An a Couple of Podcasts

Hey all I just wanted to post these here so I have them and don't forget them and maybe one day stumble upon them as an old man trying to remember what my voice once sounded like. 

I was honored to join Tommy Siegal and Billy Libby on their excellent Extremely Accurate Bird Songs podcast to talk about one of the world's gnarliest birds, the Osprey. Listen on Spotify here or Apple Podcasts here. 

 

 

I love this podcast. Tommy is a famous cartoonist, the author of the Extremely Accurate Birds calendars, and cartoons in the New Yorker and elsewhere. Billy Libby is a musician and composer and, incidentally but perhaps most importantly, is from Portland, Maine. It was great to join then and their Osprey song absolutely rips.

I was also honored to be asked to join the American Birding Association (every birder should be a member) for their This Month in Birding Podcast, along with birding luminaries Jennie Duberstein and Brodie Cass Talbot. 

 

We had a great talk, as always, and I was particularly proud of some of the hoped-for hybrids I came up with, including the Smooth Groove Ani (Groove-billed x Smooth-billed). Good times.

ABA Podcast, Illinois Kingfisher Mascot, Others

 Hey my dear friends what's happening. Will Blogger still be around after there's no democracy? Who knows. Better get these things up now.

I was recently a guest on the American Birding Association's This Month in Birding podcast, alongside superhost Nate Swick and with Nicole Jackson and Mo Stych. It was pretty depressing to start! Things are not great right now! But it got more fun and funnier! Click on the image below!

I also wrote a piece for National Audubon about an exciting initiative happening on the campus of the University of Illinois, which has been without a sports team mascot for over a decade since they ditched their own offensive Native American one. The new movement hopes to install the Belted Kingfisher as the new mascot! Great bird! I hope it works! I don't want to spoil the story, but I'll tell you that the vote went really well and that no one still knows what the next steps are! Exclamation points!

Splits and Lumps in the ABA Podcast

The American Birding Association released their annual AOS Classification Committee roundup podcast this week, my favorite annual episode. As always, host Nate Swick talks with Stonehill College professor Dr. Nick Block about this years' proposals to the Committee, and which ones might or might not pass.

LISTEN TO THE EPISODE HERE

It's great fun to hear about how our checklists might change based on the latest science, and this one was another great episode. I enjoyed the early discussion about possible White-winged Scoter splits and an unlikely Harlan's Hawk split, as well as the other scientific discussion.

However, when the conversation got to the part about possible changes to some common names, I had some qualms. QUALM ALERT. 

Not being a scientist, I have no opinion on the scientific lumps and splits stuff. Being a regular birder, though, I do have some strong opinions on common names. In the episode, Swick and Block discussed two possible name changes before the Classification Committee -- regarding McCown's Longspur and Blue-throated Hummingbird -- and I had some problems with each. 

First, I am on record as being a strong supporter of changing the name of the McCown's Longspur, which is being proposed because it turns out that John P. McCown was a general in the Confederate Army during the Civil War. Oops. I love honorific names, but also strongly support changing them if we think the honored person is no longer worthy. We have the power, let's use it!

I was surprised, then, to hear Nate hesitate on this rename, citing the ol' slippery slope argument by saying, "where do you stop once you start going down this path?" I just hate slippery slope arguments, which have been used to justify not doing all kinds of good things worth doing, because they're so often posed as a rhetorical question without an answer. Instead, slipper slope questions always have an answer, and for the question of "where do we stop once we start going down the path" of renaming birds named after unworthy people, there are two pretty clear answers. The first answer, the one that applies to all slippery slope questions, is: "We stop wherever we decide too." No decision obligates us to any other decision, and with debate and thought smart people put limits on things all the time. It's not a big deal. The second answer, the more specific one for this renaming question, is: "We stop somewhere on the other side of honoring a guy who took up arms against his countrymen so that he could keep other human beings as slaves." I hope the Committee passes this rename, and I look forward to additional reconsiderations of avian honorees.

My second qualm was about the discussion of the proposed renaming of Blue-throated Hummingbird to Blue-throated Mountaingem (Mountain-gem?). I'm no expert on Central American hummingbirds (one day I hope!), but do know a single species of the Lampornis genus from Arizona: the Blue-throated Hummingbird. Apparently, all the other species in this genus are called Mountangems, not Hummingbird, and this proposal would extend that name to the Blue-throat. Sounds cool, and Mountaingem is a hell of a word. I support it.

I furrowed my brows a bit about how Nate and Dr. Block discussed the proposal, though. There was some eye-rolling in the beginning of the episode about how the Classification Committee lacks consistency in making decisions, but I thought the support of this change was inconsistent with what the two were discussing earlier. In their talk about honorifics, Dr. Block said he preferred descriptive names (well, except for ones that are poorly descriptive, like Ring-necked Duck)...but isn't getting rid of "Hummingbird" in this species' name a step away from description and towards obfuscation? Everyone knows what a hummingbird is, but what the heck is a mountaingem? Dr. Block said that he favored the name change in part because it "reduces confusion" -- meaning that all the species in Lampornis would now share the Mountaingem name -- and I suppose that's true, but only for those birders who are familiar with the entire genus. I'd say for the rest of us, for the majority of American birders, the change would instead cause confusion!

It's a matter of perspective. To ornithologists like Dr. Block, changing the name to Mountaingem would align them with their related species elsewhere on the continent. But to American non-ornithologists, those hordes of regular birders who, like me, have enough to remember with just my Sibley, the name change would be something new and different. The Classification Committee, I suspect, will take the ornithologist view. A cursory check tells me that every member of the Committee except Jon Dunn has a Ph.D. (and he probably deserves one). These are not regular birders. But the decision to change the common name of a species is not based in science. Unlike all the other lump/split decisions made by this Committee, for which I am grateful they are the top scientists in the field, common names live with us, the commoners. Do we get a say in how common names are chosen? I hope Jon Dunn carries our water, and at least reminds the Committee of the other perspectives involved. 

ABA Podcast

Hey everyone. Had the honor of joining Nate Swick and the crew of the American Birding Association on their ABA Podcast this week. We talked about Birds at Large, Google Street View Birding, and more. Give a listen:

http://blog.aba.org/2018/12/american-birding-podcast-birds-at-large-with-nick-lund.html

Interview with Ray Brown of Ray Brown's Talkin' Birds

I first started listening to Ray Brown's Talkin' Birds back in 2006, the early days of podcasting.  It was a wild west back then, with very little content available except The Ricky Gervais Show and some weirder stuff.  Searching through the iTunes options back then I had little hope of finding anything bird-related - but there was Ray Brown's Talkin' Birds.

The show was just the fix I needed.  Recorded in Boston by a dulcet-toned broadcasting vet, Ray Brown, the show captured a sort of DIY folksiness immediately recognizable in birders - you could sometimes even hear birds at the feeders outside the studio window.  Ray's passion for the topic was evident and infectious, and the show became a constant companion.

And it's still going strong.  Ray is set to record his 500th show, and to celebrate the milestone he's hitting the road and coming to DC, recording this Sunday, November 9, at the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History.  I'll be there, and you should be too.  I was able to ask Ray a few questions in preparation for this weekend's big event.

The Birdist: Five hundred shows!  Can you talk about the impetus for Talkin' Birds?  Was it a tough pitch to the station?

Ray Brown: The impetus (which led to a result after about ten years of sporadic rumination) came about when I was doing a weekend talk show on a Boston radio station (WBZ). Somehow, when we started talking about birds one day, we got bombarded with calls (and not from listeners demanding that we change the subject). Then and there I decided to create a radio show about birds and birding. But I didn't rush into it.

Yes, the first pitch was met with a pretty big dollop of skepticism, but then again so were most of the subsequent pitches. We've managed so far to convince 14 stations to carry the show (one required a modest financial sweetener), and so far, no station that's picked up the show has dropped it. (They wouldn't dare risk havi ng a bunch of crazed birders brandishing Swarovski scopes on big tripods doing protest marches in front of the studios.)

The Birdist: What was that first show like?

Ray Brown: To tell you the truth, I haven't dared listen to it. [ed note: the great Tumblr set up for the show only goes back as far as Episode 28, with Kenn Kaufman!]

The Birdist: Ha! Haven't listened to it! Has the format changed, though, since then?  What lessons do you think you've learned since that first day?

Ray Brown: After looking at the outline of the first show, I'm not sure how we filled the thirty minutes--must have used some extended musical interludes (to set the mood for avian contemplation). The centerpiece, though, was the Mystery Bird Contest, featuring clues and the song or call of a bird and the reward of a Droll Yankees bird feeder. We still do that contest every week, and have now reduced Droll Yankees' inventory by about 500 items. We like to think that we've made significant contributions to the nutritional needs of many, many birds (assuming that the winners of the feeders actually fill them up).

Changes have included the addition of other regular features, including our Let's Ask Mike segment, in which Mike O'Connor, the witty and knowledgeable owner of  Cape Cod's Birdwatcher's General Store, and author of two very successful bird books, answers questions like "Why are there no birds at my feeders?" every week. We've also added the unfortunately-titled "Featured Feathered Friend" segment, which attempts to showcase interesting attributes of a different bird each week, often using some well-disguised humor. Other rotating segments include "Science Corner," "Birds in the News," and the "Bird Word of the Week," in which our resident professor, Dr. Rufus Towhee, corrects my misinterpretations of avian anatomical terms. ("No, 'after-shaft' is not another term for 'downsizing,'" for example.) And more guests.

One thing I've learned is that, even for a short show of 30 minutes length, it's important to have enough material to cover the time. "Wanna hear that again?" can only go so far.

The Birdist: What's the planning or writing process like before a show goes on?

Ray Brown: Someone asked me the other day if I pre-plan the show or just "wing it." I don't think he was offering an intentional pun, and I don't think he believed me when I said I spend about 15 hours preparing each program. But he doesn't know that I'm a slow worker. Anyway, I write an "opening comments" section each week that runs seven or eight minutes; put scripts together for a produced featured bird segment for each show, along with a couple of other features; record a brief weekly interview with our bird feeding expert; and set up interviews for future shows. I know, it shouldn't take so long.

The Birdist: How much do you get out to bird, and where?

Ray Brown:  I stop by the marshes and ponds on the way to work most days, and hook up occasionally with local bird clubs so I can figure out what I saw when I had only a field guide (and 5 birding apps) to help me. My office has a nice view of Boston Harbor -- I have a telescope at the window and in the winter I manage to rack up a fair number of duck species without leaving my desk. (That may partly explain why it takes me so long to produce the show.) I used to keep a life list but gave it up when I realized I'd never be featured in one of Birding Magazine's milestone reports.

The Birdist: Well, I think 500 shows is a milestone worthy of Birding Magazine...any surprises in store for the next 500?

Ray Brown: I guess it's not a surprise if I reveal it, but I can say that we'll soon have a prestigious new show contributor. (His name rhymes with Mavid Fibley.)

__

Mavid Fibley, huh?  I wonder who he could be talking about?  Ravid Gibley?  Pavid Libley?  I'm stumped, so I guess if we want to find out, we'll have to stay tuned: click here to listen to Ray Brown's Talkin' Birds online.