Tim inadvertently raises an interesting question: how is "pishing" any different from using a playback call? We all "pish", constantly. Isn't that a form of trying to "irritate" a bird to get to come closer so we can get a look at it and it can get a look at us? How is a bird reacting to a "pish" (ie, a potential predator or warning of a predator) any different than a bird reacting to a song of it's own kind? It's so easy to say "don't use playback" while we go about all sorts of other behaviors as if they are perfectly acceptable. Who decides what is acceptable and what isn't? This latter question undoubtedly is the reason why some of the initial reaction to this thread was "don't go there, drop it".....because it is a difficult topic with no real clear answers, but lots of opinions.
I'll do my best to stop now..... Cheers Dave Lauten On 3/10/2015 11:51 AM, Tim Rodenkirk wrote:
I just wanted to clarify that the first time I went to look for the CA Towhee in Brookings it was weeks after the first sighting by Ken Burton (I had been out of state for a while). He unfortunately did not actually see the bird, but heard it sing and call so it sounded pretty legit, at least to me. However, because of the rarity of the species on the south coast, the record would probably not have counted unless someone did verify it by sight. I had heard no new reports of the bird being seen or heard and was really quite shocked to actually hear what sounded like call notes for the species a couple weekends ago. I did not have any means of playback with me but I did try and pish the bird in. At first it seemed to come into my pishing, that is, the metallic chink notes got closer. However, the bird never would make itself visible. I had it calling all around me though, and it was real frustrating not being able to see it. I wished I had my iPod with me to do a bit of playback.
