[orebird] Re: eBird County Filters
- From: David Irons <llsdirons@xxxxxxx>
- To: "orebird@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <orebird@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 08:52:09 -0700
Russ,
My thinking follows Doug's. In terms of preferred protocols, traveling
checklists should not exceed 5 miles, but not all users understand this. Do we
categorically invalidate all traveling lists of greater than 5 miles? I don't.
I first look at where the count is made. If someone where to submit a checklist
for a ten-mile stretch of Hwy 20 between Brothers and Hampton (monotypic
landscape) I would validate it.
I tend error on the side of liberal for common/abundant species, figuring that
over counts are virtually impossible or at least very unlikely. I also have
interest in reviewing reports of common species because someone reports three
more than the filter threshold.
Great work on the Excel spreadsheet by the way. Having this document to work
from is huge. To my knowledge no other state has this.
Dave
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 24, 2015, at 6:05 AM, "W. Douglas Robinson "
> <w.douglas.robinson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Russ
>
> I think we generally set the numbers based on expected max counts for a
> single day of birding at the relevant season. Some people still do a
> checklist per day of effort. So, per day not per checklist counts. 25 is
> probably still too high for ghow; maybe 10 is more realistic?
>
> Doug
>
>> On Mar 24, 2015, at 12:25 AM, Russ Namitz <namitzr@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> I'm sorry, I haven't made it through all the archives yet. I'm sure this
>> question has been answered.
>>
>> I'm going through the Harney County filters and thinking to myself, yes, of
>> course there are 25 Great Horned Owls in Harney County, but no observer
>> should be submitting this number from a single checklist. So, my thought is
>> to set filters from the perspective of a single checklist, not from a county
>> standpoint.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Russ
Other related posts:
