------------------------------------------------
Feel like a broken record, but (while waiting for anything both significant and credible to come along) will repeat what I’ve voiced previously….
If Ivory-bills persist they must:
1) forage for food each day, in turn meaning they must fly to and from roost holes each day.
2) successfully breed (and even many that aren’t successful would attempt it and have nest holes).
Yet:
Not a single example of photographic evidence since the 40’s can be definitively labelled as a living Ivory-bill; a definitive example WILL BE self-evident by viewing it, requiring NO extended analysis of any sort to explain why it may or must be an Ivory-billed Woodpecker (…and IF there is to be ‘extended analysis’ it needs to come from neutral, disinterested, objective 3rd parties, not solely from individuals already committed to a belief in IBWO persistence; impartiality is an important aspect of science, and largely abandoned in the Ivorybill debate).
There are plenty of excuses for why humans haven’t attained such a clear photo/video of an IBWO, even when sightings are followed up on within 24 hours. The only excuses though for why an automatic remote camera focused on a cavity or foraging site or flyway has never attained a clear shot (nor any identifiable DNA found at such a site) are that either the species is gone or, after decades of study, humans remain embarrassingly incompetent at accurately identifying active IBWO cavities and foraging work...
While we know what IBWOs look like, we do not know, DO... NOT... KNOW precisely what IBWOs in 2024 sound like (nor the range of variability) when our only real basis for analysis is a tiny audio sample from the 1940s (which, according to many, is not even representative of their sounds then). Sample size is important in science, indeed vital…. and we have precious little sample size to draw many firm conclusions about Ivory-bills at all — indeed that was the problem of Tanner’s original study — conclusions/generalizations drawn (and blindly accepted) from too small and isolated a sample…. nice speculative guesswork, but not firm deduction.
My only conclusion from all this, and purely its own problem-filled speculation, is again that IBWOs are now mostly inhabitants of the upper forest canopies, rarely spotted or monitored well by humans — cavities, woodwork, perched or ground sightings or evidence below the upper-half tree-level are likely not IBWO (though perhaps in flight they travel lower). The Latta drone footage capturing 2 putative Ivory-bills high up in Louisiana remains for me the best evidence we have to date (better than virtually all the other evidence that receives wide publicity). Postulating they spend the bulk of their time at a level remote from most human viewing (maybe even only emerging from cavities when feeding or seeking mates) is the only way I know to explain the paucity, incredible paucity, of confirmed visual data or photographic evidence for this species after this amount of time and effort specifically in locales of claims (...always remote possibility the species has moved to other locales, even states, little searched).
p.s. (side-note)…. folks can quit sending me links to the story of the company wishing to genetically revive IBWOs — a story of little interest to me:
a) am somewhat skeptical of the company itself, but putting that aside, am skeptical that the laboratory techniques used can be successful with a bird species (at least in my lifetime)
b) like many others, even if potentially successful, I believe there are better uses for such money
At this point, my interest is mostly confined to demonstrating the Ivorybill’s persistence SOMEwhere, and then discovering where else it may be and in what numbers. I doubt it can be saved, BUT am also someone who previously doubted that the California Condor, the Whooping Crane, or even the Bald Eagle could be saved -- so HEY I’m super impressed with what wildlife humanity CAN DO when handed the resources to apply their talents/knowledge! (though in this instance it may well be too little too late, given the overriding problem of even locating the birds -- and what a massive black-eye it will be for the birding and conservation communities IF this species IS found but too late for saving).
------------------------------------------------
