Hi Peter
Pure guesswork on my part, based on some crude 'back of the postage
stamp' guesstimates that of these 32 records, some/most have been
individuals recorded 2-3 times in different locations. With conspicuous
(noisy) species like this one, where individuals seem very mobile, and
the birding community is on heightened alert, I wouldn't assume much
under-reporting. If there were a couple of dozen Koels in Melbourne
currently, I think we'd be getting many more records coming in. (Of
course there must be some records not making it to either Birdline or
Birding-Aus.) Trust me, the analysis I'm applying to my PhD work on
urban birds is more rigorous! I'm really trying to provoke some
discussion and thinking about the advancing hordes of Koels (it seems to
be working).
regards, Lawrie
Peter Shute wrote:
Lawrie, is your estimate of <10 birds from 32 records based on a formal
estimation technique? I would have thought that if there had been 32 birds
detected by birders, then there should be many more that weren't detected, so I
would say I didn't have a clue how many there were.
--
Lawrie Conole
Northcote 3070
lconole[at]gmail.com
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
===============================
|
