Hi Nev,

Many thanks for your offer to cover some of the Trafford SBIs. I've sent you a pm.

Cheers


Steve

Hi Nev,

You've clearly been very busy both birding and recording/submitting records! The GM Bird Recording Group (GMBRG) has access to BirdTrack records submitted from Greater Manchester, and those from winters 2007-11 and breeding seasons 2008 to 2011, have been incorporated into the atlas data which the BTO has also supplied to GMBRG.

So, if you are already using BirdTrack, please don't submit your records via RODIS, as this could result in duplication in both the GMBRG and GM Local Record Centre's databases. There is a data exchange agreement between the two organisations which means that all bird sightings submitted via RODIS are passed on to GMBRG.

However, Ian's post was aimed at encouraging people who currently post their sightings on the forum, but don't send their records in to GMBRG, to start doing so. The GMBRG database holds over 600k records going back to 1992 and is used not only to produce the annual county report, but also to support the work of the GM Ecology Unit in selecting and maintaining Sites of Biological Importance (SBI) of which there are currently 535. In Oldham for example there are 37 SBIs covering 34 square kilometres (23% of the borough's surface area), so they are clearly of huge importance in protecting our birds and other wildlife. All records submitted to GMBRG from within SBIs are supplied to GMEU and used to justify the continuing selection of these sites. However, in recent years there has been a noticeable decline in the number of bird records received from SBIs and this is already having a negative effect. Shore Top Reservoir in Bury was reviewed last year and is no longer considered to be a significant site for birds. There was a similar lack of information from Byrom Hall Floods in Wigan.

A number of GM birders have volunteered to record on SBIs in Oldham, Tameside and Wigan and their records are already being put to good use. There are still plenty of other sites which are not being covered at present. So if you'd like a list of SBIs from your borough we can provide these, as well as detailed maps of site boundaries and a description of the habitats and species occurring there.

As you will see Ian has also posted on the County Notice Board about a fantastic opportunity to get involved with surveys in some of GM's ancient woodland (yes we do actually have some!). Free training will be provided and give you the chance to increase your ID and recording skills.

For anyone who is interested in contributing towards protecting GM's wildlife sites but would like some guidance on how to record and the type of records to submit, we are considering running some courses on this very topic. These would be free of charge but first of all we need to know whether there is enough interest to justify running them. Please get in touch either via pm or email info@gmwilldife.co.uk.

And finally, as the breeding season gets under way, please don't forget those all important breeding codes. Bill Myerscough's post from 11th February in the GM Needs Your Bird Sightings/General Record Submission Discussion section of this forum is essential reading for anyone who wants to gen up on how to use the codes.

Steve




-- Edited by GM Local Record Centre on Thursday 4th of April 2013 01:24:25 PM

Many of you out there have already registered for RODiS and I cannot be too grateful for this; your records are being put to work daily in protecting birds and their habitats now and for the future. It's the easiest way of giving something back

There are though still many who are not submitting their records, some of which go to great lengths to type out intricate posts on here and my original questions still remains; are we getting selfish? Is personal kudos more important than spending 10 minutes submitting your records on a free on-line system?

How many of the Waxwing sightings on this forum will simply go to waste and become merely 'old news' on a forum. More importantly, how many posts about breeding birds (there was one about a Woodpigeon nest building today), the most important record we could hope for (irrelevant of species!), will be lost to a few lines in a post and nothing more, when they could so easily be utilised for the good of those birds themselves.

Come on everyone, this forum goes from strength to strength, it's number of views increases week on week and so do the number of daily posts yet all I ask for providing this is that you take the few minutes to officially submit those sightings, even if its only the important ones. I don't think that's too much to ask its it, not when after all, its for the birds and not really for me

I'm still waiting for the BTO (or whoever) to produce (in my case for Apple), an app that lets me record sightings on the go. I think I filled at least 10 notebooks with sightings last year, which then have to be added up, coded and allocated to a 1 km square (for Birdtrack). If your patch coveres several different squares (as several of my frequently visited sites do), that means separate entries (though I will admit to cheating at the borders of squares sometimes) and more effort. :( Sometimes I feel that I spend almost as much time slaving over a hot spreadsheet as I do in the field (particularly after I've visited somewhere new and found that my route criss-crossed umpteen squares ) but at the end of the day, its very gratifying to see the species richness gradually changing. Adding new species and being able to compare details such as earliest and latest dates for species adds interest for me and prompts me to look that bit closer the next time. It has definately resulted in improved observational skills (though there is still massive room for improvement), but its also rewarding to be part of a larger project from which wildlife and the wider community can benefit from.

I'll reply privately if that's okay Lawson and we can work through what's best for you.

The 'Greater Manchester needs your bird sightings' thread on this forum and the 'Bird Recording and County Rarities' page of the Manchester Birding website are good starting points though.

Andy,

Have you managed to install MapMate on your pc? Instructions were sent with the disc on how to enter records, but if you'd like to send a pm with your tel. no. I'm happy to give you a ring later today, or one evening/next weekend (whenever is convenient) and talk though entering a few records.

I'm not sure whether emails are going astray but you should have received a file with the main GM sites which needs to be imported into MapMate before you can start entering records. Again I can talk you through how to do this.

It's also important that you register your copy on the MapMate website. Once you've done that I will send you a file containing all your records from the GMBRG database. You've been a regular contributor of records since the database was set up in 1992, so there will be approx. 5k. It literally takes a couple of minutes to download and import the file and you will then be able to view and query all your old records.


Steve

Ian McKerchar wrote:

---

Andy Bissitt wrote:

---

Ian,

Here I go again. Would I be stabbing blindly in the dark in suggesting that non-recorders and twitchers are often one and the same? In any case, if you wanted to confine the argument to records, the word in the subject title might have been 'secretive'. Selfish suggests money rather than information. Sorry, I don't have the chance to be pedantic much these days!

Andy B

---

The majority of the county's twitchers do, and many always have, submitted their county sightings; so certainly from a GM perspective that's not the case Andy.

As for the use of the word 'selfish'; "Selfishness is placing concern with oneself or one's own interests above the well-being or interests of others" (in this case 'one's own interests' being our enjoyment, photographing, blogging, posting, listing etc and the 'others' being the birds themselves).

-- Edited by Ian McKerchar on Friday 11th of January 2013 10:52:34 PM

---

Ian,

That's a good answer, almost as if you had looked it up.

Seriously though, so that I do not fall into the non-reporting trap, and to snap me out of my current apathy, can you just point me towards the simplest and most easily understood guide on how to use Mapmate. It's got to be straightforward and relatively idiot proof because when I get home from work these days anything that will tax my already weary brain is a no-no.

Cheers.

Lawson - all records are valuable, whether from an hour visit or a full day. As long as its accurate (I.e. you can tell what species it is) it will be of value. E.g I have records ready to go of a pied wagtail roost I saw at a retail park in wigan why I was waiting for my mrs to finish her shopping!

Plenty of interesting comments on this thread. Coming back for my "second helping" - my own opinion (for what it's worth!) is that I'm not sure that the situation with birders not submitting details of their sightings to the Greater Manchester Bird Recording Group (GMBRG) is solely to do with selfishness or laziness. I suspect there will always be a small percentage of birders who fall into these categories and sadly that no amount of carrot or stick (or indeed any form of incentive) will make them alter their ways. I think Ian mentioned in an earlier post that he was "all ears" as to hear why birders felt they were unable to send in their records. To date all the posts on this thread appear to have been from those who do submit records and it would now be very interesting and really much more enlightening to hear from those who don't.

I suspect there might possibly be other reasons that birders don't send their records in and as is mentioned above it would be interesting to hear on this thread from some of those birders who don't and the reasons why they don't. I admit it will take some courage to come and state this but the idea is, as Ian states, not to start pointing fingers at these birders but for us to try and help them get over some of their concerns/ reservations /lack of understanding of the mechanics of record submitting. I'm not sure where it has come from but there seems to have developed a mythology around record submitting that it is difficult, complicated or time-consuming. It really is none of these and we would like to try and get to the bottom of why some birders think submitting their records is anything but simple, straightforward and quick. It would be really brilliant to hear from those birders who have thought about submitting their sightings but for whatever reason haven't quite yet got round to doing it. Please let's hear about these "hurdles", so that we can all try and muck in and help those that are keen to start off to get over them. Of course, things can always be discussed via pm, if that is what is wanted but ideally it would be better if these concerns could be discussed and shared on the forum, for others to read and learn from. The idea of all of the forums is to share information but they are also there for all of us to help each other with any problems we may have. After all, if the sharing of our concerns results in our questions being answered then it may also be the case for many other birders reading the same posts too. So instead of the answer encouraging just one birder to get started on submitting their records, we may get another 9, 99 or 999 doing so too!

Are there any birders out there that are prepared to share their reasons as to why they haven't yet started sending their sightings records into GMBRG? I hope so. There are plenty of us on the forum willing and prepared to try and help.

Cheers,

Bill.

Mike Price wrote:

---

Hi Ian,

I don't keep a record of Greater Manchester sightings, I do however record any nesting species that we monitor (mostly Derbyshire and South West Yorkshire but also a few just over the border into Gtr Manchester.

I have always assumed that this information was available to county recorders via the BTO but to be honest I have never thought to check with anyone, is this the case?

Regards

Mike


-- Edited by Mike Price on Friday 11th of January 2013 06:01:29 PM

---

Yes and no, Mike

Nest Record data is available from the BTO to Greater Manchester Bird Recording Group for the county report BUT only scanty details such as numbers of records submitted per species. Ian would be delighted to receive more detailed info which would improve the county database. Obviously precise locations of breeding birds would not be published in the county report in the same way that they are not published on this forum.

Ian,

Here I go again. Would I be stabbing blindly in the dark in suggesting that non-recorders and twitchers are often one and the same? In any case, if you wanted to confine the argument to records, the word in the subject title might have been 'secretive'. Selfish suggests money rather than information. Sorry, I don't have the chance to be pedantic much these days!

Andy B

Mark Rigby wrote:

---

Andy Bissitt wrote:

---

Ian,

You might well add to this that wouldn't it be better if all the money being spent by birdwatchers twitching rarities (and not-so-rarities) was instead given to conservation.

---

Congratulations Andy in posting the most outrageous comment for many a year!

I understand you don't partake in twitching yourself but why should those of us who do stop and give the money we would have spent to conservation. I suppose in your opinion, twitching is pointless? But its something that lots of people enjoy. Why stop at twitching, why not stop foreign birding holidays, visiting 'aunty Ethel' in Cornwall (and no I don't have an aunty Ethel in Cornwall before anybody asks) or ban the use of the motor car full stop! What about football? Supporters travelling the length and breadth of the country to support thier team-a complete waste of time and money. Why not ban anything that you don't have an interest in? The world would then be such a better place-I think not.

---

Whooooah Mr Rigby, (as in the noise emitted to stop a horse),

Much as I might appreciate being awarded the accolade of 'most outrageous comment for many a year', you have taken the bait nicely from the trap I set. Nowhere have I said that what I wrote was my personal opinion, I have merely suggested that twitching might be construed as being a form of birding selfishness. You could also add that twitching, by its very nature, is anti-conservation as a bird becoming rare makes it more desirable. You've got to agree that it is an interesting proposition. As for myself, I would still travel to see a bird I haven't seen before in Greater Manchester, and I do take foreign holidays. What I don't wish to do is class myself as somehow being 'holier than thou', and I hate hypocrisy. Perhaps I have less understanding of spending money which could be put to the greater good on getting a list of more or less the same 190-200 birds every year. I would just like to think that everyone strikes a nice balance and is not just thinking that if they deprive the RSBP or whoever of a few bob, they will have more incentive to travel to see the increasing list of birds whose numbers are dwindling to nothing. Oh, is this the 5 minute argument or the full half hour?

P.S. If I find anything of interest, I will not, and do not keep it to myself, so I don't discourage 'twitching'. That would be outrageous!

Cheers,

Andy

Andy Bissitt wrote:

---

Ian,

Here I go again. Would I be stabbing blindly in the dark in suggesting that non-recorders and twitchers are often one and the same? In any case, if you wanted to confine the argument to records, the word in the subject title might have been 'secretive'. Selfish suggests money rather than information. Sorry, I don't have the chance to be pedantic much these days!

Andy B

---

The majority of the county's twitchers do, and many always have, submitted their county sightings; so certainly from a GM perspective that's not the case Andy.

As for the use of the word 'selfish'; "Selfishness is placing concern with oneself or one's own interests above the well-being or interests of others" (in this case 'one's own interests' being our enjoyment, photographing, blogging, posting, listing etc and the 'others' being the birds themselves).

-- Edited by Ian McKerchar on Friday 11th of January 2013 10:52:34 PM

Steve Christmas wrote:

---

Here is a different angle on the same topic.
In my younger days in the early 1990s I went into a hide at Lodmoor, Dorset which was occupied by an elderly couple. I pointed out a few commoner birds to them. Then a trio of hard core twitcher types with scopes came in and sat behind us. After a few minutes, a tern appeared and obligingly flew in front of the hide a couple of times. It was clearly a summer adult whiskered tern. The elderly couple were blissfully unaware of it while the three birders behind began whispering among themselves.
After a while I turned round and said to them 'Isn't that a whiskered tern?' One of them said 'yes, we heard it was around'. It was left to me to point it out to the elderly couple, who were delighted.
I often wonder if the three birders would have said anything if I hadn't mentioned it first.
Has anyone ever been in a similar situation? Any suggestions as to the motivation of the three birders? Shyness? Elitism?Doubt in their own identification? Selfishness?

---

Right, that's another angle, you're right! We're all well-aware of the multitude of people who attend reserves - it encompasses different levels of bird ID ranging from the expert to the beginner - which is great, because underlying all of this, the enthusiasm (I hope!) of people who attend these reserves will be inherent (except, maybe, the son/daughter/wife/husband 'dragged' unwillingly, but I mean how can birds, their nature and behavior not interest or inspire anyone even a little ) so based on the presumption most people who attend reserves of any kind (be that Pennington or the organized RSPB/WWT type) are enthusiastic/passionate for birds/nature, we can see the leveler - the divisive aspect of it, as per Steve's anecdote, is complex and probably multi-faceted - I'll take a swing and assume there's a perceived-level of 'entitlement' buried in the psyche of some birders, which obviously, given the moment a mega drops by, becomes more pronounced - perhaps it was the 'entitlement' (defined as sense of "well they're not going to be bothered if it's rare or not anyway so no point letting them know) in overdrive there Steve????
By entitlement I mean, a sense that because a birder is knowledgeable, experienced and seasoned, those who are clearly not, aren't part of that clique or circle. This is a generalization and not applicable to everyone, of course.

I'll add - in an answer to the thread title, I've experienced almost nothing but the opposite of selfishness in my short time in the hobby in terms of imparted knowledge/chats/use of peoples' scopes/eyesight and try to give back - there are probably exceptions, loners who may see something half-decent, let's say Siskin or Dipper, in the direction you're heading to and they're coming from, and not let on lest they get sucked into a conversation and are ten minutes late for The Archers

Finally, I am adamant that birdwatching is, compared to other hobbies I have partook in, one of the ones where generousity is abound - I've done hobbies where there's potentially monetary value involved and THAT is where the backstabbing and selfishness really rears its ugly head.




-- Edited by John Doherty on Friday 11th of January 2013 03:00:19 PM

To put forward a positive angle, I don't think Ian realises how bad the situation might be without his website and this forum.

The forum in particular has helped create a real county birding community which, with the gradual demise of several local bird clubs and societies, would otherwise not exist.

Whenever I receive notification of a new BTO member, I send them a brief welcome e-mail in which, as well as mentioning BTO surveys, I always encourage them to a) submit records to the county recorder, b) read the county report and c) look at this website. I don't get a great number of responses but the ones I do get are always positive.

At one time my database of BTO members was a list of names, most of which meant very little to me. Thanks to the forum, I now feel that I know many more of them - even when we've not met face to face. When looking for folk to participate in the Winter Thrush Survey, I approached several people who regular post on the forum and the response in all cases was great.

I know that Ian is always trying to improve just about everything that he's involved with (and all power to his elbow!) but don't despair - it would be a lot worse without you

I'm going to be controversial here. I don't mean to offend anyone so apologies in advance if I do.

I wonder whether it is to do with when people took up the hobby? I'm basing this on chats I've had with lots of birders at different sites. What I mean is this: many new birders - both old and young - have likely come to the hobby in the recent surge in technology. As many people have noted before you rarely see a notebook these days. You can use a phone, ipad or whatever to take an interactive id guide, with song and a 'tick list' with you. Plus, many people get attracted to the listing side. Many newly retired new birders I've spoken to haven't been interested in recording, they just enjoy spending time outside and seeing the birds.

Birders of a certain age (including me) grew up with a local patch where one reason for counting and listing birds in a notebook was to relieve the boredom as much as anything. These days it's so easy to just go somewhere else, so many people just don't bother counting and recording and therefore don't actually have any records to submit, maybe?

I can understand the need to hammer home the message about the need to submit records, and I am sure that this will produce converts to the cause( It has guided me, for one, into starting to submit records).However I do not feel that ''non- recorders'',who post on the Forum,should be continually derided as if in need of some psychological assessment.
At the very least, these birders who simply post on the forum are passing on and sharing their sightings with other Birders, and placing such sightings in the public domain with the then possibility of the birds being recorded by others.
Rather, should we not aim to encourage the numerous birders who simply ''Guest'' on a regular basis on this Forum?
These include some very dedicated Bird Watchers,who I know read the Forum on a regular basis. Presumably they find the Forum interesting but choose not to make any contribution whatsoever.
There are a lot of decent people out there and I am not making any criticism of them but I do feel that some
of the targeting could be directed towards them.

One example of the ''carrot not the stick'' approach my be to give some prime examples of the success achieved by record submission to date.






-- Edited by keith mills on Thursday 10th of January 2013 07:55:03 AM

Ian,

You might well add to this that wouldn't it be better if all the money being spent by birdwatchers twitching rarities (and not-so-rarities) was instead given to conservation, we might well have a bigger fighting fund with which to face up to the people currently hurtling us towards a wildlife black hole. Trouble is, those who see conservation as some kind of archaic nonsense will always have more money and, in fact, be running the country. The world is stuffed. No doubt.

As usual, Bill manages to read my mind and articulate my thoughts better than I can

Are we getting selfish? or are we just plain lazy? I always liked the saying "if you want something doing, ask a busy person"!

Just to pick up on, query or add to some of the many points already raised on this thread. Ian's main point is that many of us are selfish when it comes to sending records in to the Greater Manchester Bird Recording Group (GMBRG). It seems like a very fair point to me and if a little home truth hurts to some GM birders then let's hope some good comes out of it. As Ian says there really is no excuse for most, if not all of the birders who use and benefit (for free!) from his forum to not be able to send some records in. We can all find excuses not to but if we are totally honest we could all find many reasons to help if we really made a tiny little bit of effort. A previous post mentioned modern technology as an issue but modern technology and all of the various methods that are now available to allow us to send in records also makes it much, much easier for us to keep records now than it was in "olden days" when everything was done long-hand, quite often on a filing card system. We don't know we are born with the options that we have available today and keeping records to send in to GMBRG is and let's be totally honest here, a very simple and straightforward process and if birders could only be bothered looking at what's available it should take very little extra time and effort for all of us who use this forum. Do we really all expect something for nothing? Isn't it about time that we put a little something back in return?

A point was made that nothing stands in the way of development and economic growth and the suggestion that record keeping in some circumstances might possibly be a largely futile affair. Sure not every fight can be won but equally not every one is lost either and if we gave up on every cause then why do any of us bother at all with birds and wildlife? Everyone who uses this forum will care enough to want to protect them...so why not do something about it? Many of the sites that some of us bird watch at around GM currently have varying levels of protected status. Why? Because bird watchers of earlier years have made the effort to document the birds and/or wildlife on these sites and allowed these sites to become designated as biologically important and afforded a degree of protection. Some of these sites only keep their protected status for a limited time span and they then need to be renewed but obviously this can only be done on more recent and not historical data. Can we really not be bothered to continue with this process?

I know it has been mentioned before but it's worth pointing out again that we really do need the strongest body of records that we can possibly get. It is very important that the GMBRG database has as many records on it each year as we can possibly get and for those records to be of the best quality that we can produce. Additional relevant remarks in any comments section and the use of breeding codes on records during the breeding season adds immense value to those particular records and gives us far greater ammunition to defend any birds and the sites they may use. Another purpose of having a large and high quality database of records each year is to allow us, as GM birders, to be able to produce the best quality county bird report that we possibly can each year. This important publication must accurately reflect what is going on in our county in any particular year and it goes without saying that it relies heavily on the quantity and quality of records we can all produce. I'm absolutely sure we all want our county report to be amongst the best, if not the very best.

I've often wondered if some birders are against recording because they don't understand what the GMBRG would like them to record and report? Should we record every Feral Pigeon and Meadow Pipit? Not sure how many are aware that on the home page of Ian's website there is a box half way down the right hand side showing as " Systematic County Bird List and Bird Record Details". Click on this and all species are listed and each is coded with a letter or letters indicating what records are required for each species. Quite simple. Why not look it up to see what is required for the above two mentioned species! If you feel you are not able to do all, then at least try and make a start somewhere. I'm not sure if many of us make bird recording seem much more difficult than it really is. If we can master mobile phones , cameras and all sorts of electrical gadgetry and software then bird recording really is absolute child's play!

Let's all look for reasons to get started this January and not for excuses why we can't do something. If we can look back through our 2012 records and get those in to Ian soon, then even better. If any assistance is required then Ian and Steve will I'm sure help privately via pm and there is also a specific sub-forum dedicated to the subject of "Greater Manchester Needs Your Bird Sightings" where topics can be aired and it would be great for this to have almost as much use as the sightings forum!

Please try and do your bit. Many thanks.


Bill.

Ian, my old lobby-gobbling mate, I sign every petition going, I write to MPs, I give my hard earned bread to many many wildlife appeals. Believe me, I would tie myself to anything and not eat pies for a whole month, BUT we are up against very rich, land-owning Tories who see the countryside, and OUR country in general as their personal playground to do with what the hell they want. Until this changes, I will remain a very sad, dejected, and dispirited man.
The things all of us on this forum care about means not a jot to 90% of the population. Very sadly so !

But it can assist the prevention of other smaller scale proposals Ian (of which there are many) or at the very least allow some mitigation work. I'm as pessimistic as you my pie-eating, butterfly loving old chum but rolling over for these @&#*$€ without trying can't be the answer? Get yourself up there and chain yourself to something...

With regards the petitions Craig, I'm completely with you there, I do the same but my post was really, I suppose, aimed more at record submissions and of course I already know you submit yours ( I have them safe and sound) as do a good deal many on this forum and much appreciated they are too. They know who they are as do those who don't.

Its a personal choice and that's fine, so long as those who don't submit their sightings don't start complaining when a planning applicationn comes in for their local patch or by their house, as has recently been the case. Without records we have nothing to fight with.

I suppose I get a little frustrated too as I pay the monthly bill for this forum myself, its not a offical forum and has nothign to do with the GMBRG beyond my own personal involvement. Its not cheap either but its great to see it so popular and see so many birders enjoy using it but I ask for nothing in return other than people at least try to submit their sightings offically. The reasons sightings within posts are not extracted to be used has been explained on here many times before and I'm happy to explain again if necessary, but its not going to happen for many very valid reasons.