Attributes of a good birder? (2 Viewers)

[markgrubb]

I’ve only been birding for a couple of years and it intrigues me as to what makes a good birder or particularly how some people become so good at spotting/identifying birds. There are some fairly obvious things such as starting at a young age, spending hours in the field, patience, perseverance, learning fieldcraft etc

What I am more intrigued by are the mental attributes people have that make them good at birding. I have a scientific background-mathematics/chemistry are the sorts of area where my strengths are. My birding skills are fairly primitive and advancing slowly and I still find birding deeply frustrating at times. The aspects of birding I have found easiest are bird song and bird calls. I have learnt these from CD and I am now able to recognise lots of birds from call-there is a certain scientific logic to this. What I find much harder is identifying birds from sight. My wife who likes nature but who is not really a birder is much better and quicker at seeing and identifying birds by sight. She is completely hopeless at the sciences but has a lot of artistic skills-whereas I could not draw a picture to save my life. I look at my Collins guide a lot but still struggle at times to differentiate between some common species that I should know better by now.

I have met a fair number of experienced local birders and a couple stand out for their ability to quickly and confidently identify birds from sight

So my question is what are the qualities that make some people good birders. Is it just experience/single mindedness or are there mental attributes(eg artistic qualities)that separate out these people from others? Interested to know your views

 

[nctexasbirder]

it helps if you are a visual person..mathematics is my weakest subject, but im best at birding and being a naturalist type person.

 

[nctexasbirder]

in fact, it would be interesting to know what the birders on here are good at other than birding...to experiment and survey.

 

[Andrew Whitehouse]

Interesting question Mark, and almost impossible to answer. Experience is important but it's more than that. It's what you get out of that experience. You can bird all your life, but if you're happy looking at stuff in your garden and not being able to put a name to everything then that experience might not count for much.

I think 'single-mindedness' is important too, or at least the desire to find and identify birds. I'm not really sure whether being scientific or artistic in inclination gives many clues as to what people's birding skills are likely to be (I'm not really either!). Both might help, but neither are pre-requisites.

 

[davercox]

This is a Xmas Eve sort of reply, not a fully considered one (in fact, not considered at all).

Yes, there may be a relation to artistic ability. It's been remarked on several times how many good birders are also great at drawing.
E.g. to draw accurately the emarginations on scapulars means seeing them clearly.

Why do you say there is a 'scientific logic' in identifying by song/calls ?
It just seems like pattern recognition to me (and I am quite good at it, hopeless on the visual side).

 

[halftwo]

Mark,
Yes, very good question. Many things, but the best birders I know stand out because of their dogged determination, single-minded devotion, almost (maybe scrub the "almost"!) psychotic mania for all things birding. And the very best are always quiet, introspective, calm yet steely-eyed. Experience isn't really an attribute - more a factor of time & dedication. Obviously a good ear & eye are helpful, but the thirst for knowledge/experience of birds is what drives these people.
H

 

[Steve Gross]

Many of the best birders I know have training in the sciences; chemical engineering, medicine, etc. One certainly begets the other, but these individuals are highly intelligent as well. These birders are often quite driven in other areas of their lives, I have found.

"Good" birders have at their disposal a mental catalog of field experience and book study; they also use their mental ability to organize and quickly retrieve information.

Here's an example of what I am describing: the Peterson guides that many US birders used early in their birding careers have silhouettes of different families of birds on their inside back covers. The process of IDing a bird involves narrowing down possibilities, from the general level (read silhouette) to the specific. Knowing the families of birds is a great point from which to start the ID process. I've also noticed this is when one begins to bird the tropics, due to the sheer numbers of species. It certainly helped me in Costa Rica during my November trip.

Here's the idea: A birder uses his/her intelligence to amass a catalog of field guide information (e.g. silhouettes, field marks) then couples that with the live experience of birds encountered in the field. Ruling out species by shape, size, song/call, habitat, time of year, etc. is what brings us to the ID we're after, and this is a fairly linear process. Knowledge of seasonality and habitat is certainly refined over years in the field; in fact, those very birders may be the ones to first document a range expansion or contraction for a given species.

So, Mark, use those mental faculties that have so helped you develop your "ear" for birds and apply them to this systematic approach to visual ID. Pay particular attention to the families that are difficult for you.

Of course, I should not end this post without adding the following: despite the mental exercise, all birders should also get a lot of enjoyment through their time in the field, regardless of how adept they are at field identification.

Steve in Houston

 

[Sedgley]

Good thread. I have an 'administrative' mind and desire to see everything in neat and ordered piles. Translated to my birding it means I keep lists and count birds to the exact figure when I record numbers. So if it is possible I count 26 redwings rather than say there were about 25. Of course sometimes you have to say c.25 but that's when you couldn't count rather than when you didn't want to.

Concerning identification, I have to know for sure what the bird is. The desire to 'get to the bottom' of things drives me mad sometimes. :h?: But I have to know what it was beyond any reasonable doubt at all. And if there is doubt I don't include it.

 

[birdpotter]

There was a thread here a while ago about the Meyers-Briggs test or something similar to it(I will try to find it) Those who took the test came up mostly (but not entirely---although I am not one to base judgement or knowledge on tests, this one is a relatively good one) with personality types who are introverted (not to an extreme though), visual (eye for art or artistic), and/or with an analytical mind. I think being anal rententive helps also!


I think what Steve said is right on the money too.

And of course, like anything, you can accomplish just about anything as long as you practice practice practice!



Found it, it has some interesting info on it, charts and whatnot
here

 

[matt green]

I'd say there are more definitions of ''bad birder'' than there are of good?

I'm not implying there are more bad birders than good ones,simply that as
long as there is dedication and honesty you have achieved the building blocks of being a great birder/naturalist.There is only a very small minority that allow themselves to develope numorous bad habbits such as poor fieldcraft,identification etc.

In my humble opinion the most basic requirement of contributing to any science should be a desire for accuracy,of course this can be achieved on many levels.

A lot of the birders on this forum are extremely knowladgable,and some are still learning from the beginning.What seems to be universal among all these different levels of birders is that learning is driven by enthusiasm.I have every faith that there are some young/teenage birders/naturalists around that have learn't more in their early years than perhaps the casual adult birder who simply wishes to enjoy some fresh air at the weekend.Anyone who has read the young birder thread will have realized that birdwatching is vigorously enjoyed by some very lively,intelligent young adults.I find this very encouraging.

As for myself,I'd think my most valued attribute is the fact that I am completely and utterly lacking in ambition for the rare and hard to find,the enthusiasm is still there but the wishfull thinking isn't

This for me affords a certain level headedness;....it could have been a goshawk,possibly but not sure,we'll let that one go and look for some long tailed tits instead!

Matt

 

[birdpotter]

In my humble opinion the most basic requirement of contributing to any science should be a desire for accuracy,of course this can be achieved on many levels.


This for me affords a certain level headedness;....it could have been a goshawk,possibly but not sure,we'll let that one go and look for some long tailed tits instead!

Matt

I think this is good. There is a point where you just have to let go of what you think you might have seen. There are birds that I would love to see, but am more than happy to see a group of Eastern Bluebirds and watch them for a bit rather than hang on to the possibility that the large raptor soaring beyond the trees and out of sight could have been a Golden Eagle. Letting go of a possible 'tick' is very important in the progress of all of humankind...or have I gotten too deep in it?

 

[Merlin]

Hi Birdpotter,
This makes a lot of sense and after many, many years birding. The things I recall with wonderment normally relate to 'everyday' birds. However, I know it is 'everyday' to you but my first American Robin in Central Park is still one of those really special moments that I always will remember.

kind regards & Merry Christmas
Merlin

I think this is good. There is a point where you just have to let go of what you think you might have seen. There are birds that I would love to see, but am more than happy to see a group of Eastern Bluebirds and watch them for a bit rather than hang on to the possibility that the large raptor soaring beyond the trees and out of sight could have been a Golden Eagle. Letting go of a possible 'tick' is very important in the progress of all of humankind...or have I gotten too deep in it?

 

[birdpotter]

Hi Birdpotter,
This makes a lot of sense and after many, many years birding. The things I recall with wonderment normally relate to 'everyday' birds. However, I know it is 'everyday' to you but my first American Robin in Central Park is still one of those really special moments that I always will remember.

kind regards & Merry Christmas
Merlin

I still get goosebumps every spring when the American Robins start really belting out their song. Even when they wake me at 430 in the morning, all I can do is smile. I am glad that this 'everyday' bird provided one of 'those special moments' for you!