In my opinion it is actually detrimental to the debate to try to lump leg
banding with regional extinctions caused by reduction of habitat islands in
the island biogeography model. I think that the article stands on its own
merit. Clearly habitat loss is one of the most significant issues that we
must deal with in trying to conserve species - the truly worrying element is
that reducing the habitat size by half can reduce the number of species
supported by that habitat by much more than half. Even in the worst case, I
think that leg banding would have a minimal impact, and I suspect probably a
zero impact. To my mind, leg banding is probably a reasonable scientific
method for tracking individuals - and probably actually improves our
understanding of complex issues relating to habitat loss. I for one would
think that anything we can do to improve our understanding of this issue is
something that we should do with some urgency.
Paul Dodd
Docklands, Melbourne
-----Original Message-----
From:
On Behalf Of Carl Clifford
Sent: Monday, 30 June 2008 1:36 PM
To: Ian May
Cc: Baus
Subject: Leg Tags
Hi Ian,
There is nothing in that article which links ringing with decline of
bird numbers in the Adelaide Hills. I think what Graham (and others
who read your post would like to know), is what is the link between
banding and decline of bird numbers in the Adelaide Hills? Have there
been studies done on this link or is it one of those things that only
requires common sense to work out?
Cheers,
Carl Clifford
On 30/06/2008, at 1:15 PM, Ian May wrote:
Hello Graham
Good question; See http://users.picknowl.com.au/~dld/Bird%20extinction.HTML
There is little doubt that some Mount Lofty Ranges bird species are in
trouble, although it is also true that some observers are skeptical
about such alarmist predictions, believing the claims are possibly
motivated by a quest for further funding rather than to contribute
objectively to useful conservation strategies.
Regards
Ian May
|
