A Crow Killer and his accomplice

TODAY
Rethink shooting of crows (http://www.todayonline.com/Voices/EDC090727-0000026/Rethink-shooting-of-crows)
05:55 AM Jul 27, 2009
Letter from Bhaskaran Kunju

I WRITE with regard to the culling of crows as carried out by the National Environment Agency (NEA). I live in an HDB estate in the northern part of Singapore where the culling of crows is carried out about once a month. The amount of noise the gunshots generate is enough to startle anyone, especially since no warning or notice is given beforehand.

There are a number of schools in the vicinity. Culling has even been carried out directly in front of a primary school, while school children were on their way home.

While the shooter may be a marksman, I find it discomforting that the NEA has allowed firearms to be used in such locations.

The culling process was started in the 1980s to reduce the crow population. I strongly believe that the numbers have dropped significantly given the culling process and our rapid urbanisation.

It is time the NEA reconsider the status of crows as pests. Apart from the population numbers, which the NEA should make public to justify its actions, the other contributing factors for the culling have been the supposed noise from the birds and their being scavengers. Crows, however, are not the only scavengers. Any bird that becomes accustomed to living in densely-populated areas with few natural preys resorts to scavenging.

It is common to see sparrows and mynahs eating the leftovers in eateries and leaving behind their droppings. Is this not also a nuisance and unhygienic?

In addition, crows do not breed as much as has been mistakenly repeated. They brood once a year and only an average of three eggs are hatched successfully. In comparison, pigeons brood as many as eight times a year.

We should also not be paranoid about the possible spread of bird flu, which is more likely to be spread by migratory birds. Pigeons are known to spread diseases as well.

I am not asking the NEA to switch its culling focus to other intrusive birds but pointing out the flawed rationality in its programme. If the issue is about aggressiveness or incessant noise, then the NEA should only act on such instances of disturbances.

I do not wish to launch into a plea of humanity against the killing of animals but it is indeed inhumane to be shooting birds when alternative methods are available to deal with them. One method is for people to be more responsible in the disposal of trash and in the clearing of leftover food in eateries.

The real cause for the population explosion of birds, if any, are these food sources. Another alternative method is to install plastic owls to scare the crows away.

If the NEA is pressing on with its culling programme and the culling has not reduced the bird population, then obviously there is a fundamental flaw in its methodology.

I am also appalled that an annual crow- hunting competition is held by the Singapore Gun Club and endorsed by the NEA. This seriously goes against the very values of the NEA as an environmental-protection agency.

To support this urgent call to use alternative humane methods of reducing the crow population, write to TODAY at voices@mediacorp.com.sg with your name, address and contact number

CrowBox (Unleashed) Exploring synanthropy one species at a time

http://www.crowboxunleashed.com/

Right now the crowbox site is in Beta as we look for people to turn our raw files into a fully-functional How-To. Please email me if you want to participate!

---

This site began with a 2008 crowbox experiment, which turned nature’s pests into practical players in society by autonomously training crows to conduct mutually beneficial behaviours with humans.

I did the initial experiment in 2008 in an attempt to teach crows how to live more purposefully for man, so that man would not annihilate the species.

At the time, I taught some captive crows, remotely, through basic operant conditioning, to feed coins into a vending machine so they could get peanuts. The idea is that a group of wild crows would teach other crows, including their offspring, to find the coins and put them into the vending machine to get peanuts. For this experiment, I received coverage all over the globe – from the New York Times, TED.com, Gizmodo and even Oprah covered the experiment!

But now – it’s your turn. The crowbox experiment is open source and this site exists to let the whole world know how to make a crow machine and then share the results.

Download the files, post some questions in the forums, add a page or three to the wiki. The open source crowbox experiment is still in beta, but together we can build it into something great.

Not true that crows attack at random

TODAY Online Only - Not true that crows attack at random
07:10 AM Jul 29, 2009
Letter from Bhaskaran Kunju

I refer to "Sparrows, pigeons can be a nuisance, too" (July 28), a reply to my letter "Rethink shooting of crows" (July 27).

The writer mentions that "Crows do attack people when it is their breeding season" unlike sparrows or pigeons. This is a fallacious statement. Firstly crows do not attack people at random when it is breeding season, they only do so if they believe they are under threat while roosting. This is not a unique trait to crows and can be seen in sparrows and pigeons as well. In fact the oriole, which is another common species in Singapore, is just as aggressive if not more ,and is a threat to other birds as well.

I think there is a need for us to break out of this misinformed mentality of crows as devious and dangerous cretins. Apart from that I await a reply from the National Enviroment Agency over the other issues I have raised.

Why not consider alternate and humane options first?

TODAY Online Only - Crows: Why not consider alternate and humane options first?
11:10 AM Jul 28, 2009
Letter from Jeslyn Long Jielin

I refer to "Rethink shooting of crows" (July 27) and agree with many points made by Bhaskaran Kunju.

Firstly, the noise from the guns is extremely disturbing. In my opinion, the sound of gunshots, coupled with the shrieking of the wounded birds, is infinitely more unpleasant than any possible disturbance created by the crows each day.

Secondly, I see no reason to single out crows for persecution as opposed to other bird species that are commonly found in the urban environment. The public impression of these racuous black birds may be that of vermin and disease carriers, yet there is no scientific evidence to prove that their presence is significantly detrimental to human health. Certainly, there is no evidence to indicate that they are more likely to spread disease than any other species of bird.

Thirdly, I agree that crows are attracted to an area as long as there are available food sources. Even if the crows are removed, another kind of animal or birds be it pigeons, mynahs or rodents would move in.The solution in this case would be to eliminate food sources through more secure and efficient disposal of trash.

Lastly, I would like to say that indiscriminate killing of animals /birds is not something that befits a civilized society. In this day and age, surely there are more sophisticated methods of dealing with human-animal/birds conflicts? I have heard of companies that make use of a variety of creative solutions, such as netting, visual and auditory deterrents in dealing with unwanted avian guests.

In any case, the relevant authorities should consider alternate options. Lethal control of problem animals/birds should be a last resort, not the first.

Rethink shooting of crows

TODAY

Rethink shooting of crows
05:55 AM Jul 27, 2009
Letter from Bhaskaran Kunju

I WRITE with regard to the culling of crows as carried out by the National Environment Agency (NEA). I live in an HDB estate in the northern part of Singapore where the culling of crows is carried out about once a month. The amount of noise the gunshots generate is enough to startle anyone, especially since no warning or notice is given beforehand.

There are a number of schools in the vicinity. Culling has even been carried out directly in front of a primary school, while school children were on their way home.

While the shooter may be a marksman, I find it discomforting that the NEA has allowed firearms to be used in such locations.

The culling process was started in the 1980s to reduce the crow population. I strongly believe that the numbers have dropped significantly given the culling process and our rapid urbanisation.

It is time the NEA reconsider the status of crows as pests. Apart from the population numbers, which the NEA should make public to justify its actions, the other contributing factors for the culling have been the supposed noise from the birds and their being scavengers. Crows, however, are not the only scavengers. Any bird that becomes accustomed to living in densely-populated areas with few natural preys resorts to scavenging.

It is common to see sparrows and mynahs eating the leftovers in eateries and leaving behind their droppings. Is this not also a nuisance and unhygienic?

In addition, crows do not breed as much as has been mistakenly repeated. They brood once a year and only an average of three eggs are hatched successfully. In comparison, pigeons brood as many as eight times a year.

We should also not be paranoid about the possible spread of bird flu, which is more likely to be spread by migratory birds. Pigeons are known to spread diseases as well.

I am not asking the NEA to switch its culling focus to other intrusive birds but pointing out the flawed rationality in its programme. If the issue is about aggressiveness or incessant noise, then the NEA should only act on such instances of disturbances.

I do not wish to launch into a plea of humanity against the killing of animals but it is indeed inhumane to be shooting birds when alternative methods are available to deal with them. One method is for people to be more responsible in the disposal of trash and in the clearing of leftover food in eateries.

The real cause for the population explosion of birds, if any, are these food sources. Another alternative method is to install plastic owls to scare the crows away.

If the NEA is pressing on with its culling programme and the culling has not reduced the bird population, then obviously there is a fundamental flaw in its methodology.

I am also appalled that an annual crow- hunting competition is held by the Singapore Gun Club and endorsed by the NEA. This seriously goes against the very values of the NEA as an environmental-protection agency.

To support this urgent call to use alternative humane methods of reducing the crow population, write to TODAY at voices@mediacorp.com.sg with your name, address and contact number

Read
http://www.picasuk.com/alternatives_to_lethal_bird_control.html