Thanks to John for digging out these data. I'd like to echo his cautious
reminder about historical records. For the time being at least, eBird,
for all its undoubted virtues, falls well short of accurately
representing regional lists for this and other reasons.
        For Franklin County, for example, I have evidence qualitatively better
than eBird's for 342--not 285--species (and without counting trumpeter
swan, mute swan, monk parakeet, etc., or published reports of other
species [often from highly-regarded persons] best regarded as
hypothetical). This is 57 (20%) more species than the eBird total, which
also may include locally unestablished species. The numbers listed for
other counties may have similar deficits.
        Overall, does the eBird database routinely incorporate all records
beyond those submitted by its enthusiasts---all CBC records or banding
data or old Biological Survey numbers, etc.? As far as I know, it seldom
does, relying instead almost entirely on recent reports from enrolled
members and their contemporaneous reports, though to his credit local
editor Vic Fazio seems to be leading the charge to include historical
records for states and counties involved. Overall, eBird promises to
study history to come rather than history past, and relies mostly on
enrolled adherents for its data rather than others. Fine as far as it
goes, but these results should not be misinterpreted as something larger.
        I think eBird automates many important analyses of numerical records of
commoner birds--a segment too often ignored--and of course it provides
free listing software, and an ever-growing network of nifty analytical
tools, not to mention encouraging a sort of social network among its
enthusiasts. Still, I advise against using it in every case as if it
represented all we know, as John Herman cautions.  It will improve with
time. In the meantime, stick with the published records if you want to
compare complete county lists.
Bill Whan
Columbus



On 1/1/2012 8:12 PM, John Herman wrote:
> The following is a list of the current ebird all-time Ohio counties top 10.
> Not surprisingly, many of the top Ohio counties are along Lake Erie. Those
> counties have the obvious advantage concerning shorebirds and gulls.
> However, inland counties, due to a variety of reasons, also have very good
> county numbers. Remember that many counties do not have all known species
> reported, mostly because the majority of records have been reported by
> individuals that have birded since 1980, and historical records lacking for
> counties. Some counties could use some birding, as Van Wert, with 51 ebird
> all time ebird species.
> Cuyahoga     320
> Lucas           320
> Ottawa         311
> Lorain           310
> Lake             299
> Erie              293
> Richland       286
> Franklin        285
> Delaware      284
> Hamilton      284
> Hancock      284

______________________________________________________________________

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]