All,
I don't know who's pleaded guilty and who hasn't but I've seen an account from
at least one 'eye witness' which rubbishes the story.
I've said it before about 'twitching bashers' but 999 times out of 1000 these
stories are completely distorted just to make some news - even the BBC.
And those 999 twitchers usually do 999 times more good for birds and
conservation than each of the one in 1000 that is detrimental on one in 1000
twitches. Which would mean that twitchers did 999,998,0000 more times good than
harm (or some kind of number like that - it doesn't matter, but you get my
logic).
Go birding on your own if you like, but twitching is fun and mostly benefits
conservation and promotes the interest in birds and their conservation. And by
the way 5 people in a car is better than one.
And there's no need to behave to the detriment of the birds - I for one would
shout if I saw anyone doing that. The whole thing about twitching is that
you're either lucky or you're not. You can't take it into your own hands.
Cheers and happy twitching
Tim
> From: > To: > Subject: Re:
> [Birding-Aus] How not to behave when a vagrant species appears> Date: Mon, 19
> Jan 2009 16:22:40 +1100> CC: > > Alan,> > When one
> "pleads guilty" to something witnesses are not required:) The > behaviour I
> referred to is harassing the bird. If you google "rose > starling dead
> twitchers", you will see that there are links to several > sites with the
> same story, which is based on a item by the BBC ( from > where The Sun no
> doubt lifted it.) The BBC item was based on a report > by a member of the
> Royal Society for Protection of Birds (RSPB), in > whose garden the bird
> ultimately expired. The RSPB member claimed to > have witnessed the alleged
> harassment. The RSPB did not investigate > the matter further, after all,
> what action could initiate the starling > was not a native and the
> perpetrators of the harassment were unknown, > so the chances of a court case
> getting up would be zero.> > I find the report quite believable, having
> witnessed similar behaviour > myself.> > Carl Clifford> > On 19/01/2009, at
> 3:28 PM, Alan Gillanders wrote:> > > Carl,> > by 'behave in this manner' do
> you mean, writing sensational stories > > with unfounded conclusions
> attributed to unidentified informants, > > driving huge distances or
> harassing a bird to death?> >> > I would plead guilty to one of them if you
|
