Discuss: The Fall of a Sparrow

A pest is usually defined as anything that competes with humans.  It is almost laughable to discuss the sparrow as a pest.  Humans are responsible for soil degration, deforestation,loss of species, pollution, acid rain, greenhouse effect, radioactive wastes, and all of this and more are products of the human situation - NOT the innocent Sparrow - whose demise can only be one more thing in the chain of destruction caused by humans.  Let us say that “The Fall of a Sparrow” can only serve as another reminder that we should all do everything we can return our lives and our environment to a natural state of balance.

In this case invasive means that HOSP was deliberately introduced here, only later to have devastating effects on native bird populations - particularly small cavity nesters such as bluebirds and tree swallows. A decline in HOSP in North America would be very desirable, not something to lament. I will do my best to contribute to that decline through passive and humane active management. Yes, humans cause all kinds of problems throughout the world, but that’s no excuse for allowing the propagation of a bird which causes such havoc for our native species. See http://www.sialis.org/hosp.htm for more information.

I found your article by following a link from http://www.sparroworks.ca/wordpress

It’s interesting to get an international perspective on the decline of the house sparrow. Here in the UK, it is now unusual to see sparrows in groups of more than a half a dozen. When I started birding, 35 years ago, flocks of several hundred could regularly be seen foraging in arable fields.

I suspect that there are many reasons behind the sparrow’s decline, including the destruction of nest sites plus changes in farming practices.

A few years ago, I visited Skara Brae and was delighted to find house sparrows nesting in the walls of the neolithic buildings.

The aborigines of Australia, when faced with the introduction of countless species brought by European settlers, witnessed the destruction that these strange animals wreaked on the local habitat. Yet when the Europeans, waking up to the `problem’ created by the species they had brought with them, began initiating policies to cull these creatures, the Aborigines were not supportive; their attitude appeared to be, once a new element has been introduced into an environment, allow the environment to find its own balance. Nature always stabilises accute instability, though it may take longer than humans are want to wait, and it may not take the form we most desire. Fundamentally however, there is a need to trust in Nature’s innate wisdom. Our energy would be best spent clearing our own mess up, pollution etc. and making our back gardens hospitable for the spirits (manifest and unmanifest) that might bless us with their presence.

Thanks, Sandra, for your heart-felt article.  These days it is hard to imagine the wealth of species and the fullness of species that the world once had.  Of course, the most competitive species, the one that destroys most habitat and evicts the native inhabitants, is our very own. 

There are nearly 1000 species of tree threatened with extinction in the USA according to the World Resources Institute.  How many animal, plant, bird, fish and insect species rely on those disappearing varieties for their survival?  (Yes, fish do rely on trees to create groundwater systems that filter water that feeds rivers and lakes.)  We clear-cut our bio-diverse forests and replace them with mono-crop,lack-lustre, bio-reduced stands of trees that we insist on calling “forests” and “woodlands”.

In a few years we harvest even these second-rate tree farms to make disposable and mostly unnecessary paper products.  Then the “forests” are planted again in soil that gets further depleted each time the cycle takes place.  But hey, what the .... It keeps the economy going.

Then we have the nerve to call other species “pests” and accuse them of competing with native species for the resources that we haven’t yet decided to use and develop for ourselves.  But if we do want to develop an area such as one where “sparrows are evicting birds from their nests and outcompeting them for tropohic resources”, we usually don’t let such minor considerations stand in our way. 

If mega-developments such as dams, power stations, sprawling malls, sprawling subrubs, highways, industrial complexes, industrial crop farming, industrial wood-fibre farming or airports are planned for an area…the goose is cooked…along with the navtive birds, invading sparrows, native cultures and longterm settled farming communities with ripening grains on their farmland. 

I don’t think we should take the moral high-ground about invasive and competitive species while we glamorize our own achievements that lay waste to the best part of nature’s gifts.  Before our domination of the earth and our pillaging of her resources, she managed to provide natural sustenance and natural economy for a much richer and abundant tapestry of species, than we have now…including our own or we wouldn’t be here now.

I hear what you are saying, Philip, but I really think that we need to look at the big picture here.

I agree with you Sandra.  It is frightening to see a common species like the house sparrow become so uncommon.  We are looking Silent Spring in the face and maybe one day we will wish from the bottom of our hearts to give up all of our investments, techno-toys knicknacks and trinkets just to see a sparrow again.

I agree with Beth that we need to look at the big picture. The article in Orion “The Fall of a Sparrow” started me wondering about the big picture.

The Audubon Society and North American Bird Conservation Initiative are two groups looking at the general decline in many bird populations.

If you are interested in what is happening to a particular bird go to http://audubon2.org/cbchist/graph.html

Using that web site I graphed the decline in the House Sparrow and the Common Grackle. The data are generated by the annual Audubon Christmas Bird Count counts (from about 107 years ago through 2006). Using these numbers, the House Sparrow in the US appears to have declined from a high roughly 50 years ago to approximately 17% of that value.

The Audubon Watchlist can be observed at http://web1.audubon.org/science/species/watchlist/browsewatchlist.php

The American Bird Conservancy says the following: More than one-third of the 650 bird species that breed in the U.S. have declining populations, are restricted to small ranges, or face serious threats. Habitat loss and poor habitat management threaten these species, and without improved effort they will continue to decline.

Much of the annual loss of birds is due to human activities.

Some good conversation about the invasive issue here. For your interest, another Orion columnist took this issue up directly in the Sept/Oct 2006 issue: Bob Pyle, Orion’s resident naturalist, wrote in With Enemies Like These that invasives are a real problem, but that they have some upsides we never hear about…in particular, butterfly bush has been a nuisance in numerous places, yet it has been a boon to particular butterfly species which are teetering on the edge.

If you have a copy of this issue handy, I encourage a quick re-read. I think Bob hits all the right notes.

Erik
Orion Grassroots Network

Well said Jonathan.