Ivory-Billed Woodpecker continued (1 Viewer)

[ZanderII]

Hi,



That's a good quote to keep in mind, thanks!

What do you think of the following paragraph from the "Ivory-billed Woodpecker (Campephilus principalis) 5-Year Review:
Summary and Evaluation" by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?



The report stems from 2019 and is available at:

https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_year_review/doc6021.pdf

10^-5 doesn't strike me as very promising odds, unfortunately.

Regards,

Henning

Admission of defeat I'd think. I did include links before to some other papers that have looked at the sighting series and calculated persistence probability.

Ivory-Billed Woodpecker continued

Short of a fresh corpse - obviously from a misadventure not a hunt - yes. Anecdotal evidence will not suffice. John I'd appreciate a reply to post 294, if you're willing.

www.birdforum.net

 

[ZanderII]

I am also unaware of egg fidelity. Please explain.

Presumably the searchers believe that IBWO eggs are nomadic which is why they cannot find the nests.

 

[ZanderII]

You posted the ebird graphic to suggest the Pearl is birded well enough that a pair of ivorybills could not go unphotographed. Do you still believe that the ebird data supports your position? If so, explain how 4% annual reporting of pileated is significant. Or withdraw your evidence.

Bottomlands, I don't think your cursory analysis is useful or even vaguely accurate. Sorry. Many of the locations have multiple checklists, for example there are over 1000 checklists for the Pearl River WMA--Honey Island Swamp: hotspot https://ebird.org/hotspot/L370457 alone. Its just not a point-based exercise on the map and many checklists are travelling counts.

 

[ZanderII]

Also unaware that some of the Singer tract IBs were somewhat acclimated by the gameskeeper for a decade plus.

Your case is very weak,,,,actually non-existent. He will try this again and again spouting of his resume here and there when beaten lol. he is looking for some one dumb in the auaudience.

 

[bottomlands]

Bottomlands, I don't think your cursory analysis is useful or even vaguely accurate. Sorry. Many of the locations have multiple checklists, for example there are over 1000 checklists for the Pearl River WMA--Honey Island Swamp: hotspot https://ebird.org/hotspot/L370457 alone. Its just not a point-based exercise on the map and many checklists are travelling counts.

 

[bottomlands]

Well, Z, you're the one who keeps posting ebird links and graphics without any analysis, suggesting it is proof of...something. And the little info you provide is inevitably misleading. For example, this recent statement "for example there are over 1000 checklists for the Pearl River WMA--Honey Island Swamp". You fail to mention the list goes back to 1983. Not an impressive average per year. How about you look at that list, pick a specific year, actually do a little math and give us an analysis. If you're unwilling to do that, then your tiny bit of supposed evidence can be dismissed without further consideration.

I notice you're refusing to answer my question about what a birder in the Pearl is likely to do if he sees what he thinks is IB. Does he report an IB on ebird, report a pileated, report nothing, or something else?

While you're ignoring that one, you will probably ignore this one too: Many of those ebird reports do not even show one pileated, when searching a place teeming with them? Why is that? Hint: It has something to do with whether large woodpeckers are as easy to find as IB skeptics seem to think.

 

[ZanderII]

Well, Z, you're the one who keeps posting ebird links and graphics without any analysis, suggesting it is proof of...something. And the little info you provide is inevitably misleading. For example, this recent statement "for example there are over 1000 checklists for the Pearl River WMA--Honey Island Swamp". You fail to mention the list goes back to 1983. Not an impressive average per year. How about you look at that list, pick a specific year, actually do a little math and give us an analysis. If you're unwilling to do that, then your tiny bit of supposed evidence can be dismissed without further consideration.

The point of the checklists is to show to anyone who will listen that these 'remote' regions are in fact visited regularly by birders. A fact acknowledged even by Mike Collins. If I'm to do some actual analysis it will go to a journal first. The screengrab is illustrative of broad patterns of observer coverage. Most of those checklists are recent (75 last year), in line with exponential growth of the platform.

 

[ZanderII]

While you're ignoring that one, you will probably ignore this one too: Many of those ebird reports do not even show one pileated, when searching a place teeming with them? Why is that? Hint: It has something to do with whether large woodpeckers are as easy to find as IB skeptics seem to think.

https://ebird.org/barchart?r=L370457&bmo=1&emo=12&byr=1900&eyr=2021&spp=pilwoo

PIWO recorded in about 70% of lists through the annual cycle but sometimes as high as 100% in season at that hotspot.

 

[bottomlands]

https://ebird.org/barchart?r=L370457&bmo=1&emo=12&byr=1900&eyr=2021&spp=pilwoo

PIWO recorded in about 70% of lists through the annual cycle but sometimes as high as 100% in season at that hotspot.

70% isn't very good, especially considering that people are moving through multiple territories of pileated pairs. That means a LOT of pileated are being completely missed, over and over and over again. And yet you think that a single pair of IB will, without any doubt, be not only spotted and reported, but conclusively photographed.

 

[ZanderII]

70% isn't very good, especially considering that people are moving through multiple territories of pileated pairs. That means a LOT of pileated are being completely missed, over and over and over again. And yet you think that a single pair of IB will, without any doubt, be not only spotted and reported, but conclusively photographed.

70% is pretty good given that 1TS told us that seeing woodpeckers in summer is impossible.

One IBWO only needs to be photographed once. Anywhere in the USA.

 

[ZanderII]

It is a bit circular - even by the searchers own admissions, each piece of evidence on its own could fall but united they stand

• acoustic ‘evidence’ - inconclusive
• bark peelings/bore holes - inconclusive
• uncorroborated sightings - inconclusive
• Therefore blurry videos stills and even more blurry photographs interpreted with an IB bias which supports conclusiveness of acoustic evidence, bark peelings/bore holes and gives credence to sightings otherwise uncorroborated.

I watched those 2005 Pearl River videos that you posted of a putative IB flying down the river towards the observer and thought, as I watched it, someone could quite easily construct a similarly forensic argument as to why it was not an IB.

Same energy.

Sasquatch Field Guide: Identifying Tracking and Sighting North America's Great Ape | REI Co-op

Essential for serious investigators and armchair explorers of the unknown, the Sasquatch Field Guide offers all you need to know about the mysterious creature known as Sasquatch or Bigfoot.

www.rei.com

 

[1TruthSeeker]

View attachment 1367396
Same energy.

Sasquatch Field Guide: Identifying Tracking and Sighting North America's Great Ape | REI Co-op

Essential for serious investigators and armchair explorers of the unknown, the Sasquatch Field Guide offers all you need to know about the mysterious creature known as Sasquatch or Bigfoot.

www.rei.com

Assume written by J Jackson and illustrated (badly) by Sibley, forward by Farnsboro who discovered the infamous Pileated Woodpecker flapping faster than any known PI up to then (unfortunately Henning had just sped up the film). Lol

 

[ZanderII]

Assume written by J Jackson and illustrated (badly) by Sibley, forward by Farnsboro who discovered the infamous Pileated Woodpecker flapping faster than any known PI up to then (unfortunately Henning had just sped up the film). Lol

Actually written by this guy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Meldrum - although his interest in cryptozoology didn't work out well for his career. He is also a believer that large iconic vertebrates can persist unconfirmed in North America.

 

[Deb Burhinus]

View attachment 1367396
Same energy.

Sasquatch Field Guide: Identifying Tracking and Sighting North America's Great Ape | REI Co-op

Essential for serious investigators and armchair explorers of the unknown, the Sasquatch Field Guide offers all you need to know about the mysterious creature known as Sasquatch or Bigfoot.

www.rei.com

Cryptozoology can become a lifestyle choice

Especially if there are vast areas of habitat to search through as 1Truthcreeper’s images and figures show - the Loch Ness is tiny in comparison yet one man camps out in hope. I can understand how the lure of finding cryptids could become all consuming and a way of life that may draw on its own bizarre sense of reality for inspiration ...

 

[jurek]

View attachment 1367396
Same energy.

Sasquatch Field Guide: Identifying Tracking and Sighting North America's Great Ape | REI Co-op

Essential for serious investigators and armchair explorers of the unknown, the Sasquatch Field Guide offers all you need to know about the mysterious creature known as Sasquatch or Bigfoot.

www.rei.com

Is there also a Sasquatch guide how to avoid humans? Would be interested, honest.

 

[Deb Burhinus]

Is there also a Sasquatch guide how to avoid humans? Would be interested, honest.

You don’t need a guide for that, just a pandemic and no computer 👍

 

[bottomlands]

70% is pretty good given that 1TS told us that seeing woodpeckers in summer is impossible.

No, it isn't. Because after missing most of the pileated woodpeckers around them, the birders put it on their report just by hearing one. So the number actually seen is even more pitifully small than the percentages suggest. You knew that and kept quiet, hoping I didn't.

One IBWO only needs to be photographed once. Anywhere in the USA.

This is a flat-out lie. One photo would be dismissed as fake, and you know it. You and others would demand more photos and videos looking for a way out, until you had no other choice but claim that IBWO are extant. But then you'd say it is probably the last of its species.

I'm still waiting, Zander, for you to answer what you think a birder is likely to do if he sees an ivorybill at the Pearl River in Louisiana, or anywhere else. You can keep offering sarcastic posts and red herring evasions, but it only shows that you're incapable of having an intellectually honest discussion. Instead, man up. Just take a deep breath, and admit that no one who sees IB will report it on eBird.

 

[Deb Burhinus]

This is a flat-out lie.

you're incapable of having an intellectually honest discussion

Excuse me? They are calling me a liar. Is THAT becoming of a Birdforum member? I don't see you chastising them.

Edit: No response from Staff holding the rod. I guess long-term European members get to insult people as long as they are careful not to actually use the word "liar".

Bottomlands, accusing people of being ‘liars’ is not helpful as you well know.

I am still waiting for you to explain why your ‘sighting of an IBWO’ is different from you claiming it is extant? Is this perhaps something you are struggling with - you have had a sighting but don’t know what to do about it? Report on Ebay? Tell other Searchers? Go on a Birdforum and ‘test the water’ with it? Get involved in a debate and try and stay on the fence until the ground softens? I can see how having a genuine sighting of a bird that is largely thought to be extinct could be problematic for any one.

What I’m finding slightly confusing however, is that on the one hand contributors to this thread are being ridiculed, even called dishonest, for suggesting an extant IB could be found in the Pearl River WMA with decent coverage. You on the other hand , say likely not, because the IB are very good at hiding (for 90 years?), are very mobile/shy and the areas are too remote. YET: you have repeatedly made references to yours and other searchers‘ sightings, including at PR bottoms. So is it that only a very small number of select, especially qualified IB searchers that are especially equipped (both physically and mentally) get to have these genuine sightings of IB? What is it that, for example, a crack team of global rarity hunters/ornithologists would be lacking (apart from belief) that would prevent them also having sightings of IB that you have had, if they were to search the same areas in which your sightings and those of other searchers occured?

 

[1TruthSeeker]

Actually written by this guy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Meldrum - although his interest in cryptozoology didn't work out well for his career. He is also a believer that large iconic vertebrates can persist unconfirmed in North America.

I have heard of him......poor soul. A primate foot expert....my goodness.... What's that they say about species when they become too specialized. Maybe we should start worrying about our own species pending Extinction. He is studying footprints no doubt.

Got to laugh that it's a bit like those chasing for 13 years plus now derivatives of derivatives meaning general theories about IB tree scaling without really any empiricalization.

 

[1TruthSeeker]

No, it isn't. Because after missing most of the pileated woodpeckers around them, the birders put it on their report just by hearing one. So the number actually seen is even more pitifully small than the percentages suggest. You knew that and kept quiet, hoping I didn't.


This is a flat-out lie. One photo would be dismissed as fake, and you know it. You and others would demand more photos and videos looking for a way out, until you had no other choice but claim that IBWO are extant. But then you'd say it is probably the last of its species.

I'm still waiting, Zander, for you to answer what you think a birder is likely to do if he sees an ivorybill at the Pearl River in Louisiana, or anywhere else. You can keep offering sarcastic posts and red herring evasions, but it only shows that you're incapable of having an intellectually honest discussion. Instead, man up. Just take a deep breath, and admit that no one who sees IB will report it on eBird.

I have been the only person that I know of to publicly predict exactly what the various factions would say if there's a picture of one bird. Now you have said it.

I'll assume my past comments may have something to do with you're likely correct prognosis today.

Unfortunately a few continue to disrupt birds and to somehow believe that a picture of one bird is going to save the ivory bill. There's a lot of work to be done if the ivory bill can make it...... And it really doesn't involve much about pictures.