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

[Hench]

I confess to knowing relatively little about the whole woodpecker thing, but prior to posting I did take the time to read posts and look at the video and listen to some of the recordings (one clearly sounded like a gunshot to me).

I showed the video to some of my birder friends, we all saw PIWO with pale patches (to us, some in the wrong place and some missing from the right place). I agree with previous postings that anything is possible....I know someone who stumbled a Red-billed Ground-cuckoo sitting on a trail preening in the dappled sunlight! Even if there was one or two IBWOs left then what?

Sad for me is the huge effort being put into this and the unabashed generation of cash (a quick look at Cornell's website demonstrates what is going on in that regard).

It's sobering that it seems to take this kind of circus to motivate and generate green pounds (dollars). I would guess that we could buy a whole lot of lowland forest or restorable land for the cost of all these searches and other efforts.

On an ethical level I'm personally not okay for money (or effort) to be raised by NGOs or others on the back of a spurious thesis. Imo it stands to undermine the strength of scientific argument and, if the healthy sceptics are right, the next time round it might just be that much more difficult to get folks excited about the next crisis.

Meanwhile, back at the farm, global warming marches on and while we worry about a few last woodpeckers (of whatever species!) whole ecosytems are clinging on by their skinteeth. Funny really.

 

[Bonsaibirder]

A)

Visual encounters. What do you make of the 2005 Gallagher and Sparling sighting where they both report seeing the bird together and at the same time, Mike Collins reports from Louisiana and the 1999 Kullivan sigting? What about all of the other sightings in recent years from both Florida and Arkansas? In other words what do you believe they saw and why do you believe they reported them as IBWO's?

Not a single one stands up on its own - a good description of a good quality sighting would not require any "belief" as Tim has pointed out.

B)

IBWO-like calls recorded. Many sound recordings of IBWO call-like sounds have been collected from Arkansas and Florida over the past couple of years. They sound similar to the known IBWO "kent" calls to be sure. What do you suppose made these noises?

Not a single one of these sounds has been observed coming from a bird, never mind a woodpecker. Could be IBWO, could be lots of other things (especially the ones from Florida). There are very few reference IBWO calls to compare with.

C)

Double-knocks. What was/were the source(s) of the double-knock sounds recorded from both Arkansas and Florida over the past couple of years?

Not a single one of these sounds has been observed coming from a bird, never mind a woodpecker. Very variable, especially the Florida ones - very little information available on how variable IBWO double-knocks were.

D)

The famous Atchafalaya photos from the early 70's, were they real or fake?

Don't know. Definitely IBWO if real.

E)

The various cavities and foraging sign that have been photographed and documented that seem consistent with IBWO sign, what do you think?

Not a single one of these has been observed being made, except by PIWOs.

F)

The Luneu Video. Pileated or Ivorybill?

Pileated.

G)

Mike Collins Video. Pileated or Ivorybill?

A woodpecker, probably Pileated.

H) Tmguy - it's made of wood !!

 

[Edward woodwood]

Okay, I'll give it a try, at the risk of getting flamed. Disclaimer, this is my opinion, and I don't pretend to have a monopoly on truth:


Mostly IBWO. A few of them might be PIWOs mis-id'ed.

Again, mostly IBWO.

Many of them are quite convincing, however.

Mostly IBWO.

Not sure, leaning toward authentic but not totally persuaded.

I've heard pretty compelling arguments from people on both sides.

What I find most persuasive is Jesse's observation that bark has been scaled on the tree. That lends them a certain aura of authenticity.

Some PIWO. The most impressive to me are some of Mike's recent photos of feeding sign from the Pearl, which don't resemble any PIWO sign I've ever seen.

Probably IBWO but I have been swayed by some of the critique to the point that I'm about 60% convinced.

Far from beyond a reasonable doubt.

The video was never the determining factor for me,

I'm far more confident that this is an IBWO

I'd add that I also find Steve Sheridan's account convincing.

...and there's me thinking you were convinced the bird is extant!!! Amazing you appear to be most convinced by Sheridan. The amount of relativistic comments is telling - nothing hard, nothing concrete.

Where you say mostly IBWO - any chance of a link to a description, a kent or a double knocky that you say is definitely an IBWO?

 

[MMinNY]

You're reading too much into a rather hastily composed response and into my willingness to see shades of gray (hat tip to Ilya). I am convinced the bird is extant. I'm convinced by Mike Collins's footage and his accounts, and by the totality of the Auburn (especially Tyler Hicks's sighting) and Cornell material. I also find the Kullivan report absolutely persuasive; his conduct in the years since is not consistent with someone who was seeking attention, and I can think of no plausible motive for him to have lied. Some of the more fleeting sightings in Arkansas and Florida could conceivably be PIWO, but that doesn't negate the other sightings and the audio.

I should have added that I also find much of the Florida feeding sign quite compelling, whereas what I've seen from Arkansas seems more ambiguous, though I have not examined it all.

As to the audio, I was writing from memory, and I'm not going to wade through all the audio again to provide specific links to sounds I find especially persuasive. There's some from both Cornell and Auburn.

Here are a couple of links to feeding sign that I find persuasive:

http://www.auburn.edu/academic/scie.../faculty/webpages/hill/ivorybill/Feeding.html

http://www.fishcrow.com/deep_foraging.jpg

I think Mike's observation about the depth and narrowness of the excavation is accurate.

At this point, there's little or nothing more to say on the subject until new evidence comes in. Here's hoping that it proves to be concrete enough for you.

...and there's me thinking you were convinced the bird is extant!!! Amazing you appear to be most convinced by Sheridan. The amount of relativistic comments is telling - nothing hard, nothing concrete.

Where you say mostly IBWO - any chance of a link to a description, a kent or a double knocky that you say is definitely an IBWO?

 

[Edward woodwood]

You're reading too much into a rather hastily composed response.

convinced.... by the totality......

absolutely persuasive.
could conceivably be PIWO,

I also find much of the Florida feeding sign quite compelling,
whereas what I've seen from Arkansas seems more ambiguous

especially persuasive.

feeding sign that I find persuasive:

I wouldn't bet that i'm reading much into anything written here if i were you.

absolutely persuasive is particularly good

you're right about the 'nothing more to say' until there's some evidence at this point - let's hope people are listening?

 

[MMinNY]

It's not Rumsfeldian; it's legalese. Sorry, I can't entirely escape the training when I'm writing argumentively. Bolding selected phrases out of context is a great way to obfuscate, but I'm sick of arguing.

I wouldn't bet that i'm reading much into anything written here if i were you.

absolutely persuasive is particularly good - Did they give you Rumsfeld's job?

you're right about the 'nothing more to say' until there's some evidence at this point - let's hope people are listening?

 

[Gomphus]

Hi guys,

Just returned from a long break in reading this thread, not sure what to make of it at all!
However I followed a couple of links and found myself at www.fishcrow.com. Mike Collins I believe? I read a bit and discovered he speaks of a sighting, in his 20/12/06 entry, by a Susan Epps, he says she saw the white triangles in the folded wing, dorsal stripes, red crest and a huge white bill... together with a long neck and leaned back posture. Later in his 28/12/06 entry he says she mentioned at the time black above the crest on the crown.
Now if taken on face value doesn't this sound like a field description of IBWO? I suppose if there were field notes illustrated it would be better?
Has this sighting been discussed on hear before? Sorry, if so, I didn't have the stamina to read miles back! Or is this sort of sighting dismissed like so many others seem to have been?

Just to set the record straight, I am a fence sitter on this subject and don't really have a view either way.

 

[Docmartin]

Ok, for a bit of fun...

A) Visual encounters
No reason to disbelieve any of them but I think the possibility of confusion with Pileated is far greater than was previously thought, and it would not surprise me if they were all Pileated.


B) IBWO-like calls recorded.
Objectively, the closest match to the sonagrams are young White-tailed Deer. It's possible that IBWOs could make those noises, though the evidence we have is that those are a less good match.

C) Double-knocks.
Possibly IBWOs in some cases. PIWOs are a possibility, and any number of woodland noises.

D) The famous Atchafalaya photos from the early 70's, were they real or fake?
No reason to disbelieve them, although I understand there's widespread disquiet.

E) The various cavities and foraging sign that have been photographed and documented that seem consistent with IBWO sign, what do you think?
Maybe consistent with IBWO, other species far from eliminated.


F) The Luneu Video. Pileated or Ivorybill?
Plumage unambiguously entirely consistent with Pileated, and inconsistent with IBWO. Wingbeat frequency remains to be confirmed as outside range of PIWO, but probably not atypical for an accelerating bird gaining height.

G) Mike Collins Video. Pileated or Ivorybill?
I really can't see enough on it to express an opinion.

 

[timeshadowed]

I wouldn't bet that i'm reading much into anything written here if i were you.

Tim,

Everyone who posts here at BF should have the right to share a personal opinion without fear of being 'attacked' and 'flamed' for having those opinions just because those opinions differ from yours.

Why do you insist on 'picking apart' the OPINIONS of others, yet refuse to answer the same questions yourself?

 

[EMalatesta]

Gomphus,

The person who posts at fishcrow.com is stark raving mad. I only go to that website for chuckles. Same reason I read this thread.

 

[timeshadowed]

Has this sighting been discussed on hear before?

No, this newest sighting by Susan Epps has not been discussed in this thread.

 

[humminbird]

Hi guys,

Just returned from a long break in reading this thread, not sure what to make of it at all!
However I followed a couple of links and found myself at www.fishcrow.com. Mike Collins I believe? I read a bit and discovered he speaks of a sighting, in his 20/12/06 entry, by a Susan Epps, he says she saw the white triangles in the folded wing, dorsal stripes, red crest and a huge white bill... together with a long neck and leaned back posture. Later in his 28/12/06 entry he says she mentioned at the time black above the crest on the crown.
Now if taken on face value doesn't this sound like a field description of IBWO? I suppose if there were field notes illustrated it would be better?
Has this sighting been discussed on hear before? Sorry, if so, I didn't have the stamina to read miles back! Or is this sort of sighting dismissed like so many others seem to have been?

Just to set the record straight, I am a fence sitter on this subject and don't really have a view either way.

I also find it hard to associate:
April 11, 2004 Melanie Driscoll who reports seeing from 120 metres through binoculars "broad white trailing edge of the wings, a white line extending from the wings up the long neck, and a small flash of red on the bird's black crest. " and
February 14, 2005 Casey Taylor who reports seeing from 80 to 120 metres away through binoculars " the broad white trailing edges to the wings, long neck with white stripe, and black head with long bill"
with Pileated. Neither sound particularly Pileated to me, especially the long neck. A photo would certainly be nice though.

 

[Winterdune]

I do love birders. Only they could spend almost 2 years and 9,000 posts arguing about various shades of grey!

Shouldn't you have posted that on a gull ID thread?
Sean

 

[dacol]

Well, I see Mississippi gets left out again.

Those Pearl birds must be very diligent about not hanging out on the east side of the river.

Sorry GWS, I was thinking of Collins' video which was taken on the LA side of the Pearl WMA. According to Mike the birds he has seen seem to be frequenting both sides of the border.

Dalcio

 

[EMalatesta]

Shouldn't you have posted that on a gull ID thread?
Sean

Good humor!

 

[SiG]

There's been a significant technological breakthrough that might be of interest to posters on this thread; details here

 

[lockbreeze926]

I think the evidence, as such, has mostly been beaten to death, until something new emerges, but I am interested in the principles of "belief" or "proof" that are freely bandied about here.

For example........you are the jury -

Person X is accused of a crime.

He is known to have a pattern of committing such crimes in the past.

There is evidence at the scene - say, footprints, consistent with shoes he owns.

His car was photographed at the scene.

He was photographed committing the crime, but his defense lawyer contests the validity of the photo.

A confession was recorded, but it's not 100% guaranteed that it's his voice.

He has been reported by many witnesses as being seen committing the crime.

Somebody certainly did it.....

But there is a lack of DNA and fingerprints.

So, do you as a juror convict, OR do you say that, unless there's objective "proof", you will always vote "not guilty"?

You certainly don't "know" he's guilty, absent conclusive forensic science, so a conviction would have to rest on a "belief" that he was.

Or are the demands of "science" simply more rigorous than those of criminal law?

Absolute proof? Beyond reasonable doubt?

I think there are a lot of ideas and arguments hopelessly tangled in this whole debate, but maybe I only believe that, and don't actually know it.

 

[one]

list for fun

for fun,

A) Arkansas sightings- Not enough reliable field marks. Some suggestive of ivory bills. It is not difficult to ID pileateds in flight (if you have seen many). it is not difficult to document an odd colored Pileated or a different and new bird species (new being a bird you have never seen before) if one immediately takes good notes after the sighting. They are a good reference to what you saw at a specific time and place. No looking at the field guide first (this has been discussed before). Also, if they did see a single, male ivory bill, the lack of sightings is not suggestive of a lack of the bird or birds (read Tanner and others). To be fair, the lack of definitive evidence is discourgaing and can suggest the birds are not there.

Florida-The Hicks sighting has a lot of suggestive field marks for ivory bill. The others less so. Maybe a few ivory bills are in florida.

B) Arkansas recordings - ivory bills make simple sounds. could be ivory bills or something else. Florida- to my ear, only a few of the many suggest an ivory bill. the majority of sounds are most likely other things.

C) last week, heard a great double knock in the morning while birding in a state forest(NJ). there is a highway nearby. However, to be fair, it did not have the loud, resonant quality of double knocks described by Tanner and others. Some of the double knocks from arkansas and florida do sound like the double knocks produced by other Campephilus woodpeckers.

D) if the photo was unaltered, then the picture is of a male ivory billed woodpecker.

F) Unidentified large woodpecker. Not enough field marks. Amount of white on the wings is not enough to id an ivory bill (Tanner).

G) Unidentified large woodpecker. Not enough.

one

 

[bitterntwisted]

I think the evidence, as such, has mostly been beaten to death, until something new emerges, but I am interested in the principles of "belief" or "proof" that are freely bandied about here.

For example........you are the jury -

Person X is accused of a crime.
He is known to have a pattern of committing such crimes in the past.
There is evidence at the scene - say, footprints, consistent with shoes he owns.
His car was photographed at the scene.
He was photographed committing the crime, but his defense lawyer contests the validity of the photo.
A confession was recorded, but it's not 100% guaranteed that it's his voice.
He has been reported by many witnesses as being seen committing the crime.
Somebody certainly did it.....
But there is a lack of DNA and fingerprints.
So, do you as a juror convict, OR do you say that, unless there's objective "proof", you will always vote "not guilty"?
You certainly don't "know" he's guilty, absent conclusive forensic science, so a conviction would have to rest on a "belief" that he was.
Or are the demands of "science" simply more rigorous than those of criminal law?
Absolute proof? Beyond reasonable doubt?

I think there are a lot of ideas and arguments hopelessly tangled in this whole debate, but maybe I only believe that, and don't actually know it.

This analogy might be made more valid if the accused "Person X" was dead at the time of the crime.

 

[emupilot]

For what it's worth (and that's probably not much after 8800 posts), this is at least a fun exercise since we don't have much else to talk about until the end of the search season and/or duck hunting season. I think using probability to answer these questions is the way to go:

A) Visual encounters. What do you make of the 2005 Gallagher and Sparling sighting where they both report seeing the bird together and at the same time, Mike Collins reports from Louisiana and the 1999 Kullivan sigting? What about all of the other sightings in recent years from both Florida and Arkansas? In other words what do you believe they saw and why do you believe they reported them as IBWO's?

Sparling and Gallagher/Harrison were in 2004, right? 90% IBWO
Mike Collins (in other words, is he accurate or a fool/fraud?) 80% IBWO
Kullivan (very unlikely to be a fraud) 90% IBWO
I'd put several others who have reported IBWO as >50% IBWO as well, including especially follow up sightings to Gallagher/Harrison and Tyler Hicks in the Choctawhatchee.

B) IBWO-like calls recorded. Many sound recordings of IBWO call-like sounds have been collected from Arkansas and Florida over the past couple of years. They sound similar to the known IBWO "kent" calls to be sure. What do you suppose made these noises?

90% IBWO - I have heard no plausible alternate scenario for the number of recordings from the Choctawhatchee

C) Double-knocks. What was/were the source(s) of the double-knock sounds recorded from both Arkansas and Florida over the past couple of years?

95% IBWO - It seems very unlikely that Pileated would making this abnormal drumming so many times without otherwise giving its identity away before or after the double-knock.

D) The famous Atchafalaya photos from the early 70's, were they real or fake?

90% Real

E) The various cavities and foraging sign that have been photographed and documented that seem consistent with IBWO sign, what do you think?

Could be IBWO or not - large cavities may be necessary for IBWO, but I'm not convinced large cavities indicate IBWO.

F) The Luneu Video. Pileated or Ivorybill?

Too much to discern from too few pixels. I find both Cornell and Sibley explanations quite unconvincing.

G) Mike Collins Video. Pileated or Ivorybill?

Too much to discern from too few pixels (and horrid light). I'd put more weight on Collins' enounter with IBWO shortly before getting video than on the video by itself.

My probabilities start by not assuming the IBWO is extinct because of previous erroneous declarations of extinction and the steady reports over the years. Before the initial announcement, I didn't assume it still lived either, but rather that its status was unknown. Alternate explanations for much of the above evidence get quite contorted, involving bizarre mutant Pileateds, stealthy Blue Jays, and respected scientists/birders suddenly turning into fools and liars, for me to give them much likelihood. Even if the probability of any of the strong pieces of evidence is well under 50%, the probability that NONE of them are IBWO is vanishingly small in my opinion.