… and even if true, the problem is what?
The report summarizes that,
The effects of climate change can clearly be seen in the ways that many bird species’ distributions are shifting. Many southern species have moved into Massachusetts in large numbers in the past few decades, while birds of high elevation and northern climes have begun to withdraw from the state. Notable disruptions among the ranks of long-distance migrant species may also be an effect of our changing climate.
But even assuming that slight changes in average winter temperature over the past few decades are associated with birds moving around — and there is no scientific evidence of this — what’s the big deal? People move; why not birds?
With respect to geographical habitat, birds come and birds go for a number of reasons — probably the least of which is imperceptible fluctuations in the meaningless concept of average temperature.
The enviros seem to believe that nature is static. If today isn’t like yesterday — they believe or at least want the public to believe — then something must be amiss.
For a group that is beating Rick Perry over the head for his comments about evolution, the enviros don’t seem to put much stock in the concept of change themselves.
Finally, let’s keep in mind that the Audubon Society helped bring about the deadly fraud about DDT, even though their own bird count data debunked the scare. As pointed out previously,
The Audubon Society was a leader in the attack on DDT, including falsely accusing DDT defenders (who subsequently won a libel suit) of lying. Not wanting to jeopardize its non-profit tax status, the Audubon Society formed the Environmental Defense Fund (now simply known as Environmental Defense) in 1967 to spearhead its anti-DDT efforts. Today the National Audubon Society takes in more than $100 million per year and has assets worth more than $200 million. Environmental Defense takes in more than $65 million per year with a net worth exceeding $73 million… [meanwhile, overlooked is the]… terrible toll [of the DDT ban] in human lives (tens of millions dead — mostly pregnant women and children under the age of 5), illness (billions sickened) and poverty (more than $1 trillion dollars in lost GDP in sub-Saharan Africa alone) caused by the tragic, decades-long ban.
When I hear about the Audubon Society, I don’t think of birds; I think of lies, misery and death.
I find irony in that John James Audubon was, in addition to being an artist, a marksman and an accomplished taxidermist. His technique for enticing the birds to sit for their portraits was to shoot them stuff them and then draw them. The perfect patron saint for a modern fluorescent green outfit.
Another alarmist nonsense story. “Birds of northern climes, and high elevation have left the state”. So, which way did they go? Anyone get names, license plate numbers? Have they been seen at any rest stops? Maybe they are vacationing in Miami.
An inconvenient truth is that food affects bird population shifts more than anything else. Blackbirds follow grasshopper infestations. Robins follow the maturing of wild berries, chokecherrys etc. Also population growth forces birds to spread out in search of food and territory, the same is true of polar bears.
Remember …the flock that Sullenberger fought against, it was birds usually seen in Canada, not NYC