What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Ivory billed woodpecker...

Ivory Billed Woodpecker Habitat Loss

The Government promised to protect this once thought, extinct bird. The rediscorvery of an extinct species is a rare gift. The special interest groups win once again and the chance that this magnificent bird way now be lost...forever.

What happened to the Wetlands Laws protecting this fragile ecological niche?

I think that this case should serve as an example for the newly-forming NASC - on who not to rely upon to make a difference.

It will take a large effort by, not just the NASC officers, but the membership as well.

Let's get the NASC ball rolling before it is too late for our beloved Sarracenia.

Tweek

Link Fixed
 
I clicked the link but it said it couldn't be found.
All I have to say about this is what's more important? A chunk of woods and a bird, or the thousands of dollars that can be made my developing the land?
Then look at the people that we have entrusted to make that decision.
And we wonder why these things happen.
 
I fixed the link Oz. I hate typing URL's.
Tweek
 
You should cut and paste it. Much faster, and works everytime.
 
I've read the article and I have to say that based the info in it that I can't say that I would oppose the pumpstation.
We all have to compromise when it comes to situations like this. I don't see how a pumpstation miles from the woodpecker would have much of an impact on it.
I would support a independent study before the construction continues.
 
We call that an Environmental Impact Report!!
 
we dont know the ivorybilled population levels. it could be just that one bird.
 
Having just one bird would be virtually impossible. I'm betting at least 4 are present.
 
Even if it is one bird, or three or four. I don't see how the pumpstation miles away is going to effect it.

If it's just one bird left, there's no hope in the future for them anyway.
 
  • #10
im not really commenting on the pumpstation as much as the unceartenty of the population status. buy your right i dont think a pump station will be a problem
 
  • #11
The corps said "only a small amount of bottomland hardwood forest would be cleared in periphery areas that are unlikely to be used by the ivory-billed woodpecker."  That's right in a simple kid of way - the birds are unlikely to use the periphery areas.  But, by clearing periphery areas, what used to be deep forest will become the new periphery areas to be avoided by the birds.  Without knowing the species' habits and needs, that's irresponsible.  The species was just rediscovered, for chrissakes, and no one knows where it travels or what it needs.
 
  • #12
So much for the "Corridor of Hope" idea. What do you expect from this administration? Enlightenment? It's the same idea as the "healthy forests" initiative, or the "clear skies" initiative. It means exactly the opposite.

One would think re-discovering a bird thought exinct for 60 years would mean something deeply profound to these people...but NO. It's just another photo-op, another sound byte, another opportunity to posture. Lip service. And the Faux-News viewing masses believe their crud.

One would think that protecting the very existence of this bird would be of utmost priority.
 
  • #13
Funny, this topic just came up between me and a friend and he was mentioning a species that was discovered about 5 maybe 10 years ago. His comment was that he was in total amazement that the first priority of the group searching for that rare/elusive bird was to capture one and kill it for a 'preserved' specimen to prove to others that it indeed was a new species.

I suppose it could be worse. Some idiotic moron out there could be trying to prove they actually "spotted" the Ivory Billed Woodpecker by capturing one and killing it to preserve a specimen.
 
  • #14
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]His comment was that he was in total amazement that the first priority of the group searching for that rare/elusive bird was to capture one and kill it for a 'preserved' specimen to prove to others that it indeed was a new species.

Ironically, this remains a priority with some collectors but also sadly with some professionals/researchers. There are massive debates in the butterfly world on the value/need of collecting vs passive observation/identification. NABA (North American Butterfly Assoc.) is a strong proponent of observation while other Lepidoptera societies defend the practice of collecting. There have been populations of rare butterflies whose numbers were decimated by collectors (Regal Fritillary). There are only 2 viable populations in the east left: one on a military reservation in PA where collectors have no access and a recently discovered group in Alabama that was unknown to them.

I remember an expedition a number of years ago whose purpose was to collect a preserved speciman of a rare bird species new to science. Even though these professionals knew the population was extremely small/rare, they had no issue with the apparent contradiction concerning killing one of the potentially last members of a species. Amazing to me. Overwhelmingly amazing actually.
smile_k_ani_32.gif
confused.gif
mad.gif
 
  • #15
I have often questioned this mindset myself. The double standards that exist out there regarding many species of both flora and fauna blow my mind.  

I'm not talking about the Brooks Garcias of the world who go to sites that are truly threatened either.  Quite frankly, I am of the opinion there are a few "researchers" who are morally bankrupt. Think of all the herbarium specimens out there. You know; all those plants (CPs not being exempt) that were uprooted, pressed flat, and dried out. This defies logic given so many other viable tools by which to document the existence of a species exist.
 
  • #16
I feel that it is necessary to have preserved specimens.  In modern times, however, this practice is not approved of by any researcher I know. They rely on photographs.  Most of the pressed flat stuff in herbariums are from the late 1800's, early 1900's, to my knowledge.

In the case of some plants...such as that "extinct" buckwheat that was just re-discovered out west..the only way they knew what it was, was because of specimens in a herbarium, no photos existed of this particular plant.    

If no-one had collected a passenger pigeon...would we even know what they looked like now? Especially their colouring?  Audubon's famous lithographs were all life studies made from birds he had shot.  Hence their un-natural looking postitions.
 
Back
Top