The discussion following John Young's recent release of Night Parrot
observations is an interesting microcosm of birding culture.
A large part revolves around whether John will release an audio
recording of a NP call, and whether releasing the call would
compromise the welfare of the species. I agree with the two Micks
that the potential impact of releasing the call is miniscule compared
to releasing the location of the birds. Twitchers flock to known
locations. All the previous twitcher aggregations and birding
pressure have involved rarities in publicised locations. While there
are some twitchers who will actively explore/search, others wait for
reports to hit the networks (a bit like buzzards who follow other
birds to the food). Few venture more than an hour or two's walk from
where they can park a vehicle.
Given the chances of observing a night parrot are comparable to
winning the lottery if you don't have the coordinates of a previous
sighting, there is little risk. The conservation benefit of sharing
the call is that birders would be able to recognise the call if they
heard it, and pass the details on to someone who can do something to
manage the pressures that threaten the survival of NPs.
Anyhow, there is the subject of secrecy. The norms of science in
general and birding in particular and are built on information
sharing. We are now in the era of crowd science, cloud storage,
social media and WikiLeaks. The dynamics of publishing information and
guarding secrets are changing.
The long-term impacts of the current partial release of information of
the Night Parrot observations remain to be seen. Ultimately, the best
way to keep a secret is not to let anyone know that you have a secret
in the first place.
Regards, Laurie.
===============================
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
===============================
|
