[wisb] Re: Rare Bird Reporting
- From: Ryan Brady <ryanbrady10@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <wisbirdn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 05:47:55 -0700
Hey folks, Mike is spot on. In my attempt to be brief perhaps I was unclear.
The Records Committee does NOT need any more "official" write-ups of the birds
in question. However, I thought it was obvious that we should continue to
monitor these birds and report them to WSO via eBird. This is second nature to
most of us at this point. In no way am I advocating that we forget about these
birds just because they've been adequately chased and documented. (It felt
ridiculous to even write that.)
Ryan Brady
Washburn, Bayfield County, WI
http://www.pbase.com/rbrady
> Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 05:34:48 -0600
> Subject: [wisb] Re: Rare Bird Reporting
> From: mcdomik@xxxxxxxxx
> To: wisbirdn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Howdy all,
> This is just a guess, but I think what Ryan was trying to say is that RC
> doesn't need any more field-mark / photo / ID documents. If someone lives
> fairly close to the vagrant bird in question, perhaps that individual will
> continue to monitor its presence to see how long it remains. However, I
> also feel it's important for birders to keep birding their regular locales
> (like I do for Pheasant Branch Conservancy). I'm not going to chase the
> Vermilion Flycatcher, but frequent checking on this vagrant would weaken my
> eBird data for PBC because of personal time constraints; I might miss
> something at the conservancy! Many vagrant birds (record late, early, too)
> are found by those birders who bird the same area(s) every day.
>
> My advice to birders who travel to see a vagrant would be to go see it
> once, eBird it, but then continue birding at your regular routes and
> locales. The Dec. 2010 Golden-crowned Sparrow was easily and sufficiently
> documented for the 10 days it remained in Middleton because it was right
> out my window at work. Nearly 300 birders came to see this particular
> vagrant over the 10-day period the bird was present. While I'm not
> discouraging people from documenting a sighting, I don't feel the RC would
> have benefited from having 300 write-ups of this sparrow hop-scratching for
> seeds in the snow below bird feeders. Essentially, I think RC wants bona
> fide documentation and then once established, any interesting anecdotal
> information, including duration of stay. Given the chase factor of a
> Vermilion Flycatcher (as well as the other vagrants birds presently in
> Wisconsin), I'm confident we're all going to know the last day these birds
> are present.
>
> Mike M.
>
> Mike McDowell
> Madison - Dane County
> www.birddigiscoper.com
> www.pheasantbranch.org
> www.facebook.com/mmcdowell
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 3:52 AM, <rcd2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Although the WSO Rare Birds Committee has plenty of reports to confirm
> > that such species as the Inca Dove and the Scissor-tailed Flycatcher have
> > visited the state this fall, it is equally important for the state records
> > to know how long these birds remain. Thus PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE continue to
> > report to the WSO any later dates as this is essential for our
> > understanding of these birds. Perhaps the RC will give a reprieve to
> > documentation of these late dates - but I am dubious of that. Late dates
> > are as critical as first dates - so keep those reports coming. One of the
> > weaknesses in state bird records is that birders all flock to see a rare
> > bird as soon as possible. Then, once checked off their personal state
> > list, the bird is ignored. I hope the Records Committee stops encouraging
> > this tendency. A great example of this is the Vermillion Flycatcher. This
> > bird, in other states, has a tendency (once found) to stick around awhile.
> > The report that put this species on the s
> > tate list was made by a birder named Brenda Rozella. She first noted
> > this bird (an adult male) on Nov. 10, 2001 in Jefferson County. She took
> > great photos! That was enough to place this bird officially on the state
> > list. But she did not stop there. She continued to monitor the bird - and
> > it continued to stay in place until Dec. 2, 2001, thus placing it into the
> > winter season. There had been 4 written reports previous to this (but were
> > not backed by photos or by other birders reporting). Is it true that all
> > four reports were of one day wonders? or was it simply that the birders
> > reported the birds once and thought that was sufficient for our thirst for
> > knowledge? I suspect the latter. But no one will ever know. Will the
> > Inca Dove, now pinned against the shore of Lake Michigan, remain into the
> > winter season? Who will know if birders are encouraged not to report.
> > Please, for the integrity of the state records, ignore the advice of the
> > RC and continue to monitor these
> > rare birds!
> > -- Bob Domagalski (at the moment sitting at his computer in St.
> > Nazianz but about to depart for the Vermillion)
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
>
> ####################
> You received this email because you are subscribed to the Wisconsin Birding
> Network (Wisbirdn).
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or SUBSCRIBE, use the Wisbirdn web interface at:
> //www.freelists.org/list/wisbirdn
> To set DIGEST or VACATION modes, use the Wisbirdn web interface at:
> //www.freelists.org/list/wisbirdn
> Visit Wisbirdn ARCHIVES at: //www.freelists.org/archives/wisbirdn
>
> ####################
You received this email because you are subscribed to the Wisconsin Birding
Network (Wisbirdn).
To UNSUBSCRIBE or SUBSCRIBE, use the Wisbirdn web interface at:
//www.freelists.org/list/wisbirdn
To set DIGEST or VACATION modes, use the Wisbirdn web interface at:
//www.freelists.org/list/wisbirdn
Visit Wisbirdn ARCHIVES at: //www.freelists.org/archives/wisbirdn
Other related posts:
