"Biotic pollution, the introduction of a foreign species into an area where it is not native, often upsets the balance among the organisms living in that area and interferes with the ecosystem's normal functioning. Unlike other forms of pollution, which may be cleaned up, biotic pollution is usually permanent." –Solomon, Berg, Martin. Biology.

Removal of a native species or addition of an exotic species usually has drastic consequences on the local ecosystem. When it comes to additions, Phragmites, Starlings, Russian Olives, Salt Cedar or Tamarisk, Zebra Mussels, and Cheatgrass all come to mind. When it comes to removals, I think of the Gray Wolf.

Now that the Gray Wolf is absent in the Southwest, ungulate herds runs unchecked; when Elk and Deer numbers are too high, they destroy native vegetation. Since the Gray Wolf has been eradicated, coyote populations have increased, which decreases the population of small game such as rabbits, voles, etc. When there isn't enough small game in an area, it affects Red-Tailed Hawks, Golden Eagles, and other birds of prey. It's been known for a long time that the removal of an ecosystems top predator will greatly affect that ecosystem.

The addition of a species to an ecosystem can also have dire consequences. The Great Basin ecosystem has been evolving to its present state for millions of years. The organisms here have been coevolving with each other for hundreds of thousands of years. Everything worked pretty well together before we started shuffling the deck.

Recently I've been worried about the Tamarisk Beetle. The Tamarisk Beetle is a Eurasian species of beetle that eats (you guessed it) Tamarisk. So what's the big deal? The beetle eats and destroys Tamarisk, which is a non-native, exotic species; when they kill all the Tamarisk, the beetle dies off too, right? What worries me is that the Tamarisk beetle could evolve to exploit other food sources. Many beetles in the history of the world have shown such an ability to evolve in short periods of time. What would happen if the Tamarisk Beetle suddenly evolved into the Fremont Cottonwood Beetle?

So why would it hurt to introduce a Starling (I have to tie this into birds somehow)? Birds have been coevolving with their environments for the past 66 million years. In a way, birds are genetically programmed to kind of know what to expect throughout their lives. They were anyway. We introduced European Starlings to the United States in 1890; that's 120 years ago. Our native species have been coevolving with their environment for the past 66 million years, and 120 years ago we threw them a huge curveball.

One thing that impresses people about Starlings is their ability to outcompete other species and survive in a hostile environment in which they are not endemic. To me, that's what is scary about Starlings: They outcompete native bird populations. Starlings are cavity nesters that outcompete native species of birds. I think it's safe to state that most of our cavity nesters in the state of Utah have been affected by the arrival of European Starlings. It's not about one species displacing another. This very well could be about 1 species displacing 20 or 30 other species. Here are just a few, off the top of my head, which I think could be affected by Starlings: Lucy's Warbler, Hairy Woodpecker, Downy Woodpecker, Northern Flicker, Western Screech-Owl, Northern Saw-Whet Owl, Wood Duck, American Kestrel, Purple Martin (not in Utah), House Wren, etc. I'm sure there are many more. I also read a study on Starlings displacing Gila Woodpeckers in Arizona.

Starlings are terrible for our native bird populations, and I think they should be managed a little more intensively. Should we all go buy bb guns and take out a handful on a weekly basis? Maybe. Should we destroy their nests when they set up shop in our Kestrel or Bluebird boxes? Probably. Should we knock their nests out of our roofs, trees, buildings, and bridges? Probably.

Exotics don't belong in Utah. The Utah ecosystem has shown that it isn't fit to deal with exotic, introduced species. The more that we introduce, and the less that we control the ones we already have, the worse it will get.

Just finished reading Ted Floyd’s Fuzzy Math post on the ABA Blog. Like most of what Ted writes or speaks about it is entertaining and informational. The premise for this post is about listing, and what species “count” for a list. Ted uses a recent outing to a park to highlight species seen—some of which were wild, some domestic, some captive, and others which don’t necessarily have a clear cut place. If you have a minute go read Ted’s post then hop back over here:

Click here to read Fuzzy Math

So as you now know (if you did your homework) Ted took an interesting view of the birds observed at the park. Following the whole thing up making the statement that he recently added Indian Peafowl to his Boulder county life list. His reasoning:

The birds are here. They’re meaningfully present in the county. They’re part of the biological and cultural landscape of Boulder County. As far as I'm concerned, they count.

Ah Ted, I could not agree with you more!!! Let’s bring Utah birding into the picture, with several examples that in my opinion make the case for being countable Utah birds.

California Condor

It has now been almost 10 years since the first condors were reported from the Kolob region of Zion National Park in southwestern Utah. This may be one of the hardest to make the case for, being that these birds still rely readily on human handouts to survive. This relic of the Pleistocene simply could not survive in modern times without the help of humans. We were responsible for the demise and now are responsible for the survival—and there is no end in sight for this. I don’t think many birders can imagine a summer trip to the Kolob region with seeing a Condor soar along the cliff tops. These birds are free flying, covering wide expanses in search of food for survival. It just so happens that most of the food they end up eating is being provided by us. Unless the government has a change of plans this project is long term and these birds will continue to be seen soaring “free as a bird”.

Mute Swan

If you have been to Washington County in the past 5 years and visited any number of local ponds or gold courses, you have likely seen the giant Mute Swans that can be found all over the county. It is no secret that these birds were all implants to add a touch of elegance to a pond here and there. But, when a pair of Mute Swan came gliding past me at Southgate Golf course one winter morning, I had to scratch my head and wonder, “how domestic are these beasts?” Any bird that is free flying and surviving without the help of humans would seem to be a countable bird in my book.

Mandarin Duck

This might perhaps be the strangest on my list, and by far the quintessential example of the “Should or shouldn’t it count game”. Mandarin Ducks have been free flying and breeding (limited) along the Wasatch front in northern Utah for countless years. What started out as bird in private collections grew into a small and local population found on random ponds, streams, and canals from Salt Lake to Ogden. Perhaps the most vivid and memorable of the three examples, when you see a Mandarin Duck you don’t forget the sighting. Now the birds obviously aren’t thriving, as we don’t see them at every park, and every pond, but every year several reports surface—letting us know they are still around.

A couple years ago I would have sang a very different story from what I am saying right now. I used to be a staunch supporter of ABA listing guidelines, and what was and wasn’t countable. Since my big year I have taken a huge step back from serious listing, and although I do keep lists, and rather thoroughly with eBird, I have included my sightings of Mute Swan and California Condor on my checklists. These birds do represent an important part of the natural system, despite how they got there or what is keeping them alive. They are there, they are meangingful, and they should count! Of course, I have always been a true believer in what is on your list is your choice—unless it comes to competitive listing. Looking at my big year list, neither Condor nor Mute Swan appears, although I saw both species numerous times.

I guess it really is situational—in that case maybe I need to add black Swan, Swan Goose, Ruddy Shelduck, Muscovy, and a handful of others to the ol’ list :)

Damn birds are great—thanks Ted for bringing this to my attention!

All Photos in this post are copyright Tim Avery.