[TN-Bird] Re: OT: Ethics, Legality, etc.?

  • From: "Mcdonald, Kenneth" <kenneth_mcdonald@xxxxxxx>
  • To: Bill Pulliam <littlezz@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 11:19:35 -0500

On a short search of literature, these have cropped up at various times in
discussions regarding the use of playbacks and pishing. As you will see
manipulating bird behavior with playbacks has shown some promise, but the
take-away lesson is that birds *can* be influenced by playbacks. Unless
pishing or playbacks are utilized with purpose and design the effect could
lead to an inadvertent, adverse outcome for the bird.

Betts, Matthew G., et al. "Social information trumps vegetation structure
in breeding-site selection by a migrant songbird." *Proceedings of the
Royal Society B: Biological Sciences* 275.1648 (2008): 2257-2263.

Ahlering, Marissa A., et al. "Research needs and recommendations for the
use of conspecific-attraction methods in the conservation of migratory
songbirds."*The Condor* 112.2 (2010): 252-264.

Virzi, Thomas, et al. "Effectiveness of artificial song playback on
influencing the settlement decisions of an endangered resident grassland
passerine." *The Condor* 114.4 (2012): 846-855.

Møller, Anders Pape. "Interspecific response to playback of bird song."
*Ethology* 90.4 (1992): 315-320.

Forsman, Jukka T., and Mikko Mönkkönen. "Responses by breeding birds to
heterospecific song and mobbing call playbacks under varying predation
risk."*Animal Behaviour* 62.6 (2001): 1067-1073.

Lima, Steven L. "Predators and the breeding bird: behavioral and
reproductive flexibility under the risk of predation." *Biological
Reviews* 84.3
(2009): 485-513.

Martin, Paul R., et al. "Response of American redstarts (suborder Passeri)
and least flycatchers (suborder Tyranni) to heterospecific playback: the
role of song in aggressive interactions and interference competition."
*Behavioral
Ecology and Sociobiology* 39.4 (1996): 227-235.

Langham, Gary M., Thomas A. Contreras, and Kathryn E. Sieving. "Why pishing
works: Titmouse (Paridae) scolds elicit a generalized response in bird
communities." *Ecoscience* 13.4 (2006): 485-496.

Huang, Ping, Kathryn E. Sieving, and Colette M. St Mary. "Heterospecific
information about predation risk influences exploratory behavior." *Behavioral
Ecology* 23.3 (2012): 463-472.

Nocera, Joseph J., and Laurene M. Ratcliffe. "Migrant and resident birds
adjust antipredator behavior in response to social information
accuracy." *Behavioral
Ecology* 21.1 (2010): 121-128.


On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 10:29 AM, Bill Pulliam <littlezz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> My thoughts on the conservation value would be...
>
> If documenting the presence of the bird in an area is valuable, then
> breeding-season playback could be warranted.  But, it would seem, as soon
> as the bird responds and is documented, the playback should stop.  No
> drawing it in to get a visual (unless visual ID is necessary) or a better
> photo.
>
> I wonder about wintertime pishing?  Has that been studied?  One could
> argue that CBC data are valuable for conservation, and pishing/screech-owl
> imitations are very widely used.  How much harm might there be in a
> once-a-year exposure to one intense bout of pishing and tooting, I wonder?
>  Might be hard to study, you might set up paired plots, pish one regularly
> the other never, then do point counts without pishing regularly during the
> study period.  Would need a lot of replicates, but could be a good student
> research project...?
>
> And along the ideas of conservation value, filtered higher-quality eBird
> data (complete checklists covering small areas) are also being used for
> large-scale "big picture" monitoring of birds at regional and continental
> scales.  So if one ^could^ argue that if consistent use of pishing as part
> of collecting these data helps elucidate the spatial and temporal patterns
> of distributions of species that might be harder to detect without it,
> maybe it can be justified...?
>
> I don't pish in the nesting season, but I do in the winter.  I am
> judicious around my house, because the birds could be exposed daily, and it
> seems that they also become resistant to the pishing as the winter wears on
> if I do it too often -- "Oh, just the big hairy one again."  Which, one
> might wonder, could impair the legitimate mobbing behaviors in response to
> a real threat?
>
> Lots of question marks.  An interesting topic.
>
> Bill Pulliam
> Hohenwald TN
>
>
> On Jun 6, 2014, at 8:46 AM, Mcdonald, Kenneth wrote:
>
>  Hi,
>>
>> My name is Ken McDonald and I am a biologist with the USFWS in
>> Cookeville. Usually, I'm the point of contact for calls regarding the
>> Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
>>
>> While this shouldn't be construed as legal advice, I point out The
>> Migratory Bird Treaty Act  of 1918  states it is "unlawful at any time, by
>> any means or in any manner, to pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill . . . [or
>> transport] any migratory bird, any part, nest, or egg of any such bird"
>>  (16 U.S.C. 703). The only exception to this is when regulations authorize
>> these activities for the purpose of conserving migratory bird trust
>> resources.
>>
>> Some agencies interpret "take" to include harassment from pishing or
>> playbacks because these activities can lead to bird mortality. For example,
>> a bird responding to a playback may become more visible to predators, may
>> inadvertently signal to predators the proximity of nests, or may abandon
>> the nest, entirely if they believe the source of the pishing or playback
>> poses as risk to themselves.  Additionally, many agencies (such as the
>> National Park Service and the Department of Defense) have even more
>> stringent mandates and legal authorities to implement regulations even more
>> protective of Migratory Birds than is found in the Migratory Bird Treaty
>> Act.
>>
>> My own view is there is a great deal of peer-reviewed, published
>> scientific literature which indicates phishing and playbacks can knock
>> individuals off of territories, make birds vulnerable to predators, or
>> cause birds to abandon nests. Given that pishing or playbacks can increase
>> risk to birds, the question I ask is "Does interacting with a bird through
>> the use of pishing or playbacks contribute to the conservation of the
>> bird?" In my own birding experiences I refrain from doing anything that
>> causes a bird to alter its behavior unless my doing so somehow contributes
>> to the well-being of the bird.
>>
>> Ken
>>
>>
>


-- 














*Kenneth W. McDonaldEnergy BiologistU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service446 Neal
StreetCookeville, TN 38501Office: 931.525.4990Fax:
931.528.7075kenneth_mcdonald@xxxxxxx <kenneth_mcdonald@xxxxxxx>*

Energy and persistence will conquer all things

-  Benjamin Franklin

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. tn-bird
  3. Archive
  4. 06-2014