European starling (Sturnus vulgaris).

A plague?  Some would have us think as much, what with their vast numbers in certain areas and their anecdotally claimed displacement of native species such as purple martins^[1].

Upon introduction to North America, starlings rapidly spread and now represent one of the most numerous birds on the continent.

So when I found a nestling fallen from its home, one pursued by a cat, I at first pondered what I’ve read from so many naturalists who try to trap and/or kill these creatures with specially designed bird houses: Do I let nature takes its course and allow the child to die?

The answer came without hesitation.  Of course not!

It amazes me constantly how nature advocates pick and choose the lives worth saving.  Invasive or not, are starlings not lives, not part of nature?

And if we act on this misguided premise of selecting what life is worth saving, we become no better than the hunters who brought extinction to the North American passenger pigeon and the Tasmanian tiger-wolf.

So I intervened.

With a small box in hand, I captured the child bird and ushered it to the local wildlife rescue and rehabilitation center not too far from where I live.

A third of its body still covered with down, they confirmed what I already knew: this was no fledgling but was instead a nestling, one who could not survive on its own and who would not make it through the night—assuming it even survived long enough to see sunset.

After I stood by and “let nature take its course” with the mockingbird nestlings approximately one year ago, I swore I would not be so idle in the future.  Call me evil for saving an invasive species if you wish.  All I know is I saved a life.

— — — — — — — — — —

[1] Many in the birding and naturalist communities swear an oath unto death that European starlings are responsible for the decimation of native cavity-nesting bird species through fierce competition for nesting sites.  The purple martin stands near the top of that list as the sacrificial species intended to convince others that the starling is not just another bird, but rather that it’s an enemy, one to be hunted and killed—including with false nests that trap the birds once they enter.  Science corroborates this assumption to some extent in localized studies.  The data remain unclear, however, and my feeling is that it’s not hard to believe but it’s also not a reason to become a killer, whether directly or through inaction.

[Update] Thank you to mArniAc who brought to my attention in the comments that I had been somewhat ambiguous when I mentioned that the wildlife rescue folks said the young starling “was no fledgling but was instead a nestling, one who could not survive on its own and who would not make it through the night—assuming it even survived long enough to see sunset.”  It’s not that they or I felt the bird would not make it through the night after its rescue; that statement referred to the bird not surviving on its own had I not rescued it.  It will in fact survive in their capable hands, and I know for certain it will fledge successfully and be released to freedom as a healthy juvenile.  Our local wildlife rescue operation takes its responsibility seriously.  They aid and assist all manner of beings from our urban wildlife refuge.  For them, every creature deserves a chance at life.  I apologize for not being clear in that regard and for making it sound as though they intended to let the bird die.  Nothing could be further from the truth.