for those who want to stop sparrowhawk attacks in garden

[Picidae]

Hi Db/Squeek - I think Lance is right (he's a Mod, why shouldn't he be! ) this has gone on too long IMO but I'd not like you or Squeek to feel you've been 'bullied' or ''silenced'' on an issue that you obviously both feel strongly about, so this is my 'take' on trying to explain why there seems to be so much heated argument on both sides:

Why are we arguing?

If feelings have run high in this thread over what apparently rests on a choice of words, it's probably important to re-emphasize that the majority of contributors are not in essence attacking 'free language', or ''freedom of thought'' or any of the other hard earned civil liberties you might care to mention, despite that perhaps coming across to you and Squeek? The heated views expressed are I believe just symptomatic of the deeper concern that members have over raptor persecution and the tidal wave of antipathy towards raptors that we have seen in recent times (just to give an example - over 200 BoP were found dead on a Reserve in Malta yesterday and two rare Black Stork shot within hours of landing on the Island - we are members of the EU and have EU representation - just food for thought). I think we all have a role, however, small, to help counteract that, especially on internet forums where the viewing is incredibly wide ranged and large!

Why does what we say about the Sparrowhawks in our garden even matter?

As more and more members of the general public are introduced to birdwatching starting with the birds they see in their own gardens, knowledge of the ecology of BoP (Sparrowhawks in gardens particularly) will need to be broadened if the tidal wave of antipathy is to be held back or even diminished. Watching garden birds is an ever growing hobby and we've seen a massive increase in the retail availability of bird food, feeders etc along with the incredible numbers of members of the public now doing the annual RSPB Big Garden Watch. If political pressure is to work regarding raptor persecution, we need a massive swing of support from the general public - Sparrowhawks are the most likely BoP many people will see in the garden (or will ever see). They can therefore be a flag pole species for that kind of support I mention, but this can only happen if people can come to accept the Sparrowhawk as just one other 'garden' bird in the wider ecology of their back gardens rather than see it as the ''enemy'' to the other birds they are feeding.

How can we help?

As you know, I'm sure, language can be very inflammatory - this is why we have laws of incite or racial abuse. I don't believe for one minute, either one of you, Squeek especially, meant anything other than the 'horror' she feels when seeing predation of her garden birds in her choice of words - that's an understandable emotional reaction. I for one, find it bl88dy horrible to seen another living creature being predated - I'm a total wuz! Without diminishing Squeek's feelings at all at the distress of witnessing predation of her garden birds, I think we all, as 'responsible' wildlife watchers, just need to be very wary of our choice of language since language so often informs and leads to wider attitudes that can have a more serious impact.

I saw this article written by a supposedly 'responsible' journalist some time back - I felt, as others have felt on this thread, that the language used in this case, was unnecessarily negative description of Peregrines in urban areas and I duly complained.

By Michael McCarthy, Environment Editor

Wednesday, 19 March 2008

They carry out targeted killings on vulnerable victims and go on nocturnal rampages of violence and aggression. A new group of deadly predators has descended on Britain's towns and cities – but fear not, these urban clashes are taking place not on the streets but high in the air.

City lights turn peregrines into night hawks - Nature, Environment - The Independent

.

[Jason Green]

I like sprawks. I really do, and by way I also detest the 'SOS campaign'. However, I can't help but notice a couple of points being raised here that don't quite seem right. Let me explain...

Frequently we get posts from members both new and long-standing, telling us how the local population of pigeons, crows, jackdaws, rooks, magpies, etc. are putting off the small birds in the garden. Remember these need to eat, too. Members suggest ways to put them off. Now, Squeek says a local sprawk is scaring away all the small birds, so is humanely trying to put it off her garden. Just one garden. In both cases, it's about the landowner selecting what they want in their own garden irrespective of anything else.

To the latter, people say 'But you'll get others copying in other areas'. Now, the only people that will think about it are those who don't want sprawks in their garden. Not those who do, or don't mind, but those who do. I don't, so wouldn't copy. These people who do, will be open to the SOS campaign - cue scary music - who may approach them and say 'If you join our organisation, we are lobbying the government into allowing a cull some of these BoP'. Some may then join them, giving them financial support and increasing their numbers of support, and remember they ask for £20/yr membership. Alternatively, you may get them reading Squeek's post with these humane ways of putting them off that A; doesn't kill, and B; saves people joining the SOS group. The latter would be a particularly good thing, as they'd have both less financial and statistical support. I don't think Squeek has been given enough credit for this. Just this.

As another point, do you remember a while ago that the chairman of the Scottish Gamekeeper's Association applying for a licence to 'control' native buzzards, in defense of an introduced species? One of the arguments against Squeek was that it might get other neighbours copying. What if the Chairman had secured a licence to control - how many other Estate's would then have copied? You don't need me to say that an Estate is probably as big as several gardens of average size, do you. His bid was unsuccessful, thankfully. If as everyone seem to have said, that the humane methods used by Squeek have the power to really affect local populations of BoP, then it says to me that those who kill BoP, or those applying for licences such as the one listed above, haven't tried enough before taking to more drastic measures. Unless you don't think it would work here. If not, why do you think it does with sprawks?!

As I said, I like sprawks. My view on this thread is irrelevant to that. If Squeek had suggested culling or joining the SOS I'd have been down on this thread before anyone else... as I'm sure you know, I'm strictly against hunting/shooting, etc. Squeek has suggested humane methods in her own garden. I may even have dissagreed with Squeek if she'd put up BoP scarers in a public place, such as the countryside or even a local park or wood. She hasn't.

Let's let this thing drop now. It's going nowhere - all contrary statements to the tongue-in-cheek statement about murder has been corrected. Surely there's no more to be said. Surely.

[Lance Morgan]

""Hi Db/Squeek - I think Lance is right (he's a Mod, why shouldn't he be!"

Thanks Picidae,
For the record I'm not a mod.

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by dickybird

well,the pomposity of some people using this site,just beggars belief!!!

i can only think they have so little in their lives that the only way they can make themselves seem important is to constantly denigrate those other individuals who were simply adding to the diversity of opinions.
.

pot , kettle , black ....

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by Jason Green

Alternatively, you may get them reading Squeek's post with these humane ways of putting them off that A; doesn't kill, and B; saves people joining the SOS group.

jason i broadly agree with you that the specific argument/debate has gone far enough, certainly there is no intent (at least on my part) to make squeek feel victimised

however in general terms the point i'm trying to get across seems to have been missed ie - what is so "humane" about stopping a bird that only eats meat from hunting in its teritory ? - you might well be condeming it or its chicks to a slow agonised death by starvation which is not remotely humane.

And as to the argument that it can go and hunt elsewhere , well yes and no - that depends on the general sprawk population level in the area and the population of prey species.

[squeek]

Originally Posted by rossy

well it seems to have raised a rather large debate on the forum squeek but i have a question for you and dont take this the wrong way do you eat meat or bacon ? or are you a vegan . rossy.

no problem rossy.. i dont eat meat , fish or some dairy products.

[squeek]

Pauline.ok you have your view i have mine and i like it better without birds being slaughtered under my nose.

they can go to a neighbours garden, i dont expect everyone around here actually belongs to this site, infact i know of no one else on it.
and then we have fields surrounding with forest/trees etc.
i really dont believe i will be responsible for the extinction of s/hawks.

and then there are people like yourself who doesnt have a problem, so the hawks can go in your/there garden/s

the world is made up of all sorts of people and we all have a different out look on life.

anyway bye for now , til next time , well i take it you havent given up trying to transform my way of thinking.

[Lance Morgan]

The End
Please!

[Jason Green]

Originally Posted by Lance Morgan

The End
Please!

- yes, PLEASE!!!

(It won't be, though... )

[squeek]

Thanks for your comments and support dickybird and Jason

ok i can see if i continue to post on my thread then it will more than likely get shut down, so i wll now leave it.

thankyou all and happy bird watching