Kelly Cassidy wrote:

> When a bird is banded, a set of standardized
> measurements (weight, wing chord, skull ossification, body fat,
> appearance of plumage, etc.) are recorded and deposited at a central
> location. The banding data is available upon request. Banding a bird
> is a contribution to a large database

Au contraire. The Bird Banding Lab (BBL) is only really interested
in the band numbers used. There is no requirement to record any
information on the bird being banded other than the species and the
age and sex if possible - even this is optional but I'd imagine the
folks at the Lab would frown of you only included species on a
regular basis.

I have only a limited amount of experience over here so my comments
really apply to the BTO ringing scheme in the UK where apparently
the same recording scheme is used.

Biometric information is specifically NOT used. The BTO is deluged
with information each year and recently asked ringers to stop
sending in biometic information unless specifically requested.
Indeed in the interests of welfare it was suggested that biometics
should only be recorded whre ringers were carrying out a specific
study - measuring every bird was seen as a waste of time.

When all the information is submitted on floppy disk and the BBL
has all the money and resources to process the information then I'm
sure a lot of interesting data will be processed until then
(whenever that might be) it's only an aspiration rather than a
reality.

> As for the potential benefits of banding, this individual could, if
> recovered, supply a piece of the migration puzzle for CCLOs.

Banding schemes are full of one-off recoveries for species. The
goal is to define what populations are doing not what individuals
are up to - when the technology gets good enough then long term
monitoring of individuals will result in a greater understanding of
the population as a whole but until then, isolated records of
individual movements are not beneficial.

> This bird is most likely a vagrant that will never again
contribute to the CCLO gene pool.

Perhaps, perhaps not. It was recently thought that all the birds
involved in waxwing irruptions in western Europe were doomed to
failure since the species was not migratory and did not possess the
necessary survival skills to return to their breeding ground. Until
that it enough birds were banded and recovered to show that this
notion was entirely wrong.

> Chances are, the band would never be seen again by people, but
> they are better than the chances of winning the lottery.

What lottery is this - I must enter :-). The chances of seeing this
bird again are effectively zero. Even the lottery has much better
odds than this. The important factor is the number of scientists and
birders within the breeding grounds - not many I'd imagine. And
given that passerines typically last only a couple of years, there's
not muc hope there.

> When a bird
> is so easy to catch and so many people are curious about its sex
> anyway, why not catch it, submit it to a few frightening minutes of
> feather ruffling, and clip a band on it? It can't be much worse
> than having half a dozen people stomping through its feeding grounds
> to flush it into view every day.

Who would be the bander to risk it. I don't have the permit to
allow me to do it and rest assured somebody would write to the BBL
to complain. I have been involved in similar situations with rare
birds in the UK. Beleive me it is definitely not worth the effort.

Air fares to Arizona are not that high and seed is cheap - much
better to go down where there would be a representative sample size
and do the job properly.

Why all this interest in the sex of one bird when there is no
interest in the sex ratios of junco wintering here or lots of other
questions for that matter. Seems to me that this debate is more
fashionable than anything else.

See ya,

Stuart
---
Stuart MacKay - powered by NeXTSTEP

5200B Ravenna Ave NE
Seattle, WA 98105
ph:(206) 522 1855
email: stuart at blarg.net