http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/20/science/earth/crowdsourcing-for-the-birds.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130820
NY Times, August 19, 2013
Crowdsourcing, for the Birds
By
JIM ROBBINS
HELENA, Mont. — On a warm morning not long ago on the shore of a small prairie lake outside this state capital, Bob Martinka trained his spotting scope on a towering
cottonwood tree heavy with blue heron nests. He counted a dozen of the tall, graceful birds and got out his smartphone, not to make a call but to type the number of birds and the species into an app that sent the information to researchers in New York.
Mr. Martinka, a retired state wildlife biologist and an avid bird-watcher, is part of the global ornithological network
eBird. Several times a week he heads into the mountains to scan lakes, grasslands, even the local dump, and then reports his sightings to the
Cornell Lab of Ornithology, a nonprofit organization based at Cornell University.
“I see rare gulls at the dump quite frequently,” Mr. Martinka said, scanning a giant mound of bird-covered trash.
Tens of thousands of birders are now what the lab calls “biological sensors,” turning their sightings into digital data by reporting where, when and how many
of which species they see. Mr. Martinka’s sighting of a dozen herons is a tiny bit of information, but such bits, gathered in the millions, provide scientists with a very big picture: perhaps the first crowdsourced, real-time view of bird populations around
the world.
Birds are notoriously hard to count. While stationary sensors can measure things like carbon dioxide levels and highway traffic, it takes people to note the type
and number of birds in an area. Until the advent of eBird, which began collecting daily global data in 2002, so-called one-day counts were the only method.
While counts like the
Audubon Christmas Bird Count and the
Breeding Bird Survey bring a lot of people together on one day to make bird observations across the country, and are scientifically valuable, they are different because they don’t provide year-round data.
And eBird’s daily view of bird movements has yielded a vast increase in data — and a revelation for scientists. The most informative product is what scientists
call a heat map: a striking image of the bird sightings represented in various shades of orange according to their density, moving through space and time across black maps. Now, more than 300 species have a heat map of their own.
“As soon as the heat maps began to come out, everybody recognized this is a game changer in how we look at animal populations and their movement,” said John W.
Fitzpatrick, director of the Cornell Lab. “Really captivating imagery teaches us more effectively.”
It was long believed, for example, that the United States had just one population of orchard orioles. Heat maps showed that the sightings were separated by a
gap, meaning there are not one but two genetically distinct populations.
Moreover, the network offers a powerful way to capture data that was lost in the old days. “People for generations have been accumulating an enormous amount of
information about where birds are and have been,” Dr. Fitzpatrick said. “Then it got burned when they died.”
No longer: eBird has compiled 141 million reports, or bits, and the number is increasing by 40 percent a year. In May, eBird gathered a record 5.6 million new
observations from 169 countries. (Mr. Martinka’s sighting of 12 herons at once, for example, is considered one species observation, or bit.)
The system also offers incentives for birders to stay involved, with apps that enable them to keep their life lists (records of the species they have seen), compare
their sightings with those of friends (and rivals), and know where to look for birds they haven’t seen before.
“When you get off the plane and turn your phone on,” Dr. Fitzpatrick said, “you can find out what has been seen near you over the last seven days and ask it to
filter out the birds you haven’t seen yet, so with a quick look you can add to your life list.”
The system is not without problems. Citizen scientists may not be as precise in reporting data as experienced researchers are, like the ones in the Breeding Bird
Survey. Cornell has tried to solve that problem by hiring top birders to travel around the world to train people like Mr. Martinka in methodology. And 500 volunteer experts read the submissions for accuracy, rejecting about 2 percent. Rare-bird sightings get
special scrutiny.
The engine that makes eBird data usable is machine learning, or artificial intelligence — a combination of software and hardware that sorts through disparities,
gaps and flaws in data collection, improving as it goes along.
“Machine learning says, ‘I know these data are sloppy, but fortunately there’s a lot of it,’ ” Dr. Fitzpatrick said. “It takes chunks of these data and sorts
through to find patterns in the noise. These programs are learning as they go, testing and refining and getting better and better.”
Still, some experts question eBird’s validity. John Sauer, a wildlife biologist with the United States Geological Survey, says that bird-watchers’ reports lack
scientific rigor. Rather than randomness, he said, “you get a lot of observations from where people like to go.” And he doubts that Cornell has proved the reliability of its machine learning efforts.
Still, the information has promise, he said, “and it’s played a powerful role in coordinating birders for recording observations, and encouraging bird-watching.”
And the data are being used by a wide array of researchers and conservationists.
Cagan H. Sekercioglu, a professor of ornithology at the University of Utah who has used similar bird-watching data in his native Turkey to study the effects of
climate change on birds, called eBird “a phenomenal resource” and said that it was “getting young people involved in natural history, which might seem slow and old-fashioned in the age of instant online gratification.”
Data about bird populations can help scientists understand other changes in the natural world and be a marker for the health of overall biodiversity. “Birds are
great indicators because they occur in all environments,” said Steve Kelling, the director of information science at the Cornell bird lab.
A decline in Eastern meadowlarks in part of New York State, for example, suggests that their habitat is shrinking — bad news for other species that depend on
the same habitat. In California, eBird data is being used by some planners to decide where cities and towns should steer development.
The data is also being combined with radar and weather data by
BirdCast, another Cornell bird lab project that forecasts migration patterns with the aim of protecting birds as they move through a gantlet of threats. “We can predict migration events that would be usable for the timing
of wind generation facilities to be turned off at night,” Dr. Fitzpatrick said.
In California, biologists use the migration data to track waterfowl at critical times. When the birds are headed through the Central Valley, for example, they
can ask rice farmers to flood their fields to create an improvised wetland habitat before the birds arrive. “The resolution is at such a level of detail they can make estimates of where species occur almost at a field-by-field level,” Mr. Kelling said.
EBird data has been used in Britain, too, combined with that of a similar program called
BirdTrack, which uses radar images, weather models and even data from microphones on top of buildings to record the sounds of migrating birds at night.
And for bird-watchers, the eBird project has given their pastime a new sense of purpose. “It’s a really neat tool,” Mr. Martinka said. “If you see one bird or
a thousand, it’s significant.”
