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
