[wisb] Re: Warbler Quiz (long, no sightings)
- From: "Bettie R. Harriman" <bettie@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: dolichovespula@xxxxxxxxx,wisbirdn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 13:18:21 -0500
I think Ted's questions are well stated. Jim Frank tried to answer
some of them in an article he wrote for the Passenger Pigeon a few
years back. The article, called Rare Bird Documentation, appeared in
Vol. 69, No. 3, Fall 2007, pages 349-357. He uses his own experience
of writing up the extrememly rare (for Wisconsin) Yellow-browed
Warbler that he saw in the fall of 2006.
He gives the step by step process he went through. Give it read.
Bettie Harriman
Pigeon Editor
At 12:47 PM 8/21/2012, Edward Keyel wrote:
>Hi all,
>I think that Ryan brings up a very important point here. Why are written
>descriptions so bad? Or, phrased slightly differently, why are they
>written so poorly? I know that it's certainly something that I struggle
>with, and if photos are better 95ish% of the time, then I'm not the only
>one. Some of the questions I'd like to bring up are what makes for a good
>write-up as well as what makes for being able to make a good write up? Is
>it enough to say that a bird belongs to a given order//family, or should
>those traits be explained as well? How much attention has really been paid
>to the bird itself? Are you learning what the bird actually looks/sounds
>like (be it shape, color, behavior, etc), or are you just recognizing it?
>
>As Ryan mentions, the advantage to photos is that not everyone describes or
>sees things the same way. Photos (or recordings) give the outside
>observer(s) a better connection to the subject matter. We also know that
>photos can be misleading, due to angle, light, behavior, etc, but some of
>that information can be provided as well to help reduce that. I tend to
>try to take photos because I know that my written descriptions are weak.
>Is this a crutch I'm leaning on?
>
>It's easy to look in a book, see what traits are pointed out there, and
>then go ahead and describe those characteristics in a write-up. How does
>one write a reliable write-up, that doesn't sound like it's taken directlly
>from a book (be it because a book was directly used or effectively
>memorized), yet the key points are still addressed?
>
>It seems to me that field notes are enormously important, yet I very rarely
>take them. I'm not sure if it's because I'm too lazy and don't want to
>take that much time to do so, or if I'm too daunted at the vast task of
>attempting to write down a myriad of information about one bird, let alone
>trying to do so for multiple birds. Is my lack of artistic ability such a
>significant handicap because I'm unable to make accurate sketches and may
>not be able to process and absorb color and shape behavior well enough? Is
>my vocabulary also limiting me, because I used choppy instead of snappy?
>
>Are there some sample write-ups available for viewing somewhere? Better
>still, sample write-ups with explanations as to why it is good or bad?
>What are some of the most frustrating phrases? I have to imagine only
>getting information like "good view" or "great light" could be very
>irritating (my apologies for past uses of such simple (for me) and
>frustrating (for the reviewer) descriptions). Some bad descriptions seem
>fairly self-explanatorily bad. Look at page such-and-such in so-and-so's
>book and it looked just like that. Are there others that people seem to
>think are good descriptions that really aren't?
>
>I find that I'm always frustrated when my records are not accepted.
>However, it's not because "the grumble, grumble records committee didn't
>accept my record" or because "the stupid e-bird reviewer hates me," but
>because I couldn't write well enough to convince a group of very
>experienced birders that I saw the bird I claimed. Especially if I had
>"good looks" and "great light", one would hope that I should be able to
>provide the salient points as to why the species is what I say it is, yet
>sometimes that's not always the case.
>
>I suppose that's the beauty of birding though, is that there's always more
>to learn and people to help you learn it. My apologies if this is too
>rambly/incoherent.
>
>Good birding,
>Ted Keyel
>Sun Prairie,
>Dane County
>
>On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Ryan Brady <ryanbrady10@xxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>
> >
> > Sorry Al but photos are better than written descriptions 95-99 times out
> > of 100. Same as seeing the bird in the field? Absolutely not. But
> > conclusive in many, many, many more cases than written descriptions. And
> > the alternative is no photo, which yields zero accountability and little
> > opportunity for anyone to advance on difficult identifications.
> >
> > Sorry for the mini-rant, this is one of my pet peeves.
> >
> > Ryan Brady
> > Washburn, Bayfield County, WI
> > http://www.pbase.com/rbrady
> >
> > > From: alschirmacher@xxxxxxxx
> > > To: wisbirdn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: [wisb] Re: Warbler Quiz
> > > Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 06:40:15 -0500
> > >
> > > While I enjoy warbler quizzes (far more than empid quizzes!), this
> > series of photos brings a discussion point to mind:
> > >
> > > * Relying on photos as the ultimate identification tool is nearly as
> > fraught with peril as a written description.
> > >
> > > Yet it is so tempting!
> > >
> > > Al Schirmacher
> > > Columbus, WI temporarily
> > > Princeton, MN again next week
> > >
> > > PS Many thanks to Wisbirders for their recommendations, directions and
> > encouragement during my return to Wisconsin. Had the opportunity to get
> > away on occasion to a variety of spots from Horicon to Madison, resulting
> > in 100+ birds and 30+ butterflies, including a life bird, two state birds
> > and six year birds. Mom passed yesterday, anticipate returning to Minnesota
> > Sunday.
> > >
> > > Special thanks to Peter Fissel, he's a trooper!
> > >
> > > ####################
> > > 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
> > >
> > > ####################
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>####################
>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
####################
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:
