OHIO-BIRDS Archives

January 2010

OHIO-BIRDS@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Victor Fazio <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Victor Fazio <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 24 Jan 2010 04:29:17 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (239 lines)
"Toward an Ohio eBird"...
.. thus have I phrased the few postings to this listserv
in order to update the birding community on its progress ...
as I know full well we are not there yet.

eBird is a tool ... a vehicle for data sharing ... how well it
performs is entirely up to those who make use of it,  or not,
as the case may be. The following is a preamble to my
response to these criticisms.

I first learned of eBird at a meeting of the Audubon Ohio IBA
meetings of the technical committtee in 2001 when I had
already been working on my own online database to
complement my website. In 2002, I shelled out more than $1000
to get a 13 field database running. A trial quickbase collection
of 1400 shorebird did get up and running  but the 22,000 record
database, representing
the bulk of checklists off the Ohio-birds listerv for 1999-2002,
was a couple of weeks away from its debut when Intuit
opted to shut off access to the Internet and change its
pricing structure. The database was sunk, and with it my will
to continue with Aves.Net. Six months later, the ohio-birds
listserv was turned over to the fledgling OOS.

In early 2004, although skeptical,  I was ready to try this
thing called eBird.

In Nov 2006, I was re-instated as state reviewer for Ohio eBird. I
had resigned 2 years earlier infrustration after just 9 months ...
eBird 1.0 was exceedingly rough and all too inflexible. When
approached by newdirector Brian Sullivan in Feb 2006 about
a short list of possible reviewers,I gave a sombre and fairly
skeptical reply ... to his credit he took it in stride.


That Nov, I took a look at the new eBird 2.0 and became
sold on the future of eBird, if not the present. ... I was to be
encouraged by the many updates, both the fixes and the
features, that seem to come every few weeks, and have high
expectations for eBird 3.0 currently under development.

Much has been said recently of eBird and the listserv that
I find dismaying. I spent 6 years defending the listserv as
its creator/manager, I spent time defending The Ohio
Cardinal as its editor, the Ohio Bird Records Committee as
its Secretary, and so I hope you will forgive this briefing
on the first 3 years of the effort to bring you an Ohio
eBird.


 The first order of business in Dec 2006, and carried
through April 2007, was to get in place checklist filters
for the state. Cornell had a generic filter in place
which frankly was laughable. One could report 30,000
Snow Geese and the filter would not catch it. To this day,
generic filters rule several states. Only this past Nov did
OK go from 4 large generic checklists
to 16. Presently, Michigan is served, or not, as
the case may be, by 3 generic filters (although more
customization is underway).


What is a checklist filter? For each species, for each month
(in the future it will be weekly), there is a threshold number
which will flag the observation for further review. DO NOT
confuse these with the so-called filtering system of the
Great Backyard Bird Count ... they have nothing in common
but the Cornell University. How I develop a checklist
filter I will reveal in another posting dedicated to the matter
of vetting eBird.


 For Ohio, I planned out 22 checklists covering the 88
counties. One can create one for each county but I wanted
something up and running quickly. Initially, I had created
14 (an average of 12hrs of research and tinkering for each
one ) by April 07 covering all but 16 OH counties. Unique
county avifaunas got their own checklist filter ...  e.g.
Lucas, Hocking, Adams. The remaining sets were broken
out by physiographic region and with an eye to major
species separations such the chickadee line.

In April 2007, most of these initial checklist filters were
brought online. A logistical snafu prevented a full
implementation which was not realized until this past
Sep. One of the beauties of eBird is that when a new filter
is implemented, ALL existing eBird entries are parsed
through the new filter, even if they had been parsed
before. In this instance something like 2700 records were
flagged ... I had my work cut out for me.

Late in 2007, Oct-Dec, I completed 4 more checklists
covering all but 6 counties ... by now every county near
a population center was covered. In all, I logged 320 hrs for
eBird that year, but figured the bulk of that was a one time
deal ... more or less ... In 2007, data entry in Ohio took off,
something that can be seen in the sample size reported
across years in any species inquiry one may run. That
spring generated 53,000+ records.

Looking for something else to do, in 2008, I became focused
on historical data. Over the course of the next 13 months,
through March 2009, I entered some 1800 historical checklists,
apart from an equal number of my own data back to 1978. The
bulk of historical datum came from book sources from 1900-
1950 involvingnon-passerines, although with the Birds of
Buckeye Lake I only got as far as thewaterfowl. I was not
doing this for completeness ... at this rate 50 years would be
insufficient. I only wanted enough sample data to offer up as
exhibit A in my endeavour to encourage others to participate
as an Ohio Archivist. I have since focused on data sets from
1997 to present, imagining that the subsequent Ohio checklist
produced in eBird may encourage others to fill in the gaps
without being overwhelmed by a blank slate. And so fleshing
out the past 15 years are ...

60 (of 180) checklists from the ODNR Big Island WA survey (1998-99)
150 aerial surveys waterfowl surveys by ODNR ... late 90's
30 monthly surveys of Kellys I. ... various years
24 months of ONWR monthly surveys ... 90's

to name a few ...

Subsequently others have entered some large databases such the
shorebird surveys of the Ottawa/Magee marshes by Mike Bolton
and JohnSzanto back to 1989. Indeed, the International Shorebird
Survey data for Ohio maintained by Manomet Bird Observatory
is here back to 1978. Individuals such as David Brinkman in the
southwest, John Yochum formerly of the far northwest, and
recently, Charlie Bombaci of the Columbus area, have contributed
massive databases.

I also had the unexpected assistance of Gregory Bennett who has
entered an untold number of checklists from ne. Ohio especially
as relates to the waterfowl of the area.

Exhibit A ... the Ohio checklist for 1990-present as generated from
eBird
http://tinyurl.com/yjusypm



 2008 saw another 240 hrs logged for eBird. By then, I had
developed a daily routine owing to the advent of the google gadget
and Jack Siler's map feature high profile species flagged by eBird.
Reviewers were encouraged to pick up the pace of review and I
felt an obligation to answer that need for the birding community.
For the past 24 months, provided I am near a computer, and it is
not one of scheduled field days, I review eBird at 5:30 in the
morning and usually again around 11pm. More on what that
involves when I discuss the vetting of eBird in a separate post.

2009 started off somewhat lax, although the daily routine began
picking up as the spring season alone approached 100,000 records.
However,
eBird, as has been correctly noted, is not without its glitches
and much of the past year I spent ironing out those that I saw
impacting Ohio (Brian Sullivan was very patient with me and
work tirelessly on this). A major one involved the implementation
of the filters I had supplied whereby about a dozen counties
continued to operate under that generic filter that permitted
so many erroneous records (Notably involving Franklin and
Montgomery counties). This culminated in Sept wherein a
completely revised set of the 18 filters were implemented now
covering all but 6 counties.  I anticipate placing the remaining
4 filters by this spring.

And with the new set, most every eBird entry was
once again parsed through the filters ...  generating 1500 new
records for review ... that was back in Sep. This left me with 180
hrs in 2009 ... or 240 if you throw in my Oct 2009 start-up with
Oklahoma  eBird. Why state my hrs ... because the matter of
how much time is spent in data review was made an issue in
a recent post.

Also, in 2009, I got a helping hand in the form of Ken Ostermiller
who has brought the backlog of hotspots (common points of
data entry) up to date .... now about 750 sites ... the widespread
adoption of which should go a long way to solving some of the
geography issues. Ken has brought a naming standard to these
sites, and working together we have been re-positioning those
that were off kilter. [A number of those constructed pre-
google proved to have coordinates incongruent with the
google coordinates.]

I thought to keep mum on all this ...  afterall pretty boring stuff.
... but hope you can see that if you have a problem with the
many of the details of
eBird in Ohio, then you have a problem with me ... that's Ok ...
I've been here all along to answer questions/criticisms ... there's
no harsher critic than myself, and I could use all the help I
can get.

If you have an issue/question about a particular sighting, you
can email me ... I made that very appeal to do so last year on the
listserv

If you wish to question a flagged item ... PLEASE use the
comment box at the end of your checklist ... all I ask is that
first you compare your report with
the existing literature ... most especially the most up to date
resources of Jim McCormac's Birds of Ohio (with its abundance
chart) and the Ohio Bird Records Committee Checklist. Not too
surprisingly, my filters don't depart too much from what one will
find in those publications. I tweak a particular threshold perhaps
2-4 times a month, which I announce on my Facebook page.

BTW, In the past 4 years, Ohio eBird has seen about a half million
records entered into the database ... the vast majority covering
that same period. Several hundred people participate, yet, of the
60 most active birders in terms of posting to the listserv, only
about 20% participate. I suspect this discrepancy  may be behind
the recent back and forth that led to an unfortunate polarization of
opinion on the listserv vs. eBird, when in reality they serve to
complement each other, with little overlap of either function or
mission.

And if you indulge me a few more posts on the subject, I will provide
my own characterizations of the limitations of eBird, the listserv, and
the printed ornithological record.

cheers

Vic Fazio
Shaker Heights, OH
Regional Editor, North American Birds, OH-PA-WV
State Reviewer, OH & OK, Project eBird.
PI: Population ecology of the Black-capped Vireo, Fort Sill, OK 2007-2011

______________________________________________________________________

Ohio-birds mailing list, a service of the Ohio Ornithological Society.
Our thanks to Miami University for hosting this mailing list.
Additional discussions can be found in our forums, at www.ohiobirds.org/forum/.

You can join or leave the list, or change your options, at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=OHIO-BIRDS
Send questions or comments about the list to: [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2