/\___/\ **********This message intended for the *********** /\___/\
| O O | multiple recipients of | O O |
|___V___| TWEETERS |___V___|
NOT subscribed to BIRDCHAT

From: Martin Cassidy <CASSIDYM at DELPHI.COM>
Subject: Hunters and Birders

Realizing that fueling the flame of the apparent conflict between
hunting and birding is useless, I've been giving thought to another
approach to the issue.

In my area (western Washington state), a properly legal bird hunter
is equippped with several pieces of paper that were purchased from
the government. To wit:

State hunting license (resident) $15
Migratory waterfowl stamp 6
Upland bird permit 35
Federal duck stamp 15

TOTAL $71

The stamps go towards purchase and maintenance of wetlands for water fowl.
The licenses ostensibly pay for enforcement and clean-up after the
yahoos already mentioned in prior posts.

As a birder (not a hunter), I find these places quite attractive. Yet
I am not obligated to put in my dollars to supporting the wildlife
refuges I use in birding. Hunters pay the costs of wetlands, migratory
bird counts, enforcement, maintenance, brochures, bird lists, trash
can emptying, road maintenance, scientific studies, etc. I'm not talking
about the tax dollars we all pay, no matter what our avocation, just the
difference in what hunters pay for their sport and what we as birders
contribute in our sport. Responsible hunters are paying for our favorite
birding spots.

Feeling guilty, I went out last weekend to see what I could buy to help
with the effort to establish and maintain wetlands, improve my favorite
birding spots, pay for the trash I always contribute, buy more sani-cans,
improve the parking lots, and clear the trails I use. I bought:

State conservation license $10
Migratroy waterfownl stamp 6
Federal duck stamp 15

TOTAL $31

I also buy a National Parks annual pass for $20. Counting that, I paid
a license fee of $51 for my annual birding permit.

Now, Gerry Rising wrote that "as we increasingly outnumber them", I'm
wondering if responsible birders acted voluntarily to buy their "permits"
the same as responsible hunters, that the dollar amount generated
would have an influence on government policies.

Sorry about being a long post. I'm looking forward to any comment on
this idea.

Martin Cassidy
Seattle

===================================

From: Phil Hansbro <HANSBRO at RSBS-CENTRAL.ANU.EDU.AU>
Subject: Hunters

I thaught people might be interested in some hunting facts about duck
shooters in Australia. On the first day of the duck shooting season at
lake Cowal in New South Wales (ie at just one location), the following
birds were found shot the next day (I can't remember exactly but it went
something like):

12 Little Pied cormorants
3 Australian Pelican (the largest pelican species in the world)
1 Galah (a species of parrot!)
1 Black-shouldered kite
4 darters
1 Brown Falcon
25 Silver Gulls

and on a lake in Victoria, on the same day, out of a flock of 60
Freckled Ducks (the rarest duck in Australia and is on the endangered
species list) 48 were found shot the next day (ie the other 12 bodies
were never found). So I suggest that the hunters in Australia are
definately not as good at identification as American hunters, who one
person said are better than the birders??????

I think the idea of permits for birders is a great idea but obviously
must be based on an honesty system ie "No I wasn't looking at that
bird". Also shouldn't we all be members of societies or bird clubs?
Surely money could be raised from those.

Hope this is of interest.

Cheers,

Phil
hansbro at rsbs-CENTRAL.ANU.EDU.AU
Australia