Re: [nfc-l] NFC protocol in eBird

[Kenneth Victor Rosenberg]

Thanks Marshall and to all of eBird!  This is terrific -- can't wait to enter 
(or edit :)) all my nfc data.

KEN


Ken Rosenberg
Conservation Science Program
Cornell Lab of Ornithology
607-254-2412
607-342-4594 (cell)
k...@cornell.edu

On Oct 24, 2011, at 5:12 PM, Marshall Iliff wrote:

NFCers,

Earlier this fall we had a discussion about how best to enter NFC counts in 
eBird. Finally, we have a good answer for you!

After much discussion, just today we added a NFC protocol to eBird. The idea 
for this is to be sure to tag NFC counts so they can be easily extracted from 
the data as well as to treat those a bit differently in eBird output to avoid 
skewing the data. While we don't expect floods of NFC counts, we do hope that 
some people will submit nightly counts, or even hourly counts. If these types 
of counts were submitted however, large volumes could certainly skew the eBird 
output that more typically represents diurnal counts.

To find this protocol, you can select it from the drop-down menu in step 2 
(date and effort) of data entry. Since there are many caveats, we ask that 
everyone reads and understands the protocol in detail. 
http://ebird.org/content/ebird/about/nfc-count-protocol

There are a few important points in this, including:

- You must report all species when using this protocol, but please select "not 
reporting all species". This is a bit of a roundabout way to make sure that we 
aren't comparing apples with oranges in eBird output.

- We encourage the use of 'x' in cases where there is moderate to high 
uncertainty in the counts, but we allow exact counts. We also encourage call 
counts being submitted in the species comments. We hope that this acknowledges 
the debate and issues with counting birds in nocturnal migration and still 
allows for the data to be of use.

- Note also the comments on the date and the definition of night

- This protocol is not to be used for automatic detectors.

Thanks to everyone on this forum for discussions that have helped us refine 
this and implement it. Let me know if you have questions or comments. And by 
all means, feel free to revise your past NFC counts to this protocol (pulling 
up all your Gray-cheeked records might be a good start, since so many are 
detected by flight call).

Best,

Marshall Iliff
eBird Project Leader


--

Marshall J. Iliff
miliff AT aol.com
West Roxbury, MA

eBird/AKN Project Leader
www.ebird.org
www.avianknowledge.net
Cornell Lab of Ornithology
Ithaca, NY

--
NFC-L List Info:
Welcome and Basics
Rules and Information
Subscribe, Configuration and 
Leave
Archives:
The Mail Archive
Surfbirds
BirdingOnThe.Net
Please submit your observations to eBird!
--


--

NFC-L List Info:
http://www.NortheastBirding.com/NFC_WELCOME
http://www.NortheastBirding.com/NFC_RULES
http://www.NortheastBirding.com/NFC-L_SubscribeConfigurationLeave.htm

ARCHIVES:
1) http://www.mail-archive.com/nfc-l@cornell.edu/maillist.html
2) http://www.surfbirds.com/birdingmail/Group/NFC-L
3) http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/NFCL.html

Please submit your observations to eBird:
http://ebird.org/content/ebird/

--

Re: [nfc-l] NFC protocol in eBird

[Andrew Farnsworth]

Hi all,
Erik, you bring up an interesting point about species' groupings.  I
think it would be cleanest and most useful (and this is what I do) to
enter spp. and grouping designations already in place (e.g. various
spuhs and generic groupings) without creating new ones and then add
the characteristics you hear (or see if you have supporting
spectrographic evidence) as comments (in as great a level of detail as
you can).  I'd be interested to hear others' perspectives on this
(because I do like and find scientific value in the groupings that
Bill E. and Michael O'B put forth), but I suspect a number on the list
might agree that creating new groupings will open up cans of worms for
eBird like "warbler/sparrow" sp. or "thrush/grosbeak/tanager" sp. etc.

Regardless, I am thrilled that this protocol is in place, thanks to
Marshall and all involved for making it happen. When do we get to
create an eBird for non-human observers?  Real eBirders . . . Kidding
. . .

Regards,
Andrew



On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 18:02, Erik Johnson  wrote:
> This is really exciting.  Kudos to the eBird team for yet another
> break-through!  Two quick thoughts:
> 1) from a programming perspective, would it be easy to force the user to
> enter "no" when submitting all species?  I can already see myself hitting
> "yes" accidentally.
> 2) is there any chance that new species groupings could be constructed?
>  Like zeeps, double-banded upsweeps, and so on.  Maybe this opens up too
> many cans of worms.  And perhaps it is more practical to enter "warbler sp."
> and then in the comments section list something like "3 zeeps and 2
> double-banded upsweeps."
> Cheers,
> Erik Johnson
> S Lafayette, LA
> ejohn33 AT lsu.edu
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Marshall Iliff  wrote:
>>
>> NFCers,
>>
>> Earlier this fall we had a discussion about how best to enter NFC counts
>> in eBird. Finally, we have a good answer for you!
>>
>> After much discussion, just today we added a NFC protocol to eBird. The
>> idea for this is to be sure to tag NFC counts so they can be easily
>> extracted from the data as well as to treat those a bit differently in eBird
>> output to avoid skewing the data. While we don't expect floods of NFC
>> counts, we do hope that some people will submit nightly counts, or even
>> hourly counts. If these types of counts were submitted however, large
>> volumes could certainly skew the eBird output that more typically represents
>> diurnal counts.
>>
>> To find this protocol, you can select it from the drop-down menu in step 2
>> (date and effort) of data entry. Since there are many caveats, we ask that
>> everyone reads and understands the protocol in detail.
>> http://ebird.org/content/ebird/about/nfc-count-protocol
>>
>> There are a few important points in this, including:
>>
>> - You must report all species when using this protocol, but please select
>> "not reporting all species". This is a bit of a roundabout way to make sure
>> that we aren't comparing apples with oranges in eBird output.
>>
>> - We encourage the use of 'x' in cases where there is moderate to high
>> uncertainty in the counts, but we allow exact counts. We also encourage call
>> counts being submitted in the species comments. We hope that this
>> acknowledges the debate and issues with counting birds in nocturnal
>> migration and still allows for the data to be of use.
>>
>> - Note also the comments on the date and the definition of night
>>
>> - This protocol is not to be used for automatic detectors.
>>
>> Thanks to everyone on this forum for discussions that have helped us
>> refine this and implement it. Let me know if you have questions or comments.
>> And by all means, feel free to revise your past NFC counts to this protocol
>> (pulling up all your Gray-cheeked records might be a good start, since so
>> many are detected by flight call).
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Marshall Iliff
>> eBird Project Leader
>>
>>
>> --
>> 
>> Marshall J. Iliff
>> miliff AT aol.com
>> West Roxbury, MA
>> 
>> eBird/AKN Project Leader
>> www.ebird.org
>> www.avianknowledge.net
>> Cornell Lab of Ornithology
>> Ithaca, NY
>> 
>> --
>> NFC-L List Info:
>> Welcome and Basics
>> Rules and Information
>> Subscribe, Configuration and Leave
>> Archives:
>> The Mail Archive
>> Surfbirds
>> BirdingOnThe.Net
>> Please submit your observations to eBird!
>> --
>
>
> --
> Erik I. Johnson, PhD
> Conservation Biologist
> Gulf of Mexico | Mississippi Flyway
> National Audubon Society
> --
> 6160 Perkins Rd., suite 135
> Baton Rouge, LA 70808
> o: 225-768-0820, ext 203
> c: 225-252-8864
> f: 225-768-0821
> --
> NFC-L List Info:
> Welcome and Basics
> Rules and Information
> Subscribe, Configuration and Leave
> Archives:
> The Mail Archive
> Surfbirds
> BirdingOnThe.Net
> Please submit your observations to eBird!
> --

--

NFC-L List Info:
http://www.NortheastBirding.com/NFC_WELCOME
http://www.NortheastBirding.co

Re: [nfc-l] NFC protocol in eBird

[Erik Johnson]

This is really exciting.  Kudos to the eBird team for yet another
break-through!  Two quick thoughts:

1) from a programming perspective, would it be easy to force the user to
enter "no" when submitting all species?  I can already see myself hitting
"yes" accidentally.

2) is there any chance that new species groupings could be constructed?
 Like zeeps, double-banded upsweeps, and so on.  Maybe this opens up too
many cans of worms.  And perhaps it is more practical to enter "warbler sp."
and then in the comments section list something like "3 zeeps and 2
double-banded upsweeps."

Cheers,
Erik Johnson
S Lafayette, LA
ejohn33 AT lsu.edu






On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Marshall Iliff  wrote:

> NFCers,
>
> Earlier this fall we had a discussion about how best to enter NFC counts in
> eBird. Finally, we have a good answer for you!
>
> After much discussion, just today we added a NFC protocol to eBird. The
> idea for this is to be sure to tag NFC counts so they can be easily
> extracted from the data as well as to treat those a bit differently in eBird
> output to avoid skewing the data. While we don't expect floods of NFC
> counts, we do hope that some people will submit nightly counts, or even
> hourly counts. If these types of counts were submitted however, large
> volumes could certainly skew the eBird output that more typically represents
> diurnal counts.
>
> To find this protocol, you can select it from the drop-down menu in step 2
> (date and effort) of data entry. Since there are many caveats, we ask that
> everyone reads and understands the protocol in detail.
> http://ebird.org/content/ebird/about/nfc-count-protocol
>
> There are a few important points in this, including:
>
> - You must report all species when using this protocol, but please select
> "not reporting all species". This is a bit of a roundabout way to make sure
> that we aren't comparing apples with oranges in eBird output.
>
> - We encourage the use of 'x' in cases where there is moderate to high
> uncertainty in the counts, but we allow exact counts. We also encourage call
> counts being submitted in the species comments. We hope that this
> acknowledges the debate and issues with counting birds in nocturnal
> migration and still allows for the data to be of use.
>
> - Note also the comments on the date and the definition of night
>
> - This protocol is not to be used for automatic detectors.
>
> Thanks to everyone on this forum for discussions that have helped us refine
> this and implement it. Let me know if you have questions or comments. And by
> all means, feel free to revise your past NFC counts to this protocol
> (pulling up all your Gray-cheeked records might be a good start, since so
> many are detected by flight call).
>
> Best,
>
> Marshall Iliff
> eBird Project Leader
>
>
> --
> 
> Marshall J. Iliff
> miliff AT aol.com
> West Roxbury, MA
> 
> eBird/AKN Project Leader
> www.ebird.org
> www.avianknowledge.net
> Cornell Lab of Ornithology
> Ithaca, NY
> 
> --
> *NFC-L List Info:*
> Welcome and Basics 
> Rules and Information 
> Subscribe, Configuration and 
> Leave
> *Archives:*
> The Mail Archive
> Surfbirds 
> BirdingOnThe.Net 
> *Please submit your observations to eBird
> !*
> --
>



-- 
Erik I. Johnson, PhD
Conservation Biologist
Gulf of Mexico | Mississippi Flyway
National Audubon Society
--
6160 Perkins Rd., suite 135
Baton Rouge, LA 70808
o: 225-768-0820, ext 203
c: 225-252-8864
f: 225-768-0821

--

NFC-L List Info:
http://www.NortheastBirding.com/NFC_WELCOME
http://www.NortheastBirding.com/NFC_RULES
http://www.NortheastBirding.com/NFC-L_SubscribeConfigurationLeave.htm

ARCHIVES:
1) http://www.mail-archive.com/nfc-l@cornell.edu/maillist.html
2) http://www.surfbirds.com/birdingmail/Group/NFC-L
3) http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/NFCL.html

Please submit your observations to eBird:
http://ebird.org/content/ebird/

--

[nfc-l] NFC protocol in eBird

[Marshall Iliff]

NFCers,

Earlier this fall we had a discussion about how best to enter NFC counts in
eBird. Finally, we have a good answer for you!

After much discussion, just today we added a NFC protocol to eBird. The idea
for this is to be sure to tag NFC counts so they can be easily extracted
from the data as well as to treat those a bit differently in eBird output to
avoid skewing the data. While we don't expect floods of NFC counts, we do
hope that some people will submit nightly counts, or even hourly counts. If
these types of counts were submitted however, large volumes could certainly
skew the eBird output that more typically represents diurnal counts.

To find this protocol, you can select it from the drop-down menu in step 2
(date and effort) of data entry. Since there are many caveats, we ask that
everyone reads and understands the protocol in detail.
http://ebird.org/content/ebird/about/nfc-count-protocol

There are a few important points in this, including:

- You must report all species when using this protocol, but please select
"not reporting all species". This is a bit of a roundabout way to make sure
that we aren't comparing apples with oranges in eBird output.

- We encourage the use of 'x' in cases where there is moderate to high
uncertainty in the counts, but we allow exact counts. We also encourage call
counts being submitted in the species comments. We hope that this
acknowledges the debate and issues with counting birds in nocturnal
migration and still allows for the data to be of use.

- Note also the comments on the date and the definition of night

- This protocol is not to be used for automatic detectors.

Thanks to everyone on this forum for discussions that have helped us refine
this and implement it. Let me know if you have questions or comments. And by
all means, feel free to revise your past NFC counts to this protocol
(pulling up all your Gray-cheeked records might be a good start, since so
many are detected by flight call).

Best,

Marshall Iliff
eBird Project Leader


-- 

Marshall J. Iliff
miliff AT aol.com
West Roxbury, MA

eBird/AKN Project Leader
www.ebird.org
www.avianknowledge.net
Cornell Lab of Ornithology
Ithaca, NY


--

NFC-L List Info:
http://www.NortheastBirding.com/NFC_WELCOME
http://www.NortheastBirding.com/NFC_RULES
http://www.NortheastBirding.com/NFC-L_SubscribeConfigurationLeave.htm

ARCHIVES:
1) http://www.mail-archive.com/nfc-l@cornell.edu/maillist.html
2) http://www.surfbirds.com/birdingmail/Group/NFC-L
3) http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/NFCL.html

Please submit your observations to eBird:
http://ebird.org/content/ebird/

--

[nfc-l] ADMIN: NFC-L Archives

[Chris Tessaglia-Hymes]

Good afternoon,

 

Executive Summary: 

 

Please try not to cross-post the same message to multiple eLists - in other
words, do not add multiple email Lists in the To: or Cc: fields of a new
message.

 

Instead, please generate a separate email message for each email List you
wish to post to. This will help prevent messages with duplicate Message ID's
from getting deleted by "smart" email-handling programs and, thus, help
prevent duplicate messages from getting dropped from the message archive
locations.

 

Details:

 

First, I am referencing the three archive locations, here:

 

Primary (Long-term):
http://www.mail-archive.com/nfc-l@cornell.edu/maillist.html

Secondary (Long-term): http://www.surfbirds.com/birdingmail/Group/NFC-L

Tertiary (Short-term): http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/NFCL.html

 

It had come to my attention that some messages are variably not successfully
being archived into the three archives available for NFC-L.

 

For the past several weeks, I have been working with these various Archive
Managers and Owners and the Cornell ListManager to identify what is causing
messages to seemingly drop from the archive - never even appearing.

 

A variety of contributing factors were identified, some of which we, as
Managers/Owners don't have any control over.


One of the factors that can prevent messages from being properly archived
has to do with an email's unique Message ID. Each time a user creates and
sends an email message, that email message will be assigned a unique Message
ID "number", regardless of how many email addresses the message is addressed
to in either the To: or Cc: field. This means that if a user sends a message
to List A and decides to Cc: the same message to List B, the message
arriving at List A and List B will have the same unique Message ID, even
though the recipient Lists are different.

 

Where this becomes a problem is in the "smart" way that many new email
servers are handling messages that appear to be "identical" through the
comparison between Message ID's. If there is a subscriber who is only
subscribed to List A, they will not see this as a problem. If there is a
subscriber to both Lists A and B, they may likely see a problem; their email
server will allow the first message arriving into their server to be
processed as normal, but recognize the second message (arriving split
seconds later) as a duplicate and trash that second "duplicate" message,
before it even goes out for delivery to their email address. The result is
that a subscriber to Lists A and B may only get that cross-posted message
from List A and not from List B, or vice versa, depending upon arrival time.

 

Now, apply this to the Archives. The Archives are treated in the same way
that any subscriber is treated. The Archives are created from a subscribed
email address. If said Archive "subscriber" is subscribed to Lists A and B,
that Archive will only "see" a single duplicated or cross-posted message -
the one which is received first by the Archive's mail server. As a result,
any cross-posted message might show up in email Archive for List A and not
in email Archive for List B, C, D, E, etc., even though the message was
originally addressed to multiple other email Lists.

 

A relatively simple work-around for this, although perhaps a bit clunky, is
to generate a unique message for each List. It probably takes an extra 20
seconds per List address (cut-and-pasting the entire message into a new
email for each List). I realize this may not be feasible or convenient for
many to do in this way. The benefit in doing this, is to produce a unique
Message ID for each message sent to each email List, allowing each
respective multi-List-subscribed email address to receive each
"cross-posted" message; thus, allowing each message to appear in each
respective email Archive for the greater good of future references to the
Archives.

 

In summary, please try not to cross-post the same message to multiple eLists
- in other words, do not add multiple email Lists in the To: or Cc: fields
of a new message.

 

Instead, please generate a separate email message for each email List you
wish to post to. This will help prevent messages with duplicate Message ID's
from getting deleted by "smart" email-handling programs and, thus, help
prevent duplicate messages from getting dropped from the message archive
locations.

 

Thanks very much to those who took the time to read this long-winded
explanation!

 

If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me
off List.

 

Thanks again and good birding!

 

Sincerely,
Chris T-H

 

--

Chris Tessaglia-Hymes

Listowner, NFC-L

Ithaca, New York

c...@cornell.edu

NFC-L   -
Archives

NFC-L   - Welcome and Basics

NFC-L   - Rules and Information

NFC-L