Despairing of the feral parakeet situation (1 Viewer)

[Richard Klim]

Why is it acceptable for escaped birds to be allowed to breed in the wild and threaten in any way a rare breeding bird? Nobody seems to want to answer that question.

Because lots of birders are desperate for an extra tick.

Richard :smoke:

 

[Jos Stratford]

Jos, I enjoy your posts and I don't want to have an arguement with you

No worries Colin, I have upmost respect for you regardless whether we differ on opinion on this one issue

I completely accept that Human persecution is the main reason... we're not just sitting back and watching as Harriers are killed by gamekeepers, action is being taken and we are trying to stamp it out. But it's a long slow process.

Wouldn't you agree that comments like "if it isn't native, get out the shotgun" from the so-called conservation half of the argument are hardly likely to help enlist public support for further protection measures?

I don't think this is intelligent use of language, merely likely to alienate those that might otherwise support the cause.

if they were rats for example, and if they had accidently been released on a seabird colony, and were threatening to decimate the population of Puffins, everybody would be up in arms demanding their removal. So what's the difference?

One difference being that rats do decimate seabird colonies and lead to long-term decline/extinction of that population, even where no other threat faces the birds. This is well documented and can be supported by fact. The same cannot be said for Eagle Owls - they co-exist with harrier populations throughout their range.

 

[David FG]

The same cannot be said for Eagle Owls - they co-exist with harrier populations throughout their range.

I have no doubt they can coexist where there are healthy populations.

Where they are just about managing to cling on in very small numbers, then one more pressure (whatever it might be) could be enough to push them over the edge. And if that 'one more pressure' can possibly be removed, then surely it should.

 

[ColonelBlimp]

Before I begin (are you sitting comfortably? ) I'd just like to say that I agree thoroughly with the sentiments expressed by DavidFG and ColinD.

Your comment was "if it isn't native, get out the shotgun", a comment that incidently supports the shooting of Little Owls and a whole range of other species. Comments like that are backward. When conservation bodies are hoping to change mindsets that sees 'undesirable' species as things to be shot and destroyed, having similar comments coming from persons presumably hoping to influence the likes of those who persecute harriers is laughable.

Throughout the history of invasive species throughout this country, the one thing that has lead to the establishment of species delerious to native wildlife is yes, you guessed it, procrastination. That is, worrying about the moral and ethical implications of getting rid of some animal, usually because it is "pretty", and hey, it's unlikely to colonise anyway, isn't it? Then, when it does, it's too late, as it is now in the back garden and mind of every vote-carrying member of the public.

Who gives a toss among Joe Public about the Whitendale owls? Not very many, I bet. Would that change if, for argument's sake, they turned invasive and were everywhere? Of course.

Therefore, in the context of my remark, when a non-native species arrives through human hands (as is apparently the case with the owls), the fallback position in my view should be one of nipping a potential invasive species 'in the bud'. If we'd followed that philosophy before, there'd be no grey squirrels, no parakeets, and indeed no little owls etc etc. ad infinitum, and thus less damage to native wildlife. Even if the invasive species 'coexists' with the native wildlife, it is still taking utilisable resources and thus limiting their viability, and so thus still having an impact, even though one not as attention-grabbing as extermination.

As you now acknowledge, all your comments are based on pure conjucture - there is no evidence that Hen Harriers would not survive alongside Eagle Owls if the real cause of their decline was addressed (but as you also admit, much easier to shoot a few supposed problem birds than actually tackle the actual problem). Again, I have to wonder why you believe the English harriers would be any different.

Of course my argument is based on conjecture, as yes, there is no evidence that Hen harriers would not survive alongside Eagle Owls, but for the specific environments of England there is no evidence that they would either. My argument thus far is merely based upon what I consider to be logically possible.

And as David FG says, Eagle Owls could well be the straw that breaks the harrier's back. We just don't know. But with something as valuable as England's Hen Harriers, it is always better to be 'safe than sorry'.

A relatively minor additional point, although I'm a little hazy on European law, I believe as a native European species, in order to legally 'blast them with your shotgun', you would need to actually show these were escapes, rather than believe them to be. In each and every case. Do you have that evidence?

As far as I know the Lancashire Eagle owls are considered to be escapees. However, I would not extrapolate this position to other stuff like Little Egrets etc. that colonise 'naturally', as that would be silly.

 

[Jos Stratford]

And as David FG says, Eagle Owls could well be the straw that breaks the harrier's back.

I think you will find that is more likely be a bullet from a misguided person. Given that folks round your way seem to delight in promoting shotguns to remove what they deem undesirable, not seeing reason to have facts to underscore their opinions, I would guess neither harrier nor eagle owl will last very long.

 

[Richard Klim]

Throughout the history of invasive species throughout this country, the one thing that has lead to the establishment of species delerious to native wildlife is yes, you guessed it, procrastination. That is, worrying about the moral and ethical implications of getting rid of some animal, usually because it is "pretty", and hey, it's unlikely to colonise anyway, isn't it? Then, when it does, it's too late, as it is now in the back garden and mind of every vote-carrying member of the public.

Exactly. And unfortunately aided and abetted by misguided birders who seem to crave any potential addition to their local avifauna (how long before someone decides that Ireland would be much better with woodpeckers?).

Wherever economically feasible, any artificially-introduced non-native (especially invasive) species should be eliminated before it becomes established. Evidence of negative impacts is irrelevant - we shouldn't be treating the planet as a Big Brother studio, allowing alien species to be introduced for our amusement.

Richard

 

[fugl]

Wherever economically feasible, any artificially-introduced non-native (especially invasive) species should be eliminated before it becomes established.

I think we're starting to go around in circles on this, but one thing still sticks in my craw. What does "artificial" have to do with anything, particularly in first-world countries with their vastly altered ecologies? Surely any sudden introduction can be problematical (or not) regardless of how it arrived?

 

[username]

Am i being naive in thinking that it would be possible to remove said 'escaped eagle owls' from 'the' hen harrier site?...without blasting them into a pile of feathers that is! This is obviously an immediate 'potential' problem here....[i fully understand the deep concerns expressed and am sympathetic to the situation].
As regards 'all the other' Bubo's in uk....'if' some of these were naturally occurring...then any sort of 'shotgun' tactics or otherwise...wud be 'bang' out of order...[every pun intended...apologies]!

 

[Richard Klim]

I think we're starting to go around in circles on this, but one thing still sticks in my craw. What does "artificial" have to do with anything, particularly in first-world countries with their vastly altered ecologies? Surely any sudden introduction can be problematical (or not) regardless of how it arrived?

I agree. But while there is much to debate about the 'natural' expansion of IUCN Global Invasive Species and potential control measures, at the very least we ought to be able to have a clear and robust position on truly artificial introductions.

I'm sure that 99.999% of conservationists accept and respect that it's illegal to release alien species into the wild, and would never dream of doing so. But whenever it actually happens, many birders nevertheless seem to hope that the species thrives and becomes established.

Returning to the subject of this thread as an example, in a recent discussion of parakeets in the UK on the UK400 Club Bird Forum, Lee Evans argued that the locations of breeding Monk and Alexandrine Parakeets should not be reported, to obstruct any potential control measures by DEFRA - essentially affording them the same protection as Schedule 1 species!

This ridiculous contradiction is usually justified by asserting that the escapees themselves are 'innocent', and therefore deserve protection in the absence of absolute proof of serious impacts (which of course often takes years to establish, by which time control measures will be far more expensive and controversial - think Ruddy Duck). [But many who argue this presumably continue to enjoy their chicken dinners with an apparently clear conscience...]

Richard

 

[Jos Stratford]

Am i being naive in thinking that it would be possible to remove said 'escaped eagle owls' from 'the' hen harrier site?...without blasting them into a pile of feathers that is! This is obviously an immediate 'potential' problem here....[i fully understand the deep concerns expressed and am sympathetic to the situation].
As regards 'all the other' Bubo's in uk....'if' some of these were naturally occurring...then any sort of 'shotgun' tactics or otherwise...wud be 'bang' out of order...[every pun intended...apologies]!

Quite.

 

[Jos Stratford]

(how long before someone decides that Ireland would be much better with woodpeckers?).

Great Spotted Woodpeckers are already in Ireland, quite probably breeding - young birds being reported at a number of localities.

 

[John o'Sullivan]

Good morning people,

I return deleriously happy following the glorious triumph of Ireland in the six nations.

Ireland, Ireland,together standing tall.
Shoulder to shoulder we'll answer Irelands Call.

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

Having got that off my chest, back to discussion.

Colin D
The adaptability that rats have over many species is they can tolerate, close proximity to humans. Some species can others can't. This is currently a major survival advantage to a wide range of species.

Other species have survival advantages because we find them attractive or useful.

In the case of rats they have very effective survival mechanisms and fecundity (that's why there are so many of them). They cannot however individually develop defence mechanism directly against us although they have developed some resistance to some poison's.

I'm not saying killing rat's is not natural. I'm saying that to do this for conservation purposes is against my belief systems. On isolated islands I don't object to them being trapped and removed if there is a sensible reason to do this.

The example you give of St Kilda's might not however be a good example.

It is possible that with global warming and overfishing (which is only going to get more extreme) the seabirds colonies around Britain's coast are going to collapse. If this is so removing hypothtical rats from St Kilda would be a futile waste of time and effort.

Like lots of current "conservation"

Paul D
Biodiversity is currently the "sacred cow" of the "conservation movement". I've no objection to it as long as it doesn't involve the culling of species on spurious natural/unnatural grounds or the diversion of reasources away from much more important concerns.

If conservationists really cared about biodiversity (as it currently exists) they would be doing everything they can to really affect global warming. They wouldn't be messing around with Ruddy Ducks, parakeets or re-introducing Cranes to the severn Estuary.

Also with regards to Biodiversity it should either matter to consevationists or not. If it matters enough to cull introduced species it should matter enough to kill "naturally" occuring species as well (those species not already defined as pests).

The distinction between the two species groups is arbitary.

 

[Richard Klim]

Great Spotted Woodpeckers are already in Ireland, quite probably breeding - young birds being reported at a number of localities.

OK - perhaps I could've picked a better example!

Richard

 

[PaulD]

Am i being naive in thinking that it would be possible to remove said 'escaped eagle owls' from 'the' hen harrier site?...without blasting them into a pile of feathers that is! This is obviously an immediate 'potential' problem here....[i fully understand the deep concerns expressed and am sympathetic to the situation].
As regards 'all the other' Bubo's in uk....'if' some of these were naturally occurring...then any sort of 'shotgun' tactics or otherwise...wud be 'bang' out of order...[every pun intended...apologies]!

This ground has been thoroughly covered before! All the available information clearly indicates that the Eagle Owls in Britain are either escapes, illegal releases or their offspring.

It is possible that wild Eagle Owls could reach Britain from the Continent, but there is no evidence that any have and if any do then they will be few and far between.

If you want information on the size of the captive population and the frequency of escapes etc then read the paper on Eagle Owls in Britain published in the September 2008 edition of British Birds magazine (Vol.101, 478-490).

If you've read that and still believe that genuinely wild birds have anything other than a negligible input to the British EO population, then I'd be interested in evidence to support your argument.

 

[username]

PaulD........i'm sure this ground has been very thoroughly covered before...and have no doubt it will be again...and again! [I was not aware of that BB Sept issue on Bubo's...thank you for bringing it to my attention]! As i have said before...i'm quite sure 'most' Eagle Owls in uk are escapes...my only concern is that this species is more than capable of reaching our shores and any eradication scheme [should one come about]...wud 'sweep' a [potentially] naturally range extending species away....this i wud not be happy about!
Of course...one day...some guy birding on some eastern headland will observe one of these 'beasts' winging itz way in off the sea...maybe!

 

[PaulD]

PaulD........i'm sure this ground has been very thoroughly covered before...and have no doubt it will be again...and again! [I was not aware of that BB Sept issue on Bubo's...thank you for bringing it to my attention]! As i have said before...i'm quite sure 'most' Eagle Owls in uk are escapes...my only concern is that this species is more than capable of reaching our shores and any eradication scheme [should one come about]...wud 'sweep' a [potentially] naturally range extending species away....this i wud not be happy about!
Of course...one day...some guy birding on some eastern headland will observe one of these 'beasts' winging itz way in off the sea...maybe!

I'm sure you're right in saying it will crop up again and again! I started off sitting on the fence as to whether we get wild birds or not, but once you look at the facts it's fairly clear that we don't (or if we do they are extremely rare).

On a slightly pedantic point I would disagree with the implication in your post that a bird seen at an east coast headland would necessarily be a wild immigrant. There are grounds for believing that the UK population is higher than the population on the near continent and the young from places like Bowland and Catterick will disperse from their nesting area and it would hardly be a surprise if one of them turned up on the east coast in autumn (BWP says that Norwegian studies showed a tendancy for young birds to disperse to coastal areas).

 

[username]

I agree PaulD....a bird appearing on an east coast headland wud not 'necessarily' be the genuine article! You and others are obviously more 'up to date' than i am on the 'current' situation....my fault for not being more informed i suppose! Last time i paid attention to this topic...[coinciding with tv programme on the subject]....i was impressed by evidence of this species migratory 'powers'.........and [at the time]? thought that Bubo's will eventually reach the uk!! This has not been proven thus far....but perhaps it will one day? We shall see....i am 'still on the fence' on this subject...quite painful at times isn't it!

 

[PaulD]

Last time i paid attention to this topic...[coinciding with tv programme on the subject]....i was impressed by evidence of this species migratory 'powers'.........and [at the time]? thought that Bubo's will eventually reach the uk!! This has not been proven thus far....but perhaps it will one day?

I'd be interested to know what that "evidence" is, as Eagle Owls don't migrate, nor are they particularly nomadic, though obviously young birds do disperse from the nesting area.

One example from the article in British Birds. By 2003, 6,663 EOs had been ringed in Sweden and there had been 1,805 recoveries. The median distance involved from ringing to recovery was 52 km.

Despite the minimal sea crossing involved (only 5 km at one point) there wasn't a single recovery from Denmark. Eagle Owls don't like sea crossings, so the English Channel and the North Sea are always going to be a significant barrier to them.

 

[Farnboro John]

I'm sure you're right in saying it will crop up again and again! I started off sitting on the fence as to whether we get wild birds or not, but once you look at the facts it's fairly clear that we don't (or if we do they are extremely rare).

On a slightly pedantic point I would disagree with the implication in your post that a bird seen at an east coast headland would necessarily be a wild immigrant. There are grounds for believing that the UK population is higher than the population on the near continent and the young from places like Bowland and Catterick will disperse from their nesting area and it would hardly be a surprise if one of them turned up on the east coast in autumn (BWP says that Norwegian studies showed a tendancy for young birds to disperse to coastal areas).

The Catterick birds at least were ringed, so they should have been obvious if they had pitched up in such a way. The only recovery to date was from Shropshire, a longish move inland ending with the bird fried by power lines.

John

 

[username]

A distance of 135 miles i believe 'FarnboroJohn' to Shropshire.....and i think another dispersing youngster was found in southern Scotland..[don't know distance involved].
PaulD.....i should not have said 'migratory' of course....i was referring to the 'dispersive' powers of immature Eagle Owls!..['this' was what i was impressed by in that tv documentary]! You may well be right that Bubo's have an aversion to sea-crossings, as there have been no documented occurrences? However, i find it hard to believe that such a creature would find the sea crossing difficult...but...maybe you're right! Roy Dennis believes that this species is more than capable of the short journey....no 'hard evidence' tho...