|To:||"'Duncan McCaskill'" <>, "'Paul T.'" <>|
|Subject:||Counting C Myna in GBS: the real story.|
|From:||"Philip Veerman" <>|
|Date:||Tue, 4 Jun 2013 22:53:54 +1000|
Duncan is right on current arrangements but I will add this history. Actually the rules of the first 2 versions of the chart were ambiguous, because they said to only record birds dependent on the area. They certainly did not ever mention the word "use". Then they gave some examples but that still left the interpretation vague because it still begged the question about what other behaviours were or were not "dependent". Then it also said but if the birds are not dependent then record them anyway but underline the record. But several categories of records were to be underlined, such as "seen beyond 100 metres". Thus it became completely confusing, with some people routinely underlining some observations and most never did. When the numbers were input to the original computer system, different people doing the input were inconsistent as to which numbers were used. I know because I spent years proof reading all those hundreds of charts as I converted the data into the MS Access system. And in that original system, once a number was entered, it was impossible to change it, without deleting the full record and reinputting the entire line. This is all explained in great clarity in The GBS Report with exact transcripts of the instructions from each chart version and a full description of why the changes were made. It did all this work for a reason, so that discussions like this would not need to happen. I really shouldn't be giving out free extracts of the GBS Report all the time but seeing as the third edition is almost sold out, here is the relevant extract:
Version one of the chart was issued
about June 1981. It was used for Years 1 to 6. The design was basic. There were
27 species printed on the chart. Two now prominent species: Common Blackbird and
Pied Currawong were not included on the list. This suggests that in 1981 these
were not considered among the 27 most widespread species. However,
These instructions contained several problems and are ambiguous. It instructs to “only record the numbers of birds dependent on the 100m”, yet allows for recording birds “not dependent on your area or seen beyond 100 metres”, with underlining of the record. This requires assessing whether a bird was dependent on the area. It also raises the problem as to how far beyond 100 metres, an observed bird, could still be included. My pilot study questionnaire of 1988 (pages 16 & 17) asked how people interpreted the distance instruction. The results suggest that observers mostly kept to the intent of the 100 metre radius. As the instructions allowed that underlining could indicate various possibilities, this ambiguity confuses interpretation of the underlining of observations. Fortunately few observers used the underline option. Those that did, often had two numbers in one cell. Dual data can not be used. If the two counts were simultaneous, such as ten Galahs perched when 25 flew over, then the maximum is 35. If those two events happened at different times, then the maximum is 25. When doing computer data entry, the original intent of any double notations or underlining is unknown. It is clear in looking at the data compiled for the ABR in the early years, that the underlining of an observation was ignored. The higher number in a cell was the one used, in this Galah example 25, unless there was some clear indication that the counts should be added. This method was retained in inputting old data into the new system. With these problems it is unfortunate that version 2 of the chart repeated this instruction. There is a possibility that recorded abundance of some species could show an artificial drop from higher levels in Years 1 to 12 than for later years. Recording of breeding was simple. Observers recorded breeding by N and F and a variety of individual styles that progressively evolved. Breeding observations noted as N on the charts are described as “activities at nest” in the species accounts. There was no C type breeding records noticed during this analysis.
Version two of the chart was designed by McComas Taylor and improved on the appearance and clarity from version one. It was issued about June 1985 and was used for Years 5 to 12. This chart continued the problems of underlined observations, determining dependence and out of area records. There were 41 species printed on the chart. The instructions for version two of the chart are:
Stocks of version two ran low in early 1993. There were discussions on whether to issue new charts improved only in appearance and maintaining continuity with the same flawed instructions or to change the instructions to match the changes already being promoted informally. The latter course was chosen.
Version three of the chart (and later versions) were designed using a computer design package, so improved substantially on appearance and clarity and are much easier to use. It also incorporated many developments to comply with the new COG database, such as new breeding codes. It was designed by Philip Veerman and Kirk Rockett and issued in June 1993. It was used for Years 13 to 17. There were 50 species printed on the chart. The instructions for version three of the chart are:
(as issued previoulsly)
From: Duncan McCaskill [
Sent: Tuesday, 4 June 2013 10:25 PM
To: Paul T.
Cc: canberra birds
Subject: Re: [canberrabirds] Counting C Myna in GBS
You had it straight, but have been confused by this discussion.
There is no requirement that birds recorded in the GBS be "using" your garden (or more correctly, your 3.1 ha site that probably includes your garden) in any way. Apparently, the very first rules in 1981 did include a requirement that birds be "using" the site in some way, but as Philip wrote, that rule was explicitly removed in the 1993 version of the chart. Given the vagueness of what could be considered "using" a site, I doubt if anyone took much notice of the rule. (I don't know for sure. This was a very long time before my involvement with COG and the GBS.)
Yes, GBS sites can and do include neighbouring bushland and other "non-garden" areas. There is no height limit. You can count birds flying over no matter how high. (A few weeks ago I recorded a Wedge-tailed Eagle flying so high it was invisible to the naked eye. I only saw it because I was watching some much lower Pelicans through binoculars.)
The issues originally raised in this email chain were about trapped and killed mynas. Yes, count mynas in your trap. As Philip said, keeping the rules simple is important to avoid confusing people.
The only issue is to not count dead birds (like mynas killed in your trap) more than once - dead birds tend to stay dead and don't move on. A recently dead bird is strong evidence that it was recently alive in your site. So, for example, if you find a road kill Barn Owl in your GBS site count it - its very likely the only Barn Owl you'll see in the week. But if, say, you find a Noisy Miner that has killed itself flying into your lounge room window sometime while you were out, then don't add it to the count of other alive Noisy Miners that may be around - since you don't know when it was alive. The GBS count is a count of the maximum number (alive) of birds seen during the week at the one time.
Come to the next COG meeting on Wednesday June 12. You can sign up for the GBS and pick up a chart. I will be giving a short talk on the GBS which hopefully will make things clear.
Garden Bird Survey Coordinator.
On 4 June 2013 20:14, Paul T. <> wrote:
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||Counting C Myna in GBS, Philip Veerman|
|Next by Date:||10 tips for birdwatchers, boy nature|
|Previous by Thread:||Counting C Myna in GBS, Duncan McCaskill|
|Next by Thread:||Counting C Myna in GBS, Philip Veerman|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|
The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the Canberra Ornithologists Group mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the list contact David McDonald, list manager, phone (02) 6231 8904 or email . If you can not contact David McDonald e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: firstname.lastname@example.org.EDU.AU