----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Hendrickson" <smithvil...@charter.net> To: "bill lane" <owl...@mindspring.com> Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 3:26 PM Subject: Re: [mou] My two cents worth: the winter of owls
>I agree with everything Bill has mentioned. I will not report any heard >Boreal Owls in Lake Co or Cook Co. I will not report the best places to >hear Boreal Owls or the best roads. Last year information was shared and >the male Boreal Owl was lured in by taping by birders. I will as many >other local birders have agreed to not report Spring Boreal Owls anywhere >in Northern Minnesota. > > I encourage birders in Minnesota and outside of Minnesota to support Bill > Lane's Owl research and visit Bill's web site and read the best source in > the US about Boreal Owls in Minnesota http://www.mindspring.com/~owlman/ > > I would even go as far and support him by helping put owl nest boxes up or > send him donations to keep his owl research going. To those that went on > MOU field trips in October of 2003 and Nov. of 2004 know how devoted Bill > is in saving and understanding Boreal and Saw Whet Owls in NE Minnesota. > In my opinion its not about numbers of owls he's banding its about the > time he puts in learning about these owl. I can't think of anyone who > would put themselves under a tree in the middle of late winter night > huddling under a tree and spend hours observing owl behavior. That's > devotion and love for owls. > > I encourage those to email Bill and ask if he needs help hanging nest > boxes up or if you can't do that then send him some kind of donation to > keep his research going. I could go on and on about my support for Bill > but I just want to know Bill is doing some unbelievable work up in > Northern Lake Co and Cook Co. > > Mike Hendrickson > Duluth, MN > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "bill lane" <owl...@mindspring.com> > To: <mou-...@cbs.umn.edu> > Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 1:24 PM > Subject: [mou] My two cents worth: the winter of owls > > >>I seldom interject my opinions into mou-related matters, but given both >>real and perceived controversies within the owl (and human) community, >>felt a different perspective of the irruption was warranted. >> >> Reading recent posts has been interesting, amusing, and frustrating. >> There have been attempts to justify intrusive human behavior at the >> individual and group levels; define owl stress (it depends on what your >> definition of "is" "is"); explain the intricacies of owl behavior; label >> the irruption as a wonderful migration; and, to describe the hypnotic >> spell cast by a roosting owl. Recently, detailed instructions for >> medical intervention have appeared along with the suggestion that the >> Raptor Center should act as a repository for dying owls who, whether you >> want to accept it or not, should die. >> >> Trust me, I don't make a statement like this with disregard for others or >> their feelings or perceptions. Nor do I say this as an insensitive, >> data-gathering biologist, although some will certainly come to those >> conclusions. Nineteen years with a nocturnal species, afterall, has >> afforded me a great deal of humility. >> >> During those 19 years (spring, some summers, and now winters), I have >> recorded data, quantified habitat, watched courtship behaviors, >> radio-tagged breeding adults, spent hundreds of hours in steadfast >> observation, watched the first flights of young owls, and watched nests >> flourish and lately, disappear. I have felt fortunate. I have felt >> cursed. After "participating" in the last 5 irruptions (1989, 1993, >> 1996, 1997, and 2001), however, I can truthfully say that I loathe >> irruption years because during irruption years, owls die. Then again, >> during irruption years, owls are supposed to die. I accept that. I >> don't like it, but I accept it. >> >> Irruptions are about owl biology and the Strigidaen response to small >> mammal population cycles. Much of this "machinery" occurs far to our >> north and we just happen to be proximal to a large, diverting body of >> water which ends most north-south movements of owls and conveniently, >> increases their visibility. The death of irruptive owls - the genetic >> elimination of those individuals unable to utilize resources in an >> unfamiliar landscape - is unfortunate, but is a function of life in the >> northern latitudes. Ultimately, these deaths will serve boreal and >> other owl species, well (a.k.a. survival of the fittest). >> >> As bleak as irruptions are, without them, boreal owls in Minnesota will >> move towards localized extinction. We need the irruptions; rather, the >> survivors of the irruptions to supplement/replace/enhance the individual >> and genetic presence in landscapes once rich with boreals but now, >> alarmingly void of them. >> >> Is extinction the direction Minnesota's boreals are headed? My >> involvement with the species is but a brief window but consider this: >> only one successful nest has been documented in the last 3 years and the >> number of singing (i.e. breeding-ready) male owls has declined from an >> approximate annual average of 35 (1987-90; including the 1989 irruption) >> to an approximate annual average of 6 (2001-04; including the 2001 >> irruption). If you are trying to sustain a population, a decrease in the >> number of adults is not the way to do it. >> >> But what if the irruption works as "it is supposed to", there are a >> number of individuals that survive, yet the North Woods landscape no >> longer has sufficient resources to support the influx? In northeast >> Minnesota, those resources are diverse mixes of old forest aspen for >> nesting and large tracts of lowland spruce for roosting and foraging. >> Unfortunately, most of the cavity trees selected by boreal owls for >> courtship and/or nesting (approximately 80 since 1988) are gone. With >> the loss of cavity trees has come a noticeable decrease in boreal owls. >> Is that a relationship or a coincidence? >> >> I suggest there is a tangible relationship, especially since the >> proportions of lowlands within the landscape have changed little from the >> tracts I first observed in 1987. Furthermore, despite concerted efforts, >> a "smarter" observer approach, and more time in the field during the >> breeding season, there is scant evidence that alternative cavity trees >> are being located or utilized by boreals. In other words, owls that >> survive an irruption might do wonders for the genetic composition of our >> metapopulations, but if critical habitat resources are limited, or >> absent, there will be no reason for the owls to call northern Minnesota >> home. >> >> Regardless of ones' approach to the current irruption, my greatest >> concern is not how individual owls are treated, how excited the birding >> community becomes every fourth winter, what economic rewards come locally >> or individually, what correct or incorrect information is presented, what >> intervention occurs, who has the final say on birding and ethics and >> decorum in our North Woods, or who saw the most owls. Instead, my >> concern is that Minnesota's resident boreal owl population is in trouble >> and our collective focus should always be towards the spring and when and >> where owls reproduce, and not the irruptive winters, when owls die. >> >> >> Respectfully, >> >> Bill Lane >> >> ****** >> FYI: I will be speaking at the MRVAC January meeting on the 27th of >> January. Information may be found at : >> http://home.comcast.net/~mrvac/trumpeter.htm >> >> owl...@mindspring.com >> www.mindspring.com/~owlman >> _______________________________________________ >> mou-net mailing list >> mou-...@cbs.umn.edu >> http://cbs.umn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mou-net >> >
