[Tweeters] Solutions for extirpated birds

Kelly Cassidy lostriver at completebbs.com
Mon Jun 6 20:19:45 PDT 2005

You're right, of course, about people not often directly feeding crows. I was using the term loosely to mean intentional and unintentional feeding (open garbage, pet food left outside, etc.) An awful lot of people enjoy feeding gulls, but I don't know what proportion of their diet it amounts to compared to dumpster diving.

I'm not sure the crows care whether the trees are hardwood or conifer, but they do like the more open terrain.

Kelly Cassidy
Pullman, WA
mailto:lostriver at completebbs.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Prplerain at aol.com
To: tweeters at u.washington.edu
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 5:22 PM
Subject: Re: [Tweeters] Solutions for extirpated birds

In a message dated 6/6/2005 12:43:20 PM Pacific Standard Time, lostriver at completebbs.com writes:
I don't think people are going to stop feeding wild animals, so
the crow and gull populations will likely remain very high.

I was under the impression that the crow population was high because of the way in which development has changed our landscape. There is so much more deciduous vegetation than there used to be, which benefits the crow. If this area was as coniferous as it once was, whether people were feeding crows or not I don't think we would have as many. Plus, I think crows scavenge more food than is directly fed to them. Same goes for gulls. I have seen people feed french fries to gulls <shudder> but more often they eat them off the ground.
Don't get me wrong, feeding wild animals is a very bad idea and I would never condone it. I just don't think it is what has caused the boom in crow and gull populations.
Rachel Silverstein
Seattle WA


Tweeters mailing list
Tweeters at u.washington.edu

More information about the Tweeters mailing list