I understand Geoff’s point on Q3 regarding third-party eBird submissions by
people wandering about in the field and I agree with it. However, it does
raise the issue of who is a legitimate home-counter. If an unknown party
located within the circle happens to report something from a fixed site on
count day, it seems to me irrelevant as to whether the compiler had this person
on a list of home counters the day before the count or not.
I’m asking Geoff to clarify this in his spare time, ha ha.
Also, I wonder about the backtracking situation if the additional time on foot
actually results in new birds added, e.g. flyby accipiters or a flock of ducks
going over that were missed on the outward stroll.
Alan Contreras
Eugene, Oregon
acontrer56@xxxxxxxxx
On Jan 5, 2017, at 9:07 AM, Tim Johnson <tim.the.fisherman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi all:
As co-compiler of the Salem Christmas Bird Count, a few new questions
regarding CBC procedures and protocol emerged from the fray this year. So I
put the questions to Geoff LeBaron, Christmas Bird Count Director, National
Audubon Society. You may be interested in his responses.
Question 1: eBird traveling protocol. Several of our team leaders use eBird
to record their Salem CBC observations. eBird has instructed us to count
miles in only one direction if we do any back tracking on a traveling count.
Should we follow this same protocol when recording traveling CBC effort?
Geoff's response: "First, with regard to the distance traveled, yes, you
should only count the one-way distance for a given route if the party needs
to double back to the starting point. So a walk of 2 miles out and 2 miles
back along the same trail is tallied as 2 miles total, not 4."
Question 2: In July of 2016, the AUO changed the name of the Western
Scrub-Jay to California Scrub-Jay. I am not able to add this new species to
the Audubon Christmas Bird Count Bird Checklist. Please advise.
Geoff's response: "With regard to the scrub-jay split, much to my chagrin
we were not able to update the species table in the CBC to accept the split.
Please enter your birds as Western Scrub-Jay. When the table is updated,
your data will be allocated retroactively to California Scrub-Jay."
Question 3: I've learned that some compilers are adding species that were
submitted to eBird in their count circle on count day that were independent
from their team efforts. Is this acceptable? If so, how should effort be
handled? Also, how do we avoid double counting birds? Are there any situation
in which this is procedure is acceptable?
Geoff's response: "It is absolutely not acceptable to add eBird or any other
reports of birds that were not tallied by the folks on your official field
parties. Doing that would totally mess with the CBC protocol, as it’s
unlikely to be a full check-list and introduces a severe likelihood of
double-counting if a full eBird checklist is added. So only species and
numbers from your official field parties (and feeder watchers) should
included with your CBC tallies. The only time this would be acceptable is if
the eBird list is submitted from a group or person who has already been in
touch to be a part of the count, as many CBC participants do upload their
route tallies to eBird. But first and foremost those types of tallies are
CBC data that are uploaded to eBird, and not vice-versa." Note, the bold
emphasis is Geoff's.
Question 4: This year, we anticipated that we would have considerable snow,
icy roads and sub freezing temperatures on count day. Some team leaders asked
us to change the count day. Many factors were considered. Eventually, we
decided to stick with the scheduled date even though conditions were not
ideal. We did advise all of our team leaders to not jeopardize their safety
or that of their team participants. Do you have any advise if this situation
should happen again in the future? From a scientific standpoint, is it
important to try to keep count day on the same day each year?
Geoff's response: "As far as inclement weather on count day and how that
affects your routes and results, as you told your party leaders first and
foremost is the safety of your observers. So if conditions are dangerous,
it’s best to cancel or postpone the count. If folks can go out, even in
reduced numbers or with reduced effort/distance, the data are still valuable
as we do gather the effort data as well as the bird data so the results are
still meaningful to researchers using CBC data. If a reduced-effort count is
necessary, it is better if possible to stick as much as you can with your
regular routes, as then the results are more comparable to normal seasons."
Tim Johnson
Co-compiler, Salem Christmas Bird Count
