Wednesday, 11 February 2026

[cobirds] Standley Lake Gull Bonanza

Hi all, 

Following up on a few recent reports of gulls from Standley Lake (including a Glaucous Gull by Jack Bushong yesterday evening), I made the trip late this evening. I encountered an absolute absurd number of gulls (spread out across four flocks, ranging in size from 1200 to 3200 birds). I estimated the total number of gulls on the reservoir to be around 6400 individuals. In these flocks, I tallied 27 Lesser Black-backed Gulls, 14 Iceland Gulls, an estimate of 125 Herring, and 3200 Ring-billed. I also could not identify to species the largest flock which was too far out. Also, of interest, I had a first year Glaucous-winged Gull fly by at close distance chasing an adult LBBG. Unfortunately, I spent too much time watching the bird through my scope and binoculars, and by the time I had my camera out the bird had passed through towards the NE corner. 

I want to get the word out as this might be the largest group of gulls I have ever seen at one place in Colorado (outside of maybe Aurora Reservoir years ago), and in hopes of anyone re-finding the Glaucous-winged, as well as any other rare individuals (I'm sure there were more out there). 

Hopefully more people can venture out here in the coming days. I parked here (39°51'19.4"N 105°06'29.3"W) and walked out to here (39°51'24.2"N 105°06'33.5"W) to scan. I suggest getting here around 4:00 p.m., as it seems the gulls really only arrive in the evening. I left at 5:32 and the birds were still active. 

Cheers, and good birding!

Ryan Bushong
Louisville, Colorado

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/42b0d087-434a-4061-beab-c3d5a7c88bdbn%40googlegroups.com.

[cobirds] CFO Speaker Series - Feather Trails with Sophie A.H. Osborn (Thurs., Feb 26)

CFO's Dead of Winter Knowledge Quest continues with award-winning environmental writer and wildlife biologist Sophie A.H. Osborn.

Birds are visible, vocal sentinels that alert us to environmental harms through their declining numbers or their failure to thrive. In her book Feather Trails—A Journey of Discovery Among Endangered Birds, Sophie Osborn shares her personal experiences reintroducing endangered Peregrine Falcons, Hawaiian Crows, and California Condors to the wild. While immersing readers in the triumphs and tribulations of being a wildlife biologist, Sophie explores the threats that imperiled these birds, and reveals that what harmed them threatens us, too. She will discuss what led to the endangerment of these three captivating species, recount the efforts of biologists to recover their populations, and read a few excerpts from her book that describe what it was like to work with these magnificent birds.

This Zoom presentation takes place Thursday, February 26th from 7:00 to 8:00 pm. For more information and to register visit: https://cobirds.org/events/speaker-series-sophie-osborn/

Linda Lee
CFO Communications Chair
Louisville


--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/0c40c190-dfdd-4678-ba69-1394c7edc3aen%40googlegroups.com.

[cobirds] DFO Presents: Ted Floyd on the Rocky Mountain Arsenal NWR, Feb 23 at 7pm


Hi CoBirders,

Mark your calendars now and register for DFO's free Zoom webinar with Ted Floyd presenting, "The Wonders & Glories of Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge". 7pm on Monday, February 23. 
Register here

Whatever Ted -- Colorado birder-writer-educator and editor of Birding Magazine -- decides to show and tell about that improbably rich haven for birds, bison and other critters on the edge of urban Denver will be worth every minute. Readers of CoBirds will recall his great posts reporting on his visits to this favorite birding spot. 

David Suddjian
DFO Communications and Outreach 

Ted Floyd

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/CAGj6RooDv86aASpen9VK14TF-46eaN3NyV9YTYiO0BZt5d6zpg%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [cobirds] Colorado now has 7 regular Hawk Migration Association Winter Raptor Surveys this season

Ajit (and Liza)
Thank for this write up. It was very interesting and helpful. 
Lynne Forrester 
Littleton,  Jeffco


From: cobirds@googlegroups.com <cobirds@googlegroups.com> on behalf of AJIT ANTONY <aiantony@earthlink.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2026 7:32:18 PM
To: COBirds <cobirds@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [cobirds] Colorado now has 7 regular Hawk Migration Association Winter Raptor Surveys this season
 
I am happy to let you know that Colorado now has 7 regular Winter Raptor Surveys under the auspices of the HMA - Hawk Migration Association, formerly HMANA - Hawk Migration Association of North America.
Like Hawkcount, also managed by HMA, the data from these surveys can be used by researchers, so this is good citizen science.

Liza and I moved from New York to Denver in summer 2022. In New York State between the two of us we had 4 different Winter Raptor Surveys which we conducted as per the protocol of HMA once a month in December, January, and February. We had started doing them when we first heard of them in 2016. Once in Colorado we started 3 Winter Raptor Surveys in 2022 &ndash;
1. South and East Boulder,
2. Valmont Rd to Rabbit Mountain,
3. Rocky Mountain Arsenal NWR and the area West of Denver International Airport going up to Barr Lake,
4. Bennett to Jackson Lake, added in 2023.

Prior to 2022 there was a short lived WRS by Jillian and Patrick Glover and Deb Callahan in the St Luis Valley with 3 surveys between December 2019 and December 2020, but none since.

There is also an infrequent survey along NE I-76 conducted by the former coordinator of the WRS who lives in Illinois and who does this survey with her son whenever she visits a son in Colorado Springs, so that there are single surveys in 2019, 2021, 2023,and 2025.

The past few 4 years I had posted occasional reports in COBirds of some of the highlights of our WRS, encouraging Colorado birders to start their own WRS, including a link to the WRS website
Winter Raptor Survey &ndash; Hawk Migration Association (https://www.hawkmigration.org/winter-raptor-survey/) offering my help if needed.

Robert Beauchamp started his own survey starting in 2022 incorporating the Nunn Raptor Alley Route, and completed 9 surveys, the last of which was in February 2025, unfortunately none this winter season. I don&rsquo;t know him, I hope he is in good health.

This winter season looking at the Winter Raptors Survey website I was delighted to find that 3 new HMA WRS have been started in Colorado this winter season.
* Jeffco Foothills WRS by Audrey Hicks, Sharon Tanaka, Karolyn Chan, and Amy Walsh who have completed 2 surveys in December and January.
* El Paso County East of Colorado Springs WRS by Chris Nigro and Jennifer McLain who have completed 3 surveys in December and January. We we had thought it could be a productive area, but it was a little too far for us to go to.
* Arapahoe East WRS by Jason Zolle, Zak Hepler and Ryan Gannon who have completed 2 surveys in December and January.
Congratulations to all these birder surveyors, and may they continue their surveys into the future.

If you go to the WRS website https://wrs.hmana.org/public_html/index.php  if you click on Main In the left sidebar you can see all the surveys done this season all over the country.
If you want to hone in on Colorado, and especially see prior years surveys, click on Survey Map in the left sidebar, zoom in on the map to Colorado and click on one of the teardrop markers. You can then click on Survey Date and GO under the WRS Survey Summary and find all previous surveys. Each survey at the bottom of the page has Survey Totals by Species. Those who already have a WRS have additional access to notes on individual raptors on each survey.

Any birder or raptor enthusiast can do a Winter Raptor Survey on their own. It is a volunteer program. If you like raptors and know of an area with raptors you can develop your own route and follow it exactly the same way each time, as long as it doesn&rsquo;t overlap an established route. Just follow the guidelines on the website. If you want any questions answered you can email the WRS coordinator.

If anyone is interested in starting their own route and needs advice or help, please feel free to contact me.

If you&rsquo;re interested in starting one and don&rsquo;t know of an area where there are a lot of raptors, the best way to figure out where to create your route is what we did, which is to look at eBird data for the past1-5 years for the location you are interested in &ndash; look up sightings for FH,RL, PrF, and GE &ndash; which will give you where you could see numbers of individuals of interesting wintering raptor species.
The dirt roads North and South of I-70 from Limon eastward is a good area, so also the area of Loveland and Fort Collins.

You can get general and specific information about the WRS programat https://www.hmana.org/winter-raptor-survey/

If you do start a survey, you will find that you will learn a lot about wintering raptors especially their ID, as we have improved our ID skills since 2022. We had to learn all about Ferruginous Hawk, Prairie Falcon, and all dark morph raptors which are not found in the east.

Ajit I Antony
Central Park, Denver, CO

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/00147cf2-2e6b-f240-cf35-d185f6944a01%40earthlink.net.

Tuesday, 10 February 2026

[cobirds] Colorado now has 7 regular Hawk Migration Association Winter Raptor Surveys this season

I am happy to let you know that Colorado now has 7 regular Winter Raptor Surveys under the auspices of the HMA - Hawk Migration Association, formerly HMANA - Hawk Migration Association of North America.
Like Hawkcount, also managed by HMA, the data from these surveys can be used by researchers, so this is good citizen science.

Liza and I moved from New York to Denver in summer 2022. In New York State between the two of us we had 4 different Winter Raptor Surveys which we conducted as per the protocol of HMA once a month in December, January, and February. We had started doing them when we first heard of them in 2016. Once in Colorado we started 3 Winter Raptor Surveys in 2022 &ndash;
1. South and East Boulder,
2. Valmont Rd to Rabbit Mountain,
3. Rocky Mountain Arsenal NWR and the area West of Denver International Airport going up to Barr Lake,
4. Bennett to Jackson Lake, added in 2023.

Prior to 2022 there was a short lived WRS by Jillian and Patrick Glover and Deb Callahan in the St Luis Valley with 3 surveys between December 2019 and December 2020, but none since.

There is also an infrequent survey along NE I-76 conducted by the former coordinator of the WRS who lives in Illinois and who does this survey with her son whenever she visits a son in Colorado Springs, so that there are single surveys in 2019, 2021, 2023,and 2025.

The past few 4 years I had posted occasional reports in COBirds of some of the highlights of our WRS, encouraging Colorado birders to start their own WRS, including a link to the WRS website
Winter Raptor Survey &ndash; Hawk Migration Association (https://www.hawkmigration.org/winter-raptor-survey/) offering my help if needed.

Robert Beauchamp started his own survey starting in 2022 incorporating the Nunn Raptor Alley Route, and completed 9 surveys, the last of which was in February 2025, unfortunately none this winter season. I don&rsquo;t know him, I hope he is in good health.

This winter season looking at the Winter Raptors Survey website I was delighted to find that 3 new HMA WRS have been started in Colorado this winter season.
* Jeffco Foothills WRS by Audrey Hicks, Sharon Tanaka, Karolyn Chan, and Amy Walsh who have completed 2 surveys in December and January.
* El Paso County East of Colorado Springs WRS by Chris Nigro and Jennifer McLain who have completed 3 surveys in December and January. We we had thought it could be a productive area, but it was a little too far for us to go to.
* Arapahoe East WRS by Jason Zolle, Zak Hepler and Ryan Gannon who have completed 2 surveys in December and January.
Congratulations to all these birder surveyors, and may they continue their surveys into the future.

If you go to the WRS website https://wrs.hmana.org/public_html/index.php if you click on Main In the left sidebar you can see all the surveys done this season all over the country.
If you want to hone in on Colorado, and especially see prior years surveys, click on Survey Map in the left sidebar, zoom in on the map to Colorado and click on one of the teardrop markers. You can then click on Survey Date and GO under the WRS Survey Summary and find all previous surveys. Each survey at the bottom of the page has Survey Totals by Species. Those who already have a WRS have additional access to notes on individual raptors on each survey.

Any birder or raptor enthusiast can do a Winter Raptor Survey on their own. It is a volunteer program. If you like raptors and know of an area with raptors you can develop your own route and follow it exactly the same way each time, as long as it doesn&rsquo;t overlap an established route. Just follow the guidelines on the website. If you want any questions answered you can email the WRS coordinator.

If anyone is interested in starting their own route and needs advice or help, please feel free to contact me.

If you&rsquo;re interested in starting one and don&rsquo;t know of an area where there are a lot of raptors, the best way to figure out where to create your route is what we did, which is to look at eBird data for the past1-5 years for the location you are interested in &ndash; look up sightings for FH,RL, PrF, and GE &ndash; which will give you where you could see numbers of individuals of interesting wintering raptor species.
The dirt roads North and South of I-70 from Limon eastward is a good area, so also the area of Loveland and Fort Collins.

You can get general and specific information about the WRS programat https://www.hmana.org/winter-raptor-survey/

If you do start a survey, you will find that you will learn a lot about wintering raptors especially their ID, as we have improved our ID skills since 2022. We had to learn all about Ferruginous Hawk, Prairie Falcon, and all dark morph raptors which are not found in the east.

Ajit I Antony
Central Park, Denver, CO

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/00147cf2-2e6b-f240-cf35-d185f6944a01%40earthlink.net.

[cobirds] Northern Pygmy-Owl predation on Eurasian Collared-Dove

Deb had worked to rake the collection of leaves and sticks from the main
pathway through the 800 ft. wildlife shelter-belt on our farm in order
to walk more quietly.  This afternoon, she stepped through and flushed a
Pygmy-Owl from the ground to a nearby olive tree.  In it's talons are
the remains of a Eurasian Collared-Dove, already substantially
consumed.  The dove would have outweighed the owl by 2-4 times.  It
seems we have a well fed Pygmy-Owl in the yard.

In past years, I haven't found Pygmy-Owls to remain into a second day at
our farm on Central Orchard Mesa.  Tomorrow is another day and there's
more of the dove remaining.  We'll see, and hope. There are plenty more
collared doves to feast on.

Steve, and Deb Bouricius
Palisade, CO


--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/f3bb59e5-4a35-45a5-a4d7-c385ab138dba%40earthlink.net.

Re: [cobirds] Next BIRD BOMBS: Ups and Downs in Colorado, Feb 26 at 7 pm

Sorry, I can't make it.



On Tuesday, February 10, 2026, 4:14 PM, David Suddjian <dsuddjian@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi CoBirders,

You can register now for DFO's next BIRD BOMBS: Ups and Downs in Colorado, set to explode on Thursday, February 26 at 7pm. This free Zoom webinar will highlight Colorado's bird population trends from the North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS). Learn what the BBS is all about, and how you can get involved. 

Check out any of the prior 41 BIRD BOMBS episodes in DFO's BIRD BOMBS library and on the DFO YouTube Channel.

David Suddjian
Littleton CO

Ups and Downs in Colorado (2).png

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/CAGj6RorSu0UkoVG9huKNOTY%3DrL0do90HEzP5XOSZey521xn0Dg%40mail.gmail.com.

[cobirds] Next BIRD BOMBS: Ups and Downs in Colorado, Feb 26 at 7 pm

Hi CoBirders,

You can register now for DFO's next BIRD BOMBS: Ups and Downs in Colorado, set to explode on Thursday, February 26 at 7pm. This free Zoom webinar will highlight Colorado's bird population trends from the North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS). Learn what the BBS is all about, and how you can get involved. 

Check out any of the prior 41 BIRD BOMBS episodes in DFO's BIRD BOMBS library and on the DFO YouTube Channel.

David Suddjian
Littleton CO



--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/CAGj6RorSu0UkoVG9huKNOTY%3DrL0do90HEzP5XOSZey521xn0Dg%40mail.gmail.com.

[cobirds] The Chorus of Cranes

Well of chorus I would have to get you the latest news on the San Luis Valley cranes. Both yesterday and today, the skies have been alive as cranes are entering the Valley. Most of the time, they are calling from very high up and hard to see. But the show has begun and it is getting exciting. 

This winter we had an unusually high number winter over. Wife Lisa had about 200 at Blanca Wetlands most of the winter. Scattered groups elsewhere as well. But it seems that the rest are starting to arrive from points south. 

No water is yet running on the MV NWR yet but I expect that to happen soon...maybe next week. Other notable arrivals are hundreds of Cackling Geese at Home Lake...arriving in the past week.

John Rawinski
Monte Vista CO 

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/a7a96399-1fd7-4e24-9803-339379668205n%40googlegroups.com.

Sunday, 8 February 2026

[cobirds] Re: Appropriate use of tools, including "technology", when identifying birds?

All:

Appropriate technology is all fine and good, but I'd like to make two points. Many eBirders (including me) use Merlin to detect birds for eBird checklists. However, its use to generate date for eBird checklists has two problems.

1 -- The first is that some eBirders start a checklist, open Merlin, let it run, and enter the species Merlin detects into the eBird checklist. However, Merlin CANNOT discern the number of different individuals vocalizing; it can only note the species it "believes" it detects. If an eBirder does this, all species detected ONLY by Merlin should be entered with 'X" for the number (but see problem #2).

2 -- The Cornell Lab, both the Merlin and eBird aspects, cautions observers NOT to enter data generated solely by Merlin. The rule is that one must personally identify the individual(s), typically through visual ID. Merlin is very far from foolproof, and certain species or combos of species cause it extreme difficulty, often identifying vocalizing birds INCORRECTLY. Chief among these species in my own experience -- but certainly nowhere near all of them -- are the three species of "Solitary Vireo" (Blue-headed, Plumbeous, and Cassin's) and Green-tailed Towhee versus Fox Sparrow, in which case it generally defaults to Fox Sparrow, because it cannot see that your phone is in a sea of sage shrubland. Again, these species are not the only ones that cause Merlin problems.

This spring/summer, we may find out how well it does at distinguishing between the two species of Warbling Vireo.

Finally, I have encountered eBird photos misidentified as species, with those identifications that the observer stated were made by Merlin. In fact, the impetus for me finally responding to this thread was a photo I ran across today in eBird of what seemed to me to be an obvious molting Forster's Tern that Merlin had identified as a Common Tern... so the observer submitted it as such, despite the obvious pale outer primaries.

And the above points out the primary problem with using "appropriate technology" on science-based surveys: Those technologies are still not as good as a skilled AND experienced birder.

Sincerely,

Tony Leukering
Denver


On Friday, February 6, 2026 at 6:09:09 PM UTC-7 Kevin Schutz wrote:
Hello CoBirds Community,

Today's post by Bill Kosar and subsequent responses prompted me to start the following discussion.

First, some background.  We all hear and read of the risks and appeals of not relying upon common technology in popular use today - Merlin, etc.  In the past, I've been forthright in admitting some of my identification limitations when inquiring about participation with various surveys and describing how I use multiple tools to (personally) learn and narrow on any reported identifications I may make.  As such, I have been declined for participation - no technology allowed, etc.  That's fine as I know the intent is to provide (reasonably) accurate data for various scientific purposes.  What I've found curious is reading subsequent posts from other participants for the same surveys indicating their use of technology.  Argh!! - so some routes potentially went uncovered.  We know of examples of published experts/authors of books covering their "big year" efforts and garnering numerous speaking engagements afterwards that use technology such as frequency shifting headphones to assist them with identification while birding.

I admit confusion, especially in the context of mixed inputs pleading for more data reporting juxtaposed against pleas and warnings that at times feel more like one is receiving a "thou shalt not" style sermon.  When is technology use appropriate when recording an identification?  Does use of technology depend on specific surveys/records/databases?  What constitutes "technology" and how is technology defined?  Does technology include sound amplification headphones, recordings that can be compared post observation at a later time against vetted libraries, optics, photography, electronic or printed guide books?  Even consultation to more experienced birders relies upon some form of technology (vocalizations, photographic confirmation, etc.).  All of the examples listed above could be characterized as "technology" in the context of humankind, and in some cases would seem to be dismissed out-of-hand.

Today, within eBird, when one submit a checklist, one is asked "Are you submitting a complete checklist of the birds you were able to identify?"  I think eBIrd used to ask something along the lines of "... to the best of your ability", but I can't attest to that with certainty.  I've always adopted the philosophy that I would record identifications to the best of my ability, which includes the use of various forms of technology to assist me with a confident identification.

What are the current, best practices deemed acceptable today for bird identification?  Should technology use be context specific (eBird database, bird surveys, other...)?  While database corruption is and always will be a concern, are we artificially limiting community science resources over such concerns?  Humans will always be fallible.  When technology limitations are appropriate, how much cheating is likely occurring?  Are we at a point where we are past being able to use an honor system, of relying upon one's best abilities?  When some form of technology has been used to assist with an identification, is it incumbent to disclose all forms of technology used (optics, photography, recordings, various forms of guidebooks, applications such as Merlin, various AI applications)?

I am sincerely interested in understanding the breadth of views present.  I may find myself having to reconsider my philosophy of using "my best ability" as no longer being appropriate.

I hope this post results in a respectful, thoughtful discussion.

KS
El Paso County

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/6a3e2ca5-31c9-40d2-9a3c-87938ac45380n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [cobirds] Appropriate use of tools, including "technology", when identifying birds?

  I have been taking pictures of birds for about 22 years and then identifying them after the fact by studying the pictures and various books, online pics, etc. Most of them have been in Colorado but a few are from the Gulf coast, east coast, and west coast. It is an interesting and enjoyable hobby for me, not a competition. I am personally looking forward to using the Merlin app to verify a few of the "shaky" IDs I have. I absolutely cannot capture and remember all of the details I see when checking out different birds in the field, I have a personal rule that I have to have an identifiable picture of a bird before I add it to my life list.

   The use of AI for image analysis (especially in the medical field) gets more accurate each year and I think the case will be the same for bird IDs.  I personally see AI in general as a very useful tool, it is not always right but it can quickly give you additional insight on a topic whether its a bird picture or something else..

Thanks
Bill Kosar
El Paso County

On Sunday, February 8, 2026 at 6:54:30 AM UTC-7 David Suddjian wrote:
As for Warbling Vireos, I think the songs of the  two newly-split vireos can be distinguished once you become familiar with them. In some areas of the state a recording may be needed to have a reviewer confirm the report in eBird, but they can be identified without technology. They are fairly distinct in their quality.

David

On Sun, Feb 8, 2026 at 6:06 AM Lynne Forrester <lforre...@gmail.com> wrote:
This made think of Warbling Vireos here in Colorado. For many of us, we will have no choice but to use technology to distinguish them, whether skill or physically challenged.

Lynne Forrester 
Littleton, Jefferson County 


From: cob...@googlegroups.com <cob...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of David Hyde <davidh...@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2026 12:01:20 PM
To: Colorado Birds <cob...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [cobirds] Appropriate use of tools, including "technology", when identifying birds?

If the fundamental purpose of databases like eBird is to locate a bird species in a specific place at a specific time then how this is done is a matter of indifference. The bird-observer can use whatever technology they like, within ethical bounds. Technology makes the process more efficient but introduces errors of its own. Bird-watching, if we can still call it that, becomes a scientific enterprise. Tools like Merlin in a sense replace the observer - the girl wandering about in a woods -- with themselves. What's the next step in this AI-ification of bird-watching? Mini bird-tropic drones to get closer to any bird for a better look? With built in AI analyzer and mini-transmitter to the birder's ear saying suavely "this is a Yellow-rumped warbler, data uploaded to eBird." Is it here already? 
      And what about that girl in the woods? I'm sure eBird knows that we're human beings and not data points. There will always be errors in their reports. I guess I just don't see the need for advanced gadgetry in the simple pastime of watching birds; it becomes about the gadgets and not the birds.
     
     

On Friday, February 6, 2026 at 8:58:01 PM UTC-7 Nathan Pieplow wrote:
Hi Kevin,

This is an excellent question, and I'm happy to weigh in. I wrote the book on bird sounds (well, one of the books), and I use Merlin Sound ID all the time. 

I used to do bird surveys for Bird Conservancy of the Rockies, but had to quit a number of years ago when I realized my high-pitched hearing was much worse than other surveyors'. During training, everybody else could hear the Blue-gray Gnatcatcher at 100 yards and I still couldn't hear it at 50. I feared my bad ears would skew the data.

But nobody has exactly the same abilities, either physical or mental. Differences between observers are an inevitable confounding factor in all big-data citizen science initiatives, including the Christmas Bird Count, eBird checklists, and Breeding Bird Survey routes. The idea is that these differences mostly wash out across the huge number of repeated surveys over time.

Merlin helps me be more accurate. It can hear things I can't. But it also makes lots of mistakes. In some situations it performs better than the average human, in some situations worse. It helps to know what it does well and what it does poorly.

I don't think we should be too afraid of assistive technology -- after all, eyeglasses and binoculars and scope are assistive technologies that greatly change detection rates of birds. But we shouldn't let technology operate unsupervised by human judgment. If Merlin detects a bird I haven't detected, I pay attention to context. It's got a great track record of detecting real Bushtits and Cedar Waxwings before I do. If it's detecting those species repeatedly during an observation, in decent habitat, I might put them on my list. I usually like to be able to see the shape of the call on the spectrogram, though, if I can't spot the birds.

If it's telling me there's an Indigo Bunting around, I'm going to be skeptical. Merlin can't tell Indigo from Lazuli in Colorado. Neither can humans. Neither can buntings. (That's why we have a lot of hybrids here -- the two species learn elements of each other's songs in the overlap zone.) With experience and study, you can learn when to place more trust in technology and when to place less. It's not a matter of using it or not using it, it's a matter of using it carefully.

Nathan Pieplow
Boulder, Colorado

On Fri, Feb 6, 2026 at 6:09 PM Kevin Schutz <ksc...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello CoBirds Community,

Today's post by Bill Kosar and subsequent responses prompted me to start the following discussion.

First, some background.  We all hear and read of the risks and appeals of not relying upon common technology in popular use today - Merlin, etc.  In the past, I've been forthright in admitting some of my identification limitations when inquiring about participation with various surveys and describing how I use multiple tools to (personally) learn and narrow on any reported identifications I may make.  As such, I have been declined for participation - no technology allowed, etc.  That's fine as I know the intent is to provide (reasonably) accurate data for various scientific purposes.  What I've found curious is reading subsequent posts from other participants for the same surveys indicating their use of technology.  Argh!! - so some routes potentially went uncovered.  We know of examples of published experts/authors of books covering their "big year" efforts and garnering numerous speaking engagements afterwards that use technology such as frequency shifting headphones to assist them with identification while birding.

I admit confusion, especially in the context of mixed inputs pleading for more data reporting juxtaposed against pleas and warnings that at times feel more like one is receiving a "thou shalt not" style sermon.  When is technology use appropriate when recording an identification?  Does use of technology depend on specific surveys/records/databases?  What constitutes "technology" and how is technology defined?  Does technology include sound amplification headphones, recordings that can be compared post observation at a later time against vetted libraries, optics, photography, electronic or printed guide books?  Even consultation to more experienced birders relies upon some form of technology (vocalizations, photographic confirmation, etc.).  All of the examples listed above could be characterized as "technology" in the context of humankind, and in some cases would seem to be dismissed out-of-hand.

Today, within eBird, when one submit a checklist, one is asked "Are you submitting a complete checklist of the birds you were able to identify?"  I think eBIrd used to ask something along the lines of "... to the best of your ability", but I can't attest to that with certainty.  I've always adopted the philosophy that I would record identifications to the best of my ability, which includes the use of various forms of technology to assist me with a confident identification.

What are the current, best practices deemed acceptable today for bird identification?  Should technology use be context specific (eBird database, bird surveys, other...)?  While database corruption is and always will be a concern, are we artificially limiting community science resources over such concerns?  Humans will always be fallible.  When technology limitations are appropriate, how much cheating is likely occurring?  Are we at a point where we are past being able to use an honor system, of relying upon one's best abilities?  When some form of technology has been used to assist with an identification, is it incumbent to disclose all forms of technology used (optics, photography, recordings, various forms of guidebooks, applications such as Merlin, various AI applications)?

I am sincerely interested in understanding the breadth of views present.  I may find myself having to reconsider my philosophy of using "my best ability" as no longer being appropriate.

I hope this post results in a respectful, thoughtful discussion.

KS
El Paso County

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cob...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/e7168f62-d4fa-4ae9-a246-23797720569cn%40googlegroups.com.

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cob...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/9dbfe5d2-116d-4784-a394-70e12d668be6n%40googlegroups.com.

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cob...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+u...@googlegroups.com.

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/ff12d860-c7a3-4e4b-8c13-a54168d62008n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [cobirds] Appropriate use of tools, including "technology", when identifying birds?

As for Warbling Vireos, I think the songs of the  two newly-split vireos can be distinguished once you become familiar with them. In some areas of the state a recording may be needed to have a reviewer confirm the report in eBird, but they can be identified without technology. They are fairly distinct in their quality.

David

On Sun, Feb 8, 2026 at 6:06 AM Lynne Forrester <lforrester27@gmail.com> wrote:
This made think of Warbling Vireos here in Colorado. For many of us, we will have no choice but to use technology to distinguish them, whether skill or physically challenged.

Lynne Forrester 
Littleton, Jefferson County 


From: cobirds@googlegroups.com <cobirds@googlegroups.com> on behalf of David Hyde <davidhyde1951@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2026 12:01:20 PM
To: Colorado Birds <cobirds@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [cobirds] Appropriate use of tools, including "technology", when identifying birds?

If the fundamental purpose of databases like eBird is to locate a bird species in a specific place at a specific time then how this is done is a matter of indifference. The bird-observer can use whatever technology they like, within ethical bounds. Technology makes the process more efficient but introduces errors of its own. Bird-watching, if we can still call it that, becomes a scientific enterprise. Tools like Merlin in a sense replace the observer - the girl wandering about in a woods -- with themselves. What's the next step in this AI-ification of bird-watching? Mini bird-tropic drones to get closer to any bird for a better look? With built in AI analyzer and mini-transmitter to the birder's ear saying suavely "this is a Yellow-rumped warbler, data uploaded to eBird." Is it here already? 
      And what about that girl in the woods? I'm sure eBird knows that we're human beings and not data points. There will always be errors in their reports. I guess I just don't see the need for advanced gadgetry in the simple pastime of watching birds; it becomes about the gadgets and not the birds.
     
     

On Friday, February 6, 2026 at 8:58:01 PM UTC-7 Nathan Pieplow wrote:
Hi Kevin,

This is an excellent question, and I'm happy to weigh in. I wrote the book on bird sounds (well, one of the books), and I use Merlin Sound ID all the time. 

I used to do bird surveys for Bird Conservancy of the Rockies, but had to quit a number of years ago when I realized my high-pitched hearing was much worse than other surveyors'. During training, everybody else could hear the Blue-gray Gnatcatcher at 100 yards and I still couldn't hear it at 50. I feared my bad ears would skew the data.

But nobody has exactly the same abilities, either physical or mental. Differences between observers are an inevitable confounding factor in all big-data citizen science initiatives, including the Christmas Bird Count, eBird checklists, and Breeding Bird Survey routes. The idea is that these differences mostly wash out across the huge number of repeated surveys over time.

Merlin helps me be more accurate. It can hear things I can't. But it also makes lots of mistakes. In some situations it performs better than the average human, in some situations worse. It helps to know what it does well and what it does poorly.

I don't think we should be too afraid of assistive technology -- after all, eyeglasses and binoculars and scope are assistive technologies that greatly change detection rates of birds. But we shouldn't let technology operate unsupervised by human judgment. If Merlin detects a bird I haven't detected, I pay attention to context. It's got a great track record of detecting real Bushtits and Cedar Waxwings before I do. If it's detecting those species repeatedly during an observation, in decent habitat, I might put them on my list. I usually like to be able to see the shape of the call on the spectrogram, though, if I can't spot the birds.

If it's telling me there's an Indigo Bunting around, I'm going to be skeptical. Merlin can't tell Indigo from Lazuli in Colorado. Neither can humans. Neither can buntings. (That's why we have a lot of hybrids here -- the two species learn elements of each other's songs in the overlap zone.) With experience and study, you can learn when to place more trust in technology and when to place less. It's not a matter of using it or not using it, it's a matter of using it carefully.

Nathan Pieplow
Boulder, Colorado

On Fri, Feb 6, 2026 at 6:09 PM Kevin Schutz <ksc...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello CoBirds Community,

Today's post by Bill Kosar and subsequent responses prompted me to start the following discussion.

First, some background.  We all hear and read of the risks and appeals of not relying upon common technology in popular use today - Merlin, etc.  In the past, I've been forthright in admitting some of my identification limitations when inquiring about participation with various surveys and describing how I use multiple tools to (personally) learn and narrow on any reported identifications I may make.  As such, I have been declined for participation - no technology allowed, etc.  That's fine as I know the intent is to provide (reasonably) accurate data for various scientific purposes.  What I've found curious is reading subsequent posts from other participants for the same surveys indicating their use of technology.  Argh!! - so some routes potentially went uncovered.  We know of examples of published experts/authors of books covering their "big year" efforts and garnering numerous speaking engagements afterwards that use technology such as frequency shifting headphones to assist them with identification while birding.

I admit confusion, especially in the context of mixed inputs pleading for more data reporting juxtaposed against pleas and warnings that at times feel more like one is receiving a "thou shalt not" style sermon.  When is technology use appropriate when recording an identification?  Does use of technology depend on specific surveys/records/databases?  What constitutes "technology" and how is technology defined?  Does technology include sound amplification headphones, recordings that can be compared post observation at a later time against vetted libraries, optics, photography, electronic or printed guide books?  Even consultation to more experienced birders relies upon some form of technology (vocalizations, photographic confirmation, etc.).  All of the examples listed above could be characterized as "technology" in the context of humankind, and in some cases would seem to be dismissed out-of-hand.

Today, within eBird, when one submit a checklist, one is asked "Are you submitting a complete checklist of the birds you were able to identify?"  I think eBIrd used to ask something along the lines of "... to the best of your ability", but I can't attest to that with certainty.  I've always adopted the philosophy that I would record identifications to the best of my ability, which includes the use of various forms of technology to assist me with a confident identification.

What are the current, best practices deemed acceptable today for bird identification?  Should technology use be context specific (eBird database, bird surveys, other...)?  While database corruption is and always will be a concern, are we artificially limiting community science resources over such concerns?  Humans will always be fallible.  When technology limitations are appropriate, how much cheating is likely occurring?  Are we at a point where we are past being able to use an honor system, of relying upon one's best abilities?  When some form of technology has been used to assist with an identification, is it incumbent to disclose all forms of technology used (optics, photography, recordings, various forms of guidebooks, applications such as Merlin, various AI applications)?

I am sincerely interested in understanding the breadth of views present.  I may find myself having to reconsider my philosophy of using "my best ability" as no longer being appropriate.

I hope this post results in a respectful, thoughtful discussion.

KS
El Paso County

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cob...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/e7168f62-d4fa-4ae9-a246-23797720569cn%40googlegroups.com.

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/9dbfe5d2-116d-4784-a394-70e12d668be6n%40googlegroups.com.

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/DM6PR07MB60432B94934F297AD28A4EBCAB64A%40DM6PR07MB6043.namprd07.prod.outlook.com.

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/CAGj6RooZkAa8MKSN3nsJ1S7jY0KO5SSeH7UvZLqtaCr0uejZzQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [cobirds] Appropriate use of tools, including "technology", when identifying birds?

This made think of Warbling Vireos here in Colorado. For many of us, we will have no choice but to use technology to distinguish them, whether skill or physically challenged.

Lynne Forrester 
Littleton, Jefferson County 


From: cobirds@googlegroups.com <cobirds@googlegroups.com> on behalf of David Hyde <davidhyde1951@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2026 12:01:20 PM
To: Colorado Birds <cobirds@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [cobirds] Appropriate use of tools, including "technology", when identifying birds?

If the fundamental purpose of databases like eBird is to locate a bird species in a specific place at a specific time then how this is done is a matter of indifference. The bird-observer can use whatever technology they like, within ethical bounds. Technology makes the process more efficient but introduces errors of its own. Bird-watching, if we can still call it that, becomes a scientific enterprise. Tools like Merlin in a sense replace the observer - the girl wandering about in a woods -- with themselves. What's the next step in this AI-ification of bird-watching? Mini bird-tropic drones to get closer to any bird for a better look? With built in AI analyzer and mini-transmitter to the birder's ear saying suavely "this is a Yellow-rumped warbler, data uploaded to eBird." Is it here already? 
      And what about that girl in the woods? I'm sure eBird knows that we're human beings and not data points. There will always be errors in their reports. I guess I just don't see the need for advanced gadgetry in the simple pastime of watching birds; it becomes about the gadgets and not the birds.
     
     

On Friday, February 6, 2026 at 8:58:01 PM UTC-7 Nathan Pieplow wrote:
Hi Kevin,

This is an excellent question, and I'm happy to weigh in. I wrote the book on bird sounds (well, one of the books), and I use Merlin Sound ID all the time. 

I used to do bird surveys for Bird Conservancy of the Rockies, but had to quit a number of years ago when I realized my high-pitched hearing was much worse than other surveyors'. During training, everybody else could hear the Blue-gray Gnatcatcher at 100 yards and I still couldn't hear it at 50. I feared my bad ears would skew the data.

But nobody has exactly the same abilities, either physical or mental. Differences between observers are an inevitable confounding factor in all big-data citizen science initiatives, including the Christmas Bird Count, eBird checklists, and Breeding Bird Survey routes. The idea is that these differences mostly wash out across the huge number of repeated surveys over time.

Merlin helps me be more accurate. It can hear things I can't. But it also makes lots of mistakes. In some situations it performs better than the average human, in some situations worse. It helps to know what it does well and what it does poorly.

I don't think we should be too afraid of assistive technology -- after all, eyeglasses and binoculars and scope are assistive technologies that greatly change detection rates of birds. But we shouldn't let technology operate unsupervised by human judgment. If Merlin detects a bird I haven't detected, I pay attention to context. It's got a great track record of detecting real Bushtits and Cedar Waxwings before I do. If it's detecting those species repeatedly during an observation, in decent habitat, I might put them on my list. I usually like to be able to see the shape of the call on the spectrogram, though, if I can't spot the birds.

If it's telling me there's an Indigo Bunting around, I'm going to be skeptical. Merlin can't tell Indigo from Lazuli in Colorado. Neither can humans. Neither can buntings. (That's why we have a lot of hybrids here -- the two species learn elements of each other's songs in the overlap zone.) With experience and study, you can learn when to place more trust in technology and when to place less. It's not a matter of using it or not using it, it's a matter of using it carefully.

Nathan Pieplow
Boulder, Colorado

On Fri, Feb 6, 2026 at 6:09 PM Kevin Schutz <ksc...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello CoBirds Community,

Today's post by Bill Kosar and subsequent responses prompted me to start the following discussion.

First, some background.  We all hear and read of the risks and appeals of not relying upon common technology in popular use today - Merlin, etc.  In the past, I've been forthright in admitting some of my identification limitations when inquiring about participation with various surveys and describing how I use multiple tools to (personally) learn and narrow on any reported identifications I may make.  As such, I have been declined for participation - no technology allowed, etc.  That's fine as I know the intent is to provide (reasonably) accurate data for various scientific purposes.  What I've found curious is reading subsequent posts from other participants for the same surveys indicating their use of technology.  Argh!! - so some routes potentially went uncovered.  We know of examples of published experts/authors of books covering their "big year" efforts and garnering numerous speaking engagements afterwards that use technology such as frequency shifting headphones to assist them with identification while birding.

I admit confusion, especially in the context of mixed inputs pleading for more data reporting juxtaposed against pleas and warnings that at times feel more like one is receiving a "thou shalt not" style sermon.  When is technology use appropriate when recording an identification?  Does use of technology depend on specific surveys/records/databases?  What constitutes "technology" and how is technology defined?  Does technology include sound amplification headphones, recordings that can be compared post observation at a later time against vetted libraries, optics, photography, electronic or printed guide books?  Even consultation to more experienced birders relies upon some form of technology (vocalizations, photographic confirmation, etc.).  All of the examples listed above could be characterized as "technology" in the context of humankind, and in some cases would seem to be dismissed out-of-hand.

Today, within eBird, when one submit a checklist, one is asked "Are you submitting a complete checklist of the birds you were able to identify?"  I think eBIrd used to ask something along the lines of "... to the best of your ability", but I can't attest to that with certainty.  I've always adopted the philosophy that I would record identifications to the best of my ability, which includes the use of various forms of technology to assist me with a confident identification.

What are the current, best practices deemed acceptable today for bird identification?  Should technology use be context specific (eBird database, bird surveys, other...)?  While database corruption is and always will be a concern, are we artificially limiting community science resources over such concerns?  Humans will always be fallible.  When technology limitations are appropriate, how much cheating is likely occurring?  Are we at a point where we are past being able to use an honor system, of relying upon one's best abilities?  When some form of technology has been used to assist with an identification, is it incumbent to disclose all forms of technology used (optics, photography, recordings, various forms of guidebooks, applications such as Merlin, various AI applications)?

I am sincerely interested in understanding the breadth of views present.  I may find myself having to reconsider my philosophy of using "my best ability" as no longer being appropriate.

I hope this post results in a respectful, thoughtful discussion.

KS
El Paso County

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cob...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/e7168f62-d4fa-4ae9-a246-23797720569cn%40googlegroups.com.

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/9dbfe5d2-116d-4784-a394-70e12d668be6n%40googlegroups.com.

Saturday, 7 February 2026

[cobirds] Found: Camera battery at South Platte Reservoir

While watching the 8 long-tailed ducks and two immature surf scoters at South Platte Park this evening, I discovered that someone had left a camera battery atop a fence post.  Ironically, it was the same post that I left my  cell phone on just a week or two ago.
The battery is a Powerextra 3.7 V. but I have no idea what type of camera it goes to.
Contact Doug Kibbe at dpkibbe@msn.com or call 303-910-9476 and we can arrange for you to get it back.



Re: [cobirds] Appropriate use of tools, including "technology", when identifying birds?

Hi CoBirds,

If the discussion continues, please keep it focused on Colorado birds and Colorado birding.

Thank you,

David Suddjian
CoBirds moderator

On Sat, Feb 7, 2026 at 1:08 PM Kevin Schutz <kschutz@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you to Paula and Nathan for participating in this discussion.

I'm curious why some surveys/studies apply different rules for the use of various forms of technology, along with how often different surveys may revisit their guidelines as technology improves.  One always should guard against being unduly influenced by suggested results and then succumbing to confirmation bias.  Both humans and technology are fallible and not 100% accurate in all situations.

I suppose unless one was able to perform DNA analysis, there may always be a small amount of ambiguity related to any specific ID.  Even then, one may question the fidelity of the testing methods skewing results.  As technology improves and costs come down to deploy at scale, who knows, maybe ordinary individuals could perform DNA testing one day.

Speaking of which, I viewed an interesting news segment on local TV this past week.  I didn't get all of the details, so I am not locating the source at the moment.  The gist was that someone has developed a "new" touchless DNA testing method for use in forensics.  I believe the piece stated the Colorado Bureau of Investigation would be the first department in the country to deploy its use.  It sounded like the testing was based on some form of a photonic "gun" to detect DNA on surfaces without contaminating the scene.  If the methodology proves reliable, think of the possibilities down the road if one could apply its use to avian or other forms of life.

Did anyone happen to see this news piece, or another similar mention of this technology?

Kevin

On Fri, Feb 6, 2026 at 8:57 PM Nathan Pieplow <npieplow@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Kevin,

This is an excellent question, and I'm happy to weigh in. I wrote the book on bird sounds (well, one of the books), and I use Merlin Sound ID all the time. 

I used to do bird surveys for Bird Conservancy of the Rockies, but had to quit a number of years ago when I realized my high-pitched hearing was much worse than other surveyors'. During training, everybody else could hear the Blue-gray Gnatcatcher at 100 yards and I still couldn't hear it at 50. I feared my bad ears would skew the data.

But nobody has exactly the same abilities, either physical or mental. Differences between observers are an inevitable confounding factor in all big-data citizen science initiatives, including the Christmas Bird Count, eBird checklists, and Breeding Bird Survey routes. The idea is that these differences mostly wash out across the huge number of repeated surveys over time.

Merlin helps me be more accurate. It can hear things I can't. But it also makes lots of mistakes. In some situations it performs better than the average human, in some situations worse. It helps to know what it does well and what it does poorly.

I don't think we should be too afraid of assistive technology -- after all, eyeglasses and binoculars and scope are assistive technologies that greatly change detection rates of birds. But we shouldn't let technology operate unsupervised by human judgment. If Merlin detects a bird I haven't detected, I pay attention to context. It's got a great track record of detecting real Bushtits and Cedar Waxwings before I do. If it's detecting those species repeatedly during an observation, in decent habitat, I might put them on my list. I usually like to be able to see the shape of the call on the spectrogram, though, if I can't spot the birds.

If it's telling me there's an Indigo Bunting around, I'm going to be skeptical. Merlin can't tell Indigo from Lazuli in Colorado. Neither can humans. Neither can buntings. (That's why we have a lot of hybrids here -- the two species learn elements of each other's songs in the overlap zone.) With experience and study, you can learn when to place more trust in technology and when to place less. It's not a matter of using it or not using it, it's a matter of using it carefully.

Nathan Pieplow
Boulder, Colorado

On Fri, Feb 6, 2026 at 6:09 PM Kevin Schutz <kschutz@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello CoBirds Community,

Today's post by Bill Kosar and subsequent responses prompted me to start the following discussion.

First, some background.  We all hear and read of the risks and appeals of not relying upon common technology in popular use today - Merlin, etc.  In the past, I've been forthright in admitting some of my identification limitations when inquiring about participation with various surveys and describing how I use multiple tools to (personally) learn and narrow on any reported identifications I may make.  As such, I have been declined for participation - no technology allowed, etc.  That's fine as I know the intent is to provide (reasonably) accurate data for various scientific purposes.  What I've found curious is reading subsequent posts from other participants for the same surveys indicating their use of technology.  Argh!! - so some routes potentially went uncovered.  We know of examples of published experts/authors of books covering their "big year" efforts and garnering numerous speaking engagements afterwards that use technology such as frequency shifting headphones to assist them with identification while birding.

I admit confusion, especially in the context of mixed inputs pleading for more data reporting juxtaposed against pleas and warnings that at times feel more like one is receiving a "thou shalt not" style sermon.  When is technology use appropriate when recording an identification?  Does use of technology depend on specific surveys/records/databases?  What constitutes "technology" and how is technology defined?  Does technology include sound amplification headphones, recordings that can be compared post observation at a later time against vetted libraries, optics, photography, electronic or printed guide books?  Even consultation to more experienced birders relies upon some form of technology (vocalizations, photographic confirmation, etc.).  All of the examples listed above could be characterized as "technology" in the context of humankind, and in some cases would seem to be dismissed out-of-hand.

Today, within eBird, when one submit a checklist, one is asked "Are you submitting a complete checklist of the birds you were able to identify?"  I think eBIrd used to ask something along the lines of "... to the best of your ability", but I can't attest to that with certainty.  I've always adopted the philosophy that I would record identifications to the best of my ability, which includes the use of various forms of technology to assist me with a confident identification.

What are the current, best practices deemed acceptable today for bird identification?  Should technology use be context specific (eBird database, bird surveys, other...)?  While database corruption is and always will be a concern, are we artificially limiting community science resources over such concerns?  Humans will always be fallible.  When technology limitations are appropriate, how much cheating is likely occurring?  Are we at a point where we are past being able to use an honor system, of relying upon one's best abilities?  When some form of technology has been used to assist with an identification, is it incumbent to disclose all forms of technology used (optics, photography, recordings, various forms of guidebooks, applications such as Merlin, various AI applications)?

I am sincerely interested in understanding the breadth of views present.  I may find myself having to reconsider my philosophy of using "my best ability" as no longer being appropriate.

I hope this post results in a respectful, thoughtful discussion.

KS
El Paso County

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/e7168f62-d4fa-4ae9-a246-23797720569cn%40googlegroups.com.


--
Kevin Schutz


--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/CAFSoCDBMUcnsXjb3JsHmhDSGweTqpg1Z5EPP0eDVPC_OcZ31Nw%40mail.gmail.com.

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/CAGj6RoqmTchbcCEn-vfdEORq_%2BkzydAskX8eRUSLh0JXrXq_Cg%40mail.gmail.com.