-- Cha-Cha-Cha --

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
just dancin' the night away (well, in my head anyway)... and noticing, for-what-its-worth, that American southern geography is chockfull of wonderful, choice-sounding names like, Chattanooga, Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctawhatchee, Chokoloskee, Chatooga, Chipola, Chippewa, Chattahoochee. Charming, ehhhh? Apalachicola and Atchafalaya kinda roll off the tongue real nice too, and several others too numerous to mention. So many places, and so many imponderables, and so little thyme... in the garden.

-- Ciao, or should I say, Cheers

... ohhh, on a side note, and sorry to get so commercial, but in case you're into juicing, I bought a Breville Juicer machine awhile back (available on the Web, if not locally), and highly recommend it -- has a large, accomodating food corridor that I just put an incredible 9 PEARS through; maybe even more possible... but enough marketing for the moment (you can always check out eBay for Ivory-bill-related items here).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Match Game --

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pens and pads ready? Today, time out for a pop quiz ---
Can you correctly match up these first and last names of some accomplished birders/ornithologists from past and present:


1. Cliff ........................... a. Short
2. Steve ........................ b. McGowan
3. Lester ....................... c. Kroodsma
4. Joel .......................... d. Shackleford
5. Pete .......................... e. Parker
6. Theodore .................. f. Nowicki
7. Geoff ........................ g. Vleck
8. Donald ...................... h. Weidensaul
9. Clay .......................... i. Hill
10. Kevin ....................... j. Dunne
11. Carol ....................... k. Sutton
12. Scott ........................ l. Welty

============================================

correct answers below:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

1d, 2f, 3a, 4l, 5j, 6e, 7i, 8c, 9k, 10b, 11g, 12h

Scoring:

10-12 right --- Excellent
7-9 --- Good
5-6 --- Fair
3-4 --- Not As Good
0-2 --- probably a Tom Nelson disciple
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- AOU Meeting --

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About a month-and-a-half ago a certain blogmeister up Minnesota-way wrote the following in reference to this year's American Ornithologists' Union upcoming October meeting in Veracruz (which he probably won't be attending, or having much fun at if he does) :

"Here is a link to the scientific program. I see some Cornell names there, but I don't see any mention of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker. Can anyone out there predict what (if anything) will happen, Ivory-bill-wise, at that meeting? "

I suspect by now some folks reading this could make those predictions... but geee... why spoil the suspense for him.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- The Power of the Web --

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lo and behold (it's a little scary!)... back on July 20th I wrote a post in reference to an Internet outfit that was selling Ivory-bill-related T-shirts and rather tongue-in-cheek suggested several options they should add to their line-up. They've now actually added some of those:

http://www.cafepress.com/servopuff/1726766

...wonderful, the influence of the Web --- I don't have any connection/ties to this company, so go ahead and buy up a dozen-or-so of them T-shirts; they'll make nifty Columbus Day presents. And if any of YOU have suggestions you'd like to see reach fruition in the future just send them along to me on the back of a $20 bill and I'll see what I can do ; - )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Another Anniversary --

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This month marks the 40-year anniversary since birders Bedford Brown Jr. and Jeffrey Sanders reported watching a PAIR of Ivory-bills scaling beetle-infested pines for 16 MINUTES near Eglin Air Force Base (1966), in a sighting that John Dennis regarded as valid. Somewhat interesting, for what it's worth, that Mike Collins' current IBWO claims come from near Stennis Space Center in Mississippi, and furthermore, in general, I now get an unusual number of 'hits' at my blog originating from military bases -- does the military or Air Force know something others don't, or just a lot of birders serving in uniform these days???
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Gotta Have One --

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you just kent get enough Ivory-bill wares to suit you, one of the companies making those plush little audible bird toys most of you are probably familiar with, has come out with a wonderful Ivory-billed Woodpecker edition. Look for it at your local retailer/bird store or go here on the internet:

http://www.tableandhome.com/prodhiagc

....and you'll probably want to purchase one before the price goes up.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Varieties of Skepticism --

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There's skepticism... and then there's schlepticism ; - ), of the sort that overwhelms the Web. Many will be surprised to hear me say I know few people more skeptical by nature than myself -- only my skepticism runs the gamut across all of science (not to mention government, religion, business, art, and oh yeah, tarot reading). Long ago I cancelled membership in a well-known international "skeptics" organization having become too skeptical of their biases and approach to matters. Having worked most of my adulthood in genetics and medicine I remain highly skeptical of those fields (and the life sciences in general) -- they are chockfull of imprecision, built-in biases, unspoken assumptions, and poorly-thought-out methodologies (not to mention fudged data and experimentation), rarely acknowledged in public. Indeed, most money spent in science is poured down a rat hole... BUUUT, that's simply the price we pay for the brilliant and life-changing science which, through it all, bubbles to the surface -- still, few in the public understand the process.

Anyway, my skepticism doesn't begin in 2005 like so much of the Web-based blathering, or for that matter with Ivory-bill reports of the 1950's; it begins with the 1942 release of James Tanner's study and followup commentary. Once one realizes, critically, the weakness of the generalizations/conclusions in that work it changes how one approaches all future claims/reports/evidence on the subject -- extinction was a possibility, but in terms of probabilities, which is all science can ever go on, that possibility (of extinction) was slim given the multitude of ongoing reports to the contrary (technically, there is NEVER PROOF in science, only evidence and probabilities -- go channel Heisenberg, or better yet Godel, if you don't understand this... or just skip it 'cuz it ain't worth arguing over). For 60 years the evidence and probabilities have simply pointed opposite of what most so-called skeptics think about IBWOs. And so while schleptics continue to believe in something (extinction) that CANNOT be substantiated in the near term (and lacks any good evidence) I believe in something that can... and will.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Mr. Cyberthrush's Neighborhood --

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey boys and girls can you say "c-o-n-s-e-r-v-a-t-i-o-n," or how about "l-a-n-d a-c-q-u-i-s-i-t-i-o-n," or maybe "r-e-g-u-l-a-t-o-r-y c-o-d-e-s," or "r-e-s-e-a-r-c-h p-r-o-t-o-c-o-l-s" --- these are a few of the important things that must be set in place before any local Ivory-bill recovery plans can be announced, and often they require time. Once accomplished though there just might be some supercalifragilisticexpialadocious news.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- So Ya Wanna Be An Ornithologist --

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-- in that case you might want to check out all the graduate programs you have to choose from (...a lot more than just Cornell out there):

http://www.ummz.umich.edu/birds/Gradwinweb.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

-- The Rumor Mill --

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Multiple rumors around this summer of Ivory-bill finds. The most detailed rumor/story will supposedly be released within 2 months (although, if real, I suspect, like the original Cornell story, it will break out over the internet ahead of time, though NOT at my site). While very hopeful, some of the specifics out there still sound a tad suspicious/fanciful to me, so as usual it's a waiting game for now (I've been waiting 40+ years, another few months or yrs. is nnnnuthin'). Other rumors afloat are less fleshed-out and will probably require further follow-up through the winter months when leaves are off the trees. And for-what-it's-worth, all the buzz that I'm hearing is from NON-Arkansas states -- not too surprising (given the scarcity of summer AR. searching). No one ever said that documenting rare, endangered, sparse, cavity-dwelling, deep woods, swamp-loving, wary, quick-moving species should be easy... and, lo-and-behold, it isn't.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 'tis the season --

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe I've stirred the pot enough for awhile (that was fun)... so will keep it short and simple today:

"To everything, turn, turn, turn
There is a season, turn, turn, turn
And a time for every purpose, under heaven"

~ Pete Seeger/Ecclesiates (...and hey, appropriately, made into a hit by 'The Byrds')

...'nuf said, for the moment.


(...tomorrow, probably a brief blurb about the rumor mill).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Why Skeptics Don't Get It --

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey, it's a tiresome job, but someone's gotta do it -- so for one last time I'll enumerate why skeptics have it wrong:

1. They greatly UNDERestimate the amount of adequate habitat available for Ivory-bills at any given time.
2. They greatly OVERestimate the amount of previous serious searching carried out (hardly any large-scale, organized searching before 2002); and with typical human arrogance place unwarranted faith in the competency and thoroughness of previous searching, when in fact very limited numbers birders have ever actually accessed likely Ivory-bill habitat for any significant length of time.
3. They wholly underestimate the tenaciousness and adaptability of living things in general, and this species in particular.
4. They fail to comprehend the tremendous ease with which winged creatures can both escape detection and seek out new habitat.
5. They fail to realize that with the elimination of hunting of this species in the early 20th century the remaining IBWOs were given plenty of 'breathing room' to stabilize and regenerate their population.
6. They falsely use a pre-conceived and premature notion of extinction to automatically discount future claims of the bird's existence; failing in short, to keep an open, objective mind (as scientists MUST do) regarding future evidence, yet blindly accepting, with no scientific critiquing, past conclusions/generalizations about the species, that lack a solid basis. In short, they fail to realize or acknowledge that it is ALWAYS easier to criticize, or offer alternative explanations for, any controversial viewpoint (such as Ivory-bill existence), than it is to conclusively substantiate the same. Many skeptics have simply never read the Ivory-bill literature either thoroughly or objectively or critically, but formed opinions based merely on what others say.
7. They utterly fail to comprehend the difficulty of getting photographic evidence of such a deep woods creature, falsely assuming any bird this large should be easy to capture on film. Indeed they seem to labor under the false notion that MOST birds in this country actually get seen and identified by birders, when in actuality most individual birds (including large ones) live their entire lives unseen by birders. Only a small percentage of what is out there is ever recorded by humans, let alone by cameras.
8. They consistently OVERestimate the physical similarity between Ivory-bills and Pileateds concluding (almost insultingly) that experienced birders could repeatedly mistake one for the other. And so we are told to blithely accept the skeptics' cursory cerebral armchair analyses, while routinely discounting the direct on-site observations/conclusions of any others.
9. In a day of instant-this and instant-that, they lack the basic patience and persistence required of real science, and wrongly regard 60 years as a significant amount of time in the life of a species. They operate on the assumption that a lack of solid confirmation for a claim is somehow tantamount to refutation of the claim, and that because some claims were clearly cases of mistaken identification, therefore all were.
10. They ignore the 'law of large numbers' -- the more times an occurrence is reported (in this case, Ivory-bill sightings) the greater the likelihood that some of those reports are true. Co-current species to the IBWO like the Passenger Pigeon and Carolina Parakeet have been reported little over the same time period supporting the likelihood of their actual extinction, while the IBWO was being reported over and over and over again.
11. In the particular instance of the Arkansas claims they focused far too much time, energy, and thought on a single 4-second piece of video, rather than looking fully, objectively, at the entire range of evidence past and present.
12. And finally, they simply feed off each others' cynicism to reinforce their own preconceptions, rather than realistically assessing the probabilities of each new claim -- they are so deeply entrenched in their own regimented "groupthink," and fanciful notions, assumptions, and circular reasoning they fail to even recognize it. The key difference between myself and the skeptics, however, is not that I know more about Ivory-billed Woodpeckers than they do, but rather that I fully recognize just how little I (we) know about these birds, while skeptics continuously operate on the foolhardy assumption that they know a lot.
The loggers, collectors, and hunters of yesteryear may be forgiven for their actions, simply normal for their time; it will be more difficult to forgive skeptics however for their ruinously persistent failures should those lead to the Ivory-bill's final demise.

13. Oh, and did I forget to mention it, they are stubbornly boneheaded.

OR, ...so it seems to me.
.........................................................................................................................................

"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance -- it is the illusion of knowledge."

~ Daniel Boorstein

"Patience is a bitter plant, but its fruit is sweet." ~ Jean Jacques Rousseau

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

-- Just The Beginning --

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One thing I've found interesting over the course of the last year is the number of backwoods/swamper types who have come out of the Arkansas' Big Woods area (either on their own, or as part of the Cornell team) to say that the Big Woods is nowhere near as remote or dense or impenetrable as implied early on by Cornell, and that there were far more genuinely inhospitable bottomland/swamp areas elsewhere through the South. Whether Cornell intentionally painted an especially harsh picture of the Big Woods in order to dissuade large numbers of weekend birders from rushing down there, or whether the initial Cornell crew was simply too inexperienced with deep swamp habitat to recognize truly difficult and inaccessible woodland from more mediocre landscape, I don't know. But what is clear by now is that the Big Woods isn't the end-of-the-line of areas needing searching... rather, it is barely a beginning.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Pre-think --

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recent TV news segments have recounted how 10 years ago inept FBI agents took the easy, convenient route (based on virtually no evidence) of pursuing an innocent Richard Jewell as the Atlanta Olympic Park bomber, rather than undertake the necessary homework to identify and catch Eric Rudolph who would turn out to be the real culprit and survive 7 more years of Federal blundering before finally being captured by a rookie local N.C. police officer. Therein lies a textbook case of false assumptions, narrow thinking, and the subjugation of reason, evidence, and responsibility to feeble presumptions. For lack of a better term, I'll call this "pre-think," when folks use ill-substantiated preconceptions to draw conclusions rather than engage in the legwork necessary to find the truth (kind of like our current Neo-Con leaders do in establishing policy prior to, and unencumbered by, the thought process ; - ) ...Today's Ivory-bill skeptics fall (or saunter sheep-like?) into the same category, narrowly, lazily stuck on notions spoon-fed to us since the 1940s. The claimed 'definitiveness' of James Tanner's study and resultant clamor of 'extinction' are powerfully biasing and presumptive notions if one allows them to be, impeding an objective, open-minded consideration of the full panoply of evidence out there... from the past, the present, and in all likelihood, still to come.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- More On Habitat --

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This article out today on the use of laser-based technology to identify more possible Ivory-bill habitat:

http://newswire.ascribe.org/cgi-bin/behold.pl?ascribeid=20060803.075025&time=09%2028%20PDT&year=2006&public=0

...I'm bettin' they're still gonna miss some spots.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Biding Time --

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Yo Verne, not a whole Hilluva lot o' hard news to report at the moment, so fer-what-it's-worth jest anutha IBWO article (ya-a-a-wwwn) from last year (May 2005) to peruse 'til things pick up a little, or a lot :

https://www.annistonstar.com/opinion/2005/as-editorials-0504-jflemingcol-5e03r1749.htm


...meanwhile, to any searchers trudging through this stifling heat and swelter, may the forest be with you!! ; - )

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

-- THE Man For The Job --

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Have been noticing lately the increasing number of Brits active on the 'BirdForum' Ivory-bill threads, and also witnessing a greater number of visits to my blog site from British URLs, and it got me to thinking that maybe we need to get all these rank-amateur, young American boyish whippersnappers (Fitzpatrick, Gallagher, Harrison, Jackson, Remsen etc.) off this Ivory-bill case and turn it over to the one man who can undoubtedly find and film these birds within a 60-minute documentary outing: 80-year-old Sir David Attenborough!! Wouldn't that be a fine way to cap his incredible career (which includes BTW bringing 'Monty Python's Flying Circus' to television). Yo David, it's just a thought if you're out there listening and sipping tea somewhere....

On a completely different note, at another blog, I just came across this older post (Nov. 2005) that includes links to several older, interesting but less-frequently-viewed articles on the Ivory-bill:

http://clarkmtnmusings.blogspot.com/2005/11/its-open-birdline-monday-special-focus_21.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- More Flap-Rate Analysis --

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For those intrigued by wingbeat data of Pileateds vs. IBWO I'll refer you to this graphic analysis posted by Bill Pulliam:

http://bbill.blogspot.com/2006/07/woodpecker-wingbeats-without-comment.html

I'm somewhat agnostic about wingbeat analysis given the small sample size available and many uncontrolled variables involved, and Bill himself similarly cautions against reaching hard conclusions, but each piece of analysis is worth a look, and as with Cornell's analysis, Bill's graph indicates the flap rate for the Luneau videotaped bird possibly outside the usual range for a Pileated.

(p.s. -- I'm breaking my own self-imposed rule-of-thumb here in even making reference to the Luneau video which has been beaten to death.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------