Tweets



I must agree with Wayne on almost every point - Though I think he grossly underestimates the number of North American birders who have 650+ species. I'm one, and I didn't get them all by jumping in my jet (or some airlines jet) to get my jollies. I was extremely fortunate to be assigned to some of the greatest "edge" spots for North American birds over many years of work including South Florida, Brownsville, TX, a whole series of assignments in the Aleutians, Tucson, and some holes in the great north I'd wish on no one else - oh, and lots of marine work on both coasts. First I worked in mining (so am I double evil?) and then in defense (triple?) but my love was always wildlife... so every weekend, every available evening, every chance to be in the field was a bird opportunity. I also have a very large world list - but none of it was obcession or recognition driven - I was there, so were the birds, I watched them - that is luck and wonder and fate all rolled up in one.



Like Wayne I do get tired of the moralistic lectures both in public posts and private special memos that I've gotten from native plant bigots, eco-nuts (they are our own worst nightmare), and others who can't seem to realize it takes all kinds of people doing all kinds of things for all kinds of reasons to make this world an interesting place. No one here has malintent towards good stewardship of the planet, they just don't agree on what good stewardship is. Let people be - the only thing I really don't tolerate well is intolerance and as I get older I am even learning to understand that...but only to a point.



Wonderful birding to all wherever they are, however they got there, for whatever reason.



Rob

Rob Conway
Oakland, CA

(formerly Fall City, WA) A Tweeter at heart!

robin_birder at hotmail.com




> From: contopus at telus.net
> To: lbviman at blackfoot.net; tweeters at u.washington.edu
> Subject: RE: [Tweeters] "Life List" / Caryn - Wedgwood
> Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 09:36:04 -0800
> CC:
>
> Jim,
>
> It's obvious that you are not a member of the American Birding Association
> (ABA).
> Far from "only a few dozen" birders having found 650 species in the ABA area
> (which is what I presume you mean by "North America"), the latest ABA
> Listing Supplement lists 532 birders who have seen 650 species or more in
> that area, and I'm sure there are at least another 500 or more who are not
> ABA members, or chose not to send in their lists. This is not
> "super-birding" by any stretch of the imagination.
>
> If you wish to engage in moralistic preaching about the evils of energy
> consumption, or to slag other birders whose priorities are different from
> yours, please do it somewhere else other than on TWEETERS. Thank you.
>
> Wayne C. Weber
> Delta, BC
> contopus at telus.net
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tweeters-bounces at mailman2.u.washington.edu
> [mailto:tweeters-bounces at mailman2.u.washington.edu] On Behalf Of Jim Greaves
> Sent: February-03-10 12:31 PM
> To: tweeters at u.washington.edu
> Subject: Re: [Tweeters] "Life List" / Caryn - Wedgwood
>
> Well, as an avid "birder" and bird photographer, with 35 years'
> experience (ONLY in the "lower 40", and mostly in 4 states), but
> barely 500 life birds, I'd have to say that "obsessing" on life lists
> is EXTREMELY costly in terms of environmental degradation alone, as
> many "super-birders" expend HUGE amounts of fossil fuels to find a
> "twitch", often "dipping" in the process; only a few dozen (a hundred
> perhaps?) US citizens have surpassed 650 species in North America in
> the process, and I'd wager most of them chase every rarity they can
> (not even pursuing life lists, but rather regional or state lists).
> Ironic, to say the least, since so many of these same people claim to
> abhor pollution and other things that adversely impact wildlife and
> wildlife habitats, while simultaneously taking every opportunity to
> denigrate those who are not so "obsessed" with wildlife as to think
> they have "rights"... There was a time when I suppose it might have
> been justified - for instance, when it was finally "proven" in the
> 1960's or 1970's that most North American warblers (and indeed a host
> of other unexpected migrants) actually DID pass through California at
> some time or other. But, today, with all the self-righteously
> expressed anti-pollution hype against those who DON'T participate in
> "things environmental", it seems a bit hypocritical of those "some"
> to be so obsessively selfish. And, just so no one will flame me since
> I HAVE chased a few dozen birds in my life [successful maybe 75% of
> the time], my "life list of birds NOT seen" includes dozens that were
> within half an hour drive of my home at the time they were present
> (some for months), or were seen on pelagic treks I could neither
> afford to make, nor thought I'd enjoy due to motion of the waves on
> my equilibrium (sea-sickness - even with pills - still is not fun).
> Anyway, I am in no way trying to denigrate those who DO chase birds,
> and value the information and data they DO generate, but still think
> that an awful lot of "waste" is involved.
>
>
> Respectfully, Jim Greaves, Montana
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tweeters mailing list
> Tweeters at u.washington.edu
> http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters

_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469230/direct/01/