Tom, et al.

As a lawyer, you may appreciated an argument I made to the ABA a few 
years ago ... At some point in time, they made the decision to 
capture and bring in all of the remaining California Condors. This 
halted the ABA counting of the condors. Years later, they began to 
release them, mostly the young birds raised in captivity; but, not 
"countable" since the population was no longer "established." 
However, one of the birds they later re-released was AC-21, an adult 
female that had been previously captured and brought-in but later 
released to provide some "parental supervision" to the kids out there 
in the wild. I presented an argument, on Birdchat, that since this 
particular bird was previously wild, it (and only it) should be able 
to be counted (as identified by its "AC-21" wing tag). The analogy is 
to a bird caught in a mist net; while it is in the net and is being 
restrained during banding, it is not countable; however, after its 
release, it is countable again.

I thought that was a good argument (yet, with tongue planted firmly 
in cheek!). The editor of the ABA Newsletter asked me to write it up 
and submit it, which I did. Then he proceeded to excoriate the idea. 
Oh well, so much thinking out of the box and for having a sense of humor ...

Again, it's your list, you can .....

** Off -topic - please do not reply to MD Osprey re Condors  - only Swans **

Phil


At 09:44 09/06/2006, Thomas Stock wrote:
>I never knew I might find some use out of going to law school in my 
>pursuit of birds. As a lawyer, I just loved reading Matt Hafner's 
>reply to Phil Davis! Bravo, Matt, you should be on the Supreme Court bar!

==================================
Phil Davis      Davidsonville, Maryland     USA
                 mailto:[log in to unmask]
==================================