Birdingonthe.Net Recent Postings from Inland NW Birders > Home > Mail > Alerts Updated on Wednesday, February 8 at 05:59 PM EST The most recently received Mail is at the top.	Red-capped Manakin,©Jan Wilczur

8 Feb Asotin Western Screech Owls ["Keith Carlson" ] 8 Feb northern Whitman ["Greg Falco" ] 8 Feb Redpols [Fran Haywood ] 8 Feb Owls in Stevebs Counties ["Terry Little" ] 7 Feb Snowy Owl Lincoln Co. {Ron Dexter} [] 7 Feb Pend Oreille Co. Thayer's Gull ["Jonathan B. Isacoff" ] 7 Feb Swallows Park Clarkston Gulls and more ["Terry Gray" ] 6 Feb Turnbull NWR Trumpeter Swans ["Tim O'Brien" ] 6 Feb Iceland ? Gull ["Keith Carlson" ] 6 Feb Iceland ? Gull ["Keith Carlson" ] 5 Feb Rose Creek [Richard Baltierra ] 5 Feb W. Screech Owl [] 5 Feb FW: Idaho Birders group help! [Jane Westervelt ] 5 Feb FW: Idaho Birders group help! [Jane Westervelt ] 4 Feb PAS field trip today ["Lavon Frazier" ] 4 Feb Lincoln County Thayer's Gull [Gina Sheridan ] 4 Feb RED-BREASTED SAPSUCKER Hood Park, WWCo. ["Mike & MerryLynn" ] 4 Feb RED-BREASTED SAPSUCKER Hood Park, WWCo. ["Mike & MerryLynn" ] 4 Feb Pend Oreille River and vicinity ["Ninebark" ] 4 Feb finch ? [david woodall ] 4 Feb A Great Day in Pend Oreille and little Spokane ["Terry Little" ] 3 Feb 4 Snowy Owls in Benton Co. ["Ron & Carole" ] 1 Feb Fw: LPO January ["Mike M" ] 31 Jan Snowy Owls Ocean Shores [kenneth trease ] 31 Jan Long-tailed Weasel Mt Spokane Foothills (Ron Dexter) [] 31 Jan Swallows Park Sandhill Crane Still Present. ["Keith Carlson" ] 31 Jan Asotin County List ["Keith Carlson" ] 30 Jan Western Screech Owl Mt Spokane Foothills (Ron Dexter) [] 31 Jan Updated VIDEOS: Northern Pygmy Owl, Gray-crowned Rosy-finches, and Spruce Grouse [khanh tran ] 29 Jan Snowy Owl Article of Interest ["Keith Carlson" ] 29 Jan Glaucous gull [Tim Durnell ] 29 Jan Owls in Pend Oreille and Spokane Counties ["Terry Little" ] 28 Jan Snowy Owl x 2 [Catherine Temple ] 27 Jan Grant and Lincoln Counties ["Terry Little" ] 26 Jan Common Redpolls update [Flyz4free ] 26 Jan RE: White Wood Duck Spokane River [Rich Landers ] 25 Jan White Wood Duck Spokane River [] 25 Jan Common Redpolls [Flyz4free ] 25 Jan Suspected Male Albino Wood Duck in Riverfront Park, Spokane, WA [Carolyn Wilcox ] 26 Jan ANSWERS to Mystery Bird Videos [khanh tran ] 25 Jan Windy Wolf Lodge Bay (Lake CdA, ID) [Doug Ward ] 25 Jan A note from eBird [Brian Sullivan ] 25 Jan Random Thoughts on Gulls, etc. ["Keith Carlson" ] 24 Jan 17+ Ravens near Mt. Spokane summit/Chair 1 ["Sherry Lee" ] 24 Jan Re: Iceland Gull - Swallows Park, Clarkston, WA [Cliff and Lisa Weisse ] 24 Jan Good Day for Owls [kenneth trease ] 24 Jan Re: Iceland Gull - Swallows Park, Clarkston, WA [Charles Swift ] 24 Jan Re: ebird [Charles Swift ] 24 Jan ebird ["lowell" ] 24 Jan Red breasted merganser [Catherine Temple ] 24 Jan Peone Wetland and Mt Spokane Foothills ["Terry Little" ] 24 Jan re: Ebird ["Scott Downes" ] 24 Jan Iceland Gull - Swallows Park, Clarkston, WA [John Hanna ] 24 Jan Re: eBird ["Jonathan B. Isacoff" ] 24 Jan Re: a note for eBird reporters [Matt Bartels ] 23 Jan Regarding eBird [Ryan Shaw ] 23 Jan Mt.Spokane WW Crossbills ["Tim O'Brien" ] 23 Jan Re: Re: a note for eBird reporters [Matthew Beatty ] 23 Jan Re: Re: a note for eBird reporters ["Keith Carlson" ] 23 Jan Re: Re: a note for eBird reporters [Cliff and Lisa Weisse ] 23 Jan Moscow South Raptor Run this a.m. ["Terry Gray" ] 23 Jan Moscow Bohemian Waxwings, 1/23/12 etc. [Charles Swift ] 23 Jan Re: Re: a note for eBird reporters ["Keith Carlson" ] 23 Jan Re: a note for eBird reporters ["Scott Downes" ] 23 Jan Re: a note for eBird reporters [Cliff and Lisa Weisse ] 22 Jan Re: a note for eBird reporters [Lisa Hardy ] 22 Jan Gull identification - Swallows Park [John Hanna ] 22 Jan Ebird ["Scott Downes" ] 22 Jan RE: test post [Marie Dymkoski ] 22 Jan Re: a note for eBird reporters [Lisa Hardy ] 22 Jan Common Redpoll in my yard [Richard Baltierra ] 22 Jan Yard bird today - Brewer's Blackbird ["Tim O'Brien" ] 22 Jan Re: [inland-NW-birders] a note for eBird reporters ["Michael Hobbs" ] 22 Jan Re: a note for eBird reporters ["Michael Hobbs" ] 22 Jan test post [david woodall ] 22 Jan Re: a note for eBird reporters ["Keith Carlson" ] Subject: Asotin Western Screech Owls From: "Keith Carlson" <kec201814 AT cableone.net> Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 14:42:51 -0800 Thanks to Rick Welle for finding and alerting me to a pair of Western Screech Owls that he found roosting buried in a Cedar Tree on 3rd St in the town of Asotin http://www.flickr.com/photos/birddog/6842851485/in/photostream/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/birddog/6842845497/in/photostream/ Keith E. Carlson Lewiston_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: northern Whitman From: "Greg Falco" <lister7 AT hughes.net> Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 11:52:57 -0800 Spent an hour birding in wheat country of extreme NW Whitman Co. Saw a couple ROUGH-LEGGED HAWKS & 1 NORTHERN SHRIKE. Signs of spring: A Red-tailed Hawk doing nest repair. A Red-winged Blackbird on territory. A few migrating Robins. Good Birding Greg Falco South Spokane Co near Turnbull _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Redpols From: Fran Haywood <birders13 AT gmail.com> Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 10:20:39 -0800 On top of Mt Spokane yesterday, we had 2 flocks of Redpols that morphed into one. They were feeding in W Larch, Fir and deciduous trees opposite the ski patrol hut as far up the mountain as you can drive this time of year. 2 Mt Chickadee at Selkirk Lodge parking lot. 2 Pileated Woodpeckers on Liberty Lake trail which is very ice covered and treacherous for walking. Also Brown Creeper, all 3 species of nuthatch and Black Capped Chickadee. Nothing else. Fran & Brad Haywood Spokane WA_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Owls in Stevebs Counties From: "Terry Little" <terry AT crossoverchurch.info> Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 08:58:33 -0500 Hello, Last night, two friends of mine and I did some owling around Waitt's Lake. We found 2 Great Horned, 2 Western Screech, 3 N Saw Whet, and 1 N Pygmy. Blessings Terry Little Mead, Wa _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Snowy Owl Lincoln Co. {Ron Dexter} From: <ronpatdexter AT msn.com> Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 19:00:37 -0800 Yes, I found a Snowy Owl today near Davenport, but it was so far out in a field that I had to use my 45 power spotting scope to make it out. I was at the intersection of Omans Rd and Hayes Rd where they have been seen on occasion since the first of the year. I scanned the fields to the east and spotted a fence post about a mile away on a hilltop about 30 deg south of east. I had to set up my scope to confirm it was a Snowy.. If it stays there, its not worth going out to look for it, but you never know, tomorrow it could be back a lot closer. Ron Dexter Spokane ronpatdexter AT msn.com _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Pend Oreille Co. Thayer's Gull From: "Jonathan B. Isacoff" <isacoff AT gonzaga.edu> Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 16:44:29 -0800 Today, Gina Sheridan, my parents visiting from NY, and I ventured up to Southern PO County to see if we could relocate the great gulls reported by Terry Little last week. We dipped on the Herring and Glaucous and we found only 1 gull all day but it was a good one: an adult THAYER'S GULL. The Gull was on the bank of the river observed from the North end of Calispell HQ Dike Road. Also along that road was a tremendous flock of 200-300 COMMON REDPOLLS. Interestingly, the flock left the typical habitat in the brushy area and trees near the road and flew to feed in an open long-grass field. One particular bird came in to the iPod for point blank looks at less than 10 feet but we were frustrated as the rest of the huge flock disappeared into the long grass, making it impossible for us to scope for a Hoary. There was another curious REDPOLL along River Road between Cusick and Usk as well as a small flock at the Manressa Grotto Boat Launch. Along River Road were a TOWNSEND'S ! SOLITAIRE and 2 EURASIAN COLLARED DOVES. A 3rd Collared Dove was on a wire near Cusick High School. They have obviously taken up residence in the area. As Terry reported last week, there were an uncountable number of waterfowl on the river: hard to say but somewhere between 10,000 and 50,000. We easily relocated the 2 TRUMPETER SWANS with Tundras near Cusick. Temperatures reached a balmy 38 degrees and visibility was nearly infinite. Good birding, Jon Jonathan B. Isacoff Chair, Environmental Studies Associate Professor, Political Science Gonzaga University, Box 52 Spokane, WA 99258-0052 isacoff AT gonzaga.edu _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Swallows Park Clarkston Gulls and more From: "Terry Gray" <clgtlg AT moscow.com> Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 13:19:53 -0800 Thanks to Keith Carlson's post yesterday I decided to see if the Iceland Gull was still there this morning and a chance the Sandhill Crane also. The Iceland and a Glaucous Gull was mixed in with over 90 other gulls this morning. Many standing on the ice close to the shore and many more out beyond the flooded island. Of course the birds I wanted to see were not on the ice but beyond the island. Good looks and photos to follow later today. Asotin Co.-Swallows Park, Asotin, US-WA Feb 7, 2012 10:30 AM - 11:45 AM Protocol: Stationary 24 species Canada Goose X American Wigeon X Mallard X Bufflehead X California Quail X Pied-billed Grebe X Double-crested Cormorant X Bald Eagle 1 Red-tailed Hawk 2 American Kestrel 1 American Coot X Ring-billed Gull X California Gull X Herring Gull X Thayer's Gull 2 Iceland Gull (Kumlien's) 1 1st cycle Glaucous Gull X 1st cycle Mourning Dove 2 Northern Flicker 1 Bewick's Wren 1 American Robin X Yellow-rumped Warbler 1 Song Sparrow X White-crowned Sparrow X Good Birding! Terry Gray 890 Stefany Ln Moscow ID 83843 (208)882-1585 http://www.flickr.com/photos/terryandchristine/ _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Turnbull NWR Trumpeter Swans From: "Tim O'Brien" <kertim7179 AT yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 19:22:43 -0800 (PST) Hi all, I made a dash out to Turnbull NWR this afternoon. 13 species in all in about a hour and a half of walking around Cheever Lake. I could have had tunnel-vision because I wanted to get close to the swans on the far end of Cheever before it got too late.  Eight Trumpeter Swans were on Cheever Lake including two juveniles. Two more adults flew in as I was walking back to the parking area and they came in from the southeast. It was great hearing the honking/trumpeting going on as the sun went down. Good birding, Tim O'Brien Cheney, WA mailto: kertim7179 at yahoo dot com _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Iceland ? Gull From: "Keith Carlson" <kec201814 AT cableone.net> Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 13:33:21 -0800 Late this AM, Catherine Temple, Rick Welle and I spent about 30-45 minutes glassing and scoping what appears to be the gull first seen by John Hanna in late January in the same Swallows Park, Clarkston location. The bird was with a mixed group of 150+/- Ring-billed, California Gulls with a couple of Herring Gulls and at least two 1st Winter Thayer's Gulls. Subject bird was similar in size to the California Gulls. It has pink legs/feet,. a rather smallish two toned bill with a dark tip, a rounded head, an overall pale tannish/whitish appearence, on the one occasion we were able to see it open it's wings it showed a white under side to the wings. The bill appeared smaller when it was next to the 1st year Thayer's Gulls. Photos were taken at considerable distance and the bird was on the far side of the mud island with willows intervening at times. http://www.flickr.com/photos/birddog/6831895175/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/birddog/6831900803/in/photostream/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/birddog/6831906949/in/photostream/ Keith E. Carlson Lewiston_______________________________________________ Tweeters mailing list Tweeters AT u.washington.edu http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters Subject: Iceland ? Gull From: "Keith Carlson" <kec201814 AT cableone.net> Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 13:33:21 -0800 Late this AM, Catherine Temple, Rick Welle and I spent about 30-45 minutes glassing and scoping what appears to be the gull first seen by John Hanna in late January in the same Swallows Park, Clarkston location. The bird was with a mixed group of 150+/- Ring-billed, California Gulls with a couple of Herring Gulls and at least two 1st Winter Thayer's Gulls. Subject bird was similar in size to the California Gulls. It has pink legs/feet,. a rather smallish two toned bill with a dark tip, a rounded head, an overall pale tannish/whitish appearence, on the one occasion we were able to see it open it's wings it showed a white under side to the wings. The bill appeared smaller when it was next to the 1st year Thayer's Gulls. Photos were taken at considerable distance and the bird was on the far side of the mud island with willows intervening at times. http://www.flickr.com/photos/birddog/6831895175/in/photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/birddog/6831900803/in/photostream/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/birddog/6831906949/in/photostream/ Keith E. Carlson Lewiston_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Rose Creek From: Richard Baltierra <wolfbaltierra AT gmail.com> Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 21:27:18 -0800 Has anyone been to Rose Creek Preserve recently? Or Kamiak Butte? Anything interesting?_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: W. Screech Owl From: <ronpatdexter AT msn.com> Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 20:24:32 -0800 The Western Screech Owl that I reported earlier in the week is still here. It has been calling from our north woods for three nights prior to tonight. Now it is back calling from the area where the nest boxes are that I am hoping will prove tempting. I believe it is trying to call in a mate since I have not heard a second one responding. I'm keeping my finners croxxed. PS: I did also hear a Saw-Whet calling last night at the same time as the Screech.. Ron Dexter Spokane Foothills ronpatdexter AT msn.com _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: FW: Idaho Birders group help! From: Jane Westervelt <jwestervelt AT live.com> Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 17:24:36 -0800 If anyone has ideas for Rachael, please contact her directly. Thanks! rachael.adams AT uleth.ca > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Hello everyone, > > My name is Rachael Adams and I have recently started my PhD at the > University of Lethbridge in Alberta. I am currently trying to sort out > permits for our upcoming field season. I am originally from Scotland and > so, having never done fieldwork before, I was wondering if anyone could > help me. > > Our project is the evolution of high latitude birds and fieldwork consists > of capturing birds by mist nets and call playback, banding and collection > of a small sample of blood from the brachial vein (<200ul) for genetic > analyses for all our target species. Our species include the black-capped > chickadee, red-naped sapsucker, and gray jays. We have located a sampling > site at Ponderosa State Park (I am in the process of securing a state park > permit) but realise that the area is quite small. Collecting 30 > individuals of each species, from each sampling location is necessary for > reliable estimates of genetic variation. We classify each sampling > location with a 40km radius. Are there any other possible areas around > Ponderosa State Park where we could sample within the 40km radius, and > should I consider applying for a Boise National Forest Permit? > Alternatively, is there anyone with feeders around the McCall area that we > could sample at? > > Any help would be greatly appreciated! > > Rachael > _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: FW: Idaho Birders group help! From: Jane Westervelt <jwestervelt AT live.com> Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 17:24:36 -0800 If anyone has ideas for Rachael, please contact her directly. Thanks! rachael.adams AT uleth.ca > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Hello everyone, > > My name is Rachael Adams and I have recently started my PhD at the > University of Lethbridge in Alberta. I am currently trying to sort out > permits for our upcoming field season. I am originally from Scotland and > so, having never done fieldwork before, I was wondering if anyone could > help me. > > Our project is the evolution of high latitude birds and fieldwork consists > of capturing birds by mist nets and call playback, banding and collection > of a small sample of blood from the brachial vein (<200ul) for genetic > analyses for all our target species. Our species include the black-capped > chickadee, red-naped sapsucker, and gray jays. We have located a sampling > site at Ponderosa State Park (I am in the process of securing a state park > permit) but realise that the area is quite small. Collecting 30 > individuals of each species, from each sampling location is necessary for > reliable estimates of genetic variation. We classify each sampling > location with a 40km radius. Are there any other possible areas around > Ponderosa State Park where we could sample within the 40km radius, and > should I consider applying for a Boise National Forest Permit? > Alternatively, is there anyone with feeders around the McCall area that we > could sample at? > > Any help would be greatly appreciated! > > Rachael > Subject: PAS field trip today From: "Lavon Frazier" <lavon_frazier AT roadrunner.com> Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 21:11:41 -0800 Greetings, Sixteen birders (were there more?) had a splendid day of birding today on the Palouse Audubon field trip to Lewiston/Clarkston hot spots including Terminal 2, the wastewater treatment plant, N side fisherman's access, the levee, West pond, Pond B, Evans Pond, Chief Timothy Park, and the Hwy 12 cliffs. The following species were seen (or heard), roughly in the order that we encountered them: Eur starlng W meadowlark house sparrow mallard common goldeneye Barrow's goldeneye bufflehead ruddy duck CA goose snow goose white-crowned sparrow CA quail red-winged blackbird Cooper's hawk d.e. junco red-tailed hawk ring-necked duck coot ring-billed gull song sparrow horned grebe mourning dove Am robin house finch b b magpie d c cormorant rock pigeon great blue heron belted kingfisher redhead bald eagle hooded merganser cackling goose lesser scaup gadwall N flicker black-crowned night-heron (4) sharp-shinned hawk yellow-rumped warbler (Audubon's) Bewick's wren lesser goldfinch ruby-crowned kinglet raven W grebe marsh wren Am goldfinch golden eagle red-breasted nuthatch black-capped chickadee peregrine falcon canyon wren gray-crowned rosy-finch (a lifer for Terry O!) 52 species All in all, a great day of birding! Lavon Frazier _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Lincoln County Thayer's Gull From: Gina Sheridan <gsherida8502 AT yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 19:32:29 -0800 (PST) On Tuesday (1/31/12), Jon Isacoff took advantage of a bright sunny day and birded some selected sites in Lincoln County. In the late morning hours, we tried quartering the area around Swanson Lakes, for Sharp-tailed & Sage Grouse. Unfortunately, we dipped on the chickens. The shrub steppe was mid-winter quiet, and only the expected species were seen (i.e. Rough-legged Hawk, No. Shrike, Horned Lark, etc.). We did see a couple of returning RED-WINGED BLACKBIRDs though. Better luck was had at the northern end of the county. In the Hawk Creek Campground, we saw AMERICAN DIPPER, COMMON GOLDENEYE, MALLARD, BUFFLEHEAD, KILLDEER, and a lively RUBY-CROWNED KINGLET that was associating with a flock of BLACK-CAPPED CHICKADEEs.   In Seven Bays, we saw a mixed flock of COMMON & BARROW'S GOLDENEYEs, HORNED GREBEs, AMERICAN GOLDFINCH, CEDAR WAXWING, EURASIAN COLLARED DOVE, and large numbers of HOUSE FINCHes.  Only two gulls were present, but one was a winter adult THAYER'S GULL, and the other a RING-BILLED GULL. This was only the fourth county record for Thayer's Gull.  Although we found an interesting patch of heavily scaled pine trees in Indian Canyon, we couldn't turn up any Black-backed Woodpeckers this time. My county nemesis  Pileated Woodpecker eluded us as well.  Our last notable bird of the day was a MERLIN (not that easy in Lincoln County) east of Reardan. All in all, it was pleasant day of birding. Gina Sheridan Spokane, WA_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: RED-BREASTED SAPSUCKER Hood Park, WWCo. From: "Mike & MerryLynn" <m.denny AT charter.net> Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 18:40:49 -0800 Hello all, After spending most of the day in Benton Co. enjoying 2 Snowy Owls (one birder reported seeing 6 yesterday) and FINALLY finding our county Eurasian Collared-Dove we stopped at Hood Park on the way home - and there in the Yellow Pine that has hosted sapsuckers in the past (including Yellow-bellied) was a RB Sapsucker - only the 3rd record for WWCo. In the cornfields across from Casey pond were about 2000 geese with 200+ Snow Geese mixed in - they're back! Was really nice to spend the day in sunshine as it was very foggy in WW when we left home this am and again now. Later, M&M ******************************************************* Mike & MerryLynn Denny Birding the beautiful Walla Walla Valley "If you haven't birded, you haven't lived"_______________________________________________ Tweeters mailing list Tweeters AT u.washington.edu http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters Subject: RED-BREASTED SAPSUCKER Hood Park, WWCo. From: "Mike & MerryLynn" <m.denny AT charter.net> Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 18:40:49 -0800 Hello all, After spending most of the day in Benton Co. enjoying 2 Snowy Owls (one birder reported seeing 6 yesterday) and FINALLY finding our county Eurasian Collared-Dove we stopped at Hood Park on the way home - and there in the Yellow Pine that has hosted sapsuckers in the past (including Yellow-bellied) was a RB Sapsucker - only the 3rd record for WWCo. In the cornfields across from Casey pond were about 2000 geese with 200+ Snow Geese mixed in - they're back! Was really nice to spend the day in sunshine as it was very foggy in WW when we left home this am and again now. Later, M&M ******************************************************* Mike & MerryLynn Denny Birding the beautiful Walla Walla Valley "If you haven't birded, you haven't lived"_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Pend Oreille River and vicinity From: "Ninebark" <ninebark AT povn.com> Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 11:40:33 -0800 We must have been overlapping a bit with Terry Little yesterday, as Bill Fouts and I traveled a bit of the River for just a couple hours. Waterfowl on the river: Mallard Hooded Mergansers Common " Pied-billed Grebe Lots of Com. Goldeneye Ringed-neck ducks (noticeable absence; Am. widgeon, usually a common winter species) Large number of waterfowl hanging on the west side of the river, opposite Kalispel Res. so unable to i.d. at 1/3 mile. Lots of Bald eagles, running in pairs, likely getting broody Red-tail hawks, several Rough-legged hawk, (have been looking for these all winter; saw two an hour apart and only about 2 miles apart, so might be the same bird) Com. Redpoll-found 2 or 3 small groups and saw another 2 groups flying with i.d. unsure. Feeding on Common tansy and spotted knapweed. Eurasian -collared doves-about a dozen, just north of Usk, right next to the river (largest group we have found in P.O. county, usually only a couple at a time.) John Stuart Newport, WA_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: finch ? From: david woodall <wldlfbio AT gmail.com> Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 11:22:54 -0800 Anyone ever see or hear of a House and Goldfinch Hybrid. I saw a bird that looked that way at my feeder this morning. -- David Woodall *"There can be no greater issue than that of conservation in this country." -Theodore Roosevelt*_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: A Great Day in Pend Oreille and little Spokane From: "Terry Little" <terry AT crossoverchurch.info> Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 01:40:30 -0500 Hello, Just got home from a really fun day of birding in Pend Oreille County. To begin with, P O county is about as "snowless" as I have ever seen in January, which makes traveling around very easy and allows access to places that are most often snow bound this time of year. Starting early this morning at Calispell Lake, I found Northern Shrike, American Dipper, Pileated Woodpecker, White breasted Nuthatch, and Brown Creeper. At the house next to McKenzie Sough where there are feeders in the back, there were six COMMON REDPOLLS in with a larger flock of American Goldfinches. A Townsend's Solitaire was in the front yard of the same home along with American Robins and one Red winged Blackbird. Along Cusick Meadows Rd was a N Rough Legged Hawk. Along the water front between the towns of Usk and Cusick on the east side of the river was a large flock of waterfowl, typical winter species. But among them were about 30 Tundra Swans and 2 TRUMPETER SWANS. Also, standing on the sandbar, were 2 HERRING GULLS (code 4 in PO) and with them a juvenile GLAUCOUS GULL (code 5, and only the second I have seen in the county). A Sharp shinned Hawk was in the town of Cusick. Several places along the PO river, there were three huge flocks of mixed waterfowl - each flock measuring a half mile - containing 14 species of ducks. Across LeClerc Rd from Mansesa Grotto down by the river was a flock of 15 COMMON REDPOLLS. At Flying Goose Ranch, there was a MARSH WREN, my first winter record in Pend Oreille County. At River Bend (community just north of the Kalispell Indian Reservation), there was a flock of eight PINE GROSBEAKS across from little green barn utility building (1028). I was surprised at the end of the day to realize that I had tallied 60 species for the county. Along Allen Rd in the southern part of PO County, were Rock Pigeons and California Quail, two rather uncommon species for the county. On my way home, I stopped briefly by Eloika Lake back in Spokane County. At the parking lot for the boat launch was another flock of COMMON REDPOLLS and at the south end of the lake was flock of BOHEMIAN WAXWINGS with a few Cedars mixed. When I got home, there were more of both species of waxwings feeding in my Mountain Ash along with a large flock Robins and a Varied Thrush. Blessings Terry Little Mead, Wa _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: 4 Snowy Owls in Benton Co. From: "Ron & Carole" <res0y3oz AT frontier.com> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 11:23:49 -0800 Ron just confirmed the 4 snowy owls in southeastern Benton Co on Mills Rd, as reported by Heidi Newsome's acquaintance. They are pretty far away. Ron & Carole Louderback Kennewick WA "If there is a mark of perfection, it is simply that it can tolerate the imperfections of others. " Fenelon, 17th century_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Fw: LPO January From: "Mike M" <strix-nebulosa AT centurylink.net> Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 21:19:13 -0800 From: Mike Munts Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2012 5:37 PM To: inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu Subject: Fw: LPO January As you all know it has been a pretty light snow winter. The bird activity has been correspondingly slow. We did manage the following 42 species on the refuge in January. I also had a couple of Barow’s Goldeneye on the LPO river behind the office this afternoon but the y did not make it for January. Mike Munts Colville Canada Goose Mallard Hooded Merganser Ring-necked Pheasant Ruffed Grouse Bald Eagle Red-tailed Hawk Rough-legged Hawk American Kestrel Mourning Dove Great Horned Owl Northern Pygmy-Owl Downy Woodpecker Hairy Woodpecker White-headed Woodpecker Black-backed Woodpecker Northern Flicker Pileated Woodpecker Gray Jay Steller's Jay Clark's Nutcracker Black-billed Magpie American Crow Common Raven Black-capped Chickadee Mountain Chickadee Red-breasted Nuthatch White-breasted Nuthatch Pygmy Nuthatch Brown Creeper Pacific Wren American Dipper Golden-crowned Kinglet American Robin American Tree Sparrow Song Sparrow Dark-eyed Junco House Finch Red Crossbill Common Redpoll Pine Siskin _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Snowy Owls Ocean Shores From: kenneth trease <kennethtrease AT yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 22:55:27 -0800 (PST) My wife and I were visiting with my son in Seattle this past weekend and we decided to take a few extra days to see the Snowy Owls at Damon Point near Ocean Shores, Wa.  If you have an opportunity to come over to the west side it is well worth the trip.  It is about 1.5 miles to the area where I saw them today.  They were in a fairly close grouping and I could see 8 owls from my vantage point.  I was happily filling up my camera card when they all suddenly flushed at the same time for no apparent reason.  I looked around and saw a Bald Eagle behind me.  By the time I got turned around and got my camera up all I got was a going away shot of the eagle with another bird in its talons.  I am sure the owls spooked because of the eagle.  If interested I posted some of today's pix on my Flickr site: http://www.flickr.com/photos/cavuken/ _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Long-tailed Weasel Mt Spokane Foothills (Ron Dexter) From: <ronpatdexter AT msn.com> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 20:56:57 -0800 This morning I found weasel tracks in the remaining snow.. tracks in and out of a two inch hole.. So, I set up a remote sensor camera to hopefully catch some photos.. I sprinkled raw hamburger in front of the camera.. I will report results... this time of year they are all white except a black tail tip..I think they are a pretty neat animal and fun to watch.. Ron DexterSpokaneronpatdexter AT msn.com _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Swallows Park Sandhill Crane Still Present. From: "Keith Carlson" <kec201814 AT cableone.net> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 13:45:16 -0800 Around noon today the Sandhill crane celebrated a month at Swallows Park, Clarkston. Was at the swimming beach with the gulls, Mallards, etc. http://www.flickr.com/photos/birddog/6797782577/in/photostream/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/birddog/6797772793/in/photostream/ Keith E. Carlson Lewiston_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Asotin County List From: "Keith Carlson" <kec201814 AT cableone.net> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 13:20:02 -0800 The Asotin County year list is now at 101 with the addition of Western Screech Owl and Red-winged Blackbird. Many thanks to out of county birders from Spokane and the Westside for the help and reporting sightings. We are off to another great year in SE Washington. Keith E. Carlson Lewiston, ID_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Western Screech Owl Mt Spokane Foothills (Ron Dexter) From: <ronpatdexter AT msn.com> Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 20:45:14 -0800 This evening around 6 pm, I was pleantly surprised to hear the bouncing ball call of a Western Screech Owl on our property in the vicinity where they nested in my nest boxes 4 and 5 years ago.. what a neat sound they make... hopefully, they will nest here again.. Ron DexterSpokane Foothillsronpatdexter AT msn.com _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Updated VIDEOS: Northern Pygmy Owl, Gray-crowned Rosy-finches, and Spruce Grouse From: khanh tran <khanhbatran AT hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 02:53:15 +0000 Hi all,  A couple of updated videos from recent and past.  Please watch in High Definition by clicking on the 'gear-wheel' icon (change quality) and selecting 720p or 1080p. This is located on the bottom right of video screen.  **********************************************  1) NORTHERN PYGMY OWL showing false-eyes.   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UCrJLFbF_Q 2) GRAY-CROWNED ROSYFINCHES against falling snow. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocNwPbxtP2c 3) A gorgeous, male SPRUCE GROUSE displaying.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeoOrM3pLto Enjoy and good birding,  www.ktbirding.com Khanh Tran (Portland, Oregon) _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Snowy Owl Article of Interest From: "Keith Carlson" <kec201814 AT cableone.net> Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 15:08:21 -0800 This from MSNC on the web. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46180562/ns/us_news-environment/ Keith E. Carlson Lewiston, ID_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Glaucous gull From: Tim Durnell <ddurnell AT centurytel.net> Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 12:32:43 -0800 Today, west of Key Pt. on a little spit of an island, there was a glaucous gull among a bunch of herring gulls. Walking through the day-use area, across the bridge by the swimming area and out to the flats is actually the best viewing. Gulls seem to very skittish the past couple of times I've tried to view them. The day-use area can be reached by turning left on Boise Rd. off of HWY 395 north of Kettle Falls and driving past the marina turnoff. Day-use area is the first right after the turnoff for Locust Grove Campground. Good birding! Tim Durnell Rice, WA _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Owls in Pend Oreille and Spokane Counties From: "Terry Little" <terry AT crossoverchurch.info> Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 01:25:18 -0500 Hello. Tonight I did some owling on the back side of Eloika Lake in the very southern edge of Pend Oreille County. I was pleased to locate two WESTERN SCREECH OWLS, a tough bird to find in the county. It was particularly satsifying to find these owls in a place that I had tried unsuccessfully at least times, but had thought it looked like a good place for screech owls. Also from this place, I heard Great Horned Owls, A little further down the road and just north of the county border, I found three N Saw Whet Owls. I also found three more N Saw Whets in Spokane County. A fun night. Blessings Terry Little Mead, Wa _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Snowy Owl x 2 From: Catherine Temple <ctemple99 AT gmail.com> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2012 16:06:37 -0800 My persistence paid off this a.m. when I finally located the Snowy Owl at Anatone Flats and I was doubly blessed as there were two birds within yards of each other. As I turned on to Davis Rd. the first bird was out of sight in the ditch probably hiding out from the howling wind. It startled me as it swooped in front of my truck, but then I was able to keep it in view and get some photos. I could never get closer than about 100 yards before it would move. It circled around and eventually came back to the same location. That's when I noticed the second bird. It then moved farther out into the field and as I watched I was treated to a Snowy owl skirmish when the first bird swooped in on it. WOW!!! At about 200 yards the photos aren't great, but good enough to get the action. Enjoy! http://www.flickr.com/photos/ctemple/6778771885/in/photostream -- *Catherine Temple* *Nature, Wildlife and Pet Portrait Artist* *Clarkston, WA. (208) 791-7052 *ctemple99 AT gmail.com www.catherinetempleart.com www.flickr.com/photos/ctemple/_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Grant and Lincoln Counties From: "Terry Little" <terry AT crossoverchurch.info> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 22:53:24 -0500 Hello, I birded the eastern edge of Grant County today from Coulee Dam south to Soap Lake, then east along Hwy 28 back into Lincoln County. Here are some the notable species I enjoyed seeing. North Dam, Banks Lake: 2 male RED BREASTED MERGANSERS, Barrow's Goldeneye, Common Loon, Virginia Rail (marsh below the dam). Northrop Point: Coope's Hawk, another RED BREASTED MERGANSER Northrop Canyon: Black capped and Mt Chickadees, Golden Crowned Kinglet, Red breasted Nuthatch, Canyon Wren Steamboat Rock: AMERICAN TREE SPARROW, Varied Thrush Lake Lenore; Greater and Lesser Scaup, Canvasback, Barrow's Goldeneye, Ruddy Duck Rd 22 NE west of Marlin: Prairie Falcon Back in Lincoln County: Highline Rd off Coffee Pot Rd: American Tree Sparrow Coffee Pot Rd just west of Rocklyn Rd: ~150 SNOW BUNTINGS Old Kuch's Rd: Northern Shrike, Prairie Falcon and 2 more Prairie Falcons between Reardan and Davenport. Blessings Terry Little Mead, Wa _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Common Redpolls update From: Flyz4free <flyz4free AT yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 09:20:29 -0800 (PST) My sighting of 50 Common Redpoles in the North Spokane (Foothills) area was on January 23rd, 2012...not February as stated in first email...sorry about the confusion. _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: RE: White Wood Duck Spokane River From: Rich Landers <RichL AT SPOKESMAN.com> Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 06:21:15 +0000 Here are photos and more details on the white wood duck in Riverfront Park. http://www.spokesman.com/galleries/2011/nov/28/riverfront-parks-white-xmas-duck/ ________________________________ From: inland-nw-birders-bounces AT uidaho.edu [inland-nw-birders-bounces AT uidaho.edu] on behalf of ronpatdexter AT msn.com [ronpatdexter AT msn.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 9:55 PM To: Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu Univ Subject: [inland-NW-birders] White Wood Duck Spokane River Note; The white Wood Duck on the Spokane River has been reported 3 years in a row now. It escaped from a owner who lives in Morgan Acres just north of Hillyard.. It is not an Albino.. just white..says the former owner. Ron Dexter Spokane ronpatdexter AT msn.com _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: White Wood Duck Spokane River From: <ronpatdexter AT msn.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 21:55:40 -0800 Note; The white Wood Duck on the Spokane River has been reported 3 years in a row now. It escaped from a owner who lives in Morgan Acres just north of Hillyard.. It is not an Albino.. just white..says the former owner. Ron Dexter Spokane ronpatdexter AT msn.com _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Common Redpolls From: Flyz4free <flyz4free AT yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 21:25:31 -0800 (PST) On Feb 23rd I saw 50 Common Redpolls in Foothills at intersection of Madison and Farwell Roads _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Suspected Male Albino Wood Duck in Riverfront Park, Spokane, WA From: Carolyn Wilcox <carolyn AT riseup.net> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 21:25:12 -0800 Hello, I found an almost-all-white duck around Riverfront Park in downtown Spokane on 1/25 at 3:30 PM. I suspect the duck is a male albino Wood Duck for the following reasons: 1) the bird was about Wood Duck size 3) long tail and overall look of the bird 4) orange around the eye (orbital ring) 5) the beak was red with white on the very front 6) vocalizations (squeals) when the bird was flying 7) a single female Wood Duck was nearby (and I have seen her hanging out alone with Mallards previously) It would be great to get confirmation from someone else as to this suspected identification. The albino waterfowl was swimming with Mallards. We saw it on the pedestrian bridge between the clock tower and the carousel. We also observed other waterfowl in the same general vicinity: 1 Pied-billed Grebe 2 male Common Goldeneye 1 female Common Goldeneye 5+ American Wigeons (both sexes) 5+ Buffleheads (both sexes) As well as the obligatory Greylag Geese, Canada Geese, and Mallards. Good birding, Carolyn Wilcox Spokane, Washington _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: ANSWERS to Mystery Bird Videos From: khanh tran <khanhbatran AT hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 04:35:15 +0000 Answers are revealed for mystery birds in flight. Yes, it was somewhat difficult but call notes were key. Some correctly id Quiz A and one keen birder got Quiz B correct. Quiz A: Mystery birds in flight  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-txbOf8MA8 **************************************** Quiz B: Mystery birds in low light and backlit  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6xBxSBCLV8 Good birding,  Khanh Tran (Portland, Oregon) www.ktbirding.com _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Windy Wolf Lodge Bay (Lake CdA, ID) From: Doug Ward <dougward AT frontier.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 23:01:13 +0000 (UTC) Took a quick trip out to Wolf Lodge Bay on Lake Coeur d'Alene (Kootenai Co., ID) today to see what might be left of Lisa's Gullfest 2011-12 that was going on before I had to head out of town.  Reading some of the posts to INWBirders that had accumulated, it looked like some of these guys may have headed south down to the L-C Valley, but I was still curious.  I got out there and the wind was blowing, ice had taken over the east end of the bay, and no gulls around.  Then battling the wind was the first gull to show up; the 1st year GLAUCOUS-WINGED GULL is still around.  Next gull was sitting down in the water near the boat ramp, a snowy white 2nd year GLAUCOUS GULL.  Pretty good, two gulls, two rarities!  Ended up with seven individual gulls, and four species altogether - the others being Herring (3) and Ring-billed (2).  There were no gulls around Higgin's Pt. and Blue Creek Bay looked empty too from a distance.  So, while Gullfest 2011-12 has moved on, there is still a good reason to head out to Wolf Lodge to catch these two; there are always a few who never want to leave a party. Good Birding, Doug PS - Keep your eyes open Lewiston, Clarkston, and Walla Walla, this amazing group of gulls had to go somewhere. 25 January 2012  Wolf Lodge Bay, Lake Coeur d'Alene, ID Canada Goose - 50 Mallard - 15 Lesser Scaup - 1 Ring-necked Duck - 25 Common Goldeneye - 15 Bufflehead - 10 Common Merganser - 50 Bald Eagle - 1ad, 2 1st Ring-billed Gull - 2ad Herring Gull - 2ad, 1 1st GLAUCOUS-WINGED GULL - 1 1st GLAUCOUS GULL - 1 2nd Common Raven - 2 _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: A note from eBird From: Brian Sullivan <bls42 AT cornell.edu> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:29:07 -0800 Hello Inland NW birders I'm the eBird Project Leader for the Western Region, and I have been watching this conversation develop RE eBird data, long traveling counts, etc. I thought it would be good to chime in here with some clarifications on eBird policy. Thanks to everyone here who uses eBird, without your data the project simply wouldn't work! First of all, I should say at the outset that ALL data submitted to eBird are valuable. Period. We use every bit of data that comes in. The key is knowing how the data were collected, and then using it for appropriate analysis and visualization. All data, both valid and invalid, are always available to researchers, and this discussion is centered around mainly what we choose to display to birders through the eBird data output tools. These tools are designed to provide access to the millions of records we collect in useful ways, so we strive to keep them as friendly and informative as possible. These include species range maps, regional species occurrence bar charts, etc. In many cases birders do submit longer traveling counts, and there is no hard and fast policy on our end to 'invalidate' traveling counts longer than 5 miles. In some cases those counts are fine, and it is up to the individual eBird editor to decide when a checklist is too long to be considered 'valid'. Especially in the West, where habitats are sometimes homogeneous across large areas, longer counts can work. But think about how species composition changes across elevation gain, and you can quickly see why mapping long traveling counts gets complicated. The <5 mile length is a general suggestion for eBirders, but not a requirement. Our researchers doing rigorous science with eBird data have found that traveling counts longer than 5 miles create problems when trying to model species/habitat relationships, and for those analyses only a subset of the data are used. But many other researchers ARE using the longer counts, it simply depends on the kinds of analyses one is interested in performing. The nice thing about eBird is that when birders tell us how they collect the data, researchers can pick and choose what slice of data they'd like to use. It is important to understand that 'valid' and 'invalid' only control what users see in terms of the public eBird data output. Right now we tend toward invalidating long traveling counts and county-level submissions SOLELY because those records appear in odd places on the eBird maps, and they can be misleading to birders looking to find a species using our mapping tools. Moving forward, however, eBird will become smarter in its ability to handle these data, and we will be able to remove these long traveling counts and county-level lists from maps, yet still make them available through our other tools that do not have a spatial component, such as the Bar Charts. County-level lists and long traveling counts are indeed great for providing information on these tools. The problem for us right now is that any 'valid' record shows up on all tools, but we'll be working on ways to improve this moving forward, and when we do that it will be easy to use county-level submissions in Bar Charts etc. That is our long-term goal. RE county-level lists, again it is not eBird policy to automatically invalidate these. Instead we leave it up to local reviewers. In some western counties that are larger than entire eastern states, invalidating county-level data make sense. In some tiny eastern counties validating county-level data makes sense. eBird is a global project, and it's hard to come up with a policy that works for everyone, and we are just trying to let people know that checklists from more refined geographic areas are ALWAYS better! They are better for your personal lists, and they are better for science. That said, we are well aware that asking people to do too much tends to reduce participation, so we will always be flexible enough to collect all data from birders, however they would like to enter it. Our job is to simply catalog the data as accurately as possible, and then let scientists and analysts do their work. For a good example of some of the cool modeling we're doing with traveling counts <5 miles, see this page. The migration animations are cool! http://ebird.org/content/ebird/home/birding-news-and-features/about/occurrence-maps Thanks again for all the participation in Idaho and Washington. And I would also like to thank the teams of volunteer editors working in both states. These folks work tirelessly without compensation to make the eBird dataset as clean as possible. Data quality is of paramount importance, so we are very appreciative of all their hard work in this arena. I hope to make it up there for a birding visit soon! Brian -- =========== Brian L. Sullivan 49 Holman Road Carmel Valley, CA 93924 eBird/AKN Project Leader www.ebird.org www.avianknowledge.net Photographic Editor, Birds of North America Online http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/BNA Cornell Lab of Ornithology 159 Sapsucker Woods Rd. Ithaca, NY 14850 Photographic Editor, North American Birds American Birding Association www.americanbirding.org bls42 AT cornell.edu 609-694-3280 -------------------------------_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Random Thoughts on Gulls, etc. From: "Keith Carlson" <kec201814 AT cableone.net> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 06:35:51 -0800 The recent discussions concerning the gull found by John Hanna at Swallows Park and supported by his excellent photos shows to me how difficult it can be to be an amateur birder. In this case, we have seen references to several experts with regard to Thayer's, Iceland, Kumliens and various possible hybrids. Even perusal of the field guides that we all use can add to the confusion. SIBLEY states that Thayer's and Iceland are"often considered a single species' and that "possibly Iceland x Thayer's hybrids are indistinguishable from Thayer's" HOWELL and DUNN in Gulls of the Americas give an interesting view of Thayer's x Kumliens hybrids and conclude that proof of the existence of this mix has not been established. So what are we as amateur birders to do? Let's keep it simple. There are two accepted authorities for checklists that we use: American Birding Association ( ABA) American Ornitholgical Union (AOU) Both list Iceland Gull, Larus glaucoides, and Thayer's Gull ( Larus thayeri) as species. Neither recognize Kumliens as other than a sub-species of Iceland. Until the "experts" convince either/both ABA and AOU otherwise, we amateur birders are left with following them. The Swallows Park gull has been accepted by the Washington eBird reviewers as an Iceland Gull- so it is. It is Asotin County #95 for the year. Keith E. Carlson Lewiston_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: 17+ Ravens near Mt. Spokane summit/Chair 1 From: "Sherry Lee" <sherrylee-1 AT comcast.net> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 23:25:58 -0800 On Sunday 1/22 around 3:15 pm while riding Chairlift #1 at Mt. Spokane we noticed a large number of Ravens flying and cavorting around just below the summit. They were hard to count, as they were flying around ragged low clouds and trees, but we had a firm count of 17 and guessed there were may have been two dozen or so! Sherry Lee _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Re: Iceland Gull - Swallows Park, Clarkston, WA From: Cliff and Lisa Weisse <CliffandLisa AT octobersetters.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 21:47:39 -0700 In response to Charles' email, I don't think this is the same bird Lisa Hardy photographed at Couer d'Alene. That individual has crisp shaft streaks on the scapulars that, together with the subterminal brown bars, form "anchors" on those feathers. The bird photographed by John Hanna at Clarkston doesn't show shaft streaks. The overall paleness of this bird, extensively pale based bill, short legs, and lightly marked tertials suggest Iceland/kumlieni to me but I'd like to see the tail and primary pattern before feeling comfortable with that ID. Very cool bird either way. Cliff -- Cliff and Lisa Weisse Island Park, Idaho cliffandlisa AT octobersetters.com _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Good Day for Owls From: kenneth trease <kennethtrease AT yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 17:41:34 -0800 (PST) Yesterday I took advantage of the afternoon sun break to bird the West Plains.  I found the Northern Hawk Owl at the same location, northwest of the farmhouse at Prewett and McLaughlin roads.  Way too far away for photos.  I looked hard along Coulee-Hite road in Spokane County and Detour Road in Lincoln County for Snowy Owl but no luck.  I did find Short-eared Owls hunting along Detour Road.  I was able to finally get some decent photos of the Short-eared Owls.  I also had a covey of Gray Partridge along Detour Road.  If interested I have posted the owl photos on my Flickr site: http://www.flickr.com/photos/cavuken/ _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Re: Iceland Gull - Swallows Park, Clarkston, WA From: Charles Swift <chaetura AT gmail.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 12:51:42 -0800 John - Thanks for the great photo study! This bird looks very similar (perhaps the same??) to a bird Lisa Hardy photographed recently in Coeur d'Alene which is pictured on Steve Hampton's gull identification web site here (2nd bird down): http://www.tertial.us/gulls/kuml1.htm Steve offers the following opinion on the Coeur d'Alene bird which might also apply to the Asotin bird: "It's a "pale Thayer's Gull", a "Thayer's with Kumlien's genes", or a "Kumlien's Gull" depending upon your taxonomic perspective." And provides some further information on 2 different perspectives on the taxonomy of this species complex. Each perspective has its supporters although the AOU considers Kumlien's to be a subspecies of Iceland Gull not a hybrid between Iceland and Thayer's Gulls. Some individuals (like the Coeur d'Alene bird according to Steve) fall in between what are considered to be the normal range of variation of Thayer's and Kumlein's causing identification headaches and challenging our desire to unambiguously label individual birds in some cases. thanks, Charles. On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 8:21 AM, John Hanna wrote: > Good morning inland-nw-birders, > > I've just been told by Keith Carlson that the gull I saw on January 22nd > at Swallows Park in Clarkston, WA has been confirmed by eBird as an Iceland > Gull. He also says it is only the 3rd sighting of Iceland Gull for Asotin > County. Below is the link to my eBird photo of this gull that lists of > summary of characteristics used to identify the bird. This is a really fun > bird to watch so I hope it sticks around and gives others a chance to see > it. > > http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnwalterhanna/6747325449/ > > Thanks for everyone's identification comments earlier, > > John > > > > _______________________________________________ > Inland-nw-birders mailing list > Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu > https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders > > -- Charles Swift Moscow, Idaho 46°43′54″ N, 116°59′50″ W email: chaetura AT gmail.com_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Re: ebird From: Charles Swift <chaetura AT gmail.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 12:45:52 -0800 Lowell - Pretty much everything you need to get started with eBird are in the quick start guide and tutorial. Here is the quick start guide: http://ebird.org/content/ebird/about/ebird-quick-start-guide Here is the full tutorial: http://ebird.org/content/ebird/about/tutorial There is a lot more information including much of what has been discussed over the past few days (data quality issues etc.) here: http://ebird.org/content/ebird/about eBird also publishes regular articles of interest on their home page here: http://ebird.org/content/ebird (for those using a "News Readers" you can get a news feed for eBird articles w/ this URL) There is also an eBird google group (email list) called eBird TechTalk for serious eBird nerds here: http://groups.google.com/group/ebirdtechtalk Charles. On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 12:28 PM, lowell wrote: > With all the chatter about changes how about a reference to the most > concise explanation of how to enter and retrieve the data for us less > experienced and who care less about opinions. > > _______________________________________________ > Inland-nw-birders mailing list > Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu > https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders > > -- Charles Swift Moscow, Idaho 46°43′54″ N, 116°59′50″ W email: chaetura AT gmail.com_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: ebird From: "lowell" <elnan AT ultraplix.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 13:28:13 -0700 With all the chatter about changes how about a reference to the most concise explanation of how to enter and retrieve the data for us less experienced and who care less about opinions. _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Red breasted merganser From: Catherine Temple <ctemple99 AT gmail.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 10:51:10 -0800 This morning I walked the by-pass levy in Lewiston and found this Red breasted merganser feeding at the pond outflow by the railroad bridge. At first I thought it may be the same bird I saw last Nov. in the same place, but after checking my photos I think this is a different bird. It appears to be an immature male. http://www.flickr.com/photos/ctemple/6756054665/in/photostream/ Last Nov. http://www.flickr.com/photos/ctemple/6310377412/in/photostream/ -- *Catherine Temple* *Nature, Wildlife and Pet Portrait Artist* *Clarkston, WA. (208) 791-7052 *ctemple99 AT gmail.com www.catherinetempleart.com www.flickr.com/photos/ctemple/_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Peone Wetland and Mt Spokane Foothills From: "Terry Little" <terry AT crossoverchurch.info> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 10:41:17 -0800 Hello, This morning I had a beautiful adult Golden Eagle flying parallel and very close to me up on Holcomb Rd in the foothills of Mt Spokane. Also had a Townsend's Solitaire at Deadman's Creek. Back out on the prairie, I had a flock of about a dozen Horned Larks. They are usually out there all winter, but this is the first flock I have seen this year at the wetland. Blessings Terry Little _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: re: Ebird From: "Scott Downes" <downess AT charter.net> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 08:31:14 -0800 Last one from me on this I promise. Wanted to shed light on a couple of things that may help to settle this debate. Ryan Shaw and I had a personal email exchange as we've known each other for many years and hopefully he is ok with me sharing a couple of helpful pieces of info that he shared with me. Those facts are: apparently it is only a handful (less than 10) people who still regularly input at the county level in Washington State, so this is a relatively minor issue as a whole. The other fact with long distance checklists is that there is not a hard rule used by reviewers in Washington (don't know about other states). That is, they evaluate a list that is longer than 5 miles to see if the data still has value to the overall landscape (i.e. few checklists submitted to that county and even poor data is some data, or if the habitat did not change drastically over the route etc..). Knowing this, it sounds like the issue is a minor one. On Jon's point of who should filter out data - submitters of data or scientists - I wanted to make a point to clear things up. It should never be one or the other. Any scientific project using ebird data is going to have to filter the raw data anyhow to their own use. I don't know if this step will help them minimize their efforts or not. I have become a fairly regular user of ebird now and I can tell you that submitting checklists do not take that much time. Collecting data in the field is the time consuming part, entering a checklist to ebird in general would take less than 5 minutes. I am still of the opinion that filtering this data doesn't really help the end product of ebird much as there are still other errors such as estimating counts, common species misidentification etc.. that also compromises the project in minor ways. In the end, these are all relatively small issues I think and ebird is a great way for people to share their bird sightings with the birding community/research community as a whole. As a side note- if you want to do some further learning on the subject, check out the following link: http://www.avianknowledge.net/content/. Ebird data does go into and becomes a part of the Avian Knowledge Network, THE AKN includes data from BBS routes, Bird Banding Lab, agency field work and this is really the backbone of what ebird data gets used for in the scientific community. The beauty of ebird is that because of the very friendly interface they have developed, the general public can use data they input in addition to researchers. Scott Downes downess AT charter.net Yakima WA_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Iceland Gull - Swallows Park, Clarkston, WA From: John Hanna <johnwalterhanna AT gmail.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 08:21:19 -0800 Good morning inland-nw-birders, I've just been told by Keith Carlson that the gull I saw on January 22nd at Swallows Park in Clarkston, WA has been confirmed by eBird as an Iceland Gull. He also says it is only the 3rd sighting of Iceland Gull for Asotin County. Below is the link to my eBird photo of this gull that lists of summary of characteristics used to identify the bird. This is a really fun bird to watch so I hope it sticks around and gives others a chance to see it. http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnwalterhanna/6747325449/ Thanks for everyone's identification comments earlier, John_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Re: eBird From: "Jonathan B. Isacoff" <isacoff AT gonzaga.edu> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 08:02:30 -0800 Hi All, I've tried to sit this one out but: there seems to be a basic misunderstanding about what eBird is about. eBird doesn't have a "mission statement" published on the website, but perhaps it should. Much of the debate hinges on what is eBird for? Is it primarily "for science" or primarily "for birding?" My understanding is that the primary goal is "for science" with a large fringe benefit for recreational birding. Given this, decisions on how eBird is managed appropriately reflect it's scientific mission. Several people have aptly pointed out that as a FREE checklist and data information service, it's a pretty darn good deal. If people paid for eBird - and by NO means am I suggesting that! - then it might make more sense that the consumer get the product tailored more to their needs. But that's not the case. Regarding the specifics: (1) A basic point is "who should do the work" of filtering out long-travelling or county lists? Should the observer do it when entering the data? Or should scientists do it later to filter out what they don't need? Either way, the data can be filtered to clean out the chaff from the wheat. But here's the deal: most eBird users are recreationalists getting a free service for a hobby. The scientists who use the data often are working very long hours for very low pay. Given eBird's science-driven mission, it makes sense to have the filtering done FIRST and not add extra layers of work, even if relatively easy and small. Scott Downes's view as a professional scientist is well taken, and if quick and easy filtering were all that were at issue, that might change matters. But there are additional aspects to this issue. (2) As many have pointed out, though it seems "draconian" to tell people their long or county lists will not be valid, they can still do it for the personal record-keeping. That's a pretty big compromise: what is considered scientifically UN-useful is not validated at the get-go to save time for those who use the data for work later. But those who use the data for PERSONAL recreation can still use eBird as a free checklist management tool with no change. (3) I firmly agree with what Ryan Shaw pointed out: EVEN for recreational hobbyists, a checklist that shows a Cassin's Finch floating 25 miles offshore or an Albatross 25 miles inland creates confusion and problems that in my mind balance out the benefits of having the long traveling list otherwise there for the bar charts. If someone is driving 200-300 miles to chase a rarity: it doesn't do very much good if you look on eBird and find the location to be 50 or more miles off from the actual site of the observation. Imagine this: you drive across the state to locate a Eurasian rarity at a feeder in a farm town but the eBird map shows the location to be atop a 8,000 foot peak in the Cascades. That would piss off many a rarity-chaser! I realize one might double-check before getting in the car, but not always... Or what if the rarity were reported while already on the road for a trip? (4) Final point that I'm not sure anyone has made: even if the filtering were essentially a no-brainer for scientists and caused them little time and even if the long traveling/county level counts have use on the bar charts: the fact is they're highly inaccurate and from personal experience, they tend to be sloppy. From working with the eBird team, I can say these counts are often not "just" 20-30 miles but sometimes 120 or 150 miles for a single checklist. Counts, species observed, and many other things get lumped together in a very imprecise way. Having been guilty of this myself, I believe sloppiness begets more sloppiness and precision begets more precision. Taking note of which species -- and how many -- were seen, and where, encourages a practice that has declined massively (as Paul Lehman noted in the latest Birding): taking accurate field notes and making IDs AT THE TIME OF OBSERVATION, not on the computer later. Entering more specific and precise checklists will! often cause observers to review where, what, and how many they saw. The odds of the sketchy ID or count "slipping into" the checklist are reduced. Perhaps I'm wrong here and this a marginal issue, but if it's not, asking birders to be more accurate and precise in entering checklists is a good way to encourage good basic birding practices in the long run. Good birding, Jon Isacoff Spokane _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Re: a note for eBird reporters From: Matt Bartels <mattxyz AT earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 06:01:41 -0800 Another opinion to toss on the pile - [perhaps discounted because I use e-bird, but am not someone who contributes to it -- I guess that's one way I'm like those much-referred-to 'researchers' out there using the data] I wish e-bird wouldn't be making this change, and consider it something that will harm the overall usefulness of e-bird for 'normal' users, rather than researchers. As others have said, it is a trivial programming issue to be able to preserve the vague data in e-bird and let the researchers filter it out or include it as desired. For non-researchers, the same choice could be provided. I don't think you should have to prove your credentials as a researcher for be given the privilege of seeing all the information, if you'd see value in it. If people entering their lists can still be vague for their own personal lists, then it seems this change will increase the amount of data that is eventually shielded from 'normal' end-users. Researchers will still be able to see the vague data and personal users will still be able to see their own vague data, but Joe & Jane Birder planning a trip don't have the option to learn from that data. Several people have commented on how misleading it can be to look at a sighting's pin in the center of a county and find out the sighting isn't referring to an exact location -- Wouldn't that be solvable by displaying county-level or other vague-location sightings differently? [a different color push-pin, a box at the side, etc] Why presume that the harm to the 'normal' users is so great that we should be shielded from the information rather than just allowed to decide for ourselves whether or not we can tolerate the map-level vagueness? When I'm planning a trip somewhere, I look up information on e-bird in a variety of fashions - For example: "Is it a good week for species X in a region?" I learn something by the inclusion of vague information, even if I don't pick up an exact spot to visit. I can understand the inclination on E-bird's side to encourage precision in the data contributed, but this seems a poor solution to the issue. Best, Matt Bartels Seattle, WA On Jan 23, 2012, at 12:46 PM, Cliff and Lisa Weisse wrote: > Keith, > > If you entered the count for Bald Eagles along a 25 mile stretch of river, the sightings would appear in your personal list but would not appear in public output like county lists or maps. The sightings WOULD be available to researchers. If you are compiling the Asotin County list for WASHINGTON BIRDER I recommend that you request access to the raw data. That way you get all the records so you can make an assessment of "validity" that's tailored to your purpose(s). If you need help with this let me know and I'll find out how to get you set you up. > > Regarding this statement: > "E Bird should be able to adapt to what "citizen" birders want and need in addition to the needs of science. " > I can tell you that, in the 4-5 years I've been involved, eBird has consistently made the needs of the birding community a priority when updating/improving the system. Discussions often centered around how changes will impact users and/or affect their ability/willingness to participate, with an emphasis on making it as user friendly as possible. > > To voice my personal opinion, I don't think it's asking too much if they encourage us to enter data in a format that makes it more valuable for research purposes. Cornell spent a lot of money and time developing what I see as an incredible personal listing and reporting tool that they allow all of us to use for free. In return they ask, but do not require, that we enter data in a way that makes it more valuable. They provide a free listing application and get data in return but we are still free to enter data however we choose, even if it isn't of any use to anyone but ourselves. > > Cliff > > > On 1/23/2012 9:30 AM, Keith Carlson wrote: >> As I understand this, if I plotted our sightings for our 25 miles + Eagle Count Trip along the Snake River these sightings would appear on my personal list but would not be avaiable to anyone else. >> If this is correct, these sightings would not appear on the countywide list. >> >> In Washington state, and perhaps other states, many birders keep county lists. >> Washington county lists are kept on behalf of WASHINGTON BIRDER on an annual basis and provide a historical view and trends of sightings. >> As a compiler for Asotin county, I monitor the eBird county list to help keep track of sightings by other birders. >> This practice will be of less value to the county list project if trip reports are restricted to"hotspots", trips < 5 miles. >> >> Many birders from thruout Washington state travel to Asotin county to bird our varied habitat ( 725ft to 6,600 ft elevation) but may not be familar with >> the correct location and nomenclature of existing eBird locations. >> Many well known birding routes, including some on the Audubon sponsored "Birding Trails" may not fit into eBird criteria. >> For example, this year Weissenfels Ridge Road/ Montgomery Ridge Road has yielded Gyrfalcons, Prairie Falcons, Rough-legged Hawks,Northern Harriers , Red-tailed Hawks, Bald and Golden Eagles , Merlin and Am Kestrel along with Chukar, Gray Partridge, Wild Turkey and Common Redpoll, Bohemian Waxwings, Lesser Goldfinch and Horned Larks along the 20 mile route. >> >> Regarding tihs statement: >> "E Bird should be able to adapt to what "citizen" birders want and need in addition to the needs of science. " >> >> Keith E. Carlson >> Lewiston >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cliff and Lisa Weisse" >> To: "Inland NW" >> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 7:46 AM >> Subject: [inland-NW-birders] Re: a note for eBird reporters >> >> >>> To follow up on Lisa's comments here, I'll use Fremont County, Idaho for an example. It covers some 2000 square miles with elevation ranging from 4,900 to over 10,000 feet. If I enter observations at the county level they are plotted SW of Island Park in coniferous forest-high desert shrub/steppe at a little over 6000 feet elevation. If I enter sightings of nesting American Pipit and singing Yellow-breasted Chat on July 1, both would be "good" records for Fremont County on that date but the map pinpoint would show them many miles from where you have any hope of seeing either species. If you found this location plotted in eBird and went there to find these species you would be disappointed and I suspect you might be a bit unhappy when you learned that it was known that the location wasn't correct. I would also point out that because of the huge variation in habitat and elevation county level lists would actually obscure arrival/departure timing at a local level. I c! an't see any upside to validating county level checklists or long traveling counts (which would have the same impact but perhaps on an even greater scale). >>> >>> Regarding Keith's point about making it harder to use eBird, I want to stress that users are not required to enter checklists for smaller areas, they just won't show up in public output if they are for imprecise locations or cover large areas. You also are not required to enter all species seen at a location (you just check "no" where it asks if you are reporting all species seen). So you do have the option of entering counts only for Bald Eagles observed along the entire 25 miles surveyed in one checklist. It doesn't make more work for users unless you choose, voluntarily, to divide your checklists into smaller chunks. >>> >>> Cliff / eBird Reviewer >>> >>> -- >>> Cliff and Lisa Weisse >>> Island Park, Idaho >>> cliffandlisa AT octobersetters.com >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Inland-nw-birders mailing list >>> Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu >>> https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders >> >> >> > > -- > Cliff and Lisa Weisse > Island Park, Idaho > cliffandlisa AT octobersetters.com > > _______________________________________________ > Inland-nw-birders mailing list > Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu > https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Regarding eBird From: Ryan Shaw <rtshaw80 AT hotmail.com> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 18:16:27 -0800 Greetings all, (I tried to post this last night but had some e-mail issues, so some people may have covered some of this, but I didn't want to edit it too much from my original). Regarding eBird and county level lists, this is getting a bit blown out of proportion: First, there are very few birders nowadays who are submitting checklists at the county level so the problem isn’t that large. Second, there are a lot more eBird users now who are entering checklists on a regular basis so that the importance of the data from those who are entering checklists at a county level are lessened. We are starting to move towards invalidating county level checklists for that reason – the data there isn’t as valuable and is being replaced by data that is of more value. Ebird’s mapping technology is at a point where the county level checklists really throw a wrench in the accuracy of those maps. The problem is greater on the west side than the east, for example say someone enters a checklist for Grays Harbor County for an offshore trip at the county level, and then the map shows Black-footed Albatross smack dab in the middle of Grays Harbor County! It’s that kind of data that really does not have any value to the overall big picture. Now the point about this data being lost – is simply not true. Cornell grants many researchers access to data, validated or invalidated. When we invalidate a species (or a checklist) we have specific reasons from a drop down menu for the invalidation. For County level, we select the reason as Location – County Level (Or State Level at a much more Macro view). It’s easily searched for and can be accessed by a request of the lab or just an e-mail to the reviewers. I have also heard that all the data, validated or invalidated can be downloaded via the Avian Knowledge Network. I have not confirmed this. One day it may be possible to include those checklists that are county level on the bar graphs and not the maps, but at this point it is not. Ebird is constantly evolving so maybe one day! Now to the point of invalidating checklists based on distance. There is no set in stone rule. Ebird recommends a 5 mile limit but again, this is a recommendation, not a rule. I am a reviewer and I will sometimes enter a checklist for a 10-15 mile traveling count (or a 35 mile traveling pelagic count), but for areas where the habitat does not change greatly (ie, the Waterville plateau) and as long as it is within the same county. Multi-county checklists are definitely ones that will get invalidated! You just need to use some personal judgment on the distance used. A few other issues: - You do not have to enter all the birds you see – you can only enter highlights if you wish. There is a checklist option which asks if you are entering a complete checklist – just click the no button. This is perfectly fine and acceptable and will not get your data invalidated. - You do not have to count everything. If you do, great! But if you want to just put an “X” for present. That is fine and will not get your data invalidated. - If you want to enter your data as county level or state level or however you want, you can. It will stay in your personal records. Ebird is an excellent life and county listing tool. I never county listed before I used eBird and I only pay attention to county lists now because eBird makes it so easy! Our hope is that as you use eBird for your listing purposes that you will broaden your scope and start entering checklists that are more specific and valuable to the birding community as a whole. A pretty neat link to a county level map of Washington in terms of eBird checklists entered for the month of January can be found here: https://plus.google.com/photos/110463962218302154116/albums/5697354029531636081/5697354187247521954?banner=pwa We eBird reviewers hope to see more people entering data. It has become much easier to do so; less cumbersome than it was a year or two ago. If you haven’t tried eBird, give it a try! Cheers, Ryan Shaw Tacoma, WA rtshaw80 AT hotmail.com _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Mt.Spokane WW Crossbills From: "Tim O'Brien" <kertim7179 AT yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 17:12:14 -0800 (PST) Hi all, I made a quick drive to the ski area on Mt.Spokane today. I was happy to find 3 chickadees, and a small flock of WHITE-WINGED CROSSBILLS. The main bird activity was just before the condos at the signed turn-around. Tim O'Brien Cheney, WA mailto: kertim7179 at yahoo dot com _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Re: Re: a note for eBird reporters From: Matthew Beatty <beattymn AT whitman.edu> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 14:57:03 -0800 Reading this discussion I can't help but think that there is an easy solution to this problem. When I go to eBird to look at sightings in a particular area, there should be a little box somewhere in the corner that I can check if I want to see only sightings reported in a specific location (<5mi or whatever the limit is), and that I can leave unchecked if I want to see all reports, including unspecific county-wide lists. Depending on what your interest is, you can choose what types of data you want shown. It seems like this would adequately meet everyone's needs. Does anyone see a problem with this? This doesn't seem like it would be difficult to implement, but I'm no expert. As an afterthought, I can't help but think that it would be a good thing for people to be encouraged to break down their day lists into more specific locations. Even if it might require more work, I think it would ultimately be rewarding for the user, as he or she would be more likely to notice subtleties in bird distribution (i.e does species A tend to be seen more often on one end of the 25mi route than the other?) Matt Beatty Walla Walla On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Keith Carlson wrote: > At the risk of beating a dead horse: > > A review of the Summary YTD for Asotin county yields: > > 85 species recorded by 40 lists submitted > > The current Asotin county list records 94 species > > Species missed by applying the trip< 5 miles criteria and observers not > using eBird. > Northern Goshawk (2) > N Pygmy Owl (2) > Barn Owl > Western Bluebird, and a Gull species still being evaluated ( Glaucous or > Iceland); > among others. > > > > Keith E. Carlson > Lewiston > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cliff and Lisa Weisse" < > CliffandLisa AT octobersetters.**com > > To: "Keith Carlson" > Cc: "Scott Downes" ; "Michael Hobbs" < > birdmarymoor AT verizon.net>; "Inland NW" > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 12:46 PM > Subject: Re: [inland-NW-birders] Re: a note for eBird reporters > > > > Keith, >> >> If you entered the count for Bald Eagles along a 25 mile stretch of >> river, the sightings would appear in your personal list but would not >> appear in public output like county lists or maps. The sightings WOULD be >> available to researchers. If you are compiling the Asotin County list for >> WASHINGTON BIRDER I recommend that you request access to the raw data. That >> way you get all the records so you can make an assessment of "validity" >> that's tailored to your purpose(s). If you need help with this let me know >> and I'll find out how to get you set you up. >> >> Regarding this statement: >> "E Bird should be able to adapt to what "citizen" birders want and need >> in addition to the needs of science. " >> I can tell you that, in the 4-5 years I've been involved, eBird has >> consistently made the needs of the birding community a priority when >> updating/improving the system. Discussions often centered around how >> changes will impact users and/or affect their ability/willingness to >> participate, with an emphasis on making it as user friendly as possible. >> >> To voice my personal opinion, I don't think it's asking too much if they >> encourage us to enter data in a format that makes it more valuable for >> research purposes. Cornell spent a lot of money and time developing what >> I see as an incredible personal listing and reporting tool that they allow >> all of us to use for free. In return they ask, but do not require, that we >> enter data in a way that makes it more valuable. They provide a free >> listing application and get data in return but we are still free to enter >> data however we choose, even if it isn't of any use to anyone but ourselves. >> >> Cliff >> >> >> On 1/23/2012 9:30 AM, Keith Carlson wrote: >> >>> As I understand this, if I plotted our sightings for our 25 miles + >>> Eagle Count Trip along the Snake River these sightings would appear on my >>> personal list but would not be avaiable to anyone else. >>> If this is correct, these sightings would not appear on the countywide >>> list. >>> >>> In Washington state, and perhaps other states, many birders keep county >>> lists. >>> Washington county lists are kept on behalf of WASHINGTON BIRDER on an >>> annual basis and provide a historical view and trends of sightings. >>> As a compiler for Asotin county, I monitor the eBird county list to help >>> keep track of sightings by other birders. >>> This practice will be of less value to the county list project if trip >>> reports are restricted to"hotspots", trips < 5 miles. >>> >>> Many birders from thruout Washington state travel to Asotin county to >>> bird our varied habitat ( 725ft to 6,600 ft elevation) but may not be >>> familar with >>> the correct location and nomenclature of existing eBird locations. >>> Many well known birding routes, including some on the Audubon sponsored >>> "Birding Trails" may not fit into eBird criteria. >>> For example, this year Weissenfels Ridge Road/ Montgomery Ridge Road has >>> yielded Gyrfalcons, Prairie Falcons, Rough-legged Hawks,Northern Harriers , >>> Red-tailed Hawks, Bald and Golden Eagles , Merlin and Am Kestrel along >>> with Chukar, Gray Partridge, Wild Turkey and Common Redpoll, Bohemian >>> Waxwings, Lesser Goldfinch and Horned Larks along the 20 mile route. >>> >>> Regarding tihs statement: >>> "E Bird should be able to adapt to what "citizen" birders want and need >>> in addition to the needs of science. " >>> >>> Keith E. Carlson >>> Lewiston >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cliff and Lisa Weisse" < >>> CliffandLisa AT octobersetters.**com > >>> To: "Inland NW" >>> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 7:46 AM >>> Subject: [inland-NW-birders] Re: a note for eBird reporters >>> >>> >>> To follow up on Lisa's comments here, I'll use Fremont County, Idaho >>>> for an example. It covers some 2000 square miles with elevation ranging >>>> from 4,900 to over 10,000 feet. If I enter observations at the county >>>> level they are plotted SW of Island Park in coniferous forest-high desert >>>> shrub/steppe at a little over 6000 feet elevation. If I enter sightings of >>>> nesting American Pipit and singing Yellow-breasted Chat on July 1, both >>>> would be "good" records for Fremont County on that date but the map >>>> pinpoint would show them many miles from where you have any hope of seeing >>>> either species. If you found this location plotted in eBird and went there >>>> to find these species you would be disappointed and I suspect you might be >>>> a bit unhappy when you learned that it was known that the location wasn't >>>> correct. I would also point out that because of the huge variation in >>>> habitat and elevation county level lists would actually obscure >>>> arrival/departure timing at a local level. I can't see any upside to >>>> validating county level checklists or long traveling counts (which would >>>> have the same impact but perhaps on an even greater scale). >>>> >>>> Regarding Keith's point about making it harder to use eBird, I want to >>>> stress that users are not required to enter checklists for smaller areas, >>>> they just won't show up in public output if they are for imprecise >>>> locations or cover large areas. You also are not required to enter all >>>> species seen at a location (you just check "no" where it asks if you are >>>> reporting all species seen). So you do have the option of entering counts >>>> only for Bald Eagles observed along the entire 25 miles surveyed in one >>>> checklist. It doesn't make more work for users unless you choose, >>>> voluntarily, to divide your checklists into smaller chunks. >>>> >>>> Cliff / eBird Reviewer >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Cliff and Lisa Weisse >>>> Island Park, Idaho >>>> cliffandlisa AT octobersetters.**com >>>> >>>> ______________________________**_________________ >>>> Inland-nw-birders mailing list >>>> Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu >>>> https://lists.uidaho.edu/**mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-**birders >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> Cliff and Lisa Weisse >> Island Park, Idaho >> cliffandlisa AT octobersetters.**com >> >> >> > ______________________________**_________________ > Inland-nw-birders mailing list > Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu > https://lists.uidaho.edu/**mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-**birders >_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Re: Re: a note for eBird reporters From: "Keith Carlson" <kec201814 AT cableone.net> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:48:30 -0800 At the risk of beating a dead horse: A review of the Summary YTD for Asotin county yields: 85 species recorded by 40 lists submitted The current Asotin county list records 94 species Species missed by applying the trip< 5 miles criteria and observers not using eBird. Northern Goshawk (2) N Pygmy Owl (2) Barn Owl Western Bluebird, and a Gull species still being evaluated ( Glaucous or Iceland); among others. Keith E. Carlson Lewiston ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cliff and Lisa Weisse" To: "Keith Carlson" Cc: "Scott Downes" ; "Michael Hobbs" ; "Inland NW" Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 12:46 PM Subject: Re: [inland-NW-birders] Re: a note for eBird reporters > Keith, > > If you entered the count for Bald Eagles along a 25 mile stretch of river, > the sightings would appear in your personal list but would not appear in > public output like county lists or maps. The sightings WOULD be available > to researchers. If you are compiling the Asotin County list for > WASHINGTON BIRDER I recommend that you request access to the raw data. > That way you get all the records so you can make an assessment of > "validity" that's tailored to your purpose(s). If you need help with this > let me know and I'll find out how to get you set you up. > > Regarding this statement: > "E Bird should be able to adapt to what "citizen" birders want and need in > addition to the needs of science. " > I can tell you that, in the 4-5 years I've been involved, eBird has > consistently made the needs of the birding community a priority when > updating/improving the system. Discussions often centered around how > changes will impact users and/or affect their ability/willingness to > participate, with an emphasis on making it as user friendly as possible. > > To voice my personal opinion, I don't think it's asking too much if they > encourage us to enter data in a format that makes it more valuable for > research purposes. Cornell spent a lot of money and time developing what > I see as an incredible personal listing and reporting tool that they allow > all of us to use for free. In return they ask, but do not require, that > we enter data in a way that makes it more valuable. They provide a free > listing application and get data in return but we are still free to enter > data however we choose, even if it isn't of any use to anyone but > ourselves. > > Cliff > > > On 1/23/2012 9:30 AM, Keith Carlson wrote: >> As I understand this, if I plotted our sightings for our 25 miles + Eagle >> Count Trip along the Snake River these sightings would appear on my >> personal list but would not be avaiable to anyone else. >> If this is correct, these sightings would not appear on the countywide >> list. >> >> In Washington state, and perhaps other states, many birders keep county >> lists. >> Washington county lists are kept on behalf of WASHINGTON BIRDER on an >> annual basis and provide a historical view and trends of sightings. >> As a compiler for Asotin county, I monitor the eBird county list to help >> keep track of sightings by other birders. >> This practice will be of less value to the county list project if trip >> reports are restricted to"hotspots", trips < 5 miles. >> >> Many birders from thruout Washington state travel to Asotin county to >> bird our varied habitat ( 725ft to 6,600 ft elevation) but may not be >> familar with >> the correct location and nomenclature of existing eBird locations. >> Many well known birding routes, including some on the Audubon sponsored >> "Birding Trails" may not fit into eBird criteria. >> For example, this year Weissenfels Ridge Road/ Montgomery Ridge Road has >> yielded Gyrfalcons, Prairie Falcons, Rough-legged Hawks,Northern Harriers >> , Red-tailed Hawks, Bald and Golden Eagles , Merlin and Am Kestrel along >> with Chukar, Gray Partridge, Wild Turkey and Common Redpoll, Bohemian >> Waxwings, Lesser Goldfinch and Horned Larks along the 20 mile route. >> >> Regarding tihs statement: >> "E Bird should be able to adapt to what "citizen" birders want and need >> in addition to the needs of science. " >> >> Keith E. Carlson >> Lewiston >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cliff and Lisa Weisse" >> >> To: "Inland NW" >> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 7:46 AM >> Subject: [inland-NW-birders] Re: a note for eBird reporters >> >> >>> To follow up on Lisa's comments here, I'll use Fremont County, Idaho for >>> an example. It covers some 2000 square miles with elevation ranging >>> from 4,900 to over 10,000 feet. If I enter observations at the county >>> level they are plotted SW of Island Park in coniferous forest-high >>> desert shrub/steppe at a little over 6000 feet elevation. If I enter >>> sightings of nesting American Pipit and singing Yellow-breasted Chat on >>> July 1, both would be "good" records for Fremont County on that date but >>> the map pinpoint would show them many miles from where you have any hope >>> of seeing either species. If you found this location plotted in eBird >>> and went there to find these species you would be disappointed and I >>> suspect you might be a bit unhappy when you learned that it was known >>> that the location wasn't correct. I would also point out that because >>> of the huge variation in habitat and elevation county level lists would >>> actually obscure arrival/departure timing at a local level. I can't see >>> any upside to validating county level checklists or long traveling >>> counts (which would have the same impact but perhaps on an even greater >>> scale). >>> >>> Regarding Keith's point about making it harder to use eBird, I want to >>> stress that users are not required to enter checklists for smaller >>> areas, they just won't show up in public output if they are for >>> imprecise locations or cover large areas. You also are not required to >>> enter all species seen at a location (you just check "no" where it asks >>> if you are reporting all species seen). So you do have the option of >>> entering counts only for Bald Eagles observed along the entire 25 miles >>> surveyed in one checklist. It doesn't make more work for users unless >>> you choose, voluntarily, to divide your checklists into smaller chunks. >>> >>> Cliff / eBird Reviewer >>> >>> -- >>> Cliff and Lisa Weisse >>> Island Park, Idaho >>> cliffandlisa AT octobersetters.com >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Inland-nw-birders mailing list >>> Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu >>> https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders >> >> >> > > -- > Cliff and Lisa Weisse > Island Park, Idaho > cliffandlisa AT octobersetters.com > > _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Re: Re: a note for eBird reporters From: Cliff and Lisa Weisse <CliffandLisa AT octobersetters.com> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:46:55 -0700 Keith, If you entered the count for Bald Eagles along a 25 mile stretch of river, the sightings would appear in your personal list but would not appear in public output like county lists or maps. The sightings WOULD be available to researchers. If you are compiling the Asotin County list for WASHINGTON BIRDER I recommend that you request access to the raw data. That way you get all the records so you can make an assessment of "validity" that's tailored to your purpose(s). If you need help with this let me know and I'll find out how to get you set you up. Regarding this statement: "E Bird should be able to adapt to what "citizen" birders want and need in addition to the needs of science. " I can tell you that, in the 4-5 years I've been involved, eBird has consistently made the needs of the birding community a priority when updating/improving the system. Discussions often centered around how changes will impact users and/or affect their ability/willingness to participate, with an emphasis on making it as user friendly as possible. To voice my personal opinion, I don't think it's asking too much if they encourage us to enter data in a format that makes it more valuable for research purposes. Cornell spent a lot of money and time developing what I see as an incredible personal listing and reporting tool that they allow all of us to use for free. In return they ask, but do not require, that we enter data in a way that makes it more valuable. They provide a free listing application and get data in return but we are still free to enter data however we choose, even if it isn't of any use to anyone but ourselves. Cliff On 1/23/2012 9:30 AM, Keith Carlson wrote: > As I understand this, if I plotted our sightings for our 25 miles + > Eagle Count Trip along the Snake River these sightings would appear > on my personal list but would not be avaiable to anyone else. > If this is correct, these sightings would not appear on the countywide > list. > > In Washington state, and perhaps other states, many birders keep > county lists. > Washington county lists are kept on behalf of WASHINGTON BIRDER on > an annual basis and provide a historical view and trends of sightings. > As a compiler for Asotin county, I monitor the eBird county list to > help keep track of sightings by other birders. > This practice will be of less value to the county list project if trip > reports are restricted to"hotspots", trips < 5 miles. > > Many birders from thruout Washington state travel to Asotin county to > bird our varied habitat ( 725ft to 6,600 ft elevation) but may not be > familar with > the correct location and nomenclature of existing eBird locations. > Many well known birding routes, including some on the Audubon > sponsored "Birding Trails" may not fit into eBird criteria. > For example, this year Weissenfels Ridge Road/ Montgomery Ridge Road > has yielded Gyrfalcons, Prairie Falcons, Rough-legged Hawks,Northern > Harriers , Red-tailed Hawks, Bald and Golden Eagles , Merlin and Am > Kestrel along with Chukar, Gray Partridge, Wild Turkey and Common > Redpoll, Bohemian Waxwings, Lesser Goldfinch and Horned Larks along > the 20 mile route. > > Regarding tihs statement: > "E Bird should be able to adapt to what "citizen" birders want and > need in addition to the needs of science. " > > Keith E. Carlson > Lewiston > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cliff and Lisa Weisse" > > To: "Inland NW" > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 7:46 AM > Subject: [inland-NW-birders] Re: a note for eBird reporters > > >> To follow up on Lisa's comments here, I'll use Fremont County, Idaho >> for an example. It covers some 2000 square miles with elevation >> ranging from 4,900 to over 10,000 feet. If I enter observations at >> the county level they are plotted SW of Island Park in coniferous >> forest-high desert shrub/steppe at a little over 6000 feet >> elevation. If I enter sightings of nesting American Pipit and >> singing Yellow-breasted Chat on July 1, both would be "good" records >> for Fremont County on that date but the map pinpoint would show them >> many miles from where you have any hope of seeing either species. If >> you found this location plotted in eBird and went there to find these >> species you would be disappointed and I suspect you might be a bit >> unhappy when you learned that it was known that the location wasn't >> correct. I would also point out that because of the huge variation >> in habitat and elevation county level lists would actually obscure >> arrival/departure timing at a local level. I can't see any upside to >> validating county level checklists or long traveling counts (which >> would have the same impact but perhaps on an even greater scale). >> >> Regarding Keith's point about making it harder to use eBird, I want >> to stress that users are not required to enter checklists for smaller >> areas, they just won't show up in public output if they are for >> imprecise locations or cover large areas. You also are not required >> to enter all species seen at a location (you just check "no" where it >> asks if you are reporting all species seen). So you do have the >> option of entering counts only for Bald Eagles observed along the >> entire 25 miles surveyed in one checklist. It doesn't make more work >> for users unless you choose, voluntarily, to divide your checklists >> into smaller chunks. >> >> Cliff / eBird Reviewer >> >> -- >> Cliff and Lisa Weisse >> Island Park, Idaho >> cliffandlisa AT octobersetters.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Inland-nw-birders mailing list >> Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu >> https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders > > > -- Cliff and Lisa Weisse Island Park, Idaho cliffandlisa AT octobersetters.com _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Moscow South Raptor Run this a.m. From: "Terry Gray" <clgtlg AT moscow.com> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 11:15:14 -0800 Hi Birders, Below is a list of birds observed during my raptor run south and south east of Moscow. Gray Partridge at least 85 birds Ring-necked Pheasant 2 California Quail 12 Northern Harrier - male along Jackshaw Road Red-tailed Hawk 3 American Kestrel 4 Great Horned Owl 2 Northern Flicker Northern Shrike Black-billed Magpie 3 Common Raven Horned Lark 6 large flocks of over 30 each one which was all the Western Artic Race Black-capped Chickadee American Robin European Starling Song Sparrow Dark-eyed Junco many Gray-crowned Rosy Finch 26 Good Birding! Terry Gray 890 Stefany Ln Moscow ID 83843 (208)882-1585 http://www.flickr.com/photos/terryandchristine/ _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Moscow Bohemian Waxwings, 1/23/12 etc. From: Charles Swift <chaetura AT gmail.com> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 09:00:35 -0800 I had a flock of ~200 Bohemian Waxwings fly over on my way into campus this morning. I also had a flock of 50 Bohemians w/ about 20 Cedar Waxwings in my yard on Saturday (1/21). Saturday was also a good day in my neighborhood w/ lots of robins around as well as a mix of House Finches, Pine Siskins, and A. Goldfinches among others at the feeders. Several blocks from my house I had a flock of ~30 Common Redpolls fly over. Charles. -- Charles Swift Moscow, Idaho 46°43′54″ N, 116°59′50″ W email: chaetura AT gmail.com_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Re: Re: a note for eBird reporters From: "Keith Carlson" <kec201814 AT cableone.net> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 08:30:22 -0800 As I understand this, if I plotted our sightings for our 25 miles + Eagle Count Trip along the Snake River these sightings would appear on my personal list but would not be avaiable to anyone else. If this is correct, these sightings would not appear on the countywide list. In Washington state, and perhaps other states, many birders keep county lists. Washington county lists are kept on behalf of WASHINGTON BIRDER on an annual basis and provide a historical view and trends of sightings. As a compiler for Asotin county, I monitor the eBird county list to help keep track of sightings by other birders. This practice will be of less value to the county list project if trip reports are restricted to"hotspots", trips < 5 miles. Many birders from thruout Washington state travel to Asotin county to bird our varied habitat ( 725ft to 6,600 ft elevation) but may not be familar with the correct location and nomenclature of existing eBird locations. Many well known birding routes, including some on the Audubon sponsored "Birding Trails" may not fit into eBird criteria. For example, this year Weissenfels Ridge Road/ Montgomery Ridge Road has yielded Gyrfalcons, Prairie Falcons, Rough-legged Hawks,Northern Harriers , Red-tailed Hawks, Bald and Golden Eagles , Merlin and Am Kestrel along with Chukar, Gray Partridge, Wild Turkey and Common Redpoll, Bohemian Waxwings, Lesser Goldfinch and Horned Larks along the 20 mile route. E Bird should be able to adapt to what "citizen" birders want and need in addition to the needs of science. Keith E. Carlson Lewiston ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cliff and Lisa Weisse" To: "Inland NW" Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 7:46 AM Subject: [inland-NW-birders] Re: a note for eBird reporters > To follow up on Lisa's comments here, I'll use Fremont County, Idaho for > an example. It covers some 2000 square miles with elevation ranging from > 4,900 to over 10,000 feet. If I enter observations at the county level > they are plotted SW of Island Park in coniferous forest-high desert > shrub/steppe at a little over 6000 feet elevation. If I enter sightings > of nesting American Pipit and singing Yellow-breasted Chat on July 1, both > would be "good" records for Fremont County on that date but the map > pinpoint would show them many miles from where you have any hope of seeing > either species. If you found this location plotted in eBird and went > there to find these species you would be disappointed and I suspect you > might be a bit unhappy when you learned that it was known that the > location wasn't correct. I would also point out that because of the huge > variation in habitat and elevation county level lists would actually > obscure arrival/departure timing at a local level. I can't see any upside > to validating county level checklists or long traveling counts (which > would have the same impact but perhaps on an even greater scale). > > Regarding Keith's point about making it harder to use eBird, I want to > stress that users are not required to enter checklists for smaller areas, > they just won't show up in public output if they are for imprecise > locations or cover large areas. You also are not required to enter all > species seen at a location (you just check "no" where it asks if you are > reporting all species seen). So you do have the option of entering counts > only for Bald Eagles observed along the entire 25 miles surveyed in one > checklist. It doesn't make more work for users unless you choose, > voluntarily, to divide your checklists into smaller chunks. > > Cliff / eBird Reviewer > > -- > Cliff and Lisa Weisse > Island Park, Idaho > cliffandlisa AT octobersetters.com > > _______________________________________________ > Inland-nw-birders mailing list > Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu > https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Re: a note for eBird reporters From: "Scott Downes" <downess AT charter.net> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 08:14:25 -0800 Following up on notes from Cliff and Lisa. In general I agree with most of their points that data not mapped in precise locations are not that helpful. There is one occasion though that the information still is quite helpful for users. It has not been discussed in depth here (though I hinted at it in my last post) so will elaborate. Often people visiting an area for the first time may be curious to know "what species are possible for that month in that area". Ebird can help with this. If I say do a seasonal bar chart of Yakima County for August it will show me all the occurrences of species found in Yakima County in August. Of course I will have to do some further investigation to determine where I might find Pine Grosbeaks or other mountain species. At a county level use though that data plotted to the county will tell the user if the species occurs in the county in a certain time in some frequency or not. Is this probably the lowest level of use of ebird? Probably. To response to Lisa, while the data is not thrown away, if it is not available to the general public on searchable maps it may as well be thrown away for their (the general public) purposes. So, this imprecise data isn't helpful to researchers and to many birders. Unless Ebird servers are struggling with storage space, I don't see the point of invalidating sightings as long as they are of some help to even a few. The sighting is tagged with "Yakima County" so users would be aware that they shouldn't go look for it in the spot anyhow. I personally think that seasonal bar charts are a great tool from ebird and think that invalidating some data makes them slightly less effective. I don't believe that birders are going to enter more lists, they will continue doing what works for them, but more lists will be invalidated and not visible to the public. Off my soapbox now. Scott Downes downess AT charter.net Yakima WA_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Re: a note for eBird reporters From: Cliff and Lisa Weisse <CliffandLisa AT octobersetters.com> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 08:46:22 -0700 To follow up on Lisa's comments here, I'll use Fremont County, Idaho for an example. It covers some 2000 square miles with elevation ranging from 4,900 to over 10,000 feet. If I enter observations at the county level they are plotted SW of Island Park in coniferous forest-high desert shrub/steppe at a little over 6000 feet elevation. If I enter sightings of nesting American Pipit and singing Yellow-breasted Chat on July 1, both would be "good" records for Fremont County on that date but the map pinpoint would show them many miles from where you have any hope of seeing either species. If you found this location plotted in eBird and went there to find these species you would be disappointed and I suspect you might be a bit unhappy when you learned that it was known that the location wasn't correct. I would also point out that because of the huge variation in habitat and elevation county level lists would actually obscure arrival/departure timing at a local level. I can't see any upside to validating county level checklists or long traveling counts (which would have the same impact but perhaps on an even greater scale). Regarding Keith's point about making it harder to use eBird, I want to stress that users are not required to enter checklists for smaller areas, they just won't show up in public output if they are for imprecise locations or cover large areas. You also are not required to enter all species seen at a location (you just check "no" where it asks if you are reporting all species seen). So you do have the option of entering counts only for Bald Eagles observed along the entire 25 miles surveyed in one checklist. It doesn't make more work for users unless you choose, voluntarily, to divide your checklists into smaller chunks. Cliff / eBird Reviewer -- Cliff and Lisa Weisse Island Park, Idaho cliffandlisa AT octobersetters.com _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Re: a note for eBird reporters From: Lisa Hardy <basalt AT earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 21:11:32 -0800 (GMT-08:00) Michael and Scott have raised a couple of good points about the uses of eBird data, but first I want to note that no data is ever "thrown away". All that reviewers do is mark records that are unsuitable for inclusion in the public maps and lists. None of this has any effect on personal lists. A primary focus of eBird has always been to develop a strong platform for managing personal observations. Right now, a checklist reported to a county, or a 20-mile-long checklist, is tagged with a single point location. You can see that this is misleading for map representation, but at present there is no means for shading the validation to be different for a map query vs. a list query. Also, public users cannot judge the location precision of other reporters' data. Scott is correct that a researcher can request ALL data and make their own determination of what data to use, but for use in the automated distribution analysis tools provided on the eBird site, a minimum level of precision is requested. It may be that future versions of eBird will be able to deal with this issue with more sophistication. Hope that helps explain why the large area checklists are problematic for the public database. Lisa Hardy Kellogg, ID _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Gull identification - Swallows Park From: John Hanna <johnwalterhanna AT gmail.com> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 20:04:39 -0800 I'm new to identifying gulls. I identified Ring-billed, Herring, and California Gulls at Swallows Park in Clarkston, WA. But then there was this odd one. http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnwalterhanna/6746602971/ After searching the net for a few hours I came across Kumlien's Gull (Iceland x Thayer's hybrid) . See figure 2 of this page http://www.tertial.us/gulls/kuml1.htm (note: this photo was taken January 13, 2012, Coeur d'Alene, ID) What do you think? John John Hanna Lewiston, ID_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Ebird From: "Scott Downes" <downess AT charter.net> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 15:55:39 -0800 Wanted to jump in here as I completely agree with Michael Hobbs. I don't see the need to invalidate lists that don't meet any particular guidelines. For biologists using those lists (I am a wildlife biologist and have read papers and seen conference presentations that used ebird data), users can get original data from ebird through requests and that data can be filtered to the users goals. Thus, they would be invalidating the data themselves if they don't believe it meet their rigor and qualifications. I believe that ebird data can also be used by the general public in a very beneficial way. That is, with the amount of data being contributed to ebird we can see "amateur ornithological" data in the forms of seasonal bar charts for a state or county and can see arrival/departure times for certain species. Finally, users of ebird data (birders) can also see where they may want to target a species based upon past sightings. This amateur data is very useful at any level even if only the county label is applied or the "incidental" label is applied. The amount of data now in ebird is making it possible to get some accurate seasonal distribution bar charts for birds at county or state level, something that used to require teams of experts many months to compile for bird finding guides. To invalidate that data would be depriving the community of seeing incidental and non-precise data. I see no reason why ebird data cannot be entered at whatever level the submitter decides and the data user can decide which data to use for scientific or other purposes. As a final note, as part of past dealings with being a WOS Board Member, I have worked with ebird reviewers in Washington to get T&E species like Spotted Owl blurred to the county level so that agencies would be comfortable having the data in ebird. I see no reason to invalidate those sightings because people are trying to protect species from disturbance. Scott Downes downess AT charter.net Yakima WA _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: RE: test post From: Marie Dymkoski <marie-dymkoski AT msn.com> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 13:07:57 -0800 Welcome David! You have to reply to inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu if you want the list to see your response. Otherwise a reply will go to the sender specific. Great to 'see' you here! Marie-Dymkoski AT palouse.com 509-595-1650 cellExecutive Director, Pullman Chamber of Commerce chamber AT pullmanchamber.com 509-334-3565www.pullmanchamber.com Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 09:05:28 -0800 From: wldlfbio AT gmail.com To: inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu Subject: [inland-NW-birders] test post I am new to this and am just seeing how I can make a post -- David Woodall "There can be no greater issue than that of conservation in this country." -Theodore Roosevelt _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Re: a note for eBird reporters From: Lisa Hardy <basalt AT earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 10:46:21 -0800 (GMT-08:00) Keith, I know what you mean - I find the eBird data entry to be clunky, and usually do all my entry as bulk uploads. And I do a lot more birding than ever gets entered into the computer in any fashion. eBird is an excellent tool for keeping track of personal observations, and there is nothing "wrong" with entering a 25-mile checklist, or even a state-level checklist, as long as the reporter is aware that it cannot be reasonably plotted on the public maps, and will have, apparently, little use to the eBird scientists. If one's primary motivation is to add to a scientific database, the data entry can overwhelm the actual birding, and I have found a personal compromise by doing the full treatment for just a couple of sites that I bird regularly. I think the important thing is to just put as much effort into the data entry as you feel comfortable with; to find a balance between time hunched over the keyboard, and time spent in the field. Lisa Lisa Hardy Kellogg, ID -----Original Message----- >From: Keith Carlson >Sent: Jan 22, 2012 8:33 AM >To: Lisa Hardy , INWB >Subject: Re: [inland-NW-birders] a note for eBird reporters > >I admit to being a bit of a skeptic re: eBird. >As a sometime participant in this and other "citizen science' projects, I >realize that science must have some priority over citizen for the whole >exercise to be of value. > >In my personal birding, I run across (and bird) with a variety of birders >from several states and of a variety of skill, interest and experience >levels. Some of these birders post to eBird, many do not. >Reasons for not participating in eBird range from lack of internet access, >lack of computer skill, complexity of use, and perceived difficulty of >dealing with sometimes unknown eBird reviewers. > >As new criteria for entries are put in place, it must be recognized by the >powers that be in eBird that there will a trade off between generating >sightiings in a form more useful to science and generating fewer entries >because of perceived "hassle". > >A case in point is last week's Eagle Count trip sponsored by the Canyon >Birders, attended by 26 birders of varying skill and interest levels, that >covered 25 +/- miles along the Washington side of the Snake River ( the >Idaho/Washington border) and continuing up the Grande Ronde River and Joseph >Creek to the Oregon line (5 more miles). >Under these new guidelines/rules, this single trip would require six or more >separate eBird entries and properly identifing a half dozen or more >"hotspots" along the route. >ebird suggests that it is more helpful to record all birds seen, not just >highlights > >This is enough of a burden that I suspect no or little data was entered into >eBird. > >In this era of "listing' at many levels ( life listers, state listers, >county listers, annual listers, etc.) making eBird harder to use to achieve >the goals of the individual birder may make the generated data more useful >to Cornell Lab, but at the expense of losing participants. > >Keith E. Carlson >Lewiston >. >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Lisa Hardy" >To: "INWB" >Sent: Friday, January 20, 2012 10:18 PM >Subject: [inland-NW-birders] a note for eBird reporters > > >>A note for eBird reporters >> >> eBird reviewers are being asked to invalidate lists that have imprecise >> geographic locations, such as checklists that are only located to the >> county, or are long traveling counts. If you wonder why some of your >> observations do not show up in the public maps, it may be for this reason. >> The data will always remain part of your personal My eBird records, but >> eBird is only able to effectively use counts that are located within a >> limited area, such as traveling counts generally 5 miles or less in >> length. >> >> Information on how you can organize checklists to be of more value to the >> eBird scientific process can be found at the following link: >> >> http://ebird.org/content/ebird/about/how-to-make-your-checklists-more-meaningful >> >> We hope that eBird participants will consider these suggestions. If you >> have any questions, please feel free to contact me. >> >> >> Lisa Hardy for the eBird state review team >> _______________________________________________ >> Inland-nw-birders mailing list >> Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu >> https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders > >_______________________________________________ >Inland-nw-birders mailing list >Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu >https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Common Redpoll in my yard From: Richard Baltierra <wolfbaltierra AT gmail.com> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 10:40:23 -0800 Just this morning I discovered my first redpoll amongst a large group of house finches. Very cool! RJ Baltierra St. John Whitman County Washington Sent from my iPod _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Yard bird today - Brewer's Blackbird From: "Tim O'Brien" <kertim7179 AT yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 09:50:44 -0800 (PST) I was just looking out the back window and spotted a blackbird walking on the snow.  Grabbed the bins and it is a Brewer's Blackbird!  Lots of House Finches, Starlings, and a few House Sparrows about as well.   Tim O'Brien Cheney, WA mailto: kertim7179 at yahoo dot com _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Re: [inland-NW-birders] a note for eBird reporters From: "Michael Hobbs" <BirdMarymoor AT frontier.com> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 09:33:30 -0800 >From below: "eBird reviewers are being asked to invalidate lists that have imprecise geographic locations, such as checklists that are only located to the county, or are long traveling counts. " I think this is just daft. I presume eBird is doing this to coerce people into providing data more to their liking. Maybe some people will change their ways and follow their guidelines. But some people will simply not bother to put data into eBird. And some people will continue to put data in, it will be invalidated by the reviewer, and nobody will be able to see that data. Any data is better than no data. eBird lists with imprecise geographic locations should be marked as such in the underlying database. That way, they can easily be excluded from any data analysis that requires better locations. However, a list that is located only to a county still should show up when querying for a county list. Even without precise locality, that data provides information about the timing of bird occurrence. Throwing away those lists throws away that valuable information. I'll admit that it would be great if imprecise geographic data used a different color flag on the map, so that one could know not to bother zooming in to see where the bird was seen. But to use up the server disk space keeping private lists for individuals, but making that data invisible to others, EVEN THOUGH STILL USEFUL in a limited way, is just nuts. == Michael Hobbs == Kirkland, WA == http://www.marymoor.org/birding.htm == http://www.marymoor.org/BirdBlog.htm == birdmarymoor AT frontier.com -----Original Message----- From: Lisa Hardy Sent: Friday, January 20, 2012 10:18 PM To: INWB Subject: [inland-NW-birders] a note for eBird reporters A note for eBird reporters eBird reviewers are being asked to invalidate lists that have imprecise geographic locations, such as checklists that are only located to the county, or are long traveling counts. If you wonder why some of your observations do not show up in the public maps, it may be for this reason. The data will always remain part of your personal My eBird records, but eBird is only able to effectively use counts that are located within a limited area, such as traveling counts generally 5 miles or less in length. Information on how you can organize checklists to be of more value to the eBird scientific process can be found at the following link: http://ebird.org/content/ebird/about/how-to-make-your-checklists-more-meaningful We hope that eBird participants will consider these suggestions. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Lisa Hardy for the eBird state review team _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders _______________________________________________ Tweeters mailing list Tweeters AT u.washington.edu http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters Subject: Re: a note for eBird reporters From: "Michael Hobbs" <BirdMarymoor AT frontier.com> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 09:33:30 -0800 >From below: "eBird reviewers are being asked to invalidate lists that have imprecise geographic locations, such as checklists that are only located to the county, or are long traveling counts. " I think this is just daft. I presume eBird is doing this to coerce people into providing data more to their liking. Maybe some people will change their ways and follow their guidelines. But some people will simply not bother to put data into eBird. And some people will continue to put data in, it will be invalidated by the reviewer, and nobody will be able to see that data. Any data is better than no data. eBird lists with imprecise geographic locations should be marked as such in the underlying database. That way, they can easily be excluded from any data analysis that requires better locations. However, a list that is located only to a county still should show up when querying for a county list. Even without precise locality, that data provides information about the timing of bird occurrence. Throwing away those lists throws away that valuable information. I'll admit that it would be great if imprecise geographic data used a different color flag on the map, so that one could know not to bother zooming in to see where the bird was seen. But to use up the server disk space keeping private lists for individuals, but making that data invisible to others, EVEN THOUGH STILL USEFUL in a limited way, is just nuts. == Michael Hobbs == Kirkland, WA == http://www.marymoor.org/birding.htm == http://www.marymoor.org/BirdBlog.htm == birdmarymoor AT frontier.com -----Original Message----- From: Lisa Hardy Sent: Friday, January 20, 2012 10:18 PM To: INWB Subject: [inland-NW-birders] a note for eBird reporters A note for eBird reporters eBird reviewers are being asked to invalidate lists that have imprecise geographic locations, such as checklists that are only located to the county, or are long traveling counts. If you wonder why some of your observations do not show up in the public maps, it may be for this reason. The data will always remain part of your personal My eBird records, but eBird is only able to effectively use counts that are located within a limited area, such as traveling counts generally 5 miles or less in length. Information on how you can organize checklists to be of more value to the eBird scientific process can be found at the following link: http://ebird.org/content/ebird/about/how-to-make-your-checklists-more-meaningful We hope that eBird participants will consider these suggestions. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Lisa Hardy for the eBird state review team _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: test post From: david woodall <wldlfbio AT gmail.com> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 09:05:28 -0800 I am new to this and am just seeing how I can make a post -- David Woodall *"There can be no greater issue than that of conservation in this country." -Theodore Roosevelt*_______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders Subject: Re: a note for eBird reporters From: "Keith Carlson" <kec201814 AT cableone.net> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 08:33:33 -0800 I admit to being a bit of a skeptic re: eBird. As a sometime participant in this and other "citizen science' projects, I realize that science must have some priority over citizen for the whole exercise to be of value. In my personal birding, I run across (and bird) with a variety of birders from several states and of a variety of skill, interest and experience levels. Some of these birders post to eBird, many do not. Reasons for not participating in eBird range from lack of internet access, lack of computer skill, complexity of use, and perceived difficulty of dealing with sometimes unknown eBird reviewers. As new criteria for entries are put in place, it must be recognized by the powers that be in eBird that there will a trade off between generating sightiings in a form more useful to science and generating fewer entries because of perceived "hassle". A case in point is last week's Eagle Count trip sponsored by the Canyon Birders, attended by 26 birders of varying skill and interest levels, that covered 25 +/- miles along the Washington side of the Snake River ( the Idaho/Washington border) and continuing up the Grande Ronde River and Joseph Creek to the Oregon line (5 more miles). Under these new guidelines/rules, this single trip would require six or more separate eBird entries and properly identifing a half dozen or more "hotspots" along the route. ebird suggests that it is more helpful to record all birds seen, not just highlights This is enough of a burden that I suspect no or little data was entered into eBird. In this era of "listing' at many levels ( life listers, state listers, county listers, annual listers, etc.) making eBird harder to use to achieve the goals of the individual birder may make the generated data more useful to Cornell Lab, but at the expense of losing participants. Keith E. Carlson Lewiston . ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lisa Hardy" To: "INWB" Sent: Friday, January 20, 2012 10:18 PM Subject: [inland-NW-birders] a note for eBird reporters >A note for eBird reporters > > eBird reviewers are being asked to invalidate lists that have imprecise > geographic locations, such as checklists that are only located to the > county, or are long traveling counts. If you wonder why some of your > observations do not show up in the public maps, it may be for this reason. > The data will always remain part of your personal My eBird records, but > eBird is only able to effectively use counts that are located within a > limited area, such as traveling counts generally 5 miles or less in > length. > > Information on how you can organize checklists to be of more value to the > eBird scientific process can be found at the following link: > > http://ebird.org/content/ebird/about/how-to-make-your-checklists-more-meaningful > > We hope that eBird participants will consider these suggestions. If you > have any questions, please feel free to contact me. > > > Lisa Hardy for the eBird state review team > _______________________________________________ > Inland-nw-birders mailing list > Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu > https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders _______________________________________________ Inland-nw-birders mailing list Inland-nw-birders AT uidaho.edu https://lists.uidaho.edu/mailman/listinfo/inland-nw-birders