Thanks, Martha and others for offering "dissident" perspectives on
this issue. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act really SHOULD exclude
non-native, (but more to the point) INTRODUCED species. Blind defense
of the "pretty" (such as Mute Swans), to the detriment of native
species and native, naturally-evolved communities of organisms is a
significant issue that deserves thorough discussion by those who love
and want to protect the natural world. Many other such instances can
be found. Fanatical defenders of large, "sexy" , but non-native
wildlife have often hindered recovery and even survival of many
native but more obscure organisms. Three classic examples come to
mind:

1. The extermination of introduced, feral farmyard goats on San
Clemente Island, off San Diego, was held up for years by lawsuits
from animal rights groups (particularly Fund for Animals), while many
species of native plants, birds, and mammals were brought to the
brink of extinction. Finally, when rational minds prevailed and the
last goats were shot, the island has made a splendid recovery (though
some species remain at critically low levels). When I visited this
island in the late 1990's to study Castilleja grisea, a native,
shrubby paintbrush endemic to San Clemente, I was impressed by the
recovery. Prior to the goat killing, Castilleja grisea was very close
to extinction, surviving the hoofed onslaught only on a few
inaccessible crevices in steep canyon walls. If the goats had
continued on San Clemente, there is no doubt that the result would
have been the same as has occurred on Isla Guadalupe, a similar
island off Baja California, where the native vegetation and most of
the native birds have essentially disappeared. This once biological
unique island is now a virtual moonscape, with the most common
animals there being (aside from the goats) black widow spiders and
aggressive earwigs. Many plant species and the endemic storm petrel
are now assumed to be extinct.

2. Attempts to remove and/or kill introduced Mountain Goats in the
Olympic National Park (there is NO credible evidence that Mountain
Goats existed in the Olympics prior to human introductions for
hunting purposes in the early 1900's) were seriously hampered and
ultimately thwarted by animal rights groups, despite clear and
compelling evidence that the goats are degrading alpine communities
not adapted to their presence, including several rare plants endemic
to the Olympics.

3 The defence and promotion of non-native Eucalyptus trees in
California, which produce allelopathic chemicals and other substances
that harm birds feeding in their leaves and prevent other plants (not
adapted to their biochemistry) from growing in their understory.

So, you may want to write a letter on this issue, though you may want
to express an opinion other than that intended by the "Best Friends
Animal Society"!!! Are introduced Mute Swans, despite their graceful
aspect, any more deserving of defence than House Sparrows or
Starlings? I would contend that the answer is "NO"!

Mark Egger
Seattle, WA



>The Migratory Bird Treaty Act was designed to protect our NATIVE species.
>Some of these species are being seriously impacted by introduced species,
>including the mute swan and others.
> For another point of view on the subject please go to the following
>website:
>
>http://www.capitolconnect.com/audubon/summary.asp?subject=326&flow=2
>
>The loon populations in the mid-west, waterfowl and shorebirds of the east
>coast and many other areas are being negatively impacted by non-natives. I
>do not support the wholesale killing of birds, but offering protection under
>the MBTA is not only folly, but not what the drafters of this important
>document intended.
>
>Martha Jordan