I am sure that it will be able to do everything - but unless a significant
proportion of birders can be persuaded to move from the systems they use now
it is likely to end up as just another place that has a few % of records.
Obviously in the long run people will use whatever systems work the best and
neither I nor BA nor BOCA nor anyone else on this list can tell people what
to use, and there will always be new ones coming along, but the more
fragmented the collection of data becomes the less useful it is both for
normal birders and for scientists. I personally would much rather have one
place to look to find data than many places, especially as tools like Google
cannot extract data readily from such databases (yet!). To a certain extent
bird-o and the new BOCA website will solve some of these problems, but the
more systems that are in use the harder it becomes for anyone to get an
overall picture of what is happening.
2010/1/5 Nigel Jackett <>
> Hi Dave,
>
> eBird will be able to do almost everything you desire, and is expected to
> cover Australia this year. Also, it is already apparently the largest
> wildlife database in existence, and much of the data contributed by birders
> is used by scientists for research and conservation purposes. It also it
> fantastic for keeping lists. You may want to check out these examples to see
> for yourself what it's capable of:
>
> http://www.ebird.org - Homepage of eBird
> http://www.ebird.org/content/newzealand - New Zealand eBird example, for
> some reasaon it's already made it there and not here!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Nigel
>
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Dave Torr <> wrote:
>
>> OK - a stab at what I would like to see - but as I don't run any of the
>> systems then it is not up to me!
>>
>> A national birding discussion group - Birding-Aus is clearly the only real
>> candidate for that
>> Both national and state birdlines - here is where we get into middy waters
>> as Eremaea does a good job in the 6 or so state/areas that it covers but
>> is
>> lacking in some places. But the Eremaea national birdline seems to get
>> little traffic, as people report national rarities more on Birding-Aus.
>> Would be nice in my humble opinion if all rare sightings went to Eremaea
>> rather then Birding-Aus and the relevant moderators decided whether to
>> escalate to the National one.
>> And finally a recording database of which the Atlas is the only serious
>> contender - again I would love it if Eremaea and Birdpedia moved out of
>> this
>> area - but I do think there needs to be more consensus as to what is
>> really
>> needed in this area. As I said - subspecies to me are essential. Many
>> birders (like myself) want to keep all of their lists in one place and
>> whilst the Atlas is great for formal surveys it is less good for "birds I
>> saw whilst driving from Melbourne to Canberra" - which are still valid for
>> my personal year list but not much good for scientists.
>> Finally I wonder about the long term future of any site that is maintained
>> and run essentially by one person. In the short history of the internet
>> many
>> websites have come and gone. It is I guess my experience that individuals
>> are much more likely to have good ideas and implement them quickly than
>> organisations, but that organisations (such as BA and BOCA) are much more
>> likely to be around in some form or other running whatever passes for a
>> website in 50 years time than the excellent sites that today's dedicated
>> individuals run. So how does one harness the dedication and drive of the
>> few
>> dedicated enthusiasts behind Birding-Aus, Eremaea, Birdpedia and others
>> whilst at the same time trying to ensure that their data will be still
>> available to researchers in 50 years time when unfortunately some of the
>> individuals behind these sites may no longer be as active as they are now!
>>
>> 2010/1/5 michael norris <>
>>
>> > Hi Dave
>> >
>> > But what are the objectives of all these reporting/recording systems?
>> >
>> > It would be great if you and other people managing them were to set up a
>> > private blog or similar to work for greater clarity on what each of you
>> is
>> > trying to achieve.
>> >
>> > For instance, Birdline Vic (on Eremaea) is ".....a site for the
>> reporting
>> > of rare or unusual birds outside their normal range, unusually high or
>> low
>> > numbers, early or late arrivals or departures for migrant species and
>> > interesting behaviour or unusual habitat usage.'
>> >
>> > So it's like the lists (also moderated and also unauthenticated) printed
>> in
>> > the Bird Observer.
>> >
>> > Quite different from the Atlas which, to my mind, should be regarded as
>> the
>> > authoritative archive for monitoring bird distributions (and sites). It
>> > also needs to be resourced properly (pay per view?), in the same way
>> that
>> > Simon Mustoe proposes an "instant" rarity reporting system would need to
>> be
>> > funded.
>> >
>> > Michael Norris
>> >
|
