When looking at bird conservation some scientists have noticed what looks to be a trend in the dangers to birds and their characteristics. Here is a section from the article “Ecological Basis of Extinction Risk in Birds: Habitat Loss Versus Human Persecution and Introduced Predators” it states the purpose of this research: “The overall aim of this study was to test the predictions that (i) different taxa are prone to different mechanisms of extinction, and (ii) different ecological factors are associated with different mechanisms of extinction.” (Owens et. al.) The factors that Owens et. al. is referring to are the physical characteristics of bird families. This article specifically discusses the problems of habitat loss, introduced predators, and the characteristics of some bird families that might make them more vulnerable to one threat than the other. This research may help scientists help specific endangered bird families by focusing their efforts on the things that negatively affect that bird family more strongly. (Owens et. al.)
For example, woodpeckers are more vulnerable to deforestation than other birds (Dorresteijn et. al. 1). This statement seems to be agreeing with the research done in the article by Owens et. al. who I mentioned earlier and if we connect their research then we can see that the characteristics of the family woodpeckers make them especially vulnerable to habitat loss. My last quotation also references things that woodpeckers need in order to survive. The factors and resources that affect birds most strongly are the things we must focus our efforts on to resolve in order to sustain the population of that bird species with maximum efficiency. Although things like dead trees or large areas of forest may seem like things that are not very useful beyond cutting down and selling, we can’t forget the purpose of the habitats around us and the things that we will lose when we destroy them. Everything in our world has a purpose. Destroying things and places without thought will reap some form of unforeseen consequences. Here is a suggestion that a author makes to the conservation of birds:
In contrast with more traditional conservation approaches that emphasize protection of uninhabited landscapes, conserving ecological integrity within human-dominated landscapes can be achieved through focusing on biodiversity benefits to humanity, such as an ‘ecosystem services’ approach or the use of innovative markets for specialized products, e.g. shade-grown coffee (Hernandez et. al.)
What this quote suggests is the possibility that instead of focusing so much on protecting natural areas that people don’t live in for the protection of birds, we could instead integrate nature into our land. We could restructure our farms and personal yards in such a way that wild birds could live there without the danger of their homes being cut down. We can solve the problem of habitat loss by making the places we live like the places the birds live (Hernandez et. al.). However, a big problem that I see with this is the fact that some birds require very specialized habitats that we just couldn’t replicate in our society. For example, woodpeckers need large forests and dead trees to forage. Integrating that into our society in some type of farm or business just does not seem possible to me.