Life Bird List and what counts (1 Viewer)

lmans66 · Jan 20, 2009

Okay...lets see where everyone stands on this issue..

In order for me to feel like I can count a bird on my life birder list I need to find that bird in it's natural habitat without the benefit of humans. So...places such as some areas of South America where I frequent, they place 'feeders' to attract hummingbirds but this is not a natural habitat and I feel cheapened counting that as a a natural habitat. It is no different than going to a zoo in some sense or even an Aviary

Where does everyone else stand on this issue. What counts as an actual siting in your life bird list?

James Lowther · Jan 20, 2009

I suspect you are very much in the minority there Imans!!

Allen S. Moore · Jan 20, 2009

You've got an interesting viewpoint there! Listing is very much a personal thing, but as far as I am concerned, a bird is the bird as long as it is wild. A lot of people are very enthusiastic about the rarities that they see, but if these birds are lost then you could say that they are not in their natural habitat. Of course, some people have records of birds caught by bird ringers at bird observatories and the like, and the catching of such birds for ringing is often the only way in which their presence is detected.
Allen

brianfm · Jan 20, 2009

Interesting points here. Firstly the feeders. If a bird is in the wild and visits a feeder I certainly wouldn't view it as any less wild so would certainly add it to my list as I have done with birds attracted to sound recordings of their calls and songs. I don't use such recordings myself, but know many who do.

Rarities outside there natural habitat is a very interesting point. Personally I would much rather see them in their natural habitat/area but even I would not refuse to tick a rarity if I found one, which I rarely do.

lmans66 · Jan 20, 2009

I probably will be in the Minority on my thinking.....and to each their own. But I have always wondered what others perceive of as being a 'sighting'...... I know I have seen birds in bird sanctuaries as they heal from various issues yet I haven't officially counted them even though I never see them in the wild. Also I agree a bird is a bird and the only way to see some birds is within a aviary etc.

But--nice to see where everyone falls since many including myself keep a life list....

mikfoz · Jan 20, 2009

I must admit I sometimes feel like it's cheating to camp out at a feeder and I'm always more pleased if I spot a bird I saw at a feeder away and out and about.

I'd still count the bird as seen as part of the challenge of birding for me is actually picking out the bird and figuring out what it is and imprinting its shape, looks and jizz on my brain so I can pick it out again at a more fleeting glimpse.

For now it's pleasing to me to know at a glance what all the common species are in my patch and I'm getting a great deal of satisfaction out of just doing that and occasionally seeing something new.

I guess it's just down to individuals.

fugl · Jan 20, 2009

Everybody has his own rules. Me, I count "feeder" birds but not birds in banding traps (or birds recently released from same or from any other form of captivity) as it just doesn't seem "sporting". I don't know what you mean by "arboretum" (aviary, maybe, or enclosed garden?--if so I don't count them either).

dantheman · Jan 20, 2009

Almost the whole planet has been affected by humans, possibly excepting some wilderness areas as you mention. But even there humans are a part of the ecosystem, albeit less obvious (eg native tribes) . . . . so hard to get away from man's influence.

What about being shown birds by guides?? (Or even by other fellow birders or from information taken from trip reports??)

Personally I wouldn't worry about birds seen by feeders myself, but I guess we are talking about something quite artificial here, not been to the tropics myself. (Actually Acorn Woodpeckers by a picnic area and various hummingbirds in the states - ticked them all!!)

On the other hand, I have resisted being shown birds. Declined to be shown Eagle Owl and Striated Scops Owl in Turkey, preferred to look for them myself (unsuccessful as it turned out!).

Problem is, a lot of these species would be hard to find or get to see yourself without the 'help' you describe . . .

oncebittern · Jan 21, 2009

I'm not sure a feeder placed in a jungle in South America is all that different to a bird table placed in my back garden. Both are there to bring the birds to me so I can see them.

Yes, looking after the birds by feeding them is also a valid reason to have them, but how many of us have our bird tables where we can't see them?

Flemingo · Jan 21, 2009

My guidelines
a) Its a wild bird
b) It arrived under its own power or decided to hitch a lift on a boat
c) Its not being prevented from leaving
d) I am happy I saw enough to be able to confirm the species myself
e) Using baits or being shown by other people is valid

So I would count your birds at the feeder :t:

lmans66 · Jan 21, 2009

Great List

Flemingo said:
My guidelines
a) Its a wild bird
b) It arrived under its own power or decided to hitch a lift on a boat
c) Its not being prevented from leaving
d) I am happy I saw enough to be able to confirm the species myself
e) Using baits or being shown by other people is valid

So I would count your birds at the feeder :t:

I might also add that the bird has to be 'alive' and not roadkill.....

I see no reason why guides are not appropriate like others...a guide does not have to always be a paid guide but can also be your neighbor down the road who you go birding with and just happens to know more about a bird than you do!...

steve_zodiac · Jan 21, 2009

The only trouble with listing is it can get a bit obsessive with so many categories: life, county, year, day, week, month, holiday, venue, British, I've even heard of car lists, and just about any list known to man.

Personally I just go for life and year, and as long as a bird is seen in the wild, having not been released by man, and is fending for itself its tickable on my lists. As for having feeders in the jungle, whats the difference between that and chumming from pelagics to so birders can watch seabirds.

I can't really see the point in listing in competition with other people because the goalposts are always being moved, cheating takes place, slanderous remarks are written about fellow birders in certain magazines and it all gets a bit silly. Hence all the pleasure goes out of birding.

lockbreeze926 · Jan 21, 2009

Flemingo said:
d) I am happy I saw enough to be able to confirm the species myself

I think this is particularly interesting.

I am pretty flexible about what I count and tend towards the inclusive rather than the exclusive approach, but like the above poster I am not happy to count something where I only see (for example) a distant silhouette, which somebody else "confirms" as X.

There's no pleasure in that, and if there's no pleasure, what's the point?

(For the same reason, I don't count "heard only" - I might actually know for certain what something is, based on song, but I don't get anything like the same buzz that a clear sighting gives.)

Chlidonias · Jan 22, 2009

my rules:
* it has to be a wild bird and part of an established self-sustaining population, whether its natural or introduced (to take an English example: ringnecks in London count, an escaped cockatiel doesn't). Being from NZ where several of our species survive ONLY in relocated populations on islands I don't really make a distinction between "natural" populations and ones that are the result of reintroductions (eg Californian condors, or in NZ saddleback, stitchbird, little spotted kiwi, etc) -- so long as they're wild and self-sustaining then they count.
* vagrants count so long as they arrived in the country under their own power
* I have to be able to identify the bird to my own satisfaction
* Although I dislike going on tours and using guides (partly just because I'm a loner by nature but also because I find it more meaningful doing it myself even if it means missing birds), birds shown to me by others still count so long as I get a proper look at them and could have identified them if the other person hadn't been there
* I have to see the bird -- calls don't count for anything in my book. Its bird-watching not bird-listening, and I can't identify most bird calls anyway

* I don't use taping to attract birds to me (just my personal choice)
* it has to be alive obviously

I think that's all....

mikfoz · Jan 22, 2009

lockbreeze926 said:
I think this is particularly interesting.

I am pretty flexible about what I count and tend towards the inclusive rather than the exclusive approach, but like the above poster I am not happy to count something where I only see (for example) a distant silhouette, which somebody else "confirms" as X.

There's no pleasure in that, and if there's no pleasure, what's the point?

(For the same reason, I don't count "heard only" - I might actually know for certain what something is, based on song, but I don't get anything like the same buzz that a clear sighting gives.)

I totally agree. I had a Little Grebe pointed out to me a few weeks back and it would have been a lifer but all I could see was a dot through my binoculars. Luckily it was fishing in the same spot the next day and I had my scope and considerably more light and I'd only count it then.

I want to actually see and identify the bird and hopefully well enough so I'll know the jizz, shape and plumage again if I see it in the future. You can't do that from guidebooks and some person telling you that's what it is even though you can't make it out.

That's not to say I mind people helping me with ID, but I want to learn enough so I can do the same for myself in future so for me, a clear view is essential.

Another example would be the fact I can now tell a Sparrowhawk and a Kestrel apart at a glance at a considerable distance in flight and that's just as a result of repeated sightings and patience. I'd totally respect someone new standing next to me saying that it's all well and good me saying it's a Kestrel but they can't tell the difference, actually. At first, I would have been that person.

lmans66 · Jan 22, 2009

good points

mikfoz said:
I want to actually see and identify the bird and hopefully well enough so I'll know the jizz, shape and plumage again if I see it in the future. You can't do that from guidebooks and some person telling you that's what it is even though you can't make it out.

Another example would be the fact I can now tell a Sparrowhawk and a Kestrel apart at a glance at a considerable distance in flight and that's just as a result of repeated sightings and patience.

Excellent points...!... I too have been shown "far off in the distance" birds that appear as dots on top of a tree. I want to actually see it to count it. A dot is not a count in my book either. Of course it all comes down to personal satisfaction.

Okay, what is the difference between a sparrow and Kestral? Enlighten me for I too thought they were the same although I should have known better

mikfoz · Jan 22, 2009

lmans66 said:
Okay, what is the difference between a sparrow and Kestral? Enlighten me for I too thought they were the same although I should have known better

It's all down to wing shape, flight dynamics, behaviour and so on. You just need to keep on watching them and spot the difference in what you saw them doing before you got a clear and confirmed view and discount any you didn't confirm as either/or and not dwell on it.

Sparrowhawks tend to jink and weave or swoop often even when not pursuing almost as if practising. Kestrels tend to have more pointed wing profiles and are more direct in their ranging flights. The Kestrel hover is totally unique and diagnostic, of course. There's some overlap but in time you just get to know the jizz of the bird.

You can tell them apart really easily with a good view if they're perched from their plumage and shape alone, but in flight and at a distance it's just all about patient observation and time.

At one time I'd have an excited birder next to me pointing out a Sparrowhawk harrassing the Teal and I'd not even be picking it out from the background clutter of fleeing prey. Now I spot one out of the corner of my eye because I'm tuned in to its effect on its environment more.

I'd be similarly lost at first in another area.

I've been rigorously concentrating on one patch to get settled into birding rather than globetrotting and turning my brain to mush with information-overload and it's working so far.

manelson · Jan 26, 2009

Yes, I am the same as most here in that I would count feeder birds. Where I am very picky is around the id of the bird. I usually photograph the bird for id purposes and will enlarge the photograph to ensure that the id is correct. Once I get home and confirm the id with more then 1 field guide then I feel comfortable adding it to my list. Naturally I am only talking about those many confusing species out there or those at a distance that I am 90% sure of. Even those ones that I thought 100% was a particular bird I would sometimes find I was wrong when I looked at the enlarged photograph.

lmans66 · Jan 26, 2009

Photography is a great way to confirm, no doubt. When I am in new areas of the world or country there are often species that I am not aware of. Photography allows me to actually confirm it one way or another. Now not that I 'only' count photo's of birds as of late in order for them to go on a life list, but it surely helps to identify birds those that do belong on my life list!

Life Bird List and what counts (1 Viewer)

Out Birding....

Well-known member

Well-known member

Botanical Birder

Out Birding....

It's not a competition. Watch the birdy!

Well-known member

Bah humbug

Steve Sheehan

I'm always wrong and it's always my fault

Out Birding....

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

It's not a competition. Watch the birdy!

Out Birding....

It's not a competition. Watch the birdy!

Guest

Out Birding....

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread