Doug makes many good points, which is why my personal use of ebird is patchy. I
don't use it at all for personal list-keeping, so I generally use it only when
I have a reasonable chunk of highly local data or when I want to flag an
unseasonable record or notable number. It really isn't designed for tracking
true rarities and I did not file a list at all when I saw it.
Alan Contreras
Eugene, Oregon
acontrer56@xxxxxxxxx
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 15, 2016, at 5:08 PM, W. Douglas Robinson
<w.douglas.robinson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
If I could offer a perspective as a researcher who uses eBird data, it is
sooooo much better if you map the exact location where you were standing when
you counted birds instead of selecting some other nearby location, such as a
pre-defined hotspot, unless you were actually standing in that particular
hotspot.
If you take the time to count all birds present when you were looking for the
rarity AND you enter an eBird checklist and answer Yes to the question, Are
you reporting all birds you were able to identify?, then it is far superior
to map the exact location where you were standing.
If you are just noting the rarity to build your own lists and you are
answering No, you did not include all birds you detected in your checklist,
then the precision of the location matters much less.
Why does it matter to be precise? Researchers often wish to associate
occurrences of species and numbers of each with habitat characteristics
within a certain radius of where you were located when counting birds. For
the Common Scoter, imagine standing at the Schooner Creek Bridge pull-out and
centering a circle of radius, say 200 m, around that point, then determining
habitat composition. You’d have part of the bay, part of the highway, and a
wooded hillside behind you, which explains why some counts done at the scoter
spot have had Wrentit, Pacific Wren and other forest birds. Then, imagine if
you found the Common Scoter over at Mo’s, did the same habitat analysis
within 200 m, you’d have some bay and you’d have a bunch of urbanized
habitat, not much woods and probably no Wrentit or Pacific Wren.
So, shifting your location away from where you were actually standing and
counting birds is usually far less than ideal. It adds a lot of noise to the
bird-habitat data.
Please consider the great value of mapping as precisely as possible where you
were located when counting birds. That value is far greater than the value of
“cleaner” maps.
It is also much friendlier to your fellow birders who are chasing a
particular bird. If you map it exactly, people can go to the exact location
of the bird. If you map it in a hotspot, they often have to wonder exactly
where the bird was. I like it when people map with GPS coordinates,
personally, because I can plug those numbers into Google Maps and get a pin
dropped on the exact location to look for the bird. Very little guess work
involved. Just go to that exact spot and start looking.
All the best!
Doug
On Nov 15, 2016, at 11:14 AM, Russ Namitz <namitzr@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jamie & Stefan~
An appropriate stakeout Hotspot like Jamie suggests would be something like
"stakeout Common Scoter, Siletz Bay (2016)" I don't feel like that would be
specific enough as this bird ranges over a mile in distance depending on the
tide. I like the idea of A) using existing Hotspots and B) using the
closest Hotspot to the bird depending on the tide.
While Stefan makes a good point about accurately representing the bird's
location, one can see the entire lower bay from the Siletz Bay Park.
Though the pullout that he describes is a good location, there is already a
Hotspot that adequately covers the viewable area.
The Josephine Young Park is ok, but doesn't quite cover the northern
section. When I first saw the bird yesterday from Josephine County Park, we
then moved to SW 69th St and then to SW Fleet Ave. It seems inefficient to
have all three markers for the same bird. This information is really more
appropriate for the comments section of the checklist.
If it were me personally as eBird Reviewer, I would request that that all
observers use these 2 Hotspots, include details of observation location or
bird location and INVALIDATE the rest. It will not affect one's personal
list, but will alleviate dozens of extraneous markers that are all 20 yards
apart from each other.
Good birding,
Russ Namitz
Medford, OR
From: Jamie Simmons <sapsuckers@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 10:43 AM
To: Russ Namitz
Cc: OBOL Freelist
Subject: Re: [obol] Common Scoter eBird checklist REQUEST
Why not create a "stakeout" hotspot for this bird, located in north Siltez
Bay?
If you aren't familiar with what I'm referring to, do Hotspot search on
stakeout and you'll see others that were created for this purpose.
(See: http://help.ebird.org/customer/portal/articles/1900690 and scroll down ;
to item #4.)
All About: Hotspots | eBird
help.ebird.org
Hotspots are an integral part of the way that eBirders submit observations.
Many of the locations that you go birding at are classified as "eBird
Hotspots."
And request (on OBOL) that folks add the coordinates and/or description of
their exact location.
Jamie Simmons
Corvallis
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Russ Namitz <namitzr@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello all~
In an attempt to keep checklists under control with less clutter, I would
suggest using one of the 2 eBird HotSpots in the area, depending on where
you observed the duck.
The closest HotSpot near the mouth of Schooner Creek is the Siletz Bay
Park. http://ebird.org/ebird/pnw/hotspot/L2488587
The close HotSpot for the Cutler City sightings is Josephine Young Park.
http://ebird.org/ebird/pnw/hotspot/L604718
It would create less clutter and I'm sure the Lincoln County eBird Reviewer
Deb Holland would appreciate it.
This is a REQUEST for future and past eBird checklists. If you have
already submitted, it would be great if you could go in and merge or change
the location.
Thanks,
Russ Namitz
Medford, OR
