• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Lynx joins with Cornell (1 Viewer)

As we already have to pay to use HBW as-is I can't see that sort of gift coming...

Neither can I but when you've lumped out about £4K on HBW and HMW, plus the various new field guides, a measly subscription isn't much to ask is it?

I see also that like the bird books, they're starting to maximise their income stream from mammals too, what will come next, ungulates, canines.....?

I wonder if they'll venture in to reptiles and amphibians?

https://www.lynxeds.com/product/primates/
 
Last edited:
Neither can I but when you've lumped out about £4K on HBW and HMW, plus the various new field guides, a measly subscription isn't much to ask is it?

I see also that like the bird books, they're starting to maximise their income stream from mammals too, what will come next, ungulates, canines.....?

I wonder if they'll venture in to reptiles and amphibians?

https://www.lynxeds.com/product/primates/

>>a measly subscription isn't much to ask is it?

Perhaps not for you / us. But (for example) what if you're in a South American village where you have an internet cafe but nothing more and where you certainly can't afford to pay for these other things. One day, (when I get around to it), I'm going to have a crack at putting range maps against all the Wikipedia bird entries—if someone doesn't beat me to it
 
>>a measly subscription isn't much to ask is it?

Perhaps not for you / us. But (for example) what if you're in a South American village where you have an internet cafe but nothing more and where you certainly can't afford to pay for these other things. One day, (when I get around to it), I'm going to have a crack at putting range maps against all the Wikipedia bird entries—if someone doesn't beat me to it

Not sure what you're point is?

What does me, complaining about the fact that despite a large outlay on Lynx books, people still have to subscribe to 'HBW Alive', have to do with someone in South America?
 
Personally I look very much forward to this merger as I like both ebird and HBW Alive and have no concerns about any of them, so I think if this is done with the necessary care and technical astuteness us birders will profit greatly from this.
I wonder about the many implications this will have and look forward to hearing more details.
Even if it was a 'takeover' instead of a merger, what would the main concerns be? Taxonomy will definitely be affected, but how many of you had actually ever embraced HBW/Birdlife taxonomy? What features might we lose? How will this compare to the ones we gain?

There has been absolutely nothing stated so far that is positive i.e what extra are we getting from this takeover (lets stop pretending this is in any way a merger based upon the statements made so far).

Taxonomy wise I use IOC so that isn't going to change, but I also use my HBW subscription as a content provider for detail especially around subspecies descriptions and comparing the groupings to species level, distribution with IOC. As such whilst not the taxonomy I value the subscription greatly.

Whilst I've started using eBird, I question why regularly ( I only started doing so Q3 last year and its secondary to my own reporting application). I started because I was using their data and thought I should contribute my own sightings - since doing so I'm realizing their data standards are highly questionable based upon the reviewers diligence.

Out of the 3, i.e IOC , HBW, Cornell/eBird content, I only actually care about the first 2. A likely result therefore is giving up on the last two if HBW is diluted.
 
There has been absolutely nothing stated so far that is positive i.e what extra are we getting from this takeover (lets stop pretending this is in any way a merger based upon the statements made so far).

Taxonomy wise I use IOC so that isn't going to change, but I also use my HBW subscription as a content provider for detail especially around subspecies descriptions and comparing the groupings to species level, distribution with IOC. As such whilst not the taxonomy I value the subscription greatly.

Whilst I've started using eBird, I question why regularly ( I only started doing so Q3 last year and its secondary to my own reporting application). I started because I was using their data and thought I should contribute my own sightings - since doing so I'm realizing their data standards are highly questionable based upon the reviewers diligence.

Out of the 3, i.e IOC , HBW, Cornell/eBird content, I only actually care about the first 2. A likely result therefore is giving up on the last two if HBW is diluted.

I commented earlier that this is a takeover, not a merger.
 
I think it is too early to tell what the result of all this will be. And therefore also too early to conclude regarding renewal or not.

Niels
 
One day, (when I get around to it), I'm going to have a crack at putting range maps against all the Wikipedia bird entries—if someone doesn't beat me to it

It would be absolutely legal to write all factual content of HBW alive on Wikipedia with simply changing wording. Somebody moderately programming savvy could even write a script doing this automatically, including changing the phrases and words. I don't even think this would influence the HBW business much - just like people pay for field guies to places they never intend to visit.

Regarding the temptation to withdraw or commercialize the project, I hope HBW and Cornell never thought of this. BTW, folks, this is serious. Just as birds are vulnerable, so free birdwatching community is intristically vulnerable.

A wild bird may be enjoyed by thousands of people, and then somebody will want it for free all to himself and shoot it. As long as there is no penalty for taking a public good, the bird will finally be shot. That is why all modern countries prohibit killing or catching wild birds outside regulated hunting. The birdwatching community itself is a public good too, and somebody might be tempted to destroy it for real or imaginary gain. A company trying to monetize access to the information. An ambitious scientist who wants to have publicly gathered data as material to publish it himself. The point is, that the free, sharing nature of birdwatching is itself vulnerable. It is not for granted. And vulnerable are benefits of mass birdwatching movement, like mass interest in bird protection.
 
Last edited:
I asked for help with a database entry yesterday and got this reply. Not quite sure what to make of it other than to note that similar previous communications have been good and helpful...consequence of this takeover move?

"Dear Mark,

I regret we cannot give you support on this.

Best wishes,

HBW Alive"
 
Another missive (missile?) from the front line received yesterday (14/3):

"We are pleased to announce that the Internet Bird Collection and the Macaulay Library and eBird at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology are joining forces. For nearly two decades, the Internet Bird Collection (IBC) has engaged a global community of birdwatchers to share their videos, sounds, and photos of birds from around the world. The IBC is full of tremendous contributors and resources that will soon find a new home with the Macaulay Library at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology—a multimedia archive of birds, mammals, amphibians, reptiles, and insects. This new collaboration will leverage the long-term archival capabilities of the 90-year-old Macaulay Library (ML) and the powerful online tools for birders developed by eBird. The IBC has played an important role in providing media resources for the HBW Alive, and the Cornell Lab of Ornithology plans to carry that critical work forward into the new "Birds of the World" project currently under development at the Lab. Your contributions to the IBC have been critical, and we greatly value the opportunity to engage with you during this time of transition and ensure that your hard work and efforts around media can be put to their best potential use.

IBC contributors will enjoy many benefits on the new platform, such as a streamlined data entry experience at eBird, full integration with eBird’s listing and birding tools, and the permanent archival capabilities of the Macaulay Library. Users will be able to take advantage of eBird’s features and Macaulay Library tools, which includes features such as the ability to upload more than one file at a time from the same date and location.

How will it work? With your explicit permission, we plan to shift every user’s IBC data over to the Macaulay Library and eBird at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology. Historic media from the IBC will be treated as a distinct collection in the ML/eBird database, and each asset brought in through this process will have the IBC brand associated with it. When logged into their accounts, users will see their IBC contributions. Moving forward, eBird (the website eBird.org and associated mobile app) will be the data entry platform for uploading videos, sounds, and photos. Media uploaded after the merger via eBird will be treated as a part of the rapidly growing global resources of the Macaulay Library and eBird at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology.

Free Access: As always, all contributors and visitors will have free online access to uploaded materials and the Cornell Lab is committed to keeping similar IBC functionality.

Timing: We expect the transition to take 6–8 months. In the interim, the current IBC site will remain active and you will be able to access the site as usual. We anticipate a process in which users will not experience a gap in service. We will inform users of the transition progress, and carefully track any issues that may arise.

Communications: Several key steps will need to be taken to ensure your data and media are successfully transferred to the Macaulay Library: 1. Users need to provide explicit permission for Lynx to share their contact information with the Cornell Lab; 2. Users need to agree to a non-exclusive licensing agreement (see below) in order for their media to be transferred, archived, and accessible online; 3. Users who do not have a Cornell Lab/eBird account will need to create a Cornell Lab account so that we can associate your IBC data with your new account. Detailed, simple-to-follow directions for each of these steps will follow.

Copyright and licensing agreement: The Cornell Lab’s media licensing agreement states that the contributor retains the copyright to each piece of contributed media, and that the Lab cannot sell your media to a third party for commercial use without explicit permission from the contributor. The Cornell Lab can use your media for education, conservation, and research—to fulfill its mission.

Is the transition mandatory? The goal is to shift the entire IBC collection over to the Macaulay Library, and transition IBC contributors into the eBird/Macaulay Library suite of tools moving forward. At the end of this process, Lynx will retire the current version of the IBC. We hope to work closely and carefully to transition every IBC user over successfully. If you choose not to opt-in to this transition, your media uploaded to the current IBC will no longer be accessible online. It will not be transferred to the Macaulay Library or be available via the IBC. We hope you do not choose this path, and we look forward to working with you.

We hope you share in our excitement at this time of change. We are here to provide support and ensure a smooth transition. We are working hard so that the level of service and scholarship provided by the Cornell Lab resources will continue to meet and exceed your expectations. Stay tuned for more information regarding the transition. Please visit MacaulayLibrary.org for more information and updates throughout the transition process. At any time please feel free to contact Eliot Miller ([email protected]) if you have any questions or concerns.

Good birding!"
 
Still nothing about how they intend to deal with the different taxonomies of the two organizations, although you wouldn't expect them to get into that sort of detail at this point.

There's upwards of a thousand points of difference between the two; my guess is that the people at Cornell will identify them and perhaps incorporate some or many of them in the Clements/eBird taxonomy. As for the others, well, eBird already has technology which they apply to existing users when their taxonomy changes, to modify their sighting information based on geography. I expect that Cornell will use that technology to shoe-horn the data from Lynx users into eBird based on geography.

It's even possible that Cornell will make this into an opportunity to reduce their dependency on the AOS for taxonomy changes and set their own course. They already took a tiny step in that direction by splitting Mallard and Mexican Duck. But I would classify that idea as highly speculative for now.
 
Last edited:
I used macaulaylibrary few years ago to get sounds of mammals. I remember that the website of macaulay library was quite slow and difficult to use, especially clicking through some taxonomic tree up and down. I am a bit worried about ease of access.

(BTW, if anybody is interested, I hoped be able to identify shrieks or howls one sometimes hears at night. Unfortunately, in the following years I added no interesting mammal sightings or identifications this way).
 
Offhand, this looks a lot like "hosting photos and videos is really expensive, let's not do that for free", and nothing more.
 
Offhand, this looks a lot like "hosting photos and videos is really expensive, let's not do that for free", and nothing more.

you mean that is why Lynx is happy to get rid of this, it was not the cash cow they hoped? ;)

Niels
 
Offhand, this looks a lot like "hosting photos and videos is really expensive, let's not do that for free", and nothing more.

Completely agree Adam,
how's that IOC update coming?

I'm away at the moment with no access so not sure if you've finished.
 
So having a play with eBird as I already have an account (had some checklists shared with me so signed up to view them).

Tried adding some observations from my apartment earlier this month: 3 species: Eurasian Jackdaw, Great Tit and Eurasian Greenfinch.

In HBW I can assign them each to the particular sub-species I want. In eBird...not the case apparently: Jackdaw is only available at the species level; my Parus major major Great Tit has to go in as Great Tit (major group) and the Greenfinch also stops at the species binomial.

What use is that? All I see is dumbing down. Wouldn't mind so much if I couldn't follow links from eBird to the inferior Clements (I favour IOC) where all it's recognised sub-species are shown!

My only immediate solution is to use the "detail" field to manually add the sub-species which is both tedious and unnecessary (if HBWs database can carry all the subspecies then so can eBird surely?)

Anyone more familiar with eBird able to correct/convince me this is progress or shall I just focus my efforts to Scythebill in future? No evangelism from eBird lovers please...you know you exist...

Screenshots: HBW; eBird; Clements excel accessed from eBird
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2019-03-16 at 23.59.30.jpg
    Screenshot 2019-03-16 at 23.59.30.jpg
    60 KB · Views: 53
  • Screenshot 2019-03-17 at 00.00.34.jpg
    Screenshot 2019-03-17 at 00.00.34.jpg
    22.2 KB · Views: 39
  • Screenshot 2019-03-17 at 00.01.27.jpg
    Screenshot 2019-03-17 at 00.01.27.jpg
    155 KB · Views: 45
Warning! This thread is more than 4 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top