so it was OK to
Incidentally, is it really just US$5 to participate in the expedition
for the new ant-pitta?
To unsubscribe from this list, please send a message to
Include "unsubscribe birding-aus" in the message body (without the quotes)