Subject:  Re Antennas Kill 40 Million Birds Per Year (Beaver)(Teule)..
Date:     Tue, 9 May 2000 062948 -0500 (CDT)
From:     "Roy L. Beavers" 
To:       emfguru 
--------------------------------------------------

.........Response from EMF-L.......

.....It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness.....
                    NEW!!! Website... http://emfguru.com
...................People are more important than profits.................
                            Missed opportunity...
          $$$$$ We could have changed the corrupted system!! $$$$$
                                  McCain !!

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 09 May 2000 11:01:29 +0200
From: teule 
To: "Roy L. Beavers" 
Subject: Re: Antennas Kill 40 Million Birds Per Year (Beaver)..


Roy,

> A possible other explanation to Christopher Beavers message, and especialle
> this part of it:
> .........................
> The problem, according to Vernon Kleen, an avian ecologist for the
> Illinois Department of Natural Resources, is that under adverse weather
> conditions, night-flying birds seem drawn to the antennas’ warning
> lights. The lights are required by the Federal Communications Commission
> for all antennas over two hundred feet. In the vicinity of airports,
> towers above 500 feet must carry either red blinking lights or white
> strobing lights.
> .........................

> could be the following:

> In january this year I asked the bird watchers over here (Netherlands) to look
> out for possible effects of radiations on birdlife. A bird has the freedom to
> move on, when she or he does not like the environment. So, if a bird has in
> some way "bad" feelings, when coming in the neighbourhood of a working
> antenna, it will do something. That could be flying away, but it could also be
> the opposite: flying towards the source of radiation, becaus they are
> attracted to it in some way. For bird watchers, who know the behaviour of
> their feathered friends, it should be possible to see any "strange" movements,
> p.e. birds flying around the antenna's. They could even compare the present
> behaviour with the behaviour before the antenna was erected. Som birds always
> come back to the place where they used to live. Are they doing it different
> now? I myself never saw a bird sitting on a GSM antenna, but that can hardly
> been seen as a "scientific observation".  The question is: do the EMF
> radiations (not the blinking lights) have some effect on the birds, on their
> navigation behaviour or on their choice of a place to live.

Maybe we could pose this quention to a larger audience. I'm very interested to
here your comments, folks!
Gerrit Teule, Netherlands





> Christopher Beaver





Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.emfguru.com