g’Day all
An uncomfortable subject
It saddens me to report that in Tasmania this morning, I observed a number of “small waders” recently leg flagged. The birds were struggling about in moderate winds, hobbled by what appeared to be fresh looking manacles. These birds were in areas where in previous years, apart from an occasional flagged stint it has been unusual to see flagged waders. The birds seen today appeared to be struggling in only moderate conditions and if this is an example of 2020 Shorebird conservation, current programs needs to questioned, reviewed and modified urgently.
Can anyone inform us of the details, if they know of any recent wader leg flagging in Tasmania? Although I would like to see it banned, in the mean time it should be a requirement of leg flaggers to notify the community in advance of planned banding operations. Specifically the public should be notified when and where, the targeted species and by whom a leg flagging operation is planned. Something similar to the requirement to notify the public when a forest burning operation is planned.
Also, can any one inform us how the decision is made by banders to apply multiple flags on a particular bird.
Regards
Ian May St Helens, Tasmania ===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) to: birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
There is a very good scientific review of the impacts on the use of instrumentation on birds at the following University of Tasmania link:
UTAS Guidelines for Instrumentation of Birds (published by the Wildlife Advisory Panel, University of Tasmania Animal Ethics Committee). http://www.research.utas.edu.au/animal_ethics/docs/Guidelines%20for%20the%20 instrumentation%20of%20birds%20final.pdf
All animal research institutions and individual researchers in Australia are obliged legally to conform to the guidelines set by their AEC. In my experience, other AECs are just as thorough and concerned about animal welfare as the one at UTAS.
Stephen Ambrose Ryde, NSW
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Hi Bob
Apologies for the long post, but you did ask! Some references looking at the impact of banding in waders. Google Scholar is your friend : )
Note I have not filtered these at all, these were all the references that came up within a couple of clicks for the search term ‘impact wader leg banding’ and following citations / related articles from some of the initial articles.
Ringing or colour-banding does not increase predation mortality in redshanksTringa totanus W. Cresswell (correspondence) et al, Journal of Avian Biology Volume 38, Issue 3, pages 309–316, May 2007 ABSTRACT: The use of metal and colour-rings or bands as a means of measuring survival, movements and behaviour in birds is universal and fundamental to testing ecological and evolutionary theories. The practice rests on the largely untested assumption that the rings do not affect survival. However this assumption may not hold for several reasons, for example because the ‘oddity effect’ predicts predators select prey that appear different to their neighbours in order to avoid the ‘confusion effect’. We compared the foraging behaviour and the death rates of redshanks Tringa totanus conspicuously marked with six colour rings and one metal ring each to unmarked birds in a study system, where routinely up to 50% of the total population are killed by avian predators during a winter. If avian predators selectively target and/or have a higher capture success of ringed birds then we would predict the proportion of colour-ringed birds in the population to decline through a winter. The proportion of colour-ringed birds in the population did not change over the course of three separate winters, and in one winter the ratio of marked:unmarked birds found killed by sparrowhawks Accipiter nisus was the same as the ratio of marked birds alive in the population. In the year with largest sample size, power was sufficient to detect a greater than 2.2% difference in predation rate between ringed and unringed groups. The average kill rate difference between ringed and unringed birds across the three winters was less than 1% (0.7392.2%) suggesting that even if there were differences in predation rate that were not detected because of low statistical power they were extremely small. There were no differences in any foraging measures comparing ringed and unringed birds, suggesting that the rings did not affect the ability of birds to meet their daily energy budgets. The results showed that colour-ringed birds were not preferentially targeted or killed by avian predators, and suggest that the presence of a metal and even several large colour-rings is unlikely to affect behaviour and predation mortality even under extreme selection.
Effects of color banding, radio tagging, and repeated handling on the condition and survival of Lapwing chicks and consequences for estimates of breeding productivity Fiona Sharpe et al Journal of Field Ornithology Volume 80, Issue 1, pages 101–110, March 2009 ABSTRACT Color bands and radio tags are widely used to facilitate individual recognition and relocation of precocial chicks in studies of prefledging survival. However, the accuracy of data collected and subsequent estimates of survival rates rely on the assumption that such techniques do not affect the parameters under study. We compared the body condition and survival of color-banded and radio-tagged Lapwing (Vanellus vanellus) chicks with noncolor-banded and nonradio-tagged individuals using a 10-year dataset (N= 3174 chicks, with 205 color banded and 700 radio tagged). Color bands did not adversely affect chicks. However, radio-tagged chicks and their untagged broodmates were handled more frequently because these broods were more readily encountered than those without a tagged member. Chicks disturbed and handled more frequently had lower body condition indices and higher mortality rates. Simulations of the impact of tagging and handling on breeding productivity under tw! o scenarios indicated a 26% reduction in productivity in situations where nest and chick survival rates were low (as in our study), but only a 7% reduction in productivity for a simulated population with the higher levels of nest and chick survival associated with a stable population. The frequent disturbance associated with radio-tracking and recapturing chicks, rather than the attachment of a tag or physical handling of chicks, may affect body condition. Frequent handling and disturbance may affect body condition by reducing foraging time, increasing stress levels, or increasing predation risk. Because our results suggested that the negative impact of handling could last up to a week, we recommend that investigators avoid disturbance of shorebird chicks more frequently than every 8 d.
Colored plastic and metal leg bands do not affect survival of Piping Plover chicks Erin A. Roche et al Journal of Field Ornithology Volume 81, Issue 3, pages 317–324, September 2010 ABSTRACT Leg bands are commonly used to mark shorebird chicks as young as 1-d old, but little is known about the possible impacts of bands on survival of prefledging shorebirds. We used a mark-recapture framework to assess the impact of bands and banding-related disturbance on prefledging survival in a federally endangered population of Piping Plovers (Charadrius melodus) breeding in the Great Lakes region from 2000 to 2008. We banded approximately 96% of all surviving chicks hatched prior to fledging, typically between 5 and 15 d of age. We used a multistate approach in program MARK whereby individuals contributed data as unbanded chicks before capture (N= 1073) and as banded chicks afterward (N= 780). The cumulative probability of surviving through 24 d of age was 0.63 and did not differ between banded and unbanded chicks. In addition, we found a positive effect of banding-related disturbance on survival up to 3 d following banding (β= 0.60 CI: 0.17–1.02), possibly du! e to increased postbanding vigilance on the part of chicks and adults. Our results indicate that banding has no detrimental effect on survival of Piping Plover chicks prior to fledging and that current capture and banding methods are appropriate for this endangered species.
Journal of Field Ornithology 72(4):521-526. 2001 EFFECTS OF COLOR BANDS ON SEMIPALMATED SANDPIPERS BANDED AT HATCH Abstract Effects of color bands on adult birds have been investigated in many studies, but much less is known about the effects of bands on birds banded at hatch. We captured Semipalmated Sandpiper (Calidris pusilla) chicks at hatch on the Alaskan North Slope and attached 0–3 bands to them. The chicks were resighted and reweighed during the subsequent two weeks. The number of chicks banded varied from 18 to 21 among treatments; 6–9 were resighted, and 6–7 were reweighed, per treatment. The proportion resighted varied from 0.33 to 0.45. The estimated resighting probability, given that we encountered a brood, was 82%. We tested for effects of the bands on survival and mass gain by analyzing whether the proportion of chicks resighted, or their mass, varied with the number of bands. We found no evidence that bands affected the chicks and were able to rule out (with 95% confidence) a decline in survivorship of more than 13% and a loss of mass of more than 10%. Although bands had little if! any effect on chicks in our study, we believe their effects should be evaluated whenever survivorship or mass gain are estimated using color-marked chicks.
Foot Losses of Metal Banded Snowy Plovers (Pérdidas de Pies en Chorlitejos Patinegros (Charadrius Alexandrinus) con Anillas Metálicas)JA Amat – Journal of Field Ornithology, 1999 – JSTOR Abstract During a 7-yr study on Snowy Plovers (Charadrius alexandrinus) in southern Spain, I banded 1072 birds. Of these, 0.6% had natural leg injuries when first captured. Of 412 plovers that were recaptured or resighted in years following banding, 1.9% had injuries caused by the metal band, the most common of which was foot loss. All these birds had the metal band on the tarsus, and no plover with metal band on the tibia was recaptured with injuries. Though foot losses did not prevent breeding, and leg injuries probably had little effects on population dynamics, it is recommended that metal banding of shorebirds on the tarsus should be avoided.
BANDING AND FOOT LOSS: AN ADDENDUM C. L. C-RATTO-TREVOR Prairie and Northern Wildlife Research Centre 115 Perimeter Road Saskatoor•,S askatchewanS 7N OX,• Canada Abstract.–Nine of 2583 (0.3%) adult shorebirds captured during migration had natural, healedl eg injuries (rangingf rom 0.0 to 0.5% in differents pecies)I.n a long-terms tudyo f a breedingp opulationo f SemipalmatedS andpipers(C alidrisp usilia),n o birdsw ere known to be injured from the metal CWS/USFWS bands used. One of the 278 individuals resighted at least 1 yr later suffered a leg injury from a color band that was too small. In at least some species of shorebirdsl,e g injuries from banding activitiesa re rare when appropriate bands and techniques are used.
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
I have a statement attached to my main monitor and it says “Don’t enter into debates on BIRDINGAUS”. Unfortunately I find that I can’t resist at times. This is one of those times but I hope to make my ‘contribution’ brief and I hope that I don’t feel too guilty about giving in.
I don’t know John Harris but I am with him on this.
But I would expand John’s suggestion to include the “non-breeding season”.
This topic comes up, unfortunately, every couple of years and nothing is ever resolved.
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the various wader study groups emerged from their self imposed secrecy and provided conclusive evidence that leg-flagging is not the ‘evil’ that some people are claiming. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if these same wader study groups could actually back up their beliefs that leg-flagging is minimum-ally harmful and maxim-ally beneficial. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if those same wader study groups made their ‘proof’ available to the ‘ordinary’ birdwatcher and thus put an end to this continual and divisive discussion. But I guess I am just ‘dreaming’.
By the same token, wouldn’t it be wonderful if those people who abhor leg-flagging (and banding) would actually provide scientifically based evidence (as opposed to subjective and/or emotionally based evidence) that leg-flagging is a devastating process.
I wouldn’t like anyone to think I am biased one way or the other on this topic but…….
I have never been involved in leg-flagging but I have held a Providence Petrel while it was banded. It was a wonderful feeling to know that that bird was going to help in the conservation of that species. Looking at a bird from a distance is a great experience but actually holding a live bird in one’s hands and feeling the life there-in really encourages one to help these naive creatures to combat the dangers that we ‘superior’ humans present them with.
I have seen numerous leg-flagged birds in the field and none of them look to be in trouble or distress.
However, if other people have scientific and verifiable proof that leg-flagging, done according to the protocols, does actually put the life of that bird in jeopardy I am sure that the people doing the leg-flagging would dearly love to know. I doubt that people involved in wader study are keen on causing harm to the birds they love. Actually, I know they are not.
I am not impressed by arguments that the apparent fact that few ‘re-captures’ of flagged birds means that most have ‘departed this mortal coil’ because of the somewhat insignificant impediment of a leg-flag. But I do wonder at the need for adding more flags than are necessary to identify where the original flag was attached. This does seem somewhat mindless.
A minimum of mental effort is needed to reveal that migratory birds such as the shorebirds which visit our shores during our summer are liable to encounter more life threatening events than having a piece of plastic weighing less than a fraction of a percent of their normal body weight.
I make a plea………. Please………….I beg that the opponents of leg-flagging (and banding) provide irrefutable proof that it is harmful.
and
Please………….I beg that the proponents (ok, there is no plural of ‘proponent’ but please give me a bit of licence) of leg-flagging provide us mere mortals with conclusive evidence that the benefits of leg-flagging out-weigh the minimal damage that ‘may’ be caused.
Am I dreaming again?
Hope not. I am sick of this topic.
Bob Inglis Sandstone Point Qld Australia http://users.tpg.com.au/inglisrc/
PS: Sorry about that. That wasn’t actually brief but it was briefer than I could have been.
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
…but can we be sure your observation did not affect the behaviour of the birdwatching groupsservation did not affect the behaviour of the birdwatching groups?…
Regards, Clive.
There’s a difference in birdwatching and studies that involve handling, banding and attaching tracking devices. But yes, your suggestion works for me. I’ve seen some appalling behaviour by some birdwatching groups who have disturbed breeding birds.
CC: birding-aus@vicnet.net.au
Based on all that Mark has mentioned, can I suggest that nobody goes birdwatching during the breeding season then………………………….
John Harris
There exists a vast amount of scientific evidence that suggests investigators do have an effect on birds and affect the accuracy of the parameters being studied. In some cases, the effects of an observer may be negligible but in others, evidence suggests that the presence of an observer can lower breeding success, alter behaviour, increase heart rates and stress hormones. Attaching tracking devices also affect a birds flight and diving ability. Phillips et al. 2003 suggested that satellite tags should be <3% of body mass. The attachment of harnesses are a big problem for some species and have caused complete breeding failure. Avian research in life history theory, demography, population dynamics require unbiased estimates of fecundity, and behavioural studies require that behaviour is not affected by investigators.
Ian brings up a very relevant point about banding studies. There is a fine line between collecting accurate data and biasing our results. Disturbance (human or investigator) that has a detrimental effect on any individual's reproductive performance, distribution or population could exacerbate declines of threatened species and therefore knowledge of these effects is important in designing any research program. Researchers would be well advised to consider their impact on the intended study species. Research on birds should explore the effects researchers have on their study animals and existing studies may also benefit from these investigations. This may also help correct biased or misleading data in past studies. Only then can we be sure that researchers are truly recording a bird's natural behaviour.
Mark
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Based on all that Mark has mentioned, can I suggest that nobody goes birdwatching during the breeding season then………………………….
John Harris
There exists a vast amount of scientific evidence that suggests investigators do have an effect on birds and affect the accuracy of the parameters being studied. In some cases, the effects of an observer may be negligible but in others, evidence suggests that the presence of an observer can lower breeding success, alter behaviour, increase heart rates and stress hormones. Attaching tracking devices also affect a birds flight and diving ability. Phillips et al. 2003 suggested that satellite tags should be <3% of body mass. The attachment of harnesses are a big problem for some species and have caused complete breeding failure. Avian research in life history theory, demography, population dynamics require unbiased estimates of fecundity, and behavioural studies require that behaviour is not affected by investigators.
Ian brings up a very relevant point about banding studies. There is a fine line between collecting accurate data and biasing our results. Disturbance (human or investigator) that has a detrimental effect on any individual's reproductive performance, distribution or population could exacerbate declines of threatened species and therefore knowledge of these effects is important in designing any research program. Researchers would be well advised to consider their impact on the intended study species. Research on birds should explore the effects researchers have on their study animals and existing studies may also benefit from these investigations. This may also help correct biased or misleading data in past studies. Only then can we be sure that researchers are truly recording a bird's natural behaviour.
Mark
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org =============================== ===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
No, the Bar-tailed Godwit example is not comparable. Although I wouldn’t be surprised if significant harm is caused to larger waders by leg flagging them, my point about the adverse impacts relate to small waders, species including and smaller than Greenshank.
Chris wrote: ===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
There exists a vast amount of scientific evidence that suggests investigators do have an effect on birds and affect the accuracy of the parameters being studied. In some cases, the effects of an observer may be negligible but in others, evidence suggests that the presence of an observer can lower breeding success, alter behaviour, increase heart rates and stress hormones. Attaching tracking devices also affect a birds flight and diving ability. Phillips et al. 2003 suggested that satellite tags should be <3% of body mass. The attachment of harnesses are a big problem for some species and have caused complete breeding failure. Avian research in life history theory, demography, population dynamics require unbiased estimates of fecundity, and behavioural studies require that behaviour is not affected by investigators.
Ian brings up a very relevant point about banding studies. There is a fine line between collecting accurate data and biasing our results. Disturbance (human or investigator) that has a detrimental effect on any individual's reproductive performance, distribution or population could exacerbate declines of threatened species and therefore knowledge of these effects is important in designing any research program. Researchers would be well advised to consider their impact on the intended study species. Research on birds should explore the effects researchers have on their study animals and existing studies may also benefit from these investigations. This may also help correct biased or misleading data in past studies. Only then can we be sure that researchers are truly recording a bird's natural behaviour.
Mark
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Guys the scientific community (certainly internationally) do a huge amount of research into the welfare of birds when various tagging techniques are used. This has to be done before it is permitted, and has also driven technological advances in making them smaller, lighter etc.. I have personal experiences of this, working with incredibly dedicated research scientists who would always put a bird’s welfare first – and they led by example. As a student in Oxford, I have used radio tags, satellite stage, radar transponders etc, on birds and have not had an issue or fatality. Before putting satellite tags on a particular species, I spent 3 months at Whipsnade Zoo trialling techniques on captive birds. A vet who specialized in birds was employed to look over the welfare of the captive birds on a continuous basis – to look at potential future issues. The tags were a tiny fraction of the overall body weight of the wild birds. They were attached to feathers and they fell off after a year once the bird moulted. The information from an applied conservation perspective was invaluable. The birds (which are endangered) migrated from 1000s of kms and back without an apparent issue. The cost – some stress for a bird while it was captured and handled for 30 minutes. Different species react in different ways – some show obvious signs of stress – but have you guys seen the albatrosses plucked form the water and tagged on the Sandra K? 5 mins later they are back behind the boat eating the free food! If we are to have a debate about this – let’s have an informed debate with those who have an applied knowledge of how such research is undertaken, the care shown, the stresses the birds endure etc. I am not an advocate for ringing, banding, tagging etc. for no reason. But there are good reasons why such projects occur and the vast majority that I am aware of are undertaken in a very professional manner. Rob Morris
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Carl, probably worth pointing out the Bar-tailed Godwits that were flagged and had transmitters a few years back made the migration from Alaska to New Zealand in one hop. Doesn’t sound like a bird struggling to migrate to me. The data was available publicly online as it came in, so no chance of tampering. Godwit E7 was seen for several years in a row at many different sites in New Zealand proving they do move round and are not necessarily site specific. A small example but at least it is hard data.
Personally I will wait til I see solid evidence that flagging is detrimental to birds before getting up in arms about it. I also am yet to see a flagged bird struggling despite having seen many hundreds carrying leg flags.
Regards, Chris
Sent from my iPhone
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Ian,
Should satellite tracking be banned as well?. Surely the capturing and application of a tracking device is equally traumatic to the birds, as is the capture and banding of them.
Carl Clifford
Hello again
Adverse impacts on affected waders from the scourge of leg flagging should not be underestimated. Very few leg flagged birds ever make it past their next migration. The surviving re-trapped birds are few and usually referred to by banders as examples to demonstrate success, rarely questioning the disappearance of the vast majority that have probably perished as a direct impact of their leg flags.
When Banders are asked why we rarely see flagged waders returning after migration, excuses such as “the birds are non site faithful” or, “the birds return to remote areas where monitoring is difficult” is a common but pathetic response. It needs to be recognised that wader leg flagging has been a major threatening process, contributing significantly to declines of Curlew Sandpiper, Red Knot and Sanderling populations in Australia. It is a devastating process to inflict on any small wader.
The 2020 Wader Conservation Project
Wader conservation projects based on field observation, counts, behaviour study, photography and habitat protection etc. should be strongly supported. These projects provide the information that is now required for effective wader and habitat conservation. But projects based on destructive processes such as leg flagging, canon netting etc should be scrapped; otherwise the 2020 shorebird program is just another public funded rort for banders and will do more harm than good for the conservation of these vulnerable birds.
Notification of Banding Operations
The benefits of announcing planned banding operations in a local region would alert other interested observers to consult and comment about projects, watch out for flagged birds and independently to assess impacts. The announcements could be via birding-aus or Eremea National
Leg Flaggers are actively targeting rare and threatened species. However leg flagging waders is now little more than an intrinsic hobby beyond its “use by” date.
Regards
Ian May St Helens, Tasmania
Ian May wrote: ===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Ian I read your note with interest. Is there actually any scientific proof behind what you are saying? As a trainee ringer in the UK (Bander here and the US) I have ringed 1000s of small passerines at a constant effort research site. This is with tiny aluminium rings not leg flags I should add. The care and training I went through lasted 5 years and was intense. I only saw 1 fatality during this time as a trainee. (Due to a fox visiting a net). I knew a lot of people that studied waders, sometimes with flags, and I never heard of any proven issues. The birds I were ringing were mainly Acrocephalus warblers and the re-trap rate year after year (and the birds were going to South Africa and back) was amazing. We had one male Reed Warbler who had returned to the same site 11 years running. I’m not suggesting you are wrong – I’m just unaware of any proof and I am no longer a practicing bander so may not be up to date. cheers
Rob Morris
Brisbane, Australia
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Hello again
Adverse impacts on affected waders from the scourge of leg flagging should not be underestimated. Very few leg flagged birds ever make it past their next migration. The surviving re-trapped birds are few and usually referred to by banders as examples to demonstrate success, rarely questioning the disappearance of the vast majority that have probably perished as a direct impact of their leg flags.
When Banders are asked why we rarely see flagged waders returning after migration, excuses such as “the birds are non site faithful” or, “the birds return to remote areas where monitoring is difficult” is a common but pathetic response. It needs to be recognised that wader leg flagging has been a major threatening process, contributing significantly to declines of Curlew Sandpiper, Red Knot and Sanderling populations in Australia. It is a devastating process to inflict on any small wader.
The 2020 Wader Conservation Project
Wader conservation projects based on field observation, counts, behaviour study, photography and habitat protection etc. should be strongly supported. These projects provide the information that is now required for effective wader and habitat conservation. But projects based on destructive processes such as leg flagging, canon netting etc should be scrapped; otherwise the 2020 shorebird program is just another public funded rort for banders and will do more harm than good for the conservation of these vulnerable birds.
Notification of Banding Operations
The benefits of announcing planned banding operations in a local region would alert other interested observers to consult and comment about projects, watch out for flagged birds and independently to assess impacts. The announcements could be via birding-aus or Eremea National
Leg Flaggers are actively targeting rare and threatened species. However leg flagging waders is now little more than an intrinsic hobby beyond its “use by” date.
Regards
Ian May St Helens, Tasmania
Ian May wrote: ===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================