At 04:01 PM 6/8/2004 +0000, Rich Peet wrote:
>Please consider all playback as not responsible.
What about the sounds of corn growing?
But, assuming you are talking about playback to sentient beings, su=
re there are times and places where playback might do harm, but unless you =
do your walking several inches above the ground, you just killed several li=
fe forms by getting into position to *record*. Not to mention that all the =
food you have ever eaten could have gone to starving third world children, =
and your entire life savings could have gone to treat AIDS victims.
Please. If we want to discuss what 'responsible playback' is then f=
ine, but to say all playback is not responsible is hyperbolic (as opposed t=
o parabolic).
>Past activity by photographers and others using
>playback have gotten in my way. Just say no to playback.
A strange non-sequitur. Is "all playback ... not responsible" becau=
se some people's reactions to it sometimes prevents you from being able to =
record? Whose ox are we talking about here?
Now, let's start the discussion by asking if my recording of a midn=
ight mockingbird in late June can be played back to the same bird in an exp=
eriment to find out if it causes this bird to either shut up or go somewher=
e else (or possibly, and this is why I hesitate, make him sing longer and l=
ouder). At this time of year the singing birds are all bachelor males who a=
re just practicing for the next mating season. I say no harm will come to t=
hem, or the other area birds, by playback. What say you?
-- Chuck
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Chuck Bragg, Pacific Palisades, CA
Membership Chair
Newsletter Editor
Santa Monica Bay Audubon Society:
www.smbas.org
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|