Would Unrealistic Field Guides Be Useful?

Debates about new field guides these days usually focus on whether the book uses illustration or photographs.  There is agreement, as far as I'm concerned, on the strengths and weaknesses of both strategies.  Photographs do a better job showing how birds actually appear in the field but are difficult to obtain (the new Crossley ID guides take a very thoughtful approach).  Illustrations look less "realistic" by virtue of the fact that they are artistic creations, but they are much more easily manipulated to show different plumages and for comparisons. 

Though illustrations are representations, it seems that the one constant for both types of field guides is the quest for realism.  This make total sense, of course: if you want to help people recognize the birds around them you'd want your images to look like the birds.  More than that, the subtle differences between many species mean that the more realistic the representations in a field guide, the better the user will be able to make the correct ID. 

Part of me wonders, though, whether there is a point that increased realism comes at the expense of usefulness in learning.  I use field guides in two ways: for study and for reference.  I study the guides to learn about the birds, the goal being to bring the knowledge into the field and use it to ID birds without further consultation from the guide.  I reference a field guide when I can't remember something, like whether it's the Sharp-shinned or the Cooper's Hawk with the squared-off tail.  Even my earliest days of birding I studied the guide much more than I referenced it.  I knew that for all good birders, birding in the field was a closed-book exam - when one talks about the "skill" of a birder they're usually talking about the ability to identify quickly and without consultation.  If I wanted to be a good birder I had to learn the birds and remember them.

Increasingly realistic imagery isn't the only strategy for the study (i.e. learning and retention) of birds, but it is the only one (visually, that is) used in any of the field guides I know of.  Would unrealistic imagery help?  I'm thinking that if a birds' colors were shown in with more contrast or the diagnostic features of its structure exaggerated, it might serve as a memory trigger when the species is seen in the field, like some kind of visual mnemonic device. 

To help make my point I've made a series of crappy drawing of raptor heads.  PLEASE DON'T LAUGH AT THEM I KNOW THEY'RE NOT GOOD. 

These images clearly show a limited set of plumages (and these raptors might not, in retrospect, have provided the best example), but simplifying the birds' features (i.e. falcon facial patterns) and exaggerating the colors could help in identifying the birds later on. 

Are Birds Dislocated By Global Warming "Countable"?

"Wild" means that the bird's occurrence at the time and place of observation is not because it, or its recent ancestors, as ever been transported or otherwise assisted by man.

-Interpretation of ABA Rule 3

We all agree that global warming is caused my man, right?  If birds start showing up in strange new locations because those locations now have more suitable climates because of climate change, are those birds considered to be "otherwise assisted by man"? 

No, because that's crazy.  Hummingbirds that over-winter in northern climes subsisting on feeders are countable, and birds that cross on ships are countable.  

I'm just thinking about it because I've been thinking a lot about Rule 3, namely how hard it is for bird records committees to judge whether a bird is an escapee or a wild bird.  Okay, okay, I'm upset that I drove forever and missed the Chaffinch today.  Are you happy?  I missed the Chaffinch.  I don't even care.

But seriously, the escapee/wild problem is the biggest problem facing records committees, correct?  How could it not be?  If a bird - a Common Chaffinch, say - is found in an odd place - I don't know, like, western New Jersey - and it doesn't have any obvious marks of confinement, how can the correct answer possibly be determined?  If both potential explanations - escapee or vagrant - are possible then anything after that is a guess.  Informed or not, without further evidence any decision is just playing the odds.  

I don't know much about the subject, but it's interesting.  I'm going to try to work on some posts coming up here to tackle the issue.  Hope they'll be showing up soon.

Which Bird Has The Weirdest Range?

I like looking though field guides at birds' ranges.  I like the neat little stories that they tell about migration, and the things you can learn about the natural characteristics of the US.  OK, I also like the pretty colors. 

There are a couple different kinds of ranges.  There are the neotropical migrants with summer ranges in the northern US or Canada and winter ranges either absent or in Florida or whatever.  There are the elevation migrants (I'm sure there are scientific names for these things), like Townsend's Solitaire, that stay in the mountains during the summer but spread out to lower elevations when they're forced out by snow and cold.

Then of course there are the non-migratory birds.  These guys are the "downers" of the range pages.  They're boring (just one color) and many of their ranges are broken up by man-made habitat fragmentation (see: grouse).  I try to flip past these guys pretty quick.

The antidote to the lame-o non-migrants are birds with weird bits in their ranges.  I'm using a Peterson guide for this, and there plenty of great examples.  Why are there holes in the American Redstart range in South Dakota and Illinois?  What does the Whip-Poor-Will find objectionable about western Ohio and the Binghamton, NY area?  What's up with that weird spot in south-central North Carolina where Vesper Sparrows can be found?

The bird with the weirdest range, though, is the Black-crowned Night Heron.  Look at this thing!

 

What a kook!  Stays year-round in Louisiana and south Alabama but skips over Mississippi?  Has no problem getting up into the depths of Alberta but won't touch Wyoming?  What's up with that little dot on the Upper Peninsula of Michigan?  I love it.  

Congrats, Black-crowned Night Heron, stay weird.

Am I The Only Birder Who Didn't Know...

...that Savannah Sparrows are named after the city of Savannah, GA and not the synonym for "grassland"?  I figured that since they're most common in fields and meadows, they were named for that habitat. 

According to a little thing called "the dictionary" (I'd never heard of it either), both "savanna" and "savannah" are proper spellings of the landscape, but the sparrow was named because the first specimens were taken there by Alexander Wilson.  

Quick: Without cheating, there are four other North American species named after American cities.  What be they?

Birding 2011 Year in Review!!!! With Graphs!!!!

It was a great year for bird a-findin' and a-identifyin' (the new terms I am going to use in 2012 instead of 'birding'). I saw 38 new birds in the ABA area and broke through the 500 barrier. I saw 347 species in the USA, my biggest year ever. I birded in Mississippi, Florida, Oregon, Louisiana, Illinois, Missouri, Arkansas, Alabama, Maine and Tennessee. I took boats out to the Dry Tortugas and the middle of the Gulf of Mexico. I sat in a suburban backyard in St. Louis and talked with the owner about Eurasian Tree Sparrow. I seawatched into the Atlantic, Pacific and the Gulf.

Here are some graphs and other visual illustrations!

This maps shows all the spots I got life birds this year.  Drag the map around and click on the blue flags to see what I saw and where.

View 2011 Life Birds in a larger map

Here's a graph showing my accumulation of year birds. The first bird I counted was a Swamp Sparrow at the south end of Sardis Lake, and the last was a vagrant Black-headed Grosbeak in Denton, Maryland. Steep sections in the middle represent trips to Oregon and Florida (March) and Monhegan Island in Maine (September).  Click to enlarge:

Here's a graph of the number of species I saw in the 17 states I birded in this year.

And another one for the counties:

Here's a picture that I didn't take to celebrate my 500th ABA bird - and a pretty damn good one if I may say - a Kentucky Warbler.

Looking forward to a big 2012!

New York Celebrity Sightings

I was in New York City this past weekend for a friend's party.  I got into Penn Station early and had some time to walk around the city.  Having always wanted to see the Guggenheim Museum, I decided to take the 3-ish mile stroll up 8th avenue, through Central Park and over to the museum.

8th Avenue was packed, and after a minute I saw a tall guy with a white mustache walking towards me. John Cleese!  I've been a huge Monty Python fan forever, and seeing him in person - even if he was just walking past on a sidewalk - was a huge thrill.  Here's a cell phone picture I snapped:

Haha nah I didn't have time to take a picture.
Anyway, I figured my celebrity sightings were over for the day.  After checking out the Guggenheim (very cool) I headed back down 5th Avenue.  After a couple blocks I heard the distinct screeching of a Red-tailed Hawk.  Pale Male!  In the world of birding, I don't think there's a bigger celeb.  

OK, it's not the best picture, but like those paparazzi who have to get whatever shots they can get when they see a skinny-dipping starlet, I did the best I could. New York! City of the Rich and Famous!

Birds At Large: State Quarters

The commemorative state quarter program that ran from 1999 to 2009 gave each state a chance to show itself off to the rest of the country.  Something the state should be known for, something pleasant to stick in the minds of the rest of the citizenry.  No surprise to me, then, that birds were depicted so often.

My count shows birds appearing in twelve of the fifty-six quarters produced for the program (that’s fifty states plus quarters for DC, American Samoa, US Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands).  Birds appear more frequently than any other subject, more than boats (9), bison (2), and stupid rock formations that fell to the ground in 2003 (1). 

The frequency of birds on these quarters is easily overlooked, but I believe its important.  Because each state submitted its own design, these quarters show the states as they think of themselves.  Clearly, states are keen to tie their identities to birds, which are both literal and symbolic representatives of natural beauty.  That, or Oklahoma just genuinely didn’t know what the hell else to stick on there.  Either way, let’s take a look.

South Carolina was the first state to feature a bird in their design, in 2000.  It’s a Carolina Wren, a choice that perhaps fits less comfortably with my “literal and symbolic representations of natural beauty” crack and more comfortably with a “let’s put a bunch of crap from South Carolina’s Wikipedia page on there” strategy.  State nickname? Check.  State tree? Check.  State bird? Check and check. 

Louisiana is next, with a Brown Pelican.  It sits among another hodgepodge of state-related stuff, but it’s a cool bird and easier to etch than the state’s first draft design: a big steaming bowl of jambalaya. 

Maine, my beloved home state, is a bit of a cop-out.  Two McDonald’s-arch gulls drift above a ship-and-lighthouse scene.  No, I’ll admit they’re just background details, but drifting gulls is just the image Maine wants to project!  We don’t need to detail our seagulls, there are so many of them that they’re just around, everywhere!  Maine rules it.

Arkansas features a mallard duck flying into a floating diamond.  It’s the trippiest design, and I’m sure that duck is about to be gunned out of the sky in a hail of shotgun fire, but it’s a bird. 

California has the California Condor.  Awesome bird, good choice.

Minnesota’s quarter show a Common Loon cruising along a lake past a couple of (probably drunk) fishermen in a boat.  Minnesota’s a pretty relaxed place.

South Dakota’s quarter stirred up some controversy by featuring three invasive thingies: the Mt. Rushmore carvings, wheat (which replaced a lot of native prairie grasses) and the Ring-necked Pheasant.  Some people felt that since the state has the highest percentage of Native Americans, putting all-invasive items in their quarter was a dumb idea.  Those people are right.

Idaho just has a giant picture of a Peregrine Falcon.  It wins the award for everything. 

Oklahoma is a prime example of a state finding beauty in a bird.  What else would Oklahoma put on its quarter?  A dustbowl?  Kevin Durant?  The Oklahoma state PR guy – down on his luck ever since his Oklahoma Is OK license plates became a national joke – totally redeemed himself by suggesting the state feature the lovely Scissor-tailed Flycatcher on their quarter.  Welcome back, friend. 

US Virgin Islands features a Bananaquit, which is cool, and The Northern Mariana Islands quarter features an awesome pair of Fairy Terns.  USA!  USA!