Graeme,
Great post and thanks for contributing. I agree that there is great variance in
how responsible different banders are. This is largely what prompted my
original support for this debate because I really think that i) banders should
frequently reflect on what they are achieving and what their motivations are
for doing what they do, and ii) because I actually think that the system should
include some re-evaluation of projects and even licenses. A great deal of
importance is placed on initial training, but far less on maintaining best
practices.
Most importantly though, I also believe that most birds that are caught in
mist-nets are done so as part of active research (here I say birds caught
rather than bands used, because these projects often have reasonably high
recapture rates). In these studies, every individual is invaluable, and when
you've waited 5 years for a particular bird to mature and start providing some
reproductive data, you'll gladly spend the extra time watching nets rather than
having a cuppa.
I'd probably agree with an estimate of a 1% death rate. However, to put that
into context, all animal testing (such as for medical trials - the only
research our government seems to be interested in funding) has 100% death rate.
But, more seriously, this is in line with other animal research (e.g. mammals
http://goo.gl/ihGnVt), and is about at the acceptable rate for animal ethics
committees (typically 0.5-2% in my experience). Less seriously (perhaps) is
that this is a drop in the ocean compared to how many chickens are alive at any
one time and awaiting slaughter (estimated around 19 billion).
> From:
> Subject: Bird banding
> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 10:06:34 +1100
> CC:
> To:
>
>
> Hello Damien,
>
> First of all I agree with what you said in your latest post on Birding-aus ,
> in particular the failure of recent governments in Australia (mainly Federal)
> to support science and the environment. We should all put our money where our
> mouth is and support AWC.
>
> However I would like to make the odd qualifier.
>
> I was a professional ornithologist and bird bander all of my working life -
> without bird banding (in particular individually colour-banded birds) we
> could not have carried out the research we did.
>
> During that time, and before when I was a teenager I also banded birds as an
> amateur in conjunction with many of the leading bird-banders of the era. I
> have been there and done that. I've also probably seen all the bad things -
> events that happened that may have been preventable with hindsight, but
> nobody's perfect.
>
> About predators and mist nets. Such deaths are as you say avoidable by
> keeping a good lookout. People don't! I have seen nets only checked once
> every half-hour. By and large I would say amateurs set as many nets as they
> can, because their measure of success is often how many birds they catch in a
> session.
>
> Overall in my experience I would estimate the death rate associated with mist
> netting as about 1%. All sorts of things happen - Brown Thornbills die in
> your hand (from shock) - predators ( Catbirds are the worst in rainforest) -
> I have known of nets left overnight accidentally containing dead birds the
> next morning - No 1 mist nets left too long can cause small birds to be so
> badly tangled that birds can barely fly when released - and finally poorly
> fitted bands can cause injury, not common but it happens.
>
> Many bird banders will deny any of this happens but they aren't telling the
> truth - out in the bush there are no witnesses!
>
> Now about cannon nets. Wrongly set, or fired when the birds are in the wrong
> position, cannon nets behead birds. Fortunately few people do and the experts
> will have learnt by experience, Having to house and process a large number
> birds in hot weather is a very difficult undertaking. By and large I don't
> know what the death rate would be, but rest assured there would be one.
> People are reluctant to report or even talk about this sort of thing.
>
> The big question is whether in the name of science, is it worth it? I believe
> it is so long as it really is science and not just weekend entertainment.
> Compared with loss of habitat, introduced predators including man, climate
> change and all the other variables, the negatives of bird banding are a drop
> in the ocean.
>
> Regards
>
> Graeme Chapman ( graemechapman.com.au)
<HR>
<BR> Birding-Aus mailing list
<BR>
<BR> To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
<BR> http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
</HR>
|
