rollingthunder
Well-known member
‘Flap rate’ - you couldn’t make this stuff up3
Laurie:t:
Laurie:t:
Upon assuming power in 1959, Fidel Castro’s government began to implement an aggressive national reforestation program. In large measure this program responded to a grave national concern given the country’s deforestation trend.
From the time of discovery to 1959, the total amount of land area forested in Cuba had declined from 72 percent to 14 percent. As a result of the reforestation program initiated in 1959, by 1992, according to official estimates, the amount of land area forested had increased to 18.2 percent of the national territory. This 30 percent increase was achieved partly through better management of timber harvesting rates but principally through reforestation. Of the total area forested in 1992, natural forests accounted for 84 percent, or two million hectares. Two-thirds (67.6 percent) of national forests were set aside as protected areas, while one-third (32.4 percent) was used for timber production. Between 1959 and 1992, the net annual addition in forested land area approached 14,000 hectares.
By 2016 the forest cover had reached 30.6%
Happy to help with regard to your lazy assumption regarding Cuba.
Whatever you say, all hail the visible benefits of international socialism as seen in all the socialist countries, especially of course Venezuela and Cuba, but a forestry program was the last thing ivory bills needed; they were exclusively birds of untouched old growth forest. I also had the uncharitable thought that a large bird like that would be too tempting a supplemental food item to survive long in a socialist country, but I have no evidence that actually happened.
That'd be too auk word to do :king:If one did turn up the islands would have to be officially renamed the Aukneys
Laurie:t:
Whatever you say, all hail the visible benefits of international socialism as seen in all the socialist countries, especially of course Venezuela and Cuba, but a forestry program was the last thing ivory bills needed; they were exclusively birds of untouched old growth forest. I also had the uncharitable thought that a large bird like that would be too tempting a supplemental food item to survive long in a socialist country, but I have no evidence that actually happened.
Whatever you say, all hail the visible benefits of international socialism as seen in all the socialist countries, especially of course Venezuela and Cuba, but a forestry program was the last thing ivory bills needed; they were exclusively birds of untouched old growth forest. I also had the uncharitable thought that a large bird like that would be too tempting a supplemental food item to survive long in a socialist country, but I have no evidence that actually happened.
This is nonsense. If anyone is interested in the facts regarding this issue (and others), they are covered in my papers.Fair point, but actually they are even closer in size than I thought, with Pileated butting up to minimum IBWO and overlap in wingspan. Simple physics (always a better guide to aerodynamics than statistics) tells you the performance is going to be as similar.
Maybe you would see if you read the paper, which contains an entire section on this issue. You mention only a few of the factors that contribute to the difficulty of detecting the Ivory-billed Woodpecker. I would advise anyone who is interested in conservation to study the information that has been laid out in the literature.Would love to be proved wrong but simply cannot see how such a large sized bird could remain "undetected" for so long. Yes I know its habitat is inhospitable and its a huge area to cover, but with the amount of people that have actively been searching over the years the odds are not in favour.
Maybe you would see if you read the paper
Birds fly funny sometimes. Any birder will tell you that. It catches us out every now and again. You need more than "it flew funny so it must have been the extinct one" to get the people who know how to find and identify birds (birders) looking for Ivory-billed Woodpeckers again I'm afraid.
This is the most recent paper, which contains: (1) quantitative arguments for why the existing evidence cannot be explained in terms of any species other than the Ivory-billed Woodpecker; (2) an analysis based on habitats and behaviors that sheds light on why nobody has managed to obtain ideal evidence in recent decades; and (3) a discussion of events dating back several decades that helps to document a persistent pattern of folly and politics that has undermined the conservation of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker.Hi Mike,
Maybe you could provide a direct link to make it more accessible? I checked your page, but couldn't figure out what you might consider the key article.
Regards,
Henning
One thing for sure!....IBW would need to be backed up by good images/film and if possible a corpse alive or otherwise, to appease ''the non-believers''.
Have you never identified a bird in the field with 100% certainty? I have no doubts about any of my ten sightings of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker. I would never claim to know the truth about everything, but knowledge comes from direct experience and research. For those reasons, I know a great deal about the Ivory-billed Woodpecker.Wow, nothing “probabilistic” about that statement! Do you know the “truth” about everything or just Ivory-billed Woodpeckers?
Pileated Woodpeckers match IBWO for flap rate.
https://bmcbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1741-7007-5-8
Enjoy. It's like I said: all you have to show is that there is overlap in performance and you can't then rely on performance as an ID character.
John
Have you never identified a bird in the field with 100% certainty? I have no doubts about any of my ten sightings of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker. I would never claim to know the truth about everything, but knowledge comes from direct experience and research. For those reasons, I know a great deal about the Ivory-billed Woodpecker.
What do you know about the evidence that has been presented so far? Three of my sightings are verified by video footage that shows flights, other behaviors, body proportions, and field marks that are consistent with the Ivory-billed Woodpecker but no other species. I challenge you to attempt to refute that evidence. But please do your homework. I'm not going to waste my time trying to have a discussion with someone who doesn't make an attempt to learn the basic facts.You may be quite right, but any claim that is made needs to be verified independently.
The current phrase 'picture or it didn't happen' is a reasonable threshold for this aspect of observational biology imho.
Imaging technology is really cheap today, so it should be possible to get more definitive visual evidence than what is presented thus far.