[va-bird] Re: Additional thoughts about visiting Ivory-billed habitat

["Christian Kessler" <northraven@xxxxxxx>]

a number of good points in this, but this only works so long as the birders 
are all individuals, and not too intrepid.  when enterprising types -- local 
or otherwise -- start to organize tours to search for the bird, that will 
change the situation.  so will use of motorized boats, if that is 
permitted -- I don't know whether there are prohibitions on motors, or how 
those prohibitions are enforced.  swamp boats [flat-bottomed aluminum boats 
powered by large fans] are used a lot in Florida in swamps.  and I can 
imagine the scene of the first guy with too much gear, of the wrong type, 
who thinks that a GPS is what he needs, finally calling on his phone giving 
the coordinates of where he's lost and demanding a helicopter come fetch him 
out -- not uncommon event these days in the White Mountains, sadly [& topo 
maps work in the mountains].

don't mean that no one should go, but I do think that continued access could 
prove far more problematic than your friends first reading would indicate.

chris kessler
falls church


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Craig Tufts" <TUFTS@xxxxxxx>
To: <va-bird@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 5:09 PM
Subject: [va-bird] Additional thoughts about visiting Ivory-billed habitat


>I wanted to share this email I received via a colleague from someone who
> participated in the Zeiss Ivory-billed WP search team in 2002. Some good
> food for thought.
>
> Craig Tufts
>
> Looking for Ivory-billed Woodpeckers
>
> Fri, 29 Apr 2005
>
> Everyone,
>
> I wasn't going to wade into this, but I feel I must comment on the
> many
> posts that have appeared re the Arkansas Ivory-billed Woodpecker
> promoting the idea that (1) the area should be closed; (2) don't let
> any birders in; (3) don't publish directions; (4) stay away; etc. etc.
>
> In a nutshell, I feel such comments are generally quite silly.  The
> very subject of "controlled access" was raised and discussed while we
> -- 
> Zeiss Ivory-billed Woodpecker Search Team -- were searching for
> Ivory-billed
> Woodpeckers in 2002 in the Pearl River of Louisiana.  In fact, during
> our entire 30-day search there I'm not even sure if we encountered ONE
> birder that was searching for the bird.  In contrast, however, we did
> see many
> hunters on a daily basis, and we never considered them to be a
> problem.
> The conclusion was that the subject was basically a non-issue.  The
> reasons are many.
>
> First of all, it is quite clear that 99% of birders that might arrive
> to search for any birds would probably, at most, spend perhaps a 1/2
> day
> of searching and then quit.  If mosquitoes were active, this time
> frame
> might be reduced to but one or two hours.
>
> Secondly, where the birds are found (either Louisiana or Arkansas) are
> vast tracts of bottomland forest that are extremely difficult to
> access. There are generally few roads and few trails (and often none).
> To
> access the area, you must expect to get very wet, or enter via a canoe
> or
> other type of boat.  What percentage of arriving birders are willing to
> do
> this?
>
> Thirdly, so far 7000 man-hours have been spent looking for the
> Arkansas
> bird, and IN TOTAL there have been only 15 sightings.  If you do the
> math, it means a birder would need to spend a MINIMUM of 55 days of
> searching if one expects a sighting.  How many birders would be
> willing
> to put in this much effort, even without the guarantee of a sighting?
> Fourth, even if the bird is seen in a particular area, it does NOT
> mean
> you simply go to that location and the bird will be waiting for you.
>
> By the time you get there, it is far more likely that the bird is now
> 2, 5
> or 10 miles away.  So even if a significant number of birders somehow
> reached the location -- after obtaining canoes, etc. -- it would not
> be a major impact.
>
> Fifth, while people are promoting the idea that birders should "stay
> away" all kinds of other outdoor enthusiasts continue to use the area
> (as they did BEFORE the bird was found).  This includes hunters,
> fishermen,
> kayakers, whatever.  Adding a few birders to this mix is not going to
> have any effect whatsoever.
>
> Van Remsen of LSU (Baton Rouge) was involved in these discussions, and
>
> he agreed that birders searching for the Ivory-billed Woodpecker was
> not a
> major issue.  As a leading authority on the Ivory-billed Woodpecker,
> there is no doubt that he would suggest otherwise if he deemed it to
> be a real problem.
>
> Now there is one potential situation that is indeed important to
> address. Should a NEST of Ivory-billed Woodpecker be found (or a
> roosting
> hole), then a total closure of the immediate area would indeed be
> necessary
> and indeed would be something that I would totally agree with.  But
> even
> then, I suspect the authorities in charge would devise a safe way in
> which visitors could view the birds.  Perhaps via a high-powered
> telescope at a distance.
>
> Alan Wormington
> Leamington, Ontario
>
>
>
> You are subscribed to VA-BIRD. To post to this mailing list, simply send 
> email to va-bird@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe, send email to
> va-bird-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field.
> 

You are subscribed to VA-BIRD. To post to this mailing list, simply send email 
to va-bird@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe, send email to
va-bird-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field.

• Follow-Ups:
  • [va-bird] Re: Additional thoughts about visiting Ivory-billed habitat
    • From: ecj100

• References:
  • [va-bird] Additional thoughts about visiting Ivory-billed habitat
    • From: Craig Tufts

Other related posts:

[va-bird] Additional thoughts about visiting Ivory-billed habitat

[va-bird] Re: Additional thoughts about visiting Ivory-billed habitat

[va-bird] Re: Additional thoughts about visiting Ivory-billed habitat