I think Tyler Hicks, Bobby Harrison, Mary Scott, and Mike Collins (Fishcrow) have each claimed three or more "Ivory-bill" sightings in recent years...
An excerpt from the above link:
...All searchers will carry video cameras unless they own a digital SLR camera. We do not have a budget to purchase digital SLR cameras for all searchers but I’m becoming convinced that such cameras are better for documenting IBWO than video cameras. Digital SLR cameras by Cannon (and likely other models but I haven’t had a chance to compare) will now turn on in less than a second and can shoot several very high-resolution frames per second. A small ivorybill image on such a high-resolution frame has greater chance of showing diagnostic plumage pattern and than a small ivorybill image on a video frame.
Posts
24 comments:
"Tyler tucked the SLR under his jacket and stealthily hiked in the direction of the kent calls. As he came around a bend in the channel, he saw an ivorybill on the trunk of a tupelo. It was only about 40 feet away. Tyler could clearly see the “ivory-white” bill on the bird—he said the pale bill “glowed” against the dark trunk of the tree. The crest of the bird was black. He’s sure. No red. The bird presented a profile so he saw one dorsal stripe running from the head to the back. The lower portion of the back of the perched bird was brilliant white. The bird paused on the tree for just a second and then fled. As it launched off the trunk and flew off Tyler could clearly see the broad white trailing edge covering the secondaries and innermost primaries of the dorsal wing surface. In flight, it had a long pointed tail and a long neck which he described as “like a pintail duck”.
Tyler’s encounter was a great photo opportunity, but the camera failed us. Tyler’s SLR was set to auto focus and it focused instead of taking photos during the couple of seconds the bird was in front of him. This is extremely frustrating for all of us, but we are getting very close to a photograph of these woodpeckers. We’ll have a photo or video soon. Having a larger search crew is making all the difference. We are able to locate and track these birds now.
Tyler’s sighting cannot be dismissed as a misidentification. The details reported by Tyler absolutely rule out any other species of bird."
Okay, so Tyler is either a liar or the Ivory-billed lives. He detailed too many of the pertinent field marks for us to call this a mis-ID, don't you think?
Okay, so Tyler is either a liar or the Ivory-billed lives.
I'm guessing you're kidding, but if not this line of reasoning is dead wrong. He may be a liar, or the IBWO may live. But far, far more likely in my opinion is that he was just simply wrong; he was just seeing what he wanted to see. This has happened repeatedly in this whole fiasco, and will continue to happen. Do you really think that in the thousands of IBWO reports that have poured in that they were all legit or all the people were liars?
Apply this to Mary Scott. It's not an either/or that she's a liar or the IBWO lives. She just wants to see them so very badly that she DOES see them. Repeatedly.
He didn't get a photo, and almost certainly nobody will get a good photo or video there, or anywhere else.
How many of these thrilling reports have to lead nowhere before people accept what is happening?
Oh, and by the way, DON'T USE THE AUTOFOCUS. Set it on infinity and leave it there. (Although blurry photos and video are key in "IBWO" photography.)
Hasn't Hicks had credibility issues in the past [the claim of a Flammulated Owl in Nebraska when he was actually in Utah, ect]?
I too think the "liar or real IBWO" choice is a bit harsh. Mistakes caused by overenthusiastic observers are probably the most common source of IBWO sightings.
For this sighting, it's now a waiting game. If the bird is sufficiently documented in the next year or so, we'll assume Hicks was right. If it is not, most of us will assume Hicks was mistaken.
I think some major evidence would have to appear to convince most people that he's actually lying. I seriously doubt that that's the case. I think he's either right or mistaken.
Here's the part that made me think it has to be real or lying:
"It was only about 40 feet away. "
Tyler IS a birder. A birder does not mistakenly see a white bill at 40 ft. That just doesn't happen.
"The crest of the bird was black. He’s sure. No red. "
You can mistake that at a distance, but 40 ft???
"The bird presented a profile so he saw one dorsal stripe running from the head to the back."
That's three IBWO characters at 40ft. I maintain. He either saw an IBWO or he lies.
I'm guessing you're kidding, but if not this line of reasoning is dead wrong. He may be a liar, or the IBWO may live. But far, far more likely in my opinion is that he was just simply wrong; he was just seeing what he wanted to see.
Such distinctions are relevant in courtrooms where a person's state of mind is an issue, either for establishing intent or for determining punishment (e.g., insane people are treated less harshly).
Under the present circumstances, however, whether Tyler Hicks is referred to as a liar or an IBWO acid eater is relevant mainly to those who, for whatever reason, find value in preserving misquided notions of "civility" in the context of a farce.
I think some major evidence would have to appear to convince most people that he's actually lying.
I'm convinced he's lying.
Here's why: there are so many people out there willing to give IBWO liars the benefit of the doubt that there is little downside to making up baloney whenever the baloney maker sees fit.
The world's prominent IBWO peddlers won't disappear until the volume of outright ridicule and scorn becomes more than faintly audible.
Compare, e.g., the number of scientists who publicly admit that they are Sasquatch fence-sitters versus those who admit the same with respect to the IBWO.
There is one reason for the difference and it's not the lack of evidence supporting the existence of Sasquatch.
The report said it was raining and there's no mention that he saw the bird through binoculars, so it must have been naked eye. At 40 ft away through the rain without binoculars you could make a case for mis-ID. I don't think he's a liar, just amped up on finding Ivory-bills, just like all the others.
Nathan
I don't know whether Tyler and other TBs are delusional, deceitful, simply incompetent, or all of the above, but in any case they are definitely stringers. Bad bird IDs are made all the time and it is up to senior members of the birding and ornithological communities to stand up for the integrity of field ornithology. In this case the academics for the most part continue to fail us. There is a thin line between being civil and being spineless.
Clearly a case of mistaken identity. That wasn't Tyler Hicks out there. That was an impostor.
Perhaps one of Amy's nefarious rock-apes in clever diguise which was blinded by Fitzcrow's brilliant white moustache and IBWO look-alike.
Either that or the universe has gone completely bonkers. Take your pick.
Let's start a database on Tyler's excuses. He can use the SLR-tucked-under-his-jacket-on-auto-focus excuse this once. Any camera will just take the picture even if still auto-focusing, and even then the image might only be slightly blurry (that's too good a focus for a TB though). This scenario suggests a fabricated story. I also can't believe the bird could not be lured back with playback. Oh, but I forgot, "things then quieted down and everyone went back to cavity surveys." Oh well, just heard an ivory-bill but it's not calling anymore, so I better get back to those cavity searches. This suggests everyone there is totally incompetent. That is certain whether they are liars or just amped on IBWO.
Where to start, where to start.....hmmm.... how about:
"We have also had three recent sightings including two by Bob Anderson, a Virginia birder who visited our site as a volunteer. Bob’s second sighting was particularly good. He observed an ivorybill 25 meters away as it flew up from the ground or from a very low perch. He clearly saw the broad band of white on the trailing edge of the wing of a large black woodpecker. He reported that it had a stiff-winged flight and that he heard loud wing flaps as it flew away from him."
=WOOD DUCK
And, would someone please explain to me what these idiots are doing still wandering around solo??
It seems that the searchers are never out of earshot of IBWO audio sign. OK, that's an exaggeration, but, seriously, they are hearing these things all the time and they can't get a picture??? BULL CRAP.
This is either outright fraud, or the observers are, for whatever reason, incompetent, in which case it's still borderline fraud to have them out there generating sightings. Dr. Hill, how about a "three strikes and you're out" policy. Three IBWO encounters without hard evidence and you are recalled and sent home?
Jeff also had an ivorybill fly over his head at treetop level just at sunrise. He only saw the silhouette of the bird but he could clearly see that it was a large woodpecker with long wings, a thin neck and a long wedge-shaped tail. It had a straight, stiff-winged flight pattern. He was confident that it was an ivorybill and not a pileated woodpecker.
This kind of report just makes me want to cringe. It was sunrise. The light sucked. It passed over my head (probably rather briefly). I'm confident that it was a...
And why can't people doing research on Ivory-billed Woodpeckers learn to use the term "Ivory-billed", not "ivorybill"?
Here's more details on Tyler Hicks (with photo--scroll down).
I once had one of the most respected bird tour leaders in the world tell me that he didn't trust any bird sightings by anyone under age 25. How old is Hicks?
Here's a Tyler Hicks sight record of a Eurasian Collared-Dove in Utah, accepted as a first state record (though other birds were reported earlier, and many more since). Kid's kinda sketchy on the details...
It'd have to be some very wicked acid to produce free-form IBWP's!
Those scamps.....sure does explain the "glow" of the alleged "ivory white" bill on a woodpecker at 40 feet. I'd bet the "trailing white edges" of the wings are just tracers.
Hopefully the acid didn't shift gears on him and start producing Pterodactyls or Greater Fanged Herons.
Remember: there is no reason to eat the small brown mushrooms.
Sometimes where there's smoke, there's just some dude smoking a crack pipe.
Marasmius oreades is a delectable small brown mushroom, the stems are a bit tough though and it takes quite a few of the buggers to make an adequate side dish for a dinner party. However, your warning is well taken. KNOW your mushrooms before consuming them.
Then again, the crack pipe theory shouldn't be dismissed out of hand....
I'm beginning to see what the problem is. Some here are looking for evidence of the IBWP ... and the guys in the field are looking for the IBWO. A simple mistake.
sounds to me like yall gettin kinda nervous bout sumpin
It's a comin, dat fir shure. You folks ain't as smart as yall thought, dat's fir shure. Dat bird stil flys.
well, gotta go, gotta finish watch Florida kick Ohio State butt.
A few moments ago the University of Florida Gators stunned the college football world by solidly trouncing Ohio State in the BCS Championship (the Super Bowl of College Football). To many/most college football fans the fact that Florida beat Ohio State, who was undefeated this year and heavily favored, would be considered "an irrefutable, long shot miracle".
The odds look pretty good that history will show this is only one of two "irrefutable, long shot miracles" to come out of Florida in the early half of 2007. So keep tuned to the forums sports and IBWO fans (as if you are going anywhere else...)
Rube (Cletus's son) said...
"sounds to me like yall gettin kinda nervous bout sumpin
It's a comin, dat fir shure. You folks ain't as smart as yall thought, dat's fir shure. Dat bird stil flys.
well, gotta go, gotta finish watch Florida kick Ohio State butt."
Dear Rube:
This is pretty much what your daddy (butt is he really your daddy?) said weaks ago, and we's still waitin and waitin.....
Post a Comment