[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TAS BirdBoard ] [ FAQ ]
Posted by Michael Moore on 18:10:33 04/16/10
In Reply to: Re: Red-footed Booby? posted by Bill Pranty
Hi,
I think Bill is exactly right that the ABA rules are a little vague in this situation and everyone will have to interpret them according to their own conscience.
Facts to consider are that the bird has been free flying for nearly six months, is no longer fed by the staff at the station and has been absent (and presumably flown somewhere else) for long periods. Boobies are creatures of habit and returning to a reliable food source or favored roosting location for long periods is certainly consistent with the behavior of wild birds. Whether the fact that the bird learned about that food source while in captivity several months ago still constitutes being under the influence of captivity is a tough judgement call.
I can see both sides of this debate, but lean toward the bird being countable for the three reasons cited above. I think the bird is under the influence of having been fed by people (as are feeder birds) but is no longer influenced by having been restrained in a cage at this location, which I think is the intent of the ABA wording. However, as Bill emphasized each person will have to interpret the rules for themselves.
Mike Moore
Newark, DE
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TAS BirdBoard ] [ FAQ ]