Tuesday, July 10, 2007

-- And The Beat Goes On --



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

A couple of the skeptics out there enjoy blanketly stating that all who claim to see Ivory-bills are "stringers" --- of course, if John Terres, John Dennis, Herbert Stoddard, and Tim Gallagher are stringers than I s'pose 90% of the ABA membership are stringers as well, and possibly listers with undocumented and exaggerated lifelists. A more common and reasonable refrain from the skeptical side is simply that "birders make mistakes," as if that simple truism is adequate to explain away all Ivory-bill reports over the decades. Birders mistake one gull for another, one flycatcher for another, one fall or female warbler for another, but how often do experienced birders claim to see a supposedly extinct bird, realizing the magnitude of such a claim? How often do they report Bachman's Warblers, Passenger Pigeons, Carolina Parakeets, Eskimo Curlews, or even simply out-of-range birds (in fact a great many out-of-range birds are probably missed because of most birders' nervous reluctance to report such)? Everyone has their own story of some terrible bird mis-identification they know of or took part in --- but what makes it a story worth telling is precisely the fact that such mis-IDs are NOT the norm... except apparently among IBWO observers.

People do make mistakes, a common one being to prematurely dismiss that which conflicts with one's own preconceived notions. If an Ivory-bill flies through a forest canopy, but no one captures it on film, then apparently it didn't happen, because afterall IBWOs went extinct 60 years ago. (...and trees don't make sounds when they fall in the forest with no one there to hear.)
The most fervent preconceptions at work in the Ivory-bill saga are not those of believers and agnostics, but those of certain skeptics, self-assured that the story ended in the 1940s, unwilling or able to let patience and persistence run their full course searching out needles in haystacks. Any evidence that does arise immediately falls victim to those preconceptions, rather than the full range of possibilities. Anyone who thinks the search for Ivory-bills is a waste of time and money is free to spend THEIR time and money elsewhere. Why certain skeptics continue to debate the same points ad nauseum, I'm not sure --- let the searchers do their job (and your legwork) and they will bolster your case given enough time... if in fact you have a case to bolster.

In related matters, Bobby Harrison's Ivory-billed Woodpecker Foundation website is slowly taking on more form here:

http://www.ibwfound.org/Index.html

And hey, to all the searchers out there I'll end with the simple words quoted by "Fangsheath" on another forum recently:
"Be the bird".... ; - )
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Monday, July 09, 2007

-- As the Bumper Sticker Says --

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If you're NOT outraged, you're NOT paying attention!"

No... I'm not talking about the skeptics' view of this blog; I'm talking about the festering catastrophe that is the current Administration in Washington. More bumper stickers available here:

http://www.cafepress.com/beatbushgear/364595

(sorry, skeptics, no 'Impeach Cyberthrush' stickers available yet --- but as for impeaching Dick Cheney, go here and here.)

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

Sunday, July 08, 2007

-- More This and That --

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

A recent post by Bill Pulliam inspires me to reiterate what I've said multiple times before. What is most important for Ivory-bill debaters to consider is NOT the likelihood of being right, but rather the consequences of being wrong. If one believes the Ivory-bill persists and you are wrong than a lot of time, energy, and money is being spent in one direction that maybe could've gone in some other more productive direction (although a lot of that energy and $$$ simply wouldn't have existed without the original Ivory-bill announcement). But if you believe the Ivory-bill is extinct and you are wrong than inaction will almost assuredly cost this species its life at long last... not something to be proud of, especially for anyone claiming concern for birds or conservation. I'm willing to take a chance of making that first error, but unwilling to take a chance of making the second without a lot more data... in fact, why anyone would deliberately chance making the second error when sightings continue and time may be of the essence, is a bit baffling, except they apparently have faith in a level of scientific certainty which is illusory. There seems to be blind faith that because mistaken identifications occur on occasion (and many IBWO claims are known to be just that), apparently all such instances across decades and locations and observers, can automatically be generalized as such without specific, solid evidence for doing so. I wish skeptics would at least be consistent and give 10's of 1000's of unverified, undocumented, unscientific bird count reports the same scrutiny, instead of a free pass, but that would involve having their own reports examined...

Fred Virrazzi posts this mini-summary of last search season on the New Jersey listserv:

http://littlebirdiehome.com/A070707_Ivory-billed_Update.htm

At least a couple of purported sightings, which may or may not be included in final reports, go unmentioned here. The Florida video release Fred mentions will occur at the August AOU meeting in Wyoming, about a month from now. I doubt it will be released any earlier, and likely won't be on the Web, since that requires compression, which makes it fuzzier than it already is at full resolution.

A few emailers have asked what I think of the Birding Magazine photo quiz: I don't happen to believe the birds in question are Ivory-bills, but won't say what my own best guess would be, since it's no better (and actually worse) than other guesses will be (...and am surprised there haven't already been more online guesses voiced). I do hope some expertise may exist out there for making measurements of the wing/body ratios of these birds to aid in eliminating certain possibilities, but don't know if the resolution is good enough to do so with enough accuracy.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Friday, July 06, 2007

-- Prestidigitation --

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Louis Bevier has finally posted a personal website dealing with the Luneau video beginning here (and including 4 separate sections):

http://web.mac.com/lrbevier/iWeb/ivorybilled/Overview.html


Maybe the most comprehensive single source yet for the skeptical view of the Luneau bird (that it is a normal Pileated). The first section ("Overview") is rather non-substantive so be sure to look at the other 3 sections that are the 'meat' of the website.
Most of this information was already available elsewhere (and remains debatable), but it is pulled together well here, and some of the numbers and details may be new to folks; further there is new discussion of wingbeat data. Moreover, Bevier may add to the site as he sees fit for clarification, correction, or in response to comments. Of course he still says nothing that convinces me 100% that the bird in question is even a woodpecker ; - )))

But once again, here's the thing: In magic, the art of "distraction" is one of the most frequent tools the illusionist employs. 'Look over here, look at my right hand, pay no attention to what my left hand is doing'. Skeptics keep pulling the focus back to the Luneau video, acting as if
only they just debunk it, it puts the case for the Ivory-billed Woodpecker to rest. Don't look at 50 years worth of sightings; don't look at signs or sounds; just look at this single piece of evidence... ohhh, and by the way only look at it the way I do. They're like a rottweiler with a ragdoll, shaking it back-and-forth, unable to let go. As possibly the most quantifiable piece of evidence thus far, I s'pose nothing will deter folks from pouring over this one item of accidental evidence with a false sense of accomplishment or certainty. Again, the Ivory-bill debate stretches across 50+ years of which the Big Woods and Choctawhatchee stories are just current blips on the screen. In opting to analyze-to-death 4 seconds of blurry pixels people are missing the big picture, but so be it. In all likelihood, there will eventually be other videos and images.

In the meantime, the latest issue of Birding Magazine has as their monthly photo quiz (for readers to try ID'ing) an automatic Reconyx photo of 3 birds from the Choctawhatchee (taken last November):

http://americanbirding.org/pubs/birding/archives/vol39no4p96.pdf

(I'm pretty sure it's 3 Rufous Hummingbirds on steroids ;-), but Louis may disagree --- and depending on your computer screen, you may get a slightly sharper view from the magazine itself than from the above pdf.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tuesday, July 03, 2007

-- North Carolina --

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

If you don't follow the Ivory-bill Researchers Forum you may have missed the 2-page thread on IBWO searching in N. Carolina. A small group of independent folks is focusing on specific areas within the Green Swamp region (southeast NC.), where a claimed pair sighting occurred in 2004. The thread begins here (if you happen to be interested in being involved contact people are given here as well):

http://www.ibwo.net/forum/showthread.php?t=29

Although not historically a main area of focus, North Carolina becomes more intriguing with its adjacency to S. Carolina and the increased interest arising there (the notable lack of prior intense searching in N.C. may be a plus as well --- neither Tanner nor anyone since has given the state much serious consideration since Ivory-bills were thought extirpated therein by the mid-19th century). Just one more area to add to the dozen-or-so others that still need a good look-see.

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

Monday, July 02, 2007

-- Catching Up A Bit --

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

Dan Mennill is back in his home lab and posted this update regarding processing of Auburn's acoustic data:

http://web2.uwindsor.ca/courses/biology/dmennill/IBWO/IBWO07News.html

FWIW, a reader sends me a note they received from the ACONE folks in the Big Woods (in charge of the automatic sky viewing camera) saying they are still sorting through a huge volume of data and will have a new update to their findings in the "next couple of months."

This article on the Texas search for Ivory-bills leads to a speculative piece (pdf) on the IBWO's persistence:

http://www.houstonaudubon.org/screenprint.cfm?newsletterid=799

a reader sends in this depressing link to the destruction of cypress forest in Louisiana:

http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/index.php?cl=3166801

(...as if I weren't already depressed enough!!)

For the Ivory-billed Woodpecker aficionado who has (almost) everything, a toilet seat offered on eBay here :-)))

--- If anything like last summer, could be quite awhile (Oct./Nov.???) before we get a final report from Cornell on their latest AR. search efforts (hey kids, can you spell "S-L-O-W"?). And there seems to be some uncertainty as to whether the South Carolina folks will release their final search report to the public or not. Auburn may be the first out of the gate with some sort of summary if they don't wait for all acoustic data to be processed. Skeptics continue to run with whatever limited tidbits pop up on the Web, but really a lot of watching and waiting yet to do, prior to next season's search and the efforts of independents. The same old arguments keep getting rehashed, settling nothing. Search the pertinent areas, evaluate sighting reports, and collect/assess peripheral evidence --- plenty of all that left to do (science can be tedious).

...and from one of the great naturalists of 20th century America, T. Gilbert Pearson, this quote (April 1933, National Geographic Magazine):

"The supreme moment of my life as a bird student came in May, 1932, when in a great primeval forest in northern Louisiana, I saw, for the first time, a living ivory-billed woodpecker... The ivory-bill is decidedly larger than the pileated, and this difference in size is very apparent, as we had ample opportunity to observe, when by chance birds of both species fed at the same time on a tall decayed stump within 80 feet of our hiding place."

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

Thursday, June 28, 2007

-- Bye Ol' Bud' --

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

You brought cheer into this world far out of proportion to your pint-size body, and you'll be missed....

A beloved pet passed away early this morning and I'll likely take a few more days off from posting than usual.

So a Happy Independence Day, July 4, to all
in the event I'm not back online before then (well, all except for my British readers that is ;-)))
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------