What view of a bird do you need to consider it "Checked/Ticked" off list? (1 Viewer)

[kb57]

I don't really count my list totals much as the amount of birds I've seen total doesn't really matter, I'm more of a patch guy. I doubt im ever going to be travelling the world or even the UK for birds. Maybe that will change one day, who knows but at the moment im not much of a twitcher. There are lots of "common" birds in nearby places that I could probably go and tick off whenever I want but just haven't bothered. Most of my birding goes on birdtrack, and I'm more into the recording data for the local area sort of thing, and just hope that a local rarity turns up now and again to keep things exciting.
So I almost feel like the records aren't really for me in a way, though I do get excited at a new patch tick or new highest flock count or whatever.
So I will record heard only (though obviously depending on the bird that could be really disappointing). And would record dead (and report it).

The purpose of your list is key, and although I'm a 'seen only' guy for my personal life and year lists, like you I would absolutely record heard-only birds if I was putting the data out on eBird or Birdtrack, as you are aiding knowledge of all the birds which occur on that site, not just the ones you've seen.
When undertaking a breeding bird survey hearing becomes more important than seeing species, since you are recording the number of individuals proclaiming territory as an aid to estimating breeding density.

 

[Andy Lakin]

For me no (I wouldn't have known what it was if somebody hadn't Iidentified it) ticks. It can be very frustrating especially when seawatchibg when the experts are picking up stuff well out, sometimes you just have to remember that they have probably spent far longer doing this, better eyesight, optics etc. Another tricky area is when you are twitching a bird and you are prepared for what I'd features to look out for as if you had found it yourself you may have passed it off as another more common species.

 

[bonxie birder]

Great thread. I love the moral dilemma. Nobody is wrong. Your list is simply that, YOUR list. Personally, heard is not good enough for a life list, but is for a year list, as long as it’s already on the list. I’ve heard dozens of quail, but never seen one, so it’s not on my life list or my year lists. So it hurts my ears every time I hear one! I confess my criteria for acceptance is quite different in the UK as it is abroad. In the UK it has to be a 100% identification by me to tick it and I need a reasonable view as well. Abroad, I am much more likely to accept a guide’s call. Having said that, I spend the first few days after any birding holiday deleting a couple of ticks where I realise that in hindsight, I personally wasn’t satisfied with my identification/view. (I did the same with the St Abbs paddyfield a couple of days ago.) My uk year lists are too irresistible. I was determined to take a step back this year because of the fuel costs, but that idea didn’t last too long.
Second confession, I definitely bird for my lists, although fortunately I love just being out and about so that’s ok.

 

[Lerxst]

We are visual creatures. And to be honest, if I had not lost 98% of my vision, I'd probably be among the majority that demand a good view of a bird to count it. But I am in some tiny way almost thankful for my disability because it made it clear to me how important hearing is, and I have learned to appreciate bird song far more than I did in my 20s when my eyes were just starting to fail.

This past spring I had the wonderful experience of competing in the NJ Audubon World Series of Birding with a group of other birders that had disabilites. One of them has been totally blind since birth, and he is a major inspiration to me. You can tell his audio experience of birds is no less meaningful to him than the visual is for most birders. And personal experience is all that matters in the end, because nobody else cares one whit about your life list. At least, that has been my experience.

 

[Bino Steve]

We die with our lists undone and unimportant to anyone else. So enjoy what you will. You have a great attitude Lerxst. Cheers to you.

 

[bonxie birder]

We are visual creatures. And to be honest, if I had not lost 98% of my vision, I'd probably be among the majority that demand a good view of a bird to count it. But I am in some tiny way almost thankful for my disability because it made it clear to me how important hearing is, and I have learned to appreciate bird song far more than I did in my 20s when my eyes were just starting to fail.

This past spring I had the wonderful experience of competing in the NJ Audubon World Series of Birding with a group of other birders that had disabilites. One of them has been totally blind since birth, and he is a major inspiration to me. You can tell his audio experience of birds is no less meaningful to him than the visual is for most birders. And personal experience is all that matters in the end, because nobody else cares one whit about your life list. At least, that has been my experience.

Great response.

 

[Ruff-Leg]

For my ticks, hearing is as good as seeing. In the ABA area, I have a handful of owls, nightjars, rails which are heard only. Thrashing about trying to see them could have been deleterious to the birds and their habitat. Will I enjoy seeing a Yellow Rail? Of course! But that vocalization is a surer ID than a fleeting glimpse of the skulker!

The Western Flycatcher I saw this AM? At 1000m in the Arizona mountains it was probably a Pacific-slope. Its call assured the ID. (Of course, it's only Pac-slope for now...)

 

[anonymousbirder]

I don't have a hard rule other than I need to be fairly certain it was that species of bird. For rarities, usually that means getting some recording or picture to verify with more experienced birders.

 

[Redmist]

This year I have added spotted crake and wryneck, based on calls alone. These are not paticularly rare here, and I was not likely to confuse them with anything else. So I am happy with that but it will make the day when I see one just that little bit more special.

 

[Val35]

I count it as long as I have seen the field marks allowing me to identify the species with certainty...I also count "heard only birds" even though I prefer to see them.

 

[Andy Lakin]

Strictly speaking people couldn't count birds identified by others from.their photos/ descriptions, but that feels harsh! The amount of birds found by non/casual birdwatchers seems to be increasing all the time. Another factor is sometimes the view required is proportionate to the miles traveled to see a bird its rarity level etc! Surely we've all got at least one dodgy/ less than satisfying sighting. The worst one is where you turn up just as a bird is flying away disappearing into a reed bed etc.

 

[Farnboro John]

Strictly speaking people couldn't count birds identified by others from.their photos/ descriptions, but that feels harsh! The amount of birds found by non/casual birdwatchers seems to be increasing all the time. Another factor is sometimes the view required is proportionate to the miles traveled to see a bird its rarity level etc! Surely we've all got at least one dodgy/ less than satisfying sighting. The worst one is where you turn up just as a bird is flying away disappearing into a reed bed etc.

I remember reading about Britain's first Bimaculated Lark which was submitted as a Calandra but accepted on the description and sketches which proved the identification as a Bimac. I think it unrealistic to expect the observers not to tick it......

John

 

[MiddleRiver]

For me, my acceptance criteria depend on the importance of the tick. I have the strictest rules for life ticks, but looser rules for routine ticks in my local reserve.

For a life tick, I must be very certain of my ID. I also want to have a good view of it. Generally, I do not tick "I didn't see it very well but the guide said it was a XXX". I must have had a good enough view to be able to identify it by myself.

Also, I generally don't tick any "heard only". I must have seen the bird if I want to tick it. But if heard clearly and without doubt of ID, I would accept a lower standard for the visual ID in that case. I know "heard only" is evidence of the presence of the bird, but then tropical birding would get a bit too easy and less fun. I'm not going to tick that Nocturnal Curassow just because I heard it calling.

My standard gets lower for routine birds. I don't need to get a perfect look of a Blackbird or Robin because they are so common and I already know what it is. Though I still don't tick them if I only hear them but don't see them (but that's just me wasting my time on seeing common birds!).

What he said ;-)

Ideally a pic too, tho not always so lucky.

 

[Bino Steve]

Great input so far. For me, other than for folks with vision handicap, it would have to be seen. It is called " bird WATCHING " after all.

 

[Farnboro John]

Great input so far. For me, other than for folks with vision handicap, it would have to be seen. It is called " bird WATCHING " after all.

Well, it kind of isn't. People really into it - which would have to include most if not all listers - go birding.

John

 

[Lerxst]

Well, it kind of isn't. People really into it - which would have to include most if not all listers - go birding.

John

Just like it says on eBird, "What did you see or hear?" I think they should change the order of those two verbs. Even without my vision problems, I thnk I'd always find and ID more birds by hearing than by seeing.

 

[wolfbirder]

Had plenty of dilemmas - others may have higher standards than me, but in fairness the basic clincher is whether I see identifiable features. I ‘ just’ saw the Baillons Crake moving through a sparse section of reeds at Rainham, enough to clinch it but I would have liked better. Distant perched views only briefly in the drizzle of Marmoras Warbler in Wales, distant views only of White/ winged Scoter at Musselburgh where the pink bill stood out in the sunlight to clinch, sometimes beggars can’t be choosers. Birds are skulking and may only present themselves briefly or in flight. Take what you can as long as you could tell it was the bird, and not what those around you tell you.

 

[KenM]

I can recall my “gone in a flash” sighting of Maidstone’s Golden-Winged Warbler “up on the roof” went the cry!
Unsure that I even had time to focus on it before it was gone!
However, I was left with a transient flash of yellow, black, grey and white small “thingy” in my mind’s eye, simultaneously the “roar erupted”…..and it was on my list!….a halcyon moment.
I can’t imagine even the most pedantic stringent lister not listing it!😮

 

[Mysticete]

My difficulties usually lie with seeing birds on pelagics. Sure, sometimes you get a great long-lasting view of an albatross. But other times you get a distant flyby of a hard to ID petrel that is only really ID'ed by the experienced pelagic birders on board. Those for me tend to invite more mental struggle on if I should count it or not.

 

[Farnboro John]

My difficulties usually lie with seeing birds on pelagics. Sure, sometimes you get a great long-lasting view of an albatross. But other times you get a distant flyby of a hard to ID petrel that is only really ID'ed by the experienced pelagic birders on board. Those for me tend to invite more mental struggle on if I should count it or not.

Well, here's an interesting can of worms. A whole section of BF is dedicated to answering ID queries (and they aren't always photos, so they can be challenging to anybody - mind you some of the photos are also challenging!) Are we saying nobody can trot away from there with a tick? I'm sure a load of people would think that renders much of the traffic in the ID section somewhat pointless. Including me.

Likewise in the field... provided that the ID guru actually is one, is there anything wrong with ticking on their diagnosis? I don't honestly think there is. However, I do think there is an onus on both the confident ID guru to give, and the aspirant ticker to seek, explanation of the diagnosis. That introduces the learning aspect which is fundamental to birding and gives the student a head start the next time they see the species.

John