Jan's comment is out of context, but that said, it might also be worth
mentioning that I practice what I preach: I have contributed dozens of bird
species this summer to my local-area BBS atlas block without needing to get
into a vehicle to do so! Most of the birds nested on my small property
(otherwise known as The Nature-friendly Garden), illustrating the value of
proper landscaping for wildlife.
Some of the birds that insisted upon nesting here this year were so unusual
that I wrote about it for my columns, one of which you can access here, if
you are interested:
http://www.crozetgazette.com/2017/07/06/blue-ridge-naturalist-some-very-unna
tural-bird-behavior-this-year/
Sincerely,
Marlene
In a message dated 7/25/2017 5:20:23 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
va-bird@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
It's probably worth mentioning that Ms. Condon disapproved in a prior
discussion of simply driving to a location to do bird surveys like BBS,
grassland, etc. For the inexperienced birder's edification, these typically
involve standing quietly and recording what one sees or hears, and do not
require playback, pishing, pursuit, etc. All of that is usually prohibited
in the protocol for any study I have worked on for a government agency or
academic entity. I think it is fair to disclose what the term harm
includes when looking at her list. I have no idea how we are supposed to
figure out what populations are crashing or what habitat needs to be
protected by sitting at home. She didn't answer.
I am sad to lose access at Shirley. It was important to me and many other
locals in every season and every type of weather. Once a year during the
CBC we could venture a little further, and once in a while on a field
trip. Now we aren't even supposed to stop. I can put away the step stool
now, and I won't need the no slip mat for my tripod on the hood of the car.
But if I come to the local patch of whoever caused this, I will still do my
best to obey any rule I know about regarding access and behavior. Might
even bring a step stool.
I have found the majority of property owners I run into very friendly and
hospitable with access to their land, no matter what project I was working
on. If I don't meet them, I obey the no trespassing signs no matter what I
see on the map or how good the habitat looks. There is more private land
available than I can possibly cover by the end of the atlas project, just
from being respectful of their rights and expectations and also educating
them about why and for who I do what I do. When it gets as bad as it has at
Shirley, the community clearly has some things to work on. The people I met
who were living and working there were always positive and welcoming in the
past, right up until 8:30pm on the 16th when one was teaching his daughter
to drive.
Jan
On Jul 25, 2017 11:22 AM, "Kim Harrell via va-bird" <va-bird@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I thought it was crystal clear, and if it sounds like we've heard it
before, maybe it didn't quite "take" on the first try, or the second, or
third. Or possibly there are people here who haven't heard it, and needed
to.
Interesting but sad that the only reactions here have been negative in
tone, and even defensive, pretty much proving Marlene's point to some
extent. Therefore I wanted to just say "thanks" for the thought and effort;
if it may not be heeded by all, that's all the more reason to say it
anyway, and keep saying it.
thanks,
Kim Harrell
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Gibson via va-bird" <va-bird@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: MARLENECONDON@xxxxxxx
Cc: "VA-BIRD" <va-bird@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "C. Michael Stinson" <
myrmecocichla@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, July 23, 2017 2:54:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Va-bird] birder behavior
Hi Marlene, I don't know about a waste of time (though you may be right),
but it was much too long and rambling--and not terribly lucid IMHO, and I'm
not sure if many people bothered to read it in its entirety. It was also
kind of a rehashing of stuff we've all read 100 times before. I applaud
the
'signatories' for their effort, but would urge them to revisit and to
briefly make their points crystal clear and with good examples. (I would
have loved a few concrete examples of bad behavior and actions taken.)
Best, Dave
On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 12:33 PM, MARLENECONDON--- via va-bird <
va-bird@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I applaud Ned, Mike, and Todd for taking the time to put together thearound--such
comments expressed below. However, I have to say that, sadly, it was
probably
a waste of time. Here's why:
I have tried to speak to folks about unethical birding behavior, but they
will have none of it. EVERY person justifies--in his own mind--why his
bird harassment is acceptable. Whether it's taking photos, overplaying
tapes
to bring a bird out into the open, or literally chasing birds
as a Snowy Owl on a cold winter's day--there is always a justification.want.
The excuses fall generally into 4 categories:
(1) The person is doing "science". This excuse is the worst, because
people feel it gives them a moral high ground that negates any harm they
do to
birds.
(2) The person's picture-taking is going to help conserve birds. By
sharing photos in some way, this type of birder feels he can get other
people
interested so they will care about birds and give money to conservation
fund-raising. There are two problems here. One is the complete lack of
empathy for the birds photographed--whether it be owls blinded, even if
only
temporarily, by flashes, or adult birds chased off their nests, or
nestlings
terrified by this "thing" in their faces. The second is that these
intrusions can bring harm to birds, as for example, when a blinded owl
stays put it
could be taken by a predator.
(3) The person simply does not believe he is causing harm. For example,
most people cannot comprehend what it means to not know where your next
meal is coming from so that every calorie counts. As a result, they think
nothing of constantly scaring up a Snowy Owl in a field instead of
letting it
try to find food.
(4) Field trip leaders feel they MUST produce a bird that would be a
lifer for someone, so they overuse tapes. I've seen this done during
nesting
season by VSO leaders!
So-o-o, good luck with changing bad birder behavior. As long as folks
believe they are justified--and far too many do--it will never happen.
Sincerely,
Marlene
In a message dated 7/21/2017 4:44:13 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
va-bird@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
Hello everyone -
Please note that although I am posting the letter below using my account,
it has three signatories and expresses the views of all three of us.
Thanks -
Mike
Probably most of us have been given a gift we didn’t particularly like,
and
as children we learned that “it’s the thought that counts” and we should
say thank you anyway. In other words, we’ve been taught that gratitude is
a
proper response to any gift – even the ones we don’t really like or
of
When someone finds a rare bird and posts the information on where to see
it, you’re being given a gift – at least two of them, in fact. The gift
information regarding where the bird is, and the gift of access, so thatbeen
you can visit the property where the bird is. We might even step back a
bit
and think of all birds themselves, as well as the time we have to devote
to
them, as gifts, even aside from their rarity.
Unfortunately, it seems that some birders are not saying “thank you.” In
fact, many birders act as though they aren’t aware that what they’ve
given is a gift at all. Instead, we’re concerned that the behavior ofsome
birders, especially when rare birds appear, implies that they are notbesides
concerned about what impact what they’re doing will have on anyone
themselves. Repeated actions by some birders in recent years, especiallylaw),
when rarities appear, indicate to us that too many birders are willing to
put their own desires to see and photograph birds ahead of the welfare of
birds, the stated desires of property owners (and in some cases, the
and the interests of other birders in seeing the same birds.but
The birds that we are often most anxious to see (rarities) are also often
ones that are especially stressed. They are typically in a strange
environment and so are coping with pressures to survive that are at least
partly foreign to them. Food, predators, and other components of the
habitat in which they’ve found themselves are not what they’re used to,
which makes them more vulnerable. Birders who pursue such birds too
closely
are adding to their stress and are making them less likely to survive.
This
is obviously not in the best interest of the birds, and it makes it less
likely that such birds will survive until other birders can see them. The
excuse that such birds “are going to die anyway” might often be true,
it’s not a certainty, nor is it an excuse for irritating other birders orgovernmental,
property owners.
Property owners, whether individual or corporate, private or
have the right in this country to tell birders when and how they maywe
access
their property. While it’s true that some restrictions might seem
unreasonable from a birder’s perspective, when they are clearly stated,
risk their anger (if not legal retribution) when disregarding them. Anit
all-too-common response by landowners angered at birders is simply to
restrict or end access to their property. This is understandable, since
is an efficient solution, much more efficient than trying to compile aguidelines
list
of “good” vs. “bad” birders, i.e. those who follow the stated
and those who don’t. Restricting access to a site harms all birders, andmight
eliminates whatever value the scientific data contributed by birders
have had.and
Birders are people, and all people are not the same. To be frank, some
care
more about other people, and some care less. Birder misbehavior that
threatens birds and angers property owners is also frustrating to other
birders, and it appears that some birders need to be reminded of this.
Some
reasons have already been mentioned above: that birds might leave an area
or die prematurely due to stress, meaning that fewer birders see them,
that access to good birding areas can be curtailed. And there are otherenough
reasons.
One reason that has been mentioned before is that birding is common
that there can be such a thing as a “public perception of a birder.” ToEach
give a similar example, consider any other label that we put on other
people: hunter, vegetarian, liberal, conservative, atheist, theist….
of these carries certain biases and images, for better or worse, accuratea
or inaccurate. What we do as birders contributes to the public image of a
birder. Rightly or wrongly, people often apply characteristics of the
extremists within a group to all the members of the group. If birders
tolerate a few trespassers who will do anything to get a better look at a
bird or a better photograph of a bird, we risk being categorized with
them.
Your behavior as a birder reflects on other birders. Even if that is not
reasonable, it is the way people think.
It has been less than 100 years since ornithology that used a shotgun as
primary tool evolved into birding that uses binoculars as a primary tool.concerned
Now we’ve entered a time when our binoculars are routinely supplemented
with social media and digital photography. As with any new technology,
this
combination has the potential for abuse, and we are particularly
about the repeated abuse of information gained through social media bya
birders generally, and by bird photographers in particular.
While we could tell numerous stories of particular offenses and offenders
from recent years, we do not want to engage in finger-pointing at
individuals. But the possession of expensive equipment does not exempt
anyone from the guidelines we’ve discussed above. Arguably, it gives one
even more responsibility, since it can give non-birders a stronger
impression of someone who has time and money to spend chasing birds than
do
our binoculars. (The average member of the public probably can’t tell at
glance the difference between a $200 pair of binoculars and a $2200 pair,with
but they can tell the difference between a point-and-shoot and a DSLR
a Canon 500mm f/4L IS lens.) Similarly, the misuse of sound recordingand
broadcasting equipment remains a concern, especially since the field useseen
of
phones with superb sound reproduction capabilities is now routine.
We want to remind all birders that behaviors that stress the birds we
purse, or stress the landowners on whose land the birds occur, or stress
other birders, should be avoided. Such incidents have the potential to
become even more common as birder numbers increase and we continue to use
social media. We also want to point out that in recent years, we have
incidents ourselves, and heard numerous other reports, indicating thattoo
bird
photographers are responsible for a large number of such incidents. And,
we
want to encourage birders who do not engage in or condone such behaviors
to
speak to, and speak out against, those who do.
Not all bird species are the same and not all respond to birder pressure
the same. Every situation is a little different. Seeing a rare
storm-petrel
from a boat on a pelagic trip, seeing a rare hummingbird at a feeder on
someone’s porch, and seeing a rare wader on a private pond by a public
road
are three distinctly different birding scenarios. And although we can
agree
on general guidelines, they still have to be applied in particular
birding
situations. What was not too close to a bird in one situation might be
close in another, even when observing the same species of bird. We needto
help each other realize the subtleties of such situations. In many casesposting
birds are little bothered by our presence. But when large numbers of
birders crowd into a single spot, both birds and landowners are more
likely
to be disturbed.
You might say that we are motivated by selfish concerns ourselves. We
still
want to see rare birds, and we live with regret that formerly productive
birding sites such as the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel have had their
access severely curtailed or eliminated. While some blame for such
restrictions can be laid on post-911 caution / paranoia, that cannot
explain every limit we’ve been forced to live with. We are also active
birders who do not wish to be forced to take the position of never
the locations of rarities we find because we’re worried about theand
likelihood of misbehavior by other birders. It’s reasonable to us that
such
an attitude could become increasingly common if birders continue to
disregard the welfare of birds, the rights of property owners, and the
hopes of other birders.
Those who gain a reputation as offenders by repeatedly harassing birds
disregarding the interests of landowners and other birders cannot beVirginia,
surprised if they find themselves excluded from the news about rare birds
in the future; what they may gain instead is the ire of other birders who
are also not made aware of rarities when information about such birds is
kept away from social media. This is not an idle conceit; it has occurred
in some situations already. We are aware of birds now present in
and others recently occurring here, whose presence was not made publicdue
to exactly the sort of concerns we are describing. We wish that this didsuch
not have to be the case, and we are writing this letter in hopes that
situations can be minimized in the future.information
We live in the first era in the history of humanity in which information
about the presence of birds (and other wildlife) can be disseminated
instantaneously. It would be bitterly ironic if the technological
revolution that makes possible this interconnection between people
interested in birds were to result in a backlash in which such
is routinely suppressed, all because of a few bad actors. For decades,the
American Birding Association has published a Code of Birding Ethics (courtesy,
http://listing.aba.org/ethics/). The ABA regularly revises and discusses
this document. Whether one is a lister, a photographer, or a general
birding enthusiast, we the undersigned feel that it is the obligation of
birders to abide by the letter and the spirit of this document. If our
birding culture cannot be governed by what is, in the end, basic
consideration, and common sense, then we risk losing the culture itself.would
At
the very least, communication about special places and special birds
become much more limited and private than it is at this moment. We urge*** You are subscribed to va-bird as flyingfish1@xxxxxxxxx. If you wish to
everyone to read the ABA’s Code of Birding Ethics and take the Code to
heart.
Mike Stinson
Ned Brinkley
Todd Day
eBird reviewers
--
C. Michael Stinson
Dillwyn, VA
*** You are subscribed to va-bird as marlenecondon@xxxxxxx. If you wish
to
unsubscribe, or modify your preferences please visit
http://mailman.listserve.com/listmanager/listinfo/va-bird ***
*** You are subscribed to va-bird as 20cabot@xxxxxxxxx. If you wish to
unsubscribe, or modify your preferences please visit
http://mailman.listserve.com/listmanager/listinfo/va-bird ***
