Greg
To have a different opinion to someone is not to give "a slap in the face".
I am opposed to banding for ethical reasons( reasons which perhaps you
don't agree with) and I believe the benefits of banding don't outweigh
the costs to the birds. As everyone agrees habitat protection is the name
of the game.
The ethical reasons are the bird is being caught in a net for up to an
hour, placed in a bag for 20 mins or so, while other birds are being
processed. This clearly stresses the bird. Imagine if it happened to you.
You state, "it is a shame that there a small number of people on this site
who are strongly anti-banding" I have no idea how many people on this
site are anti-banding and I would suggest neither do you. I do know that
it is difficult to speak out against things which are considered the normal
and acceptable way to do things. A short while ago it was normal and
acceptable to collect specimens, fortunately with the advent of DNA this
practice is diminishing.
Good birding
Gary
On 24 February 2013 22:39, Greg and Val Clancy <> wrote:
> Spot on Chris.
>
> I would like to respond to a number of comments raised on this issue by
> stating some facts, not necessarily in the order of importance:
>
> Only a small percentage of birds are ever caught and banded, they act as a
> sample of the whole population on which to base management decisions;
>
> Bird banding is carried out by people who volunteer their time, money and
> expertise because they want to contribute to the scientific study of birds
> and assist in their conservation;
>
> We don't know enough about any species to say that banding is a waste of
> time and an unnecessary intrusion into a bird's life. Banding was started
> in Australia in a coordinated way in 1953 but it has always been run on a
> shoestring and by volunteers who have worked hard to fill the gaps in the
> knowledge of our birds life histories. The Australian Bird and Bat banding
> Scheme is run by two staff, one for only a couple of days a week;
>
> Banding is only carried out in accordance with strict conditions
> determined by the Australian Bird and Bat Banding Scheme and by banders who
> have received extensive training and experience;
>
> Modern techniques such as satellite tracking are an additional techniques
> to banding and not alternatives to it. Most transmitters have a very short
> life. Bands last the life of the bird (in most cases). I chose powder
> coated colour bands for my Black-necked Stork research rather than the more
> costly satellite tracking as they provide long term data that satellite
> tracking doesn't. The results have been very impressive;
>
> Banding is one tool in a tool box of methods to research birds. To not
> use it would be like driving your car at night with your lights off;
>
> Any adverse effects detected on birds from banding have been swiftly
> addressed by the banding office. When it was found that penguin flipper
> bands had reduced the foraging efficiency of penguins by a small percentage
> their use was discontinued. Banders are more than happy to receive
> documented cases of harm so that it can be prevented in the future. These
> cases seem to be extremely rare or non-existent. But if a case does arise
> then people witnessing the problem should advise the banding office with
> the relevant evidence but shouldn't jump to conclusions as the cause of the
> problem may not be what is first thought.
>
> It is a shame that there is a small number of people on this site that are
> strongly anti-banding. The sentiments expressed are certainly a slap in
> the face to the dedicated people who spend many hours working to learn more
> about our birds by carrying out bird banding activities. It would be great
> if you could come on board and help promote banding as it is an extremely
> valuable tool in learning more about our birds, many of which are under
> threat. Banding is not the threat. It is part of the armoury to help
> fight the decline. We can have a hands off approach and then watch as our
> birds disappear without any knowledge of why.
>
>
> Greg
> Dr Greg. P. Clancy
> Ecologist and Birding-wildlife Guide
> PO Box 63 Coutts Crossing NSW 2460
> 0266493153 0429601960
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Chris Cooper
> Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 9:19 PM
> To:
> Subject: [Birding-Aus] Another bivalve victim
>
>
> In relation to benefits of bird banding; at one point people thought
> we knew everything there was to know about physics. Lord Kelvin
> (1824- 1907) said:
>
> "There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now, All that
> remains is more and more precise measurement."
>
> It difficult to imagine anything further from the truth. The point is
> we don't know what we don't know and we will never know unless we do
> the research.
>
> I addition to proving points in relation to developments, knowing the
> birds movements better and their habitat preferences has to help with
> conservation.
>
> Chris Ross
> ==============================**=
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to: <>
>
> http://birding-aus.org
> ==============================**=
> ==============================**=
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to: <>
>
> http://birding-aus.org
> ==============================**=
>
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
http://birding-aus.org
===============================
|
