-- Short Notice, and a Sidenote --

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Cornell's Ron Rohrbaugh speaks TODAY (Sun. 11th at 2 pm.) at the Ossea Masonic Lodge in Wellsboro, PA. on the IBWO search:

http://www.tiaudubon.org/

(BTW I jumped the gun a bit on S. Weidensaul's talk a few posts back listing it thinking it was a week off, when in fact it is a month away, so I'll likely mention it again closer to it's actual date.)

Sidenote: much discussion continues to argue that the "null" hypothesis for the Luneau video is "Pileated;" yet those making this argument believe the initial frames show a bird already in flight, NOT a perched bird -- the ONLY real reason for believing this bird is a woodpecker is the presumption it is perched on a tree trunk at the start (impossible to say definitively); if one doesn't see it that way, than quite simply there ARE other possibilities besides Pileated (depending again on initial assumptions) and there is no longer a single or simple null hypothesis. IF that bird is a woodpecker I continue to believe it is an IBWO, but as I've said from the start I don't find the evidence compelling that it must even be a woodpecker, nor can any further analysis determine such except as a probability -- I'll just assume henceforth that it's a muscovy duck ; - ))) and it changes NOTHING whatsoever about the continued existence of the Ivory-bill. This will hopefully be my final comment in reference to the video.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Of Sightings, Sounds, and Videotape --

---------------------------------------------------------------------
rant, rant, rant, rant.....

I'd prefer not to even reference the Luneau video anymore (what's left to say that hasn't already been said somewhere), but with others linking to its further discussion on "Frontiers of Bird Identification" I can't ignore it completely; again, this is only for the compulsively obsessed:

http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/FRID.html

My genuine relunctance to draw attention to this discussion is because such focus on David's clip simply furthers an inference that the existence of Ivory-bills in AR. hinges on the ID of a bird in a blurry 4-second clip, which is COMPLETELY FALSE and misleading. The clip cannot be definitively resolved by techniques currently available (argue about it for fun and mental gymnastics if you wish, but it will not progress the IBWO debate at this point). In the long run sound recordings may prove more valuable, although for now I remain dubious of them as well due to the innumerable variables involved in their analysis and the very tiny sample of old IBWO recordings for comparison. No, for now, the important 'data' I'll continue to maintain (as in the vast majority of birding instances, where other evidence is unavailable) are the 7 eyewitness accounts used for original publication, and the judgment of those who interrogated/interviewed the claimants assessing their competency/credibility -- THAT is the central evidence (in conjunction with all the other credible historical claims) that must be shaken by 'second-thoughts,' self-doubts, retractions, or the like on the part of the sighters which hasn't happened; all the rest is mere window-dressing required for publication, but actually rather inconsequential (keep in mind David L. never originally claimed to have filmed an IBWO -- he didn't know what had just flown in front of him at the time -- only when Cornell failed to capture an IBWO on tape heading closer toward publication did they RE-visit David's clip, and upon finer analysis, conclude they'd gotten 'Elvis' on tape afterall).
The vast majority of birding is based quite solely on eyewitness report by competent/credible observers, and in a case where realistically there are only 2 likely possibilities even spotters simply noting that it was NOT "A" (...Pileated), leaves "B" (...IBWO) as the only probability. The sightings may be relatively brief (like MOST bird sightings) and of course can be questioned (it's easy as pie to invent skeptical scenarios for any event or claim), but they come from multiple, apparently steadfast, able, and knowledgeable observers; in the past little more would be asked for. The skeptics' case continues to rest entirely on the rubric of "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence," which in turn rests on an assumption of extinction based upon 60 skimpy years of data (really a few years-worth of skimpy data and 50+ yrs. of non-data) and a typical rush to judgment. Conclusions reached in science depend as much on initial assumptions as on collected data. 60 years might represent a big chunk in the life of a human, but it's a moment in the life of a species. While our grandchildren may be able to intelligently discuss the extinction of Campephilus principalis; for us to do so remains but presumptuous and unfounded speculation....
---------------------------------------------------------------------

-- S. Weidensaul Talk --

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Weidensaul will be talking about the Ivory-billed Woodpecker at 7 pm. on Sat. July 15 at the Bushkill Meeting Center in Bushkill, Pa. for the National Park Service if any readers are in that area (...I'm sure the top brains at the NSA are following me intensely since typing "Bushkill" into a search engine!). Assuming Scott speaks as well as he writes oughta be good! -- and I'd be curious to hear about his current take on the whole matter if someone attends and cares to send me a synopsis via email.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Objectivity In Science --

--------------------------------------------------------------------
...rarely exists. Objectivity is an ideal, that honest scientists usually admit doesn't exist in pure form in their endeavors. Contrary to the public view of science as a gathering of raw facts/data/information, which through the use of reason, is turned into theories and "laws," it actually is often the opposite: scientists start with unspoken theories, prejudices, 'hunches,' 'gut feelings,' and consciously or unconsciously attempt to fashion facts or experiments to support (usually) or refute same.
And so we have a dilemma in the Ivory-bill arena: some have questioned Jerry Jackson's objectivity of the Cornell data due to his lack of involvement (or even knowledge) of the initial search. David Sibley, Kenn Kaufman, and many others, were previously on record as believing the IBWO was extinct, and their objectivity or willingness to say they were wrong and shortsighted can also be questioned. And certainly skeptics will claim that the Cornell principals have so stubborny painted themselves into a corner that they are unable to honestly or fairly view any objections to their case. I'm not saying that ANY of this is necessarily true, only that it is the public perception we now face. In short, there is likely NO ONE left out there who's judgment or expertise is fully trusted by both sides (believers and skeptics), again leaving glossy indisputable photos or videotape as the sole means to resolve the debate (and it can only be resolved in one direction, since the LACK of such evidence resolves nothing). This is an unfortunate state of affairs to say the least; a sort of undercurrent lack of trust and yes, even faith, in the competency and objectivity of those involved that has developed. If the Ivory-bill is never documented it is difficult to see the rift ever repairing itself, but if/when those photos/video do arise EVERYone will suddenly rush together in unified support for this magnificent species and its habitat... it's just that the contributions of some of those supporters will be far far more deserving of recognition than that of others.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

-- New Article --

--------------------------------------------------------------
Fairly interesting new article in the Arkansas Times today with a few tidbits I'd not read before -- skewed toward the skeptical side, but somewhat even-handed:

http://www.arktimes.com/Articles/ArticleViewer.aspx?ArticleID=8f174468-5479-4e3b-b460-a4c4ca4e62cc
--------------------------------------------------------------

-- PIWO Video --

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Birdviewing.com has posted a link to Pileated flight videos from David Nolin that can be compared to the bird in the Luneau video for yet more fuel in the debate. Interesting, but of course not definitive (and these of course are normal PIWOs; the issue of piebalds still hovers out there). Given its brevity and quality, and the scarcity of historical IBWO video for comparison, I'll reiterate my belief that the Luneau video simply can't be resolved (and needn't be), but for those who want to check every new chink of evidence....

http://birdviewing.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- ...and All Pileateds All the Time --

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Surfing around a bit today came across this nice little website devoted exclusively to Elvis's smaller counterpart for those of you who can't get enough of large, impressive, black-and-white, pointy-headed woodpeckers (has a nice 'information' page and some interesting 'links' as well):

http://www.pileatedwoodpeckercentral.com/index.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------

-- From Big Woods To Big Sur --

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, departing from IBWOs for the moment to other birds back from the brink...
The below page has photos of released California Condors recently found feasting on a beached gray whale in Big Sur, California -- quite a banquet! (...and somewhat humorous seeing them parade around with their number-identifying tags on in full glory, but otherwise may not wish to view it while downing your morning coffee and bagel!):

http://www.informationforeveryone.com/whale/

And some further explanation of the photos is available at this listserv post:

http://www.surfbirds.com/phorum/read.php?f=83&i=13728&t=13728
--------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Cornell Q & A --

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Cornell has added a page to their website answering some of the more common questions concerning their search just ended; worth a gander:

http://www.birds.cornell.edu/ivory/field/new0506qanda/document_view

...and since the summer will likely be slow for IBWO news I'll break my usual "ALL Ivory-bills ALL the time" rule to point to occasional other stories of interest, like the recent finding of 8 previously unknown species (crustaceans and invertebrates, just a few million years old!) in an Israeli cave (thought those caves had been pretty thoroughly surveyed since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls decades ago -- hard to imagine that species could persist undetected by Man in an environment hardly considered life-sustaining... and for over 60 years, no less! skeptics better jump on this one ; - ) :

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/05/060531094605.htm

Commenting on the find, Smithsonian Research Fellow Allen G. Collins said it "underscores how little we know about life on our planet and how important it is to keep looking." ...Amen to that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Things We Just Don't Know --

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Skeptics are fond of pointing out things we can't know for certain about purported Ivory-bill sightings, so I'll take a moment to point out a few other things we simply don't know for certain:

1) In the last 60 years how many times have birders in deep woods briefly seen a large black-and-white woodpecker fly through the canopy and routinely written it off as a Pileated without a second thought... when in fact it was an Ivory-bill?

2) How many non-birders over that time have encountered Ivory-bills, but didn't know what they were seeing and never reported it?

3) How many birders over that time have seen Ivory-bills, and feel certain of it, but never reported it, believing it either unethical or simply useless to do so?

4) And finally, we simply don't know for certain what the behaviors, habitat needs, food requirements, breeding habits, or lifespans of any IBWOs remaining today are -- at best we know some info only as it pertained to a small sample of Ivory-bills from over 60 years ago; even information about calls, wingbeats, and flight pattern, could have changed from the small (representative???) sampling obtained early on, over the passing generations since. Humans have a myopic tendency to perceive all species, other than themselves, as unchanging over time... it ain't necessarily so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

-- April "Auk" Article (from Cornell) --

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks to folks at "BirdForum" the April response by Cornell to Jerry Jackson's Jan. Auk article was found online here. It is lengthy and obviously worth reading though Cornell seems to be using a blunderbust instead of a scalpel to bury Jackson in criticisms many of which are important but others of which are picayunish or simply semantic in nature, and more importantly almost all of which are simply irresolvable at this point. Unfortunately, in the public arena, skeptics have played their arguments so well (in conjunction with a press that loves dueling experts) that much of what is out there can simply be interpreted or argued different ways. Moreover, they have succeeded in raising the bar of required evidence to that of indisputable photographic or video evidence (which will likely eventually come, but it won't be easy). A lengthy sighting by Sibley or Kaufman might also be accepted (and I mean literally only those two out of all American ornithologists at this point!), but short of that the fact is there is always room for skepticism over other sightings, acoustic data, foraging signs, and even DNA (if we ever got any) can be flawed. Needless to say, this is an unfortunate state of affairs (this ponderous climate of cynicism), possibly unique in the annals of ornithology -- by its inherent nature field biology is rarely a truly precise or meticulous science of the sort some are imagining, and almost any journal article can be taken to task if one is determined to do so. Sad too, the sharp division arisen between so many prominent field professionals.
When I first read about Ivory-bills 40+ years ago there was no doubt in my mind that they still existed, and today I feel no less certain (considering ALL the evidence) -- though the possible numbers are quite worrisome. But alas, through all the trying circumstances, convincing the multitudes of folks out there seems to get harder and harder with every new ray of hope (...and sadly the main consequence of Cornell's first large-scale search season, despite valiant efforts to defend themselves and challenge Jackson et. al., has been, in the press, to further feed that skepticism).

Addendum, looking on the bright side: With Cornell's departure the Cache River area has once again been opened to the public. With an influx of people possibly there will be more IBWO sightings (both real and imagined) in months ahead -- the more sightings the more possibilities for photo/video. Moreover, many of the best bird spotters around probably felt they simply could NOT be a part of the Cornell team and be placed under such strict contractual dictums -- in short, they would want to retain full control over their own pictures, notes, reports, recordings, press releases etc. They will now be more free to roam the Cache in such an individual effort.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

-- B. Harrison's Outlook --

------------------------------------------------------------------------
The below article summarizes part of what Bobby Harrison is saying these days in talks around the country, including the following thought:

"[The ivory-bill] travels to post-disaster areas, feeding off the beetles found in trees about two years after a hurricane, fire or ice storm, he said. So Harrison's team plans to search wooded areas in South Alabama and the Panhandle this fall -- two years after Ivan. The team already has received calls from bird-watchers reporting ivory-billed sightings."

http://www.gulfcoastgateway.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060526/NEWS01/605260332/1006
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

--A Few Chuckles --

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

Nothing new in this current article but some good lines worth a laugh....

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

-- Sidenote --

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
As a sidenote thought this picture of an unknown seabird flying over Wash. DC. from another blog somewhat interesting. Interesting not only from the standpoint of ID'ing it, but from the IBWO-controversy standpoint because of the glaring whiteness of the left-hand wing -- one might expect that wing to clearly show the same black tip pattern of the right wing, but instead is totally-washed out in white, indicating the problems that angle and lighting introduce to photography and why in part the Luneau video remains so controversial. Keep in mind that this is a single still photograph while David's video of course involves many individual frames, and also that Cornell has size and wingbeat analysis (which one may or may not accept) to go with their 'Elvis' video, but still I think it gives some indication of why photographic visual cues alone can be so tricky.

http://dcaudubon.blogspot.com/2006/05/mystery-seabird-in-dc.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- The Word From Cornell --

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For anyone who hasn't seen it here is the statement sent out by Cornell to its subscribers summarizing the 2005-6 IBWO search. It makes several important points:

"The 2005-2006 search for the Ivory-billed Woodpecker has now drawn to a close in Arkansas. Search team leaders from the Lab of Ornithology and Audubon Arkansas, plus Recovery Team leaders from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service held a news conference Thursday to talk about the field season and what happens next. These were the main points from the conference:

- During this field season, the search team did not collect any additional confirmation of ivory-bills in the Big Woods. They are now fairly sure that there is not a pair of ivory-bills residing in the Bayou de View area of the Cache River National Wildlife Refuge, the area where there was a number of sightings in the 2004-2005 field season. They believe the bird spotted there in 2004 is no longer frequenting the area. Because of this, managed access restrictions have been lifted--a move supported by the Lab.

- Enough positive data have been gathered to warrant a continuation of the search for another field season in Arkansas. It's likely the effort will be scaled down somewhat, and rely heavily on volunteers to conduct the fieldwork. Remote time-lapse camera systems have been perfected and will also be used, along with autonomous recording units to capture sounds in the forest. Search efforts have already been expanded into other states, such as Texas, Louisiana, and South Carolina, overseen by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Lab staff will assist those searches with equipment and methodology. A small, mobile ivory-bill search team will also be formed to deploy to areas where promising encounters may occur.

- During the field season just ended, there were four brief possible sightings, one by a volunteer, and three by members of the public. In each case they saw one field mark: an expanse of white on the trailing edge of the bird's wing as it was flying. No pictures were obtained.

- On a number of occasions, searchers heard possible kent calls and double raps that are characteristic of the ivory-bill. Some of the double-raps were recorded on video camera sound tracks and are being analyzed now to confirm whether or not they match ivory-bill sounds. Although there were fewer visual encounters this season, there have been more occasions when people heard potential ivory-bill sounds.

- This season, search teams covered 33,000 acres of forest searching for roost holes, nest holes, or signs of ivory-bill foraging. Combined with last year's effort, 72,000 acres have been searched. That amounts to 13 percent of the total habitat available in the Big Woods. The team has found 10 cavities that are the right size and shape for the ivory-bill and much too large for the Pileated Woodpecker. That is the number that researchers say they would expect to find for a bird as rare as the ivory-bill which requires a large amount of territory.

- Both the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the Cornell Lab of Ornithology stand behind the conclusion that the bird videotaped in the Cache River National Wildlife Refuge in February 2005 is indeed an Ivory-billed Woodpecker. It may take years of searching to find the bird or birds again. According to the leader of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker Recovery Team from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, the agency is a "long way" from declaring that the ivory-bill is extinct.

- The Recovery Team has drafted a recovery plan for the ivory-bill for internal review, and it will be released for public comment toward the end of September. The search team from the Lab of Ornithology will have a final report on the findings of this past season later in the summer.

Certainly our deepest thanks go out to all the wonderful volunteers and professional full-time staff who joined us in the 2005-2006 search season--more than 100 of some of the best field biologists and birders in the nation. They were unfailingly eager, enthusiastic, and dedicated. Much good conservation work has been done by The Nature Conservancy, Audubon Arkansas, and others since news of the rediscovery. Welcome attention has been focused on saving the unique ecosystem of the Big Woods and the many birds and animals that inhabit its green corridors. We're still in high gear and still going to keep searching, using the most rigorous scientific methods, keeping an open mind, but being very cautious about our conclusions, as we have been so far.

We're deeply grateful for all the interest in and support for this project that you have shown. Stay tuned!"

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

....and a further word from me: as could be expected, much press reportage since Cornell's announcement has once again stated or implied that the Ivory-bill is extinct, because of the search's failure to attain photographic evidence from this one locale of attention -- Cornell acknowledges they no longer believe it likely that IBWOs reside in the Bayou de View area of the 2-year-ago sightings. This says nothing about the remainder of the Big Woods or the other areas of the Southeast that remain to be studied. Scientifically there simply remains no solid basis, other than impatience, for assuming the Ivory-bill extinct. Indeed, no bird has ever been declared extinct with an equivalent history of sightings/claims. The unfortunate consequence of Cornell's efforts and the subsequent controversy will now be even more skepticism/cynicism toward future sighting reports and a retrenchment of the interest in the species that had taken so long to establish. Possibly one of the automatic camera units will yet capture the evidence desired. Or else it may now fall on one of the original sighters to re-double their efforts to attain that evidence if only to rescue their own credibility (...and speaking engagements!!); or maybe it will be some other persistent searcher from Mike Collins to Jerry Jackson to Bob Russell or Mary Scott to get the needed photo; it is unfortunately the case that many others drawn into the search this season will now pack up their interest and energy and move on to other things, skepticism having won the day in many quarters. Hamlet famously pronounced, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy" -- with patience and persistence, possiby the truth of that sentiment will yet be demonstrated to those of a cynical bent...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Perspective --

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus far less than 15% of the Big Woods region has been much explored by IBWO searchers; although the Bayou de View area does not appear to hold IBWOs, the White River area (which many believed all along held the best habitat) has not been as thoroughly combed, and other areas have been untouched.
Before 2004, Arkansas wasn't even on many IBWO searchers' radar as a likely place to harbor the species. Both then and now Florida, Louisiana, and Mississippi, held the greatest hope for numbers of Ivory-bills, with Texas and S. Carolina not far behind, and Georgia, Alabama, and some other areas still having possibilities. The significance of the AR. sightings for me was NOT what it said about IBWO existence, but what it potentially said about the NUMBERS that might still persist. On that score I am once again somewhat pessimistic, but not on the issue of existence.
Despite discouragement at Cornell's search results it is vital to keep things in perspective, especially since 3 issues/questions continually get muddled together unnecessarily in this whole affair:

1) Do Ivory-bills still survive in America?
2) Do Ivory-bills exist in the Big Woods of Arkansas?
3) Is the bird in the Luneau film clip an Ivory-bill?

If the answer to #3 is "Yes" than obviously the answer to all 3 questions is 'yes,' but unfortunately too many people seem to assume that if the answer is 'no' than the answers to #1 and #2 are also 'no,' when in fact a 'no' answer says NOTHING about those (more important) questions. (Similarly, if the answer to #1 is 'no' than the other 2 questions are automatically also 'no,' but if the answer is 'yes' it says nothing about the answers to the other 2.)
In short, the best we can say for now from Cornell's results is that there is likely no current population of Ivory-bills residing in the Bayou de View area of Arkansas, but in all truth, we can't go far beyond that, though skeptics will continue to simplify matters by choosing to do so. Overgeneralization is a constant bugaboo in biological study. The leap from no Ivory-bills in a section of the Big Woods of Arkansas to 'Ivory-bills are extinct' is quite simply... a leap of faith, not of science.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Read It and Weep --

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Have your Prozac ready and within arm's reach....

The (de)press(ing) news coverage has begun of Cornell's 2005-6 Ivory-bill search results. Following are some of the initial articles reporting on the (lack of) findings. The first one, from a Chicago Tribune writer, is probably the best of the lot and most thorough (2nd from Reuters, 3rd from Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 4th the NY Times). The number of possible 'sightings' being reported is even lower than anitcipated: four (3 from the public, only one from a Cornell volunteer). And even more disheartening than the scarcity of human sightings is the lack of current evidence from automatic remote cameras, or truly strong indications for roost holes, nestholes, or bark scrapings (acoustic data still being analyzed, but nothing dramatic reported); possibly there will be more hopeful details given at tomorrow's official presentation in AR., or possibly not. The rift between those who believe in the species' persistence and those who don't is bound to only worsen, but as that great ornithologist Yogi Berra always said, 'It's not over 'til it's over...' and it ain't over yet, as for the first time in 60 years real searches in multiple areas are finally taking place, but it certainly can't be a happy day in Brinkley or Clarendon, AR.... or Ithaca, NY :

http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunherald/news/nation/14613990.htm

http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/36456/story.htm

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/science/stories/0518woodpecker.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/19/science/19bird.html?ex=1305691200&en=40a8cc170868fce2&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

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

-- Cornell Releases Statement --

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Today Cornell released an initial statement of their 2005-6 IBWO search findings, with, as expected, nothing really significant to report. The release begins as follows:

"There were teasing glimpses and tantalizing sounds, but the 2005-2006 search for the Ivory-billed Woodpecker in Arkansas has concluded without the definitive visual documentation being sought. The search, led by the Cornell Lab of Ornithology, with support from Audubon Arkansas, stretched from November through April when ivory-bill activity would be highest and a lack of leaf-cover permitted clear views through the dense forest. The search included 22 full-time searchers and state-of-the-art acoustic and video monitoring technology. To supplement the full-time effort, volunteer groups of 14 spent two weeks at a time helping to search the 550,000-acre area focused on the Cache and White River National Wildlife Refuges.
'The search teams were very skilled, not only technically but in the execution of the search,' said Dr. John Fitzpatrick, director of the Cornell Lab of Ornithology. “Even though we didn’t get additional definitive evidence of the ivory-bill in Arkansas, we’re not discouraged. The vastness of the forest combined with the highly mobile nature of the bird warrant additional searching.”

(full statement at: http://www.birds.cornell.edu/ivory/latest/end_of_season)

(also, related story here.)

Saturday is the official day for their report announcement at the Clarendon Birding Festival so there will likely be additional details available at that point. As the Chicago Cubs would say, 'there's always next season.' But seriously, there are still other searchers to hear from and other locales to scour along with Cache/White River so while skeptics have a field day relax, take some deep breaths, and don't despair...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------