kwikstick wrote: just kill everything, the american way
Trappers euthanized nine foxes last week after catching them in Robert Moses State Park, a breeding ground for the threatened piping plover.
Wildlife officials blamed the foxes trapped near Democrat Point for a precipitous drop in the number of nesting plover pairs in the park, said Ronald Foley, Long Island regional director of the state parks department.
In 2009, he said, 24 pairs of piping plovers were in the park; in 2010 there were 11, and last year there were 12. Thirteen, four and 16 chicks grew to maturity in those years, respectively.
During the same period, the fox population appears to have surged, though there has been no official count, Foley said.
The evidence against them is abundant but circumstantial: officials have spotted plover carcasses near fox tracks in the isolated area at the far western end of the park, Foley said, and motion-activated cameras have shown foxes near plover nests at Jones Beach, about 21 miles away. "I've seen pictures of foxes at night looking right at the camera," he said.
About a quarter of the 800 pair of plovers on the Atlantic coast use Long Island's sandy beaches for breeding and nesting, arriving in early April. The birds nest through the spring and summer and retreat to their wintering areas by early September.
Unlike plovers, foxes are not a protected species under federal and state law. "They're common on Long Island," Foley said.
Padded "leg-hold" traps were used to catch the foxes, Foley said. He did not know how they were killed. He added that other protective measures are already in place, such as wire mesh nest "exclosures" to keep predators away from plover nests. The nests are closely monitored, and if human visitors -- mostly fishermen and off-road vehicle drivers -- disturb the population, the beach is closed.
Simply trapping and moving the foxes isn't a solution, wildlife officials and advocates agree. "That's just moving the problem somewhere else," Foley said.
Advocacy groups are divided on the use of traps -- and euthanasia. In a position paper on the issue, the Wildlife Society describes government-regulated trapping as "versatile, safe, effective and ecologically sound" and a primary tool of most wildlife management programs.
But Monica Engebretson, a senior program associate with Born Free USA, a group that generally opposes trapping, warned that the practice has complicated -- and sometimes unpredictable -- consequences.
"Anytime you kill a native species, it has an impact," she said. Other animal populations could be affected, she said, and more foxes could breed to fill the niche opened by those who are killed, leaving wildlife officials with the uncomfortable task of regular fox killing.
"I do recognize the dilemma," Foley said. "There's a balance all the time, and we're expected to maintain that balance." But when the very existence of a species is at stake, he said, "the balance has to be in favor of that species."
Simply amazing. I guess a bird's life is worth more than a foxes. Who knew?
eisey wrote: Demo beach will now be shut down by the fire department as it is not operating in accordance to the fire departments occupancy code.
It is frequently over crowded by Piping Plovers. This spring it was reported there was four nests being used for their mating usage. Could you imagine if it was 50 nests? Endangered my ass. Where did all these guys come from? Not 4 nests.
Those are Piping Plovers, in the summer they have one complete or sometimes incomplete dark band around their neck, when their winter plummage grows in the band dissappears.
Killdeer are very similiar looking to Piping Plovers, but they have 2 dark bands around their neck as opposed to the Piping Plovers one.
Sandpipers are solitary birds, you'll never see them in a flock like that.
Sanderlings are much smaller, and are a much lighter grey color, no bands.
I can understand taking reasonable non-lethal precautions to help these birds, regardless of my opinion on the ultimate futility of the efforts, but killing other animals is out of bounds as far as I'm concerned. They'll now need to trap and kill the all the racoons, rats and feral cats also. Oh, let's not forget all the deer that roam the area, as they are liable to step on an egg. Kill them all, but the end result will be the same. You can't perpetuate a species that nature did not endow with the necessary skills to survive.
If all women suddenly started leaving their babies on the LIE, we wouldn't be around long either.
Check out my weekly blog at Stripers247 View from the beach Drive your car like your life depends on it.
Here is the next step! How about anti aircraft guns to take out the Seagulls, they eat plover chicks too! I once saw the seagulls wipe out a whole family of ducklings at the sore Thumb, plover chicks are smaller then duck chicks! Seagull appetizers! LOL!
Human's feet wipe them out too. or are you inferring that humans someow are more important than plover birds?
Oh I forgot; we can humiliate humans, put humans in jail, or close the entire south shore beach area to keep them out and let them suffer, while these brainless birds can roam around the sandy beaches with their stupid families and stupid chicks.
Just Imagine, 20 birds can Take over the Entire South Shore onLI, and 50 birds can wipe out an enire NC beach community. Try telling this to anyone when you go on vacation abroad. I can't fish during prime time in spring because they close the entire beach to protect 20 stupid birds.
I am going to make it a daily ritual, and I hope more follow my lead: any egg I find it goes 5 feet below the sand. Why? If the chick survives by crawling up 4 feet, then it will be a smarter bird.
Save the Seals they make the Perfect Pets
This post edited by f150OffRoad 04:56 PM 02/01/2012
This is perhaps the single most one sided topic surf fishermen argue about and it is completely ASININE and that response above me is one of the most ignorant things I have heard in quite some time.
This bird has been wiped out due to the extreme HUMAN population growth. It is a threatened species BECAUSE of humans. There is no way a small bird whose existence relies solely on the beach will survive with humans destroying there habitat. There is no way ANY animal will survive with humans destroying their habitat. Take a close look at all the endangered species in the rainforests of the Amazon. Take a look at the Dodo bird. Humans were the sole reason for its extinction.
On the beach, a truck tire is absolutely no match for a cleverly camouflaged nest with chicks or eggs. Development of the beach for homes, golf courses and public bathing areas have destroyed most of these birds as well as vehicular beach access. It's not that they haven't been hunted by foxes or gulls or raptors throughout their history. They developed the instincts to evade these predators. Humans, as mostly selfish morons ( myself and a few others excluded) WANT WANT WANT, everything else be damned.
WAAAAHHH, I have to walk on the beach instead of drive. Yes, I do understand some are disabled. Well maybe we, as a species, should try not to kill everything in our path and make the world a better place by giving back and sacrificing a little bit. The numbers of these birds are actually coming back. No, the flocks of "plovers" that you see are sanderlings. The Plovers hang out in pairs until they have chicks, then the family will be seen together but usually not more than three or four chicks and the parents.
Did you know that when you destroy eggs, chicks or nests then the Plover will actually hang around even longer? This is to have more eggs and increase their own populations. Something humans have no problems doing. The Plover wouldn't be in this predicament if humans were responsible for themselves in the first place.
Let me give you a hypothetical example of endangerment/extinction.
There is a fish that many many humans like to fish for and eat. Those who don't eat them let them go with a small chance they will die. These fish, while grand and majestic creatures, eat pieces of wood and plastic when they are hungry. There is not a piece of this wood or plastic that actually resembles a true lifelike fish but they eat them anyway. Another way humans fish for them is to throw large nets in the water and chug around in big, loud diesel exhaust spewing boats that make great wakes on the surface. These, hypothetical fish get caught up in the easily seen nets (huge nets, big mass of other fish stuck in it) and proceed to their demise. Stupid fish right? They should deserve to be extinct shouldn't they? This, despite the fact that, before humans (hypothetically of course) set on a path to completely wipe them out because they were hungry and/or had fun killing them they were in absolute abundance. We should all say EFF these stupid fish. They deserve to die because they are so stupid. Yet, there seem to be quite a few humans who want this idiot of a fish to survive. The humans form committees, go to meetings, preach incessantly about the damages to this dumb fish's populations. Are they idiots? They must be because that fish is as smart as a box of rocks.
I know, without a doubt, that most of you could give a f*** about what I am saying and that will show your true intelligence.
I know, without a doubt, that some of you will comment on my diatribe with negative remarks. To you I say that if you have an intelligent remark or question then I will be happy to oblige you with an answer. To the others, you will not bait me into arguing against your nonsense.
This post edited by frankiesurf 06:38 PM 02/01/2012
To say this is a matter of natural selection is far from fact. The animal populations in that micro environment of Fire Island are heavily influenced by man's actions. Fox trapping and hunting is legal and going on, on the rest of Long Island currently (as this is the season). There are too many deer on Fire Island because of man. Feral cats don't belong anywhere in the environment and should all be shot. The fox population are often out of whack on Fire Island too, which is why they often succumb to the terrible death that mange and other diseases bring them. Trapping a few fox from the state park will have very little impact on the population on Fire Island.
To take the "natural selection" argument a step further. What the heck does everyone think is happening to humans where we use medicines to cure, or avoid, every allergy/disease/deformity that would otherwise kill us if we were living in nature. I was at a meeting yesterday where the topic of using peanut butter for rodent bait came up, and the liability of affecting people with peanut allergies that could come into contact with it was a real concern. . . Now really, if there was a issue where natural selection had been circumvented, shouldn't fostering humans that would otherwise die if exposed to peanut oil/bee stings/etc be one of those things that we say. . . "Eh, it's natural selection."
King Leonites wrote: This is SPARTA!
President, RAIBS Recreational Anglers against Internet BS
This post edited by Hunt n' Fish 07:06 PM 02/01/2012
Trapping a few fox from the state park will have very little impact on the population on Fire Island.
lol me to
also they can trap all the fox they want to, if they think the fox are harming the birds, i hate to see anything get wiped of the face of the earth..forever...... but why kill the fox ? no need for that