Folks
As a serious photographed I support Bills comments 100 % on this unethical practice. This behavior is inexcusable. The health and safety of the animal is much more important then your damn picture. Shame on you and I hope you are reading this.
George Jett
<gmjett...>
www.georgejett.net
From: Bill Hubick
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 10:00 PM
To: MDBirds
Cc: Marshall Iliff ; Christopher Wood ; Brian Sullivan
Subject: [MDBirding] Bad News--Disturbance of Long-eared Owls
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
--
--
|