• 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.

Ivory-billed Woodpecker (formerly updates) (8 Viewers)

cinclodes said:
It's tempting to do some searching during the summer, but the odds of success are very slim. Even after the end of February, I only had a few possible sightings. I will return in the fall.

This week there was a thousand plus acre burn near Fakahatchee in a WLMA where Red Cocs. are known and remote enough that only helicopters could try to suppress the fire.

When should this area be searched?

I would think that burns would present great summer time viewing, though very uncomfortable.
 
Last edited:
naples said:
This week there was a thousand plus acre burn near Fakahatchee in a WLMA where Red Cocs. are known and remote enough that only helicopters could try to suppress the fire.

When should this area be searched?

I would think that burns would present great summer time viewing, though very uncomfortable.
The place in Mississippi that I visited on Monday had some burned pines that had a ton of suspicious looking bark scaling. This was near the location of the sighting from a few weeks ago. I'm not sure how long it takes a burned area to become prime for foraging. To be honest, the foraging aspect of this problem is not my area of expertise. A few things that I found in the Pearl got me excited initially, but then I realized that it was pileated work. It's good to hear that you're searching in Florida. I've been dying to do some serious searching down there. I grew up in the swamps near the Hillsborough River. A friend of mine saw an ivorybill along the upper reaches of that river about 50 years ago.
 
Hi Tim,

I guess curnir's point was that there were two authoritative statements and one was clearly wrong. However I dont consider the church to be an authority on anything. Anyway, in the IBWO case I don't think the Luneau film clearly shows either. Same with Mike's video.




Tim Allwood said:
Earth goes around Sun

no opinion about it

your point being what?

i'll take my movement of heavenly bodies from astronomers thank you... never really trusted the religeous nutters when it came to that discipline

Tim
 
Because comparing blurry still frames has little or no meaning. The differences in flight pattern and wing beat frequency are (in this persons opinion) the important variables to consider.
 
Snowy1 said:
quoting Piltdownwoman:

"get a better camera and sound recording equipment - or your searches are doomed. You say you got these birds calling all the time, flying over your head etc etc etc - get a better photo!"

Piltdownwoman, you say that you have been in the field. From the comment above, I begin to wonder. Do you have any idea what Mike went through to get the video he did, regardless of the quality? If not, I strongly suggest you read his comments earlier in the thread when he was in the field. What you are asking is easier said than done and even though I've never met Mike, I have to defend the guy in some fashion from a continuous, undeserving bashing.

For anyone who has done any real searching for the Ivorybill (and by real searching I don't mean driving refuge roads) you'll know that obtaining a video in that type of habitat is very difficult. Obtaining a video of an Ivorybill may take years. Plain and simple. For the armchair Ivorybillers on this thread to essentially say: "take your videos and take a hike" well, is just not good enough and not acceptable. That type of talk is just not constructive.

The same goes for the Nolin videos. Here's a guy who spends days/weeks attempting to recreate the flight pattern of the IBWO in the Luneau video and because some of his birds are slightly higher or flying slightly faster he receives comments such as "go take another video and bring your shotgun to alter the flight paths" or some rediculous comment along those lines.

If the work people are doing to attempt to resolve this situation is not good enough for some, then I ask those people to go out and do the work themselves and submit "better" work. I challenge you - see what you can do!

I am not bashing the guy. Look his posts, which I have read and I have even read his website, they indicate that he had multiple sightings with a bird many people think is, at best, the rarest bird in North America, and at worst extinct. Can we agree on that at least?

Next, there is no widely accepted documentation that this species is extant. Can we agree on that?

That said, if you publish a web site with reports of multiple sightings, none of which are seen by anyone else, you can expect to be met with skepticism at best. This just isn't good enough to make the claim of IBWO. If there was really an opportunity to see these birds multiple times it needed to be taken more seriously - not one guy out in a secret location with a leaky kayak and some bad recording equipment. Why no help at the scene? If it is federal land, why no feds involved? Why is no one there now?

Bad information on one person's part does not require that anyone else drop what they are doing, say working with Endangered Species, to dash off and disprove the work. So the "oh just go do it yourself" argument is not valid.

I really think one of the diservices that was done by the "acceptance" of the Luneau video was to significantly lower the bar of what is an acceptable record of a rare bird. These vidos are worse and are posted in an edited form.

Also, this - "we can't search in the summer" paradigm is really silly. Both CLO and the poster are claiming multiple IVORY-BILLED WOODPECKER sightings everyone! Hello - EXTINCT BIRD! They should be out there 24/7/365 until they can prove it!

The statement from the poster was that there had been no critique - I was explaining a few reasons why - not bashing. The videos of the PIWO at the feeder are really interesting and valuable. We need more of this. Go to ID Frontiers to see that people are taking those videos seriously.

I have lugged enough junk around field sites for 25 years to know that it is a pain in the neck, I've managed grants and people in very remote places. Somtimes you make mistakes - lens cover on, forget to measure the air temperature, dump the kayak, leave your pencil at home. But ususally, after a little while, it does come together and you document what is there. Sometimes what you document is that you were wrong. CLO documented that there are PIWOs in their study sites, Fishcrow has documented that there are edited videos of what appear to be PIWO at his site.

To paraphrase - the more prepared you are the luckier you are.
 
You're creating a catch-22. You say you aren't bashing Mike, but you seem to be blaming him for the lack of follow-up on his report. If such reports are perenially greeted with "skepticism at best"; why should anyone follow up on them? This has been a serious problem for decades. Presumptions about extinction have led to the out-of-hand dismissal of many sightings that, at the very least, deserved to be thoroughly investigated.

You decry the fact that there aren't more people out there searching "24/7/365", but I get the distinct impression from your posts that you believe it's a waste of time and money to do so. You can't have it both ways. Mike has been out there searching hard, for months at a stretch, on his own dime. It's absurd to suggest that he should be doing more.



Piltdownwoman said:
I am not bashing the guy. Look his posts, which I have read and I have even read his website, they indicate that he had multiple sightings with a bird many people think is, at best, the rarest bird in North America, and at worst extinct. Can we agree on that at least?

Next, there is no widely accepted documentation that this species is extant. Can we agree on that?

That said, if you publish a web site with reports of multiple sightings, none of which are seen by anyone else, you can expect to be met with skepticism at best. This just isn't good enough to make the claim of IBWO. If there was really an opportunity to see these birds multiple times it needed to be taken more seriously - not one guy out in a secret location with a leaky kayak and some bad recording equipment. Why no help at the scene? If it is federal land, why no feds involved? Why is no one there now?



Also, this - "we can't search in the summer" paradigm is really silly. Both CLO and the poster are claiming multiple IVORY-BILLED WOODPECKER sightings everyone! Hello - EXTINCT BIRD! They should be out there 24/7/365 until they can prove it!
 
Last edited:
Piltdownwoman said:
I am not bashing the guy...
Well, it's about time! Someone with all the answers has finally come along. Please get out there immediately and put all this wisdom to work. Get that beautiful video that Cornell has been trying to get for three years and that many others tried to get this year. Since summer searching is so easy and you're such a genius, I'm sure we can expect to see it by the end of the month.
 
We all know that Ivory bills are extinct. For those who want to prove the point its been proven please don't belabor the point. We are all wrong or stupid, or worse.

For all of you who want us to be out 7 days a week feel free to send the check to cover the costs. You can email me directly for an address. I expect to receive no less than $10,000 from you by the end of the week. After all, we have to buy the equipment you demand as well and we are not on grant money here. Unless we receive your check, well, we will only be able to work when we can, and buy the equipment we can afford. If this isn't good enough for you the answer is right in your own hands. WRITE THAT CHECK!! I am up to about $10,000 in my own funds spent on this project. You should be willing to match that amount. (this is not a real solicitation for funds, but mere rhetoric).

As for the real folks out there the summer is a better time to search areas with high, heavy canopy cover. This, at least up north, results in easier access (as opposed to other places with less canopy cover) as there is less ground cover, ivy, etc. to contend with. It's easier in the winter, but in the summer these places can be searched. Other places this may not work as well esp down in the deep south. I have been in some cypress swamps where there is water and it is quite easy to penetrate - other than the fact of the water and muck. Other places the ground cover is too thick to do much with, and still other places look impenetrable but really aren't too bad once you get past the opening "wall" of green.

Ground cover is a bit of a problem still as you usually are not able to see as well. I use a walking stick to try and clear a path so that I scare off any unfriendlies prior to walking into an area. I almost stepped on a snake the other day. I got lucky.

Remember, there are many losers out there for whom it is easier to sit back and whine, complain, and moan about the work every one else is doing than to actually get off their backside and get out there. Don't let these people get you down.
 
Last edited:
cinclodes said:
Well, it's about time! Someone with all the answers has finally come along. Please get out there immediately and put all this wisdom to work. Get that beautiful video that Cornell has been trying to get for three years and that many others tried to get this year. Since summer searching is so easy and you're such a genius, I'm sure we can expect to see it by the end of the month.

Whoa there fella, calm down. I think Cornell got the video, unfortunately like all of their of their videos, it is of a PIWO.

Your challenge was to have someone tell you why no one had reviewed your video. I suggest you put up the entire video for people to review, not edited sections. I suggest that if you have found an extinct bird, and the same for CLO, that you keep looking until you get some real photos or video.

Don't shoot me. I'm just the messenger.

While the genius thing is sure flattering, you don't have to be so kind. Let me know how ou feel when the meds kick in.
 
MMinNY said:
You're creating a catch-22. You say you aren't bashing Mike, but you seem to be blaming him for the lack of follow-up on his report. If such reports are perenially greeted with "skepticism at best"; why should anyone follow up on them? This has been a serious problem for decades. Presumptions about extinction have led to the out-of-hand dismissal of many sightings that, at the very least, deserved to be thoroughly investigated.

You decry the fact that there aren't more people out there searching "24/7/365", but I get the distinct impression from your posts that you believe it's a waste of time and money to do so. You can't have it both ways. Mike has been out there searching hard, for months at a stretch, on his own dime. It's absurd to suggest that he should be doing more.

I'm not bashing him as clearly as he is bashing me!

I'm not blaming him for other people not following-up on his report either. I was just saying that to be taken seriously he should post the entire unedited video, and think about a publication. I applaude people for tracking down these reports, but without identifiable photos the possibility that this bird is extant grows dimmer every day. It is not a waste of time or money to search, and you shouldn't read that into my posts.

Given the scenario described on the web site and in posts (multiple birds seen over and over, calling birds, etc) the quality of the evidence makes me really uneasy.

Do you really think it is absurd to suggest that if a person has found found a spot where there were multiple IBWO flying around, calling, etc (as he claims) that he should return to get evidence? Rewind to what you thought about this bird 3 years ago - the absurd thing is to leave the spot, not to stay.
 
He stayed as long as he could. And if you have actually read his posts in detail, you should know he lost track of the birds after making a concerted effort to re-locate them.


Piltdownwoman said:
I'm not bashing him as clearly as he is bashing me!

I'm not blaming him for other people not following-up on his report either. I was just saying that to be taken seriously he should post the entire unedited video, and think about a publication. I applaude people for tracking down these reports, but without identifiable photos the possibility that this bird is extant grows dimmer every day. It is not a waste of time or money to search, and you shouldn't read that into my posts.

Given the scenario described on the web site and in posts (multiple birds seen over and over, calling birds, etc) the quality of the evidence makes me really uneasy.

Do you really think it is absurd to suggest that if a person has found found a spot where there were multiple IBWO flying around, calling, etc (as he claims) that he should return to get evidence? Rewind to what you thought about this bird 3 years ago - the absurd thing is to leave the spot, not to stay.
 
Last edited:
MMinNY said:
He stayed as long as he could. And if you have actually read his posts in detail, you would know he lost track of the birds after making a concerted effort to re-locate them.

I have read them, I especially like the last possible sighting:

4-4-06. I didn't notice any field marks, but the size, shape, and wingbeats were right. This bird flew over the treetops from left to right at a fast pace.

Fishcrow, when will you post an unedited video capture?
 
IBWO_Agnostic said:
Can someone that believes the Luneau video is an IBWO try to explain to me what the yellow arrows are pointing to in the two attached pictures? This has always been troubling to me.

Bueller.........? Bueller.............? Bueller..............?
 
The Wilson Bulletin article says: "Campephilus principalis. Ivory-billed Woodpecker. In Florida this splendid Woodpecker is now confined to the wildest and remotest swamps. Far down in the Big Cypress I had the good fortune to see and hear it, the reward of hours of laborious wading. It is readily distinguishable from the Pileated Woodpecker in flight by the large amount of white on the wings."

So, he didn't get a photo or video, and all he saw was the white on the wings. Hmm. Seems we've heard that one before. How do we know it wasn't just a "bog standard" Pileated? I'd say this observation is inadmissible.
 
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