Ivory-billed Woodpecker (formerly updates) (1 Viewer)

[Andigena]

Details, no actually just rumor. These folks do stick out around here so if they were seen hovering over the few fast speed internet servers in this area just indicates that they were outside their normal deviation.
Numerous variables here,e.g. why is Cornell bumming CPU time off a lowly Community college?

The Cache River at Cotton Plant has risen 8 feet in the last week, and the White River at Augusta has risen over 10 feet in the last two weeks (USGS gages). Has this flooded large areas that CLO was recently searching by foot? Does this mean the rivers are well out of their banks? Has this thrown Cornell off-balance? By the way, Goat, do you use a boat in WRNWR? What kind?

 

[fangsheath]

As much as the White has risen it has still not reached flood stage. The Cache is finally above flood stage and this undoubtedly helps with getting around quietly. Far from throwing them off-balance, I think it gives the searchers more advantage. But the water needs to come up still more to flood large areas of White River NWR.

 

[lvn600]

In regards to double knocks-do you think it is possible that some pranksters could be making some of the double knock sounds in the same way that some people make phony crop circles and bigfoot footprints?(I'm not being sarchastic-just asking the question)

 

[fangsheath]

I think anything is possible. One of the biggest problems with trying to understand the acoustic evidence is the secrecy surrounding it. Since we don't have access to more than a few of the double-knock recordings or any of the knocking sounds that were rejected it is difficult to make an independent assessment. What we do know is that among the double-knocks that were included as candidates last year, there is a temporal and spatial clustering, with many occurring pre-dawn and another cluster post-sunset. We know that candidate double-knocks are clustered in the very same two areas that suspicuous vocalizations occurred. There are at least two double-knock recordings in which it is apparent to my ear that there are two distinct sources of double-knocks. And it is very apparent to me that the candidate double-knocks are local sounds, not distant sounds. I would add that to my knowledge there was not a single candidate double-knock identified in the Pearl River ARU recordings from 2002, other than the one later determined to be gunshots, nor any candidate vocalizations.

There are other suspicious events, such as Iliff's encounter, but the fact is, there is a lot of secrecy and with secrecy it is next to impossible to really understand what is going on. With careers on the line there is even more pressure for secrecy and so we have a vicious circle. This will continue until a clear image of an ivory-bill is produced by the CLO, one that detractors know they cannot challenge in the courtroom of public opinion and succeed.

 

[Edward woodwood]

Vladimir Dinets posted this on ID Frontiers listserv
http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0603d&L=birdwg01&T=0&P=3722
For anyone who hasn't heard of him - this is a man who knows how to find and watch animals and birds. His exploits are already legendary and rather extreme. He knows his stuff though.
http://dinets.travel.ru/ is his website. be amazed.

A few points on the woodpecker issue:
Whatever the genetics involved, it is a known fact that birds from certain
populations can become extremely difficult to find if they are heavily
persecuted. In Central Russia, where Northern goshawk has been shot on site
as vermin for decades, it is virtually impossible to see one, even where
this species is common. But in unpopulated parts of Siberia it can be tame
and noisy, especially around nests.
But I've never heard of such a thing happening to a woodpecker. Black
woodpecker used to be routinely shot by Russian hunters, either for its
habit of noisily following them along the trail, for being black and weird,
or simply because they are trigger-happy and stupid. But it is still very
tame and still often follows people, even though it is now rare in many
areas because of habitat loss and "sanitary logging" (it used to be a common
practice to remove snags in managed forests in Russia due to believe that
they are a sorce of fungal infections of living trees).
Why don't black woodpeckers become more shy, while goshawks do? I don't
know. Might have something to do with the amount of learning a chick gets
from its parents.
I bought the original rediscovery story, even though I was amazed that such
a huge bird could remain undetected for decades in a country with millions
of birders. Last summer I visited the area in question, and immediately
became VERY sceptical. It is small, not particularly inaccessible, and the
oldgrowth area is mostly a very narrow belt. Unless some hard evidence is
produced within the next few weeks, I think we should accept the sad fact.
But I'll still be checking every pileated woodpecker I see, just in case...
Vladimir Dinets
U. of Miami

 

[Curtis Croulet]

even though I was amazed that such
a huge bird could remain undetected for decades in a country with millions
of birders.

It wasn't!

 

[Edward woodwood]

It wasn't!

could you list the accepted sightings then

just to put us in the picture?

BirdLife (who i prefer to trust on these matters) say

2005 IUCN Red List Category (as evaluated by BirdLife International - the official Red List Authority for birds for IUCN): Critically Endangered

Justification This species was rediscovered in eastern Arkansas in 2004, 60 years after the last confirmed North American record. Although all sightings may have referred to just one individual, a large area of fairly suitable habitat remains. It may also survive in south-eastern Cuba, but there have been no confirmed records since 1987 despite many searches. The global population is likely to be tiny, and for these reasons it is treated as Critically Endangered.

Tim

You reckon they still think it was 'rediscovered'?

 

[Curtis Croulet]

The claim was that they haven't been seen, not whether the sightings conform to some arbitrary standard of a "confirmed" sighting. Those are two different things.

 

[Edward woodwood]

The claim was that they haven't been seen, not whether the sightings conform to some arbitrary standard of a "confirmed" sighting. Those are two different things.

your approach to rare bird sightings and your reasoning is why we have rigourous bodies like BirdLife International and national and regional rarities committees.

they are not arbitrary standards.

surely you must see the reason we have these bodies?

people have claimed in all sincerity to have seen UFOs, Bigfoot, Yeti, Chupacabras, Elvis, and even at one time, Hitler. You cannot accord these sightings any credence without adequate documentation. Of which there is none.

Tim

 

[Curtis Croulet]

It's fine for an organization to want confirmation for their own listings, but that doesn't imply (nor do I think they mean it to imply) that everyone who claims to have seen a rare species is lying or incompetent. They just haven't met the standard for the list. It implies a need for further investigation, not dismissal.

 

[Edward woodwood]

It's fine for an organization to want confirmation for their own listings, but that doesn't imply (nor do I think they mean it to imply) that everyone who claims to have seen a rare species is lying or incompetent. They just haven't met the standard for the list. It implies a need for further investigation, not dismissal.

unfortunately it's not for 'their own listings'

the red data books and lists are used by policy makers

governments require rigourous analysis and objectivity before shelling out cash for conservation. Hence only fully documented records can be included

it's another excellent reason that folks observing IBWO should document their sightings fully and submit their notes. To not do so is almost criminally negligent. Especially if they are of genuine IBWO.

as you say, non-acceptance of a record doesn't necessarily mean the observer made an error, just didn't obtain adequate documentation. If it happens a couple of times then fair enough, but repeatedly over a large number of years then the sightings may be questioned on a larger scale...

one of the things that most worrying me is that of the people who had sightings, several are now making money off the back of it... call me cynical if you like.

Tim :king:

 

[Curtis Croulet]

several are now making money off the back of it

Such as?

 

[SBauer]

2005 IUCN Red List Category (as evaluated by BirdLife International - the official Red List Authority for birds for IUCN): Critically Endangered

Justification This species was rediscovered in eastern Arkansas in 2004, 60 years after the last confirmed North American record. Although all sightings may have referred to just one individual, a large area of fairly suitable habitat remains. It may also survive in south-eastern Cuba, but there have been no confirmed records since 1987 despite many searches.

Actually, according to Jackson's book 'In Search of Ivory-billed Woodpeckers', the records from Cuba in 1987 were not truly "confirmed". There are apparently no photos, film, video, or sound recordings of the birds.

Check out the postings from Julian Sellers on the ID-Frontiers discussion. Sounds like what Jackson said about the Ivory-billeds behavior in the Auk paper directly contradicts what he said in the book. His Cuba adventures sound strangely similar to what's happened in Arkansas.

 

[Edward woodwood]

Sufjan Stevens (a modern singer songwriter, slightly eccentric, for those of you not up to speed on popular culture) has recently written a song about IBWO...

http://anon.npr-mp3.speedera.net/anon.npr-mp3/atc/20050706_atc_godbird.mp3

it's a free download

Tim

 

[Curtis Croulet]

Actually, according to Jackson's book 'In Search of Ivory-billed Woodpeckers', the records from Cuba in 1987 were not truly "confirmed". There are apparently no photos, film, video, or sound recordings of the birds.

So, we have a sliding standard for what consitutes "confirmed," dependent on the immediate motives of those compiling the list.

Getting back to the Dinets quote: he's entitled to his opinion. But I think he's simply incorrect to say "undetected." "Unconfirmed," OK. "Undetected," not OK. Some of the pre-2004 sightings are quite credible, even if they don't rise to the standard of an international list.

Studying the website of the California BRC, it appears to me that -- if the Ivory-bill were a concern in our state -- the recent sightings would probably put it on the "review" list, awaiting better evidence. It wouldn't be a binary choice of being "on the list" or being dismissed as non-existent. FWIW, they have the California Condor listed as "extirpated."

 

[Edward woodwood]

So, we have a sliding standard for what consitutes "confirmed," dependent on the immediate motives of those compiling the list.

you must remember that's just a quote from Jackson's book NOT a judgement from a records committee or a comment in a Red Data Book

in other words, just his opinion

BirdLife say this:
The last accepted sightings of Ivory-billed Woodpecker were in Cuba in 1987 and 1988; and the last fully documented US sighting occurred in Louisiana in 1944. While there have been a number of reports of possible Ivory-billed Woodpecker sightings since then, none have been confirmed prior to today's announcement.
A resident subspecies of ivory-billed woodpecker (Campephilus
principalis bairdii) occupied tall forests throughout Cuba, and a small
population was mapped and photographed in eastern Cuba as late as 1956.
Fleeting observations of at least two individuals in 1986 and 1987 by
several experts are widely accepted as valid, but repeated efforts to
confirm continued existence of that population have failed.

if anyone is interested in the species status in Cuba, they could read these:
Lammertink, J. M.. 1992. Search for Ivory-billed Woodpecker in Cuba. Dutch Birding 14: 170–173.

Lammertink, J. M.. 1995. No more hope for the Ivory-billed Woodpecker Campephilus principalis. Cotinga 3: 45–47.

Lammertink, M., A. R. Estrada. 1995. Status of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker Campephilus principalis in Cuba: almost certainly extinct. Bird Conserv. Int. 5: 53–59.

it may still cling on in Sierra Maestre, prob more chance than in Arkansas but it doesn't look good

there's a link to the Cotinga paper here: http://users.aristotle.net/~swarmack/ojito.html

Tim

 

[Curtis Croulet]

Lammertink is working with Cornell in Arkansas. He's a believer!

 

[Xenospiza]

Lammertink is working with Cornell in Arkansas. He's a believer!

Which has no relevance whatsoever to his assessment of the Cuban Ivorybill.

 

[artistangelrrt]

Great views from the White River

But the water needs to come up still more to flood large areas of White River NWR.

Still great views and news from a friend just drifting down the White River this morning."The river is high enough to see over the banks and beyond. In the woods, the birds are a feeding frenzy above the rising water as insects climb to safety". Yall come.

 

[timeshadowed]

Vladimir Dinets posted this on ID Frontiers listserv
http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0603d&L=birdwg01&T=0&P=3722
For anyone who hasn't heard of him - this is a man who knows how to find and watch animals and birds. His exploits are already legendary and rather extreme. He knows his stuff though.
http://dinets.travel.ru/ is his website. be amazed.
{Quote Vladimir Dinets:}
I bought the original rediscovery story, even though I was amazed that such a huge bird could remain undetected for decades in a country with millions of birders.
Vladimir Dinets U. of Miami

What of the sightings of the IBWO on "Private Land" which remain off-limits to birders??

There have been several reports in the interveining years of IBWO's being sighted by hunters on "Private Land" and the land owner dis-allowing ANYONE on the property to confirm such sightings. Right or wrong of the land owner's decision, but the fact remains that the IBWO's have not been "undetected for decades" as Vladimir Dinets has just stated.

I believe that these "unconfirmed" sightings should carry at least some weight. They should not just be dismissed or ignored, as they have been for decades.

TimeShadowed