http://www.astropix.com/HTML/J_DIGIT/ETHICS.HTM

Relates to astronomy, but the principles therein are still the same.
Drake

"Jester's mummy" <cocky2 at (no spam) nest.egg> wrote in message
news:dhdoe5hilgaeqgtsi1b5ei25sovh0cutoe at (no spam) 4ax.com...

thermazene wrote:
I have been monitoring this thread with interest, however I am not
concerned with the technology but the hummingbirds themselves. What
emotional distress does flashbulbs in the face and all the other
bizarre behaviors, such as catching, banding, and releasing, have on
the hummingbirds? I don't think anyone is thinking of THEM here and
many have gotten away from the true subject at hand.

I don't think hummers should be pursued or photographed with a flash
or captured/ banded because no one knows what the long term effects
are to the species. If you can't take a simple picture from a
distance, don't do it. Stop screwing around with nature.

That is wrong more ways than the last troll was.

I'm really sorry I posted those picture-pointers.

"Larry Sheldon" <lfsheldon at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7l33fdF3buhocU1 at (no spam) mid.individual.net...


That is wrong more ways than the last troll was.

I'm really sorry I posted those picture-pointers.

I'm not trying to take a stab at the messenger here (it's not your
fault for criticisms beyond your control), but your comment begs the
question "why"? Would you want a flashbulb directly in the face or to
be captured, poked or proded? Don't think anyone would, least of all
the birds

In article <hci9m9$e5n$1 at (no spam) news.eternal-september.org>,
"thermazene" <a at (no spam) bc.ded> wrote:

To be honest, I don't understand the purpose of banding. What
benefit does mankind gain from such an activity other than to
possibly cause harm to the birds? Also, some of the photos out
there of captured/ sedated/ banded birds doesn't look too kindly
regarding bird health.

I'll take you at your word, and explain:

First, birds are not sedated for banding. Once captured, most of them
relax once they figure out struggling isn't productive, and just wait
more-or-less patiently for release. However, birds have individual
personalities (for want of a better term), and a few remain squirmy.
Banders are taught to monitor their subjects constantly for signs of
stress, and stressed birds are released immediately, whether or not
they've been banded. So are birds that don't settle down, if there's
the least concern about them hurting themselves. We recognize that
capture is potentially stressful for the bird, and banding is only
authorized to gather raw data for bona fide research, and only if the
benefit to the species outweighs the risk to the individual.

Of course, banders are also taught how to capture, handle, and
restrain birds without injury. They also pledge to follow a written
code of ethics. The welfare of the bird always comes first, and any
bander who violates this first principle will lose his permit.
Banding is learned through apprenticeship, and attitude is far more
important than skill to the successful completion of training.

The benefit isn't to mankind, except to help us be better stewards of
nature--the goal of bird banding is conservation. To study a species'
population, one must study individuals then aggregate the data over
both geography and time. Without data that illuminates population
trends, we cannot know how habitat changes and other factors affect
each species. Aside from just counting birds, banding is the basic
(usually the only) tool to track individuals as they migrate, so we
can correlate breeding and wintering ranges; routine examination and
measurements also tell us about each bird's health.

I am a licensed master hummingbird bander. In my ten years'
experience, most birds fly away as soon as I release them. A few take
several seconds to reorient themselves before leaving. I've only had
to release two birds prematurely due to concern about their levels of
stress. Any hummingbird held captive for more than a couple of
minutes is offered a chance to feed before release. Most of the birds
I band at my home are back at the same feeder the next day, and some
fly back into my trap within minutes, despite plenty of other feeders
in my neighborhood. I have never injured a bird, nor had one die due
to capture or handling.

Keep in mind, if the birds didn't return in good health to be
recaptured (so the band can be read), banding would be utterly
useless as a scientific tool and permits would never be issued.

Learn more here: http://www.pwrc.usgs.gov/bbl/

Jerry Avins" <jya at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote in message
news:no2Hm.1401$XP2.303 at (no spam) newsfe17.iad...
thermazene wrote:

...

To be honest, I don't understand the purpose of banding. What
benefit does mankind gain from such an activity other than to
possibly cause harm to the birds? Also, some of the photos out there
of captured/ sedated/ banded birds doesn't look too kindly regarding
bird health.

You don't know the purpose so you assume there is none. We can't
protect bird's habitats without knowing how and when you use them.
Banding is important for determining migration patterns and survival
rates. If you subscribe to the notion that ignorance is bliss, you
might be very happy. I believe (to cough up another cliche) that
knowledge is power.

Thousands of species have survived on this planet for uncounted
thousands of years without interference from us. Why interfere now?

If I decided to expose you to a bunch of radiation where you had no
choice in the matter, but I said that you were probably safe, but not
absolutely, would you like it?

I get X-rayed, cat scanned and MRIed pretty often. On the whole, I'm
healthier for it.

Are you sure about that? What has your total radiation exposure been?
What percentage of your x-rays have been "hard"/ "soft" and what
frequency/ intensity? Without knowing this data, it's difficult to say
what, if any, your long term health effects will be. Radiation exposure
is cumulative, so small amounts add up over time.

Let's say it was 100 Rems, which is
known to cause blood changes in the human body with unknown long term
effects, but probably leukemia in the long term. Going by your line
of thinking, everyone else says "do it" but then again it's not them,
it's YOU. But you have no choice because I'm exposing you anyway.

No responsible person would do that.

Exactly. Would the responsible person also not willingly expose
hummingbirds to processes that could endanger their welfare?

If you can't take a simple picture from a distance, don't
do it.

Why not? Please let us all know the answer to the question: What harm
does it cause?

Well, what harm does the radiation cause? Almost nothing in the
short term, but I wouldn't want to be in your shoes over the next 20
years.

You described the harm very well.

Thank you. That was the point.

Stop screwing around with nature.

Do you mean that we shouldn't plow fields and all that?

You mean we should all stop feeding hummingbirds? Or should we all just
shoot ourselves. Aren't we part of nature too?

I don't see where feeding is that harmful as long as they are left
alone.... no flashbulbs in their face, banding, feeding by hand, etc.
Your "shoot ourselves" logic doesn't make sense here and I fail to
see the point.

If the flashes bother them, they wouldn't come back for more. There's
no coercion involved.

How do you know it doesn't? Many beat up women go back to their abusive
husbands all the time even though they expect more beatings. No
coercion involved there either.

thermazene wrote:
Jerry Avins" <jya at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote in message
news:no2Hm.1401$XP2.303 at (no spam) newsfe17.iad...
thermazene wrote:

...

To be honest, I don't understand the purpose of banding. What benefit
does mankind gain from such an activity other than to possibly cause
harm to the birds? Also, some of the photos out there of captured/
sedated/ banded birds doesn't look too kindly regarding bird health.

You don't know the purpose so you assume there is none. We can't protect
bird's habitats without knowing how and when you use them. Banding is
important for determining migration patterns and survival rates. If you
subscribe to the notion that ignorance is bliss, you might be very
happy. I believe (to cough up another cliche) that knowledge is power.

Thousands of species have survived on this planet for uncounted thousands
of years without interference from us. Why interfere now?

Because we are greatly disturbing their habitats, and if we don't do
mitigation extinction will be rapid and widespread. Google "redpoll".

If I decided to expose you to a bunch of radiation where you had no
choice in the matter, but I said that you were probably safe, but not
absolutely, would you like it?

I get X-rayed, cat scanned and MRIed pretty often. On the whole, I'm
healthier for it.

Are you sure about that? What has your total radiation exposure been?
What percentage of your x-rays have been "hard"/ "soft" and what
frequency/ intensity? Without knowing this data, it's difficult to say
what, if any, your long term health effects will be. Radiation exposure
is cumulative, so small amounts add up over time.

I'm sure. They found the cancer and excised it.

Let's say it was 100 Rems, which is
known to cause blood changes in the human body with unknown long term
effects, but probably leukemia in the long term. Going by your line of
thinking, everyone else says "do it" but then again it's not them, it's
YOU. But you have no choice because I'm exposing you anyway.

No responsible person would do that.

Exactly. Would the responsible person also not willingly expose
hummingbirds to processes that could endanger their welfare?

You assume that they do. You are mistaken.

If you can't take a simple picture from a distance, don't
do it.

Why not? Please let us all know the answer to the question: What harm
does it cause?

Well, what harm does the radiation cause? Almost nothing in the short
term, but I wouldn't want to be in your shoes over the next 20 years.

You described the harm very well.

Thank you. That was the point.

Yet you asked the question. Few here aer susceptible to such rhetorical
trickery.

Stop screwing around with nature.

Do you mean that we shouldn't plow fields and all that?

Well? Is plowing "screwing around with nature" or not?

You mean we should all stop feeding hummingbirds? Or should we all
just
shoot ourselves. Aren't we part of nature too?

I don't see where feeding is that harmful as long as they are left
alone.... no flashbulbs in their face, banding, feeding by hand, etc.
Your "shoot ourselves" logic doesn't make sense here and I fail to see
the point.

If the flashes bother them, they wouldn't come back for more. There's no
coercion involved.

How do you know it doesn't? Many beat up women go back to their abusive
husbands all the time even though they expect more beatings. No coercion
involved there either.

No coercion? Our society makes women dependent on men's earning power and
leads them to believe that they're even more dependent than they really
are. Don't be surprised at what a mother will endure to ensure that her
children are fed. It has been demonstrated many times that *when women are
offered a believable alternative* they leave abusive relationships. Unless
you're addicted to old myths, get your facts straight

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

"Jerry Avins" <jya at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote in message
news:h64Hm.1409$XP2.974 at (no spam) newsfe17.iad...
thermazene wrote:
Jerry Avins" <jya at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote in message
news:no2Hm.1401$XP2.303 at (no spam) newsfe17.iad...
thermazene wrote:

...

To be honest, I don't understand the purpose of banding. What
benefit does mankind gain from such an activity other than to
possibly cause harm to the birds? Also, some of the photos out
there of captured/ sedated/ banded birds doesn't look too kindly
regarding bird health.

You don't know the purpose so you assume there is none. We can't
protect bird's habitats without knowing how and when you use them.
Banding is important for determining migration patterns and survival
rates. If you subscribe to the notion that ignorance is bliss, you
might be very happy. I believe (to cough up another cliche) that
knowledge is power.

Thousands of species have survived on this planet for uncounted
thousands of years without interference from us. Why interfere now?

Because we are greatly disturbing their habitats, and if we don't do
mitigation extinction will be rapid and widespread. Google "redpoll".

Why? Extinction is a natural process. While I feel that mankind may
make a small dent in the process, is it worth some of the huge cost
involved to try and save a few select animals? Without our
intervention, or even with it in most cases, extinction will occur
anyway. And even if we are distrubing their habitat, what can man do to
himself to stop the harm other than capturing, probing, etc the innocent
animal.

If I decided to expose you to a bunch of radiation where you had no
choice in the matter, but I said that you were probably safe, but
not absolutely, would you like it?

I get X-rayed, cat scanned and MRIed pretty often. On the whole, I'm
healthier for it.

Are you sure about that? What has your total radiation exposure
been? What percentage of your x-rays have been "hard"/ "soft" and
what frequency/ intensity? Without knowing this data, it's difficult
to say what, if any, your long term health effects will be.
Radiation exposure is cumulative, so small amounts add up over time.

I'm sure. They found the cancer and excised it.

I'm sorry about that. If I may ask, was it caused by the radiation or
was radiation used to help battle it? You needn't answer here of course.

Let's say it was 100 Rems, which
is known to cause blood changes in the human body with unknown long
term effects, but probably leukemia in the long term. Going by
your line of thinking, everyone else says "do it" but then again
it's not them, it's YOU. But you have no choice because I'm
exposing you anyway.

No responsible person would do that.

Exactly. Would the responsible person also not willingly expose
hummingbirds to processes that could endanger their welfare?

You assume that they do. You are mistaken.

I'm trying not to totally assume anything, just basing my discussion on
what I see/ read/ study. Not trying to be absolute.

If you can't take a simple picture from a distance, don't
do it.

Why not? Please let us all know the answer to the question: What harm
does it cause?

Well, what harm does the radiation cause? Almost nothing in the
short term, but I wouldn't want to be in your shoes over the next
20 years.

You described the harm very well.

Thank you. That was the point.

Yet you asked the question. Few here aer susceptible to such
rhetorical trickery.

Sorry, still don't get it.

Stop screwing around with nature.

Do you mean that we shouldn't plow fields and all that?

Well? Is plowing "screwing around with nature" or not?

In a sense it is, yes. It must be carefully controlled and monitored
for environmental success which unfortunately isn't usually the case.
It's a problem, yes.

You mean we should all stop feeding hummingbirds? Or should we all
just
shoot ourselves. Aren't we part of nature too?

I don't see where feeding is that harmful as long as they are left
alone.... no flashbulbs in their face, banding, feeding by hand,
etc. Your "shoot ourselves" logic doesn't make sense here and I
fail to see the point.

If the flashes bother them, they wouldn't come back for more.
There's no coercion involved.

How do you know it doesn't? Many beat up women go back to their
abusive husbands all the time even though they expect more beatings.
No coercion involved there either.

No coercion? Our society makes women dependent on men's earning power
and leads them to believe that they're even more dependent than they
really are. Don't be surprised at what a mother will endure to ensure
that her children are fed. It has been demonstrated many times that
*when women are offered a believable alternative* they leave abusive
relationships. Unless you're addicted to old myths, get your facts
straight

The point was the hummer's attraction to sugar water, even putting up
with flashes and captures. There are areas where they become quite
dependent on our feeding of them and pursue the food at some personal
cost. So, as the woman continues to return under adverse circumstances,
so does the hummer. Such action still does not make it right on our behalf.

The point was the hummer's attraction to sugar water, even putting up
with flashes and captures. There are areas where they become quite
dependent on our feeding of them and pursue the food at some personal
cost.

Dependency has never been shown in even approximately normal weather.