Michelle wrote about Starling trapping (many snips):

"How to get the starling out.
" First of all, DO NOT EVER EVER RELEASE A LIVE STARLING. If you're not
willing to kill it, don't bother trapping it, because all you will do is
train all the other starlings about this trap. I repeat, if you can't kill
the starling, don't trap them in the first place.

"You can kill them in various ways. One woman who uses this trap says she
just
leaves them in the cage until they die. Cruel? Well, perhaps....but at least
they don't get out to reproduce. She says it takes a day or two for them to
die of exhaustion from jumping. And sometimes, if there's two or more in the
cage, one manages to get out.

" I have to believe that the swallows entered the trap only as a very last
resort, because I have dozens of violet greens here every year (I have ten
boxes up for them) and I've only had the misfortune of trapping two. That's
why it's important to make the interior of the house as dark as possible, to
make it unattractive to other hole nesters.
I've never had any other bird even think about entering it.
So it is vitally necessary for you to check it twice, (at least!) every day,
to release possible non-target birds.

"So the two rules are:
Don't trap starlings if you can't kill them
Check the trap at least twice a day for non-target birds.

"Let's get out there and trap starlings!!"
Michelle
MBlanchrd at aol.com
Oly, WA
-------------------------------------------------
Tweeters:

First: It is absolutely reprehensible to intentionally cause any pain &
suffering to any creature. It's merely thoughtless and cruel to do so
inadvertently. Even hunters do not seek to cause suffering to the animals
that they kill for food. Checking the trap only once or twice a day is not
sufficient. Bird banders who are permitted to trap and release wild birds
generally check their traps every ? to one hour, at least. This is to keep
the bird from going through excessive stress, heat prostration, cold, etc.
Leaving a bird to starve to death or die of exposure in such a trap violates
any consideration of human compassion and violates the basic animal cruelty
laws - Pasado's Law notwithstanding. I would personally report to the
authorities any one who I saw treating any live animal in such a manner, and
testify at the trial.

Second: Trapping of this sort - if it 'takes' ANY wild, protected songbirds
such as swallows, wrens, sparrows, etc. would be illegal without State and
Federal Permits. Even though the trapping of swallows would be incidental
to the trapping of starlings, you just can't legally do it without a permit.
Same thing goes for those "English Sparrow Traps" sold in the garden stores
and catalogs - when you trap a House Finch or Goldfinch or Song Sparrow
without a permit, you're breaking the law. No matter how "good" your
intentions are.

Editorial: In general, I really don't understand how a person can decide
that it's OK to kill one bird species and not another (I'm not talking about
hunting, chicken farming, millinery, etc., here - just the attitude of "it's
bad; kill it"). Sure, starlings & house sparrows are 'exotics'. So are
house finches in New York. So are we, along with our pets, livestock,
landscaping of ivy, ornamental trees and European lawn grasses. The
starlings are here, just as are the Caucasian-Asian-African-origin peoples,
in the land of 'Native America'. When I give bird-banding demonstrations
to scout groups or school/college classes, I've had any number of birders
and 'conservationists' give me grief for my not killing the starlings or
English sparrows that I capture, band and release. They're rarely placated
when I point out that killing a few individuals of any species won't make a
bit of difference in the population of the species as a whole, that
information on movements and migration of these 'resident' exotics is pretty
well unknown, and that killing the bird just makes me feel bad without doing
any good.

To disrespect the life of a bird - individual or species - because its
origins are not from here, is an attitude too easily transferred to a wide
range of "others", including 'them foreigners' of (Fill in the Blank) race.
We think it deplorable that the 'wise use' folks have a 'people first'
attitude with endangered species, and want to 'let go' the salmon or eagles
or wolves if their protection infringes their 'property rights', but we are
self-righteous in determining that 'exotics' are less worthy of humane
treatment?

I am not so wise or omniscient to believe that I should be able to say that
'Kirtland's Warblers and Dusky Thrushes are exotic to the PNW, but they're
rare songbirds and must be protected', or 'Trumpeter swans and Townsend's
warblers are pretty and native so they must be protected', or 'Crows,
ravens, magpies and Bewick's wrens are nest-predators, but they're native
species so they should be protected', but 'Starlings and House Sparrows are
exotics and nest competitors, so must be killed at every opportunity'. Life
is precious, and - as far as I know - rare in the universe. I believe we
should respect that Life, and live and let live. Even with starlings...

Jon. (Damned-Starling-Lover) Anderson
Olympia, Washington
festuca at olywa.net
--------------------------------------------------------------------