After reading the full report emailed to me by Peter Kyne (thanks), it's
interesting to note that they concluded that humans walking without dogs
"also induced some disturbance but typically less than half that induced
by dogs". Sounds like a good justification for keeping *everyone* out
of at least some areas.
I wonder how much disturbance a birder causes compared to the walkers
they measured results for. Birder tend to walk slower, poke around,
etc. I don't know if that would cause more disturbance, or less.
It's also interesting to read all the predictable "yeah, but ..."
comments from dog owners below the online article.
Peter Shute
wrote on Wednesday, 5 September 2007
5:47 PM:
> The following item illustrates why dogs shouldn't be taken into
> sensitive environments, even on a lead.
>
> Regards, Laurie.
>
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article2388323.ece
>
> How man's best friend becomes birds' worst enemy on that walk
> Lewis Smith, Environment Reporter September 5, 2007
>
> Walkies, the seemingly innocuous duty of exercising the dog, has been
> identified as a huge threat to wildlife.
> While it is held to be good for the health of owners by ensuring a
> daily dose of exercise, dog-walking can spell disaster for
> birds. Numbers of birds in areas where people took their dogs
> for a walk were
> found to plummet by more than 40 per cent, according to a scientific
> study. Researchers also found that the range of bird species in
> dog-walking areas slumped by 35 per cent, especially among the
> easy-to-disturb ground-nesting varieties.
==============================www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
=============================
|
