Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

pelagic trip data vs ebird

Expand Messages
  • WK
    [This is a request disguised as a question. Because of the great number of pelagic trips from California, I assume that it is appropriate for this group.]
    Message 1 of 4 , Dec 10, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      [This is a request disguised as a question. Because of the great number of pelagic trips from California, I assume that it is appropriate for this group.]

      Here's something that I have been wondering for a while, and I assume others as well: What is the best way of entering the observations from a pelagic trip into ebird? None of the standard categories apply and it takes an awful lot of time/gps bookkeeping to enter a 12 hour trip as fragments. Is there a convention that people use to solve this problem (stationary, 100+ mile traveling count)?

      My implied request to those closely involved with ebird.org: a new category "pelagic trip" would be greatly appreciated.

      - Wim (Goleta, CA)
    • Dany Sloan
      Please reply to the group, I d like to know as well Cheers Dany Sloan LA CA ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Message 2 of 4 , Dec 10, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Please reply to the group, I'd like to know as well

        Cheers
        Dany Sloan
        LA CA



        On Dec 10, 2009, at 9:16, "WK" <wim.van.dam@...> wrote:

        > [This is a request disguised as a question. Because of the great
        > number of pelagic trips from California, I assume that it is
        > appropriate for this group.]
        >
        > Here's something that I have been wondering for a while, and I
        > assume others as well: What is the best way of entering the
        > observations from a pelagic trip into ebird? None of the standard
        > categories apply and it takes an awful lot of time/gps bookkeeping
        > to enter a 12 hour trip as fragments. Is there a convention that
        > people use to solve this problem (stationary, 100+ mile traveling
        > count)?
        >
        > My implied request to those closely involved with ebird.org: a new
        > category "pelagic trip" would be greatly appreciated.
        >
        > - Wim (Goleta, CA)
        >
        >


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Don Roberson
        This is a good question, and I can respond from the perspective of the Monterey Bay area, where there are many pelagic trips. I am one of the Monterey County
        Message 3 of 4 , Dec 10, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          This is a good question, and I can respond from the perspective of the
          Monterey Bay area, where there are many pelagic trips. I am one of the
          Monterey County editors, as well as a birder who regularly enters
          pelagic trips into eBird.

          eBird prefers that on-shore Traveling counts be 5 miles or less in
          length, in part because habitat often changes within that distance.
          There are situations where the 5 mile limit on-shore is extended, such
          as when birding over a uniform habitat (a stretch of unbroken sagebrush,
          for example), but in general I do attempt to limit my on-shore
          checklists to 5 miles or less. However, we have not been using that
          convention offshore, in part because habitat is more or less
          undifferentiated (with the exceptions discussed below). So, as a short
          response, it is typical to enter a single 60-80 nmi pelagic trip on
          Monterey Bay as a single checklist, assuming that the trip is within a
          single county.

          The most important aspect of the pelagic trip checklist, however, is to
          confine it strictly to pelagic species. For myself, I typically include
          only species seen more than 1 nmi mile offshore. So for me, a typical
          Monterey Bay checklist has two elements: a Monterey Bay list [using the
          existing hot spot "Monterey Bay pelagic (Monterey Co.)"] and a second
          checklist for birds seen inshore, from the harbor and along the shore.
          Depending on which direction the boat takes, there are two existing hot
          spots for this checklist: "Monterey Bay pelagic--Monterey Harbor to Pt.
          Pinos" or "Monterey Bay pelagic--inshore Moss Landing to Monterey."

          As a county editor, I have slowly been going through pelagic checklists
          and disallowing species that map to an offshore locale but were actually
          seen in the harbor or next to the shore. I have more or less completed
          this for Harlequin Duck, for example, and hopefully no eBird map will
          show Harlequins in the middle of the Bay or well offshore, as all the
          eBird data entered for this species is off "in the harbor" or "next to
          shore" observations. In my opinion, including inshore birds on a
          pelagic checklist is the single biggest problem with pelagic lists in
          eBird.

          It is typical for a standard Monterey Bay pelagic trip leaving from
          Monterey harbor to also go into the Santa Cruz County side of the Bay.
          If I am aboard, I enter a third checklist for such a trip, using these
          three hot spots:
          "Monterey Bay pelagic--Monterey Harbor to Pt. Pinos"
          "Monterey Bay pelagic (Monterey Co.)" and
          "Monterey Bay pelagic (Santa Cruz Co.)"

          This is a little more complicated because one must segregate the
          offshore observations between two counties, and jot down time and
          mileage in each county, but I find this is not very difficult. The
          leaders of most Monterey Bay trips will announce when the county line is
          crossed, and Elias Elias has posted recently about this information
          being available for downlaod into GPS units.

          A longer trip might also go into San Mateo Co., and in such instances, I
          do yet another eBird checklist, using the hot spot "Offshore waters (San
          Mateo Co.)"

          There are also existing hot spots for other destinations farther
          offshore, and when aboard such a longer pelagic trip, I will use
          whichever existing hot spot best fits the trip. These include
          "Monterey Seavalley pelagic (Monterey Co.)"
          "Monterey pelagic--nearshore waters to Pt. Sur"
          "Monterey pelagic--to offshore Pt. Sur" [these are for trips that go
          farther offshore but are not overnight trips to the Davidson}, and
          "Davidson Seamount pelagic (Monterey Co.)"

          I have used all of these hot spots to enter checklists, and some of
          those trips are 12+ hours long and 100 nmi in length. This may not be
          ideal, but is at least practical. It is also fair to say that while
          there are distinctive zones of habitat offshore, these are not fixed
          boundaries but change day to day and year to year with water temperature
          & salinity. From a practical standpoint, entering such longer checklists
          over the ocean does not seem objectionable to me, as long as the
          distinctive inshore species are not included. The avifauna does change
          dramatically when one reaches the North Pacific gyre, typically at 50-75
          nmi offshore in the Monterey area, but very few pelagic trips get out
          that far.

          Species that I avoid including on pelagic trip checklists -- unless they
          are actually seen well offshore, where they are very unusual -- include
          Pelagic Cormorant [the least pelagic of the coastal cormorants], Pigeon
          Guillemot [very restricted to inshore waters unless on migration... I
          have seen it twice in 30+ years at mid-Bay], and inshore ducks, grebes,
          loons, waders, etc. There is an existing hot spot just for "Monterey
          Harbor", and I also use it a lot when the boat otherwise goes straight
          out to deeper water.

          In looking a a map of eBird hot spots, it looks like most eBird users do
          something similar in their areas of the State. I hope this is a helpful
          start.

          Don Roberson
          Pacific Grove CA
        • bjinsd
          I take a similar approach to the one that Don does with a slight variation. Here on the San Diego pelagic trips that I have been on there are very distinct
          Message 4 of 4 , Dec 11, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            I take a similar approach to the one that Don does with a slight variation. Here on the San Diego pelagic trips that I have been on there are very distinct areas the boats tend to go. Because of underwater banks the life zones tend to usually be concentrated in about the same area. I will have lists for those areas.

            For example I have Pelagic--Nine Mile Bank (San Diego County waters), Pelagic--Nine Mile Bank (Mexico waters) and Thirty Mile Bank.

            In between these banks the life tends to drop off dramatically and so I have separate list for these areas (Pelagic--Nine Mile Bank to Thirty Mile Bank) which can cover 20+ miles. Over time it is very interesting to see what species are seen in these "lifeless" zones.

            Keeping track of the time at each location is fairly simple. I find the hard part to be tracking the distance, especially when the route isn't a straight line.

            Another area that I tend to be a bit different from what Don has mentioned is that I do have an inshore list. I will have one list for San Diego Bay that included inshore species and another list for the mouth of San Diego Bay to just out a couple of miles. I then move on to a more "pure" pelagic list with one of locations. I do like to have inshore species on my list, though I do see the importance of having them separate from the other lists. On this list it would be a good idea to add a note that this list distance covered 10 miles in distance, though no further out than 2 miles.

            I'm very interested in what others do with their pelagic lists.


            BJ Stacey
            Santee, CA
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.