Well, I seem to have had my usual mediocre results at trying to
communicate electronically. Maybe I can clear some of this up...

On Sat, 2 Mar 1996, Russell Rogers wrote:

> I am still baffled as to why it was not alright to band the Longspur and
> apparently alright to band the Owl.

Actually, speaking only for myself, I didn't really think banding the owl
was a great idea, either. But (and perhaps I was wrong about this, see
below) it seemed like the tagging of the owl was done a little more openly.

Chris:
> > As an appendix, I'll say that my reaction to capture of the [CCLO] would
> > have been far different if the whole operation had been upfront. Maybe I
> > would agree that it was right to catch the bird, maybe I would disagree.
> > If you remember, I was one of the people discussing the various ways to
> > sex birds in the hand when the topic of catching Phil came up. But if I
> > have not made myself clear yet, what bugs me is the "conspiracy of
> > silence" that surrounds the event like a bad smell. As a bird bander
> > myself, I feel tainted by the whole thing.

RR:
> Here, I think Chris jumps to some pretty major conclusions. No one has
> lied about banding the bird. There was never a "conspiracy" to keep it a
> secret. I spoke freely about the banding to many people on and off the
> net, I just never did so on tweeters. It is also a pretty major assumption
> that the bander is on tweeters, and that they got the information about
> the bird from the list. The bird was first reported to the BirdBox. And
> then it was reported to tweeters from there. It was also on the RBA. I am
> not certain, but I don't think the bander is on tweeters.

OK, I am guilty as charged, and embarassed at my purple prose - at least,
up to a point. I was assuming that the bander was a tweet or was aware of
tweeters, and probably learned of the bird through tweeters. That is not
necessarily true, of course. Aside from chance meetings in the field with
other birders, I get most of my local birding info from tweets, so I'm
sure I exaggerate its importance. If the bander was not a tweet, and
didn't learn of the bird from tweets, (s)he doesn't owe tweets an
explanation. End of story.

As for my going ballistic about people witholding information about
banding the longspur, though, I am still not convinced that the whole
thing was quite as open as Russell implies. Even after the longspur
disappeared, there was a fair bit of conversation on tweets about the
bird, it's gender, and what might have happened to it (e.g., why it might
have decided to leave). I think I remember posts that asked (indirectly,
at least) if the bird had been caught and banded. And at least once or
twice I read things that made me think "hmm, this person knows something
that they aren't telling." So when it comes out much later that the bird
had been caught, and that some tweets knew it pretty much all along, but
let conversation continue on tweeters as if it hadn't, I felt snookered,
and took it a bit personally. And Russell's comment about the banding
party feeling that tweeters was not a "receptive audience" seemed to
support my assumptions. But I may just have been "trolled" on that one :)

Actually, Russell has filled in quite a lot of the details about the
banding so I'll shut up now and get back to more sensible pursuits, like
looking for my first swallow of the spring.

Good birding,

Chris Hill
Everett, WA
cehill at u.washington.edu

Russell with the final word:
> The bird was banded legally. It was released unharmed. You may not like
> it, I may not like it, and tweeters may not like it, but it was done. As
> far as I know, no birder was effected by the banding. It was done in broad
> daylight at 1:00 PM December 12, 1995, 9 days after the bird was first
> noted. Also, after checking the records, this was right before the massive
> cold front hit Washington. Which is probably why the bird dissappeared. I
> would say that the most opportune time to band the bird without effecting
> birders enjoyment of it, would have been that day at that time. I dont
> know if the bird was seen after the banding. There is no reports of the
> bird (seen or not seen) by birders after the 9th of December.