Serge Le Huitouze wrote:

"I sure think it would be a good idea to control (=kill) ALL STARLINGS in
North America (BTW how far south are they annoying native birds ?),
but I can't imagine how to do this.

Do you, Dennis, or anyone out there, have any idea about thw way of achieving
this ?"

Serge, I wish I did--biological control isn't my field :-)

But I do know that where there's a will there's a way. I suppose solutions
depend upon both the intensity of the *will* and the time, energy, and
resources expended for the *way.* Cowbirds are trapped and killed, I
believe, by the tens of thousands, in some areas where they are considered
threats to endangered bird speciess (Kirtland's Warbler and Black-capped
Vireo are the two I know about). There are *lots* of people employed as
Cowbird Control Consultants. Something like this could be done for
starlings if we were serious about getting rid of them (or, at best,
substantially reducing some of their populations), but, interestingly,
there's no evidence, except for some local stuff like Don Baccus' example
of Lewis' Woodpecker, that they have really done pervasive harm to native
species on this continent.

By the way, it's hard for me to respond to your question about how far
south starlings are "annoying native birds." I saw no changes in southern
Florida in hole-nester populations after starlings colonized Miami. For
years I've been a starling defender (even though I was quoted in the
newspaper as saying KILL 'EM ALL). I think they have got a bum rap for
affecting birds on which they actually have little effect. Don, I would
have proposed that Lewis' Woodpecker disappeared from western WA for the
same reason that bluebirds did, the growing up of logged areas and the
disappearance of snag-filled open woodland. Most of the birds of semiopen
country in western WA (including the woodpecker and the bluebird)
disappeared *before* starlings made it out here in any numbers (no one
should argue that, because the first starling was sighted in 1949 and
another bird species was last seen in 1952, the cause and effect are
obvious). And, of course, some of the birds that disappeared aren't even
hole nesters.

It has been written elsewhere, as Mike said when he started this thread
(thorns in sides do get plucked, Mike), that these birds are very much
associated with humans. Notwithstanding what I wrote about wide habitat
use, most of the places they are common are areas that wouldn't even
suffice as, say, good Lewis' Woodpecker habitat. Nevertheless, "city"
populations might do so well that they furnish colonists to keep pressure
on "country" birds. My feeling is that starlings and house sparrows and
some other "symbionts" don't really have anything like the effect on native
bird populations that some other natives (gulls & crows mentioned) that do
occur in all the wild places have. And notice it is as predators rather
than competitors that I think some of these species interactions are
significant.

Should we put into this thread the problem of bald eagles depredating great
blue heron colonies and causing murre colonies to lose most of their eggs,
or the problem of peregrine falcons wiping out the small alcids on Tatoosh
Island? There is now management of native species (e.g., cowbirds and
gulls) going on widely, perhaps not loved by everyone but considered at
least by some people necessary. We would certainly draw the line at this
time at killing eagles and peregrines to manage them (but what to do--maybe
a problem some day?), but with the same compassion we should consider other
interests than those of starlings and house sparrows (or introduced Canada
geese and painted turtles and mountain goats) when thinking about entire
ecosystems.

Dennis Paulson phone: (206) 756-3798
Slater Museum of Natural History fax: (206) 756-3352
University of Puget Sound e-mail: dpaulson at ups.edu
Tacoma, WA 98416