Subject: Re: unbearable futility of rehabbing (was Re: rehab - long)
Date: Jul 22 07:55:18 1996
From: Tom Foote - footet at elwha.evergreen.edu




On Sun, 21 Jul 1996, ivan & dana shukster wrote:

> At 15:17 96-07-19 -0700, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >On Fri, 19 Jul 1996, David Wright wrote:
> >
> >> There are arguably better uses for the money spent each year on
> >> rehabbing, but much money is spent *birding*? Wouldn't that money
> >> be better spent buying habitat, etc.?
> >
> >David--
> >
> > I'm not sure that really addresses the argument I posed
> > in my original post...I was questioning the effectiveness
> > of rehabbing and what, if anything, the spin off good
> > was, as a result of the energy and resources
> > that go into that. There have been several posts since
> > then which address the various aspects of interfering
> > with the natural process to *save* the injured bird..
> > It really looks to me like it's questionable in terms
> > of the good that effort does. As Dennis pointed out
> > it makes the rehabbers feel good..just like it made
> > me feel good to drive that Pine Siskin to MacLeary..whether
> > or not it was helpful to the Siskin remained to be
> > seen...the news wasn't good when the rehabber checked
> > it out..chances are it died anyway.. So, perhaps
> > Dennis' point about it making us feel good is
> > accurate, but I don't think I see, so far, a cogent and
> > succinct argument that justifies it other than people
> > want to, or are compelled to, do it. I just puzzled
> > over whether the effort was worth it in terms of birds
> > successfully returned to the environment and I don't
> > yet see a convincing rationale that sways me to think
> > so. As I said, I'm still puzzling over this one..I
> > don't think I could ignore an injured bird, but I
> > would think about the circumstance in light of the
> > new information and the discussion I've seen back and
> > forth on the net. And, maybe I've made my last trip
> > to MacLeary..I don't know for sure.
> >
> >
> >I don't think we're in any position to be throwing stones at rehabbers.
> >>
> > I don't think we're throwing stones at rehabbers..they
> > do what they do out of a commitment to being of assistance
> > in what they perceive to be, a need. Some of us are simply
> > asking the question, "Who benefits by this action?" And, I
> > think there's substantial evidence in some of the posts
> > I've seen to answer.."the people who do it..and not necessarily
> > the birds they do it for"..(which becomes *do it to* in some cases)
> >
> > It's a hard question and it needs discussion and rumination
> > and lots of interchange...sometimes it takes a little heat
> > to get some light..
> >
> > Tom
> >
> I think that if you check with rehabbers you will see that the majority of
> birds in for rehab are from human causes, either direct ( shot , hit by
> vehicles) or indirect (windows, power lines)
>
I think I already responded to this concern...I don't believe
it matters how they got into rehab..


The question is if rehab is interfering with nature are we expecting birds
> to evolve to be able to avoid human structures and activities?

not in our lifetime... :)


And isn't
> the main benefit of rehabbers and rehab centres is to educate the public in
> the need to consider wildlife?
>
> Now this is an interesting supposition...I can see how a
rehab facility could possibly be a teaching tool, but
most of them are so busy they don't have time to conduct
any kind of outreach..

It would probably make more sense to take the money spent
on rehabbing and give it to Mike Waller and other Zoo
keepers for some kind of outreach program that gets into
the schools at an early age. Most of us have been around
birds and we know how great that feeling is...the few times
I've seen raptors in a public setting, the response is
that those who get close to a hawk are are struck and smitten.
It would be nice if we could get little kids to feel that way
and perhaps they wouldn't grow up thinking it was a good
idea to shoot them. I talked to a local vet who tells me
people are still bringing him hawks that have been shot..

Tom