• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Feel the intensity, not your equipment. Maximum image quality. Minimum weight. The new ZEISS SFL, up to 30% less weight than comparable competitors.

Ivory-billed Woodpecker: takeoffs with deep and rapid flaps + wing noises (1 Viewer)

Farnboro John

Well-known member
The many accounts of the birds being wary, from the 1800s to the 2000s, far outnumber the accounts of them being approachable. The quickest way to read about all this is Chris Haney's new book Woody's Last Laugh.
This sounds exactly like the people I meet who walk daily along rivers and canals where every possible territory is occupied by Kingfishers, and sigh "I'd love to see a Kingfisher" at me - sometimes as one flashes past.....

Unless you can quantify the numbers of observations of IBWO that are wary (and the skills of each observer) and the numbers where the birds are pretty much promiscuous (such as the one photographed sitting on the observer's hat) and the skills involved to achieve that, what you have are not data but meaningless anecdotes. But I expect you will have done that as part of your research.

At present the good evidence remains that they were not shy and the inference, that they are now not there.

John
 

400+birder

Well-known member
United States
This sounds exactly like the people I meet who walk daily along rivers and canals where every possible territory is occupied by Kingfishers, and sigh "I'd love to see a Kingfisher" at me - sometimes as one flashes past.....

Unless you can quantify the numbers of observations of IBWO that are wary (and the skills of each observer) and the numbers where the birds are pretty much promiscuous (such as the one photographed sitting on the observer's hat) and the skills involved to achieve that, what you have are not data but meaningless anecdotes. But I expect you will have done that as part of your research.

At present the good evidence remains that they were not shy and the inference, that they are now not there.

John
Without reference, your last statement is laughable. Prove it. Here's mine-- the birds have been noted to be wary for over 150 years. These accounts far outweigh any mentions of approachable birds. This comes from the new encyclopedic work by Chris Haney-- "Woody's Last Laugh: How The "Extinct" Ivory-Billed Woodpecker Fools Us Into Making 53 Thinking Errors", which some are considering more of a must-read than Tanner's dissertation. Have you read Haney? There's my reference-- now for yours. Go on, lots of people may be reading.
 

MiddleRiver

Well-known member
United States
I 'get' that IBW is politically loaded as it's tied to habitat protection, but as a birder I don't get the ugly conversation. Even if those that believe are kooks, so be it. Anything that can be done to try and spot one is a good thing IMHO, and for that matter, protecting old-growth areas is a win as well.
I can only hope there's some much deeper back-story, because to a newcomer, it's hard to fathom the animosity.
 

PYRTLE

Old Berkshire Boy
I 'get' that IBW is politically loaded as it's tied to habitat protection, but as a birder I don't get the ugly conversation. Even if those that believe are kooks, so be it. Anything that can be done to try and spot one is a good thing IMHO, and for that matter, protecting old-growth areas is a win as well.
I can only hope there's some much deeper back-story, because to a newcomer, it's hard to fathom the animosity.
I can see and understand what you say. The conservation of habitat, every birder will agree with. But it is the more than liberal sprinkling of subtifuge, misleading poor data combined with repetitive outlandish statements that draw out any ridicule towards the field researchers and disciples ( kinder than "kooks" ).
Trust me, thousands of enthusiasts would be thrilled to see overwhelming proof of IBW still existing.
 

400+birder

Well-known member
United States
I 'get' that IBW is politically loaded as it's tied to habitat protection, but as a birder I don't get the ugly conversation. Even if those that believe are kooks, so be it. Anything that can be done to try and spot one is a good thing IMHO, and for that matter, protecting old-growth areas is a win as well.
I can only hope there's some much deeper back-story, because to a newcomer, it's hard to fathom the animosity.
Like I said to PYRTLE, prove it. The one thing you will NOT read here is him backing up his statement. He did not even state that the IB on a hat was "Sonny Boy," a juvenile that fell out of a nest. My conversation is not ugly, and instead of animosity I prefer directness. And please note that the beginning of this thread was by Mike Collins on a basically unrelated matter, so the critics are doing something called "cherry-picking," changing the subject. I spend some time here lately because intelligent people are reading. And, I've been in contact with people who have seen the bird recently. It's just a matter of time and tech, and logic if you know how to think with humility. The critics simply don't put the time in.
 

PYRTLE

Old Berkshire Boy
"John", the sceptics and doubters have nothing to prove. The IWB believers have to, and the onlookers still wait for something more than hot air, eg another reference to a recent sighting. Some of us form our opinion by authorities views and facts such as from your AFWA.
 
Last edited:

SueO

Well-known member
I'm hoping that was a mistake. Great images by the way.
I believe that was a mistake as much as I believe I'll find and photograph an IBWO when I get to the bottomlands in a few weeks. ;) I have to see some of this ecosystem. I have a list of possible lifers and am pretty excited to get out there. Haven't done any 'real' birding for far too long. Well, other than too few trips to Mexico. Thanks for the comment on the photos. I was very happy to find the Pale-billed, I was sure we would sail out of range before seeing it.
 

Farnboro John

Well-known member
I'm hoping that was a mistake. Great images by the way.
It was perhaps over the top. I agree about the images. The point I was making was that when you have been around and within the entire community of birders for forty years or so you learn that not all are the same and there are some bad apples in addition to some who just consistently fool themselves. I know some very nice people who are in the latter category, consistently coming away from Scilly with a sheaf of rarity reports to complete and never having any accepted because they are simply fantasy based on a bad view of a common bird. So going birding alone doesn't necessarily expose one to the range of human behaviour found in the world of birding, but that is something that has to be taken into account when dealing at the edge of possibility. I hope that's a bit clearer and less upsetting.

John
 

rkj

Well-known member
Having just read this whole thread for the first time, I hope readers will forgive me if I go back to a post from some time ago. In particular, post #91 from 27 January 2022. I really wish John Williams the best of luck in finding and recording an Ivory-billed Woodpecker, but I am doubtful that the equipment discussed in that post will do the job. The camera is said to have good resolution, but in the attached photo I cannot read the license plate on any of the cars and even the much larger print on the postal truck is not entirely clear. I think it will take something much better if you are going to get a recording that convinces everyone you have seen the bird.
 

Hauksen

Forum member
Antarctica
Hi rkj,

Having just read this whole thread for the first time, I hope readers will forgive me if I go back to a post from some time ago. In particular, post #91 from 27 January 2022. I really wish John Williams the best of luck in finding and recording an Ivory-billed Woodpecker, but I am doubtful that the equipment discussed in that post will do the job. The camera is said to have good resolution, but in the attached photo I cannot read the license plate on any of the cars and even the much larger print on the postal truck is not entirely clear. I think it will take something much better if you are going to get a recording that convinces everyone you have seen the bird.

There's a separate thread on the camera equipment now ... I tend to agree with you.

Here's my attempt at creating the desired headgar rig for the camera:


Regards,

Henning
 

jurek

Well-known member
If there is really an area pinned down as an ivory-billed woodpecker territory, then high quality photos with a better camera should follow soon.

I looked at the photos posted, and some are rather indicative of an ivorybill. However, a low quality camera can produce artifacts, for example sun glare appearing like a white patch on the back etc etc.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top