Nabble - BirdChat

Re: Non-countable exotics on Christmas Bird Counts

2009-12-18T12:26:50Z

Ted,

re cbc and other counting of "exotics" The following appeared on
NYSBirds, on 12-08-09 - an excerpt of what Angus Wilson, Chair of the
NYSARC committee wrote " Re: [nysbirds-l] extralimital shelduck in MA...

This discussion of Common Shelducks and their possible wild origins
offers a perfect example of why it is so important for observers to
report and document sightings of so-called 'exotics'. Only by sharing
and ultimately archiving these various sightings can we properly
understand any underlying patterns of occurrence. How often does such
and such as species occur? Are they more frequent in a particular
season? Do they display habitat preferences? Both NYSARC and the
Kingbird Regional editors welcome such reports. It is particularly
helpful to document the presence or absence of any signs of captive
origins (e.g. absence of leg bands, intact toes and flight feathers
etc). even if this suggests there is a mix of 'possibly wild' and
'definitely escaped/released' birds in our area. "

Now what's all this about "heard only" and "chasing vs listing" -
do not these fall under the aegis of shades of grey and or personal
preference?

Arie Gilbert
North Babylon, NY

President - Queens County Bird Club, Inc
http://www.queenscountybirdclub.org

Ted Floyd wrote:
> Well, *one* of Ted's favorite stalking horses [insert smiley-face]. I have others: the lunacy of heard-only birds, "chasing" (which I distinguish from listing), the quixotic ideal of "checklist stability," and the false dichotomy of conservation vs. "fun."

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Redstart ID needed

2009-12-18T10:43:46Z

I photographed a redstart in Genove, Italy on December11, 2009. Is there someone I could send the pictures to, in order to get a species ID? The books say that Common Redstart should be gone from that area in winter, yet my bird looks too pale for Black Redstart, which would be the expected species to be found there in winter.

Clifford Miles
Mountain Lakes, NJ
clifford.a.miles@...

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Re: Non-countable exotics on Christmas Bird Counts

2009-12-18T10:26:08Z

Joe

Well said! I keep reminding my competitive participants that this is a
CENSUS, not a competition.
I believe that the CBC is citizen science at it's best.
As Citizen Science, it must be FUN for all, or all won't play.
We use our count as an outreach program for the Buena Vista Audubon
Society with a "Birding Basics" portion of the count for beginners.
Yes, as Citizen Science, the count will never be perfect, but it sure
paints great broad strokes of winter status & distribution.
That said, Guy McCaskie is empowered to poach any area in which he sees
promise. ;-)
We compilers walk a fine line.....
Happy Holidays.
Peace on Earth.

Terry Hunefeld - Compiler
Oceanside California CBC (#11 at 192 species last year) ;-)

Join us for the Oceanside Christmas bird count:
http://www.socalbirding.com/christmasbirdcount/2009cbc.html

W. Terry Hunefeld, Encinitas
Life is short. Seabird often.
In memory of Luke Cole
“Come on out with us to see what’s out there.”

Southern California Seabirding Trips
by: Buena Vista Audubon Society
http://www.SoCalBirding.com
Los Coronados Islands & Nine Mile Bank
all the way to the edge of the Continental Shelf

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 08:02 -0800, "Joseph Morlan" <jmorlan@...>
wrote:

> On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 07:20:57 -0800, Ted Floyd <tedfloyd57@...>
> wrote:
>
> >How do bird records committees enter into the picture? Is the objective of a records committee to create a list of countable species for listers? Or is it to document state and provincial avifaunas? If it's the latter, then, shouldn't, oh, what the heck?, the California Bird Records Committee be a lot more concerned with Black-throated Magpie-Jays, Nutmeg Mannikins, and Orange Bishops than with Newell's Shearwaters, Eurasian Kestrels, and Common Rosefinches? The former are biologically fascinating components of the California avifauna, and they are potentially important with regard to avian conservation and management; the latter are intriguing, of course, from a lister's perspective, but that's about it.
> >
> >Again, I totally "get" the game of listing. I play it myself. But I'm not so sure I like it when records committees play the listing game, as opposed to the science game. If we're talking avifaunas, we're talking magpie-jays and mannikins. Come on, records committees, get to work.
>
> I'd like to thank Ted for bringing up this issue and I agree strongly
> with
> the concept. Implementation is another issue.
>
> I think we understand the Christmas Bird Counts should not be listing
> contests, but in many areas they have become de facto sporting events.
> When
> the result come in, the question is not "Who had the most Coots?" It is
> "How many species did Santa Barbara get?" When asked "How did San Diego
> do
> this year?" the answer is not "We beat our 10 year average for California
> Towhees." Instead it's, "Our unofficial total came in at 204 but some of
> these may not make it on the final tally."
>
> These annual competitions to see if California can beat Texas, or if San
> Diego can beat Santa Barbara result in the wholesale eliminating of
> obvious
> exotics from the species totals to ensure that everybody is playing by
> the
> rules. Otherwise the species totals will be meaningless.
>
> In the quest for maximum number of species, some counts use free-lance
> rovers whose sole job is to pick up rarities, especially stake-outs.
> These
> rovers make no effort to count common species. This effort can add
> significantly to the number of species recorded, but if party hours are
> included by free-lancers seeking rarities, I think that dilutes any
> attempt
> at normalizing CBC data by party hours.
>
> Ted has brought up his favorite stalking horse, records committees. I
> would like to defend the California Committee's mechanism for dealing
> with
> exotics. We have established a subcommittee which deals only with
> introduced birds. The chair of the subcommittee has extensive files on
> all
> exotics and attempts to get documentation of successful nesting and
> distribution for all such species. From time to time, the subcommittee
> votes on proposing an established or naturalized exotic species for
> addition to the main list. All supporting documentation is circulated to
> the rest of the committee and the species is then added to the official
> state list, assuming it is accepted. This is a lengthy and deliberative
> process. Exotics are not haphazardly added to the California list but we
> do seek out information on them and have a mechanism for archiving that
> information.
>
> I agree with Ted that Christmas bird counts can be an useful source of
> information on the distribution of exotic species and I agree that the
> data
> should be gathered and curated.
>
> We need to know which exotic species are expanding or declining. More
> importantly, we need to know where they are nesting. Christmas bird
> counts
> don't usually help us there. But summer bird counts and breeding bird
> surveys and atlas projects can do much to help with our understanding of
> the spread or demise of potentially established or naturalized exotics.
>
> Another underutilized source of data is eBird. I think eBird could be
> much
> more pro-active in encouraging the gathering and analyzing of data on
> exotic species.
>
> The expansion of the Eurasian Collard-Dove across North America can be
> nicely mapped using CBC data and eBird data. So the mechanisms are
> there.
>
> --
> Joseph Morlan, Pacifica, CA jmorlan (at) ccsf.edu
> SF Birding Classes start Feb.9 http://fog.ccsf.edu/jmorlan/
> California Bird Records Committee http://www.californiabirds.org/
> Western Field Ornithologists
> http://www.westernfieldornithologists.org/
>
> BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
> Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

----
W. Terry Hunefeld
San Diego
Life is short. Bird often.
reply to: thunefeld@...
----

--
http://www.fastmail.fm - IMAP accessible web-mail

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Owl tries to dognap pooch

2009-12-18T10:04:06Z

Hi Chatters,

A similar story from the Seattle area:

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/78394322.html

Kathy
(chukarbird at yahoo dot com)

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Re: Non-countable exotics on Christmas Bird Counts

2009-12-18T09:22:45Z

Hello, BirdChatters.

> Ted has brought up his favorite stalking horse, records committees.

Well, *one* of Ted's favorite stalking horses [insert smiley-face]. I have others: the lunacy of heard-only birds, "chasing" (which I distinguish from listing), the quixotic ideal of "checklist stability," and the false dichotomy of conservation vs. "fun."

To name a few...

> I would like to defend the California Committee's
> mechanism for dealing with exotics. We have established

And I should take this opportunity to say that I am--and have for a very long time been--a great admirer of the California Bird Records Committee (CBRC). The CBRC is, in my mind, the ne plus ultra of bird records committees. It is *the* standard. The New York Yankees of bird records committees.

That lofty setting for the CBRC puts it in the awkward position of being a natural point of reference--and a natural lightning rod for criticism. True, I've groused from time to time about the CBRC. But I also hold the work of the CBRC in the greatest esteem. I would commend to all birders--not just listers, not just the "hard-core," but everyone--the annual report of the CBRC, published in the journal Western Birds. I read literally every word of it, each year. It's that good.

Having said that, it does have its quirks [another smiley-face goes here]. Here's a surreal offering from the current (33rd) report of the CBRC:

"ABSTRACT: The California Bird Records Committee reached decisions on 285 records involving 92 species evaluated during 2007, endorsing 238 of them. New to California were Townsend’s (Newell's) Shearwater (Puffinus auricularis newelli), Tristram's Storm-Petrel (Oceanodroma tristrami), Lesser Frigatebird (Fregata ariel), Swallow-tailed Kite (Elanoides forficatus), Eurasian Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus), Wood Sandpiper (Tringa glareola), and Common Rosefinch (Carpodacus erythrinus). Adusting for these changes brings California's bird list to 640 species, ten of which are non-native."

The surreal part is the twisting of the well-understood concept of "non-native." Would *anyone* really say something like:

"Oh, gee. I just got back from a trip to California, and I was delighted to see a Eurasian Kestrel and a Common Rosefinch, two species that are native to the splendiferous Golden State."

Eurasian Kestrel and Common Rosefinch are emphatically *not* California natives. They're magnificent outliers, aliens, otherwordly visitors, call 'em what you will. They're not nearly as native as the Rose-ringed Parakeets, say, that have lived, bred, and become established around Bakersfield--for generations. And, why, the poor Rose-rings aren't even on the state list.

The CBRC doesn't really mean "non-native." Rather, that term is a euphemism for "offputting to the purist sensibilities of certain old-school, hard-core listers." I'm totally fine with that. But, c'mon, this is putting lipstick on a pig.

(To be serious for a moment, I think the CBRC should change "non-native" to "well-established exotics.")

-------------------------------

Ted Floyd

Editor, Birding
Check out Birding magazine on Twitter: http://twitter.com/BirdingMagazine

-------------------------------
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141664/direct/01/
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Re: Non-countable exotics on Christmas Bird Counts

2009-12-18T08:02:13Z

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 07:20:57 -0800, Ted Floyd <tedfloyd57@...>
wrote:

>How do bird records committees enter into the picture? Is the objective of a records committee to create a list of countable species for listers? Or is it to document state and provincial avifaunas? If it's the latter, then, shouldn't, oh, what the heck?, the California Bird Records Committee be a lot more concerned with Black-throated Magpie-Jays, Nutmeg Mannikins, and Orange Bishops than with Newell's Shearwaters, Eurasian Kestrels, and Common Rosefinches? The former are biologically fascinating components of the California avifauna, and they are potentially important with regard to avian conservation and management; the latter are intriguing, of course, from a lister's perspective, but that's about it.
>
>Again, I totally "get" the game of listing. I play it myself. But I'm not so sure I like it when records committees play the listing game, as opposed to the science game. If we're talking avifaunas, we're talking magpie-jays and mannikins. Come on, records committees, get to work.

I'd like to thank Ted for bringing up this issue and I agree strongly with
the concept. Implementation is another issue.

I think we understand the Christmas Bird Counts should not be listing
contests, but in many areas they have become de facto sporting events. When
the result come in, the question is not "Who had the most Coots?" It is
"How many species did Santa Barbara get?" When asked "How did San Diego do
this year?" the answer is not "We beat our 10 year average for California
Towhees." Instead it's, "Our unofficial total came in at 204 but some of
these may not make it on the final tally."

These annual competitions to see if California can beat Texas, or if San
Diego can beat Santa Barbara result in the wholesale eliminating of obvious
exotics from the species totals to ensure that everybody is playing by the
rules. Otherwise the species totals will be meaningless.

In the quest for maximum number of species, some counts use free-lance
rovers whose sole job is to pick up rarities, especially stake-outs. These
rovers make no effort to count common species. This effort can add
significantly to the number of species recorded, but if party hours are
included by free-lancers seeking rarities, I think that dilutes any attempt
at normalizing CBC data by party hours.

Ted has brought up his favorite stalking horse, records committees. I
would like to defend the California Committee's mechanism for dealing with
exotics. We have established a subcommittee which deals only with
introduced birds. The chair of the subcommittee has extensive files on all
exotics and attempts to get documentation of successful nesting and
distribution for all such species. From time to time, the subcommittee
votes on proposing an established or naturalized exotic species for
addition to the main list. All supporting documentation is circulated to
the rest of the committee and the species is then added to the official
state list, assuming it is accepted. This is a lengthy and deliberative
process. Exotics are not haphazardly added to the California list but we
do seek out information on them and have a mechanism for archiving that
information.

I agree with Ted that Christmas bird counts can be an useful source of
information on the distribution of exotic species and I agree that the data
should be gathered and curated.

We need to know which exotic species are expanding or declining. More
importantly, we need to know where they are nesting. Christmas bird counts
don't usually help us there. But summer bird counts and breeding bird
surveys and atlas projects can do much to help with our understanding of
the spread or demise of potentially established or naturalized exotics.

Another underutilized source of data is eBird. I think eBird could be much
more pro-active in encouraging the gathering and analyzing of data on
exotic species.

The expansion of the Eurasian Collard-Dove across North America can be
nicely mapped using CBC data and eBird data. So the mechanisms are there.

--
Joseph Morlan, Pacifica, CA jmorlan (at) ccsf.edu
SF Birding Classes start Feb.9 http://fog.ccsf.edu/jmorlan/
California Bird Records Committee http://www.californiabirds.org/
Western Field Ornithologists http://www.westernfieldornithologists.org/

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Fw: [Mexico-Birding] FW: Volunteer positions

2009-12-18T07:39:33Z

--- On Fri, 12/18/09, Brito Aguilar, Rafael (MU-Student) <rbyq9@...> wrote:

From: Brito Aguilar, Rafael (MU-Student) <rbyq9@...>
Subject: [Mexico-Birding] FW: Volunteer positions
To: "Ornitologica_de_Mexico@..." <Ornitologica_de_Mexico@...>, "Mexico-Birding@..." <Mexico-Birding@...>
Date: Friday, December 18, 2009, 9:31 AM







VOLUNTEER
FIELD ASSISTANTS: Volunteers needed from December 29 2009 to March 26
2010 for an avian monitoring project at El Cielo Biosphere Reserve in
Northeastern Mexico (Tamaulipas). I am seeking experienced and highly
motivated individuals to help on a bird banding project on this magnificent
Biosphere Reserve in northeastern Mexico (5 hours south from Brownsville, TX).
Excellent banding and data collection skills necessary, experience conducting
field work highly desirable. Some knowledge of Spanish would be helpful but not
necessary. Primary responsibilities involve set up mist-nest, taking birds out of
the nets, banding, measuring and weighting the birds, collecting tail feathers.
Additional duties include performing vegetation surveys and sharing all the
basic responsibilities of camping (cooking, cleaning, etc). Field work is
intensive and will often require long working hours, expect pre-dawn starts
most days, with dawn to dusk days when banding. The weather is mostly warm with
some cold days, mosquitoes are abundant. Participants will gain experience
working with a highly diverse Neotropical Avifauna, and will have the chance to
experience a different culture. Volunteers will be responsible for their own
airfare from where they live to Brownsville, TX. Transportation from
Brownsville, TX to El Cielo Biosphere reserve will be provided. Basic housing (shared)
will be provided, some camping is possible. Meals will be partially covered.

Please
email a cover letter summarizing relevant field and birding experience, CV,
names of three references (with contact information) to Rafael Brito-Aguilar,
Avian Ecology Lab, University of Missouri-Columbia, rbyq9ATmail. mizzou.edu. Applications will be
evaluated as received until positions are filled.

Se buscan voluntarios para trabajo de campo: Oportunidad para trabajo de campo como voluntario, en un proyecto
sobre monitoreo de aves migratorias neotropicales y residentes en la reserva de
la Biosfera El Cielo, en Tamaulipas, México. El monitoreo se realizara
de Diciembre 29 2009 a Marzo 26 del 2010. Estoy buscando personas
altamente motivadas (estudiantes o egresados de biología o carrera afín) y con
deseos de aprender, con experiencia previa en el uso de redes de niebla y
anillamiento de paseriformes. Las principales responsabilidades son el manejo
de redes de niebla para la captura de aves, anillamiento, toma de datos
morfométricos, colecta de plumas y liberación de los individuos, y muestreo de
vegetación. Los voluntarios serán responsables del traslado de su lugar de
origen a Cd. Victoria, Tamaulipas, de aquí la transportació n será ofrecida por
el responsable del proyecto. Alojamiento (se acampara en ocasiones) será
otorgado por el responsable del proyecto. Los interesados favor de mandar
curriculum vitae, una carta de interés (describiendo sus antecedentes
profesionales, experiencia y objetivos a futuro), y nombres y correos
electrónicos de tres referencias personales. Enviar toda la información
solicitada a: Rafael Brito-Aguilar, rbyq9ATmail. mizzou.edu.
Las solicitudes se evaluaran conforme sean recibidas hasta que los puestos de
voluntarios sean ocupados.

************ *******

Rafael
Brito-Aguilar

Ph.D.
candidate

105
Tucker Hall

University
of Missouri

Columbia,
MO 65211

ph:
573-882-4854

fax:
573-882-0123

************ *******

__._,_.___

Reply to sender
|
Reply to group

Messages in this topic
(1)

Recent Activity:

Visit Your Group
Start a New Topic

MARKETPLACE

Going Green: Your Yahoo! Groups resource for green living

Parenting Zone: Your community resource for family and home

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use

.

__,_._,___

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Re: Non-countable exotics on Christmas Bird Counts

2009-12-18T07:33:39Z

In my opinion, records committees should do as they've always done,
producing the official list of established species and naturally-occurring
vagrants for their area. But they should also maintain a file for every
species reported, documenting their own reasoning for including or not
including each sighting. This, in my opinion, should be done for ALL
reports. Sometimes a species is reported and either accepted or rejected,
based on what was currently known, and then the sighting is reconsidered as
more information comes to light.

Best, Laura

On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Ted Floyd <tedfloyd57@...> wrote:

> Hello, BirdChatters.
>
> Thanks for the interesting feedback on what to do about non-countable
> exotics on Christmas Bird Counts. I agree with everyone. In particular, I
> appreciate Jeff Bouton's distinction between listing and doing avifaunal
> surveys. I totally get it. In the example of the California Quail in eastern
> Colorado, I totally understand that: (a) the species wouldn't count for an
> ABA-compliant "big day" but (b) the species ought to be recorded for the
> Christmas Bird Count. No problem there for me at all.
>
> But here's something to ponder.
>
> How do bird records committees enter into the picture? Is the objective of
> a records committee to create a list of countable species for listers? Or is
> it to document state and provincial avifaunas? If it's the latter, then,
> shouldn't, oh, what the heck?, the California Bird Records Committee be a
> lot more concerned with Black-throated Magpie-Jays, Nutmeg Mannikins, and
> Orange Bishops than with Newell's Shearwaters, Eurasian Kestrels, and Common
> Rosefinches? The former are biologically fascinating components of the
> California avifauna, and they are potentially important with regard to avian
> conservation and management; the latter are intriguing, of course, from a
> lister's perspective, but that's about it.
>
> Again, I totally "get" the game of listing. I play it myself. But I'm not
> so sure I like it when records committees play the listing game, as opposed
> to the science game. If we're talking avifaunas, we're talking magpie-jays
> and mannikins. Come on, records committees, get to work.
>
> -------------------------------
>
> Ted Floyd
> Editor, Birding
>
> Check out Birding magazine on Twitter: http://twitter.com/BirdingMagazine
>
> -------------------------------
> _________________________________________________________________
> Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141664/direct/01/
> BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
> Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
>
>

--
--
Laura Erickson
Science Editor
Cornell Lab of Ornithology
159 Sapsucker Woods Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
607-254-1114

If you've found this information useful, I hope you'll consider supporting
our work on behalf of birds and other wildlife. In addition to knowing
that you'll be making a difference for conservation, you'll receive our
award-winning Living Bird magazine and informative BirdScope newsletter four
times a year. We invite you to join our "force for nature." To sign up or
watch our video about membership, visit
http://www.birds.cornell.edu/NetCommunity/membership or call us at
1-800-843-2473.

For the love, understanding, and protection of birds

There is symbolic as well as actual beauty in the migration of birds. There
is something infinitely healing in the repeated refrains of nature--the
assurance that dawn comes after night, and spring after the winter.

--Rachel Carson

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Re: Non-countable exotics on Christmas Bird Counts

2009-12-18T07:20:57Z

Hello, BirdChatters.

Thanks for the interesting feedback on what to do about non-countable exotics on Christmas Bird Counts. I agree with everyone. In particular, I appreciate Jeff Bouton's distinction between listing and doing avifaunal surveys. I totally get it. In the example of the California Quail in eastern Colorado, I totally understand that: (a) the species wouldn't count for an ABA-compliant "big day" but (b) the species ought to be recorded for the Christmas Bird Count. No problem there for me at all.

But here's something to ponder.

How do bird records committees enter into the picture? Is the objective of a records committee to create a list of countable species for listers? Or is it to document state and provincial avifaunas? If it's the latter, then, shouldn't, oh, what the heck?, the California Bird Records Committee be a lot more concerned with Black-throated Magpie-Jays, Nutmeg Mannikins, and Orange Bishops than with Newell's Shearwaters, Eurasian Kestrels, and Common Rosefinches? The former are biologically fascinating components of the California avifauna, and they are potentially important with regard to avian conservation and management; the latter are intriguing, of course, from a lister's perspective, but that's about it.

Again, I totally "get" the game of listing. I play it myself. But I'm not so sure I like it when records committees play the listing game, as opposed to the science game. If we're talking avifaunas, we're talking magpie-jays and mannikins. Come on, records committees, get to work.

-------------------------------

Ted Floyd
Editor, Birding

Check out Birding magazine on Twitter: http://twitter.com/BirdingMagazine

-------------------------------
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141664/direct/01/
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Re: Non-countable exotics on Christmas Bird Counts

2009-12-18T05:17:40Z

Rob and all,

Regarding how far do you go, I'd say record and report it all. In this way, at least you aren't missing documentation of a population being established those errant reports or birds that won't make it, can always be dropped later. Certainly here n Florida much data like this was lost or not recorded in the early CBC's of late due to efforts by Bill Pranty and others this has gotten much better.

At any rate, I think it important to recognize we aren't listing here (which is of course a game we play) but recording data on the avifauna in our areas.Even if "not countable" these birds are out there and have to be effecting the natural cycle in some way. Having records of these may be helpful down the line for (perhaps) noting trends or direct correlations between increases in some non-native exotic and drops in numbers of native bird species that utilize the same resources.

For the record, I'm all for listing and keep many different lists, despite recognizing it as a game that we like to play. :)

Best,

Jeff Bouton
Florida, USA
jbouton2@...

--- On Fri, 12/18/09, Rob Parsons <parsons8@...> wrote:

From: Rob Parsons <parsons8@...>
Subject: Re: [BIRDCHAT] Non-countable exotics on Christmas Bird Counts
To: BIRDHAT@...
Date: Friday, December 18, 2009, 12:49 AM

Hi all,

For the most part, I'm with Ted & Laura all the way. One of the things
that always used to bug the <insert any crude word you like> out of me was
when I would get the CBC issue of American Birds and read in the CBC
summaries from Missouri, year after year, "X Mute Swans removed from totals
as non-established exotic". This, in spite of the fact it is definitely
established in at least one adjacent state. While I never got around to
writing to the National Audubon Society and ask them to please override the
bad reasoning of those who had made this decision, I sure wished for it. I
could see the reasoning, even as I disagreed with it, behind removing
something that has no established populations anywhere in North America, but
I totally disagreed with removing one that did. But I digress.

My only concern is how far do you go? Do you really want to include a
Budgerigar seen in Seattle, or (heaven forbid) in Winnipeg? Birds that
won't survive beyond a few days (or hours) don't seem deserving of the same
treatment as the species mentioned by Ted (including the Smew in SD--tell me
where it is and I might make a little detour!) that will survive at least as
individuals, if not populations.

Cheers,

Rob Parsons
Winnipeg, MB
CANADA
parsons8@...

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Re: Non-countable exotics on Christmas Bird Counts

2009-12-17T21:47:41Z

Hi all,

For the most part, I'm with Ted & Laura all the way. One of the things
that always used to bug the <insert any crude word you like> out of me was
when I would get the CBC issue of American Birds and read in the CBC
summaries from Missouri, year after year, "X Mute Swans removed from totals
as non-established exotic". This, in spite of the fact it is definitely
established in at least one adjacent state. While I never got around to
writing to the National Audubon Society and ask them to please override the
bad reasoning of those who had made this decision, I sure wished for it. I
could see the reasoning, even as I disagreed with it, behind removing
something that has no established populations anywhere in North America, but
I totally disagreed with removing one that did. But I digress.

My only concern is how far do you go? Do you really want to include a
Budgerigar seen in Seattle, or (heaven forbid) in Winnipeg? Birds that
won't survive beyond a few days (or hours) don't seem deserving of the same
treatment as the species mentioned by Ted (including the Smew in SD--tell me
where it is and I might make a little detour!) that will survive at least as
individuals, if not populations.

Cheers,

Rob Parsons
Winnipeg, MB
CANADA
parsons8@...

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Looking for Russell Stone

2009-12-17T18:31:10Z

Hi all,

If there is anyone who can provide me with an e-mail contact for birder
and software designer Russell Stone of Los Angeles, would you please contact
me off list?

Cheers,

Rob Parsons
Winnipeg, MB
CANADA
parsons8@...

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

RFI: Southwest Florida in January

2009-12-17T16:03:34Z

I will be in Fort Myers, Florida for a week at the beginning of January. I
am looking for reliable locations for the following target species within an
hour or so of the Fort Myers area. There is some information on the internet
but much of the information seems to be out of date and it is hard to find
reliable locations for the following species.

Fulvous and Black-bellied Whistling Duck
American Avocet
Black-necked Stilt
Purple Gallinule
Snail Kite
Short-tailed Hawk
Crested Caracara
White-winged Dove
Red-cockaded Woodpecker
Florida Scrub-Jay
Brown-headed Nuthatch
Western Kingbird (Naples area?)
Scissor-tailed Flycatcher
Shiny Cowbird
Bronzed Cowbird
Saltmarsh Sharp-tailed Sparrow
Seaside Sparrow
Spot-breasted Oriole

Also any birding locations in the area, especially the lesser known ones.

Thanks in advance for any information anyone can give,

Robbie LaCelle
Camden, NY
thebooksearcher@...

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Top 10 Birds of the Decade

2009-12-17T10:03:33Z

With all the best-of-the-decade lists swirling around in the media, I
started thinking about the bird-related highlights of the 2000s. The
result -- my "Top 10 Birds of the Decade" -- is here:
http://djringer.com/birding/2009/12/15/top-10-birds-of-the-decade/

What are some other candidates for the list?

David Ringer
Vicksburg, Mississippi

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Re: Non-countable exotics on Christmas Bird Counts

2009-12-17T09:44:55Z

Ted, thank you SO much for this post. It has long been frustrating for me to
hear people's "good birds" dismissed as not countable. In the vast majority
of cases, escaped pets, game birds that stage a major breakout from a
retriever training club, and other exotic birds are not going to survive in
the long run. But some will, and even in the short run, it's of scientific
value to know what exotic species are "out there," sometimes interacting
with or even spreading diseases to "natural" wild birds. ABA rules reflect
birding as a sport. Official state/regional lists reflect the state of bird
populations. But CBCs and other surveys reflect the original scientific
data, some which will be useful for one purpose but not others.

Unfortunately, some compilers who are very familiar with ABA rules, and even
some people on state ornithological list committees, don't have a firm
understanding of science. Today a Chukar may not belong on the Scranton
list, but if a population were one day to become viable, it would be very
useful to know where and when the first individuals were recorded.
"Uncountable" birds may not belong on the list, but do belong in the
permanent files from which these lists are developed.

Best, Laura Erickson (wearing my "dilettante birder" hat)

--
--
Laura Erickson
Science Editor
Cornell Lab of Ornithology
159 Sapsucker Woods Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
607-254-1114

If you've found this information useful, I hope you'll consider supporting
our work on behalf of birds and other wildlife. In addition to knowing
that you'll be making a difference for conservation, you'll receive our
award-winning Living Bird magazine and informative BirdScope newsletter four
times a year. We invite you to join our "force for nature." To sign up or
watch our video about membership, visit
http://www.birds.cornell.edu/NetCommunity/membership or call us at
1-800-843-2473.

For the love, understanding, and protection of birds

There is symbolic as well as actual beauty in the migration of birds. There
is something infinitely healing in the repeated refrains of nature--the
assurance that dawn comes after night, and spring after the winter.

--Rachel Carson

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

mystery birds, bird videos (links)

2009-12-17T09:31:19Z

hello everyone,

the most recently demystified mystery bird was a Leucistic/albino European Herring Gull, Larus argentatus;

http://bit.ly/4GgTr9

today's mystery bird is actually a mystery fluffball, kindly provided by a reader in Georgia;

http://bit.ly/6Jwa7D

and yesterday's mystery bird -- thanks to fellow birder Lyn Topinka, is a bit of a blur, but i think it is identifiable;

http://bit.ly/8CzrwL

you might enjoy this quirky little video animation, Pigeon: Impossible;

http://bit.ly/8T8s2M

you might also enjoy watching the famous cockatoo, Snowball, dance to Christmas carols;

http://bit.ly/5aGU4A

cheers,

GrrlScientist
http://scienceblogs.com/grrlscientist/
http://twitter.com/GrrlScientist
http://profile.to/grrlscientist/
American Expat living in Frankfurt, Germany

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Non-countable exotics on Christmas Bird Counts

2009-12-17T09:09:47Z

Hello, BirdChatters.

We all know the "rule." You can't put a non-countable exotic on your life list. A Ringed Teal in Reno, a Chukar in Scranton, a Sacred Ibis in Miami--those birds aren't countable, so you can't put them on your list.

Except on Christmas Bird Counts!

This matter of non-countable exotics came up in discussion a few days ago when I was a participant in the Fountain Creek, Colorado, Christmas Bird Count. Somebody had found 6 California Quail, a species not on the "official" Colorado list, and somebody else promptly declared that they wouldn't count. However, the count compiler, to his credit, did, in fact, enter the 6 California Quail on the list. [Present for many months, photo-documented, even bred and raised young earlier in the year; but that's not really relevant here.]

Well, we did the right thing on the Fountain Creek CBC, but I will note that, over the years, I've been on many CBCs which did it the wrong way. A Mute Swan was excluded because it might--just might--have been an escape; a Ring-necked Pheasant was scratched off the list because of rumors there'd been a release at the local hunt club; or dozens of Nutmeg Mannikins were declared uncountable for the simple reason that they're not yet on some official state or continental list.

The Christmas Bird Count isn't a fully scientific enterprise, I accept, but neither is it supposed to conform entirely to the "rules" of the listing game. On a CBC, it's okay to count a bird by the method of "remote detection" from a real-time owl-camera or falcon-camera; on a CBC, there's certainly no need to apply the "95% rule" which stipulates that all members of a party must see or hear at least 95% of the birds reported; and on a CBC, it's okay--it's more than okay, it's a very good idea--to count exotic birds that aren't yet on some "official" list.

To see what I'm talking about, check out recent CBCs from Florida. Along with all the Yellow-rumped Warblers and Laughing Gulls (native species, obviously), and along with all the Rock Pigeons and European Starlings (exotics with long-established populations in the state), you'll also get tallies like 29 Chestnut-fronted Macaws, 53 Red-masked Parakeets, and 1 Cockatiel. Those birds are out there, in the environment, interacting with their environment, and it is appropriate to make note of them. It is right to count them.

On CBCs, it is especially important to count non-countable exotics for the critical reason that they might well become permanently established--sooner, quite possibly, than most folks would have anticipated. Thanks in large part to CBC data, we have a clear picture of patterns of expansion for recently established species like Eurasian Collared-Dove and Common Myna. Both species are currently considered to be "countable" (i.e., for personal lists), but I note that they were counted on CBCs prior to their being declared officially countable. We got a "head start" on understanding those species by counting them even before they were officially countable. And that same reasoning ought to apply to lots of other species that are either well-established or apparently on their way to being well-established--even though they're not yet countable.

Some fairly well-known examples in Florida--where there's a good, strong tradition of CBC monitoring of exotics--include Purple Swamphen and Black-hooded Parakeet. Those birds are there, they're established, they're part of the avifauna, they're potentially interacting with other organisms and their environment, and it's frankly irresponsible for us not to count them.

In California, which doesn't, perhaps, have quite as strong a tradition of CBC monitoring of exotics, there are all sorts of possibilities. Common Peafowl, Mandarin Ducks, Rose-ringed Parakeets, Black-throated Magpie-Jays, Nutmeg Mannikins, Orange Bishops--all those species are apparently established, but with very little data. We need to know what's going on with their populations. We need to count them on CBCs. Go ahead! Go on! Do it! Count them. Even a Demoiselle Crane in Lodi. It's a real bird, for crying out loud. It's THERE, actually THERE, in the wild, interacting with other organisms, exchanging energy and matter with the environment. It oughtta be counted.

The problem of well-established or potentially established (or establishing) populations of non-countable exotics is best known in South Florida and Southern California, but it affects all of us, really. Mute Swans, Muscovy Ducks, Eurasian Collared-Doves, Monk Parakeets--all those birds are on the move, and they oughtta be noted even in areas in which they're not yet considered to be established. Even Peach-faced Lovebirds in Phoenix, even a whole slew of Old World passerines in the Upper Midwest--they're here, and the CBC provides us with a great opportunity to understand them.

And even, yes, California Quail. I and others were amazed when we opened up the Arizona Breeding Bird Atlas, published a few years ago, and learned that the species had been established for 40+ years in east-central Arizona, near the New Mexico border. They're all over Chile, too. And they've been established for close to 50 years in Corsica. They get around. They get established. Who knows?--maybe we'll someday learn, sooner than anyone had expected, that they're established and expanding in and around the Fountain Creek region of Colorado. The habitat looks perfect.

The Christmas Bird Count is an awesome tradition. For many of us, our local CBC is the ornithological highlight of the year. Especially if we've been doing the same CBC for years or even decades--as is the case with so many of us. And the most exciting thing of all, for a lot of us, is monitoring all the changes in bird populations over the years.

If you find a Smew on the Pierre, South Dakota, CBC this coming Saturday, just count it! Someone else can worry about whether it flew in from Asia or escaped from the South Dakota Discovery Center & Aquarium. Doesn't matter. The bird was there. You saw it. Count it.

-------------------------------

Ted Floyd
Editor, Birding

Check out Birding magazine on Twitter: http://twitter.com/BirdingMagazine

-------------------------------
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141664/direct/01/
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Re: Pomeranian Snatched by Great Horned Owl / Falls from the Sky

2009-12-17T06:02:10Z

I'd like to remind people of the BirdChat guideline that states that our
words on BirdChat belong to us and should not be quoted outside BirdChat
without our permission. This is especially important for those of us
associated with institutions. Our opinions posted here are our own, even
when we carelessly leave our standard professional signature line in place.

Best, Laura

Ithaca, NY

--
--
My professional signature--even though my posts on BirdChat are by "Laura
Erickson, dilettante birder."
Laura Erickson
Science Editor
Cornell Lab of Ornithology
159 Sapsucker Woods Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
607-254-1114

If you've found this information useful, I hope you'll consider supporting
our work on behalf of birds and other wildlife. In addition to knowing
that you'll be making a difference for conservation, you'll receive our
award-winning Living Bird magazine and informative BirdScope newsletter four
times a year. We invite you to join our "force for nature." To sign up or
watch our video about membership, visit
http://www.birds.cornell.edu/NetCommunity/membership or call us at
1-800-843-2473.

For the love, understanding, and protection of birds

There is symbolic as well as actual beauty in the migration of birds. There
is something infinitely healing in the repeated refrains of nature--the
assurance that dawn comes after night, and spring after the winter.

--Rachel Carson

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Re: Pomeranian Snatched by Great Horned Owl / Falls from the Sky

2009-12-17T05:03:37Z

Well Ed, I don't know how many small dogs or other pets have been
snatched by Great Horned Owls over the years but I can sadly tell you
of the demise of one of our chihuahuas. Cookie weighed about 6
pounds. Late one night in April of 2007 here in Naples, Florida,
Cookie had to go out. I was sleeping. John, my partner, took her
outside and neglected to put her on her leash. We have a Live Oak
about 10 feet right outside our door. Cookie went to do her business
behind the tree while John waited by the door. Cookie never came
back. John came back in the house and woke me. I grabbed a flashlight
and searched the yard which borders a wooded area next to Greg "The
Shark" Norman's Tiburon Golf Course. I found Cookie about 20 feet
from the tree line and about 40 feet from the front door where she
was last seen. She had two large puncture wounds on both of her
sides. She was dead. A vet friend told me it was a large bird of prey
because the puncture wounds were made by sharp talons. We had heard
the Great Horned Owl for several nights prior to the unfortunate
incident. Since it was 3:00AM, no other predator with sharp talons
would be about. We're positive it was the GHOW. Needless to say, we
were devastated by her untimely death. She brought such joy to our
lives. Let this be a lesson to owners of small dogs. Always put them
on a leash and stay with them. Had that been done, Cookie would
probably still be with us.

Vincent Lucas
Naples, FL
vplucas@...

Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 00:30:31 -0800
From: Ed Stonick <edstonick@...>
Subject: Pomeranian Snatched by Great Horned Owl / Falls from the Sky

Seasons Greetings!

One of our local (Los Angeles) radio stations often focuses on offbeat
stories, and they mentioned a Pomeranian falling from the sky in front
of a Quad City (Iowa) driver on a recent evening.

It seems the dog was frightened by fireworks and ran away from home. It
was caught by a Great Horned Owl which apparently dropped it while
flying.
Fortunately for the dog, a driver saw it fall from the sky and
rescued it,
chasing away the owl when it returned in an attempt to retake its prey.

Pomeranians only weight 4-5 pounds.

The dog had a few scratches but was otherwise okay.

One wonders how many cats and small dogs may be carried off by owls in =
the night.

Here is a link to an interview with the dog owner and rescuer:

http://gazetteonline.com/blogs/news-hawk/2009/12/14/dog-falls-from-
sky-in=
-front-of-qc-driver-pomeranian-dropped-by-great-horned-owl-
after-24-30-block=-flight

Regards,
Ed

Ed Stonick
Pasadena, CA
edstonick@...

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

American Coots thwart nest invaders and kill their chicks

2009-12-16T10:09:00Z

Hello everyone,

New research published this week in the journal Nature shows that the American Coot's reproductive life is full of deception and violence.

Dai Shizuka and Bruce Lyon of UC Santa Cruz report that coot parents can tell the difference between their own chicks and any impostors that manage to hatch in their nest, and they will violently reject most impostor chicks.

Their paper is available only to Nature subscribers. The abstract is here:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature08655.html

I've summarized the research in a new post on our blog and have included a stunning photo by Lyon showing an adult coot attacking a chick.
http://bit.ly/coot_research

--
Matt Mendenhall
Associate Editor, Birder's World
http://www.birdersworld.com

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Re: Pomeranian Snatched by Great Horned Owl / Falls from the Sky

2009-12-16T09:56:21Z

Jim's point is important. The article said the dog weighed around 4
pounds--comparable to a rabbit. Dogs that weigh 10 pounds appear very little
to us, but are much too heavy for birds to carry. But that's no cause for
complacency--when people ask if an owl can carry off their 12-pound
miniature poodle, I tell them nope--they'll eat it on the ground where they
killed it. I personally have a 13-pound bichon frise, Photon, who sometimes
goes birding with me. I've seen eagles and Red-tails circle over, inspecting
her. I live under Hawk Ridge in Duluth, and though I know darned well that
nothing flying over could carry her off, it still would be unpleasant going
out to find her half-eaten carcass. And as Jim noted, there are predators
out there that can easily carry dogs much larger than Pomerians. In northern
Wisconsin, bears have become extremely good at picking up small dogs,
ripping them off their chains before carrying them away.

Laura Erickson

On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Jim Royer <jrmotmot@...> wrote:

> This is another great reason to keep dogs confined at home and cats inside.
> I always keep my dog confined although she is an 80 pound German Shepherd
> mix and I doubt owls pose much of a risk to her! Her problem is that she
> likes to eat cats and although hardcore birders might applaud that
> proclivity, my neighbors who let their cats loose wouldn't be too happy.
> Having her near the feeder on a leash does help protect the birds I feed. I
> know that cats have disappeared in my area due to Great Horned Owls,
> coyotes
> and foxes. My friend's neighbor's cat was killed by a coyote. The cat's
> name was "Muffin".
>
> Enjoy your holiday treats!
>
> Jim Royer
> Los Osos, CA
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 12:30 AM, Ed Stonick <edstonick@...
> >wrote:
>
> > Seasons Greetings!
> >
> > One of our local (Los Angeles) radio stations often focuses on offbeat
> > stories, and they mentioned a Pomeranian falling from the sky in front of
> a
> > Quad City (Iowa) driver on a recent evening.
> >
> > It seems the dog was frightened by fireworks and ran away from home. It
> > was
> > caught by a Great Horned Owl which apparently dropped it while flying.
> > Fortunately for the dog, a driver saw it fall from the sky and rescued
> it,
> > chasing away the owl when it returned in an attempt to retake its prey.
> >
> > Pomeranians only weight 4-5 pounds.
> >
> > The dog had a few scratches but was otherwise okay.
> >
> > One wonders how many cats and small dogs may be carried off by owls in
> the
> > night.
> >
> > Here is a link to an interview with the dog owner and rescuer:
> >
> >
> >
> http://gazetteonline.com/blogs/news-hawk/2009/12/14/dog-falls-from-sky-in-fr
> >
> >
> ont-of-qc-driver-pomeranian-dropped-by-great-horned-owl-after-24-30-block-fl
> > ight
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ed
> >
> > Ed Stonick
> > Pasadena, CA
> > edstonick@...
> >
> >
> > BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
> > Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
> >
>
> BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
> Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
>
>

Re: Pomeranian Snatched by Great Horned Owl / Falls from the Sky

2009-12-16T09:37:53Z

This is another great reason to keep dogs confined at home and cats inside.
I always keep my dog confined although she is an 80 pound German Shepherd
mix and I doubt owls pose much of a risk to her! Her problem is that she
likes to eat cats and although hardcore birders might applaud that
proclivity, my neighbors who let their cats loose wouldn't be too happy.
Having her near the feeder on a leash does help protect the birds I feed. I
know that cats have disappeared in my area due to Great Horned Owls, coyotes
and foxes. My friend's neighbor's cat was killed by a coyote. The cat's
name was "Muffin".

Enjoy your holiday treats!

Jim Royer
Los Osos, CA

On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 12:30 AM, Ed Stonick <edstonick@...>wrote:

> Seasons Greetings!
>
> One of our local (Los Angeles) radio stations often focuses on offbeat
> stories, and they mentioned a Pomeranian falling from the sky in front of a
> Quad City (Iowa) driver on a recent evening.
>
> It seems the dog was frightened by fireworks and ran away from home. It
> was
> caught by a Great Horned Owl which apparently dropped it while flying.
> Fortunately for the dog, a driver saw it fall from the sky and rescued it,
> chasing away the owl when it returned in an attempt to retake its prey.
>
> Pomeranians only weight 4-5 pounds.
>
> The dog had a few scratches but was otherwise okay.
>
> One wonders how many cats and small dogs may be carried off by owls in the
> night.
>
> Here is a link to an interview with the dog owner and rescuer:
>
>
> http://gazetteonline.com/blogs/news-hawk/2009/12/14/dog-falls-from-sky-in-fr
>
> ont-of-qc-driver-pomeranian-dropped-by-great-horned-owl-after-24-30-block-fl
> ight
>
> Regards,
> Ed
>
> Ed Stonick
> Pasadena, CA
> edstonick@...
>
>
> BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
> Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
>

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Pomeranian Snatched by Great Horned Owl / Falls from the Sky

2009-12-16T00:30:31Z

Seasons Greetings!

One of our local (Los Angeles) radio stations often focuses on offbeat
stories, and they mentioned a Pomeranian falling from the sky in front of a
Quad City (Iowa) driver on a recent evening.

It seems the dog was frightened by fireworks and ran away from home. It was
caught by a Great Horned Owl which apparently dropped it while flying.
Fortunately for the dog, a driver saw it fall from the sky and rescued it,
chasing away the owl when it returned in an attempt to retake its prey.

Pomeranians only weight 4-5 pounds.

The dog had a few scratches but was otherwise okay.

One wonders how many cats and small dogs may be carried off by owls in the
night.

Here is a link to an interview with the dog owner and rescuer:

http://gazetteonline.com/blogs/news-hawk/2009/12/14/dog-falls-from-sky-in-fr
ont-of-qc-driver-pomeranian-dropped-by-great-horned-owl-after-24-30-block-fl
ight

Regards,
Ed

Ed Stonick
Pasadena, CA
edstonick@...

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

New WINGS trivia question

2009-12-15T11:02:31Z

Dear All,

I've posted a new trivia question--well, really more of a riddle this
time--for you to puzzle out. The question is at
http://simpledream.createsend.com/t/ViewEmailArchive/r/AA292F97F150D026/C67FD2F38AC4859C/,
and you can leave your answers at
http://wingsbirds.com/blog .

Congratulations to Joe Morlan for winning the November prize by correctly
identifying the Wild Turkey as the first native North American breeder
transported west across the Atlantic from Europe.

All the best,
--
Rick Wright
http://birdaz.com, http://birdaz.com/blog

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

mystery birds, ten tips to keep your pet birds safe this holiday season (links)

2009-12-15T07:15:33Z

hello everyone,

i've been busy recently with relocating myself and my five parrots from the USA to Germany -- not a trivial matter, but i managed to accomplish this three weeks ago. i still managed to keep the daily mystery birds going despite all the challenges associated with that (including weeks where i was had extremely limited wireless access). the two most recent mystery birds should provide you with quite a challenge; one of these two birds might not be identifiable, but i'll let you all decide this.

yesterday's mystery bird is actually a pile of feathers that might intrigue you;

http://scienceblogs.com/grrlscientist/2009/12/todays_mystery_bird_for_you_to_435.php

today's mystery bird was photographed in france;

http://scienceblogs.com/grrlscientist/2009/12/todays_mystery_bird_for_you_to_436.php

for those of you with pets, especially those with pet birds, this list of ten things you can do to keep your pets safe during this holiday season should be helpful;

http://scienceblogs.com/grrlscientist/2009/12/ten_tips_to_keep_your_pet_bird_1.php

happy holidays,
GrrlScientist
http://scienceblogs.com/grrlscientist/
http://twitter.com/GrrlScientist
http://profile.to/grrlscientist/
American Expat living in Frankfurt, Germany

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Re: RFI Puerto Rico and Dominica

2009-12-15T03:17:39Z

My wife and I just returned from Puerto Rico, including birding for endemics in the
eastern end of the island. I can highly recommend Hilda Morales of AdvenTours
(adventourspr.com).
Dave

David Larson
Bradford, MA
redpoll(at)comcast.net
larsonweb.org/birds/
"The classification of living birds, or, for that matter, any other large group of
animals, is full of hopeless difficulties and insoluble problems." Ludlow Griscom

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 12:25:25 -0800
From: Judy Taylor <gaviapacifica@...>
Subject: RFI Puerto Rico and Dominica

Greetings,

I didn't find any recent posts on Puerto Rico in the archives. Is there any info
available on changes to the seven 'Places to Bird' that are listed in the back of
Raffaele's book, "Birds of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands?" Copyright on my
revised edition is 1989, so I rather expect some changes have occurred. Are these
still good spots for diversity?

Any suggestions for a local bird guide service? I'm considering a one-day guided
trip; otherwise, I pretty much wing-it on my own.

Also, any recommendations for a place to stay in Dominica, an off-the- beaten-path
kinda place?

Time frame I am considering is late May-early June (post crowds season)

Best,
Judy Taylor
Warm Beach, WA
USA
gaviapacifica@...

------------------------------

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Fwd: [PABIRDS] Link to Lancaster Newspaper story http://articles.lancasteronl...

2009-12-14T16:58:43Z

Forwarding article with photo of Allen's hummingbird still seen at feeder
in Lancaster county PA.

Marcia Makadon
Philadelphia, PA

____________________________________
From: pkarner@...
To: PABIRDS@...
Sent: 12/14/2009 7:16:03 P.M. Eastern Standard Time
Subj: [PABIRDS] Link to Lancaster Newspaper story
http://articles.lancasteronline.com/local/4/246255

Go here http://articles.lancasteronline.com/local/4/246255

Paul H Karner

Cavity Nesters of Northampton County

Bangor, Pa. 18013

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

New Caledonia, PNG Bird Photos

2009-12-14T16:37:15Z

I have just completed putting up my wife Nancy's photos on her website from our August trip to New Caledonia and Papua New Guinea! Go to: www.bellbird.us. Enjoy!
Charles Bell
612 Manhead Mountain Drive
Livermore, CO 80536
Tel 970-484-8791

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

New Southeast Asian species underscores importance of karst habitats

2009-12-14T14:47:07Z

A new study recognizes the Limestone Leaf Warbler (Phylloscopus
calciatilis), which is -- like the Bare-faced Bulbul that generated a
lot of attention earlier this year -- a resident of Southeast Asian
karst forest: http://djringer.com/birding/2009/12/14/new-bird-species-described-from-asia-limestone-leaf-warbler/

David Ringer
Vicksburg, Mississippi

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

RFI Puerto Rico and Dominica

2009-12-14T12:25:25Z

Greetings,

I didn't find any recent posts on Puerto Rico in the archives. Is there any info available on changes to the seven 'Places to Bird' that are listed in the back of Raffaele's book, "Birds of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands?" Copyright on my revised edition is 1989, so I rather expect some changes have occurred. Are these still good spots for diversity?

Any suggestions for a local bird guide service? I'm considering a one-day guided trip; otherwise, I pretty much wing-it on my own.

Also, any recommendations for a place to stay in Dominica, an off-the- beaten-path kinda place?

Time frame I am considering is late May-early June (post crowds season)

Best,
Judy Taylor
Warm Beach, WA
USA
gaviapacifica@...

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Re: Mumbai, India, 5-6 December

2009-12-14T08:24:47Z

Pete Myers' interesting account of his trip to Mumbai, India immediately
made me think of the very talented group of Indian bird photographers
who post their pictures on the birds-pix yahoo group. If you haven't
visited this site, it's worth looking at--not just the Indians, but
excellent bird photography from many other parts of the world.

John Walters
Bonita, CA
john-walters@...

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Mumbai, India, 5-6 December

2009-12-14T05:02:48Z

I was in Mumbai, India, for a very short trip on 4-6 December, attending an
"industrial green chemistry" workshop based at a hotel in the outskirts of
Mumbai. The meeting absorbed most of my time (they paid my way so I had to
pay attention) but whenever time permitted I went outside with binoculars
and Grimmett et al.'s "Birds of India."

Wasn't expecting much but it turned out that the hotel (Hotel Renaissance)
was at the edge of a large reservoir, Vihar Lake, that was created several
decades ago by damming one of Mumbai's major rivers. It is now a heavily
vegetated wetland with much floating vegetation and a lot of open water.
India's leading technology university is across the lake and they have
preserved a lot of forest along the lake shore.

My big breakthrough came at dinner when I was showing one of my hosts, a
technology guru, the iPhone app I've been working on for a while, BirdsEye.
He said: "You must meet Bhadresh." Ok. It turned out that Bhadresh
Padia was not only board chair of the company that was the principal sponsor of
the meeting, but more to the point, he had begun birding while a student at
the nearby university 30 years ago, and went birding there every Sunday
morning, still.

Bhadresh turned out to be one of those incredibly knowledgeable, incredibly
generous birders who love to share their knowledge with others. He took
me birding at the university for the next two mornings at dawn, early enough
to get back to the meeting before it got underway. What great good luck!

I had never been to the Indian subcontinent before, so it wasn't hard to
find new things. This had started the first afternoon when an Asian Grey
Hornbill flew across the lake.

Here's what he shared with me.

Flying foxes!

Names/order from Grimmett et al.
Spot-billed Duck
Coppersmith Barbet
White-throated Kingfisher
Green Bee-eater
Asian Koel
Greater Coucal
Alexandrine Parakeet
Rose-ringed Parakeet
Asian Palm Swift
Spotted Owlet
White-breasted Waterhen
Purple Swamphen
Common Coot
Pheasant-tailed Jacana
Bronzed-winged Jacana
Red-wattled Lapwing
Yellow-legged Gull
River Tern
Brahminy Kite
Common Buzzard
Little Grebe
Little Cormorant
Indian Cormorant
Great Egret
Cattle Egret
Indian Pond Heron
Purple Heron
Bay-backed Shrike
House Crow
Large-billed Crow
Black-hooded Oriole
Black Drongo
Common Myna
Red-rumped Swallow
Streak-throated Swallow
Red-whiskered Bulbul
Ashy Prinia
Purple-rumped Sunbird

Pete Myers
White Hall VA
www.GetBirdsEye.com

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Re: Steve Howell commentary in Nov. 2009 Birding

2009-12-13T19:19:43Z

Long post--delete if you like!

I probably had a different start from most. I received my first pair of
binoculars and first field guide, the Peterson, for Christmas in 1974. I
devoured it, cover to cover, and since it mentioned the Golden Guide, I used
my Christmas gift money to buy a copy of that, devoured it, and set out on
my first bird quest on March 2, 1975. I was 23.

During the two and a half months I was reading the field guides before I saw
a single bird in the flesh, I noticed that the birds I might find swimming
were scattered here and there in the Golden Guide (which I preferred because
it was 100 percent color--the Peterson at that point still had lots of black
and white drawings). I also noticed a pretty slate-gray bird with a snow
white tummy in the middle of my Golden Guide, but then there was another one
closer to the end. At this point, I'd never identified anything beyond
pigeons, robins, cardinals, those little birds I fed French fries to and
called McDonald's Sparrows (I thought there were two different species), and
what we always called crows that my field guides turned into grackles--I had
no concept of either a junco or a Black Phoebe, didn't know how easy it
would be to see the pink or black bills of different shapes, and was
petrified that there might be other pairs of birds spaced out in the field
uide but equally similar. So I decided that in order to count any bird, I
had to see every single field mark the guides mentioned. I loved the lines
to field marks in the Peterson guide, so I drew them into my Golden Guide
(though I could only add lines for the Eastern birds, so the Black Phoebe's
bill color went somewhat unexamined). Drawing in Peterson's lines proved to
be an extraordinarily useful exercise--it still took me forever to identify
my first birds, but whenever I added a bird I remembered reading about,
there was a joyful surge of recognition.

I saw my first American Coot (#110 on my list) in November when my
mother-in-law and I took a little trip to the Morton Arboretum outside
Chicago. Oh, my gosh I was thrilled--I called them "cute coots with their
white snoots," and that tiny triangle of white on their behind was as
adorable on the coots in the lake as it had been on those on the page. I was
elated. Within a few minutes, we came upon a couple of what I thought of as
"real birders"--two men wearing Leitz binoculars and khaki slacks and vests
(I was a blue-collar girl who had never seen any men wearing khaki pants in
my life except "real birders.") They walked up to us, said they'd seen Red
Crossbills in one spot and several Brown Creepers in another and asked if we
had seen anything good. Somehow during that first year I'd already absorbed
the lesson that some birds were "good" and others weren't, and based on
something in the field guide description mentioning how common they were, I
instantly realized that the coots weren't "good birds," and was about to say
nothing in particular, but my mother-in-law blurted out, "We saw some coots
on the lake. Laura added them to her lifelist!" The look of disdain on their
faces was mortifying. They turned around and walked away without a word.

It didn't take me long to realize that I really didn't give a hoot what
other birds considered "good birds." I think it was when I was birding with
a few serious birders the following spring. I'd noticed that when warblers
were about, they seemed almost always to be hanging out with chickadees, so
I made it a special point to watch and listen for chickadees. But when I'd
get excited to hear chickadees, some of the other birders sort of chided me
about looking for better birds than that. I loved seeing warblers--the
rainbow of colors, imagining their amazing journeys, listening to their
splendid songs--but somehow I was so taken with the intelligent looks on
chickadees, and how I could see one every single day I went out, and it
seemed rather rude to take advantage of their associating with warblers
while taking the chickadees themselves for granted. So I decided the heck
with it, and I stopped censoring myself.

Anyway, this whole stream of consciousness started because I wanted to say
that I would most certainly have looked in the duck section for my first
coots had I not so carefully been studying my field guide, both before I
ever went out and then during almost every day that year. Kenn's
organization is one of the reasons I so strongly recommend his book for
beginners today, though I, too, am still inordinately fond of my Golden
Guide. I went through three copies (all the same printing) during my first
three years of birding--that's how heavily used they were. When the pages
fell out of my first one, I cut them up to make flashcards for my students.
Kenn's organization is just one strength--another is that kids today seem
more connected to the kind of photographs used in Kenn's guide than to the
drawings I was so taken with by Singer and Peterson. Just as my generation
of birders got impatient with the black-and-white that was so useful for
earlier generations, I think many kids prefer photos, and Kenn's guide is
the ONLY one that pulls the photos out of the background and sets them up on
the page the way the illustrated guides did, so you can have similar birds
on the same page providing wonderfully useful comparisons.

Anyway, it sure makes sense to me to making at least some field guides as
accessible and easy for rank beginners to use. Being from an uneducated
background, I don't think electronic apps are going to be very helpful for a
large segment of the American population. I know that they're "only" $20 or
so, but that's on top of the cost of the iPhone or iPod Touch, and someone
collecting unemployment or working at minimum wage won't necessarily even
know about apps, much less be running out to buy them. So I sure hope we
have paper field guides for many generations to come.

Best, Laura

On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Robert Kyse <RobertKyse@...>wrote:

> As discordant as an electronic field guide seems to me, I would expand on
> Brandon's vision to expect it to be intelligent and self aware. It will be
> able to automatically obtain date, location (GPS) and local list data
> (wireless internet) and apply probabilities to each species.
>
> To tell the truth I don't actually use a field guide in the field,
> although,
> I do keep a book in my car. And, I go birding to disconnect not to plug in.
> But an idea like contributing my experience of a location to a data base,
> Wikipedia style, and accessing it anywhere is attractive.
>
> Perhaps the next piece of equipment I will need is a portable chair. With
> all this information available, I'll want to sit down and read about the
> place I find myself and maybe take a snooze.
>
> Robert Kyse
>
> RR, NM
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ted Floyd" <tedfloyd57@...>
> To: <BIRDCHAT@...>
> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 6:56 AM
> Subject: [BIRDCHAT] Steve Howell commentary in Nov. 2009 Birding
>
>
> Hello, BirdChatters.
>
> In the current (Nov. 2009) issue of Birding, Steve Howell and coauthors
> have
> a commentary on how field guides keep shuffling checklist sequence. (They
> also propose a solution.) This problem of checklist shuffling has been
> around forever, it seems. Well, see for yourself. Free download (0.5
> megabytes) at: http://aba.org/birding/v41n6p44.pdf
>
> Feedback, anyone?
>
> -------------------------------
>
> Ted Floyd
> Editor, Birding
>
> Check out Birding magazine on Twitter: http://twitter.com/BirdingMagazine
>
> -------------------------------
> _________________________________________________________________
> Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222985/direct/01/
> BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
> Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
>
> BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
> Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
>
>

Fwd: Re: WIND MILLS NEAR POINT PELEE. ANOTHER INSANE ATTEMPT?

2009-12-13T18:04:04Z

>
>
>
>>Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2009 20:53:54 -0500
>>To: AZU.
>>From: Alf Rider <arider@...>
>>Subject: Fwd: Re: WIND MILLS NEAR POINT PELEE. ANOTHER INSANE ATTEMPT?
>>
>>>Hello Chatters.
>>
>>This is from a friend who lives just outside of the Point Pelee
>>National Park.
>>
>>(I know that the National Park and others successfully argued
>>against the previous attempt to place a field of windmills in the
>>Lake just outside the National Park.)
>>
>>>Hi Alf,
>>>They are still planning three banks of wind mills in Lake Erie
>>>from Leamington to Kingsville. Also it looks as if there will be
>>>wind mills north of us somewhere along highway 77.
>>Alf Rider.
>>Forest. Ontario.
>>Canada.
>

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

Re: Steve Howell commentary in Nov. 2009 Birding

2009-12-13T13:25:20Z

Make it 4- when I first started birding many years ago- I couldn't find the coot either.

Tom Thomas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kenn Kaufman" <kenn.kaufman@...>
To: BIRDCHAT@...
Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2009 12:43:46 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [BIRDCHAT] Steve Howell commentary in Nov. 2009 Birding

This is long; delete if you're not interested in the sequence used in field
guides.

Ted Floyd wrote:

"Hello, BirdChatters.

In the current (Nov. 2009) issue of Birding, Steve Howell and coauthors have
a commentary on how field guides keep shuffling checklist sequence. (They
also propose a solution.) This problem of checklist shuffling has been
around forever, it seems. Well, see for yourself. Free download (0.5
megabytes) at: http://aba.org/birding/v41n6p44.pdf

Feedback, anyone?"

This subject is of considerable interest to me because I spent a lot of time
thinking about it in the late 1990s when I was working on my field guide
(Kaufman Field Guide to Birds of North America, Houghton Mifflin Co., 2000).
I had decided to depart from AOU Checklist order because I felt that the
primary purpose of a field guide was to help people identify birds -- not to
teach them that moment's version of classification (which is constantly
changing anyway). I also had given a lot of thought to the intended
audience. Many birders take what seems a narrow view, that all field guides
should be written for THEM, with no allowance for varying levels of
expertise. In fact, it's impossible for any field guide to be ideal for all
levels of experience.

Looking at what's out there now, some guides seem clearly designed for the
person who already basically knows what the bird is. National Geographic and
Sibley are examples. Those are outstanding books, so I'm not criticising at
all; but the ideal user for either of those guides is the person who reaches
for the book thinking, "Hmm, is that a Nelson's (Sharp-tailed) Sparrow?"
rather than, "Gee, what's that bird?" Then there are guides designed for the
person who does NOT know what the bird is. My own guide, the earlier
Petersons (before the recent one done by committee), and I believe Ned
Brinkley's were aimed at that audience. With those guides, it's a lot easier
to make the case for using an independent, more convenient or user-friendly
sequence, one that departs from AOU Check-list order.

When Steve Howell and company were working on the commentary that was
published in the recent issue of Birding, I had some correspondence with
them, and I'll copy one of my messages below. The main point on which we
differed was their opinion that families of birds should always be kept
together. I disagreed, as noted below:

(From Kenn Kaufman message to Steve Howell et al., June 2009) -- For
starters, I think you need to revisit the ironclad rule of keeping families
together. What's a family? In the first field guides I owned as a kid,
Evening Grosbeak and Rose-breasted Grosbeak were in the same family. Later
there was a period when these birds, along with all the wood-warblers,
icterids, finches, sparrows, and tanagers, were put into a greatly expanded
Emberizidae that included about one-sixth of all North American birds. That
family has been split up since, in new ways, and some of the pieces are
still being moved around. In the time that I've been birding, Bushtit and
Verdin have been taken out of the titmouse family, euphonias have been taken
out of the tanager family and put in with the finches, becards have been
moved back and forth between the flycatchers and the cotingas, kinglets have
been classified in three different families (Sylviidae, Muscicapidae, and
Regulidae), Wrentit has been classified in three different families
(Chamaeidae, Muscicapidae, and Timaliidae), Bananaquit has been kicked all
over the place, and we've been told that "our" tanagers are probably not
tanagers at all. What's a family? Since your sequence breaks up orders
repeatedly, why should families be sacrosanct?

I agree that for field guide purposes, it makes sense to keep most of the
families (as currently defined) together unless there's a good reason to
split them up. But in at least one case, there IS a good reason. At the
moment I wouldn't use your sequence because it fails the coot test.

How often do you actually stumble across some stranger in the field having
trouble with their field guide? (Actually for me it's every day in May on
the Magee Marsh boardwalk, but, in normal situations ...) And yet three
different times, in three places, I've seen exactly the same scenario
playing out. Eager beginners (twice it was younger couples, once an older
woman) are learning their birds, and they've decided to take the easy step
of going to a wetland and identifying some ducks. And they're bursting with
frustration because they've gone back and forth through all the ducks in the
book, and they just can't figure out this common charcoal-and-black duck
with the white beak. Mind you, this is three times that I've actually seen
this in the process of happening. Several times I've had similar scenarios
described to me in conversation, and at least twice I've seen anguished
posts on state listserves from people who can't figure out that common duck.

So if you want a field guide to be useful for people who actually need a
field guide, why on earth would you put the coot so far away from the
waterfowl? [ note: the sequence proposed by Howell et al. would put the
ducks in group 1 and the coot in group 28. ]

I would urge you to go back and look at the sequence I used in my guide. It
starts with ducks (and this was before the AOU moved the Anatidae to the
front of the line), goes through ducks, geese, swans, two pages of exotic
waterfowl, then you turn the page and the next bird is American Coot. So:
Anatidae; then coot, moorhen, gallinule; then grebes; alcids; loons;
(there's no reason to have loons adjacent to grebes, other than history);
cormorants; Anhinga; and then on into the group that I called Aerial
Waterbirds. The rails come much later in the book, in the same section with
herons and other wading birds. The coot & co. are cross-referenced to the
rails, but there's no reason, in a field guide, for them to be grouped
together.

That's the main argument that I have with your sequence, but I also agree
with Ned Brinkley that it's important to allow for juxtaposing Sandhill
Crane and Great Blue Heron. I had a page of "huge wading birds" that covered
Great Blue Heron, Sandhill Crane, Whooping Crane, and Wood Stork, with the
rest of the herons starting on the following spread. We all know that cranes
don't really look like herons, but the public doesn't know that.

... That's the end of the text quoted from my message to Howell et al. I
have to admit that I'm pretty happy with the sequence I used in my field
guide, and will continue to use it in future editions unless I hear of some
reason to change it. At the same time, I can understand why guides aimed at
expert birders (like Natl Geo and Sibley) would follow AOU sequence, and I'm
following the AOU myself in my update to my old Field Guide to Advanced
Birding, because advanced birders DO tend to keep up with all the shifts and
changes in the official checklists.

Kenn Kaufman
Oak Harbor, Ohio

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html

BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html