Birdsong Apps Disrespectful to Birds (13 Viewers)

[chris butterworth]

I think you're being a little over-reductionist here. Stress obviously comes in more than one flavor and the flavor most often stirred up by tape luring is surely anger not fear

I could go into a detailed description of the processes carried out in the rhombencephalon and cerebellum of vertebrates, the effects of biochemical actions generated by these and many other things ( complete with an extensive list of references ) but that would be ridiculous. My statement that the area if the brain governing stress and fear was pretty "universal" was not 'over reductionist' but merely a statement of fact. The processes involved have been widely tested, and published, over the last 20 years. These two areas are some of the most primitive parts of the brain with direct evolutionary links to the sub-esophageal ganglion of invertebrates.

Chris

 

[cheshirebirder]

I wonder how many of us have been on foreign trips where guides and tour leaders have used tape-luring on the more difficult to see species ? Seems like it's an accepted norm on these trips.
Personally, I think anyone with experience should know that using tapes should kept to a minimum .I would not be averse to using one on an out of range non-breeding rarity that was being very elusive,for example( as long as others present were in agreement ). Is it worse than an organised flush ?I would never use it on our breeding birds just to get a better view - it's lazy birding anyway.
It seems we have an increasing number of in-experienced people ( many with cameras) who have not the understanding of their subject and have no field-craft. On the Wirral ,there's been a problem with photographers flushing feeding waders by trying to get too close. Isn't this over-use of tapes part of the same problem ?

 

[chris butterworth]

But that's my point, are all forms of "stress" equal in their effects, detrimental or otherwise? Predators are one thing, rivals quite another (or so I would think).

The biochemical results of stress induced fear and stress induced anger are exactly the same. Only the external reaction differs. It's well known ( to most people ) as the 'fight or flight response'

Chris

 

[fugl]

The biochemical results of stress induced fear and stress induced anger are exactly the same. Only the external reaction differs. It's well known ( to most people ) as the 'fight or flight response'

Indeed, and it's "exactly" the "external reaction" that matters most in this context.

 

[chris butterworth]

I wonder how many of us have been on foreign trips where guides and tour leaders have used tape-luring on the more difficult to see species ? Seems like it's an accepted norm on these trips.

I can't comment on others but I've only used tapes during census surveys in Borneo. As soon as the target species replied the tape was turned off, immediately.

Personally, I think anyone with experience should know that using tapes should kept to a minimum .I would not be averse to using one on an out of range non-breeding rarity that was being very elusive,for example( as long as others present were in agreement ). Is it worse than an organised flush ?I would never use it on our breeding birds just to get a better view - it's lazy birding anyway.

It was used in that way, with the agreement of all present, at Red Rocks for the Blyths Reed and then only for 15 (+/-) seconds at a time over a couple of minutes. A very limited amount of time, outside the breeding season, contact calls only and on a vagrant. I had no quarrel with that.

Wirral? Photographers? Flushing waders? I'm a DEVW vol warden so I'll not comment - or I'll wear my fingers out with a truly major rant. I'll just say many of the photographers are well versed in none disturbance and behave impeccably.

Chris

 

[fugl]

I could go into a detailed description of the processes carried out in the rhombencephalon and cerebellum of vertebrates, the effects of biochemical actions generated by these and many other things ( complete with an extensive list of references ) but that would be ridiculous. My statement that the area if the brain governing stress and fear was pretty "universal" was not 'over reductionist' but merely a statement of fact. The processes involved have been widely tested, and published, over the last 20 years. These two areas are some of the most primitive parts of the brain with direct evolutionary links to the sub-esophageal ganglion of invertebrates

You miss my point. Stress is doubtless stress (as you maintain) but what matters in this context is not the underlying biochemistry (which I don't query) but how the bird reacts behaviorally to the stress. And to know that, we need properly conducted field studies.

 

[chris butterworth]

Indeed, and it's "exactly" the "external reaction" that matters most in this context.

You stated that tape luring induces anger, not fear ( 'surely' was the word used ) inferring they were different. I've just said, in clear English, there is no difference in the effect it has on the bird. Your perception of the birds behaviour has no bearing on the matter. The physical effects on the bird do. It matters not whether to bird deserts the nest or is overstressed to the point where it cannot settle or feed young. The outcome would be the same.

Chris

 

[chris butterworth]

You miss my point. Stress is doubtless stress (as you maintain) but what matters in this context is not the underlying biochemistry (which I don't query) but how the bird reacts behaviorally to the stress. And to know that, we need properly conducted field studies.

Behavioural studies will show what the studied birds do during the period of the study, in that particular place. At a different time, different place and with a different population density the results will differ. In order to get a complete and accurate answer the field studies would have to be huge. The bio-chemical effects will show if actual harm is being caused. I've already stated that, from a biological standpoint, the loss of a clutch / brood is of no importance. The question that is posed is "does tape luring harm birds?" In a very real, and physical way it does. Any extra induced stress physically harms. That in itself should cause at least some pause for thought.

Chris

 

[fugl]

As you say "stress of various kinds is omnipresent". A valid, and probably true statement. Then you claim your "own practice is to tape lure now and again but try not to overdo it" ( my emphasis ). This appears, to me anyway, that, at least on rare occasions, you do, or have, knowingly 'overdone' it. I would like to know the criteria you apply to calculate if youve "overdone" the luring, and what were the long term effects of that. It also removes from the equation anyone else that has been tape luring before you, and anyone that comes after you. Stress, "in its many flavours", can be induced by a single incident, but is more often the product of accumulation. So we come to what really constitutes "a little tape luring" and what is, possibly, harmful?

"Try not to overdo it" is just a form of words, as I'm sure you well know, meaning nothing quantifiable. And I don't "calculate" anything, my tape luring "criteria" being strictly seat-of-the-pants like just about everybody else's who tape lures at all. Finally, "accumulation" doesn't normally come into it in the thinly birded places I tend to frequent.

So, there it is. I do a little tape luring when I feel like it & when in my judgment the chances of harm to the bird is likely to be small, while you disapprove of tape luring under any circumstances & don't do any at all. Ok, ok, ok--to each his own. Fortunately, the likelihood of us meeting in the field and having to duke it out over this matter is vanishingly small.

 

[fugl]

Behavioural studies will show what the studied birds do during the period of the study, in that particular place. At a different time, different place and with a different population density the results will differ. In order to get a complete and accurate answer the field studies would have to be huge. The bio-chemical effects will show if actual harm is being caused. I've already stated that, from a biological standpoint, the loss of a clutch / brood is of no importance. The question that is posed is "does tape luring harm birds?" In a very real, and physical way it does. Any extra induced stress physically harms. That in itself should cause at least some pause for thought.

Of course, the loss of a clutch or brood matters as does any other life event that negatively affects lifetime reproductive output. As far as "any extra induced stress physically harms" is concerned, I'd want to see chapter & verse on that one. And I never tape lure without "pause for thought".

You vastly exaggerate the difficulties of a field study of this problem. All that is needed are study populations and controls and some easily measured variable such as nest desertion rate. Whether such studies are worth doing, of course, is another matter.

 

[A2GG]

A friend gave me one of those bird call whistle thingys, but I just have it on my bookcase as a little novelty to display. I don't even do the pishing and personally I wouldn't ever try to lure a bird with a recorded bird call or song. I don't feel comfortable with purposefully trying to distract the bird and take it away from its daily duties simply to get a look. I feel it would be a little selfish of me to have this indifferent attitude toward the bird's life and its relatively short time here on earth.

I think Imann said it best:
" it makes sense that as naturalists, (birders, photographers etc) we of all people should be more attuned to not wanting to take the chance of it causing any harm."

If there is even the small possibility that it may cause some extra stress (little or small) then I'm against this practice personally. Since we are observing birds, we should just observe and intrude on their lives as little as possible. We , as humans, already harm them in so many indirect (and direct) ways as is. Just my two cents.

 

[pppppvvvv]

I have one experience which was enough to form my views on the subject: in south america, our guide used a tape lure to get us views of a shy skulking bird which duly hopped into view and proceeded to return the calls. Less than a minute later, this bird was being pursued through the forest by a Hawk. We've no idea of the outcome, but luring is disruptive, interference. I wouldn't be able to justify doing it. Certainly not for a tick, how selfish would that be?

 

[Boro Birder]

Personally I myself would rather sit and wait for the bird/animal to show itself, isn't that what birding/nature watching is all about, looking for your intended species, looking for clues/tracks/birdsong, learning as you go along, and then the excitement/thrill of the chase, call it what you want, when what you have been waiting to see comes in to view, sometimes for a bird you have waited a lifetime to see. Happy Birding.

 

[chris butterworth]

"Try not to overdo it" is just a form of words, as I'm sure you well know, meaning nothing quantifiable. And I don't "calculate" anything, my tape luring "criteria" being strictly seat-of-the-pants like just about everybody else's who tape lures at all. Finally, "accumulation" doesn't normally come into it in the thinly birded places I tend to frequent.

So, there it is. I do a little tape luring when I feel like it & when in my judgment the chances of harm to the bird is likely to be small, while you disapprove of tape luring under any circumstances & don't do any at all. Ok, ok, ok--to each his own. Fortunately, the likelihood of us meeting in the field and having to duke it out over this matter is vanishingly small.

I don't understand how you can make statements such as 'just a form of words' and 'seat of the pants' and expect to get away with it. I asked a perfectly acceptable question. Show me the criteria you use and the results. You can't go around demanding people post proof in the form of verified literature and not expect them to demand the same from you. So, I ask again. Show us the proof of your former statements.

Chris

 

[chris butterworth]

Of course, the loss of a clutch or brood matters as does any other life event that negatively affects lifetime reproductive output. As far as "any extra induced stress physically harms" is concerned, I'd want to see chapter & verse on that one. And I never tape lure without "pause for thought".

You vastly exaggerate the difficulties of a field study of this problem. All that is needed are study populations and controls and some easily measured variable such as nest desertion rate. Whether such studies are worth doing, of course, is another matter.

I think you vastly underestimate the situation. Which species are you going to study? Will the reaction of that species, in any way, mirror the reaction of any other? Is the study area going to be urban, semi-natural or wilderness?. Is it going to be boreal or tropical? Which part of the world, one where there is a high human population or a relatively small one? One where there is masses of illegal hunting, such as Malta or one where there is little or no bird hunting such as Tibet or Mongolia? The world and it's avifauna is vastly larger than Nevada and there are tape luring birders all over it. Settinig the criteria for field studies is difficult enough without having the amount of variables needed in the one you seem to be suggesting. Any study carried out on a few species, or even one, in a small area of the world must be loaded with caveats accepting the limited scope of the data and the probability the results are not applicable elsewhere.

Chris

 

[chris butterworth]

A friend gave me one of those bird call whistle thingys, but I just have it on my bookcase as a little novelty to display. I don't even do the pishing and personally I wouldn't ever try to lure a bird with a recorded bird call or song. I don't feel comfortable with purposefully trying to distract the bird and take it away from its daily duties simply to get a look. I feel it would be a little selfish of me to have this indifferent attitude toward the bird's life and its relatively short time here on earth.

I think Imann said it best:
" it makes sense that as naturalists, (birders, photographers etc) we of all people should be more attuned to not wanting to take the chance of it causing any harm."

If there is even the small possibility that it may cause some extra stress (little or small) then I'm against this practice personally. Since we are observing birds, we should just observe and intrude on their lives as little as possible. We , as humans, already harm them in so many indirect (and direct) ways as is. Just my two cents.

Your last paragraph sums it up perfectly Annabeth. By intruding on the lives of wildlife as little as possible we also get to see them behave in a more 'normal' way. Tape luring just allows us to, selfishly, in my mind, tick off a species and move on, without any consideration of the effects.

Chris

p.s. New avi? Bring back the green bins :eek!:

C

 

[lmans66]

Here we go again! Can you point me to critical studies?

And I agree, "disrespectful" is a ridiculous word in this context.

Obviously people are missing the point....it shouldn't be a matter of 'prove it or else' ....It shouldn't be a matter of splitting hairs. We are not school kids trying to see how far we can stretch the system...Rather, the matter of using apps to lure birds should be something that we as naturalists are extremely aware of and do not overly abuse this 'tech power' we have as humans. We are simply playing with mother nature, and that is never a sound idea.

True, it makes no difference if we are speaking of photographers or birders, the end result is the same. Use wisely & sparingly....

As for guides in other countries using bird apps to lure birds---just so the paying birder (why not truly bird without it?) can 'up' your bird count ...to me that is poor guiding. Guides are naturalists too and although some are more trained than others, the basic premise of keeping nature..nature, should exist.

Apps exist and always will...the tech is there and not going away. The advantages are clearly there for scientific terms if used sparingly, and with the bird in mind. To use, just to get a good pic or to up your 'tic' count, needs to be seriously reflected upon.

 

[fugl]

I think you vastly underestimate the situation. Which species are you going to study? Will the reaction of that species, in any way, mirror the reaction of any other? Is the study area going to be urban, semi-natural or wilderness?. Is it going to be boreal or tropical? Which part of the world, one where there is a high human population or a relatively small one? One where there is masses of illegal hunting, such as Malta or one where there is little or no bird hunting such as Tibet or Mongolia? The world and it's avifauna is vastly larger than Nevada and there are tape luring birders all over it. Settinig the criteria for field studies is difficult enough without having the amount of variables needed in the one you seem to be suggesting. Any study carried out on a few species, or even one, in a small area of the world must be loaded with caveats accepting the limited scope of the data and the probability the results are not applicable elsewhere.

What you say applies to the field study of just about any aspect of bird behavior and is therefore an argument against avian field studies in general. Or am I missing some nuance in your position? The approach here would be the same as in any other field research project: conduct a limited study or 2, drawing provisional conclusions from the results; confirm or disconfirm by further studies (or not, if the interest isn't there); and so on and so on.

 

[fugl]

True, it makes no difference if we are speaking of photographers or birders, the end result is the same. Use wisely & sparingly....

Indeed, a point I've already made more than once in my numerous (God forgive me!) posts to this thread. But we're just going round and round here--& by "we" I mean everybody, not just you and me--so I think I'll hang it up at this stage.

So many wrangles, so little time!

 

[lmans66]

So many wrangles, so little time!

Total agreement!