-- Martjan Lammertink coming up --

 --------------------------------------------------------

A reminder that Dr. Martjan Lammertink will be Matt Courtman's guest on his coming Monday night Zoom meeting (free, Nov. 20).

I don’t want to detract from Martjan’s expertise or current status, but can’t help but note that it was he who almost 30 years ago published a paper that many of us found objectionable, entitled, “No More Hope For The Ivory-billed Woodpecker Campephilus Principalis,” which for many at the time, pounded nails into the IBWO coffin. He seemed to return to the optimist fold around the time of or shortly before the Cornell 2004 finding, and I expect he may have much of interest to say with Matt. Martjan knows the history, details, backstories, and issues of this saga as well as anyone, and just perhaps he'll know something about the current state of mind of the USFWS...?

I've been avoiding linking to 90% of the current IBWO stories, postings, podcasts, press releases, etc. that are around these days because they just fail to add enough new or significant or credible info to what we already know, but this is one that may be worth a listen. 

p.s.... such a low percentage of these Zoom meetings have been recorded for YouTube I'd recommend that if you wish to hear Martjan watch it live if you can.

 --------------------------------------------------------

11/23:  For those who missed it, Matt Courtman says he will upload a recording of the (long, 2+ hrs.) meeting within weeks. You can check his site here:

https://www.facebook.com/MissionIvorybill

Always good to hear someone like Martjan, but I was quite disappointed that most of the talk was of OLD, historical information/evidence. While there are constantly new people joining the Ivory-bill discussion who may find such information helpful, it is nonetheless all available in books, articles, internet pages, YouTube, etc. etc. with a little legwork. We simply walk in circles re-treading it over and over and over again, as we can do for another 20 years, when what is needed is new, fresh information, or at least in this case, discussion of the last dozen or so years (since the Cornell/Auburn searches ended) of evidence/speculation and the submissions to USFWS, not the 70-year well-worn history/background prior. In fact the only real tidbit of much interest I got from these 2+ hours came when Martjan was asked what he thought of the famous Mike Collins' "flyunder" video and he unenthusiastically responded to being unimpressed with it, feeling the quality was too low to even identify as a woodpecker -- I agree, as for me it is simultaneously the most intriguing bit of Collins' voluminous evidence but still not identifiable (let alone definitive) for many reasons/variables.  And then (elsewhere) you have Collins himself arguing that the Project Principalis drone video (submitted to USFWS), which many of us find quite persuasive, is just a Pileated -- in short a lot of dissension amongst so called IBWO-truthers themselves, let alone between 'believers' and skeptics... just as, despite all the meticulous analysis and modern day technology, the Luneau video still cannot be agreed upon by experienced/skilled field birders and ornithologists. Frustrating and exhausting, though I also fully understand how weak, imprecise, and prone-to-error human perception is, and how complicated (and often immeasurable) the variables are....

It's the winter season, a time when, if new evidence is to arrive at all, it may yet come (though there's often a long lag time between when new evidence is obtained and when it is made public), and about a month away from USFWS supposedly making their own official announcement (perhaps an anti-climax by now).

--------------------------------------

— And Now For Something Totally Different — +Addenda

 --------------------------------------------------------

These days I mostly try to focus here on current news or genuinely fresh, credible information (not speculation, hearsay, theories, rehash, same-ol-same-ol etc.) of which there is precious little… but I’ll take a moment to pass along this quirky tangent that blew me away!

On Facebook, Mishelle Lynn posts about a TV show including a segment showing Charlemagne's Palace Chapel Cathedral in Aachen, Germany where she noticed a single mosaic (as they were panning around) with what appears to clearly be an Ivory-billed Woodpecker (certainly more clear than anyone else in recent times has produced ;) Mind you this cathedral dates back to around the year 900!, though from Mishelle's own research this mosaic may have been a replacement(?) put in around the 1870s -- that would be well passed the time of early American painters/ornithologists prominently noting the IBWO, but still a bit mind-boggling that it should end up in this context.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/179784035376368/permalink/7046358702052166/

Campephilus woodpeckers (let alone IBWOs) were certainly not a German, nor even European, species, so what an oddball occurrence. It’s well-known that Ivory-bill specimens were distributed to museums throughout the world, including Europe, but still fascinating (to me) that an artist would see fit to include it in a medieval chapel setting. What was he thinking; what was the inspiration???

Mishelle asks several questions in making the FB posting, so do visit it (if you’re on FB) and see if any further questions get answered.

(I don't have the time to research it myself, but if someone else does and wants to report back any results feel free, or perhaps someone already knows the back story on this!). 

Sometimes I almost get tired of hearing the adjective "iconic" applied to this bird, and feel it is overused... but then I see a story or example like this, and think, YUP, it's iconic!!

 --------------------------------------------------------

ADDENDUM :

And now today, yet another crazy, entertaining story off Facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/179784035376368/permalink/7052449328109770/

It reminds me oddly of the story of claims that Louisianian Fielding Lewis, famous for a couple of 1971 never-authenticated photos of an Ivory-billed Woodpecker in the Atchafalaya, had additional photos that he never ever released -- they were looked for among his belongings upon his death and never located.... are they buried in an attic, a thrift store, a shoebox somewhere.... or, they just never existed to begin with?

------------------------------------------

ADDENDUM 10/31:

Just wanted to take a moment to acknowledge the death of Chris Feeney, at 77 (reported by Matt Courtman), a long-time Ivory-bill enthusiast and searcher. I’d communicated with Chris a bit over a dozen years ago, and then again a few months back when clarifying Paul Sykes’ current view of matters.

He often worked in conjunction with Keith Collins (another long-time searcher), who will be out there again this winter (if he isn’t already) searching in Florida (and perhaps Arkansas?).

It’s a shame that if there is ever a positive outcome to this whole saga, so many of the genuinely long-involved folks will no longer be around to experience it. :(

------------------------------------------

…and, another ADDENDUM 11/1:

Matt Courtman announces his guest on his (free) Nov. 20 Ivory-bill evening Zoom meeting will be Martjan Lammertink one of the world’s foremost experts on the IBWO and Campephilus woodpeckers more generally:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/179784035376368/permalink/7087788361242533/?mibextid=zDhOQc

…I will try to remember to post a reminder for this closer to the date.

------------------------------------------

ADDENDUM 11/3:

The fun never ends....

I've lost count of the number of "groups" on Facebook that tout the existence of the IBWO, but now there is also a group (for skeptics) devoted to dissing such claims, calling itself, "Ivory-billed Woodpecker, Sighting, Lies, and Fabrications" (...it's a tad reminiscent of some of the comments/discussion that prevailed over 15 years ago on some IBWO sites):

https://www.facebook.com/groups/220897210949459

------------------------------------------

-- Washington Post +Addenda --

 ————————————————————

Another Ivory-bill update article today, this time in the Washington Post, if you can access it (always nice to see a major publication covering the saga seriously). Nothing terribly new; does mention that USFWS is still debating its decision because of all the controversial views/data it must evaluate (in its slow, not-very-transparent way); even says at one point it’s not known when they’ll make a decision, though USFWS earlier indicated they would have a decision by the end of this year — not very far away at all, or will they again be AWOL come December 31?

I did find it interesting that in well under 24 hours the article already has over 160 comments (when I last checked -- Edit: a day later, 250 comments!)… few of which add much value to the piece at all, but still nice to see that much public interest remaining. IBWO skeptics, I suppose, will cancel their subscriptions... ;)

————————————————————

ADDENDUM 10/18:

The information in the above article has by now been passed along in dozens of other press articles (including NY Times), testament to a story that will not die (anytime soon). I’m not too convinced myself of the competency of the USFWS at this point, but nonetheless have to chuckle a bit at the degree to which skeptics must be tearing their hair out by now….  ;)

Someone on Facebook did recently post a link to this lengthy skeptic-take from a year ago:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ibi.13144

It’s two main (and old) arguments are that 1) all the recent “evidence” for Ivory-billed Woodpeckers is sketchy and uncertain — this is of course a matter of some prolonged and subjective debate as to just how sketchy each piece of evidence is (though I agree it isn't conclusive), and 2) the ongoing ‘limited pie’ argument that every dollar (or even hour) spent on the IBWO is money and time that could be better spent on some other pressing conservation issue — I get a little tired of this take, since it is almost ALWAYS the case that one can find a “better” place to spend any given set of dollars, time, energy. I suspect the authors themselves have spent money on lattes, furniture, family vacations, doodads, etc. etc. that could’ve instead gone to help endangered species, starving children, earthquake victims, or whatever. Even money spent saving say the Bald Eagle, California Condor, Red-cockaded Woodpecker, etc. could also have been well-spent on other different cases (including less glamorous ones). While the ‘fixed pie’ argument can sometimes have merit, it will always be one of debatable choices between competing interests, and the relatively small amount being apportioned for the Ivory-bill makes it seem a tad disingenuous/rhetorical.

---------------------------------------------

-- PIWO In Flight --

------------------------------------------------------------

Couple of clips of a Pileated Woodpecker in flight posted on FB:

(there are many videos of PIWOs in flight on the Web, but these have some nice features)

https://www.facebook.com/reel/1007519790298785

[...some discussion over here:

 https://www.facebook.com/groups/179784035376368/permalink/6961828803838490/ ]

another video: https://www.facebook.com/melmore/videos/1574420766314754

...and an old clip:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFPEAQe0qCk

-----------------------------------------------------------

ADDENDUM 10/2:

I hesitate to even link to it, but what the hey (will do so for those with interest in such)…. Paul Guris has a new followup post on FB including 7 brief videos of Pileateds in escape flight… a number of potential issues in the videos, and indeed I have issues with most analysis of flight style and flap rates... as well as issues with auditory evidence (kents and DKs), and potential issues with eDNA as well…. feel like a broken record, but will repeat again: IBWOs, if they exist, forage and roost…. every.… single.… day…. find a foraging site or roosthole (or nesthole), place a remote, automatic motion-activated camera on it, walk away, and let the camera do the work. Short of that, I find it difficult to imagine any sort of evidence being persuasive.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/179784035376368/permalink/6965961206758583/

-- Lost Birds Initiative --

 —————————————————-——

Over on Facebook, Dwight Norris passes along a link to a newish article on the Ivory-bill and the “Lost Birds initiative”:

https://64parishes.org/lost

One interesting note to read is that LSU’s Van Remsen plans to teach a course in the LSU Honors College based upon Christopher Haney’s book, “Woody’s Last Laugh.”

————————————————————

-- Legacy --

 -----------------------------------------------------------

Many warned (for those who would listen) that the single greatest danger (...out of sooo many, like him being a Russian puppet for at least the last 3 decades) posed by Donald Trump’s 2016 election, would be his lasting effect on the Supreme Court and the nationwide judiciary more generally. Those toxic changes/influences will continue to come home to roost:

https://www.npr.org/2023/08/29/1196654382/epa-wetlands-waterways-supreme-court

Such actions likely risk far greater impact/harm to the Ivory-billed Woodpecker and other endangered species, as well as wildlife and wild spaces more generally, than any de-listing decisions made by USFWS. 

 :((

-------------------------------------------------------------

— And the Beat Goes On... —

 ——————————————————

Ivory-billed Woodpecker continues drawing lots of press in recent weeks, but I’ll only bother to pass along a couple of brief things:

1)  The American Ornithological Society is currently holding its annual meeting in Canada and Steve Latta gave a very-well-attended presentation today on the Project Principalis evidence. Certainly a great deal of interest, and I suspect at least some people had their minds opened a bit (…while some other minds are closed tight!). Haven’t seen or heard any direct feedback yet on the talk though, but will add anything significant if I come across it, in Addenda below (…or of course anyone who saw the presentation and wants to comment feel free to).

2)  Speaking of opening minds, a few weeks back long-time searcher Chris Feeney mentioned on Matt Courtman’s monthly Zoom meeting that Paul Sykes, one of the country’s premier experts on the IBWO, now is more open to the possibility of Ivorybill survival. Sykes, whose opinion is widely respected, had, after years of searching and study, turned very skeptical/doubtful that IBWOs could still persist, but recent evidence has notably loosened his skepticism. (I don’t believe Paul has publicly commented or written on the change-of-heart, but Chris knew from personal communications with him).

Otherwise, nothing I particularly want to report on right now, and still, so far as I'm aware, not a peep from USFWS (there are different possible reasons for this, but until persuaded otherwise, I'll continue to assume it indicates dissension in their ranks).

——————————————————

-- USFWS.... AWOL? --

 ------------------------------------------------------------

USFWS looks increasingly like a timid deer in headlights in it’s public indecision over what to do about the Ivory-billed Woodpecker (…I presume an indication of the level of infighting/disagreement amongst staff?). Some claim there will be a decision before the end of the year, though we already seem well-passed the point that the Agency's own bureaucratic requirements (as well as common sense) would’ve expected a simple yay-or-nay decision.

Unlike many, I’m not overly worried about it, as the IBWO is already either functionally or in actuality, extinct, OR (as I and others believe) has survived the last 80+ years with its own wiles, and can continue to do so. The habitat it lives in is already largely protected for many reasons other than possible Ivory-bill persistence.

But what does concern me is the whole lousy decision-making process…. which consisted of individuals publicly submitting evidence to USFWS, while staffers sat there, like lumps on a log, simply listening…. asking no questions, making no comments or statements, bringing in no outside ‘experts’ to publicly review the submissions, or interrogate the submitters. In short, nothing terribly scientific about the faux process (that the public is privy to); more like very weak show-and-tell than science. If there is 'science' going on behind the scenes, well there's little sign of it? And so (not surprisingly) most of the public submissions were clearly evidence (including pictures) of Pileated Woodpeckers, duhhhh; yet no mention even of that from USFWS, in what at least could’ve been a decent teaching moment. And again, the few submissions that hinted at the possibility at least of extant IBWOs facing no direct challenges/questions/rebuttal/clarifications/peer-review etc. "Science" stripped of its potency and give-and-take.

It all makes me lose a lot of confidence that USFWS is even up to the task. And I recently finished reading a 2023 book (that I recommend), “A Wing and a Prayer, the race to save vanishing birds” by Anders and Beverly Gyllenhaal, who toward the end likewise find fault/weakness with the current-day USFWS:

“The primary federal agency responsible for birds has yet to rise to the occasion. Instead, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service seems content to manage the declines. It’s been unwilling to take significant steps to confront the loss of a third of North America’s birds, or even to address some of the most pressing contributors that so obviously merit action….

“These failures symbolize the inadequate current policies of the Fish and Wildlife Service.  By keeping a low profile on these issues, the agency is missing an opportunity to provide a voice on behalf of birds at a crucial time. With research, technology, and knowledge for understanding birds reaching new heights, the agency should be making the most of these advances. Even insiders who’ve devoted their careers to the agency say they’re frustrated with what they’re seeing. Don Barry, the former chief counsel at U.S. Fish and Wildlife, who helped shape the agency’s laws and enforcement for years, is direct about it: ‘Unfortunately over the last twenty years, the Fish and Wildlife Service has grown increasingly timid.’ Dan Ashe, director of the agency for almost a decade during the Obama administration, says, ‘They just don’t have the depth of field that’s necessary to deal with the challenges they’re facing.”

Yes, from a subjective outside-observer point-of-view, "depth of field" definitely appears to be lacking. We live in an age of a lot of pressure to shrink government, even widespread simplistic anti-government sentiment.... the problems/flaws of the USFWS are shared by many Federal agencies. The onus for settling this whole IBWO issue will be, more than ever, on the few believers who continue to actively search for the species, without much help from USFWS -- and 'settling' the issue can only arise by documenting the bird conclusively; it is not currently possible to prove extinction.

--------------------------------------------------------------

ADDENDUM  7/7/23:

A decent interview (~26 mins) with Steve Latta about their Louisiana findings. Though largely re-hash of re-hash of re-hash, it's worth hearing if you’ve never heard Steve verbally state his case before:

https://www.upr.org/show/undisciplined/2023-07-06/undisciplined-first-sighting-in-70-years-researchers-say-theyve-seen-extinct-ivory-billed-woodpecker

(...and I think one of the most important points, of several, that he makes here toward the end, is that if the IBWO persists -- as they're convinced it does in one sector of Louisiana -- then, rather than this being a last stand, there are numerous other locales across the Southeast where small populations may be holding out as well.)

-- Chill --

 --------------------------------------------------------

Sorry, had a few bits of interest I was planning to link to, but honestly I'm so peeved by the huge increase in false IDs, dubious reports, misinformation, poor speculation, wild ideas etc. generated online by so much IBWO publicity (all of which tends to shine a further poor light on the credibility of the ‘believer’ community in general) that I think I’ll stop adding to the muddle that is already out there, by restricting myself, for the moment, to truly new (and non-confidential) information or clear photos/video that arise (as well as any decision by the USFWS).

There's enough other news in the U.S. these days to keep busy with(!) without adding to the never-ending churning of Ivory-bill material that still fails to conclusively document the species! Feel free to continue to send along your pics and stories, but recognize that the likelihood of a very positive response from here is not great.

AND.... at some point this summer (without much warning) I may finally upgrade the blog to a new theme/platform (as Google asked me to do 15 years ago!), which could cause a major loss of material, primarily from left-hand column -- so if any of those links are important to you, you may want to copy them ahead of time, as I might not make the effort to restore links and configurations lost in any transition.

 --------------------------------------------------------

-- Intermission --

————————————--——

Might link to a couple of small things soon, but for now just an 'intermission' to entertain with a few favorite old visual illusions (...still no real clue when the tardy USFWS might release a statement -- does delay imply a lot of disagreement/bickering amongst themselves???):

1)  “The Cafe Wall Illusion” in which all the lines are straight and parallel:

2)  The ‘Nonexistent Dots’ illusion… none of the (perceived) black dots actually exist:

3)  Or, the 'Disappearing Dots' illusion where 12 dots DO exist but can't be seen at once:

4/5)  a couple of famous Escher type illusions, ‘the impossible staircase’ and the ‘3 or 4 bar illusion’:

All for now....

—————————————————