ID-FRONTIERS for September 9-15, 2001

Messages are displayed in the order they were received.  Subject  From  Date   Time   Massachusetts "Cox's Sandpiper" Am. Birds article   James H. Barton   Sun, 9 Sep 2001   6:43am   Mystery Bird from Ecuador (summary)   David A Cahlander    Sun, 9 Sep 2001   8:39pm   Pacific vs American Golden-Plover ID   Angus Wilson    Mon, 10 Sep 2001   12:43pm   Comments on the NJ Golden Plover (Long)   James H. Barton   Mon, 10 Sep 2001   5:53pm   Re: Massachusetts "Cox's Sandpiper" Am. Birds article   Tony Leukering    Tue, 11 Sep 2001   6:18pm   Massachusetts "Cox's Sandpiper"   Bill Pranty    Wed, 12 Sep 2001   4:37am   C.a.pacifica/hudsoni   Arne Lesterhuis    Thu, 13 Sep 2001   7:49am   So very sorry   Norman D.van Swelm   Thu, 13 Sep 2001   1:54pm   Re: So very sorry   Florida Nature Tours   Thu, 13 Sep 2001   4:45pm   Re: So very sorry   Richard Stern    Fri, 14 Sep 2001   6:05am   Taking optics on airplanes   James H. Barton   Fri, 14 Sep 2001   7:09am   A Calidris from Poland   John Idzikowski    Fri, 14 Sep 2001   1:08pm   Fea's Petrel and Zino's Petrel at sea   Andrew Harrop    Sat, 15 Sep 2001   4:47am   Traveling Birders, Carry-on Optics, etc.   canyonwren    Sat, 15 Sep 2001   5:08pm

To use email addresses replace '(AT)' with '@'. This is done to confuse the spam 'bots.

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Massachusetts "Cox's Sandpiper" Am. Birds article
From: "James H. Barton" <redwing1986(AT)MEDIAONE.NET>
Date: 9 Sep 2001 6:43am

    Friends, if memory serves, American Birds ran a front cover picture
of the MA "Cox's Sandpiper" within a year after the bird  was
discovered, entitled "World's First Juvenile Cox's Sandpiper". .  I
can't supply the reference.  Some one of you surely can look up the
issue.

    In answer to Martin Reid's question, I do clearly recall hearing
that the bird was trapped and that blood samples were taken.  I don't
recall that the Am. Birds article reached any definitive conclusions;
however, I do recall reading, many years later, and on this list (I
think), that blood tests had conclusively demonstrated that "Cox's
Sandpiper" is a hybrid Pectoral Sandpiper >C. melanatos< x Curlew
Sandpiper >C. ferruginea<.

    The MA bird was first mistakenly identified and broadcast as
Sharp-tailed Sandpiper >C. acuminata<, despite the fact that "Cox's" and
Sharp-tailed are both portrayed on the same page of >Shorebirds<.   Just
yesterday, I was informed that the record was set straight publicly only
because a visiting authority from  Maine intervened in the discussion.

    Yours,.

    Jim Barton
    redwing1986(AT)mediaone.net
    Cambridge, MA


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Mystery Bird from Ecuador (summary)
From: David A Cahlander <dac(AT)MIRAGE.SKYPOINT.COM>
Date: 9 Sep 2001 8:39pm

There is a summary of all the input for the identification of this "mystery
bird" on the web site:

        http://www.skypoint.com/members/dac/mystery.htm

The identifications are:

Swainson's Flycatcher           Peter English, Stephen Greenfield
Brownish Twistwing              Mike Mulligan
Crowned Slaty Flycatcher        Paul Greenfield, John Sterling
Short-Creasted Flycatcher       Luis Santaella
Golden-crowned Flycatcher       Michael L. P. Retter, Martin Reid

I'm still not sure, but I lean toward the Crowned Slaty Flycatcher.

Thanks for all that helped look at this bird.
--
Dave Cahlander  Burnsville, MN  Dakota Co. 952-894-5910


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Pacific vs American Golden-Plover ID
From: Angus Wilson <wilsoa02(AT)ENDEAVOR.MED.NYU.EDU>
Date: 10 Sep 2001 12:43pm

For those interested in the thorny issue of Golden-Plover
identification, I have put together some photos of the probable Pacific
Golden-Plover discovered in southern New Jersey, USA by richard
Crossley, Michael O'Brien and Evan Obercian.

http://oceanwanderers.com/NJPGP.html

Informed comments on the molt state and identification of this
fascinating bird would be greatly appreciated.

Enjoy!

Angus Wilson
New York City
angus.wilson(AT)med.nyu.edu


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Comments on the NJ Golden Plover (Long)
From: "James H. Barton" <redwing1986(AT)MEDIAONE.NET>
Date: 10 Sep 2001 5:53pm

    Friends, though I cannot claim extensive experience with fulva, I've
been doing a great deal of research to document two birds seen on August
26, 2000 at S. Monomoy, Chatham, MA (one photographed).  My research has
involved extensive reading and private international correspondence.  On
the basis of that work, I offer the following informal comments below.

    My principal published source is Byrkjedal and Thompson's >Tundra
Plovers<.  In particular, for detail, please see pp. 398-402.  On
request, I will be happy to provide a summary of the field marks
presented on pp. 401-402.  I will also be happy to share my extensive
research with the NJ observers, the members of the NJ records committee,
and any other serious students of ID accustomed to paying very close
attention to detail.

    1.  Introduction.  On looking at the photos, one after the other,
I'm confident the bird is fulva.  But more than a year of research and
of arguing for fulva on the photographed S. Monomoy bird have shown me
the necessity of presenting a closely reasoned account of very fine
detail, taking all characters into consideration, and making due
allowance for significant intra-specific variability (see below).  My
own draft report, which has benefited from heavy vetting, and some
vehement opposition, now approaches 12 tight pages of 10 pt..  However
confident I may feel that the NJ bird is fulva,   I believe I can raise
enough questions about the characters used to establish an ID of fulva
and about the available photographic evidence to justify requesting a
similarly closely reasoned account, also heavily vetted.  I will be
happy to invite the people who have assisted me and vetted my account to
assist interested parties.

    2.  Wing Projection.  The NJ birds shows the classic relationships
expected of fulva between the primaries, tertials and tail tip.  Few
primaries appear to extend beyond the longest tertial, which, in turn,
appears to extend to about 2/3 the length of the tail.  In addition, the
tips of the primaries barely extend beyond the tip of the tail.

    But hold on.  As Angus Wilson's Hong Kong photo shows, the degree to
which the primaries extend beyond the end of the tail is unreliable for
separating fulva from dominica, and, as my data and photos will show,
"long-winged" fulva are by no means uncommon.  And if fulva can be
"long-winged", then I should think that one has to allow for the
possibility of "short-winged" dominica.

    The above doesn't  mean that the NJ bird isn't fulva.  What it does
mean, I submit,  is that short wing projection beyond the end of the
tail doesn't prove anything one way or the other.  What one has to
determine, as with the photographed S. Monomoy bird, is whether the
expected relationships for fulva hold between the longest tertial and
the tip of the tail, and between the primary tips and the longest
tertial.  On the NJ bird, as on the photographed S. Monomoy bird, they
certainly appear to do so.

    3.  Plumage.  The NJ bird appears to be in very advanced molt.  To
judge from my private correspondence, only the most cautious of
statements should be based on the plumage of a bird at this stage.  For
example, though I'm encouraged by the thin supercilium, I don't believe
that the almost completely clean undertail coverts/vent can cited as a
character supporting fulva.

    Again, the above doesn't argue against fulva.  But it does argue
against using plumage characters with confidence for a positive ID of
fulva.

    4.  A Potential Plumage Problem:  Notably in one photo, the spots on
the bird's back appear to be of equal or near equal size.  If one wanted
to base any strong arguments for fulva based on plumage, one would have
to contend with the fact that spots of equal or near equal size are
indicative of dominica.  Field guides describe fulva as presenting a
more "coarse" appearance that dominica.  That's because the spots on the
upperparts of fulva come in small, medium and large sizes.  The larger
spots make the bird look rougher.

    5.  Bill Size, Length and Shape.  What first struck me about the NJ
bird was the size, length and shape of the bill.  Folded back across the
eye, the bill extends to the back of the eye or beyond, depending on the
photo.  That's one of the ID characters for fulva presented in >Tundra
Plovers<.

    On the other hand, bill length alone doesn't eliminate dominica.
I've seen a photo a very long-billed dominica on a web page. .

    On yet another hand, the bill of that long-billed dominica is
noticeably thin, and almost needle-like, not at all like the bill of the
NJ bird.  Size and shape have to be considered, not just length.

    What first struck two observers about the unphotographed S. Monomoy
bird was its bill, and the photographed bird presented a very similar
bill to the unphotographed bird.  As on the NJ bird, the bills of the S.
Monomoy birds were long and thick, and showed a bulge on the lower
mandible approaching the tip.  One of my corespondents says he finds
this to be typical of museum specimens of fulva.   I don't see any such
bulge on dominica.

    But I don't see it on Angus Wilson's Hong Kong bird, either.

    6.  Tibia/Tarsus Ratio.  The NJ bird was said to be "seemingly
longer legged".  That sounds very hopeful.  Unfortunately, none of the
photos seems to offer a good opportunity for determining the
tibia/tarsus ratio.

    The biometric data I've examined shows that the tarsi of  fulva and
dominica are virtually identical in length, but that the tibia of fulva
average longer than those of dominica.  As a result, fulva can be
expected to be longer-legged overall.

    But individuals defy general expectations.  On the one hand, the
unphotographed S. Monomoy bird was very noticeably long legged.  On the
other hand, the photographed bird fell within the lower end of the
tibia/tarsus ratio expected of fulva, and, to some international
observers, looks so short-legged that they have great difficulty with a
proposed ID of fulva.  So, where are we?  Does apparent length of leg
matter?

    An international authority on pluvialis plovers finds the apparent
tibia/tarsus ratio of the photographed S. Monomoy bird to be within the
range expected of fulva, and beyond the range expected of dominica,
though he does say that the bird looked short to him at first glance,
leading him to an initial reading of dominica.  If an apparently
short-legged bird can briefly mislead an international authority,  then
I would certainly say that the >long< legged appearance reported for the
NJ bird argues for fulva.   I would hope that the observers can locate
some photos which will enable them to establish the tibia/tarsus ratio.

    But on a discouraging note, (here I go again), I should also add
that after seeing the S. Monomoy birds last year, and reading >Tundra
Plovers< intently, I went out to examine the apparent leg length and
tibia/tarsus ratio of every dominica I could find.  Alas, four of them
seen together at Plum Island, Newburyport, MA, all appeared to have very
long tibia.  The fact that they were all juveniles might have had
something to do it.  I don't know.

    Yours,

    Jim Barton
    redwing1986(AT)mediaone.net
    Cambridge, MA


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Massachusetts "Cox's Sandpiper" Am. Birds
         article
From: Tony Leukering <GreatGrayO(AT)AOL.COM>
Date: 11 Sep 2001 6:18pm

----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----

Hi all:

Having been one of the people that chased and missed the "Cox's" in MA, I
believe that the bird was NOT blood-sampled.  The bird was originally banded
as something entirely different, but in-hand photos were taken.  However, I
was there the second day (third?) and Brian Harrington and a Manomet crew
were set up to TRY to recapture it specifically for the purpose of extracting
blood for genetic work.  The bird had been frequenting a large wash-up of
stuff (kelp? algae? whatever), but the recent high tide had moved that stuff
on and the bird was nowhere to be found and was never seen again.

Anyway, that's the memory in my getting-older-and-more-unreliable-every-day
brain.

Sincerely,

Tony Leukering
Brighton, CO

----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Massachusetts "Cox's Sandpiper"
From: Bill Pranty <billpranty(AT)HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 12 Sep 2001 4:37am

Good morning,

I have not yet seen a post about the Massachusetts "Cox's Sandpiper" from
somebody who has read the "American Birds" articles recently, nor have I
seen the citations to these articles made available. My apologies if I
missed any earlier posts that did supply this information.

The Winter 1987 issue of "American Birds" had two articles on the "Cox's
Sandpiper:"

Kasprzyk, M.J., R.A. Forster, and B.A. Harrington. 1987. First Northern
Hemisphere record and first juvenile plumage description of the Cox's
Sandpiper (Calidris paramelanotos). American Birds 41(5): 1359-1364.

Then follows a color plate by Paul Donahue that illustrates Pectoral and
"Cox's" sandpipers, on page [1365]. Then the second article:

Vickery, P.D., D.W. Finch, and P.K. Donahue. 1987. Juvenile Cox's Sandpiper
(Calidris paramelanotos) in Massachusetts, a first New World occurrence and
a hitherto undescribed plumage. American Birds 41(5): 1366-1369.

Both articles (and the cover) contain extensive color photos, including
several in the hand. The first article states that the bird was, "banded,
measured, photographed, and released during the early morning of September
16." Blood samples seem to have not been taken during this time. A few days
later, a decision was made to recapture the bird to obtain blood samples,
but the bird departed shortly after.

Best regards,

Bill Pranty
Audubon of Florida
410 Ware Boulevard, Suite 702
Tampa, Florida 33619
813-623-6826
billpranty(AT)hotmail.com

Florida IBA Program: http://www.audubon.org/bird/iba/florida

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: C.a.pacifica/hudsoni
From: Arne Lesterhuis <djentl(AT)HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 13 Sep 2001 7:49am

Hi all,

Can anybody give me some addresses of shorebird sites which show pictures of
adult Calidris alpina hudsoni and Calidris alpina pacifica, in breeding
plumage?

Best wishes,
Arne

Arne J. Lesterhuis
Guyra Paraguay

_________________________________________________________________
Descargue GRATUITAMENTE MSN Explorer en http://explorer.msn.es/intl.asp


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: So very sorry
From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm(AT)WXS.NL>
Date: 13 Sep 2001 1:54pm

Dear American friends and colleagues,
Rest assured that our thoughts are with you all and that we mourn and cry
with you.
Norman


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: So very sorry
From: Florida Nature Tours <fnt(AT)GDI.NET>
Date: 13 Sep 2001 4:45pm

  Dear Norman:

  As I was reading your most welcome post here in my library I am hearing
the
  word that the White House has announced that Osama bin Laden is directly
  responsible for what happened in New York, Washington & Pennsylvania. When
  the United States military responds against the countries that have been
  supporting him & his organization, there will be operations conducted that
  will need support from all of our friends around the world, NATO members &
  everyone else. Make no mistake about it, we feel that war has been
declared
  against us, & the anger level is rising. We are the same people we were on
  December 7th 1941. I lost relatives that day at Pearl Harbor, & Tuesday I
  lost a friend in New york.

  Thank you for your words of sympathy. I know that you send it out to all
of us,
  but I am taking it personally. Thank you so much for your words of
kindness.
  I can't express how much it means to us to hear support from our friends
in
  other countries. When I think of the affection that I feel for countries
such
  as yours, and the United Kingdom, Mexico, Canada & others, it is
comforting
  to be reminded that there are friends in those places who care about us.

  Wes Biggs
  Orlando, Florida

"Norman D.van Swelm" wrote:
>
> Dear American friends and colleagues,
> Rest assured that our thoughts are with you all and that we mourn and cry
> with you.
> Norman

--

 Wes Biggs
 Florida Nature Tours, Orlando  407/363-1360  fnt(AT)gdi.net
 http://www.floridanaturetours.com   ABA sponsored


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: So very sorry
From: Richard Stern <rbstern(AT)NS.SYMPATICO.CA>
Date: 14 Sep 2001 6:05am

 This may be off topic, but I hope people won't mind - All of us here in
Canada too are astounded and horrified by all this, and feel equally
devastated. Today, I echo the words in a letter to one of our national
newspapers, to paraphrase JFK, -- "Ich bin ein New Yorker".

 However, unfortunately getting angry (understandably) and bombing Osama Bin
Laden or whoever, won't make it go away. We in N.America have suddenly been
brought into the reality of the real world, and have the prospect of living
like the Israelis and the British and others have done every day for years.
Much of the world hates and is jealous of the N. American way of life, and
for millions of people achieving recognition in however a (to us) perverted
way is to them preferable to their otherwise miserable existence in endless
grinding poverty. We as birders, who often visit odd places in out of the
way locations, are in a unique position to recognize this and spread the
word that preserving and preventing degradation of the natural environment
is one step towards halting global desertification and other factors that
are contributing to human misery, which breeds violence.

    On  a practical note, I was seeing my wife off at our local airport
yesterday just after it re-opened, and a fellow birder on his way to Europe
was in the line just ahead. They refused to let him check his binoculars in
as hand luggage. Has anyone else met this yet, and is it a concern?

####################

Richard Stern
Kentville
Nova Scotia
Canada

rbstern(AT)ns.sympatico.ca

####################

Original message

 >>>>>>>Dear Norman:

  As I was reading your most welcome post here in my library I am hearing
the
  word that the White House has announced that Osama bin Laden is directly
  responsible for what happened in New York, Washington & Pennsylvania. When
  the United States military responds against the countries that have been
  supporting him & his organization, there will be operations conducted that
  will need support from all of our friends around the world, NATO members &
  everyone else. Make no mistake about it, we feel that war has been
declared
  against us, & the anger level is rising. We are the same people we were on
  December 7th 1941. I lost relatives that day at Pearl Harbor, & Tuesday I
  lost a friend in New york.

  Thank you for your words of sympathy. I know that you send it out to all
of us,
  but I am taking it personally. Thank you so much for your words of
kindness.
  I can't express how much it means to us to hear support from our friends
in
  other countries. When I think of the affection that I feel for countries
such
  as yours, and the United Kingdom, Mexico, Canada & others, it is
comforting
  to be reminded that there are friends in those places who care about us.

  Wes Biggs
  Orlando, Florida <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Taking optics on airplanes
From: "James H. Barton" <redwing1986(AT)MEDIAONE.NET>
Date: 14 Sep 2001 7:09am

    Friends, several months ago, airport security demanded that I open a
spotting scope, despite the fact that they could look all the way
through it.  The inspectors didn't seem to have any familiarity with
optics.  I removed the eye piece.  An inspector studied the interior of
the scope.  She didn't appear to know what she was looking for.  She
returned the scope, and we went on our way.

   Now, in these days, birders shouldn't be surprised to encounter
problems.  I have just read, for example, the Taliban recently sought to
assasinate an opposition leader using a video camera packed with
explosives.

    Jim Barton
    redwing1986(AT)mediaone.net
    Cambridge, MA


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: A Calidris from Poland
From: John Idzikowski <idzikoj(AT)UWM.EDU>
Date: 14 Sep 2001 1:08pm

I am forwarding the following message and I have posted the pictures of this
bird at:

http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=1596768&a=13755918

Please respond to the group; Marcin is not a member of IDF but he will
follow comments from Jack Siler's page.

John Idzikowski, Milwaukee

> Hi,
> I'm a field ornithologist from Poland.
> On 3rd August 1998 in South Poland I`ve observed 1 mystery adult sandpiper
> similar to Semipalmated Sandpiper, but in Europe this species is very
rare!
> Numerous is the Little Stint, but the observed bird wasn`t a tipical
Little
> Stint, he had a different voice and he looked like Semipalmated Sandpiper.
I
> don`t konw this species form my field observations becouse I have never
been
> to North America.
> You should know this species very well, so I wonder if you could help me.
> Let me know what do you think about this bird, what kind of species it can
> be?. I`m mailing you some photos.
> Big thanks in advance!
> Best regards,
> Marcin Faber.


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Fea's Petrel and Zino's Petrel at sea
From: Andrew Harrop <andrew.harrop(AT)VIRGIN.NET>
Date: 15 Sep 2001 4:47am

> THIS MESSAGE IS IN MIME FORMAT. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----

Dear All,

Fea=B9s Petrel and Zino=B9s Petrel at sea

Michael Tove (=8CBirding World=B9 14: 283-289), and others cited in his
references, have done an excellent job in making us all more familiar with
the =8CSoft-plumaged Petrel complex=B9 Pterodroma mollis/feae/madeira. There
is=
,
however, a danger that we are being led to believe that field identificatio=
n
of members of this group is more straightforward than it really is.

On 19 July, 1998 I was fortunate to be able to observe over 45 Fea=B9s Petrel=
s
at sea off the Desertas Islands, Madeira. The birds were observed both in
flight and in rafts on the water, and many were observed at very close
range. They were watched both in calm conditions in the lee of Bugio, and i=
n
more windy conditions to the south of the island. Whilst I would agree with
the pratincole analogy originally suggested by Steve Madge (=8CBirding World=B9
3: 138-139), my field notes state: =B3hand mainly looks rounded (at tip), but
pointed in some attitudes (especially in less sheltered
conditions)...paleness of grey tail variable and not very
striking...stoutness of bill only visible at close range=B2. The first point
quoted above suggests that caution should be exercised when interpreting
wing-shape as it appears in photographs and video-grabs.

It is notable that Zino & Biscoito (2001), on the basis of study and
measurements of birds of known identity, were both hesitant to proclaim
differences in measurements useful under most field circumstances and unabl=
e
to find any reliable plumage differences. If we turn to Tove=B9s
interpretation of photographs of members of this complex, however, there ar=
e
some notable anomalies. His Shape B in Figure 1 is based on photographs by
Tony Marr (left hand bird) and Andy Swash, respectively off Bugio in August
and between Madeira and the Desertas in October. On the basis of my field
observations cited above, I would argue that it is at the very least unsafe
to conclude that Marr=B9s bird is Zino=B9s, especially as it forms part of a
series of photographs of Fea=B9s Petrels. The four photographs by Swash were
first published as Fea=B9s (=8CBirding World=B9 2: 284), then as presumed
Zino=B9s
(=8CBirding World=B9 8: 259). Whilst I hesitate to disagree with the view of
their identity attributed to Frank Zino by Tove (p. 286), I would suggest
that there is no apparent difference between, for example, the head and bil=
l
of Swash=B9s top right-hand bird and Plate 5 of the bird off Scilly (=8CBirding
World=B9 14: 292). Furthermore, Shape B in Figure 2 is based on a photograph
(Figure 11 in Wingate et.al. 1998) in which the spread of the bird=B9s
primaries is affected by the fact that it is being held at the carpal joint=
,
and is no more natural than the shape of the opposite wing (the hand of
which appears pointed).

Whilst I agree that it is statistically likely that birds in British waters
are Fea=B9s, it is fundamentally unsound to base theories about their
separation in the field on photographs of birds whose identity is contested=
,
or on the selective use of photographs to support such theories. To suggest
that separating Fea=B9s and Zino=B9s in the field is no more difficult than
separating Audubon=B9s and Manx Shearwaters or Wilson=B9s and Madeiran Petrels
is, on current knowledge, fanciful.

There is, however, a difference in bill structure which appears consistent
in photographs of birds of known identity: on Fea=B9s Petrel the distance
between the tip of the nostril and the back of the hook on the upper
mandible is very short, forming a small =8Cnotch=B9 in the contour of the bill
in profile; on Zino=B9s the distance is longer, and does not form the
impression of a =8Cnotch=B9 so much as of a 'wedge'. Not surprisingly, it will
require very good views and preferably close, sharp photographs of the head
and bill for this feature to be assessed. To date I have seen photographs o=
f
only two vagrants which show the feature sufficiently well for realistic
assessment: =8CBirding=B9 XXIX: 312 (Figure 9 of a bird off Hatteras on 20 July
1996), and =8CBirding World=B9 14: 326-7 (Plates 1 and especially 3 of a bird
i=
n
the Western Approaches on 12 August 2001).

References
Wingate, D.B., Hass, T., Brinkley, E.S. & Patteson, J.B. (1998)
=B3Identification of Bermuda Petrel=B2, =8CBirding=B9 30: 19-36

Zino, F. & Biscoito, M. (2001) =B3Comparative biometrics of Pterodroma madeir=
a
and P. feae from the archipelago of Madeira (NE Atlantic)=B2, Symposium Poste=
r
Presentation, Freira Conservation Project, Funchal, Madeira.

Andrew Harrop, 30 Dean Street, Oakham, Rutland LE15 6AF
andrew.harrop(AT)virgin.net

----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Traveling Birders, Carry-on Optics, etc.
From: canyonwren <canyonwren(AT)ADSNET.COM>
Date: 15 Sep 2001 5:08pm

Hi All,
This post contains information that may prove very useful to birders
traveling by plane.

Yesterday Richard Stern wrote the following:

>     On  a practical note, I was seeing my wife off at our local airport
> yesterday just after it re-opened, and a fellow birder on his way to
Europe
> was in the line just ahead. They refused to let him check his binoculars
in
> as hand luggage. Has anyone else met this yet, and is it a concern?

I flew home from a birding trip to Los Angeles on a red-eye arriving early
today.  I carried on both my binoculars and my 35mm camera with three
lenses.  These were inspected and passed.  My film also was checked for
explosives with a hand device.

My carry-ons were searched.  A small folding scissors and nail clippers were
confiscated.  I was allowed to keep my tweezers which were not pointed.
Forgot I had those in with my toothbrush, etc. or I would have put them in
my checked luggage with my pocket knife.  These items will not be returned
to me.  A pilot had similar items confiscated.

I did arrive three hours prior to departure.  Security was very, very tight.
I had to pass through three different check points.  Those not arriving
early enough were not permitted to have carry-ons since there was not
adequate time for them to pass through security.  All checked luggage is
X-rayed.  Nothing can be checked at the gate.  My carry-on was good sized
and I was forewarned that if it did not fit under the seat, I would be
unable to fly on this plane.

Other precautionary measures included:  Coast to coast flights are not
taking place at this time.  Not all scheduled flights will actually fly.
These measures are intended to discourage terrorists, I'm sure.  Also,  it
appeared that flights now have a plain-clothed, armed federal marshall on
board which is comforting to know.  This may not be common knowledge.  I
hope that this policy continues from this day forward.

I found myself being more vigilant paying particular attention to
conversations and behaviours of the other passengers both at the gate and
after boarding.  Had I noted anything suspicious, I would have gotten up and
walked out of the range of the individual's hearing and alerted airline
personnel.  In light of this week's tragedies, I think it is safe to say
that passengers must and will play a much more active role in defending
themselves and others against another terrorist act.  Even though I am an
older female, I can honestly say that I would not sit quietly by and allow
unauthorized persons to be in control of the plane. There is strength in
numbers.  Five or six women of my age could certainly over-power one male
terrorist.

I am mentioning all these things, because we all need to consider these when
flying anywhere in the world from this time forward.  Hi-jackings today are
not the hi-jackings of the 70s.  There may be no hope of surviving if a
suicide terrorist is in control of a plane unless passengers act
defensively.  Four or five crew members cannot overcome four or five
terrorists, but a cabin full of passengers may be able to.

September 11, 2001 is a day that will live long in my memory.   I was on
Santa Cruz Island. Shortly after having seen the Island Scrub Jay, National
Park Rangers on the island told me of the atrocity.  The jay was my #700 ABA
bird.  My joy was short-lived.  I will never be able to recall that event
without thinking about the great tragedies that occurred on that day.

God Bless America.
Lynea

Lynea Hinchman
Michigan City, IN
canyonwren(AT)adsnet.com