While at the mall over the weekend I noticed quite a few sea gull feathers on the ground. I’ve never seen them called out in a pattern. Is there a reason for this? Just wondering…
In Skues extensive list of useful birds (to fly dressing ), he only mentions two sea birds -
quote
*Seagull (Seamew). - There are numerous pale blue feathers in the wing of this bird, which, for winging pale summer duns like the Little Pale Blue, and for hackling hackled patterns, look equal to sea swallows.
*Sea Swallow (Common Tern). - Numerous feathers other than the primaries and secondaries, occur in the wing of this bird and on the back, which are highly prized for winging and hackling pale summer patterns of duns. The feather is exceedingly delicate and mobile, and is of a most delicate blue grey.
For more info on Birds, have a look on my site, Skues - Birds.
I believe they are illegal to be in your possession.
at least in the usa
Interesting re: Skues. Makes sense.
I thought about the illegal angle but since they aren’t a “protected” bird per se thought that they may be exempt.
Thanks for the responses.
Phil
IMO, sea gulls are up there with Canada Geese as my least favorite birds. Seems all they do is eat, poop and bother people. Pretty much useless in my book.
I met a guy who once shot a seagull, took it home and attempted to eat it, All he could say was N A S T Y!!! Yuk.
Joe
This subject has been brought up several times in the past. I do not have any expertize in law and the below is my personal opinion.
-
The seagull as well as many other birds are protected the the Migratory Bird Treaty between the US and several other countries. (you can Google up this act)
-
This treaty prohibits the use or possession of birds covered by the the treaty to include their feathers. There are exceptions for birds that are hunted such as ducks, geese and swans.
Here is an excerpt from Cornell University Law school that may be helpful.
Unless and except as permitted by regulations made as hereinafter provided in this subchapter, it shall be unlawful at any time, by any means or in any manner, to pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture, or kill, possess, offer for sale, sell, offer to barter, barter, offer to purchase, purchase, deliver for shipment, ship, export, import, cause to be shipped, exported, or imported, deliver for transportation, transport or cause to be transported, carry or cause to be carried, or receive for shipment, transportation, carriage, or export, any migratory bird, any part, nest, or eggs of any such bird, or any product, whether or not manufactured, which consists, or is composed in whole or part, of any such bird or any part, nest, or egg thereof, included in the terms of the conventions between the United States and Great Britain for the protection of migratory birds concluded August 16, 1916 (39 Stat. 1702), the United States and the United Mexican States for the protection of migratory birds and game mammals concluded February 7, 1936, the United States and the Government of Japan for the protection of migratory birds and birds in danger of extinction, and their environment concluded March 4, 1972 [1] and the convention between the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics for the conservation of migratory birds and their environments concluded November 19, 1976.
Tim Anderson
Sea gull is a very generic term used for many birds. While some gulls may be protected, some may not be. I would contact a federal or state department and ask for a list of protected and exempt birds.
MBTA covers basically anything that flies in this country. Birds that can be hunted and are managed by state and federal agencies (upland birds, ducks, geese, etc), have their own rules, and there are a couple species that do not have any protection (English sparrows, starlings, Eurasian collared doves, for instance) under this act, but to the best of my knowledge, all seabirds, including gulls, are protected. In short, leave the feathers alone. You do NOT want the USFWS knocking on your door about this.
DG
Ok. I’ll stick with “commercial” feathers. Thanks for all the replies.
Phil
Phil:
Don’t be afraid of using feathers from birds that can be hunted legally such as pheasants, turkey, grouse, ducks, geese, brant and swans. They have many uses in fly tying and are perfectly legal.
Tim
All gulls are not protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, US Code Of Federal Regulations, Title 50; Section 10.13. All gulls do not migrate. The list names the following species as ‘protected’:
Albatross-only the short-tailed, black-footed, yellow-nosed and Layssan species are covered.
Gulls-Black-Headed, Bonaparte’s, California, Franklin’s, Glaucous, Heerman’s, Herring, Iceland, Ivory, Laughing, Little, Ring-Billed, Ross’s, Sabine’s, Slatey-Backed, Thayer’s, Western, and Yellow-Footed species are protected. The Common Gull is not, at least by Federal Law. Most of the protected species are Arctic and/or rarely seen in the US, and the rest are only here seasonally.
All species of Petrel are protected, but these are stricly pelagic birds and only come to land to breed.
Both species of Skua are protected, but they are restricted mostly to the Antarctic and are seldom seen in the US, although rarely one will be reported in Greenland or the Aleutian Islands.
All species of Terns are protected, as they are all major long-distance migrators. Terns are not gulls.
Another problem arises because gulls freely inter-breed with each other, so hybridization is rampant. It would be questionable whether a hybrid species, especially one that did not migrate, would be covered by the Act, since it specifically names all the species covered.
A gull species could still be protected by State Law, statue and city and county ordinances, and by the ubiquitous ‘Animal Cruelty’ charge.
I doubt very seriously that you would suffer any criminal penalties for picking up gull feathers and tying flies with them. It would be very difficult to prosecute. I pick up feathers all the time and tie flies with them, without even knowing what bird they came off of. I haven’t been fined or jailed yet, in over 40 years.
Semper Fi!
HAHAHA
Seagulls have become just about my best friends lately.
I’ve been out in my kayak fishing for bluefish two or three days a week for the last few weeks
Watching what the gulls do is as an important part of this game as anything
Obviously when the fish the are blitzing the gulls get in on the action pretty quick and you can see the birds wheeling and diving from a long ways off.
A small flock of gulls sitting on the water or on the beach are a good indication that something has just happened or that they think something will happen soon.
Multiple gulls flying low in one direction are a good indication that they know something that you don’t.
Single gulls will casually fly around just looking at stuff. When they slow and hover a bit and cock their heads for a good look-see, they might be looking at a crab or an interesting piece of trash. Then again it might be a school of bait or even a game fish.
They’re telling me to check it out.
Gig, I just spent a day with the DOW and USFWS folks doing some law enforcement training for hunting season here, and one of the scenarios we went through was the “feather hanging from the rearview mirror” one. USFWS, at least out here, takes a dim view of folks with MBTA violations. And BGEPA violations. And ESA violations. They CAN and WILL, if they so desire, prosecute even for picking up a feather, although I agree, it is unlikely due to teh caseload they have against commercial traffic in wildlife. But it is STILL AGAINST THE LAW. For me to have feathers like that in my office, I need both a federal and state permit, and can’t just have them to have them, nor can I use them to tie flies.
MBTA states that it is a Federal prohibition, unless permitted by regulations, to “pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture or kill, possess, offer for sale, sell, offer to purchase, purchase, deliver for shipment, ship, cause to be shipped, deliver for transportation, transport, cause to be transported, carry, or cause to be carried by any means whatever, receive for shipment, transportation or carriage, or export, at any time, or in any manner, any migratory bird, included in the terms of this Convention . . . for the protection of migratory birds . . . or any part, nest, or egg of any such bird.” (16 U.S.C. 703) I added the boldface.
Just remember that the fines for violating the MBTA are a whole helluva lot steeper than for fishing without a license and such things (misdemeanor conviction up to $15K). And the law can nail you for something as simple as transporting a feather.
Using feathers from protected birds on flies can create a demand for those feathers, and there is undoubtedly a market in illegal feathers, such as heron, and I for one am not willing to risk the fines, jail time, loss of my career (as a federal biologist), just to be able to use a feather to tie a fly.
The MBTA list is (sort of) dynamic, and changes to it are made with changes in known ranges of birds, taxonomic changes, etc.
By the way, The AOU list does not contain a species known as “common gull”.
The current MBTA list can be seen at http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/intrn … tandx.html
Proposed additions to the list can be seen at http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/fedre … oposed.pdf
The current American Ornothologists Union species list can be seen at http://www.aou.org/checklist/birdlist47.pdf
Also, posting on a public forum like this that you knowingly break a federal law is not necessarily a wise thing to do. USFWS does wonderful internet searches these days.
I started this topic with a simple question and I appreciate the responses. But it now occurs to me that there seems to be more concern about feathers and animals than children in our society. A sad state of affairs, indeed.
Phil
DG - In regards to the 2d paragraph of your post. Here is some more info:
Tim
Common Gull (Larus canus), and Common American Gull (Larus delawarensis). Recognized species by all biologist and scientists, the Audubon Society, etc… The Orinthological Union doesn’t list it probably because I imagine it is a politacal organization, with maybe a few actual scientists on the payroll just to rubber stamp anything they request.
And I did not advocate, nor state that I have broken the law. One of the things necesary for a conviction is ‘Intent’, or ‘Criminal Negligence’, neither of which would be present in the scenario. According to this reasoning, we would all be guilty of a crime anytime we rake our yards and dispose of the debris, because I can just about guarantee that there will be some bird feathers in it. I would think with all the things going on in the world, our government officials would have something better to do than try to harrass people over feathers from birds that aren’t even threatened.
Here’s a great example: Dave Winfield, a pitcher for the NY Yankees, accidently hit a seagull with a pitch during the course of a game, and was subsequitely publically arrested, in front of all the fans, and charged with animal cruelty. After posting a cash bond, the charges were dropped, and if he was smart, he would’ve sued the pants off of the Toronto PD for the public embarrasment.
So, should we arrest airline and military pilots who hit birds, or have them sucked into the jet intakes? Are we going to arrest truck drivers who have birds run into thier trucks? What about high-rise buiildings? Are the owners going to be held liable everytime a bird crashes into the windows?
So, if I find a dead bird in my yard, am I to just let it rot and stink up everything so as not to violate this ill-thought out law? Because to dipose of it would be transporting it, or causing it to be transported, and illegal by those definitions. So, should we just forget about drug-dealers, child molesters, and other criminals so that Law Enforcement can devote all thier time to rounding up all of us hideous alleged bird molesters?
Does anyone but me see how ridiculous this is?
And the only way a demand could be created for these feathers is if they were made available for sale. You wouldn’t be able to get enough off of the ground to make that a workable proposition.
Feathers on the ground, are officially refuse, trash and debris, and at least in my own yard, I can and will clean them up. In some places, you can also be fined for having debris in your yard and not cleaning it up.
[b]
Also, posting on a public forum like this that you knowingly break a federal law is not necessarily a wise thing to do. USFWS does wonderful internet searches these days.
[/b]
I am also not crazy about being called a criminal and threatened on a public forum. If someone want’s to accuse someone of wrongdoing, they should at least have the decency to do with a PM, and not on the public forum. Shame on you!
Semper Fi!
Just for the record, I have a Bachelors and Masters degree in Zoology from Texas A & M University and a PHD in Biology. I have 30+ years of field experience. With that being said, please regard the following post accordingly.
Here’s an update on the American Onithologists Union. This is not an government, or even internationally recognized scientific organiztion. They claim to be a professional organization, but membership is actually open to anyone who wants to join, regardless of education or scientific background. They are, in actuality, an organization of bird-watchers, most of whom have little or no formal training in zoology. Thier claim to be the largest and oldest organization in the ‘New World’ is correct. The recognized International Avian Authority is the Audubon Society, and is international. The AOU is basically just a bird-version of PETA.
Thier claim to be the authority on scientific names is false. All scientific names are governed by the International Commission of Zoological Nomenclature. They have a very strict code for the naming of all animals. They are THE FINAL WORLD AUTHORITY on ALL scientific names. The AOU is NOT the accepted authority for Bird nomenclature in the scientific world. Maybe only in US politics, but that doesn’t surprise me.
In examining thier check list, the glaring errors are too numerous to mention. The scientific name Larus delewarensis has been incorrectly assigned to the Ring-Billed Gull (Larus zonorhyncus), when it is actually the scientific name for the Common American Gull, the State Bird of Utah.
After about 15 of these errors, among the various species of birds, I quite looking. The list is incorrect, especially for any legal, or scientific purposes. This is why science needs to left to scientists, and not beauricrats. The only reason for using this list would be that since it is a completely American organization, political pressure can be exerted on it for various agendas.
There is no one on the planet that is more environmentally concerned than I am, and I am extremely active politically on environmental issues, but here is a point when it becomes ridiculous, such as throwing a lot of people out of work to ‘protect’ spotted owls, which are not even threated, nation-wide. The environmental ‘whackos’ labeled it as a sub species, the Northern Spotted Owl, which is not recognized as a subspecies. So, if you can’t do it legally, just change the name and try again???
There is a such thing as ‘common-sense’.
I wil desist my rant now, and I apologize to innocent bystanders. I am not accustomed to being slandered and threatened on public forums, at least not this one.
I’m outta here!
Semper Fi!
Gig,
I applaude you and thank you for your insight and information.
Keep on, keepin’ on.
Well! Well! Well!, all this over what are known at sea as shite-hawks.
You have my sympathies Gig.
I suppose I am now in trouble with the Society for the Banning of Unsuitable Anglo-Saxon Words.
Gigmaster:
In the interest of accuracy, Larus delawarensis is the ring-billed gull (the Utah state bird), which in the 19th century was called “common american gull” or “american gull.” The current common name, which has been in use for many decades, is highly descriptive as the gull does indeed have a black ring around its bill. This gull is abundant here in the Great Basin west, but has also expanded its range rapidly in the past 60 years or so (having suffered dramatically during the plume-trade days of the 19th century). Meanwhile, Larus canus is the mew gull, a circumpolar species whose usual range within the North American continent is esentially the west coast, Alaska, and northwest/northcentral Canada. Being circumpolar, L. canus is also found in Eurasia (the nominate race of three races) and only there is it called “common gull.” The issues surrounding the northern spotted owl are far more broad than you allude, but suffice to say we don’t need to discuss that herein!
Jacobhunter