Regarding the 'disturbing' of the Choc 'birds', the following is a from a Dec 2006 online National Geographic article on the possibility of IBWO in the Suwannee. It quotes Jerome Jackson and Greg Butcher (Audubon):Just as the birds can coexist with deer and turkey hunters, they should also be able to coexist with tourists visiting the Suwannee River.
"If the bird is there and the habitat is protected, I think the bird will do fine," Jackson said. "I don't think people in kayaks or canoes or hiking are going to make a lot of difference."
Butcher, of the Audubon Society, agrees, saying that "there's no reason to suspect that they'd be more disturbed by hunters, boaters, or birdwatchers than any other bird would be."
David Viner Day
2 hours ago
Posts
11 comments:
Tom,
It strikes me that American ornithology has entered it's postmodernism era. The previous adherance to science and provability was centralized among a few "experts" who had to conform to rational beliefs.
Now in the postmodern era, everyone is an expert and entitled to his belief whether rational or not. In the past, such people would not have had undue influence on the true experts. But now with modern communications and unlimited free time, the boundary of expert and rank amateur is easily crossed.
Worse, there is not longer an accepted expert class that can beat back the irrationality. And the expert is no longer the only voice in the political dialogue on his area of expertise. The result affects even the science oriented buearacracies such as US Fish and Wildlife. Who should they listen to? The experts or the vocal but irrational amateurs who nevertheless have political power?
Yes, we have entered the postmodern era of ornithology. Science be damned.
Watch it Tom. You are treading on the last gasping defense of the TBs. The birds simply MUST be deathly afraid of birders (as compared to hunters, fisherman, jet skiers, and hikers). More search effort simply MUST be counter-productive, not only for finding the bird but for the very welfare and survival of the species itself! The alternative for the TBs is unthinkable; that maybe, just maybe, the bird doesn't exist.
Oh, yeah. And Jerome Jackson and Greg Butcher will be responsible if the IBWO goes extinct blah, blah, blah...
"Now in the postmodern era, everyone is an expert and entitled to his belief whether rational or not."
Not true. White male oppressors have had their say already and its time for them to shut up. Rational thought led us to conclude that the IBWO was extinct thereby causing it to become extinct. An unacceptable conclusion, so what good was rationality? If we need a few logical thinkers for technological, military, and corporate purposes we can bring in some more Chinese grad students. Non-citizens can't vote so will pose no threat to our faith-based utopia.
Just to illustrate my point about postmodernism. We have Bill Pulliam over on his blog speculating in a postmodernist psuedo-scientific way that based on all the "sightings" there is likely less than 100 IBWO left.
It's all crap. But modern communications and the lack of peer review makes it sound all so authoritative.
"It's all crap. But modern communications and the lack of peer review makes it sound all so authoritative."
Which, of course, makes this blog a suitable place to share your opinions.
Which, of course, makes this blog a suitable place to share your opinions.
This blog is the only place where experts have consistently gathered to debunk this IBWO fiasco. So yes, this is a good place for the discussion.
Tom, is the only one that allows free discussion on the topic.
Cyberthrush doesn't. Bill Pullium doesn't.
What was your point?
You can't disturb what isn't there. We are suppposed to pretend that IBWOs AREN'T extinct based on the flimsiest of evidence? Get in touch with reality. Hypothetically, we could encircle the IBWO search area (immediately following an encounter, so we KNOW they're in there) and clear the forest tree by tree, and we still wouldn't find any IBWOs. What would be the explanation from Hillcrow? Which new set of excuses would they come up with? The most plausible explanation would be that the FL encounters are bogus and that IBWO is extinct.
Meanwhile, let's save the habitat, and not clear it tree by tree. But, let's not use postmodern pseudoconservation.
Funny...
Many might consider the use of a blog to challenge the Official Proclamations of authorities from Academia and Government on issues ranging from conservation biology and bird ID to global warming to be the very archetype of postmodern journalism.
PP
to be the very archetype of postmodern journalism.
I never mentioned postmodern journalism. I announced the beginning of postmodern American ornithology.
Every ornithology department that I know of, and that's quite a few, follows this blog to keep up on what's happening with this issue.
This blog is part of modern science on this one issue. This blog is the outlet for those who decry what ornithology is becoming.
"Every ornithology department that I know of..."
Let's see...how many fingers does it take to name them?
Depends on what you call a department. Remember, even an Ivy league university with a well known department can make a horrible mistake.
So their model of a department may not be a very good one. Now is it?
Post a Comment