After re-introduction of paddy rice planting to Long Valley, we have successfully attracted some rare birds such as Yellow-breasted Bunting. Besides, over a thousand munias were attracted to paddy fields and consumed most of the rice produced. There is no exception this autumn. The rice we have planted begins to produce grains and 9 Yellow-breasted Buntings were recorded yesterday.
Long Valley is long been an agricultural wetland. The project team work hard to gain benefit in both ecological and agricultural aspects, and take a balance point between the two. This autumn, we are going to implement a paddy rice protection work by putting some bird repelling materials in some of the paddy fields until the harvesting two weeks later, with the principle of not hurting any bird and other wildlife. At the same time, some of the paddy fields will be reserved for birds and will not be harvested. This aims to continue our bird conservation work and, on the other hand, protect and reserve some of the rice for project promotion, education, generate income for wetland protection as well as the seeds for rice planting next year.
Bird repelling materials include CDs, colored ribbons and altogether two ultrasonic bird repelling devices (effective range of 6 meters each). We have also refered to farmers in Taiwan to put plastic fashion model to repel birds (video for reference (Chinese only): http://www.happyplays.com/discuz/viewthread.php?tid=10721).
We are still recruiting the above mentioned materials. If you would like to donate, please contact Miss Vicky Yeung (yvicky@hkbws.org.hk or tel: 2377 4387). Author: tsheunglai Time: 8/10/2010 21:33 Subject: Some words about you sonic bird dispellers
Dear all
When someone was using the sonic equipment at LV I was there. Paddyfield is man-introduced and
as it brings advantages and disadvantages. It seems a lttle odd that we need to put such extra-effort to drive away the munias there in order to preserve the seeds for other purposes.
Yellow-breasted buntings need to face competition as dictated by natural selection which is something
like God' decree. It is the whole ecosystems here and elsewhere that we need to conserve which mean to turn it back to as much akin to its pristine condition as possible, and paddyfields are doing the
least harm and outwardly bringing good to birds and especially migrants like yellow-breasted buntings.
Before we bring in other measures, please think about this. How do you know the yellow-breasted
buntings which come later need the rice seeds more than those which are reported to have been found
about the rice field on Thursday? How can you judge the fields will not provide enough for all birds, local as well as yellow-breasted buntings? How do you assess the harm done by the sharp noise to all
the birds nearby, locals as well as wild ones? I myself was upset a little bit when I heard the shrilling noise and saw the young man, turning on and off his machines, fun beaming all over his face. Conservation is a precarious business, needing great caution, the situation more all less like a medical surgeon operating on a patient. It is not a case for trial and error.
S L Tai Author: tmichael Time: 9/10/2010 00:16
I think SLT has a point here.
Why don't we just let the birds have all the rice seeds produced. After all it could save their lives, especially the Ybr Buntings. Rice served up in its natural form like this is what they absolutely need.
Can't we find the funds elsewhere to cover "project promotion, education, generation of income for wetland protection as well as the seeds for rice planting"? Especially "generation of income for wetland protection"? Can LV rice sales really make any difference there?
Mike Turnbull Author: sdavid Time: 9/10/2010 12:19
Is the use of bird repellents by HKBWS possibly be sending the wrong message to other farmers? How long will it be before sonic devices are in all LV fields to scare birds away?
Like previous messages, why not leave the rice for the birds? How much more inome is a rice crop likely to bring in? Author: subbuteo Time: 9/10/2010 12:47
The HKBWS is chasing birds away. Where to? Aren't we trying to save Long Valley for the birds? Why plant the rice if not to attract the birds in?
What is the expected income from the rice? If the cost is an issue, I am sure birders would quite happily sponsor planting given the birds it brought in last year.
Dylan
[ Last edited by subbuteo at 9/10/2010 19:43 ] Author: HKBWS Vicky Time: 9/10/2010 13:08
Thank you for all your comments.
The project team agrees that rice is important to birds esp. migrants and we are glad that our work attracted Yellow-breasted Bunting successfully. It is hard to make this decision that to implement bird repelling practices to paddy fields. However, we hope all of you understand that the LV management project comprises of three major elements: agriculture, ecological conservation and public education/involvement. All three elements are included in the whole process of rice planting and harvesting which is the only crop that can have such fulfillment. And rice is a key component to bring the project towards sustainability. In addition, the funding agency, Environment and Conservation Fund (ECF), strongly requested us to increase the project sustainability, income, public involvement and publicity when we have submitted the project proposal. Therefore, after taking a balance point between bird conservation and all other factors. We decided to have the rice protection works on only part of the paddy fields.
The ultrasonic bird repelling device is not installed to the field due to some technical problem. After reading your comments, we will re-consider and sort out a mild and suitable approach.
Please feel free to give advises and comments on this issue.
Thank you!!
Vicky Author: tmichael Time: 9/10/2010 20:45
The clarification on the funding issue helps (though the ECF administrators sound rather mixed up in their sense of mission to me).
Actually I can't see how preventing birds from feeding, whatever method you use, can tally with the aims (and underlying values) of the HKBWS.
If this rice project, or its funding method, involves putting time and effort into producing habitat for threatened birds, such as Yellow-breasted Buntings, and then preventing them from feeding on it, wouldn't we be better off just letting it be rank grassland with "wild" rice in it, and letting nature take its cost-free course.
Mike Turnbull Author: tsheunglai Time: 9/10/2010 21:25 Subject: LV , rice fields, food and birds
Dear Vicky
I am happy that I at last know the name of one of the ladies who work hard for the Society.
Be reminded that being able to call someone by name is the first step to put us human beings within
friendly distance. That is the sole reason I put forward my opinion so strongly here and again
at the Strategic meeting, though at the latter occasion I was misunderstood by CY (we all addressed
Mr Lam Chiu Ying as such) and met with strong open rebuff.
Now go back to the topic in question. Growing rice in Hong Kong is no long viable as a kind of economic
production which is a statement which probably sounds even platitudinous to many of our readers here. I know about the plight of Y-b Buntings from Simba's (whose full name is Simba Chan Shing-yin if my memory does not fail me)article in OBC's Fortail (Bulletin?). We owe the birds and
I must say all birds great debts for taking up as much as I think 99% of their living space (by living space I don't mean area in land alone). It is only a token step by letting them eat something nutritious as rice seeds within two small patches of land at LV.
We must be sincere to the fund managers the purpose of rice growing. They can't and can never expect
that rice-growing project yield anything near long-term sustainabilty. Organic farming of vegetables
seems to me one of the possible ways out. Again we need and should seek the fund managers' sympathy
and understanding. They must be patient. Let them see our survey data and the level of bio-diversity
we have raised.
By the way where is the society's conservation officer? He should be here to offer assistance and
pull together resources including the most important one which we call brains.
I hope I have at least showed concern about your problems in hand.
S L Tai Author: HFCheung Time: 11/10/2010 17:36
Let me clarify some points here.
1. Most (about 2/3) of the rice grown in LV are free for the bird to feed on.
2. This year, we have increased the area of rice growing. So the rice available to birds are not less than last year.
3. Part of the project is to use the rice for funding raising. Money raised will be fed back into the project, which is mainly for habitat management. Although the amount of money raised this year may not be very high, we still need to test whether this is practical.
HF Cheung Author: cgeoff Time: 11/10/2010 21:19
One issue that seems not to have been considered is whether the bird repellent devices are likely to be successful. I have worked in the area of bird deterrence on airfields for nearly 15 years, mainly at Chek Lap Kok airport. In the literature I am familiar with, there is little evidence that static or automatic bird scaring devices are successful in the long term. They may have a short-term impact, but after a short while habituation occurs. In other words, birds become accustomed to the noise or visual disturbance, realise it is not a threat to their well-being and, after a while, simply ignore it. It reminds me of an observation made by David Melville at Kai Tak airport, where gas cannons were deployed to scare birds. David saw Black Kites perching on the cannons; every so often, when the birds felt the firing mechanism commence, they would lift off a short way while the cannon fired, and then simply drop down again to resume their rest.
Ultrasonic devices have only been proven to work with two types of birds: owls and, perhaps rather surprisingly, Barn Swallows. There is absolutely no evidence that other species even hear ultrasound! While CDs and coloured ribbons, as well as effigies and other items, are deployed in many parts of the world, there is no evidence that these work for anything other than a short period of time. It is thus likely that, in the case of LV rice, the effect would simply be to extend the time the munias require to strip the fields of rice by a few days. Static devices are also subject to the same habituation effect.
It is only when these acoustic and visual devices are used by humans in a highly visible way that there can be said to be long term impact. That, however, requires substantial investment of time and effort.
The accepted view is that, if you want to deter birds from an area, then you make sure the habitat that attracts them is not present (the South Korean government is well aware of this!). Obviously, this is not an option in this case, and it seems to me that if it is desired to exclude birds from a particular area of rice paddy, then probably the only effective way is to enclose it with netting through which birds cannot pass.
I must confess to being slightly unclear as to what is happening in the LV case. Is the rice is being sold as income for the project? If so, is the rice not harvested before it becomes highly attractive munia food? Like MikeT, I'm slight puzzled as to why ECF thinks that income, public involvement and publicity are so important. But perhaps that's simply due to our ignorance of the aims of the ECF and this project? And if these things are so important, then whether we support 7 or 10 or 15 Yellow-breasted Buntings may not be very important. It's still a very small proportion of the population, and there are probably ample food supplies elsewhere in northwest NT. I realise, of course, that these buntings are part of the educational resource, but so are thousands of munias and the other common species.
My feeling is that if it is required to save a portion of the rice for some purpose, then do so with an effective measure, and not techniques that are not proven as successful. As for the rest, simply let nature take its course, and exploit it for educational purposes in any manner it allows.
I wholly agree to witness a small 'cloud' of munias of nearly a hundred in no.(vision impact similar to see waders taking flight and fly together tight and fast) is a delightful sight for young minds when they go to LV. the mental impact thus created certainly has an educational value.
Take some pictures of the phenomenon and the fund managers would certainly be impressed.
S L Tai
Welcome to HKBWS Forum 香港觀鳥會討論區 (http://hkbws.org.hk/BBS/)
