Dear Editor:

From "Too Many Ducks?" (Dateline, July 16), I concluded that there are too many (233) ducks for the arboretum to support, feeding is harmful, and a finite number of ducks should occupy the arboretum as if they were fixed objects.

The data hinge on the word "support," but no aviary net encloses the arboretum -- ducks are moving in and out. I suggest the arboretum represents a safe resting place with low numbers of predators, and the additional energy needed is provided by foraging elsewhere. And disease is not necessarily a bad thing but controls excess numbers. The real problem with "excess" ducks is the conflict arising from the "fowl water" vs. the "pleasure" of human/duck encounters.

Adding predators (snapping turtles) won't work. Imagine the emotional crisis of seeing a duckling pulled underwater! The arboretum shouldn't be analyzed as a closed system for wildlife, which can and do move in and out of its confines. The real point should have been to use the data to make clear how much "additional" wetland area is necessary to sustain the ducks and how much of that area is lost each year.

-- Steven Tinling, director of research, Otolaryngology Research Labs