Mike Robinson
Well-known member
Dear Phil: thanks. I'm inclined to the view that I saw it too! Mike .....
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Would you tick this sighting of a Little Bittern ? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter senatore
- Start date
Bob Philpott
Well-known member
I have watched this thread with interest and it underlines for me why I won't join any 'How many have got in the UK/England/Wiltshire etc' list. The reason is that you get embroiled in someone else's rules. I see birdwatching / birding / twitching as a personal matter and you make your own decisions.
The one area where I would disagree with this statement is if the end result of that sighting is to go into a Bird Track report / WeBS count or any of the other surveys where others will at some point rely on the sighting.
The one area where I would disagree with this statement is if the end result of that sighting is to go into a Bird Track report / WeBS count or any of the other surveys where others will at some point rely on the sighting.
StevePreddy
Well-known member
No he (or she) wouldn't. The key point for senatore being that he said he wouldn't have been able to identify it himself.
This reminds me of my own Ixobrychus conundrum. I have seen Least Bittern once: very briefly in flight at Cape May - though the only reason I know it was a Least Bittern and not some other Ixobrychus was because of where I was .... to tick or not to tick? I will tell you what I ended up doing, but I'd like to hear what others would have done.
Larry Sweetland
Formerly 'Larry Wheatland'
Interesting point Steve. I'm sure I've got loads of 'range ticks' on my list, many of which are probably only seperable in the hand.
angusmcoatup
Paul
Nah, it's like being told there's a Surf Scoter amongst a flock of a couple of hundred Common Scoters or Green Winged Teal amongst Common Teal. Yes you've likely seen it in the loosest technical way but your brain hasn't registered anything about it to make it memorable or distinctive. Tick it if you want , but as someone has pointed out, if you have to ask then it's not really worth it.
dantheman
Bah humbug
A few years back someone posted on here a flock of Reed Buntings or similar perched in a bush that they wanted confirmation of. It was pointed out that there was also a Yellow Wagtail sitting in the bush.
'Excellent!' they said. 'I can tick Yellow Wagtail as well'.
No they couldn't.
'Excellent!' they said. 'I can tick Yellow Wagtail as well'.
No they couldn't.
Phil Andrews
It's only Rock and Roller but I like it
And that was the basis of my response to Exeat - whilst he couldnt put a name to the Bonaparte's Gull he could clearly identify it as something different to the neighbouring BHGs.
Adam W
Well-known member
Well thats the thing, Yes they could If they wanted to as its their list.
It all depends what you want your list to mean and as somebody already said a list doesnt need to reflect your experiences of a bird or what birding means to you or how much of a 'proper' birder you are, It's simply a list of what you've seen if thats what you want it to be.
If I add a bird to my list it simply means I'm satisfied that I've seen one its not saying I've had wondeful views or i was able to ID it myself or I was able to ID it in the field at the time or I'm a good birder or anything else other than I've seen one,nothing more nothing less.
Pete Mella
Getting there...
Yeah you can, you were just looking for some confirmation you were on the right tracks. I've far, far worse on my list, and would certainly add it in that situation.
And I know this is a bit semantic, but of course you saw it. All anyone arguing otherwise is you couldn't have it added to your tally, on a technicality in the "game" of birding, not that you didn't see it.
To be honest it's just a list really, if you're comfortable having it there go for it. It only matters in the slightest if you start bragging about numbers or competing with others who take it seriously.
Larry Sweetland
Formerly 'Larry Wheatland'
To give an example of Steve's earlier point: I wonder if Eurasian Reed Warblers were seen at the Little Bittern Site that day? If that's what they were. Are you sure you're not just going on range? Having seen and heard several presumed African Reed Warblers in southern Africa this winter, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be confident enough to tell them apart for sure. I guess I'll have to cross 'em both off my life list. Probably forever. :-C
James Lowther
Well-known member
hi larry,
i've ticked loads of stuff on range, it's a reasonable part of the thought process that goes into IDing a bird. Decent (but in strict terms unidentifiable) flight views of wilson's snipe in central america one example. practically every swift sp. i have on my list for another. you'd drive yourself mad otherwise although i admire the rigour of truly observant birders with higher standards.
but i wouldn't tick the OP's little bittern!!
although if he wants to that is fine (as with the yellow wag example above).
but this discussion isn't really about individual choices in ticking species, it's about community standards of what is tickable. And while as we can see community standards aren't 100% clear-cut there are some particularly egregious cases where flouting community standards will inevitably bring a certain degree of distaste from the community. but if you don't care about that then that's no big deal.
cheers,
james
i've ticked loads of stuff on range, it's a reasonable part of the thought process that goes into IDing a bird. Decent (but in strict terms unidentifiable) flight views of wilson's snipe in central america one example. practically every swift sp. i have on my list for another. you'd drive yourself mad otherwise although i admire the rigour of truly observant birders with higher standards.
but i wouldn't tick the OP's little bittern!!
although if he wants to that is fine (as with the yellow wag example above).
but this discussion isn't really about individual choices in ticking species, it's about community standards of what is tickable. And while as we can see community standards aren't 100% clear-cut there are some particularly egregious cases where flouting community standards will inevitably bring a certain degree of distaste from the community. but if you don't care about that then that's no big deal.
cheers,
james
Mike Robinson
Well-known member
Dear Pete: thanks; the reference to not seeing it was badly worded.
dantheman
Bah humbug
Of course, but that's not the same as 'birding' and keeping a list of birds seen/recorded. (Actually I recall they wanted to know what the 'sparrow-like birds' were. They definitely hadn't clocked the different one.). It's a different hobby. (And this isn't newbie-bashing either.)
To take it into a different realm slightly, just say some one was into spotting celebrities, they went to Wimbledon, back home on the telly they saw that some famous person like Edwina Currie was in the front row but they hadn't noticed them at the time - are you saying they would then able to tell all their friends they'd seen Edwina? Methinks not.
The photons pass your retina (or enter it, or something), but you also have to have some kind of conscious brain effort to 'see' the bird concerned.
As James says, it's some kind of community thing, where there aren't hard and fast rules, but some kind of consensus amongst participants of some basic 'rules'. Individuals can still play it how they like in some respects (eg ticking birds on heard only etc), but if you get too silly it stops becoming 'birding' as we know it ...
Adam W
Well-known member
If they'd taken a photo of the person next to her without realising it was her then realised later that she was also in the picture so they must have seen her too then I dont really see why they couldnt say they'd seen her(how on earth did we end up talking about ticking Edwina Currie?:-O)
I do actually agree with all the principles behind what you are saying in terms of what birding is or should be about I've just never thought about it terms of a list reflecting that.
For me a list of birds seen is just that it doesnt say anything about the overall experience or how you came to know you'd seen it,just simply that you have seen it.
I'm sure there's plenty out there with big lists that include lots of birds poorly seen or where they couldnt in all honestly 100% ID themselves at the time or they didnt have a wonderful all round experience but I dont see why their list shouldnt reflect the fact that they have still seen them.
This is exactly my position.
Can't really see how you can get competitive about something where its completely impossible for a third party to validate what people have seen.
Robin Edwards
Well-known member
So, given that what people want to include on their lists is entirely their call, (unless playing by some competitive rules with like-minded listers) where do people stand wanting to tick birds that have been tape-lured and can only be seen in the hand during/after trapping at night?
Now I for one would love to see a Swinhoe's Petrel and for those who have chosen to twitch Fair Isle, good luck and I hope the trip pays dividends.
Personally though, I can't help thinking that if I were on Fair Isle and had seen the bird in question, whilst I would absolutely enjoy the experiance, I don't think I could reconcile adding it to my list. Am I unique in feeling this way?
Now I for one would love to see a Swinhoe's Petrel and for those who have chosen to twitch Fair Isle, good luck and I hope the trip pays dividends.
Personally though, I can't help thinking that if I were on Fair Isle and had seen the bird in question, whilst I would absolutely enjoy the experiance, I don't think I could reconcile adding it to my list. Am I unique in feeling this way?
Regarding the petrel: I would hope to hear it during the night, I would expect to have studied up on the voice of that one and similar species, and I would then add it to my list based on hearing the voice.
I am not sure I would enjoy seeing it being plucked out of a net, but my reaction to that would entirely depend on why the net was there. If it was there only to show the birds to visiting twitchers, then I would not even want to see the bird; if it was there as part of a scientific study (say, putting on and retrieving geolocators) then I would be entirely fine with the presence of the net and with seeing the species caught.
Niels
I am not sure I would enjoy seeing it being plucked out of a net, but my reaction to that would entirely depend on why the net was there. If it was there only to show the birds to visiting twitchers, then I would not even want to see the bird; if it was there as part of a scientific study (say, putting on and retrieving geolocators) then I would be entirely fine with the presence of the net and with seeing the species caught.
Niels
Don't actually list per se, so my answer is a little redundant, but for me to consider a new bird 'seen', I certainly need to see it well enough to identify, but increasingly I also feel the need to see it well enough to 'appreciate' it, i.e. though I would add a fleeting glimpse of a corking species to a trip list or year list, etc, I'd personally hold a grudge against that particular bird until I get to see it properly and I wouldn't feel it 'truly' on my life list.
In my mind, it ain't 'on the list' till it's had a good grilling, plus or minus.
As for the Little Bittern example, a resounding no for me, but couldn't really say I care the monkeys if someone else lists it.
In my mind, it ain't 'on the list' till it's had a good grilling, plus or minus.
As for the Little Bittern example, a resounding no for me, but couldn't really say I care the monkeys if someone else lists it.
