Confirmed vs Unconfirmed Continues to Be Annoying

[Les R Becker]

Dear List Members & State eBird Reviewers:

I am truly not trying to 'troll' here.

This is a long-standing (and simmering) issue with some, or at least me. I posted the Glossy Ibis in MoCo last night with two photos. My post is 'unconfirmed'. This AM, additional postings at the same location, marked 'continuing', and lacking the photos that were taken (I'm not questioning that they were or were not), are marked 'confirmed'.

I do not expect that any of my rare bird sightings lacking photos will ever be 'confirmed'. In fact, even as infrequently as I experience them, I stopped posting any potential rare sighting lacking photographic evidence a long time for this very reason. However, I do believe that anyone's sightings with appropriate photographic evidence should be marked 'confirmed' and that the confirmation process should operate systematically and equitably.

I'm told that the list of sightings to be reviewed is long and back-logged and that the dedicated volunteer reviewers devote considerable time to these efforts. I'm certain that they do and I appreciate those efforts.

The point here is equity. Why isn't there one standard for all? The pattern I have described does nothing but promote elitism. Nor does this pattern promote careful record-keeping, as has been suggested in the past.

TY

Les

--

[Jared Fisher]

Les, your ibis sighting is confirmed but hidden under the hughes hollow hotspot. Zoom in on the map view to see it. 

--
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group 'Maryland & DC Birding'.
To view group guidelines or change email preferences, visit this group on the web at http://www.mdbirding.com
Unfamiliar with a hotspot mentioned on this list? Quickly locate it here - http://www.mdbirding.com/hotspot.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Maryland & DC Birding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mdbirding+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mdbirding/CA%2BzmAm%2BKBzzz0qJcOh-%3D2R%3DExQ7Lf%2BZShBpsZs9%3DdvaYdkVW1A%40mail.gmail.com.

[JAMES SPEICHER]

The "subscribed" eBird alert sent to me and  time tagged to (from memory) 3:04 AM Saturday shows Les' sighting as confirmed. In fact, among a total of 51 total sightings only one is unconfirmed.

Jim S

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mdbirding/CAN%3DjEv%2BXndVCstm51Liaaxet22LeuP-%3DFBRe7_hooNNsumijXg%40mail.gmail.com.

[JAMES SPEICHER]

The unconfirmed sighting is probably a reflection on when it was posted, which may be later than the time of the sighting.

Let's give the local eBird "moderators" some slack as well as thanks for doing a difficult job exceptionally well...

Jim S

[timm...@gmail.com]

To clarify several points here:

- If an eBird entry is flagged (rare or high count), it is marked UNCONFIRMED until a reviewer addresses it. If we accept it, it will then show as CONFIRMED on the alerts and it will be visible on the range maps and hotspot pages. Not accepting it will leave it as UNCONFIRMED. In this case, it appears that the alerts were sent out before a reviewer handled this record, meaning it was initially marked UNCONFIRMED, and appeared as such on the alerts, but should now show as CONFIRMED on subsequent alerts.

- eBird checklists do not immediately show up in our review queue when you enter them. I cannot figure out the timing but it seems like they are posted as a 'batch' every few hours. Likewise, rarities do not show up on the alerts immediately. It might be a few hours before we even see the flagged entries. If a checklist is posted at night, we might not be able to address it until the next morning at the earliest.

- Users need to use the actual hotspot for data to appear on the hotspot page and at the hotspot pin. Entering data at a personal location named after the hotspot means that none of that data will be assigned to the hotspot. You need to use the actual orange hotspot pin for data to be included at the hotspot.

When it comes to transparency, I often think about showing users the actual review interface so you can see it firsthand. However, this would breach privacy concerns, so I can't do that - remember that sensitive species are also included in our review queue, and these are marked 'sensitive' for a reason.

Tim Carney

Parkville, MD

MD eBird Review Team

[James Tyler Bell]

As Tim pointed out, he can't show you what's in the review queue due to the sensitivity of the data. But, below is a snip of the St. Mary's County filter, where I live, showing you what drives eBird.

When you have a flagged submission, it's for one of two reasons, both regarding exceeding a threshold value. First, a high number that exceeds the non-zero threshold in the filter. In this case, let's use Snow Goose as an example. You find 6 Snow Geese in St. Mary's which is above the highest threshold of 5. That's a great number as they're not that common down here but not a mega. If you put in some details that say why it was a SNGO and not a Ross's or a Tundra Swan, or a white domestic goose, that should be enough for it to get validated when a reviewer sees it.

Second scenario, again because it exceeds the threshold value, but in this case something rare like Ross's Goose with a filter value of Zero 365 days a year. Mikey Lutmerding found two ROGOs at the end of Harry James Road several years ago that is the only record of ROGO in St. Mary's. In this case, because they're so uncommon, photos would be really great and almost mandatory since SNGO and ROGO can look very similar especially at a distance.

Most eBird users in Maryland understand the status and distribution of birds throughout the state well enough to know when something is going to be a Zero/365 bird and will strive to document it well enough to be validated right away. In some cases where it's not possible to get documentation shots, and it's a statewide or regional records committee review species, the eBird reviewers will punt the submission to the RC. Birding by committee sucks but sometimes it's out of our hands. The Loch Raven Western/Clark's Grebes and the two Western-type flycatchers in Frederick and Baltimore Counties are recent examples that despite lots of high quality photos, eBird reviewers can't determine the species.

Each county has a filter specific to it. The numbers may be similar or they may vary considerably. But, the filters are what drives eBird and it's not something that most people know of or understand. As Tim said earlier, the reviewers try and treat everyone equally. If you have provided adequate details about why your bird is what you claim it is, or if you have photos/video/audio that is conclusive, it's usually just a matter of time between your checklist submission and when a reviewer validates it. Remember that the reviewers don't get paid, they're also birders, and they don't sit at their respective computers all day doing this. It's a never ending process and during spring and fall migration, the queue sometimes gets a little bogged down. Patience is a virtue.

Tyler Bell
jtyle...@yahoo.com
California, Maryland

--
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group 'Maryland & DC Birding'.
To view group guidelines or change email preferences, visit this group on the web at http://www.mdbirding.com
Unfamiliar with a hotspot mentioned on this list? Quickly locate it here - http://www.mdbirding.com/hotspot.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Maryland & DC Birding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mdbirding+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mdbirding/39c289d3-0eb4-4e72-af06-fd9ed308fa0fn%40googlegroups.com

.

[Scott Young]

Thanks for the insights.

Just curious - if a species becomes common or, unfortunately, rare, does eBird/Cornell change the filters automatically or do the reviewers make suggestions first?

Thanks,

Scott Young

Gaithersburg

[Jim Green]

I’ll try and make this somewhat brief and to the point. How many of us are out birding all the time especially this time of year. I am definitely guilty of this. I report and eBird what I see and then move on. I make a real effort 99% of the time to only report species I am confident in confirming. I rarely look back to see if one of my sightings is confirmed or unconfirmed. That is not important to me. 

The number of MD eBird reviewers compared to the number of birders is crazy and definitely not in the favor of the reviewers. The number of NEW birders since Covid changed all our lives continues to increase on a weekly basis. 

The handful of reviewers are human and “occasionally” they like to bird also. And to me that is what they should do just like us. So please don’t question or criticize when they go home after birding and try and review eBird lists half the night and then get up early to work or whatever. 

I’m not pointing fingers at anybody. This concern and criticism has surfaced from time to time in recent years and probably will continue to do so. I’ve kept my thoughts to myself previously but decided to now give my two cents worth on this subject. 

Walk a mile in their moccasins and think about it from their perspective. Happy Birding to all. 

Jim Green

Gaithersburg MD

Sent from my iPhone

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mdbirding/6cc0191c-ff71-482e-a321-72a98d2953ecn%40googlegroups.com.

[James Tyler Bell]

That's an interesting question. Perhaps at some point in time, the filters will auto-adjust based on how uncommon birds are. But, in the meantime, they're all done manually.

A case in point is Mute Swans. 10-20 years ago, if you drove over the Bay Bridge, you'd see dozens or hundreds of them around Kent Island. If you see one now, it's a miracle. The filters are set pretty tight so when people submit their historical data, it gets flagged. The reviewers understand that they used to be common and now are not. I personally tag them and use a code "Record - Not Exceptional" and make a note that at that date in MD they were common. Good luck to up and coming county listers who are trying to tick them now! Of course, now we have the ID conundrum of Tundra/Trumpeter Swan. Separating Mutes and Tundras is a snap compared to those two.

Tyler Bell
jtyle...@yahoo.com
California, Maryland

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mdbirding/6cc0191c-ff71-482e-a321-72a98d2953ecn%40googlegroups.com

.