Lesser Yellowlegs (Tringa flavipes)
The Lesser Yellowlegs (Tringa flavipes), first discovered on Aug 26, was still feeding at the same irrigation pond this morning, Sep 11. As noted in my previous post, this pond is actually located in the municipality of Tazacorte, but for birding purposes is usually included under the label "Las Martelas" (Los Llanos de Aridane).
Many irrigation ponds in the area have been completely abandoned in recent decades, but others, like this one, are still in use and can be found with varying water-levels.
Ponds of this type are often full of emerging dragonflies, frogs, tadpoles, larvae, insects, and sometimes fish. In short, there is no shortage of food for migratory wading birds.
Lesser Yellowlegs (Tringa flavipes) with a small fish.
The Lesser Yellowlegs (Tringa flavipes) habitually forages in shallow water or on land, favouring freshwater ponds and reservoirs when away from its breeding grounds, and also brackish pools and lagoons.
It consumes insects and invertebrates of all kinds, crustaceans, snails, worms, and even small fish. In the photo above, and in the enlargement below, the bird can be seen about to devour a tiny fish which it captured in the shallows and carried to the water´s edge.
Lesser Yellowlegs (Tringa flavipes) about to consume a small fish.
Given the abundant food supply, it is perhaps no wonder that this migratory shorebird has decided to make such a lengthy stopover!
In addition, the pond is completely out of bounds to the general public, meaning that disturbance is minimal. All photographs were taken through the wire-mesh fence.
Lesser Yellowlegs (Tringa flavipes)
Other individuals of this species are less fortunate on their annual migration across the Caribbean. Quoting from an article found on the Cornell Lab Birds of the World site:
"As recently as 1991, however, several thousand Lesser Yellowlegs were still being shot annually for sport in the Caribbean, and this shooting continues. Recent (2012) estimates suggest that 7,000-15,000 individuals may be shot each fall in migration at wetlands constructed by shooting clubs on Barbados; perhaps half that many may be shot each fall on Guadeloupe and Martinique, with a potentially significant take also on wintering grounds in Suriname and Guyana. See details in Clay et al. (2012). Clearly this is a significant threat to the species and requires continued monitoring".
Lesser Yellowlegs (Tringa flavipes)
Oh no, please...not "continued monitoring"! That sounds like a terrible threat to the hunting community: the shooters must be literally trembling in their rubber boots at the prospect of continued monitoring of their activities.
Why not propose the banning of hunting altogether, or is that too confrontational for the spineless authors(s) of this study? As always, for these conservation clerks, the get-out-of-jail card is the argument that mere estimates of negative shorebird population-trends are insufficient for robust analysis: these pedantic accountants need precise figures for their tables, bar graphs and pie charts.
And of course, this is a never-ending cycle. By the time results get published in the corresponding journal, we are back to square one again, because the validity of the data has expired by then, and a plea for the gathering of new information can be voiced. Vacancies for conservation clerks become available at regular intervals.
In the meantime, throughout the Caribbean, several thousand birds are needlessly blown out of the sky every year...
Lesser Yellowlegs (Tringa flavipes)
Here is a fine sample of the authors´stunted writing style:
"However, lack of
contemporary information on the harvest, including species harvested and level of harvest has
precluded scientific assessments of the impact of the harvest on continental and local
populations and has generally resulted in a polarized debate about the future of the hunt
based on perceptions instead of facts".
No, never trust mere "perceptions", even if you are standing knee-deep in dead birds. And, incidentally, who authorised the use of the hideous term "harvest" in this context, as if the subject were apple-picking?
If you have a strong enough stomach, click on the link below. But, be warned: you won´t find anything relating to real conservation here, only kowtowing to vested interests by a group of paid conservation accountants.
I particularly recommend the section entitled ¨Limiting the harvest¨ which includes such gems as:
"These events demonstrated willingness of the hunters to consider justifiable changes to their
shooting practices" such as (try not to laugh):
"1. Limiting the gross annual harvest on the island to 22,500 shorebirds;
2. Allowing no more than 2,500 shorebirds to be shot per swamp each year;
3. Shooting no more than 300 birds in a given day per swamp;
4. Limiting the Lesser Yellowlegs harvest per swamp to 1,250 birds annually; and
5. Restricting the shooting of American Golden Plovers to 100 birds in any swamp on any
given day.
6. No use of speakers to lure shorebirds;
7. No use of shotgun extension magazines; and
8. Restricting the number of hunters such that no more than thee hunters present arms in
each swamp at one time".
Are these authors serious?
