Is avian taxonomy still dependent on ongoing specimen collection? (3 Viewers)

[cajanuma]

So, tell me, how many territories had you detected before you collected the specimens? I'd really love to know. How did you get into that "difficult to reach terrain"? How many have you found in the national park?

That has got to be one of the most remarkable things I've ever read on Birdforum. It's one thing to argue that collecting is morally wrong - I happen not to agree with you, but it's a perfectly legitimate position - but quite another to accuse collectors - on the basis of no evidence whatsoever - of having done significant damage to the conservation status of a new species.
Blithely brushing aside the facts as presented by the discoverers of the new species themselves takes this to a whole new level...

I will gladly make a donation to conservation efforts at Flor de Oro or to CORBIDI directly, hopefully you and the others involved in this discussion can do the same and some good will come out of this

 

[lewis20126]

That has got to be one of the most remarkable things I've ever read on Birdforum. It's one thing to argue that collecting is morally wrong - I happen not to agree with you, but it's a perfectly legitimate position - but quite another to accuse collectors - on the basis of no evidence whatsoever - of having done significant damage to the conservation status of a new species.
Blithely brushing aside the facts as presented by the discoverers of the new species themselves takes this to a whole new level...

I will gladly make a donation to conservation efforts at Flor de Oro or to CORBIDI directly, hopefully you and the others involved in this discussion can do the same and some good will come out of this

Since when have very simple questions been remarkable? Dan should have no problem answering them, in very few words.

Cheers, a

 

[cajanuma]

Since when have very simple questions been remarkable? Dan should have no problem answering them, in very few words.

Cheers, a

He did! The important ones anyway. The second set of questions is entirely pointless. The one about the number of territories detected before collection is just a way to imply that the birds were greedily collected before any population estimate was made (and again you have no evidence of this). Perhaps you'd like to explain why knowing how they got into difficult-to-reach terrain is of any relevance whatsoever? Who the f_ cares? And surely the existance of a massive, essentially untouched and unsurveyed protected area right next to the type locality strongly suggests a healthy population of the antbirds is found there? We don't have mathematical certainty, of course, but surely it's a solid starting assumption?

 

[lewis20126]

He did! The important ones anyway. The second set of questions is entirely pointless. The one about the number of territories detected before collection is just a way to imply that the birds were greedily collected before any population estimate was made (and again you have no evidence of this). Perhaps you'd like to explain why knowing how they got into difficult-to-reach terrain is of any relevance whatsoever? Who the f_ cares? And surely the existance of a massive, essentially untouched and unsurveyed protected area right next to the type locality strongly suggests a healthy population of the antbirds is found there? We don't have mathematical certainty, of course, but surely it's a solid starting assumption?

Haha; I'll be the judge of whether my questions are important. Easy to answer aren't they? Why would anyone in Dan's position, not be able to answer them?

Cheers, a

 

[DMW]

And surely the existance of a massive, essentially untouched and unsurveyed protected area right next to the type locality strongly suggests a healthy population of the antbirds is found there? We don't have mathematical certainty, of course, but surely it's a solid starting assumption?

Surely the existence of a massive, and essentially untouched protected area right next to the type locality would also render the comments linking collecting with conservation efforts disingenuous? Are the threats from climate change and deforestation likely to be mitigated by the formal description of an obscure new antbird?

 

[cajanuma]

Are the threats from climate change and deforestation likely to be mitigated by the formal description of an obscure new antbird?

No, of course. But that's not the main point, is it? If we're debating whether the collection of four specimens of the new antbird has jeopardized its conservation status, then I think the comments by the discoverers have convincingly dispelled that notion.

 

[lewis20126]

And for crissake, stop fabricating gossip, Regina! [that was a reference to the movie Mean Girls, by the way]

Cheers,
Dan
..

I have to say this cultural reference was wasted on me. I had vaguely heard of the film, but had to look it up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_Girls .

cheers, alan

 

[lewis20126]

I think the comments by the discoverers have convincingly dispelled that notion.

Er, no. Here are three simple questions:

1) How many territories were known when the specimens were collected?

2) Where are those difficult to reach areas with all those other territories?

3) Is the species known from the National Park, or is it just an assumption that it is there?

The response can involve long paragraphs demanding that I donate to what I'm sure are very worthwhile causes or that collecting is essential to the designation of protected areas and so on, and feel free to use these types of distraction, but the nub of this is the extent to which the collector established the population size before taking the specimens.

cheers, alan

 

[cajanuma]

but the nub of this is the extent to which the collector established the population size before taking the specimens.

cheers, alan

OK, I'll take the bait. I'm only working on assumptions, same as you, and the discoverers can answer these questions much better, so the whole excercise is rather pointless, but anyway...

If you're suggesting that a full-scale, thorough, formal population survey must be carried out before any collection of a potentially new species, then I'm guessing - and I stress guessing - that this was not done.

However it seems to me that having established that the antbird was locally fairly common - see the discoverers' comments above, they left the birds that were easiest to find alone - and that there was extensive unspoiled habitat nearby, and having decades of field experience doing exactly this kind of work, they reasonably assumed that the collection of four individuals (in habitat that is likely to disappear soon anyway - at Flor de Oro, not in the Cordillera Azul National Park) would have no effect whatsoever on the population.

That's good enough for me, and I guess it's not good enough for you, right? If so, then we can end this discussion.

...but I still don't see how knowing how they got to difficult-to-reach areas has anything to do with anything

 

[lewis20126]

OK, I'll take the bait. I'm only working on assumptions, same as you, and the discoverers can answer these questions much better, so the whole excercise is rather pointless, but anyway...

If you're suggesting that a full-scale, thorough, formal population survey must be carried out before any collection of a potentially new species, then I'm guessing - and I stress guessing - that this was not done.

However it seems to me that having established that the antbird was locally fairly common - see the discoverers' comments above, they left the birds that were easiest to find alone - and that there was extensive unspoiled habitat nearby, and having decades of field experience doing exactly this kind of work, they reasonably assumed that the collection of four individuals (in habitat that is likely to disappear soon anyway - at Flor de Oro, not in the Cordillera Azul National Park) would have no effect whatsoever on the population.

That's good enough for me, and I guess it's not good enough for you, right? If so, then we can end this discussion.

...but I still don't see how knowing how they got to difficult-to-reach areas has anything to do with anything

Many territories

If Dan based (any) his assessment on assumption, then let him say that. In his response, however, he states that there are "many territories" in difficult to reach areas. I take that to mean known territories.

If you read my first post on this matter, I acknowledge it may prove to be more widespread. I agree it is very likely to be present in the nearby national park. However I caution against the use of assumptions and would remind all scientists of the "precautionary principle". Since everything ends with Bugun Liocichla, it is worth pointing out that this species essentially remains known from a tiny area where it was discovered and (to my knowledge with one exception) has not been detected far away from that location.

cheers, alan

 

[lewis20126]

Alan,

Thank you for chiming in with your wealth of knowledge and unbiased opinion.

It was I who discovered the new Myrmoderus sp and want to correct some of your misinformation such that you have the option of basing your opinions on fact, at least.
Cheers from Bolivia,
Josh Beck

Josh,

Congratulations on your find and on your excellent blog:

https://birdsofpassage.wordpress.com/about/

I may not have spent as much time in South America as you, but my first (three month) visit was, I think, to Ecuador in 1994. When did you first go? You don't look that old. My most recent experience of photographing a Myrmoderus sp was this year in Guyana and very nice it was too.

cheers, alan

 

[lewis20126]

Precautionary Principle

"The precautionary principle (or precautionary approach) to risk management states that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public, or to the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus (that the action or policy is not harmful), the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking an action that may or may not be a risk.

The principle is used by policy makers to justify discretionary decisions in situations where there is the possibility of harm from making a certain decision (e.g. taking a particular course of action) when extensive scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking. The principle implies that there is a social responsibility to protect the public from exposure to harm, when scientific investigation has found a plausible risk. These protections can be relaxed only if further scientific findings emerge that provide sound evidence that no harm will result."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle


cheers, alan

 

[cajanuma]

In his response, however, he states that there are "many territories" in difficult to reach areas. I take that to mean known territories.

OK, fair enough and I appreciate your reply. As regards the "many territories", Dan's response reads "we found many territories", which can only be taken to mean that these territories are known to be there (not just assumed to be there). A minor point but one worth making.

 

[cajanuma]

but my first (three month) visit was, I think, to Ecuador in 1994.

Any chance we may have met a Cajanuma, Podocarpus NP in July of that year then? I spent a couple of days with four British birders there, but I can't remember if there was an Alan among them.

I know we met briefly at Boca de Camarones, Colombia in 2012

Ottavio

 

[lewis20126]

Any chance we may have met a Cajanuma, Podocarpus NP in July of that year then? I spent a couple of days with four British birders there, but I can't remember if there was an Alan among them.

I know we met briefly at Boca de Camarones, Colombia in 2012

Ottavio

Possibly, although there were only 3 of us at that stage - shortly before the cabin burnt down. Anyway, good to debate with you!

cheers, alan

 

[Smilodon17]

I have a few questions for anti-collectors. I am only asking because I would like to understand your point of view. I am a museum scientist and a paleontologist. I study birds. I collect birds for my work which is motivated by understanding diversity and conservation.

What if the new species habitat is destroyed and the bird goes extinct? How much value does that photograph have after the bird is extinct?

Do you realize that if there are four individuals left the population is not viable. Imagine the population bottleneck and the inbreeding that will result in those four individuals and their offspring reproduce and this assumes that all the individuals survive. The population is already doomed in your scenario.

What if for whatever reason you can no longer go to the locality the bird was found ever again? What value does that photo have?

What if someone finds fossils in the region of the new bird species? You know the only way to identify fossils is with skeletal material. What if someone finds fossils in a location where the bird is not found today? If the latter happens then it suggests that the species range was larger historically and the modern range and individuals probably deserve protection.

What if there is some plumage difference or morphological difference that you need to measure in the lab that you couldn't measure in the field? What if the only characters that can be used to diagnose the new species are can't be measure in the field?

Lastly, and this one is more personal but I am curious, are anti-collectors vegan? If not that's some crazy hypocrisy. You waste more animal lives by eating them.

 

[DMW]

1. Do you use paper products, consume food products with palm nut oil, drive a car, or use technology that requires electricity? Do you believe that deforestation is a serious problem, or that anthropogenic global warming is a fact?

2. Google Chatham Island Black Robin.

I have a few questions for anti-collectors. I am only asking because I would like to understand your point of view. I am a museum scientist and a paleontologist. I study birds. I collect birds for my work which is motivated by understanding diversity and conservation.

What if the new species habitat is destroyed and the bird goes extinct? How much value does that photograph have after the bird is extinct?

Do you realize that if there are four individuals left the population is not viable. Imagine the population bottleneck and the inbreeding that will result in those four individuals and their offspring reproduce and this assumes that all the individuals survive. The population is already doomed in your scenario.

What if for whatever reason you can no longer go to the locality the bird was found ever again? What value does that photo have?

What if someone finds fossils in the region of the new bird species? You know the only way to identify fossils is with skeletal material. What if someone finds fossils in a location where the bird is not found today? If the latter happens then it suggests that the species range was larger historically and the modern range and individuals probably deserve protection.

What if there is some plumage difference or morphological difference that you need to measure in the lab that you couldn't measure in the field? What if the only characters that can be used to diagnose the new species are can't be measure in the field?

Lastly, and this one is more personal but I am curious, are anti-collectors vegan? If not that's some crazy hypocrisy. You waste more animal lives by eating them.

 

[Britseye]

Precautionary Principle

"The precautionary principle (or precautionary approach) to risk management states that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public, or to the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus (that the action or policy is not harmful), the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking an action that may or may not be a risk.

The principle is used by policy makers to justify discretionary decisions in situations where there is the possibility of harm from making a certain decision (e.g. taking a particular course of action) when extensive scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking. The principle implies that there is a social responsibility to protect the public from exposure to harm, when scientific investigation has found a plausible risk. These protections can be relaxed only if further scientific findings emerge that provide sound evidence that no harm will result."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle


cheers, alan

This is very impressive, Alan. I respect wisdom when I see it. I'm only guessing but I assume the principle is a constant for you in your profession?

I know nothing of Antbirds, but isn't the Jocotoco Antpitta another recent example of irresponsible collecting of a recently-discovered species? (Am I imagining I recall hearing they'd moved straight in on the Long-whiskered Owls as well?) I think the behaviour falls somewhere along the spectrum of sociopathy.

 

[Smilodon17]

Wait --- I avoid foods with palm oil, I mostly bike but drive a Prius when I need to, I am a vegan, I believe that deforestation is a serious problem as is global warming. My entire research platform is focused on studying species' responses to climate change. I have seen deforestation destroy an incredible amount of endemic bird habitat in Peru over just a few years.

My question about veganism is directly related to the question about collecting. You value the lives of a handful of bird species while eat chickens without thinking twice when you throw away a carcass or poo out what you needed from it.

P.S. the Chatham Island Black Robin is a nice looking bird. I googled it. It is endangered because people introduced predators to the island. Yeah, ok so one female 'saved' the species. Who is going to do that for all new species? Are you going to go down to Peru and round up some pairs and figure out what conditions they need to breed? What are you going to do when some individuals die during your breeding project?

1. Do you use paper products, consume food products with palm nut oil, drive a car, or use technology that requires electricity? Do you believe that deforestation is a serious problem, or that anthropogenic global warming is a fact?

2. Google Chatham Island Black Robin.

 

[cajanuma]

but isn't the Jocotoco Antpitta another recent example of irresponsible collecting of a recently-discovered species?

Whoa, hold on! There are legitimate arguments for being against collecting, but can you point to any shred of evidence that collection has had even the slightest impact on the population of Jocotoco Antpitta? I know some extremely misleading claims were made about the collection of a couple of birds in Peru (see here for a rebuttal: http://www.museum.lsu.edu/~Remsen/ABCletter.html) but this is exactly how false rumors get started