My perspective
on the data basing discussion:
I am not too
concerned whether or not the data end up with BA, but foremost they should end
up with COG.
I enter most of
my obs. into the COG data base (and, as an aside, I also would welcome a system
that is easier to use than the current one.) I want to know what determines
presence/absence, booms and busts of local birds, and like to follow/see the
changes over time, especially long-term.
How well or
otherwise we can do this depends so much on the willingness of observers to
enter their observations into at least one data base (COG?s or birdline) as well
as comments on the chat line. The more observations are available, the better
the Annual Bird Report will reflect what happened in a given report period
within COG?s area of interest.
[I still would
like to know how smooth and within what time frame data added to the birdline
will end up via BA with COG. ]
Further, the
more data is held in the COG data base, the better COG can respond to requests
for information from government and organizations and comment on or raise issues
of conservation.
These 2 reasons,
quality of the ABR, and the conservation aspect provide enough impetus for me to
focus on the COG data base rather than other systems. I would certainly welcome
improvements to the COG system. I am also quite impressed with some of the
birdline features.
My hope is that
all sides keep talking to each other and address the various issues raised by
several members in this discussion, and that we will see improvements that make
data entry and transfer easier.
Michael
Lenz
