HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: josh@cqs.washington.edu (Josh Hayes)
Newsgroups: rec.birds
Subject: Re: Field Notes
Date: 22 Jan 93 00:16:50 GMT
Organization: University of Washington
NNTP-Posting-Host: pogo.cqs.washington.edu

Tom asks about how we take notes in the field.

If I'm just birding, rather than engaging in more rigorous
research, I often forego the notes entirely, unless I have
some expectation that I'll see something unusual.

If I want a record, I generally take a little dictating
tape machine with me, and just speak my notes. I can then
transcribe them at my leisure and also take notes WHILE
I'm looking through my binocs or spotting scope. No hands
necessary. Very nice. These things are often quite cheap,
at Radio Shack or the like, and the batteries usually last
plenty long for an extended bird trip.

I have a stock of waterproof paper, too, for pelagic or
active surf birding, but I haven't used it in years. Too
much like work.

Anyone else?

Josh Hayes

--
  Josh Hayes, Quantitative Sciences HR-20 U of Washington
  josh@mowgli.cqs.washington.edu             206 543-5004
     The harvest now is over, the summer days are gone
	     And yet no power cometh to help us
Newsgroups: rec.birds
From: christ@sci.ccny.cuny.edu (Chris Thompson)
Subject: Re: Something I noticed about the falconry post
Organization: City College of New York - Science Computing Facility
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 18:10:37 GMT

And something ***I*** noticed (from the limited number of cross-
postings) was that the rec.hunting crowd was almost completely
flame-free on the topic (granted, it's a moderated group).

What does that tell us?

Chris

-- 
(Help!  I've fallen and I can't reach my beer!)
From: deby@cs.utwente.nl (Rolf de By)
Newsgroups: rec.birds
Subject: Re: Bird watching at night
Date: 26 Jan 93 16:44:05 GMT
Organization: University of Twente, Dept. of Computer Science

On the topic of birdwatching at night, I have seen a few people making
mention of shorebirds actively feeding during that time.

This should not appear strange to you as they obviously will feed at
the best possible time of day. In fact, this need not be during the day,
as---it seems to me---to be completely dependent on the tides. When
the tide is out the biggest feeding area is available, and since many
shorebirds find their food by touch (I am told) the absence of proper
light is of no concern.

In fact, on mudflats the absence of light will probably mean absence of
predators also . . .

Now, shorebirds also feed at night in areas not affected by the tide!

Rolf

-- 
Rolf A. de By
Vakgroep Informatiesystemen			Tel   : +31-53-893753
Faculteit der Informatica			secr. : +31-53-893690
Universiteit Twente				Fax   : +31-53-339605
Postbus 217, 7500 AE Enschede			Email : deby@cs.utwente.nl
The Netherlands
From: chavel@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Chris Havel)
Newsgroups: rec.birds
Subject: Re: Bird watching at night
Date: 27 Jan 1993 21:14:52 -0600
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

giordano@andromeda.rutgers.edu (E. Giordano) writes:


>    This may sound like an utterly stupid question -- BUT here
>goes anyway--can any real productive bird wathcing happen at night
>or past dusk aside from the logistical problem os not]
>being able to see--don't most bird hide or "sleep" at night,
>you never see them at the feeder after dusk and before
>dawn, and further ducks are never in the same place at night as they are in 
>the day--where do they go?

I LOVE birding at night!! Since night doesn't necessarily mean DARK (moon,
urban lights), it's a special treat to lie out (face up, if you please),
and wait for an owl or nighthawk to come wafting by. Many a goose flock
has passed over...unseen...but leave their song behind in the dusk air.

As for the ducks, quite a few spend the night on shore hidden away (under
a shrub near the water, fr'instance). Try the night birding. You'll love it.

Chris

chavel@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.birds
From: lbrother@zia.aoc.nrao.edu (Larry Brothers)
Subject: Re: Do YOU Have Peregrine Falcon on YOUR Yard List?
Keywords: Condors
Organization: National Radio Astronomy Observatory, Socorro NM
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 18:11:32 GMT

Not necessarily in my yard, but how about from my office window?  It's
really not fair, because that's the control room of the Very Large
Array (VLA) (perhaps you've heard of it :-).  I'm looking out on about
100 square miles of high plains, surrounded by mountains, with 85-foot
dish antennas for perches.  Yes, I've seen peregrine, prairie,
kestrels, and, as I type, am watching an immature ferruginous perched
on an old wind tower.

It's a dirty job, but...

lb.
From: josh@cqs.washington.edu (Josh Hayes)
Newsgroups: rec.birds
Subject: Re: field notes
Date: 24 Jan 93 19:43:56 GMT
Organization: University of Washington
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: pogo.cqs.washington.edu

Oh, yeah, one more thing about notebooks.

In the science biz, spiral-bound notebooks are frowned
upon, simply because it's too easy to remove pages and
leave no evidence....for hard-ass scientists, only
lab-notebook-style books are acceptable - with a sewn
binding, and the pages pre-stamped with numbers.....

If you have aspirations to use these field notes for
scientific conclusions, you may want to start playing
the game now....just a word of warning...

Josh Hayes
--
  Josh Hayes, Quantitative Sciences HR-20 U of Washington
  josh@mowgli.cqs.washington.edu             206 543-5004
      Old man, how is it that you hear these things?
          Young man, how is it that you do not?
Newsgroups: rec.birds
From: tony@zoo.toronto.edu (Anthony L. Lang)
Subject: Re: hacking Bald Eagles
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 16:01:53 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology



>In article <1993Jan19.221325.5572@watson.ibm.com>, andrewt@watson.ibm.com (Andrew Taylor) writes:
>> In article <1993Jan19.185424.12429@lehi3b15.CSEE.Lehigh.EDU> carmanr@lafcol.lafayette.edu (Carman Robert (picro)) writes:
>> >but the same methods have since been used to restore
>> >birds of no interest to falconers, including ospreys, bald eagles, 
>> >California condors, and the Mauritius kestrel.
>> 
>> Was captive breeding used for Ospreys? (or are you refering to something else)
>> How relevant was falconery knowledge to the California Condor program?
>> Falconers don't keep New World Vultures do they?
>> 
>> Andrew Taylor

In article: <1993Jan20.214831.12514@lehi3b15.CSEE.Lehigh.EDU>
 carmanr@lafcol.lafayette.edu (Carman Robert (picro)) replies:

>My reference there was not to captive breeding but to hacking methods used to
>return young ospreys, eagles, and condors to the wild. The peregrine program 
>used techniques that essentially reversed those used by falconers with young
>falcons (eyas birds in their jargon) taken from the nest before they can fly
>or hunt on their own. The methods used to hack captive-bred peregrines back 
>to the wild have also been applied to other raptors. I am unaware of any 
>captive breeding programs for ospreys, but in these parts the hacking technique
>have been used with young birds hatched from eggs secured in areas where the 
>species is not threatened. I think most eagles hacked in the Northeast have 
>likewise come from eggs removed from nests elsewhere. In totting up the credits

Those eggs and eaglets came from British Columbia and 
Saskatchewan to be exact.  The provincial wildlife people
in B.C. were almost prevented from taking eaglets for this
purpose once by animal rights activists who had camped out under the
nest.  Luckily, the biologists had anticipated this and had
staked out other nests to get birds from.  So much for
for trying to educate the public about wildlife restoration.


-- 

Anthony Lang
Dept. of Zoology, 
University of Toronto
Newsgroups: rec.birds
From: ssouther@ent1.ent.ncsu.edu (P. Sterling Southern)
Subject: Re: binocular facts
Originator: ssouther@ent1.ent.ncsu.edu
Organization: Dept. of Entomology - NCSU, Raleigh, NC
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 17:23:21 GMT

Several good points have been made about binoculars, but some misleading
ones as well.

1.  I believe the book "The Complete Birder" has a (good) chapter on
choosing binoculars.  A novice should check such a source for a good
understanding.

2.  Binoculars for use by birders are occasionally rated in some of the
birding magazines.  The most recent in the US was probably in The Living
Bird, produced by Cornell.  I have a synopsis of this article produced
by someone else which I could e-mail.

3.  Yes the first number is the power, the second the size of the
objective.  However, the number derived by dividing the second by the
first is not a measure of the field of view.  It is a measure of the
exit pupil.  That is to say, the diameter of the column of light coming
out of the eyepiece measured in millimeters.  An exit pupil of 2 or 3
delivers less light than the eye can handle, thus you get an apparently
darker image.  Even in low light, the human eye doesn't dialate beyond
about 5 mm, so an exit pupil value of higher than 5 doesn't add to the
brightness of what you see.  As stated by others, most birders go for
binoculars with an exit pupil of 4 or 5.  Some, however, may give up
some light delivering capability to get a pair of light-weight or
compact binocs.  (Other things, like optics and coatings also contribute
to brightness.)  Back to the original point, it is true that higher
power and/or smaller objective binocs do usually have narrower fields of
view, but I don't believe its a simple linear relationship, other
factors are also involved.

4.  Almost all birders use binocs in the 7 - 10X range of power.
Anything larger is too hard to hold steady without a tripod.  Some of
the most expensive and widely used binocs are 7 or 8X.  Resolution,
sharpness of image, is generally more important than power in this range
of magnification.  It's definately not a matter of "the higher the
power, the better the binocs."      

5.  Adequate binoculars for beginners can be had for as low as $50.
Good quality binocs used by serious birders are usually in the $200-300
range.  The top of the line stuff used by serious birders who also have
the money are in the $700-1100 range.  It's also not a matter of "the
higher the power, the more expensive".

-- 
| Sterling Southern, NCSU-Entomology, Box 7613, Raleigh NC 27695-7613   |
|=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=|
| Voice: (919) 515-2703      |  CAROLINE: ssouther@ent1                 |
| FAX:   (919) 515-7746      |  INTERNET: ssouthern@ent.ncsu.edu        | 
Newsgroups: rec.birds
From: Edward Darnel <darnel@sciborg.uwaterloo.ca>
Subject: Bird-banding Locations in NA
Originator: darnel@sciborg.uwaterloo.ca
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 20:15:31 GMT
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]

Newsgroups: rec.birds
From: andrewt@watson.ibm.com (Andrew Taylor)
Subject: Re: Bird watching at night
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 23:31:56 GMT
Distribution: na
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In article <1993Jan22.191621.24483@cbnewsm.cb.att.com> ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins) writes:
>Just worth pointing out that in many of the US National Parks there are
>specific regulations which prohibit the use of artifical lighting to
>observe wildlife at night

Its legal in Australian parks (but few people do it).  Many animals seem
little disturbed.  However waterfowl seem to go beserk if the spotlight
hits them.  I try to avoid this.  Wallabies don't seem keen on it either.

I ment to mention that when taking photgraphs if someone else holds the
spotlight still at a reasonable distance you seem to be able to approach
closer for a photo without scaring the bird.

Andrew Taylor
From: mick@dcs.bbk.ac.uk (Mick Farmer)
Newsgroups: rec.birds
Subject: Re: Binoculars Question
Date: 26 Jan 93 03:10:55 GMT
Organization: Bloomsbury Computing Consortium

Paul asks the meaning of 8 x 40 for bins.  The 8 is the
magnification and the 40 is  the diameter of the objective
lens.  The value 40 / 8 (i.e. 5) is a measure of the width
of the field of view.  Thus 7 x 42 have a lower
magnification, but a wider field of view -- better for
following birds through trees relatively close to.

Regards,

Mick
Newsgroups: rec.birds
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Subject: Re: Field Notes
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 19:11:00 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.182958.13576@pixel.kodak.com>, tgl@ssd.kodak.com (Tom Lathrop) writes:
> I am relatively new to birding, and am interested in learning what other
> birders use for making notes in the field. I tried using a small spiral-
> bound notebook, but it hasn't stood up well to being tossed in my
> birding bag with other paraphernalia. Also, what sort of notes do you
> make? I've mostly recorded the date, weather, location, and species seen.
> In the case of a bird I don't know, I'll usually write a description,
> then look up the bird in the field guide and write down what I think it
> is. That way, if the bird flies away before I can find it in the field
> guide, at least I have a written description. But should I be writing more
> than this? 
> 

I've found a small microcasette recorder to be very useful. You can record
a lot of observations without taking your eyes off what you are looking
at. It is also useful for recording photographic information and much quicker
than trying to write things down.

===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================
From: birchall@pilot.njin.net (Shag)
Newsgroups: rec.birds
Subject: Re: Do YOU Have Peregrine Falcon on YOUR Yard List?
Date: 28 Jan 93 06:39:36 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Screaming in Digital, the Queensryche Digest

mbehrens@cs.utexas.edu (Mikael Behrens) writes:

>I haven't seen any Peregrines in my yard, but I HAVE seen a few  
>Mississippi kites flying over the house.  By the way, out of four bird  
>field guides I have, only the Peterson's _Hawks_ guide had a plate of a  
>flying Mississippi Kite that looked anything like the real thing.

>Any other interesting accounts of "yard raptors?"

*snicker*  Well.... several years ago, I learned that raising ducks in an
area which had a fence around it, but no roof over it was a good way to
attract the local Red-Tailed Hawks.... unfortunately, it was also a good
way to lose ducks.  The hawks could easily subdue a duck, but they had a
hard time carrying one off.

-Shag (now that I'm into hawks, I wonder if I should raise ducks as bait. ;)

-- 
birchall@pilot.njin.net, shag@glia.biostr.washington.edu, birchall@njin.bitnet
  Operator of ShagNet - Rutgers/NJIN dialup access for Burlington County, NJ
     Happy and informative user of a PPI 14400 FaxModem and GeoWorks Pro
       Editor of the Queensryche E-mail Digest - "Screaming in Digital"
Newsgroups: rec.birds
From: mark@austin.ibm.com (Mark Einkauf)
Subject: Purple Martin's Arrival	
Originator: mark@einkauf.austin.ibm.com
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 16:28:46 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: IBM Austin


I know Purple Martin's will be returning soon.  I have my house up and waiting for 
them.  I'm in central Texas and have not seen any yet.  Can some of you in	
the southern US post to this group when you begin to see the birds?  It would 
be nice to know the progress of their return in case some of us are waiting to	
put our house up.  In my case, if I start having problems with Sparrows or
Starlings, I might take my house down, or cover it, until I knew the Martins were
close.  If I knew where they were, I'd have a good chance of getting everything	
ready just before they arrive, thereby limiting the Sparrows/Starlings' chance
to move in first.  Thanks.

-- 
  Mark Einkauf     [ mark@einkauf.austin.ibm.com (only valid within ibm.com) ]
  IBM - Advanced Workstations and Systems - Graphics Systems
  Austin TX
 * Views and opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of IBM Corp. *
From: bethp@milton.u.washington.edu (Beth Plotkin)
Newsgroups: rec.birds
Subject: HELP: Best travel destination(s) for bird-watching???
Summary: HELP: Best travel destination for bird watching
Keywords: travel, bird-watching
Date: 24 Jan 93 16:27:20 GMT
Article-I.D.: milton.bethp.727892840
Organization: University of Washington
NNTP-Posting-Host: milton.u.washington.edu

HELP: What are some of the best travel destinations in the world
for bird watching?  All opinions welcome!
Newsgroups: rec.birds
From: tony@zoo.toronto.edu (Anthony L. Lang)
Subject: Re: Toxic Bird?
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 16:53:12 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article: <1jvkhaINN6ja@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>
 br105@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Jeffrey A. Del Col) writes:

>In the well known ornithology journal THE WEEKLY READER (My son's
>in the third grade) I found an article about a toxic bird, the
>Hooded Pitohui.  This is a New Guinea sp. found to have toxic
>feathers and skin.  Can anyone provide more information about
>this?  The article mentions a John Dumbacher as the scientist who
>discovered the bird's toxicity when he licked some cuts on his
>hands after handling a pitohui.  Has he published a report of this
>anywhere?

Dumbacher, J.P., B.M. Beehler, T.F. Spande, H.M. Garaffo and J.W.
     Daly, 1992. Homobatrachotoxin in the genus Pitohui: Chemical
     Defense in Birds? Science 258: 799-801.

This is the original paper.  It also says that native New Guineans
already knew of the genus' toxic properties and call it "trash
bird".  The scientists found the toxin (an alkaloid) in the
following species (in decreasing order of toxicity:  HOODED PITOHUI
(Pitohui dichrous), VARIABLE PITOHUI (P. kirhocephalus), RUSTY
PITOHUI (P. ferrrugineus).  Concentrations of the toxin were
highest in skin and feathers.  They speculated that this property
evolved for chemical defense.  Like other toxic species of animals,
these species have bright, contrasting colours.  

>Does anyone know of any other species of bird with such
>properties?

There are no other toxic birds.  Homobatrachotoxin is only known
from poison dart frogs (Phyllobates spp.).  
I wonder if the bird was named for the sound humans make when
they spit it out?
-- 

Anthony Lang
Dept. of Zoology, 
University of Toronto
Newsgroups: rec.birds
From: tony@zoo.toronto.edu (Anthony L. Lang)
Subject: Re: Baikal Teal in Colorado; Dusky Thrush near Vancouver
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 22:55:36 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article: <C1G0rt.KAH@acsu.buffalo.edu>
 dmark@acsu.buffalo.edu (David Mark) writes:


>And my father told me that a Dusky Thrush (Turdus naumanni) was
>being seen somewhere near Vancouver (he knew; I've forgotten).
>As of 1983, there had been no sightings of T. naumanni in
>North America south of Alaska.

According to Peter Whelan's regular Saturday birding column in the
Toronto Globe and Mail, this bird was seen on about Jan. 2 in
Langley, B.C. near Vancouver.  It stayed for only a few days, but
plenty of people saw it.
-- 

Anthony Lang
Dept. of Zoology, 
University of Toronto
Newsgroups: rec.birds
From: tgl@ssd.kodak.com (Tom Lathrop)
Subject: Field Notes
Originator: tgl@pluto
Organization: Eastman Kodak
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 18:29:58 GMT

I am relatively new to birding, and am interested in learning what other
birders use for making notes in the field. I tried using a small spiral-
bound notebook, but it hasn't stood up well to being tossed in my
birding bag with other paraphernalia. Also, what sort of notes do you
make? I've mostly recorded the date, weather, location, and species seen.
In the case of a bird I don't know, I'll usually write a description,
then look up the bird in the field guide and write down what I think it
is. That way, if the bird flies away before I can find it in the field
guide, at least I have a written description. But should I be writing more
than this? 

Tom Lathrop
tgl@sector.kodak.com
From: winer@husc10.harvard.edu (Adam Winer)
Newsgroups: rec.birds
Subject: Re: Binoculars Question
Date: 26 Jan 93 18:45:20 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc.winer.728073920

mick@dcs.bbk.ac.uk (Mick Farmer) writes:

>Paul asks the meaning of 8 x 40 for bins.  The 8 is the
>magnification and the 40 is  the diameter of the objective
>lens.  The value 40 / 8 (i.e. 5) is a measure of the width
>of the field of view.  Thus 7 x 42 have a lower
>magnification, but a wider field of view -- better for
>following birds through trees relatively close to.

I'm pretty sure this is incorrect.  The value 40/8 (5)
is a measure of how wide the image leaving the binoculars is.
In other words, it measures not how wide a field of view you get,
but how much light you can see.  8 x 40 bins and 7 x 35 bins
(everything else equal) give you the same brightness of image,
but could have completely different fields of view.
Any ratio over 7 is wasted, because the human eye's maximum
pupil width is 7 mm.
-- 
Adam Winer              | The number you have reached is imaginary.
WINER@HUSC.HARVARD.EDU  | Please rotate your phone 90 degrees and
                        | try again.
Newsgroups: rec.birds
From: tony@zoo.toronto.edu (Anthony L. Lang)
Subject: Are Bogen/Manfrotto tripods sturdy?
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 17:53:08 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

A couple of people have told me that their relatively new
Bogen/Manfrotto tripods have fallen apart in the field.
What's the word?  Are they worth the money?
-- 

Anthony Lang
Dept. of Zoology, 
University of Toronto
From: toby@stein.u.washington.edu (Toby Bradshaw)
Newsgroups: rec.birds
Subject: Re: Bird watching at night
Date: 21 Jan 1993 19:12:07 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
NNTP-Posting-Host: stein.u.washington.edu

In article <josh.727641751@pogo> josh@cqs.washington.edu (Josh Hayes) writes:
>On a related question, has anyone had any success "jacklighting"
>birds; that is, going out at night with a nice bright spotlight
>and catching eyeshine?

Works especially well for goatsuckers, which have an intense red
eyeshine.

Toby Bradshaw                       |
Department of Biochemistry          |  Will make genetic linkage maps
and College of Forest Resources     |            for food.
University of Washington, Seattle   |
toby@u.washington.edu               |



Newsgroups: rec.birds
From: andrewt@watson.ibm.com (Andrew Taylor)
Subject: Re: Bird watching at night
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:24:33 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In article <josh.727641751@pogo> josh@cqs.washington.edu (Josh Hayes) writes:
>On a related question, has anyone had any success "jacklighting"
>birds; that is, going out at night with a nice bright spotlight
>and catching eyeshine?

I've done this quite often in Australia.  In forest, listening for calls and
imitating calls/using tapes seems a much more efficient way of locating owls.
but I have found various owls just by spotlight.  Its pretty slow - maybe
1 owl for every 3-4 hours spotlighting (for me, others seem to do better)
but mammals are more frequently seen.

My favourite spot is in Royal National Park on Sydney's southern outskirts.
There I've seen

Tawny Frogmouth - usually siting low and lets you approach
Boobook Owl - small Ninox owl
Barking Owl - medium-sized Ninox owl (heard once)
Powerful Owl - largest of the Ninox Hawk Owls, sometimes sitting on prey
Sooty Owl - rare Tyto owl (heard several times but stayed out of spotlight)
various sleeping passerines - often tucked so tightly into an a ball that they
	can't be identified.  If you don't disturb the branch they on they
	will stayed tucked while you approach very closely

Also 7 species of possum including 4 gliding species  and various terrestrial
mammals.

I've been successful in finding Barn Owl spotlighing from a slowly moving
car on roads through farmland near Sydney (seeing 4-6 in 2-3 hours again
others seem to find more).

In Africa driving quiet roads is favoured method of locating nightjars.
They will sit on the road almost until the vehicle hits them, even at slow
speeds. They will also allow themselves to be picked up which eases
identification.

Andrew Taylor
Newsgroups: rec.birds