FreeLists / birdky / [birdky] A bander responds: Banding and the science of ornithology (long)

["C. C. Murray" <ccmurray@xxxxxxxx>]

I had intended to post nothing further on the matter of banding
hummingbirds, until this response from a bander was posted in Ohio. The
text follows, with no additional comment from me. If you find anything
further on the subject is just too much there is a conveniently located
delete icon above.

Bud Murray
Crawfordsville IN

>From: "Marcus C. England" <marcus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ohio-birds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 12:07 PM
Subject: Banding and the science of ornithology (long)

>I believe that before ANY argument can be made for or against the
capture
and marking (banding) of any bird, there must be a clear understanding
of
what information is being gathered and for what purpose. Clearly, the
capture of any bird places a certain degree of stress on that bird... a
percentage (VERY small, if the person running the operation knows what
he/she is doing) will die in the process, this should generally be kept
well under one percent.

The loss of any bird in this process is extremely unfortunate. Most
researchers--myself included--feel this loss is justifiable as long as
the
project for which the capture is done IS FOR THE GREATER GOOD OF THE
SPECIES AND/OR ECOSYSTEM INVOLVED. In other words, if the data being
collected, when analyzed and published or otherwise disseminated to the
public, can be used to help us understand that species' evolutionary
background, niche, importance in the environment, etc. and thus assist
in
obtaining the knowledge necessary to conserve that species and/or its
habitat, then the small losses are worthwhile when weighed against the
probability that without such work many more individuals will be lost
due
to our own species ignorance and neglect.

The knowledge gained by these projects has accumulated over time,
building... one project on another... until we get to our current
knowledge
base. ALMOST EVERYTHING WE KNOW ABOUT BIRDS IS BECAUSE OF THESE
PROJECTS,
whether you realize it or not. Capture and marking of birds is essential
to
most statistical analyses... without marking birds you do not know (in
most
cases) if observations of subjects under study are independent of each
other... an essential prerequisite if we are draw to general conclusions
about larger population groups based on the smaller number of
individuals
actually studied.

To my left on my desk are the most recent copies of the journals THE
AUK,
THE WILSON BULLETIN, JOURNAL OF FIELD ORNITHOLOGY, THE CONDOR,
ORNITOLOGIA
NEOTROPICAL, and COTINGA... just under 1000 pages of some recent
discoveries in ornithology. A perusal of any or all of these journals
will
lead the reader to discover that most all of the projects used capture
and
often, subsequent marking of birds as the basis for their studies. A
good
study that illustrates the importance of capture and "invasive"
techniques
to conservation of species can be found in Auk 119: 641-657. In
"Subspecific differentiation and conservation of Song Sparrows
(Melospiza
melodia) in the San Francisco Bay region inferred by microsatellite loci
analysis" Chan and Arcese are able to suggest priorities for land
conservation based on the genetic structure of this species'
population...
the gene of a species IS an important conservation unit, and without the
capture of this study subject and collection of blood samples (gathered
most often through the brachial vein under the wing), these conclusions
could not possibly be drawn. I know... Song Sparrows aren't exactly
rare,
but many species are and the use of these techniques is extended to
species
of conservation priority. In addition, without netting of birds, many of
our recent discoveries or re-discoveries of rare tropical species in
South
America would not have happened... many of these have been important in
preventing the logging of rainforest tracts.

By arguing the above, I DO NOT intend to defend all banding projects, as
many (in my humble opinion) are not well-run and do not seem to serve a
real purpose other than to prop up the egos of those involved. Many
argue
that the work of constant-effort mist-netting stations (such as those
operated under the MAPS program... these are the banding "stations" that
many of you are familiar with) bears little fruit. I disagree. Yes, band
returns are low (a constant complaint of those against banding), but
these
projects help us to have a better understanding of bird movements. I do,
however, know of some fairly horrible practices/events undertaken by
participants of some fairly high profile stations (all second-hand, but
through reliable sources), including the capture of an endangered
species
in which case the individual bird in question was driven to another
place
many miles away to show off to visiting birders, then driven back and
released. In another station there was the continuing banding of owls
despite a VERY high mortality rate due to fox predation on unremoved
net-captured birds, and at the same station, continuing capture of owls
after running out of bands to mark them with (they were marked with
colored
string). I am sure that many of you long time birders who are against
banding know of similar horror stories, but LET'S NOT CONFUSE THE
IGNORANCE
OF SOME BAD BANDERS WITH THE PRACTICE OF BANDING AS A WHOLE. I believe
that
these sorts of indefensible practices should merit loss of permits
and/or
closing of the station... I was unable to persuade those with direct
knowledge of these practices to report the offenders.

In regard to the hummingbird in question, that particular type of
capture
is open to debate. The capture and identification of these vagrants
certainly allows us to investigate some interesting aspects of their
biology... namely the degree to which these western species stray
eastward
and the consistency of individuals to do so repeatedly. The information
on
recaptured Rufous Hummingbirds given by Bill Whan is VERY interesting.
If
those birds weren't banded, we wouldn't know that the same individuals
will
stray east in multiple years... the importance of that data tidbit can
be
left up for discussion by hummingbird experts.

However, hummingbirds are widely known in the banding community to have
high mortality rates when captured... most general banding projects
(including the one I led in Belize) will release them immediately on
capture, leaving work on these species to hummingbird "experts" with
specialized equipment and techniques for gathering banding data from
these
species without harm to the birds.

So, debate the capture of the Calliope. If the capturer was--as
stated--an
expert in hummingbird banding with a valid scientific use for the data,
then there should be little debate. The loss was, no doubt, an
unfortunate
one even if inevitable. If the bander was capturing the bird with no
intent
to collect useful information other than to potentially add a new
species
to the state list, then there should be some debate... but let's not
lump
ALL bird banding together in these discussions.

-Marcus

PS: For the record, I have NEVER lost a bird in 2000 net captures, but I
understand and accept that I likely will should I do such projects in
the
future.
________________________________________________________
Marcus C. England
Director | Ornithology Expeditions | BELIZE BIRDING OUTFITTERS


================NOTES TO SUBSCRIBERS==============

The BIRDKY Mailing List requires you to sign 
your messages with first & last name, city, & 
state abbreviation.
--------------------------------------------------
To post to this mailing list, send e-mail to:
birdky@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
-------------------------------------------------- 
To unsubscribe, send e-mail to:
birdky-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject line.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *  
Visit the Kentucky Ornithological Society
web site at http://www.biology.eku.edu/kos.htm
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 
BIRDKY List Manager: Gary Ritchison, Richmond, KY
E-mail: gary.ritchison@xxxxxxx