[NatureNS] Acadian Flycatcher on Brier Island

DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
References: <20180521145731.5795927.11046.153415@dal.ca> <A271860C-65A5-4501-9EEF-2FBF236367DB@gmail.com>
From: Richard Stern <sternrichard@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 08:28:19 -0300
To: NatureNS <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>
Precedence: bulk
Return-Path: <naturens-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>
Original-Recipient: rfc822;"| (cd /csuite/info/Environment/FNSN/MList; /csuite/lib/arch2html)"

next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects

&gt; about 10am. I glimpsed it from the rear fir
--000000000000592c5a056cddd73d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The old-fashioned method of ID-ing rare birds, or birds of uncertain ID,
was to "collect" (shoot) them and then study them feather by feather. The
medium-fashioned way was to look carefully, try and draw a diagram in the
field notebook you always had with you, and describe the bird feather tract
by feather tract. The new-fashioned way is to take a photo, and assume that
records committees, e-bird etc. trust your honesty re: where and when etc.
The problem with just taking a photo and then asking What is this?, as many
beginners (especially Facebook users), seem to do a lot, is that it does
not ingrain into consciousness any sense of the bird's biology, behaviour
or relationships etc. The FB group on hawk ID has the right idea - when
someone posts a picture asking for the ID, any answer has to include the
reasoning behind it, not just the name of the bird. I usually try to do
that when I answer queries on line.

The other issue is that while a good photo can be diagnostic, a single
photo only shows one aspect of the bird, and in a particular light - which
can often be misleading - one reason why I think field guides with
idealised drawings, e.g. Sibley, are better than photographic field guides.
And ..... instead of simply posting a picture and asking What is it, I
think everyone interested in bird ID should purchase a good field guide and
learn how to use it properly, as well as read the ins and outs of the ID
process, and at least come to a tentative conclusion before asking the
question. But perhaps I'm preaching to the choir on this forum.

Richard

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 7:48 AM, Paul Murray <pwmurray.murray911@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi All,
> Further to the discussion of pros and cons of bird ID via photographic
> means and the theme that direct observation, experience and avian knowled=
ge
> are the preferred methods for bird ID and educational reasons:  I would
> like to support the bird/nature watchers amongst us who rely on our camer=
as
> to ID what we see in nature.
>
> Some of us who rely heavily on our cameras for bird (and wildlife in
> general) ID due to personal infirmities or handicaps probably would not b=
e
> bird watchers or observers of nature were it not for the benefit of the
> camera and associated long lenses.  I envy those with good colour vision,
> eyesight and hearing who can easily pick out a red bird from green foliag=
e
> or see directly all the various colour differences of a bird's plumage
> within a species or, who are able to hear the high frequency song a bird
> makes when no direct sighting is possible. For those of us who are colour
> blind, have poor eyesight and/or defective hearing, the enjoyment of
> looking for and identifying birds is impossible without a camera.  For us=
,
> the camera and a long lens is mandatory if we want to enjoy the "sport" a=
nd
> ID of a bird species after the fact via our photographs is usually the on=
ly
> way we can identify what we think we observed - it might not have been a
> bird but a log that looked like a heron from a distance. LOL
>
> So, when you see us in the field with our cameras and long lenses, please
> be mindful that the use of such equipment may be the only way that person
> can take part in the hobby that you love.
>
> Paul Murray
> Dartmouth
>
> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 8:14 PM, Fritz McEvoy <fritzmcevoy@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>     I've been bird watching around my home since the late 90's and have
>> a good knowledge of how to ID birds, but have almost never sent in a rar=
e
>> bird submission without an accompanying photo.
>>      I bought  camcorder many years ago and think it can be just as good
>> a tool as binoculars for identifying birds as well other species.
>> A knowledge  of field marks, flight times, range and habitat is
>> important but a good quality photo or video (particularly with audio) is
>> better for ID purposes.
>>      There are a few tricks that make using a camera a better tool
>> for ID'ing birds none more important than positioning yourself so that t=
he
>> sun is behind you. I find a HD camcorder with a high power optical zoom =
and
>> image stabilization plus an ability to view and edit the video frame by
>> frame is best.
>>      On a related note a camera has replaced collecting for many, like
>> me, who watch and report on Lepidoptera. In this case I've found
>> - being the contrarian that I am - collecting to be a much better means =
of
>> identification for moths and butterflies.
>>        There is nothing wrong with being old school as a bird watcher bu=
t
>> I think we have to accept that most people aren't interested in learning
>> the finer points of bird identification; they just want to know what the=
y
>> saw. That's why sites like iNaturalist have become so popular. All the b=
est.
>>               Fritz McEvoy
>>                 Sunrise valley, CB
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca <naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca> on
>> behalf of Laviolette, Lance <lance.laviolette@lmco.com>
>> *Sent:* May 22, 2018 2:35 PM
>> *To:* naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
>>
>> *Subject:* RE: [NatureNS] Acadian Flycatcher on Brier Island
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>> Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your point of view),
>> photographic equipment has become so advanced and taking photographs so
>> inexpensive that =E2=80=98shoot first, identify after=E2=80=99 is a tech=
nique that is
>> gaining favor. I know a number of birders who have hung up their binocul=
ars
>> and now carry only a camera with long lens. Their gear allows them to sh=
oot
>> many photos a second so they point, shoot and look through the photos on
>> their camera=E2=80=99s view screen to identify what they photographed.
>>
>>
>>
>> The obvious plus is that they always have photographic evidence of a
>> sighting. The negative is that I=E2=80=99m seeing more people starting o=
ut their
>> birding =E2=80=98career=E2=80=99 by taking photographs without learning =
the basics of bird
>> identification. They repeatedly submit photographs of the same common bi=
rd
>> to Facebook pages or web sites asking others to identify it for them.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>
>>
>> Lance
>>
>>
>>
>> Lance Laviolett