[texbirds] eBird, science, and carrots (a bit long)

  • From: Matt Heindel <mtheindel@xxxxxxx>
  • To: texbirds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 13:33:49 -0400 (EDT)

I find some of the posts regarding eBirdinteresting, as this medium represents 
different things to different people,and many of the posts are written as if 
eBird can or should only be as the writerframes the issue. But, we see this 
differently. Indeed, there are some of uswho continue to be concerned over the 
quality of the data and as the mass increases(more people submitting- even with 
the best of intentions), the more thisproblem grows. 


If it were not for incredibly diligentreviewers, eBird would be a flaming mess. 
These folks, unpaid, have to spend anamazing amount of time dealing with this 
ever-increasing number of submissions,many of which are submitted by folks who 
need to sharpen their identificationskills, better understand status and 
distribution, and embrace the concept of aclean database. Of course, they do 
not think they are making mistakes and arelikely being earnest in their 
efforts, but …..And by the way, if the reviewerscould just toss out 
sightings, I think being unpaid volunteers is right, but Iknow many of these 
reviewers who go to a lot of effort to first coax moreinformation, coach people 
through identification issues, etc, and to do this canbe monumental. It might 
only be 3,4, or 5 emails for one submitter, but it ishours and hours for the 
reviewer if they are trying to help people along. And,if they are not trying to 
help people, the observers can get surly in theirattitude about the process. 
(Actually, I have had several examples forwarded tome where the submitters were 
plenty surly even with a helpful reviewer.)


I was particularly struck by this  recent eBird commentary:
There needs to be a carrot to encourage submittingdata, and that carrot is
seeing your own data appear on the map.  Ebird is a scientific database,
not a listers tool or a piece of software run bythe American Birding
Association. It appears to me that some very important data is not being
gathered.
 
First, eBird is not science: just becausepeople say it is, does not make it so. 
Let's not confuse the point. The databasehas value (and great potential), but I 
think calling this science is a problem.(In this post it is just the database 
being called scientific, but there aremany cases where people call eBird itself 
science). Perhaps that is a goodgoal, but I think it is wiser to change the 
verbiage (and the debate) to focuson the value of the data, the shortfalls, and 
how these shortfalls might beaddressed. If some think this is science, ok, it 
is your right to use anamorphous definition, but we won't get far on that 
discussion.


As with every bird sighting repository, forexample North American Birds and its 
earlier forms, there are mistakes and anadvantage of eBird is the ability to 
correct them at some point, much harder todo in the old print version. But, as 
the increasing number of sightings areentered, the borderline identifications, 
or borderline early and late dates areeasily obfuscated. I have previously 
complained (in an area roughly San Antonio and pointseast) over fall 
Orange-crowned Warblers (for nominate orestera, generally lateSeptember at the 
early end) and Black-chinned Hummingbirds (ad males usuallygone in Aug; most 
gone by mid-Sep) but have been told by others that"there are a lot of records 
in eBird, so what is the problem?"  Yup, if they were there, then that must 
bewhat really happened….


In the above clip, I see that the databaseis said to be scientific and yet see 
that the very normal and human emotionenters into the fray (gotta have that 
carrot, etc). It is the emotional aspect,a typically (and understandable) human 
trait, that is not the friend ofscientific data. 


When I talk to the key people involved witheBird (all of whom are good people, 
good birders, and well intended), they maketwo points that are correct but miss 
my criticisms. First, we can always goback and edit out things we find to be 
mistakes. True. Got it. But, it is notthe obvious mistakes that concern me- 
it's the little ones as those are harderto differentiate. Second, we can sort 
data any way we like to get a"real" picture. The problem with this solution is 
you have to knowthe answer before you can ask the question. As an example, back 
to myOrange-crowned Warbler: I could only include OCWA after 25 Sep, and look 
intoall earlier claims to decide if they should be included in some 
fictionalwrite-up I was doing. But, that is because I know orestera should not 
yet behere. For others, they will look at the graph and see that there are a 
lot ofreports and so that greenish thing they had here on Labor Day must be an 
early OCWA. Even well-intendedbirders who want to see if their suspected 
sighting is unusual might use eBirdas a gauge, but if not governed by a good 
reviewer, they could be reading baddata……And, in this area people trying to 
be helpful often post their eBird liststo Texbirds so even if a reviewer has 
nixed a sighting after the fact, otherbirders will not necessarily know that 
and could then more likely make asimilar mistake. If we had great reviewers 
everywhere, we could better scrubthe data but a) this is not yet possible, and 
b) it takes a lot of time bythese volunteers. 


We have different objectives with regard toeBird and only the opinions of those 
in charge really count. A simpledelineation in these objectives might be speed 
and tranquility (happysubmitters) on the one side versus quality on the other 
side. It is quite frustrating forsome of us to see an unconstrained eBird being 
pushed by many people that emphasizeseeing their data fast (why aren't my 
sightings showing up right away?), aswell as the ever-present battle over 
whether someone did or did not have whatthey claimed. It is human nature. I get 
it. And eBird is with us to stay. I getthat, too. But, as we waddle down this 
road, there are opportunities to shiftthe value of the database and, for those 
most interested in the quality of thedata, we need to find ways to push emotion 
and other human frailties aside.This problem is not unique to eBird either- 
just ask any NAB compiler aboutgrief they have received from birders not having 
a record included. Thehuman/emotional side of this passion is a real challenge, 
but if we can placethe emotion into proper perspective, we might one day 
approach something that might,maybe, resemble something scientific.


Matt Heindel
Fair Oaks Ranch, TX

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

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. texbirds
  3. Archive
  4. 03-2013