This would be a great project for the CBC and John has made thoughtful, thorough points. It will be a tough sell to DEC, though, as in my experience, many people at DEC (but hopefully not all) view wildlife only as "stuff to hunt."
--Sandy Podulka At 09:29 AM 1/5/2013, Linda Orkin wrote: >Hello All, > >Yes, I think this could be a project of the bird >club with this input and support from people >like John and Bill and their extensive >knowledge and experience with >"authorities". Let us pursue this worthy >goal. What would be a good next step? Should >those of us interested get together? > >John's points are so well presented and thought >out it seems to be the perfect starting place. > >Linda Orkin > >On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Meena Haribal ><<mailto:m...@cornell.edu>m...@cornell.edu> wrote: > >Hi all, > > > >I think this would be great conservation project >for CBC to take up, with inputs from Bill and >John and anyone else to be part of it. > > > >Cheers > >Meena > > >Meena Haribal >Ithaca NY 14850 ><http://haribal.org/>http://haribal.org/ >http://meenaharibal.blogspot.com/ > > >---------- >From: ><mailto:bounce-72558715-3493...@list.cornell.edu>bounce-72558715-3493...@list.cornell.edu > >[<mailto:bounce-72558715-3493...@list.cornell.edu>bounce-72558715-3493...@list.cornell.edu] > >on behalf of Bill Evans >[<mailto:wrev...@clarityconnect.com>wrev...@clarityconnect.com] >Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 8:52 AM >To: John Confer; CAYUGABIRDS-L >Subject: Re: [cayugabirds-l] (Long comment) >Exempt part of Cayuga Lake from hunting diving ducks > >This would be a nice accomplishment that is long >overdue. Ive thought that the few >individuals...greatly reducing the pleasure of >many angle should be enough to produce such an >exemption, but your approach of population >analysis and presenting a scientific case for >the exemption might help facilitate the change >for DEC. Certainly the issue of hunting in such >close proximity to a population center seems >like it could be a driver besides the safety >issue, the sound of gunshots can be quite unnerving for some in our society. > > From the birding and environmental education > perspective, it would be wonderful to enjoy > viewing large rafts of Aythya ducks and their > cohorts on a more consistent basis. > >Nearly 20 years ago Common Council voted to ban >hunting in Allan Treman Marine Park apparently >the City of Ithaca had allowed hunting there >after it was purchased by the state in 1976. >Hunting currently occurs in the water offshore, >and Im not clear on jurisdiction involved. > >Bill E > >From: <mailto:con...@ithaca.edu>John Confer >Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013 2:55 PM >To: <mailto:Cayugabirds-L@cornell.edu>Cayuga >Bird List ; ><mailto:confergoldw...@aol.com>Confer, Karen ; ><mailto:j...@cornell.edu>j...@cornell.edu >Subject: [cayugabirds-l] (Long comment) Exempt >part of Cayuga Lake from hunting diving ducks > >Hi Folks, > > CBC are always fun for many reasons. It > tickles the grey cells to think about > population trends and regulatory factors. I > shared a fun discussion about the impact of > hunting on waterfowl on the south end and the > rest of Cayuga Lake and we discussed if there > were objective data on population abundance to > justify preventing such hunting. This got me thinking. > The Fish and Wildlife spends an immense > amount of effort to census waterfowl every > year: extensive aerial surveys that criss-cross > the prairie potholes and elsewhere and Hudson > Bay coast, really extensive banding efforts, > and hundreds of hours of ground surveys, etc. > All of this provides an estimate of pop > abundance for each species. This is used to set > bag limits. This immense effort is predicated > on the belief that hunters are one of the > significant factors that regulate waterfowl > abundance, and that to sustain the population > at nearly level numbers over the long term, one > must adjust the bag limit in some proportion to > the abundance at the start of fall migration. > In the same line of reasoning, the spring snow > goose hunting season and the split canada goose > hunting season are all based on the belief that > hunting in general regulates waterfowl > abundance. The newly proposed expansion of > waterfowl hunting on snow geese for Montezuma > is also based on hunting will continue to > regulate abundance. Either, hunting does > regulate waterfowl abundance, or the F&WS is fooling us and themselves. > It is impossible to acquire the specific, > statistically-based evidence that hunting > regulates the specific population of waterfowl > using Cayuga Lake for several reasons. There is > no reason to believe that the impact of hunting > of waterfowl on Cayuga Lake is exempt from this > generality. In fact, it would be incumbent for > the merit of such an argument to provide > evidence why Cayuga Lake is an exception to the > general concept of waterfowl management. > Difficulties in making data-based arguments > about waterfowl on Cayuga Lake include many factors. >1) There is no estimate of the take, which >obviously means you can't quantify the impact. >The absence of the fundamental data limits the >ability to say if there is or isn't an effect. >2)There is no way to estimate the impact of >driving the waterfowl out of their favored >foraging site. A reasonable hypothesis is that >winter food supply is important. Waterfowl speak >with their wings. This provides strong support >for the hypothesis that the shallows of Cayuga >Lake provide a favorable foraging site. There >are no other areas in the inland northeast that >have as many diving ducks in mid-winter as >Seneca and Cayuga Lakes. The abundance of diving >waterfowl on these lakes during times outside of >the hunting season suggest that this food source >may be one of the best in the entire winter >range. In which case, limiting access to a food >source for part of the winter may be very >deleterious, and could have negative effects on >far more than the number killed by shot. >3) When I first came here, there was a waterfowl >bander on Seneca Lake. I never met him and don't >recall his name. I was told, with what seemed >like high credibility, that banding indicated >that waterfowl moved back and forth between >Seneca Lake, and by inference Cayuga Lake as >well, and the coast repeatedly during the >winter. Thus, populations on Seneca Lake, and >by inference Cayuga Lake, are a sub-sample of >the eastern population. The suggestion that an >increase in waterfowl on Cayuga Lake during the >winter shows that hunting on Cayuga Lake has no >impact on the Cayuga Lake population fails to >consider that the Cayuga Lake population is a >portion of and exchanges with the east coast >wintering population. In order to detect an >effect of Cayuga Lake take, it would have to be >large enough to impact a perceptible portion of >the entire eastern wintering population. >4) Reliable data on the impact of hunting on >diving ducks on part of Cayuga Lake can not be >based on data documenting an effect of hunting, >because there is no such data. Further, it would >be nigh impossible to obtain. Such data would >require a series of years with and without >hunting seasons, including years when the >continental populations are high and are low. It >would require a level of precision on the take >of the population and quantitative information >on the exchange with the larger coastal >population. It does not seem feasible to me to >obtain such a data-based decision on the impact >that hunting on Cayuga Lake has on the east coast population of diving ducks. > I believe such a ban can be defended on > general arguments. The decision to create > federal wildlife refuges is based on the > argument that waterfowl need some place to > forage and loaf where they are free of hunting > pressure. J. "Ding" Darling, with Ithaca > relations, helped popularize this perception. > The refuge system was proposed as a means to > sustain a high population for hunters for the > long run. For diving ducks, Cayuga Lake has no > refuge because during the hunting season ponds > are frozen and the ducks are chased up and > down the entire shore, the only available > habitat. While some shorelines do not allow > hunting access, hunting and fishing from boats > eliminates these sites as loafing areas. The > great majority of the diving ducks who would > use this lake if they were not hunted, are > either killed or driven out during the hunting > season. (Dabblers, who in the largest part > migrate south of here when the shallow waters > freeze, are affected by a different mixture of > factors.) It is compatible with the basic > reason for the refuge system to presume, until > shown otherwise, that the loss of a highly > favorable foraging and loafing site is highly > likely to have a negative impact on the > population. In the long run, this is deleterious to hunters. > An entirely different argument is based on > the relative involvement for non-consumptive > watching and hunting. Hunting diving ducks on > Cayuga Lake is obviously deleterious to birders > and there are far more birders than hunters. In > New York, 3,800,000 people participated in > wildlife watching in 2006 and spent $1.5 > billion, while 568,000 people participated in > hunting for waterfowl and upland game in NY > spending $715 million. More locally, at MNWR > the current annual use is approximately 124,924 > visitor-days by those who participated in > wildlife watching, photography and > environmental education and 2252 visitor-days > for individuals who hunt for upland game and > waterfowl. I support hunting: the deer > population should be greatly reduced and > hunting seems to be the optimum method, and, > e.g., canada geese and snow geese should be > greatly reduced. Shooting diving ducks on all > parts of Cayuga Lake is not in the same > category to me. First, I don't think that a few > individuals should greatly reduce the pleasure > of many. Second, the initial popular movement > and reasoning for the creation of the > refuge system were predicated on the > hypothesis that preserving favorable sites for > foraging and for loafing are essential to > maintaining future populations that are > abundant enough to allow hunting success. I > believe that argument is valid and support its > philosophy. Some portions of the Cayuga Lake > shoreline, which are attractive to diving > ducks, should be exempt from hunting. > >Cheers, > >John Confer > > >-- >Cayugabirds-L List Info: ><http://www.northeastbirding.com/CayugabirdsWELCOME>Welcome and Basics ><http://www.northeastbirding.com/CayugabirdsRULES>Rules and Information ><http://www.northeastbirding.com/CayugabirdsSubscribeConfigurationLeave.htm>Subscribe, > >Configuration and Leave >Archives: ><http://www.mail-archive.com/cayugabirds-l@cornell.edu/maillist.html>The >Mail Archive ><http://www.surfbirds.com/birdingmail/Group/Cayugabirds>Surfbirds ><http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/CAYU.html>BirdingOnThe.Net >Please submit your observations to <http://ebird.org/content/ebird/>eBird! >-- >-- >Cayugabirds-L List Info: ><http://www.northeastbirding.com/CayugabirdsWELCOME>Welcome and Basics ><http://www.northeastbirding.com/CayugabirdsRULES>Rules and Information ><http://www.northeastbirding.com/CayugabirdsSubscribeConfigurationLeave.htm>Subscribe, > >Configuration and Leave >Archives: ><http://www.mail-archive.com/cayugabirds-l@cornell.edu/maillist.html>The >Mail Archive ><http://www.surfbirds.com/birdingmail/Group/Cayugabirds>Surfbirds ><http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/CAYU.html>BirdingOnThe.Net >Please submit your observations to <http://ebird.org/content/ebird/>eBird! >-- >-- >Cayugabirds-L List Info: ><http://www.northeastbirding.com/CayugabirdsWELCOME>Welcome and Basics ><http://www.northeastbirding.com/CayugabirdsRULES>Rules and Information ><http://www.northeastbirding.com/CayugabirdsSubscribeConfigurationLeave.htm>Subscribe, > >Configuration and Leave >Archives: ><http://www.mail-archive.com/cayugabirds-l@cornell.edu/maillist.html>The >Mail Archive ><http://www.surfbirds.com/birdingmail/Group/Cayugabirds>Surfbirds ><http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/CAYU.html>BirdingOnThe.Net >Please submit your observations to <http://ebird.org/content/ebird/>eBird! >-- > > > > >-- >Don't ask what your bird club can do for you, >ask what you can do for your bird club!! <')_,/ > >-- >Cayugabirds-L List Info: ><http://www.northeastbirding.com/CayugabirdsWELCOME>Welcome and Basics ><http://www.northeastbirding.com/CayugabirdsRULES>Rules and Information ><http://www.northeastbirding.com/CayugabirdsSubscribeConfigurationLeave.htm>Subscribe, > >Configuration and Leave >Archives: ><http://www.mail-archive.com/cayugabirds-l@cornell.edu/maillist.html>The >Mail Archive ><http://www.surfbirds.com/birdingmail/Group/Cayugabirds>Surfbirds ><http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/CAYU.html>BirdingOnThe.Net >Please submit your observations to <http://ebird.org/content/ebird/>eBird! >-- -- Cayugabirds-L List Info: http://www.NortheastBirding.com/CayugabirdsWELCOME http://www.NortheastBirding.com/CayugabirdsRULES http://www.NortheastBirding.com/CayugabirdsSubscribeConfigurationLeave.htm ARCHIVES: 1) http://www.mail-archive.com/cayugabirds-l@cornell.edu/maillist.html 2) http://www.surfbirds.com/birdingmail/Group/Cayugabirds 3) http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/CAYU.html Please submit your observations to eBird: http://ebird.org/content/ebird/ --
