Re: [mou-net] Question re Breeding Bird Survey Results - a minor correction

2021-05-02 Thread JULIAN SELLERS
Well, the highlighting got lost in the translation to MOU-NET.  The last "2019" 
below is correct.  In the original, it was "2017."

Julian


From: Minnesota Birds  on behalf of JULIAN SELLERS 

Sent: Sunday, May 2, 2021 12:55
To: MOU-NET@LISTS.UMN.EDU 
Subject: [mou-net] Question re Breeding Bird Survey Results - a minor correction

I made an obvious error in my posting.  See the highlighted correction below.

Julian


Last year I made charts of the population trends of a number of species from
the BBS results for all of the years available—1966 to 2017.  The BBS web site
now contains results for the years 1966 to 2019.  (It’s a separate data set;
the 1966 to 2017 set is still available.)  I would have assumed that the new
results would be exactly the same, but with the addition of the years 2018 and
2019, but they’re not.  I’ve checked the data for quite a few species, and, in
the 1966 to 2019 data set, the number of birds per BBS route is different for
all of the years 1966 to 2017 than it is in the 1966 to 2019 edition.  To take
just one little example, for Eastern Kingbird in Minnesota, the number per BBS
route in 1968 is 5.083706 in the 1966-2017 edition, but 3.77 in the 1966-2019
edition (never mind the fewer decimal places).  Obviously, there’s something I
don’t understand. Can anyone explain it?



Join or Leave mou-net: 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.umn.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fwa%3FSUBED1%3Dmou-netdata=04%7C01%7C%7Ca78bcf90f1054ed6b57708d90d938cfe%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637555749643775258%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000sdata=9qFhyGtNOrrl7QaNj2RQ7k4WakVgnKr%2BUTPNazyN7tA%3Dreserved=0
Archives: 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.umn.edu%2Farchives%2Fmou-net.htmldata=04%7C01%7C%7Ca78bcf90f1054ed6b57708d90d938cfe%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637555749643775258%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000sdata=hFLtvbZ5RULrYnXj4iTVXqFL93Z5ihc2gvSZIbwjSD0%3Dreserved=0

During the pandemic, the MOU encourages you to stay safe, practice social 
distancing, and continue to bird responsibly.


Join or Leave mou-net: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=mou-net
Archives: http://lists.umn.edu/archives/mou-net.html

During the pandemic, the MOU encourages you to stay safe, practice social 
distancing, and continue to bird responsibly.


[mou-net] Question re Breeding Bird Survey Results - a minor correction

2021-05-02 Thread JULIAN SELLERS
I made an obvious error in my posting.  See the highlighted correction below.

Julian


Last year I made charts of the population trends of a number of species from
the BBS results for all of the years available—1966 to 2017.  The BBS web site
now contains results for the years 1966 to 2019.  (It’s a separate data set;
the 1966 to 2017 set is still available.)  I would have assumed that the new
results would be exactly the same, but with the addition of the years 2018 and
2019, but they’re not.  I’ve checked the data for quite a few species, and, in
the 1966 to 2019 data set, the number of birds per BBS route is different for
all of the years 1966 to 2017 than it is in the 1966 to 2019 edition.  To take
just one little example, for Eastern Kingbird in Minnesota, the number per BBS
route in 1968 is 5.083706 in the 1966-2017 edition, but 3.77 in the 1966-2019
edition (never mind the fewer decimal places).  Obviously, there’s something I
don’t understand. Can anyone explain it?



Join or Leave mou-net: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=mou-net
Archives: http://lists.umn.edu/archives/mou-net.html

During the pandemic, the MOU encourages you to stay safe, practice social 
distancing, and continue to bird responsibly.