Posted by Doc Martin
Post #5342
OK, let's look at these records in detail with my record-assessment hat on. I'll do it formally as if it were a first for Britain. I don't speak like this really. and I have no particular reason for wanting IBWO to be extinct.
The first sighting (1970) was in the family garden when the observer was still living at home (presumable child/teenager). He had never seen Pileated, and in fact it sounds like it was the first time he had ever looked at a bird. While I'm not doubting that weird shit happens, does that not strike you as a bit unlikely?
Steve replies-I had seen multiple birds up to that time, most consisted of very common birds such as pigeons, house sparrows, cardinals, etc. I was certainly not a birder at the time if that is what you are referring to. Previous to moving to the area where the Ivory-bills where seen, my family lived in a small town. I realize now some populations of Pileateds have adapted to living in towns, but at that time, I had never seen or heard of a Pileated (and coming from a town, rather than the country that was very normal for the date and location). Pileateds were/are still relatively uncommon in the general area that I grew up in (in southern Indiana). The sighting where the ivorybills where seen was (at the time) largely uncut (with some probable virgin) timber.
Second, I know when I started birding I was not able to recall or describe bird plumages accurately. For example, I had my first Little Owl pointed out to me, and I remember every detail of where I was and who I was with, and my notes describe a Little owl, but every detail of my memory paints it as a Barn Owl, clear as day. It *was* a Little Owl but at the time my poor brain had only ever seen pictures of Barn Owl, so that's what I remembered seeing. There's loads of other 'I wonder if it was [rare bird]?' episodes from my early birding days, and I'm absolutely convinced that it is possible, in good faith, to 'remember' seeing an unidentified rarity when you were little and to convince yourself it really was a rarity, when in fact, as we all know, it was much more likely statistically, to have been a common bird. So I would want to see pretty good notes taken at the time before this record was acceptable.
Steve replies-On the first sighting, I could have possibly agreed with you if myself and four others did not make a positive identification with a bird guide in hand (this was stated and explained quite clearly on the website)
I saw this bird,
my brother Ben saw this bird,
my sister Susan saw this bird,
my mother Pearl saw this bird,
my father Patrick saw this bird, all while looking at a field guide with a picture of both a Pileated and an Ivorybill side by side. That is why so many details have been remembered, because we were comparing it to the field guide, not by any means because we were expert birders (we were not). I remember asking my mother why the bird we were looking at had a white stripe going only under its eye, while the one in the book had the white stripe going to and touching the bill (unknown to us at the time, the painting in the field guide had been illustrated incorrectly). I have explained in detail (on the website) a very probable explanation of the pale grey bill color/dark nasal bristle color).
Third, in light of that, there are no field notes presented (although they are referred to).
Steve replies-The first digital illustrations where indeed not created from field note, but from memory and I have stated that some features were clearly remembered, and some features were not clearly remembered.
The second illustration (of bird in flight) is a complete digital recreation of the ACTUAL field notes, including much of the recorded text and flight pattern on the page.
The painting presented was drawn from memory *34* years later and includes very minor plumage and structural details that would not have been recorded or noted by a beginning birdwatcher. The details presented are not consistent with the competence of the observer or the circumstances of the observation.
Steve replies-Again refer to this (previously stated)
On the first sighting, I could have possibly agreed with you if myself and four others did not make a positive identification with a bird guide in had (this was stated and explained quite clearly on the website)
I saw this bird,
my brother Ben saw this bird,
my sister Susan saw this bird,
my mother Pearl saw this bird,
my father Patrick saw this bird, all while looking at a field guide with a picture of both a Pileated and an Ivorybill side by side. That is why so many details have been remembered, because we were comparing it to the field guide, not by any means because we were expert birders (we were not). I remember asking my mother why the bird we were looking at had a white stripe going only under its eye, while the one in the book had the white stripe going to and touching the bill (painting in the field guide had been illustrated incorrectly). I have explained in detail (on the website) a very probable explanation of the pale grey bill color and dark nasal bristle color.
Fourth, the description contains plumage and bare part details that are absolutely wrong for IBWO.
Steve replies-Explain yourself in detail on this........plumage is as consistent as the second sighting of the flying bird at 50+/- feet would allow and perched at 70+/- feet would allow. I have already previously explained (again on web site) that the details of the exact white/black distribution in relation to which secondaries/primaries were involved is subject to question. Tell me who can give an exact description down to the exact feathers on a bird whose wings are in continuous movement, I for one cannot, so I recorded (within 30 minutes) to the best of my abilities.
bare part details that are absolutely wrong for IBWO
Steve replies- I have explained in detail (on the website) a very probable explanation of the pale grey bill color and dark nasal bristle color.
Formally, the record would be rejected, and privately I would think that (in good faith) the observer has inadvertently embellished his memory in the 34 years before doing his paintings.
Steve replies- As explained above, I have admitted (in detail, on website) that the first sighting may have some errors in some areas, other areas of that sighting where recorded accurately (compared against a field guide, again described on website). Many of the details of the first sighting were recorded accurately only because a field guide and four other observers were involved (again-NOT because any of us were expert birders).
Second sighting - recorded at the time of occurrence as accurately as possibly, memory was not an issue here and a field guide was not referred to.
The second record (1978) is a better one, if one ignores the fact that the observer's reputation was a bit shot by the previous flight of fantasy.
Steve replies- I have always tried to be civil in my replies to others, I would appreciate the same from you. Please stick to facts or constructive criticism on discussion, rather than personal opinion/attacks not based on the information at hand. I have explained in full detail why such first sighting details were recorded.
The observer has now been birding for 8 years (good!) and has seen a 'fair few' Pileateds (not good - suggests limited experience - there are surely 1000s Pileateds to every putative IBWO).
Steve replies-Again please stick to the facts, 10 sightings a year of Pileated in this area was pretty good at the time. They certainly are not as plentiful here as in the southern swamps. You are basing your opinion on lack of knowledge of this specific area. I have not had “huge numbers” of Pileated sightings. I have seen probably 500 or less Pileateds in my life time, I know others have seen many more than this. I have examined museum Pileateds and a dead bird in hand (shot with a 22 rifle by an unknown individual). I am familiar with Pileated characteristics.
The sighting was less than 2 minutes (can't be helped) also close to the observer's house (wow! - odd), in flight and perched.
Steve replies-You have taken this out of context. My house was surrounded on three side by woodland, two sides of which were possible virgin timber, this was not someone’s “in town” home here. The second sighting was not in my yard, it was in the woods.
Field notes were taken within 30 minutes of the sighting (just about acceptable) but are not presented.
Steve replies-They were presented, please re-read the website and the above notes. You seem to have chosen to omit much of what was presented on the web page/pdf files.
We are presented with two finished paintings that show more plumage details than could be observed under the circumstances, but are strongly indicative of IBWO.
Steve replies-This was discussed in detail here and on the website, please re-read the website and the above notes. The images are digital creations, not paintings, Those of the second bird in flight are based on the scanned images of the actual old field notes.
Unfortunately, they also contain details (bare part color) that are wrong for IBWO.
Steve replies-This was discussed in detail here and on the website, please re-read the website and the above notes.
If the original field notes were presented, the record might get the benefit of the doubt for an 'average' rarity, but would be probably be rejected if we were assessing it at a level equivalent to a British first.
Steve replies-Details of the original notes for the second sighting were indeed supplied, the pdf showing the flying bird is based largely on those notes. I fail to understand why you have chosen to ignore so much of the data/discussions that was/were presented on the webpage.
-----------------
Steve replies-Should you have any additional questions, I will be glad to answer them. Please read/study/absorb all the information on the web site as it appears that you missed much of its content (I am not saying this to be critical). You cannot begin to imagine the amount of outside grief my sightings have caused me. It would have been so much easier just to keep my mouth shut about these sightings, my life certainly would have been much easier. In knowing what I have truly seen, I just cannot lie by remaining silent. I acknowledge that pale grey bill/dark nasal bristles are not typical of Ivorybills, that is why I presented the very logical staining theory (staining is common in other North American woodpeckers, I have documented it in Downies, Hairies and Red-bellieds, why not Ivorybills?).
If I intended to fake these sightings, don’t you think I would have made them “text book classic”
with stunning white bills,
white nasal bristles,
fast straight “Pintail duck” like flight
rather than based on recording what I truly saw.
very sincerely Steve Sheridan
-------
edition added 7/14/06. Regarding the staining, I have also seen, documented and photographed Downy woodpeckers with chestnut staining (from probable wood tannins) on face and lower neck/throat.
Since chestnut is never one of the colors that normally appear on Downies, would you dismiss these sightings on this bases? At least one of these birds was a female that could be consistently recognized from all other local Downies. The staining was indeed just that, as at other times of the year this female showed normal color.
to discuss/debate it)
