==> THEblog devoted, since 2005, to news & commentary on the most iconic bird in American ornithology, the Ivory-billed Woodpecker (IBWO)... and sometimes other schtuff [contact: cyberthrush@gmail.com]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A lot has happened since 1989 in the Ivory-bill arena, but back then Dr. Jerry Jackson prepared a report for USFWS based on his study of the species' status at that point in time and included this prioritization for future searches:
-- 1st Priority:
Louisiana: Atchafalaya Basin
Mississippi: Lower Yazoo River and adjacent bottomland forest along the Mississippi; Delta National Forest
Florida: area between and near Chipola and Appalachicola Rivers, Appalachicola National Forest; areas south and east of Kinard
-- 2nd Priority:
Louisiana: Tensas National Wildlife Refuge and contiguous forest
Mississippi: Pascagoula Hardwood Tract and continguous foest in Jackson and George counties.
South Carolina: Lower Santee River, Wambaw Creek Wilderness and vicinity
Florida: Big Cypress Preserve and adjacent areas; Fakahatchee Strand
Texas: Big Thicket
Florida: California Swamp and adjacent areas near the Lower Suwanee; other swamp forests of the "Big Bend" area
-- 3rd Priority:
Georgia: Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge
Mississippi/Alabama: Lower Noxubee River and adjacent areas along the Tombigbee River
Georgia: Lower Altamaha River
Florida: Wekiva River preserves and adjacent portions of Ocala National Forest
Arkansas: Lower White River and nearby bottomland
Again, I'm sure 21 years later the precise order of priorities will have changed significantly, but still interesting to look back at the conclusions from a time before all the current hoopla. ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Jerry Jackson will be speaking at Florida Atlantic University (Boca Raton, FL.) in a couple weeks on "History, Hoopla, and Hope: Lessons of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker and its Emergence as an Icon for Conservation" as part of their 'Frontiers of Science Lecture Series': Friday, March 19, 3:30 - 4:30pm. Location:Room 126, Biomedical Science Center, Boca Raton Campus Contact:Patsy Jones, 561-297-1301 Obviously, a timely presentation. If any readers get a chance to attend please feel free to offer your thoughts/synopses via comments or email.In fact if anyone attends and wishes to ask Dr. Jackson a question, one that I'd personally like to see posed runs as follows: "If you had to name just 2-3 areas remaining that you'd like to see get further intensive exploration (for IBWO) where would they be?"
One of Jackson's prior print pieces that likely touches on some of the material he'll discuss on the 19th here (15 pg. pdf):
Just consolidating together these 4 wonderful U-streamed nestcams (all from Calif.), to keep you entertained while we await any IBWO news for this search season. Great and fascinating stuff, peering into the family/nesting lives of species, as rarely observed by humans before:
There are lots of other nestcams worldwide, but these 4 are particularly good and varied, and can keep one mesmerized for a good while. The first 3 are currently sitting on eggs, and the real fun starts when chicks appear and child-rearing begins, as in the 4th one. Hats off to the folks running these sites (which include chat rooms, BTW). Of course there's still a certain woodpecker nestcam we'd all really like to see...
One other note worth mentioning: Bill Benish recently started a blog exclusively devoted to Campephilus woodpeckers that is definitely worth perusing for all the woodpecker-philes out there:
Meanwhile, John Trapp, at his blog, has previously noted a link to all the Ivory-bill-related blogposts of Ohioan artist/birder John Agnew who was active with the Choctawhatchee group, as well as claiming a sighting himself in 2008 (which he depicted in a painting). His latest IBWO post (a week ago) touches upon "paranoid thoughts on Ivory-bill conservation":
For decades many feared that if the Ivory-billed Woodpecker was found it would create a mass crush of birders, scientists, news-folk, and curiosity-seekers into an area, disturbing the bird further. But IBWO sightings in recent years haven't resulted in such a trampling horde of humans. Indeed, at this point, it's more likely that any IBWO claim will be greeted with a yawn, than with frenzy. Thus, one major reason for much secrecy around Ivory-bill sightings seems no longer to hold, if it ever did. The off-the-beaten-path areas where sightings occur, usually are not even amenable to casual weekend birders or naturalists visiting on a whim.
When IBWOs were discovered in Cuba in the late '80s, another group took over that search, and held their cards closely, just as the broader confederation of agencies involved in the current 'recovery' effort has done. The underlying fact (that everyone realizes) is that the Ivory-billed Woodpecker is a cash-cow for anyone who can corner the market on proof of its existence. Early on in the Big Woods effort the very harshest critics/skeptics accused Cornell/Nature Conservancy of a 'hoax,' or at best an exploitative P.R. scheme for funds and attention. As ridiculous as those charges were, the reason they stick at all in some people's minds, is because of the appearances that officials have permitted to go forward, by virtue of secrecy, silence, and confidentiality (and appearances are important).
As recently as three years ago I couldn't see the value or practicality of "open access science," but over time have become a convert to its value, efficacy, and need (and, it IS the wave of the future). The Ivory-billed Woodpecker saga is a glaring example of why the slow, inefficient, old ways are breaking down and becoming obsolete, in favor of openness, in the digital age.'Open access' doesn't mean EVERYthing has to be laid out on the table, just a whole lot more than we've witnessed in this instance. [...p.s.: may be worth noting that Cornell University was itself at the forefront of open access "arXivs" for physics, math, and computer science papers].
A few germane articles/links (on "open access" science and "science commons") :
(...this is not really a wise interaction of household pets, and I don't want to encourage it... but entertaining, yes) -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Am a bit tuckered out on a certain topic for the moment, so may just post some non-Ivorybill stuff for a couple days of respite, unless breaking news occurs...
Some emailers continue to ask why there would be such a delay in settling this matter, unless there is in fact something to Rainsong's claims? I don't know the answer... but until the silence lifts, s'pose I can keep speculatin':
Cornell, as I understand it, is trying to reach consensus on the Rainsong case with the various reviewers from Arkansas, Louisiana, Iowa, Ithaca, and Jackson in Florida (and for all I know maybe others are involved at this point). The sheer bureaucracy of it no doubt accounts for some of the sloth --- personally, I'd rather actually see a dozen independent opinions expressed, but no they seem to prefer manufactured unanimity. There is always the possibility that given what they have they simply can't "prove" fraud, and can't "prove" the photo'd bird to be an IBWO, so are left lacking enough substance to pursue the claims, but also lacking enough hard first-hand evidence to prove a hoax either. Or, could be that just 1 or 2 reviewers are holding out for more information/analysis and unwilling to completely diss the Sabine claims just yet, stalling any unanimity. It is unfortunate that a rebuke of Rainsong's story may tend to paint (and taint) anyone coming forth with sightings from the Sabine (or even searching there), with a broad brush, even though the Sabine Basin is a perfectly legitimate area to look for Ivory-bills.
When Steve Sheridan forged an "Ivory-bill" photo in southern Illinois, his lame excuse for doing so was that he was so confident of the species' presence there (and he cared sooo much for IBWOs) that he felt justified doing anything to get the attention of authorities who weren't taking his claims seriously. I don't think Daniel Rainsong cares a twit about the Ivory-billed Woodpecker, but I think he does care a lot about $10,000 checks, and so in another scenario, it could even be that Rainsong genuinely thinks he has seen IBWOs in the Sabine area on earlier trips, and felt justified committing a hoax to get the money he might truly believe he deserves. Indeed, it raises the whole issue of what happens 6 months or a year from now, if another individual actually were to document the presence of IBWOs in the Sabine River Basin --- does Rainsong suddenly become a hero or birding martyr of sorts, in retrospect (even with no evidence that his own photos were real)??? As a blogger I don't feel the constraints of all the nuances and what-ifs that Cornell might be fully working through before releasing any statement; they may simply be exploring every conceivable scenario...
Finally, is it possible authorities are actively pursuing legal charges against Rainsong, and taking time to assemble full documentation toward that end? (as one emailer notes, if it is indeed fraud, there are interstate aspects to this that could make it a Federal case, with serious consequences)... I just don't know. OR hey, maybe nothing is at it seems to me, and Cornell is actually preparing to declare that there is at least one male IBWO, we'll call him Elvis II, loose along the Sabine River! -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Soon another 100+ birders who were sitting on the fencepost over the possibility of Ivory-bill existence may throw up their hands in exasperation and join the ranks of skeptics; such is the unfortunate impact of cases like this. And the evidence bar (already high) required for inexperienced or unknown birders who want to turn in claims will be just that much further out of reach, but so it goes...That's why some of us have no patience whatsoever for the likes of hoaxes, as I for one, believe we have here.
The entire background/credibility of Daniel "Rainsong" is alone enough to call this story into serious question (UNDERstatement), but I won't even delve into that for now. The complete lack of transparency in having a blood relative post a "news-release" containing inaccuracies on a hokey news website, and involving your own sister in the same story, are more huge red flags, but I won't spend time on those details here either. Nor does planning to write a book, before you even have acquired solid material to write about, bode well. And finding an Ivory-bill to photograph within 10 days of setting out, when others have spent years looking, is damn fine luck. In short, everything that surrounds this story is crap-assy from the get-go, but since a lot of people seem only (and foolhardily) interested in Rainsong's photos, that's what I'll address at the moment.
My understanding is based on various sources whose information I trust, and who have generally been consistent, but if anyone believes any details wrong, feel free to say so:
Out of a great many photos (and videotape) taken, Rainsong turned in but two pics as the sole examples showing the bird in question; ALL other (before, after, intermittent) photos of the area conveniently discarded along the way, before any review. The bird bears some markings (and size) consistent with male Ivory-billed Woodpecker, and other features (shortish bill and tail) not consistent, but basically is too unclear for definitive identification. But the real question is not what the bird is, but rather is it even a living bird at all? I would argue the posture of the bird has changed little in the two pics (some may feel it has changed much more), and yet the pics are determined to have been taken more than 3 MINUTES APART (...do you understand how much a bird typically moves in THREE &$%#@!! MINUTES!!! --- count out 180 seconds), despite Rainsong initially claiming that the pics were taken 5 seconds apart! (...just a teensy discrepancy... NOTTTT!!!). This alone spoils/destroys/annhilates his storyline (for me), but when added to WHO was present at the time he took the pics, and why his first travelmate departed early, and his clear central focus on monetary reward, and why he never led other searchers to the site, and his stated intention to write a book before any pics were ever taken, and his lack of birding experience or knowledge, and unwillingness to publicly release the photos, and... well nevermind, you get the idea... this story isn't resting on quicksand, it's sliding around on donkey puke, and someone more official than this blogger ought to say it (in their own tepid words). There are multiple ways of positioning a painted decoy at the crotch of a tree... but there's one requirement for photographing a living Ivory-billed Woodpecker: it has to be there. I believe the photos show a painted decoy, possibly blowing in the wind, perhaps on a rope pulley system, and that ought clearly be the null hypothesis until shown otherwise... and I doubt that showing otherwise is within the realm of possibility.
I trust my sources, my own research, and my conclusions, but sure there's always the possibility that they're all wrong. Until someone can demonstrate that (or, that humans never walked on the moon), I don't believe Mr. Rainsong saw or photographed an Ivory-billed Woodpecker (or any other bird for that matter). I don't believe Mr. Rainsong, period. I think we likely have a clearcut case of fraud for money (by someone essentially already charged with such in other matters in the state of Iowa). That's my belief as we await with baited breath to hear what folks in Ithaca, NY believe. In the meantime, maybe some real work can yet get accomplished in Arkansas, or Louisiana, or Florida, or Tennessee... Good luck to the real searchers still out there, trying to accomplish things the old-fashioned way... honestly. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just a little overview today, before tomorrow's post re: the photos...
If David Sibley ever walks in with a photo of an Ivory-billed Woodpecker, I'd like to sit down and pore over that picture (while David can go quietly sip tea in another room). But if "Daniel Q. Public" walks in with IBWO pics, I don't initially give a crap about the photos; they can be set aside --- I want to sit DQP down and find out WHO the HELL he is, and what possible credibility he brings to the table. It is concerning that some folks interested in this Sabine River episode seemed to want to focus on Daniel Rainsong's evidence when they hadn't even established his credentials, background, knowledge-level, experience, integrity, motivation etc. to any significant degree (...BTW, maybe worth noting that "tree trimming" and arborist work is part of his family business, and J. Hepperle himself called Daniel a regular "Daniel Boone" at one point --- dare I guess that climbin' trees is second nature to him?). A 2-hour+ grilling of most fellows will crack open any tall tales like a raw egg and put them to rest quickly. That a few have taken this particular story seriously when almost nothing about it appears solid is disconcerting (luckily, a healthy, vast majority, saw through the transparencies --- but those who didn't, really need to take their BS meters in for a major tune-up, and if they have college degrees in science, well, maybe they ought to relinquish them).
And I don't say all of that lightly, because it is certainly possible that some non-birding countrified fellow from the boonies will indeed one day be the documenter of Ivory-bills --- wouldn't surprise me at all (the Mason Spencer story still haunts all of us). But first, unknowns HAVE TO establish their credentials, character, motives, background, WHO they are, etc. It's basic (falls under the rubric 'common sense'); their so-called "evidence" can be dealt with later.
Reminds me of decades ago when some intelligent people (including scientists) fell for Uri Geller's "psychic" abilities because they chose to focus on what they saw with their eyes rather than first investigate Geller's past and training, and find out who the heck the guy was (...DUHHH!). I've often considered writing a post that would describe for readers how to recognize:
a) a claim that is most likely a hoax vs. b) a claim that is sincere, but almost certainly a case of mistaken identification vs. c) a claim that is sincere and actually has some credibility to it
But long ago concluded that such a post would only serve as a playbook for ne'er-do-wells to concoct plausible hoaxes. And I do believe a really careful, intelligent, patient, well-rehearsed individual could hatch a highly plausible Ivory-bill hoax, not the plate of steaming rubbish we've recently seen. The Ivory-bill arena is an absolute buzz-saw for lightweights trying to pull off such a charade... and yet a few clowns will try, and someone with a higher IQ might actually succeed. Did I forget to mention... I'm a bit peeved :-[
...Tomorrow, a little about the unconvincing pictures (as if they even matter, when all other aspects of this case are considered). --------------------------------------------------------------------------
I originally presumed the Sabine River storyline would last 7-10 days. Hindsight is always lucid... If I'd realized 31 days ago how long authorities would take on this matter I'd have said more way back then --- I suspect there may be 15-year-olds in my neighborhood who could've thoroughly analyzed Rainsong's photos in 48 hours (but Cornell seems bent on a quest for 100% consensus, lest, heaven-forbid, they have to modify any preliminary findings that could've already been announced by now, or take any flak as they did following their Luneau video analysis).
It's been awkward to have formulated a clear opinion on this story early on, but been uncomfortable divulging the basis for that opinion --- in the future, in a similar situation, I'll try to say more earlier. With that said, next week I'll indicate at least a few of the key elements to this story (as I perceive it).
Meanwhile, Cornell says their technical summary volume reviewing the entire IBWO search will be out in 2011. Either the bird will be found by then, in which case the tome will no doubt be put off further, or it won't be found by then, in which case the volume will be perceived in many circles as a face-saving joke. (We're living in the digital 21st century, but some scientists seem stuck in the ways of the 1970's --- am I peeved... yeah, a tad.)
Lastly, on a complete sidebar (and speaking of the digital age), worth noting thatThe Sibley eGuide to the Birds of North America is now available as an app for the iPhone or iPod:
(stay tuned: tomorrow an "overview" and Monday a few more details on photos...) -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Several folks have emailed me the brief notice from yesterday's Iowa police blotter listing Daniel Rainsong's recent arrest:
"Daniel Rainsong, 53, 1916 Ferndale Ave., was arrested and charged with theft in the first degree. (reported at 7:30 p.m.)."
While this could relate to his IBWO saga, it could easily relate to several other things as well. For those who haven't already explored the credibility, background, character, of Mr. Rainsong they may want to look up information under the names "Daniel Rainsong" and "Daniel Dean Hepperle" that is available on a variety of internet search and people sites.
While I'm still waiting for Cornell or someone official to make an announcement about the purported photos in question, if they have said nothing by next week I may go ahead and disclose certain details/understandings I have, as this matter is dragging on way beyond any sense.They need to put this matter behind them so they can concentrate on getting summary or 'recovery' reports out that might actually aid field searchers in the current ongoing season.Time's a'wastin'.
=> ADDENDUM: a commenter below sends a link to much more info on the Rainsong arrest here:
Longer-term readers know that I share Cornell's Ron Rohrbaugh's recently-expressed pessimism about any recoverable population of Ivory-bills persisting in the Southeast. I don't doubt that Ivory-bills could hang on for another couple decades in some low steady-state numbers, but see no hope for them being around a century from now. Of course that goes for a LOT of bird species --- while the next few decades bear glimmers of hope, the next century or two do not (and the case for many mammals is even worse).
If Ivory-billed Woodpeckers made it into the 21st century one might surmise they likely persisted in an approximate 50/50 sex ratio to do so; OR, if the genders are skewed in any direction, one might expect it to favor females over males to bolster the species' survival chances. Thus, I'm often troubled by the high percentage of IBWO sightings that cite males, when gender is identified (in fact in the last 5 years I can't recall a single claim arriving in my email specifying a female) --- it's bad enough that male IBWOs and male Pileateds are the easiest ones to confuse, but moreover, there simply ought be more females in the mix if the species is out there. I'd guesstimate that maybe 70++% of credible or semi-serious sightings cite male birds --- but if Cornell or someone else has an actual breakdown of the figures I'd like to see it; maybe I'm off. Yes, there have been some good sightings of females and even pairs in recent times; they simply seem dwarfed by the number of male claims over that time.There could be plausible reasons for such a prevalence:
1) The vast majority of those claims may well be male Pileateds, dropping the actual IBWO male/female ratio back down to normality. 2) Females spend more time on the nest so possibly males are out-and-about, traveling more often and greater distances, and exposed to sighters more often. 3) Males are more visually striking and possibly noisier, thus perhaps more attention-getting.
Maybe it is that simple; but to the degree that male predominance of sightings actually reflect the ratio of Ivory-bills in the wild then it would be yet one more factor not boding well for a species that needs all the help it can get. ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two weeks ago I posted about an active hummingbird nestcam in Calif. The lone remaining baby should've left the nest by now but is way underdeveloped (lack of feathers), and not sure what the outcome will be; you may still wish to follow along, though it could be a sad ending:
Induction and "The Raven Paradox" (classic problem in scientific method, from Carl Hempel):