Being seen now view location: http://maps.google.com/maps?q=loc:40.664331,-73.969673
03/09/2013 @ 12:31 PM Arie Gilbert No. Babylon, NY WWW.QCBirdClub.ORG WWW.PowerBirder.blogspot.com Maps: WWW.QCBirdClub.ORG/birding-site-maps Sent from "Loretta" in the field -------- Original message -------- From: Andrew Baksh <birdingd...@gmail.com> Date: 03/09/2013 12:25 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Nyc ebirds <ebirds...@yahoogroups.com> Cc: "& [NYSBIRDS]" <nysbird...@list.cornell.edu> Subject: Re: [nysbirds-l] Prospect park varied thrush YES The Varied Thrush continues at Prospect Park. Now being seen in Ambergill near Esdale Bridge which is below the Lower Pools. Sent from somewhere in the field using my mobile device! Andrew Baksh www.birdingdude.blogspot.com On Mar 9, 2013, at 9:05 AM, "swalte...@verizon.net" <swalte...@verizon.net> wrote: Seen on slope at 9:00 *Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless* -----Original message----- *From: *Tom Preston <tom...@gmail.com>* To: *"& [NYSBIRDS]" <nysbird...@list.cornell.edu>* Sent: *Sat, Mar 9, 2013 12:58:28 GMT+00:00* Subject: *[nysbirds-l] Prospect park varied thrush yes Spotted by Sean Zimmer. S of bridge. We watched for about 5 minutes before it moved upslope On Mar 9, 2013 1:09 AM, "& [NYSBIRDS] digest" <nysbird...@list.cornell.edu> wrote: > NYSBIRDS-L Digest for Friday, March 08, 2013. > > 1. Fwd: [MDBirding] Re: Bad News--Disturbance of Long-eared Owls AND eBird > corporate" stance & related future eBird changes > 2. Re: Fwd: [MDBirding] Re: Bad News--Disturbance of Long-eared Owls AND > eBird corporate" stance & related future eBird changes > 3. Varied Thrush- Prospect Park > 4. Varied Thrush > 5. VARIED THRUSH in Prospect Park ( Kings) > 6. Brooklyn Varied Thrush follow-up > 7. Varied Thrush - Prospect Park > 8. Re: Varied Thrush, Brooklyn > 9. Re: Brooklyn Varied Thrush follow-up > 10. Varied Thrush - Prospect Park, Bklyn. > 11. Photos of Varied Thrush > 12. Spring Shorebird Migration Volunteers Needed > 13. BirdCallsRadio Update! > 14. NYC Area RBA: 8 March 2013 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: Fwd: [MDBirding] Re: Bad News--Disturbance of Long-eared Owls AND > eBird corporate" stance & related future eBird changes > From: Andrew Baksh <birdingd...@gmail.com> > Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 07:51:31 -0500 > X-Message-Number: 1 > > Good Morning All: > > Marshall Illiff, eBird Project Leader has given me permission to re-post an > e-mail submitted by him to the Maryland (MD) list serve, in response to a > discussion on the disturbance of Long-Eared Owls. Marshall's response on > the MD list serve, highlights the understanding of eBird personnel on the > challenges faced by birders on the reporting of sensitive species and > discusses related changes coming soon to eBird to address this and other > reporting issues. > > I recommend reading Marshall's write-up in its entirety or at the very > least, read the end. I think you will find it gives hope for the continued > use of eBird for entering sensitive species, while protecting the birds we > love. > > Good and Responsible Birding! > > Andrew Baksh > Queens, NY > www.birdingdude.blogspot.com > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Marshall Iliff <mil...@aol.com> > Date: Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 7:31 AM > Subject: Fwd: [MDBirding] Re: Bad News--Disturbance of Long-eared Owls > To: Andrew Baksh <birdingd...@gmail.com> > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Marshall Iliff <mil...@aol.com> > Date: Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:26 AM > Subject: Re: [MDBirding] Re: Bad News--Disturbance of Long-eared Owls > To: mdbird...@googlegroups.com > > > MDBirding, > > As many of you may know, I am an ex-Marylander, still have family in > Annapolis, and live now in Massachusetts. I feel quite nostalgic for my > home state, especially when I see how much Maryland has embraced eBird and > what a vibrant, curious, and interesting community of birders Maryland has, > as evidenced by discussions like this and others on MDBirding. The topic in > this case is an unfortunate one, but it is not one that is unique to > Maryland. > > I think Bill, Matt and others have provided some great comments and > guidance for this issue in general. I'd like to specifically address where > eBird is on this. You can consider this the "eBird corporate" stance, if > you will, as Bill is fond of saying :-). > > First, the issue of sensitive species is one that has been on our radar > screen for a long time at the Cornell Lab as we have tried to grow eBird. > There has always been tension between the two ideas that have been > mentioned: on the one hand, we want the birds that we love to be safe and > do not want actions by birders or photographers to negatively impact the > birds as they seek them out and enjoy them in the field; on the other hand, > we also firmly believe that the scientific value, usefulness as a tool for > birdwatchers, and, importantly, the conservation value of the bird > information in eBird is most helpful when birds are reported at the finest > (most specific) scale possible. Reporting a Scarlet Tanager sighting from > "Maryland" is not worthless, but not very informative. Reporting it as > "Anne Arundel County", is slightly better, and from the town of "Annapolis" > better still. Reporting it from the hotspot that represents the 80-acre > property on the South River starts to get even more specific and truly > valuable for understanding the relationship of the bird to the habitat it > was using, and this is what we hope most eBirders are doing. Obviously one > could report at even finer scales, maybe from the 20 acre woodland near > Forest Drive that is the actual habitat where 2-3 Scarlet Tanager > territories still persist; I could even do a stationary count at the exact > spot where I saw or heard the tanager. Our official eBird recommendations > are "the finer scale the better" and if I divided my one-mile morning > birdwalks on this property into 50 sections of 100 ft each, that would be a > fantastic dataset. But no one has the time to do that, so our general rule > is try to keep your traveling counts to five miles or less, try to report > from the most accurate location possible and try to use established > hotspots when possible. If you are willing to establish a route of point > counts or short transects and survey those regularly, eBird welcomes that, > but many of us are busy. Those that submit from "Blackwater NWR" or > "Assateague National Seashore" are still providing very valuable data, even > if the traveling counts are apt to be long and those hotspots represent > large areas. > > So with that stance that we want fine-scale reports, how then can we > balance the very real problems with sensitive species? > > I should say at the outset, that the Maryland eBird reviewers, and Bill in > particular, have regularly been very helpful to those of us at "eBird > Central" to defining policies on sensitive species. Recognizing that such > cases are rare, we also have to acknowledge that serious ethical (or legal) > breaches *do* occur. A short list of the sensitive species problems that > eBird users have been involved with include: failure to follow established > protocol for access to birding sites; trespassing on private personal > property; trespassing on federal property; visitation of highly restricted > scientific research stations involved in the study and protection of > Endangered species; disturbance of rare/sensitive species; and even, at > least once, targeted hunting (successfully) rare ducks reported via eBird. > Of course, the recent Long-eared Owl issue may be connected to eBird as > well. > > Although these examples are all rare, they are also very concerning. While > eBird is not really directly responsible for the unethical or illegal > actions of a very small minority of inconsiderate > birders/photographers/hunters, eBird does have great responsibility as the > gatekeepers to an unprecedented database (now 120 million records and > growing) on bird occurrence and distribution. We work hard to make the > information free and available, but we need to do this responsibly. > > We are at a point now where the old methods -- entrusting birders to report > responsibly and understand the nuances of site specificity and the myriad > output tools in eBird -- simply is no longer tenable. We are proud of the > enthusiasm around eBird Rarity Alerts and eBird Needs Alerts, but we also > see the danger with instantly feeding out "needed" birds in ways that can't > be controlled. Bachman's Warblers are presumed extinct, but if a Bachman's > Warbler is found in the Great Dismal Swamp in April 2013 and reported with > site specific directions on eBird, those details will literally be > available to the entire community of eBird users--even those without > accounts--within an hour. While this is also true of a listserv posting, I > think we can all agree that if a single pair of Bachman's Warblers remains > in the world, the best thing for that species' survival may *not* be to > have birders know about it. Even if 99.9% of us are respectful, I can > pretty much guarantee that some birders will sneak in, disobey rules, play > tape to the pair, try to find the nest, and stalk both male and female > relentlessly for photos. While I understand that impulse, I worry about > eBird's role in adding to the pressure for rare and sensitive species > simply through providing 21st century era information exchange. While we > inherently believe that information exchange is good in almost all cases, > all of us should think first before putting any bird information out on the > internet (eBird or listservs), just in case it is one of those rare cases > where it may cause more harm than good. > > To that end, eBird is committed to revising the tools available to hide or > obscure reports. This will almost certainly involve better tools for a > user, that allow one to hide a specific observation from eBird output > (currently one can only hide an entire checklist) or to hide or obscure a > specific personal location. For mapped output, we also expect to implement > a structure whereby some species of high concern will be automatically > "blurred". Once this is implemented, we will recommend that the Maryland > editor team "blur" Long-eared Owls. This would mean that anyone can report > Long-eared Owl from Maryland when they find one, but it will not be > possible to find the specific information via eBird output tools. We may > even need a way to obscure the reporter of such birds, so that that > individual is not hounded by others saying "I know you had a Long-eared > Owl, tell me where. Tell Me Where! TELL ME WHERE!!!!" > > We hope and expect this "blurring" will be used only in very very few > cases, but when species are truly sensitive and their very safety may be at > risk from birder attention, we simply have to modify eBird to protect them. > This is especially critical in the United Kingdom. Last time I visited I > was taken to see raptor species in one of the last locations for the > species in the country. To make sure that I didn't put the bird at risk (by > reporting to eBird), I was told stories about egg collectors who learned of > another location, snuck in past wardens assigned to protect the birds, > found the nest, and stole the entire clutch. Thankfully this type of > behavior is rare to nonexistent in the U.S., but I have heard of goshawk > and Peregrine nests being raided by falconers, so American birds are indeed > at risk from similar activity. > > I am posting not to address this specific situation, but simply to plant a > flag that eBird will deal with this issue comprehensively in the near > future (for us that means within the year, or so), and that in the meantime > we would like to stress again that birders that use eBird (by the way, > thank you for reporting to eBird!) think about what cases you may need to > modify your reporting for the bird's benefit. I know Bill and others have > posted it here before, but our story on the topic does address the > important cases and how to approach them: > http://ebird.org/content/ebird/about/reporting-sensitive-species > > If you made it this far, thanks for reading, and thanks for your support of > eBird. I'll post a more lighthearted followup. > > Best, > > Marshall Iliff > eBird Project Leader > West Roxbury, MA > miliff AT aol.com > > > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 8:51 AM, world oceans <world.ocea...@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > This is a good dialogue on a very important topic. Thank you, Bill, > > for your informative discussion of this . I don't know which is more > > disturbing , the disregard for owls' welfare or the ego- driven > > animosity that surfaces too often among birders . As a person who has > > loved and studied owls all my life, I can tell you that many birders > > want to see owls so much, they will do almost anything to make that > > happen. The bottom line which we all must remember is that the birds' > > well-being is ALWAYS more important than our lists or selfish desires > > -- no exceptions, no excuses, no 'it wont matter just this once ' > > justifications. > > > > James Gibson > > Silver Spring > > > > On 2/6/13, jflowers <artsnima...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tuesday, February 5, 2013 10:00:24 PM UTC-5, Bill Hubick wrote: > > >> All, > > >> > > >> I received a highly troubling report today that a known > > >> Long-eared Owl roost site has been seriously disturbed. It appears > > >> someone has cut branches from the roost tree to allow for better > > >> photography. The cuts were fresh, only on the roost tree, and clearly > > >> not part of a larger park maintenance effort. At least one of the > > >> branches cut was described as being nearly the width of the observer's > > >> arm. > > >> Horrible. > > >> > > >> > > >> The topic of sensitive species has received some recent discussion, > > >> with the more vocal parties being on the "why is information being > > >> suppressed?" side. Unfortunately, unacceptable events like this one > have > > >> happened many times before. It is the significantly increased risk of > > >> events like this that makes open discussion of sensitive species so > > >> dangerous. In most cases, it's not a problem if > > >> a few more respectful people observe from a distance. However, as > > >> traffic increases, the likelihood of poor behavior drastically > > >> increases. One could argue that education is the key ("don't keep it > > >> secret | tell people how to behave"), but people who do something like > > >> this aren't just lacking mentoring. The changes in the communication > of > > >> bird sightings in the last five years can hardly be overstated. We > have > > a > > >> primary list-serve at record-setting membership that is supplemented > by > > >> many new members. We have a Maryland Facebook page attracting many > new > > >> and enthusiastic people. We are also one of the states with the most > > >> comprehensive eBird buy-in in the country. And eBird, of course, has > > >> fundamentally changed how we share our sightings, with the various > > >> hourly "needs" alerts that are so popular certainly factoring in > heavily > > >> in these cases. These are all very good things, and I actively > > >> support all of them. The wider net is a great thing and is not > > >> going away. That said, these technological changes certainly have a > lot > > >> to do > > >> with the increased attention these Long-eared Owls have received. > > >> Balancing transparency and sensitivity is going to remain a challenge, > > >> and self-policing what is shared, when, and how needs to be further > > >> considered. > > >> > > >> > > >> This list-serve just yesterday amended its guidelines to explicitly > > >> state that locations for Long-eared Owls are not allowed. I am a > > >> Maryland eBird reviewer and I personally lean toward hiding all > specific > > >> locations for LEOW there as well. However, I must discus that opinion > > >> as part of a team and with input from corporate eBird. This is far > from > > a > > >> black-and-white issue. The "we can't protect it if we don't know it's > > >> there" argument is sound. But how do you balance that with "we know > > >> we're not protecting them when we're sawing @#$#*% branches off their > > >> roost trees"? So as a reviewer, I assure you we will revisit this > topic. > > >> In the mean time, remember that eBird is a > > >> public communication tool like this list-serve. You can make > decisions > > >> to use the "hide" functionality, to report such species at the county > > >> level, and so on. More importantly, you can encourage others to do the > > >> same. Whatever suggestions you make, please do so politely. There have > > >> been some barbs thrown recently that were unwarranted. This list-serve > > >> wants productive discussion of such topics, but will cut off any > threads > > >> that turn into flame wars. > > >> > > >> > > >> Our growth as a nature study community only matters if we find ways to > > >> harness it for good things. Let's find ways to do so. > > >> > > >> Bill > > >> > > >> Bill Hubick > > >> Pasadena, Maryland > > >> bill_...@yahoo.com > > >> http://www.billhubick.com > > >> http://www.marylandbiodiversity.com > > > > > > > > > This is truly annoying Bill! However, are you sure it was a > photographer > > > that did this? It might and does make sense, but pinning that on a > > > photographer unless knowing this for sure might be jumping the gun a > > bit. No > > > matter who the culprit was he or she needs to be educated as to the > > > sensitivity of this species. > > > > > > My concern for your diagnoses is that there is already enough animosity > > > between birders and photographers as it is. I say this with concern as > I > > am > > > both a birder and an avian photographer and I have witnessed rudeness > and > > > bad behavior by both birders and photographers more than I care to > admit. > > > > > > I remember several occasions last year sitting in my car on a little > but > > > well known road in western Maryland with a camera and 800mm lens on a > > bean > > > bag in my window while a few large groups of birders were stomping down > > the > > > breeding habitat of Golden-winged Warblers. I was so angry you could > have > > > fried an egg with my breath. > > > > > > But I will say that I'm sorry that someone wanted a look or a > photograph > > of > > > this species without any concern for it. There is no excuse for that! > We > > > needd to better police our fellow birders and photographers. > > > > > > JIm > > > > > > -- > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Group > > > 'Maryland & DC Birding'. > > > To view group guidelines or change email preferences, visit this group > on > > > the web at http://www.mdbirding.com > > > Posts can be sent to the group by sending an email to > > > mdbird...@googlegroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > **************************** > Marshall J. Iliff > miliff AT aol.com > West Roxbury, MA > **************************** > eBird/AKN Project Leader > www.ebird.org > www.avianknowledge.net > > Cornell Lab of Ornithology > Ithaca, NY > **************************** > > > > -- > > > **************************** > Marshall J. Iliff > miliff AT aol.com > West Roxbury, MA > **************************** > eBird/AKN Project Leader > www.ebird.org > www.avianknowledge.net > Cornell Lab of Ornithology > Ithaca, NY > **************************** > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: Re: Fwd: [MDBirding] Re: Bad News--Disturbance of Long-eared Owls > AND eBird corporate" stance & related future eBird changes > From: Hugh McGuinness <hdmcguinn...@gmail.com> > Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 08:48:45 -0500 > X-Message-Number: 2 > > Just as an FYI, everyone should know that it turned out that these > particular Long-eared Owls were not subjected to purposeful disturbance. > The story: some branches were cut on their roost tree. Everyone presumed > that a photographer had done it, however, it turned out that a state agency > that had no knowledge of the birds' presence had just been performing > routine maintenance along a right-of-way. This doesn't change the intent of > Andrew's post, but I just didn't want this incident to cause bad feelings > and disenchantment about unspecified and non-existent evil-doers. > > Hugh > > On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Andrew Baksh <birdingd...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Good Morning All: > > > > Marshall Illiff, eBird Project Leader has given me permission to re-post > > an e-mail submitted by him to the Maryland (MD) list serve, in response > to > > a discussion on the disturbance of Long-Eared Owls. Marshall's response > on > > the MD list serve, highlights the understanding of eBird personnel on the > > challenges faced by birders on the reporting of sensitive species and > > discusses related changes coming soon to eBird to address this and other > > reporting issues. > > > > I recommend reading Marshall's write-up in its entirety or at the very > > least, read the end. I think you will find it gives hope for the > continued > > use of eBird for entering sensitive species, while protecting the birds > we > > love. > > > > Good and Responsible Birding! > > > > Andrew Baksh > > Queens, NY > > www.birdingdude.blogspot.com > > > > > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: Marshall Iliff <mil...@aol.com> > > Date: Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 7:31 AM > > Subject: Fwd: [MDBirding] Re: Bad News--Disturbance of Long-eared Owls > > To: Andrew Baksh <birdingd...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: Marshall Iliff <mil...@aol.com> > > Date: Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:26 AM > > Subject: Re: [MDBirding] Re: Bad News--Disturbance of Long-eared Owls > > To: mdbird...@googlegroups.com > > > > > > MDBirding, > > > > As many of you may know, I am an ex-Marylander, still have family in > > Annapolis, and live now in Massachusetts. I feel quite nostalgic for my > > home state, especially when I see how much Maryland has embraced eBird > and > > what a vibrant, curious, and interesting community of birders Maryland > has, > > as evidenced by discussions like this and others on MDBirding. The topic > in > > this case is an unfortunate one, but it is not one that is unique to > > Maryland. > > > > I think Bill, Matt and others have provided some great comments and > > guidance for this issue in general. I'd like to specifically address > where > > eBird is on this. You can consider this the "eBird corporate" stance, if > > you will, as Bill is fond of saying :-). > > > > First, the issue of sensitive species is one that has been on our radar > > screen for a long time at the Cornell Lab as we have tried to grow eBird. > > There has always been tension between the two ideas that have been > > mentioned: on the one hand, we want the birds that we love to be safe and > > do not want actions by birders or photographers to negatively impact the > > birds as they seek them out and enjoy them in the field; on the other > hand, > > we also firmly believe that the scientific value, usefulness as a tool > for > > birdwatchers, and, importantly, the conservation value of the bird > > information in eBird is most helpful when birds are reported at the > finest > > (most specific) scale possible. Reporting a Scarlet Tanager sighting from > > "Maryland" is not worthless, but not very informative. Reporting it as > > "Anne Arundel County", is slightly better, and from the town of > "Annapolis" > > better still. Reporting it from the hotspot that represents the 80-acre > > property on the South River starts to get even more specific and truly > > valuable for understanding the relationship of the bird to the habitat it > > was using, and this is what we hope most eBirders are doing. Obviously > one > > could report at even finer scales, maybe from the 20 acre woodland near > > Forest Drive that is the actual habitat where 2-3 Scarlet Tanager > > territories still persist; I could even do a stationary count at the > exact > > spot where I saw or heard the tanager. Our official eBird recommendations > > are "the finer scale the better" and if I divided my one-mile morning > > birdwalks on this property into 50 sections of 100 ft each, that would > be a > > fantastic dataset. But no one has the time to do that, so our general > rule > > is try to keep your traveling counts to five miles or less, try to report > > from the most accurate location possible and try to use established > > hotspots when possible. If you are willing to establish a route of point > > counts or short transects and survey those regularly, eBird welcomes > that, > > but many of us are busy. Those that submit from "Blackwater NWR" or > > "Assateague National Seashore" are still providing very valuable data, > even > > if the traveling counts are apt to be long and those hotspots represent > > large areas. > > > > So with that stance that we want fine-scale reports, how then can we > > balance the very real problems with sensitive species? > > > > I should say at the outset, that the Maryland eBird reviewers, and Bill > in > > particular, have regularly been very helpful to those of us at "eBird > > Central" to defining policies on sensitive species. Recognizing that such > > cases are rare, we also have to acknowledge that serious ethical (or > legal) > > breaches *do* occur. A short list of the sensitive species problems that > > eBird users have been involved with include: failure to follow > established > > protocol for access to birding sites; trespassing on private personal > > property; trespassing on federal property; visitation of highly > restricted > > scientific research stations involved in the study and protection of > > Endangered species; disturbance of rare/sensitive species; and even, at > > least once, targeted hunting (successfully) rare ducks reported via > eBird. > > Of course, the recent Long-eared Owl issue may be connected to eBird as > > well. > > > > Although these examples are all rare, they are also very concerning. > While > > eBird is not really directly responsible for the unethical or illegal > > actions of a very small minority of inconsiderate > > birders/photographers/hunters, eBird does have great responsibility as > the > > gatekeepers to an unprecedented database (now 120 million records and > > growing) on bird occurrence and distribution. We work hard to make the > > information free and available, but we need to do this responsibly. > > > > We are at a point now where the old methods -- entrusting birders to > > report responsibly and understand the nuances of site specificity and the > > myriad output tools in eBird -- simply is no longer tenable. We are proud > > of the enthusiasm around eBird Rarity Alerts and eBird Needs Alerts, but > we > > also see the danger with instantly feeding out "needed" birds in ways > that > > can't be controlled. Bachman's Warblers are presumed extinct, but if a > > Bachman's Warbler is found in the Great Dismal Swamp in April 2013 and > > reported with site specific directions on eBird, those details will > > literally be available to the entire community of eBird users--even those > > without accounts--within an hour. While this is also true of a listserv > > posting, I think we can all agree that if a single pair of Bachman's > > Warblers remains in the world, the best thing for that species' survival > > may *not* be to have birders know about it. Even if 99.9% of us are > > respectful, I can pretty much guarantee that some birders will sneak in, > > disobey rules, play tape to the pair, try to find the nest, and stalk > both > > male and female relentlessly for photos. While I understand that > impulse, I > > worry about eBird's role in adding to the pressure for rare and sensitive > > species simply through providing 21st century era information exchange. > > While we inherently believe that information exchange is good in almost > all > > cases, all of us should think first before putting any bird information > out > > on the internet (eBird or listservs), just in case it is one of those > rare > > cases where it may cause more harm than good. > > > > To that end, eBird is committed to revising the tools available to hide > or > > obscure reports. This will almost certainly involve better tools for a > > user, that allow one to hide a specific observation from eBird output > > (currently one can only hide an entire checklist) or to hide or obscure a > > specific personal location. For mapped output, we also expect to > implement > > a structure whereby some species of high concern will be automatically > > "blurred". Once this is implemented, we will recommend that the Maryland > > editor team "blur" Long-eared Owls. This would mean that anyone can > report > > Long-eared Owl from Maryland when they find one, but it will not be > > possible to find the specific information via eBird output tools. We may > > even need a way to obscure the reporter of such birds, so that that > > individual is not hounded by others saying "I know you had a Long-eared > > Owl, tell me where. Tell Me Where! TELL ME WHERE!!!!" > > > > We hope and expect this "blurring" will be used only in very very few > > cases, but when species are truly sensitive and their very safety may be > at > > risk from birder attention, we simply have to modify eBird to protect > them. > > This is especially critical in the United Kingdom. Last time I visited I > > was taken to see raptor species in one of the last locations for the > > species in the country. To make sure that I didn't put the bird at risk > (by > > reporting to eBird), I was told stories about egg collectors who learned > of > > another location, snuck in past wardens assigned to protect the birds, > > found the nest, and stole the entire clutch. Thankfully this type of > > behavior is rare to nonexistent in the U.S., but I have heard of goshawk > > and Peregrine nests being raided by falconers, so American birds are > indeed > > at risk from similar activity. > > > > I am posting not to address this specific situation, but simply to plant > a > > flag that eBird will deal with this issue comprehensively in the near > > future (for us that means within the year, or so), and that in the > meantime > > we would like to stress again that birders that use eBird (by the way, > > thank you for reporting to eBird!) think about what cases you may need to > > modify your reporting for the bird's benefit. I know Bill and others have > > posted it here before, but our story on the topic does address the > > important cases and how to approach them: > > http://ebird.org/content/ebird/about/reporting-sensitive-species > > > > If you made it this far, thanks for reading, and thanks for your support > > of eBird. I'll post a more lighthearted followup. > > > > Best, > > > > Marshall Iliff > > eBird Project Leader > > West Roxbury, MA > > miliff AT aol.com > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 8:51 AM, world oceans <world.ocea...@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > >> This is a good dialogue on a very important topic. Thank you, Bill, > >> for your informative discussion of this . I don't know which is more > >> disturbing , the disregard for owls' welfare or the ego- driven > >> animosity that surfaces too often among birders . As a person who has > >> loved and studied owls all my life, I can tell you that many birders > >> want to see owls so much, they will do almost anything to make that > >> happen. The bottom line which we all must remember is that the birds' > >> well-being is ALWAYS more important than our lists or selfish desires > >> -- no exceptions, no excuses, no 'it wont matter just this once ' > >> justifications. > >> > >> James Gibson > >> Silver Spring > >> > >> On 2/6/13, jflowers <artsnima...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > On Tuesday, February 5, 2013 10:00:24 PM UTC-5, Bill Hubick wrote: > >> >> All, > >> >> > >> >> I received a highly troubling report today that a known > >> >> Long-eared Owl roost site has been seriously disturbed. It appears > >> >> someone has cut branches from the roost tree to allow for better > >> >> photography. The cuts were fresh, only on the roost tree, and clearly > >> >> not part of a larger park maintenance effort. At least one of the > >> >> branches cut was described as being nearly the width of the > observer's > >> >> arm. > >> >> Horrible. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> The topic of sensitive species has received some recent discussion, > >> >> with the more vocal parties being on the "why is information being > >> >> suppressed?" side. Unfortunately, unacceptable events like this one > >> have > >> >> happened many times before. It is the significantly increased risk > of > >> >> events like this that makes open discussion of sensitive species so > >> >> dangerous. In most cases, it's not a problem if > >> >> a few more respectful people observe from a distance. However, as > >> >> traffic increases, the likelihood of poor behavior drastically > >> >> increases. One could argue that education is the key ("don't keep it > >> >> secret | tell people how to behave"), but people who do something > like > >> >> this aren't just lacking mentoring. The changes in the communication > of > >> >> bird sightings in the last five years can hardly be overstated. We > >> have a > >> >> primary list-serve at record-setting membership that is supplemented > >> by > >> >> many new members. We have a Maryland Facebook page attracting many > new > >> >> and enthusiastic people. We are also one of the states with the most > >> >> comprehensive eBird buy-in in the country. And eBird, of course, has > >> >> fundamentally changed how we share our sightings, with the various > >> >> hourly "needs" alerts that are so popular certainly factoring in > >> heavily > >> >> in these cases. These are all very good things, and I actively > >> >> support all of them. The wider net is a great thing and is not > >> >> going away. That said, these technological changes certainly have a > >> lot > >> >> to do > >> >> with the increased attention these Long-eared Owls have received. > >> >> Balancing transparency and sensitivity is going to remain a > challenge, > >> >> and self-policing what is shared, when, and how needs to be further > >> >> considered. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> This list-serve just yesterday amended its guidelines to explicitly > >> >> state that locations for Long-eared Owls are not allowed. I am a > >> >> Maryland eBird reviewer and I personally lean toward hiding all > >> specific > >> >> locations for LEOW there as well. However, I must discus that > opinion > >> >> as part of a team and with input from corporate eBird. This is far > >> from a > >> >> black-and-white issue. The "we can't protect it if we don't know > it's > >> >> there" argument is sound. But how do you balance that with "we know > >> >> we're not protecting them when we're sawing @#$#*% branches off their > >> >> roost trees"? So as a reviewer, I assure you we will revisit this > >> topic. > >> >> In the mean time, remember that eBird is a > >> >> public communication tool like this list-serve. You can make > decisions > >> >> to use the "hide" functionality, to report such species at the county > >> >> level, and so on. More importantly, you can encourage others to do > the > >> >> same. Whatever suggestions you make, please do so politely. There > have > >> >> been some barbs thrown recently that were unwarranted. This > list-serve > >> >> wants productive discussion of such topics, but will cut off any > >> threads > >> >> that turn into flame wars. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Our growth as a nature study community only matters if we find ways > to > >> >> harness it for good things. Let's find ways to do so. > >> >> > >> >> Bill > >> >> > >> >> Bill Hubick > >> >> Pasadena, Maryland > >> >> bill_...@yahoo.com > >> >> http://www.billhubick.com > >> >> http://www.marylandbiodiversity.com > >> > > >> > > >> > This is truly annoying Bill! However, are you sure it was a > photographer > >> > that did this? It might and does make sense, but pinning that on a > >> > photographer unless knowing this for sure might be jumping the gun a > >> bit. No > >> > matter who the culprit was he or she needs to be educated as to the > >> > sensitivity of this species. > >> > > >> > My concern for your diagnoses is that there is already enough > animosity > >> > between birders and photographers as it is. I say this with concern as > >> I am > >> > both a birder and an avian photographer and I have witnessed rudeness > >> and > >> > bad behavior by both birders and photographers more than I care to -- 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/ --
