I am re-posting the comment below for those who dont read all the timeline replies. Jono Irvine is one of the lead researchers on our EagleCAM team. Even though he is now based on the UK, his research work with the project continues. This pair has nested every year since 2009 and in that period have successfully fledged 1,2,1,2 young in 2009-2012, followed by 2 years of failure in 2013- 2014. This gives an average figure of 1 young fledged per breeding attempt. They laid 2 eggs in each year, giving a mortality rate of 50 percent, “mortality” meaning eggs that failed to hatch or young that died in the nest. Compared to other studies conducted over several years on breeding attempts by WBSEs around Australia, this pair, despite two consecutive years of failure, still maintain a normal “success” rate. In Debus’ paper of 2008, the pairs studied in NSW successfully raised 0.8 young per breeding attempt. In Dennis’ paper of 2011, just taking the figures for nests with “low” disturbance (discounting the less successful nests with medium and high disturbance), the success rate was 1.14 young per breeding attempt in South Australia from a total of 30 attempts recorded. In Corbett’s paper of 2011, a 48 percent mortality rate was recorded in the Northern Territory from a total of 128 breeding attempts recorded. Thus it can clearly be seen that egg failure and nestling mortality is a fairly common phenomenon in WBSEs across a wide geographical area with, on average, one egg failing or one hatchling dying per nesting attempt. There is no reason to suspect that this pair should be any different. It is just the way things are with these birds. This has probably been going on for thousands of years and probably will continue to go on for thousands of years to come; it is just the simple facts of life. When viewing wild animals on this type of live cam, one has to be prepared for the apparent cruelty of nature as well as its beauty. The intervention policy of the joint organisations concerned has been clearly stated under the live feed on the internet for all to read. Like it or leave it. The cameras were not placed there for our entertainment; they are there primarily as a research tool to better understand the needs of the species. The live feed on the internet is a by-product of this, not its raison dêtre. The nest is not in a zoo and there should not be any obligation on anyone to take sick birds into “care”. How many wildlife documentaries have been filmed where an animal is suffering through the simple trials of life? If the cameramen and camerawomen all put down their cameras to continually help out in some way, we would be blessed with a plethora of animals in care, a paucity of documentaries, and neither very wild because of that. Everyone does care about these birds deeply and passionately and the decisions are not taken lightly and/or heartlessly.
Posted on: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 04:32:24 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015