How many WABBERS report their sightings?

[Deb London]

Originally Posted by The Woodman

As one who uses records from a county database on a weekly (and paid for) basis to assist in making conservation and mitigation judgements, I find them invaluable and necessary. I find nothing more frustrating than to survey an area and the recorded data doesn't reflect my findings due to lack of data.

We can all contribute to the knowledge bank whether it be a dead rabbit on the road to a rare species. It's all useful stuff.

I have never seen any element of interfering with a recorded animal just because it's been recorded. I edit an annual county mammal report and am careful that references to records cannot be used to accurately locate sensitive and susceptible species e.g. badger setts.

RR, reprting your GCN's wouldn't stop you watching and enjoying them. The record may well help their conservation in your area by providing presence and abundance information to those who deal with such matters.

Records are as accurate as the information given to the recorder.

There has to be a cut-off point when a species is too common to be recorded, or is this not the case? As I learn to identify things, I also realise just how many of the things I spot are common. I've seen thousands of Great Tits this year. How often would I report them? How many places would I report them for? If I get bored or reporting Great Tits, would it look like the Great Tit population had plummeted because I was the only person bothering to submit Great Tit records? These are serious questions. Who reports Great Tits? I would have thought Great Tits were covered by the Big Garden Bird Watch and did not need recording.

[Paul mabbott]

Originally Posted by tristanba

I would second all this - as the national recorder for the newly created Shieldbug and allies recording scheme I am only too aware of how sparse the NBN distribution maps are, even for the commoner species. Please send in all your records, regardless of how widespread or common you think a particular species might be.

I would go even further - 'common' species records are more important than those of rarities. If we don't know where the abundant species are, where they are, whether they are increasing or decreasing in numbers or distribution then we can say nothing much about the rarities.

I'm not the first to note that for many years ornithology books had vast numbers of pages devoted to Sylvia undata while Passer domesticus was covered in a page or two. Which was and is the endangered species? This has much to do with the invidious effects of 'twitching' but also because folk consider the mundane not worth recording: when there was last a change of London Mammals Recorder, the new one found that, apparently, there were more pipistrelles in London than grey squirrels!

[The Woodman]

Originally Posted by Red Robin

....I'd just like to put on record and make it absolutely clear that I have not got any Great Crested Newts in my small wildlife garden pond to report. I have 5 (on the last count) breeding Palmate Newts and long may they be happy there

I'm glad you put the record straight. My mis-reading. Get the Palmates recorded.

[RoyW]

Originally Posted by Matt Smith

As a National Recorder for Tachinid flies, and a County Recorder for amphibians and reptiles (Berkshire) I can say without a shadow of doubt that ALL records for species, common or not, are always wanted.

As has been said, a lot of the time, common species don't get reported because people think they are "common", but if no one records them, proving this can be quite a challenge at times. The Common Sparrow used to be very common, we now know it's not as common as it used to be soley because we have records.

As for data overload, for common species, with modern computers it's not really a problem. Data entry is the time consuming aspect, though if I can get records in electronic format (ie spreadsheets) then the task usually goes much faster. Once the records are in the database, it is a simple task to, if needed, remove duplicate records. I don't mind getting lots of records for the same species of fly from the same site on different dates, info like this can be useful in working out the phenology of the species.

Originally Posted by Deb London

There has to be a cut-off point when a species is too common to be recorded, or is this not the case? As I learn to identify things, I also realise just how many of the things I spot are common. I've seen thousands of Great Tits this year. How often would I report them? How many places would I report them for? If I get bored or reporting Great Tits, would it look like the Great Tit population had plummeted because I was the only person bothering to submit Great Tit records? These are serious questions. Who reports Great Tits? I would have thought Great Tits were covered by the Big Garden Bird Watch and did not need recording.

No species is too common to be recorded, and for many groups low numbers of recorders does often mean that even "common" species may not officially have been reported from a given site/area. However, despite the fact that modern computers do make the storage (and sorting) of data possible, for groups that are well covered (ie. birds) there is a limit to the number and type of records that are wanted for common species. Taking Debs Great Tit example: I can generally expect to see several Great Tits each day and will usually see or hear at least one in four or five different locations on most days (even if I'm not birding). If I entered every record on a database, this would easily be well over 1000 records during the year. If only 50 observers submit records to the county recorder, and all of them send in details of every time they have seen Great Tits, that may be 50,000 records (most of one or two Great Tits). Obviously this is an extreme example, but it should show that not every record is required in some cases! Most county bird recorders will have a list of the type of records that they want to receive, with the same list usually published in the county bird report (and perhaps on the recording societies web page). For a species like Great Tit this might typically include numbers of breeding territories, counts above a certain number, trends & unusual records, and counts/records that may indicate passage (for sites that you visit regularly a summary at the end of each year will usually be useful rather than each individual record, eg.: "Local Wood - at least three pairs bred including one pair nesting in a post box at the edge of the wood, maximum of 24 seen on most visits, but 36 on Oct 29th. Numbers seemed lower than previous years." In general though, trends, including regional trends, in common species like this will be picked up from other surveys (Garden Bird Survey, BBS, WBBS, data from 'constant effort' ringing sites etc.).

As I said previously, if you contact the recorders for the groups that you are interested in they will generally be happy to advise you.

Originally Posted by STYRBJORN

There's another point here. I have made sightings of unusual animals and been reluctant to report them, partly because drawing too much attention might scare the beasts away, and partly because I can hug my special knowledge to myself. "I know something you don't so Nyah". Selfish, wrong, but very tempting.

Ric

This is actually entirely understandable (at least to a point). You do unfortunately hear about cases where the presence of rare animals or plants has become known and the increased visitor pressure has then caused problems for the species or the site. However if the presence is not reported it is equally possible that the presence will be threatened by development and/or inappropriate management practices.
County recorders will be well aware of the potential problems that could be caused if they release details of the presence of scarce species, and they will not release sensitive details that could identify a site (or any other details if they are requested not to). However, if the details are in the relevant databases they could potentially help to protect a site, and the species concerned.
If you feel this way about reporting records, please at the very least keep all details recorded in a form that can be passed on to county recorders at some stage (and hope that nothing that could perhaps have been prevented happens to the site in the meantime!).

[Paul mabbott]

Believe me, problems like those would be welcomed by most invertebrate recorders! There's no such thing as 'too common'!
Start with birds though: the 'Big Garden Birdwatch' can provide useful info but it is what it says - only a record of what is seen in gardens and then only for one day (weekend?) of the year. It will therefore tell us something of the broader state of garden birds and perhaps, over the years, of some trends; but if, there are weather or other anomalies then its value may be limited. Much more information (more precise and more accurate) can be gleaned from the BTO's 'Garden Bird Survey' which provides information on a weekly basis therefore is much more sensitive to long-term trends; but , again, it only deals with garden birds although the survey holds background information on local habitat &c..
More comprehensive information, of course, will come from surveys of birds in different habitats and over the whole country in various seasons.
So what should the average naturalist do? For birds, I would suggest that the Garden Bird Survey is easy to perform and produces useful data for national surveys. Other observations should be sent to your local recorder - undoubtedly they will be interested to see your weekly records for two or three years but, once that baseline is established, they would probably only want to hear of exceptional cases! I think the same may apply to people who regularly visit particular sites: obtain a baseline and then note and report any deviations .... either excessive numbers or unexpected absences, as well as the appearance of rarities of course.
I'm not a bird recorder so it's a taxon which I see from the view of a reporter. I'd be interested to hear the views of fully-fledged bird recorders!

Originally Posted by Deb London

There has to be a cut-off point when a species is too common to be recorded, or is this not the case? As I learn to identify things, I also realise just how many of the things I spot are common. I've seen thousands of Great Tits this year. How often would I report them? How many places would I report them for? If I get bored or reporting Great Tits, would it look like the Great Tit population had plummeted because I was the only person bothering to submit Great Tit records? These are serious questions. Who reports Great Tits? I would have thought Great Tits were covered by the Big Garden Bird Watch and did not need recording.

[STYRBJORN]

Also to set the record straight, I did report 2 of the three, and was glad I did in one case in particular, a little colony of GCN. I left the village, and when I dropped in to my old local a few years later found that building on the site had been restricted. If I'd kept schtum the scoreline would have read GCN 0 JCB 20.

The other case I reported was more problematic. I knew the whereabouts of a breeding pair of water voles. My problem arose because the site was in the middle of town, opposite a canal-bank pub. Any attention drawn to the site was begging for a yobbo with a scope sighted airgun to add to his trophy list. When I rang the local guy who kept the records and explained, he asked me to show him the site so he could confirm they were indeed voles and then they would be left strictly alone.

A week later all my efforts were nearly undone. I was sitting on the bank with a pint and a roll-up, communing with nature like yer do. There was a little hole on the ground close by. Suddenly out popped momma vole and about 4 - 5 little volettes. They had a wander then popped back and this time I saw them come to the surface and swim back to the nest. So much for all my discretion!

The wood ants are doing fine in their 20-yr old nest and I ain't talking.

Ric

[Red Robin]

Originally Posted by STYRBJORN

The wood ants are doing fine in their 20-yr old nest and I ain't talking.

Ric

.... LOL

I always enjoy reading your posts, Ric

[thunder]

Originally Posted by RoyW

Taking Debs Great Tit example: I can generally expect to see several Great Tits each day and will usually see or hear at least one in four or five different locations on most days (even if I'm not birding). If I entered every record on a database, this would easily be well over 1000 records during the year. If only 50 observers submit records to the county recorder, and all of them send in details of every time they have seen Great Tits, that may be 50,000 records (most of one or two Great Tits). Obviously this is an extreme example, but it should show that not every record is required in some cases! .

You do have a point, but if nobody records common species regularly it does mean that slow declines (or slow increases) can be missed. You make 1000 Great Tit records this year. Was it 1000 last year, or only 950, or perhaps 1050? Will it be 950 or 1050 next year? Of course it depends on you doing the same amount of recording to make it more meaningful, but I hope you can see the point I am trying to make. Somebody needs to make consistent records of common species throughout the year. But I guess most bird recorders will be happy with "Great Tits regularly seen in garden throughout the year", and if enough people write "Great Tits regularly seen in garden throughout the year, but not as many as last year" then someone may see that further investigation is needed.

henrya

[JaySteel]

I report most of my reptile and amphibian sightings. My local adder site in particular is a privately owned derelict site that could well end up scheduled for development one day when the market picks up. I feel that records for this site showing the presence of various reptiles could prove invaluable should it be necessary to oppose any such development one day.

I have before pondered over the consequences of reporting rare species if I were find them living on my property. Someone recently posted images of GCNs living in their abandoned outdoor swimming pool. Now that the presence of this highly protected species is publicly known the owner of that pool is extremely restricted and limited as to what action they could take if they were to decide one day that they no longer wanted that eyesore in their back garden. And without a valid licence they would have to be very careful that they didn't disturb them in any way either.

Jason