I agree with Jon, a person who sets a trap and only checks it once or
twice a day, or, worse, checks it and leaves the animal in it to die
should be reported. Hope she doesn't get out and reproduce.

On Wed, 24 Jan 2001, Jon. Anderson and Marty Chaney wrote:

> Michelle wrote about Starling trapping (many snips):
>=20
>=20
> "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 le=
ast
> 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.
>=20
> Tweeters:
>=20
> 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 animal=
s
> that they kill for food. Checking the trap only once or twice a day is n=
ot
> sufficient. Bird banders who are permitted to trap and release wild bird=
s
> generally check their traps every =BD to one hour, at least. This is to =
keep
> the bird from going through excessive stress, heat prostration, cold, etc=
=2E
> Leaving a bird to starve to death or die of exposure in such a trap viola=
tes
> any consideration of human compassion and violates the basic animal cruel=
ty
> 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.
>=20
> Second: Trapping of this sort - if it 'takes' ANY wild, protected songbi=
rds
> such as swallows, wrens, sparrows, etc. would be illegal without State an=
d
> Federal Permits. Even though the trapping of swallows would be incidenta=
l
> to the trapping of starlings, you just can't legally do it without a perm=
it.
> Same thing goes for those "English Sparrow Traps" sold in the garden stor=
es
> 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.
>=20
> 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 ab=
out
> hunting, chicken farming, millinery, etc., here - just the attitude of "i=
t'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 people=
s,
> in the land of 'Native America'. When I give bird-banding demonstration=
s
> 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 placat=
ed
> 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 pre=
tty
> well unknown, and that killing the bird just makes me feel bad without do=
ing
> any good.
>=20
> 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 wid=
e
> range of "others", including 'them foreigners' of (Fill in the Blank) rac=
e.
> 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 eagl=
es
> or wolves if their protection infringes their 'property rights', but we a=
re
> self-righteous in determining that 'exotics' are less worthy of humane
> treatment?
>=20
> I am not so wise or omniscient to believe that I should be able to say th=
at
> 'Kirtland's Warblers and Dusky Thrushes are exotic to the PNW, but they'r=
e
> 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 a=
re
> exotics and nest competitors, so must be killed at every opportunity'. L=
ife
> 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...
>=20
> Jon. (Damned-Starling-Lover) Anderson
> Olympia, Washington
> festuca at olywa.net
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>=20
>=20