Using Field Notes

[Picidae]

I'd be interested to know how many members use field notes when watching birds. It seems to be a dying trend and yet it's an excellent learning tool for bird indentification. It sometimes amazes me that so many photos end up on identification threads where the original poster can't remember some key features of what they saw in the field. This isn't a problem with very clear photos of birds, especially when there is little potential for confusion species. HOwever, not everyone is an excellent photographer.

Fieldnotes is how I learned to ID birds. It increases your powers of observation. Teaches you to look at salient diagnostic features in the field. Most importantly, allows you to reserve and record behaviour in the field (eg. how it was feeding, relationship to other birds, flight patterns, vocals etc) all of which can sometimes be instrumental in arriving at a correct ID. There's something in the process of drawing and studying what you see at the time that allows you to absorb what you are looking at in a way that you don't do with a camera, information which then becomes part of the learning process. I enjoy photography and do a lot myself but relying on a photo which you look at later on the computer in order to get an ID can be full of pitfalls (not least if the shot's rather blurry!). Light can effect plumage colour, structure and photos rarely give enough information about the behavior of the bird or even it's size.

I should emphasise, you don't need to be an artist or even good at drawing birds (I enjoy sketching so it's probably a bit easier for me than it might be for some). A basic outline shape is suffice - practicing outline shapes of different groups of birds beforehand or even using prepared stencil shapes can help initially. Some of the things that you might record should include where ever possible:

1. How it differed from other birds in the field, especially size comparisons (if the bird is alone then using a mental image of a bird whose size you are very familiar with can help)
2. Key features: Bill shape/colour/lenght, Leg length/colour, facial features, wing shape, main plumage colours etc
3. Behavior: eg. was it wagging it's tail? flight description, was it skulking, sitting on top of a bush, feeding on insects/mud/ etc etc
4. Finer plumage features: eg. underwing/upperwing pattern, facial features, noting eg supercilium or lack of, eye rings, any barring, streaking or spotting
5. Any vocals (this can be essential in separating confusion species!)







They don't have to be works of art - sometimes my notes are a complete mess! Some from a long while back ...



But record the essential features



The more difficult it is you find to draw, the more information you need to write - it's worth keeping a few coloured pencils in the rucksack too.

I'd really recommend using fieldnotes if you want to learn how to ID birds for yourself - what do others think? Do you use them?

[gecko]

Your field notes are beautiful, some of those would be up on the wall if they were mine! Unfortunately I struggle at even drawing stick figures sometimes

So, I tend to stick to notes, usually in illegible handwriting, but I try to get enough of the features you mention that it will be possible to identify the species later.

john

[AshLee]

Beautiful notes and images Picidae Your passion for birdwatching really shines through!

I'm not a complete loss. I (always) have a folded sheet of plain paper in my back pocket, along with a pencil-eraser, a spare pencil and an extra small piece of eraser (they take up very little room). I've never needed more than this. I have a very good eye for colour and tone so I wouldn't take coloured pencils, for example. My memory would serve me better than trying to pick the right pencil, which wouldn't actually exist.

However, these have been of more use to me when studying subjects which are sedentary, very rarely birds. For these, my camera is used, and as quick as I can. The birds that interest me the most at the moment tend to be the ones that flit around in the tops of trees very quickly, affording little/no time for a sketch. I am lucky if I find them with my bins, and VERY lucky if I get a shot. Nevertheless my camera serves as my sketch book. It's small, easy to use with good resolution.

Part of the enjoyment for me is being able to travel fast and light. The small bag over my shoulder houses the camera and bins, a compass (I'm not high-tech and don't like to rely on waiting for signals) and a hand lens (used more in summer, but kept there for safekeeping). A printed section of a map is usually located in my other back pocket. My rucksack carries a ruler, a watertight sample carrier (haven't need this yet) and some personal items (such as spare sunglasses, a waterproof, wet wipes, and a tool for extracting ticks, which hasn't yet been needed (praise the Lord!)). But by far the heaviest item in this bag is the HUGE flask of tea, which is essential if I stand a chance of being accompanied in my pursuits. This bag stays on my back for the most part of my trip, out of the way, keeping my hands free and allowing me access to the things I use most. I'm not actually sure where I'd put a sketch pad

But I do think that when I get home I should write things up. I'm looking into this at the moment. That's when I might think about writing some notes, with small pictures instead of the sketches.

And I joined a natural history society recently. I read in a report from one group that their waterproof notebooks and writing tools came in very handy on one trip. Stop, rewind, say again! I took a double take That's one thing I might consider, although I'm not sure if I'm just a bit intrigued as to how waterproof paper actually works and also to try and look like I belong and know what I'm doing

Ash

[The Woodman]

AshLee - agreed, Picidaes field notes are exemplary.

You ask how waterproof paper works. I haven't got an answer for that but it feels like thin plastic to me.

I use waterproof paper daily for field survey notes and for many years have used Aquascribes A5 ruled springbound notebooks. To keep them rigid they are bulldog clipped on to a slightly larger sheet of thinnish aluminium.

However, a useful recent additon to my kit is a ring bound pocket sized "Surveyor Waterbook" with a 5mm grid and semi rigid covers produced by Weatherwriter - WeatherWriter weatherproof writing boards pens and paper

One advantage of this type of paper is that it can be reused. Remove graphite marks with a kitchen cleaner such as Cif or any cream cleaner with a very mild abrasive on a cloth with a circular motion.

Sorry Picidae - have diverted from your original question.

[Picidae]

Originally Posted by AshLee

But I do think that when I get home I should write things up. I'm looking into this at the moment. That's when I might think about writing some notes, with small pictures instead of the sketches.
Ash

Thanks all for the comments. Ash, the idea of fieldnotes is that they are taken in situ at the time rather than later. I know this isn't always possible but it's very difficult to memorise what you see after the event. Most submission to rare birds committees require good contemporaneous field notes (and photos), so it's a good practice to get into. It's too easy to 'fill gaps' in by memory using fieldguides etc which can lead to wrong assumptions about what you saw at the time. This is particularly a good practice to get into with regard to birdwatching but perhaps not so necessary with mammals or insects for different reasons. Insects tend to 'sit' longer allowing more photo ops and there's less confusion potential with most UK mammals.

I keep a secretary notepad and biro/pencil in the side pocket of my combat trousers which I always wear for birding. It takes up very little room. I also sketch birds for artistic reasons and sometimes take proper sketchpads/watercolours but this is very different from taking fieldnotes for identification purposes.

As for watercolour sketching in the field - a small portable watercolour box, a small A5 sketchpad, a pencil is suffice for me (I use a bit of drinking water for the paint) - all of which fits into a small pencil case.

Water Colour paper is loosely bound and much thicker than normal paper so is very absorbent. It's already stretched, so can take up water without getting wrinkled or bumpy.

Again though, for the purposes of taking fieldnotes at the time of seeing something in the field, a biro/pencil and little notebook is suffice. I've later done more 'finished' paintings/drawings from my fieldnotes but that's a completely different kettle of fish (and one I find very challenging!) and not necessary for the purposes I'm referring to.

[earthdragon64]

My main problem with field notes is my dyslexia, I have few problems reading, but writing is another story entirely and drawing even the simplest of sketches is completely beyond me. Writing is made much worse if I'm under pressure or in a rush.

I'm happy if I get home from a field trip and can actually read the list of species I've seen, I tend to write in block capitals to try to make this easier.

Most days out, I'm with my husband, he will usually record most of what we see, although I'll usually do the flowers. We both use our cameras, hubby usually has a zoom lens, my camera has either a standard or macro lens. Between us we can normally get good enough photos to use to ID things from reference books when we get home.

Days when I'm out on my own are a bit more problematic, I do jot some observations down if I find a bird I don't recognise, but often can't read them when I get home. In those circumstances, I tend to rely on my memory a lot.

I've a friend who has started taking a little digital dictaphone type thing with her on field trips, it's something I'm considering.

I have to say, I'm hugely envious of people who can write neatly and quickly and can draw, both are things I'd love to be able to do.

[Picidae]

Originally Posted by earthdragon64

I've a friend who has started taking a little digital dictaphone type thing with her on field trips, it's something I'm considering.

I think that's an excellent idea and considered it myself - again, another means of getting on the spot observations recorded while you're actually there. I think quite a few birders who can't get their head around using written fieldnotes are using these now and transcribing them later. The important thing with using a dictaphone is that it is essential to learn basic topography so you can verbally describe what you see without reference to sketching. (Most reputable birdguides will provide this at the beginning of the book in diagrammatic form)

[Picidae]

Some more old fieldnotes in the hope it inspires others to take notes in the field rather than discourages! Just to show how naff and messy it can be with still getting down some essential information at the time of the sighting.





If anyone else has any it would be great to see them - feel free to upload them - it really isn't about 'good art' but about observation, so birds that look like aeroplanes (as all mine did when I first started!) are fine provided there's some written info to accompany them!

[SuzieandFlo]

What an excellent post and very helpful too ! Thankyou .
I'm just starting out and any useful information like this is very much appreciated. So far , I haven't ventured any further than my back garden.
Thanks again .

[Picidae]

Originally Posted by SuzieandFlo

What an excellent post and very helpful too ! Thankyou .
I'm just starting out and any useful information like this is very much appreciated. So far , I haven't ventured any further than my back garden.
Thanks again .

I'm glad you found it helpful Suzie/flo, that was the purpose of the thread - still hoping others might be encouraged to share some of their experiences with fieldnotes too!

Good luck with your new hobby btw - the garden is a great place to start watching and sketching birds since you get prolonged close views of birds on feeders.