Michael and Tweeters,

I agree with your well-written post Michael. It also occurs to me that as
a result of Michelle's (albeit reactive) actions of putting the young
Killdeer's body in the trash, it's life was subsequently wasted... for
nothing... The crow will now need to find something else (possibly another
chick) to feed it's young.

As I've stated before, surely we need to look honestly at the problem of
pest species, giving due consideration to the root causes of the problems
and how WE help to perpetuate them. Crows, House Sparrows, starlings,
geese, squirrels, rats and cats etc. etc. are "successful" species (like
us... ) doing what comes naturally where human activity _nurtures_ their
proliferation.

Also, because we have paved over and otherwise modified so much of the
natural environment, wildlife species are being brought much closer
together in their efforts to find food resources and habitat, creating
unfortunate conjunctions that otherwise may not occur with such regularity
if there were more "room". A possible (as yet unverified) example might
prove to be the notable degree of Bald Eagle predation on Great Blue Heron
nests.

Michele Herzberg
Kent, WA
<foxglove at jps.net>


-----Michael wrote------

>Hi Tweets,
>
>Michelle Blanchard writes:
>
>(snip)
>>I know, I know, I was interfering in act of nature..but there's too
>>damned many crows out here now. I won't go into that again.
>(edit)
>>trash..sorry, mr. crow, but you aren't having killdeer for breakfast.
>
>How did you know it wasn't the mother?
>
>I'm afraid this occurrence illustrates the principle that one's heart should
>be in the right place, but the right place for a heart is not on top of
>one's shoulders.
>
>Have you ever examined objectively your hatred of crows, Michelle? If
>there's too many of them near you, the greater population in urban or
>semi-urban habitats is invariably because humans offer them levels of food
>availability they don't get in the wild--uncovered garbage, discarded food
>and human habitat destruction eventually all help to raise their numbers.
>Why should you blame *them* before accepting your own responsibility as a
>habitat-altering human? Are you really justified in making them suffer
>violent death or injury because your particular human presence has, in part,
>led to their increased population? To extend the logic, would you strew
>chocolate bars around a neighborhood and then shoot children for picking
>them up?
>
>If your shooting of the crow had been successful, and had you killed it,
>then you would have left one crow parent to bring up the half-orphaned
>young. As they do naturally, Michelle, crows predate on eggs and young
>typically when they have their own young in the nest; as young birds of any
>species do, including plovers, nestling crows need large amounts of protein
>to develop quickly. After their young fledge, this type of predation greatly
>lessens and they consume a more general diet.
>
>Also, if you had successfully orphaned that brood, it's possible that the
>adolescent children of that family's parent would have pitched to help the
>widow/er, since crows have developed much higher levels of family values
>than plovers. Given the North American promotion of 'Famly Values', I've
>never understood why crows aren't more widely admired for this exemplary
>behavior, as research has shown they actually practice what we humans spend
>a lot of breath yapping about but have a chequered history of accomplishing.
>
>Please, Michelle, I beg you to reconsider your attitude to these
>fascinating, complex, loyal creatures, and to remember that their parental
>dynamic *compels* them to feed their young with whatever prey they can find.
>They are not creatures of evil motive, as your post implies but doesn't say
>overtly: you tried to kill a parent trying to raise its kids the best it can.
>
>Michael Price
>Vancouver BC Canada
>mporice at mindlink.net

---------------------