A public "thank you" for the voice of reason. The unnecessary personal
attacks on Michelle failed where this letter calmly and intelligently points
out the reality. Thank you Wayne!
Dianna Moore
Ocean Shores, Wa.
dlmoor2 at coastaccess.com

----- Original Message -----
From: WAYNE WEBER <contopus at home.com>
To: TWEETERS <tweeters at u.washington.edu>
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 12:26 AM
Subject: STARLING CONTROL


> Tweeters,
>
> I can speak with a lot of personal experience about Starlings. I
> completed a B.Sc. honours thesis on Starling roosts in Vancouver, and
> I wrote an M.Sc. thesis about the ecology of urban birds including
> Starlings. Even more to the point, for 12 years (1982 to 1994) I
> worked for the B.C. Ministry of Agriculture as a Bird Control
> Specialist and Wildlife Damage Specialist. For this time period,
> finding ways of reducing Starling damage to crops, and carrying out
> extension programs on reducing bird damage to crops, was a large part
> of my job. I am probably the closest thing there is to a Starling
> expert in B.C.
>
> European Starlings are a non-native species in North America, and they
> cause many millions of dollars in damage to crops every year, never
> mind the major population reductions in some native birds (e.g.
> Eastern and Mountain Bluebirds, Purple Martins, flickers, and probably
> Lewis's Woodpeckers) caused by nest-site competition. However,
> Starlings are one of the 2 or 3 most abundant bird species on the
> continent, and any attempt to reduce their populations by lethal
> control methods is certain to fail.
>
> Michelle is correct that Starlings (like House Sparrows and Rock
> Doves, also introduced) are not legally protected and can legally be
> captured and killed-- for good reasons-- in both the U.S. and Canada.
>
> My approach when I worked for the Ministry of Agriculture was to
> strongly de-emphasize lethal control methods, and to advocate methods
> like protecting blueberries and grapes by the use of bird-proof
> plastic netting. Although costly to put up, plastic netting is
> effective, and in many situations, pays for the cost of installation
> within 3 or 4 years. Methods of protecting vulnerable bird species
> from Starlings, such as putting up bluebird nest boxes with entrance
> holes that are too small for Starlings but big enough for bluebirds,
> are far more effective than killing any number of Starlings.
>
> The nest-box trap described by Michelle has been used for many years,
> and will often catch 1 or 2 birds a day. Much larger numbers (up to 50
> or 100 birds a day) can be caught in large "cage traps" baited with
> fruit, especially if there are a few "decoy" Starlings to start with.
> Research has shown that in some situations, intensive trapping with
> several "cage traps" can reduce Starling numbers and damage
> temporarily, such as at a winter cattle-feeding operation. However, it
> has absolutely no effect on the number of Starlings returning the next
> year.
>
> In B.C., before my time with the Agriculture ministry, large-scale
> trapping of Starlings was advocated in fruit-growing areas of the
> Okanagan Valley, and was even carried out by Ministry employees for
> awhile. However, it was soon found that the results generally were not
> worth the effort, and trapping was abandoned as a damage control
> method. It was replaced by plastic netting and scaring methods such as
> propane exploders, taped Starling distress calls, and mechanical
> noisemakers like the "Av-Alarm".
>
> Trapping and killing Starlings (there are humane methods of doing so)
> is still legal in Canada and the U.S. However, the only thing it
> usually accomplishes is to allow the trap operator to exercise a
> little revenge against the birds for crop losses, or for perceived
> losses of other bird species. It usually does little if anything to
> solve the problem.
>
> Although attitudes vary greatly (as exemplified by previous Tweeters
> messages), most people find killing birds offensive, even if they do
> not object to killing mice, rats, and cockroaches in the name of pest
> control. This is one of the reasons why I have always advocated
> non-lethal methods of reducing bird damage. Two other reasons are that
> lethal control methods are almost always ineffective, while there are
> other methods of damage control that are effective.
>
> Having studied Starlings for many years, I find them a fascinating and
> adaptable bird. In many ways, especially in their adaptability, they
> remind me of humans. However-- like humans-- I find that individually,
> they are often attractive and interesting, but when they start to
> gather in the tens and hundreds of thousands, they become a pain in
> the neck!
>
> Wayne C. Weber
> Kamloops, BC
> contopus at home.com
>
>
>