Thank you for your compassionate and thoughtful response, Jon! I was
horrified at the nonchalance and cruelty of that email message. Some of the
actions below Are illegal, not to mention unconscionable.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jon. Anderson and Marty Chaney <festuca at olywa.net>
To: tweeters at u.washington.edu <tweeters at u.washington.edu>
Date: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 9:38 PM
Subject: Humane handling of animals


>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
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>