The species is number 403 on my state list, which may sound like a lot, but I think I'm the lowest ranking member of the 400 Club, well behind most of the others who have crossed the 400 milestone. And I must be one of the last birdwatchers in Louisiana to add Brown Booby to the life experiences list...
The presence of these birds in Ponchartrain may make sense to the boobies, but it baffles most of us. This species had generally been found only offshore--or at least on the beach--until a few years ago. The 20 individuals we saw outnumbered the total number of Brown Boobies ever recorded in Louisiana prior to the event.
The boobies at the lake were first found a couple of winters back, and even though many of the birds there now are adults, whether some of these birds are the same individuals from before is a matter of speculation. Keep in mind that 3 Brown Boobies were also found in a lake south of Lake Charles a few years back, and in one of the oddest bird records I can remember, Steve Cardiff saw a Brown Booby flying over the SWLA ricefields last winter in close proximity to geese. Records are piling up. Something's going on, and as is probably often true, people may be the last to find out what it is.
The boat trip was a good end to a summer that saw me doing far more yard work and spending more time at home than in a long time. It was a great summer, and here's to a good fall and a great school year!
No, actually, I'm now the "lowest" ranking member of the Louisiana 400 club with exactly 400 since February 2015. Not bad considering I've only been birding in LA for 12 years, and I've only been a "resident" for half that period. In other words, I'm the youngest birder ever (29 years old at the time) to hit 400 species of birds for LA and the first and only non-resident to do so. Best of all, I'm only 30 years old and many, many more years to go.
ReplyDeleteIt's been an exceptional and enigmatic pasts three years for extralimital BRBO, especially in LA, but elsewhere throughout the U.S. I'm fortunate to have multiple individuals for 4 parishes now.
ReplyDelete*past
DeleteLAbirder,
ReplyDeleteI can think of exactly 90 species that you haven't seen in the state, and there are only 479 on the state list. Looking at it logically then, there's literally no way you can have more than 389 on your state list.
Recalling your posts from the time, I likewise think your Big Year list is at 350 or 351.
The birders ahead of you on the list understand that science should drive birding. That's what makes their lists meaningful and not just the scorecards from scavenger hunts. Their lists are composed of well-documented records that will stand up to the scrutiny of future scientists.
I believe another birder actually did get to 400 by age 30 but wouldn't consider it worth mentioning. And, I can think of a couple of birders that are close to your 389 that have been birding for less than 12 years. Technology has revolutionized listing and accelerated the pace of building lists. Birders today stand on the shoulders of eBird, LAbird, and smart phones.
If Louisiana birders continue to find hot and rarities that stay put as they have for the past couple of years, I have no doubt you'll hit 400 within 3 years, give or take a year. But you're not there yet.
I am there already. I don't go by what the LBRC accepts and doesn't accept. There's so much subjective bias and flaws governing the review and evaluation of my reports. The details, the descriptions, the information, and PHOTO/ VIDEO documentation is all there yet a select few cantankerous individuals vote against the Bosler name at every "controversial" turn. It's simply unfair and ridiculous at this day in age. And all of the birding community and voting members alike know it well. And l still hold the LA Big Year record at 356 species for 2011. And lastly, nearly 90% or more of my state list are self-found species.
ReplyDeleteCorrect me if I'm wrong but I believe your list contains the following species, each of which will receive a comments box:
ReplyDeleteHOUSE CROW. Not on ABA or U.S. list. This individual, which I also saw and thus voted against my own record, flew a beeline to me and started begging for food. It had broken feathers, odd molt, and was a mess.
ReplyDeleteTROPICAL PARULA. You found an individual with irregular white areas on face. You noted that detail in your report and mentioned that published data indicated this was OK for TRPA. However, in light of studies showing wide areas of hybridization in Texas, Sibley retracted his published statement that Tropicals can have white on the face and considers such individuals Northern X Tropical hybrids ("So I would now say that the bird I illustrated in the Guide is a hybrid."). The research detailing hybridization and the physical appearance of hybrids has been available to the LBRC for at least 15 years and it was ahead of Sibley in that knowledge. You believe that the LBRC has a vast conspiracy against the Boslers, so do you extend that circle of conspirators to include outside researchers and David Sibley or just concede that your bird is a hybrid? The LBRC vote was not a "few cantankerous individuals" voting against this record; I don't recall anyone doubting that it was a hybrid.
ReplyDeleteSee: http://www.sibleyguides.com/2008/01/parula-hybrids/
ANTILLEAN NIGHTHAWK. Dan Lane found the bird and in his report expresses a lack of confidence that it's an Antillean, believing it to be a hybrid at best or just an odd - sounding Common. Dan Lane is a renowned expert on vocalizations and ID. Do you really think your opinion is in the same league as his? Is Dan Lane, one of the most personable people I've ever met, against you also?
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeletePACIFIC LOON. Your photos were so indecipherable that many birders had to ask for guidance in distinguishing body parts. One birder had to ask you if there was even a bird in the picture. From what I could make out the bird had a dingy neck with what appears to be a pale transverse mark on the side as in Common Loon. It lacked the typical abrupt demarcation between white foreneck and dark hindneck. You, however, described a clean cut neck, while the other observer's description noted a dingy neck: "I assume this bird had not completely molted its worn, dark alternate neck plumage because it
lacked the white on the front of the neck." The image size was minute, the distance was 1 mile. In loon ID, runt Common Loons are the biggest source of confusion according to any expert you ask (or google "runt Common Loon"). It appears to be a runt Common to me, and neither observer was able to eliminate runt Common Loon. Few birders would disagree. Keep in mind, this report dealt with a possible FIRST STATE RECORD. Per the LBRC Report, "the overwhelming consensus was that the documentation was not strong enough to hold up as a first state occurrence." Not a few cantankerous voters, but overwhelming consensus. I'm confident most LA birders would agree with the decision.
LONG-TAILED JAEGER. Jaegers are so notoriously difficult to separate that many ID articles and books have been discredited and are considered worthless. In a state with almost no Long-tailed records you see two inland jaegers and ID them by feel without noting any definitive diagnostic field marks. Such a record would be remarkable. Your photos show a bird with a disporportionately small head that doesn'teliminate and may even point to Parasitic Jaeger. This bird hasn't been submitted to the LBRC so I can't say how others would feel about it, but if it is submitted and is unaccepted, it would be in good company. Van Remsen and LBRC member Curt Sorrells had similar reports that were not accepted, so attributing LBRC motives to personal feelings or conspiracy certainly is out of line.
ReplyDeleteCANADA GOOSE. You haven't seen a wild individual in Louisiana. Our birds are not reintroduced indigenous birds as Canadas are not known to have bred historically below 35 degrees N, nor are they part of expanding reintroduced indigenous populations from outside of the state. Our birds are locally released non-natives, in other words, feral birds such as our Muscovies. It's your list, and you can count what you want, but feral Canadas are not on the state list, wild ones are.
ReplyDeleteSee: http://listing.aba.org/reintroduced-indigenous-species/
TUNDRA SWAN. You saw two swans in NE LA that flew over. By your own admission, you didn't get the right view to ID them to species. You IDed them by default as Tundra based solely on the fact that Trumpeters hadn't been reported in modern times. The fact that Trumpeters had been reported very close to your location was pointed out to you, and you rejected it outright. Within a year, I believe, we started getting definitive reports of Trumpeters within the state. I don't see how you can maintain confidence in a sighting where you didn't physically ID the bird. The ABA rules prohibits counting such birds: "Diagnostic characteristics, sufficient for the recorder to identify it to species, must have been seen and/or heard and/or documented for the bird encountered."
ReplyDeleteELEGANT TERN. This bird hasn't been decided on yet, but there was recently an article (in Birding, I believe) on the identity--not the identification, mind you--of birds that look like Elegant in the eastern U.S. and western Europe. This has been a matter of international debate for decades and there's no consensus about what these birds are. At the least, the fact that vagrants of a Pacific Coastal species should make their first appearance on the Atlantic Coast of Europe inspires caution about calling such birds Elegant Terns. If there is debate at the LBRC level, it will merely be a microcosm of the debate at the level of the worldwide scientific community.
ReplyDeleteBLACK RAIL. It belongs on your list but you only heard it. Your ABA list should not be marked as "No Heard-only."
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteAbove are 8 birds that you're including that you shouldn't by reason or can't by rule. Beyond that, I can't fathom what would be on your list, but there are 3 other species that don't belong there. You relish competition, but for all of the birders in the 380s that look at you and think you're at 400, I think you should apologize to them and play by the rules they're playing by. You might be 5 birds ahead of them, but don't take advantage of them by claiming to be 15 up. It's bad science and poor sportsmanship.
As for your Big Year list, if the other competitors approach your record or fall one species short of what you claim as your number, do you really think they won't start to question how you counted some of the species you did--some of which are in the list above? In that real world example it won't be a cantankerous conspiracy against you, it will be your peers taking the same objective looks at your methods that you ascribe to jealousy and spite when the scientific community does so.
As for your animosity toward the LBRC, I would suggest that it's the scrutiny you have a problem with. Yes, you hate Conover, Cardiff, and Dittmann, we know, we know! But who in their rational mind in this state would have anything against Nancy Newfield, Erik Johnson, Phillip Wallace, John Dillon, Rob Dobbs, or Curt Sorrells?
ReplyDeleteWhy would you dislike Donna and Steve, anyway? Two birders who have helped so many birders and have done so many great things for the Louisiana Birding Community, including starting two birding festivals that raise awareness of Louisiana birding and birding issues should be celebrated, not bashed. How many of us have become better birders because Donna and Steve take minutes out of their day and months out of their year to help individuals improve their skills and help groups immerse themselves in Louisiana and its culture?
You claim to be a scientist, but you consider scientific skepticism--one of the cornerstones of the scientific method--as a personal attack when it involves you.
I've heard you express skepticism about the abilities of other birders more often than not. I've heard you wonder why birders that can't identify the birds they photograph even watch birds in the first place. I've seen you dismiss the word of world experts that point out your misIDs.
You can't have it both ways. That's the kind of "subjective bias and flaws" we need less of in this state.
Excuse me, I NEVER mentioned that I hated anyone. I greatly respect and admire Steve Cardiff and Donna Dittmann. You are absolutely right about them. They've been a positive and instrumental force in LA birding for well over three decades. Their tremendous contributions to LA ornithology are greatly appreciated by me, Devin Bosler. And always be will.
ReplyDeleteI don't have anything against the other members of the LBRC either. I just don't always agree with their judgements and decisions. That's all. I also greatly appreciate what they have done and continue to do for the LA birding community.
I wish you, the web master of the LBRC, would display all of my material and reports on the pending reports pages but I'm afraid that you won't take that on for me. Thanks for displaying what you do. It's too bad that most of my details, descriptions, and information is hidden from public view. I guess that's what those in power do to combat those they feel "in control" over. "Let's do everything we possibly can to undermine and diminish the Boslers strong and undeniable presence as long-time, well-rounded, skilled, experienced, knowledgable birders in Louisiana birding history". Well, do what you can now, because it won't last forever. Only the truth is unbreakable.
Labirder,
ReplyDeleteThere are dozens of long-time, skilled, experienced, knowledgeable birders in Louisiana birding history. There are dozens of younger versions of the same. I'm not sure why you feel that out of all of the birders that have birded the state, someone who is "in power" would feel the need to single you out to "control."
In all walks of life, we've all seen people that have complained that others are out to get them, that people are jealous of them, and that they're not getting a fair shake. Usually the truth is far different. Certainly in this case it is. Birders in this state go out of their way to help other birders, young birders are welcomed into the crowd, and the few birders that exist outside of the birding circles do so of their own will. Some are birders that feel the sting of pride so harshly when they make errors that any witness becomes an enemy.
Disagreements with the decisions of the LBRC are a case in point. We've all failed to document birds well enough to convince others of our finds. Most of us realize that this in inevitable, and that it happens sometimes. It sucks. We get over it. It's just a bird. It shouldn't result in attacks on public forums that accuse the LBRC--and therefore its members--of having an unethical and personal vendetta against a birder. That's not how to show someone that you "respect and admire" them.
ReplyDeleteAll available accepted reports are included on the LBRC website. All. The pending reports of people that violate the standards of decency with the webmaster are not. The same rule would appear to apply to eBird and LaBird. Believe it or not, some people don't feel that bird records are worth suffering threats and insults.
One last time: I almost never FAIL to photo/ video-document my Review List species. I've always done my best to provide supporting hard evidence with my exceptional finds. So, no, I won't get over it when it's not accepted for so called "lack" of documentation. It means more to me than that. I put forth tremendous effort, and, therefore, expect tremendous respect and consideration when it comes time to review and evaluate my records. It's only fair. It's only right. You, or I, or anybody else cannot change the past but we can create a better tomorrow. I've learned my lessons since 2011 and 2012. I'll do my part to keep the peace.
ReplyDeleteAs far as eBird and LABIRD go. The dictatorship still reigns in power in Louisiana. Those brave and strong-willed individuals, such as myself, who don't conform and "abide" by the supreme leader's made-up "rules" and guidelines are subject to banishment. That's all. I can't help that I disagree with him and stand up for my eBirding rights. He just takes his anger and animosity a step further by sabotaging the database he works so diligently to preserve. Just imagine how much data is not publicly viewable or readily available to birders, conservationist, and the like. It deeply saddens me that someone personal vendetta negatively impacts SO many others. It's a damn shame really. I've apologized for my passionate and perhaps inflammatory outbursts toward him but it doesn't seem to matter. It's become quite clear to me that he doesn't give a damn about the potential of the Louisiana eBird database or me for that matter. He does care a great deal, however, about having the ultimate power and control over Louisiana eBirders and the public birding forum. He absolutely loves that. He also thrives by making me "suffer" or so he thinks. He can take away my voice and publicity but he cannot take away my passion, spirit, and legacy.
I'm not alone here. Many other birders and eBirders have been and still are fed up with his "my way or no way" methodology and his bitter and harsh eBird review process. I know multiple birders that have given up on the current system and are awaiting better years to come. Some eBirders I know are even keeping track of what he's "demanding" they change on their personal eBird checklist, so that when his reign is over, they can turn around and change it right back. He would like the eBird database to reflect the LBRC decisions, which could be good or bad depending upon how one looks at it. But it's funny how he hasn't invalidated any of his own submissions not accepted by LBRC or any others for that matter except those submitted by the Boslers. That's when I finally came to grips with his true feelings toward us. I couldn't believe how many unsubstantiated submissions, sometimes by single observers, were validated by him that were never even submitted to LBRC or were immediately unaccepted.
I don't know what to do now. I'm asking for the credit, recognition, and respect I deserve, and then I'll return the favor ten fold. It's not too much to ask. And don't confuse pride with passion. I'm deeply passionate about this stuff. If you're not as passionate that's great but don't hold it against me. Thank you!
I respect birding passion, and I respect people getting out in the field to look for birds. But I also respect birders that don't flame others when things don't go their way--and in birding, we all know things don't always go our way.
ReplyDeleteThe "he" you're referring to is the official eBird reviewer for Louisiana. In that capacity, he does what many/most other eBird reviewers in the nation do--uses the decisions of the states bird records committee as one of the guidelines for validating entries. I should point out that with the millions of records he has to go through, some slip through. I should also point out that if I point out to him that unreviewed or unsubmitted records--including his own--are in eBird, he takes care of them.
You say that there's an army of angry people who are waiting to reinstate their invalidated records, then say only those submitted by the Boslers have been invalidated. I'd say that the contradiction undermines your premise. The fact is that many of us have had our records questioned or invalidated by him--myself included. Why? Because they don't rise to the standards of science. I've submitted many records that would have been early or late records for a species, but when he points out that exceptional records should be substantiated with photos I have to admit that he's right. However much confidence I may have in my abilities, I know such records won't pass the smell test in the future.
ReplyDeleteScientists don't always agree. Data can be interpreted in various ways by various people, and some birders mistake inference for observation. These basic tenets of science are included in the standards I teach to my gifted 7th grade science students--and they get it easily enough. When it comes to science, egos have no place. Perhaps you see the scientific decisions of the eBird reviewer as ego-driven because you see the world through such a lens, but objective fact should be the standard.
As for that army of disgruntled birders that are waiting for the revolution, I can tell you that as the webmaster for the LBRC I've been CCed into many discussions regarding questionable records. The eBird reviewer uses the same boilerplate email form that most eBird reviewers use; you're probably on the eBird reviewer and editor listserv, so you know that statement is beyond debate. He uses the same criteria as other reviewers, likewise beyond debate. The biggest difference is that he's able to catch a higher percentage of errors and question marks than reviewers with more records to oversee. It's not his fault that some birders react personally to what should be a factual exercise and have put him on their hate lists.
As to the suffering you think he's caused you, I'd like for you to reflect on the "perhaps" inflammatory remarks you've mailed him over the years. Let's not sugarcoat it. Your mail to him has been so full of seething anger that one birding organization had him forward it to the local law enforcement authorities. And all of that hatred is your gratitude toward a man that once used his powers to mentor you and defend you from the dozens of other Louisiana birders that you had sent abusive emails to.
ReplyDeleteApologies don't erase such behavior.
I think it's fair to point out that he's not associated with the ABA and LaBird Facebook pages that have also asked you in the past to cool your jets. Nor is he associated with the LBRC, whose members--without my request or even knowledge--agreed that the webmaster shouldn't have to put up with abuse in my role and asked you to send your reports directly to the secretary (and they are voted on objectively like all other records).
As you have in the past, I expect you'll chalk this defense of him up as sycophancy--his only source of admiration, you claim. I've butted heads with him several times publicly, so you should know better. As a younger birder, I found myself at odds with his rigid adherence to principles that I thought shouldn't apply to me. I know better now. I can't think of any state that has a more credible body of bird records, and it's all because of the vigilance I was once so sensitive about.
As for your need for validation through bird records, vita brevis, that's between you and your mirror. If the brave and strong-willed birders you refer to include people like the fellow you once cited as a freedom fighter against the tyranny of Louisiana birding, let me just say that he was a fellow that many of us once considered a friend, but who apparently went clinically insane. A collector and LBRC member who went crazy denouncing collectors and the LBRC might not be a very good symbol for The Resistance.
ReplyDeleteI discussed several records that failed muster in previous responses. Reread them and feel free to make specific objections. Perhaps it's a shame that these reports were never visible, but looking at your Flickr page, it appears that your loon photos were only recented posted even there for some reason. The link is https://www.flickr.com/photos/dbosler/with/16524119431/
Perhaps you could post the loon photos as a photo quiz on the LaBird FB page. I would be curious to see if birders whose skills you trust believe that these pictures in conjunction with your and Dillon's contradictory descriptions are strong enough evidence for a 1st state record. I'm guessing the revolutionaries will scream Aye!--but would they be willing to bet on it?
I would like to take part in that forum to point out the odd white blaze on the side of the anomalously dark neck visible in 2-3 pictures. What is that Common-like mark doing on a Pacific Loon? At one mile--literally--could you really make out enough detail to eliminate a runt Common? See my other comments, far far above.
Please don't claim that I or any other member doesn't take the time or give the respect that each LBRC report deserves. I go over every report detail by detail, and whenever I vote to not accept a report I'm willing to explain my process in detail to the submitter, be it friend or foe. No objective person can claim that the LBRC plays favorites or allows bias. There's not a lead birder in the state that hasn't had a record rejected. Most accept it knowing that insufficient documentation was the reason. The people who believe it was personal have some serious rationalizing to do considering the level of expertise and the degree of personal respect the members of the committee have among the Louisiana birding community. I'm not sure why there's a disconnect between these data in your mind.
In your mind, there's apparently an anti-Bosler bloc on the LBRC that shoots your records down. In truth, you'd have a hard time divining which comments belong to which voters. We all put objectivity first, as much as you might like to scoff at the notion. It's about the state record, not individual honors. If all records were submitted anonymously, you would see the truth for what it is. But, anonymity means the lack of the attention and personal glory that makes you angry. That is correct, is it not?
holy frickin cow, I was just reading through old blogs like this to learn more about Louisiana birding. I didn't expect to find this sorta drama.
ReplyDelete"Your mail to him has been so full of seething anger that one birding organization had him forward it to the local law enforcement authorities." What in the world is wrong with this LABirder guy? Holy frickin cow. I honestly thought birding was a chill hobby, if there are more birders like this labirder dude I dont even think I wanna get involved anymore lol