True Johnny. It depends on the scenario. I would come back with there are many people who SAY that but pound for pound, same time in the field, same good areas, produce significantly less.
Yes inland areas don't get as much as coastal areas. (they might get a few more quacks). But the point is...if you have a high British/Irish list, but a low finds list, then it shows that you spent your time twitching the birds rather than hunting your own.
The time issue. You clearly had the time to twitch all these birds. Which in britain, means a far more extensive effort that Ireland, going to shetland and scillies etc.
For everyday you went for a tick, or a bird for your county or whatever, that was a day you could have spent looking for your own birds.
You don't even need to stay inland if that is where you are settled. You would go to norfolk or spurn at the drop of a hat if there was a british tick.
Why not go for a day or weekend if the weather looks promising?
On that basis I don't buy into the "poor me I'm in a birding wasteland" excuse.
Most people I know in birding wastelands get themselves to the coast every chance they get anyway.
Owen
Hi Owen,
this can't be right. You've made a few points and I'll answer each one:
"
True Johnny. It depends on the scenario. I would come back with there are many people who SAY that but pound for pound, same time in the field, same good areas, produce significantly less."
Where is your evidence for this ?
"
Yes inland areas don't get as much as coastal areas. (they might get a few more quacks). But the point is...if you have a high British/Irish list, but a low finds list, then it shows that you spent your time twitching the birds rather than hunting your own."
Disagree. It shows that you spend
some of your time twitching rather than free birding. It certainly doesn't mean that you spend little or no time free birding (it certainly wouldn't for me).
"
The time issue. You clearly had the time to twitch all these birds. Which in britain, means a far more extensive effort that Ireland, going to shetland and scillies etc."
This, of course, doesn't mean that one has little or no time for free birding or puts in no time free birding.
"
For everyday you went for a tick, or a bird for your county or whatever, that was a day you could have spent looking for your own birds."
Again, one still has plenty of time for free birding (and when you twitch a bird it's possible to bird in the area you find yourself in, as I have done this year on the few occasions I've travelled).
"
You don't even need to stay inland if that is where you are settled. You would go to norfolk or spurn at the drop of a hat if there was a british tick.
Why not go for a day or weekend if the weather looks promising?"
But you're assuming I want to go to free birding in these birding 'hotspots' and I don't. My point was that it's easier to find scarce and rare birds at these locations, not that I personally want to find more. If I did, I'd have moved to one of these places long ago.
"
On that basis I don't buy into the "poor me I'm in a birding wasteland" excuse."
You have misread previous posts. I do not request sympathy, I choose to bird where I bird and am happy to do so. My point is that there are some who crow about all the good finds they make, when, all things being equal (such as birding ability, time spent in the field etc), geographical location has a great deal to do with it. This is obvious.
"
Most people I know in birding wastelands get themselves to the coast every chance they get anyway."
Well I don't and I'd say most of the birders in my area don't, but maybe you're nearer the coast.
Johnny
