Ivory-billed Woodpecker (formerly updates) (5 Viewers)

[Larry Lade]

No, Jesse, I did not see the Pileated Woodpecker at work on this tree. I just assumed that this was the work of the pileated. I did not think that a Red-headed Woodpecker would have done such an extensive job on the tree as was apparent here. I did see a Pileated "flyover", but none of the six species of woodpecker I saw this morning came to this tree.

Anyboy else had any thoughts on which woodpecker might have been foraging here, Bill, Fang, Pileated, Steve, gws,....anybody?

 

[steveholz]

Even though I mentioned that it's hard to tell without measuring, it seems that all the Pileated work we looked at had pits and 'looked rough'. The suspect trees in the White and the Cache were lacking pits and the scaling seemed 'neatly done'. Again, it's really all speculation. As it's been said previously, there are no real 'experts' around and we can only surmise.

 

[fangsheath]

Judging from the size of the chips, I would guess pileated, but again, without gouge dimensions there is really no way to make a diagnosis. Although I would certainly pause if I saw sign like that posted by Steve, or like that in the USFWS brochure, I would certainly not peg it as ivory-bill without gouge measurements.

 

[Jesse Gilsdorf]

"http://www.americanbirding.org/pubs/birding/archives/vol33no6p514to522.pdf#search='ivorybill%20Lowery%201971"

For those that missed it. Credits to the person who originally posted it. Nice photo of an IBW taken in LA in 1971 -- unless of course it's a fake. But again, to put a fake on a scaled tree? What a nice touch!

ACtually, I think it is the best evidence to show the bird A. Existed in 71, and B. to show the bird actively scaled the tree.

NOt a great photo, but better than nothing.

 

[fangsheath]

This was not the only photo submitted by Fielding Lewis. Another photo at a different tree can be seen in John Fitzpatrick's plenary address on the CLO web site. Mention has been made of still other photos but these are the only two I have seen.

I might mention also Fred Collins' reference to photos taken in eastern Texas that he described as unmistakably ivory-bill. These among others have never been submitted for public examination to my knowledge.

 

[Jesse Gilsdorf]

I don't think Fred's were released. He did, I think, interview people that refuse to disclose locations that had photos.

While I think about it I have contacted AY Gunter, author of The Big Thicket to clarify something. He had interviewed people that had observed IBW holes/ scalings. Unfortunately, I read the book about 30 years to late and it appears that the person that had observed the scalings is now deceased.

Still, it is a good book and worth the time reading in general on the Thicket.

Thanks for the reference to the other photos. I didn't know that they were out there.

JG

 

[Wompoo Dove]

I believe Georgia is going to do 'something' but they're not sure what that will entail yet.

I think that volunteers (whether coordinated by agencies, or free-lance) will perform a large role in determining the status of the bird in other states. Stay tuned. This forum and the regular state birding listservs will be made aware when volunteer opportunities arise.

Back in the 1980's I was highly involved in Breeding Bird Atlas work throughout the Maritime provinces in Canada. One of the joys of "atlasing" was working with young "keeners". Usually college age males or in their 20's, who with tons of testoserone and spirit and being highly competitive, also had the distinction of being crackerjack birders. Excellent at detail and with no end to energy they were indispensible in covering large areas of remote woodland especially in Northern New Brunswick. What sets this group apart is what their highly competitive nature and level of fitness produces. As simple as that. Whether paid or unpaid for bird observation they are driven. I know because from some of the senior scientists within the Canadian government they considered me one as well.. if I might say so modestly.

The Ivory bill is a species that literally screams that it needs this type of swat team in every state where there have been serious reports. I dont mean to be unkind here but genteel or casual birders accompanied by fluffly little dogs will be unlikely to yield much data on ivory bills. I will stress and stress again stealth and fitness and the keenest ears will provide the most data.

I surveyed vast tracts of forest in the maritime provinces. During a one day period you may only get a look at 1 bay breasted warbler. This might lend one to believe that Bay Breasts are very uncommon. This could not be more further than the truth. An "acoustical photograph" of the area literally reveals dozens of breeding pairs of these warblers in a block of forest of a mere 350 sq yards. I am not trying to compare ivory bills to baybreasts. I am trying to point out that acoustical birding is light years ahead of visual. But the observer needs stealth to see and confirm what he is hearing on occasion to reassure himself that he is hearing the correct species while learning the calls of the target bird. We need sharp ears in the field who are keen and competitive and the sooner the better for this species. Nesting season is well under way.

By the way I have loved reading Bill Smith aka thatmagicguys reports. I found them spellbinding. One can only conclude that Bill and others are either delusional and are seeing things or they literally have had the joy of interacting several times with this amazing bird.

This is an amazing forum and I am delighted to have the opportunity to post here.

Don Kimball

 

[Billbill]

I will stress and stress again stealth and fitness and the keenest ears will provide the most data.

Rather off topic.. but I have often wondered (tongue in cheek) how much the declines in forest songbirds in BBS data actually reflect the fading hearing of the observers conducting them year to year!

Don't count us 40-somethings out, though.. some of us can still get around in rough terrain just fine, and what our ears may have lost in accuity our minds compensate for with experience!

 

[Snowy1]

Here's a request:

Is there a resource on the internet that groups all photos ever taken of the Ivorybill, controversial or not?

I can't help but comment on the 1971 Louisiana photo: Isn't there just too much white on the back? It looks very odd to me. Sorry if I just started a bonfire.

 

[cyberthrush]

Here's a request:

Is there a resource on the internet that groups all photos ever taken of the Ivorybill, controversial or not?

I can't help but comment on the 1971 Louisiana photo: Isn't there just too much white on the back? It looks very odd to me. Sorry if I just started a bonfire.

I don't believe there's any source clumping together ALL IBWO photos, but of course CLO has a lot of the old Singer Tract shots on their site.

As far as the '71 photo goes, I could be wrong but I think that version of it has been enhanced -- anytime I've seen a copy of the original in print it was in black-in-white and much fuzzier than the print for the Williams article -- nonetheless, there's never been any question that the bird in the photo is an Ivory-bill, only whether it is alive, or stuffed and placed in the tree -- the two shots released to the public show a bird in the same posture with bill unviewable, giving skeptics room to doubt -- Gallagher's book, by the way, gives a nice fuller treatment to this whole Fielding Lewis (aka "the Chief") story not found elsewhere, if you haven't already read it.

 

[jeeping31]

Me and some of us talked about this subject and we truely believe that some people have seen this bird and enjoy to see it but enjoy it more to leave it alone so these people are true to the bird. I have mix feelings I think sometime maybe we the humans can fix or save what we destroy. But I do think if there was a way to prevent the race to disapear to help I think we should but then learn about this to anything that Endangered or Threaten to make sure we save wildlife from extinction.

Like the House of Representatives approved legislation which would, if it becomes law, eliminate the requirement to protect 'critical habitat' for endangered species -- delivering a potentially fatal blow to the recovery of wildlife facing extinction. For 30 years, the Endangered Species Act has safeguarded America's wildlife from extinction. In fact, the Act has a 99% success rate in preventing animals from going extinct. Hundreds of species have been saved, and the loss of this legislation would put animals like the Florida panther, bald eagle, gray wolf and grizzly bear in grave danger.

But now anti-environmental forces in Congress -- headed by House Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo (R-CA) -- are pulling out all the stops to undermine this critical protection for America's wildlife.


Just my feelings see you all,
jeeping31

 

[naples]

I was woundering how these "expert" searches are done.
First of all, I would like to say that, fang and Steve H. have the right idea of how to track this bird.

Secondly, as far as getting a picture I believe it's a bit more like a pheasant hunt than a duck hunt.

I've seen the pictures of the Cornell people slogging through the mud and have read about the pearl river search.

You see, I grew up in the midwest, my searches for birds began with pheasants. When we hunted an area we always had people blocking the exits. The younger people (me) and dogs slogged through as flushers, and the blockers, got all the good looks.

I guess two points here,

1. People should be blocking exits, or up ahead looking for flushed birds in this case.
2. I think people with a hunters frame of mind, would be better suited for this search.

Oh, and could the bird just hunker down in a roost hole until the search has passed. I'm thinking, about those lumberjacks that run up trees with spikes and tethers, I know it seem agressive.
But hey lets "get out of judgement and get into curiosity."

Finally we all need to keep our sense of humor and be patient, good things will come.

 

[fangsheath]

When I saw the Fielding Lewis photos back in the 1970's (I didn't know who took them then) they were always black and white and I assumed the originals were too. However I am now fairly certain that the originals are color prints. I don't think anyone should feel apprehensive about looking at them or any other photos critically. But again I am not sure if this is the right forum.

I suspect that a milder version of "blocking exits" is being employed in Arkansas. When suspect double-taps occurring very late in the day can be localized, it seems logical that they would deploy people to encircle the area quietly during the night and try to get audio and/or video of the bird(s) the next morning. Many candidate double-taps have been recorded just after sunset. Sooner or later I think this will pay off. I have my suspicions that it has already happened but regardless I think it is likely to happen before the end of this field season. This is only one of the ways I think the searchers are inevitably closing in on these birds.

 

[fangsheath]

Jerome Jackson's paper in The Auk has, I think many good points and many bad points. It certainly reveals a lot about the author and how he approaches recent events in Arkansas. But what I found most valuable was his description of a letter he found under an ivory-bill specimen, from M.G. Vaiden of Rosedale, Mississippi. Vaiden apparently knew of 6 pairs of ivory-bills just south of Rosedale, Mississippi, at the beginning of World War II. The forests of White River NWR are a mere 25 miles away.

http://www.aou.org/persp1231.pdf

 

[MMinNY]

Jerome Jackson's paper in The Auk has, I think many good points and many bad points. It certainly reveals a lot about the author and how he approaches recent events in Arkansas. But what I found most valuable was his description of a letter he found under an ivory-bill specimen, from M.G. Vaiden of Rosedale, Mississippi. Vaiden apparently knew of 6 pairs of ivory-bills just south of Rosedale, Mississippi, at the beginning of World War II. The forests of White River NWR are a mere 25 miles away.

http://www.aou.org/persp1231.pdf

That Rosedale bit was very interesting. As to the rest of the paper, much of it seems like sour grapes to me. I'm a lawyer not a scientist, so perhaps I have a different understanding of evidence. Based on the available information, I think the evidence for the existence of ivory bills in Arkansas (and elsewhere) is quite compelling -- even assuming for the sake of argument that Jackson is right about the video.

As an aside, I'm troubled by his use of unpublished material and innuendo to support his argument that the video shows a pileated; The statement that "others have independently come to the same conclusion, and publication of independent analyses may be forthcoming" seems particularly problematic to me, since neither the statement nor the analyses can be rebutted.


The idea that the ivory bill's survival is an "extraordinary claim" requiring extraordinary proof is based on an acceptance of received wisdom that is hardly characteristic of a true skeptic. It seems to me that it's up to Jackson and the other "skeptics" to do a lot better in refuting the ample circumstantial evidence that exists. Saying "I'm convinced that the bird in the video is a pileated" just isn't enough.

 

[fangsheath]

I would only add for the sake of future work, again I realize this is not the forum to discuss past evidence: If you have alternative hypotheses, you test them. You don't simply say, "They haven't demonstrated that hypothesis A is correct to my satisfaction." If you hypothesize that the bird in the Luneau video is a pileated, great. Get your butt out there and test it. Take some video of pileateds. Study it. Get data on color pattern and wingbeat rate. Show us how the Luneau video falls within the known range of variation. Get out of the peanut gallery and do some real science.

There is far too much dependence on "expert opinion" in my view. "David Sibley thinks the bird in the Luneau video is a pileated." Okay. Other "experts" like Lammertink think otherwise. Where does that get us? I'm not very interested in dueling experts. I'm interested in data, and I don't need an expert to interpret it for me. In past years all we got was, "That foraging sign looks odd for a pileated." "Well, it is odd, but maybe it is pileated." How bout some quantification, people? Data, data, data. Not opinions. That's what I want to see.

 

[Jesse Gilsdorf]

I can't help but comment on the 1971 Louisiana photo: Isn't there just too much white on the back? It looks very odd to me. Sorry if I just started a bonfire.

Maybe: Some birds when mounted do not show the "shield on the back, but two triangles with a black line down the middle, similar to what is viewed but the black line would go further down. This appears to be the result of the mounting in which the wings are not tight together and the black of the back is showing through. Imperials (mounted- obviously - I wish there were some) have shown similar markings (imperials lack the white running up the back to the head but have the white secondaries).

The sollid white shield is a filed mark for some, however, from what I have seen in museum specimens and other photos there may be more peppering of black into the shield area towards the top. Peppering is not the best word, but more infiltrating of black downward. Simply put, there will be more white on some birds then others. If you view the attached photo you may understand more of to what I am referring.

 

[mrtweedy1]

Saying "I'm convinced that the bird in the video is a pileated" just isn't enough.

On the other hand, is it enough to say "I'm convinced that the bird in the video is an Ivory-bill, because the 'jizz' doesn't seem right for Pileated"?

 

[MMinNY]

I would say yes. . .

On the other hand, is it enough to say "I'm convinced that the bird in the video is an Ivory-bill, because the 'jizz' doesn't seem right for Pileated"?

When that statement is considered in the context of the totality of the evidence that has been presented thus far.

But I agree with Fangsheath, battles of the experts are for courtrooms. Let's see some data.

 

[fangsheath]

Perhaps I was unclear about the context of my remarks. If anyone on this forum or anywhere else wants to express their personal opinion about videos, sound recordings, jizz, or anything else having to do with the bird that is A-okay with me. But if you are a professional ornithologist bemoaning the lack of good science in what is going on, it hardly helps your case to merely rattle off your quick judgment about the evidence. Test your hypotheses! Then I will take seriously your case that science is getting the shaft in these goings on.