This thread from the Cayuga list might have crossed over accidentally, but I think it raises interesting questions for all birders.
> "-- really shows what kind of diversity a top birder can find when they are > covering the whole area looking for target birds instead of walking all over > counting chickadees and juncos" > > True, but species count is actually just a game and distraction from the > value of a Christmas Bird Count. The true importance of a CBC comes from the > numbers of chickadees and juncos that can be compared through the years. > That's why the protocol is for extensive coverage of guaranteed boring areas, > not just everyone trying to max out their daily list. I’d caution against over-simplifying the costs and benefits of different modes of birding effort. In general, my CBC ethic falls mostly in line with the second one above: it’s deeply satisfying to cover an area thoroughly and consistently from year to year, noting the changes that arise in the local avifauna, as well as the waxing and waning of one’s own physical and mental skills. These are things I’ve thought about a lot during more than 100 CBCs since the early 80s. When I was a young birder, my elders sized up my skill set quickly and accurately: vision weak, hearing decent, legs strong, tolerance of foul weather excellent; social skills poor, identification skills decent, counting skills good, curiosity regarding Carolina Wren numbers at all spatial and temporal scales unprecedented. Accordingly, I was assigned “guaranteed boring areas” in most of the eight or so circles that I’ve covered extensively over the years, and the matches have been mostly successful. Although my fanatical devotion to wren enumeration has undoubtedly come at the cost of a few species on each of my 100+ CBC day lists, it has also yielded quite a few novelties over the years. More importantly, it has actually managed to overturn people’s perceptions about the boringness of several of the areas I cover. At the same time, I recognize that detecting other kinds of birds (especially highly mobile waterbirds) involves a very different approach, such as checking and re-checking favorable sites repeatedly, as light, wind, tide, hunting pressure, and other factors shift throughout the day. Although this sort of approach could potentially devolve into mere cherry-picking, it needn’t. The important thing is to match people with tasks that suit them, measure the effort in a credible way, and coordinate people’s work so that toes don’t get stepped on. Shai Mitra Bay Shore ________________________________ Washington Monthly<http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/septemberoctober_2012/features/americas_bestbangforthebuck_co039461.php> magazine ranks the College of Staten Island as one of “America’s Best-Bang-for-the-Buck Colleges” -- NYSbirds-L List Info: http://www.NortheastBirding.com/NYSbirdsWELCOME http://www.NortheastBirding.com/NYSbirdsRULES http://www.NortheastBirding.com/NYSbirdsSubscribeConfigurationLeave.htm ARCHIVES: 1) http://www.mail-archive.com/nysbirds-l@cornell.edu/maillist.html 2) http://www.surfbirds.com/birdingmail/Group/NYSBirds-L 3) http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/NYSB.html Please submit your observations to eBird: http://ebird.org/content/ebird/ --
