[Tweeters] eBird Hotspot Boosting

Kevin Lucas vikingcove at gmail.com
Thu May 20 14:22:08 PDT 2021

I second Doug's sentiments.
Kevin Lucas
Yakima County, WA
*Qui tacet consentire videtur*

On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 2:15 PM Doug Santoni <dougsantoni at gmail.com> wrote:

> As a non-scientist, I just wanted to speak out on behalf of the sentiment

> expressed by the original poster, and say that the intention of broadening

> our knowledge and trying new birding spots is a worthy endeavor. I think

> all of us in this forum share a love for birds and our natural world!


> Doug Santoni

> Ph 305-962-4226

> DougSantoni at gmail.com


> On May 20, 2021, at 1:41 PM, J Christian Kessler <1northraven at gmail.com>

> wrote:



> this is to misunderstand the role of hotspots and their use in science.

> scientists are looking at species over much wider areas than just one or a

> few hotspots. in this context hotspots are non-random sampling points.

> any scientific statement about a species population (occurrence; density)

> for an area would have to take into account the density of hotspots in that

> area, the frequency of reports on each hotspot, along with other habitat &

> and such variables.


> hotspots are themselves highly non-random and hence non-scientific. some

> hotspots cover definable areas (like the UBNA) that may include multiple

> discrete habitats, while others are simply geographic coordinates for a

> place birders have found productive. there is from a scientific

> perspective no rhyme or reason to the identification of hotspots as

> individual locations, but as a collective set of data points covering a

> separately identified (by a scientist researching a specific question)

> area, they provide a time-series and wide-area picture of great value.


> and a key element of that value is the occurrence of a species by season.

> eBird bar charts are organized for occurrence by week of the year. in the

> end, "flooding" a hotspot only makes inherently non-random data even less

> non-random, which is to say statistically biased in hard to determine

> ways. starting a new hotspot in an area with few of them could, on the

> other hand, be beneficial to the comprehensive data set.


> Chris Kessler,

> Seattle


> On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 11:29 AM Joey McCracken <joemccracken3 at gmail.com>

> wrote:


>> Hi everyone, I've got an idea for those on eBird. What if we were to find

>> an eBird Hotspot in the area with not too many checklists or species and

>> then for the next week we try and get as many species as possible for that

>> location and we will change the location every week. We could really fill

>> in some missing data and maybe find some rarities in places that are not

>> well birded. It's just an idea for now but if you all want to do it maybe

>> we can start at Brierwood Park <https://ebird.org/hotspot/L7009887> just

>> south of Alderwood. Happy birding!

>> -Joey McCracken

>> _______________________________________________

>> Tweeters mailing list

>> Tweeters at u.washington.edu

>> http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters




> --

> "moderation in everything, including moderation"

> Rustin Thompson

> _______________________________________________

> Tweeters mailing list

> Tweeters at u.washington.edu

> http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters


> _______________________________________________

> Tweeters mailing list

> Tweeters at u.washington.edu

> http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/pipermail/tweeters/attachments/20210520/a4556a4f/attachment.html>

More information about the Tweeters mailing list