Subject: birding ethics
Date: Jan 26 17:55:47 1999
From: Ruth Sullivan - godwit at worldnet.att.net


To ALL,
This remind's me of watching the RARE SKYLARK i n Sequim.Last visit there
we had 3 Bicyclist driving all over almost driving over us. With all the
noice, we could never be able the find this bird.We finaly left, this kids
had all the fun.
Ruth

----------
> From: Deb Beutler <dbeutler at wsunix.wsu.edu>
> To: tweeters at u.washington.edu
> Subject: Re: birding ethics
> Date: Tuesday, January 26, 1999 2:04 PM
>
>
> drugge_dean/23 at belnet.bellevue.k12.wa.us wrote:
>
> > Subject: birding ethics
> > From: drugge_dean/23 at belnet
> > To: tweeters at u.washington.edu
> >
> > I would like
> > to remind us all of the American Birding Association's 'Principles of
> > Birding Ethics' I(b). "To avoid stressing birds or exposing them to
> > danger, exercise restraint and caution during observation, photography,
> > sound recording, or filming."
>
>
> The degree to which we stress organisms simply by walking the earth can't
be
> ignored either. How many times have you been watching a bird from a long
> distance and have some non-birder flush the bird just by walking around?
A
> couple of weeks ago, I visited the fabulous owl roost that is Hell's Gate
> State Park in Lewiston, Idaho. Several of the Barn Owls flushed before
we
> were even aware of their presence. However, once we got better at
figuring
> out where they were likely to be, we started to find them without
flushing
> them and that was much more enjoyable.
>
> However, I felt bad for one particular owl that day. We had spotted it
from
> a long distance away and had carefully and quietly approached closer. It
> was clearly not disturbed by this; it never opened its eyes the whole
time.
> Then, just as we were backing away, a pair of bicyclist came by,
screaming
> loudly. The owl woke up, saw us not very far from its tree and took off
> like a bat out of you know where. If the bicyclists had been quiet, the
owl
> never would have seen us and would have continued to sleep the afternoon
> away. The bikers never knew about the owl. Unfortunately, the
disturbance
> to owls continued because the first owl woke up a second and third that
we
> were unaware of even though it was only a few feet from our heads!!
>
> But all of us have to be careful and minimize impact as much as possible.
> When we flushed the owls, we watched where they flew and avoided flushing
> them again. We can't help having an impact on the wildlife around us; we
> just have to be aware of it and try to minimize it as much as possible.
In
> most cases, I think the impact by birders is less than the impact by the
> general public. The exception when birders are "pursuing" rarities; a
few
> forget their manners and the volume of traffic is dramatically increased.
>
> Jerry Converse wrote:
>
> Except in the name of science, Ya know--like--mist nets, trapping,
banding,
> tagging, nasel disks----
>
> Whoa Jerry. Before you start picking on us poor old scientists,
remember,
> the ethics code originally cited was written by birders for birders and
> cover several million people out every day looking for birds and
disturbing
> millions of bird on a daily basis. The examples Jerry cites are a few
> hundred individuals working on several million birds and for only a very
> short time span. Yes, the "stress" is greater but it is short-lived.
>
> By the way, the scientists also have a code. The American Ornithological
> Union published a guide on the handling and care of birds by researchers.
> The Animal Behavior Society also has a similar code. They are designed
to
> minimize the disturbance to organisms. Most universities also have
> animal-use committees that must approve your protocols for handling and
> caring for animals before you can actually carry out an experiment, even
if
> the experiment is not conducted on campus. For example, if I planned on
> weighing, measuring and banding nestling warblers in the woods around
> Chewelah as part of my PhD. thesis at Washington State University, I
would
> have to go through the Animal Use committee even though my handling of
the
> warblers would be minimal and I wouldn't be caring for them at all.
(This
> is just an example; my actual research involves counting birds without
> touching them so I don't have to go through the Animal Use Committee. I
> just have to wear camo and be very quiet.)
>
> I think most of us birders and most of my fellow scientists try to
minimize
> our impact on animals as much as possible while still enjoying our
favorite
> past time and fields of study. But is always good to remind us once in a
> while.
>
> Deb Beutler
> Dept. of Zoology
> Washington State University
> Pullman, Whitman Co., WA
>
> dbeutler at wsunix.wsu.edu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Rosso <jrosso at mediaseek.com>
> To: drugge_dean/23 at belnet.bellevue.k12.wa.us
> <drugge_dean/23 at belnet.bellevue.k12.wa.us>; tweeters at u.washington.edu
> <tweeters at u.washington.edu>
> Date: Tuesday, January 26, 1999 8:32 AM
> Subject: Re: birding ethics
>
>
> >At 07:38 AM 1/26/99 -0800, drugge_dean/23 at belnet.bellevue.k12.wa.us
wrote:
> >>BTW, I did
> >>yell out 'view the birds, don't flush 'em'. I was shown respect for
> >>birds, and the need to 'stay back' after a trip to Boundary Bay (Snowy
> >>Owls) a few years ago with Bob Sundstrom. Why do we bird anyway?
> >>
> >> -dean
> >
> >This is always a tough subject for the photographers in the group. As a
> >photographer the quality of the picture always improves as I get closer.
> >But at the same point I get better pictures if the bird stays relaxed
and
> >can continue to do what its doing . I try to watch carefully so I can
tell
> >when the bird is feeling pressured and then back off. But its not a
perfect
> >science.
> >
> >I have also found that different things cause birds to flush. Sometimes
its
> >movement. Sometimes its the flash. Sometimes its somebody yelling. You
> >just never can tell.
> >
> >
> >Jim Rosso
> >Jim Rosso
> >Issaquah, Washington
> >425-392-8440
> >jrosso at mediaseek.com
> >