On Tue, 27 Feb 1996, Laura Saavedra wrote:
> The double standard
> applies to both those who decry the research yet want to know more and to
> those who do the research yet don't let the public know about what's
> gained.
>
Bravo! And I would also add that while scientific methodology is
important in setting up studies, there is also a need for other methods
as well. Sticking a net up in a specific area and catching the randomly
occurring regular migrants and not publicizing the research or using it
in ways beyond reporting it to the Banding Lab is not really any better
than randomly tagging birds beyond their normal range. Indeed, it seems
okay if the bird randomly flies into the net (like on the Farallons), but
banding the rarity purposefully seems to bother some.
It is the dissemination of information which seems to be woefully
lacking in many cases, and I would again turn this into a plea for
Tweeters discussers and lurkers to support any such scientific effort and
to report all bands, participate in atlas projects, and to generally
share their knowledge of birds in their area. Our discussions often
provide more information to improve understanding of range and id than
most studies.

> I also agree with R. Rowlett that it sure would be nice to find out more
> about the more common birds around us (like wouldn't it be great to tag
> some of the Montlake Crows to see how far they come to roost?).
When you find out that some chickadees move thirty miles from season to
season along major river valleys in Nebraska, it makes our local birds
seem not so local. But the research on this is not pretty--everyone
wants to be Michael Jordan, no one wants to be Billy Paultz.

Report bands--Participate in atlases--Send your sightings to Russell, to
Audubon--post them on Tweeters--and ENJOY!!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ray Korpi "One could do worse than be a swinger of birches."
Hm: Portland, OR --from "Birches"
Wk: Clark College by Robert Frost
Vancouver, WA
rkorpi at clark.edu