HOME | DD
Okavanga — Oxpeckers
#giraffe #oxpecker #southafrica #rhonoridge #wildbirdphotography
Published: 2018-09-02 06:16:43 +0000 UTC; Views: 325; Favourites: 40; Downloads: 2
Redirect to original
Description
Buphagus erythrorhinchusRhino Ridge
Some Birds of South Africa Part 2In Part 1 of this Journal, Some Birds of South Africa Part 1, I covered several of the bigger species of bird that I encountered on my recent vacation in KwaZulu Natal, one of the main provinces of the Republic of South Africa. The bird life in this region is amazing and I was fortunate enough to be able to capture about 50 different species while I was there. The shots seen in these journals are from three main areas: around Montusi Mountain Lodge in the northern Drakensbergs www.montusi.co.za/ ; around Moorcroft Manor at Himeville in the southern Drakensbergs www.moorcroft.co.za/; and around Rhino Ridge Lodge www.rhinoridge.co.za/
Related content
Comments: 34
Helping han...beaks.
Sorry to read you were taken ill while you were away. I don't believe I ever had an oyster so wouldn't know if I had a bad one either.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I have form when it comes to being ill on holiday - dengue fever, African Tick bite fever, food poisoning, gout....not to mention the odd hangover.
David
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
True - they are not really odd - just hangovers!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Busy wee birdies!
Many Thanks, Cynthia.
David
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Good analogy, Mayumi. The oxpecker cleaning crew!
David
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Complex issue, Sheri. They feed off the ticks and other insects that they find on the giraffes skin. So, yes they are cleaning it, but it is a never ending task.
Many Thanks
David
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Whales, Sharks...they have little hitchhikers under water that do the same thing. Makes perfect sense.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
these are awesome little guys......great shots all around
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Many thanks indeed, M. All these wee fellows are awesome in their own way.
Cheers
David
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Nature is surely amazing! 
I doubt the giraffe would agree even slightly that the birds are parasites, David. I would think they bring the animals much needed relief. Must be hell to have things such as ticks, and flies too, on you and in your face constantly, and you can't do anything about it.
Great shot!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I would have totally agreed with you, Linda, until I read up a bit about this. I'm not sure that these large mammals are that bothered by ticks as the animals have very thick and insensitive skin compared to humans. And, having had ticks on occasion myself I know they can be on your skin and you do not notice. Flies certainly cause animals some direct problems, more in terms of nuisance. Ticks are a problem if they carry a disease as is often the case with human interactions - African Tick Bite Fever as I can vouch for! The birds are acting as foragers and instinctively know that if they eat all the crop then there will be none left, so they limit what they eat. Again, a complex area.
Many Thanks
David
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, some very good points, David. Still, they've got to be of some help, I reckon. I've seen videos of dogs and cats and other animals in the wild and, you wouldn't believe the amount of tics accumulated on them... in such cases, that can equal huge amounts of blood loss; weakness and fatigue; maybe even death.
.... true about the birds being natural "foragers"... I guess nature has a purpose for All pests... much to our distress.
Complex indeed! I enjoy complex, though.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
One day, I shall introduce you to the Umwelt, Linda, and tell you about the life of ticks!
David
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
"distinguishing the Umgebung, the objective space in which we see a living being moving, from the Umwelt, the environment-world that is constituted by a more or less broad series of elements that he calls “carriers of significance"
I found this to be pretty interesting!
I didn't enjoy how it abruptly cut off, sparing bits, near the end. But an interesting read nonetheless. (I've just got to memorize these strange, foreign to me, words) Thanks for this, David!
monoskop.org/images/7/71/Agamb…
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
OK, Linda, you're up to my speed on this. Although that particular reference is a bit turgid, it does cover many of the key points from the original ideas. Once upon a time, long, long ago in a galaxy called "Work" I used to give a lecture to my Honours students called "The Sensory World of the Cell" or some such. I was concerned as a physical organic chemist who taught, inter alia, aspects of medicinal chemistry to introduce students to the idea that at a molecular level - the level of living cells - such cells had sensory apparatus that allowed them to interact with their environment. We big creatures have eyes, ears, touch, smell, taste and perhaps other more arcane sensory organs, but how does a cell interact with its world? The answer, from my chemical perspective was through molecular structures (receptors) that protrude from the cell and interact chemically with suitable substances in the environment, triggering changes in structure of the receptors that, in turn, induce appropriate changes within the cell. Most of the lecture was then about the chemical structure of receptors and the types of changes that occurred such as to induce change within the cell. But, had I known it then, I was trespassing into the Umwelt of the cell. In that theory the cell can identify signs within its Umwelt that it may respond to. How that happens and the mechanism of response is less important in Umwelt theory than the fact that it does happen and such is then a characteristic of the cell and its Umwelt. As soon as we recognise that the cell is responding to signs, then another overarching theory called semiotics can be used to address numerous issues. I have long tried to understand semiotics, but usually fall at the first hurdle, although I do appreciate the idea of the Umwelt and that any organism reacts solely within its own world, irrespective of what else may be there, and that world, its Umwelt, is not necessarily, in fact almost always, not known directly to us. So, the little bird that flies away startled at our approach may be reacting to something in its Umwelt that is entirely unknown to us, but which we interpret in an anthropomorphic way - "it got a fright!"
Enough for now - my brain hurts!!
Cheers
David
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes indeed... it all comes down to cause and effect... (though a bit more complicated! ) I like that you realized this David, years ago, though not yet with it's own expression: "Umwelt"... I wonder, what might you have referred to it as? Is there even an English equivalent, I wonder...
It's always fascinated me that many foreign words, while using just one word, can convey so much thought!!
Oh bah! Such brain pain is Always good! ... just as long as it doesn't (much) keep you awake nights. 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The English equivalent would be "environment", Linda, but that doesn't convey the concept of "environment as perceived solely by one species" idea.
David
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, and that's what I meant, David; some foreign words are fascinating to me in that they can convey so much more.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I never heard that term before, David; but just had a nosey into it. I am interested already! I think tonight, when things are quieter, I shall have a look-up about the life of ticks, specifically. Thanks, luv!!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I do not wish to sound that Nature is 'complicated' but really it challenges some 'thought'. Firstly, good shot, David. Secondly, your narrative - particularly the mention that, parasites do not decrease; which, I believe Nature is continuously providing food for the birds - which also (as you perfectly put it) become parasites. Nature keeps the chain of Life intact.
Cheers!
Henry K
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Good point, Henry. If the birds actually ate all the parasites then there would be no more food and the birds would die of hunger. In a sense I suppose the birds could be considered as farmers harvesting what Bopunty has given them.
David
👍: 0 ⏩: 1