John Cantelo
Well-known member
I should say straight away that I’m a great fan of the E-bird concept. I’ve only relatively recently discovered it but have found it so useful (and reliable) in Spain that I’ve added links to the relevant sites to my birding guide to Cadiz province (although, shamefacedly, I have to admit that I still need to transfer data from the pile of notebooks sitting reproachfully next to my desk).
However, on a recent trip to Queensland, I discovered that the resource could be very misleading and inaccurate. I was staying at Cassowary House with my old school friend Phil Gregory. During my stay I regularly went for an early AM walk along the Black Mountain Road and on one of my saunters met a birder whose perception of what could be seen there seemed curiously inflated. Even with my very meagre knowledge of Australian birds I quickly realised that several of his target species didn’t occur there. Back at Cassowary House I mentioned this to Phil so we checked the entries for the area. That for the Black Mountain Road got it about right with 91 species (all but a handful causing no raised eyebrows for my host). However, that for Cassowary House listed 213 species. This caused Phil some astonishment since in 20 odd years of living there he’s only had about 120 species! As the author of two field guides (inc. one on north Queensland) and a new Helm monograph, Phil’s no slouch as a birder and, although he readily conceded he might have missed a handful of species, dipping 90 odd birds was out of the question. On closer inspection it was plain that some folks were posting records from other sites. Red-necked Stints, Sharp-tailed Sandpiper and other waders were surely seen at Cairns Esplanade rather than over dense rainforest. This much was obvious. However, other reports may simply have been a matter of error and much less obvious to the untutored eye (species that appear to exist nearby for example but are strictly limited to west of the Great Dividing Range such as Atherton Scrubwren). One observer listed at least three species Phil had never seen there, all on the same day. Phil immediately contacted E-bird to express his concerns but several weeks down the line the faulty list is still there and Phil’s had no response.
Now I realise that E-bird depends heavily on unpaid moderators and such like and that the occasional error will inevitably creep in but the level of misinformation involved here seems unacceptably excessive. Although I was able to twig something was wrong not everyone has a local guru to hand. It’s hard for users without the guidance I enjoyed to sort the wheat from the chaff. If some sites/areas lack moderation, as seems to be the case here (and unlike the situation I’ve found in Spain), then perhaps some sort of ‘caveat emptor’ warning that the list is unmoderated should be added. Hopefully, this level of misinformation is exceptional but have others had similar problems or is it very unusual?
However, on a recent trip to Queensland, I discovered that the resource could be very misleading and inaccurate. I was staying at Cassowary House with my old school friend Phil Gregory. During my stay I regularly went for an early AM walk along the Black Mountain Road and on one of my saunters met a birder whose perception of what could be seen there seemed curiously inflated. Even with my very meagre knowledge of Australian birds I quickly realised that several of his target species didn’t occur there. Back at Cassowary House I mentioned this to Phil so we checked the entries for the area. That for the Black Mountain Road got it about right with 91 species (all but a handful causing no raised eyebrows for my host). However, that for Cassowary House listed 213 species. This caused Phil some astonishment since in 20 odd years of living there he’s only had about 120 species! As the author of two field guides (inc. one on north Queensland) and a new Helm monograph, Phil’s no slouch as a birder and, although he readily conceded he might have missed a handful of species, dipping 90 odd birds was out of the question. On closer inspection it was plain that some folks were posting records from other sites. Red-necked Stints, Sharp-tailed Sandpiper and other waders were surely seen at Cairns Esplanade rather than over dense rainforest. This much was obvious. However, other reports may simply have been a matter of error and much less obvious to the untutored eye (species that appear to exist nearby for example but are strictly limited to west of the Great Dividing Range such as Atherton Scrubwren). One observer listed at least three species Phil had never seen there, all on the same day. Phil immediately contacted E-bird to express his concerns but several weeks down the line the faulty list is still there and Phil’s had no response.
Now I realise that E-bird depends heavily on unpaid moderators and such like and that the occasional error will inevitably creep in but the level of misinformation involved here seems unacceptably excessive. Although I was able to twig something was wrong not everyone has a local guru to hand. It’s hard for users without the guidance I enjoyed to sort the wheat from the chaff. If some sites/areas lack moderation, as seems to be the case here (and unlike the situation I’ve found in Spain), then perhaps some sort of ‘caveat emptor’ warning that the list is unmoderated should be added. Hopefully, this level of misinformation is exceptional but have others had similar problems or is it very unusual?