• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

What Would You Do: Someone badly misidentifying birds on a list (1 Viewer)

Zackiedawg

Well-known member
I was hoping to get a general feel for how birders would react to a situation I encountered this weekend. I am mostly a bird photographer, moreso than a pure birder, but having done so for many years and with a few of my local spots that I know well. I frequently come across birders compiling lists of what they spot - some are very knowledgeable and can ID species with high degree of accuracy - others will reach out and ask if they're unsure, even reviewing a shot I took of the bird zoomed in so we can both correctly identify what we saw. I don't think I've ever come across anyone intentionally trying to fudge their list to add species they didn't see - though I suppose like anything else, it exists out there in the world.

However, what I came across this weekend was a couple, both with binoculars, and a list as well as a bird guide book, who were discussing and debating their sightings within earshot of me, and what really struck me was how many species they were getting wrong. Initially, I tried to just stay out of it, but when they misidentified a yellow-rumped warbler I had just photographed, calling it a golden-winged warbler, I offered a correction showing them the photograph...their reaction was not rude or negative, but semi-dismissive - sort of 'thank you, but we're sticking with our ID'. So I went about my business again as it was no real concern to me. I did overhear that they intended to place their list on e-bird. As I moved a little farther down and saw a juvenile common yellowthroat in the reeds, and photographed him, they moved in just beside me and saw the same bird - excitedly both writing down that they'd spotted a Nashville warbler. I didn't intervene this time. Later, a female red-winged blackbird was rooting around in the tall reeds just above the wetlands waterline, and once again the couple came in behind me, declaring to eachother that they could now add a marsh wren to their list. A green heron was recorded as a least bittern. A cooper's hawk became a sharp-shinned hawk. A palm warbler became an orange-crowned warbler. It just kept on going - I decided to stop for a while and let them work their way far down the boardwalk from me, just so I didn't have to keep hearing the wrong identifications.

So - should I have intervened, tried to reason with them, showed them more photos to prove the IDs, or simply ignore it and let it go? I let it go - but then the part that bothers me is seeing e-bird lists which have all these sightings on it, which will mislead many other folks reading those lists and hoping to go find some rarities that were never there.

What would you do?
 
That's an idea. I'm not registered on e-bird myself - I sometimes look at the lists as a reference for parks I'll be visiting, but never posted there myself. I suppose it may be worthwhile to notify them if the IDs are that poor. I do have photos of most of those birds they misidentified, but no proof to e-bird that this was the bird they saw when they recorded their ID.
 
That's an idea. I'm not registered on e-bird myself - I sometimes look at the lists as a reference for parks I'll be visiting, but never posted there myself. I suppose it may be worthwhile to notify them if the IDs are that poor. I do have photos of most of those birds they misidentified, but no proof to e-bird that this was the bird they saw when they recorded their ID.

I’d just forget about it. There must be lots of wrong IDs submitted to ebird, the cost of doing business in relying on unvetted amateurs for data collection. The ebird reviewer will catch anything really anomalous
 
It's always a tricky situation and very often one you have to play by ear judging what the right approach should be to help them towards an accurate identification (or, if you judge it to be the best course, just walk away). Usually, I find people are pleased to have the help of a more knowledgeable birder but every now and again you come across obdurate types. I have found the best approach can simply ask them what features makes them think it is bird "A" but gently counter with features as to why the visible features are a better fit for bird "B". It doesn't always work though. I remember one day at Titchwell going through the waders on the beach and then the ducks at sea with a beginner and telling him what they were and how I knew. He was very pleased but as he turned to leave saw a juv Stonechat and asked me what it was - I told him but he then came back to me and, pointing in his photoguide at the illustration of male Stonechat, told me I was wrong. He wouldn't budge in his opinion. The same day I had a "Goshawk" standing on the saltings pointed out to me by a group of birders which I politely explained - point by point - was a female Sparrowhawk. They became very aggressive, angrily telling me that the leader of the group (not present) had been birding for ten years said it was one and I was therefore wrong. No point in getting angry, I just said 'fine' and started to walk away but was utterly astonished when my usually quiet wife really had a go at them telling them that I really knew my stuff, they ought to listen, I had been birding 40 years, etc! So, in short, there's never a 'right way'! However, I think with the rise of e-bird false IDs are a potential problem although I'd guess if they include highly unlikely birds at well-known sites then their lack of expertise will become apparent.
 
Many thanks - seems my approach was the majority-decision one - to just let it go. I made my kindly initial attempt to explain their first mistaken ID with a photo to help, and was politely rebuffed - so though they were wrong much of the day they were never rude or defensive about it...for me, it wasn't worth escalating to anything more.
Indeed I would imagine there's an accepted percentage of e-bird IDs that are incorrect...and probably they are detected or statistically anomalous and therefore dismissed. I admit I've seen IDs of a rare bird before that I've ignored - it was a single ID, no photographic evidence, etc. When something rare is spotted at one of my local parks, there are usually multiple sightings by different people at different times of day, which tend to make those sightings more believable and more reliable.
 
When something rare is spotted at one of my local parks, there are usually multiple sightings by different people at different times of day, which tend to make those sightings more believable and more reliable.
Usually, anyway! There are known cases of multi-observer delusions 3:)
 
In these camera happy days, the adage is 'Picture or it didn't happen'.
That approach probably reduces the risk of egregious errors involving rarities.
For the rest, I'd agree with fugl, let it go. As he noted, there are lots of bad IDs posted with Ebird, it is inherent in such an uncontrolled data collection system.
More broadly, for many people birding is a casual hobby, a social occasion rather than a search for exact truth.
So it does not matter if they make mistakes, they still get to enjoy nature and the environment. If ever any of them become more seriously interested, they may recognize that there were mistakes made, but it is pointless to attempt to convince people if they believe different. Each individual has their own standards for their lists, so let it be.
 
Many thanks - seems my approach was the majority-decision one - to just let it go. I made my kindly initial attempt to explain their first mistaken ID with a photo to help, and was politely rebuffed - so though they were wrong much of the day they were never rude or defensive about it...for me, it wasn't worth escalating to anything more.

Agree. In my experience, if they aren't receptive to your initial comments, they probably aren't going to be receptive to further attempts. People who are so clueless that they don't realize they are clueless won't accept help readily.

As for eBird, many of their reports will likely be flagged by eBird filters for review, so it should come to the reviewers' attention as a matter of course. eBird made the decision at its inception to be inclusive and not try to deter beginners from submitting reports (presumably on the theory that beginners who get hooked early will become more valuable contributors later). So they likely deal with this kind of thing fairly regularly.
 
I think the biggest problem with ebird isn't likely to be the obviously unlikely species, as these will be picked up by the moderators. The biggest problem is likely to be the deluge of misidentified birds that could feasibly be at the site, but are actually absent or very rare. And once they're noted for the site, this will prompt more and more misidentified records for the site!
 
Some people are not born athletes, equally some are not born birders and sadly will never be much good. That's fair enough as long as they aren't corrupting a data pool that many people refer to, globally and I'm not sure how you address this tbh.

Some people will enjoy being corrected and take on board all they are told, others are arrogant enough to believe that they don't need the help, it's the human condition unfortunately.

Some of you may have noticed that I can be less than politic, in the OP, the situation described, I think if I'd received such a cool reply and knew they were submitting to e.g ebird, I'm not sure I'd have been so polite. If they're conducive to learning, that's fine but I may have suggested too, were they the type to take it on board, that until they become more proficient, they shouldn't submit anything unless verified by a more experienced birder.

Just to say though that I am also more than willing to give help, if I can, to those willing to accept it.


A
 
Last edited:
I agree that it would prompt me to intervene if I overheard the ebird submission thing. Maybe just to gently point out that you're 100% sure that some of their ID's are wrong, so submitting them to ebird would be most unhelpful!
 
I agree that it would prompt me to intervene if I overheard the ebird submission thing. Maybe just to gently point out that you're 100% sure that some of their ID's are wrong, for reasons you're more than happy to explain, so submitting them to ebird would be most unhelpful!
 
It sounds like they were having a great time though!......Isn't that how National and Regional recorders start out tunnel visioned and obdurate? Eventually "some" see light at the end of......;)
 
The circumstances that the OP described are maybe not so problematic, if it is a well-birded site in USA with multiple submissions to eBird then their observations will stand out as outliers. In most of the rest of the world there is either a much lower takeup of eBird, or fewer observers, so then poor IDs are more likely to mislead.
Personally I can't understand people who won't listen to friendly advice from others about ID. Whatever your level of expertise, you are always learning, and can always improve.
 
The circumstances that the OP described are maybe not so problematic, if it is a well-birded site in USA with multiple submissions to eBird then their observations will stand out as outliers. In most of the rest of the world there is either a much lower takeup of eBird, or fewer observers, so then poor IDs are more likely to mislead.
Personally I can't understand people who won't listen to friendly advice from others about ID. Whatever your level of expertise, you are always learning, and can always improve.

I've witnessed multiple ID errors from lazy guides in the years gone by and when I've discreetly mentioned it to a tour participant, they have become fiercly protective of 'their' guide who in their eyes is peerless.

Perhaps that's more a reflection on some of the people who go one fully ecorted tours than it is the norm? They pay a lot of money to be told what they're looking at and just cannot imagine that their guide could make a mistake but, in most cases, they aren't competent enough to challenge the ID and they certainly don't like the idea that a random stranger can know better than their guide.




A
 
Last edited:
Perhaps that's more a reflection on some of the people who go one fully ecorted tours than it is the norm? They pay a lot of money to be told what they're looking at and just cannot imagine that their guide could make a mistake but, in most cases, they aren't competent enough to challenge the ID and they certainly don't like the idea that a random stranger can know better than their guide.

A

Think that is surely spot on, people do get invested in their trip experience enough that it really pains them to have some outsider pop the bubble.

That said, guides will usually point out the salient ID features for one to pick out.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top