Ivory-billed Woodpecker (formerly updates) (2 Viewers)

The Black-footed ferret stayed hidden very well until a ranchers dog killed one.
That is the question, this species has not been staying hidden, it is rare and elusive, but it has been seen, time and again with some very good sighting descriptions. It is just a matter of if you chose to believe the sighting descriptions on the better sightings.

I've asked a few times about Cuba, but no-one replies...
Have I been blocked by anyone?
Apart from the 'video' (which was a joke), I've been very polite on here.

There is no problem with questioning sightings or data, if one chooses to do so with a genuinely open mind. If at that time, one chooses to believe that the bird is extinct that is that persons choice, but please do not dismiss all sightings/data out of hand as has happened so many times before.

Interesting side note here. In southern Indiana in the 1990s (close to where I used to live), two young girls reported seeing a Mountain Lion as they walked through a farmers small wooded lot. They told several people and were dismissed out of hand. Word eventually got back to the farmer, who went to the area and lo and behold, he also said he saw a Mountain Lion. A game warden checked out the sightings/area and saw nothing, but a trap was set. The next day, the trap contained a young Mountain Lion. The Mountain Lion later turned out to be rather tame, and had obviously belonged to someone at one point in time, but this just goes to show you never know what you may actually find if you keep an open mind. Had this been continously dismissed out of hand, the locals would have just thought, oh those girls just had a vivid imagination.

Jesse Gilsdorf said:

Your "standard" of proof is photo only. I do not subscribe to that theory as it is not, nor has it ever been, the burden of proof for any species.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, like it or not, confirmation of the existance of this bird is going to require more than a series of single observer records, no matter how well they feel they have documented it. Not casting a stone against your reputation or anyone else's, but it would not take long for me to put together an entirely credible description of such a bird and claim to have seen it in the swamplands down the back of my land. Of course, being on the wrong continent, it would rightly be dismissed, but the fact is I could ut that description together.

Again, if observers are looking for an i.d. feature, it has occurred that they have 'seen' it when in fact it wasn't actually there, something like 'mind over reality' There was a case some years back of a Red-necked Stint being found, an extreme rarity in Europe, and many very prominent birders went to see it, dare I say reliable observers with good track records. Features were noted and the bird thought genuine. But it wasn't one! It was a Curlew Sandpiper if I remember correctly, a species not even that similar! Mass illusion, excitement of a real find, who knows?

Anyhow, for acceptance of something so dramatic as the rediscovery of a bird thought lost for donkey's years, it is simply going to take more than a series of persons who are convinced they have seen it, heard it, etc.

As for the 'double tap', I freely admit I know nothing of IBW or PW, but surely this can only be indicative of a possible IBW rather than absolute one? Over here, Three-toed Woodpecker is rare where I live, but has a distinctive tap too. Heard the distinctive tapping about a month back (it was also in thick spruce, TTW preferred habitat here), followed the tapping and eventually located the bird ...but, hmff, it was another species of woodpecker!

Jesse Gilsdorf said:

Evidence and proof are synonomous. ...... I am not stupid. If you wish to ignore evidence, well...

Click to expand...

Evidence and proof are not synonymous

btw is synonomous a synonym of synonymous? or just a minor oversight?

eh Mr Clever Clogs?

Tim

colonelboris - I have not even considered blocking you, I liked your video and appreciate your questions. I consider your earlier remark about "half-naked and covered in camo paint" a friendly jab meant only in good fun, unlike some of the genuine mean-spiritedness I have seen in this thread.

IBWO_Agnostic said:

like you said, there are no Pileateds in Cuba to confuse an IBWO with, and the area is 100% more remote than anywhere in the southeastern US.

I know everyone likes to think that there are impenetrable large swamps here, but that's just not true. Most of these areas are used by hunters, have highways cut through them, and some even have yearly Christmas Bird Counts. If we were talking about a smaller, more sedentary species, then yes, I could believe it could hide out, but a large, noisy, less sedentary species is much harder to stay hidden.

Click to expand...

Of course there are impenetrable swamps,,and woods. I could take you to several in a 50 mile radius of my home. Areas with no trails, no highways, waterways blocked with stumps, knees, fallen trees and mud. Only people who have not actually gone out and seen these places would believe they don't exist. It takes me over two hours to get through a mile and a half area to where the bird lives and roosts in Florida. Hunters have no use for an area like this. The pine forests that surround this area provide plenty of areas for hunting and so forth. Bill

Posted by Jos Stratford
Post #5306

Jos
Unfortunately, like it or not, confirmation of the existance of this bird is going to require more than a series of single observer records, no matter how well they feel they have documented it.
Steve
I agree with you on this

Jos
Not casting a stone against your reputation or anyone else's,
Steve
No offense taken

Jos
but it would not take long for me to put together an entirely credible description of such a bird and claim to have seen it in the swamplands down the back of my land.
Steve
This is where the actual facts of the sighting come in.
If you are talking after the Cornell news release, you are absolutely correct.
The problem with this line of thought is that the details of my sightings (and the three most detailed pdf files) were recorded, documented and made available to Cornell and others months before any news releases or mention of the Ivorybill were made public. Much info. from these sightings was made available in the early 1980s.
You could not have recorded this degree of detail regarding this bird before the news releases as the data simply was not available. The only way this degree of detail could have been recorded before the news releases would have been
A - To have very closely examined museum specimens (which I had not)
B - To have actually seen living Ivorybills

Jos
Of course, being on the wrong continent, it would rightly be dismissed, but the fact is I could ut that description together.

Again, if observers are looking for an i.d. feature, it has occurred that they have 'seen' it when in fact it wasn't actually there, something like 'mind over reality'
Steve
Four observers described the same thing.

Jos
There was a case some years back of a Red-necked Stint being found, an extreme rarity in Europe, and many very prominent birders went to see it, dare I say reliable observers with good track records. Features were noted and the bird thought genuine. But it wasn't one! It was a Curlew Sandpiper if I remember correctly, a species not even that similar! Mass illusion, excitement of a real find, who knows?
Anyhow, for acceptance of something so dramatic as the rediscovery of a bird thought lost for donkey's years, it is simply going to take more than a series of persons who are convinced they have seen it, heard it, etc.
Steve
Yes, again, I have to agree on this


ps Hope this helps to clear the air regarding these sightings.
Steve

Tim Allwood said:

How convenient...

no more comment on that

Tim

Click to expand...

good tim.. cuz.. quite frankly.... your opinion matters very little if at all to me......

how Van Remsen, Tim G and others view me.... and my info... does matter...

choupique1 said:

good tim.. cuz.. quite frankly.... your opinion matters very little if at all to me......

how Van Remsen, Tim G and others view me.... and my info... does matter...

Click to expand...

I can attest that choupique1 isn't blowing smoke. Last year, I contacted Van Remsen about hearing kents at Stennis in 2000. He immediately put me in touch with choupique1. I listened to his suggestions, which played a major role in my success this year.

cinclodes said:

I can attest that choupique1 isn't blowing smoke. Last year, I contacted Van Remsen about hearing kents at Stennis in 2000. He immediately put me in touch with choupique1. I listened to his suggestions, which played a major role in my success this year.

Click to expand...

How big is the Stennis reserve?

do recent photo's exist of woodpecker/s which clearly show Ivory-billed, not sure I understand whether or not they do!

Tim Allwood said:

Evidence and proof are not synonymous
btw is synonomous a synonym of synonymous? or just a minor oversight?
eh Mr Clever Clogs?
Tim

Click to expand...

Good siting, Tim.

By the way, I didn't declare the IBWO extinct. I am merely convinced by other scientists' arguments that is is extinct, more than I am convinced it is NOT extinct. No one has shown me anything to make me believe otherwise. It's YOUR job to make me believe it is extant, and so far you have not.

Jos Stratford said:

Unfortunately, like it or not, confirmation of the existance of this bird is going to require more than a series of single observer records, no matter how well they feel they have documented it. Not casting a stone against your reputation or anyone else's, but it would not take long for me to put together an entirely credible description of such a bird and claim to have seen it in the swamplands down the back of my land. Of course, being on the wrong continent, it would rightly be dismissed, but the fact is I could ut that description together.

Again, if observers are looking for an i.d. feature, it has occurred that they have 'seen' it when in fact it wasn't actually there, something like 'mind over reality' There was a case some years back of a Red-necked Stint being found, an extreme rarity in Europe, and many very prominent birders went to see it, dare I say reliable observers with good track records. Features were noted and the bird thought genuine. But it wasn't one! It was a Curlew Sandpiper if I remember correctly, a species not even that similar! Mass illusion, excitement of a real find, who knows?

Anyhow, for acceptance of something so dramatic as the rediscovery of a bird thought lost for donkey's years, it is simply going to take more than a series of persons who are convinced they have seen it, heard it, etc.

As for the 'double tap', I freely admit I know nothing of IBW or PW, but surely this can only be indicative of a possible IBW rather than absolute one? Over here, Three-toed Woodpecker is rare where I live, but has a distinctive tap too. Heard the distinctive tapping about a month back (it was also in thick spruce, TTW preferred habitat here), followed the tapping and eventually located the bird ...but, hmff, it was another species of woodpecker!

Click to expand...

I understand your statements. However, my point is that many people will simply dismiss out of hand multiple observations. Such actions are, in fact, stupid. When there are recordings to back it up it is even more so. I do not claim that they should be given immediate credence, either, as such actions would, in fact, be stupid. Observations need to be made, and at some point the claims could be proven or potentially disproven (it is hard to prove a negative). If Jerome Jackson walks out where I and others claim to have seent he bird and he sees it, does that prove it? Only if you place some value on his credibility.

What happens unfortunately is as follows: There is a report of a bird. However, we all know that the bird is extinct, therefore the reports of the bird are wrong, and since no one has seen the bird it therefore proves the bird is extinct. This is the fact. I have copies of old letters of Steve Sheridan's I was just reading that proves it. One signed by Roger Tory Peterson in which it is clear that because it was not "prime habitat" it was probably wrong. To my knowledge he never came and actually LOOKED. Other letters say similar things.

What is more intelligent: A. that all the reports are wrong for the past 60 years, or B. that some were wrong - some right, or C. all were right?

I would say the probability is B. is correct.

Sure people can get "mass hysteria". However, that is clearly not the case with the folks I've talked to. Further, can people get a good description from study skins? Sure. Easy enough to do. Have I claimed to see blue legs, white spot, yellow eyes, a bill approximately 2 1/2 inches - 3 inches long of an off white colour, a perfectly white shield while the bird is at rest, followed by it flying over head showing a white leading edge and a white trailing edge with a small amount of black separating, the wings sounding almost wooden while flying? Add to this the fact that there was a crest, in disarray, that was black (so it can't be a pileated) with two white stipes coming down the back. Slightly larger than a crow. There were two birds, of course, the male having the white spot. The birds kent called for 5 minutes, close to the end of the day. Made a few double raps after ripping off several pieces of 20 inch long bark, and grabbing large beetles in the bills. Before retiring to their cavities (in trees that were knocked down by tornadoes) they clasped their bills momentarily?

MacGillivray's Trout said:

Good siting, Tim.

By the way, I didn't declare the IBWO extinct. I am merely convinced by other scientists' arguments that is is extinct, more than I am convinced it is NOT extinct.

Click to expand...

Arguments are not proof.

Modern Ornithologists (scientists) claim to have seen this bird. So have laymen birders.

A few (obviously, too few) scientists are taught:

Nothing is impossible.

curunir said:

How big is the Stennis reserve?

Click to expand...

It's on the order of ten square miles. Since NASA tests rocket engines at Stennis, there's a much larger easement in the surrounding area that cannot be developed. This includes the Pearl River WMA, where there have been numerous sightings (including Kulivan's). NASA has a couple of field biologists on site, and one of them saw an ivorybill just south of Stennis in 2002. There have also been mountain lion sightings at and near Stennis. I heard kents at Stennis in 2000. This year, I heard double raps at Stennis and just across the Pearl from Stennis. Stennis provides easy access to prime habitat just above the cypress zone in an area with less disturbance than other parts of the Pearl.

Sounds just the like the Tasmanian tiger - they appear to live in an area that's no-go because of mines. Wheter big holes in the ground or the ones that erupt rudely under you, I can't remember, but they think that's where they are.

London Birder said:

do recent photo's exist of woodpecker/s which clearly show Ivory-billed, not sure I understand whether or not they do!

Click to expand...

take it that's a resounding no then ...

Peregrinator said:

Arguments are not proof.

Modern Ornithologists (scientists) claim to have seen this bird. So have laymen birders.

A few (obviously, too few) scientists are taught:

Nothing is impossible.

Click to expand...

All you are presenting is arguments, not proof. Claims are not proof. The proof is in the pictures, which don't exist.

Nothing is impossible, but some things are highly improbable. And there is nothing out there that makes me think IBWO still exist.

MacGillivray's Trout said:

All you are presenting is arguments, not proof. Claims are not proof. The proof is in the pictures, which don't exist.

Nothing is impossible, but some things are highly improbable. And there is nothing out there that makes me think IBWO still exist.

Click to expand...

What?? One of the points of my post was that arguments are NOT proof. I"m NOT presenting ANYTHING, YOU are the one claiming arguments*(please refer to 5315 in MAC's post) are proof. I was disputing YOU! I"m simply responding to your:

Good siting, Tim.

By the way, I didn't declare the IBWO extinct. I am merely convinced by other scientists' arguments(*) that is is extinct, more than I am convinced it is NOT extinct. No one has shown me anything to make me believe otherwise. It's YOUR job to make me believe it is extant, and so far you have not.



I am merely telling YOU that YOUR assertions that, "I am merely convinced by other scientists' arguments that is is extinct..." are not proof. Just because YOU believe "arguments" make the IB extinct, doesn't make it extinct. YOU are the one who is merely presenting arguments, not proof. YOU are the one claiming arguments are proof..., not me. YOU are the one stating claims (yours) are proof (not me). Read post #5315
P.S. Have a nice day.