[texbirds] Re: Tropical Mockingbird - missing back toe nail on right foot
- From: Ted Lee Eubanks <tedleeeubanks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: brushfreeman@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 19:27:48 -0500
We seem to be trying to maneuver that camel, once again, through the eye of
a needle. Dan comments that " with a steady stream of oil tankers chugging
from Campeche up to the Texas City, there is a ready conduit for
transportation of nonmigratory Mexican species to the Texas coast." No one
disagrees with this observation, but does that mean that any bird from the
tropics that is seen anywhere near the coast is automatically discounted? I
have watched this discussion and the objections progress over the past
decades. The first objection was identification. This has been largely
resolved by digital photography. In other words, there is no doubt as to
the identity of the birds in question. The second objection relates to the
bird trade. Is the bird kept in captivity? Now we move on to the
possibilities of the birds being ship assisted.
Here is what we do know. The birds were, and are, here. We know nothing
else. We have no idea about provenance, whether are not they were caged, or
whether or not they hitched on a ship. What about the sungrebe in New
Mexico? The bird is not traded or sold, was not remotely near a port, yet
showed up at Bosque del Apache. How do we discount that bird except for it
being ridiculously unlikely. Until we can definitely prove that these
rarities are somehow the products of direct human intervention (capture),
then I suggest that we go with the most plausible explanation. Birds have
wings, can fly, and don't read the range maps.
Ted Eubanks
Austin, Texas
Other related posts:
