Thanks to Randy and Scott for these posts as I wholeheartedly agree
and think this is quite important.

On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Randy and Elaine Hill <re_hill at q.com> wrote:
> ?or is rare in your local area?
>
>
>
> Based on Tweeters posts this is missed or ignored by many.
>
>
>
> Randy Hill
>
> Ridgefield
>
>
>
> From: tweeters-bounces at mailman2.u.washington.edu
> [mailto:tweeters-bounces at mailman2.u.washington.edu] On Behalf Of Scott
> Downes
> Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2010 1:22 PM
> To: Wayne Weber; tweeters at u.washington.edu
> Subject: [Tweeters] Re: "State Candidate" species in WA
>
>
>
> Tweets,
>
> As Gene, Dennis and Wayne have commented on my post in terms of questioning
> why these species are on the list, it appears that the point of my post was
> missed. My post was NOT advocating that Species of Concern should be
> avoiding when using Ipod or advocating that this was a "off limits list". If
> somebody took that message from my post, then I'm sorry I didn't get the
> point accross.?My post?was to point out that too often the ABA code of
> ethics gets thrown around and I don't think people really have thought
> through all the aspects of when they say "follow the ABA code of ethics". As
> I quoted in my previous post, the ABA code says "Limit the use of recordings
> and other methods of attracting birds, and never use such methods in heavily
> birded areas, or for attracting any species that is Threatened, Endangered,
> or of Special Concern, or is rare in your local area". I underlined the word
> never as the code is fairly clear on this. So if you were to play tapes to
> any of the species I listed, technically you'd be going against the ABA
> code. I tend to believe that most species (with the exception of T&E
> species) can tolerate some Ipod playing in moderation and that madoeration
> should be increased during breeding season and for "species of concern".
> Thus it might be just fine to play a tape briefly for a sage sparrow in
> March (I have done it myself) but do it brief and if you don't get good
> views, then oh well. Thus my post was more food for thought, i.e. in
> accepting the ABA code are people aware that they are also agreeing to not
> call in species of concern. So, perhaps a more thorough examination of the
> ABA code is warranted if people believe that limited calling to many of
> these species is ok.
>
>
>
> I hope this final post helps to clarify my earlier post on the subject. If
> people believe that there is strong evidence against a species status as
> Wayne, Gene and Dennis seem to do on PIWO, I would suggest working with WDFW
> staff (or at least contacting them).
>
>
>
> Scott Downes
>
> downess at charter.net
>
> Yakima WA
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tweeters mailing list
> Tweeters at u.washington.edu
> http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters
>
>



--
Paul L. Bannick
Nature and Bird Photography
www.paulbannick.com
206-352-1940

My first book, "The Owl and the Woodpecker: Encounters with North
America's Most Iconic Birds" features a foreword by Tony Angell and
recordings by Martyn Stewart.

For sample pages, book event dates and more information, see:
http://www.paulbannick.com