Jim, thank you for the input. I appreciate it.
I, personally, would not have minded hunting some 300 yrs ago, when there
were huge birch forests as Bob mentioned, and life was diverse and
abundant, and one had to "live off the land". It was a different lifestyle
really. If one hunted for food, one was prepared to become food as well.
There's a certain fairness in Nature at its purest.

However, in this day and age  wild water fowl are too few and far between.
I, personally, would not hunt these birds because they are just too
gorgeous, incredibly beautiful creatures; not for food, never for pleasure!

I understand that the hunters conserve areas and such, and I appreciate
that; However, it would really fantastic to conserve the areas just to
protect these diverse, wonderful, migrating waterbirds, shoot the with
cameras instead of hunt them with guns? If only for their absolutely
precious wild beauty?
Sometimes, I wonder if we should leave a barren and empty planet full of
ugly buildings for our next generations, perhaps we owe them a better
legacy?  Just a thought!!

respectfully and sincerely
Pow


On 26 March 2014 16:15, Jim Kimmel <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I have been a birder since childhood learning to appreciate bird watching
> from my mother and grandmother.
> But I also am a hunter and had many memorable and remarkable days afield.
> For instance I will never forget the beauty of the sight at Pamlico Point
> in North Carolina and admiring a flock of teal buzzing our decoys  sounding
> almost like a jet plane ant the sun reflecting off their beautiful breast
> feathers.
> Do any of you eat store-bought chicken or turkey?
> I have eaten the meat or used the feathers of any ducks,doves or turkeys
> that  I have ever killed.
> And I have thanked the bird or nature (God) when harvesting my kill
> I am not removed from the gutting and cleaning of the meat as many
> civilized citizens are today
> Ducks unlimited and the national wild turkey federation and money from
> hunting license sales all provide habitat resources support.
> Perhaps it would have been more humane for the parks to have allowed
> hunting on these frozen lakes?
> Respectfully,
> Jim Kimmel
> Butler county Ohio
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> > On Mar 26, 2014, at 1:22 PM, Pow Joshi <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you Bob Hinkle, and others or the response. I see that all of you
> are
> > as much concerned, so I put together a list of possible solutions. This
> is
> > with some web-research and some input from friends who are
> > birders/eco-people from Virginia, and Europe:
> >
> > A simple observation after scouring the web for options:People are more
> > resourceful when they want to kill the birds than conserve:
> >
> http://www.ducks.org/hunting/hunting-tips/fight-the-ice-on-your-next-duck-hunt
> > .. More on this toward the end of the email, because I believe one could
> > use  their methods for conservation.
> >
> > *Energy expending methods:*
> >
> > 1. Heating. This may be eco-friendly if its combined with a renewable
> > energy source like solar or wind.
> >
> > Advantages: simple, effective, non-interactive
> >
> > Disadvantages:  good for smaller areas but not larger, energy consuming,
> > eco-friendly options like wind vanes may be hazardous for birds.  Heating
> > may also create some issues for bird trapping and electrocution. However,
> > if the heating coils were well insulated and below the surface that's
> > accessible to diving birds.  It would still be for small areas.
> >
> > *@Cynthia Norris: *Windmills (fans) should not be too difficult,
> especially
> > bigger the rotors, the slower are the movements you need. In addition,
> one
> > could decorate them with bright colors or flashing lights. Disadvantage:
> > One might scare the birds away with the decorations. ???
> >
> > 2.     Pressure based- creating flowing motion in the water: similar
> > advantages and disadvantages as above.
> >
> > *Chemical methods:*
> >
> > 3.     Anti-freeze compounds added to the water: Advantage- effective and
> > biodegradable especially if using peptides. Disadvantages- expensive, and
> > can get diluted if using on a large water body.  Using antifreeze
> compounds
> > like glycol would be toxic and is not advisable.  Glycerol would,
> perhaps,
> > be okay... however one would needs lots of it, and I am sure that is not
> a
> > good idea, since it may affect the ecosystem and the birds.
>

______________________________________________________________________

Ohio-birds mailing list, a service of the Ohio Ornithological Society.
Please consider joining our Society, at www.ohiobirds.org/site/membership.php.
Our thanks to Miami University for hosting this mailing list.


You can join or leave the list, or change your options, at:
listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=OHIO-BIRDS
Send questions or comments about the list to: [log in to unmask]