both comments are completely true. And we can speak of typical gardens or GBS
areas or whatever else we wish to speak of. (I think Geoffrey's start point was
not about GBS.) I am not entirely comfortable about the description of a
"distortion" though. This issue of the problems and biases of the GBS is all of
these things a: feature, attribute, strength, weakness, opportunity,
threat. That GBS by its rules extends often beyond the immediate person's garden
allows collection of status data that otherwise simply would not have been
collected. What comes out of the GBS relates to what went in, with all its good
points and its inconsistencies. That is why I devoted so much attention to
explaining the history, style and methods of the GBS and the time and space
connections in the data. Accepting the Birds of Canberra Gardens book is
distorting, because it makes no useful or accurate attempt to explain these
you, Martin, and spoken like a statistician. We are speaking
of typical gardens here. One of the distortions of the GBS is that
it takes in non-garden areas, eg chunks of nature parks. The proposition
that ducks nest in tree hollows in gardens will come as a surprise to the
average Canberra gardener.
butterfield [ Sent: Saturday, 14 April 2012
12:39 PM To: Geoffrey
Subject: Re: [canberrabirds]
Canberra Birds for beginners
Nice try, but I don't think a
cigar can be awarded.
Many gardens get visits from waterbirds (eg
White-faced Herons knocking off goldfish from 2m square ponds, Australian Wood
Ducks and Pacific Black Ducks doing what ducks do (eg grazing on lawns, nesting
in tree hollows).
Whether open country birds turn up is a matter
of where the garden is located and what is there that might interest the
birds. Both Skylarks and Australasian Pipits have been reported reasonably
often in the GBS (Skylark at least once in 28/30 years and Australasian Pipit at
least once in 29/30 years).
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Geoffrey Dabb <>