When is a tick a tick for you? (1 Viewer)

I have been birding for two years and my life list is 131 species.

I am thinking of restarting my life list, and here's why:

I went to see a White-winged Black Tern at Staines Reservoir a couple of days ago. I didn't get a change to do any research before I went there, and forgot to take my book. I assumed that this bird would look markedly different from Black Tern.

Last night I checked the diagnostic features of White-winged Black Tern and the 2S bird I saw, and I can't say that I noticed these diagnostic features.

So while I know that the bird I saw was a White-winged Black Tern, I didn't personally identify it as such. This makes me want to untick the bird.

What this has made me realise is that, for me, a tick is a species that I have ID'd, not seeing a bird that I am, however reliably, informed is X.

This lead to a question: how many other species have I seen where I did not personally and satisfactorily view the diagnostic features that separate that species from similar ones? I can't reliably answer that question.

So I am going to restart my life list, and I think this process will re-enforce things I have previously learnt (and possibly forgotten) and probably learn new things in doing so.

But I wonder what other people think of this? Do you tick a bird on being 'reliably informed' (for example, someone else's photographic evidence) or do you need to 'see for yourself'?

I know how you feel and I suggest you learn from this experience. I did, many years ago, and came to the conclusion that taking extensive notes on the spot is essential. Carrying a fieldguide does not, in my view, help a great deal. In fact, I think it's a downright disadvantage as you can spend more time looking at the book than the bird! Train yourself to take notes on all aspects of plumage and appearance (size compared to a similar-sized bird with which you are famiiliar, bill shape, colour, leg colour, etc), movement, voice, habitat (even down to "how far up a tree") and general jizz. When you've done that you can compare to the fieldguide - inevitably this can be frustrating in the early days as your fieldguide will point out some point about the appearance that you didn't note. But keep at it and experience will pay off.

I rarely take a fieldguide with me when I go birding in familiar avian territory (which means much of western Europe). I'll take the notes and wait until I get home or back to the hotel. Even in unfamiliar parts of the world where I'm likely to be seeing species I've never seen before I'll still make the notes in the same way. The only difference here is that the fieldguide will be in the car so I can check a bit quicker and, if needs be, I may be able to go back for a second look.

As to whether or not you count a species on the basis of somebody pointing out a "new" bird - well that's down to how well you know, and trust, the individual. If I was with someone I knew and respected for their knowledge of the area I was in then I think it's reasonable to "tick". But even then you should still take the notes for comparison with fieldguides and other resources.

Whether you restart your list is up to you - if you do, at least you'll get plenty of "lifers" over the next few months! But this does seem a bit dramatic. Perhaps you can compromise by deleting those for which you are not 100% sure.

These are my quick reactions that I hope may help or, at least, give you further food for thought.

Good birding

David

It's your list, your rules.

It matters to some people how big your list is. To others it doesn't.

I do think it's a bit of a savage restriction though!

I must agree with David, take lots of field notes / sketches on site and really look at the bird. If you check them out back at home and they don't match up to what the bird was supposed to be then don't tick it, you're only conning yoursellf ( and you know it )
Chris

Interesting comments, thanks.

DavidinParis said:

As to whether or not you count a species on the basis of somebody pointing out a "new" bird - well that's down to how well you know, and trust, the individual.

Click to expand...

Well, that's what surprised me:

I've realised that, for me, a tick is not seeing a species of bird but seeing and confirming the identification of a species of bird.

So it doesn't matter how much I trust that what I'm looking at is X, because for me if I don't personally identify it as such with a good deal of confidence, I don't feel right ticking it, even though I might be 100% sure that it was X by other sources.

That surprised me, although I have been noticing this attitude developing, and I thought it was probably not the way that most people approach their lists, so might be interesting to others.

Certainly I don't need to restart my life list, but given it is only 130 species and no real rarities, it wouldn't be any problem.

I want to approach each sighting with the question "Have I personally seen the diagnostic features needed to identify this species?".

I feel like I will learn a lot more taking this approach.

I notice you mentioned not having a chance to look up the species before you went to Staines. This can actually be a good thing as it prevents you having preconceptions.

This will almost certainly lead you to look more closely at a bird and reach your own conclusions about it. Sometimes you will find that despite what the crowd says, the Emperor really does have no clothes!

A long time ago I went from Cornwall to Pagham without having a chance to go home and look up the features of summer plumaged Greater Sand Plover. When I got there, I gave the bird an intense scrutiny - much more so than I would usually having checked guides beforehand.

When I got home I couldn't make the bird fit the field guide, so despite the news agencies saying Greater, I advised my twitching buddies to go see it.

Several weeks later a bit of a storm broke as Birding World wrote it up as a Lesser.....

Mind you I think restarting your life list is going a bit far. By all means learn from experience but this is a hobby. For heaven's sake don't start taking it (or yourself) seriously.

John

I want to be able to ID the bird, not only be told that it is a certain species. If someone tells me "it's a [whatever] because of the shape of the bill and you see that bar on the wing and so on", and I can see all those features and remember them and ID the bird by myself the next time I encounter it, then it counts. But I have to be able to realise why it is that species and not something else.

If I go out with the intent of seeing a certain species, I check the field guide first, to know what I should look for (a white wingbar, a certain call, the shape of he head etc., whatever separates it from a similar species). Makes it easier to pick something out of maybe hundreds of other birds... however, I do then look at the bird very carefully, noting stuff, and then taking a more thourough look in the field guide afterwards, and also often searching the internet and reading other bird books, just to confirm it. Works for me.

Enji said:

I want to be able to ID the bird, not only be told that it is a certain species. If someone tells me "it's a [whatever] because of the shape of the bill and you see that bar on the wing and so on", and I can see all those features and remember them and ID the bird by myself the next time I encounter it, then it counts. But I have to be able to realise why it is that species and not something else.

Click to expand...

Yes that's exactly how I feel about it.

I'm going to review my list for any birds I cant remember positively IDing myself. Start a new 'PC' (properly confirmed) list!

As for taking it too seriously, I think throwing away my list would be a great example of not taking it too seriously, it will be fun filling it back up again but with the benefit of all I have learnt in the past two years.

This has to be one of the best hobbies I have found myself so far in life!

Thanks for all your comments.

Guizotia....you and Enji are on the 'right' track....[to me anyway]! Birding needs more guys like you......don't follow the 'crowd'...make up you're own minds on a birds identity. Nice to hear you say 'those' things..very refreshing. I always like to see, or at least hear, something on a bird that 'makes it so'....[did that just sound like Picard out of star trek....sorry...i digress]?!

Good on ya anyway!

ps.....as someone else said tho...there's no rules to wot you do or don't count...hey...as long as you're happy.....tick away....!

I need to see the bird to really want to tick it.... I know I see things on the side of the road as I drive pass and glare at it going 60 mph....I have a good idea of what it is for I can quickly pick out features... When I go someplace new I have in my mind birds I might see so that helps.

But without stopping at the time and really id'ing the features (notes, sketches or better yet photography) and later matching up to a book, I don't like to include that as a tic. OR, when someone else will tell me, 'you saw this'....okay...I saw it and if I have it ID'd at the time with sketches, notes, photo's...I will tic it, but otherwise no.

I started a new life list recently (although I don't really keep track of it, I have no idea how many birds I've got on it... could probably check it and count but too lazy), because I birded some when I was a lot younger (together with mom), but I can't really remember what I saw then.
The "real" life list is probably longer than the one I have now, since I lived in Hong Kong as a kid and birded some there, but since I don't know what I saw they don't count. I only count the birds I saw as a kid that I am absolutely sure of, like Crested Mynah, 'cause they were everywhere in HK.

Sometimes I get the feeling that some birders say that they've seen a bird although they're not entirely sure. I think most don't, and it doesn't really matter for me since a list is a personal thing, but anyway. Last Sunday I was out birding when a Red-rumped Swallow was spotted, which lead to loads of people coming to see it. The bird was VERY difficult to see, (in fact I failed to see it... picking it out from hundreds of Barn Swallows at a distance... no. I'm not good enough.) but I wonder if everyone there who said they saw the bird actually saw it... or at least could have ID:d it, it was really far away!

I just don't find any satisfaction in ticking a bird unless I'm absolutely sure of what I saw. Or heard, for that reason, I do tick heard-only birds. Mainly because it would be so hard to get species like Bittern on my life list otherwise, and if I can positively ID a bird by sound I see no reason not to.

Enji said:

I want to be able to ID the bird, not only be told that it is a certain species. If someone tells me "it's a [whatever] because of the shape of the bill and you see that bar on the wing and so on", and I can see all those features and remember them and ID the bird by myself the next time I encounter it, then it counts. But I have to be able to realise why it is that species and not something else.

Click to expand...

This is my approach also.

The field guide is obviously a source of info, but so is the person who's able to point out field markings. None of us would be able to ID a particular bird without having had input from an outside source at some point (or in most cases, regular and routine input). What you choose as a reliable source is up to you. I'll listen to what a person says about markings, take a really good look at it myself, and then double check my guide to make sure he/she saw the same thing that I think I did...

Enji said:

I just don't find any satisfaction in ticking a bird unless I'm absolutely sure of what I saw. Or heard, for that reason, I do tick heard-only birds. Mainly because it would be so hard to get species like Bittern on my life list otherwise, and if I can positively ID a bird by sound I see no reason not to.

Click to expand...

Unless you happen upon one sitting high up in a leafless tree

Like this one that I found about 15 feet up in a tree at the edge of a pond.

||