[wisb] Re: Too Many Christmas Bird Count Circles?
- From: Gayle Davis <humnbrd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: wisbirdn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 21:57:35 -0600
There's not much more to say that hasn't already been said in *support
of maintaining CBCs* regardless of the number of participants. It would
seem to me consistency is the most important factor in maintaining a
degree of science to these counts, and I don't feel the importance of
CBCS could ever be overstated. I took over the compiler role for the
Owen CBC a few years back, and I have three circle maps: one with six
routes, one with seven, and one with eight routes (the latter for use if
I'm realllllly flush some year with participants!) As Chris stated, I
would have no idea of what to do with 15 or more counters, and the idea
of having the luxury of twenty-four routes blows my mind!
The Owen count is _consistently_ counted by six to seven parties, with
one to two people in a party, and there is nothing "substandard" about
our coverage or our efforts that would lead us to consider
"decommissioning" the count. Participants go at it wholeheartedly and
the results of their work are invaluable IMO. If the Owen circle is
counted by approximately the same number of counters yearly, patterns
will become evident in bird populations, even if we've missed birds on
the count due to having so much of an area to cover. There's still a
consistency in what's been missed, too :) During compiling, the
conversations always involve observations as to what bird species seem
to be down, or up, or steady in numbers.
There are five CBCs conducted within a relatively small area here in
north-central Wisconsin, those being Owen, Spencer, Willard, Gilman, and
Medford. All would be considered to have "substandard participation" if
that notion was to be entertained (also a notion I, frankly, felt
somewhat insulted by). We (the compilers and counters) make the counts
work because we collaborate our efforts, and many counters participate
in three or more of the five counts. Yes, this year is a bit tougher on
scheduling due to how the holidays are falling, but we've managed to
make it work and there is no overlapping of dates. The counts are
running from Dec 14th to as late as Jan 1st to promote sufficient
participation. Emails go out to potential participants to ensure it
looks like we'll be adequately "staffed" before we finalize the dates.
I hope that we, as birders concerned about ensuring birds are around for
years to come, continue to conduct _all_ CBCs with regularity,
consistency, and dedication.
Gayle Davis, compiler Owen CBC, participant Spencer, Willard, Gilman,
and Medford CBCs
Owen, Taylor Cty
On 11/29/2011 2:46 PM, Andrea Szymczak wrote:
> All,
> With the holiday's falling squarely on two key weekends this year, the
> problem of coverage is particularly acute! I am well aware that the
> proverbial "can" is being opened by raising this topic, but let me offer my
> Milwaukee circle as an example:
> In the most populated area of the state I have the benefit of coverage far
> better than many areas. Here's how it roughly breaks down: I will
> probably have 15-17 field parties to cover 24 sections within the circle
> (some "popular" locations within a particular section sometimes have their
> own parties, like Lake Park, so certain sections receive multiple coverage
> because of this). Of those 24 sections, 5-6 of my field parties will have
> to cover at least 2 sections. In several cases, only one field observer is
> available to cover 2 sections by themselves! In addition, several other
> parties are currently dividing their time between the Milwaukee and a
> neighboring count.
> Please do not misunderstand, I do not outline the Milwaukee count to
> "complain", but merely to illustrate that even in an area with many
> participants to draw on, there are challenges to ensuring complete coverage
> of the circle. Perhaps, in regions of the state with a multitude of
> counts, certain counts ought to be "decommissioned". This would also be
> appropriate for other counts that have ongoing substandard levels of
> participation. My thoughts are that diluted, half-hearted coverage does a
> disservice to the purpose of these winter survey's. Personally, I would
> prefer a smaller number of counts with more thorough coverage.
> Andrea Szymczak
> Milwaukee CBC participant& compiler, Palmyra count participant
> Waukesha, WI
>
> ####################
> You received this email because you are subscribed to the Wisconsin Birding
> Network (Wisbirdn).
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or SUBSCRIBE, use the Wisbirdn web interface at:
> //www.freelists.org/list/wisbirdn
> To set DIGEST or VACATION modes, use the Wisbirdn web interface at:
> //www.freelists.org/list/wisbirdn
> Visit Wisbirdn ARCHIVES at: //www.freelists.org/archives/wisbirdn
>
>
>
> Internal Virus Database is out of date.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.454 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4025 - Release Date: 11/18/11
> 19:34:00
>
####################
You received this email because you are subscribed to the Wisconsin Birding
Network (Wisbirdn).
To UNSUBSCRIBE or SUBSCRIBE, use the Wisbirdn web interface at:
//www.freelists.org/list/wisbirdn
To set DIGEST or VACATION modes, use the Wisbirdn web interface at:
//www.freelists.org/list/wisbirdn
Visit Wisbirdn ARCHIVES at: //www.freelists.org/archives/wisbirdn
Other related posts:
