| Author |
Messages |
|
aldeboro 
Posts:207
 |
| 02/08/2012 5:22 PM |
 Alert
|
Jeff,
Here is the list of species that I found to have location errors associated with California as noted on the other message that were not incorporated. It's probably due to the splits that took place in the last few years.
Brown-capped Vireo- Remove California from locations
Bahama Warbler - Remove California from locations
Common Scoter - Remove California from locations
Eurasian Moorhen - Remove California from locations
Kentish Plover - Remove California from locations
Smoky Warbler - Remove California from locations
Himalayan Bluetail - Remove California from locations
Other US locations should probably be removed as well but I only checked against California.
Also, not fixed, AOU has the 5 Mountain-Gems with the "g" lower case (Mountain-gem)
and the Ellfin-Woods Warbler with "w" lower case (Elfin-woods Warbler).
Regards, Al |
|
|
|
|
jjones
Posts:5332
|
| 02/08/2012 5:32 PM |
Alert
|
Thanks Al.
Ok - we are just going to work with one item right now to figure out why there is a discrepancy.
My master database does NOT have the "Brown-capped Vireo" attached to California.
How is it, exactly, that you see it attached to CA? Please be specific about exactly what you are doing that shows this bird attached to California. If you imported the latest checklist data (perhaps this error you mentioned on the import occurred before it got to this bird) it should have been removed in your database.
Let's start here please. Please don't re-execute any checklist import at this time. I want to isolate what happened.
Thanks,
Jeff |
|
Birder's Diary Technical Support |
|
|
aldeboro
Posts:207
|
| 02/08/2012 6:18 PM |
Alert
|
Jeff,
I found it by creating a report using AOU Taxonomy filtered for California. I did the same using Clements Taxonomy. I was looking for differences between the 3 tax lists for California to see if they needed to be reconciled. I went to the Checklist editor and entered Brown-capped Vireo and California was in the list of locations.
It was split from Warbling Vireo. When I enter Warbling Vireo in the Checklist Editor, I get the ambiguous thing window. I click on Brown-capped Vireo in either AOU or Clements and you can see California in the list. see Screenshots.
Al |
|
|
|
|
aldeboro
Posts:207
|
| 02/08/2012 6:21 PM |
Alert
|
Jeff,
Forgot to add the screenshot with just Brown-capped Vireo entered in the Checklist editor. So here it is.
Al |
|
|
|
|
jjones
Posts:5332
|
| 02/08/2012 6:42 PM |
Alert
|
Thanks for the details and the screenshots Al. So helpful. 
But, I think this has to do with the error you are getting in your other post. Please see that for instructions and then your checklist data should be updated correctly. Please report back after done.
Thanks,
Jeff |
|
Birder's Diary Technical Support |
|
|
aldeboro
Posts:207
|
| 02/08/2012 9:13 PM |
Alert
|
Jeff,
After disabling Petey, I restarted the import and found nothing changed. Checklist data is still incorrect. Brown-capped Vireo still has California for a location just like in the prior screenshots. Also, just to make sure that the downloads were not corrupted, I downloaded a new set of the Taxonomy lists from the downloads page every time time I restarted the import process.
Regards, Al |
|
|
|
|
jjones
Posts:5332
|
| 02/09/2012 11:35 AM |
Alert
|
Hi Al,
Is it either possible for me to get onto your computer and have a look, and/or have you perform a backup, zip the backup, and upload the zip file to this site - via the file upload page?
Just getting on your system will be faster.
Let me know please,
Jeff |
|
Birder's Diary Technical Support |
|
|
jjones
Posts:5332
|
| 02/09/2012 1:38 PM |
Alert
|
Nevermind Al. I was able to reproduce this. Now I have to figure out why.
Stay tuned.
|
|
Birder's Diary Technical Support |
|
|
jjones
Posts:5332
|
| 02/09/2012 4:29 PM |
Alert
|
Ok - found the problem. It is a bug in the auto-import-checklist code, not in the checklist file itself.
You can import this file manually with the settings below, until I get a new release out that fixes this.
Jeff |
|
Birder's Diary Technical Support |
|
|
aldeboro
Posts:207
|
| 02/09/2012 8:46 PM |
Alert
|
Jrff,
It was such a nice day that I could not resist taking advantage of it and was gone to the wilds of Antelope Valley all day. Since you have a handle on the solution, does the fix apply to the AOU 2011 list as well?
Regards, Al |
|
|
|
|
jjones
Posts:5332
|
| 02/09/2012 8:48 PM |
Alert
|
Yes, of course. But, you only need to import the Clements 6.6 checklist, as of course, it has all things and all locations in it; even those used by ABA, AOU, etc etc.
Install build 60 available now.
Jeff |
|
Birder's Diary Technical Support |
|
|
aldeboro
Posts:207
|
| 02/10/2012 12:52 PM |
Alert
|
Jeff,
After updating to BD v3.7.60, I downloaded and re-installed Clements 2011 6.6 using the auto import checklist mode. I got some astonishing results.
The 7 species I requested to have California removed from their locations did take place so now the totals for California in the ABA, AOU and Clements checklists are reconciled. AOU and Clements both split Galapagos Petrel and Hawaiian Petrel into two species and both carry the Mitred Parakeet on their lists which makes it 2 greater than ABA.
ABA - 644, AOU - 646, Clements - 646 (Five Thumbs Up)
And now the thumbs down.
When checking totals in the Checklist Reports for ABA, AOU, Clements the total species count was reduced.
ABA - 965, AOU - 2073, Clements - 10154
I review of the lists resulted in the following omissions:
Labrador Duck - Missing from ABA, AOU, Clements (no locations listed)
Great Auk - Missing from ABA, AOU (no ABA or AOU locations listed)
Carolina Parakeet - Missing from ABA, AOU, Clements (no locations listed)
Brown Hawk-Owl - Missing From ABA, AOU (no ABA or AOU locations listed)
Bachman's Warbler - Missing from ABA, AOU, Clements (no locations listed)
It appears the applicable locations went missing after the checklist re-installation. If those species had locations asigned, the count totals would be correct as noted below.
ABA - (965 + 5) 970 , AOU - (2073 + 5) 1078 , Clements - (10154 + 3) 10157
Regards, Al |
|
|
|
|
jjones
Posts:5332
|
| 02/10/2012 1:17 PM |
Alert
|
Hi Al,
Please tell me exactly how you come to these numbers; since there are a number of methods within BD - and various parameters for each method. Also, if using the Checklist Reports feature, specify location used for each. I assume that subspecies are not counted and that you did not have "Include Only Common" checked; but worth mentioning. Just so we are on the same page. My numbers are not matching yours, so I am left wondering exactly how you came by each. So let me know on that one please.
All the birds you mention above are extinct except for Brown Hawk-Owl. So - I removed locations for them. Seemed the appropriate thing to do, since they are truly not known for any locations. Bachman's Warbler may be the exception - "The last confirmed sightings were in 1988 and before that in 1961". Of course, all are still on the taxonomic list.
On the brown hawk-owl, some others have brought up the fact that the ABA and AOU brown hawk-owl should not be tied to Clements Brown Hawk-Owl (Ninox scutulata), but rather tied to Clements Northern Boobook (Ninox japonica) - which is tied to Alaska in the checklist data. Anyone else?
Does all this make sense?
Jeff
|
|
Birder's Diary Technical Support |
|
|
aldeboro
Posts:207
|
| 02/10/2012 4:06 PM |
Alert
|
Jeff,
Let me preface my remarks with something you told me when we discussed Mitred Parakeets, you said if the official governing body has it in it's checklist then we should keep the BD lists consistant with the official lists.
As a data base, I compared the ABA official list (dated Nov 2011) from their website and the AOU official list (dated Aug 2011, 52nd suppl) from their website and the Clements v6.6 excel spreadsheet from Cornell website.
They all carry the extinct birds in their checklists therefore BD should also. If the state and province lists still carry them, then BD should also. As a minimum, suggest using "ABA Area" and "AOU Locations" and maybe "World" for Clements (don't know if this will cause a trickle down affect to the children) to keep the checklist totals consistant with the official checklists.
As for the Brown Hawk-Owl, there was some chatter that it should be Northern Boobook but that ruling has not been made and you should stick to the specie listed on the official checklists, namely Brown Hawk-Owl (Ninox Scutulata) until and if they make the change officially (AOU Proposals 2008-C).
The method I use to check BD against the official lists is as follows.
Example:
ABA Official List from their website - 970
BD ABA - 2011
I check totals using the Taxonomy Viewer
I check totals using the Sightings Entry Checklist Method (filtered for ABA Area)
I check totals using Reports, Filtered for ABA Area, Using ABA - 2011 Taxonomy
I go through the same process for AOU except using AOU Locations as the location filter.
I then check ABA, AOU and Clements filtered for California
The Clements list is too large for me to analize at the local level (even against ABA Area and AOU Locations it's daunting) other than against CAlifornia.
If there are differences, I go through the lists specie by specie until I find the anomilies and reconcile them. In most cases it's a missing location, missing specie, a split, or a different name (different names for the same specie do not affect totals: i.e., Shy Albatross/White-capped Albatross).
Regards, Al |
|
|
|
|
jjones
Posts:5332
|
| 02/10/2012 4:29 PM |
Alert
|
Hi Al,
The ABA taxonomic list as well as the AOU and Clements all agree exactly with their respective authorities. Everything they list as being on their taxonomy is on BD's version of that tax list. BD does carry those extinct birds in its taxonomic list. You are using the term checklist above to refer to taxonomic list. In BD, I use the term checklist to indicate 'what bird has been seen at what location'. Checklist data ties a thing to a location in BD. I make the distinction because this term is used somewhat ambiguously outside of BD; referring both to a taxonomic list (e.g. Clements Checklist of the World), and to what birds are seen at what location (e.g. a checklist of birds for Colorado).
Where we are differing is on 'what locations should be attached to each species/subspecies'. Now, I did change my thinking on this for extinct species as opposed to past years. And this is how it goes; if a bird hasn't been reported for a location (e.g. state for example) for 50 years, should BD really list it as present in that state? Or, for the Carolina Parakeet which is known extinct for about 100 years, should it really be carried on anyone's state and show up on BD checklists? Two questions on this: a) does any state really list this bird as an official bird for their state?, and if so, b) what is the purpose for that? I can see the point that if the state authority lists it, then who are we to argue. But I also field questions constantly the other way around; users of BD asking me why it is there. I am open to any good argument, and perhaps the best argument is if a state has it on their list, then BD should tie it to that location. Let me know what you all think on this.
As a side note of course - BD checklist data is completely customizable by any user. Perhaps I could post an import file here that would add back these extinct species to the states that still list them. That way, users that want them showing on their checklist reports could get them back. I didn't mean to cause a stir here - so, definite apologies if I goofed this up.
Thanks for the details on how you got your numbers. Makes sense, and you were thorough all right.
And so, you think all is currently good, except for the extinct species and perhaps adding the Brown Hawk-Owl to Alaska?
Thanks for taking the time to do the research and challenging this data. It only serves to make it better for everyone.
Jeff |
|
Birder's Diary Technical Support |
|
|
aldeboro
Posts:207
|
| 02/10/2012 5:39 PM |
Alert
|
Jeff,
I agree the BD Taxonomy lists agree with their authorities. But at the local level, states may add a new specie that has not been found in the ABA or AOU areas before. The acceptance process may take a year or better to go from the state level to the ABA Committee to the AOU Committee for acceptance. California is notorious for new species so that is why I check the California official checklist against the ABA and AOU official checklists and against the BD taxonomy and checklists lists. Example: Swallow-tailed Gull. It was years before ABA and AOU accepted the California record being a first to the area. I kept track of the anomily until the other agencies got on board. I even prodded them to get them to act.
I should have been more specific when I said missing but assumed when I stated locations were missing that it was a checklist location issue and not a taxonomy list issue.
If you don't put them back, people like me are going to continually question why is the BD checklist different from the official checklist be it at state, or area level. Example: ABA Official checklist 970 BD ABA 2011 checklist 965
And as stated before, I do not customize my checklist data. I use the BD official lists from the downloads page exclusively. I monitor acceptance progress by the authorities and advise you of the decisions when they occur. You have incorporated my inputs very well.
My two cents and I will continue to live with whatever approach you take.
Deffinitely put Alaska as a location for Brown Hawk-Owl (the official 2012 Alaska checklist has it). Urge maintaining checklist data for extinct species.
Regards, Al |
|
|
|
|
|