World's Best 100 Birds (3 Viewers)

[David Pedder]

Crispycreme - May I respectfully suggest you read the BirdForum guidelines to be found on the Member's Notice Board, paying particular attention to the guidelines regarding being respectful of the opinions of others.

We are all entitled to express an opinion without it resulting in personal attack.

 

[crispycreme]

David, I would like you to read my post again and point out any personal attacks. Calling someone's comments "rude" or "mean spirited" is not a personal attack. It's a commentary on the written words. I did not make any claim about the individual. It's no more a personal attack than calling someone else's opinion "twaddle".

For the record, I have read the guidelines more than once.

 

[weather]

Well...This was an enjoyable thread.

I don't have one blasted bird on the list!

Here's someone else that went along the same lines.

http://montereybay.com/creagrus/best_birds.html

Mike

 

[Grousemore]

Crispycreme - May I respectfully suggest you read the BirdForum guidelines to be found on the Member's Notice Board, paying particular attention to the guidelines regarding being respectful of the opinions of others.

We are all entitled to express an opinion without it resulting in personal attack.

Crispy said what I was thinking, but couldn't be bothered to post...and said it more politely!

 

[Edward woodwood]

It's a great thread highlighting some of the most threatened birds of the world

hopefully this is the kind of thing that will raise awareness of threatened birds (there's more out there than the Ivorybill) and some of the younger birders on Bird Forum might be inspired to get involved with conservation or actually go and see them. I loved to hear birers talk of these mythical birds when i was a kid. I'd have killed for threads and info like this as a teenager

If people 'don't get it' maybe it's best to leave it to those who do...?

Tim

 

[GreatHornedOwl]

.... Eh.... I went through the list again, I found the NOT-extinct Pink-headed duck , but didn't see Eskimo curlew or Slender-billed curlew ; what happened to them, surely they're not extinct yet? B

BTW, are there currently any research/conservation efforts done for the Slender-billed curlew ?

 

[Rasmus Boegh]

What a heck is Rondonia Bushbird?

:news:

RoNdonia Bushbird....(thanks for drawing my attention to the typo), is a distinctive bizarre Antbird that no one ever sees in a remote tiny speck of Brazil. There is only one other bird in the genus, and its Huge recruved bill is striking and singular. (PS I know you know what a Rondonia Bushbird is, Jurek...just writing this in case anyone else is interested)....

There's another member of the genus, quite similar to the Rondonia Bushbird and likewise very rare: The Recurve-billed Bushbird (C. alixii). Both members of this genus are amazing to say the least and I'd give my left arm (almost, anyway) to re-discover one of them. I've seen the closely related Black Bushbird and while it's quite amazing, the bill still isn't as extraordinary as in the two members of Clytoctantes. As far as I am aware the last record of the Recurve-billed Bushbird was in 1965, but there's a good chance it still exists in one or two of the increasingly small forest patches in the central valley of Colombia. The Rondonian Bushbird is only known from a single specimen and less than a handful of sightings. Most recent record may be a friend of mine who "may have heard it" and has informed the right people, but I doubt he will go official with it due to the uncertainty involved in his record. The Rondonia Bushbird is only known from an tiny part of the Amazon - by coincidence probably the part of the Amazon that's disappearing at the fastest rate. Most of the unique forest in this corner of the Amazon is already lost, but hopefully a small part can be saved before it's too late...

 

[BarbatusOne]

.... Eh.... I went through the list again, I found the NOT-extinct Pink-headed duck , but didn't see Eskimo curlew or Slender-billed curlew ; what happened to them, surely they're not extinct yet? B

Slender-billed Curlew is # 87, and it does def. still exist...indeed it may have been seen at Minsmere a year ago (right?) The problem with this species is that no one has found the breeding population (that we know of)...thus it's almost impossible to protect them. Pink-headed Duck was almost assuredly seen by researches in Burma this year, but Eskimo hasn't been seen for a long time, and is almost certainly gone for good- that's what the tealeaves are telling me anyway.

 

[Edward woodwood]

.... Eh.... I went through the list again, I found the NOT-extinct Pink-headed duck , but didn't see Eskimo curlew or Slender-billed curlew ; what happened to them, surely they're not extinct yet? B

BTW, are there currently any research/conservation efforts done for the Slender-billed curlew ?

Hi GHO

Adam Gretton looked for their breeding grounds, without luck, in a large BirdLife Survey a few years back (summary of results was published in British Birds, more detail in Bird Conservation International I think)

the species has to be found first!!!

the minsmere bird was a Curlew and the PHD is not a confirmed sighting.

atb
Tim

 

[Rasmus Boegh]

I wonder if anyone alive has ever seen half?

I've seen ca. 1/4 of the species on your list, so I think it's pretty certain that at least a few people have seen more than half (i.e. Jon Hornbuckle, Peter Kaestner, the late Phoebe Snetsinger, etc.). On the other hand there's a few species on the list that - as far as I know - have been seen by no-one in the last 50+ years, while there's another few on the list that's only been seen a few times (sometimes only once) in the last 50 years. BTW: In my opinion the virtually unknown Yellow-crested Helmetshrike deserves a spot in the light. And yes, for people not knowing it: It is as amazing as the name indicate!

 

[GreatHornedOwl]

Hi GHO

Adam Gretton looked for their breeding grounds, without luck, in a large BirdLife Survey a few years back (summary of results was published in British Birds, more detail in Bird Conservation International I think)

the species has to be found first!!!

the minsmere bird was a Curlew and the PHD is not a confirmed sighting.

atb
Tim

Aha - here : http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/nature/directive/birdactionplan/numeniustenuirostris.htm

Thanks, Tim.

 

[David Pedder]

Crispycreme, Thank you. I have re-read your post as requested. Of course you have every right to comment on the written word as being, in your opinion, “rude” and “mean spirited”. However, to call someone’s post “a waste of bandwith” and to suggest they should “save their energies for something more worthwhile,” is, to me, not only arrogant but personally most offensive.

Back to the thread: Tim’s comments have made great sense and have encouraged me, as a new and very lowly birder, to understand what Grant’s work is all about and and to appreciate the importance of it. I was initially one of those who “did not get it” but, thanks to this forum and to Grant’s detailed and fascinating explanation of his work, I am now far more aware about some of the most threatened birds of the world, most of which I had never even heard of!
I can’t agree, Tim, that “If people ‘don’t get it’ maybe it is best to leave it to those who do?” Would that not make BirdForum some sort of exclusive club? I, and thousands of others I’m sure, use this forum as a superb resource from which to learn and if we don’t “get it” at first, hopefully we eventually will.

 

[Edward woodwood]

Wow Rasmus, a quarter is pretty good going!

I reckon Hornbuckle might have done over 50% and perhaps Tom Gullick too

David
no offence intended mate
BF is great indeed. I'm sure you'll hear about many weird and wonderful birds here

atb
Tim

 

[level seven]

Never having (knowingly) seen such a common bird in the UK as a Shag, I'm going to claim the prize of being the most rubbish birder to have seen at least one of the Top 100 - Siberian Crane. Can anyone beat that?

 

[Edward woodwood]

Hi Graham

I am decidedly more rubbish than you at Brit. birding and have two in the top 10

hoping for a Shag very soon though... maybe today even

er... better get up the coast!

Tim

 

[level seven]

LOL! And to think I resisted any Shag jokes myself...

 

[David Pedder]

Thanks Tim. No offence taken. Enjoy the Phalacrocorax aristotelis!

 

[rezMole]

What are you talking about? That's exactly what the thread is about. Blake's list of the world's best 100 birds. He's the thread originator so it's a duplication of effort to title it "Blake's list of the world's best 100 birds". It's inferred! It's his thread! Any list of the best anything is purely subjective, as everyone should know, so to trounce in here and do nothing but mock the effort is purely mean spirited and rude on your part, not to mention a complete waste of bandwidth. Save your energies for something more worthwhile.

I found the list fascinating, Blake. One of these days I hope to get one, any one, of those birds on my list!

I too found the list "interesting", but it was the "best" bit of the thread title that i didn't understand. Why are these the "best" birds? Is one bird better than another simply because it is more "obscure" or "rare"?

Is it so important to get to see a bird species before it disappears forever? I personally don't think it is - and i'm glad I think this way. If i never get to see any of the birds in the "best" 100, then what does it matter? I get to see Little Ringed Plovers, Goosanders and Grey Herons quite regularly, and thats's enough. Maybe these birds would only score a measly 1% rating, but to me, these are brilliant birds.

What i didn't like about the way the list was compiled was that it appeared to have some "scientific" methodology in its compilation, but at the end of the day was just subjective. Subjective in the criteria that was set in the first place. Add another criteria (colourfulness, size, speed, anything) and the results would be totally different.



Perhaps the use of the word "twaddle" caused offence - it wasn't meant to. It's obviously one of those words that has a differnt "tone" depending on your nationality. Where i come from "twaddle" is a tongue-in-cheek, humourous word - a bit like "twonk" and "plonker". Sorry for the use of "twaddle" - i'll try not to use it again - even though i often spout it myself a lot!!!

 

[BarbatusOne]

for the use of "twaddle" - i'll try not to use it again - even though i often spout it myself a lot!!!

I was not offended by your calling the project twaddle, on the contrary I was interested and bemused being, as I was, totally oblivious to its meaning. It clearly however did not have a very complimentary connotation, as has been evidenced by your subsequent posts, that much was obvious.

In the Inspiration and Methods section I tried to go out of my way to explain that I was interpreting the meaning of the word ''best'' to entail a number of various attributes that I, personally, subjectively, consider to constitute making a bird particularly ''good'' or desirable from the perspective of a world lister. It seems to me that life itself on just about every level can be seen as a necessarily subjective enterprise, and that whenever we open our mouths about any matter we reveal a bias. Such is the case with my list. In my view (notice careful invocation of subjective term-in MY view , the use of the term ''Best'' in the thread title suggests nothing to the contrary. How many times have you opened a magazine to see a spread on the ''ten best country houses'' or the ''ten hottest babes of the month?'' While we hope such lists are well-informed we certainly don't expect them to meet an objective or trasncendant criteria of truth.

You are faulting the list for being something that I never intended it to be, nor could it ever have been.

Thank you for injecting a little spice into the thread though! It certainly drew more attention to the list than would have otherwise occured B

Best

 

[crispycreme]

David, I'm afraid we'll have to simply disagree on what constitutes a personal attack. I am not a clinical type of person, and occasionally my posts reflect that, but I am careful not to denigrate the individual. I think we'll have to leave it at that. If the moderators think otherwise, of course they have the right and responsibility to edit and/or admonish.

RezMole, I don't think there's any problem with disagreeing with an opinion. It's the lack of effort you made in your post, in contrast to the gargantuan effort Blake made in presenting his. It was astonishingly disrespectful, and yes, a waste of bandwidth in my opinion, since it didn't even say why the original post was twaddle. Now that you've elaborated, I can understand your point of view. I don't necessarily agree with it, but that's beside the point. Thank you for clarifying.

As Tim and others have said, these are almost all birds that can use as much time in the spotlight as possible, if they're to have any chance at all. It doesn't mean that your local thrush or flycatcher isn't a superb bird, and any less worthy of admiration, but those who read this thread can at least contemplate for a minute on birds that are in peril of extinction.

(That's all I have to say on the matter, as others in the thread undoubtably will appreciate )