• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

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

curunir

Well-known member
Professions

I'm under the impression that many of the contributors here used to be in environmental or natural resources positions but left for more money in the corporate tool arena. Is that impression correct?
 

MMinNY

Well-known member
I was in public interest law, policy work not litigation, some environmental issues but mostly human rights. . .left for something entirely different, non-legal, and not at all corporate (I keep my license up but don't practice). . .not a lot of money in what I'm doing now either. So in my case, no.

I'm under the impression that many of the contributors here used to be in environmental or natural resources positions but left for more money in the corporate tool arena. Is that impression correct?
 

John Mariani

Well-known member
I'm under the impression that many of the contributors here used to be in environmental or natural resources positions but left for more money in the corporate tool arena. Is that impression correct?

...Partly. In my case I've ALWAYS been a corporate tool. ;)
 

pcoin

Well-known member
Duck double-raps

According to Birdwatch there is an article in the Wilson Journal of Ornithology claiming that the double raps are perhaps being confused with the wing collisions of Gadwall.
http://birdwatchmagazine.blogspot.com/2007/06/another-nail-in-coffin-for-ivory-billed.html

Good link. There was also a brief discussion of this a few pages back--not to blame, it is hard to navigate through this thread! See these posts: 1 and 2.

In post (2) above, I did note this had actually been discussed in detail by Cornell in their 2005-06 report, made available over a year ago. I believe the Wilson Journal paper is their peer-reviewed version. Very clever--one mistake, two papers! (As a former academic researcher, I admire that!)
 

Ilya Maclean

charlatan
It is indeed. Gave me a bit of a jump when I first saw it and demonstrated to me, based on a short view, just how easy it is to see IBWOs where they aren't. Actually, the reason I posted the photo was the cavity size. From the Auburn website:

“Many of the cavities that we measured had entrance holes that were outside the size range recorded for the cavities of Pileated Woodpeckers and within the range of nest cavities of Ivory-billed Woodpeckers recorded in the Singer Tract of Louisiana in the 1930s. The vertical dimension of the entrances of twenty of the cavities that we measured exceeded 12.7 cm (5 inches), and the width of 67 cavities exceeded 10.2 cm (4 inches).”

Based on known sizes of Red-headed woodpeckers, I’d say that hole exceeds or approaches closely the kind of size, supposedly ruling out Pileated. I just wanted to show that even small woodpeckers use big holes. I suppose there’s no guarantee the red-headed in the photo made that hole, but if their happy to use them, surely they’d be happy to make them.

Edit: also the only remote camera photo I could track down of a woodpecker around one of the more "promising holes". Both Cornell and Auburn, seem to be ominously quiet about what they capture around those holes.
 
Last edited:

emupilot

Well-known member
Can someone annotate the pic to tell me what I'm looking at! Stuck in a foreign country squinting at a lap top screen!

Left-most tree, half way up, just to the right of the large hole. Definitely not the first Red-headed Woodpecker caught on automated cameras.

On edit: Actually, this may be the first Red-headed Woodpecker caught on automated cameras, since the image was put up on David Luneau's website in February.
 
Last edited:

humminbird

Well-known member
Based on known sizes of Red-headed woodpeckers, I’d say that hole exceeds or approaches closely the kind of size, supposedly ruling out Pileated. I just wanted to show that even small woodpeckers use big holes. I suppose there’s no guarantee the red-headed in the photo made that hole, but if their happy to use them, surely they’d be happy to make them.


I don't see how this follows Ilya. I have a pair of Titmice that are on their second clutch of nestlings in my Eastern Screech-owl box this year. They're (not "their") obviously quite happy to use the box with an opening that far exceeds the 1.125 inch opening generally recommended for this species, but I see no evidence that the same species using a bluebird box out back is prepared to excavate the opening to the 5.75 inch square opening of the screech owl box. On what do we base the statement "surely they'd be happy to make them"?

By the way, the id is spot on and no doubt about it.
 

cyberthrush

Well-known member
....Edit: also the only remote camera photo I could track down of a woodpecker around one of the more "promising holes". Both Cornell and Auburn, seem to be ominously quiet about what they capture around those holes.

Cornell has found nothing significant around their 'promising holes' thus far; Auburn still has 1000's of images left to analyze.
 

Ilya Maclean

charlatan
I don't see how this follows Ilya. I have a pair of Titmice that are on their second clutch of nestlings in my Eastern Screech-owl box this year. They're (not "their") obviously quite happy to use the box with an opening that far exceeds the 1.125 inch opening generally recommended for this species, but I see no evidence that the same species using a bluebird box out back is prepared to excavate the opening to the 5.75 inch square opening of the screech owl box. On what do we base the statement "surely they'd be happy to make them"?

By the way, the id is spot on and no doubt about it.
I was waiting for that one. No of course I can't prove the hole wasn't made by an IBWO and being used by the red-headed in the photo, but when we start seeing other woodies around “promising" cavities, hearing ducks that sound like “promising” double-knocks, hearing deer that sound like "promising" kent calls and the Luneau video has been argued as convincingly to be a PIWO as an IBWO, irrespective of relative rarity, you really have to wonder what's left.

Cornell’s back tracking and even members of Auburn's search team don’t believe Rolek’s or Tyler’s sightings. I’m just amazed there are still people out there that do believe it exists.
 
Last edited:

humminbird

Well-known member
I was waiting for that one. No of course I can't prove the hole wasn't made by an IBWO and being used by the red-headed in the photo, but when we start seeing other woodies around “promising cavities”, hearing ducks that sound like “promising” double-knocks, hearing deer that sound like "promising" kent calls and the Luneau video has been argued as convincingly to be a PIWO as an IBWO, irrespective of relative rarity, you really have to wonder what's left.

It would certainly be nice to see some follow through on all these "promises".
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top