I do have an open couch policy and will guide when I am in town. Good luck catching me when I am in town though. GO RED RAIDERS! Cameron Carver Currently not in Lubbock. Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 15, 2013, at 18:53, peter keyel <labtroglodyte@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I think Bruce Bodson's post is right on the money here. These issues are not > actually about doing good science or following what the science/evidence > suggests. It's about knocking down the data that contradicts your data/what > you want to do so that you can convince people that you are right in doing > what you want to do. > > If they came up with a stat claiming that 350' is far enough, you need to > knock that one down. If it's old, if it's in the wrong state/habitat, if > there are new studies, if you can find a couple examples where endangered > species/habitat had problems with the close buffer, etc, these are all things > that will help knock it down. > > If they attack eBird data, the data can and need to be defended. While there > are some known caveats to eBird data, there are caveats on all databases and > it remains the premier database on bird sightings. What would probably be > very helpful would be to contact the eBird staff and see if they have > statements highlighting the science (ie # of publications using eBird data) > done using eBird (especially using Texas and ideally your county data), the > new avenues of research eBird data has opened up, and the fact that the > reviewers are all expert, local birders who ensure good, quality data goes > into eBird. These sorts of statements probably go into their grant > applications, so it should be readily available. > > FWIW, Missouri tracks bird sitings in their Conservation Areas and State > Parks through their CACHE/SPARKS databases. These databases put the data into > eBird as well. Clearly they value eBird as a national repository of bird data. > > If it was the developer's biologist who didn't like the inclusion of other > counties, it doesn't matter what he thinks, just whether you can adequately > address his concerns to the committee. His goal is to knock down your science. > > Cameron made a good point about skill levels of biologists involved. If the > people who have put eBird data in for your county/area have many years' worth > of eBird data, that will further counter claims that eBird is entered by a > bunch of novices, especially if the birders have more experience with the > area than the developers' biologists. > > When you look into these alternative databases, you need to do so with full > scientific rigor. By that, I mean finding all of the flaws, from checklist > density, any potential observer biases, sampling biases, lack of effort > information, adequate description of species observed, no pictures in their > database, etc. > > These sorts of issues also help illustrate why it is really helpful for > everyone out birding to put their observations into eBird. There are a lot of > places (especially up here in the South Plains/Panhandle) that are still > underbirded, so the data aren't as strong. If any of y'all want to come up > and help bird up here, we get Evening Grosbeaks and had a Gyrfalcon. Probably > Black-billed Magpies/Rosy-finches could be found, too, if the Panhandle was > better birded. Plus, I'll generously offer Cameron's or Anthony's couch as a > place to stay when coming up to bird the South Plains/Panhandle ;) > > Peter Keyel > Lubbock, TX > labtroglodyte@xxxxxxxxx > > "Gonna buy a fast car > Put on my lead boots > And take a long, long drive" > -The Who, "My Wife" > > > > > Edit your Freelists account settings for TEXBIRDS at > //www.freelists.org/list/texbirds > > Reposting of traffic from TEXBIRDS is prohibited without seeking permission > from the List Owner > > Edit your Freelists account settings for TEXBIRDS at //www.freelists.org/list/texbirds Reposting of traffic from TEXBIRDS is prohibited without seeking permission from the List Owner