-- Ivory-bill Atheists --

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm putting off a planned rant at skeptics for a day to clarify just who these rants refer to: Many say that skepticism is in the highest tradition of science, and I agree: I AM a skeptic -- I am skeptical of Christmas counts, of journal articles, of the classification of species, of lifelists, of field guides, of PhDs, of published data, of NCAA basketball ratings, and yes of Ivory-bill reports -- of anything and everything where human certainty or 100% accuracy might be implied, but I still view and remain open to any and all possibilities, despite the skepticism. To draw a distinction therefore from the brand of skeptics I am criticizing, maybe a better, more precise term would be "scoffers." These individuals allow their skepticism to swell into scoffing at new and old evidence, forfeiting the objectivity and open-mindedness required of science. They scoff at Cornell while giving David Sibley's piece a free ride. They scoff at David Kulivan and Gallagher and Bobby Harrison, but never critique Tanner. They scoffed at Jerry Jackson when he argued for 20 years that Ivory-bills might yet survive, then embraced him when he was critical of the most recent evidence. They scoff at anything that doesn't conform to their preconceived notions, and blindly follow, without scientific analysis, anything that does conform. They are following not scientific methodology, but mere bias and pretend-science. They are upset that Cornell spoke with such certainty of finding the IBWO in AR., yet they now speak with their own unsupportable certainty that Cornell did not find it.
Those who are skeptical but open-minded, who are doubtful but aiding the searches, who are unconvinced but looking afresh at every new lead, I have few qualms with --- you are essentially agnostics and that is a perfectly respectable scientific position. But to the Ivory-bill atheists out there, who have made up their minds that the species no longer exists and that any evidence to the contrary must be explained away by alternative hypotheses, and who thus let preconceptions immediately shape their response to any new claims, you are not engaging in science and truly you ought to stop kidding yourselves (...and others) that you are.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Recess! --

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time to dabble in some humor and break all the pent-up tension out there!... At the risk (hope???) of encouraging even more of these amateurish offerings I've listed below a couple of links to "youtube" website attempts at Ivory-bill humor -- these are okay for first tries, but come on folks, I think some creative soul out there can do far better than this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78AFGvhLiIE&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QS7d6vCwrXc&mode=related&search=

There's also a parody of Steve Irwin looking for the Ivory-bill on the 'youtube' site which, in deference to his sudden tragic death, I won't link to, but you may hunt for if you so choose (there are many parodies of the beloved Irwin on "youtube," obviously made in respect and gratitude for him well prior to the recent tragedy).

Finally, and completely NON-IBWO-related, if you're already over at the "youtube" site anyway, and you've not yet seen this pepped-up version of Pachelbel's Canon on electric guitar, check it out (somewhat awesome, and I think highly fun/entertaining -- there are actually several renditions at 'youtube'):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjA5faZF1A8

....and enjoy this sidelight while you can, because tomorrow I may be ranting about skepticism once again.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Tanner Redux --

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
James Tanner was the typical grad student working on a dissertation, appropriately humble and hesitant in his findings when he wrote his Ivory-billed Woodpecker monograph. Yet, once published, he was raised to an authoritative pedestal to which all who were interested in the species pretty much came and knelt before. As time proceeded his statements and views took on more dogmatic and less open-minded tones as an inevitable consequence of this commanding position that was thrust upon him. Still, I think some of the most important words he ever wrote, came at the end of the "Introduction" to his original study, before that dogmatism set in, and they deserve repeated citation:

"The chief difficulty of the study has been that of drawing conclusions from relatively few observations, necessary because of the extreme scarcity of the bird. My own observations of the birds have been entirely confined to a few individuals in one part of Louisiana... the conclusions drawn from them will not necessarily apply to the species as it once was nor to individuals living in other areas. The difficulty of finding the birds, even when their whereabouts was known, also limited the number of observations. Especially was this true in the non-breeding season. With these considerations in mind, one must draw conclusions carefully and with reservations." [all italics added]

On this, at least, I believe Tanner got it 100% right (I wish he and others since had adhered to it)...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Skepticism's Role --

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Writer/birder/Audubon President John Terres saw two Ivory-bills in the 1950s but didn't report it for 30 years because he saw no good that could come of it, even in the unlikely event that people believed him. Ornithologist John Dennis (with a Master's Degree) went to his grave believing that PhDs. looked down on him in not accepting some of his Ivory-bill reports of the 60s. And famously, ornithologist George Lowery came to regret ever publicly disclosing the Fielding Lewis Ivory-bill photos of the 70s which he believed were authentic (but others thought not), due to the tarnishing that it brought his reputation. These were just 3 of the more prominent people who were affected by overbearing Ivory-bill skepticism.
A lot of folks today talk and act as if the IBWO controversy began in 2005 with Cornell's Big Woods' announcement, but this controversy was already 60 years old at that point. Even though Tanner himself believed Ivory-bills existed in S.C. and Florida, somehow in the 40s the Singer Tract population became largely regarded as the last specimens in the Southeast and nobody even knows in what direction they moved once that Tract was cut over. At that point a baseless assumption of extinction was allowed to set in, resulting in a stigma attached to those sighting reports that did come in -- and because most IBWO claims turned in were erroneous, a jaded birding community simply presumed all were.
In turn this stigma meant that:

1. fewer individuals seriously searched for the birds than would otherwise have been the case, let alone any large-scale, organized, meaningful searches being done

2. individuals who did report the bird, unless they had major credentials, were rarely taken seriously

3. many, if not most, who believed they saw the bird, chose not to officially report it at all, rather than face potential doubts and ridicule

4. the few individuals (hunters/trappers/fishermen, NOT birders) who routinely entered likely Ivory-bill environs were never given any incentive to report the species if encountered

In short, prevailing skepticism over Ivory-bills fashioned a cynical atmosphere entirely NON-conducive to finding or saving the species, and long after the loggers and hunters were gone, this pernicious atmosphere is what truly worked against remaining Ivory-bills of the 50s and 60s when they most needed a human assist. Whether enough remain now to yet bring their numbers back time will tell, but skeptics cannot just blithely escape their negative role in the last 50 years and the 'waste-of-time' feeling that they promoted. This sort of hasty, cavalier dismissal of an entire species based on misguided faith in the thoroughness of human logic or study ought never occur. Thus my contention that skeptics are more responsible than anyone else for the failure to find and save this species 20, 30, 40, or 50 years ago. Even the likes of Tanner and Les Short, who should've known better, worked against Jerry Jackson's pleading in the 80's for more searching and study. WHAAAT were they thinking? (...or utterly failing to think).

I'm not speaking here of all the Johnny-come-lately, leap-on-the-bandwagon skeptics who barely even know all the issues involved and were putty in the hands of others, but of the prominent ones who over time set the agenda, preached extinction, and prejudiced the birding majority. If IBWOs are confirmed, those skeptics, after years of obstructively smirking at the foolishness of IBWO believers, will suddenly glob on to say, 'ohhh this is wonderful, finally the evidence we sooo wished for; how great they are indeed still around, yada, yada, yada, yada...' It will be at this point that I hope most of you will fully understand and excuse me if I saunter off to be alone somewhere where I can less-than-merrily stand over a white porcelain commode with my extended index finger firmly planted oh-so-precisely down my ever-luvin' throat!! ....OR..., if IBWOs aren't confirmed, well, then, as Miss Emily Latila would've said, n-n-n-n-n-n-nevermind!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- RFI... George Lamb article --

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IBWO searcher Jesse Gilsdorf is trying to get a copy of an article by George R. Lamb on the Cuban Ivory-bill ("The Ivory-billed Woodpecker in Cuba") , and I'm letting this blog assist him. The article exists at the Smithsonian in D.C. if it is convenient for anyone to make a copy of it there to send to Jesse (or obviously if someone has a private copy they can xerox that would be even easier). He will reimburse for any copying/mailing expenses. Information on the Smithsonian copy is copied below. If you can be of assistance, contact Jesse at: gilsdorf@adams.net
If people occasionally want to network with one another about information or other sorts of assistance through this blog, email me regarding such requests.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The publication you are interested in is owned by the Birds Library, which
> is a specialized collection within the Smithsonian Institition's National
> Museum of Natural History's Natural and Physical Sciences Department.
>
> Author: Lamb, George R.
> Title: The ivory-billed woodpecker in Cuba / / G.R. Lamb.
> Publisher: New York, N.Y. : Pan-American Section, International Committee
> for Bird Preservation, [1957]
> Description: 17 leaves : ill., maps ; 28 cm.
> Series: Research report / Pan-American Section, International Committee
> for Bird Preservation ; -- no. 1
> Research report (International Committee for Bird Preservation. Pan
> American Section) no. 1.

> Catalog Source No.: (OCoLC)ocm30055916

> The call number for this publication is: QL696.P56 L36 1992

> Richmond Memorial Library
> Division of Birds
> National Museum of Natural History
> Smithsonian Institution Libraries
> 10th and Constitution Ave, N. W.
> ROOM E609
> Washington, D.C. 20560
> reference telephone: (202) 633-1693
> <http://www.sil.si.edu/libraries/vz/index.htm#BIRDS

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

-- Rumor Wrapup --

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to ongoing emails seeking specifics about "rumors" afoot in IBWO-land, I'll just re-cap what I've essentially already reported here (many in the ornithology community already know more of the details than what follows):

[Multiple] IBWOs have been found in a non-Arkansas state (found quite awhile ago actually) by credible observers; actions are underway for the future study and conservation of these birds (and these things take time). An official announcement will probably follow within 5 weeks-or-so detailing the find, at which point all may assess the evidence. Whether all skeptics will be convinced I can't predict (although I believe some major skeptics of the Cornell evidence are already persuaded). From my personal standpoint there is little that is overly remarkable about this find, but I expect most others will find it quite stunning. To date, those involved have done a remarkable job of keeping the lid on things. There also remain other rumors in other locales, and only time will tell of their status. Now let's try, somehow, to talk about other things while awaiting official word -- it could be a long boring month ahead in the interim! (Lest anyone be concerned about leaks, the information in this post was okayed for disclosure ahead of time by those involved in the find, and there are many individuals out there who already know far more of the specifics than divulged here.)

...Ivory-bills live, as they always have; whether Man has the insight, ability, and will to safeguard their survival well into the future is another question entirely; the acute damage already done by skeptics, over decades, in impeding the process does not bode well.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- New Season Up Ahead --

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Collins is preparing to return to the Stennis Space Center/Pearl River area to continue his study of Ivory-bills there. One of his recent posts at Birdforum ran as follows:

"Last year, I publicly guaranteed that I would find ivorybills. That mission was easy enough. This year's guarantee is that I'll get a good image."

From what I've heard I believe Mike may find more company than last year searching the Pearl; also more folks involved in searches of S.C. and Texas and at least one other locale (actually, probably several locales). On the other hand, Arkansas' Big Woods area will likely experience scaled-back numbers of searchers from last winter's Cornell effort, as focus shifts elsewhere.

....tomorrow: a brief re-cap of the main IBWO rumor afloat -- NOTHING new, just a capsule review (because of the ongoing email inquiries I'm getting) of stuff I've mostly already posted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Re-visiting Some Quotes --

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems like a good time perhaps to re-visit some prior quotes --

First, this famous one from John James Audubon describing Ivory-billed country:

"I wish, kind reader, it were in my power to present to your mind’s eye the favourite resort of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker. Would I could describe the extent of those deep morasses, overshadowed by millions of gigantic dark cypresses, spreading their sturdy moss-covered branchses, as if to admonish intruding man to pause and reflect on the many difficulties which he must encounter, should he persist in venturing farther into their almost inaccessible recesses, extending for miles before him, where he should be interrupted by huge projecting branches, here and there the mossy trunk of a fallen and decaying tree, and thousands of creeping and twining plants of numberless species! Would that I could represent to you the dangerous nature of the ground, its oozing, spongy, and miry disposition, although covered with a beautiful but treacheous carpeting, composed of the richest mosses, flags, and water lilies, no sooner receiving the pressure of the foot than it yields and endangers the very life of the adventurer, whilst here and there, as he approaches an opening, that proves merely a lake of black muddy water, his ear is assailed by the dismal croaking of innumerable frogs, the hissing of serpents, or the bellowing of alligators! Would that I could give you an idea of the sultry pestiferous atmosphere that nearly suffocates the intruder during the meridian heat of our dogdays, in those gloomy and horrible swamps! But the attempt to picture these scenes would be in vain. Nothing short of ocular demonstration can impress any adequate idea of them."

And then this, from another weblog from October last year:

"The reappearance of the [ivory-billed] woodpecker seems like a second chance -- a chance to expand its habitat, to get it right this time. Maybe that's what links the big surprises of 2005, this sense that there can be another unexpected round, the tenth inning in which the outcome could be different; that failure and devastation are not always final...
The woodpecker was a spectacular thing unto itself, but also a message that we don't really know what's out there, even in the forests of the not-very-wild southeast, let alone the ocean depths from which previously uncatalogued creatures regularly emerge. Late last month, University of Alaska marine biologists reported seven new species found during an expedition under the arctic ice that uncovered a much richer habitat with far more fauna than anticipated...
The woodpecker is a small story; the big environmental story of our time is about extinctions and endangerments, about creatures and habitats moving toward the very brink this bird came back from; but this small story suggests that there are still grounds to hope -- to doubt that we truly know exactly what is out there and what is possible. Hope is not history's Barcalounger, as is often thought: it requires you get back out there and protect that habitat or stop that war. It is not the same as optimism, the belief that everything will probably turn out all right despite your inactivity, the same kind of inactivity that despair begets. Hope involves a sense of possibility, but with it comes responsibility." ( -- Rebecca Solnit)

....Amen
......................................................

p.s. -- if you haven't taken Floyd Hayes Ivory-bill survey yet (see post for Aug. 25), just a reminder to do so, especially if you're a goil : - ) Some days back Floyd wrote at another website, "So far so good: 66 responses in 3 hours. The only surprise so far is the highly skewed ratio of men to women." (a couple days later he was approaching 300 respondents)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Hunting and the Ivory-bill --

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Apologies to BirdForum readers who've already seen me discuss this...)

I've argued for several years that hunting may have been a more important factor, and habitat loss a less important factor, in the Ivory-bill's demise than the standard literature portrays (at least I can find no evidence to refute the possibility), but I thought I was the only one making such a case. Thus, I was pleasantly surprised when one of my readers sent along a 1933 article on the IBWO by no less than T. Gilbert Pearson which ends with this conclusion:

"The reduction in abundance of this species is due most probably to persecution by man, as the species has been shot relentlessly without particular cause except curiosity and a desire for the feathers or beaks." (National Geographic Magazine, April 1933)

This is written almost a decade before Tanner published his conclusions which would become unchallenged gospel. The point once again is that most everything we commonly believe today about Ivory-bills stems from one man's study. If he got it 100% right, there'd be no problem... but what are the chances of that. There's simply too much we don't and can't know with certainty. Or putting it a different way, it's not even what we don't know that creates the biggest problems, it's what we think we DO know that's simply wrong that generates the greatest errors. The point is, birds DIE when they are shot; they DON'T die when their habitat is destroyed -- they fly off looking for new habitat -- they may die later or fail to reproduce due to lack of habitat, but there is NO IMMEDIATE effect as there is with hunting; the effect of habitat loss is drawn out and indirect; still very powerful in the long term, but very different from hunting/collecting in the shorter term.
To whatever degree hunting played a major role in the IBWO's decline, its cessation gave the remaining IBWOs the opportunity to stabilize and recover their population -- I can't stress this point enough. Even Tanner concluded that in many specific locales after habitat loss had its effect, it was hunting/collecting that really drove the final nails into the IBWO's coffin. It is also possible that other factors of disease, in-breeding, and predation, could have played greater roles in the decline of certain IBWO populations than realized. In short, the incessant chant of "habitat-loss, habitat-loss, habitat-loss" may be convenient, but way too simplistic (although I don't want this in any way taken as belittling the overall drastic consequences of habitat destruction around the globe today).

--- As a sidenote I just recently learned that writer/ornithologist Noel F.R. Snyder is currently completing a paper on this very subject of the causes of the Ivory-bill's demise. Something to look forward to.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Survey Time --

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Floyd Hayes requests that I link to an IBWO survey (college project I presume) asking for reader participation (please direct any questions/comments to Floyd, not to me):

....................................................................................................
A simple survey designed to assess opinions on the
currently available evidence for the existence of the
Ivory-billed Woodpecker is posted at:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=211781934539

If you would be willing to spend a few minutes
answering the fifteen questions, I would be grateful.
All responses are anonymous. At some point in the
future I will make the results of the survey public.
If others can forward this message to pertinent
listserves or blogs I would be most grateful.

Floyd E. Hayes
Department of Biology
Pacific Union College
Angwin, CA 94508, USA
..........................................................................................

...my guess is, that if the sample size is large enough (it may not be) the survey results will be strewn across the categories much more widely than some might anticipate (i.e., not just two polarized camps of 'believers' and 'skeptics').

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

-- Still More Luneau Analysis --

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can't let Bill Pulliam's hard work go to waste, so I'll refer folks again to his ongoing further analysis of the Luneau video (which most know I'm exasperated with); the Mon. Aug. 21 entry, including comments, is particularly interesting; but again I think Bill is simply proving my point that nothing can be finally resolved by this film clip (...or it would've been by now!). And I'll stick by my own conclusion that even if the bird in question is a muscovy duck ; - ))), it barely makes a twit of difference to the overall Cornell evidence.
For the sake of accuracy and consistency though I do wish henceforth the birding community would require videotaping and field notes of all birds counted and turned in on future Christmas counts (sheeesh... talk about brief sightings and unverified data!).

http://bbill.blogspot.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- May As Well Check Elsewhere --

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blog traffic has spiked up considerably this week which I presume is from people searching for additional Ivory-bill rumor info -- save the mouse clicks folks: probably won't be reporting any additional info or specifics beyond what I've previously posted or is floating around elsewhere on the Web -- if the story breaks in cyberspace before the principals make an announcement, it will be at some other newsgroup, listserv, chat room, or blog, not here (similarly, with but a few exceptions, I won't be adding further specifics in private emails either), though I might comment on info being reported if I think it is highly misleading or false. Otherwise will await the official disclosure by those involved, which might not come 'til the Oct. AOU Convention.
Of course many skeptics have already decided any such rumors are hokum anyway, and some of them no longer have much choice in what they think since painting themselves into a corner from which free unbiased thought is far more impossible than the survival of IBWOs. The pertinent questiion is not 'do Ivory-bills exist?,' but rather, 'in how many different locales do they exist?' And the other burning question that will eventually need addressing is, 'why did American ornithology so utterly fail this species for 60 years?'
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Possibly Of Interest --

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fielding Lewis (alias, "the Chief" of some IBWO literature) who took controversial and still unresolved photos of an Ivory-bill in the Atchafalaya region of Louisiana 30+ years ago which were passed on to premier La. birder George Lowery (largely bringing him scorn), authored a book later in life (1988) of his La. adventures, including some of his IBWO anecdotes: Tales of a Louisiana Duck Hunter. Almost by accident I just came across this site that currently listed several copies for sale ranging from $15 to $95! (didn't happen to look at Amazon):

http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?&isbn=0533078431&nsa=1

(Tim Gallagher's book, The Grail Bird, has an entire chapter, entitled "The Boxer," devoted to meeting/chatting with Lewis.)
And still to this day, Louisiana's Atchafalaya region is one of the most likely (and difficult) locales which can be expected to harbor Ivory-bills.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Just a Reminder --

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are only a few ways to demonstrate the likely extinction of an entire species:

1. Await a long passage of time (100's of years) over which the species is no longer observed.

2. Conduct thorough searches of all locales the species might inhabit and find none.

3. Carry out some adequate combination of both the above (a shorter passage of time, but with an adequate search, and no reports).

Pterodactyls and Moas are thusly most likely extinct. Ivory-billed Woodpeckers, not even close. Everyone agrees they were around as recently as 60 years ago, and they have been reported repeatedly ever since, with thorough, organized searches being undertaken only recently in many quarters.

So just a reminder to those folks who are fond of saying, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" -- the extinction of an entire species IS an extraordinary claim, and yes, it requires extraordinary evidence. By all means, let me know when you have some; I'd be interested in seeing it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Wambaw Creek --

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll just throw this out for what it's worth to the powers-that-be, and especially to those involved in the South Carolina searches. I have an acquaintance who has said for years, based both on rumors and his own knowledge of the area, that the Wambaw Creek area off the Santee in S.C. may well harbor Ivory-bills (parts of it are almost inaccessible). I trust this individual's gut instincts a lot, and mention the area because last spring's S.C. search seemed to focus only on the Congaree, so I'm not certain how much attention has been paid to the Santee, and specifically, the Wambaw area recently. Bob Russell makes mention of Wambaw Creek in his list of top areas and Jerry Jackson also speaks favorably of it in his volume.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Golden Oldie --

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once again I'll just return to a golden oldie post from about a year ago which was focussed on the Arkansas find, but the gist of which still holds true for all future finds:

..........................................
"There are many reasons to believe in the Ivory-bill's existence, but I've said for several years, that if I had to pick out just one reason it would be the VERY SAME one most birders use to argue for the bird's demise: HABITAT! Most folks claim there is no suitable habitat remaining for this species. To the contrary, the number of remote, little-accessed, dense Southern forest patches available that could sustain 1-2 pairs of IBWOs (not to mention non-breeding juveniles) has long been SIGNIFICANT and growing. In the current Smithsonian magazine (Aug. 2005), top-notch birder Scott Weidensaul says this:

"And there is another, far more potent reason for hope. I've birded all over the country, but the Big Woods area was a revelation to me -- a vast, beautiful chunk of wild land." (italics added).

If this area was a "revelation" to someone as knowledgeable and experienced as Scott, than how much other habitat has been ignored by the country's birders? Jerry Jackson argued for years that revised forestry practices have allowed possible adequate IBWO habitat to INCREASE substantially over the decades, NOT decrease, as people blindly presume.

A lot of headlines in ensuing months will go understandably to the Cornell guys (and gals), but truly MUCH recognition ought to also be directed to David Luneau, Bob Russell, Mary Scott, and others unsung who, in the presence of deaf ears, have been telling us for years that the habitat IS OUT THERE, and who specifically honed-in on the Arkansas region. THANKS guys, for leading the way when others, with their words... or their silence, failed to do so...."
.............................................................

Actually, there will be yet some others, not commonly associated with Ivory-bills, soon getting headlines, but the basic above points still hold. As has been written before, in terms of habitat, both historically and currently, Florida most likely holds the most Ivory-bills, followed by Louisiana and Mississippi. At best, the Arkansas population may only be fourth on the list and it could conceivably be as low as 8th (behind Ga., Al., S.C., and TX.), though I'd be doubtful of that. Still, Scott W.'s insight should be a "revelation" for all.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- That Magic Guy (+addendum) --

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd been trying to avoid all this but for anyone not already aware of it, "Bill 'Magic Guy' Smith" has long claimed Ivory-bill finds in Florida and has now posted a fuller-sized version of his controversial photo from many months ago here:

http://www.birdforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=55456

His no-longer-active website is here:

http://billismad.tripod.com/mysearchfortheivorybilledwoodpecker/index.html

And if you haven't been following the current debate on BirdForum (Ivory-bill 'formerly Updates' thread) you can go here and read backwards to try and to play catchup on Bill's claims.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=660169#post660169

I remain highly skeptical of his picture and reports for reasons I won't elaborate, but am glad to see he is at least finally taking time to defend his position publicly and thereby possibly persuading myself and other doubters of his unusual claims at some point. But I place the links here only for my readers' interest and so they can make up their own minds, NOT as an endorsement of his claims which I don't find credible thus far (though I'd be thrilled to be wrong on this), and which will likely be made somewhat moot in the near future anyway.

Also, on another BirdForum Ivory-bill thread 'Insights and Current Reports,' for any obsessive-compulsive folks not already aware of it, there is ongoing discussion/analysis of Mike Collins' latest video claims from his Pearl River search last season:

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=660169#post660169

or, go directly to his site: http://www.fishcrow.com/winter06.html

ADDENDUM: I think I'll carry this one step further -- "Bill" has repeatedly indicated contacts with Fla. state officials (FWS and/or others) who are aware of his claims and know of the presence of IBWOs and may in fact even have their own photos. I would be interested... needless to say... to hear from any such official through email (confidentiality assured) who can verify the agency he/she works with, and who has met with Bill and is willing to vouch for the credibility/veracity/validity (whatever) of Bill's claims: cyberthrush@wildmail.com
Or, any such official who has met with Bill and cares to pass along information otherwise may also write.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Attn: Boston Terrier Lovers --

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OFF-TOPIC Sidebar:

Many, if not most of you are familiar with Julie Zickefoose, fine bird artist, wonderful nature writer, (and IBWO enthusiast). You may or may not know of her adopted 4-legged child, "Chet Baker," a Boston Terrier who runs his own internet blog (but allows Julie to attach her name to it). Anyway, Chet is ill, causing Julie much high anxiety. If you're a pet-lover, dog-lover, or certainly a Boston Terrier-lover you might want to drop her a line with your positive thoughts:

http://www.juliezickefoose.com/blog/index.php
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------