Sadly, the headlong rush?in the politically correct biofuels direction has the potential to prove disastrous in the long-run to much wildlife (and particularly bird) habitat.? For example, i ncredibly productive CRP land in the potholes regions is being converted en masse to corn production rather than being renewed in the CRP program.? I was just back east to my home state of PA for a family visit and birded in areas near my old hometown, and in various spots as we drove from PA to eastern Tennessee for a retreat.? I talked with several rural folks along the way about any changes in farming.? The common theme - marginal areas that haven't been farmed for years (but which in their fallow state were great open or edge habitat for birds) are being plowed under and sowed with corn for biofuel.? We simply don't seem to be able as a country to step back and take a balanced scientific view of various energy alternatives and take the emotion out of policy decisions.?



[Relevant reference : - National Geographic, October 2007, pp. 35-59, "Green Dreams".? A quote from page 41: "Biofuels as currently rendered in the U.S. are doing great things for some farmers and for agricultural giants like Archer Daniels Midland and Cargill, but little for the environment."? Also note the image on page 43 showing a mountain of corn that will feed 16 ethanol distilleries in Nebraska - and the caption that says an additional 50 more distilleries are planned.? More visually impactful is the centerfold image of sugar cane fields stretching to?the horizon ?in Brazil, on pages 50-51.? This cane is?grown specifically for ethanol/biofuels production.? Mentally turn that sugar cane into corn fields in the midwest USA and ask yourself how many species you would be likely to find while birding that area, and then further realize that much of that massive cornfield might well have been productive bird habitat in the CRP program before being put back into corn production. ]



When I grew up, cornfields at least had Ring-necked Pheasant populations, but that was only because farmers back then were hunters as well and understood the need to leave hedgerows and un-tilled areas for the birds to nest and reproduce.? They also would typically leave some standing corn at harvest time to tide the pheasants ?over the winter,?which also served to feed grouse, doves and other?seed eaters.? Corporate corn farming practices in most areas?now leave no edge habitat at all and harvest the fields so close to the ground that no cover (and very little remnant seed) remains for birds over the winter.? I n order to compete with the megafarms , the smaller farmers have to try to use their land as efficiently as the large corporate farms or they can't make it economically.



Then there is the ?"every tree is a good tree" mentality that Dennis and Kelly allude to that ?is well-intentioned but not logically sound is in the long-run in my view.? I believe?it is going to be a primary reason for open space and edge bird species decline and even extinction in this country.? If you don't believe there can be such a thing as too many trees, and too many mature forests, talk to some old-timers in New England.? Many of the old farms in that area were sold for other uses well before the biofuels craze started, and in many cases people either planted them up with trees or the resilient forest relentlessly took back the open space.? Logging, if it's done at all anymore, is done selectively - which has its benefits, but which does not produce the large scrubby areas and significant patches of second growth forest?that come from previous farming and logging practices.? And as another factor, very high deer populations browse the understory in younger forests so heavily that young trees are often unable to take root at all - and then the ?forest is on its way to maturity with missing generations of future trees and a much-reduced understory flora .? Result? - avian species that?utilize shrubby areas and second growth forests have been significantly reduced.? (One specific?example species is the?Ruffed Grouse.)? Mature and old growth forests are of course critical to certain species, but from an avian?species diversity point of view, they are?not very productive habitats.? Many biologists believe that New England is more heavily forested today than when Europeans first colonized the area because some native populations on the east coast actually did some forest management practices,?using natural and controlled burns?and clearing for cultivation.? Of course, the Indian populations were much smaller and much more tuned into the natural environment and their impact on it than subsequent residents.



Alas, our environmental policies at this point seem pretty cast in stone, and so we'll just have to watch as this scenario plays itself out.? I hope those folks like me who have major concerns about biofuels and the no-tree-is-bad philosophy are wrong in our projections of where this is heading.



John Tubbs

Snoqualmie, WA

johntubbs at comcast.net

www.tubbsphoto.com










----- Original Message -----
From: "Kelly McAllister" <mcallisters4 at comcast.net>
To: "Tweeters" <tweeters at u.washington.edu>
Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2009 8:04:23 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: [Tweeters] a few birds at the ocean


Such interesting observations, which are repeated over and over again, in different places. The tragedy of the commons, our public lands trying to do so many things and ending up doing none of them very well. It's obvious, looking at an aerial photo or satellite image, how important our public lands are for maintaining natural habitats over the long term. However, many of these same lands get loved to death and wildlife can be less diverse and abundant in a perfectly wonderful habitat that has too many people while an unimpressive piece, behind a locked gate on private land, can be rich in wildlife.

The planting of woody vegetation is something that has often bothered me but, it's true, it's a very common restoration practice, probably correctly justified by the dominant historic conditions in many riparian and wetland habitats. However, it doesn't necessarily provide for the species that need the most help.

Kelly McAllister


----- Original Message -----
From: Dennis Paulson
To: Tweeters
Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2009 6:50 PM
Subject: [Tweeters] a few birds at the ocean

Hello, tweets.


Today Netta Smith and I saw the Red Phalarope at Midway Beach described by Charlotte Byers and also saw Gregg Thompson's photos of it. Green with envy. We were at the pond at Midway Beach at midday, and a female Red Phalarope was still there, but way across at the other side of the pond. The Red-necked Phalaropes, however, were at our feet, often passing less than 10 feet away as they swam around and fed, and we probably took 200 photos of them, absolutely impossible not to. I haven't looked at the photos yet, but I suspect there are at least a few good ones. There were at least 20-25 red-necks on the pond, scattered all along it. There was also a flock of 25 Western Sandpipers and a Semipalmated Plover on the far (western) side of the pond. But this is public property, and groups of people with kids and dogs (said without prejudice) kept coming up to the pond from both sides. One group crossed the pond from east to west and scared all the phalaropes away, not even noticing them.


We looked out at Bottle Beach in the morning, when the tide was still fairly low, and saw nary a shorebird, but I heard a Greater Yellowlegs in the distance, both calling and singing. It is so cool to hear shorebirds singing as they head north in the spring. The new state park is somewhat disconcerting to me, because there will now be a stream of recreating visitors there (we saw 5 carloads while we were there, all with either dogs or small children, that walked out to the beach and along it), far outnumbering birders and mostly not concerned with whether they scare away roosting shorebirds or not. In fact, I would predict there will be some active scaring away of shorebirds, unless all the adults practice rigorous child and pet control. I guess that's progress, and I realize there are far more nonbirders than birders, but I'm sorry that the end of that road may not be such a dependable place for shorebird roosting in the future. I suspect it will affect birders more than birds, which can just move farther away from that spot. It probably will be best to go there when high tide is early in the morning, before a lot of other people show up. I'll admit this is all speculation, but I've been watching people as long as I have birds.


I'm more disturbed by the obvious planting of tremendous numbers of trees and shrubs there, which will change it from an open area with a view out over fields and wetlands eventually to a dense patch of shrubbery or woodland that you walk through to get to the beach. The prevailing attitude in nature management, including "restoration," always seems to be to plant woody vegetation, with no thought to the value and relative rarity of the open habitats that will be lost. I would have had a consultant from the national wildlife refuge system showing the state park people how to modify the landscape to support freshwater shorebirds, which are a lot scarcer than Song Sparrows and Bewick's Wrens (again, no prejudice against these fine little birds).


We also saw a first-year Glaucous Gull at Shoalwater Bay, where one was reported yesterday, and another at Westport. A roosting flock of 30 Bonaparte's Gulls at Shoalwater Bay comprised mostly immatures; the adults are already heading for their breeding grounds. There were also about 20 immature Mew Gulls but not a single adult. There were more Brown Pelicans roosting on the breakwater at Westport than I have ever seen there, hundreds and hundreds of them lined up beak to tail, the great majority adults. But there was very little additional activity in the harbor, just a few gulls, D-c Cormorants, and guillemots. We looked out in the ocean for shearwaters wherever we were but never saw one. There was a flock of 50 or more Marbled Godwits roosting at a distance in the Tokeland Marina, but we saw no other shorebirds on the beach at Grayland or in Shoalwater Bay. Birds were generally uncommon (it is the end of the migration, after all), and I was really surprised not to see or hear a Caspian Tern. I did hear a Common Tern while we were at Midway Beach.



-----
Dennis Paulson
1724 NE 98 St.
Seattle, WA 98115
206-528-1382
dennispaulson at comcast.net








_______________________________________________
Tweeters mailing list
Tweeters at u.washington.edu
http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters

_______________________________________________ Tweeters mailing list Tweeters at u.washington.edu http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters