———————————————————————
I’m pretty distracted with everything else going on in the world these days, so only happened to check the blog a few days back to discover 60+ comments (still continuing) on the last post — probably only a few individuals involved, but still will start a fresh “open thread” here if anyone wishes to begin anew with some IBWO-related discussion (or you can continue at previous post if preferred, but I think hard to follow).
I will ask 2 things (just for lack of time though, will try to stay out of things):
1) please don’t engage in personal attacks on other interested parties, and
2) I’d prefer if those using the “Anonymous” tag would still give themselves a "label," at beginning or end of comment, to make it easier to read who is saying what to whom about what. Label could be “Abe Lincoln” or “R-9348172-MWX4” for all I care so long as you use it consistently, so your comments (and who you're responding to) can be more easily tracked.
———————————————————————
80 comments:
This is Bob from Michigan. I am quite technologically backward so please forgive me for and "goof ups". I have been hoping against hope since the late 1960's that someone would produce definative evidence that there are still Ivory Bills in this world. I would like to share that in February of this year my wife and I took a hike in the Florida Panther refuge. On our hike a Pileated Woodpecker flew out of heavy cover and landed on a tree a short (maybe 15 feet) ways in front of us. My heart skipped a beat and I think my eyes bugged out. My wife, ever cool, simply said "quite a woodpecker". It was very large bird and immediately I was looking for IBWO indicators while I dropped my camera and tripped over my own feet. In a way I am glad it was not an IBWO as I would not have any evidence other than my word. Ah well, it was exciting for several seconds and a few minutes before my heart rate returned to normal.
Bob you know my old friend from UOM AA Dr Vant Hoof?
We have been to the F. Strand multiple times with ADKs and the PNWR. The longest serving ranger in the area and multiple other long time researchers claim only one sighting in decades in the large area including the Big Cypress. BC area has much marl which often does not support much other than pahokee although there are strands of big cypress in BC and some hammocks.
The standing dead wood can be minimal to good but spotty after fires. Certainly there are not many IBs if any in this part of FL. Trained biologists and tour leaders say there are no IBs to their extensive knowledge.
The one sighting had described field marks that do not fit IBWO (slow flying, bad light, in flight, few field marks seen).
The very old IB mangrove sightings or slough sightings are confusing, old and no longer material. An aerial sighting this century is doubted by some S FL scientists.
Ok
John
Has this been posted on the forum? Not sure if it even allowed.
On Wednesday, May 13, from 2-5 pm EST, the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) will be holding an online Public Hearing about the proposed titanium mine on the doorstep of the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge.
Twin Pines Minerals, LLC, has now submitted two applications and yet the company has consistently failed to prove that they will cause no harm to the Okefenokee, the St. Marys River, or the Suwannee River. In fact, over 20 national and state organizations and myriad experts firmly believe that irreparable damage will be done to this rare and fragile environmental treasure.
It is imperative that the public has a voice in this crucial matter. Over 30,000 advocates have submitted written comments and now we ask you to take this next quick step.
Please join the online hearing for as much time as you can spare.
The meeting will be held using the WebEx platform. In order to attend the Virtual Public Meeting, you must RSVP by emailing CESAS-SpecialProjects@usace.army.mil Subject: “RSVP for 13 MAY Public Meeting TPM”. Make sure that you include your full name, email address, and contact phone number with area code.
Before the meeting, you will receive the meeting link and security code. Just click the link and follow the prompts.
FYI John
Recovery Plan IB 2010 comments. It is such a sad chapter how this entire event has shown that researchers, natural scientists, academics are so squeezed for funding their own projects that they would scapegoat the Ivory-billed.
Only a fraction of us in the underfunded community did this, but they were vocal as they elbowed there way into the IB story inclusive of the wording and working structure of the recovery plan.
Their signed petition submitted in the comments section of the recovery plan did not mention the general systemic underfunding for all rare species. Instead they emphasized that the IB is extinct or likely extinct so no money should be spent on the IB plan.
They attacked the symptom of the systemic underfunding instead of its cause and all for the chance of a few dollars they pimped themselves onto the recovery team.
And now they are left with no money and we are all left with fewer IBs.
Swth22
After various ivory-billed discoveries, and peer reviewed evidence from 14 to 16 years ago it was prudent for experienced avian surveyors to cover the most likely habitats for a few seasons. If an Ivory-bill(s) is present it is not that difficult to hear (kents; double knocks) or see one, when competent, trained surveyors utilize well thought out survey methods. The recovery plan provided funds for this type of work with their own “recovery team/Cornell approved” methods which cause my own caveats below.
Budgetary pragmatists, and skeptics hiding behind these bean counters on the recovery team, were allowed to take part in purposely burdening the survey teams with gathering data on non-Ivory billed species and in unnecessary ecological sets. These experienced skeptics might have been diabolical, assuming their premeditation, in the way they hoped to, and did incrementally, or worse, hamper the surveys from finding Ivory-bills. IB kents, d. knocks, s. knocks, feeding sign, etc. may be only encountered in one second per field week or in a few patches of trees; any unnecessary tasks substantially increase the chances of missing that rare IB data point. It's a rare bird, with a large range, that suffered severe non-stochastic selection (hunting takes out the least wary and most vocal).
Hearing, seeing, recording or photographing more IBs would not have looked good against the vocal skeptics, pot-committed reputations and assumed substantial egos. The recovery teams protagonists might have been forced to acquiesce to the budget conscious and skeptics due to the plan's own models and declarations that declared "the IB had a low probability of recovery". The over stated evidence controversy and a belief that more IBs would be discovered probably softened the push back against those that diluted the survey methods. And some protagonists might not have understood the concentration needed when surveying for a rare and relatively quiet quarry, in noisy and difficult habitat.
part 1
part 2
These official surveys and their closely allied searches acoustically covered some consequential percentage of the best public habitat for Ivory-bills in the US. However the experience of the surveyors and their methods were far from optimal. The young age of the surveyors made it impossible for them to have all the field and literature experience to be prepared to perform a high quality, with the highest detection probability, Ivory-billed survey. The best potential IBWO transect or point surveyor should have previously accumulated several years, to decades of skills and experience by extensive formal and informal SE US field survey presence. They should have a relaxed field presence even when several acoustic sounds per minute are ringing in the woods; they should be able to ID all 7 hypothetical sounds, if humanly possible . They are relaxed because their years of experience allows them to seamlessly ID to species the sounds as they occur, readying the listener immediately for the next field sound. Related is an immediate mental process of categorizing the sound into a non-IB category or IB category.
This type of specific experience is often found in those with years of varied experience with ecology and counting or surveying birds according to USFWS and Canadian BBS rules. Others also gain that type of skills over decades of IDing singing birds. I do not believe that a high percentage of field surveyors for the recovery team and partners had the highest skills needed, although undoubtedly almost all had some skills. Regardless they had some good chance of hearing or finding at least one or a few IBs in the US if the number of IBs were over a score of birds in the collective areas surveyed.
Survey Methods: Some or most surveys utilized ADKs. The super-stimuli method of ADKs recommended by Cornell was very aggressive; it works well with Pale-billed Woodpeckers et al., that will often knock back at you even if you just slam your head against a tree twice. The modern USA IB may be unlikely to react the same way since S hunters used this method to locate IBs. Aggressive ADK methods may in some or all states alarm IBs and not induce an audio response.
In conclusion the above factors affected the efficacy of the older surveys. Regardless if there were some debatable number of IBs in the areas they surveyed there should have been some detections. To my knowledge there were detections in a very few locations by tangential searches including one area that I have direct knowledge of.
Private serious searches and more casual visits to IBWO habitat have collectively been substantial over the last 15 years. Its hard to quantify the capability of all these different searchers that no doubt ranged from excellent to well below.
Regardless the results of these varied searches can be summarized that there are very few places with recently known or highly suspected IB presence. Any of those few remaining with an interest in finding IBs, should think of new ideas and not employ the same ideas and methods.
thanks,
SWTH22
Hi all, I was driving us on an interstate at high speed westbound in AM and a bird flew across 200 yards ahead, 150 feet high; front-lit bird.
Instantaneously all the front seat people said Pileated. The shape was so different than and other birds, shape of wings, flap cadence overall, giss, white on mostly black.
When you read some of these modern sightings that some searchers put up from LA and FL, you have to scratch your head. They carry on and on about these small rationalized points that involve impressions and that double knocks occurred a day ago.
Its obvious they have never had a rare report in before to anyone, they have never garnered any knowledge of how even some casual birders let along ornithologists prepare a field report. Connected they do not know the different parts of a good field report, so how they expect the entire report to ever amount to much is beyond us.
They really are unprepared researchers; their reports veracity just melts away.
good day
searcher in LA
Well it goes both ways as demonstrated by skeptics and believers.
With some people not realizing that the bird species they are claiming to have seen, they actually did not see it well or at all. They are just filling in fictitious details or rationalizing.
Then we have skeptics who claim some expertise in the field with Campephilus yet never saw one of the three species in the N clade, even though they had solid chances.
The British skeptic Steve Howell, bird trip leader for ~ 35 years, comes to mind. Even though he and other skeptics had a chance at 3 N clade species they showed no effort other than some ridicule about things (US IB) they knew little about.
He is strong in Mexico, wrote a field guide, but never read much of anything about the Imperial W. from him.
He had some better chance at the Cuban IB; same thing no effort from him. Then the US IB is declared still persisting by substantial ornithologists and he all of a sudden is some skeptic of strong standing. Never saw one day of field effort from him for the US bird. Left his umbrella home I suppose.
______Steve Howell has been birding for as long as he can remember: of course, this may simply mean that his memory isn’t very good._______
Maybe he just forgot that field birders had already found 2 of these 3 when he was kicking around and he did not see them......therefore they are extinct. Yawn
BIRD usa
No doubt his inability to find any Imperials or even look, and same for bairdii made him (Howell) unable to notice that there has never been and never will be a Pileated to have such as high flap rate 4 seconds post take off. Rhein tape proved Howell knew little about important Campephilus-centric characteristics. How odd for two field guide authors not to know flap rate characteristics of entire genus.?!?!!
Was taking about Howells opinion on the Arkansas ib video, he said it was a Pileated. We can be pretty sure he never saw an Imperial after 40 years in Mexico, otherwise he would have known even this largest Woodpecker flapped differently than a Pileated.
Poor work by Howell....extreme foolishness.
I do remember that cheap and shallow shot by Howell. This seems to be the quote below. How embarrassing.
A book review by Steve N. G. Howell in the latest Western Birds (2006, Vol. 37, No.2, p. 118) contains the following paragraph:
"Of course, if the world were perfect we humans wouldn't be here. So what if this book, like all the NGS field guides, was pushed out under unreasonable deadlines? It's all about marketing. After all, if thousands of people can be shown a few seconds of blurry video of a Pileated Woodpecker and be convinced that it's an Ivory-billed Woodpecker, then the sky's the limit.
Not knowing flap rate or even noticing in seconds that the Luneau video sure didn't seem like a Piwo, is not really a valid excuse for not thinking. And no retraction after the Rhein film...
I received and email that Howell in the Mexican guide circa 1994 said the Imperial may have existed then:
May survive in the remotest areas of the Sierra Madre Occidental.
Wow he may have missed one Camp. species completely in his main stumping ground (Mex.), didn't get to Cuba, and didn't do anything with the US IB except some snide remarks. And of course couldn't ID the Luneau video as obviously not a Pileated.
Yes we will take his word.
Bird
Fitting that various web resources that skeptics linked to are gone. Some taken down after the Imperial Woodpecker tape showed how the largest Campephilus flew; it fully supported claims by others and belatedly Cornell that flap rate, wing beat frequency, was right on for Ivory-billed in the Luneau video.
John
ML viewed Rheim’s Imperial videos in 1998 and Cornell’s lab of ornithology acquired them in 2005. They chose not to use the Imperial videos in support of their interpretation of the Luneau video and to keep them secret until after an expedition to Mexico in 2010. Has anyone ever asked them why?
Hello John, I have the Mexican Guide by Howell. In the text he mentions nothing that indicates he knew the species had a fast wing beat frequency even though it would be useful in distinguishing the species from sympatric birds. Since he was writing a field guide and he certainly was in the birds range many, many times its odd that he and Sibley on the IB were ignorant of this documented characteristic of Campephilus.
Sibley also had the birds feet, toes configured wrong. You can expect errata in these types of works but when the authors get involved with supporting extinction claims or refuting peer reviewed papers, we do not expect gross mistakes. The Luneau video was always an IBWO supported by its lengthy examination and the rest of the Science paper. Ignoring facts or being ignorant of them is no excuse for lazy or flawed work or cavalier comments on this subject 15 years ago or now.
tks ANON CU
To the above Rheim film questioner.
You ask "why did they keep it secret"---- on the supportive Imperial film. I do not know that their was any intent to keep it "secret" as you state as if there was something nefarious.
They addressed wing beat frequency almost immediately (see below) in the answer to the rejected (by USFWS, recovery team; many) skeptics' short, flawed rebuttal.
The skepticism to the paper was based more on politics, jealousy, selfish budgetary worries, ignorance than pure science. The paper's authors needed to get it out; working on the unedited, shaky Rheim films was probably low on the list of priorities.
The authors could not anticipate in 2005 that the skeptics would drive and proselytize a NUMBER OF ERRONEOUS POINTS HOPING SOME WOULD STICK, or at least cause doubt. Their motives where at least partially caused by jealousy, ignorance and the wrong belief that analytical science and experimental evidence is somehow trumped by RARE BIRD COMMITTE STATE RULES. RBCs often practice formal, rigid, political review of pictures which is quite different from science.
Why you think bringing in a 3rd species (Imperial) into an atmosphere like that would have mattered much? It likely would have confused more people, which is exactly what the skeptics wanted, so it was probably not a strategic move. That is even if the Imperial film was edited by 2005.
Also see below for another error that multiple people besides skeptics are not aware of. The IB was perched on a tree on the L. video before it moved to the spot that if flew for 4 seconds from. In other words there is direct evidence that a woodpecker like bird with white in the right place, flew from one tree to another, then flew as seen.
The science based case is solid but you must remember the public likes their pretty pictures even more than the RBCs.
Hence confusement in the public; but rejection of the skeptic's by real scientists, USFWS. et al.
tks CU
Rapid and direct flight. The Luneau woodpecker flies with a wingbeat frequency of 8.6 Hz without undulation for more than 4 s. The 1935 audio recording of a pair of ivory-billed woodpeckers at a nest (SOM text) captured one bird flying away with noisy wingbeats [as described in (9)] having a frequency of 8.4 Hz (3). The close match between the Luneau woodpecker and the 1935 recording is especially important because both are faster than any wingbeat frequency ever documented for pileated woodpecker. The sustained duration of this direct flight pattern by the Luneau woodpecker is extraordinary, because pileated woodpeckers typically shift to slower, deeper wingbeats moments after launching from a perch, even when the initial few beats are rapid (3).
Perched woodpecker. Contrary to the interpretation of Sibley et al. (2), the black and white object apparent in the Luneau video 26 s before the bird flies is consistent in size (35 to 45 cm), shape (vertically elongate, leaning away from the trunk), and pattern (black with white central patch) with a perched ivory-billed woodpecker [video close-up in (3)]. The object remains fixed on the trunk as the camera's viewing angle shifts relative positions of objects at different distances from the camera (fig. S2). Unlike the objects identified in figure S1 of Sibley et al. (2), this object is too large, too well-defined over a 6-s period, and its midportion too white to be a video artifact or leaf cluster. Moreover, the object was gone when the Luneau canoe came around the bend in the bayou and the woodpecker launched into flight nearby (fig. S2). It was never present on subsequent examinations of the site. Identity of this object is not crucial to identification of the flying bird, but we cannot explain its size, pattern, and disappearance from view except as an ivory-billed woodpecker that flew 3 m to hide behind a tupelo, then fled moments later as the canoe approached. No evaluation of the Luneau video can be considered exhaustive without a credible interpretation of this feature.
“Why you think bringing in a 3rd species (Imperial) into an atmosphere like that would have mattered much?”
If it wouldn’t have mattered then, how can it possibly matter now?
(Same guy as earlier.)
If realizing YOU were duped 15 years ago just now doesn't change your future actions then we really have not gained or lost anything in respect to your possible hypothetical contribution have we?
Non-responsive sarcasm aside, you obviously don’t have an answer.
Sgae
People get back on the subject. IBs
SGAE how many IBs are in the US if any and about where?
Did you find the 2005-6 skeptics various points and short Science notes convincing?
SWTH22
The modern IB sightings post 1998 may just have been more noticeable because of the internet and increase of birder numbers rather than any increase in bird numbers.
John
That does make sense, John. The first sightings were actually just acidental. Collins a birder said he either heard one or saw one at Stennis. Kullivan was hunting but told professor who organized birders, Sparling reported vaguely on the net and it reached birders. These reprtsMoreports reached Hill and he looked and found a bird within hours.
All these events were influenced by the well documented increase in productivity, data availability and rapid communication caused by the net starting in the 90s. Concurrently birder numbers went up.
There is no need to insist or rationalize any substantial increase in numbers of bills into 2005 if the above facts are true.
Swth22
I reluctantly agree and add that some of the birds encountered in the last 20 years where just run into with no intent to find.
If the numbers are increasing since 2005 why few if anymore accidental sightings?
And why so few sightings by intentional searchers?
These LA people have been sitting on the same patch for ten years and I assume at best we are going to be told of audio evidence about a few birds in one general location.
Not exactly an Earth shattering 15 years.
Bird
Yes it's looking a bit precarious, as an understatement. There are problems in all directions; money and resources will be near impossible from public sources.
That obviously leaves it up to mostly citizens with or without stretched NGOs.
If reproduction doesn't pick up its game over, this all = girdle trees, a lot of them, now.
SWTH22
It is a shame, three of the world's most spectacular species and largest woodpeckers are almost gone.
John
I am getting emails from various international guides from other continents that ecotourism is at a standstill and poverty up. Not good for many species.
SWTH22
SW22 yes things are bad in many areas.
Helping rare animal populations can take decades, many many steps and the dedication of a group of selflish citizens. Trying to address one of the steps is great but ignoring all the other steps is not. Just because the skeptics didn't like the Science paper, Auburn paper and LA papers doesn't mean you try and please their never ending whining.
If you fail at the one step or method, as we have here, its no reason to just say nothing can be done. Sure you feel bad but it was never going to be easy despite what some of these people and websites said.
Failing to find many birds is no reason to give up on helping the remaining ones with habitat management.
Paul
First White Storks to nest in United Kingdom in hundreds of years just occurred. Years of management were needed.
The idea or actually the codified rule for most of the Endangered Species Act to be helpful requires a population to be documented.
Why the forum didn't inform researchers what progress really is a good question. You needed much more than a picture; yet to this day that is what many think is a solution or some big accomplishment. It's not.
Here from official summaries, population is again brought up:
Teams searched more than 523,000 acres in 8 states, beginning in Arkansas where multiple compelling sightings and a few seconds of video were captured in 2005. No definitive evidence of a surviving Ivory-billed Woodpecker population was found during the subsequent searches.
Bird
Is there a way to document a population without pictures? Do tell us.
The owner of the site has respectfully asked you to sign your posts. Read his post.
Since you didn't read that short paragraph I am sure you haven't read the many resources on how populations are enhanced ,managed for, studied and documented.
There are premisses and questions upthread to you that are again unaddressed and unanswered.
I recommend
we all ignore this person who has gotten us where we are unless he shows some understanding that his methods have not and will not work.....or defends them with something others than pretending to have any actual field knowledge.
Bird
Sightings are not acceptable documentation for IB. AR and FL proved that.
Sgae
Again please ignore SGAE unless he reads and addresses all the issues about getting a picture that were already mentioned.
Regardless he is showing everyone exactly what the skeptics will demand if you get a decent picture of one bird. They will say you likely got a picture of the last IB. They will demand a picture of at least 4 or more separate IBWOs with 2 distinct males and 2 females, minimum.
By the way the FOrum was set up so we can report our sightings, but you say sightings are no good. Someone inform the Forum .
Thanks SGAE, you're the best. It might not be worth ignoring you.
He is so mixed up; there is no realization that he has supported many of the points upthread by various.
Its a sure thing that he will not be the one that gets pictures of at least 4 or more separate IBWOs birds in one season, from one area.!
_____Sightings are not acceptable documentation for IB_______.
too funny...…….
Bird
What’s funny is that if you ignore me you’ll only have your three fake alternate IDs and maybe one other poster here to talk to. Now THAT’S a small population.
sgae
Ignore him please, he cannot contribute. By the way its leaf out now. Do we need another year?
John
Yes, we should ignore him. He makes all sorts of claims about being on search teams and knowing details of sightings here, there, but no not any in that area. And that there is lots of habitat conservation being done specifically for IBWO right now, but without offering a single example. No evidence that any of what he says is true. But he is mildly entertaining to read while stuck in the house. What he doesn’t understand is that I’m not a skeptic. I believe there are IB in FL, LA, MS, AR. But I am also a realist and pragmatist who understands that real hope of habitat conservation specifically for IB depends on getting conclusive evidence that will be accepted by the scientific community, experienced birders, and the general public.
Yes, leaves are fully out and it is getting much too hot in the bottoms. We do need one more search season. Are you okay with waiting one more year John?
sgae
You have been tricked by the skeptics needs while ignoring the birds. There is no time or actual reason to wait to improve habitat. You may be a glory seeker and must rationalize your needs while ignoring the facts of 15 years of failure.
Also you create an illusion that a picture of a bird suddenly erases all problems and magically creates ibs.
The Usfws already believed the species existed.....you are treading water, badly,and are sinking us and the bird.
Swth22
You really need to live in the real world and face facts as they are. USFWS is set to delist IBWO from the list of endangered species due to extinction. See second from bottom on page 4 of this document:
https://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/3-Year_Downlisting_Delisting_Workplan.pdf
Take the medicine your doctor prescribed. Stop pretending to be three people. Suppress your control-freak urges. Get more couch time with a good shrink who will help you separate reality from fantasy. Seriously. You need help. I’ve no doubt you were a competent biologist, maybe even very good. But you can’t help the birds when you’re delusional or suffering from effects of schizophrenia. I’m not a MD, but I can recognize mental illness. You’ve got one, and probably more.
And here is the five-year report published by FWS less than a year ago which recommends delisting:
https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_year_review/doc6021.pdf
So what exactly is the basis for your fantasy that FWS believes that ivorybills still live? Show us some evidence, if you have any.
While you’re at it, show us any bit of evidence that IB-specific habitat preservation or renewal is taking place today.
sgae
SGAE get a grip. It was said the USFWS BELIEVED, not "believes", see that's past tense.
Put your reading glasses on----this is what you asked---- So what exactly is the basis for your fantasy that FWS believes that ivorybills still live? Show us some evidence, if you have any.------
Most everyone knows the IB may be delisted, its upthread 2 times. Get with it.
Your other quote on habitat work is also fabricated. Please have someone read it all to you.
Bird
So you and your alter egos want to live in the past, complaining about what people did or didn’t do, and using what FWS believed fifteen years ago as the basis for some nebulous action plan today. Thanks for the confirmation.
FWS intends to delist. No IB-specific conservation efforts are in action, and delisting will permanently end any thought of such action. But for some reason the supposed expert here thing is insisting that searchers should cease efforts to find and photograph the bird and focus instead on conservation efforts and girdling trees.
Conservation of habitat with IBWO in mind would get a huge boost with indisputable universally accepted photos or video. It is absolute Looney Tunes to think it can happen any other way. You need to get a big two-fisted grip on THAT reality, Bird.
Some are sleeping as others are in the field working AG. Not good.
Many are waiting for pictures from these misguided individuals; not all though.
Their 10 step plan to address recovery has lost 15 crucial years and is still on step one with more mt boasts. It has all morphed into an extinction plan.
Some believe the trees are dripping with ibs others believe they can create an imaginary definition of a population with a clear picture. Others believe the usfws, ruled by bankrupt committees with political overtones is going to turn 360 degrees and help after these hypothetical pictures are submitted.
Never any answers to the many basic questions upthread.
How, when and where are they going to produce any evidence?
Why would anyone wait for failed methods.
Good am
John
Fingerpointing is not a plan and does not help ivorybills. Some one get good video of one or more birds please.
DFW Raptor
>>>>Fingerpointing is not a plan and does not help ivorybills. Some one get good video of one or more birds please.
DFW Raptor<<<<
We are open to a new plan. That's what this thread is about; we need good proposals though and an explanation by anyone why volunteers can only carry cameras and not snake guards, axes, nest boves, roost boxes, more.
tks
SWTH22
It might be a surprise to some but not all. Upthread it was mentioned. S certain large percentage of people will do absolutely nothing but picture chase.
It's shown as expected by this poster. He can't defend it, he can't tell you why it will be different this year, he can't say why we can't do any management now, etc.
The public is allowed no answers other than a cover page photo will solve everything.
Even if it happens its not true. There are millions of acres out there waiting for management, no purchase necessary.
It's just not as glamorous as being the one to get the picture and maybe write a book. Sad.
John
Why must a hobby which uses a few days of recreational time per year be defended? What is the moral imperative creating an obligation to do more than walk in the woods, sit quietly, and try to get a photograph?
sgae
It also might surprise some that what’s happening in these threads is known as sockpuppetry. One poster is pretending to be multiple people with similar opinions in order to “ballot stuff”.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_(Internet)
Sgae
You have changed your tune, for weeks its been the only way to save the species. Now chasing the picture is just recreation.
Finally some truth.
Bird
Give it up.
The lets get the polaroid faction is all over the place. One says its so critical and the other is taking a "walk in woods and sitting down".
I wonder which field method is going to get these multiple unequivocal pictures? Walking around or sitting?
Or maybe the poster who can't answer a single question but thinks its the only option has some undescribed secret game cam, go pro with novel iso, f, and shutter speed capabilities.
T
Can I make a suggestion can it be changed from the ivory-billed researchers forum to the ivory-billed recreational forum?
Anyway i do hope some fledging has occured. This is the month when there are more birds then perhaps any other month of the year.
Bird
The Choctaw birds were said to be attracted to the standing dead wood in a tornado rip. I have looked at the aerials for several pertinent open space and there's no stands of deadwood. Girdling, in important respects produces some of the effects of fire.
Is very likely that the breeding phenology of IV bills may be triggered by deadwood concentration. The concentration might have to be heterogenous.
Fire can create dense stands of standing dead trees
that provide habitat for a variety of wildlife, notably woodpeckers.
Ibs are unlike cuban ibs in important ways. Evidence supports that they might not prefer or may not be adapted to forage in forests where there has been no catastrophic input of Deadwood.
Thanks swth22
The below cut and paste infers there have been recent sighting on private land. In LA etc there can be more than 50% of possible acres privately owned.
Has any one trying to get evidence/pictures asked for leads from various entities of private land owners who claim a sighting?
5 year review:
Status: Various partners such as The Nature Conservancy (TNC), Ducks Unlimited, and private landowners have been implementing measures to protect wetlands and swamps where IBWOs are suspected to have occurred based on historical range maps and data. They are using tools such as the Natural Resources Conservation Service’s (NRCS) Wetland Reserve Program (WRP) and Habitat Incentives Programs and the Service’s Partners for Fish and Wildlife program to reforest areas. There is some evidence that increased outreach has helped with potential sightings since the publication of the Recovery Plan. However, IBWO sightings on private lands have not been well documented or have been determined to be misidentifications (i.e. the pileated woodpecker), therefore we have been unable to confirm IBWOs. This criterion cannot be met, if we are unable to locate individuals to better know what habitat to conserve.
UC
I have not but it is a good point. Some or most of these landowners seem likely to have already been cooperating WITH official entities, so good possibility of leads and access into "virgin" territory.
Some might just be thinking their land will be more valuable if IBs there. especially if it is wetlands they could be right. So it's an incentivized opportunity for some.
thanks
SWTH
Pretty ridiculous calling the species extinct after the pror 15 years proved the species extant but admittedly little evidence of a population.
Population seems to creep in again. Regardless this is not evidence of extinction.
Bird
A person (or persons) have suggested we all go around girdling trees, putting up snake guards and doing other tasks on millions of acres across the south to improve IB habitat. Seriously? All the best habitat is on protected lands such as national wildlife refuges and national forests where such acts would be illegal. Stupid non-starter suggestions like that don't help.
Wishful drinking aside, habitat will be preserved and improved if someone gets a good video. If not then not.
DFW Raptor
Raptor you evidently pretend or are ignorant of a thing called permits, experiments and initiative. You have no ideas other than to follow others who have failed for 80 years
In addition you seem to not know that 50% of the forest in for example LA is privately owned. Hundreds of thousands of acres are open for various private agreements; its takes work, obviously you are not up to it.
If you are so worried about permission then you can ask. Or is that not allowed? The funding for studies is so low that you have a chance to get approvals. You can design a beetle or woodpecker study etc.
As far as public lands, again agreements and studies have been made in the past involving killing trees. It takes work and real thought; you are not up to it. You may be busy, silly, lazy or even a skeptic. To say its beyond comprehension to get some trees girdled shows you have little tenacity for discovery or effort. Imagination, knowledge and effort will produce some results.
Your attitude is easily seen through. Even your posts are lazy and untruthful.
You have no chance of making any difference as another 6 months go by then 10 years.
Bird
Snotty personal attacks don’t help either.
Most people who look for the bird are not scientists and can only give a few days effort each year. They don’t have the funding, experience, qualifications and connections you claim. They do what they can. Demanding more and insulting people accomplishes nothing.
NO IBWO CONTENT here. You are not able to even follow the site owners and others reasonable requests. Your post is IBWO contentless.
SJ
Looking at the responses for and against citizen led management, things become obvious. Some people’s ideas fit the classic definition of insanity, keep doing the same thing and expect a different result. They make every excuse for these alleged poor souls with limited capability yet never address that these same poor souls claim great knowledge or things are coming.
Others propose some fairly basic management techniques and the people proposing the insanity path come out with their sophomoric comments.
Some people are disgusted with the rationalizations, excuses and denials these people try to pass on. FACT the IBWO has proven extremely difficult to video or photo after hundreds of thousands of field hours .
FACT the bird is critically endangered (or worse) with little learned in twenty years.
FACT a clear picture is not needed to manage for the species or for large woodpeckers in general.
FACT the plurality of “researchers” saying “we need a picture” is partially caused by the ease of putting a camera in one’s hand and then hiking with it. You can then by definition call yourself a researcher and still have fun.
FACT some proven management techniques are quite simple. They are not hard or involved. Stop with your endless lies, obfuscations and rationalizations.
FACT some proven management is actually harder, but not all. Some field efforts for large woodpeckers involve actual work, communication skills, writing, overcoming obstacles and research.
FACT anyone telling you it’s impossible or extremely difficult for the average citizen to become involved in management for large woodpeckers is a liar.
Bird
Bird repeats widely used bogus definition of insanity as though it is true. That shows he is very poor judge of fact vs myth.
Bird orders everyone do what he demands. But we know him. He has done nothing himself. Only tells people what they do wrong. Huge ego. No accomplishments. Sits doing nothing now.
No good IB conservation work will happen without decent video proof the bird is extant.
We want a picture, not a belly itcher!
Well get out there troll and get the picture////its only been 20 years.
SJ
As we agreed before do not respond to this troll or anyone who hasn't answered any of the reasonable questions asked.
He is repetitive, unexciting, uninspiring but admittingly may be an expert on insanity as he claims.
Bird
Why only “20 years”? Wiki says “The last universally accepted sighting was in 1944.” That makes 76 years.
Without proof it is believed extinct. So why run around doing woodpecker studies and improving the forest for an extinct bird?
We do not respond to people who quote Wiki as a sure sign they are not in touch with actual field conditions and all published and private literature/data/calls/DKs much more. We also do not speak with those that can not respect the site owners simple requests.
In general though, many of us have been in the field, for months to years you obviously haven't (hence Wiki) so have no actual or recent knowledge as we do.
Also learn of and actually analyze all actual data on Campephilus flight characteristics and actual video, putative and almost certainly actual IBWOs.
regrds SJ
>>>>Without proof it is believed extinct. So why run around doing woodpecker studies and improving the forest for an extinct bird?<<<<
You can't even maintain consistency in your own loopy world. "Believed extinct" does not mean it is extinct.
It very unlikely to be extinct; regardless many species have been found after loopy claims of extinction.
good day
The two posts above refuse to answer simple question of why “20 years”. Fiction and opinion is all I see. No proof or even facts. And they refuse to talk to me? Hahahahaha. Like they say anything worth reading.
Read the Science paper and other modern peer reviewed papers. Read the Imperial Woodpecker film paper with The Luneau video in mind.
If you can rebut that paper, one author of many being Remsen then the bird might be extinct.
Remsen published his first scientific paper at age 20, and published numerous other technical papers during his graduate student years, including the article "On taking field notes" in the journal American Birds which became much-noticed by field observers and American birders in the following decades.[2]
In 1997 he produced the monograph "Studies in Neotropical Ornithology Honoring Ted Parker" "Ornithological Monographs"" No. 48: 1-917), a collection of 51 peer-reviewed papers.
In 1998, Remsen co-described the subspecies Cinnycerthia fulva gravesi and Cinnycerthia fulva fitzpatricki of the fulvous wren.[6] In 2003, he wrote the 196-page chapter of the family of ovenbirds (Furnariidae) in the eighth volume of the Handbook of the Birds of the World and in collaboration with Edward C. Dickinson he was co-author of the third edition of the Howard and Moore Complete Checklist of the Birds of the World. In 2013, they collaborated again on the fourth edition of the Howard & Moore checklist on non-passerines.[7]
In 2005, Remsen was co-author of an article in the scientific journal Science where the rediscovery of the ivory-billed woodpecker (Campephilus principalis) was announced.[8]
good luck on the rebuttal
Papers? We don’t need no papers. We don’t need to read your stinking papers.
76 years and all you got is papers? You know why you want more studies and point at papers? Because you don’t have a real solution. You and the other experts have failed for 76 years and don’t want to even talk to people like me. You don’t have a real solution and can only point at other peoples papers.
Find a solution and stop being the problem.
Contact your pharmacy....they gave you an oral laxative.... instead of your usual lithium...
EPIC fail. Just like your 76 years trying to find ivorybills.
your stuttering
Troll...........I love your unintended metaphor, you relate to Gold Hat (bandito) and also can't read.
By the way you got the quote wrong too it's "stinkin'"
not stinking. lol
Who IS this guy who thinks he can and should tell others how to spend their free time?
None of the searchers get paid or get funding. That ended years ago. It takes a huge ego to right to criticize searchers for trying to get a photo and push them to do his field work. Get a life, dude. Your own. Stop trying to run the lives of others.
Troll, do you have anything new to report on anything?
You are telling someone what to do and while yelling that he is telling others what to do.
Certainly it would be useless to discuss IBWO matters with you.
John
These trolls cant seem to figure out this is an ivory-billed blog. Not the national enquirer; hence their useless gossip about people and delusions about mind control.
>>> criticize searchers for trying to get a photo and push them to do his field work. <<<<<<<
Read the comments correctly. In past posts its been suggested, with decades of evidence, that chasing only a picture is not working well. And that nothing is stopping searchers from doing basic habitat improvements.
This could help the searchers get the pix. Picture chasing hasn't and can not be outlawed despite your melodramatic, cerebral contortions.
And it not research for me, again it benefits the searcher and the IB to do habitat management.
thanks
The above troll can only use the collective gaggle of Wiki while we have SWTH22 upthread. Its obvious Who knows more about IBs:
After various ivory-billed discoveries, and peer reviewed evidence from 14 to 16 years ago it was prudent for experienced avian surveyors to cover the most likely habitats for a few seasons. If an Ivory-bill(s) is present it is not that difficult to hear (kents; double knocks) or see one, when competent, trained surveyors utilize well thought out survey methods. The recovery plan provided funds for this type of work with their own “recovery team/Cornell approved” methods which cause my own caveats below.
Budgetary pragmatists, and skeptics hiding behind these bean counters on the recovery team, were allowed to take part in purposely burdening the survey teams with gathering data on non-Ivory billed species and in unnecessary ecological sets. These experienced skeptics might have been diabolical, assuming their premeditation, in the way they hoped to, and did incrementally, or worse, hamper the surveys from finding Ivory-bills. IB kents, d. knocks, s. knocks, feeding sign, etc. may be only encountered in one second per field week or in a few patches of trees; any unnecessary tasks substantially increase the chances of missing that rare IB data point. It's a rare bird, with a large range, that suffered severe non-stochastic selection (hunting takes out the least wary and most vocal).
Hearing, seeing, recording or photographing more IBs would not have looked good against the vocal skeptics, pot-committed reputations and assumed substantial egos. The recovery teams protagonists might have been forced to acquiesce to the budget conscious and skeptics due to the plan's own models and declarations that declared "the IB had a low probability of recovery". The over stated evidence controversy and a belief that more IBs would be discovered probably softened the push back against those that diluted the survey methods. And some protagonists might not have understood the concentration needed when surveying for a rare and relatively quiet quarry, in noisy and difficult habitat.
These official surveys and their closely allied searches acoustically covered some consequential percentage of the best public habitat for Ivory-bills in the US. However the experience of the surveyors and their methods were far from optimal.
The young age of the surveyors made it impossible for them to have all the field and literature experience to be prepared to perform a high quality, with the highest detection probability, Ivory-billed survey. The best potential IBWO transect or point surveyor should have previously accumulated several years, to decades of skills and experience by extensive formal and informal SE US field survey presence. They should have a relaxed field presence even when several acoustic sounds per minute are ringing in the woods; they should be able to ID all 7 hypothetical sounds, if humanly possible . They are relaxed because their years of experience allows them to seamlessly ID to species the sounds as they occur, readying the listener immediately for the next field sound. Related is an immediate mental process of categorizing the sound into a non-IB category or IB category.
cont.
cont.
This type of specific experience is often found in those with years of varied experience with ecology and counting or surveying birds according to USFWS and Canadian BBS rules. Others also gain that type of skills over decades of IDing singing birds. I do not believe that a high percentage of field surveyors for the recovery team and partners had the highest skills needed, although undoubtedly almost all had some skills.
Regardless they had some good chance of hearing or finding at least one or a few IBs in the US if the number of IBs were over a score of birds in the collective areas surveyed.
Survey Methods: Some or most surveys utilized ADKs. The super-stimuli method of ADKs recommended by Cornell was very aggressive; it works well with Pale-billed Woodpeckers et al., that will often knock back at you even if you just slam your head against a tree twice. The modern USA IB may be unlikely to react the same way since S hunters used this method to locate IBs. Aggressive ADK methods may in some or all states alarm IBs and not induce an audio response.
In conclusion the above factors affected the efficacy of the older surveys. Regardless if there were some debatable number of IBs in the areas they surveyed there should have been some detections. To my knowledge there were detections in a very few locations by tangential searches including one area that I have direct knowledge of.
Private serious searches and more casual visits to IBWO habitat have collectively been substantial over the last 15 years. Its hard to quantify the capability of all these different searchers that no doubt ranged from excellent to well below.
Regardless the results of these varied searches can be summarized that there are very few places with recently known or highly suspected IB presence. Any of those few remaining with an interest in finding IBs, should think of new ideas and not employ the same ideas and methods.
thanks,
SWTH22
It's likely the person needing the Wikipedia refence to muster knowledge about the IB situation is from Europe (likely UK). Upthread there were posts about the UK Birder Steve Howell who mainly birded in the neotropics
emphasizing Mexico missed seeing or evidently even hearing 3 of the N Campephilus members.
They were all likely extant during his treks yet he never found or commented much on even one species even though he had several thousands days to find/hear one.
He then felt compelled to be "witty" and condescending when saying we were all fools to believe the Luneau video was an IB.
I guess minimum to no experience with the 3 species makes one really oblivious to wing beat implications. LOL
SWTH22
For the modeling and statisticians types amongst us, maybe Cyberthrush, what does it say about the numbers of Ivory-bills then (2004 to 2006) to now per the following? :
On a few occasions (initial trip by Cornell reps after Sparling trip) and Hills initial follow up of some old info he had from the Pea River etc, they each found Ivory-bill(s) within a few field hours.
Since and now we have had very little sightings.
thanks Bird
Post a Comment