Are all sparrows of the devil? (2 Viewers)

[Bird_Bill]

And methods of dispatch, put the birds in a plastic bag and attach to your car exhaust. Stand to be corrected, but pretty sure that would be illegal in much of Europe!

How about a citation from Audubon, or one of these other fan clubs you mention that sustains that allegation.
Not a news paper story from some gal alleging what her mother did. Something from those actual organizations.


Entire subject has been covered before here in the past.
My advice to the OP is to get ahold of local or state authorities for real help.
Going half way round the world may not accomplish much.

 

[wrambler]

It's very interesting reading the different impressions of US house sparrows vs European house sparrows. Maybe since they're native to Europe, other European bird species have figured out a way to coexist (or they would have been pushed out of existence long ago). I can only speak to what I see within sight of my backyard. While a few house sparrows feed inside the cage, a few more hang on to the outside and peck at any other species that decide they want a bite to eat. The only birds that can effectively peck back and continue eating are the full grown male cardinal and blue jay.

Maybe the reason people in the US aren't as supportive of sitting by and watching the invasion and subsequent natural selection is because these birds aren't native here. So even if you marvel at the beauty of evolution, in this case it seems a little twisted, and well, unnatural. The US isn't the only county that is trying to deal with a non-native invasive species.

Hindsight I should have posted in the US or Texas sections, didn't expect the thread to go this far off, sorry.

Back to the constructive responses:
- I'll give nyjer a shot and see if the sparrows decide to bogart that as well, thanks!
- Also appreciate the info that not all sparrows are of the devil, only the band of house sparrows in my backyard.

 

[Simon Wates]

The problem I'm having with the descriptions of House Sparrows devilishness - is - all that rage/hate directed at them. It was, after all, man's fault introducing them and providing them with a suitable environment.

Kinda like hating the plants in your garden really.

 

[fugl]

Maybe the reason people in the US aren't as supportive of sitting by and watching the invasion and subsequent natural selection is because these birds aren't native here. So even if you marvel at the beauty of evolution, in this case it seems a little twisted, and well, unnatural. The US isn't the only county that is trying to deal with a non-native invasive species, like those cute little harmless grey squirrels in the British Isles and how they're being eradicated, oh

It's much too late to "watch the invasion" which was successfully completed before most contributors to this thread were born. House Sparrows are now an established part of our fauna and "eradication" simply isn't an option. If you don't want them in your backyard, stop putting out their favorite foods.

 

[Ruff]

I live in a relatively rural area and see very few house sparrow out here in the sticks- years can go by. They are urban birds, tough little hellions with gang affiliations that like living in warm cement-and-shrubbery areas the rest of the local bird population isn't adapted to and clearly doesn't 'want' to.

 

[Soj]

You vastly exaggerate the harm House Sparrows cause native birds which outside suburban backyards is close to zero in most places. In my very birdy suburban backyard in Reno they do no harm at all as far as I can tell. As for aggressiveness to other hole nesters, they're pretty much on a par with many other competitors for this scarce resource and certainly no worse than such native species as House Wrens and Tree Swallows.

As others have pointed out, there's nothing "demonic" about House Sparrows which are just birds like any others. They've co-evolved with humans for millennia in the Old World and while not native to North America specifically they are native to us--settled humanity--wherever we live and once established around human settlements anywhere they tend to flourish, out-competing more poorly adapted species--"native" or otherwise.

I beg to differ. On my 28 acres in mid-MO, house sparrows were still a problem. There was a HUGE colony nesting in a falling down house within sight of my place. And they were spreading out from there. It is a myth that the European house sparrow is only found in urban/suburban areas. They create a huge pest problem in agricultural/rural areas as well.

In MY "very birdy backyard in Reno", I have yet to see a European house sparrow. I submit that has more to do with the fact that we are in a desert than with a supposition that because you don't see them that often, they therefore must not be a problem for ANYBODY in the entire country.

Since you don't worry about non-native species out-competing native species, apparently because you go for a dog-eat-dog view of natural selection, I guess you should be happy with the Zebra mussel infestation, the Chestnut blight that has effectively destroyed our native chestnut species, kudzu, the snakehead fish, giant African snails, Asian carp, fire ants, African bees, and the mongeese some idiot imported to Hawaii that are now killing off native Hawaiian birds. They are all outcompeting local species, so by your lights, all the flora and fauna they destroy must be "poorly adapted" and deserves to go.

That's just so wrong-headed it needs no further discussion.

 

[ovenbird43]

Maybe since they're native to Europe, other European bird species have figured out a way to coexist (or they would have been pushed out of existence long ago).

I would argue that in the US, House Sparrows and native birds DO coexist for the most part. On a small scale yes, House Sparrows may dominate a few feeders, but on a larger scale they're not pushing any native species toward extinction. And, as fugl pointed out, other native cavity-nesters compete just a fiercely for nest holes - House Wrens are known to destroy other species' eggs in the process.

My tolerant view toward House Sparrows is also partly philosophical - after all, how many of us posting from the US are also of European ancestry? We don't "belong" here any more than House Sparrows... and collectively we're a much bigger problem! Not that I'm against prevention or control of invasive species, but we have to pick our battles, and controlling House Sparrows would require a monumental effort (impossible, really) with little to gain from it.

And since they're going to come to my feeders anyways, I figure I may as well enjoy them :t:

 

[fugl]

I beg to differ. On my 28 acres in mid-MO, house sparrows were still a problem. There was a HUGE colony nesting in a falling down house within sight of my place. And they were spreading out from there. It is a myth that the European house sparrow is only found in urban/suburban areas. They create a huge pest problem in agricultural/rural areas as well.

Spreading over the countryside and. . .what exactly?

In MY "very birdy backyard in Reno", I have yet to see a European house sparrow. I submit that has more to do with the fact that we are in a desert than with a supposition that because you don't see them that often, they therefore must not be a problem for ANYBODY in the entire country.

I don't understand your point here. There are lots of House Sparrows in my yard and I see them everyday at my feeders

ISince you don't worry about non-native species out-competing native species, apparently because you go for a dog-eat-dog view of natural selection, I guess you should be happy with the Zebra mussel infestation, the Chestnut blight that has effectively destroyed our native chestnut species, kudzu, the snakehead fish, giant African snails, Asian carp, fire ants, African bees, and the mongeese some idiot imported to Hawaii that are now killing off native Hawaiian birds. They are all outcompeting local species, so by your lights, all the flora and fauna they destroy must be "poorly adapted" and deserves to go.

C'mon, don't be childish. There's no over-arching principle here. Each case needs to be evaluated on its merits.

 

[ptickner]

While there is lots of anecdotal evidence about House Sparrow effects on Bluebird populations, there doesn't appear to be much concrete data. According to Cornell's The Birdhouse Network project leader Tina Phillips:

What effect is this having on North America's bluebirds, swallows and other native cavity-nesting species? "We don't know," says Phillips. "There are no long-term studies showing the effect of competition between house sparrows and our native cavity-nesters."

She goes on to say that "according to 2003 data collected by TBN, house sparrows account for 43 percent of all competitor species (species that take over nest boxes intended for native birds)" and "One thing is known for sure: In head-to-head competition, house sparrows readily out-compete native species for nesting sites by evicting other nesting birds, destroying their eggs, killing nestlings and sometimes even killing the incubating female. Adding to the competition is the fact that once a male house sparrow establishes a territory, he remains there year-round and starts defending that territory early in the season, often preventing later-arriving species, such as bluebirds and swallows, from nesting."

The full article can be found here: http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2004/04/citizens-asked-monitor-impact-invasive-bird-species

 

[Soj]

I live in a relatively rural area and see very few house sparrow out here in the sticks- years can go by. They are urban birds, tough little hellions with gang affiliations that like living in warm cement-and-shrubbery areas the rest of the local bird population isn't adapted to and clearly doesn't 'want' to.

I lived in a rural area where the nearest neighbor was over a mile away. Plenty of house sparrows. They are notorious agricultural pests that attack many agricultural crops such as grains and fruits. They foul feed for horses and cattle. They are carriers of a wide variety of diseases, including West Nile Virus, chlamydiosis, salmonellosis, transmissible gastroenteritis, tuberculosis, encephalitis, and internal parasites such as toxoplasmosis and trichomoniasis. Not to ignore a wide variety of ticks, mites, fleas and lice.

Certainly house sparrows are not the only birds that kill other birds for nesting sites (starlings are worse for this behavior), nor the only birds that can carry disease or any of the other pesty things they do. However, there aren't a lot of birds that meet ALL those pesty criteria, AND nest in colonies, AND aren't the slightest bit fazed by being in close proximity to humans and their dwellings and agricultural buildings. The European house sparrow exists in a sort of "perfect pest storm". Starlings and these "sparrows" (which are actually finches) are two of the worst non-native invasive pest species in the entire USA, if not THE worst.

It doesn't matter that they are "already here". They should not be treated as desirable birds, but as the pests that they are. They have been particularly hard on native bluebird populations. While starlings can be excluded from nest boxes by reducing the size of the nesting box entryway to 1.5", thus allowing bluebirds safe nesting, unfortunately the house sparrow can quite easily enter a box with an entry down to about an inch (too small for native bluebirds). Protecting bluebird nesting sites requires active trapping and close monitoring of the nesting sites - and even that will fail on occasion.

That is why people see the European house sparrow as "devilish". Nobody thinks they are actual demons - but they are animals which are out of place, and because they are out of place, they are destructive. Keep in mind - the European House Swallows that are here now are not the same as those that were originally imported. They have adapted to much harsher weather, and in other ways as well. Sending some of our version back to where they came from could very well result in similar destructiveness in their original habitat.

 

[Soj]

Spreading over the countryside and. . .what exactly?

Yes, what exactly?

I don't understand your point here. There are lots of House Sparrows in my yard and I see them everyday at my feeders

My point is that you can't take your personal situation in an environment that is NOT typical and therefore extrapolate to the entire country. I do believe that is what I specifically said, in fact.

C'mon, don't be childish. There's no over-arching principle here. Each case needs to be evaluated on its merits.

... they are native to us--settled humanity--wherever we live and once established around human settlements anywhere they tend to flourish, out-competing more poorly adapted species--"native" or otherwise

My comment was too the point - you have expressed the idea that they (European house swallows) are "out competing more poorly adapted species" and therefore presumably those "more poorly adapted species" are of no import. It's a dog-eat-dog view of evolution.

Rattus rattus and Rattus norvegicus are also "native to ... settled humanity" and "they tend to flourish" around human settlements. Doesn't mean we have to let them live with us. House sparrows are rats with wings.

 

[Soj]

So, as on the numerous websites in the US, the facts as as they say, yes? Sparrows kill simply for the sake of killing? Can displace any bird?

I don't find that being said on any reliable web site. Not on an Audubon Society site, not on Cornell. I haven't even come across it on somebody's bird blog. So - even if there are "numerous" websites that say such thing - the question is - what is the credibility of those sites, and in what context is it being said, and by whom?

Citation?

And as for methods, is it responsible for Audubon and all the purple martin/bluebird fanclubs to publish and encourage lay persons to use traps which they freely admit can catch any species, native of otherwise? Adding the caveat, check traps at least once every 24 hours is a joke - even if the trapped birds don't die in that 24 hours, and even if the average lay person doesn't forget to check every day, then still it is a joke - if the bird is breeding, 24 hours trapped is potentially going to lead to death of birds in nests waiting to be fed.

Where I have seen trapping discussed, the traps are to be checked EVERY HOUR, not once a day. And if one is not CERTAIN that on has trapped a European House Sparrow, "when in doubt, let it out".

And yes, I DO feel trapping is warranted. I have no problem with people trapping these birds. Or shooting them, or dumping their nests, or feeding them to snakes.

And methods of dispatch, put the birds in a plastic bag and attach to your car exhaust. Stand to be corrected, but pretty sure that would be illegal in much of Europe!

Citation? I have NEVER heard it suggested that anyone do any such thing, let alone the Audubon Society, Sialis.org folks, or the folks at Cornell.

If one foolish person suggest doing so somewhere, that does not have anything to do with other methods of reducing the European House Swallow population on these shores.

If Audubon and conservation bodies think the species should be culled, then an organised, planned and effective strategy should be devised at a large scale, not a campaign of misinformation to try and get a patchwork of untrained persons to randomly kill birds at their particular locality (a totally ineffective means as neighbouring populations will be untouched).

You honestly think the approach to House Sparrows in the US at present is the best?

Ignoring the "campaign of misinformation" strawman -

If it were the BEST, we would be actively eradicating both European House Sparrows and Starlings. However, at this point in time, lacking the skills and technology required to develop a disease or nanobot that will target those birds and only those birds - of course its not the best. So? You only embark on activities which you can perform perfectly? Most human beings just aren't that special. We must muddle along as best we can.

 

[fugl]

While there is lots of anecdotal evidence about House Sparrow effects on Bluebird populations, there doesn't appear to be much concrete data. According to Cornell's The Birdhouse Network project leader Tina Phillips:

What effect is this having on North America's bluebirds, swallows and other native cavity-nesting species? "We don't know," says Phillips. "There are no long-term studies showing the effect of competition between house sparrows and our native cavity-nesters."

She goes on to say that "according to 2003 data collected by TBN, house sparrows account for 43 percent of all competitor species (species that take over nest boxes intended for native birds)" and "One thing is known for sure: In head-to-head competition, house sparrows readily out-compete native species for nesting sites by evicting other nesting birds, destroying their eggs, killing nestlings and sometimes even killing the incubating female. Adding to the competition is the fact that once a male house sparrow establishes a territory, he remains there year-round and starts defending that territory early in the season, often preventing later-arriving species, such as bluebirds and swallows, from nesting."

The full article can be found here: http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2004/04/citizens-asked-monitor-impact-invasive-bird-species

Nest boxes yes, but there's a big wide world outside nest-box territory where there's little evidence that House Sparrows are a significant threat to native species. With regard to alleged "surging populations", according to BNA-online (2006) recent years have witnessed a "continent-wide" decline in North American House Sparrow numbers.

 

[Soj]

While there is lots of anecdotal evidence about House Sparrow effects on Bluebird populations, there doesn't appear to be much concrete data. According to Cornell's The Birdhouse Network project leader Tina Phillips:

What effect is this having on North America's bluebirds, swallows and other native cavity-nesting species? "We don't know," says Phillips. "There are no long-term studies showing the effect of competition between house sparrows and our native cavity-nesters."

She goes on to say that "according to 2003 data collected by TBN, house sparrows account for 43 percent of all competitor species (species that take over nest boxes intended for native birds)" and "One thing is known for sure: In head-to-head competition, house sparrows readily out-compete native species for nesting sites by evicting other nesting birds, destroying their eggs, killing nestlings and sometimes even killing the incubating female. Adding to the competition is the fact that once a male house sparrow establishes a territory, he remains there year-round and starts defending that territory early in the season, often preventing later-arriving species, such as bluebirds and swallows, from nesting."

The full article can be found here: http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2004/04/citizens-asked-monitor-impact-invasive-bird-species

That's 43% of ALL competitor species. ONE BIRD makes up nearly half of all nest-stealers. I'd like to see data on relative violence. I have seen other birds (not starlings, they're as bad as house sparrows, or worse) steal nests - but I cannot recall ever finding dead birds pushed out of their nest except when a Starling or European House Sparrows is the culprit. I'm not saying other birds don't do that - but the house sparrow does it pretty frequently. Almost routinely. Even when there are nearby empty nest sites.

The rest of that paragraph goes on to provide support for the fact that European House Sparrows have a deleterious effect on native song birds.

It's true that there has been little research done on the effects of nesting in the wild. That research needs to be done. I can tell you that - anecdotally speaking - I have seen house sparrows take over wild nesting sites on my 28 acres in mid-MO - all but 9 acres are wooded and there is a lot of varied habitat there. It is anecdotal evidence - which should be followed up with well-designed and implemented research by experts.

 

[Soj]

Nest boxes yes, but there's a big wide world outside nest-box territory where House Sparrows are mostly absent. With regard to alleged "surging populations", according to BNA-online (2006) recent years have witnessed a "continent-wide" decline in North American House Sparrow numbers.

That's mostly in the UK - and that has apparently stabilised. Frankly, at this point, I'm not even sure the 2 are the same species any more.

I can't get at any information on the BNA site because it requires a membership. However, other sources report that European House Sparrow populations have declined 81% overall (in the USA) since 1966 (3.5% per year).

I would say GOOD to that - if it were only the European House Sparrow that was declining like that. Unfortunately, nearly ALL bird species have declined by 68% (on average) in the same time period. There are other species that have declined 80% or more in addition to the Eu House Sparrow. Even grackle populations have declined significantly. So the fact that the EU house sparrow in the US is being affected by the same systems that are affecting all birds doesn't really say much one way or the other.

I don't know why you think the EU house sparrow is "mostly absent ... outside nesting box territory". That is definitely not the case. And I don't know where the "surging population" thing came from either. I don't think ANY bird population could be said to be "surging" at this point in time, at least not on a national level. So I'm not sure what the point is about that.

Basically, given the choice between supporting populations of a bird that shouldn't even be here and is known to be highly aggressive and predatory in its nesting habits towards native songbirds, and supporting said native songbirds, I'm coming down on the side of the native songbirds. Given that ALL bird populations are declining, my time, money, and effort goes to the bluebirds and other songbirds, and the house sparrow gets nada. Or as close to it as I can manage.

 

[fugl]

I lived in a rural area where the nearest neighbor was over a mile away. Plenty of house sparrows. They are notorious agricultural pests that attack many agricultural crops such as grains and fruits. They foul feed for horses and cattle. They are carriers of a wide variety of diseases, including West Nile Virus, chlamydiosis, salmonellosis, transmissible gastroenteritis, tuberculosis, encephalitis, and internal parasites such as toxoplasmosis and trichomoniasis. Not to ignore a wide variety of ticks, mites, fleas and lice.

But none of this is true. They are not "rats with wings", they're song birds, among the few capable of enlivening otherwise birdless urban places. They are not important agricultural pests, certainly not in comparison with the native crows and blackbirds. And they're not significant carriers of "disease" and fleas and ticks and the rest of it, no more than any other bird. They're just birds and with an estimated continental population of 150,000,000 they're here to stay, like it or not

Keep in mind - the European House Swallows that are here now are not the same as those that were originally imported. They have adapted to much harsher weather, and in other ways as well. Sending some of our version back to where they came from could very well result in similar destructiveness in their original habitat.

Nonsense, the worst kind of tendentious speculation based on nothing.

 

[Soj]

From researching on this forum and elsewhere, it's obvious that House (aka English) Sparrows are loved in some areas but I'm starting to see the reason they're loathed in so many other locations (I'm in the United States, Central Texas). In just a few days a group of about 10 female and male house sparrows have taken ownership of my 2 feeders and I'm starting to see evicted eggs on the ground around my yard. Who knows what damage they're doing to any young in the nests but I'm sure it isn't pretty. The titmouse, chickadees, young cardinals, young blue jays, etc are ganged-up on and chased-off as soon as they land on the feeders. I'm even seeing less activity at the hummingbird feeders (maybe unrelated, although I have seen a sparrow perched on the hummingbird feeder). The only birds that seem to be able to fight back are the full grown male cardinal and blue jay.

We've already moved to black sunflower & safflower seed, and the sparrows approach the feeders from all angles so I don't see much use in hanging wire or a "halo." If things don't settle down in a few days, I plan to thin the house sparrow population at my feeder to allow all the other birds to return.

So this gets me to my questions:

- The female house sparrows look similar to song sparrows, are song sparrows as invasive as the house sparrow?

- What about other sparrows? Savannah, vesper, etc?

- I love seeing a variety of birds, which we've been fortunate to experience until the recent house sparrow takeover. Are there any other invasive birds I need to watch for around my feeders in Central Texas?

Thanks in advance for you help!

http://www.sialis.org/halo.htm

Putting up strips of mylar around occupied nesting sites will generally keep the EU house sparrow away while not deterring the nesting birds. If the nest site is NOT occupied, it'll scare everybody away. Expect to see more ejected eggs and pitiful little bodies when EU house sparrows move in on you.

Many scare devices only work until the birds get used to them, but the halo seems to remain effective for years. Not 100% effective - but 80% or more after 4 years is being reported.

Home made halos in general are not necessarily as effective, or effective at all. If nothing else, buy one and then copy that.

There is a type of bluebird nest that is less attractive to house swallows. It is made of PVC.

Gilbertson PVC nest

Again - not 100% effective - but its the best option available at this time. It is only of interest if you are interested in bluebirds. If you are interested in supporting other birds - nesting boxes with an opening of 1.25" or less will generally successfully keep the EU house sparrow out of the box. That's also too small for bluebirds, unfortunately.

The EU house sparrow is actually a type of finch, so don't worry about other sparrows. They're not even related.

You could also put feeders in a cage setup that has openings small enough to exclude house sparrows but let smaller birds - such as chickadees and goldfinches - in. Of course you would be excluding ALL birds the size of a house sparrow or larger, including jays, cardinals, and some larger finches. But at least if there is no feeding ground nearby, the house sparrows are unlikely to colonize your yard. So it may be worthwhile to try, even if you lose some of the other birds as well.

Don't feed millet, cracked corn, or wheat. I may see fewer house sparrows than most because I feed exclusively BOS and nyjer. The EU HOSP will still eat BOS, but I have never seen as many of them at a feeder with BOS as at a feeder with a mix that includes millet etc.

I rarely, if ever, see a EU HOSP on a nyjer feeder. However, if they become a problem for you even on your nyjer feeders, try a metal mesh cling feeder. I almost never see anything but goldfinches on those types of feeders - most larger finches (and the EU HOSP is actually a finch) can't get at the seed, their bills are too big. The one I had was made by Aspects, I think. It is woven and not welded and the mesh is smaller than the metal ones with holes poked all around.

I have a cheapy feeder that looks like a square candleholder. The perches are wide but set very close to the feed tray. The EU HOSP and other larger birds have trouble perching and feeding from it. It doesn't stop them - but it does slow them way down.

 

[Zheljko]

What is the American opinion on EU Tree Sparrows (Passer montanus) where they exist? Are they sharing the HS reputation?

 

[etudiant]

What is the American opinion on EU Tree Sparrows (Passer montanus) where they exist? Are they sharing the HS reputation?

It is hanging on around St Louis, but has not spread, unlike the HS.
Most birders in the US would be happy just to see one.

 

[chris butterworth]

As with views on all introduced species that reach large numbers and become widespread there seems to be no middle ground. It's either a case of 'spawn of Satan deliberately targeting our poor defenceless species' or, a more pragmatic ' they are part of the ecosystem now, live with it'. House Sparrow ( and Common Starling ) have spread, and are present in huge numbers, in North America but the question is "Why?" Could it be that they gained a toehold in areas where native species had been exterminated? Or did they, originally, find unexploited niches in North America. Whatever the reason they are there to stay, and given the numbers present, and the size of their distribution it is futility itself not to accept their presence. If we, in a place the size of the UK, cannot eradicate Canada Goose ( which, occasionally, do pose a health hazard by polluting drinking water ), or Eastern Gray Squirrel, or New Zealanders with their all out campaigns against Possums, Stoats etc., you've got no chance with Sparrows and Starlings.