From a Records Committtee and eBird perspective, such heard-only records are indeed very difficult to deal with. I don't have much to add to what others have said except that you should try to take a recording. Handheld recorders are relatively cheap and sometimes effective. If the bird is close or loud enough, recording clips with the video function of your digital camera or even a cell phone is often possible. A final bit of advice would be to make sure you write down all the info on what you heard before you listen to any recordings -- it's so easy for everything to blend together after you start listening to your favorite birding-by-ear resources. The Records Committee has a number of species requiring review that are likely to be "heard-only" and we plan to develop criteria/guidance on suitably documenting these species. This discussion has helped inform some basics of that process, so thanks. Ryan Brady Washburn, Bayfield County, WI http://www.pbase.com/rbrady > Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 17:42:30 -0500 > Subject: [wisb] Re: What else sounds like... Menominee Co. > From: calocitta8@xxxxxxxxx > CC: Wisbirdn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Hey all- > the best approach here (and in many cases of documentation) is to both > describe what you heard, AND describe exactly how you ruled out other > species, even if you did so unconsciously. Cover all the bases and > overwhelm the records committee. As mentioned, N. Waterthrush is one of the > warblers with a really big song - it's very loud. It shares this with > Louisiana Waterthrush, Ovenbird, Connecticut Warbler, and Kentucky Warbler. > Carolina Wrens also have very loud songs (though structurally quite > different than waterthrush). > > Other things to describe - the number of parts to the song, and define the > parts (I tend to think of N Waterthrush having 3 part songs, L. Waterthrush > 3-4, depending on how you define it). Say whether those parts were > generally increasing/decreasing in pitch or staying even. Say something > about the notes that make up each part. Mention loudness, harshness, nasal > quality. > > The issue is that the committee or ebird reviewer will say to themselves > "What other options fit the stated description?" Even if one of those is > not necessarily more likely, if it's at all reasonable compared with your > potential record, they won't be able to rule it out and will not be able to > accept the record. > > I for one would focus on being clear about how you ruled out Louisiana > Waterthrush, which can produce song with many of the same characteristics > as Northern, and in migration could very easily occur in the same habitat. > It is also expected to arrive before Northern Waterthrush, and therefore > would be a species that reviewers would want to rule out. > > Jesse Ellis > Madison, WI > > On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Tom Wood <tcwood729@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > I have on occasion heard a Northern Waterthrush and thought Connecticut > > Warbler. Both have loud, rather choppy songs and I am not very good at > > sound identification, being able to identify probably only a bit better > > than > > 50% of the birds I hear. Also, when you are hoping for something like a > > Connecticut > > Warbler, any similar song probably makes the sought after species jump into > > your head. In your case, Connecticut Warbler would be the least likely > > species > > you would hear in April or early May since they are late migrants. Besides, > > you probably know both species well and wouldn't have to think about what > > you were hearing, anyway. > > Some species lend themselves well to song description. Whip-poor-will , > > Chuck-will's-widow, Yellow Rail, The Empidonax flycatcher complex, etc. But > > how would you document the song of a goldfinch, House Finch, or a Winter > > Wren? Those would be too complex for me to even attempt. > > I guess the best one can do when attempting a description of a song would > > be > > to describe the general nature of the song (trill, phrases, buzzy sounds, > > whistles, grunts,etc), then describe how many syllables you hear and which > > syllable has the strongest emphasis, if there is variation. Does the song > > rise in pitch or fall in pitch? Is it delivered rapidly (Prairie Warbler) > > or > > slowly (like Red-eyed Vireo)? High frequency (Cape May Warbler) or lower > > (Mourning Warbler). > > I use mnemonic devices (Fitz-bew for Willow Flycatcher) to remember some > > songs and these would probably be helpful to a records committee in getting > > a feel for what you heard, even though everybody probably uses different > > ones. > > I hope you can come up with something to document your Northern Waterthrush > > because it would add to the remarkable early occurrence data that has > > characterized this spring. I think that in the "previous experience with > > species..." section you should probably note that the location was a known > > location for > > the species last year. > > > > Thomas Wood,Menomonee Falls, Waukesha County > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: wisbirdn-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wisbirdn-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > On Behalf Of Nancy Richmond > > Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 9:38 PM > > To: Wisbirdn > > Subject: [wisb] What else sounds like... Menominee Co. > > > > Hi All - > > I ran the second replicate of my Red-Shouldered Hawk Survey Route in > > Northwestern Menominee County this morning (with Tribal permission). I had > > more Barred owls calling than on my Owl Survey route and even saw one! And > > more Yellow Bellied Sapsuckers than most people see in a year (34 in 3 > > hours) This is great habitat for woodpeckers! I had a couple Red-Shoulders > > respond verbally, but didn't see any. > > > > My question is... What else sounds similar to a Northern Waterthrush? > > I heard what I am certain is a Northern Waterthrush in appropriate habitat. > > eBird asked for confirmation. I haven't found a good way to describe sound > > in type. Imitating a bird song is only slightly better - how limited we > > humans are vocally! So I typed the stupid sounding explanation (wouldn't > > pass muster with the Records Committee).... "it matches the call on the CD" > > Which it did. Exactly. And even if I hadn't had the Stokes Bird songs > > along, > > I was certain that's what it was. It's pretty distinctive. Loud, ringing. > > with that whippy little ending. Singing in a wooded swamp... > > (Same swamp had the same call last spring too) > > > > I didn't have time to find the bird and get visual confirmation - I was > > running a survey protocol. > > > > So eBird asked for confirmation of today's bird and I provided my lame > > evidence. > > > > The big problem is I heard the exact same call in the same spot on my first > > run of the hawk route, which was April 5. If it is/was a Northern > > Waterthrush, it would have been record early for the state. There are only > > 3 records before April 14 - 2 in Milwaukee county 1 in Door. So here I am > > better than halfway up the state with a bird that would break the record by > > 4 days. How likely is that?...hmmm > > > > So.. what might it be, if it wasn't a Northern Waterthrush? I really am > > interested in similar sounding birds that would be less unlikely, even > > though I'm about 90 % sure :-) > > > > And a more general question - Can you document "heard only" birds > > adequately? How? > > > > Nancy Richmond > > Polar- Langlade Co. > > > > > > #################### > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > ----- > > No virus found in this message. > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2411/4955 - Release Date: 04/23/12 > > > > ----- > > No virus found in this message. > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2411/4955 - Release Date: 04/23/12 > > > > #################### > > 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 > > > > > > > > > -- > Jesse Ellis > Post-doctoral Researcher > Dept. of Zoology > University of Wisconsin - Madison > Madison, Dane Co, WI > > > #################### > 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