Further to Quest for the breeding K Parrot

["Philip Veerman" <>]

Yesterday I wrote about Martin's graph and comments on the issue. Martin says that I decided to say with the simpler format: In truth I have already done all the necessary work, years ago. All Martin needed to do was to run my report "Breeding records and ratios by species and year". All it takes is about 2 clicks on the computer to select it and all the data is instantly there (or run the query that the report is based on, to export the data to MS Excel). Or a few more clicks to select just the one species. So I don't see how his format is simpler, it certainly is not easier. I did all that work for a reason - so that the data can be used, it is so frustrating to see the resource wasted.

 

Right from year 1 McComas Taylor recognised the importance of considering results relative to observer input and that system should prevail in every aspect of the analysis. Having said that and in the knowledge gained since then that observer input is so hugely variable over the years, I have looked at the results. Doing that, the low result highlighted by Martin, in years 14 to 16 simply does not exist. On the basis that Year 15 is high. Apart from that, it is not beyond random. My summary is that: not surprisingly, given the huge increase in abundance of the species over the years, in all measures, the breeding results are much higher from year 17 onwards than earlier years (years 13 and 15 were also high). And to take on Geoffrey's comment. Yes I agree that most (or maybe all) of the GBS breeding records are based on DY observations and the likely nesting location is far from the site of the DY observation.

 

Philip