Legal wrangling

Jesse Gilsdorf recently posted a couple of Grand Prairie-related documents on BirdForum. (I'm agnostic on the outcome of this legal battle, but I am interested in the numerous Ivory-bill claims and arguments made by both sides). Below are a couple of excerpts (the bold font is mine):

From this document (PDF format), which is a National Wildlife Federation memorandum describing their position in Arkansas, filed 10/28/2005:

On August 2, 2005, FWS acknowledged that experts had detected several ivory bills in the White River National Wildlife Refuge. See James Gorman and Andrew Revkin, New York Times, Vindication for a Bird and Its Fans (Aug. 2, 2005) (Ex. F); see also Map (Nunley Decl., Ex. 1). These birds are in addition to the earlier confirmed sightings in the Cache River National Wildlife Refuge.

From this document (PDF format), which is the government's response, filed 11/14/2005:

Though initially more cautious, FWS determined that a 0.125 [mile] buffer around structures, and no buffer around roads, was appropriate because while the IBWO is somewhat sensitive to disturbance, it is likely that they develop a tolerance to some degree of noise and human activity. Id. This decision was based on several factors: (1)Tanner (1942) established a camp 300 feet from an IBWO nest cavity, with some initial response but a short acclimation to the presence of his research team; (2) many of the recent confirmed sightings of IBWO have been within .125 miles of highways; (3) timber harvests using heavy equipment have been occurring in the area for many years; and (4) the locations where the IBWO have been spotted are areas of considerable recreational use. Id. FWS determined that the IBWO has apparently acclimated to the recurring activities and has been able to avoid or make adjustments to the less frequent activities. Id.

"way overblown"

Here is a Foxnews.com article on the Ivory-bill controversy.

(Note that when I reference other people's words here, I'm not necessarily implying that I agree or disagree with everything they say...)

Cornell Daily Sun article

You should read this entire Cornell Daily Sun article on the Ivory-bill controversy.

Here's just one snippet:

The lab of ornithology has just designed a new website with a detailed analysis of the [Luneau] video that, according to Fitzpatrick, allows everyone to see what Cornell ornithologists take as proof of the existence of one ivory-billed. The website also allows viewers to compare the ivory-billed video with over 60 videos of pileated woodpeckers.

"A lone cry of reason from the wilderness"

Here is a link to Don Hendershot's latest article on the Ivory-bill controversy.

The Travels of Elvis

As time continues to pass with no definitive Ivory-bill evidence, more and more people must be realizing that Bobby Harrison's theory on "Elvis" must not be correct (ie, that Elvis was a bird dispersing from the White River area, because there was no room at the White River refuge).

It seems that we may increasingly hear the "lone male" theory about Elvis--that is, he was a lone male, correctly identified, but now he has died or flown hundreds of miles away.

Under this theory, maybe Elvis produced the recorded double-knock in the Cache River area on 12/25/04. Then, maybe 50 miles away, he produced the kent-like calls recorded in the White River area the following Jan 17, 29, and 31. Then there is the matter of him double-knocking on an ARU recording on 2/5/05, somewhere in the White River area. Soon afterwards, he must have made the long trek back to the Cache River area in time to be glimpsed by Casey Taylor on 2/14/05.

To me, that seems like a lot of travel. Some additional questions that arise are:

1. Why did he produce the recorded kent-like call sequences only down in the White River area, in places where Blue Jays were seen and heard making very similar kent-like call sequences?

2. Why did he offer fleeting glimpses only up in the Cache River area, coincidentally where a population of abnormal Pileateds live[d]?

3. The Feb 5 double-knock recording was supposedly two Ivory-bills communicating with each other. Where did the second Ivory-bill go?

4. Evidently, none of the 54 recorded double-knocks included recorded kent-like calls as well. Why not?

The Little-Known Status and Distribution of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker by Stuart Keith (The Auklet, 1983)

Here is a humorous 1983 article, now online for the
first time...

Overselling

In my opinion, this article represents hype about Arkansas as a hot birding destination, the kind of hype that may have inspired plans to build a welcome center at the edge of Bayou DeView.

In contrast, I think this post by Laura Erickson represents a dose of reality.

Ivory-bill cartoons in Birding magazine

Earlier this month, I received my Jan/Feb 2006 copy of the American Birding Association Magazine "Birding". Considering that the Ivory-bill "rediscovery" was one of the biggest birding stories of all time, I think it's notable that the bird is hardly mentioned in the entire issue.

There is an interesting humorous article on pages 72 and 73, complete with a couple of cartoons. Author Ron Knaus, a retired physicist, proposes a new elementary wave particle called the "Suank" ("Knaus" spelled backwards) to explain why we can't get a decent look at an Ivory-bill. These particles are beamed out of the eye, through your binoculars to the Ivory-bills, who happen to possess an uncanny ability to maneuver and avoid Suank Wave-particles.