Is ringing ethical? (1 Viewer)

KnockerNorton · Oct 24, 2006

Jos Stratford said:
Overall, to the long-term benefit of birds, is ringing good or bad? Answer that and you have the answer, broadly, to whether it is ethical.

Yes, that's been true up to now. But things do seem to have shifted a little. Ringing is, to echo what i said earlier, getting more like an extension of birding than science. It's full of listers. Ringing projects are often devised and carried out by amateurs with no real grasp of project design or even analysis of the results (which are going to be hopelessly biassed and useless in many cases). It's not as simple as going out and ringing a few sparrows and then finding the magic answer to their decline. But plenty of people do go out and ring a few sparrows. But it's not giving any useful data. Such projects need to be targetted and managed by people who know what they're doing when it comes to scientific methods. Ringing coastal migrants these days seems little better than tying a card to a balloon. These bad practices and unsound ringing strategies need nipping in the bud, and perhaps ringing should be restricted to specific projects with clearly stated aims that aim to fill gaps or answer specific questions. It all needs much better management.

To use someone else's analogy, people can't go testing stuff on rats for a hobby, so why should they be able to go ringing for a hobby? Especially when the BTO lets much of the data languish without any analysis (eg, have you ever seen anything published on wing chord or moult scores or muscle scores studies?).

Bernard the cat · Oct 24, 2006

Mike Johnston said:
Well, according to Websters Dictionary, 'fear' is:
1 a : an unpleasant often strong emotion caused by anticipation or awareness of danger b (1) : an instance of this emotion (2) : a state marked by this emotion
2 : anxious concern
3 : profound reverence and awe especially toward God
4 : reason for alarm

As you see, they all involve a psychological aspect - an awareness of oneself as an individual and a knowledge that one is in danger. If you take away this psychological aspect, as you do, you are no longer left with 'fear' but with a physiological response to a perceived threat, i.e. 'stress'.

I don't really think it's helpful to split semantic hairs over the what exactly constitutes fear as opposed to stress, and I think it's fair to assume that birds will experience the fight-or-flight response (which is fundamental to fear) when being pursued by a predator or when captured in a net. I would also point out that dictionaries are not written by behavioural psychologists, biochemists or zoologists, and as such quoting dictionary definitions does not really move this debate forward.

Bernard the cat · Oct 24, 2006

jurek said:
Pity that you did not take my advice, because you might not ask:

...because birds usually resume normal activity, feeding etc. within minutes after release.

It was said in previous thread, and is known to anybody who ringed birds and had a chance to see what they do afterwards.
:t:

I admit that I've never done ringing and so I would not know, though even if they resume normal activity after ringing, this still does not necessarily justify putting them through the ordeal to begin with, especially if it's not directly linked to species protection or conservation.

Mike Johnston · Oct 24, 2006

ocelot said:
I don't really think it's helpful to split semantic hairs over the what exactly constitutes fear as opposed to stress, and I think it's fair to assume that birds will experience the fight-or-flight response (which is an fundamental to fear) when being pursued by a predator or when captured in a net. I would also point out that dictionaries are not written by behavioural psychologists, biochemists or zoologists, and as such quoting dictionary definitions does not really move this debate forward.

It's not a question of semantics. If one introduces an emotive word such as 'fear', or phrases such as 'heart stopping terror', into a debate on the ethics of ringing, one changes the nature of the debate; i.e. one is positing that a bird experiences 'fear' in the same manner as humans, which is not the case. And words mean what they mean, not what particular groups wish them to mean.

hannu · Oct 24, 2006

ocelot said:
I do not agree with any scientific research on animals that causes death, injury, suffering or significant distress, irrespective of the benefits, even if it leads to a cure for all forms of cancer. My whole point is that it's not always possible to be 100% consistent with your values and principles given the society we live in. I'd greatly prefer it if medication was developed without the need for any research on animals, and I believe that this will one day be the case. However, in the meantime, I don't really have much choice but to take the medication until alternatives are available. Clearly we all think that the medical experiments carried out on Jews in places like Auschwitz were morally indefensible, but if I was a German citizen in 1942, and my life depended upon taking medication that was passed as safe by testing it on Jews, then I'd take it, as most people would. It doesn't mean I wouldn't abhor what was done to pass the medication as safe, or that I wouldn't pray for an ethical alternative. Sometimes, most of the time in fact, life isn't as black and white as we think.

Now you admit that when it benefits yourself (because it's only method), your etnical and moral values start to be more flexible. When it's question in our own navel, then you can accept permanently cruel methods. So now anyone can think that are you really etnical or not ?!

Because life isn't black and white, that's the one reason why I ring ! There has not been any better method to get info about these matters, but I hope that someone will develop new methods to study birds, so we can get enough info to protect nature and birds (and of course, satisfy our curiosity).

Strandman · Oct 24, 2006

Jane Turner said:
I know there was at least one eastern vagrant - I think it was a Rustic Bunting, that was recovered on a subsequent migration "back on track".

there's a view that the Rustic

"a recovery of an adult male Rustic Bunting ringed as adult at Stora
Fjäderägg near Umeå 16th September 2001 was made in China on the border to
North Korea on 1st November 2004. Distance 6443 km."

(being ringed as an adult) was better viewed as an extreme example of its normal migration rather than a re-orientating vagrant

so it's value lies in showing how even westerly breeding populations may have threatened wintering grounds in Asia

I understand that, but I'm still not sure where the value lies in catching and ringing something like the Sora at Gibraltar point though..

EDIT- I see the debate has moved to er broader topics..

Bernard the cat · Oct 24, 2006

Mike Johnston said:
It's not a question of semantics. If one introduces an emotive word such as 'fear', or phrases such as 'heart stopping terror', into a debate on the ethics of ringing, one changes the nature of the debate; i.e. one is positing that a bird experiences 'fear' in the same manner as humans, which is not the case. And words mean what they mean, not what particular groups wish them to mean.

1, They are not emotive words or phrases, just verbal approximations of what I believe may be experienced by birds in the ringing process. I may be wrong, but I believe there is a case for arguing that that birds may well experience such trauma.
2, I'm not 'positing' that a bird experiences fear in the same way that humans do, and I went to considerable lengths in my previous post to point out some of the respective differences.
3, Words do not 'mean what they mean', they are labels attached to objects, events, experiences, cognitive concepts etc, and in many cases will be influenced by a person's subjective biases - this was clearly demonstrated in your assertion that 'fear' was a certain thing experienced in a certain way, and neatly seperated from 'stress'.

I'm not going to interact with you anymore, as I think your motive in this thread is to just disagree with anything that I say in my posts - I'm sure that the fact I reported you to the administrators for directly inferring that I was a 'tw*t' in another thread has more than a little bearing on this. And I'm guessing it's only a matter of time before before you resort to personal attacks in this thread.

Mike Johnston · Oct 24, 2006

ocelot said:
I'm not going to interact with you anymore, as I think your motive in this thread is to just disagree with anything that I say in my posts - I'm sure that the fact I reported you to the administrators for directly inferring that I was a 'tw*t' in another thread has more than a little bearing on this. And I'm guessing it's only a matter of time before before you resort to personal attacks in this thread.

Fair enough. (By the way, I was not referring to you as a tw*t in the other thread, I was referring to idiotic twitchers as tw*ts. But you never checked before you flew off the handle).

Bernard the cat · Oct 24, 2006

hannu said:
Now you admit that when it benefits yourself (because it's only method), your etnical and moral values start to be more flexible. When it's question in our own navel, then you can accept permanently cruel methods. So now anyone can think that are you really etnical or not ?!

I'm not interested in what you think about my ethics or morals, they are between me and God and nobody else. This thread is not about my morals or ethics, I only used these as examples to illustrate a point about ringing. You clearly have no interest in trying to understand the point that I'm trying to make, and my feeling is that, like Mike Johnston, you just want to disagree with everything I say because I ruffled a few feathers in another thread. I'm therefore not going to interact with you anymore.

hannu · Oct 24, 2006

In my mind, we should also make a bigger question, does our own way of living (life style) etnical or not? Because answer to the question, why we research birds, is that human kind destroy this nature (some more , some less) and if we want to save some bird species, we have to study these one or another method. For that reason we have to ask ourself the bigger question.
My way of living is not so etnical as it should be, but e.g. I'll try to bicycle 9km to the work even in winter, when temperature is minus 20-25 C.

Bernard the cat · Oct 24, 2006

Mike Johnston said:
Fair enough. (By the way, I was not referring to you as a tw*t in the other thread, I was referring to idiotic twitchers as tw*ts. But you never checked before you flew off the handle).

It seemed pretty clear to me that your post was directly inferring that I was a tw*t. If I am wrong about this, then clearly a little thought about how such posts impact on others wouldn't go amiss.

jurek · Oct 24, 2006

ocelot said:
I would point out that a lack of empirical evidence does not disprove any causal link between ringing and bird casualties

There are very few means to estimate bird survival without ringing them. In a few cases where it was possible to compare survival of ringed and unringed birds, there was no difference.

Again, it was discussed year before. :scribe: :smoke:

hannu · Oct 24, 2006

ocelot said:
I'm not interested in what you think about my ethics or morals, they are between me and God and nobody else. This thread is not about my morals or ethics, I only used these as examples to illustrate a point about ringing. You clearly have no interest in trying to understand the point that I'm trying to make, and my feeling is that, like Mike Johnston, you just want to disagree with everything I say because I ruffled a few feathers in another thread. I'm therefore not going to interact with you anymore.

I admit that there has been some breakdowns in ringing, but it does not mean that whole ringing is useless and unetnical in every aspect. I tried to clear up what is your opinion in different situation and it is very clear now.

kuksa · Oct 24, 2006

white-back said:
there's a view that the Rustic

"a recovery of an adult male Rustic Bunting ringed as adult at Stora
Fjäderägg near Umeå 16th September 2001 was made in China on the border to
North Korea on 1st November 2004. Distance 6443 km."
.

All 4 recoverys made on Rustic Buntind marked in Umeå area were found on the same direction (3 not mentiond comming from both sides of Moscva) that show the actuall migrating rouds. However, nearly 13 000 km too big to compleat in 1 year. Also this particular bird was traped with 3 years in between. Therefore there is more information needed, also including dissapearence of them from Stora Fjäderägg trapping list.

Ilya Maclean · Oct 24, 2006

Poecile said:
Especially when the BTO lets much of the data languish without any analysis (eg, have you ever seen anything published on wing chord or moult scores or muscle scores studies?).

Loads, but just a couple of the top of my head. The first makes use of BTO data the second is authored by BTO researchers.

Gosler, AG (1994) Mass-change during moult in the Great Tit Parus major. Bird Study Vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 146-154. 1994.

Atkinson, P.W et al. (2005) Unravelling the migration and moult strategies of a long-distance migrant using stable isotopes: Red Knot Calidris canutus movements. Ibis 147: 738-741.

More could be done undoubtedly, but suspect that’s due to lack of funding rather than lack of intent.

CornishExile · Oct 24, 2006

ocelot said:
I'm not going to interact with you anymore, as I think your motive in this thread is to just disagree with anything that I say in my posts - I'm sure that the fact I reported you to the administrators for directly inferring that I was a 'tw*t' in another thread has more than a little bearing on this. And I'm guessing it's only a matter of time before before you resort to personal attacks in this thread.

With the greatest of respect, ocelot, you're a little provocative yourself.

ocelot in his twitching thread said:
I'm outta here - with the odd exception, you people are a bunch of arrogant, moronic simple-minded idiots who have confirmed my worst suspicions about certain birders. At worst you're the type of people who have no respect for others, their property or their personal space, nor for people who enjoy different aspects of birding to yourselves, nor even for wildlife itself. At best, you're a bunch of arrogant, sarcastic, pathetic, juvenile snakes-in-the grass with no respect for others, and who can't think beyond their own immediate gratification, even if it is just to turn what could have been an interesting thread into a pathetic piss-taking free for all. Some of you remind me of offenders that I used to work with, which when you think about it is quite sad. Goodbye losers.

Calm down mate. Nobody's calling you a tw@t, and if people disagree with you it's probably not personal. It's just a debate.

ce

KnockerNorton · Oct 24, 2006

Ilya Maclean said:
Loads, but just a couple of the top of my head. The first makes use of BTO data the second is authored by BTO researchers.

Gosler, AG (1994) Mass-change during moult in the Great Tit Parus major. Bird Study Vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 146-154. 1994.

Atkinson, P.W et al. (2005) Unravelling the migration and moult strategies of a long-distance migrant using stable isotopes: Red Knot Calidris canutus movements. Ibis 147: 738-741.

More could be done undoubtedly, but suspect that’s due to lack of funding rather than lack of intent.

They are specific studies using data collected on those studies. I'm talking about all of the routine wing lengths etc recorded by all ringers, which is submitted on IPMR. Gosler is a professor and Atkinson is also an academic, and they were using their own data, not the BTOs.

The BTO does lack funding, and also some expertise, for its analyses. In that case, you have to ask why it a). collects all the data in the first place and b). assumes intellectual property rights over it, which stops anybody else analysing it independently without going cap-in-hand to the BTO and often paying a fee for data which has been submitted by volunteers who have alread paid the BTO for the priviledge for being allowed to collect it.

Pterodroma · Oct 24, 2006

Poecile said:
Ringing is, to echo what i said earlier, getting more like an extension of birding than science. It's full of listers. Ringing projects are often devised and carried out by amateurs with no real grasp of project design or even analysis of the results (which are going to be hopelessly biassed and useless in many cases). It's not as simple as going out and ringing a few sparrows and then finding the magic answer to their decline. But plenty of people do go out and ring a few sparrows. But it's not giving any useful data. Such projects need to be targetted and managed by people who know what they're doing when it comes to scientific methods. Ringing coastal migrants these days seems little better than tying a card to a balloon. These bad practices and unsound ringing strategies need nipping in the bud, and perhaps ringing should be restricted to specific projects with clearly stated aims that aim to fill gaps or answer specific questions. It all needs much better management.

Jeez, this thread is going all over the place!

I agree totally with the above

hannu · Oct 24, 2006

Poecile said:
They are specific studies using data collected on those studies. I'm talking about all of the routine wing lengths etc recorded by all ringers, which is submitted on IPMR. Gosler is a professor and Atkinson is also an academic, and they were using their own data, not the BTOs.

The BTO does lack funding, and also some expertise, for its analyses. In that case, you have to ask why it a). collects all the data in the first place and b). assumes intellectual property rights over it, which stops anybody else analysing it independently without going cap-in-hand to the BTO and often paying a fee for data which has been submitted by volunteers who have alread paid the BTO for the priviledge for being allowed to collect it.

PLEASE, Send PM to BTO, this is the wrong forum to discuss it, because main part of us don't know the purpose of data collection !

kuksa · Oct 24, 2006

Poecile said:
These bad practices and unsound ringing strategies need nipping in the bud, and perhaps ringing should be restricted to specific projects with clearly stated aims that aim to fill gaps or answer specific questions. It all needs much better management.

Your wright, and that is used in Sweden. If you want to mark in Sweden you must first to thing about the project. And you will get (or not) license for particular bird species and/or area and/or time and/or method. However, think like that, if you traped the bird species not included in your licens? You must release it, I did that with Goshowk...... .

Is ringing ethical? (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Registered User

Registered User

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Registered User

Well-known member

Registered User

Well-known member

Registered User

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

charlatan

rydhsys rag Kernow lemmyn!

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread