I recently saw an entry for a local area (Woolston Eyes) in the Sightings pages of Bird Watching magazine that read "There was an influx of Reed Buntings (15 ringed) and Great Tits (8 ringed)" . When I asked the question "why are these birds being ringed?" the reply I got was that this particular site is a BTO Constant Effort Site and here's the justification I was given for this activity:"The Scheme provides valuable trend information on abundance of adults and juveniles, productivity and also adult survival rates for 25 species of common songbird."What a load of utter whitewash. There is no way you could get that information for those particular species from ringing. I'm sorry but this is just a pseudo-scientific smokescreen. The ringers are only too glad to be given a reason to do more ringing because they enjoy it, and the BTO are eager to shore up their own existence with yet more studies and more data. What I'd like to see is a much more measured use of this privilege rather than the 'let's trap it because we can' approach. You see I'm a simple guy with a simple outlook. You watch wildlife - you enjoy wildlife - but the only time you trap and handle any wild animal is when it's absolutely essential. And this isn't.Ringing needs more regulation from outside the BTO. And I'm not just referring to the ringers licensing scheme. I would have expected the RSPB, the royal society for the Protection of birds, to be voicing their disapproval. Being caught in a net, handled and then ringed is a pretty traumatic experience, and when performed inappropriately, amounts to cruelty in my opinion.
Hi Buzzard Well personally where you say not one person commented I cannot see any connection as I am afraid you have got miles away from the thread so I suggest that if you want comments start a new thread and I will comment otherwise I can see some bright spark saying I am going away from the subject.My views are completely opposite to yours but can still consider all you say and sorry you have had a comment removed probably because you got a bit passionate,best wishes Sooty.
Buzzard should add that I feel sure that V M could not have imagined the furore this would cause and you did say he would be naive not to well I cannot believe the furore and no one has ever described me as naive in fact the criticism would always be the opposite.None of this meant as criticism of you just hope it is in some way a explanation and for sure you were not the only one with less than complimentary comments so do not take it all personally as perhaps V M and myself if we have what appears such strange views should expect flak and just one thing ringing while birds are in the nest is a separate issue altogether as far as I am concerned but should have made that plain as surely much less stress but hope not to set anyone off again.
Trochilus said: Buzzard, I didn't mean to ignore your contribution to the debate - you have provided a lot of good solid stats about ringing - I simply remembered that KatTai had mentioned the percentage of ringed birds that are recovered.
Buzzard, I didn't mean to ignore your contribution to the debate - you have provided a lot of good solid stats about ringing - I simply remembered that KatTai had mentioned the percentage of ringed birds that are recovered.
Trochilus, no problem.
VM did start a thread stating to much ringing, I thought it only right to provide the precise stats.
I did state that on average fewer than one out of every fifty birds ringed is subsequently reported to the BTO.
Again there is a difference between a recovery and a retrapped bird.
Recoveries are reports of birds found dead or found alive away from the site of ringing. For most species, birds recaught within 5km of the ringing site are generally excluded.
For those that are interested the following link provides all the data for last year by species.
http://blx1.bto.org/ring/countyrec/results2009/ringUK2009.htm
Pulli Juvenile Un- aged Adult Total 2009 Recovered
Grand Totals 166,083 414,753 259,011 50,626 890,473 15,777
Regards Buzzard
Nature Is Amazing - Let Us Keep It That Way
Very true, Buzzard. All the figures here go to show that a lot of birds need to be ringed in order to get meaningful results because of the low recovery and retrap rates. Too much ringing going on? I personally don't think so.
This is a fascinating thread. I have been reading it with great interest. I had talked about going into ringing birds with my girlfriend, I am beginning to wonder whether I was actually wanting to do it as it was a cool thing to do, rather than the scientific aspect. It is indeed food for thought!
Ant
"IT IS SAID THAT LIFE FLASHES BEFORE YOUR EYES BEFORE YOU DIE. THAT IS TRUE, IT'S CALLED LIVING."Death - Terry Pratchett (The Last Continent).
michael s said: Hi Buzzard Well personally where you say not one person commented I cannot see any connection as I am afraid you have got miles away from the thread so I suggest that if you want comments start a new thread and I will comment otherwise I can see some bright spark saying I am going away from the subject.My views are completely opposite to yours but can still consider all you say and sorry you have had a comment removed probably because you got a bit passionate,best wishes Sooty. Buzzard should add that I feel sure that V M could not have imagined the furore this would cause and you did say he would be naive not to well I cannot believe the furore and no one has ever described me as naive in fact the criticism would always be the opposite.None of this meant as criticism of you just hope it is in some way a explanation and for sure you were not the only one with less than complimentary comments so do not take it all personally as perhaps V M and myself if we have what appears such strange views should expect flak and just one thing ringing while birds are in the nest is a separate issue altogether as far as I am concerned but should have made that plain as surely much less stress but hope not to set anyone off again.
Hi Sooty,
I'm sorry if you still can't see the connection.
It's about the NUMBERS, nothing else. I'm making a comparison using NUMBERS on other topical issues.
VM's satement was in relation to to many birds been ringed.
What I'm saying it is 55 times less birds which are ringed than those which are killed by cats in the UK, 60 times less than one state of america ( all seperate issue's I know ) . The whole purpose of ringing has been outlined by numerous members and the benefits that it brings. It also enables organization like the RSPB to bring their weight and might into the plight to save so many endangered species through the scientific data that is collated.
I hope I have explained myself so you can grasp what I'm saying.
Quote VM
" I'm afraid I find the BTO tee-shirts emblazoned with "100 Years of Bird Ringing" to be rather offensive. You may consider the activity a necessary evil, and some of the results it has yielded worthy of celebration, but surely it should never be brazenly advertised to the world as a good thing in itself."
Imagine the outry from the cat lovers if anyone voiced there opinions opposed to cats, never mind wearing T-shirts to show their disapproval.
Buzzard
I take your point about the t shirt but doubt he meant to insult anyone but can see how ringers would take it to heart.Think most people just made too much fuss about him/her being new to the forum.
Would like to suggest without insulting you or anyone else the fact that we and of course others who consider too much ringing does not mean that you and ringers like you are any more bird lovers than those who have different views on ringing,or perhaps people think because of our views we dislike birds.
Poor V M has taken a pasting and here is someone who hand feeds badgers,whoops hope that does not upset too many.
Just think lots of people over reacted on the basis he/she came on here to upset everyone and I know it does happen but innocent until proven guilty is the saying and before condemning someone along those lines people far better than I on a computer could have looked up previous comments and seen that was not guilty in this case.
Thankyou all for trying to calm the waters. Now that we've all kissed and made up and I've dried my eyes, it's my turn to apologise. You're quite right to reprimand me for coming in all guns blazing. I should have at least introduced myself first and settled in for a while. And I should definitely have toned down my opener. But I'm afraid this topic is something I feel very strongly about so couldn't contain myself once I'd discovered this forum. I feel frustrated and helpless because I want to provoke a change so I'm constantly on the lookout for like-minded souls. But you'd think I'd have learned by my age (I've recently retired) that changes of this sort are nigh on impossible to bring about.
Anyway I know that others are also passionate about their beliefs so I assure you that no offence has been taken.
So ...... on with the debate .....
Buzzard said: Is one bird ringed to many? Is this what you are implying.
Is one bird ringed to many? Is this what you are implying.
YES. And if that bird is say a Great Tit or a Chaffinch then absolutely YES! I just don't think you have the right to do it.
With regards to population high and lows in the short term and no cause for concern, I would beg to differ. I suggest you do some homework and look at recent studies: here is one to get you started. Ten million fewer House Sparrows in the UK than there were twenty-five years ago!
With regards to population high and lows in the short term and no cause for concern, I would beg to differ.
I suggest you do some homework and look at recent studies: here is one to get you started.
Ten million fewer House Sparrows in the UK than there were twenty-five years ago!
It's obvious we're never going to agree but this really just illustrates the point I made. 25 years is nothing in bird population terms. Plus I can't even accept those figures. Population sizes of common birds in the whole of the UK are only ever going to be gross estimates. Sure, there are visibly fewer house sparrows in London but I can honestly say, no word of a lie, we have more house sparrows in our garden currently than there have ever been since we came here (coincidentally 25 years ago). And I'm not the only one in the village noticing this either. I counted 54 in our garden alone one day in early September! One of our pairs has raised three broods over the garage this year :-)
And I never said it was "no cause for concern". What I said was "it doesn't necessarily warrant immediate studies or intervention".
Well, that was an interesting, and very long read.
I have to say I'm disappointed with some of the comments posted, especially earlier in the thread.
"This post has been edited by Moderators to keep the post on topic."
Moving on, I'm going to buck the trend here, and agree with Victor.
I think ringing of certain bird species for the sake of GENUINE scientific study is acceptable.
But the copious ringing of common birds seems to me to be superfluous overkill. What can be learnt from ringing say a .....Dunnock?
A resident bird, that doesn't move far in its short life, how can ringing large numbers of this species tell us anything we don't already know about its habits, its population trends etc? Just a thought.
I would think that the VAST majority of ringers are responsible, and have the birds best interests and science at heart.
But, as in every field, you will find some people who may want to compete with their peers, ie, 'so and so has ringed twenty birds today, I will try and ring thirty tomorrow.'
And if you take into account that every time one of these birds is caught, and handled by a human being, it is likely to become frightened, and traumatized, ( I would think it believes its about to be eaten!) I begin to question whether this is acceptable......just my opinion.
Jimmy.
Jimbob
Jimbob said: "This post has been edited by Moderators to keep the post on topic." Moving on, I'm going to buck the trend here, and agree with Victor. I think ringing of certain bird species for the sake of GENUINE scientific study is acceptable. But the copious ringing of common birds seems to me to be superfluous overkill. What can be learnt from ringing say a .....Dunnock? A resident bird, that doesn't move far in its short life, how can ringing large numbers of this species tell us anything we don't already know about its habits, its population trends etc? Just a thought. I would think that the VAST majority of ringers are responsible, and have the birds best interests and science at heart. But, as in every field, you will find some people who may want to compete with their peers, ie, 'so and so has ringed twenty birds today, I will try and ring thirty tomorrow.' Jimmy.
Hi Jimmy,
I think that all ringers are responsible! and that as far as it been somewhat a competion to see who rings the most I find this quite defamatory.
As far as copius ringing of resident species been overkill, what can this tell us what we don't already know.
What do we know. What studies, papers and journals have you read?
I know the Dunnock has seen a 25-50% decline since the 80's and is on the BOUC amber list and is a priority species. The cause of the decline remains unknown.
http://www.bto.org/birdtrends2009/wcrdunno.shtml
Jimbob said: Well, that was an interesting, and very long read. I have to say I'm disappointed with some of the comments posted, especially earlier in the thread. "This post has been edited by Moderators to keep the post on topic." Moving on, I'm going to buck the trend here, and agree with Victor. I think ringing of certain bird species for the sake of GENUINE scientific study is acceptable. But the copious ringing of common birds seems to me to be superfluous overkill. What can be learnt from ringing say a .....Dunnock? A resident bird, that doesn't move far in its short life, how can ringing large numbers of this species tell us anything we don't already know about its habits, its population trends etc? Just a thought. I would think that the VAST majority of ringers are responsible, and have the birds best interests and science at heart. But, as in every field, you will find some people who may want to compete with their peers, ie, 'so and so has ringed twenty birds today, I will try and ring thirty tomorrow.' And if you take into account that every time one of these birds is caught, and handled by a human being, it is likely to become frightened, and traumatized, ( I would think it believes its about to be eaten!) I begin to question whether this is acceptable......just my opinion. Jimmy.
Hi Jimbob think you summed it up perfectly and once more have to agree with one of V M points we also have many more house sparrows than we have seen for years and almost back to highest levels several nesting all summer in boxes provided for tits and seems they have managed to make entrance slightly larger this makes me wonder if some information on numbers is out of date as it seems several people think more H S about.No rings on them just counts on bird tables and in nest boxes.