next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
uld play recordings of mobbing calls to at This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01D62EAD.E8687CB0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A meeting on this subject seems like a great idea! From: naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca On Behalf Of Diane LeBlanc Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 13:39 To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Question: Starling Behaviour Your point is well-taken John, thank you. I understood the ABA as lumping playback and mob calls together as "recordings and other audio methods." Given that using audio in the field is stressful for birds, why doesn't the ABA Code of Ethics state that audio is only acceptable for bird studies and not for hobby birding? I would love to have a members meeting on this topic, a panel discussion on the pros and cons of using audio (with regard to the birds needs and not our own). And while I am dreaming, an outline of what the 'limits' are: when it is okay and when it is not okay, assuming it is okay at times. I will admit (gulp!) that I have used audio and have been a bystander to its use. A clear ethical code and explicit agreements about its use in Nova Scotia may help change practices here. From: "naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca <mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca> " <naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca <mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca> > on behalf of John Kearney <j.f.kearney@gmail.com <mailto:j.f.kearney@gmail.com> > Reply-To: "naturens@chebucto.ns.ca <mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca> " <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca <mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca> > Date: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 1:07 PM To: "naturens@chebucto.ns.ca <mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca> " <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca <mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca> > Subject: RE: [NatureNS] Question: Starling Behaviour Please note Diane that I directed my remarks about unethical birding to the play-back of mobbing calls, which does not avoid but instead aims to stress birds. I do agree with you that many dimensions of birding and ornithology disturb birds. We need to reassess our actions continually. How much of our intervention in the life of birds stems from meeting their needs or our needs? Science-based evidence is a useful tool, but it is not enough. We also need to decide what kind of relationship we want to have with them. If it is one of respect, and understanding our lives as intertwined with theirs, then many of our practices may have to be called into question. John From: naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca <mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca> On Behalf Of Diane LeBlanc Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 11:50 To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca <mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca> Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Question: Starling Behaviour With regard to playback and mob calls, the ABA Code of Ethics limits but does not ban the use of audio: Here is an excerpt from their Code of Ethics: "Avoid stressing birds or exposing them to danger. Be particularly cautious around active nests and nesting colonies, roosts, display sites, and feeding sites. Limit the use of recordings and other audio methods of attracting birds, particularly in heavily birded areas, for species that are rare in the area, and for species that are threatened or endangered. Always exercise caution and restraint when photographing, recording, or otherwise approaching birds." Audubon is more lenient: Here is an excerpt from their website: "Playback is one of the most powerful tools in a birder's struggle to see birds in the wild. It will arouse the curiosity of any species at any time of year, but it works best on territorial species during nesting season. Birds that might otherwise be too shy to come into the open can be attracted by the sound of a potential rival. Whether this trickery has any significant impact on the birds is not so clear. Fundamentally, birding disturbs birds. Everything we do has an impact on them. But in some situations playback can be less disruptive than other methods of attracting birds, at times even less disruptive than sitting quietly and waiting for a bird to show. Proponents argue that playback reduces the need to physically enter and disturb a bird's habitat and, unlike pishing, targets a single species." So, it is no wonder that birders may feel that it's okay to use mob calls and bird recording to attract birds. I suggest that changing this birder behaviour requires scientific evidence followed by strong peer pressure. I'd be very interested to see studies, and, in particular, meta-analyses on this topic. The NSBS is strongly committed to putting birds first but we need to be in a defensible position before making recommendations. Just my thoughts! Diane From: " <mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca> naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca" < <mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca> naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca> on behalf of Shouty McShoutsalot < <mailto:desolatechair@gmail.com> desolatechair@gmail.com> Reply-To: " <mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca> naturens@chebucto.ns.ca" < <mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca> naturens@chebucto.ns.ca> Date: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 11:04 AM To: naturens < <mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca> naturens@chebucto.ns.ca> Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Question: Starling Behaviour Education is incremental. However there birders who should know better who still employ pishing. On Wed., May 20, 2020, 08:08 John Kearney, <j.f.kearney@gmail.com <mailto:j.f.kearney@gmail.com> > wrote: That is unfortunate, and those who are doing so are not following the ethical guidelines of Birds Canada and the American Birding Association. In some cases, judicious use of playback is considered permissible for conservation research. However, as noted in an earlier discussion in this forum, this is increasingly unnecessary with the availability of autonomous recording units. From: <mailto:naturens-owner@chebu