Any scientific report of an unusual phenomenon must be supported by documentation: that
is, verifiable evidence reported and vouched for by a first-hand observer, submitted for
peer review before acceptance and publication. In general, the rarer and more interesting
the occurrence, the more important is documentation to verify it for the record.
In bygone days, adequate documentation of an important occurrence of a bird began with a
specimen—usually its skin, procured with a shotgun and prepared with a scalpel and
chemical preservatives. Many of these specimens, some of them hundreds of years old,
still reside in museums and constitute type, voucher, and study specimens that add
immeasurably to our knowledge. Today, nearly all bird species and subspecies have been
accounted for by specimens, most of them many times. The collection of bird specimens
happens comparatively rarely now, and specimens are no longer required for most purposes,
including the verification of state records. All the same, remains of rare birds found or
collected for other reasons have formed the basis of a number of OBRC decisions, and are
always welcome. They should be handled by licensed salvagers or collectors and deposited
with qualified museums.
Photographs, especially with convenient modern methods yielding images far more
informative than before, have emerged as one of the best ways of documenting the
occurrence of wild birds. Nowadays, a birder can carry in a shirt pocket a film or digital
camera that in combination with standard field optics can result in photographs that, even
if they aren’t works of art, can contribute greatly to the verification of a rare species.
Videotapes, too, can sometimes be extraordinarily helpful. The OBRC recommends that
serious birders always carry some handy method of procuring photographic evidence of a
rarity.
Field drawings, even rudimentary ones, can often be vital in evaluating a record. It is
worth learning even the basics of sketching a bird for this purpose, but even a caveman-
style attempt at illustrating important features can make a difference.
Audio tape recordings can be vital to confirming species, especially those whose calls and
songs differ significantly, but which look alike. Observers should always try to procure a
tape recording of vocalizing birds when identification by sight alone is problematic.
Write out details in full. Even with superb photos, sharp drawings, and audio tapes,
written details are essential. Written details will always include the essential data of
date, time, weather and light conditions, equipment relied upon, other observers, etc.,
but they can also convey important information that cannot be expressed in any other way—
impressions of shape, behavior, etc., or subtleties of color, tone, and so on that would
be missed by photos, audio tapes, and other mechanical methods. While it is not required
in any way, using the OBRC’s documentation form (available as a Microsoft Word document or as a PDF file) can be an excellent way to make sure you have
included all salient information and organized it in a useful way. (To view this document,
you will need the Adobe Reader, available for free download at on Adobe's
website.) Send your documentation to the Secretary, Ned Keller, at nedkeller49@gmail.com, or by snail mail to 1912
Devils Backbone Road, Cincinnati, OH 45233.
Every time we use a birding reference—a field guide, a range map, a checklist, a journal
article, even a hot-line report of a rare species, we are benefiting from the work of
others who have worked to record carefully their field observations for the rest of us. We
owe them a great debt, and if we are fortunate we sometimes get chances to repay it.
We may get lucky, and find something unusual—a truly unexpected bird, a record that must
be shared. Undocumented, our sighting is a mere rumor, and will never enter published
records for others to use in the future. Suppose a species is split into two others in the
future: will the documentation on file help everyone to know which of the new species has
occurred in Ohio? Good details in archives will help verify the status of certain birds,
such as the Eurasian collared-dove, in a state of rapid change in range. Other less
obvious consequences result from documentation. Take for example the piping plover. If too
many unexamined reports—undocumented, anecdotal, and perhaps erroneous— of this species
accumulate, it may seem less endangered than it really is, and efforts to protect it may
be relaxed.
Further, accurate details reported on each observed individual of any scarce species—its
age, sex, state of molt, any bands or dyeing, even peculiarities in behavior or plumage—
help in assessing its local numbers and distribution, or its origin. The presence of two
emerging white tail feathers—noticed and documented by several observers—in the tail of
a first-winter mew gull found in early 1998 at Fairport Harbor, for example, helped to
confirm that only a single individual was present.
Part of the excitement of birding comes when we find something unusual, something rare or
unexpected we can relish and share with others. Reports of rarities, when they can be
authenticated and published, help to fill out the total picture of our local avifauna, and
are still more important than the thrill of pointing a bird out to others. As records,
they can help us all to recognize habitats, regions, or seasons in which scarce species
are most likely to be found.
Even if all this weren’t enough, documenting our observations is a satisfying exercise
that can help us to become better birders. Even the most expert among us can learn more
about birds by practicing the discipline of paying careful attention to detail and
describing fully and accurately what we see and hear. Birders are renowned for taking
pleasure in sharing their discoveries with others, and careful documentation of a sighting
is a unique way of doing so that can be especially meaningful, as it can be shared with
others a hundred years from now.
Documenting our observations can sometimes seem like a chore, but remember that it may be
impossible to judge the significance of reports until a lot of information is collected
and analyzed. We may have something important to contribute without realizing it at the
time. Inevitably, we will make mistakes, but we can profit from the comments of others,
and if we miss something we’ll know more about how to look for certain details in the
future. It sometimes happens that documentation that could not be accepted at one time is
later accepted when new evidence comes to light; once in a while two sets of documentation
that by themselves are not sufficient to verify a species are, when combined, acceptable
verification. For example, a 1998 fourth state record of a Townsend’s solitaire at
Killdeer Plains was made possible only by considering two different documentations,
neither of which could be accepted independently.
Some feel reluctant to send in documentation of a sighting because they feel an analysis
of the material might involve an excessively critical view of their birding skills. One’s
reputation, however, can only be enhanced by one’s willingness to help. While knowing
that reporters are acknowledged experts can add weight to their reports (and experts have
the heaviest responsibility to document rarities well, since they are skilled in
describing what they observe), being relatively unknown will never by itself detract from
anyone else’s report. Even when reviewers do not accept a documented report of a rare
species, it’s important to remember it is one’s documentation, not one’s actual experience
of the bird in question, that falls short in one way or another of unequivocally verifying
the species. The comments of reviewers should help us to observe, and record our
impressions, more carefully next time. Lots of rare birds have been seen whose
documentations records committees have simply been unable to accept. This is regrettable,
but in most cases it can be avoided if you learn how to gather evidence for a
scientifically verifiable sighting.
Over the years, certain essays have emerged that offer particularly good advice about
taking notes, drawing sketches, and preparing the best possible documentation for
sightings of rarities. Some of these essays are posted on the Web:
- Claudia Wilds and Robert Hilton, "Emerging from the Silent Majority: Documenting Rarities" on the Maryland Bird Records Committee site athttp://www.mdbirds.org/mddcrc/rarities. html
- Claudia Wilds, "On Taking a Notebook Afield" on the MBRC web site at http://www.mdbirds.org/mddcrc/notebook. html
- Timothy Keller, "The Whys, Hows, Whens and Wheres of Documenting Rare Bird Sightings, on the Indiana Bird Records Committee site at http://www.indianaaudubon.org/ibrc/docarticle.htm
- Donna Dittmann and Greg Lasley, "How to Document Rare Birds" at http://www.greglasley.net/document.html
- Mike Patterson, "How to Write Convincing Details" at http://home.pacifier.com/~mpatters/details/details.html
