I wild note that a permit is not required to capture an injured or orphaned wild bird and bring it promptly to a licensed wildlife rehabilitator. No Good Samaritan clause is in play here. Also, a wild bird that cannot fly IS considered badly injured, since it cannot survive the winter in that condition. The challenge here is that it is easier said than done to capture an injured bird which has any flight capability at all. But, having witnessed (through volunteering) the successful rehabilitation of many migratory birds by those who have received the training and have the experience to do so, I would hope that someone will attempt to capture it and bring it into rehabilitation. In my opinion, wIldlife has enough challenges with loss of habitat, avoiding car/window collisions and dog/cat attacks, as well as other human-caused threats, for us to do nothing. I would hope that someone who is able and has some basic equipment (e.g. Long handled net, towels, cat carrier etc.) will be able to capture the bird and bring it to a licensed rehabilitator. I read elsewhere that Jayne Neville, an experienced migratory bird rehabilitator, has offered to take the bird in for rehabilitation. Carole Donagher Farmington Sent from my iPad > On Oct 1, 2015, at 2:11 PM, Chris Elphick via CTBirds <ctbirds@lists.ctbirding.org> wrote: > > Personally I would not be in favour of catching the bird - it does not appear badly injured (it appears to be feeding well, can move its wing more or less normally, and can certainly fly short distances). Even if that were not the case I think that in all but exceptional circumstances it is better to let nature take its course however sad that may seem (note that it is normal for most young birds to die in their first year). That said I'm probably just a cold hearted cynic (ok, the " probably" is misleading). > > But, if someone does plan to do something they should make certain that they are acting in accordance with state and federal laws, which both require permits for captures of (most) wild birds. There is a Good Samaritan clause for certain cases involving injuries, but it is perhaps arguable that this case fits the bill. > > Chris > > Chris Elphick > Storrs, CT > @ssts > >> On Oct 1, 2015, at 13:47, Tricia Reid reidtri@gmail.com [nosbird] <nosbird@yahoogroups.com> wrote: >> >> As the person who made the initial sighting, if a decision is made by those more experienced than I to attempt to capture the bird, I would be more than willing to put on my wellies and tromp through the swamp. I can be contacted off list at reidtri@gmail.com. >> Tricia Reid, Mansfield Center >> >> __._,_.___ >> Posted by: Tricia Reid <reidtri@gmail.com> >> Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (1) >> Web address: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nosbird >> - >> NOS Website: http://nosbird.org >> VISIT YOUR GROUP New Members 1 >> • Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use >> . >> >> >> __,_._,___ > _______________________________________________ > This list is provided by the Connecticut Ornithological Association (COA) for the discussion of birds and birding in Connecticut. > For subscription information visit http://lists.ctbirding.org/mailman/listinfo/ctbirds_lists.ctbirding.org

Why not ensure the well-being of this bird? It is obviously injured, and apparently cannot fly. With cold temperatures arriving soon, doing nothing will likely lead to its (premature) death. There may be "weak evidence" that this species's population is in decline, yet science indicates that its habitat is threatened by wetland destruction and increasing sea levels, which humankind is mostly responsible for. So, should we take responsibility for the consequences of human impacts on gallinule habitat? If yes, then save this bird. Bluebirds are not especially endangered, but that does not keep me from building, installing and monitoring bluebird nest boxes to protect their populations from the continuing assault of habitat loss and invasive species infestation (i.e. starlings and house sparrows.) Purple gallinules deserve no less from us. Scientists provide us valuable insights into nature. Their disposition toward numbers, rather than heart, should be respected. Yet, our hearts lend us to believe that good conservation advances in baby steps, such as mending this bird and returning it to its normal range, and then, of course, working to protect its habitat. On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 9:21 PM, Chris Elphick via CTBirds < ctbirds@lists.ctbirding.org> wrote: > Hi Lisa, > I completely agree that there is much to do in order to address the many > harms we've inflicted on wildlife. I've spent my entire career trying to > do that. As I indicated in my original email, there are certainly some > cases where capture might be appropriate. If it were a whooping crane or a > black robin, I might feel very differently (though the legal issues there > would be an order of magnitude more complex!). > > But, this is a species with a large geographic range, a global population > that is likely in the 100,000s, not known to be declining rangewide (though > there is weak evidence that hints at a possible decline in the US - but > it's very weak evidence), and for which habitat loss is unlikely to be a > major issue. For all these reasons it is ranked as "Least Concern" in > systematic assessments of the status of the world's bird populations. It > is also an individual that is far outside its normal range and so unlikely > to contribute to the population's ability to thrive, and that under normal > circumstances would have had a high chance of dying anyway (because most > young birds do ... in fact in the species' I study even adults have a about > 40-50% chance of dying every year ... not because of anything that humans > do, but because that is typical in most birds). > > I do totally understand your concerns, and think that they are critically > important things to worry about. I just don't see any way that capturing > this bird will address any of them. The solutions to most bird declines > center around protecting habitat, consuming less, driving less, and so on. > There are sometimes very good reasons for rehabilitating injured birds, but > conservation is rarely one of them. > > I hope this helps explain my thinking. And if you continue to disagree, > that's just fine too :). > > Best wishes, > Chris > Chris Elphick @ssts > Storrs, CT > elphick@sbcglobal.net > From: Lisa White <madalynwhite@aol.com> > To: Aidan Kiley <eezambo@gmail.com> > Cc: elphick@sbcglobal.net; Tricia Reid <reidtri@gmail.com>; > ctbirds@lists.ctbirding.org > Sent: Thursday, October 1, 2015 3:01 PM > Subject: Re: [CT Birds] [NOSbird] Purple gallinule > > I respectfully disagree. In a perfect world, I think nature taking its > course would be the right thing. But we don't live in a perfect world. We > live in a world where bird populations are dramatically declining due to > our poor stewardship -- habitat loss, global warming, etc. So I think that > if a bird is truly injured (and perhaps this bird is not), we should always > help it out if we can. > > Lisa White > > > _______________________________________________ > This list is provided by the Connecticut Ornithological Association (COA) > for the discussion of birds and birding in Connecticut. > For subscription information visit > http://lists.ctbirding.org/mailman/listinfo/ctbirds_lists.ctbirding.org >

Hi Tom, You are absolutely right that conservation should not be restricted to endangered species, and I'm a strong advocate for the mantra of "keeping common birds common".  The bluebird analogy is a poor one however.  There is good reason to believe that nest sites for bluebirds have declined due to a reduction of snags and natural tree cavities in the landscape.  Building nest boxes directly addresses that issue, and so it is not unreasonable to think that it might help bluebird populations.  It is very hard to see, however, how capturing this bird will help protect wetlands or reverse sea level rise.  And science tells us very clearly that prolonging the life of one individual in a population of this size will have no appreciable effect on that population's ability to persist.  As I said previously the solution to that problem is protecting habitat and for every one of us (me included, perhaps especially) to get much more serious about reducing consumption.  I don't disagree that there are other reasons to capture this bird, but it is very clear that conservation is not one of them.  Moreover, the evidence that it cannot fly, or that it won't survive is circumstantial at best.  I've seen it fly short distances, wing stretch, etc.  It clearly has some injury, but it can certainly use the wing and it is not all that unusual to see birds in a similar state.  There is certainly a risk it might die, but for an out of range bird with winter coming, that would be true even if it were not injured.  Close to half the birds currently in CT will die in the next year - that is normal (and would be the case even if humans were not around).  Given this bird's mobility, my guess (having caught 1000s of birds of 100s of species over the years) is that it could be hard to catch, and there is a risk of doing more damage by trying to capture such a mobile bird (though spotlighting or a walk-in rail trap could certainly work, especially if done by someone with appropriate experience).  Maybe that risk is worth it, maybe not.  For these reasons, I reiterate, I personally would not attempt to capture it.  Of course, you and others are welcome to disagree. I promised Roy last night that I would not prolong this debate on the list and I doubt that I have much more to contribute at this point.  If you or others would like to continue the discussion off-line, I'd be happy to do that.  Best, Chris Chris Elphick @ssts Storrs, CT elphick@sbcglobal.net