Last Two Days and Barrow's Goldeneye Controversy
Now that’s the kind of snowstorm I’ve been craving! Although this morning was spent clearing the driveway, porch, feeders, etc, the next few days will provide excellent cross-country skiing and snowshoeing – finally.
During the storm yesterday, I opened the store for the first half of the days and there were certainly more customers at the store’s feeders than in the store! 18 American Goldfinches (our flock has varied from 6 to 27 this winter, although they have been present just about daily), a single White-throated Sparrow (we’ve had 1-3 all winter, below our usually sparrow selection here), and our first Hairy Woodpecker in a month or two (this summer was the first time we had these at all at our feeders here, as our store is in a much more developed area – Hairy’s need a fair amount of mature woods in the area).
The feeders at the house were less active, but by the time I got home, the blizzard conditions were beginning, so the feeder-watching was less than productive.
The other day, I posted a request for comments to be submitted to Maine’s Department of Inland Fish and Game regarding the latest round of proposed additions to the state’s threatened and endangered list. One particular species, that I am admittedly quite fond of, that is generating a bit of controversy is the Barrow’s Goldeneye.
Some hunter’s groups are opposing the addition of this species due to the potential for accidental shooting when hunting the similar Common Goldeneye, as described in a recent article in the Bangor Daily News.
Yesterday, there were two relevant posts on the Maine-birds listserve. One was a posting suggesting birders submit comments. The next posting was from State Rep, and birder, Bob Duchesne. And finally, here was my response that I posted today (However, I think my reference to a “precipitous decline” in Barrow’s populations should probably be retracted as we don’t have a lot of data on this species, so my interpretation was based mostly on anecdotal data and conversations – and not referenced to any peer review study; for those of you who are submitting comments - which I urge you to do!)