Tuesday, April 12, 2005

Blakeman's Answer to Response to Rejoinder: [posted on 4/10]

Under the heading "Oops, you're right" John Blakeman writes:


Once again your information has very perfectly deflated some more of my conjectural explanations, this time dealing with the putative roles of pigeon spikes and larger branches for nest construction. My ideas on these aren't valid anymore. It's so important to get real information from the field, not just the mind. I'm glad to have the spikes and sticks question resolved. Mine were good ideas, if I say so myself. But they were just that, ideas. You've provided authentic local information that resolves the questions (and answers) that I proposed. This is good.

I'm particularly delighted to hear that Central Park doesn't have (at least in The Ramble) conventional urban park management where dead trees are seen as a blight and are removed. Your promotion of enlightened management policies that emulate natural forest ecosystems -- where dead trees and branches play significant ecological roles -- is very encouraging. This makes these natural areas of Central Park ever more receptive to the wonderful wildlife being observed there. Good minds. Good management. Good results.


John A. Blakeman