Rfalconcam Forum

http://www.8newsnow.com/story/22892334/feds-say-falcons-recovered-no-more-chick-rescues (http://www.8newsnow.com/story/22892334/feds-say-falcons-recovered-no-more-chick-rescues)

                           :(

How sad, just let them plop into the water and watch them drown?? I could never. I wouldn't want to be on that watch or any bridge watch!

 :thumbsdown:

well if she falls in a river I hope no one rescues her cause its just a part of life

bet you money its people who are more of a threat to the shore birds than any of those falcons chicks could be.

I will never believe a watcher, or a rescuer, or a rehabber will stand by and let a peregrine chick drown without trying to rescue it. A silly regulation will not stop them from doing what is right. They rescue anything they see, be it a peregrine, a pigeon, a sparrow, .....Good Heavens, I have even known them to rescue human beings and God knows there is no shortage of those critters.

If there's a will, there's a way to get to them and I would find a way. Arrest me! Pfft, worth it!

"We see the loss of a chick by natural causes as an educational moment as this happens in nature all the time," said Strassburger.

So perhaps this ruling will apply only to natural bridges?  :rolleyes:

Good question!

Glen Stewart post via email I received today:

Helping Bridge Falcons Get a Start in life
by stewartfalcon
 

http://news.yahoo.com/feds-falcons-recovered-no-more-chick-rescues-133858209.html#! (http://news.yahoo.com/feds-falcons-recovered-no-more-chick-rescues-133858209.html#!)

This story ran yesterday in papers across the country and Canada. After a couple of years of trying to get good cooperation from state and federal wildlife authorities in Sacramento I was left with the one recourse of going to the press.

The feds were a little demeaning in their characterization of fuzzy chicks that are cute but that nest failure is a natural part of life. We know for a fact that some structures we put up are particularly bad for fledging falcons. They don't slip and fall--they fly well and land poorly EVERY time they fledge. The problem on the underside of a bridge is that they do not get a second chance. We know that to be the case. I am willing to spend precious program money on the capture, rearing, and release, post-release monitoring (for eight weeks with help from volunteers and collaborators) to give these young a chance at a successful start in life.

The US Fish and Wildlife Service has said no to a permit for that humanitarian act. The interesting thing is that the peregrine falcon is a state of California fully protected bird--only 13 birds are listed. Why is the federal government dictating management strategy to the State? If the State agrees with this management strategy why are developers and construction workers made to accommodate this fully protected species and climbers made to avoid routes with nesting peregrines while bridge fledglings are squandered?

The State and Feds can't have it both ways. They have an inconsistent management strategy that at times favors peregrines to the great inconvenience of many, and at times completely ignores the well-being of peregrines causing their death.

Our elected officials are very good at asking pointed questions of agency officials. I suggest you ask yours to inquire about the topsy turvy management approach to peregrine falcons--a fully protected species just taken off the California list of endangered species in 2009. Why, we should ask, do they prefer to see them fledge into the sea when I would happily move them to a safe release site.