Ivory-billed Woodpecker (formerly updates) (1 Viewer)

[fishcrow]

You do not have to be 'made of the right stuff', you have to be able to get into habitat and have good observation skills. That's it. God (or GAIA) doesn't give you special powers to see something mere mortals can not.

If just anyone can do it, then why have so few been successful? It takes someone who is extremely dedicated and willing to make sacrifices. Such people don't degrade themselves (like you are) by trying to downplay or discredit achievements by others. Instead, we share the joy of their successes and congratulate them.

 

[MMinNY]

Agnostic??? Please. . .I hear the sound of axes a-grindin'

Wow...check out Kenn Kaufman's post on the OH listserv:
http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/OHIO.html#1142434587

Ouch...

 

[HASnyder]

Sibley article now out in Science

David Sibley's commentary on the Luneau video and CLO's reply is now out: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/vol311/issue5767/index.dtl

You need to have a membership to read - maybe it will appear somewhere posted & available.

 

[Billbill]

David Sibley's commentary on the Luneau video and CLO's reply is now out: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/vol311/issue5767/index.dtl

You need to have a membership to read - maybe it will appear somewhere posted & available.

Science is widely available in libraries, though I am not sure what the lag time between date-of-issue and magazine-on-shelf usually is. Only one page for both... wonder if there is anything there in either paper that we've not already heard.

 

[timeshadowed]

Science is widely available in libraries, though I am not sure what the lag time between date-of-issue and magazine-on-shelf usually is. Only one page for both... wonder if there is anything there in either paper that we've not already heard.

Libraries also have access to online publications. It's worth a try.

TimeShadowed

 

[slobyn]

Science is widely available in libraries, though I am not sure what the lag time between date-of-issue and magazine-on-shelf usually is. Only one page for both... wonder if there is anything there in either paper that we've not already heard.

Yes, one page for both comments looks very brief. I guess that the bulk of the analysis may be found in the the supporting on-line materials, and that what is in the printed journal is just a brief summary.

 

[HASnyder]

Back when I took the print version, it landed in the mailbox a day or two after publication. Science and Nature are like Time and Newsweek in that they strive for very timely delivery of their publications, once pub. date is reached.

 

[SBauer]

I'd still check out http://www.sciencemag.org/sciencexpress/recent.dtl tomorrow (Thursday, 16 Mar). My sources have indicated that there will be an accessible online version showing up there. Could be wrong, but...

 

[Edward woodwood]

If just anyone can do it, then why have so few been successful? It takes someone who is extremely dedicated and willing to make sacrifices. Such people don't degrade themselves (like you are) by trying to downplay or discredit achievements by others. Instead, we share the joy of their successes and congratulate them.

quite Mike

as i understand it you have a very good track record of finding very unusual birds. I won't post a list of them here.

any of them been accepted by the relevant committees?

Tim

 

[Edward woodwood]

Kenn Kaufman posted this today on the Ohio-birds listserve

The reported rediscovery of Ivory-billed Woodpeckers in Arkansas has been mentioned on ohio-birds many times over the last 11 months, which suggests that this is an acceptable topic for this forum.

Last month in Ecuador we caught up with a related species, the Powerful Woodpecker (Campephilus pollens). I'd missed it on previous trips to South America -- not surprisingly, since it's rather rare. In The Birds of Ecuador, Vol. 1, Robert Ridgely says that it's "rare to uncommon and perhaps local." In Vol. 2, he expands on this to say that its habits are "similar to other Campephilus woodpeckers, though Powerful's home range seems exceptionally large and as a result the species is encountered only infrequently." We found a family group in forest on the east slope. The birds were wary, as one would expect with a large woodpecker, and they were in dense forest, but we were able to follow them at a respectful distance for a long time, and Kim even got decent photos with her small digital camera.

The encounter got me to thinking about our North American species of Campephilus, and I went back and reread Roger Tory Peterson's account of seeing the Ivory-bill in 1942. (This was in RTP's wonderful book, Birds Over America, published in 1948.) He had sought the bird in South Carolina on the basis of rumors there in the 1930s, but finally he went to the Singer Tract in Louisiana, the last place where there were still known to be any living Ivory-bills (two adult females had been seen there a few months earlier). The Singer Tract was big, 80,000 acres, and there were no stakeouts such as roost sites, so Peterson and his companions knew it wouldn't be easy. It wasn't: it took them a whole day and a half to find the birds. Once they found them, though, they were able to follow them for almost an hour.

Now, about these freakishly elusive, supernaturally un-photographable birds in Arkansas... Once you look at the only "proof," the famous four-second video, and realize that it actually shows a Pileated Woodpecker, you have to wonder: What's really going on there?

Kenn Kaufman
Rocky Ridge, Ohio

 

[humminbird]

Kenn Kaufman posted this today on the Ohio-birds listserve

The reported rediscovery of Ivory-billed Woodpeckers in Arkansas has been mentioned on ohio-birds many times over the last 11 months, which suggests that this is an acceptable topic for this forum.

Last month in Ecuador we caught up with a related species, the Powerful Woodpecker (Campephilus pollens). I'd missed it on previous trips to South America -- not surprisingly, since it's rather rare. In The Birds of Ecuador, Vol. 1, Robert Ridgely says that it's "rare to uncommon and perhaps local." In Vol. 2, he expands on this to say that its habits are "similar to other Campephilus woodpeckers, though Powerful's home range seems exceptionally large and as a result the species is encountered only infrequently." We found a family group in forest on the east slope. The birds were wary, as one would expect with a large woodpecker, and they were in dense forest, but we were able to follow them at a respectful distance for a long time, and Kim even got decent photos with her small digital camera.

The encounter got me to thinking about our North American species of Campephilus, and I went back and reread Roger Tory Peterson's account of seeing the Ivory-bill in 1942. (This was in RTP's wonderful book, Birds Over America, published in 1948.) He had sought the bird in South Carolina on the basis of rumors there in the 1930s, but finally he went to the Singer Tract in Louisiana, the last place where there were still known to be any living Ivory-bills (two adult females had been seen there a few months earlier). The Singer Tract was big, 80,000 acres, and there were no stakeouts such as roost sites, so Peterson and his companions knew it wouldn't be easy. It wasn't: it took them a whole day and a half to find the birds. Once they found them, though, they were able to follow them for almost an hour.

Now, about these freakishly elusive, supernaturally un-photographable birds in Arkansas... Once you look at the only "proof," the famous four-second video, and realize that it actually shows a Pileated Woodpecker, you have to wonder: What's really going on there?

Kenn Kaufman
Rocky Ridge, Ohio

Read the %$## thread! We already had that and it has already been responded to!

 

[Edward woodwood]

my apologies

it didn't come up in my new posts when i logged on. I'm grabbing minutes at school as and when i can... it happens sometimes. Don't overreact.

and don't swear at me please, whatever your name is

 

[Xenospiza]

It was linked to in post #3545 or so, and axed by Mike because Kenn never saw an Ivorybill. Sibley(who never saw an Ivorybill either)'s article is not on-line yet (unless you can read embargo'ed articles).

 

[Strandman]

It was linked to in post #3545 or so, and axed by Mike because Kenn never saw an Ivorybill. Sibley(who never saw an Ivorybill either)'s article is not on-line yet (unless you can read embargo'ed articles).

Do you know when the embargo comes off? I'm getting itchy fingers..

 

[Xenospiza]

Just looked it up:
No news coverage of your paper can appear anywhere before 2:00 p.m. Eastern U.S. Time on the Thursday before your paper's publication. (Science is published each Friday, except for the last Friday of the calendar year.)
So that's 7:00 pm GMT! Back to work....

 

[Strandman]

Science is usually on-line somewhere on Thursday afternoon – maybe we should wait till 15:00 GMT or so? (probably early morning EST?) I just reload the page now-and-again...

hey ho I might have to do some work for an hour or two I guess..

[We cross-posted. I see we might have to work for a number of hours..]

 

[Billbill]

as i understand it you have a very good track record of finding very unusual birds. I won't post a list of them here.

any of them been accepted by the relevant committees?

You're insinuating. Care to provide some specifics, or just stick to innuendo?

 

[Blackstart]

Read the %$## thread! We already had that and it has already been responded to!

Cinclodes comments on Kaufman's comments: Kaufmann's comments on this species, which he has never seen, are ignorant and naive. He just flat-out doesn't know what he's talking about.

One of America's most eminent field birders is ignorant and naive? How many bird books do the people here on this thread have to their credit?

Adam

 

[olivacea]

BTW IBO_Agnostic and Olivacea, what are your real names? How much time have you spent in suitable IBWO habitat that you can say with such confidence that they are gone or that you can discredit Mikes observations so much? I'm done ranting now...

First... No, I do not feel any obligation to give my real name. Has any person who is a supporter of Clinclodes and who uses a screen name been asked to reveal their identity? No.

Second... Yes, I have spent many hours in the field in areas that have received prominent mention as possible Ivory-billed habitat, and were the location of sightings in the 1950s. No, I have not seen or heard anything that could have been an Ivory-billed.

Third... I have never stated that they are gone. I have said on several posts that I hope that they are still extant. I am just not convinced by any tangible evidence that I have seen or heard so far.

Anonymously Foolish...
olivacea

 

[Edward woodwood]

You're insinuating. Care to provide some specifics, or just stick to innuendo?

I can do it in a PM to you if you wish

I don't want to wash dirty linen in public

Tim