A hypothesis about the disconnect between going birding and doing conservation: the influence of temporal scales

     You may have heard the adage -- take someone birding and get them excited about conserving bird habitat.  This may be a reasobably accurate statement, but of course, there are lots of steps between seeing cool-looking birds, recognizing the need for habitat conservation, and actually takinig some kind of action.  Some people's conservation actions include donating money to one  or more conservation groups, and that is a fine thing to do. 

     I wonder about the connection between going birding and doing conservation work at a very local geographic scale -- say your favorite birding patch.  For ease of discussion, consider the following four cause-and-effect loops of activities and consequences: (1) a BIRDER COMMUNICATION loop in which birders go birding, see birds, report their sightings, attract more birders to go birding there, who report their sightings and so on, (2) a BIRD DISTURBANCE loop where just a few birders in the patch have little affect on birds occurring there, but as more and more birders show up, it could affect the numbers of birds or the species that occur there, (3) a HABITAT DISTURBANCE loop whereby the first birders leave almost no trace of their presence, but more and more birders showing up end up trampling vegetation, making new trails, inadvertently bringing in seeds of invasive species and otherwise messing up the habitat for birds, and (4) a HABITAT RESTORATION loop in which birders visiting the area recognize the damage to the habitat and ultimately take action to restore the bird habitat.  These loops are shown in the Figure below. 

Figure 1. Four cause-and-effect loops of birding activities showing how the events in each loop occur at different time scales.

     Note that the BIRDER COMMUNICATION loop at the bottom of the figure occurs very rapidly.  We've all seen this happen.  If a "good" bird shows up somewhere, it doesn't take long for word to get out and for more birders to show up.  If it's a "really good" bird, birders might show up from all over the country in a matter of a day or two.

     The next loop up from the bottom (BIRD  DISTURBANCE loop) takes a little longer to unfold.  the reason for this is that it really depends on the speed of the bottom loop.  Sure, a small number of birders might disturb birds to the point of inadvertently chasing them out of an area.  But, the likelihood of this kind of disturbance happening increases dramatically as the number of birders increases and the birding pressure is sustained for several days. 

     The HABITAT DISTURBANCE loop can take awhile to play out.  Trampling of vegetation, removing it to get better looks at a pond or other site, or human behaviors that alter plant species composition take not only numbers of people to occur but usually repeated presence of people over a relatively long period of time.

     The loop at the top of the figure (HABITAT RESTORATION loop) is the slowest loop to occur.  One reason is that the HHABITAT DISTURBANCE loop has to occur first (or at least some recognition that the habitat is degraded if it already was before anybody started birding the area).  In addition, it takes somem  time for people to get geared up to do any habitat restoration activities, and of course, the habitat needs time to respond to those restoration activities.

     Thinking about the time scales on which different events and activities occur can help us all develop realistic ideas and expectations about how introducing people to birding might turn them into conservationists.

Go bird!

Why do some Apprentice Birders loose interest in posting their lists of sightings?

          Many relatively new birders -- those who are essentially trying-out an identity as a birder (i.e., Apprentice Birders) -- start out with quite a zeal for posting their sightings of birds on listserves and other places.  And why not?  Their interest has not only been piqued, it has been fired up.  They are learning to identify birds that many of their friends may not know how to identify and they want to feel like they are an integral part of their new-found birding culture. 

Will these observers post their bird sightings?

          We all get a lot of vicarious enjoyment from folks who post their sightings for all the world to see.  I know that I like to know what others are seeing around the local area, and love some of the wonderful anecdotes that folks share along with their sightings.  A lot of these new (Apprentice) birders post sightings feverishly for awhile and then stop.  Why is that?  Do they get tired of reporting the same sightings over and over?  Do they stop going birding?  If they stop reporting their sightings of common birds, will they still report uncommon birds that other folks might want to go and see?  In this blog post, I model a few hypotheses about this kind of behavior by Apprentice Birders.  Some of these hypotheses may have ramifications for birder recruitment and retention efforts.

          First, I want to discuss the question of why any birders (Apprentices or full-fledged Recruited Birders) report any sightings anyway.  In other words, what motivates a birder to report sightings?  Social science research suggests that different people may have different motivations for the same behavior, and even one person  may have different motivations from  time to time (although one motivation is usually is more dominant than others).  Some of these different motivations may be: (a) to fulfill a desire to share information with others, (b) to maintain a sense of belonging to birding community, or (c) to let folks know that you're out there looking for, and seeing, birds (i.e., searching for some degree of prestige although nobody would admit to calling it that).  As a corollary, people may be motivated to report sightings of rare birds either (a) to fulfill a desire to share information with others, (b) to earn credibility among their birding peers, or (c) to stake a first claim to having found a rare bird (i.e., prevent "poaching" of discovered birds).  Hypotheses can fairly easily be developed about any of these different motivations. 

          Because I want to focus on Apprentice Birders in this blog post, I will limit my models to motivations pertaining to (a) fulfill a desire to share information with others, and (b) maintaining a sense of belonging to the birding community.  Both of these motivations (desire to share and desire to feel connected) can be thought of as identity-defining, characteristic traits for some birders.  As such, both can be depicted in models as "stocks" (see main page about how to read the components of models) that can increase or decrease depending on certain factors (Figure 1).  

Figure 1.  Two possible identity-defining, characteristic traits depicted as stocks that can increase or decrease depending on various factors.


          If these are indeed, identity-defining traits of some Apprentice Birders, increasing or maintaining the levels of these stocks would be important motivators for Apprentices to report their sightings of birds -- if those Apprentices linked in their minds (1) reporting birds and (2) increases in one or both of these traits.  In a model, it might look something like what you see below (Figure 2).

Figure 2.  Reporting bird sightings can help Apprentice Birders feel more connected to the birding community, especially when those sightings are confirmed by others and those other birders thank the Apprentices for reporting the birds.


          In the figure above, I only show "sense of belonging" just to save space.  I think that trying to increase one's sense of belonging to a desirable group can be a major motivation for behavior.   Similarly, trying to increase or maintain some minimum desirable level of "being a sharer" also likely is a major motivation for reporting behavior.  However, reporting bird sightings can be a real 2-edged sword, especially for Apprentice Birders whose excitement level may exceed their level of skill at the finer points of bird identification.  Sometimes, Apprentice Birders make mistakes.  Every birder does, even the supposed experts.  If someone identifies a fall Blackburnian Warbler as an out-of-range Yellow-throated Warbler, it really is no big deal.  A few folks may spend gas money and time away from family or work to try to see the more rare species, but the world is not going to end, and they may stumble upons some other interesting birds.

          Still, if Apprentice Birders are reporting their sightings in an effort to feel more connected to the birding community, any public notification that they made an identification error -- no matter how tactfully the notification is done -- will depress that sense of being connectied.  Further, if the erroneous sighting is corrected in some untactful way, it could lead to an intolerable level of "ridicule."  In this case (Figure 3), "ridicule" could be an identity-destroying characteristic.  Loss of a "sense of connection" to the birding community is likely to lead to the Apprenitice stopping reporting (because erroneous reporting is draining away that sense of connection).  If the Apprentice's feeling of ridicule gets too high, he is likely to actually stop trying to develop his identity as a birder. 

Figure 3.  Apprentice Birders may be motivated to report their bird sightings to increase their sense of being connected to the birding community, but hearing that they have may an erroneous identification can decrease that sense of connection, and untactful notifcation of their error can lead to intolerable levels of an identity-destroying trait like "ridicule."

           Moral of the model is to take it easy on Apprentice Birders and thank them for sharing their sightings whether or not they made an identification mistake.

          Go bird!

Having fun with models: understanding the Patagonia Picnic Table Effect



     Ever hear of the Patagonia Picnic Table Effect?  It's named for the concrete picnic table at the roadside rest along the 2-lane highway near Patagonia, Arizona.  

Rose-throated Beccard



The story goes that somebody found some "good" birds there when they got out of their car to take a break.  Perhaps those "good" birds were some Rose-throated Beccards that nested there for a few years, or maybe a Tropical Kingbird, or some other denizen from south of the Mexican border. 

 

Anyway, the discoverer duly reported the find.  Soon other birders came to see that rarity, and found other "good" birds, like Blue Mockingbird, Rufous-capped Warbler, and others.  These birds were also reported to Rare Bird alerts, more birders came to the rest stop, and  found more rarities.  These were reported, thus attracting even more birders, and so on.  This kind of scenario obviously has occurred in lots of other places.  Indeed, almost any "hot spot" has become a "hot spot" because of this Effect.  

Blue Mockingbird

     I am not sure who was the first to name this scenario the Patagonia Picnic Table Effect, but many writers have referred to it by this name.  As a modeler, I like to think that models can be used to help us understand real life, and the Patagonia Picnic Table Effect provides a good example to try to model just for fun.  See, not every model has to be used to discover some unknown piece of the bigger puzzle or to test hypotheses.  Models can be just for fun!

     So, what would a model of the Patagonia Picnic Table Effect look like?  Like many other models of birders' behavior in the field, this model starts out with some basic Bird-Birder interactions like encountering birds, deciding whether to try to identify them, and ultimately working out some of the identifications.  The addition to the basic model in this case is that at least one of the identified birds is recognized by the birder as a "rarity" (Figure 1).

 

Figure 1.  Basic Bird-Birder interactions leading to the identification and recognition of some "rarity" worthy of being reported to a local hotline.

 

     When the birder recognizes a rare or unusual species, she decides not to keep the sighting to herself, but reports it to a Rare Bird Alert or some other birding hotline.  Birders who were dutifully at work or having a second cup of coffee at home or otherwise "inactive" (i.e., not in the field birding) get these reports, and that is when all heck breaks loose.  If the reported bird is really unusual for that location, it motivates these inactive birders to go "chase" the bird (i.e., to chase the report of the bird, actually).  In this model, I am calling folks who hear these reports and decide to go try to see the rarity "chasers" to distinguish them from "active birders" who initially find and report these birds (Figure 2).

Figure 2.  Inactive birders hear reports of rare birds and are motivated to become "chasers" of those reports.

     As these "chasers" show up and (hopefully) relocate the rare bird, their searching can turn up other "good" birds.  These also get reported to the hotlines, bringing even more "chasers" to the scene who find even more "good" birds, and so on.  This last figure (3) shows the full Patagonia Picnic Table Effect.

Figure 3.  Full model of the Patagonia Picnic Table Effect.

     I hope that this blog post has shown that models can be developed to show experiences that occur in real life, including situations that have been immortalized in the birding literature with their own names.  See models can be fun, can't they?

Go bird!

Hypothesis 1 for Apprentice Birders: the cycle of building and releasing frustration keeps some Apprentice Birders stuck in "beginner mode"

Recall the basic bird-birder interactions that form the foundation for understanding the behavior of birders in the field.  To summarize the model (Figure 1), the Apprentice Birder encounters birds.  He focuses on one particular bird, and decides whether to try to identify it.  Unfortunately, the observed bird looks like many similar ones in the bird book.  That’s Ok, he’ll just look for another to that might be easier to identify.  But, the next one is too hard to identity.  And so is the third one, and the fourth one. 

Figure 1.  Basic bird-birder interactions.

Each time this happens, a little a little more frustration builds for the Apprentice Birder (note the red box in Figure 2).  In an effort to release that building frustration, the Apprentice Birder looks for another, easier-to-identify bird.  Easier-to-identify birds might be birds the Apprentice already knows, or they might be birds that look just like a picture in a book.

Figure 2.  Some Apprentice Birders become frustrated by encountering birds that are "too hard" for them to even try to identify and so go look for easier birds to identify.  By always looking for birds to identify that are not "too hard," they never improve their identification skills.  The result is that they get stuck in "beginner mode."

Either way, the Apprentice’s level of skill in identifying birds does not improve.  (Note in the model that no flow pipes come into or out of the variable called “skill and expertise” indicating that the level remains constant.)  Because a high percentage of encountered birds always will be “too difficult” for the Apprentice to even try to identify, the level of frustration always will exceed some tolerable level.  Consciously or unconsciously, the Apprentice Birder will seek to release that frustration.  The easiest way to do that is for the Apprentice to look for another bird to try to identify. 

An important key for getting “unstuck from beginner mode” is for the Apprentice Birder to improve his or her bird identification skills.  There may be many good ways to do this (and some ways that are not so good).  Future blogs will address some hypotheses about various ways.

Go bird!

For Whom Do You Cheer

Ever see a Peregrine Falcon swoop low across the mud flats and scare a flock of shorebirds into flight?  More often than not when I have seen this behavior in the company of birding friends, the others cheer when the Peregrine comes up empty.  Not me. 

I am no sadist.  I do not revel at horror movies.  I have no relatives who are vampires.  I simply appreciate the equations of nature dealing with energy intake and survival.  Namely, things have to eat to survive.  A Peregrine Falcon’s food sources include shorebirds. 

      After all, shorebirds eat, especially lots of invertebrates.  Who cheers for the worms that got away?  Who cheers for the mosquito larvae that wiggled out of the grasp of a Least Sandpiper?  I know what you’re thinking: worms and mosquitos – eewwww.   It doesn’t matter.  Live things are alive because other things used to be, but aren’t any more. 

I’m not sure if it’s something about wanting the underdog to win or an aversion to death, but lots to people seem to cheer for prey when predators are around.  In the philosophical treatise on birding “Life in the Sky with Wings,” author Jonathan Rosen substantiates this preference for prey eluding predators.  On page 144, Rosen describes accompanying a falconer who uses a pair of Harris’ Hawks to capture partridges:

…the partridge was in the shadow when I finally noticed it.  The bird was beautifully marked with black shadow lines – the whole bird looked like a painted face.  The hawks were both ten feet or so up, but they had not yet noticed the partridge.  The partridge, however, was aware of the hawks, and seemed frozen with fear I felt I could reach out and pick the bird up with my bare hands… Standing with the petrified bird at my feet and the dark raptors above, I felt not the murderous rapture I had hoped to experience in some perverse way, but a kind of bored impatience and a bit of shame.  This was not what I wanted.  My sympathy was with the partridge.

                My sympathy lies with the predator.  Watching the death part of the circle of life and death helps me feel connected to nature in all its fullness.  When a raptor stoops on avian prey, but misses, the circle of life and death is not a closed loop.  It’s like an open electrical circuit, and the current of life cannot proceed. 

               I guess cheering for either the predator or the prey is a little weird anyway.  Despite the fact that I firmly believe humans are an integral part of nature, the notion of cheering for either the falcon or the shorebird seems like I am wishing I could truly be a part of nature, but feeling at that moment like I am relegated to standing on the sidelines.

                Next time you see a Peregrine Falcon swoop across a mud flat filled with shorebirds, for whom will you cheer?

         Go bird!

Becoming a Birder by building character

                If you have spent very much time in birding circles, you’ve probably heard someone comment, “Mr. So-and-so goes birding all the time, but he is not much of a birder.”  Or, perhaps you’ve heard somebody say, “Ms. Whats-her-name hardly ever goes on outings with the bird club, but she’s definitely a real birder.”  As I have said elsewhere (How do you know if a birder is recruited or retained?), being a birder is not really about what you do, but rather who you are.  What exactly do I mean by that?  How would you know if somebody is a real birder or is just somebody who goes birding?

Are any of these people birders?

Characteristic attributes associated with being a birder

Many long-time birders can remember some experiences where they went birding under some really challenging circumstances.  Maybe it was freezing cold, or blazing hot, or raining water and warblers all at the same time.  In his book, Birders: tales of a tribe, British birder and author Mark Cocker shares lots of stories of situations through which birders persevered and developed character – or characteristic attributes.  Cocker’s birding buddies withstood long hitch-hikes, having pig manure spread on them by an irate farmer, having to sleep in rat-infested barns, being robbed, and of course missing the hoped-for bird.

                Some of Cocker’s friends had to be very patient while trying to hitch-hike to a birding locale or while waiting for a particular bird “to show.”  Some had to be tenacious and persistent in their efforts to see some species of bird.  Some had to have dogged determination.  Many were highly skilled although many had only average birding ability.  Certainly, these are characteristic traits for some birders, but not for all.  There undoubtedly are many, many possible characteristic traits, and different kinds of birders almost surely have different attributes. 

                Because different birders will disagree about what the characteristic attributes are that make someone a birder, ample evidence exists to indicate that there is more than one birder identity.  I will develop another post that investigates the question: How many different birder identities exist?    Well, given that multiple birder identities exist, and that different birders will list overlapping traits or characteristics, a list of characteristic attributes is not a good way to determine what anthropologists call the ”boundary” between identities, in other words what separates one birder identity from another.

Developing traits as birders?

                Other important questions to examine about characteristic attributes are these.  How does somebody develop characteristic attributes?  Who determines which attributes go with which birder identity?

                Here is a chance for you readers to provide some input.  How would you describe a birder to someone who does not know what a birder is?  What three words or phrases would you use to fill in the blanks below?  (Please put your responses in the comments to this blog and I’ll tally them up.  Thanks!)

                A birder is……

                _________________________________________

                _________________________________________

                And _____________________________________

How do you know if a birder is recruited or retained?

          Recently, there has been a big push on to recruit more people into birding.  You may have heard about the Global Birding Initiative called Pledge to Fledge  (www.globalbirdinginitiative.org/blog/).  There have been lots of other similar efforts to recruit more birders over the last couple of decades.  The reasons for wanting to recruit and retain more birders are both numerous and very important.  For example, many folks believe that by getting people interested in birding, it will instill in those people a passion for the conservation of wildlife species and the habitats they depend on.   This will then result in financial and political support for conservation and maybe even some people who are willing to put their labor into conservation activities.  Also, getting people outside and connected to nature is believed to have both physical benefits (e.g., exercise from walking) and mental benefits (e.g., restoration of our ability for focused attention in school and at work).  From my perspective, all of these efforts are very much needed and very well-intentioned.

The big question is: how do you know when a birder is recruited or retained?  This is more than just an esoteric question.  There are very practical reasons for thinking about this question and how to answer it.  One practical reason has to do with the idea of evaluating recruitment programs.  If individuals and organizations are going to spend time and money on birder recruitment and retention, they need to have some way of knowing whether they are successful or not.  Another practical reason has to do with the supposed link to conservation that I mentioned in the paragraph above.

Historically, social science research has focused on participation in singular activities as indices to recruitment and retention.  For example, recruitment into citizen science programs is indicated by folks being willing to provide data.  Recruitment into hunting and fishing has been indicated by people being willing to buy a license to do those activities.  Similarly, recruitment into birding has been indicated by a willingness to go birding.

Social science researchers have used a number of very good scientific foundations as the basis for trying to understand participation.  Both the Theory of Reasoned Action and the Theory of Planned Behavior rely on measuring attitudes, beliefs, and norms as a way of predicting behavior.  Theory measuring motivations and constraints is used to understand peoples’ personal goals and any barriers to participating in activities that help meet those goals.   A multiple-satisfactions approach has been used to try to understand how participation in activities helps people meet their personal goals.  Also, activity innovation-adoption has been used in an effort to understand how people move from becoming aware of an activity to being interested in it to trying it out to finally continuing to participate in it.  All of these foundations are scientifically valid and can help shed much light on participation.

There are some shortcomings of using participation in some activity as an index to recruitment and retention.  First, some people who participate derive no personal meaning from participation and are very likely to switch to some other activity when given the chance.  On the other hand, some people who participate sporadically or even stop participating permanently still think of themselves as having an identity linked to the behavior.  Further, whether a person participates in any particular activity is not indicative of that person’s deep-seated, underlying values.

Instead of using participation as an index to recruitment and retention, research with which I have been involved has used the development of a self-perception or identity as an index.  This makes sense to me because people seek out opportunities to participate in activities that are consistent with, or help reinforce, their identity (e.g., as a birder).  In this way, participation in birding does not define whether someone is a birder.  Rather, their self-perception as a birder comes from having been changed from one category (e.g., non-birder) to another (e.g., birder).  Also, and very important in terms of recruitment and retention, it is other people who already hold the identity of being birders who facilitate opportunities for a person to have the right experiences in the right social contexts that fuel the change from one category to the other, and thus help produce the identity.

Please check out my earlier post about how people become birders to learn more about  birder identity development.  http://modelbirder.blogspot.com/2012/09/how-do-people-become-birders.html

Go bird!

How do people become birders?

     One of my interests is in understanding what people do as well as why they do it.  This applies to birders and their birding activities.  Social science researchers who study these things often try to determine peoples' motivations for their behaviors.  There are two main challenges with this approach, in my opinion.  First, it necessarily links the idea of "being a birder" to some set of birding behaviors.  Am I only a birder when I put my binoculars around my neck and purposefully go out birding?  Am I a birder even when I don't go out birding?  The second challenge with a motivations approach to understanding birders and birding is that being a birder involves many, many different kinds of behaviors.  As a birder, I may have very different motivations for any of those behaviors.

     One way I try to get around those challenges, is to try to understand birding from the perspective of people developing an identity as a birder.  A main premise of this approach is that people become recruited into the population of birders through a process of identity development.  Over several years, a person may progress from being a nonbirder, to a potential birder, to an apprentice birder, to a recruited birder, and finally to a retained birder.  Although awareness of the activity of birding, determination of individual motivations and constraints, and birding satisfaction all are important concepts in the identity model as in other models pertaining to individuals making decisions about participation, these concepts are interpreted and applied differently here.  Overall, the identity model posits that it is not what you do, but who you are, that defines you as a birder. 

            The development, and ultimately maintenance, of one’s self-perception (i.e., identity) as a birder is a socio-cultural process that can be marked by various stages.  For example, non-birders are not aware that someone may have an identity as a birder although they likely are aware of the activity of birding.  Potential birders know that birding is more than an activity for some people, and that it can be a “way of life” or an expression of “who I am.”  This awareness arises through interactions with retained birders and other members of the birding culture (i.e., social anthropologists call these “sources of productive power”) who also make potential birders familiar with the characteristic attributes of birders (e.g., observant, in-tune with season rhythms of wildlife, conservation-minded, ethical, etc.).  When potential birders believe consistency exists between their personal motivations and the characteristic attributes of birders, potential birders become interested in “trying-out” the activities and social mores associated with being a birder. 



Figure 1.  Non-birders become potential birders when they develop an awareness that birding means more than just an activity for some people, and that being a birder be an important element of a person's identity.



            Apprentice birders start developing an identity as a birder by tying-out birding-related activities.  At this stage, retained birders and other mentors help apprentices develop the technical competencies (e.g., how-to skills) and social competencies (i.e., norms and values) needed to develop a birder identity.  Technical competence develops through repeated participation in birding “rituals” (another term borrowed from social anthropologists, and importantly distinguished from the term “rites of passage”) that build skill and understanding about how to apply that skill in different situations.  Social competence is built over time through transformative behaviors and experiences, referred to as “rites-of-passage,” which help apprentices attain the characteristic attributes of being a birder.  Most contemporary birding recruitment programs focus on building technical competence (how to use binoculars, where to go birding, how to recognize bird songs, etc.), but lack specific interventions to develop social competencies (e.g., what qualities or traits make someone a birder).



Figure 2.  Potential birders become apprentice birders when they try out different  birding behaviors, and learn both the "how-to" elements and the meaning associated with being a birder.



Recruited birders are recognized, by themselves and often by others, as having “made it” as birders because they have attained the skills, knowledge, and characteristic attributes of a birder.  Retained birders sustain their identity by remaining satisfied that they hold and express the characteristic attributes of a birder (e.g., as ethical as I want to be, as knowledgeable, as respectful, etc.).  As long as cultural capacity exists (within the birding culture), retained birders are likely to interpret dissatisfaction (i.e., less than desired levels of characteristic attributes) as a threat to their birder identity, and will act politically and financially to make sure that the threat is addressed. 



Figure 3.  Full model showing how someone goes through various stages of identity development from a non-birder, to a potential birder, to an apprentice birder, to a recruited birder and ultimately a retained birder.



One important point to note is that a person could participate in birding activities (i.e., go birding) and be in any stage of identity development – even the non-birder stage of identity development.  Going birding does not make someone a birder!  Development of characteristic traits makes somebody a birder, and that development takes time.  Other posts will try to answer the following questions.  What are the characteristic attributes of a birder?  Who determines which attributes makes somebody a birder?  What are the processes through which those attributes are developed? 

Go bird!

Modeling basic bird-birder interactions

The cast of characters: Birds and Birders

Here is a simple model showing basic interactions between birds and birders in some local patch.  First, birds come and birds go in the patch.  Their coming and going is affected by things like migration and daily movements in search of food and cover, among other things.

Figure 1.  Birds come and birds go in a local patch.

Now suppose some birder (maybe you?) are busy at home or are doing something other than birding.  In other words, you are an inactive birder.  At some point you are motivated to go birding.  When you are done birding and go home, the active birder becomes an inactive birder again.

Figure 2.  Inactive birders become active birders when acting on their motivations to go birding.

Basic Bird-Birder interactions: (1) encountering different kinds of birds

     There is a basic pattern to all bird-birder interactions.  First, the birder encounters birds (i.e.,  sees or hears birds).  This encounter might be with a single bird or a whole bunch of birds.  During the time the birder spends in the patch, she will probably encounter lots of different kinds of birds.  The important part that makes this model useful for all birders (from beginners to experts) is that "different kinds" does  not mean "different species" in this model.  Rather, it means birds that look different to the birder.




Figure 3.  When an active birder goes birding, she encounters a number of birds that look or sound different from each other.


A second basic Bird-Birder interaction: (2) deciding whether to try to identify an encountered bird

     Some birders try to identify every single bird they encounter.  However, especially when folks are just starting out learning about birding, they simply do not have the knowledge base to do this.  They ignore lots of birds that are too difficult for them to even try to identify (e.g., think streaky sparrows, gulls, shorebirds, etc.).  These folks will decide to try to identify only a small percentage of the different kinds of birds they encounter.  For the sake of this model I am creating, I will refer to the percentage of birds that the birder decides to try to identify as an index to the birder's willingness to identify an encountered bird.  This willingness can be affected by lots of things like how good the view of the bird is, various distractions, etc., but the greatest influencing factor (at least in this model) is the birder's skill level.

Figure 4.  A birder tries to identify only a percentage of encountered birds; "willingness to identify" is an index to this percentage.

A final basic Bird-Birder interaction: (3) trying to work out the identification of an encountered bird

     So, a birder will decide (i.e., be willing) to try to identify only a small percentage of encountered birds while birding.  Similarly, he will be able to put a name on only a percentage of birds he tries to identify.  Here, I refer to this percentage as an index to his "effectiveness at identifying" birds.  Think of it this way: I tried to identify 10 birds, but could only put a name on 7.  In this case, the effectiveness is 70%. 

     By taking the number of different kinds of birds encountered by the birder and multiplying by her willingness to identify birds, one can "calculate" the number of types the birder is willing to try to identify.  Then by multiplying this by her effectiveness at identifying birds, you can "calculate" the total number identified.  Essentially, the last box in the model is the number of types on n the list of  birds tallied by the birder while birding.

Figure 5.  The complete model of basic bird-birder interactions, including encounters with birds, willingness to try to identify encountered birds, and effectiveness at identifying them.

     This basic model will form the basis of many, many subsequent posts about the birding behavior of birders.

Go bird!