Hey tweets, I've been reading this thread about overpopulation with great
interest. I can't contribute anything more thoughtful than the posts I've
already read. But I do want to say something about the fact that these
thoughts *are* posted at all.

Some tweets have stated that tweeters should be about birds only. I myself
have received some criticism because I often write about not just birds, but
the meaning of birds to me. For some tweeters, this is marsh gas that they
would rather not waste their time with.

I disagree. I think it's very important for us to discuss so-called side
issues from time to time, issues such as birding ethics, environmental
protection, conservation, philosophy. In the first place, such discussions
serve to turn us into a community, which benefits us all, even the chasers.

In the second place, without such discussions birds would just be one more
collectable, and why not collect agates instead, or Hummel plates?

Third, if we fail to pay attention to these issues, the birds will die off
and then what will we look at? Oh yeah, agates and Hummel plates.

Lastly, such discussions make tweeters more interesting to read. I subscribe
to several other bird bulletin boards that *do* focus almost exclusively on
"what I saw today." They tend to be so boring that it's a major chore to
read through them to find the kernels of info that I would find useful.

I am not advocating that tweeters be turned into a political chatbox. I love
the diversity of postings as they are: a little bit of rarity, some backyard
regulars, a few jokes now and then, a little philosophy, some politics. To
me, this mix represents the essence of birding itself: There is something
for everyone. - Connie, Seattle

csidles at isomedia.com