-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
How often ? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter JohnZ
- Start date
Black Wheatear
Bowed but not broken, yet!
I think David, Poecile and others like me, need to close the door behind them on this link, if there is a constant demand to answer Colin's postings. There is certainly no value in debating/answering the extreme cases, real or imagined, that Colin raises here. We 'all' know there are extremes to all birding activities, including photography, birdwatching, twitching, ringing etc., but I would never imply any of these are typical or weave them into generalisations. Colin could do far worse than read Mark Granthams remarks above and then follow his site links for more information. Colin and others that bear witness to bad practises can and should, in the case of ringing, report the offenders to their country's licensing authority. He will have done no one any kind of service, least of all the birds, by not so doing!
Last edited:
Black Wheatear said:
A: To suggest that the instances which I have quoted might be "imagined" (i.e. are lies) is an insult to my integrity.
B: To also say that: "There is certainly no value in debating/answering the extreme cases, real or imagined, that Colin raises here" is really just pulling the carpet from under your own feet - you have no answer and you are admitting defeat.
Are you not able to admit that within the ringing fraternity there are a lot of people who are just "in it for the kick" and that there are a lot instances of "bad practice" where the welfare of the birds is secondary?
Unless you are able to come clean and own up to this then ringing will always have a "tainted" purview in the eyes of a great many birders and birdwatchers.
Colin
dbradnum
Well-known member
Sweeping what under the carpet? Could you clarify what you think is being hidden, since I honestly can't see? I did attempt to make clear that I was talking about ringing under suitably controlled conditions, so it's all exactly the same process as the BTO endorse here, but in a different country.Colin Key said:
Over the last few posts, I think Colin has raised two broad points, which I'll reply to in turn - I hope no-one objects to my paraphrasing and summarising:
1: There are some examples of "ringing gone wrong", which are pretty appalling to anyone, whether you're a ringer, birder, conservationist, or just Fred Bloggs on the street. No-one is condoning these, and as Mark and others have pointed out clearly, they should be reported to the appropriate bodies, who will take strong action.
I can fully understand why such events have coloured people's opinion of ringing, but am also pleased that Colin's noted that it's only a very small minority that cause the problems. There isn't really anything much to debate here, as Black Wheatear has suggested, since everyone is broadly in agreement, I think: it's an extreme case, which should be strongly dealt with as such, and then not colour the rest of the situation to an inappropriately large extent.
2: People travelling abroad apparently just to gain "ringers ticks". I personally think this is a relatively minor concern, though I do appreciate what you're saying, Colin, that some ringers' motives for travelling may be somewhat questionable, perhaps hard to understand and in themselves unscientific. However, provided that they work within the rules and regulations, as they would in their home country, then they won't cause any problems. Furthermore, their act of ringing birds will contribute to scientific studies organised in the host country. Although this might not be the primary reason for them going in the first place, they aren't doing any harm (are they?) and they are contributing to something worthwhile.
My other concern with is that it's incredibly difficult to second-guess what someone's motives are for doing something: our own feelings and opinions often cloud judgement. Granted, this isn't always the case and may well not be here, but I hope we can all agree that it's a somewhat dangerous game to play.
dbradnum
Well-known member
Equally are you able to show that there are "a lot of people who are in it for the kick"? Can you show "a lot of instances of bad practice"?Colin Key said:
I cannot, which is why I'm currently sticking with this thread, and attempting to present a rather more balanced viewpoint - see my last post. (Admittedly, I am just starting to wonder why I'm bothering, though).
If you can support these statements, then you should contact the authorities, and provide full details to them. I am no doubt that they will act, given evidence. Otherwise, if this is just your opinion, and unsupportable by concrete fact, then I think you should say so, in order that others' opinions are not clouded and the entire ringing scheme is not trailed through the mud without cause.
Last edited:
Ausable Bird Observatory
Registered Member
Colin Key said:
As a proud Portuguese ringer, I can categorically announce that it is not a common occurence in Portugal to see birds with more than one metallic ring. The only place I know of this happening is as part of a North American pilot project where different info was printed on each band.
Birds may also be colour ringed as part of individual projects, and there is nothing to say that the bird that was seen was a Portuguese bird or a migrant.
Without seeming aggressive, I know the majority of Portuguese ringers having trained a fair few and being well respected in the circle. The behaviour that you described in regards to the Redstart I am unaware of, especially as the only ringers in that area belong to the A Rocha group, therefore I personally find it highly unlikely.
In regards to the incident of birds in a net, I would be interested to hear the location of this site (if in Portugal) - you may prefer to PM me.
Peter Fearon
Ausable Bird Observatory
Registered Member
I was lucky enough to get into ringing at a very early age and I have been around birds ever since. To me, ringing is enjoyable.But I am a scientist and I believe in the scientific benefits of ringing.
There are ringers who ring because they enjoy it. Birdwatchers, I presume, birdwatch because they enjoy it, as there will be photographers and twitchers for the same reason. But ask any ringer and they will tell you of the reasons why ringing is important scientifically, incidentally they find it enjoyable.
Once a bird is ringed/banded, it is hoped that that bird will be caught again, or recovered if found dead or injured - window fatality, car fatality, poisoning etc. THIS is where we get our data, so that populations and species can be better understood so that conservation programs can be effectively put into place.
I assure you, it is not ringers who are responsible for the disappearance of corn buntings or tree sparrows in the UK, however the data on these species collected by ringers is used to determine the reasons why they're disappearing.
As a ringer, we're constantly reappraising ourselves and the other ringers that we ring with, not only for data accuracy, but for ethical reasons. There will undoubtably be some ringers that come across as a little flamboyant or casual, and others that may feel a little defensive when questioned about ringing. It is important for non-ringers to understand why ringers might get defensive - afterall, the ringers are out there trying to collect data for conservation reasons, and to recieve criticism can be a little hard to swallow.
As a ringer, travelling to new countries to ring birds is a good thing, as it allows ringers to get a wider species knowledge, while it enjoyable and satisfying to get a new 'tick', the underlying fact is, that by seeing new species and new methods, we are widening our knowledge to bring home. It is a good and valuable experience for any ringer.
Ringers appreciate birds. We don't treat them like they are sport - not in my experience anyhow - and if fatalities were evident, then we would stop, because the birds welfare is paramount - its the golden rule so to speak. Birds aren't manhandled, they are treated with respect. A handling technique may seem unsavoury to the untrained eye, but all ringers are extensively trained on how to handle birds safely - they wouldn't have their permits if they didn't.
But as I have said before, ultimately we all have the same aims, and that is conservation. As a ringer and a birdwatcher, I try to see both sides of the arguement as objectively as possible, but I run a bird observatory now in Canada (with the rest of my free time spent in Portugal, ringing on a few projects that I am involved in) - so I am bound to be somewhat biased.
It was a long one. I appologise.
PF
There are ringers who ring because they enjoy it. Birdwatchers, I presume, birdwatch because they enjoy it, as there will be photographers and twitchers for the same reason. But ask any ringer and they will tell you of the reasons why ringing is important scientifically, incidentally they find it enjoyable.
Once a bird is ringed/banded, it is hoped that that bird will be caught again, or recovered if found dead or injured - window fatality, car fatality, poisoning etc. THIS is where we get our data, so that populations and species can be better understood so that conservation programs can be effectively put into place.
I assure you, it is not ringers who are responsible for the disappearance of corn buntings or tree sparrows in the UK, however the data on these species collected by ringers is used to determine the reasons why they're disappearing.
As a ringer, we're constantly reappraising ourselves and the other ringers that we ring with, not only for data accuracy, but for ethical reasons. There will undoubtably be some ringers that come across as a little flamboyant or casual, and others that may feel a little defensive when questioned about ringing. It is important for non-ringers to understand why ringers might get defensive - afterall, the ringers are out there trying to collect data for conservation reasons, and to recieve criticism can be a little hard to swallow.
As a ringer, travelling to new countries to ring birds is a good thing, as it allows ringers to get a wider species knowledge, while it enjoyable and satisfying to get a new 'tick', the underlying fact is, that by seeing new species and new methods, we are widening our knowledge to bring home. It is a good and valuable experience for any ringer.
Ringers appreciate birds. We don't treat them like they are sport - not in my experience anyhow - and if fatalities were evident, then we would stop, because the birds welfare is paramount - its the golden rule so to speak. Birds aren't manhandled, they are treated with respect. A handling technique may seem unsavoury to the untrained eye, but all ringers are extensively trained on how to handle birds safely - they wouldn't have their permits if they didn't.
But as I have said before, ultimately we all have the same aims, and that is conservation. As a ringer and a birdwatcher, I try to see both sides of the arguement as objectively as possible, but I run a bird observatory now in Canada (with the rest of my free time spent in Portugal, ringing on a few projects that I am involved in) - so I am bound to be somewhat biased.
It was a long one. I appologise.
PF
Black Wheatear
Bowed but not broken, yet!
I am afraid Peter and David, that it is absolutely no use to use logical agruments. Colin has seen it as quite acceptable to air his misgivings here about 'extreme' cases, which could never have any bearing on any sensible discussion on the virtues of ringing and ringers in general. Extreme means extreme and is not usual. The argument or rant, which ever term you might care to use, is for me entirely unacceptable, if the person making these observations could not be bothered to report these undefendable acts of bad ringing practise. Why not? In the interests of my beloved birds, I most certainly would and every ringer I know would do the same. I mentioned previously 'real or imagined' as a term of perception. I have been ringing and actively involved in ringing for over 36 years and never, yes Colin, never seen such a multitude of 'extreme' behaviour among fellow ringers. So my observations of your remarks is based on real and lengthy experience.
Last edited:
kuksa
Active member
As the extension of my post, I would like to ask bird-watchers and photographers (ringers are not involved in this) are it OK to disturbed birds like this Night Heron? It is just the last example on slightly rear bird, I found 127 reports (some of them multiple, including not reporting persons making it over 200, I guess) on this bird between 3-26 January on Swedish birders site (Svalan). How much this bird was disturbed? You guess bird-watchers been keeping distance? Might be... however, I count 28 different photographers posting photos!!! There coming examples:
http://www.artportalen.se/artportalen/gallery/image.aspx?obsid=7999404
http://www.artportalen.se/artportalen/gallery/image.aspx?obsid=8004534
http://www.artportalen.se/artportalen/gallery/image.aspx?obsid=8169519
http://www.artportalen.se/artportalen/gallery/image.aspx?obsid=8187180
http://www.artportalen.se/artportalen/gallery/image.aspx?obsid=8188074
http://www.artportalen.se/artportalen/gallery/image.aspx?obsid=8188339
So what distance you need for taking these photo? And what a tolerance range for such bird? I repeat again, non of ringers hunt it with nets
http://www.artportalen.se/artportalen/gallery/image.aspx?obsid=7999404
http://www.artportalen.se/artportalen/gallery/image.aspx?obsid=8004534
http://www.artportalen.se/artportalen/gallery/image.aspx?obsid=8169519
http://www.artportalen.se/artportalen/gallery/image.aspx?obsid=8187180
http://www.artportalen.se/artportalen/gallery/image.aspx?obsid=8188074
http://www.artportalen.se/artportalen/gallery/image.aspx?obsid=8188339
So what distance you need for taking these photo? And what a tolerance range for such bird? I repeat again, non of ringers hunt it with nets
JohnZ
Well-known member
Colin, Give it up mate. You have had Black Wheatear virtually calling you a liar and Peter, with his highly unlikely remark, also casting doubt on your eyesight.
Black Wheatear, There have been no constant demands for anybody to address the points raised by Colin. I think I am the only person on this thread who has suggested this and it was most certainly not directed at you !
Had I realised the abuse and bullying that my original, and innocent/naive, question was going to engender then I would not have bothered. You can all now rest assured that I would not have anything to do with ringing, and especially its participants, if my life depended on it.
Black Wheatear, There have been no constant demands for anybody to address the points raised by Colin. I think I am the only person on this thread who has suggested this and it was most certainly not directed at you !
Had I realised the abuse and bullying that my original, and innocent/naive, question was going to engender then I would not have bothered. You can all now rest assured that I would not have anything to do with ringing, and especially its participants, if my life depended on it.
Ausable Bird Observatory
Registered Member
I wish to make the point that I harbour no ill-feeling towards anyone who disagrees with me. Insults and pettiness are not the way forward, from either side.
I merely wish to put across a 'professional' ringers opinion based on my own experience and knowledge.
(with that said, I shall become a politician)
I merely wish to put across a 'professional' ringers opinion based on my own experience and knowledge.
(with that said, I shall become a politician)
Ausable Bird Observatory
Registered Member
JohnZ said:
That seems somewhat harsh. Any abuse seems to have been balanced from both sides.
I hope JohnZ that maybe you will appreciate some of the points that I raised earlier before you decide to judge ringers and/or any ringing scheme.
ESTEBANNIC
Well-known member
:clap: Well putAusable Bird Observatory said:
ESTEBANNIC
Well-known member
JohnZ said:
Thank you for revealing yourself in such a direct manner.
Black Wheatear
Bowed but not broken, yet!
Agreed KC. Should have taken my own advice much earlier. All very emotive and not at all constructive. No more posts from me here.
Mark Grantham
Well-known member
valley boy said:
To answer this quickly and easily, the BTO Scheme rings around 850,000 birds annually and receives around 12,000 reports back. The reporting rate varies according to size of bird (a Mute Swan is far more likely to be found than a Dunnock), likelihood of finding (an urban Blue Tit is more likely to be found than a moorland Meadow Pipit), and susceptibility to death (a Barn Owl hunting alongside a main road is more likely to be killed than a Tawny Owl hunting alongside a woodland).
Mark Grantham
BTO Ringing Unit
I said at the outset that I was treading lightly on this and for that reason I am also going to leave the stage.
I would however just finally clarify my position. I am not launching a vendetta against ringers or ringing. I personally am against ringing but I can live with that (I am against quite a lot of things but the chances of me being able to change them are slim).
I stepped in in support of Keith Reeder's opinion that the motives of some ringers might be questionable, and based on some experiences which I have had I stand by that view. I am not going to name names or organisations since I do not want this to become too personal, but rest assured that appropriate action was taken at the time. I have sent PM's to some posters here citing other examples of what I consider to be inappropriate ringing behaviour. You professional, skilled and well-intentioned ringers (which I am certain describes the vast majority of ringers) cannot ignore cases where things have gone wrong simply by saying that they are only a very tiny minority.
I am now going out birding and hope you all have as good a day as I am going to have.
Colin
I would however just finally clarify my position. I am not launching a vendetta against ringers or ringing. I personally am against ringing but I can live with that (I am against quite a lot of things but the chances of me being able to change them are slim).
I stepped in in support of Keith Reeder's opinion that the motives of some ringers might be questionable, and based on some experiences which I have had I stand by that view. I am not going to name names or organisations since I do not want this to become too personal, but rest assured that appropriate action was taken at the time. I have sent PM's to some posters here citing other examples of what I consider to be inappropriate ringing behaviour. You professional, skilled and well-intentioned ringers (which I am certain describes the vast majority of ringers) cannot ignore cases where things have gone wrong simply by saying that they are only a very tiny minority.
I am now going out birding and hope you all have as good a day as I am going to have.
Colin
Similar threads
