Subject: Neotropical migrant research
Date: Feb 14 13:32:10 1995
From: Jerry Tangren - Jerry_Tangren at tfrec.ncw.net




Warning: the following is a knee-jerk response, read at your own risk

I believe that Dennis raises some real concerns with the current rage
in Neotropical migrants. However, to put it all into perspective, my
father loves to quote the line , "One should never confuse science and
engineering; they have nothing to do with each other." This also
applies to the present Partners in Flight and associated programs. As
Dan Stephens outlined in his post, some real science has gone into
studies on the biology of Neotropical migrants. However, not to confuse
the issue, the programs in Neotropical migrants may be more an
application of the science, rather than the science itself.

Here with WSU at a research and extension center, we often run into the
differences between basic and applied science. A lack of clear cut
insight into the differences can often cause confusion as to what is
trying to be accomplished and how best to do it. I'm often presented
with data from a field trial that a scientists is trying to use for
basic science. And almost just as often it's impossible. Survey data is
probably even worse. The variablity introduced without careful planning
can be greater than the differences a study is trying to detect.

An additional problem is that good applied science because it is more
likely working with real world complexities requires more talent than
good basic science. Like Dennis I believe that the Partners in Flight
has become a band wagon that too many people have jumped on who don't
understand some of the basic principles involved. Just the definition
of what defines a Neotropical migrant is a mess. Reading Terbough's
book is not a substitute for reading the large volume of scientific
literature, much of which was also written by Terbough.

The concept of managing the total habitat use of birds is nothing new.
Waterfowl biologists have it to a fine art. You can tell which programs
under Partners in Flight have experienced wildlife biologists by the
good science and common sense demonstrated. They stick out in
comparison to those programs which are public relations first and good
science last.

If we're really interested in managing our bird populations, we need to
know each species' summer, winter, and migration period requirements.
To lump species into broad categories overlooks the fact that each
species is different. Dan's posting lists several sub-categories of
Neotropical migrant, but these are still basically too broad.
Because the underlying objective is essentially to save tropical
habitat, the entire picture is limited. They are many migratory birds
which never put wing into the tropics, but the concepts for their
management are the same. Once again witness the large body of knowledge
collected for waterfowl management, and look at who's involved in the
more sucessful Partners in Flight programs.

I don't believe that there are special considerations that even apply to
Neotropical migrants. Perhaps only that there are special areas in the
tropics that are threatened. But that's not science.

Jerry Tangren
Systems and Programming Professional
Washington State University
Tree Fruit Research and Extension Center
1100 N. Western Ave.
Wenatchee WA 98801

E-mail: Jerry_Tangren at tfrec.ncw.net
Phone: 509-663-8181 ext 231