On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 19:55:03 -0000, "Tumbleweed"
wrote:


"Colonel Bloomer" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 17:20:45 +0000 (UTC), "W K"
wrote:


"Colonel Bloomer" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 11:59:32 +0000 (UTC), "W K"
wrote:


"Colonel Bloomer" wrote in message
.. .


Shame the RSPB are not inclined to spend some of our millions and do
some serious research into this decline

They do.

Really! where?

You may have seen, in this thread, mention of a "Kate" researching this.

She is having her research funded in part by the RSPB.
http://www.birdfood.co.uk/cj/project_hssparrow.htm

Not really an all guns blazing contribution is it, doubtful it even
reaches four figures in total. I'd have thought given the fact they
rake in £50million PA and spend £7million PA on advertising, they
could afford to at least show a real interest in finding out why the
situation is so serious and not only for sparrows.

Just out of interest, why is it 'serious'?

Because it is according to the stats and certainly in my part of south
london we are noticing serious declines in sparrows, five, ten years
ago there were hundreds I'm sure, now we are lucky to see a handful
each day, as for thrush, blackbird etc none for ages.

I see many birds now that I
never saw as a kid, including (perhaps not coincidentally) many species of
raptors and numerous magpies. If a part of the decline is due to that, and
another part due to us not having sparrows living in our house roofs, and a
further part due to farmers not feeding them by scattering grain all over
the fields when harvesting, then you could reasonably argue that the sparrow
pop of (say) 1900-1950 was artificially boosted over what it would be in an
environment with no human interference, since there would be far fewer
artificial (i.e. houses) nesting sites , much less food, and many more
predators, in such an environment. Maybe the 'natural' sparrow pop is
closer to what it is now, than it was 50 years ago?


You make a very good point. This is why it would be nice to see some
of our RSPB funding spent on serious research so that we may have a
definitive answer.

I feel this is a bit more than the natural yoyo cycle of populations.

Tim Lamb writes

Improved hygiene requirements for the storage of food on farms both for
animal and human consumption has eliminated this food source.

Remember the seriously improved hygiene AND TIDINESS is imposed on farms
by supermarket diktat. Obviously the less grain lying about the fewer
birds and the fewer small rodents.

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
DEMON address no longer in use.

Tim Lamb writes

Improved hygiene requirements for the storage of food on farms both for
animal and human consumption has eliminated this food source.

Remember the seriously improved hygiene AND TIDINESS is imposed on farms
by supermarket diktat. Obviously the less grain lying about the fewer
birds and the fewer small rodents.

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
DEMON address no longer in use.

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 23:15:18 -0000, "Christina Websell"
christina.websell@zoomdotcodotuk wrote:


W K wrote in message
...

"Colonel Bloomer" wrote in message
...

doubtful it even
reaches four figures in total.

Funding a PhD student costs a lot more than that.

Particularly if she has 600 nest boxes up.
Bloomer for the killfile I fear.
Kate's work has really been very impressive. She appealed on local radio at
first for people who had sparrows and would be prepared to let her study
them. Then the preliminary surveys of the sites offered, and then the boxes
installed and visited and examined weekly. Adult roosts identified,
mistnetted, and birds rung and recorded late in the evening.
Birds nesting in my eaves observed using an oscilloscope. Nestboxes checked
for nest material, then for eggs, then chicks rung, and weighed and also
measured each week for leg length, wing length and feather growth. Faecal
samples taken and analysed, both from the chicks and from droppings of the
adults, scraped from my windowsills.
Vegetation in gardens regularly examined for invertebrates, samples taken
from hedges, trees, bushes and plants. Newsletters produced and distributed
to participants and regular phone and email contact for matters of interest
relating to sparrows and all this over three years. And more I don't know
about, no doubt.

I would suggest that this would take plenty of funding and I say well done
all who funded it. RSPB/BTO etc.
And well done to Kate who cares about sparrow's decline.

Tina

You would appear to be missing the point. Yes, kate is doing a grand
job, no one claimed otherwise. The RSPB however are offering lip
service to a very serious problem, this should be a national,
scientific, peer reviewed study on a grand scale, we've certainly paid
for it an without it the results are meaningless. this SHOULD have
been done five, ten years ago. Lets hope it's not too late, certainly
if we waited for the RSPB to dip into their pockets it will be.

The RSPB have managed to raise over £5 million pounds to fund a ruddy
duck cull that no body wants except a few twitchers obsessed with
their own self importance. Surely they could put as much effort into
raising the same kind of over funding for the decline in sparrows etc?

Regardless it comes from RSPB coffers or tax payer, the RSPB can do it
and yet have done nothing!

In the meantime whilst we all wait around for them to do something,
because we expect them to do something and that's what they are there
for, the declines are looking pretty serious and some are talking of
extinctions!

You might be gullible enough to consider kate is the savior of the
sparrow and nothing else needs doing. I'm not.

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 23:15:18 -0000, "Christina Websell"
christina.websell@zoomdotcodotuk wrote:


W K wrote in message
...

"Colonel Bloomer" wrote in message
...

doubtful it even
reaches four figures in total.

Funding a PhD student costs a lot more than that.

Particularly if she has 600 nest boxes up.
Bloomer for the killfile I fear.
Kate's work has really been very impressive. She appealed on local radio at
first for people who had sparrows and would be prepared to let her study
them. Then the preliminary surveys of the sites offered, and then the boxes
installed and visited and examined weekly. Adult roosts identified,
mistnetted, and birds rung and recorded late in the evening.
Birds nesting in my eaves observed using an oscilloscope. Nestboxes checked
for nest material, then for eggs, then chicks rung, and weighed and also
measured each week for leg length, wing length and feather growth. Faecal
samples taken and analysed, both from the chicks and from droppings of the
adults, scraped from my windowsills.
Vegetation in gardens regularly examined for invertebrates, samples taken
from hedges, trees, bushes and plants. Newsletters produced and distributed
to participants and regular phone and email contact for matters of interest
relating to sparrows and all this over three years. And more I don't know
about, no doubt.

I would suggest that this would take plenty of funding and I say well done
all who funded it. RSPB/BTO etc.
And well done to Kate who cares about sparrow's decline.

Tina

You would appear to be missing the point. Yes, kate is doing a grand
job, no one claimed otherwise. The RSPB however are offering lip
service to a very serious problem, this should be a national,
scientific, peer reviewed study on a grand scale, we've certainly paid
for it an without it the results are meaningless. this SHOULD have
been done five, ten years ago. Lets hope it's not too late, certainly
if we waited for the RSPB to dip into their pockets it will be.

The RSPB have managed to raise over £5 million pounds to fund a ruddy
duck cull that no body wants except a few twitchers obsessed with
their own self importance. Surely they could put as much effort into
raising the same kind of over funding for the decline in sparrows etc?

Regardless it comes from RSPB coffers or tax payer, the RSPB can do it
and yet have done nothing!

In the meantime whilst we all wait around for them to do something,
because we expect them to do something and that's what they are there
for, the declines are looking pretty serious and some are talking of
extinctions!

You might be gullible enough to consider kate is the savior of the
sparrow and nothing else needs doing. I'm not.

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 19:55:03 -0000, "Tumbleweed"
wrote:


"Colonel Bloomer" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 17:20:45 +0000 (UTC), "W K"
wrote:


"Colonel Bloomer" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 11:59:32 +0000 (UTC), "W K"
wrote:


"Colonel Bloomer" wrote in message
.. .


Shame the RSPB are not inclined to spend some of our millions and do
some serious research into this decline

They do.

Really! where?

You may have seen, in this thread, mention of a "Kate" researching this.

She is having her research funded in part by the RSPB.
http://www.birdfood.co.uk/cj/project_hssparrow.htm

Not really an all guns blazing contribution is it, doubtful it even
reaches four figures in total. I'd have thought given the fact they
rake in £50million PA and spend £7million PA on advertising, they
could afford to at least show a real interest in finding out why the
situation is so serious and not only for sparrows.

Just out of interest, why is it 'serious'?

Because it is according to the stats and certainly in my part of south
london we are noticing serious declines in sparrows, five, ten years
ago there were hundreds I'm sure, now we are lucky to see a handful
each day, as for thrush, blackbird etc none for ages.

I see many birds now that I
never saw as a kid, including (perhaps not coincidentally) many species of
raptors and numerous magpies. If a part of the decline is due to that, and
another part due to us not having sparrows living in our house roofs, and a
further part due to farmers not feeding them by scattering grain all over
the fields when harvesting, then you could reasonably argue that the sparrow
pop of (say) 1900-1950 was artificially boosted over what it would be in an
environment with no human interference, since there would be far fewer
artificial (i.e. houses) nesting sites , much less food, and many more
predators, in such an environment. Maybe the 'natural' sparrow pop is
closer to what it is now, than it was 50 years ago?


You make a very good point. This is why it would be nice to see some
of our RSPB funding spent on serious research so that we may have a
definitive answer.

I feel this is a bit more than the natural yoyo cycle of populations.

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 22:56:50 -0000, "Christina Websell"
christina.websell@zoomdotcodotuk wrote:


W K wrote in message
...

"Colonel Bloomer" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 11:59:32 +0000 (UTC), "W K"
wrote:


"Colonel Bloomer" wrote in message
.. .


Shame the RSPB are not inclined to spend some of our millions and do
some serious research into this decline

They do.

Really! where?

You may have seen, in this thread, mention of a "Kate" researching this.

She is having her research funded in part by the RSPB.
http://www.birdfood.co.uk/cj/project_hssparrow.htm



Indeed, Kate Vincent is/was having her study part funded by BTO/RSPB and
others. After a month of two of arriving in a beat up car, she came in an
RSPB van, with a helper for the hardest summer work from the RSPB.
Dr Peach from RSPB came and clambered into my loft via the bathroom door the
first year to see the sparrows under the eaves, and advise Kate how to go
about studying them.
So, yes, the RSPB are spending money on this..
And as I mentioned just a few days ago, see the house sparrows here studied
for 3 years by Kate, filmed by the RSPB. (soon)

Get the video (or it might be on TV, .not sure yet.)

Have you even read the page at that url?

It's now 2004 you know!

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 22:56:50 -0000, "Christina Websell"
christina.websell@zoomdotcodotuk wrote:


W K wrote in message
...

"Colonel Bloomer" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 11:59:32 +0000 (UTC), "W K"
wrote:


"Colonel Bloomer" wrote in message
.. .


Shame the RSPB are not inclined to spend some of our millions and do
some serious research into this decline

They do.

Really! where?

You may have seen, in this thread, mention of a "Kate" researching this.

She is having her research funded in part by the RSPB.
http://www.birdfood.co.uk/cj/project_hssparrow.htm



Indeed, Kate Vincent is/was having her study part funded by BTO/RSPB and
others. After a month of two of arriving in a beat up car, she came in an
RSPB van, with a helper for the hardest summer work from the RSPB.
Dr Peach from RSPB came and clambered into my loft via the bathroom door the
first year to see the sparrows under the eaves, and advise Kate how to go
about studying them.
So, yes, the RSPB are spending money on this..
And as I mentioned just a few days ago, see the house sparrows here studied
for 3 years by Kate, filmed by the RSPB. (soon)

Get the video (or it might be on TV, .not sure yet.)

Have you even read the page at that url?

It's now 2004 you know!

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 19:55:03 -0000, "Tumbleweed"
wrote:


"Colonel Bloomer" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 17:20:45 +0000 (UTC), "W K"
wrote:


"Colonel Bloomer" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 11:59:32 +0000 (UTC), "W K"
wrote:


"Colonel Bloomer" wrote in message
.. .


Shame the RSPB are not inclined to spend some of our millions and do
some serious research into this decline

They do.

Really! where?

You may have seen, in this thread, mention of a "Kate" researching this.

She is having her research funded in part by the RSPB.
http://www.birdfood.co.uk/cj/project_hssparrow.htm

Not really an all guns blazing contribution is it, doubtful it even
reaches four figures in total. I'd have thought given the fact they
rake in £50million PA and spend £7million PA on advertising, they
could afford to at least show a real interest in finding out why the
situation is so serious and not only for sparrows.

Just out of interest, why is it 'serious'?

Because it is according to the stats and certainly in my part of south
london we are noticing serious declines in sparrows, five, ten years
ago there were hundreds I'm sure, now we are lucky to see a handful
each day, as for thrush, blackbird etc none for ages.

I see many birds now that I
never saw as a kid, including (perhaps not coincidentally) many species of
raptors and numerous magpies. If a part of the decline is due to that, and
another part due to us not having sparrows living in our house roofs, and a
further part due to farmers not feeding them by scattering grain all over
the fields when harvesting, then you could reasonably argue that the sparrow
pop of (say) 1900-1950 was artificially boosted over what it would be in an
environment with no human interference, since there would be far fewer
artificial (i.e. houses) nesting sites , much less food, and many more
predators, in such an environment. Maybe the 'natural' sparrow pop is
closer to what it is now, than it was 50 years ago?


You make a very good point. This is why it would be nice to see some
of our RSPB funding spent on serious research so that we may have a
definitive answer.

I feel this is a bit more than the natural yoyo cycle of populations.

Tim Lamb writes

Improved hygiene requirements for the storage of food on farms both for
animal and human consumption has eliminated this food source.

Remember the seriously improved hygiene AND TIDINESS is imposed on farms
by supermarket diktat. Obviously the less grain lying about the fewer
birds and the fewer small rodents.

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
DEMON address no longer in use.

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 23:15:18 -0000, "Christina Websell"
christina.websell@zoomdotcodotuk wrote:


W K wrote in message
...

"Colonel Bloomer" wrote in message
...

doubtful it even
reaches four figures in total.

Funding a PhD student costs a lot more than that.

Particularly if she has 600 nest boxes up.
Bloomer for the killfile I fear.
Kate's work has really been very impressive. She appealed on local radio at
first for people who had sparrows and would be prepared to let her study
them. Then the preliminary surveys of the sites offered, and then the boxes
installed and visited and examined weekly. Adult roosts identified,
mistnetted, and birds rung and recorded late in the evening.
Birds nesting in my eaves observed using an oscilloscope. Nestboxes checked
for nest material, then for eggs, then chicks rung, and weighed and also
measured each week for leg length, wing length and feather growth. Faecal
samples taken and analysed, both from the chicks and from droppings of the
adults, scraped from my windowsills.
Vegetation in gardens regularly examined for invertebrates, samples taken
from hedges, trees, bushes and plants. Newsletters produced and distributed
to participants and regular phone and email contact for matters of interest
relating to sparrows and all this over three years. And more I don't know
about, no doubt.

I would suggest that this would take plenty of funding and I say well done
all who funded it. RSPB/BTO etc.
And well done to Kate who cares about sparrow's decline.

Tina

You would appear to be missing the point. Yes, kate is doing a grand
job, no one claimed otherwise. The RSPB however are offering lip
service to a very serious problem, this should be a national,
scientific, peer reviewed study on a grand scale, we've certainly paid
for it an without it the results are meaningless. this SHOULD have
been done five, ten years ago. Lets hope it's not too late, certainly
if we waited for the RSPB to dip into their pockets it will be.

The RSPB have managed to raise over £5 million pounds to fund a ruddy
duck cull that no body wants except a few twitchers obsessed with
their own self importance. Surely they could put as much effort into
raising the same kind of over funding for the decline in sparrows etc?

Regardless it comes from RSPB coffers or tax payer, the RSPB can do it
and yet have done nothing!

In the meantime whilst we all wait around for them to do something,
because we expect them to do something and that's what they are there
for, the declines are looking pretty serious and some are talking of
extinctions!

You might be gullible enough to consider kate is the savior of the
sparrow and nothing else needs doing. I'm not.

Tim Lamb wrote in
:

I believe we are moving toward a revised population balance
in many species that formerly relied heavily on human
carelessness for their food and nest sites.

At my home in Glenlivet, below Ben Rinnes, back in the 70's I
used to see the stacks of oats covered with Black Game when
there was a good covering of snow. (One year we got 26 inches of
snow and it stayed for weeks). There were always coveys of hill
grey partridges pecking around where the cattle were fed on oats
on the sheaf (unthreshed) over winter.

Then my neighbours gradually put up buildings and kept their
cattle inside over winter and they hired a combine rather than
using a binder to harvest the oats. Result? The partridges
disappeared and the grouse declined. Most of these farms, and
the lower parts of the grouse moors, have now been planted up
for forestry to grow trees nobody wants.

I have too many sparrows here (40 miles north of Inverness), but
then my buildings are dilapidated and the free range hens are on
a self feeder.

Derry

Tim Lamb wrote in
:

I believe we are moving toward a revised population balance
in many species that formerly relied heavily on human
carelessness for their food and nest sites.

At my home in Glenlivet, below Ben Rinnes, back in the 70's I
used to see the stacks of oats covered with Black Game when
there was a good covering of snow. (One year we got 26 inches of
snow and it stayed for weeks). There were always coveys of hill
grey partridges pecking around where the cattle were fed on oats
on the sheaf (unthreshed) over winter.

Then my neighbours gradually put up buildings and kept their
cattle inside over winter and they hired a combine rather than
using a binder to harvest the oats. Result? The partridges
disappeared and the grouse declined. Most of these farms, and
the lower parts of the grouse moors, have now been planted up
for forestry to grow trees nobody wants.

I have too many sparrows here (40 miles north of Inverness), but
then my buildings are dilapidated and the free range hens are on
a self feeder.

Derry

Tim Lamb wrote in
:

I believe we are moving toward a revised population balance
in many species that formerly relied heavily on human
carelessness for their food and nest sites.

At my home in Glenlivet, below Ben Rinnes, back in the 70's I
used to see the stacks of oats covered with Black Game when
there was a good covering of snow. (One year we got 26 inches of
snow and it stayed for weeks). There were always coveys of hill
grey partridges pecking around where the cattle were fed on oats
on the sheaf (unthreshed) over winter.

Then my neighbours gradually put up buildings and kept their
cattle inside over winter and they hired a combine rather than
using a binder to harvest the oats. Result? The partridges
disappeared and the grouse declined. Most of these farms, and
the lower parts of the grouse moors, have now been planted up
for forestry to grow trees nobody wants.

I have too many sparrows here (40 miles north of Inverness), but
then my buildings are dilapidated and the free range hens are on
a self feeder.

Derry

Tim Lamb wrote in
:

I believe we are moving toward a revised population balance
in many species that formerly relied heavily on human
carelessness for their food and nest sites.

At my home in Glenlivet, below Ben Rinnes, back in the 70's I
used to see the stacks of oats covered with Black Game when
there was a good covering of snow. (One year we got 26 inches of
snow and it stayed for weeks). There were always coveys of hill
grey partridges pecking around where the cattle were fed on oats
on the sheaf (unthreshed) over winter.

Then my neighbours gradually put up buildings and kept their
cattle inside over winter and they hired a combine rather than
using a binder to harvest the oats. Result? The partridges
disappeared and the grouse declined. Most of these farms, and
the lower parts of the grouse moors, have now been planted up
for forestry to grow trees nobody wants.

I have too many sparrows here (40 miles north of Inverness), but
then my buildings are dilapidated and the free range hens are on
a self feeder.

Derry