This has become a heated topic, especially here in Montreal, in particular with the Snowy Owls in St-Barthelemy, Quebec. There are many issues involved besides just etiquette. There is the birds' health to consider as well. I doubt very much that these photographers that use mice for baiting are actually catching the mice themselves. No!! They are buying them in stores. Which leaves this question to be answered. What type of bacteria or other organisms do these mice carry that the Owls do not have strong resistance to? This has always been an issue. Snowy Owls come from the far north. Eskimo country I call it. They are brought up mainly on lemmings, and they become immune to whatever organisms these rodents carry. The other issue is over-feeding. I have heard of instances where a single bird was fed about 30 mice in one day, and that's besides what it is going to hunt on its own. That's way too much. These birds can eat up to 15 rodents a day, but that should be the limit. 30 is ridiculously overdoing it, and could cause issues with the bird's health.
On the other side of things, I have heard of photographers using fake mice to bait Owls. This, although will not cause any health issues, except for causing the bird to exhaust needed energy it will use for hunting, it is far worse than baiting with real mice. I consider this teasing as well as baiting. If one thing could be said about baiting with live mice as compared to this, it's that at least the bird is being rewarded for "performing".
It is especially distressing that people are baiting (or tricking) an endangered species. I also find it morally wrong to buy a mouse at a store and have it killed in order to make a monetary gain.
Posted by David Bostedo on January 31, 2010 at 10:29 AM
Hal - I'd guess it's been a heated topic for years at this point. There have been several threads on here talking about baiiting... do a search on here for baiting and you should find lots of threads.
Posted by dan elster on January 31, 2010 at 10:47 AM
Hey Hal,
Yes, this topic has come up from time to time on this website and I have been one of the more outspoken about the problems with baiting. I also took a pretty good beating on another site when I expressed my views. It seems every winter, it becomes a bigger and bigger problem. I finally just shut up and swore I'd never comment on another snowy or hawk owl image again.
I think all of this baiting is selfish and shortsighted. The actions of a few are reflecting badly upon all of us - as you are seeing up in your neck of the woods. You must be furious! The fact that federal/local conservation groups are now going to step in is long overdue, but it's also unfair that guys like you(non baiters) who are going to also pay the price with the loss of access to good owl sites.
I can only imagine how angry I'd be if this were going on in my part of the world.
Posted by Jim DeWitt on January 31, 2010 at 6:20 PM
Some of us have engaged in long, passionate discussions about this issue. See, e.g., this thread. I share the views of Dan Elster and Richard Ditch (among many others). And I regard it as particularly reprehensible when dealing with threatened and endangered species, or birds at the top of the food chain, whose bodies accumulate the garbage that's injected into and fed to store-bought mice. Obviously, others disagree.
I don't know Canadian or provincial law, but in the states it can be a crime to bait wild birds. Getting the authorities to actually do something can be a challenge, but that's a different issue...
Posted by David Graham on January 31, 2010 at 9:43 PM
Reply to Hal Trachtenberg's post:
-------------------------
Hal said:
"...I doubt...these photographers that use mice for baiting are actually
catching the mice themselves. No!! They are buying them in stores. ...What
type of bacteria or other organisms do these mice carry that the Owls do
not have strong resistance to?
The other issue is over-feeding. I have heard of instances where a single
bird was fed about 30 mice in one day, and that's besides what it is going
to hunt on its own. That's way too much. These birds can eat up to 15
rodents a day, but that should be the limit. 30 is ridiculously overdoing
it, and could cause issues with the bird's health.
On the other side of things, I have heard of photographers using fake mice
to bait Owls. This, although will not cause any health issues, except for
causing the bird to exhaust needed energy it will use for hunting"
------------------------------------------
In response to Hal's comments and assertions, I'm putting on my hats of
falconer, raptor rehabilitator, veterinarian and pathologist (Diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Pathologists) with a particular interest in raptor nutrition to offer the following observations and comments.
The question re: feeding "pet store" or "laboratory" mice instead of wild-
caught mice is a reasonable one, and one that was of concern in the early
60s when a number of veterinarians began treating and rehabilitaing injured
diurnal (mostly gunshot or trap-injured) and nocturnal raptors - including
snowy owls and hawk owls- (mostly vehicle impact injuries, but including
some debilitated by naturally acquired parasitic diseases). The food items
offered the raptors recuperating from their injuries/surgery/treatment
included domestically bred mice and rats, day-old cockerels from commercial
poultry operations, captive-bred coturnix quail, pheasants, and 20- to 30-
day old domestic fowl raised commercially compounded gamebird or poultry grower rations.
During the 30 years that I was involved in raptor treatment and
rehabilitation I performed detailed post-mortem examinations (necropsies
/"autopsies")on those birds which died during the course of their treatment
by myself and by other veterinarians and rehabilitators. In no instance
was there evidence of illness or death resulting from any infectious or
parasitic disease that could have conceivably been contracted from feeding,
during their enforced captivity, on "domestically bred" prey/food items.
Indeed, such food items have been and continue to be the food fed to the
hundreds of raptors, including gyrfalcons from the arctic, that were and are being bred in captivity.
To make the claim that "...these birds can eat up to 15 rodents a day, but
that should be the limit. 30 is ridiculously overdoing it, and could cause
issues with the bird's health" without specifying the particular "rodents"
consumed is meaningless. Small, juvenile, still-growing mice can be
purchased from the "pet store" and fifteen or twenty such small mice could
be the mass/caloric equivalent of the five or six full-grown "old
breeder"mice or meadow voles that would likely satisfy a fit snowy owl, as
would the entire carcass of a wood rat or partial carcass of a cottontail
rabbit (a lagomorph, not a rodent).
Overfeeding and attendant pathologic obesity can, indeed, be hazards of
careless feeding practices used with captive raptors and must be guarded
against. The raptor captive during the treatment phase of its possible
rehabilitaion to the wild state is unable to exercise sufficiently to
utilize and "burn-off" the caloric intake that it would routinely consume
in the wild state. A snowy owl, for example, that could not only survive
but maintain top athletic condition on five to seven meadow voles daily
during a zero to minus-10F cold spell would gain excessive internal fat if
offered that same amount while a caged captive. Could a wild snowy owl
consume more than that? Absolutely. It might catch a cottontail rabbit
and gorge on the carcass... and then not attempt to feed again for several
days until its hunger/appetite returned. The raptors are not the wanton
killing machines that a mink, weasel, skunk, or even a Norway rat can be,
killing more than they need or are capable of eating. The falconer may be
able (with considerable luck) to take the legal bag of quarry with his
hawk, falcon, or owl, but only by preventing his feathered hunting partner
from "feeding up" on the taken prey before the day's hunt is over. Were it
to get a full feed on the first rabbit or pheasant it caught, it would have
not the slightest inclination to fly after any other prey that day, or
perhaps for several days, and in the wild, would have no motivation to take
more prey either.
The idea that a wild snowy, or great grey, or great-horned, much less a
little hawk owl would consume thirty full-grown laboratory or "pet store"
mice is, indeed, ludicrous. Smaller mice? Sure! How many could be consumed
would depend on "how small"!
As to the practice of "baiting" owls or other raptors with artificial, furred inedible baits?? I concur with Hal, but his implication that causing depletion of a bird's energy reserves is some how not a significant "health issue" is unfortunate. Energy depletion through unrewarded exertion is the most dangerous and profound hazard imposed upon birds baited with inedible lures. A bird not consuming enough calories to hunt and to maintain its body temperature will rapidly utilize all of its depot (storage) fat reserves and then immediately begin to catabolyze (break down)its own muscle tissue. A captured live owl that is "thin" - in other words its carina (breast bone) is sharply prominant because of severe muscle atrophy on both sides of it- has almost completely depleted its catabolyzable muscle mass and is at risk of imminent death from starvation. In cold weather a bird that has depleted its fat stores can regress from apparently full-breasted, well-muscled condition to fatal/terminal muscle and energy depletion in as short a time as 36 to 72 hours, depending on the temperature gradient against which it is attempting to maintain its body temperature.
Especially in the winter - when adequate caloric intake is in crucial and
delicate balance with calories expended maintaining body temperature as
well as with calories expended without caloric reward in unsuccessful
flights at prey - I find baiting with inedible baits to be a truly inhumane, thoughtless, and dangerous practice that should be statutorily proscribed. I've read the caution to wannabe wildlife photographers that "not more than one or two flights at a furred, inedible lure be permitted" to avoid such problems. But when an owl is so-lured by several photographers in the same day, It could well be a dead owl before the next dawn.
So, what about live-mouse luring? Go for it. Encourage it.
It is a predictable and documented phenomenon that the diurnal and nocturnal raptors, as well as most other most other native avian species, experience approximately 70% mortality in their first year of life. The odds are that a significant number of the raptors that come south for the winter - and the majority of the snowy owls, subarctic great-horned owls, hawk owls, gyrfalcons, and goshawks that get down to the latitudes of the southern regions of the Provinces and the northern United States ARE juveniles - would likely die before their return north. A few of these ostensibly doomed youngsters will survive the winter specifically due to the gratuitous additions to their diet that they receive from live-luring birders and photographers! There should be no worries that they'll become "perch potatoes"; they'll simply be more likely to survive the winter and return to the taiga and tundra whence they came to breed anew.
With best regards and, I hope, more than a little food for thought,
I remain
Yours truly,
David Graham,
Wildlife Rehabilitator (long before licensure...Ret.), Master
Posted by Peter Conway on February 3, 2010 at 9:04 AM
David,
Thank you for a response the addresses that issue with facts and reason.
I think there are valid reasons to question the practice of baiting that revolve around changing the nature of the relationship between man and wild birds/animals, but I acknowledge that much of that is predicated on a personal preference of what that relationship should be.
Like many other similar issues it becomes ever more problematic as the sheer number of people involved grows and grows.
My personal thoughts on the matter is this. If one is photographing a baited bird then one is in reality participating in the baiting even if one is not personally feeding the bird. I often see photographers who claim not to bait but they are right there photographing along with people who are baiting the bird. To me it's the same thing. People who are truly against baiting, these are the people who will have nothing to do with it. They walk away when they see it happening. Otherwise it's just a convenient way to try and keep ones hands appearing clean while participating and benefitting from the practice. I am only speaking in general here.
Discussion
7 repliesOn the other side of things, I have heard of photographers using fake mice to bait Owls. This, although will not cause any health issues, except for causing the bird to exhaust needed energy it will use for hunting, it is far worse than baiting with real mice. I consider this teasing as well as baiting. If one thing could be said about baiting with live mice as compared to this, it's that at least the bird is being rewarded for "performing".
Yes, this topic has come up from time to time on this website and I have been one of the more outspoken about the problems with baiting. I also took a pretty good beating on another site when I expressed my views. It seems every winter, it becomes a bigger and bigger problem. I finally just shut up and swore I'd never comment on another snowy or hawk owl image again.
I think all of this baiting is selfish and shortsighted. The actions of a few are reflecting badly upon all of us - as you are seeing up in your neck of the woods. You must be furious! The fact that federal/local conservation groups are now going to step in is long overdue, but it's also unfair that guys like you(non baiters) who are going to also pay the price with the loss of access to good owl sites.
I can only imagine how angry I'd be if this were going on in my part of the world.
I don't know Canadian or provincial law, but in the states it can be a crime to bait wild birds. Getting the authorities to actually do something can be a challenge, but that's a different issue...
-------------------------
Hal said:
"...I doubt...these photographers that use mice for baiting are actually
catching the mice themselves. No!! They are buying them in stores. ...What
type of bacteria or other organisms do these mice carry that the Owls do
not have strong resistance to?
The other issue is over-feeding. I have heard of instances where a single
bird was fed about 30 mice in one day, and that's besides what it is going
to hunt on its own. That's way too much. These birds can eat up to 15
rodents a day, but that should be the limit. 30 is ridiculously overdoing
it, and could cause issues with the bird's health.
On the other side of things, I have heard of photographers using fake mice
to bait Owls. This, although will not cause any health issues, except for
causing the bird to exhaust needed energy it will use for hunting"
------------------------------------------
In response to Hal's comments and assertions, I'm putting on my hats of
falconer, raptor rehabilitator, veterinarian and pathologist (Diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Pathologists) with a particular interest in raptor nutrition to offer the following observations and comments.
The question re: feeding "pet store" or "laboratory" mice instead of wild-
caught mice is a reasonable one, and one that was of concern in the early
60s when a number of veterinarians began treating and rehabilitaing injured
diurnal (mostly gunshot or trap-injured) and nocturnal raptors - including
snowy owls and hawk owls- (mostly vehicle impact injuries, but including
some debilitated by naturally acquired parasitic diseases). The food items
offered the raptors recuperating from their injuries/surgery/treatment
included domestically bred mice and rats, day-old cockerels from commercial
poultry operations, captive-bred coturnix quail, pheasants, and 20- to 30-
day old domestic fowl raised commercially compounded gamebird or poultry grower rations.
During the 30 years that I was involved in raptor treatment and
rehabilitation I performed detailed post-mortem examinations (necropsies
/"autopsies")on those birds which died during the course of their treatment
by myself and by other veterinarians and rehabilitators. In no instance
was there evidence of illness or death resulting from any infectious or
parasitic disease that could have conceivably been contracted from feeding,
during their enforced captivity, on "domestically bred" prey/food items.
Indeed, such food items have been and continue to be the food fed to the
hundreds of raptors, including gyrfalcons from the arctic, that were and are being bred in captivity.
To make the claim that "...these birds can eat up to 15 rodents a day, but
that should be the limit. 30 is ridiculously overdoing it, and could cause
issues with the bird's health" without specifying the particular "rodents"
consumed is meaningless. Small, juvenile, still-growing mice can be
purchased from the "pet store" and fifteen or twenty such small mice could
be the mass/caloric equivalent of the five or six full-grown "old
breeder"mice or meadow voles that would likely satisfy a fit snowy owl, as
would the entire carcass of a wood rat or partial carcass of a cottontail
rabbit (a lagomorph, not a rodent).
Overfeeding and attendant pathologic obesity can, indeed, be hazards of
careless feeding practices used with captive raptors and must be guarded
against. The raptor captive during the treatment phase of its possible
rehabilitaion to the wild state is unable to exercise sufficiently to
utilize and "burn-off" the caloric intake that it would routinely consume
in the wild state. A snowy owl, for example, that could not only survive
but maintain top athletic condition on five to seven meadow voles daily
during a zero to minus-10F cold spell would gain excessive internal fat if
offered that same amount while a caged captive. Could a wild snowy owl
consume more than that? Absolutely. It might catch a cottontail rabbit
and gorge on the carcass... and then not attempt to feed again for several
days until its hunger/appetite returned. The raptors are not the wanton
killing machines that a mink, weasel, skunk, or even a Norway rat can be,
killing more than they need or are capable of eating. The falconer may be
able (with considerable luck) to take the legal bag of quarry with his
hawk, falcon, or owl, but only by preventing his feathered hunting partner
from "feeding up" on the taken prey before the day's hunt is over. Were it
to get a full feed on the first rabbit or pheasant it caught, it would have
not the slightest inclination to fly after any other prey that day, or
perhaps for several days, and in the wild, would have no motivation to take
more prey either.
The idea that a wild snowy, or great grey, or great-horned, much less a
little hawk owl would consume thirty full-grown laboratory or "pet store"
mice is, indeed, ludicrous. Smaller mice? Sure! How many could be consumed
would depend on "how small"!
As to the practice of "baiting" owls or other raptors with artificial, furred inedible baits?? I concur with Hal, but his implication that causing depletion of a bird's energy reserves is some how not a significant "health issue" is unfortunate. Energy depletion through unrewarded exertion is the most dangerous and profound hazard imposed upon birds baited with inedible lures. A bird not consuming enough calories to hunt and to maintain its body temperature will rapidly utilize all of its depot (storage) fat reserves and then immediately begin to catabolyze (break down)its own muscle tissue. A captured live owl that is "thin" - in other words its carina (breast bone) is sharply prominant because of severe muscle atrophy on both sides of it- has almost completely depleted its catabolyzable muscle mass and is at risk of imminent death from starvation. In cold weather a bird that has depleted its fat stores can regress from apparently full-breasted, well-muscled condition to fatal/terminal muscle and energy depletion in as short a time as 36 to 72 hours, depending on the temperature gradient against which it is attempting to maintain its body temperature.
Especially in the winter - when adequate caloric intake is in crucial and
delicate balance with calories expended maintaining body temperature as
well as with calories expended without caloric reward in unsuccessful
flights at prey - I find baiting with inedible baits to be a truly inhumane, thoughtless, and dangerous practice that should be statutorily proscribed. I've read the caution to wannabe wildlife photographers that "not more than one or two flights at a furred, inedible lure be permitted" to avoid such problems. But when an owl is so-lured by several photographers in the same day, It could well be a dead owl before the next dawn.
So, what about live-mouse luring? Go for it. Encourage it.
It is a predictable and documented phenomenon that the diurnal and nocturnal raptors, as well as most other most other native avian species, experience approximately 70% mortality in their first year of life. The odds are that a significant number of the raptors that come south for the winter - and the majority of the snowy owls, subarctic great-horned owls, hawk owls, gyrfalcons, and goshawks that get down to the latitudes of the southern regions of the Provinces and the northern United States ARE juveniles - would likely die before their return north. A few of these ostensibly doomed youngsters will survive the winter specifically due to the gratuitous additions to their diet that they receive from live-luring birders and photographers! There should be no worries that they'll become "perch potatoes"; they'll simply be more likely to survive the winter and return to the taiga and tundra whence they came to breed anew.
With best regards and, I hope, more than a little food for thought,
I remain
Yours truly,
David Graham,
Wildlife Rehabilitator (long before licensure...Ret.), Master
Falconer(Ret.), Veterinary Pathologist (Ret.), Wildlife Disease Researcher
(Ret.), and Landscape/Wildlife Photographer
Estelline, South Dakota
Thank you for a response the addresses that issue with facts and reason.
I think there are valid reasons to question the practice of baiting that revolve around changing the nature of the relationship between man and wild birds/animals, but I acknowledge that much of that is predicated on a personal preference of what that relationship should be.
Like many other similar issues it becomes ever more problematic as the sheer number of people involved grows and grows.