When to put something on a list or not?

[djnd2]

Hello all, I am not sure if this has been discussed or not before but i was just wondering what other birders policys where on the matter. When you are making a list and you hear a bird you have seen before and you know 100% that is what you are hearing but you cant see it what is your policy? Do you add it to a list? I dont mean birds you have never seen before but say it was a monthly list or yearly list you where doing. An example for me is the tawny owl, I live beside a botanic gardens and i occasionnally hear them calling to each other but rarely see them so I cant decide if I should include it. What do other people do in this situation? Or is it a matter of it must be seen to be included.

[fugl]

Yes, I list "heard-only" birds, & I think most other people do too. If I'm not sure, because I didn't hear call that well or because I'm not 100% certain of the ID, I list the species with a question mark (as I do doubtful IDs of all kinds). In fact, as far as owls & nightjars are concerned I'm often more confident of a "heard-only" ID than of a "seen-only" one (& ditto for some of the more nondescript diurnal birds as well).

[Tero]

Well, it is your list. If you report it to someone collecting data, it is a valid datapoint. I think nesting birds are cataloged mostly by song.

[Dave Hall]

Hi Its your list so you can put on it anything you want just a word of caution on bird calls some years ago I had a Starling that sat on the roof of my house and called like a number of other birds its best was Redshank and Curlew which it did 100% right

[jedigrant]

As others have said, whatever you feel comfortable with is ok.

As for me, I insist upon seeing a bird before adding it to my life list. After that point, however, I will count heard-only birds on any list.

[Enji]

As others have said, for your personal list it's all up to you. I add heard-only birds to my lists, although I usually mark them as such and I often do my best to try to see them as well. Also, I'm still learning to identify birds by sound, so I only add them if I'm absolutely sure.

[djnd2]

Thank you, I just wanted to know what other people did. As I have seen Tawny owls before then I would probably put it on the list stating as it was only heard. As its only March i hope to see one this year hopefully but if it was a lifer then i would want to see it to confirm.

[John B (not the sloop)]

I reckon that if you can get a positive ID from the call then that's good enough to tick.

If it isn't I've submitted a few fraudulent sponsored birdwatch claims in my time.....

[lmans66]

Listening by sound is at times the only way you are going to 'see' some birds...nothing wrong with that. If you are skilled at listening than that is great...count it...

[hollis_f]

Like lots of others I've made the rule that I have to see it for a lifer but year-ticks are OK if they're only heard. Which is why Wood Warbler still ain't on my life list despite having heard a few.

[J. Moore]

Like lots of others I've made the rule that I have to see it for a lifer but year-ticks are OK if they're only heard. Which is why Wood Warbler still ain't on my life list despite having heard a few.

I agree. (Except in the case of mostly nocturnal owls & nightjars -- with them I think hearing is enough.) I think that is one of the most well-entrenched traditions. And I read too much about birds singing each others' songs to reply upon voice alone in the case of a lifer.

And while of course you can do whatever you want, I think it is better to follow a widespread practice because life and year lists are things people frequently talk about and compare, and these discussions will only be meaningful if people are using the same or similar standards.

Jim

[lmans66]

Owling is an area that I need help in....I need to practice hearing them as well....and ID'ing to the owl. Perhaps DVD's or other things would help but when I do hear one, I agree...that is what I would count on my list as having seeing/heard it from that particular birds perspective....

[mikfoz]

It's your list. Just put a qualifier "Heard only" next to it if you're bothered.

[myoudale]

what would you guys do with species like ruddy shelduck?

Would you only count it if its on the UK400 list?

[deansmith]

if you follow all the rules ect then it can be mind boggling, as everyone else said your list, mines a seen only list and includes any bird no matter what catagory its in as long as its wild and in some place of its own accord - no park birds or escapees ect

[steve_zodiac]

what would you guys do with species like ruddy shelduck?

Would you only count it if its on the UK400 list?

Personally I never go by the UK400 list because its one man's rules and regulations, and subject to change (don't ask, it will take me all day).

But I've known birders put dead birds on their life list.

[mikfoz]

As long as they're not going round putting live birds on their dead list...

[ovenbird43]

As most others have said, I feel I have to see a bird to add it to my life list, but for everything else "heard-only" is ok. The only exception I've made is for Western Screech-Owl, which is on my life list despite having only heard them.

There are cases where birds are only separable by sound, and cases where birds are best identified by sight. I know many people who don't put much faith into sound IDs, but it's not really prone to error any more so than sight IDs are- both are skills that require development and practice.