Hi Mark, list
All publicly accessible databases contain errors. Moderation is a vital
chore which would result in a large nett reduction in errors but it too
inevitably must add some errors. (Presumably the chatline would have errors
too.)
Instead of formally mining the chatline for database entries would it be
appropriate
to contrive some way to remind users to also enter their records to one of
the databases? (That will require them to provide the necessary fields, which
the chatline does not and will lead to moderation.)
I like Canberra Nature Map because it accepts all organisms recorded on an
outing not
just one taxonomic group, it is moderated, and it is mainly based on photos
and georeferences, so both the records and the locations are pretty reliable to
begin with.
(Trusted individuals can enter records without photos.) ALA seems to me
less reliable.
Few if any of the database managers are going to stop work in the interests of
having one big database. Clearly any serious investigation of species
occurrence must collate entries from multiple databases. Annoying but that's
just how it is. Some sharing of records between databases is happening though
I believe.
Cheers, Don Fletcher
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Clayton
Sent: Saturday, 5 November 2016 4:52 PM
To: 'David McDonald (personal)' <>;
Subject: Capturing our list's reports (was Re:
[canberrabirds] Spotless Crake Chick)
In the past I suggested to either the COG committee, or a person on the
committee, that someone should be appointed, and possibly paid a modest
"honorarium", to enter these sorts of records as we were losing too much
potentially valuable information. My suggestion was met with, at best, a
very luke warm reception and I have heard nothing further on the subject
since then! I have suggested to Julian that he sends in a COG "Incidental
Report Form", available on the COG website.
I also know from personal experience that data entered to eBird does not
always make it to the COG database. My point in question was last year when
a visiting Canadian birder was out with me and he entered his day's list
into eBird. One species was queried (a Restless Flycatcher) where the local
moderator wanted a description of the bird as it was considered "Rare" - (I
do agree with that definition) - locally. Despite the fact that the observer
said that I was with him the record was rejected with a comment somewhat
similar to "it is what you saw, we don't take other people into account, it
doen't matter who they are". We went back several days later and we (I)
found the birds nest building. The only way this record will get in to the
COG system is because I put the records in via the COG "incidental report
form".
On a recent trip to PNG there was an American couple putting in all their
daily records via eBird. When talking to the lady doing the eBird data entry
I discovered that at least 50% of what was about to go in to eBird was
wrong. If I hadn't corrected the lady doing the entry there would have been
a lot of very interesting birds recorded for that part of PNG.
Similarly I checked with a colleague at CSIRO, who has had quite a bit to do
with the Atlas of Living Australia, prior to visiting the Iron Range
National Park several years ago using data from the Birdlife Australia's
Birdata to check on the location of Northern Scrub-robin, we found that
virtually all records were way out in the Coral Sea!!
I know the local eBird moderators do a very good job of vetting records but
do we really need all these recording programs? There is nothing wrong with
using the COG system and it is where I will continue to put any data that I
collect. I suggest that this is how COG and its members should be recording
data.
No doubt I will receive numerous complaints and abuse from those who use the
other systems. Such is life!
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: David McDonald (personal)
Sent: Saturday, 5 November 2016 1:42 PM
To:
Subject: Capturing our list's reports (was Re:
[canberrabirds] Spotless Crake Chick)
Thanks for passing this on, Julian.
It highlights the fact that information such as this, posted to the list,
does not get into any databases unless the subscriber also enters it into
COG's data management system, eBird Australia or Birdlife Australia's
Birdata. So far as I know, reports submitted directly to the Canberra Nature
Map or to the Atlas of Living Australia are not, at present, incorporated
into other databases.
I wonder if, among our approx 350 subscribers, there might be someone
willing to volunteer to get this type of report into COG's database? It may
entail a commitment of a couple of hours, or fewer, a week.
Thanks - David
On 5/11/2016 12:52 PM, Julian Teh wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> In the last couple of days I’ve been in contact with an American birder
> Carlos Sanchez who was visiting Canberra - I told him I saw a Spotless
> Crake at Jerrabomberra Wetlands on Sunday, and on chasing it up yesterday
> he found that it has a chick.
>
> Thought someone might be interested in the breeding record!
>
> Cheers,
> Julian Teh
> **********************************************************************
> ********************************* This is the email announcement and
> discussion list of the Canberra Ornithologists Group.
> Emails posted to the list that exceed 200 kB in size, including
> attachments, will be rejected.
> All emails distributed via the list are archived at
> http://bioacoustics.cse.unsw.edu.au/archives/html/canberrabirds. It is a
> condition of list membership that you agree to your contributions being
> archived.
> When subscribing or unsubscribing, please insert the word 'Subscribe' or
> 'Unsubscribe', as applicable, in the email's subject line.
> List-Post: <>
> List-Help: <>
> List-Unsubscribe:
> <>
> List-Subscribe: <>
> List manager: David McDonald, email
> <>
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************************************
|
