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

[slobyn]

Hopefully it'll work. I don't have the DVD myself so it would be great if you could post anything that you find out.

I did the step-thru on the Internet version on the Science Mag website. I have Luneau's DVD, and I'm not sure if I even can step through it, but he takes too long getting to the fly-off. I'll have to see what I can do with it.

 

[fangsheath]

I'm not sure which version of the video you're watching, but basically the versions I have seen show the frames more or less as they were in the original - At least, there are no frames "missing," as it were, that would account for the sudden appearance of the white. To my eye there are 2 frames in which the white on the perched bird is conspicuous. In the frame previous to the first of the above 2 frames, I seem to detect a very small amount of white just beginning to appear. It see no indication of black in that frame. But it is apparent to me that the bird either moves or begins to extend its wings - It is not merely perched when the white becomes clearly visible, or it would be clearly seen in previous frames. The boat is in fact moving toward the right and the bird should be less visible over time. Yet it suddenly appears and within a few frames the tail swings out.

 

[jurek]

But here’s where it gets confusing.

Because updating this information is rather slow and half is updated, half not.

 

[jurek]

(putting conspiracy hat on)

Eeh, not believing IBWO needs conspiracy theory.

Several observers said that IBWO had white upperwing. To believe, as Sibley et al. want, that white patch is on underwing you need:
- several experienced birders cannot tell upperwing from underwing,
- conspiracy theory.

Or just it was IBWO.

 

[Curtis Croulet]

Eeh, not believing IBWO needs conspiracy theory.

Several observers said that IBWO had white upperwing. To believe, as Sibley et al. want, that white patch is on underwing you need:
- several experienced birders cannot tell upperwing from underwing,
- conspiracy theory.

Or just it was IBWO.

No. Sibley's paper is about the Luneau video. The sightings are a separate issue, and Sibley's paper (unless I've missed something) does not question them. According to Gallagher, when he talked in San Diego, Sibley believes Ivory-bills are there. He just doesn't think the video shows one.

 

[jurek]

Video was taken during an observation when people saw white trailing edge on upperwing. I don't see a reason to separate video from field notes.

 

[Curtis Croulet]

"David told me later that he never would have mentioned the sighting if not for the videotape. 'I just didn't get a good enough look,' he said. 'Whenever I see a large woodpecker flying, I look at the wing pattern to see whether the white trails or leads the black, which usually takes just a split second. This was particularly frustrating, because I only saw the bird from the rear. When it finally did turn, it was too far away to see the black-white relationship with my naked eye.'" (The Grail Bird, pp. 222-223)

 

[cts]

Sunday my wife and I watched two PIWO hanging around our house. They were in a very wooded area flying from downed log to log. Spending a lot of the time on ground, then taking off for another near by log and or tree. We watched from for at least 6 minutes seeing them take off and land many times. After watching this great circus we watched the Luneau video on DVD and neither of us could in any way say that the Luneau video was a normal PIWO. No way. Another interesting thing was that a female Northern Flicker followed the female PIWO around from log to log always keeping about 10 feet distance. I added the Flicker part because I wondered if this is unusal. WE have watched Blue Jays following the PIWO in the upper limbs of trees, but have not see this before. Is this that unusual?

 

[Andigena]

Despite all of this, it it clear that Birdlife International, the Audubon Society and the IUCN Redlist all currently list the IBWO as extant.
Dave

As we look at what the UN, and international birdwatchers' organizations are saying, and reviewing the jousting of academics and birders in the journals and in the blogs, it should not be forgotten that the organization which has the most LEGAL clout over the IBWO in the United States is the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).

The Endangered Species Act requires the USFWS to conserve endangered species. Importantly, the USFWS considers the IBWO to be an endangered species (not an extinct species), and they are developing a recovery plan for the IBWO. They began this process in May, 2005, after the Arkansas announcements. The recovery planning is an expensive endeavor, involving many scientists within and associated with the USFWS, doing habitat surveys, various population analyses and projections, etc. Their current proposal is to have a recovery plan draft by the end of 2006.

See the USFWS IBWO website at http://www.fws.gov/ivorybill/ I recommend the brochure on the lower right side of the homepage, which has the most thorough recent review of IBWO biology I have seen. Under "history", they also have a nice .pdf map of existing bottomland forest habitat in the USA superimposed by locations of 29 sightings of IBWO from 1950-2003, drawn from JJackson (2004) and USFWS files. Some of these sightings are backed by photos (FLewis), tapes (JDennis), extensive published notes (Agey/Heinzman), or were made by eminent biologists in the USA (WEastman, HStoddard, etc.). Confirmation was never made--but these records are apparently maintained in the files of the USFWS as possible evidence of IBWO.

 

[Curtis Croulet]

Andigena: Thank you for locating the map of post-1944 sightings. Gallagher showed this during his talk in San Diego, and I was hoping to get a better look at it.

 

[MMinNY]

Though I've sworn off this thread, I'm going to make a brief return to provide a link to an article that points up the pernicious impact of some of the more extreme skeptical arguments and how these arguments can be recruited in service of an anti-environmental agenda. It also leads me to wonder whether, as has been the case in the debate over global warming, any of the skeptics are being funded by corporate interests (including non-scientists posting on blogs and forums; this is a common practice on political blogs btw).

Note that I am NOT alluding to anyone in particular. Just speculating in general terms.

The most relevant quote:

"How would surrounding private-property owners be protected from intrusive, costly, federal regulations if TNC were to conjure up another highly-suspect species like the ivory-billed woodpecker? The answers are self-evident."

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2006/032006/03282006/175213

 

[Curtis Croulet]

(followup to the other thread)

MMinNY: All I got at surfbirds was a script error.

Although I have argued that Cornell could well be withholding some very cool stuff from us, I do think that if they had something good enough to silence the skeptics, they'd have revealed it by now. Short of that, they'll wait until the season is over.

 

[Goatnose]

Roller Coaster

(followup to the other thread)

MMinNY: All I got at surfbirds was a script error.

Although I have argued that Cornell could well be withholding some very cool stuff from us, I do think that if they had something good enough to silence the skeptics, they'd have revealed it by now. Short of that, they'll wait until the season is over.

Although I have argued that Cornell could well be withholding some very cool stuff from us, I do think that if they had something good enough to silence the skeptics, they'd have revealed it by now. Short of that, they'll wait until the season is over.[/QUOTE]
From a local. As I posted last week, I believe the volunteers have something finally, based on rumor. The rumor that I heard is that an active nest cavity has been found WRNWR. Now, let us hope that the volunteers do know the difference between a Pileated and an Ivory Billed.
As for my searches, I have had but one scare since October 2005 in the area that I am searching on the WRNWR. That is the East Lake, Forked Lake, Green River, Cut Bluff Slough, WRNWR. Before October several scares (scare being could have been an IBWO) June 05 to October 05. I will return to this area in the fall but until the end of the season, below Crockett’s Bluff to St. Charles to Maddox Bay will be my area to search, based on rumor. Probable that the St. Charles Access area( also know as Brown Shanty access area) will be closed due to high water soon( this happens most every spring), thus opportunities to task out another access point…yea good luck. Also I did search in 2005 during June and July but this year, based on that experience, I will not search and wait until late August or September to venture back.
In summation, at this point in time it has been a “roller coaster season” with ups and downs every week. Hoping this latest rumor from the volunteers will take root.

 

[MMinNY]

I sincerely hope this rumor proves to be true and also that the Cornell team does nothing disruptive. The Allen and Kellogg paper discussed on the other thread yesterday strikes me as a bit alarming in this regard.

http://elibrary.unm.edu/sora/Auk/v0...p0164-p0184.pdf

Not that I think the Cornell team would be foolish enough to bang on the tree (see page 20), but the paper suggests that there's a high rate of nest failure, and I can't help but suspect that the presence of a study team was a contributing factor in the instances reported.

Although I have argued that Cornell could well be withholding some very cool stuff from us, I do think that if they had something good enough to silence the skeptics, they'd have revealed it by now. Short of that, they'll wait until the season is over.

From a local. As I posted last week, I believe the volunteers have something finally, based on rumor. The rumor that I heard is that an active nest cavity has been found WRNWR. Now, let us hope that the volunteers do know the difference between a Pileated and an Ivory Billed.
As for my searches, I have had but one scare since October 2005 in the area that I am searching on the WRNWR. That is the East Lake, Forked Lake, Green River, Cut Bluff Slough, WRNWR. Before October several scares (scare being could have been an IBWO) June 05 to October 05. I will return to this area in the fall but until the end of the season, below Crockett’s Bluff to St. Charles to Maddox Bay will be my area to search, based on rumor. Probable that the St. Charles Access area( also know as Brown Shanty access area) will be closed due to high water soon( this happens most every spring), thus opportunities to task out another access point…yea good luck. Also I did search in 2005 during June and July but this year, based on that experience, I will not search and wait until late August or September to venture back.
In summation, at this point in time it has been a “roller coaster season” with ups and downs every week. Hoping this latest rumor from the volunteers will take root.[/QUOTE]

 

[Curtis Croulet]

Hmm. Someone says, "I wonder if they found a nest?" This comment is overheard, and people start saying, "They found a nest!"

 

[Goatnose]

Slim Chance

Hmm. Someone says, "I wonder if they found a nest?" This comment is overheard, and people start saying, "They found a nest!"

I agree Curtis, slim chance, after oh this many years. Why has not someone with credentials declared this bird extinct? It has been 60 years! We wish to maintain this species in our head but that is in itself not maintaining our responsibility. This matter should be resolved and not put off for another generation to decide. You are as old as I, you and I need data yes or no not maybe or rumors. Keep looking ....I am.

 

[Curtis Croulet]

Goatnose: I think they're there. It's just this rumor that seems flimsy to me. But, hey, I hope it's true! I'm hoping to see some people eating large servings of crow.

 

[choupique1]

the very cool stuff... whatever it may be that occurred recently... was on a private holding.. and it was not found by a volunteer...

 

[timeshadowed]

the very cool stuff... whatever it may be that occurred recently... was on a private holding.. and it was not found by a volunteer...

Thanks Chou!! Very, very cool to know that the 'something'... "whatever it may be" is more than just a 'rumor'. !!

TimeShadowed

 

[jurek]

I sincerely hope this rumor proves to be true and also that the Cornell team does nothing disruptive. The Allen and Kellogg paper discussed on the other thread yesterday strikes me as a bit alarming in this regard.

I think no Cornell birder or any other birder would behave like these guys decades ago.

Equipment, skill, means of transport, conduct of ornithologistss were completely different than today. I think it makes us easily mis-understand their words.

They write they camped 300 feet (100m) from active nest. What they call "shy" or "visible" can mean completely different things. For example, ivorybill can be described as "noisy" because they banged into the tree trunk and then sat 10 m from the tree. I wonder if they had binoculars and what quality?