Birds

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      More Than 100 Animals Seized From Long Island Home

      by

      Animal welfare authorities say the animals were being illegally held and included a South American ostrich, a giant African snail, two prairie dogs and an endangered tiger salamander.Animal welfare authorities seized more than 100 animals from a Long Island home this week — including a South American ostrich, a giant African snail, two prairie dogs and an endangered tiger salamander — after a tip they received about exotic animals led them to their owner’s doorstep.“He was running a pop-up circus,” said Detective Matt Roper, director of law enforcement for the Nassau County SPCA. “Bringing these animals out in public and letting children play with these animals.”Detective Roper said the animals’ owner was given court summonses for several state and local violations, including endangering the public and housing and possessing endangered species. Federal authorities are also investigating, he said.Detective Roper emphasized that there were no signs that the animals had been abused or neglected.“They were all cared for,” Detective Roper said. “They were just in violation of being held or kept as either pets or for exhibition purposes.”Detective Roper, who declined to name the animals’ owner because the investigation is continuing, said that on Tuesday the authorities took 104 animals from the basement and backyard of the house, which is in North Bellmore.Humane Long Island, an animal advocacy organization that took custody of dozens of the animals that were seized, identified their owner as Matthew Spohrer, 32. He was issued 30 violations relating to illegal possession of animals, the group said in a news release.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber?  More

    • 113 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Taking a Cue From the Squirrels in My Birdhouse

      by

      Just before 2023 gave way to 2024, my husband and I drove down a mountain, talking about how to manage election-year anxiety. Specifically, my election-year anxiety. We had just spent a few days in a cottage in the woods, and we were jazzed on silence and stillness and the obligation to do nothing but walk together among the trees. To listen to the wind in the trees.We weren’t making New Year’s resolutions, exactly. We were feeling for ways to carry those days of calm into a troubling new year. I was proposing things like eating by candlelight every night or reading only poems after 5 p.m. My husband was proposing things like hiding my phone.For most of 2023 I managed to avoid poll-related panic by reminding myself that the election was still more than a year away. There were plenty of other calamities to worry about in the meantime — climate, biodiversity, war, gun violence, racism, health care access and the persecution of my L.G.B.T.Q. neighbors, just for starters. But lurking beneath it all was an understanding of how very much worse such troubles would get if autocrats took control of the American presidency in 2024.My husband is not very worried about the election. He trusts that American voters aren’t fools. He is able to check the news at night and only a moment later fall into the sleep of winter bears. I, on the other hand, will lie awake if I so much as glance at the headlines after dark.I found I didn’t worry so much while I was out on book tour last fall. There is really nothing like spending time in libraries and bookstores to give a person faith in humanity. I am profoundly direction-impaired, and solo travel can be disorienting for me, every street bewildering in the dark. But inside those little lighted spaces, people were nodding and smiling. People were reaching out for my hands.They would go home with a book, or sometimes a whole stack of books, and I was reminded yet again of how this commonplace miracle of connection — between writers and readers, between readers and one another — persists across distances. Every time I left a bookshop or a library last fall, I was filled with love for the sweetness in people.But it’s January now, and there is nothing to distract me from a looming election during which a shocking number of Americans hope to see an aspiring dictator reinstalled in the White House.My husband and I saw the New Year in as we always do, with our closest friends, and the next morning I woke up smiling. But when I went to the bedroom window to look for my first bird of the year, there were no birds to be seen. A squirrel peered at me from our largest birdhouse but quickly ducked back into the shelter of the leafy nest she’d built inside the box. She raised a litter of babies there last summer, and I’m pretty sure at least one of those youngsters, now grown, was inside with her on that cold New Year’s morning.When I stepped outside my own house, all was silence. No towhee scratching in the leaf litter. No winter-drab goldfinch picking through seedcrowns in the pollinator garden. No thirsty bluebird at the heated birdbath. No robin harvesting the last of the pokeberries. Not even any crows stalking across the churned soil where our late neighbor’s house so recently stood.According to birding tradition, the first bird you see on New Year’s Day sets a theme for your year. A robin can be a sign of renewal. A starling suggests adaptability. A crow might mean a year of wit and problem-solving and maybe even a little mischief. What did it mean for the new year to dawn entirely bereft of birds?I know that songbirds are quiet in cold weather, conserving their energy for warmth. I know they take shelter on gray days when hawks are on the wing, hunting while they can fly without casting a warning shadow. But my first thought on that silent New Year’s morning was not a realistic recognition of the cold or the drear. My first thought was an atavistic, apocalyptic fear: This what it will be like when all the birds are gone.After an hour of scanning the trees, I finally heard a blue jay, and then the returning call of another, and a moment later the first bird of 2024 appeared. Its colors were muted on that gray day — in birds, the color blue is created not by pigment but by the interaction of light and feather — but the blue jay’s impossible beauty was as clear to me in that instant as it has ever been in all my life of loving blue jays.The birds weren’t gone, of course. Like the squirrel in the nest box outside our bedroom window and the opossum tucked between the floor joists under our family room, they were only keeping still in the dense protection of pine and cedar, or roosting in the boxes they nested in last spring. In bad weather they always shelter together, sharing warmth — bluebirds in the nest box in our front yard, chickadees in the box under the climbing rose, Carolina wrens in the clothespin bag by the back door.The natural world does not exist to teach us how to live, much less to match our purposes, and the first-bird game is only a bit of whimsy. But in that moment of whooshing relief, after a blue jay finally flew from a pine, I found my lesson for the coming year. And it had nothing to do with where I keep the phone or how often I check for news, and very little to do with silence or candlelight or even poetry.To make it through the gathering disquiet, I will need embodied connection. As my wild neighbors did in the uncheery newness of an inhospitable morning, as I did myself in all the lovely places I visited on book tour, and in the company of dear friends on New Year’s Eve, I will need to seek comfort in the warmth of others this year. Whenever the cold creeps in, wherever the dark night pools, I will need to look for others. I will need not pixels but voices. Not distances but reaching hands.Margaret Renkl, a contributing Opinion writer, is the author of the books “The Comfort of Crows: A Backyard Year,” “Graceland, at Last” and “Late Migrations.”The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X and Threads. More

    • 88 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Unsafe Roads: The Perils of Riding E-Bikes

      by

      More from our inbox:Why Indictments Boost Trump’s PopularityRename the Audubon SocietyRon DeSantis, BullyAshely Kingsley and her daughter, Scout, at Charlie’s Electric Bike store in Encinitas, where they were renting e-bikes for the day.Ariana Drehsler for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Teenagers’ Accidents Expose the Risks of E-Bikes” (front page, July 31):While it is clear that stronger regulation around the speeds of e-bikes is needed, roadway design determines the safety of our communities.What we are seeing is the deadly consequences of a system built for cars and cars only. As one of the people quoted in the article notes, the bikes’ speed is “too fast for sidewalks, but it’s too slow to be in traffic.”In a better system, bikes and cars would not have to share the road, and our roads would be designed to accommodate the reality that people get around in different ways, and everyone deserves to get around safely.Bikes are not motorcycles, and they should not be treated as if they were. These crashes are happening because people on bikes are forced to use unsafe roadways around cars that are often going too fast.Earl BlumenauerPortland, Ore.The writer, a member of Congress, is the founder and co-chair of the Congressional Bicycle Caucus.To the Editor:I have been riding motorcycles since 1972. One of the first things you learn, either from hard experience or from older riders, is that you are invisible to most traffic. They aren’t looking for you, so they don’t see you. E-bikes are even smaller, so the problem is likely worse.I rode one of the faster e-bikes about a month ago. It had a top speed of 35 miles per hour and was much closer to being a motorcycle than a bicycle. Parents, law enforcement and legislators need to wake up to that reality.Dale LeppoHudson, OhioTo the Editor:While “Teenagers’ Accidents Expose the Risks of E-Bikes” demonstrates the need for safety in planning and organizing the e-bike rollout, I think it’s important to note that the deaths and injuries cited are due to car drivers, not e-bike riders.As the article states, 15-year-old Brodee Champlain “did everything right,” including signaling to make a left turn, before a driver hit him. To frame such accidents as the fault of the e-bike is blaming the victim rather than the cause.Nor is this a problem that will be helped by slowing the introduction of e-bikes to our streets. The fewer people driving cars, the fewer e-bike accidents there will be.The best way, then, to make cyclists safer is to build up the cycling infrastructure and substantively change our cities’ car-centric design, rather than trying to regulate e-bikes around two-ton vehicles that are far deadlier.Charles BonkowskySalt Lake CityThe writer is an intern at the Salt Lake City Sustainability Department.To the Editor:As a former New Yorker, I thought I was accustomed to the perils of pedestrians when out and about, but I had a rude awakening upon moving to Southern California, where e-bikes are ubiquitous. The amazing climate and hilly terrain make it easy to understand why e-bikes have become so popular here, and they provide a handy alternative form of transportation for kids with busy parents.But seeing young people, often preteens, zip around at 30-plus miles an hour while looking at their phones or drinking a soda makes me concerned for the pedestrians who share the sidewalks with them and for the kids themselves.Regulation is needed before more lives are lost.Leigh JonesAliso Viejo, Calif.Why Indictments Boost Trump’s Popularity Mark Peterson for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Each Indictment Solidifies Trump’s Base,” by Rich Lowry (Opinion guest essay, Aug. 8):Mr. Lowry points out that Donald Trump’s recent indictments have enhanced his popularity with the Republican base.It is not that his supporters like him despite his wrongdoing; they adore him specifically because he thumbs his nose at the laws, rules and institutions that are the basis for our democracy. They are angry at the status quo and the foundational aspects of our government, and Mr. Trump appears anathema to what they perceive as the “deep state.”Mr. Lowry glosses over the Russia investigation and claims that in the end Mr. Trump was “vindicated.” This is nonsense. A clear case was made that Mr. Trump obstructed justice in the Mueller inquiry. Since he was never indicted for his attempts to thwart that investigation, he continued to obstruct justice in the cases for which he will now have to appear before a judge and jury.The next two years will test this nation in many ways because of the actions of Donald Trump.Ellen Silverman PopperQueensTo the Editor:During every campaign Republican politicians and pundits like Rich Lowry pound their fists and scream about “law and order!” But when it comes to Donald Trump’s rampant criminality, they promote every excuse in the book not to hold him accountable — the most ridiculous one being that it will just make him more popular with the MAGA crowd.We’ve heard that since the day Mr. Trump boasted about hypothetically shooting a person on Fifth Avenue with no loss of support. We’ve heard it a thousand times. His supporters’ sense of perpetual grievance is being fanned daily on Fox and Breitbart and even in the pages of Mr. Lowry’s publication, National Review.Mr. Lowry should have used his essay not to reinforce predictable right-wing talking points, but to persuade people on his side of the aisle that these indictments are not only appropriate, but absolutely critical to a healthy, functioning democracy.Bud LaveryHighland, N.Y.Rename the Audubon Society Hannah Beier for The New York TimesTo the Editor:“Rising Racial Tensions Shake a Tranquil Pastime” (front page, Aug. 9) reports on a feud within the National Audubon Society, including “the question of whether the conservation group should drop its eponym, John James Audubon, who owned slaves.”I grew up worshiping the Audubon “brand” as a youthful birder, spent the better part of 20 years on the staff of the Audubon Society, and have studied and written about the life of John James Audubon. (Parts of a biographical sketch I wrote are still found on the Audubon.org website.)Here’s why I think the Audubon name should be dropped.It is essential in 2023 that we welcome birders of every background to the movement. The future of conservation depends on it. Social justice and conservation are deeply intertwined; they point to a sustainable future. And names are just a cultural artifact. There is no compelling reason to keep the Audubon name, just as we wouldn’t do for other enslavers and Confederate generals.I have a suggestion: Rename it the American Society for the Protection of Birds, to borrow a page from our friends across the pond in the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. Problem solved.Fred BaumgartenHaydenville, Mass.Ron DeSantis, BullyGov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, speaking in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, this month.Rachel Mummey for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “DeSantis Suspends a 2nd Elected Prosecutor in Florida, a Democrat in Orlando” (news article, Aug. 10):Our hapless governor and would-be president, Ron DeSantis, goes back to the only thing that’s consistently worked for him: bullying.David ReddyTampa, Fla. More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      The animal species imperiled by Trump's war on the environment

      by

      Climate countdown

      The animal species imperiled by Trump’s war on the environment

      A humpback whale breaches in the Pacific Ocean. The Trump administration has withdrawn regulations aimed at preventing humpbacks and other creatures from being entangled in nets off the west coast.
      Photograph: Luis Robayo/AFP/Getty Images

      Despite a grim outlook for American biodiversity, Trump has lifted protections for at-risk animals as part of his aggressive rollback of environmental rules
      75 ways Trump made America dirtier and the planet warmer
      by Paola Rosa-Aquino

      Main image:
      A humpback whale breaches in the Pacific Ocean. The Trump administration has withdrawn regulations aimed at preventing humpbacks and other creatures from being entangled in nets off the west coast.
      Photograph: Luis Robayo/AFP/Getty Images

      The prognosis for biodiversity on Earth is grim. According to a sobering report released by the United Nations last year, 1 million land and marine species across the globe are threatened with extinction – more than at any other period in human history.
      According to a recent study, about 20% of the countries in the world risk ecosystem collapse due to the destruction of wildlife and their habitats, a result of human activity in tandem with a warming climate. The United States is the ninth most at risk.
      Despite this desperate outlook, the Trump administration, as part of its aggressive rollback of regulations designed to protect the environment, has lifted protections for America’s animals. It has shrunk several national monuments and opened up a huge amount of federal land for oil and gas drilling, coalmining and other industrial activities – actions that conservationists warn could imperil species whose numbers are already dwindling and that are core to the health of our ecosystems.
      Here we look at some of the animals most at risk from Trump’s rollbacks.
      Wolverines More