Ivory-billed Woodpecker (formerly updates) (21 Viewers)

[fishcrow]

I have been puzzled by the flaps of the bird in my video since the day I obtained it. The flaps are very deep and powerful. Many birders have observed that these flaps are very different from pileated flaps, but there was a dilemma. Classic accounts of ivorybill flight is that it's like a pintail. The bird in my video is clearly not flying like a pintail. So what is going on? Now that it has dawned on me, I feel foolish for not figuring it out sooner. An ivorybill is a massive bird and it has relatively thin wings that don't provide enough lift until the bird reaches a sufficient speed. So it has no choice but to resort to deep flaps at takeoff (unless if swoops downward). I don't know if there are any classic accounts of this, but it is an obvious physiological fact for such a bird. It would have been very interesting if I had seen that bird when it flew to the left, tracked it with the camera, and captured the deep flaps transitioning into pintail-like flaps as the bird gained speed.

 

[Edward woodwood]

I always wrote down my notes the same day, which was usually a few hours later since I mostly searched in the morning and worked later in the day. If I tried to produce field notes, it would definitely not reveal anything about the quality of the sighting since I'm one of the least talented artists in the world.

I'm afraid your comments are very revealing and many people will read a lot in to them... maybe wrongly. I too have made many trips overseas (don't know what you mean by 'extensive' but is two years enough?) but i also know that i can, and do, still make mistakes and need to fully document any rare bird i may encounter

If you want to be taken seriously don't tell us you usually write your notes on the same day, a few hours later... You should be writing them there and then. Any committee member will tell you that any sketch is worth submitting no matter how poor and that a great set of field notes doesn't even need a sketch.

Tim

 

[fishcrow]

If you want to be taken seriously...

The people that really matter do take me seriously. Several of the Cornell folks spent several hours with me. Jerome Jackson and another ornithologist visited me in the Pearl while I was there. Van Remsen sent two of his people over. The fish and wildlife agencies of Louisiana and Mississippi sent their people out to meet with me. Many birders travelled long distances to look for the birds. None of these people asked about field notes. Like me, they apparently realize that field notes don't mean much for a species that you know like the back of your hand.

 

[MMinNY]

Mike has taken an awful lot of bashing (here and elsewhere on the net), and he doesn't deserve it. The recent discussion is an improvement over what went on a few months ago, but I think there's still a subtle casting of aspersions that is unfair and inappropriate.

As the person who was 'selling' Mike's DVD, I want to reiterate that I too did not make a dime. When Mike first obtained the footage and was still in the midst of his search, I offered to help him in any way I could. He asked me to distribute the DVD and suggested I charge $10 for my time and expenses in doing so. As it turned out, I did not come close to covering my costs (for duplication, postage, not to mention my time), but I didn't expect to. . .well, full disclosure, Mike did take my wife and me to dinner when we met him last month, so I suppose that might put me up a few dollars. . .Still, it's unfair to imply that this was a commercial venture.

I also showed the DVD to an "expert" and got another to review the fishcrow.com website. One was convinced, and one was not. Neither would go on record; the IBWO has long been a loaded subject, more so now, and it's unfortunate but not surprising that many people are unwilling to commit themselves. If someone wants to offer an honest, serious, detailed analysis and critique of Mike's footage, that would be welcome. If someone can make a compelling case, on the merits, that Mike's bird is a pileated, let him/her do so. Deriding his footage or rejecting it without analysis serves no one. All of us (Mike included) agree that the quality of the video is poor, but at this point, the worst anyone can say is that it's inconclusive

At the very least, Mike's sightings deserve serious follow-up, which is what he has been seeking all along. I can understand the desire for field notes, but I don't think Mike is particularly interested in records committees. Moreover, I suspect that many of those who doubt him would doubt him even if his field notes were 'perfect'. Mike himself deserves respect and appreciation for his monumental efforts, regardless of whether a person finds his evidence convincing; constructive criticism has its place; patronizing comments and insinuations about his integrity (and mine to a much lesser degree) do not.

 

[timeshadowed]

Mike,

It's good to see you posting again, I missed reading your interesting posts. I am looking forward to being able to read more posts next fall when you will be out searching for the IBWO again.

May I suggest that when you are in the field again, that you 'voice record' a few notes in 'real time' just to humor your critics who are demanding more 'field notes'. You might even enjoy the experience if you made it like a commentary of your thoughts during your time out in the field.

Typical format might be:

1. Description of weather conditions including time of day.
2. Description of any sounds you hear around you - do not limit this to just IBWO.
3. Describe any wildlife that you see along the way - both birds and mammals.
4. Include any random thoughts that seem to just 'pop into your mind' at the time.

Then when you get back to your room/office you can transcribe these 'notes' into more readable 'field notes' for your website. No one needs to ever listen to this 'ruff' recording, unless you want them to, but at least it may put an end to what some of your critics are saying.

ps

I believe you saw IBWO's in LA, so I am not one of your critics. The above remarks are intended only to be of some help, because I don't enjoy reading posts that tend to 'put you down' for your hard work.

TimeShadowed

 

[Edward woodwood]

Mike,


May I suggest that when you are in the field again, that you 'voice record' a few notes in 'real time' just to humor your critics who are demanding more 'field notes'. You might even enjoy the experience if you made it like a commentary of your thoughts during your time out in the field.
d

don't come it mate...

it's standard practice, and if you think it's not, or that it's unecessary to document sightings with notes taken in the field, you are plain wrong. Try telling a rarities committee how you approach the matter if you won't take any advice on it. Don't humour us, just do it how it should be done and is done by 99% of the finders of rare birds, at least over here anyway

try s little test, look at a pic of bird you haven't seen and write notes on it there and then, then try a different species but write the notes tomorrow morning

 

[Curtis Croulet]

What we're hearing here from the twitcher community is contradictory. There's a demand for immediately-taken notes and sketches from Mike, yet, according to Piltdownwoman, only a photo or video will do, and Alwood had his Black-eared Wheateater rejected in spite of having notes and a sketch. Unless he produces a bloody carcass, there's no way Mike can win with the twitchers.

 

[timeshadowed]

What I don't understand is why Piltdownwoman and Allwood are not out there searching for the IBWO themselves since they seem so discontent with the way others are conducting the searches and they have both declared that they have traveled to search for other birds in the past.

TimeShadowed

What we're hearing here from the twitcher community is contradictory.

 

[Edward woodwood]

a) i'm not a twitcher
b) there are no birds there
c) comment about notes was rarities in general, there have been so many stringy IBWO sightings that now people do demand a photo and not bloody suprising is it when Jesse says he knows they are in Illinois this year then we hear nothing more... etc...

d) i don't care how you search but if you see something document it like any half decent birder would...

e) I might have made a mistake with the wheatear

f) er, that's it

 

[humminbird]

What we're hearing here from the twitcher community is contradictory. There's a demand for immediately-taken notes and sketches from Mike, yet, according to Piltdownwoman, only a photo or video will do, and Alwood had his Black-eared Wheateater rejected in spite of having notes and a sketch. Unless he produces a bloody carcass, there's no way Mike can win with the twitchers.

Sadly, I fear you are right Curtis.

 

[humminbird]

a) i'm not a twitcher
b) there are no birds there
c) comment about notes was rarities in general, there have been so many stringy IBWO sightings that now people do demand a photo and not bloody suprising is it when Jesse says he knows they are in Illinois this year then we hear nothing more... etc...

d) i don't care how you search but if you see something document it like any half decent birder would...

e) I might have made a mistake with the wheatear

f) er, that's it

a) then exactly how would you prefer to have yourself referred to?

b) You apparently know more than anyone else who has been willing to comment except Kaufman and Piltdown

c)then GET OFF YOUR DUFF AND GET A PHOTO INSTEAD OF CRITICIZING THOSE WHO DO. I for one know how difficult any wildlife can be to photo and am impressed by what Mike, David and others are doing. It may or may not be an IBWO (personally I am convinced, but I am willing to look at comments from others. So far I have seen nothing that convinces me it is not).

d)Field notes were provided by both Gallagher and Harrison, but that was not good enough for you either. Yes, many people do take notes when they see a rarity, and MANY DO NOT. Without notes, it does call a persons observations into question, but IMHO not nearly to the extent you purport.

e) and on the IBWO

 

[MMinNY]

Are you saying you are convinced the ivory-bill is extinct? That seems to go well beyond what most academic skeptics have contended (I don't know about others such as Tom Nelson); I don't think Piltdownwoman would agree either, based on her most recent post.

If that's really what you believe, then I would be interested in reading a thoughtful and comprehensive explanation of your opinion and how you arrived at it. I'm sure I won't agree, as I've ready made it clear I think such a presumption is unfounded. Nevertheless, you've apparently just embraced an extreme view, in a very casual way; I think you should elaborate. It also makes me wonder about a couple of things: since your mind is made up, why do you waste your time with this forum, and just what would it take to persuade you that you're mistaken? Clearly, better field notes from Mike Collins would not be adequate.

b) there are no birds there

 

[timeshadowed]

b) there are no birds there

Ah, that is the very reason that 'you' need to go out looking for the bird, because only if 'you' see it with your own eyes, will you believe it still exists.

You also need to see for yourself just how hard it is to not only find the bird, but to obtain clear photos as well.

I'm almost certain that if you did go looking, you would find an IBWO!

Are you up for the challenge??

 

[Edward woodwood]

It might be there, i obviously don't know for sure it isn't... but it's mightily difficult to prove a negative isn't it? However, we're inching closer to that proof every day. The Luneau video is dead in the water i reckon.

I post on this thread to counter the twaddle that people might read and think has some backing in the birding world. Discussions on other forums are very different to this one. This appears to be about the only place where people still believe IBWOs are all over the place

Decent field notes from Mike would help of course but if you keep seeing them, don't write field notes on the spot, read too much into blurry videos, have some similar 'issues' regarding records in the past then...

I am very casual, I'm just having fun... while standing behind everything i write

I travel, watch birds, animals, plants, have edited ornthological stuff for OBC - the whole lot, never been big on labels though. We'd never have published that Science travesty though...

Love and Kisses
Tim

 

[colonelboris]

I think I posted this question a while ago, but don't think anyone responded, but what are the chances of finding any in Cuba? I've seen on a few sites that they were once there as well as the US.

 

[Curtis Croulet]

Sadly, I fear you are right Curtis.

An acceptable standard of "proof" will always be just out-of-reach for some people. Neither Mike nor CLO can legally shoot a bird to supply real "proof," and any photo or video they obtain, even if better than what we have so far, is unlikely to be good enough to escape alternate interpretations or allegations of fraud.

Also, I would say that anyone who is obsessed with lists and who needs the validation of a committee to decide if they really saw something or not qualifies as a "twitcher."

 

[Piltdownwoman]

What we're hearing here from the twitcher community is contradictory. There's a demand for immediately-taken notes and sketches from Mike, yet, according to Piltdownwoman, only a photo or video will do, and Alwood had his Black-eared Wheateater rejected in spite of having notes and a sketch. Unless he produces a bloody carcass, there's no way Mike can win with the twitchers.

This claim is such a mega-rarity that only a video and/or photos will do - the same goes for all the other possibly extinct birds. This is not solely for Fishcrow's claim, it is for everyone.

 

[Curtis Croulet]

This claim is such a mega-rarity that only a video and/or photos will do - the same goes for all the other possibly extinct birds. This is not solely for Fishcrow's claim, it is for everyone.

The twitcher demand is for Mike to write better notes, but then he's told he'd be wasting his time if he provided them.

 

[Piltdownwoman]

What I don't understand is why Piltdownwoman and Allwood are not out there searching for the IBWO themselves since they seem so discontent with the way others are conducting the searches and they have both declared that they have traveled to search for other birds in the past.

TimeShadowed

I guess cause I have a job. Why aren't the rest of you there?

All anyone is trying to do here is look at the evidence and see if it eliminates PIWO and if it does, does it fit IBWO. The suggestions of going back out and getting better video was actually made in good faith. It is posted on the web site as an IBWO and by doing that invites comment (I thought that was what this was all about?) .

He says he had multiple sightings, calling birds etc (you are not going to like this)....yet the posted info doesn't seem to support that.The songs on Fishcrow's web site sound like dead ringers for Blue Jays, and the video shows nothhing to rule out IBWO. Maybe the full video will reveal more. But if no one is willing to send this to a record's committee - what is the point?

 

[Piltdownwoman]

The twitcher demand is for Mike to write better notes, but then he's told he'd be wasting his time if he provided them.

Again, on this one, Passenger Pigeon, Eskimo Curlew, or the most recent one to drop out - Bachman's Warbler - you better have a photo/video - or it is the one that got away.