The Project > Ask the Peregrine Chick

Human Interference vs Interaction

(1/3) > >>

newchick:
Read through all of this, lots of discussion back and forth.

I'm thinking cameras are a learning tool.

Banding is necessary, as it helps trace the bird as to age, sex, etc.

Banding of other birds is done for the same reason.

Transmitters, sure it seems to be a good tracing tool, and I think this is a U of M study, but, doesn't seem to be very successful, due to the fact transmitters seem to be failing, or we haven't been able to trace the birds for a long term.

The Peregrine Chick:
The developers have done some work inside since 2011 but not much.  The condos were suppose to be occupied by this point as I recall.  I do know they have fixed some of the roof leaking and they receptive to postponing their rooftop work until after the chicks had fledged ... just not the 2011 or 2012 chicks ... and not the 2013 chicks either.

Yup, I warned the researcher that we would probably not be able to catch the chicks, but Conservation asked us to make the trip and assess our chances on-site, just in case.  And we sat inside in lawn chairs watching the monitor to see if we could maybe catch Maya after her brothers had fledged since females tend to fledge a few days later than their male siblings.  Being smaller it was six of one, half dozen of another but it was worth taking the time to find out.  It's almost too bad we didn't manage to put one on her, we might have been able to suspect that she was in trouble/or might be in trouble so far away from home.  Or maybe just get to her sooner.

Rose:

--- Quote from: The Peregrine Chick on June 20, 2013, 21:29 ---And just to correct a wee bit of revisionist history ...


--- Quote from: Rose on June 20, 2013, 14:33 ---Last year we were told that the west Winnipeg chicks were hacked because of their unsafe natal nest but in reality they were needed for a research project so transmitters could be put on them
--- End quote ---

In 2011 the West Winnipeg chick was moved from his unsafe nest site at banding age and when he was older was given a transmitter.  In 2012, the chicks could not be retrieved at banding age so they couldn't be moved to the same location as 2011 (they need 10 days at least to imprint on a new location) so when we were offered the opportunity to hack release the chicks outside the city we accepted.  It gave us the opportunity to move the chicks from their unsafe fledge site and it would give then 10 days to imprint before release.  They too were given transmitters before they fledged.  So long as we are unable to get the West Winnipeg pair to nest elsewhere, we will continue to try and move their chicks to improve their odds of fledging successfully.


--- Quote from: Rose on June 20, 2013, 14:33 ---The McKenzie chicks were taken out of their nest box the last two years and put on the roof floor so they could be easily caught and have transmitters put on them. We were told the first year that the developer wanted to do some work on the nest box wall and they would be safer on the floor but we find out a week or so later that the chicks would be getting some new blings (transmitters) and no work of any kind has been done on the building or the wall since. The first year the chicks were easily caught and wore transmitters but the transmitters went off line (one just after migration and the other the next spring) Last year the chicks on the floor were a little smarter and weren't caught.
--- End quote ---

In 2011 some reinforcing was to be conducted on the wall with the nestbox so we agreed to install a nestbox on the roof just in case the need arose to move the chicks.  When the McKenzie Seeds chicks were to be include in the transmitter research, it made sense to move the chicks to the roof at banding rather than try to retrieve them a second time from the wall nestbox where the potential for one or more of them to try to escape and injure themselves was much greater.  In 2012, the decision was made to use the same technique as it had worked well the previous year.  We were a couple of days later than in 2011 which at this stage in the chicks' development meant we had to to be prepared for the possibility that we wouldn't be able to catch the chicks because we didn't want to push them into fledging early.  So we watched the cams and waited for an opportunity and as soon as they hopped up on the wall, we knew we weren't going to be able to include them in the research that year.

--- End quote ---

Thank you for your  long and wordy correction of a wee bit of revisionist history but did the development company ever do any work on that wall( to your knowledge)? They certainly have not done any work since and all their plans have changed and everything is in limbo, apartments are now being considered. As for the chicks in 2012 you must have known they were up on the wall before you even came to Brandon. RCF posted pics on the forum(July12 reply #178).  July 13  Sol fledged when you opened the roof door and you and Dennis had to come down and look for him (the researcher and Allison from conservation stayed up on the roof and didn't help you look). RCF found him on the Annex safe and sound but knowing that you still went up to the roof and waited in the heat and humidity for another 3 hours hoping to catch Maya. While we, Dennis, RCF and I waited down below and watched Hunter playing on the wall.

bccs:
well now, this is a wonderful debate going on right now.
I raised this question a year or so ago and really got no answer.

It appears that intervention is subjective.

Conservation  claims one mantra, but employs another.

Should we move the chicks? Loaded question. Who makes the decision to move them? Conservation or the project? On who's authority?

A lot of questions, too few hard and fast rules, too much ambiguity.

The Peregrine Chick:
And just to correct a wee bit of revisionist history ...


--- Quote from: Rose on June 20, 2013, 14:33 ---Last year we were told that the west Winnipeg chicks were hacked because of their unsafe natal nest but in reality they were needed for a research project so transmitters could be put on them
--- End quote ---

In 2011 the West Winnipeg chick was moved from his unsafe nest site at banding age and when he was older was given a transmitter.  In 2012, the chicks could not be retrieved at banding age so they couldn't be moved to the same location as 2011 (they need 10 days at least to imprint on a new location) so when we were offered the opportunity to hack release the chicks outside the city we accepted.  It gave us the opportunity to move the chicks from their unsafe fledge site and it would give then 10 days to imprint before release.  They too were given transmitters before they fledged.  So long as we are unable to get the West Winnipeg pair to nest elsewhere, we will continue to try and move their chicks to improve their odds of fledging successfully.


--- Quote from: Rose on June 20, 2013, 14:33 ---The McKenzie chicks were taken out of their nest box the last two years and put on the roof floor so they could be easily caught and have transmitters put on them. We were told the first year that the developer wanted to do some work on the nest box wall and they would be safer on the floor but we find out a week or so later that the chicks would be getting some new blings (transmitters) and no work of any kind has been done on the building or the wall since. The first year the chicks were easily caught and wore transmitters but the transmitters went off line (one just after migration and the other the next spring) Last year the chicks on the floor were a little smarter and weren't caught.
--- End quote ---

In 2011 some reinforcing was to be conducted on the wall with the nestbox so we agreed to install a nestbox on the roof just in case the need arose to move the chicks.  When the McKenzie Seeds chicks were to be include in the transmitter research, it made sense to move the chicks to the roof at banding rather than try to retrieve them a second time from the wall nestbox where the potential for one or more of them to try to escape and injure themselves was much greater.  In 2012, the decision was made to use the same technique as it had worked well the previous year.  We were a couple of days later than in 2011 which at this stage in the chicks' development meant we had to to be prepared for the possibility that we wouldn't be able to catch the chicks because we didn't want to push them into fledging early.  So we watched the cams and waited for an opportunity and as soon as they hopped up on the wall, we knew we weren't going to be able to include them in the research that year.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page