 |
|
|
|
|
BIRDCHAT for Saturday, April 5, 2008
[ Prev Day
| Next Day
| Calendar Month
| BIRDCHAT Info
]
|
|
To use email addresses replace '(AT)' with '@'.
This is done to confuse the spam 'bots.
|
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Field Guides: Redux
From: Ted Floyd <tedfloyd57(AT)hotmail.com>
Date: 5 Apr 2008 1:12am
Hello, Birders.
I have greatly enjoyed, and learned from, this thread that Jim Turner started.
Here are some of my own impressions and experiences.
THE SIBLEY GUIDE TO BIRDS. In my opinion, the definitive North American field
guide. The gold standard. The ne plus ultra of North American field guides. The
illustrations are outrageously accurate. Birds in the field look exactly like
the birds in The Sibley Guide. If there is a debate about the ID of some tricky
bird, this is the guide that settles it. That's all fantastic, but several
objections have been raised in this thread, including the following:
-- It's too big! I'm not sympathetic with this argument. I view "portability"
more as a fad than as a true virtue. For ages, we've been lugging around big ole
telescopes. Of late, we've added digital cameras to our arsenal. And when we go
to Peru or China, we carry great big field guides with us. Besides, there are,
in fact, "portable" versions of The Sibley Guide (East and West). If "Big
Sibley" is too much, then go for the regional Sibleys.
-- It has too much information!--especially with regard to subspecies. Yes,
there's a lot of information in there, but I find it to be very well organized.
Scott Weidensaul's new book on the history of birding, Of a Feather, discusses
in a fair bit of detail the care that went into planning the organization for
The Sibley Guide. There's a lot of misunderstanding, in my opinion, about The
Sibley Guide's approach to subspecies. The Sibley Guide does *not* encourage the
user to slap trinomials onto every bird; rather, it helps the user to attempt
to make sense of field-discernible patterns of natural variation--which may or
may not correspond to formal subspecific boundaries. By the way, the author
addressed the question of practical applications of the subspecies concept in a
recent article in Birding (D. Sibley, 2004, "In defense of listing, and
subspecies, but not listing subspecies," Birding, February 2004, pp. 80-84).
-- It's not for beginners! I can't address this one directly, as I had been
birding for close to 20 years when The Sibley Guide was published. But I can get
at it from a different angle. When I am out in the field with beginners, I use
The Sibley Guide. We look at the real bird in the field, then we look at the
illustration in Sibley, and, voila!, the bird has been identified.
-- Vocalizations? Opinions on this one seem to differ. I think the descriptions
tend to be spot-on. I, personally, favor the detail and, of course, the
accuracy. But I also accept that there are multiple methods for learning bird
vocalizations. The approach in the Sibley Guide, which emphasizes
English-language transliterations, works well for some folks. But not for
others. By the way, there's a thoughtful and recent treatise on this matter by
N. Pieplow ("Describing bird sounds in words," Birding, July/August 2007, pp.
48-54). The article is available online,
http://www.aba.org/birding/v39n4p48.pdf.
NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC FIELD GUIDE TO THE BIRDS OF NORTH AMERICA. Authoritative and
accurate. The editors, Jon Dunn and Jonathan Alderfer, are deeply committed to
excellence. In evaluating this guide, it is essential to realize that, more than
any other major North American field guide, "Nat Geo" is a collaborative work,
or, if you prefer, a work by committee. (Less so, though, I get the impression,
in recent editions than earlier.) It has gone through quite a number of editions
and printings (with more on the way), and I don't have a problem with that.
Sure, there may be a marketing angle to it, but it is also the case, if you ask
me, that each edition or printing is better than the preceding one. Again, Dunn
and Alderfer are perfectionists. Speaking of perfection, the 5th edition (2006)
is the first North American field guide to depict every species recorded on the
contintent; cool! The following two aspects of the guide are problematic, in my
opinion:
-- Art by committee. (First off, look up the meaning of the word 'problematic';
it's one of those words like 'enormity' that doesn't mean what you think it
means!) On the one hand, art by committee precludes, to some extent, a unified
artistic vision, as in the Sibley and Peterson guides. On the other hand, so
what? I think it's great to have multiple perspectives. I am absolutely,
positively, 100% certain that folks look at birds in different ways. To the
extent that "Nat Geo" reflects diverse methods of looking at birds, I'm all for
it. Besides, there is, for sure, a unified editorial vision for the guide; it's
not as though the editors just went out and found a bunch of nice-looking
plates, cobbled them together, and called it a field guide. Quite the opposite,
the art is very much conceived in integrative and collaborative terms.
-- Subspecies. Hey, I'm all in favor of learning about and appreciating natural
variation in birds. Far too much so, my friends tell me. That said, I
respectfully disagree with the approach of this guide to naming subspecies. Go
to p. 120 of the 5th edition, for example. One of the White-tailed Kites is give
the trinomial majusculus. That's it. There is no other information. No other
context. What's the user to make of the information? Is majusculus
differentiable from other subspecies? Are there multiple subspecies in North
America? Etc. On the same plate, Swallow-tailed Kite and Mississippi Kite lack
any trinomial data. Might the user reasonably infer that there are multiple
North American subspecies of White-tailed Kite, but that Swallow-tailed and
Mississippi Kites are monotypic? That inference would be substantially
erroneous. (Fair disclosure: My assessment of the treatment of subspecies in
"Nat Geo" is somewhat outside the mainstream. I hasten to point out that the
treatment in this guide of subspecies is considered by many experts to be
exemplary.)
NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC COMPLETE BIRDS OF NORTH AMERICA. Briefly, I'll just note
that this is, essentially, a greatly expanded version of the National Geographic
field guide. Now it *really* is a desk reference, and this is not just a
"portability" issue. That's not a problem at all, just so long as you realize
that Complete Birds is something that you consult once you get back home. Or,
better, before you head out into the field.
KAUFMAN (FOCUS) FIELD GUIDE TO BIRDS OF NORTH AMERICA. Beginners love it, and
some experts misunderstand it. My impression is that this is the most popular
guide for beginners. It's the one that I see sticking out of back pockets; it's
the one that gets passed around at the hawkwatch; it's the one that folks ask me
questions from. It has two great strengths that are perhaps not as widely
appreciated as they should be, and it is problematic (again, in the
etymologically correct sense of the word) in a particular way. Without further
ado:
-- The text. It's terrific! Page after page, bird after bird, the brief written
descriptions wonderfully capture the essence of the bird in the field. Check
out, say, p. 286, the "Miscellaneous Micro-Birds," as Kaufman calls them. The
written descriptions of Ruby-crowned Kinglet, Golden-crowned Kinglet, Bushtit,
and Verdin are spot-on. They are surely of immense help to beginners, although,
as with The Sibley Guide, I can't directly evaluate that claim, as I had been
birding for close to 20 years when The Kaufman Guide came out. But the written
descriptions are also well worth a close look from experts; there is ample
sophistication and subtlety in there.
-- The maps. When this guide first came out, the maps were incontestably the
best, both in terms of graphic design and accuracy. Bird after bird after bird,
I found that the maps in Kaufman outperformed the maps in other field guides.
Now, range maps have, on the whole, gotten much more accurate in this first
decade of the 21st century, and it's probably no longer the case that the maps
in Kaufman are substantially more accurate than those in other field guides. But
the graphic design of the maps--especially the use of light and dark shading to
indicate regional differences in abundance--remains the best.
-- Digitally enhanced photos. Y'know, this one is a bit like steroids and
baseball players. Jose Canseco's probably right: Sooner or later, everybody's
going to be doing it, and nobody's going to object. Canseco is going to turn out
to be a prophet. And I suspect we'll one day look back at the digitally
enhanced photos in Kaufman, and say they were an idea whose time hadn't yet
come. You can argue that the execution in Kaufman wasn't perfect (although I'm
not sure I'd make that argument; where, exactly, is the problem?), but I predict
that we'll some day soon acknowledge that what Kaufman did was a breakthrough,
was visionary, and, eventually, became normative and uncontroversial. Let's
revisit the matter in 2018...
THE GOLDEN GUIDE TO FIELD IDENTIFICATION OF BIRDS OF NORTH AMERICA. Sad to say,
there's a fair bit of cultural amnesia out there about this one. It was the
first important guide to treat all of North America; it was the first to employ
the scheme of putting all the information on one page; it was substantially more
collaborative than its predecessors; it was revolutionary in its approach to
the treatment of vocalizations; etc. I, personally, don't refer to this one too
often, and I don't see it in the back pockets of a lot of beginners. But we all
owe a debt of gratitude to The Golden Guide. Anyone with an interest in pedagogy
vis-a-vis the field guide genre should pick up a copy. It's been really
beneficial and influential, even though many of us have forgotten that. By the
way, someone commented earlier in this thread that this guide was poorly
constructed, in a physical sense, and I agree. I've owned several copies, and
they just don't survive hard-core use in the field. I'd rather have a big book
that's well-put-together (see comments on Sibley, above) than a "portable" guide
that can't survive an encounter or ten with a mudflat.
A FIELD GUIDE TO THE BIRDS. Peterson's guide is, of course, the most important
bird book of all time. I would go further, and say that it is one of the most
important works in all of natural history. Felicitously, it is still in use. It
deserves to be. It is that good. Many folks have pointed out its deficiencies,
but that's like faulting Isaac Newton for not writing about general relativity
in the Principia, or dissing Charles Darwin for ignoring DNA in Origin. If
you're a good physicist or a good biologist, you still marvel at every umpteenth
encounter with the Principia or with Origin. Same thing with A Field Guide to
the Birds. If you're a good birder, you own a copy of, and frequently refer to,
A Field Guide to the Birds. You still marvel at its singular genius. It still
comes across, after all these years, as revolutionary. I do have two caveats
about this guide, though, as follow:
-- East vs. West. I agree that the Eastern guide is more successful than the
Western guide. "The Peterson System" is not as well-suited to the riot of
geographic variation in western North America as it is to the comparatively
simple avifauna of the East.
-- The 3rd edition (1947). That was Peterson's masterpiece. Hey, we shouldn't
take it as axiomatic that subsequent editions are necessarily improvements.
Subsequent editions of Darwin's Origin were watered down and relatively
obfuscatory, relative to the first edition of 1859; and Newton spent many years
after the Principia in largely futile investigations into optics and alchemy. I
view the 1947 edition of A Field Guide to the Birds as the zenith of "The
Peterson System." The much-anticipated and much-ballyhooed 4th edition (1980)
was something of a retreat from the razor-sharp pedagogy and crystal-clarity of
purpose of the 1947 edition. Well, Darwin had the same problem...
ALL THE BIRDS OF NORTH AMERICA. This one has sort of fallen by the wayside,
hasn't it? It was well-marketed, from what I gather, and a lot of us picked up a
copy. My personal copy disappeared quite some time ago, and I don't remember a
great deal about the guide. I do recall that the art was interesting, and
entertaining, and even rather clever. (I'm a little hazy on this particular
memory, but I remember that one of the plates--of ducks, as I recall--conveyed
subliminal environmental messages in the form of grafitti on a bridge in the
background.) Which gets at a broader point: All The Birds attempted to integrate
behavioral and ecological information to an extent that has not been since
emulated in the field guide genre. There's still work to be done on that point!
ADVANCED BIRDING. Hard to believe it's almost 20 years old. Anyhow, this is Kenn
Kaufman's offering in the Peterson series. The book was an exhortation to so
many of us in the birding community to push the frontiers of bird
identification, and I think the book was important and influential in that
regard. A fair bit of the content is now, to some extent, "common knowledge,"
but it is also "received wisdom"--received from Advanced Birding, and we
oughtn't lose sight of that contribution. I have long felt, by the way, that the
black-and-white drawings in Advanced Birding were considerably greater than
they have been given credit for. My impression is that folks really dug into the
detailed and analytical text, while glossing over the fine illustrations.
Believe it or not, Advanced Birding is a guide that I often show to beginners.
Especially the illustrations.
IDENTIFICATION GUIDE TO NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS, PART I ("THE PYLE GUIDE"). Hey,
has nobody mentioned this one? What's up with that? Granted, the Pyle Guide is
not for the faint of heart. It's not a beginner's guide. It requires some amount
of discipline to use. But here comes a comment that I'm going to put in all
caps: THE PYLE GUIDE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT REFERENCE FOR ADVANCED BIRDERS. If
you want to master geographic variation, if you want to master molt, if you want
to master aging and sexing, if you truly want to be an expert, you cannot be
without this guide. I consult this guide almost daily. I learn something new
every time I open up The Pyle Guide. And check this out: Part II will be coming
out in 2008. That will be a major, major event. Peterson's field guide is
Newton's Principia; The Pyle Guide is Einstein's Theory of General Relativity.
NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION FIELD GUIDE TO BIRDS OF NORTH AMERICA (THE BRINKLEY
GUIDE). This one is quite new (2007), and it's a photographic guide. Has anyone
weighed in on this one? I'd be especially interested to hear what beginners
make of it. Brinkely is a gifted educator, and I suspect a lot of beginners have
profited substantially from time afield with this guide. Something about this
guide that is particularly appealing to me is that it is simultaneously
sophisticated and user-friendly. A beginner can put it to good use, without
feeling spoken down to. I have a feeling this guide is doing quite well with
smart beginners.
BIRDS OF EUROPE (THE COLLINS GUIDE). The word on the street is that this is the
greatest field guide of all time. (Jon Dunn will have something to say about the
matter, in the upcoming July/August 2008 issue of Birding.) See next entry.
BIRDS OF EUROPE (THE JONSSON GUIDE). This is the one, though, that I use in
Europe. It works! You see a bird in the field, you match it to the guide, and
you have your bird. Just like The Sibley Guide, and it's even "portable," for
what that's worth. Mind you, I don't have a great deal of experience with
birding in Europe, and I suspect I'd "upgrade" to The Collins Guide with
additional European experience.
NGS HANDHELD, BNA ONLINE, WHATBIRD, EBIRD, WIKIPEDIA, etc. Like it or not, such
offerings are, I am quite confident, the wave of the future. I'm all for it. It
wouldn't surprise me if today's field guides are one day thought of in the same
manner that we now think of shotguns, opera glasses, and dichotomous keys. And
that day may come sooner than we realize. A little birdie tells me that a major
new field guide is just about to hit the shelves, and that it has a significant
DVD component...
Ted Floyd
tedfloyd57(AT)hotmail.com
Lafayette, Boulder County, Colorado
_________________________________________________________________
Pack up or back up–use SkyDrive to transfer files or keep extra copies. Learn
how.
hthttp://www.windowslive.com/skydrive/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_skydrive_packup_042008
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: help with ID please
From: "Carol Anderson" <mayancarol(AT)gmail.com>
Date: 5 Apr 2008 3:10am
My webmaster graciously posted these photos for me. Any help will be greatly
appreciated.
http://www.monterey-bay.net/birds/guatemala/mystery.htm
These shots were taken yesterday in Guatemala.
Thank you in advance.
--
Carol C. Anderson
San Pedro La Laguna
Guatemala
mail to:
mayancarol(AT)gmail.com
www.monterey-bay.net/birds
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Field Guides: Redux
From: John Trapp <birdsetcetera(AT)yahoo.com>
Date: 5 Apr 2008 5:02am
In his expansive review of field guides, Ted Floyd
asked if anyone has "weighed in on" the NATIONAL
WILDLIFE FEDERATION FIELD GUIDE TO BIRDS OF NORTH
AMERICA, by Edward S. Brinkley. I have, and you can
find my brief review at this link:
http://birdstuff.blogspot.com/2008/01/other-field-guide-to-birds.html
I'd also like to dispel the notion that this guide
will be useful only to "smart beginners." I've been
using the Brinkley guide reguarly now for the last
months and have found it to be an extremely
serviceable reference, and I've been birding for 50+
years and have used all of the various North American
guides mentioned by Ted.
John L. Trapp
Buchanan Township, Michigan
http://birdstuff.blogspot.com
____________________________________________________________________________________
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total
Access, No Cost.
http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Yes/BNA Online...&...: Field Guides
From: DANIEL EDELSTEIN <edelstein(AT)earthlink.net>
Date: 5 Apr 2008 6:14am
Hello Birders:
Ted Floyd's fine critique is spot-on........and, indeed, my four cents follow:
- Daily, I use BNA ONLINE
http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna
.....both for my job (when I need a citation/reference and fundamental
information as well as esoterica that is not found in the major field guides)
and my own other fun with birding.
To me, the annual $40 fee is chickenfeed for what you get: ~720
exhaustive/comprehensive accounts of N.A. bird spp., plus citations. Priceless.
The BNA ONLINE editors continue to add features to bird species accounts and to
other areas that are accessed through the Home Page.
Look at the Home Page, if you have not done so recently. Even the programming
features are more eyeball- and user-friendly.
So-called "value-added" features appear regularly at BNA ONLINE.
If selling insurance was my suspenders job as a 9 to 5 grind, then I'd want to
sell BNA ONLINE as the best life insurance policy to buy happiness.
NOTE to squatters of BNA ONLINE who merely wish to visit without paying:
There's plenty of free information to glean. Let your commensal information
feeding begin.
- THE SIBLEY GUIDE TO BIRDS is where I turn most often when I need a field
guide.
The girth bothers some folks, but not me.
I use this guide with groups in the field. Folks seem to like using it in the
field if it's present (and the guide's poundage/girth not an issue because my
sidesaddle bag provides immediate access rather than schlepping off and on a
daypack).
In the field with groups, this guide works for most species in terms of showing
the life cycle of a bird as it progresses from juvenile/immature through
definitive adult......and, often, there's even a basic vs. alternate plumage
image.
There's a copy in the car and on the windowsill.........and, in addition, the
smaller "Western" abridged/adapted version is in the garage.
If I had an outhouse, there would be one there, too.
I'm glad to give more money to Mr. Sibley when his next edition arrives, as I
also love his THE SIBLEY GUIDE TO BIRD LIFE AND BEHAVIOR............& SIBLEY'S
BIRDING BASICS -- both of which I also use regularly and, sometimes, as required
reading with my adult students.
- Other field guides I use REGULARLY and remain close at hand -- and that I turn
to with a pinkie underneath the photos/images when I'm in the field teaching
with groups:
- GULLS (Dunn & Howell) (somewhat new, and I HIGHLY recommend it.)
- GULLS of Europe, Asia, and North America (Klaus Malling Olsen,Hans Larsson)
(on the market longer; a fine resource before the new GULLS guide arrived.....)
- WARBLERS (Dunn & Garrett) (small enough to carry in the field, if a person
wished)
- A Guide to the Identification and Natural History of the SPARROWs of the
United States and Canada (James D. Rising)
When I go to North Dakota or n. WI in June or July, I would not leave home
without it (this guide). But it's also invaluable in n. CA where plenty of
sparrow spp. esoterica may appear and often do on the landscape.
- I have NOT even got into the raptor guides......plenty in the car trunk;
another day another time for that expose. Maybe a new thread in the future for
chatters (?)
*
Good birding everyone.......Happy Spring, Daniel
Daniel Edelstein
Novato, CA (Bay Area)
&
Ellison Bay, WI
http://www.warblerwatch.com
http://warblerwatch.blogspot.com (my blog devoted to wood-warblers)
12 Kingfisher Court
Novato, CA 94949-6628 USA
415-382-1827 (voice & DSL fax)
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Field Guides
From: Jim Turner <havivoca(AT)yahoo.com>
Date: 5 Apr 2008 7:11am
Reading all the excellenet replies, it seems that there are still two
contentious issues. 1) Field Guides vs. Desk Refernces, and 2) Beginners vs.
Advanced.
For any single volume to meet all combinations of those needs would seem an
unrealistic expectations, if not flat-out oxymoronic. So, then, should not we
have at least three respected 'bibles' on birding, each of them addresssing one
combination of the above, and abandon the idea that a single volume can be the
be-all-end-all?
As a footnote, I would add that none of us ever stops being a beginner. If
you have forgotten what it is like to be a beginner, get off the plane in Cancun
with Peterson or Howell or both,(or even better, in Singapore with King) and
you wll quickly remember how miraculous the Golden Guide was.
=================
Jim Turner
Victoria, Texas
havivoca(AT)yahoo.com
---------------------------------
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total
Access, No Cost.
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Birders in the world
From: "Bird Uganda Safaris" <director(AT)birduganda.com>
Date: 5 Apr 2008 7:31am
Hello Dick,
I remember meeting you in Bangor Maine in 2006 at the ABA convention. Thanks
for the info about World Birders. Its true at the moment it is still
difficult to asertain the correct figures of worlder birders. There are
millions who love birds, millions who have the passion for birding, and
millions who travel all over the world to find birds. May be at one point a
comprehensive study will be carried out, and thats when we shall be able to
estimate how much birdwatchers contribute to the Global economy. To me such
figures would help me in my strategic planing for exclusive birding
services.
Just to go off the topic birding is very amazing and always challenging.
This morning I took young birders to our usual wetland to find wetland birds
and ofcourse the Shoebill which I never get tired of watching. We got about
55 species in only two hours including the Shoebill. One boy of 14 suggested
that we stay watching this strange bird and record its behaviours. Another
one suggested that we bring the President and show him this bird so that he
can order for the protection of that swamp from any other person except
nature lovers. Another one wondered whether they will be able find these
birds still protected with this increase in population. Another one
expressed fears that when the Nibiru planet hits the Earth in Dec 2011,
these birds will also die. etc. Anyway this expressed to me a success in the
awareness about birds and bird habitat conservation in the youth. We have
done this for the last 3years. Now Iam sure that once the youth are
educated in responsible use of our natural resources, our ecosytems will be
conserved.
Good Birding.
Herbert
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 7:12 PM, Richard H. Payne (rhp AT shsu.edu) <
rhp(AT)shsu.edu> wrote:
> Herbert's question about numbers is one that we've been wrestling with for
> years. In my case, more than 20 years. The answer really depends on how
> you ask the question and what you need to do with the answer.
>
> While I really can't speak to the world figures, the US numbers are
> interesting in and of themselves. (Warning: I will over-simplify this in
> the interest of considerable brevity.) The National Survey of Recreation
> and the Environment done under the auspices of the US Forest Service asks
> simply whether people look at birds. NSRE finds 81.8 million people who
> look at birds. The US Fish and Wildlife Service study asks if people
> looked at birds while away from home, and that obviously covers a wide
> range of looking. They come up with 47.7 million. They also ask if the
> primary purpose in leaving home was to look at birds, which still covers a
> wide range of activity. The numbers for that question show 20
> million "primary purpose birders." In the 2001 FWS survey, respondents
> were asked whether they kept a list. 2.3 million people said they did.
>
> Many of my birding friends have argued about these numbers through every
> iteration of the surveys. However, their arguments are invariably
> misdirected, because they really want to argue about the definition of
> a "real birder." And that is an unending and unwinnable argument. What the
> surveys are essentially telling us is the number of people who find their
> way to nature through birding. That's very important from a public policy
> standpoint. Having looked at the designs of the survey's, I am very
> comfortable with what they produce. The margins of error are quite small
> and the levels of confidence are quite high. From a statistical analysis
> standpoint, the projects are solid.
>
> So, there are a lot of birders out there and, obviously, they are of
> different levels of skill and avidity. However, the economic impact of our
> recreation is huge, but that's another topic for another time.
>
> Dick Payne
> Colorado Springs, CO
>
>
>
--
Executive Director
Bird Uganda Safaris Ltd
2nd Floor
Jos House, Plot 55B,
Opp. Fish Factory
Telephone +256 312289048
Fax +256 (0)414383031
Cellphone +256(0)772518290/ 777912938
Email. director(AT)birduganda.com
web www.birduganda.com
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Field Guides
From: Ronald Orenstein <ron.orenstein(AT)rogers.com>
Date: 5 Apr 2008 7:34am
This is the glory, I think, of the Collins guide to Europe, which has everything
Sibley offers in (to me) a much clearer text and better field guide format.
There is a reason why it is called the best guide in the world. Europe is also
way ahead of us in detailed desk-reference guides, in my opinion.
Ronald Orenstein
1825 Shady Creek Court
Mississauga, ON L5L 3W2
Canada
----- Original Message ----
From: Jim Turner <havivoca(AT)YAHOO.COM>
To: BIRDCHAT(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Sent: Saturday, April 5, 2008 10:11:19 PM
Subject: Re: [BIRDCHAT] Field Guides
Reading all the excellenet replies, it seems that there are still two
contentious issues. 1) Field Guides vs. Desk Refernces, and 2) Beginners vs.
Advanced.
For any single volume to meet all combinations of those needs would seem an
unrealistic expectations, if not flat-out oxymoronic. So, then, should not we
have at least three respected 'bibles' on birding, each of them addresssing one
combination of the above, and abandon the idea that a single volume can be the
be-all-end-all?
As a footnote, I would add that none of us ever stops being a beginner. If
you have forgotten what it is like to be a beginner, get off the plane in Cancun
with Peterson or Howell or both,(or even better, in Singapore with King) and
you wll quickly remember how miraculous the Golden Guide was.
=================
Jim Turner
Victoria, Texas
havivoca(AT)yahoo.com
---------------------------------
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total
Access, No Cost.
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
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: North America Field Guides---How do they rate?
From: "Ber Carr" <mycocarex(AT)hotmail.com>
Date: 5 Apr 2008 8:27am
Can folks take one more opinion on this subject? I don't like National
Geographic other than as at home desk reference. Some sections are fine with
great info but I wouldn't recommend it. Its time has come and gone. Why
was the black and white warbler depiction never corrected in all the
subsequent editions? It looks as if the artist had never seen one in the
field.
Bernie Carr
Syracuse, NY
mycocarex(AT)hotmail.com
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Field Guides: Time and Tangability
From: "Robert Kyse" <RobertKyse(AT)cableone.net>
Date: 5 Apr 2008 3:41pm
First I would like to thank all those who have contributed to this field
guide string - it has truly been an education and an example of the finest
use of Birdchat.
I also have some thoughts to share:
1) Ted Floyd wrote: "A little birdie tells me ... significant DVD
component...". I've been waiting for a high definition DVD lounge guide for
some time. Wont it be great to be able to get a handle on the gis of all
those skulkers without the frustration of the bush.
2) I think it is generally acknowledged that real books are preferred to
digital formats (Please don't ask me to explain this. Its just somehow more
pleasant). Perhaps a different technology - materials science - will be able
to overcome the difficulty of bringing a rigorous text into the field.
Presently the field guides are made of thick, treated paper that make the
books quite massive. No doubt this is an effort to make them more durable.
But, I also suspect that part of the reasoning is based on marketing -
heavier seems more valuable than lighter. However, I should think by now
there is a printing material that would allow for a much lighter, thinner
and more "ruggedized" field guide. I would certainly carry the Sibley guide
into the field if I could fold it up and put him in my back pocket.
Do we have any printers out there?
Robert Kyse
Rio Rancho, NM
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: RE: Border Fence and Sabal Palm Sanctuary
From: "William Leigh" <leightern(AT)msn.com>
Date: 5 Apr 2008 5:42pm
I was just in South Texas and visited both Sabal Palm and The Nature
Conservancy site. I think it is unfortunate that two such wonderful birding
spots could be lost to accomodate unsound political concerns. I saw several
lifers at these two sights and was especially glad to be able to view the
Fork-tailed Flycatcher that was hanging out at the Nature Conservancy site,
not to mention the Green King Fishers, Least Grebes, Buff-bellied Hummers,
Peregrine Falcons, Stilts, Groove-billed Anis (which I missed) I believe
Swallow-tailed Kites were also reported. I talked to the manager at the
Nature Conservancy and he was quite concerned about the fence as well he
should be.... but he seemed to think that he would be able to work this
refuge but that he would have to pass through a security check point to
access parts of the refuge on the Mexican side of the fence. I believe the
whole fence idea is counterproductive and the recent political talk of
rounding up all illegal immigrants is patently offensive and inhumane. I
have heard that Mexican tourist account for 40-60% of sales for the towns
along the border. I think too that demonizing illegal immigrants is a just
another political ploy to keep Americans from realizing and dealing with the
real issues that face this country such as Gloabal Warming, clean Energy
production , Nuclear Proliferation to name just a few.
William Leigh
Bridgewater VA
leightern(AT)msn.com
>From: "Richard H. Payne (rhp AT shsu.edu)" <rhp(AT)SHSU.EDU>
>Reply-To: "Richard H. Payne (rhp AT shsu.edu)" <rhp(AT)SHSU.EDU>
>To: BIRDCHAT(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
>Subject: [BIRDCHAT] Border Fence and Sabal Palm Sanctuary
>Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 08:41:21 -0700
>
>The following story is on the Austin American-Statesman web page this
>morning.
>
>Dick Payne
>Colorado Springs, CO
>---------------------
>
>Border fence could cede last sabal palm forest to Mexico
>Friday, April 04, 2008
>
>BROWNSVILLE
>
>Fence could cede forest to Mexico
>
>The announcement this week that the federal government would waive a
>number of environmental protection laws for the border fence is expected
>to lead to the closure of two nature preserves that support a growing
>ecotourism business in a struggling region.
>
>The Sabal Palm Audubon Center and Sanctuary and most of The Nature
>Conservancy's Lennox Foundation Southmost Preserve would end up in the no-
>man's land between the fence and Mexico.
>
>Between the Audubon and The Nature Conservancy's sites, as well as some
>neighboring National Wildlife Refuge land, the last native groves of a
>sabal palm forest that once blanketed thousands of acres along the banks
>of the Rio Grande will be ceded to the Mexican side of the fence.
>
>Fence planners have suggested they could add an access gate for its
>property, but Audubon Texas has dismissed that as unworkable once the
>preserve is behind a steel fence.
>
>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
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Field Guides
From: Jim Turner <havivoca(AT)yahoo.com>
Date: 5 Apr 2008 7:18pm
Relieved, now. I googled it and determined that what you all are calling
"Collins" (for Europe) is indeed the wonderful book that I had earlier called
"Mullarney". My copy, a 1999 edition, is called a Princeton Field Guide, and
Mullarney is the first of the four "author" credits on the cover. In my copy,
the only reference to Collins is on the copyright page.
=================
Jim Turner
Victoria, Texas
havivoca(AT)yahoo.com
---------------------------------
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total
Access, No Cost.
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Focused Field Guides
From: Pat Burden <tallerpat(AT)aol.com>
Date: 5 Apr 2008 8:28pm
I have enjoyed this thread tremendously and picking up an idea from a
previous email, I would like to know your opinions on some of the more
focused guides: to Warblers, Sparrows, Gulls, etc. I am more
concerned about a book I can add to the collection in the back seat of
the car when the occasion calls for it, rather than one that would only
be convenient to study at home.
Thank you,
Pat Burden
Yale, MI
tallerpatATaol.com
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Migration on radar tonight.
From: "R.D. Everhart" <everhart(AT)black-hole.com>
Date: 5 Apr 2008 10:05pm
I was just checking the nexrad radar for any signs of migration and
it appears that tonight might be seeing some movement up the
Mississippi River Flyway. I have posted an image from doppler radar
on my blog if you'd like to see what was going on about 11:30 CDT
Saturday night.
http://minnesotabirdnerd.blogspot.com
Roger Everhart
Apple Valley, MN
www.ncbo.org
BirdChat Guidelines: http://www.ksu.edu/audubon/chatguidelines.html
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdchat.html
|
|
|
|
BIRDxxxx
BIRDCHAT
ID-FRONTIERS
US:NewEngland