All,
I received a highly troubling report today that a known
Long-eared Owl roost site has been seriously disturbed. It appears
someone has cut branches from the roost tree to allow for better
photography. The cuts were fresh, only on the roost tree, and clearly
not part of a larger park maintenance effort. At least one of the
branches cut was described as being nearly the width of the observer's arm.
Horrible.
The topic of sensitive species has received some recent discussion,
with the more vocal parties being on the "why is information being
suppressed?" side. Unfortunately, unacceptable events like this one have
happened many times before. It is the significantly increased risk of
events like this that makes open discussion of sensitive species so
dangerous. In most cases, it's not a problem if
a few more respectful people observe from a distance. However, as
traffic increases, the likelihood of poor behavior drastically
increases. One could argue that education is the key ("don't keep it
secret | tell people how to behave"), but people who do something like
this aren't just lacking mentoring. The changes in the communication of
bird sightings in the last five years can hardly be overstated. We have a
primary list-serve at record-setting membership that is supplemented by
many new members. We have a Maryland Facebook page attracting many new
and enthusiastic people. We are also one of the states with the most
comprehensive eBird buy-in in the country. And eBird, of course, has
fundamentally changed how we share our sightings, with the various
hourly "needs" alerts that are so popular certainly factoring in heavily
in these cases. These are all very good things, and I actively
support all of them. The wider net is a great thing and is not
going away. That said, these technological changes certainly have a lot to do
with the increased attention these Long-eared Owls have received.
Balancing transparency and sensitivity is going to remain a challenge,
and self-policing what is shared, when, and how needs to be further
considered.
This list-serve just yesterday amended its guidelines to explicitly
state that locations for Long-eared Owls are not allowed. I am a
Maryland eBird reviewer and I personally lean toward hiding all specific
locations for LEOW there as well. However, I must discus that opinion
as part of a team and with input from corporate eBird. This is far from a
black-and-white issue. The "we can't protect it if we don't know it's
there" argument is sound. But how do you balance that with "we know
we're not protecting them when we're sawing @#$#*% branches off their
roost trees"? So as a reviewer, I assure you we will revisit this topic.
In the mean time, remember that eBird is a
public communication tool like this list-serve. You can make decisions
to use the "hide" functionality, to report such species at the county
level, and so on. More importantly, you can encourage others to do the
same. Whatever suggestions you make, please do so politely. There have
been some barbs thrown recently that were unwarranted. This list-serve
wants productive discussion of such topics, but will cut off any threads
that turn into flame wars.
Our growth as a nature study community only matters if we find ways to harness it for good things. Let's find ways to do so.
Bill
�
Bill Hubick
Pasadena, Maryland
<bill_hubick...>
http://www.billhubick.com
http://www.marylandbiodiversity.com
--
|