FreeLists / tn-bird / [TN-Bird] some cbc-related info

[Steve Stedman <SSTEDMAN@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear CBC participants and compilers,

        I've reviewed the 54 CBCs submitted to the
national database for TN (25), MS (17), and AL (12).
There were fewer "issues" to deal with this year than
in any of the previous four years that I have edited
the Regional CBCs, but a few of them remain, and it
is hard to know how to deal with them, so I could use
some feedback from any and all who take part in the
CBCs.

        One matter of concern has to do with the
way that some hard-to-identify (at least for most
birders who have not found grace in the eyes of the
bird gods) species are documented on CBCs.  These
include species that are uncommon to rare AND that
look similar to more common species, thus requiring
some discernment to be properly identified.  Those who
have the favor of the bird gods do not have trouble
with these species, but it is hard to know which
kind of observer one is dealing with sometimes, and
it seems unfair to require documentation for these
species from some observers and not from others.
Better to hold all observers to one documentation
requirement than to try to make fine distinctions
in ability--at least that's my current thinking.

        The Greater Scaup is a species in the
category noted above; it is varyingly uncommon
to rare in the three states, and it definitely
can pose an i.d. challenge to even the more
discerning field observers among us.  In the 
past I have asked for details on all sightings
of this species, but I have received very few
dcoumentation forms for it, apparently because
compilers seem collectively to believe that
my concern for the proper i.d. of this species
is not well founded.  I have received some
documentation forms from participants on counts
where the compilers share my concern.  Sometimes
the documentation forms I receive reveal good
knowledge of the field marks that separate the
two scaups, but, all too often, these forms
reveal considerable lack of understanding
about those field marks.  For instance, many
observers (and compilers) are under the impression
that the color of the iridescence on the head of
male scaups is a valid way to distinguish them,
but nothing could be further from the truth.

        Even before David Sibley's guide noted
the complete uselessness of head color on male
scaups as an i.d. character, this uselessness
was out there in field character-land for anyone
to take note of who wished to do so.  But Sibley
made it crystal clear that head color is not
a way to separate the male scaups.  So it has
been surprising to me how many field observers
still rely on this field mark as the main way to
go about identifying a Greater Scaup.

        Many observers are similarly ill-informed
about the head shape of scaups, often writing
about the roundedness of Greater Scaups' heads versus
the peakedness of Lesser Scaups' head, but a close
look at Sibley will reveal that this is not quite
the right way to see the situation.  Greaters have
a more rounded head with a peak well to the back
of the head, while Lessers have a less rounded
head with a peak more toward the top of the head.

        Other field marks can be used to separate
the scaups, but almost always these are not well
understood by many who write documentation about the
Greater Scaups they think they have seen.  Nail size,
bill size, overall size, dorsal color on males, the
auriculars of females, and the length of the wing-
stripe on the extended wing can all be useful matters
to attend to in the identification of scaups, but
all too often the subtle distinctions involved are
made to seem much more dramatic than they really
are on most birds in the field.

        I am fairly certain that many, possibly most,
of the CBC records of Greater Scaup that have been
turned in during the past five CBCs that I have edited 
CBCs from TN, AL, and MS are invalid; certainly few
have been well documented; most are in the database
without any documentation at all (and have the DD
or ND codes attached to them) because of an ill-
advised belief that identification of the species
is easier than it really is and that the species
is common enough not to need any documentation at
all.  Yet if you will look at the numbers of 
Greater Scaups listed on CBCs in these states
for 2002, you will see a grand total of only
161 individuals--and 94 of those came on just one
CBC (Chattanooga, TN).

        I urge all participants on Regional CBCs
to become more familiar with the subtleties of
scaup identification and to document their sightings
of Greater Scaup with great care; and I urge all
compilers to refuse to include observations of
Greater Scaups on their CBCs without thorough
documentation.

        I plan to put some information at my
website about species like Greater Scaup for
the benefit of participants and compilers of
the 104th CBC, coming up at the end of the year.
I'll make this info available well before the
next CBC season.

Good birding,

Steve Stedman
Regional Editor of CBCs
for TN, MS, and AL
 
=================NOTES TO SUBSCRIBER=====================

The TN-Bird Net requires you to sign your messages with
first and last name, city (town) and state abbreviation.
-----------------------------------------------------
To post to this mailing list, simply send email to:
tn-bird@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
----------------------------------------------------- 
To unsubscribe, send email to:
tn-bird-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Topographical Maps located at http://topozone.com/find.asp
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
     Visit the Tennessee Ornithological Society
          web site at http://www.tnbirds.org
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
    TN-Bird Net Owner: Wallace Coffey, Bristol, TN
        jwcoffey@xxxxxxxxxx      (423) 764-3958
=========================================================