My Response to Owlboy
Owlboy's assertion: “Store bought mice are lab raised and are disease free."
It is owlboy who is misinformed. Had he done his homework and conducted just a simple internet search on pet store rodents and diseases, he would have found a myriad of information and articles on the subject, including ones from the scientifically peer-reviewed Journal of of the American Medical Association and also the CDC:
Outbreak of Multidrug-Resistant Salmonella Typhimurium Associated With Rodents Purchased at Retail Pet Stores—United States, December 2003–October 2004
His premise is wrong, therefore his conclusion that pet store rodents are a safer bait for owls is advanced to a category of strong doubt. Obviously, rodents in the wild carry diseases. However, releasing a diseased pet store rodent increases a probability of introducing a bacterial or viral variant. Wild owls may have a hard time dealing with it due to a lack of natural resistance to a bug that is not typically found in its natural ecological foraging niche.
The needs of the bird outweigh my need for a photograph. Again, in my opinion, erring on the side of caution is the most ethical position to take regarding the baiting of owls. I have never lured an owl and I will not bait them. I believe my rationale is sound and based on reasonable evidence.
Link: CDC: Pet Rodents Can Carry Salmonella
Link: Ectoparasites of House Mice from Pet Stores in South Carolina
Link: The Case of the Suspicious Hamsters
Great Gray Owl © 2007 Mike McDowell
9 Comments:
Owlboy: "The fact of the matter, finding Owls in the wild with lures is not easy. Finding Owls in the wild, without lures, on a regular basis is EXTREMELY hard."
Oh, boo-hoo! Shed a tear for a guy who doesn't want to spend any time in the great outdoors looking for owls. Go watch a video.
Owlboy: "Almost all biologist and state conservations departments use lures to survey, track, and study owls."
And STUDY might be the operative word here -- these people use the data for further understanding of the needs of the owls, contributing to management and conservation. I'd be interested to see Owlboy's peer-reviewed contributions to science, but I see from his profile he is a "programmer" whose web site is an electronics parts store.
Some people think that they should be able to do anything they want in order to get a wildlife picture. They are known as "idiots."
You are right on track, Mike. Photographers need to understand reality for the wildlife.
Owlboy's comments remind me of footage I saw of a fashion shoot in Africa where the director couldn't understand why the zebras wouldn't let them get within a hundred feet to have their photo snapped with the model.
Mike, there is no communicating with people who continue to justify baiting irruptive species.. I see and hear ALOT of owls and I've never had to resort to baiting.. ever. And I never would. These folks will justify what they do with ridiculous assumptions.. obviously.
Mike,
You’re ahead of your time. During the late 80s there was a huge revolution in the field of (professional) wildlife cinematography. The ethics of how you captured an image of a wild creature became very important. Remember how much trouble Marty Stauffer got into when it was discovered that some of his scenes were staged?
Staging a wildlife scene is a big no-no in the professional world and it’s a credit to your skill that you don’t play these tricks.
Owlboy: My point was that the use of lures by scientists in controlled studies that further conservation or management has merit. The fact you have degrees and hike a lot tells me nothing about what you have contributed to science. A list of publications you have contributed to, either as co-author or in the acknowledgments, was what I would find helpful to see.
Presumably, what we are really discussing is the use of lures by people who just want to look at owls or photograph owls, for their own pleasure. So perhaps you need to clarify your original position.
You originally say that finding owls without lures is "extremely difficult." You say "If we didn't use lures, and owls didn't hoot most people would not even know that they exist." You characterize people who do not believe people should use lures as "purists" and "elitist kooks."
In your latest comment, you state that you have found hundreds of owls, ALL without use of lures.
If you have been so successful without them, why would you endorse the use of lures, or call people who do not endorse them names? Under what non-scientific situations would you find the use of lures acceptable, given that you yourself have proven that they are not necessary?
there are a lot worse things to be as a wildlife artist than a purist.
Owlboy said
If we didn't use lures, and owls didn't hoot most people would not even know that they exist. They would be like the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker.
My response
I see Owls all the time. I don't use lures and I often find them without hearing them hoot!
Of course owls are the best kept secret in the Natural World. I was only talking to my postal carrier the other day and mentione the Owl sitting in my front yard.
"What's an Owl" he declared "Are they as hard to see as the Ivory-billed Woodpecker"
"Yeah" I replied "I wouldn't have noticed that one if it hadn't hooted"
Your comment has to be the most ridiculous I've read Owlboy.
This is undoubtedly a conspiracy, cooked up by Eagle Optics and Mike McDowell to viciously attack Digital SLR photographers and their methods thus enhancing the sales of their digiscoping equipment. It makes sense, after all $40,000 worth of Canon euqipment is a big threat to the digiscoping industry!
Give me a break Owlboy.
Mike:
Mike you are very well respected in the birding world and a lot of birders enjoy your photos.
Keep up the good work!
Mike H.
I've been following the rather remarkable series of posts by Owlboy on his forum. Mike has, succinctly and politely, explained his point and intention in disagreeing with Owlboy's position on luring owls, and using captive bred rodents to do so. Owlboy's response has been variously wide-ranging, shifting, and at times rude.
After reading thousands of words, I gather the bottom line, for Owlboy, is that he strongly endorses the use of luring owls with rodents, whether by photographers, researchers, or people who just want to look at owls, even though he admits he has found thousands or owls without the use of lures. It doesn't appear anything will dissuade his view.
Mike, I've never met or talked to you, but you've come out ahead in this one. May as well let it rest.
Post a Comment
<< Home