Came across this cool photo of a very spangled plover.
While I had a good idea what it all was, there was unfortunately a lot of ignorance calling it abuse and such. Thankfully there were some well informed responses,and I thought I’d share them with you.
From Mark Medved
Question. How many bands are needed for adequate research? This Piping plover seems to have at least five bands. And why is one not in the form of a ring? Photo by Linda Schwegman
And the most helpful answer from the comments:
“Former” Piping Plover biologist here!
The metal band on the upper portion of her left leg is the standard USGS band that every banded bird in the US receives.
The orange “flag” band on the upper portion of her right leg is an auxiliary band that indicates to the observer that she is part of the Great Lakes Population. This is very important because this particular population is federally endangered and there are only around 90 breeding pairs in the entire Great Lakes.
The three other bands on the lower portion of her legs indicate to the observer exactly which individual this is. Each Great Lakes Piping Plover [ideally] has a unique band combination to distinguish that individual to an observer. There are over 2.8 million possible adult combinations. When we know who is who, we get to know so much more about how they live and how we can help them
Here is a nice poster showing how those flags are used to get info to the correct researcher.
By this method, birds can be identified and tracked without the need for difficult and stressful recapture.
With so few of these birds remaining, there is no way anyone would be allowed to hurt these birds. Bird legs don’t grow like ours. There is not much beyond bone, tendons, and blood vessels in the part of the leg where the bands are attached, so they won’t outgrow them. Each species gets a specific size to ensure a safe fit. They are designed to not cause discomfort or to get snagged on things, and they are very lightweight and make us less than 1% of the bird’s body weight.
For a full writeup of band info for this population of Oliver’s in the Great Lakes region, check out the study’s official website, and you can also donate or even participate in helping save the plovers.
In 1990, the population was down to about 26 birds. Programs like this are the only reason we can tell if preservation methods are working or not, especially with birds like these that migrate great distances.
Scientists. Scientists are to say it’s not having an impact on selection.
I can guarantee you they’ve asked that already, and researched the topic extensively.
Look, scientists are (semi) normal people with a wickedly intense interest. If someone is willing to devote 5+ years learning about how to study bird behavior to get their doctorate, do you think they’re not going to be concerned about the bird’s well being? When the entire point of the research and study of endangered species is conservation?
lol, awesome. Thanks for sharing. I approach most things skeptically. At first glance, indeed, this seems excessive. And I had a stray thought about what the potential long term consequences of this approach might be. Nice to know others thought about this too! And sure, we can give benefit of the doubt to researchers, but they can also too be blinded by focus. I’d still argue that this is still too invasive. I can appreciate the solution for what it is and what it enables. I just wish we could solve tracking in such a way where there is no need to do a study to make sure we aren’t fucking things up.
It is good to ask questions, especially if the concern is the animals’ welfare!
Depending on what one considers bird banding, especially in a formal or scientific context, there is extensive use cases we can look at. Some credit James Audubon as the first scientific bander, but others in Europe were starting to also band birds for research in the 1890s. If we look at just people who decided to tag birds for personal reasons, we have records of Romans labeling birds with metal tags around 250BC so the bander could be notified if the bird was found. So saying a lot of time and attention has been put into banding is an understatement.
Banding is a nearly free, durable, and reliable means of gaining countless data point on birds. Before banding, we couldn’t tell how old birds were, how far did they fly, do they migrate, who do they mate with, and many more things. With advanced tools we have today, we can track things like diseases and recovery programs or get a better idea of ecosystem health as a whole. The data bands let us collect is priceless to humans, and honestly for all the animals being banded. It lets us know things like what species need the most protection. Even after the birds die, those bands exist and can pass along information afterwards to prevent the loss of more animals.
Studies aren’t really prone to much outside influence. Not anyone can band birds and people can’t just band whatever they please. In the US, the USGS approves all banding projects. Researchers need to go to them with a formal plan stating how many of what kind of bird they want to band in what specific location and that needs to be approved. Industry sadly does not show much interest in the outcomes of animals, so their influence is not really a factor, and (not to be a smartass) animals don’t pay and animal research generates no money, because, again, business does not care what happens to wild animals. Anyone doing this work is doing it purely out of interest and love of animals. If banding had negative effects, the first people to know that would be the banders, and they would want to change it. Even banding materials have been investigated to determine metals and plastics safe for the birds.
Banding is a really cool topic and one regular people can be involved in with tons of rich history. If you have any more questions, feel free to ask and I will give you serious answers without talking down to you. This is still such a crucial element of saving our wildlife, I’d like anyone to understand all the benefits.
Here are some articles about the history and benefits of banding I grabbed quick, but again, any more questions or concerns, feel free to ask!
USGS: Why We Band Birds
USGS Bird Banding Lab: The U.S. Bird Banding Laboratory: an overview of its history and current practices
Raptor Resource Project: Banding Birds: A Brief History
Uh, yeah, actually.
I have been around long enough now to realize that scientists are human and some.of them care a lot more about publishing papers regardless of their veracity to further their career or taking funding from sources that cause a conflict of intrrest in their research.
🤷♂️
You definitely should not trust “scientists” - we have a whole reproducibility problem because of this thinking.
Much of that issue is one of published papers being used as a metric of success and career building. Plagiarism, paper mills, and publishers that will let things through for money are absolutely problems in scientific journals. A lot of these papers, even after being disproven, still get cited in even further research, perpetuating issues, and we end up with things like with Andrew Wakefield’s anti-vax research still being presented as fact by some today, over 20 years later. When people make careers based on the number of times they are published and not necessarily the quality of their work, people are going to do shady things. This should not give us distrust in all research. There are multitudes more legitimate papers than false ones. And sewing distrust in research hurts funding for further research, some of which is what would be doing peer reviews, making the problem even worse.
To the topic at hand, banding has led to many insights and discoveries with minimal impact on animals. In just the US and Canada, over 77 million birds have been banded, with over 5 million re-encounters reported. Over 1.2 million birds, again, just in US/Canada alone, are banded each year. Countless discoveries and insights have resulted from all this work, using just tiny strips of metal and people reporting sightings. If there is a better system, we have not found it yet.
We shouldn’t ever blindly trust any individual, but in this case, it’s something hardly any person that works with birds will deny the benefit to birds and mankind. The verification is there, and has been for a very long time now.
No, your perspective is how we get climate science denial and vaccine skepticism and removal of fluoride from drinking water.
People with no subject matter experience or practical knowledge of what “Science” actually is.
I said trust scientists. Not a scientist. Scientists. Plural. Trust the literature reviews and meta analyses of multiple studies. Trust the scientists that have amassed DECADES of knowledge of an incredibly small and specialized area of interest.
Instead, we get schmucks all up and down shitting on whatever study they want. The number of times I’ve seen papers dismissed simply on the population size alone for being “poor statistical power” without any discussion on effective and whether the study was actually appropriately powered or not.
I bet you don’t even really know what the drivers are for the reproducibility crisis and where real problems are.
Ad hominem. I am out.