-- The Week Begins --

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest update from Auburn's Dr. Hill here. Nothing very promising to report, except that he is committed to searching through May (later than most searches), feeling that spring foliage breakout does not significantly hurt sighting opportunities (because the Choc. canopy is high enough to allow plenty of viewable space below-canopy) --- he notes that, "some of the best ivorybill sightings by Brian Rolek and Tyler Hicks in 2005 and 2006 were made when trees were fully leafed out. I think that leaves on trees will have only a minor negative impact on most ivorybill searches." --- he does grant that sitting still and quiet, watching for big woodpeckers, while being harassed by newly-partying mosquitoes can be a challenge, however.

.........................................................................

...and from the Web Grab Bag this:

if you're a wine-lover, you might want to thank an owl...

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

-- Florida News Article --

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Florida newspaper story here. Starts off as just another review piece on the Ivorybill search, but last half a bit more interesting in at least revealing an inkling of the personalities involved as they deal with thus-far disappointing results of months in the swamp.


Addendum:
Ta daaaaa... a new feature (...maybe):

There's just too many fascinating things going on in the universe outside the IBWO arena to pass up... So starting this week I'm going to try a new feature, called "From the Grab Bag," which will simply be additional postings or links scattered through the week to bring up anything of interest striking my fancy (likely bird or nature-related stuff, but could be anything). Hopefully, it will add a little quirky pizzazz to the blog and treat for readers, while those who stop by here ONLY for IBWO news can simply ignore it. (I'll give it a try for 2-3 weeks and then decide if to continue.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Remote Camerawork --

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a new post David Luneau links to a page explaining a little more about processing the remote time-lapse photography of chosen cavities and scaling sites in the Big Woods. Even with some realization of how time-consuming the work must be I was rather taken aback by his mention of "over 250,000 images" to sort through from 2 weeks ago and "over 100,000" from last week (and this is only from a couple of hours of camera use per day at each site). Hope he has more than a few grad students at his disposal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Mist Nets --

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This blog post from Chile shows a juvenile Magellanic Woodpecker caught in a mist net (usually used to catch smaller neotropical migrants for banding or other study). Mist net use has occasionally been brought up (not all that realistically) in the search for the Ivory-bill. An adult IBWO might well be able to break free of a mist net or become dangerously entangled trying, if you could even determine the best place to place one.
Somewhat interestingly, in handling the captured bird, this blogger mentions she was "somewhat afraid it was going to stab my eyeballs out with its huge, tree shattering bill." As an aside, this is in fact what happens toward the end of Greg Lewbart's old novel, Ivory Hunters, when one of the principal characters is killed by being stabbed through the eyeball by an Ivory-bill!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Looking To the Skies --

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of interest: David Luneau just recently linked to this page on the automated camera system (reported on earlier) that is scanning the skies above the Big Woods (Arkansas) for large flying birds. Improvements continue to be made to the operation, although so far as I know there are no current plans to employ this system in any other Ivory-bill search area for the time being.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- What If... --

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The big question looming for 'believers' now of course is, 'what if this season ends with no new photgraphic/video documentation for IBWO?' Skeptics have pushed the envelope to the point that any evidence or claims lacking photography is largely nudged aside. Interest and funds will diminish further if nothing more solid is presented this season than what has already been reported. Indeed, similar reports/claims could continue for years without swaying opinions --- in fact, skeptics will no doubt view such further reports, lacking in photographs, as yet more evidence for their rationale of human error and human expectancies run amuck.

It is possible that resolution will never come (although I still believe it will). And worse, if no definitive documentation is attained, skeptics will continue tooting the unsubstantiated notion that Ivory-bills died out in the 1940s. Those who believe the species persisted at least through the 50's, 60's and 70's may be left largely unheard in many quarters, all for lack of a clearcut photograph in the post-2000 period; this would be ashame, that such a likely myth might be continued. And in a sense 'science' has already lost out since both sides believe the other side is perverting science to argue its case.

Final summaries from Cornell, their mobile team, Auburn, South Carolina, and Texas, could contain several optimistic elements, and yet without the necessary photo not receive serious attention, and several other locales probably won't even be heard from this season. After 60 years of talk (or, more often silence), multiple, serious, systematic searches have finally begun, in at least some habitats; may we have the patience to see them through (...with, or without, a photograph in the next 30-60 days).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Entering the Final Stretch --

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By May, Ivory-bill habitat will be getting dense with foliage (not to mention hot, buggy, and snakey) diminishing further the likelihood of clearcut IBWO encounters, let alone good photographs. So we may be entering the last month for hopeful documentation for this search season (possible sightings/claims continue to trickle in from disparate areas, but with the now-required photograph yet elusive).

By now too I would think there'd be a fair amount of data gathered from automatic remote cameras focussed on 'suspicious' cavities (in Arkansas, if not at the Choctawhatchee) --- it would be interesting to know how many of these cavities were found to be used by Pileateds, how many were never caught in use at all, and how many were used by other creatures, neither PIWO nor IBWO --- just to get a better sense of how accurate the classification of 'interesting' cavities is. Maybe such data will be in Cornell's season wrap-up report???
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- April 1 --

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Dallas News checks in here on the Ivory-bill search.

I mentioned a couple days back reading John Brockman's latest book, What Is Your Dangerous Idea. In light of the rancor that sometimes overtakes the Ivory-bill debate I thought a short entry there from Harvard psychologist Daniel Gilbert possibly of some pertinence :

"Dangerous... means likely to cause great harm. The most dangerous idea is...: The idea that ideas can be dangerous.
We live in a world in which people are beheaded, imprisoned, demoted, and censured simply because they have opened their mouths, flapped their lips, and vibrated some air. Yes, those vibrations can make us feel sad or stupid or alienated. Too bad. That's the price of admission to the marketplace of ideas. Hateful, blasphemous, prejudiced, vulgar, rude, or ignorant remarks are the music of a free society, and the relentless patter of idiots is how we know we're in one. When all the words in our public conversation are fair, good, and true, it's time to make a run for the fence."

I don't think I even agree with this, but an interestingly-expressed thought nonetheless.

And hopefully there will be NO Ivory-bill sightings reported today... given today's date. . . .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Apalachicola --

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article on the ongoing search in Florida's Apalachicola/Chipola region (about 90 mi. east of the Choctawhatchee area) here:

http://www.tallahassee.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007703310321

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

-- A Dangerous Idea? --

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I seem to be promoting a number of books/writers lately who I happen to enjoy, so yet another: Over the last 10+ years, (nonscientist) John Brockman has edited several wonderful anthologies of short essays by top-notch scientists/thinkers on all manner of cutting edge thought. In fact he runs a website, edge.org, that brims with mind-expanding offerings from major scientists for lay readers (and each other). I just picked up his latest volume, in which scientists were asked to pose a "dangerous idea" they had that just might turn out to be true (in a sense, these are largely ideas that might prove to be scientifically valid, but 'culturally' or 'politically incorrect.').

Anyway, in leafing through the book, it occurred to me that for many the idea of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker yet being alive in multiple locales and having escaped human detection for decades, may in fact be a 'dangerous idea' (ok, not truly in the sense Brockman uses it) --- the notion that so many (humans), could've been so mistaken, for so long a time, about such a significant case, is just too much for some scientists (especially if they're in that group) to acknowledge as a real possibility, and they cling to the more comforting and committed view that the species is extinct, lest ornithological gospel and texts have to be re-written. Indeed, if they are wrong in this instance, how many other long-held beliefs about animal behavior/cognition/adaptation are wrong as well...? But in actuality this is often how science progresses, not by being right all the time, but by discovering where it is wrong, and working to avert such error in the future.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Again, Into the Mire --

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a post entitled "Walking through the Luneau mire" Bill Pulliam once again walks us through his interpretation of the Luneau video, or maybe more appropriately, the Luneau artifacts and shadows; interesting, if only because his view doesn't totally coincide with Cornell, let alone with any of the skeptics. But clearly folks will take issue with some of his notions (at least folks who can bear to read any more Luneau analysis... and we're still waiting to get the official Cornell rebuttal to Collinson as well). I continue to believe that the issues are unresolvable, and that yes, it is possible under some circumstances for a Pileated to appear IBWO-like in fuzzy video (though based on the amount and positioning of white on the Luneau bird, the 'oaring' motion of wings, and wingbeat frequency, "Ivory-bill" remains the best fit for that particular blurry image). What is important is that people realize we are still dealing with a very open question here, and not permit skeptics their rashness of referring to the Luneau video as "debunked." Neither it, nor any of the Cornell sightings, nor any published sightings since, have even been close to debunked, just because it is possible to manufacture alternative explanations. Oh and by the way, let me tell you what really happened when the American Gov't. claimed they landed men on the moon...

One thing I do wonder though, is to what degree the so-called "Sibley" position, was actually generated by his co-authors, and David granted first-authorship simply to add more gravitas to their case (and if that was the plan, it worked!) --- David is recognized for his on-site field expertise, which doesn't even necessarily translate to any more skill in interpreting blurry film than possessed by any number of amateurs out there, let alone the team at Cornell. And on and on it goes....
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- FWIW --

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of interest, this posting by Harry LeGrand on the Carolina birding listserv:

http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/CARO.html#1175046101

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

--"Awareness of how little we really know and understand" --

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, just another diversion today, to a blog post by one of my favorite science writers, Chet Raymo, (not directly IBWO-related, and yet, I would argue, not entirely disconnected either):

http://www.sciencemusings.com/blog/2007/03/shaving-close.html

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

-- Whatever... --

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
News story on the Texas Big Thicket Ivory-bill search here:

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Science/2007/03/25/3829397-ap.html

Update on Choctawhatchee acoustic detections from Dr. Mennill here:

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

And cyberthrush rant here:

The Ivorybill debate includes ongoing disputes over blurry video, large cavities, interesting sounds, foraging signs, and other evidence that can be analyzed to death to little avail. My own quarrel with most skeptics though, boils down to more basic differences in perception: skeptics see "birders" as a large group of folks who, over time, have thoroughly surveyed prospective IBWO habitat; I see a relatively small group who only rarely venture into the more remote and interior portions of such habitat. Skeptics perceive 60 years without a clearcut photograph as a lengthy period of time; I see it as an insignificant amount of time, given the relatively recent emphasis on and availability of photography to most birders. Skeptics assume the Ivory-bill extinct and operate off that presumption; I've seen NO solid evidence for such an assumption and proceed otherwise. Though I typically view glasses as half-empty where others see them as half-full, in this lone instance the tables are turned, and skeptics see a glass as 9/10's empty, which I see clearly as 4/5's full!

Oddly, in all of this, IBWO skeptics seem to accept unblinkingly the validity and usefulness of routine bird counts, bird lists, species taxonomy and classification, most data in journal articles --- all of which I believe worthy of skepticism. But the one thing which carries weight for me, is the one thing they routinely dismiss: confident, repeated sightings of Ivory-bills by credible observers, who are well-acquainted with Pileated Woodpeckers, and who don't merely say, "I think I saw an Ivory-bill," or "I may have seen an Ivory-bill," but quite directly, "I SAW an Ivory-billed Woodpecker." I'm not talking here of the 100s (maybe by now 1000s) of reports by less credible figures over the years, which ARE indeed mostly cases of mistaken identification, but am referring to the residue of dozens of reports across locales, across decades, and under varying circumstances, by experienced individuals who fully understand the seriousness of the claims they make, and feel certain of the sight they've seen. If all these individuals, with their credentials, are wrong time and time again, they are not merely 'mistaken,' as skeptics politely assert, but they must be, as skeptics surely believe, foolish, to account for SUCH a magnitude of error. One can argue the nuances of a video back-and-forth for the next decade, but faced with a knowledgeable person who tells you that they know they saw an Ivory-bill, you can only call them a liar or a fool... or, believe them; that is the fundamental choice before us.

So skeptics resort to notions of "groupthink," "wishful thinking," "self-fulfilling prophecy," arising over and over and over again, to explain this succession of errors, as if THIS is of higher probability than a bird simply being extant in wide expanses of habitat and evading documentation for decades (as other birds have done, and continue to do); so biased are they by an unsubstantiated notion of species-extinction and self-imposed reliance on photographic evidence --- and so (falsely) convinced are they of the thoroughness and infallibility of past human searches (...truly something to be skeptical of).

If there were NO sounds, cavities, and signs of interest it would cast a shadow on the plausibility of sightings, and so I am glad they are there and being studied, but they will not yield the definitive answers sought. 'Sightings' by knowledgeable observers, are what always have and will be, the crux of birding --- has any other species ever been reported so repeatedly and then been shown to be extinct? And should that indisputable photo or video arise 3 months or 3 years from now, what words will skeptics then use: "miraculous," "extraordinary," "incredible," "astonishing".... or the only word that might actually be apropos... "inevitable."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Articles --

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recent Ivory-bill article from long-time birder/writer Jim Williams here:

http://www.startribune.com/418/v-print/story/1065193.html

And story on biologist and Cornell volunteer Leah Filo (including audio) here:

http://www.northcountrypublicradio.org/news.php?getnewsfordate=1&mm=03&dd=23&yyyy=2007#8902
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Snowflakes... Off-topic, Maybe Not --

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One of my readers sends in this surprisingly long N.Y. Times article on snowflakes (specifically, giant ones):

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/snowflakes-as-big-as-frisbees/20070320114909990001

Pertains to probabilities and rare occurrences... the very last line from an amateur weather watcher certainly applies to the IBWO saga:

“It’s a matter of being at the right place at the right time,” Mr. Close said of the unusual show. “Sometimes you get lucky.”

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

-- Auburn Update --

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Hill gives another update from the Choctawhatchee here, reporting on a couple of specific auditory encounters outside of their main focus area (no photo/video). Also, notes that potential IBWO sounds have declined in March from February, as might be expected if the birds have gone to nest... and an active nesthole of course would be the ultimate coup for any search group.

If you haven't yet got your hands on Dr. Hill's book you might want to read this posting from Fangsheath over at IBWO Researchers Forum, which summarizes a few of the notions therein:

http://www.ibwo.net/forum/showpost.php?p=1450&postcount=27

Dr. Hill is also due to release at some point their early IBWO video from the Choc. which was never deemed of sufficient quality for publication. Certainly we all enjoy seeing every shred of evidence available for these birds, but I'd caution folks not to expect too much from this piece of data... except likely more argument over 'artifacts,' 'shadow,' 'bleeding,' 'angle,' and the like.
BTW, I think Dr. Hill is to be highly commended for the openness and regularity of his public communications with interested parties --- a much higher frequency and degree of disclosure than seen from any other organized search group (having said that, there are good reasons for the non-disclosure of information in certain circumstances).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Jackson Talks of Pascagoula --

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Short but interesting interview with Jerry Jackson here.

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