LOUNGE all new asksnapzu ideasforsnapzu newtribes interesting pics videos funny technology science technews gaming health history worldnews business web research entertainment food living internet socialmedia mobile space sports photography nature animals movies culture travel television finance music celebrities gadgets environment usa crime politics law money justice psychology security cars wtf art google books lifetips bigbrother women apple kids recipes whoa military privacy education facebook medicine computing wildlife design war drugs middleeast diet toplists economy fail violence humor africa microsoft parenting dogs canada neuroscience architecture religion advertising infographics sex journalism disaster software aviation relationships energy booze life japan ukraine newmovies nsa cannabis name Name of the tribe humanrights nasa cute weather gifs discoveries cops futurism football earth dataviz pets guns entrepreneurship fitness android extremeweather fashion insects india northamerica
+47 47 0
Published 3 years ago with 3 Comments

Join the Discussion

  • Auto Tier
  • All
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Post Comment
  • a7h13f

    I don't understand. The article states:

    It is estimated that there are only 250–1000 mature individuals left, but the bird’s elusiveness puts even those figures into question.

    But then the researchers claim that:

    Paul Sweet, collection manager for the museum’s Department of Ornithology, told Audubon that he and his colleagues assessed the state of the bird’s population and habitat, and concluded it was substantial and healthy enough to withstand the loss.

    So which is it? Do we have only the roughest estimate of the population, or do we know the population is stable enough to take a loss. I don't see how both can be correct...

  • b1ackbird (edited 3 years ago)

    Is this for real? Please tell me this is a Onion article.

    It should be- that would be hilarious. This is trite and everything that's wrong with humanity.

    :::begins squawking and cawing::: We birds aren't going to just take this lying down! This was just supposed to be a photo op!

    Seriously though, Professor Bekoff says it best:

    “Even if this handsome male were a member of a common species, there was no reason to kill him. It sickens me that this practice continues and I hope more people will work hard to put an end to it right now, before more fascinating animals are killed.”

  • moe

    For days the researchers looked for the bird. They set fine nets into the forest canopy, hoping to capture the individual. After a blustery morning of cold winds and rain showers, they managed to capture the male moustached kingfisher.

    If the bird was caught, wouldn't it be a more valuable specimen when taken alive? Am I misunderstanding what "capture" means in this context?

Here are some other snaps you may like...