The darker side of listing (1 Viewer)

[DunnoKev]

Nope, it wasn't in hindsight.It was with full awareness of the facts - based on input from world class microbiologists, the FAO, BirdLife and other sources. It was presented in the media, argued in the legislature and common knowledge to all birders at the time.

The closures went on for six years by which time it had been crystal clear most of that time that the decision-makers concerned were being tossers and fuelling an unfounded fear of infection from wild birds rather than admit to incompetence.

It also meant that the reserve (run by WWF, who also opposed the closures) lost substantial revenue from visitors during the regulation three week closure for discovery of an infected bird within three kilometres of the site - a regulation devised incidentally to prevent contamination from one poultry farm to another, not to prevent people being infected by wild birds.

and if we're thinking of the same JC . . . He was without sin. Not much point in Him otherwise.

Cheers
Mike

Hi Mike,

Cheers for the fuller details. Mea culpa your desciption of the reserve staff took me somewhere else entirely

The interesting statement for me this time is 'argued in the legislature', which points to ongoing debate and a settling of alternative interpretations of the facts at the time. There's still nothing there that would make me consider tresspassing. But I'll give you I'm weird on this as I'm still one of the few who thinks that with our own F&M outbreak our Govt behaved appropriately *at the time*, even though hindsight now shows some of the actions were too draconian and would (probably) not be needed in a similar situation.

And yup we're on the same chap- he has got plenty, he's supposedly burdening all of ours. Its actions and consequences again ;-)

 

[RE Birder]

Unless of course you know him and have seen who he works for?

Do you?

 

[DunnoKev]

(..but then I guess even crocheting has its dark side too ... ?? )

Ooo don't get me started, we're on the other half's home turf, and the stories behind the fallout in the last few years between the new regime at the Embroiderers' Guild and their local groups, well, you'd drop stitches if I told you even the half of it

 

[Paul Chapman]

AdamW/Tideliner

"Yeah because thats what we always see at major twitches isnt it?

I would love to think that that is exactly what would have happened but i think history would probably suggest otherwise."

"Paul ,I work in conservation doing survey work for a number of employers from conservation trusts to windfarm firms ,under contract. The information I collect is not mine it belongs to my employers and its up to them to release any information or not as the case may be. Some of the information does end up in the local bird reports , but some does not. It depends on the site and the company policy. If information has conservation issues it is passed on the the relevent conservation body and my interests in it cease. Its up to the conservation body or county council to make use of that information when considering planning applications."

AdamW - I did not say that always happens at twitches but I anticipate yes, that would probably have been the case here. It happens in the vast majority of cases.

Tideliner - your explanation to me seems thin. I do not understand how you are prevented from reporting the record or requesting permission to do so. The BBRC is happy to record the record as "locality withheld". Of course, there are a lot of follow up questions that could be used to attempt to elucidate a more satisfactory answer but I do not anticipate that would be the result.

All the best

Paul Chapman

 

[Mysticete]

While I don't agree with trespassing on private land, I would say it's probably on the lesser side of things. I get much more disturbed by use of tapes on locally endangered species at well known sites, or trimming away cover to get better pictures of owls. The latter I know has occurred at several sites in the US, has been the source of some photographer vs birder arguments.

 

[DunnoKev]

Dunno Kev,

Your standards do you credit: I doubt that many will match up to your moral code.
I started the thread in a light-hearted vein, hoping to expand my pool of birding anecdotes. I also wondered whether people might challenge some of the prevailing orthodoxies of listing. Birders tend to be a fairly serious lot when discussing their hobby and I've always been intrigued by some of the contradictions (and hypocrisy) of conservation vs twitching (which include travel and trespass).
Peter

Don't worry Peter, my morals do go out the window now and then. Usually when involving c... and d... btw.

Light-hearted and challenging some of the prevailing orthodoxies of listing. Crikey. Good luck with that. Well, if it puts a smile on your face anything I record in my spare time at home has to go down on the work's 'list', what with living on site. Oh the shame. Still, listed a very dodgy feral snow goose this week, just for effect. Now that's how listing should be.

 

[O.Reville1989]

Do you?

I believe we have met yes on a couple of occasions yes.....

 

[RE Birder]

I believe we have met yes on a couple of occasions yes.....

And you know who he works and surveys for?

 

[Phil Andrews]

In a slightly different take on trespassing, how many birders still ventured out in the field during the Food and Mouth crisis despite large areas of the countryside being shut down?

 

[O.Reville1989]

And you know who he works and surveys for?

"No one expects the Spanish inquisition".....

ps: Yes!

 

[RE Birder]

"No one expects the Spanish inquisition".....

ps: Yes!

Hmm. That changes things perhaps? Tideliner?

 

[birdboybowley]

In a slightly different take on trespassing, how many birders still ventured out in the field during the Food and Mouth crisis despite large areas of the countryside being shut down?

Me!

 

[O.Reville1989]

Hmm. That changes things perhaps? Tideliner?

I doubt he would remember me.
To Tideliner (if you do remember me): We met once earlier in the summer at the now former Ryburgh watch point. Guy called Mike was there as well (drives a red Citreon), I remember you had your Labrador with you that day and we discussed the motives of introducing White-Tailed Eagles in Suffolk!

 

[Si Clayton]

This recent short article http://www.science20.com/anthrophysis/value_rare_birds-83376 "The Value of Rare Birds" may be of interest to some.
In fact some of you may well have unwittingly contributed with your revealing (and sometimes very honest) postings and at-twitch behaviour.
This forum is a wonderful resource for these kinds of studies.
It alludes to "The Dark Side", but there is a light side beyond the tunnel vision of the few brave rebels who practice those dark arts. o

Adjusts halo and whistles Inbetweeners theme

 

[Johann Sebastian Bach]

This recent short article http://www.science20.com/anthrophysis/value_rare_birds-83376 "The Value of Rare Birds" may be of interest to some.
In fact some of you may well have unwittingly contributed with your revealing (and sometimes very honest) postings and at-twitch behaviour.
This forum is a wonderful resource for these kinds of studies.
It alludes to "The Dark Side", but there is a light side beyond the tunnel vision of the few brave rebels who practice those dark arts. o

Adjusts halo and whistles Inbetweeners theme

A revealing study which provides ammunition for the "No trespass" camp:

"The scientists reported that the birdwatchers could be quite aggressive in their searches for extreme rarities, trampling vegetation and trespassing onto private land. In cases when vagrants hang around for several days, quite a bit of cumulative damage could be done to the local habitat."

Peter

 

[DunnoKev]

A revealing study which provides ammunition for the "No trespass" camp:

Sorry, there's no camping tolerated either

 

[DMW]

A revealing study which provides ammunition for the "No trespass" camp:

Revealing? I thought it just stated the bleeding obvious!

I wonder if they would pay for me to test my theory that 5 star Amazonian lodges are more comfortable than dossing in a tent?

 

[dantheman]

Ooo don't get me started, we're on the other half's home turf, and the stories behind the fallout in the last few years between the new regime at the Embroiderers' Guild and their local groups, well, you'd drop stitches if I told you even the half of it.

It's the darker side of turf-laying that really gets me worried. Although seafarers probably have more to worry about when it comes to the darker side of 'listing' ...

 

[Tideliner]

If you are a chemist working for a chemical company and you discover a new wonder drug your discovery is still the property of the company you work for. If you work for a car company and you discover how to make a car do 200 miles to the gal its still not your discovery to give to the world , it’s the car company that owns it. And its no different if you are doing survey work for a conservation body or windfarm company and find a rare bird on site. That information is not mine to tell the world, its my employers.

For most on here birdwatching is a hobby and good luck to you. For me it’s a living and if I gave out the records to the public domain I would not get much work in the future. What is important the records get to the appropriate conservation or public body. If they then choose to forward it onto the county recorder then so be it. But remember there is no legal necessity to publicly record any rare bird that you see .

There is nothing exceptional recording rare birds during survey work. Some of the sites I have looked at have been surveys covering all day light hours once a week for a year. And I may have several such sites running at a time some in prime conservation areas. Put that amount of time into a site some of which have a very high bird conservation value and you will see all sorts of goodies. Release the information and that will attract interest from hobby bird watchers which with the disturbance that will cause may effect the results of the survey to the detriment of the sites future conservation.

To give an example of this , there is one site where a wind farm was planned. A long stay rarity turned up which attracted a number of birders. This site was an important feeding area for waders and they promptly deserted the site in the numbers previously seen while groups of birders turned up to view the rare bird. The results at the end of the year suggested that the site was not important and the planning consent for a wind farm would have been granted , but for my past knowledge of the site . A repeat survey the following winter ( no birders present ) showed that the site was used by 8% and 1.7% of two of the wader species national population and also held the last probable breeding pair of willow tits in the eastern section of the county where it is already very scarce.

Result - the wind farm was stopped.

 

[Johann Sebastian Bach]

Tideliner,

There's a world of difference between the discovery of a miracle cure and a nutcracker. However, you make your point well concerning how wader counts can be artificially skewed by birders' interest in a rarity.
Could you tell me if you told your employers about the nutcracker and if you advised them what to do with the information?

Peter