next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
>>> in the long-term, will provide more in-depth and reliabl This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------96B6B38DCD5C48B1BE201374 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit This was an interesting exchange about owl surveys. Having participated in the Nocturnal Owl Survey for a number of years using the playback system provided through Bird Studies Canada (BSC), I would share some concerns about disturbing owls, but the BSC protocol should not negatively affect or disturb the owls to a significant extent. It really is just once a year for several minutes for any owls detected along a defined survey route. After each playback terminates, one must move to the next site at a reasonable pace by vehicle in order to complete the entire survey on time. The next site is located far enough away (in theory) so as not to be heard by the owls at the previous stop. BSC produces some useful population trend analyses from our observations: Atlantic Nocturnal Owl Survey results <https://www.birdscanada.org/library/acowlsrpt.pdf> My concern stems from the playback recordings being used by folks who are _not _surveying anything, but wanting to see owls 'just for fun'. This may have negative impacts, taking away from time required to incubate eggs, forage and feed chicks on a cold winter night, or finding food for a mate who's incubating eggs. I don't think this has ever been addressed in the BSC instructions as some sort of warning about using their playback outside the normal survey protocol, but it would be a good idea. We humans often remain oblivious to how our seemingly benign activities harm other species. A posting on websites with bird songs/calls should possibly also post a warning about harassing wildlife by repeatedly using the recordings to attract birds during their most vulnerable breeding period. People have asked me for the barred owl recordings on various occasions and I have politely avoided giving it out. Of course, there are many ways these days to play owl calls, so perhaps offering an educational message on potential impacts would be beneficial to the wildlife. There is a trade-off when trying to enhance public awareness to the presence of owls and the wonders of their forest habitat and incurring a small negative impact in the process. I think that using a play-back to enhance some awareness is helpful. I've had woodlot owners become more aware and thoughtful about what they are cutting down once they stare into the liquid brown eyes of a barred owl for a moment. It's difficult to get to know our nocturnal wildlife. Can we embrace the use of some limited playback to educate and enhance awareness of people who are completely out of contact with nature, as long as this tool is accompanied with a message about limiting the use of playback calls, and potential impacts to breeding birds? The more passive recording detection using audiomoths should work well at detecting owls and will definitely be more useful in the long run, particularly now that we can analyze the digital recordings without requiring us to actually physically listen to endless recordings. Computers can process it all for us. Owls can have long periods where no calls are emitted so passively listening will not produce results in all cases. (Amusingly, I've had times when I wished a saw-whet would STOP CALLING, barely able to hear myself think!! Or wanted on occasion for barred owls to cease hooting after the wondrous novelty of their hoots had 'worn thin' after 10+ minutes and sometimes attracting additional owls-noisy, wonderful, but noisy, and long after bedtime with thoughts turned to an early morning quickly coming. Shhhh!) Donna On 2020-02-12 1:02 p.m., Randy Lauff wrote: > "Scaring birds into responding by excessive pishing, playback or > broadcasting alarm calls just isn’t right." > > I completely agree (except for the "scaring" part). But the key is > "excessive." I would bet a lot of money that the Nocturnal Owl Survey > routes are done once, then are not revisited until the following year. > Total playback at each site is around 5 minutes (spread over four > bouts)...think of it this way, if nesting birds were THAT sensitive to > intruders that a few minutes playback causes them to abandon, the > species would have been doomed long ago. > > Done over and over and over again...that's a different story. > > Randy > _________________________________ > RF Lauff > Way in the boonies of > Antigonish County, NS. > > > On Wed, 12 Feb 2020 at 11:23, nancy dowd <nancypdowd@gmail.com > <mailto:nancypdowd@gmail.com>> wrote: > > I am extremely happy to hear about the Listening Together survey > protocol. I also do not wish to be involved in surveys relying on > playback. This cuts off many I would otherwise get involved in > (Marsh Monitoring and the forested wetland species mentioned, for > example). Scaring birds into responding by excessive pishing, > playback or broadcasting alarm calls just isn’t right. > > Nancy D > > Sent from my iPad > > > On Feb 12, 2020, at 10:31 AM, Bev Wigney <bkwigney@gmail.com > <mailto:bkwigney@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > Hi John, > > > > That sounds like an interesting project. I just bought an AudioMoth > > unit to try out and was thinking of buying a couple more. I bought > > this one to put in forests to determine which birds are nesting > in an > > area. I'll be interested in hearing more about how you will be > > putting your units to work. > > Agree -- I think community listening projects could be quite useful. > > Our local facebook group has a few hundred members in the Annapolis > > Royal area and many are very interested in nature. I'm quite > sure we > > could get something going for listening for owls as many people are > > already doing so at their farms and rural residences. > > I look forward to hearing more about how you'll be putting the > > AudioMoth units to use in your area. > > > > Bev > > > >> On 2/12/20, John Kearney <j.f.kearney@gmail.com > <mailto:j.f.kearney@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> Hi Donna and all, > >> > >> This kind of census has a great appeal to me. I don't > participate in the > >> nocturnal owl studies sponsored by Birds Canada since I don't > agree with > >> disturbing and agitating breeding birds that may result from the > >> requirement &