bitterntwisted
Graham Howard Shortt
Went IBWO searching in a boat called "Dignity". Sank, inevitably.
Ricky Ross (It's all linked, you see)
-
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.
Ivory-billed Woodpecker (formerly updates) (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter KC Foggin
- Start date
Went IBWO searching in a boat called "Dignity". Sank, inevitably.
Ricky Ross (It's all linked, you see)
I was in public interest law, policy work not litigation, some environmental issues but mostly human rights. . .left for something entirely different, non-legal, and not at all corporate (I keep my license up but don't practice). . .not a lot of money in what I'm doing now either. So in my case, no.
John Mariani
Well-known member
Jane Turner
Well-known member
I shed the corporate toolishness 7 about years ago to be a self-employed tool.
Last edited:
Mike Johnston
Well-known member
According to Birdwatch there is an article in the Wilson Journal of Ornithology claiming that the double raps are perhaps being confused with the wing collisions of Gadwall.
http://birdwatchmagazine.blogspot.com/2007/06/another-nail-in-coffin-for-ivory-billed.html
http://birdwatchmagazine.blogspot.com/2007/06/another-nail-in-coffin-for-ivory-billed.html
pcoin
Well-known member
Duck double-raps
Good link. There was also a brief discussion of this a few pages back--not to blame, it is hard to navigate through this thread! See these posts: 1 and 2.
In post (2) above, I did note this had actually been discussed in detail by Cornell in their 2005-06 report, made available over a year ago. I believe the Wilson Journal paper is their peer-reviewed version. Very clever--one mistake, two papers! (As a former academic researcher, I admire that!)
Good link. There was also a brief discussion of this a few pages back--not to blame, it is hard to navigate through this thread! See these posts: 1 and 2.
In post (2) above, I did note this had actually been discussed in detail by Cornell in their 2005-06 report, made available over a year ago. I believe the Wilson Journal paper is their peer-reviewed version. Very clever--one mistake, two papers! (As a former academic researcher, I admire that!)
Ilya Maclean
charlatan
lewis20126
Well-known member
red-headed woodpecker?
Ilya Maclean
charlatan
It is indeed. Gave me a bit of a jump when I first saw it and demonstrated to me, based on a short view, just how easy it is to see IBWOs where they aren't. Actually, the reason I posted the photo was the cavity size. From the Auburn website:
“Many of the cavities that we measured had entrance holes that were outside the size range recorded for the cavities of Pileated Woodpeckers and within the range of nest cavities of Ivory-billed Woodpeckers recorded in the Singer Tract of Louisiana in the 1930s. The vertical dimension of the entrances of twenty of the cavities that we measured exceeded 12.7 cm (5 inches), and the width of 67 cavities exceeded 10.2 cm (4 inches).”
Based on known sizes of Red-headed woodpeckers, I’d say that hole exceeds or approaches closely the kind of size, supposedly ruling out Pileated. I just wanted to show that even small woodpeckers use big holes. I suppose there’s no guarantee the red-headed in the photo made that hole, but if their happy to use them, surely they’d be happy to make them.
Edit: also the only remote camera photo I could track down of a woodpecker around one of the more "promising holes". Both Cornell and Auburn, seem to be ominously quiet about what they capture around those holes.
“Many of the cavities that we measured had entrance holes that were outside the size range recorded for the cavities of Pileated Woodpeckers and within the range of nest cavities of Ivory-billed Woodpeckers recorded in the Singer Tract of Louisiana in the 1930s. The vertical dimension of the entrances of twenty of the cavities that we measured exceeded 12.7 cm (5 inches), and the width of 67 cavities exceeded 10.2 cm (4 inches).”
Based on known sizes of Red-headed woodpeckers, I’d say that hole exceeds or approaches closely the kind of size, supposedly ruling out Pileated. I just wanted to show that even small woodpeckers use big holes. I suppose there’s no guarantee the red-headed in the photo made that hole, but if their happy to use them, surely they’d be happy to make them.
Edit: also the only remote camera photo I could track down of a woodpecker around one of the more "promising holes". Both Cornell and Auburn, seem to be ominously quiet about what they capture around those holes.
Last edited:
Jane Turner
Well-known member
Can someone annotate the pic to tell me what I'm looking at! Stuck in a foreign country squinting at a lap top screen!
Edward woodwood
Member
Left-most tree, half way up, just to the right of the large hole. Definitely not the first Red-headed Woodpecker caught on automated cameras.
On edit: Actually, this may be the first Red-headed Woodpecker caught on automated cameras, since the image was put up on David Luneau's website in February.
Last edited:
humminbird
Well-known member
I don't see how this follows Ilya. I have a pair of Titmice that are on their second clutch of nestlings in my Eastern Screech-owl box this year. They're (not "their") obviously quite happy to use the box with an opening that far exceeds the 1.125 inch opening generally recommended for this species, but I see no evidence that the same species using a bluebird box out back is prepared to excavate the opening to the 5.75 inch square opening of the screech owl box. On what do we base the statement "surely they'd be happy to make them"?
By the way, the id is spot on and no doubt about it.
lewis20126
Well-known member
Phew! There's a pic of a RHWO I took on Long Island at the end of this thread:
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=76783
Truly brilliant birds.
halftwo
Wird Batcher
cyberthrush
Well-known member
Cornell has found nothing significant around their 'promising holes' thus far; Auburn still has 1000's of images left to analyze.
Jane Turner
Well-known member
Looks more like a map of Africa - but thanks!
Ilya Maclean
charlatan
I was waiting for that one. No of course I can't prove the hole wasn't made by an IBWO and being used by the red-headed in the photo, but when we start seeing other woodies around “promising" cavities, hearing ducks that sound like “promising” double-knocks, hearing deer that sound like "promising" kent calls and the Luneau video has been argued as convincingly to be a PIWO as an IBWO, irrespective of relative rarity, you really have to wonder what's left.
Cornell’s back tracking and even members of Auburn's search team don’t believe Rolek’s or Tyler’s sightings. I’m just amazed there are still people out there that do believe it exists.
Last edited:
humminbird
Well-known member
It would certainly be nice to see some follow through on all these "promises".
Similar threads
