==> THEblog devoted, since 2005, to news & commentary on the most iconic bird in American ornithology, the Ivory-billed Woodpecker (IBWO).... [contact: cyberthrush@gmail.com]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's the middle of May... do you know where any Ivory-billed Woodpeckers are???
Traditionally, May, with its heat, humidity, leaf-out, and skeeters, is the end of the Ivory-bill search season, and while kents and hints and further tidbits of continuing possibilities do dribble in, nothing appears imminent that is likely to be persuasive to the many who now perceive the whole IBWO search as an extensive goose chase of the wild sort. Indeed, since Cornell's 'official' announcement that they are suspending their search, most of the public seem to presume the search is over and done with. It isn't, and won't be for awhile yet, but will be difficult to ever again excite folks over announced sightings or fuzzy pictures or claims not directly-accompanied with clearcut video or a dead carcass.
Perhaps a long, slow summer ahead for those of us who don't conform to the wild-goose-chase scenario; a chance to review the amassed data and claims, as best it is available online, without awaiting whatever conclusions(?) Cornell or others may publish next year. (If any of you independent searchers who don't have an internet presence and who've contacted me privately in the past, are continuing some searching through the summer, please email me and let me know what you're up to and where, just so I can keep track of current activity --- thanks.)
In other (non-IBWO) news, Molly the Owl's 4 barn owlets are very close to fledging (at least one spent some time outside the nestbox last night):
Nothing whatsoeverto do with Ivory-billed Woodpeckers... just a bit for people who are either fans of owls or fans of ABBA (if you are among the many who don't care for EITHER, then do not, I repeat DO NOT!, click on the arrow):
"Everywhere there have been camera studies, as long as it's in wooded or semi-wooded habitat, rat snakes emerge as the single most important predator. They're common throughout the range, and they're really good at finding bird nests."
and
"...rat snakes are very opportunistic," Weatherhead said. "I have a picture of a rat snake eating a full-grown squirrel. So that's a mouthful. They're generalists both in terms of the mammals they eat and in terms of the birds that they prey on. They'll take whatever birds they encounter, and because they're such good climbers, they can get to both low nests and high nests. They can climb just about any kind of tree. They eat bird eggs, fledglings and sometimes they'll even get the mom if she's sitting on the eggs..." -------------------------------------------------------------------------
And finally, I've previously reported on the computer simulation (animation) work grad student Jeff Wang had been doing to simulate Ivory-billed and Pileated Woodpeckers in the flight pattern of the Luneau video, but I never saw a final conclusion from that work, and only just now discovered the following article (from Jan. of this yr.) which, as I surmised, indicates the simulation work was simply inconclusive (surprise, surprise):
Much will no doubt be written/blogged about the massive oil spill now threatening so many fragile Gulf Coast areas; one of the worst ecological disasters in modern times. Chuck Hagner has a "Birder's World" post enumerating some of the key bird habitat areas potentially affected here:
Of course a lot of creatures besides just birds will be affected by this barely-imaginable calamity. I won't dwell on the story here, but the magnitude of the catastrophe and mournful reports to come must be noted. [If you find a website or a post that covers the bird/nature/habitat consequences of this unfolding disaster in a particularly insightful way, feel free to post the URL in the comments.]
...Addendum: I said I wouldn't dwell on this... but... I will link to one more story, from the UK actually, focusing a bit on the first bird (a Northern Gannet) pulled from the slick:
(commenters below have justly noted that these wildlife-saving efforts are trifling relative to the overall devastation rendered, but still.....) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[We've just passed the 5-year anniversary of that incredible public pronouncement on the IBWO.]
Have covered this ground before, but due to some email I've had, repeating it...:
I grew up at a time when the Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology was automatically revered without question by birders across the land. ...Boy, how times have changed.
I hear increasingly from birding-critics embarrassed that the Lab spent so much time, energy, and money on what they believe was a wild goose chase from the get-go. The harshest cynics continue to chant the outrageous notion that the IBWO search was little more from the start than a sinister money-grubbing conspiracy on the part of major conservation groups, including CLO (I won't dignify that ridiculous charge by wasting time refuting it).
But unfortunately Cornell is losing more and more friends on the other side as well. I've been perturbed by the incomplete, undetailed, almost lackadaisical reporting of one of the most important ornithological stories in my lifetime; in the process permitting cynics to flourish; this isn't just one more 'citizen science' project (some more detailed reports are finally being released now).I don't know if their failure to respond adequately to critics is due to simple lack of time (the principals involved have other responsibilities besides the IBWO project), or lack of consensus in their own ranks, or due to simple hubris ('HEY, we're CORNELL, and we don't have to respond to others' petty opinions'), but as I've noted before, appearances are often more harmful than reality.
And other "believers" are sometimes even harsher, concluding that Cornell was inept, heavy-handed, and/or misguided in their leadership of this effort. As the ol' saying goes, "with friends like these who needs enemies." Still others have suggested that there were too many academic-sorts and average birders in the mix, and not enough 'pure' (and expert) birders involved. Over time, I've heard from Cornell volunteers who felt the effort was disorganized or poorly-contrived, but probably heard from more who say that despite inevitable flaws, it was a very solid endeavor, and that if the bird was in the places searched it would undoubtedly have been found... no doubt a lot depends on which 2 (or more) weeks you spent with Cornell and under whose guidance. It's still too early, in my mind, to pass final judgment.
Here's hoping the Lab finds their way out of a pickle of their own creation, but it won't be easy (if the IBWO is finally documented by independents, what will THAT finally say about the quality of this 5-year venture, and if they put out a scientific report on the entire IBWO effort next year as promised (and, the bird has not yet been found), it will serve only as a loud reminder of failure just when CLO least needs to be reminding folks). It is close to a no-win situation for Ithaca, though they will go about their normal affairs as if all is just fine; that has been their style. I have my own guess what will happen... but I ain't sayin'...
Obviously, CLO is involved in a LOT of projects besides their Ivory-bill work, and as a repository of information, remain a gold mine, but it may be a long time, if ever, before they shine again with the pristine, idyllic (and maybe unrealistic) reputation of my youth... and that is almost a sadder outcome of these 5 years than the failure (thus far) to document the Ivory-billed Woodpecker.
(In fairness to CLO, I ought note that the IBWO Recovery Team in charge of the search planning, was composed of a lot more members than just Cornell-ites. It may have been as bureaucratic a committee as there has ever been in avian work, and we all know the jokes about what happens when you try to accomplish anything important by committee... Over the years a few folks have emailed me, in fact, to say they didn't believe any large-scale group effort could likely succeed at documenting the Ivory-bill; that only a single, persistent, dogged individual or small, stealthy team had much chance of accomplishing the task --- I've always found that view hard to fathom, but now needless to say... by God I hope they're right!) -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Michaels has a new update from the "Project Coyote" group in Louisiana, which focuses on IBWO anatomy (with links to several papers) as an aid to recognizing their foraging sign:
I'm not sure that the discussion (primarily of IBWO footing and stance) will result in a clearer indication of IBWO foraging sign than we already have. Much work has already previously gone into trying to relate IBWO bill size and shape to their foraging sign (which seems logical), but without much success in distinguishing their sign from that of others. And scaling and peeling of bark can also result from critters (and natural forces) other than woodpeckers, so it's not singly a matter of distinguishing IBWO from PIWO. I'm just not sure that focusing on other attributes will lead to clear distinctions, but will wait to see where the discussion eventually leads. (I believe, if not mistaken, that Cornell had a system for rating foraging sign for IBWO probability, just as they did with cavities; it would be useful to know their criteria, if they had such).
Mark also mentions that further (inconclusive) camera-trap images and audio examples may be posted at their site in the future.
I've had a post on Cornell waiting in the wings for awhile, and also a post on why bird counts are scientific crap (and scientific crap can be very useful! ;-)) so maybe one of those for tomorrow...or not. --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------- On-the-one-hand, probably no bird in history has had so many sighting claims (even eliminating all the least plausible/credible ones) and still been thought extinct by so many people, as has the Ivory-billed Woodpecker. On-the-other-hand, it's likely that no extant bird species has ever before been the subject of so much time and energy and yet failed to be definitively confirmed. That, in a nutshell, I think are the two competing views that cannot be easily conjoined here.
One side sees the sheer volume of repeated IBWO claims (and associated evidence) as hugely difficult to just explain away, especially by simple, ad hoc proclamation of "mistakes" regarding a bird that is nearly unmistakable. They picture a wary, cavity-dwelling bird, fast in flight, thin in numbers, spread out among vast habitat, with essentially, bumbling ill-able humans in not-so-hot pursuit. The other side finds repeated failed follow-ups (often within 48 hours) to sightings over and over and over again for decades, to be the part that is almost impossible to account for --- how could such a large forest creature traverse known locales and escape solid detection for so long by experienced, skilled humans? ...Two stances, looking at the same circumstances, but with conclusions irreconcilably in stark contrast.
Yeah, I'm oversimplifying a bit, but not by much. The longer searches go on, the more the skeptic case is slowly bolstered, and the thinner the tightrope that optimists must walk to account for the facts at-hand --- simultaneously, explaining the scarcity of the bird and sightings, yet allowing for continuous active breeding for 6+ decades --- it can all be explained, it just gets harder with each passing year.
And while human inability to get an adequate photo is comprehensible, I remain troubled by matters I've referenced before:
1. Lack of a photo from ACONE cameras at Bayou de View -- these were the "intelligent" automatic cameras that were placed to continuously film a logical flyway for Ivory-bills in the Big Woods, that only snapped shots of birds fitting a software algorithm which described an Ivory-bill in flight. While the technology was very advanced, the idea was beautifully simple: no humans needed, just set the cameras in an open flyway that IBWOs were likely to cross, given other evidence from the Big Woods, and wait for it to snap a picture of the wanted bird. The system was down a great deal and had various mechanical problems, but also, as intended, took a great many pics... just none (identifiable) of IBWOs. I've never heard an adequate explanation of what in total it did collect, or how much of the time it was down, or any sort of clear explanation for why it failed to capture the bird on film in a locale the bird was expected to be.
2. Lack of a photo from automatic cameras placed at promising foraging sites or cavities --- even with all the failures, problems, and poor quality of automatic cameras, the fact is these cameras DID capture recognizable Pileateds, flickers, mockingbirds, mammals, etc. etc. on film... just no IBWOs. Either IBWO's weren't in those areas or researchers truly lack any insight to select out active IBWO foraging sign and cavities from others. Are we this incompetent?... possibly.
Further, on a 5-year project, I'd expect information gathered in the first two years to translate to refined, more focused efforts in the 3rd, and then a more focused search in the 4th etc. etc. I'd expect more sightings, sounds, foraging signs as time proceeded... but such has not transpired. Instead there seems a remarkable lack of progress to this story... a lack of progress, and an equally remarkable lack of consensus of what it all means.
"Cotinis" fairly asks over at another site, 'where are we headed from here?'... are we to conclude yet AGAIN that the IBWO may be in any of a dozen or more places, ohhh, but BTW it's kinda hard to find? Is that what 5 years and $10 million will bring us as a scientific conclusion? Something is amiss. Despite it all, I still believe probabilities (yes, based on sightings) broadly favor the persistence of this species, but for that to be so, something must be very amiss with the science employed. -------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've been scanning over the various IBWO claims that people have sent me over the last 5 years, that haven't really been in the press/internet. A lot of them of course have little substantive detail, and the vast majority of those that do come from well-known, previously-rumored areas, the Apalachicola/Chipola, Big Thicket, Congaree/Santee, etc. But there are a tiny few leftover reports, that have just enough detail to be intriguing, and not enough detail to totally rule out, other than their unusual/unlikely locations in some cases. I'll just mention the general locales involved in case anyone should wish to look into the areas further; nothing to lose at this point (and most of these claims BTW, are not particularly recent, generally being from 5 to over 15 years ago):
a. southeast of Heflin, Alabama (Cleburne County, AL.)
b. north of Wright City, Missouri (Warren County, MO.)
c. near the Savannah River/Broad River Basin in either Elbert or Wilkes County, Georgia.
d. near the Deep River in Moore County, North Carolina, and similarly near Siler City and Deep River in Chatham County, N. Carolina.
I throw these out, for what it's worth, simply in the event that someone is near them and wants to explore the possibilities in a place that few may have spent much time looking, but I don't want to exaggerate what the likelihood is. -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Addendum: by sheer coincidence (no, we didn't plan it) Bill Pulliam also did a post today dealing with probabilities, and both of us are essentially intimating the same underlying point; i.e. that people's perception of probability is often mathematically fallacious. My link touches on the point in a very general way; Bill much more specifically tries to apply the notion to the IBWO situation:
Presumably, living Ivory-billed Woodpeckers traverse about and forage everyday, 365 days a year, week-after-week, year-after-year, decade-after-decade. And at some point during those daily jaunts they likely vocalize with 'kents' and double-knocks that have some carrying capacity through the forest. I've said before that while the lack of a clear photo/video after a 5-year effort isn't overly taxing, the lack of a marked increase in sightings, foraging signs, and auditory encounters with more and more searchers out-and-about in more and more fields over a 5-year period, is troublesome, and difficult to explain IF searchers are in the right places. With that said....
Two of Cornell's recent posted reports are early summaries from the Arkansas Big Woods, but since searching continued in Arkansas I'd prefer to wait for a final wrap-up before concluding much from the Big Woods in general. On-the-other-hand, the posted Louisiana and Florida "final" reports (essentially from Cornell's Mobile Search teams) are more interesting in that there may be no further significant data coming (from Cornell) for the specific locales addressed, and some very important areas are covered: in Louisiana, the central and northern Atchafalaya Basin, Lake Maurepas, and the Pearl River WMA are reported on, and in Florida the Fakahatchee Strand. And the bottom-line, take-home message seems to be that no sightings nor signs of any significance for the presence of Ivory-bills was found in any of these habitats (nor any response to artificial double-knocks played). Cornell always cautions (and rightly so) that they have not done an exhaustive search of these regions, and some suitable habitat certainly does exist therein, but still the implication seems clear that they find little basis for holding out great hope of Ivory-bills residing in any of these often highly-touted areas, even though they add the following about south Florida:
..."south Florida contains a remarkably large contiguous area of protected lands that has scattered areas of forest suitable for Ivory-billed Woodpeckers, including pine forests, mangrove forests, bald cypress stands, and subtropical hardwood strands and hammocks. It is the largest block of protected areas in the historical range of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker and has received too little survey effort for the species. "
and also this:
"...we cannot rule out the continued existence of a few Ivory-billed Woodpeckers in south Florida. If any birds remain in south Florida, the Fakahatchee Strand is a likely area to attract Ivory-billed Woodpeckers because it is the largest tract of tall forest in south Florida,with a suitable mix of hardwood and cypress forests and large royal palms mixed in. "
(Moreover, they recommend the use of Automatic Recording Units as a means of monitoring the more remote areas of interest in the event the need arises.) But the above are a few hopeful sentences couched within a primarily pessimistic report. I've said for some time now, we probably need to begin setting aside from consideration many of the multitude of areas that have been touted for 60+ years for IBWO potential, and then see what remains. Perhaps we are finally, slowly on the way to doing that. Even though these reports only cover a few of the areas to be considered, they are some very key areas --- the Atchafalaya is often historically cited as one of THE most promising of all habitats; the Fakahatchee I believe was a key area of interest for Jerry Jackson (and others), and of course the Pearl is given quite a different take currently by Mike Collins (Cornell actually notes that the density of woodpeckers in general in the Pearl is much reduced since Hurricane Katrina.)
My sense from the reports, once again, is that these constitute areas that IBWOs might conceivably stray into on occasion, and future credible claims ought certainly be followed up on, BUT the likelihood of resident, ongoing populations of the species therein is EXCEEDINGLY slim; i.e. better to look elsewhere. Hopefully, future summary reports will cast doubt on other areas as well from major focus. There are limited, even though several, plausible locales left for Ivory-bills; if they persist at all they must be residing/breeding in 1 or more of them, not merely hopscotching around willy-nilly from place A to place B; my interest in stray, dispersing birds is waning; we need to find a pair on a territory, that can be re-found (not because they are easy to see, but because they should be repeatedly audible and then locatable, although this will be very difficult for lone searchers)... anything else seems indeed, to be a ghost bird. ------------------------------------------------------------------------
For folks' weekend interest, while I'm playing around with different posts that may or may not ever see the light-of-day, I'll just again refer viewers to several of the beguiling Ustream nestcams currently running... 3 linked to in left-hand column under "Other" (including the unsurpassed 'Molly and McGee' Barn Owl site), and others linked to in this previous post (where I keep adding a few on):
t's the middle of May... do you know where any Ivory-billed Woodpeckers are???