Bird watching vs Ornithology (1 Viewer)

[steve55]

I should start this off by saying that with the following post I mean no offence and I’m not having a go at anyone but I just have a question that I’d never really though of before.

I know from reading previous posts that there’s a lot of stereotypes of certain individuals and that there's a huge diversity of types of people you might encounter when out observing birds.

The thing i was wondering...

Is there a division between watching birds and studying birds?

I’m relatively new to the whole world of birds, there’s still a lot out there that I would not be too sure of identifying but at the same time there's a decent number of species that I do recognise...

Anyway this is a very general question put out to everyone on the forum (assuming that everyone does actually watch birds) but do all you people out there as well as watching birds also study them.

Do watchers also take an interest in bird biology as well as physical appearance of birds? Would you know about the evolution of flight, and the theories involving archaeopteryx and hoatzin, as well as telling me about how to tell a chiffchaff from a willow warbler?

Do you care about polyandry, polygamy (sequential or simultaneous) monogamous breeding strategies and extra pair copulations or is it just about where the latest "3 star rarity" is and visually collecting birds to put on a list?

So basically the question again...

Do people that watch also study?

Again this is just aimed to get a general consensus and I’m not trying to say that everyone is just in it for the ticks.

Cheers,

Steve

 

[Katy Penland]

Hope you're prepared for 25,000+ different answers!

I'm definitely not into birdwatching for ticks (except the ones that hitch a ride home on my jeans), but am interested to varying degrees in just about every other aspect of birdwatching both as a hobby and in the science, particularly behaviors and abundance (the latter for purposes of conservation). The area of "study" I've most concentrated on is birdsong and calls and really need to do more in the natural history area.

So to answer your question, yes, I watch and study. :t:

 

[birdpotter]

Yes, although I haven't had much time lately to sit and really study on birds, I would have to say that I too watch and study.
I think it is helpful to know the background science/theories. Of course, I have forgotten ALL of these things and only have vague recollections when someone brings up things like "the evolution of flight, and the theories involving archaeopteryx and hoatzin". There is a flash of recognition, but then it fades into obscurity. I figure, and nobody laugh because I am still naive about raising children and still have hopes and dreams, but I figure once my son, who is almost three, gets into school and we start having a routine going where I have more time for myself, I can start flipping through some old text books and get some of that knowledge back. Right now I just thrill in seeing any type of bird and the birds that I have never seen before that happen across my path make life that much more pleasurable.

Too much info? Oh well.
Best
Elizabeth

 

[Grousemore]

Is there a division between watching birds and studying birds?

I’m relatively new to the whole world of birds, there’s still a lot out there that I would not be too sure of identifying but at the same time there's a decent number of species that I do recognise...


Steve

Possibly a bit too soon to be asking this sort of question then?
More experience and you'll be able to make your own judgements.

 

[Lucky Birder]

Well Steve, I would consider myself a birder AND an ornithologist. My interest used to be largely tick focused throughout the 80's and well in to the 90's but I'm now more interested in migration and bird behaviour particularly of Spotted Flycatchers. Without writing my biography, I would say that most observer's interests evolve throughout there bird careers and the way I see birding now is different to how I saw it in the early 1980's identification period and different to how I saw it in 1990's twitching period. I am now very much in a studying period and can quite easily spend an hour watching and trying to photograph a Common Whitethroat- the little buggers!

 

[Mark Bruce]

Possibly a bit too soon to be asking this sort of question then?
More experience and you'll be able to make your own judgements.

At times the questions from the inexperienced are the most challenging.I don't think that it's too soon for Steve to ask a question like this.I don't believe making your own experienced based judgements will necessarily answer the question.I think Katy is right in saying you are going to get 25 000+ different answers,making judgements on that's going to be hard.The lack of experience may well lead to a more open and honest judgement.

Mark

 

[mountain man]

Just because you study a bird doesn't make you an ornithologist.

 

[Andrew]

Here's my two penn'orth......

I would wager that NONE of us are Ornithologists.

Has anyone ever spent a whole year with a family of Sparrows or Greenfinches to learn their behaviourial patterns or influences on the natural environment and then submitted a paper on it to a journal?

Have any of us collected and tabulated migration patterns to use for assessing any patterns over so many years?

Has anyone studied DNA or parasites in birds and submitted a paper?

Looking at a bird and noting the wing formulas, plumage stages, colours and so on is just Birdwatching. We are not contributing to mankinds knowledge of birds so we are not Ornithologists.

A real Ornithologist would be so swamped under with paper work they would have no time for BF.


As for me I am a tick crazy birdwatcher.

 

[the bird]

An ornothologist to my understanding usually has a degree in a related subject, where bird watchers don't.

Now somebody mentioned twitching. This is a form of bird watching but not ornothology. Twitchers tend to travel around the country ticking birds they see - these birds can land any where at any time - in habitats that relate in no way to their natural environments ie pub car parks, shopping centres etc etc.

Ornothologists tend to understand more about habitat and bird species that are more often found that habitat.

Before any body gets on their high horse, this is a personal opinion and based upon times I have twitched, and the amazement I've felt when twitchers tick birds by just seeing the tail feathers of a rarity.

Another example - twitched Rose-coloured Starling at Flamborough Head a couple of weeks ago. I had three groups of twitchers come over to see the bird in the time I had been looking at/studying the bird.

Its a case of -

twitchers - seen it, ticked it, moved on to see next rarity 50 miles away.

ornothologist/good birder - find it, see it, cup of coffee, study bird, watch behaviour etc etc and after another cup of coffee, move on and see whatelse is in the area.

To the all the twitchers out there - this ticking business - doesn't it make you feel abit hollow - there is no excitement in it.


Back to the original question - after a few years of birding I think a good birder automatically becomes an ornothologist - degree or not.


The bird - John

 

[helenol]

I thought ornithology was the scientific study of birds.

 

[Steven Astley]

Unfortunately there is illness that effects many birdwatchers in Britain to varying degrees its called twitching. Where there is an overiding desire to collect a big list of species seen within the british isles which clouds all other aspects of the very interesting points you make. As a solitary birdwatcher I remember reading an article around 6 years ago, think it was in the Times, about these inflicted people describing them in rather unsavoury terms such as sexist. I was shocked and in disbelief. Its only untill I recently I realise how true the article is. Birdwatching should be about watching a bird in its natural habitat behaving in a natural way. I get great excitment every time I see a kingfisher on my local patch. It will always be a magical bird. It symbolises the regenerated health of the local river. Twitchers would rather travel 100s of miles, polluting the atmosphere, to see a near dead penguin in someones backgarden. Their use of language and mannerism would give harry enfield a great character rivalling vicky pollard. Watch springwatch tonight, Simon descibes little ringed plovers as rare, which they are ( a twitcher would never describe this bird as rare for fear of seeming incompotent ). Also simon gets excited watching coots. Although not quite as they say 'plastic' a twictcher is bored by sight of these. We all as birders sufer from twitcheritis. Some more than others

 

[HH75]

Hi Bolton Birdman,
You are entitled to your opinions of twitching, and I'll agree with you in so much as there sometimes are unsavoury incidents related to twitching (poor fieldcraft, lack of concern for a bird's welfare, trespassing etc), though these are thankfully rare (almost unknown in Ireland, not sure what the situation is in the UK?)
That said, your persistent attacks on the twitching fraternity make you, in an odd way, almost as 'elitist' as you perceive them to be (i.e. you're 'better' than them, as you look at the commoner birds and enjoy them etc)!
Reality isn't as simple as you make out: many of those who twitch also take part in vital survey work, wetland bird counts, edit county reports, work a local patch to find their own birds etc. I personally twitch, but look at common birds all the time: something like a group of 1st-w Herring Gulls, even once I'm happy that there's nothing rarer in with them, is well worth studying to get to grips with the variation in appearance.
Before anyone replies, I DO acknowledge that some birders just twitch and do little else: while I couldn't limit myself to that, the people that DO are not bad people (or, if they are, it's not because they are twitchers). Birds are a source of fascination, and that fascination affects different people in different ways. Long may you enjoy your own type of birding, there's plenty of room for everyone!
Regards,
Harry

 

[POP]

Well said Harry.

POP

 

[Steven Astley]

Hi harry. I agree with everything you say. Apart from the fact there isn't enough room for the million or so birdwatchers in Britain to turn into twitchers. The enviroment cannot handle it. Also there isn't enough room in the hides for twitchers to recover from their twitch when other people are trying to birdwatch

 

[HH75]

Hi BB,
Did I ever say that I wanted all of the birdwatchers in Britain to become twitchers? I think not....
Harry

 

[helenol]

I wondered how long it would take to turn this thread into a "twitching" thread once again.

 

[James Lowther]

Twitching isn't orntihology, but then neither is birding. If you study bird behaviour for your own pleasure that's not ornithology either. Being interested in ornithology doesn't make you an ornithologist.

HOWEVER,
that doesn't mean any of the above activities aren't worth doing

 

[the bird]

Twitching isn't orntihology, but then neither is birding. If you study bird behaviour for your own pleasure that's not ornithology either. Being interested in ornithology doesn't make you an ornithologist.

HOWEVER,
that doesn't mean any of the above activities aren't worth doing

should that have started with the words 'In my opinion...' .....but I get the point. So what is ornothology? In your opinion.

The Bird

 

[James Lowther]

To be honest, my opinion doesn't really come into it. Ornithology IS the scientific study of birds, as helenol said earlier.

 

[Steven Astley]

Ornithology is a loose term for studying birds, you cannot get a degree in it, although nowadays you probally can. Zoologist, Biologist or Ecologist are people who earn money out of studying birds. When I was younger I was a member of RSPB youth section which was known as the Young Ornithologist Club. People who write books on birds with no formal education or training often refer to themselfs as ornithologists, I believe its a loose term. Perhaps the best person to call themselfs an ornithologists are zoologists who specialise in bird biology ( Ornithology )