Nine hours and 18 miles in the field this weekend and bugger all to show for it apart from an aching thigh. Unable to [zero-carbon] self-find Golden Plover, Barn Owl and Crossbill and I can't find a Pochard within walking distance...which, realistically, are the easier species I have left to go for this month. Anything else would be a bonus/ surprise/ stroke of luck.
And we still have February to come, which in birding terms isn't so much a month as a state of mind.
How are we treating Cetti's Warbler at 'known/ traditional sites?' Contentious...
I have passed three BirdTrack milestones this week however: 40,000 total records, 1,000 total lists and 1,000 records for 2014. Not a bad dataset is developing, although I'm not quite sure what I'm going to do with it.
DOM
Congrats on the birdtrack milestones. With regard to cetti, it is not easy but I think the starting point is the separation between an individual and a population. Also maybe if you are going to a place just to find a population rather than as part of normal birding etc. Could debate the same points about firecrest in lowes wood area for example or mandarin at the three regular sites.
ReplyDeleteCongrats on the birdtrack milestones. With regard to cetti, it is not easy but I think the starting point is the separation between an individual and a population. Also maybe if you are going to a place just to find a population rather than as part of normal birding etc. Could debate the same points about firecrest in lowes wood area for example or mandarin at the three regular sites.
ReplyDeleteThanks Andy, an interesting - and to a point - logical justification, although the terms 'individual' and 'population' are not mutually exclusive. One can, for example, have a population of one individual. Perhaps as pertinent is whether the species is a sedentary, resident/ localised breeder, a la Mandarin, Marsh Tit, Lesser Spotted Woodpecker, Firecrest etc. Subjectively, we may also need to consider whether 'it is reasonable to expect to find x species away from traditional sites.'
DeleteI think we need some guidelines on this. What do others think. This competition/ blog is a 'democracy moderated by benevolent dictators' so I think we should go with majority rule. ;-)
D
Cetti's is either all in or all out. We've covered this subject before;
ReplyDeleteIf we can only count individuals recorded at new sites in the county, (which would exclude New Road, Marston Vale and Willington etc.) the species becomes 'unfindable' in a very short space of time. I say, go to traditional sites and count it! In the same way that SFYL competitors count Little Ringed Plover.............
Sorry Matt, if this has been covered before, I missed that particular conversation...
DeleteSo far then, that is two ayes and one abstention...
D