Ivory-billed Woodpecker (formerly updates) (16 Viewers)

fishing4clues said:

If you look at the film you will notice that there is a lot of green foilage still on the trees. and there is no ICE in the water. They are wearing light-weight gear not heavy coats as is the norm in the middle of Feb.

Click to expand...

I'm confused as to what video you are talking about?

jurek said:

However, it will happen only if a population will remain low for many generations.

Click to expand...

That isn't exactly true. The problem with a bottleneck isn't the time but the amount of individuals that survive it. It could take one generation, but if you lose 95% of a population you are going to lose a ton of genetic variability in the following breeding season.

jurek said:

Many birds and mammals have extremely low genetic variation and are doing fine - some apparently from natural causes..

Click to expand...

Could you give an example of this?

fishing4clues said:

... If you look at the film you will notice that there is a lot of green foilage still on the trees. and there is no ICE in the water. They are wearing light-weight gear not heavy coats as is the norm in the middle of Feb. I hope you take the time to watch the film again to verify what I have stated to confirm this. I have no doubt the film is real just that the date has been altered. check it out..

Click to expand...

If you are talking about the Luneau video note that it was taken on 25 April 2004. Hence the green tinge on the vegetation and the light wear.

Dalcio

humminbird said:

Terry:
As a fellow hunter that would normally be my opinion, but this appears to have been an honest mistake and the hunters did everything they could unsuccessfully to save those two birds when they realized their mistake.

Mark
Bastrop, TX

Click to expand...

I'm glad to hear that. I hunt pheasant and other upland birds and I just get a sick feeling in my gut when I hear stories like that.

Thanks for filling me in. Although I don't quite see what it was they thought they were shooting....

Terry O'Nolley said:

I'm glad to hear that. I hunt pheasant and other upland birds and I just get a sick feeling in my gut when I hear stories like that.

Thanks for filling me in. Although I don't quite see what it was they thought they were shooting....

Click to expand...

They were hunting Sandhill Cranes.

That is correct white-back.

Mark
Bastrop, TX

white-back said:

They were hunting Sandhill Cranes.

Click to expand...

I never knew Cranes made for good eating!
I learn something new here every day.

(or were they just shooting at them to kill them because it is legal to do so if you pay the state enough money?)

Terry O'Nolley said:

I never knew Cranes made for good eating!
I learn something new here every day.

(or were they just shooting at them to kill them because it is legal to do so if you pay the state enough money?)

Click to expand...

Sarcasm not appreciated!

Mark
Bastrop, TX

Terry O'Nolley said:

(or were they just shooting at them to kill them because it is legal to do so if you pay the state enough money?)

Click to expand...

They were probably shooting them because farmers see Sandhill Cranes as pests after a while. It is completely legal in many states to shoot the cranes during open season and no extra money is needed outside of your migratory bird permit. I imagine some people eat them also.

dacol said:

If you are talking about the Luneau video note that it was taken on 25 April 2004. Hence the green tinge on the vegetation and the light wear.

Dalcio

Click to expand...

I attended the 1st meeting that was held in Brinkley when the 1st announcement was released. That is the only time I have ever watched the video. In that video which seems to be the same one that you are referring to it said Feb.11 2004. I don't know about the April 25 2004 video except that they look identical to one another. The videos I mean. After the meeting I talked with Ron Rohenbaugh (I might have misspelled his last name) and told him who I was. After a few days he and an associate of his show up where I work and I asked when they were going to release the true picture of the bird. He stated that was what he looked like and I told him that was not exactly right for the bird that I told the wmf officers about had blue legs, a bone colored beak one strip of white on its face and that his wings were black at the top, the top middle was saltand pepper streaked that looked basically grey and the bottom of the feathers was white all except the pin-feathers which were black. It was only about 15 feet straight above me on a cypress tree. When it flew it was going back in the direction that it had came in at. When the wings were spread the wing closest to body underneath side it was white except for the black that was in the center that pointed toward the tip of the wing. The body was black underneath. The crown of his head were mostly black with a slight rusty tinge to them in the center. On the top of his beak there was a spungy grissle looking mass that was a little off-white but a definate different color than the beak itself. Which looked just like a bone. Not black and white just bone colored. That is when I was told that it was a Ivorybilled.
This sighting occured in aug.1999 I told the wildlife officers in decof 1999 and met Gene Sparling the first time in Jan 2000. Then when the press is called in 2005 they released that Gene found the bird within 1/2 mile from where I saw it you be the judge. Oh and by the way....Marjon limmertink (probably spelled his name wrong too.) Stated that he had no doubt it was me that started Gene in looking for the bird. He actually said thank you for the help in finding the bird. He seemed to know of me and he has the hand written version of the sighting I gave it to him to give to Ron because he wanted it in writing.

fishing4clues said:

He stated that was what he looked like and I told him that was not exactly right for the bird that I told the wmf officers about had blue legs, a bone colored beak one strip of white on its face and that his wings were black at the top, the top middle was saltand pepper streaked that looked basically grey and the bottom of the feathers was white all except the pin-feathers which were black. It was only about 15 feet straight above me on a cypress tree. When it flew it was going back in the direction that it had came in at. When the wings were spread the wing closest to body underneath side it was white except for the black that was in the center that pointed toward the tip of the wing. The body was black underneath. The crown of his head were mostly black with a slight rusty tinge to them in the center. On the top of his beak there was a spungy grissle looking mass that was a little off-white but a definate different color than the beak itself. Which looked just like a bone. Not black and white just bone colored.

Click to expand...

Sorry to say but your description of the bird sounds nothing like any ivory-billed I've heard described. Very interesting.

It is a bad description,,not bad in the sense of what is being described but it is not being described in clear terms,,,,example, " wings were black at the top, the top middle was saltand pepper streaked that looked basically grey and the bottom of the feathers was white all except the pin-feathers which were black." I've read and re-read this and my head hurts,,and it is not Fishing4Clues fault,,not everyone is a trained or experienced writer of observations. It could be a juvenile IBWP that hasn't developed proper colors,,,,but on the other hand,,wouldn't it be interesting if some exotic bird was released into the area and is being mistaken for a woodpecker? I'm lost on the "spungy grissle looking mass",,,,a waddle perhaps? Mynah species? Blue legs? One thing that I have learned here in florida on my search for the bird is to not dismiss laymens' observations,,,they haven't been jaded by preconceived expectations and therefore are sometimes the best observers even when they cannot put their observations into words that are easy to decipher,,,,I'm perplexed and fascinated by this observation. Bill

affe22 said:

That isn't exactly true. The problem with a bottleneck isn't the time but the amount of individuals that survive it. It could take one generation, but if you lose 95% of a population you are going to lose a ton of genetic variability in the following breeding season.

Click to expand...

Apparently not. If you have unrelated individuals, even few of them (ca.40-50) will have, in between them, most of genetic variability of a population. If they will then breed and expand quickly, these genes will survive.

If you have few individuals for very many generations, then genetic vaRriability will be lost - variants of genes will disappear from population by chance.

affe22 said:

Could you give an example of this?

Click to expand...

Cheetahs, European badger and European beaver have naturally low genetic variation. Beavers, interestingly, have no variability in MHC genes - ones responsible for the very immune system protecting against diseases.

In birds I only remember man-caused cases. All New Zealand black robins come from 5 birds (1 female), Mauritius Kestrels from 5 birds.

jurek said:

Cheetahs, European badger and European beaver have naturally low genetic variation. Beavers, interestingly, have no variability in MHC genes - ones responsible for the very immune system protecting against diseases.

Click to expand...

I don't know about the badger and beaver, but I know a lot of people who would say that cheetahs aren't exactly a healthy species. I know they have some problems health wise.

As for genetic variation, it really depends on what you start out with before a bottleneck. Low populations that experience a large decrease over a single generation will lose a lot of information. That's just how it works. Anyhow, the IBWP bottleneck would have been multiple generations now since it most likely started in the early 1900s when all the old growth was cut.

thatmagicguy said:

,,,,but on the other hand,,wouldn't it be interesting if some exotic bird was released into the area and is being mistaken for a woodpecker?

Click to expand...

That would be interesting.

Fishing4clues, I'm curious. Was the bird clinging to the cypress tree, and otherwise behaving like a woodpecker?

thatmagicguy said:

It is a bad description,,not bad in the sense of what is being described but it is not being described in clear terms,,,,example, " wings were black at the top, the top middle was saltand pepper streaked that looked basically grey and the bottom of the feathers was white all except the pin-feathers which were black." I've read and re-read this and my head hurts,,and it is not Fishing4Clues fault,,not everyone is a trained or experienced writer of observations. It could be a juvenile IBWP that hasn't developed proper colors,,,,but on the other hand,,wouldn't it be interesting if some exotic bird was released into the area and is being mistaken for a woodpecker? I'm lost on the "spungy grissle looking mass",,,,a waddle perhaps? Mynah species? Blue legs? One thing that I have learned here in florida on my search for the bird is to not dismiss laymens' observations,,,they haven't been jaded by preconceived expectations and therefore are sometimes the best observers even when they cannot put their observations into words that are easy to decipher,,,,I'm perplexed and fascinated by this observation. Bill

Click to expand...

thank you bill, I was told it was a juvenille. I know it's not really clear on my description. I was in a hurry and I don't know all the terminology. I am not a birder per say. I am just an ordinary person. Just wanting to know what I had seen on a fishing trip The reason I know it was a woodpecker is simple My father-in-law asked me...Is it pecking on the tree? I said yes and he said that it is a woodpecker. I couldn't have phrased it better myself. I just didn't know what kind of woodpecker. It was throwing down little splinters of wood that was landing right beside my foot. I'm sorry if I sounded rude last time but I was in a hurry....sorry The spungy grizzly thing I was told was the thing that keeps him from beating his head in when he is pecking on the wood

Pileated_MO said:

That would be interesting.

Fishing4clues, I'm curious. Was the bird clinging to the cypress tree, and otherwise behaving like a woodpecker?

Click to expand...

yes it was and it stayed there for appx. 10 min. It was very close to the tree it's chest was almost touching the tree. It hopped toward me 1 hop. Clung to the tree in a diagnal perch at a 5:00 position looked at me and I closed my eyes and lowered my head it stayed for about 15 seconds more and took off in exactly the same direction that it had came from. It flew in a straight pattern not zigzag. During the 10 min stay I observed it tearing the bark. Doing the call and had enough time to see what the body looked like. In flight and while on the tree.

Your story intrigues me and has some interesting significance. You were introduced to Gene Sparling in Jan of 2000? Gene was introduced to the world as an unwhitting observer who happened upon the bird while on a kayaking trip. He posted his observation on a kayaking board and didn't make a big deal about it,,it was forwarded to Mary Scott who passed on the info to Tim Gallagher. If you met him in 2000, and you can correct me if I'm wrong,,this means he DID have prior knowledge of the bird and his kayaking trip may have had more significance than he let on. If this part is true then I am mad. I really try to trust people who are "in charge" but there seems to be more to this story than we're being told. This is why so many people DON'T report their sightings,,,

If your story is true,,(I hope it is), then it must be an interesting feeling to know in your own mind that the bird exists,,and that you saw a juvenile which means it is reproducing. But my question is,,,why hasn't your sighting been included in the literature? And how did you come to meet Sparling in 2000? Was he indeed looking for the bird at that point? It's obviously before he had his own sighting.

Please fill us(me) in,,,I really would like to know what is going on? Bill

"

On the top of his beak there was a spungy grissle looking mass that was a little off-white but a definate different color than the beak itself."

Click to expand...

Looking at the National Geographic field guide there is a small cluster of off white "feathers" where the beak joins the head, and only on top. As for the blue legs? fishing4clues how many toes were there?

I was also intrigued by the fact that Fishing4Clues said Sparling was out looking for the IBWP after they had a discussion. As thatmagicguy said, Sparling has been presented as someone who didn't think his sighting was anything special outside of the fact that he hadn't seen the bird. Tim Gallagher even put all of that in The Grail Bird and kind of made it seem like Sparling wasn't particularly a birder. I'm sorry to say, but the more things Fishing4Clues says, the less I am believing them.

cts said:

" Looking at the National Geographic field guide there is a small cluster of off white "feathers" where the beak joins the head, and only on top. As for the blue legs? fishing4clues how many toes were there?

Click to expand...

Gotta remember folks, light can play tricks on color patterns. How many have seen photos of red breasted hummingbirds? I get them all the time from confused observers who do not realize that the light coming off the feeder will create a red tint. On the right background, with the light at the right angle, black feet and legs could apear blue.

Mark
Bastrop, TX