Hi Folks!
Here are the major choices:
(1) Trumpeter Swan: Please add details from your observation that supports
this conclusion
(2) Tundra Swan: Please add details from your observation that supports
this conclusion
(3) Trumpeter x Tundra Swan (hybrid): Please add details from your
observation that supports this conclusion
(4) Trumpeter/Tundra Swan: this eliminates Mute Swan, Black Swan, etc. but
includes all three of the above and leaves the specific identity open
(5) swan sp.: Anything in genus Cygnus, including Mute Swan, Black Swan
etc.
The current opinion of the eBird Review Team is that we can validate #4
and #5 because it leaves open the option that the bird is a #3. At the
present time we can not validate #1, #2 or #3
Jim Stasz
North Beach MD
In a message dated 3/12/2013 3:55:52 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
<cm.tonra...> writes:
Thank you Rob, I appreciate the response and further clarification. Always
nice to pull back the curtain a bit...
Again I want to thank all of you who volunteer your time to eBird and
elsewhere for this purpose. Certainly not an easy job, but an important one.
Good Birding
Chris
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Robert Ostrowski <_rjostrowski...>
(mailto:<rjostrowski...>) > wrote:
Hi Chris,
I appreciate you following up on this issue, as I think we can all benefit
from this conversation. As you might expect, it can be tough for reviewers
to give input on identifications without appearing to overstep our duties.
Yes, at the end of the day, the reviewers need to make judgments on
whether or not the documentation provided is enough to confirm the report, but we
want to stay away from telling people what to submit. Users can make their
own identifications and submit their checklists accordingly.
That being said, it's the consensus of the MD eBird team that none of the
documentation collected thus far confirms the exact species of the swan at
Cash Lake. That is to say, we can't confirm the swan as either a Tundra,
Trumpeter or Trumpling (Trumpeter Swan x Tundra Swan hybrid). I think most of
us believe a decent argument can be made for Trumpling Swan, but it's
impossible to confirm that with only field observations. In summary, at this
point, we can only confirm entries of "swan sp." or "Trumpeter/Tundra Swan."
Note that neither of these entries excludes the possibility of a hybrid.
If you haven't already, I recommend reading Mikey Lutmerding's post from
2/28. Perhaps further scrutiny of additional documentation (e.g. sound
recording, feather analysis) will shed some light on this tough ID.
Rob Ostrowski
Silver Spring, MD
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Chris Tonra <_cm.tonra...>
(mailto:<cm.tonra...>) > wrote:
Hi Jim,
I think what Tim and I are asking, from you or someone else, is what is
the official position of eBird reviewers/MD record keepers, hybrid or
otherwise? There is a lot of inconsistency, and right now in eBird it appears that
if you saw the bird before March 1, you saw a Trumpeter, but after that,
you saw something undefinable.
I am no expert on hybrids, but I think a lot of us who use eBird try to
keep the data quality high, as it is a valuable citizen science tool. So we
would like to enter the bird consistent with what the official record is.
The purpose of having reviewers at all is to make judgments on issues such
as this.
While, certainly, some birds will remain inscrutable, telling people to
enter essentially whatever they want is a bit frustrating.
I very much appreciate all the time and effort that reviewers volunteer to
eBird and other official records. eBird is revolutionary, and a fantastic
resource, I think we are just looking for a bit more clarity on this
particular bird.
Thanks
Chris Tonra
Silver Spring
On Monday, March 11, 2013 8:43:43 PM UTC-4, Jim Stasz wrote:
> I don't promote any option. Use the one that is appropriate for your
observations and analysis. Trumpeter, Tundra, Trumpeter/Tundra, Tundra x
Trumpeter, swan sp. Identify to the best of your own ability, not someone
else's.
>
> Jim
>
> Jim Stasz
> North Beach MD
> <_Jlstasz...> (mailto:<Jlstasz...>)
>
> Timothy Reichard <_diracma...> (mailto:<diracma...>) > wrote:
>
> >On Monday, March 11, 2013 12:44:46 PM UTC-4, Jim Stasz wrote:
> >> You can use the "Add Species" feature if You want to use "Trumpeter x
> >> Tundra Swan (hybrid)" or "swan sp. - Cygnus sp."
> >
> >eBird also has a "Trumpeter/Tundra Swan" option. This is less specific
than the hybrid designation but more specific than "swan sp." Would the
slash designation be more appropriate, or is the hybrid hypothesis fairly
certain?
> >
> >Tim Reichard
> >Central MD
> >
> >--
> >-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Group 'Maryland & DC Birding'.
> >To view group guidelines or change email preferences, visit this group
on the web at _http://www.mdbirding.com_ (http://www.mdbirding.com/)
> >Posts can be sent to the group by sending an email to
<_mdbirding...> (mailto:<mdbirding...>)
> >
> >
--
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Group 'Maryland & DC Birding'.
To view group guidelines or change email preferences, visit this group on
the web at _http://www.mdbirding.com_ (http://www.mdbirding.com/)
Posts can be sent to the group by sending an email to
<_mdbirding...> (mailto:<mdbirding...>)
--
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Group 'Maryland & DC Birding'.
To view group guidelines or change email preferences, visit this group on
the web at _http://www.mdbirding.com_ (http://www.mdbirding.com/)
Posts can be sent to the group by sending an email to
<mdbirding...>
--
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group 'Maryland & DC Birding'.
To view group guidelines or change email preferences, visit this group on the web at http://www.mdbirding.com
Posts can be sent to the group by sending an email to <mdbirding...>
|