-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delightful old David Attenborough BBC video clip of Magellanic Woodpeckers presented by Bill Benish over at his Campephilus Woodpecker blog here:
http://tinyurl.com/4rfszxo
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, March 02, 2011
Monday, February 28, 2011
-- Harrison Recalls... and So Does Caroline Martin --
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the anniversary (yesterday) of his and Tim Gallagher's 2004 sighting, Bobby Harrison posts this recounting of his IBWO sightings to date:
http://ibwfound.blogspot.com/2011/02/7th-anniversary-of-ivory-billed.html
...and a reader sends me this link to a 9-min. video on the Ivory-bill, from Arkansas middle-school student Caroline Martin:
http://www.youtube.com/user/ARNaturalHeritage#p/u/0/_PqEvlqxrkA
(...some small errors, but great job overall from Caroline!!)
Addendum: Additionally, here's a generally upbeat newspaper piece from long-time birder Jim Williams:
http://tinyurl.com/4gp6o45
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the anniversary (yesterday) of his and Tim Gallagher's 2004 sighting, Bobby Harrison posts this recounting of his IBWO sightings to date:
http://ibwfound.blogspot.com/2011/02/7th-anniversary-of-ivory-billed.html
...and a reader sends me this link to a 9-min. video on the Ivory-bill, from Arkansas middle-school student Caroline Martin:
http://www.youtube.com/user/ARNaturalHeritage#p/u/0/_PqEvlqxrkA
(...some small errors, but great job overall from Caroline!!)
Addendum: Additionally, here's a generally upbeat newspaper piece from long-time birder Jim Williams:
http://tinyurl.com/4gp6o45
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Friday, February 25, 2011
-- Slow News Day.... --
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Could be several slow news days (weeks, months???) ahead, from an Ivory-bill-standpoint....
About 2/3 of the interview forms I sent out 3 months ago still haven't trickled back (again, a THANK YOU to those who did respond!), so I'll throw things open a little wider (for a possible better percentage return), by asking if there are any who have been involved in the ivory-bill saga over the last several years who would like to be interviewed for posterity ;-) ?
I'm looking primarily for folks (optimists OR skeptics) who meet 1 of the following 2 criteria:
1) You have a name or 'internet handle,' associated with the Ivory-bill story, that will be recognizable to readers, who may thus have interest in your views or information.
OR,
2) You have been integrally involved with the official Ivory-bill search in some capacity and believe you have information or opinions worth offering, even if your name is not widely known (you can remain anonymous if you wish) --- IF this is the case, and I have not communicated with you in the past, you will need to offer some sort of evidence that you are who you say you are, and have had the involvement you claim to have (also, realize it may be difficult to guarantee full anonymity, given the questions I might want to pose in an interview).
Any takers? ...drop me a line at: cyberthrush@gmail.com
...can't promise I'll interview all that respond (depends how many, if any, there are, and how much overlap or redundancy they might represent).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Could be several slow news days (weeks, months???) ahead, from an Ivory-bill-standpoint....
About 2/3 of the interview forms I sent out 3 months ago still haven't trickled back (again, a THANK YOU to those who did respond!), so I'll throw things open a little wider (for a possible better percentage return), by asking if there are any who have been involved in the ivory-bill saga over the last several years who would like to be interviewed for posterity ;-) ?
I'm looking primarily for folks (optimists OR skeptics) who meet 1 of the following 2 criteria:
1) You have a name or 'internet handle,' associated with the Ivory-bill story, that will be recognizable to readers, who may thus have interest in your views or information.
OR,
2) You have been integrally involved with the official Ivory-bill search in some capacity and believe you have information or opinions worth offering, even if your name is not widely known (you can remain anonymous if you wish) --- IF this is the case, and I have not communicated with you in the past, you will need to offer some sort of evidence that you are who you say you are, and have had the involvement you claim to have (also, realize it may be difficult to guarantee full anonymity, given the questions I might want to pose in an interview).
Any takers? ...drop me a line at: cyberthrush@gmail.com
...can't promise I'll interview all that respond (depends how many, if any, there are, and how much overlap or redundancy they might represent).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saturday, February 19, 2011
-- Whooping Crane Tragedy --
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
For those who have followed the senseless Whooping Crane shootings in recent months, incredibly, yet a fifth bird has now been shot/killed, this one in Georgia (one other in Ga. and 3 in Alabama). There is over $20,000 in reward money for information leading to those involved:
http://www.walb.com/Global/story.asp?S=14061572
One can't help but wonder what this portends for protecting any wide-ranging Ivory-billed Woodpeckers if ever found and confirmed (...indeed some have long speculated that Cornell's "Elvis" of the Big Woods may have been poached soon after his presence was announced... sheer conjecture of course, but not preposterously so).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
For those who have followed the senseless Whooping Crane shootings in recent months, incredibly, yet a fifth bird has now been shot/killed, this one in Georgia (one other in Ga. and 3 in Alabama). There is over $20,000 in reward money for information leading to those involved:
http://www.walb.com/Global/story.asp?S=14061572
One can't help but wonder what this portends for protecting any wide-ranging Ivory-billed Woodpeckers if ever found and confirmed (...indeed some have long speculated that Cornell's "Elvis" of the Big Woods may have been poached soon after his presence was announced... sheer conjecture of course, but not preposterously so).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
-- What's David Up To? --
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought David Sibley was rather tired of addressing the Luneau video, and the topic of Ivory-bills in general (barring new evidence coming along), so am a bit surprised he has put forth a couple of "recently-revised" posts/discussions at the very time the topic is essentially dead for so many birders...
one is here (which includes several recent comments):
and the other is his fairly methodical analysis of the Luneau video here (forcefully arguing the bird captured on film must be a Pileated):
Is this some sort of pre-emptive strike against Cornell's anticipated defense of their analysis to come later this year in an eventual summary report? ...Or a slap at the brief, undetailed dissing USFWS (in their final report), gave the skeptics/Sibley analysis? ...Or just attempting once-and-for-all to pound some final nails in the coffin of this disputed video? I don't know. Just that the timing seems odd, to be returning yet again to this particular debate.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sunday, February 13, 2011
-- Review of The Crossley ID Guide --
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Crossley ID Guide" by esteemed birder/photographer Richard Crossley is finally out... WOWZA!... and now for a longer review:
It's often the case that a heavily-touted, high expectation event or product simply can't live up to the buzz it creates....
With that said, I received a review copy of the new, much-anticipated "Crossley ID Guide," and will say for starters that every birder (of eastern N. America anyway) will likely want a copy of this luscious volume for their shelves... even though it may not be all that some had expected or imagined.
Every birder knows there is no such thing as a perfect bird guide --- each has different strengths and weaknesses (and much depends on personal preference). Over recent times we've witnessed a long string of new guides, each tweaking one thing or another, yet really not all that different from those preceding.
Personally, I never thought the highly-touted Sibley guide, with its minimalist artwork, to be much of an improvement over Peterson (but that's just me, and I did like Sibley's text). HELLO Richard Crossley!! Here, we really do have an innovative, almost startlingly different approach. The volume is a joy just to leaf through! Many things to note:
1) The artwork (which the author calls "the heart and soul of this book") is simply GORGEOUS, stunningly so, and realistic (from 10,000 of the author's own photographs), especially relative to the stripped-down, plain views that have become standard for most bird field guides (which do serve a functional purpose, but still...). Showing birds as one might actually see them in the wild, is at one-and-the-same-time an obvious, yet unique, approach --- especially I think illustrative for beginning-to-intermediate birders. As Crossley writes in his "Introduction" (which is mandatory reading if you purchase this volume):
I suspect birders may debate these color plates for some time. Aesthetically, they are awesome, even exhilarating, but (as Crossley says) they carry a "staggering" amount of information. Whereas some field guides can be viewed in a slapdash manner and still be useful, this book really requires some focused effort and study to deal with the rich overload of these 'busy' and complex plates.
2) It's obvious now why all along this has been called "The Crossley ID Guide" and NOT the Crossley Field Guide. It is BIG; bigger than the original Sibley Guide, which took flack as not being a true field guide, because it wasn't convenient for carrying in the field. My own definition of a bird 'field guide' includes being able to easily hold it open in one hand while the other hand operates binoculars or focuses a bird scope --- this is NOT a field guide. It's a volume for the backseat of the car or the coffee table or reference-shelf at home, or yes, a backpack. Still, I have no doubt that for tough ID calls in the future this will now be my 2nd book of choice after whatever field guide I'm carrying.
3) The graphics are so massive and page-consuming (some songbirds are shown life-size) it leaves little room for the text, which is quite small, and possibly not as well-organized as in some other guides (but still very good and useful -- Addendum: the more I read through this volume, the MORE impressed I am with the text and descriptive portions!). Oddly too, the text is in Gill Sans font --- a non-serif font that, while fine on a computer screen, is very unusual (and I think rather unpleasing) in a book format. This is obviously a minor concern overall, but it is quite unconventional, as serif fonts are the norm.
On the positive side, the large depictions elegantly show multiple angles and multiple phases/plumages of most species. On the downside, this means that sometimes as few as only 2 species are being depicted on facing pages --- i.e., if you want to compare 3 or 4 similar species you have to flip back-and-forth between several pages, whereas they might be viewable altogether on a single color plate in another field guide (for example, comparing confusing fall warblers, or "little brown jobs," in this volume is somewhat challenging). For this and other reasons, I think birding novices, starting from scratch, may need to begin with a more basic volume, and this book will prove most beneficial to intermediate and above birders (but novices will still want to own it!).
4) The Guide organizes birds by "habitat and physical similarity" --- this makes tremendous sense to me, but to those totally accustomed to the "taxonomic" order employed by most field guides, it may be annoying and confusing.
5) The book extensively uses the official 4-letter short-hand banding codes for each species --- again, something that may annoy some people, but once more I think a positive and educative development, given how often these codes are now used in the digital age.
6) Even the Introduction to this book is great, especially the section "How To Be a Better Birder" --- if you purchase the volume be sure to read the entire Intro. Indeed, this is a book I want to sit down with and just pour over, slowly perusing each scrumptious page, one at a time, from beginning to end; savoring (unlike any previous guide).
I'll leave it to the more experienced, keen-eyed birders to review this volume for any technical flaws it may contain (usually a few creep in). For now, I'm too blown-away to worry about certain details.
Hats-off to Mr. Crossley and to Princeton University Press for this remarkable, bold effort (just when you think nothing new can come along in the form of a bird guide... KABOOM!). I just wish Roger Tory Peterson was around to witness what the revolution he started has wrought --- I imagine he'd be very pleased and amazed to see this (even though it's a very different approach from the one he introduced!).
...I also wish I was 10-years-old and this book was among my early introductions to birding... instead of being a tad older and probably making my last few bird guide purchases.
Ohh, and one last note, specifically for my loyal readers: no, the Ivory-billed Woodpecker is not included in the Guide (and I didn't expect it to be). Perhaps, just maybe... in a future edition.... ;-))
A few more links:
http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9384.html
http://www.crossleybirds.com/
http://www.facebook.com/CrossleyIDGuide
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Crossley ID Guide" by esteemed birder/photographer Richard Crossley is finally out... WOWZA!... and now for a longer review:
It's often the case that a heavily-touted, high expectation event or product simply can't live up to the buzz it creates....
With that said, I received a review copy of the new, much-anticipated "Crossley ID Guide," and will say for starters that every birder (of eastern N. America anyway) will likely want a copy of this luscious volume for their shelves... even though it may not be all that some had expected or imagined.
Every birder knows there is no such thing as a perfect bird guide --- each has different strengths and weaknesses (and much depends on personal preference). Over recent times we've witnessed a long string of new guides, each tweaking one thing or another, yet really not all that different from those preceding.
Personally, I never thought the highly-touted Sibley guide, with its minimalist artwork, to be much of an improvement over Peterson (but that's just me, and I did like Sibley's text). HELLO Richard Crossley!! Here, we really do have an innovative, almost startlingly different approach. The volume is a joy just to leaf through! Many things to note:
1) The artwork (which the author calls "the heart and soul of this book") is simply GORGEOUS, stunningly so, and realistic (from 10,000 of the author's own photographs), especially relative to the stripped-down, plain views that have become standard for most bird field guides (which do serve a functional purpose, but still...). Showing birds as one might actually see them in the wild, is at one-and-the-same-time an obvious, yet unique, approach --- especially I think illustrative for beginning-to-intermediate birders. As Crossley writes in his "Introduction" (which is mandatory reading if you purchase this volume):
"This is the first guide that uses lifelike scenes. Take advantage of them to practice so you are better prepared to identify any bird you see in the field. Practice makes perfect.Still, the key field-mark identifying arrows of a Peterson (or other guides) are absent, and it will be interesting to see if everyone can indeed "take advantage" of this more gestalt-ish method. Richard, by the way, calls his approach "reality birding," to stress the representation of birds as we actually encounter them.
A picture is worth 1000 words! And these plates contain many pictures. The amount of information in these plates is staggering. It is up to you to take advantage of this."
I suspect birders may debate these color plates for some time. Aesthetically, they are awesome, even exhilarating, but (as Crossley says) they carry a "staggering" amount of information. Whereas some field guides can be viewed in a slapdash manner and still be useful, this book really requires some focused effort and study to deal with the rich overload of these 'busy' and complex plates.
2) It's obvious now why all along this has been called "The Crossley ID Guide" and NOT the Crossley Field Guide. It is BIG; bigger than the original Sibley Guide, which took flack as not being a true field guide, because it wasn't convenient for carrying in the field. My own definition of a bird 'field guide' includes being able to easily hold it open in one hand while the other hand operates binoculars or focuses a bird scope --- this is NOT a field guide. It's a volume for the backseat of the car or the coffee table or reference-shelf at home, or yes, a backpack. Still, I have no doubt that for tough ID calls in the future this will now be my 2nd book of choice after whatever field guide I'm carrying.
3) The graphics are so massive and page-consuming (some songbirds are shown life-size) it leaves little room for the text, which is quite small, and possibly not as well-organized as in some other guides (but still very good and useful -- Addendum: the more I read through this volume, the MORE impressed I am with the text and descriptive portions!). Oddly too, the text is in Gill Sans font --- a non-serif font that, while fine on a computer screen, is very unusual (and I think rather unpleasing) in a book format. This is obviously a minor concern overall, but it is quite unconventional, as serif fonts are the norm.
On the positive side, the large depictions elegantly show multiple angles and multiple phases/plumages of most species. On the downside, this means that sometimes as few as only 2 species are being depicted on facing pages --- i.e., if you want to compare 3 or 4 similar species you have to flip back-and-forth between several pages, whereas they might be viewable altogether on a single color plate in another field guide (for example, comparing confusing fall warblers, or "little brown jobs," in this volume is somewhat challenging). For this and other reasons, I think birding novices, starting from scratch, may need to begin with a more basic volume, and this book will prove most beneficial to intermediate and above birders (but novices will still want to own it!).
4) The Guide organizes birds by "habitat and physical similarity" --- this makes tremendous sense to me, but to those totally accustomed to the "taxonomic" order employed by most field guides, it may be annoying and confusing.
5) The book extensively uses the official 4-letter short-hand banding codes for each species --- again, something that may annoy some people, but once more I think a positive and educative development, given how often these codes are now used in the digital age.
6) Even the Introduction to this book is great, especially the section "How To Be a Better Birder" --- if you purchase the volume be sure to read the entire Intro. Indeed, this is a book I want to sit down with and just pour over, slowly perusing each scrumptious page, one at a time, from beginning to end; savoring (unlike any previous guide).
I'll leave it to the more experienced, keen-eyed birders to review this volume for any technical flaws it may contain (usually a few creep in). For now, I'm too blown-away to worry about certain details.
Hats-off to Mr. Crossley and to Princeton University Press for this remarkable, bold effort (just when you think nothing new can come along in the form of a bird guide... KABOOM!). I just wish Roger Tory Peterson was around to witness what the revolution he started has wrought --- I imagine he'd be very pleased and amazed to see this (even though it's a very different approach from the one he introduced!).
...I also wish I was 10-years-old and this book was among my early introductions to birding... instead of being a tad older and probably making my last few bird guide purchases.
Ohh, and one last note, specifically for my loyal readers: no, the Ivory-billed Woodpecker is not included in the Guide (and I didn't expect it to be). Perhaps, just maybe... in a future edition.... ;-))
A few more links:
http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9384.html
http://www.crossleybirds.com/
http://www.facebook.com/CrossleyIDGuide
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saturday, February 12, 2011
-- A Voice From the (IBWO) Past --
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Worth passing along....
Haven't heard much from him lately (probably because he feels the battle has been won), but prominent British birder and IBWO skeptic Martin Collinson has a wonderful interview on a British birding site here, with his usual deft sense-of-humor... enjoy:
http://www.britishbirds.co.uk/2011/02/12/martin-collinson/
Speaking of that keen British sense-of-humor, I forget if I've already linked to any of their hilarious animal voice-over "walk on the wild side" TV clips, but here's one to get you started, if you've not seen them before (there are many more clips on YouTube):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xaPepCVepCg
Lastly, I've now received a review copy of Richard Crossley's (also, originally a Brit) remarkable new bird guide and will be posting a review soon. For now, I'll just say, WOW!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Worth passing along....
Haven't heard much from him lately (probably because he feels the battle has been won), but prominent British birder and IBWO skeptic Martin Collinson has a wonderful interview on a British birding site here, with his usual deft sense-of-humor... enjoy:
http://www.britishbirds.co.uk/2011/02/12/martin-collinson/
Speaking of that keen British sense-of-humor, I forget if I've already linked to any of their hilarious animal voice-over "walk on the wild side" TV clips, but here's one to get you started, if you've not seen them before (there are many more clips on YouTube):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xaPepCVepCg
Lastly, I've now received a review copy of Richard Crossley's (also, originally a Brit) remarkable new bird guide and will be posting a review soon. For now, I'll just say, WOW!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Monday, February 07, 2011
-- Another Day of Miscellany --
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) First, today marks the 137th anniversary of the birth of Louis Agassiz Fuertes... one of the greatest bird portraitists of all-time, including one of my personal favorites (Pileated Woodpeckers):
2) An old joke (originally from George Carlin, I think???) asks, "WHAT do you do if you see an endangered animal eating an endangered plant?"
1) First, today marks the 137th anniversary of the birth of Louis Agassiz Fuertes... one of the greatest bird portraitists of all-time, including one of my personal favorites (Pileated Woodpeckers):
2) An old joke (originally from George Carlin, I think???) asks, "WHAT do you do if you see an endangered animal eating an endangered plant?"
But in the world of conservation it's not such a joke, as similar situations actually occur on occasion. Sadly, the competition between Barred Owls and Spotted Owls in the Pacific Northwest appears to be such a case. Read about the tough decisions being made there:
http://tinyurl.com/65xvpqb
3) An early review of Richard Crossley's new bird field guide, due in bookstores soon, here:
http://tinyurl.com/5se976b
(GOTTA have it!!)
4) And finally below, physicist Richard Feynman's classic discussion of bird names... and science:
3) An early review of Richard Crossley's new bird field guide, due in bookstores soon, here:
http://tinyurl.com/5se976b
(GOTTA have it!!)
4) And finally below, physicist Richard Feynman's classic discussion of bird names... and science:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saturday, February 05, 2011
-- Forthcoming IBWO Movies? ;-) --
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All the chatter lately about the 3 main Ivory-bill-related movies, "Ghost Bird" (Crocker) "The Lord God Bird" (George Butler), and the fictionalized account, "Woodpecker" (Karpovsky), got me to thinkin' about the many other possible titles for Ivory-bill movies perhaps yet to come. So without further adieu, a dozen possible forthcoming releases for the big screen ;-))):
1) Close Encounters of the Bird Kind
2) 2005: A Swamp Odyssey
3) Gone With the Singer Tract
4) One Flew Over the Woodpecker's Nest
5) Sleepless In Bayou de View
6) Pirates of the Choctawhatchee
7) Swamp Trek
8) The Good, The Bad, and The Elusive
9) Boggy Horror Picture Show
10) Last Tango In Brinkley
11) The LordGodBirdFather
12) Monty Python and the Holy Grail Bird
and to finish out, a couple of titles that don't even need altering:
13) Great Expectations
14) It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World
So grab a soda, pop some popcorn, and come set a spell....
------------------------------------------------------------
All the chatter lately about the 3 main Ivory-bill-related movies, "Ghost Bird" (Crocker) "The Lord God Bird" (George Butler), and the fictionalized account, "Woodpecker" (Karpovsky), got me to thinkin' about the many other possible titles for Ivory-bill movies perhaps yet to come. So without further adieu, a dozen possible forthcoming releases for the big screen ;-))):
1) Close Encounters of the Bird Kind
2) 2005: A Swamp Odyssey
3) Gone With the Singer Tract
4) One Flew Over the Woodpecker's Nest
5) Sleepless In Bayou de View
6) Pirates of the Choctawhatchee
7) Swamp Trek
8) The Good, The Bad, and The Elusive
9) Boggy Horror Picture Show
10) Last Tango In Brinkley
11) The LordGodBirdFather
12) Monty Python and the Holy Grail Bird
and to finish out, a couple of titles that don't even need altering:
13) Great Expectations
14) It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World
So grab a soda, pop some popcorn, and come set a spell....
------------------------------------------------------------
Friday, February 04, 2011
-- Rohrbaugh on Podcast --
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The second half of an interview with Ron Rohrbaugh of Cornell is up at The Wilderness Center, reviewing the Ivory-bill search situation here (starts at about the 22-minute point, podcast #96):
I didn't previously link to the first half of this interview because frankly it seemed like largely 'softball-ish' answers to 'softball-ish' questions, but if you wish to hear it, it starts at around the 27-minute point here (podcast #95):
The second half is better, with a little more depth, though still nothing new that hasn't already been well-reported. Cornell is likely trying to set the stage for the report they say they will issue before year's end summarizing the multi-year search-effort for the IBWO.
For any who missed it, the US Fish and Wildlife Service 2010 final summary plan for Ivory-bill recovery is available for download (pdf) from their site:
http://www.fws.gov/ivorybill/
For any who missed it, the US Fish and Wildlife Service 2010 final summary plan for Ivory-bill recovery is available for download (pdf) from their site:
http://www.fws.gov/ivorybill/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, February 02, 2011
-- Miscellany --
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) First, just an oddball article I recently ran across (don't remember seeing before... but then my memory ain't what it used to be) here:
http://tinyurl.com/47tnj7f
This is just the abstract (I don't have access to full paper), but it reports on a "a new feather mite species" found in "the wing plumage of the ivory-billed woodpecker" --- it was apparently found on some museum specimens. Interestingly, it's from 2004, before the excitement out of Arkansas erupted. Maybe someone can elaborate more on this --- I mean, I'm not clear if the mite has supposedly been living on museum skins for decades unnoticed, or is a more recent inhabitant, and does it have any special significance for the ecology of the Ivory-bill?
2) Outliers: The Ivory-bill's original range, prior to 1900 included the entire American Southeast. Since Tanner's day the prevalence of claims and major searches have tended to focus on parts of a handful of states: South Carolina, Texas, Louisiana, Florida, and more recently Arkansas. Outlying states with but slender areas in the original distribution have received far less (though some) attention: Oklahoma, Tennessee, Missouri, Illinois, Kentucky (by 1900, the species was assumed gone from all these states).
3) A bit ago I casually posted about an interesting-looking novel entitled "Quick Fall of Light," wherein Passenger Pigeons play a central role, and since then received a nice note from the author. The book looks like an engaging read, and there is a homepage for it here:
http://www.quickfalloflight.com/index.html
There is also a nice 'trailer' for the novel on YouTube here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbGCB9nkLXQ
4) And just to end on a light-hearted note you can re-visit this oldie-but-goodie contribution (from back when the current IBWO story began) from Tom Toles, perhaps the best political cartoonist ever in the history of the Milky Way Galaxy:
http://tinyurl.com/5t76q8n
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) First, just an oddball article I recently ran across (don't remember seeing before... but then my memory ain't what it used to be) here:
http://tinyurl.com/47tnj7f
This is just the abstract (I don't have access to full paper), but it reports on a "a new feather mite species" found in "the wing plumage of the ivory-billed woodpecker" --- it was apparently found on some museum specimens. Interestingly, it's from 2004, before the excitement out of Arkansas erupted. Maybe someone can elaborate more on this --- I mean, I'm not clear if the mite has supposedly been living on museum skins for decades unnoticed, or is a more recent inhabitant, and does it have any special significance for the ecology of the Ivory-bill?
2) Outliers: The Ivory-bill's original range, prior to 1900 included the entire American Southeast. Since Tanner's day the prevalence of claims and major searches have tended to focus on parts of a handful of states: South Carolina, Texas, Louisiana, Florida, and more recently Arkansas. Outlying states with but slender areas in the original distribution have received far less (though some) attention: Oklahoma, Tennessee, Missouri, Illinois, Kentucky (by 1900, the species was assumed gone from all these states).
3) A bit ago I casually posted about an interesting-looking novel entitled "Quick Fall of Light," wherein Passenger Pigeons play a central role, and since then received a nice note from the author. The book looks like an engaging read, and there is a homepage for it here:
http://www.quickfalloflight.com/index.html
There is also a nice 'trailer' for the novel on YouTube here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbGCB9nkLXQ
4) And just to end on a light-hearted note you can re-visit this oldie-but-goodie contribution (from back when the current IBWO story began) from Tom Toles, perhaps the best political cartoonist ever in the history of the Milky Way Galaxy:
http://tinyurl.com/5t76q8n
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thursday, January 27, 2011
-- Scott Crocker Interview --
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Time for another IBL interview, this time with producer/director of the independent film "Ghost Bird," Scott Crocker. Most readers here are by now probably familiar with this award-winning documentary, even if you haven't had a chance to see it yet. I actually emailed Scott these questions some months back, but probably wouldn't change them much if I were doing the interview anew today. His answers are both interesting and sometimes provocative. Enjoy....
1. CT: Although your film, "Ghost Bird," shows both sides of the IBWO story, I think it leaves the impression that you lean toward the belief that the original claims were mistaken/overblown, and the Ivory-bill is most likely now extinct. Is that a fair summary of your current viewpoint?
SC: I originally set out to make a film that explored both sides of the debate more fully and left the viewer to wrestle with the uncertainty of the Ivory-bill's continued existence. The further I got into the project however, this intention changed to reflect a more skeptical point of view. The main reason for this was the uncooperativeness of Cornell in not allowing their search team staff and associated recovery participants to be interviewed. Their circle of control widened out to individuals who were not employed by Cornell but were under their immediate influence.
Obviously, this limited who I could interview and which perspectives I could include in the film. As time passed, there was a broadening of the debate between believers and skeptics, and as passionately as it was argued by both sides within the birding community, this heated discussion didn't really travel beyond the birding world. My conversations with non-birders left me with the impression that while most folks had heard about the rediscovery of an extinct woodpecker, they were unaware that the rediscovery had been contested by other scientists and birding experts. Furthermore, people often attributed evidence to the rediscovery that had not been obtained, like clear photographs or roost holes with feathers or eggs in them. Since the confirmation of the Ivory-bill's existence carried more popular weight than the criticism of the evidence, the more skeptical perspective that Ghost Bird ended up having seemed to right the imbalance. Based on the general feedback I have heard from viewers, the film achieves this delicate balance.
On a related note, I am often asked what I think about the bird's existence. While I did a lot of poking around and had lengthy conversations with many of the better informed people chasing Ivory-bill's, I think the question misses the mark. Whether I think it is or isn't alive doesn't mean very much. The more central question that I believe the film raises for viewers is whether the search beginning in 2004 compromised the scientific method in its effort to confirm the species persistence. My personal answer to that question is "yes". That still leaves open the question as to whether the bird was seen flying through the Bayou DeView. Without irrefutable evidence to support the alleged sightings, only the eye-witnesses have an answer to that. The rest of us are left choosing between believing that they saw an Ivory-bill, or not. Unfortunately, no matter how you look at it, that is a choice of faith not science.
2. CT: Were there any individuals who you really wished to interview or otherwise include in the film who refused to participate, and can you say why they chose not to take part?
SC: While there are many people I wanted to interview for the film, most of them originally agreed to participate. It was only after agreeing to being interviewed that they retracted their consent. In the case of Cornell search leader Martjan Lammertink, his consent was retracted for him by the Lab of Ornithology's Director of Communications. Needless to say, that set a strong precedent with respect to the Lab's position on my interviewing their people. As I previously mentioned, the Lab exerted its influence over numerous others beyond just the individuals who had signed non-disclosure agreements with them. This sounds like paranoia or a conspiracy theory, after all we are talking about scientific research and a major university, both of which we expect to meet our expectations of openness and inclusiveness. However, my experience has been corroborated by both a senior editor and a writer at Science, the same publication that originally published Cornell's confirmation paper. The bottom line is that individuals who had agreed to be interviewed were coerced not to participate.
This leads one to ask why would the Cornell Lab of Ornithology do this? What is most telling is that most of the interview denials happened in 2005, before the public skepticism had really galvanized. My sense is that initially, the Lab's exclusivity and control of access to people and information was driven by their understandable desire to keep the story from being scooped. After all, they immanently anticipated finding an active roost hole and photographing Ivory-bills at close range. As the months flew by, their coercive behavior looked more and more defensive. After several search seasons ended empty-handed, their controlling behavior appeared more like damage control.
While it may sound shocking, I have spoken with a number of people who work in academia that say Cornell is hardly alone in this kind of activity which is becoming increasingly common as research funding gets tighter and the race to publish accelerates. Sadly, science takes a back seat.
3. CT: Were there certain people whose views you found particularly convincing and well-thought-out among all those you interviewed?
SC: Everybody I interviewed had something to offer so it is hard to single anyone out. I especially appreciated David Luneau's contributions. As someone who has searched for Ivory-bills for over a decade, both independently and with Cornell, he was able to put a lot into perspective. He is also really methodical and was possibly one of the most thoughtful scientists involved with the searchers. Where others were quick to express optimism, David seemed to maintain a healthy degree of open mindedness. Jerome Jackson has also been a great resource and was incredibly generous with his time and knowledge. This is nicely illustrated by one of the nine extra scenes included on the DVD where Jerome leads a tour of his collection Ivory-bill memorabilia. It's truly astonishing and a reminder both of the profound legacy of the Ivory-bill and the tragedy of its demise as a species.
4. CT: Have you been at all surprised by the success and positive reviews of "Ghost Bird," or did you reasonably expect that it would strike a chord with viewers?
SC: I knew the birding world was fascinated by this subject, but my decision to make the movie was based on my I belief that the story of the Ivory-billed woodpecker had an important environmental message for everyone. The bird is iconic in its own right but it is also emblematic of other species that have needlessly gone extinct or had their populations severely reduced. What I was not sure of was whether I could tell the story in a way that would successfully resonate with a wider audience. Having poured five years of my life into Ghost Bird, I am incredibly grateful for the positive reviews that indicate I accomplished this. It is professionally very validating to have one of the more demanding critics at the New York Times write that the film is "a multilayered story that will fascinate practically everybody."
5. CT: In the making of "Ghost Bird" was there any one thing that stood out for you as the most surprising or unexpected element/occurrence that you hadn't foreseen?
SC: The most surprising thing I discovered while making the film had to do with the way government funds for searching for Ivory-bills had been robbed from grants to protect endangered species like Kirtland's warbler. This struck me as a disturbingly cynical way of celebrating the rediscovery of a species already believed extinct. Unfortunately, it also made a lot of sense given the Bush Administration's lip service with respect to environmental issues while at the same time it was de-listing species or increasing tolerance levels for toxins. In keeping with this underhandedness, I found it appropriately ironic when Gale Norton, who first announced the Ivory-bill's rediscovery, left her position as Secretary of the Interior to work as legal consul for Shell Oil. It's a slippery slope!
6. CT: A real hypothetical here: IF, in the next year say, the Ivory-bill was once-and-for-all documented to EVERYONE'S satisfaction, would you do some sort of follow-up to the story? Either another film or re-release of "Ghost Bird" with new material added?
SC: At this point I feel like the film does a really good job of chronicling the arch of the story beginning with the announcement all the way through to the loud silence of the inconclusive end to the search. It is an important time capsule. Were the bird to be irrefutably documented tomorrow, that would definitely upset the thrust of the movie which is fundamentally about uncertainty. In a strange way however, the current film would then become more about its own uncertainty rather than our collective uncertainty, which is still a powerful and profound message in an age of overwhelming information masquerading as knowledge. That said, it would be very tempting to do an epilogue for the next printing of the DVD.
7. CT: For fans, when will the film be out for purchase on DVD?
SC: The DVD is now available with forty minutes of extra scenes at www.ghostbirdmovie.com. We also have a cool Ivory-bill t-shirt that collectors and fans of the contemporary artist Mark Dion will love.
8. CT: What project(s) are you working on now?
SC: Believe it or not, Ghost BIrd still takes up most of my time coordinating materials for community screenings, launching the Educational Edition and promoting awareness of the film and the issue of species loss. I do have a project in suspended development about alternative energy and the race to find a silver bullet to our disappearing petroleum resources. You can get a preview at http://www.worldsfastestsubmarine.com.
9. CT: Anything else you care to pass along about the IBWO saga and your film that readers might be interested in knowing?
SC: One conspiracy theory about the rediscovery that I didn't have time to finish exploring has to do with the role of the Army Corps of Engineers and their plans to redirect and control the waters of the Bayou DeView on behalf of agribusiness in need of reliable irrigation for soybean and rice cultivation. Once the Ivory-bill was rediscovered, their plans have been put on indefinite hold. Sounds far fetched, but this is a huge industry in the Brinkley area, and it wouldn't be the first time a swamp was saved from destruction by unconfirmed claims that Ivory-bills lived there (read about Alex Sanders and the Santee Swamp). I am not implying the whole thing was a hoax, only that one guy in a kayak may have embellished a little to help preserve "the natural state". The rest, as they say, is history. True or not, I think if a similar hoax could have saved the Singer Tract and its Ivory-bills along with it, most people would have welcomed the deception.
CT: Thanks Scott, for your interesting, thought-provoking responses here, and continued good luck in your future film-making endeavors.
==> I realize some readers may take issue with various comments Scott makes here. I don't want to stifle opinion, but I will ask commenters to remain civil and on-point with any critical feedback they wish to offer. (...I'm grateful to all my interviewees who take time from busy schedules to answer a blogger's questions, and they ought feel free to voice their sincere opinions without concern about the tone of reader-response.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time for another IBL interview, this time with producer/director of the independent film "Ghost Bird," Scott Crocker. Most readers here are by now probably familiar with this award-winning documentary, even if you haven't had a chance to see it yet. I actually emailed Scott these questions some months back, but probably wouldn't change them much if I were doing the interview anew today. His answers are both interesting and sometimes provocative. Enjoy....
1. CT: Although your film, "Ghost Bird," shows both sides of the IBWO story, I think it leaves the impression that you lean toward the belief that the original claims were mistaken/overblown, and the Ivory-bill is most likely now extinct. Is that a fair summary of your current viewpoint?
SC: I originally set out to make a film that explored both sides of the debate more fully and left the viewer to wrestle with the uncertainty of the Ivory-bill's continued existence. The further I got into the project however, this intention changed to reflect a more skeptical point of view. The main reason for this was the uncooperativeness of Cornell in not allowing their search team staff and associated recovery participants to be interviewed. Their circle of control widened out to individuals who were not employed by Cornell but were under their immediate influence.
Obviously, this limited who I could interview and which perspectives I could include in the film. As time passed, there was a broadening of the debate between believers and skeptics, and as passionately as it was argued by both sides within the birding community, this heated discussion didn't really travel beyond the birding world. My conversations with non-birders left me with the impression that while most folks had heard about the rediscovery of an extinct woodpecker, they were unaware that the rediscovery had been contested by other scientists and birding experts. Furthermore, people often attributed evidence to the rediscovery that had not been obtained, like clear photographs or roost holes with feathers or eggs in them. Since the confirmation of the Ivory-bill's existence carried more popular weight than the criticism of the evidence, the more skeptical perspective that Ghost Bird ended up having seemed to right the imbalance. Based on the general feedback I have heard from viewers, the film achieves this delicate balance.
On a related note, I am often asked what I think about the bird's existence. While I did a lot of poking around and had lengthy conversations with many of the better informed people chasing Ivory-bill's, I think the question misses the mark. Whether I think it is or isn't alive doesn't mean very much. The more central question that I believe the film raises for viewers is whether the search beginning in 2004 compromised the scientific method in its effort to confirm the species persistence. My personal answer to that question is "yes". That still leaves open the question as to whether the bird was seen flying through the Bayou DeView. Without irrefutable evidence to support the alleged sightings, only the eye-witnesses have an answer to that. The rest of us are left choosing between believing that they saw an Ivory-bill, or not. Unfortunately, no matter how you look at it, that is a choice of faith not science.
2. CT: Were there any individuals who you really wished to interview or otherwise include in the film who refused to participate, and can you say why they chose not to take part?
SC: While there are many people I wanted to interview for the film, most of them originally agreed to participate. It was only after agreeing to being interviewed that they retracted their consent. In the case of Cornell search leader Martjan Lammertink, his consent was retracted for him by the Lab of Ornithology's Director of Communications. Needless to say, that set a strong precedent with respect to the Lab's position on my interviewing their people. As I previously mentioned, the Lab exerted its influence over numerous others beyond just the individuals who had signed non-disclosure agreements with them. This sounds like paranoia or a conspiracy theory, after all we are talking about scientific research and a major university, both of which we expect to meet our expectations of openness and inclusiveness. However, my experience has been corroborated by both a senior editor and a writer at Science, the same publication that originally published Cornell's confirmation paper. The bottom line is that individuals who had agreed to be interviewed were coerced not to participate.
This leads one to ask why would the Cornell Lab of Ornithology do this? What is most telling is that most of the interview denials happened in 2005, before the public skepticism had really galvanized. My sense is that initially, the Lab's exclusivity and control of access to people and information was driven by their understandable desire to keep the story from being scooped. After all, they immanently anticipated finding an active roost hole and photographing Ivory-bills at close range. As the months flew by, their coercive behavior looked more and more defensive. After several search seasons ended empty-handed, their controlling behavior appeared more like damage control.
While it may sound shocking, I have spoken with a number of people who work in academia that say Cornell is hardly alone in this kind of activity which is becoming increasingly common as research funding gets tighter and the race to publish accelerates. Sadly, science takes a back seat.
3. CT: Were there certain people whose views you found particularly convincing and well-thought-out among all those you interviewed?
SC: Everybody I interviewed had something to offer so it is hard to single anyone out. I especially appreciated David Luneau's contributions. As someone who has searched for Ivory-bills for over a decade, both independently and with Cornell, he was able to put a lot into perspective. He is also really methodical and was possibly one of the most thoughtful scientists involved with the searchers. Where others were quick to express optimism, David seemed to maintain a healthy degree of open mindedness. Jerome Jackson has also been a great resource and was incredibly generous with his time and knowledge. This is nicely illustrated by one of the nine extra scenes included on the DVD where Jerome leads a tour of his collection Ivory-bill memorabilia. It's truly astonishing and a reminder both of the profound legacy of the Ivory-bill and the tragedy of its demise as a species.
4. CT: Have you been at all surprised by the success and positive reviews of "Ghost Bird," or did you reasonably expect that it would strike a chord with viewers?
SC: I knew the birding world was fascinated by this subject, but my decision to make the movie was based on my I belief that the story of the Ivory-billed woodpecker had an important environmental message for everyone. The bird is iconic in its own right but it is also emblematic of other species that have needlessly gone extinct or had their populations severely reduced. What I was not sure of was whether I could tell the story in a way that would successfully resonate with a wider audience. Having poured five years of my life into Ghost Bird, I am incredibly grateful for the positive reviews that indicate I accomplished this. It is professionally very validating to have one of the more demanding critics at the New York Times write that the film is "a multilayered story that will fascinate practically everybody."
5. CT: In the making of "Ghost Bird" was there any one thing that stood out for you as the most surprising or unexpected element/occurrence that you hadn't foreseen?
SC: The most surprising thing I discovered while making the film had to do with the way government funds for searching for Ivory-bills had been robbed from grants to protect endangered species like Kirtland's warbler. This struck me as a disturbingly cynical way of celebrating the rediscovery of a species already believed extinct. Unfortunately, it also made a lot of sense given the Bush Administration's lip service with respect to environmental issues while at the same time it was de-listing species or increasing tolerance levels for toxins. In keeping with this underhandedness, I found it appropriately ironic when Gale Norton, who first announced the Ivory-bill's rediscovery, left her position as Secretary of the Interior to work as legal consul for Shell Oil. It's a slippery slope!
6. CT: A real hypothetical here: IF, in the next year say, the Ivory-bill was once-and-for-all documented to EVERYONE'S satisfaction, would you do some sort of follow-up to the story? Either another film or re-release of "Ghost Bird" with new material added?
SC: At this point I feel like the film does a really good job of chronicling the arch of the story beginning with the announcement all the way through to the loud silence of the inconclusive end to the search. It is an important time capsule. Were the bird to be irrefutably documented tomorrow, that would definitely upset the thrust of the movie which is fundamentally about uncertainty. In a strange way however, the current film would then become more about its own uncertainty rather than our collective uncertainty, which is still a powerful and profound message in an age of overwhelming information masquerading as knowledge. That said, it would be very tempting to do an epilogue for the next printing of the DVD.
7. CT: For fans, when will the film be out for purchase on DVD?
SC: The DVD is now available with forty minutes of extra scenes at www.ghostbirdmovie.com. We also have a cool Ivory-bill t-shirt that collectors and fans of the contemporary artist Mark Dion will love.
8. CT: What project(s) are you working on now?
SC: Believe it or not, Ghost BIrd still takes up most of my time coordinating materials for community screenings, launching the Educational Edition and promoting awareness of the film and the issue of species loss. I do have a project in suspended development about alternative energy and the race to find a silver bullet to our disappearing petroleum resources. You can get a preview at http://www.worldsfastestsubmarine.com.
9. CT: Anything else you care to pass along about the IBWO saga and your film that readers might be interested in knowing?
SC: One conspiracy theory about the rediscovery that I didn't have time to finish exploring has to do with the role of the Army Corps of Engineers and their plans to redirect and control the waters of the Bayou DeView on behalf of agribusiness in need of reliable irrigation for soybean and rice cultivation. Once the Ivory-bill was rediscovered, their plans have been put on indefinite hold. Sounds far fetched, but this is a huge industry in the Brinkley area, and it wouldn't be the first time a swamp was saved from destruction by unconfirmed claims that Ivory-bills lived there (read about Alex Sanders and the Santee Swamp). I am not implying the whole thing was a hoax, only that one guy in a kayak may have embellished a little to help preserve "the natural state". The rest, as they say, is history. True or not, I think if a similar hoax could have saved the Singer Tract and its Ivory-bills along with it, most people would have welcomed the deception.
CT: Thanks Scott, for your interesting, thought-provoking responses here, and continued good luck in your future film-making endeavors.
==> I realize some readers may take issue with various comments Scott makes here. I don't want to stifle opinion, but I will ask commenters to remain civil and on-point with any critical feedback they wish to offer. (...I'm grateful to all my interviewees who take time from busy schedules to answer a blogger's questions, and they ought feel free to voice their sincere opinions without concern about the tone of reader-response.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
-- Passing the Time... --
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not a fiction-reader myself, but for those who are, and are also birders, I'll pass along this recent novel, that I came across on the Web: "Quick Fall of Light" by Sherrida Woodley, in which Passenger Pigeons, interestingly, play a major role:
http://tinyurl.com/63lahvo
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not a fiction-reader myself, but for those who are, and are also birders, I'll pass along this recent novel, that I came across on the Web: "Quick Fall of Light" by Sherrida Woodley, in which Passenger Pigeons, interestingly, play a major role:
http://tinyurl.com/63lahvo
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thursday, January 20, 2011
-- No Giant Woodpecker, But Giant Crayfish --
---------------------------------------------------------------------
just gotta look under enough rocks:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-01/uoia-rdg011911.php
--------------------------------------------------------------------
just gotta look under enough rocks:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-01/uoia-rdg011911.php
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
-- More Choctawhatchee Narrative --
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Donald Ware recounts his knowledge/experience regarding the Ivory-billed Woodpecker along the Choctawhatchee River (FL.) at the end of this post:
http://tinyurl.com/4buy477
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Donald Ware recounts his knowledge/experience regarding the Ivory-billed Woodpecker along the Choctawhatchee River (FL.) at the end of this post:
http://tinyurl.com/4buy477
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sunday, January 16, 2011
-- Some Good News In Bird Conservation --
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parrot species represent some of the most threatened bird species on Earth, but good news recently from the American Bird Conservancy for the South American Yellow-eared Parrot climbing back from the brink of extinction:
http://tinyurl.com/6b7pm8h
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parrot species represent some of the most threatened bird species on Earth, but good news recently from the American Bird Conservancy for the South American Yellow-eared Parrot climbing back from the brink of extinction:
http://tinyurl.com/6b7pm8h
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
-- Cuban Ivory-bill --
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read elsewhere on Web that Dr. Giraldo Alayon, a renowned Cuban ornithologist/naturalist and one of the last people to see the Ivory-billed Woodpecker in Cuba back in the 1980s, is currently writing a book on the Cuban IBWO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read elsewhere on Web that Dr. Giraldo Alayon, a renowned Cuban ornithologist/naturalist and one of the last people to see the Ivory-billed Woodpecker in Cuba back in the 1980s, is currently writing a book on the Cuban IBWO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sunday, January 09, 2011
-- American Melancholy --
---------------------------------------------------------------------
A little off-topic today...
...with thoughts/prayers for the latest victims of American violence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
A little off-topic today...
...with thoughts/prayers for the latest victims of American violence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)