Tuesday, May 31, 2005

Interview with Tim Gallagher, Author of The Grail Bird

I finally have managed to get the email interview with Tim Gallagher, author of the newly released book, The Grail Bird, ready for you to read. I sent the questions to him later than I had said I would (this past Sunday, to be exact) because my end-of-semester obligations took up more time than I ever imagined possible. But Tim was a very good sport and answered very quickly, as you can see. So without further ado, here is the interview for your reading pleasure.


"Elusive Ivory" by Larry Chandler.

This question is from a reader, Mike; I've noticed that many individuals online are concerned that the ivory-bill is commanding a disproportionate level of attention and resources while other less charismatic species are still being ignored. Though I'm not worried about this at all, I wonder if Mr. Gallagher has any insight into what other at-risk species will benefit from IBW conservation efforts.

Every living thing in that southern bottomland swamp forest habitat -- birds, mammals, fishes, reptiles, plants, you name it -- will benefit from the conservation work being done on behalf of the ivory-bill. And that's no small accomplishment. Throughout our history, this has been one of the most neglected habitats in America. At a time when people were saving Yellowstone, Yosemite, and so many other great places, no one did anything for the southern swamp forests. And they were well worth saving. When the Civil War ended, they were still an immense wilderness of towering trees, full of bears, wolves, panthers, and other magnificent animals -- including the ivory-billed woodpecker. But it didn't take long for the large logging interests to move in and start cutting. Millions of board feet a year were harvested for decade after decade after decade, until little of consequence was left. We had a chance to save the Singer Tract -- an 80,000 acre remnant of primeval forest in northeastern Louisiana -- in the early 1940s, but we didn't do it. We let it slip away. We should be very thankful that we have a charismatic bird like the ivory-bill to help us preserve and enhance and expand the bottomland swamp forest habitat of the South.

An anonymous reader asks; I guess while other skeptics are expressing themselves, I'd like to ask Mr. Gallagher if all the scientists and conservation experts involved in this rediscovery really think the government should be spending so much money on the possibility of there being more than one woodpecker when so many other species need help. (Habitat preservation aside.)

Well, this question implies that if money were not spent on the ivory-bill, it would be spent on these other worthy but neglected species. Sadly, this is probably not the case. The funds would most likely be spent on something completely unrelated to conservation. At least if we help the ivory-bill, we're helping every other plant and animal species present in these bottomland forests. I should also point out that so far the lion's share of the funding for research and land acquisition has come from private donors, not the government, and this will probably continue.

Do you have confidence that the Nature Conservancy has the funds and other resources available to protect adequate habitat for these birds? If so, what makes you so confident?

They've certainly got a great track record with this project so far, with more than 18,000 acres of forest saved since our sighting. And they'd already done some excellent work in the Big Woods of Arkansas in earlier years, helping to save the very bayou where we saw the bird. Twenty years ago it had been slated to be channelized. Imagine that. There would have been no trees at all, just a straight channel going for miles.

Do you think that the current administration has the political will to protect these birds' habitat? If so, why do you think this?

Well, that's the big question, isn't it? And I don't know the answer. But it was very gratifying to see the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture pledge $10 million to help save the bird and its habitat. I hope they see it through and do what is necessary to protect and expand the ivory-bill's habitat.

Another anonymous reader asks; I'm sorry to say it, but I'm put off mightily by the fact that announcement of the rediscovery of the Ivory-bill was delayed until a snappy logo was created, not just one but several websites were designed, a magazine article was prepared, (auto?) biographies were written, and, oh, yes, Tim Gallagher's book (and Terri Roberts Luneau's children's book) were readied for publication. Is someone also selling Ivory-bill coffee? And Ivory-bill t-shirts? Scott Weidensaul quotes John Fitzpatrick as asking, "You know what? Our lives are going to change." Just what, I wonder, did he mean by that?

The delay in announcing the rediscovery of the ivory-bill had nothing to do with designing logos, web sites, etc. We didn't even think about any of that until fairly recently. Our primary concern has always been the well-being of the species. We needed time to develop plans for research, conservation, and public education. The first research goal was to get physical proof of the bird's existence. When Bobby Harrison, Gene Sparling, and I came out of the swamp in February 2004, we had only our word that we had seen an ivory-bill. Although that's enough for people who know me, we knew that the world at large would demand solid proof. For more than half a century, scientists have regarded ivory-bill sightings as being the same as Bigfoot or Elvis sightings. We had hoped -- and believed -- that we would be able to find a nest or at least a roost hole and take excellent photographs and videos of ivory-bills, but unfortunately this didn't happen. Every sighting was brief, with no chance to raise a camera and take a picture. David Luneau only got his video of the bird because he kept his camcorder running constantly and it happened to be pointed in the right direction as the bird took off. The only other video we got in 14 months was one taken by Bobby Harrison, and the glimpse of the bird it provided was even shorter than David's. Over these months we did develop and hone our search technique, but it's been a daunting task. So far, we've only searched about eight percent of the forest in the area.

I'm happy to say that our conservation efforts are moving ahead quickly. Since February 2004, the Nature Conservancy has placed more than 18,000 additional acres into conservation in the Big Woods area of Arkansas. The web sites, press releases, and other media materials were part of the public education effort, as were the descriptive panels put in place at the designated visitation areas. We knew that everyone would want to learn more about the ivory-bill as soon as the story came out, and that's why we created all the educational materials and web sites.

As for my book, it was well underway before we saw the bird in Arkansas. In some ways, the book led directly to the rediscovery, because I was following up on seemingly credible reports across the South -- the ones that everyone was writing off as Elvis sightings -- when Bobby Harrison and I checked out Gene Sparling's sighting and saw the bird. Otherwise, I'm afraid Gene's excellent sighting would have gone unnoticed like so many others.

About John Fitzpatrick's statement that our lives were going to change, I think he was warning me that we were crossing the Rubicon, and there was no turning back. We were completely embracing the idea that the ivory-billed woodpecker still exists -- and putting our careers on the line. From that day on, we knew that this bird would be the focal point of our lives for years -- perhaps forever -- and it was a sobering thought.

A friend, Ian, also asks what was meant when Fitz said "You know what? Our lives are going to change." Ian says that you all still have to go to work every day, still have to do the same mundane tasks, so how exactly does this event/sighting change your lives?

Yes, we still have to go to work each day and do the same tasks. The only difference is that now we have two full-time jobs -- in my case, editing Living Bird magazine and working on the ivory-bill project. But the deepest change is in the focus of my life. I seem to spend most of my waking hours now thinking about the ivory-bill and what we can do to help it. This has completely changed my direction and my goals.

What do you think of using aviculture to help increase the numbers of this bird, as they are using successfully for the California Condor? [I am especially thinking of removing some eggs and using artificial incubation until they hatch (to increase egg/chick production) combined with fostering the chicks under other woodpecker species until they can be replaced into an ivory-billed woodpecker nest while still nestlings and possibly providing additional feedings to the nestlings several times per day]

I'm nervous about using such a hands-on approach at this point. I worked on the peregrine falcon recovery in the 1970s, and that was a wonderful success using aggressive techniques such as manipulation of wild nests, captive breeding, and massive reintroduction efforts in areas where the falcons had vanished. But this was a special case. Raptors (even wild-trapped adults) adapt readily to captivity. This had been proven by countless falconers over the centuries. Condors proved to be similarly successful at adapting to captivity and producing young in artificial conditions. I'm not sure things would work out as well for ivory-bills. These are shy, secretive birds. Trying to trap them and keep them in aviaries could prove disastrous -- and just suggesting such a plan would be very controversial. I believe in this case we'll have to help these birds the old-fashioned way by protecting and expanding their habitat. I don't think there's any shortcut here.

Is anyone considering installing a nestbox cam into an active ivory-billed woodpecker nest? These cams are getting ever smaller and are not very intrusive, and I think it could be a great fund-raising or public-relations campaign. If free access to the webcam is provided to the public, it could reduce the numbers of people wandering the swamps in search of these birds, too.

It might be risky and would certainly be controversial to install a nestbox cam inside an ivory-bill's nest cavity. But we have talked about having one of these cameras on an adjacent tree, aimed right at the cavity, so that the public could watch the comings and goings of the ivory-bills. But first we've got to find a nest or roost hole.

A reader, Tabor asks; I'd like to know if he thinks there is a good breeding population or was this just a lucky sighting of one bird in a tiny population? Also, is there an effort underway (perhaps you birders already know this), to expand habitat for this species?

I think this is clearly a very small population, or the birds would be much easier to find. Some people have asked me if I think this is the last ivory-bill in the world. I truly doubt it; the odds against it are astronomical. These birds probably only live 10 to 15 years, so this bird was hatched in the 1990s or perhaps even in this century, more than 50 years after scientists had written off the species. That in itself is a miracle. A major effort is now underway to expand the habitat for these birds. Since our sighting of the bird in February 2004, the Nature Conservancy has already placed more than 18,000 additional acres into conservation in the Big Woods area of Arkansas, and that's just the beginning.

I (and an anonymous reader) was quite bothered about Jerome Jackson's lack of any sort of role in the search for the ivory-billed woodpecker. We both ask; I'm curious to know how it was determined who would be on the large, secret search team; I'm especially wondering why Dr. Jerome Jackson, who has done extensive work on the IBWO, written a book about them, wrote the Birds of North America account on them, and participated in the Zeiss search, was not included or even told about the discovery.

I did not have a prominent role in determining who would be included in the search team. A key concern from the start was to keep the story of the bird's sighting quiet until we'd had time to search the sighting area thoroughly and determine whether the bird was breeding. This process would have been greatly complicated if crowds of birders or the media had descended on the swamp at that time. Obviously, this would be the hottest birding story imaginable. We knew as soon as it hit the Internet, the story would be circling the globe in minutes. Let's face it, all birders are blabbermouths, myself included. The only way to keep it quiet was to tell as few people as possible. Everyone had to be approved by the core group of researchers and had to sign nondisclosure agreements. I have many good friends and colleagues who are angry with me because I didn't tell them about the ivory-bill, but I think it was good to keep it quiet. One of the most remarkable things about all this is that we kept things quiet for fourteen months. As for Jerry Jackson, I have nothing but respect for him. He is one of the few scientists who kept hope alive for the ivory-bill when so many others had written it off.

I have one last question; Do you think that Mary Scott really saw the ivory-billed woodpecker? It seems impossible for one person to see such an astonishingly rare bird not once, not twice, but three times (!) in such a short time period.

I admit I'm not sure about Mary Scott's first two sightings. She was new to ivory-bill searching at that time, and it's impossible to say for certain what she saw. But after that, she became totally committed to learning everything she could find out about this species. She created a lecture and slide show and took it on the road. By the time she went to the White River in March 2003, she really knew what she was looking for. So it's much harder to dismiss that third sighting. She stepped out of a car, she saw a large woodpecker fly up and land on a tree trunk, and she locked her binoculars on it. The way she described this bird to me was perfect for an ivory-bill -- and nothing else. Did she dream it? Did she make it up? I don't think so. To me she seems perfectly credible. I've played the recording of my interview with her for several people -- including a couple of skeptics -- and all agree that she is completely sincere; she believes she saw an ivory-bill. I might add that the habitat where she saw the bird is some of the best I've seen. I should also say that the first thing I did after interviewing Gene Sparling for the first time was to look at a map and determine how far his sighting area was from Mary's. They were about 48 miles apart, connected almost the entire way by a narrow corridor of forest. Would I have checked out Gene's sighting if it hadn't been so close to where Mary had seen her bird? Probably not.


I would like to thank Taryn Roeder from Houghton Mifflin publishers for suggesting this interview and for setting it up, Tim Gallagher for taking time from his very busy schedule to write thoughtful answers to these questions, and most of all, I'd like to thank you, dear readers, for asking interesting and lively questions. I had so much fun with this. If you have follow-up questions that you'd like to ask, Tim is willing to answer them. He says that it may take a couple weeks because he has other commitments (a job, for example) that he needs to take care of.


Several images linked from;

Rediscovering the ivory-billed woodpecker, Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology.

Search for the ivory-billed woodpecker, National Public Radio's Radio Expeditions.

Ivory-billed Woodpeckers.

By John James Audubon, from his book, The Birds of America


© 2004, 2005, 2006 by GrrlScientist

Monday, May 30, 2005

Regarding the Smithsonian and the Discovery Institute

Apparently, the scientists at the Smithsonian are also mystified as to what is happening between their museum and the Discovery Institute. This comment (below) by Scott Wing, who is the Chairman of the Paleobiology Department at the Smithsonian Institute, was posted yesterday to the Panda's Thumb. The Panda's Thumb readers are embroiled in an interesting debate regarding the IDiot mess that the Smithsonian placed itself into the middle of when they agreed to screen the creationist film, The Priviledged Planet.

Scott Wing writes;

In spite of renting the Baird Auditorium for the showing of the “The Privileged Planet: The Search for Purpose in the Universe,” I know that the staff and the administration of the Smithsonian’s Museum of Natural History endorse the statement of the American Association for the Advancement of Science on intelligent design, specifically:

“Whereas, ID proponents claim that contemporary evolutionary theory is incapable of explaining the origin of the diversity of living organisms;
Whereas, to date, the ID movement has failed to offer credible scientific evidence to support their claim that ID undermines the current scientifically accepted theory of evolution;
Whereas, the ID movement has not proposed a scientific means of testing its claims;
Therefore Be It Resolved, that the lack of scientific warrant for so-called “intelligent design theory” makes it improper to include as a part of science education.”

I don’t know how the Smithsonian ended up renting the auditorium to the Discovery Institute, and neither do the other Smithsonian staff I have consulted in the last few hours. The rental certainly does not reflect any endorsement by the staff or the administration of intelligent design.

Scott Wing
Chairman, Dept. of Paleobiology
National Museum of Natural History

I suspect that the Discovery Institute will present the Smithsonian's screening of this film as representing their tacit support for ID beliefs. These powerfully mixed signals from the Smithsonian Institute will only serve to further confuse the vast majority of the public who do not know what the evolution-ID argument is really about.

I also found the trailer for the film indexed in a variety of formats, which deals with astonomy and cosmology and only indirectly attacks evolution and the Big Bang. After going to their trailer index, I tried to view the trailer and it crashed my computer, so be careful! But some people saw the trailer and lived to tell about it. They have a few things to say;

Correction for The New York Times: Documentary at Smithsonian Isn’t About Biological Evolution by Jonathan Witt

The New York Times has a story reporting on the June 23rd screening of The Privileged Planet at The Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of Natural History. A factual error in the story’s headline and lead sentence suggests that the science documentary makes a case against biological evolution. In fact, the film doesn’t even touch on the subject.

The Privileged Planet focuses on cosmology and astronomy, and on Earth’s place in the universe. One could be a strict Darwinist and still agree with the argument in The Privileged Planet. In fact, that accurately describes at least two of the prominent scientists who endorsed the book.

(Posted by Jonathan Witt at 02:35:27 pm)

Think again, Jonathan! Here's a quote posted by Albion (also in The Panda's Thumb comments) that reveals Jonathan is either deliberately lying or he is merely a tool;

“Is it possible that this immense, symphonic system of atoms, fields, forces, stars, galaxies, and people is the result of a choice, a purpose or intention, rather than simply some inscrutable outworking of blind necessity or an inexplicable accident? If so, then it’s surely possible that there could be evidence to suggest such a possibility…

“Perhaps we have also been staring past … a signal revealing a universe so skillfully crafted for life and discovery that it seems to whisper of an extra-terrestrial intelligence immeasurably more vast, more ancient, and more magnificent than anything we’ve been willing to expect or imagine.”

Do these IDiots think that rational, thinking humans don’t understand what is meant when they claim there is “an extra-terrestrial intelligence immeasurably more vast, more ancient, and more magnificent than anything we’ve been willing to expect or imagine.” Or perhaps they are now asking us to believe in space aliens?

I am convinced this film screening is in direct violation of the Smithonian Institution's Special Events Policy, which states that "Personal events (i.e. weddings, etc.), fund raising events, and events of a religious or partisan political nature [italics mine] are not permitted." This screening also damages the proud tradition of the Smithsonian Institution's reality-based scientific research.

The only option is to protest. In addition to the Smithsonian contact information link that I provided yesterday, Pat Hayes provides more contact information for the Smithsonian so you can make a more direct presentation of your displeasure (remember to be polite);

Public Affairs can be contacted at
Phone: 202-633-2950
Fax: 202-786-2982

Here are the numbers for Public Affairs staff:
Randall Kremer: 202-633-0817
Michele Urie: 202-633-0820

The Special Events e-mail address is: nhevents@si.edu

I also plucked their snailmail address from the web (Correction: a friend sent this updated address -- an unfortunate result of the anthrax events);

National Museum of Natural History
Smithsonian Institution
PO Box 37012
Washington, D.C. 20013-7012

Call, write, email AND FAX your displeasure to these people.

Some things to remember when writing effective protest letters:

1. Your words as well as your numbers are important -- numbers are determined by the number of letters received and the method of delivery used to send them (US mail receives the greatest respect but is the slowest to be delivered).
2. Deliver your letter of protest using both email and USmail at least. If you have access to a FAX machine, use that delivery method, too.
3. In your letter, clearly state; (a) the problem (screening of the creationist film, The Privileged Planet), (b) your disapproval and (c) your desired solution (do not screen this film at the Smithsonian Institution).
4. Concise and clearly-worded letters (250-500 words) are most effective.
5. Sign your letter with your name and contact information (unsigned letters or letters without contact information are ignored and discarded).

Other things to include in your protest letters;

I suggest you get as much mileage as you can from your letters of protest. Because the Smithsonian is directly funded by congress, let your congresscritters know of your displeasure. If you are a constituent of any of the political animals who are on the Smithsonian's board of trustees or who are otherwise involved with this decision, be sure to tell them how their reaction to this event will affect your future vote. You should mention in your letter if you or your family and friends already are (or plan to become) members of the Smithsonian Institute and how their screening of this film will affect your future membership plans. Hit 'em in the pocketbook!


© 2004, 2005, 2006 by GrrlScientist

Sunday, May 29, 2005

Smithsonian Institution Screens Anti-evolution Film for Money

In a shocking development, the "Discovery Institute" has teamed up with the Smithsonian Institute to offer a national premier screening of the anti-evolution film, The Privileged Planet: The Search for Purpose in the Universe.

The Seattle-based Discovery Institute promotes the religious belief, "intelligent design", that supposedly explains how life came to be. In contrast, the Smithsonian Institution houses many fossils that support the scientific Theory of Evolution.

Bruce Chapman, president of the Discovery Institute, said his organization approached the Smithsonian's public relations company and the museum staff asked to see the film. After watching the film, Chapman claims that "they liked it very much - and not only would they have the event at the museum, but they said they would co-sponsor it," he recalled. "That was their suggestion. Of course we're delighted."

In his zeal, Chapman obviously hasn't read the Smithonian's Special Events Policy carefully, which clearly states that the museum co-sponsors all events that result in "an unrestricted contribution to the National Museum of Natural History" (the Smithsonian Institution). The Policy also states that these gifts "help support the scientific and educational work of the Museum."

Randall Kremer, a museum spokesman seemed to confirm this policy when he said, "We're happy to receive this contribution from the Discovery Institute to further our scientific research."

This will undoubtedly be the first time that the Discovery Institute has ever supported any sort of evolutionary research.

The museum, Chapman acknowledged, offers rental of its Baird Auditorium to many organizations and corporations in return for contributions. The Discovery Institute paid $16,000 to the Smithsonian for use of the auditorium. In view of this, it is obvious that the Smithsonian accepted an "unrestricted contribution" from the Discovery Institute to fund museum research in exchange for co-sponsoring the screening of this film. So basically, the nation's premier museum was bought. For a mere $16,000.

But even more appalling, this film screening is a blatant disregard of the Smithonian's Special Events Policy, which goes on to state that "Personal events (i.e. weddings, etc.), fund raising events, and events of a religious or partisan political nature [italics mine] are not permitted."

It is obvious that the Smithsonian really screwed up.

But Chapman attempts to be cautious. "We are not implying in any sense that they endorsed the content, but they are co-sponsoring it, and we are delighted. We're not claiming anything more than that. They certainly didn't say, 'We're really warming up to intelligent design, and therefore we're going to sponsor this.' "

So it appears that this event will take place. Already, the Discovery Institute's director is announcing on their web site that they and the director of the Smithsonian "are happy to announce the national premiere and private evening reception" on June 23. But so far, this screening is not listed on the Smithsonian's online Calendar of Events. I wonder why? Because it's private? Or ... ?

All this leads me to ask what are the Smithsonian's Board of Trustees thinking? Is the nation's premier museum broke again? Or are they making yet another ethical miscalculation on behalf of the nation's troubled museum as they seek to protect their special funding status and restore their prestige?

This story has every appearance of being true, despite the source (the Discovery Institute) so we need to voice our opinion as loudly as possible regarding this event. At the very least, think carefully before renewing your annual membership!


© 2004, 2005, 2006 by GrrlScientist

Ten Things I've Never Done Meme

BotanicalGirl, tagged me with this meme .. it took me awhile to respond because this past week has been the most hectic week I've experienced this entire year. Who would ever have thought that underemployment could be so demanding? Besides, I was (characteristically) trying to think of a clever answer. Finally, I gave up on the "clever" part of my answer because I realize that those neurons were sizzled by excessive stress. I hope they regenerate themselves for your sakes, dear readers.

Ten Things I Have Never Done;

1. eaten chocolate-covered ants

2. mist-netted a woodpecker

3. been to New Guinea, Australia, the Solomon Islands, Fiji or Tahiti (where my research birds live)

4. prepared an avian study skin

5. personally attended any of the Triple Crown horse races, although I have seen almost all of them on TV (since I was five years old or so)

6. owned a television

7. picked up a man at a bar or been picked up at a bar (but it is "Fleet Week" so Manhattan is swarming with thousands of gorgeous navy men in their dress whites .. maybe my courage and luck (lust?) will change?)

8. served on a jury (but I intend to write about it when I do)

9. gone subway surfing ("get IN the train, not on it!")

10. fallen out of a tree

tags: , ,


© 2004, 2005, 2006 by GrrlScientist

Saturday, May 28, 2005

Ordinary Beauty

I have been restoring order to my messy apartment and cat sitting most of today and will be doing so for the entire weekend. This means that I don't have as much time as usual to respond to emails, to write blog essays and to finish those articles that are languishing on my computer. I am also writing another scientific paper and preparing for this Friday's interview with "that very respectable college", an interview that will last four hours (I am interviewing for a spring semester teaching position). As part of this interview, I will give a 45 minute presentation. Yesterday, my contact at the college informed me that they want me to give a talk about the physiological and genetic underpinnings of behavior.

Hrm. That sounds remarkably similar to my dissertation work. But they don't want me to talk about my dissertation. So I have decided to prepare a talk about the physiology and genetics of aggression and song in the white-throated sparrow (WTSP), Zonotrichia albicollis. These remarkable little birds are closely related to my own dissertation birds, the white-crowned sparrow, Zonotrichia leucophrys, and they have similar behaviors and physiology. But they are remarkable in the ways that they differ from their close relatives. First, WTSP have two easily identifiable color morphs, the "white morph" and the "tan morph", which describes the color of their head stripes. Both sexes of white-morph birds have higher testosterone levels, higher aggression levels and higher songs rates than do both sexes of tan-morph birds. Basically, WTSPs are color-coded as to their physiological and behavioral traits.

But wait, there's more; these traits are genetic, although the genetics are somewhat more complex than one might initially assume. We know that WTSPs mate assortatively; most breeding pairs of these birds are comprised of one tan morph and one white morph bird and their nests contain chicks of both color morphs. So the chicks are all growing up in a similar environment, and yet their behavior is determined mainly by their genetics. There also is a seasonal component; apparently white morph birds are more aggressive in spring when days are growing longer, whereas they switch roles in winter when tan morphs are typically more dominant.

So I am describing a common migratory wild animal who lives and breeds in our backyards throughout the eastern USA and Canada. This common species has clearly marked morphological differences (tan versus white morphs), each morphology is associated with distinct behavioral traits (differing levels of aggression and song), and these behaviors are supported by a different physiological character (easily measured disparities in plasma testosterone concentrations).

WTSPs are such a strikingly beautiful system that link genetics, physiology, morphology and behavior that simply thinking about them gives me chills of excitement. I hope my presentation captures the beauty of these birds and inspires my audience to think more about them and about what we can learn from them, too. Perhaps my audience will never look at another white-throated sparrow the same way again.

Tan morph male white-throated sparrow (left) has subdued tan and brown coloring on its head and face. Photo courtesy of Surfbirds.
White morph male white-throated sparrow (right) has a more crisp black and white coloring on its head and face. Photo courtesy of Lang Elliott, linked from Annenberg/CPB Learner.org.


© 2004, 2005, 2006 by GrrlScientist

Friday, May 27, 2005

Birds in the News #13

Birds in Science and Environment

While carrying out some tasks, humans have a tendency to devote more visual attention to the left side of the visual world than the right side, a phenomenon known as pseudoneglect. Researchers now report that pseudoneglect is shared with birds, suggesting that it may reflect an evolutionary adaptation that allows animals to devote attention to multiple aspects of their environment. This also suggests that brain structures that are currently thought to play a role in pseudoneglect may not actually be essential for this phenomenon.

Recently published research shows that the world's biodiversity is declining at an alarming rate, threatening human well-being and future development. This presents a crisis that requires new thinking about conservation, says a sweeping international report released on Thursday. This report, prepared by the U.N. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment with the cooperation of the Convention on Biological Diversity, blames biodiversity change on a number of factors including habitat destruction, climate change, pollution and over-exploitation of resources.

Another recent report sounds the alarm again that the red knot, Calidris canutus, could become extinct in 5 years. The red knot is a migratory shorebird that weighs less than 5 ounces (142 grams), that feeds on horseshoe crab eggs while completing its 10,000-mile (16,093-km) migration from Tierra del Fuego in Argentina to its breeding grounds in Arctic Canada.

Biologists believe their old methods of finding spotted owls, Strix occidentalis, which relied on owls hooting in response to biologists' calls, may not be working as well as in the past. Scientists think spotted owls may be keeping quiet so as not to reveal their whereabouts to newly invading predators -- and that may be leading timber companies to erroneously conclude that the protected birds are absent from places where they actually still live.

What is causing the dramatic decline of the lesser spotted woodpecker, Dendrocopos minor, and other woodland birds in Great Britain? In the past 30 years, the lesser spotted woodpecker has declined by 80%, alarming observers. In fact, all woodland birds are rapidly becoming scarse. Possible causes include a population explosion of introduced species or removal of too many dead trees, which woodpeckers rely on for insect larvae. These stories reveal the complexities of ecosystem mangement.

Black-necked Stilt, Himantopus mexicanus. [Reuters Photo]

Many places in India are also experiencing loss of birds and other rare animals as valuable habitat is destroyed. This story, Distress calls, sadly observes; it is almost like a big farce that each one of us is pulling on the other. We have not realised that the joke's on us, each one of us, on our water, our air, our forests, our wildlife; the very systems without which we would not be. [...] What's happened in Sariska is only a blip on the radar, more like a bad dream. It is merely a symptom of a malaise that runs deep.

People Helping Birds:

Can bird watchers make significant contributions to the science of ornithology? This opinion piece describes how birders are helping to preserve bird populations while contributing new information about birds to science.

One example of "citizen science" in action is this story, which shows that windows take a toll on bird populations. This story not only describes the observed problem and the studies that provided the data that further define the problem, but it also proposes solutions to reduce or stop mortalities from birds flying into windows.

This short story tells the story of recovery for Comanche, a badly injured eagle in West Virginia.

After discovering 178 migratory birds that died from avian influenza, China began vaccinating three million migratory birds against bird flu in the province of Qinghai on Monday. Migratory birds, especially waterfowl, have been widely blamed for the spread of avian influenza throughout Asia. However, there is "no ultimate proof" that the bird flu is spread by migratory birds, says the head of the Chinese Ornithology Society, Song Jie. I agree: officials throughout Asia should closely examine their poultry handling practices, including ranching, marketing, and slaughter, and they also need to stop cockfighting, which is the probably the primary culprit for distributing bird flu far and wide.

Ivory-billed Woodpecker News:

Another member of the ivory-billed woodpecker search team, Mindy LaBranche, tells the story of her sighting of the elusive bird as it flew past her one rainy day.

Why has the rediscovery of the ivory-billed woodpecker, Campephilus principalis, so electified the public? This interview with Phillip Hoose, author of the book, The Race to Find the Lord God Bird, might provide some insight. This article describes the history of the ivory-billed woodpecker's decline in the southern USA. But perhaps one reader captured the public's response best in his letter to the editor of The Advocate; "The ivory bill is a precious, tenuous link to our real Southern heritage. We have a rare, tangible chance to go back in time and save something we thought was lost, but now, amazingly, is found."

People Hurting Birds:

In a shocking display of human cruelty, a pair of introduced mute swans, Cygnus olor, were beaten, stabbed and then killed in a NYC park while they apparently tried to defend their nest. The birds' bodies were discovered near their eggs, which were taken to an emergency animal shelter and incubated. Surprisingly, this small act of kindness has paid off nicely because the eggs are hatching.

Officials on the Caribbean island country of Trinidad and Tobago confiscated thousands of birds and other animals from a couple who ran an illegal wildlife smuggling and distribution operation. The couple sold these protected and endangered animals to pet stores throughout nearby Venezuela.

A Chinese-registered logging vessel was found to be smuggling endangered parrots from the Solomon Islands, according to this story.

Birds Hurting People:

This is a humorous update on Houston's great tailed grackles, Quiscalus mexicanus, that are hammering passersby on the head.

tags: , , , ,

Previous : : Birds in the News : : Next


© 2004, 2005, 2006 by GrrlScientist

Wednesday, May 25, 2005

Haiku Happiness

Okay, I am feeling happier by the minute because I am almost done grading final exams! To reward myself for my hard work, I decided to borrow an idea from Dharma Bums, who are some of the bestest peeps on earth, peeps whom I would hang out with on a regular basis if they only lived 3,000 miles closer to me (or I, to them).

In this blog entry, Rexroth's Daughter reminded me of how much I love Haiku, and I think that all of you should love them, too. So in an effort to spread Haiku happiness, I am going to ask you all to respond to this blog entry with a Haiku. To get the ball rolling and to show you that I am not afraid to look silly in public, I'll share this (not very good, but fun to write) Haiku that I quickly scribbled in their comments section;

fierce living jewel
hummingbird hovering over
my open hand



© 2004, 2005, 2006 by GrrlScientist

I'm Baaaack!

Okay, I am finally here after a harrowing three days. My illness, which never really was resolved, became worse during the past three days. Coincidentally, I was writing my Anatomy & Physiology students' final exam during the past three days, too. Last night was the final exam. The most I will say (for now) about the entire experience is that

it is over!!

Well, almost!

A Seattle pal of mine sent a cartoon that I know you all will chuckle over. Keep in mind that I am a bird lover (okay, I am an ornithologist) and an evolutionary biologist, so I think this cartoon is brilliant. While you enjoy that, I will get a latte to sip while I compute final lab grades for my biochemistry class (I co-taught that one), grade my students' A&P final exams, compute final scores and turn them all in to the registrar (I have 48 hours to get this done).


Linked from Working for Change.


© 2004, 2005, 2006 by GrrlScientist

Sunday, May 22, 2005


A couple days ago, I said I would tell you about my most recent job interview that occurred last Thursday. I am writing this story mainly because it illuminates so many things, and also because it is the most positive experience I've had so far interviewing for an academic position. It also is a rather peculiar story, or so I think. The short story is that the interview went well -- to my great surprise -- and I also learned a lot, especially about Sweatshop U.

In response to my "shotgun" job application methodology that I am now thinking of patenting, I had been contacted by this particular school a little more than two weeks ago regarding an interview. The Chair of the Biology Department called and spent a fair amount of time asking questions that vaguely annoyed me such as "you've certainly worked a lot of different jobs, haven't you?" and "why doesn't your current employer keep you?" and "I don't understand why no one has hired you yet."

By the time that first conversation ended, I was tense and cranky. And I was still sick, too. In fact, the day before my scheduled interview with this school, I was still quite ill so I cancelled it because the two-hour each way commute was so daunting. But more than that, I didn't want to interview there because I could not imagine trying to rebuild my shaky self-esteem while working under a Department Chair who was so unaware of the current job market. I did not ask to reschedule the interview for a later date.

I hoped that my interview cancellation would make this school go away. But it seemed to increase their resolve: the Department Chair pursued me relentlessly, calling several times per week, first to reschedule our interview and then to ask more questions. After the fourth phone call, I was convinced that she was accusing me of some sort of misrepresentation when she asked for yet another explanation for my "unusual" work history -- a history that I thought attested to my resourcefulness and determination to remain in science despite all the hardships I'd faced. I felt a particularly uncomfortable jab of pain behind my eyes when she suggested that a car would make commuting easier. I was certain that she was misrepresenting the situation, as Sweatshop U had done, when she claimed that working for her school would be a great opportunity. In short, I dreaded the interview. Finally, she contacted my postdoc advisor and asked him the same series of questions that she had subjected me to.

Meanwhile, even though I was still sick, I was interviewing with other, much closer, schools, scrambling to locate that elusive summer job that might pay my rent through the beginning of autumn semester, when I had two Adjunct job offers, both of which I intended to accept. Even though I was so ill, I felt I had to interview because, according to my fellow Adjuncts, summer positions are very difficult to get, even for returning summer Adjuncts. Because of this scarcity of summer jobs and the likelihood that I would not be hired, I also planned to apply for welfare and food stamps to help pay some of my bills after my Unemployment Benefits ended this summer.

The evening before this interview was to take place, I casually mentioned it to my fellow Adjuncts. A silence suddenly fell over the room. I looked up from the stack of papers that I was grading and saw them all staring at me.

"Wow, that's really impressive," the retired government microbiologist said finally. "They're a very good school."

Surprised, I told them the remainder of the story and concluded by saying that I didn't want that job because the commute was too long, the Department Chair was out of touch with the realities of the job market, I thought she lacked tact and I was tired of trying to explain my work record to her.

"Hey, they don't pursue anyone -- they don't have to pursue anyone, especially for an Adjunct position -- and they are pursuing you," commented another of my fellow Adjuncts. "You should take this interview very seriously."

My fellow Adjuncts have never steered me wrong so, despite my misgivings about the situation, I followed their advice: I took the interview seriously. I prepared for the interview for the remainder of the evening, hoping that my efforts would be good enough despite my late start.

The next day, I wore the best outfit I own, a silver-grey silk suit with thin white pinstripes and a white-on-white striped blouse. I had saved my money for months and purchased this suit almost one year ago (at a substantial discount), in the hopes that I would soon be using it for interviewing. This was the last piece of clothing I bought before my funding ended and this was the first time I've worn it. I looked great, even if I must say so myself.

The next morning, I sat on a speeding subway train, clutching my black TravelPro briefcase in my hand while reading and rereading the meticulous notes I had made the previous evening about each faculty member's interests and research. Occasionally, I looked at my reflection in the subway windows, readjusting the collar of my blouse ... should I wear it outside or inside of my suit collar? I couldn't remember which way was proper. I tried not to be nervous and even though I never truly get lost, I suddenly had visions of my fellow Adjuncts sending out a search party a week later to find me, lost and hungry, brambles tangled in my hair, somewhere in the wilds of NYC.

Despite my misgivings, I made it to campus without a problem. Because I typically budget "getting lost time" into my travel plans, I arrived early, in fact. Sipping on a latte (thanks, James!), I wandered the halls of the Science Building, admiring display cases full of rocks from all over the world and dozens of topological maps of the area, each stretching fifty feet down the hallways. Judging from the science building alone, this was the best school I've interviewed with.

I arrived 20 minutes early in the Biology Office, where the secretary was in a heated telephone conversation with a woman who was demanding that her daughter be registered for a summer biology course that was closed. At some point in the conversation, the caller revealed that she was a state judge.

"That doesn't change the fact that the course is closed!" The secretary stated flatly in her Long Island (Lon-Goy-Lan?) accent. I liked the secretary immediately.

The Department Chair appeared and invited me into her spacious office.

"I spoke with your Postdoctoral Advisor and he had a lot of good things to say about you," she said as soon as I had sat down. I was pleasantly surprised and relaxed a little bit. The conversation evolved from there. In fact, we talked about science for two and a half hours. It was fun and interesting and I was pleased to discover that the Department Chair was a woman whom I could easily respect and admire and with whom I would happily learn from and work under. Honestly, I was astonished to realize that I had misjudged her so badly -- I have never misjudged anyone so erroneously before. And to think that I almost blew off this interview as a result! I am still puzzled by this egregious error, and the only explanation I can arrive at is the combination of my long illness with a telephone interview (I hate telephones) seriously impaired my judgment.

"We want to hire you," the Department Chair said soon after I went into her office and she repeated this several times during the interview. Much to my intense relief, I was offered a year long Adjunct Assistant Professor of Biology position so I will not have to constantly look for work for the following semesters.

The Department Chair informed me that they are opening up a search for a tenure-track position in evolutionary biology and she wants me to apply for it. Since there are only two or three tenure-track positions available in this field each year, I think it is very unlikely that I will get it, but her confidence that I could get it was inspiring and exhilarating.

She then advised me to develop collaborations with the faculty so I could get my name on a few more papers. This astonished me because Adjuncts are never provided such opportunities, according to my sources and experiences. She also told me about a "teaching postdoc" that she wants me to apply for because she wants me to stay there (in the event that I am not hired for their tenure-track position? She never stated that, but I assume so). This postdoc provides two years of funding, one year for research and the other year for teaching. This truly is a great opportunity because they are obviously willing to invest time and resources into helping me develop my career further. I fell silent, too overwhelmed to speak.

It all sounded too good to be true, but she seems to be a person who would not misrepresent the situation nor her intentions. Perhaps to help build my trust or maybe to reassure me that she was sincere, the Department Chair showed me the current wage scale and stated that my wages at Sweatshop U are $10.79 below union minimum for an Adjunct with a PhD, that I was in fact being paid the union minimum for an instructor with a Bachelor's degree. She was very concerned that I should claim my lost wages by filing a grievance with the union. Of course, I would be insane not to pursue this: this sum of lost wages is sufficient to pay my rent for two months!!

I was quiet because I was stunned by everything, especially by this last revelation. I didn't bother mentioning that I had told Sweatshop U's Science Department Chair that I was barely scraping by on unemployment when he hired me, that despite knowing this, he turned in my paperwork so late that I went six weeks without any income at all, and ended up paying rent with my credit card and mooching food and metrocards from friends so I could get to work. Adding this insult to that very real financial injury made my blood run cold. I realized that Sweatshop U's Chair is probably as untrustworthy and unethical in all his endeavors, especially in his science, as he was when dealing with me when I was so vulnerable.

Later that same day, I went to Sweatshop U to pick up some papers that describe the desired format for the final exam, and I saw the Department Chair. He pretended not to notice me even though I could see surprise in his eyes (surprise that I was dressed so well? That I was there on a vacation day?).

"Hello," I smiled quietly at him, cheerfully imagining that he had been discredited as a scientist and spends his nights sleeping on a park bench. His dark bushy eyebrows gathered together into a giant furry unibrow as he ignored me and walked away without even a backward glance.


© 2004, 2005, 2006 by GrrlScientist

Saturday, May 21, 2005

Eight Reasons Why We Watch Birds

I am not feeling well today (still) so I am still writing my interview story for you. Because I want to give you something to read and because I conveniently found this essay several days ago, I am republishing it here for your reading pleasure. I particularly relate to point number eight, especially after surviving the past eight months.

Eight Reasons Why We Watch Birds

1. It sharpens your sight. Before you know it, you learn to see the ruby-crowned kinglet, to identify the ever-so-slight upswing in the bill of the greater yellowlegs, and to spot the half-inch wide band on the breast of the bank swallow as he twirls past you at 40 miles per hour.

2. It encourages you to explore the world. You ride out on chartered fishing boats with fishermen who are wondering why anyone would spend 30 bucks not to fish but to look for something called "shearwaters," which, when finally found after nine solid hours of looking, turn out to be only some long-winged dark birds that skim across the waves and disappear in a minute.

3. It gives you something to write about: "Dear Mom, How are you? It snowed here the other day, but we still have two kingfishers down on the pond. Against the white they seem especially beautiful..."

4. It makes you an authority in the neighborhood. People you have never met will bring you robins and orioles their cat caught and ask, "What's the wingspan of an eagle?"

5. It helps you to treasure a moment -- that June evening, for example, when you find on the branch of a fallen tree, his plumage dark and golden, one eye closed and one eye watching you back, your first Chuck-will's-widow.

6. It provides you with opportunities to meet someone like my friend John Henry Hintermister -- who keeps his life list locked in a steel box in case of fire; who every spring, in the second week of March, hikes the route Frank M. Chapman hiked in 1890 in search of the now-possibly extinct Bachman's warbler. He comes home exhausted, ticks in his hair, and says, "I'm only going to chase that !#@& bird for 15 more years. If I don't see one by then, I'll give it up."

7. It will make you politically active. You will write intricately argued, adrenalin-fueled letters to your congressman demanding that something be done so people will stop littering, riding jeeps on beaches, throwing rocks at gulls, building condominiums, driving airboats in the Everglades, spraying insecticides, and sawing down trees.

8. Finally, it can save your life. One day you will be walking home from work, depressed. Your kid has the flu; the car's clutch needs to be fixed; and you are thinking tomorrow is your birthday. Another year has passed, and once again you have not triumphed at anything, really. Then you glance at the sky in despair, and right there, right over your head, blessing that particular air space on your street forever, is the world's most beautiful bird! With pearly white head, black and white wings, long forked tail, it circles slowly, a hundred feet up, eating dragonflies, tearing off the wings and letting them flutter down -- while you toss your briefcase in a bush, grab the first person to come along, and shout, "A swallow-tailed kite! A swallow-tailed kite!" until he, too, looks up and blinks at the sight and knows suddenly that he must buy some binoculars and become a bird watcher himself.

-- Jack Conner, Eight Reasons Why We Bird, Bird Watcher's Digest, July/August 1984.


© 2004, 2005, 2006 by GrrlScientist

Friday, May 20, 2005

Birds in the News #12

This week, my peeps and I found lots of interesting and entertaining links about birds for you. Of course, I begin my report with birds in science, and one of these articles describes how Caspian terns, Sterna caspia, reveal humanity's hubris, then I move on to conservation news with an update on efforts to protect a newly-described and incredibly rare manakin species, and then I provide a large update on the World Series of Birding. I also have links to online audio interviews with Tim Gallagher, author of The Grail Bird (and don't forget that I also have an upcoming interview with Tim Gallagher on my blog next week). I end this week's Birds in the News with the reader photoblog of the week featuring an adult male pileated woodpecker. This digital image is astonishingly clear and shows the field marks for this species extremely well. You will never mistake pileated and ivory-billed woodpeckers for each other agan after seeing this image!

As always, if you have an interesting link or photograph, feel free to email them to me (email is linked on the left-hand sidebar; I am not writing it here because my email box is being spammed mercilessly right now).

Birds in Science:

Bird brains are much more complex and human-like than previously thought, and thus, birds offer insights into human brains and behavior. Birds show us that many things thought to be unique to humans just ... aren't. The authors of the research papers cited in this article wrote, "when you show that [a] pigeon can recognize itself in a mirror, or that a crow can manufacture a tool, it is not just an interesting demonstration, but it also refines our views regarding the neural mechanism that underlie such behavior."

New high-tech DNA research has shown that the extinct heath hen was a unique species, instead of being a subspecies of the greater prairie chicken, Tympamuchus cupido, as widely thought. The heath hen was native to much of the eastern seaboard from Maine to North Carolina. It was persecuted by overhunting and habitat destruction until only a remnant population remained on Martha's Vineyard. They became extinct in 1932, when the last individual of the species, a male, disappeared and was later declared dead. [Original paper: Palkovacs, E.P., A.J. Oppenheimer, E. Gladyshev, J.E. Toepfer, G. Amato, T. Chase & A. Caccone. 2004. Genetic evaluation of a proposed introduction: the case of the greater prairie chicken and the extinct heath hen. Molecular Ecology 13:1759-1769.]

Unseen by humans for 58 years, and known only from a single female collected in 1947, rusty-throated wren-babbler, Spelaeornis badeigularis (pictured), is even more mysterious than the ivory-billed woodpecker. In this story, two ornithologists report that they recently rediscovered this species in India's Arunachal Pradesh region.

The active volcano, Mount St. Helens in southwestern Washington state, has been a source of much research ever since its dramatic eruption on 18 May 1980 that killed 57 people and destroyed thousands of acres of pristine habitat. These two news updates find that there are a large variety of avian species and amphibian species that have recolonized in the blast zone during the past 25 years.

Beginning 20 years ago, when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers dredged the Columbia River to make way for bigger ships, they created sandy islands that attracted "thousands of squabbling Caspian terns [who] pack the sand like giant cotton balls — fluttering on the breeze, strutting like little emperors or screeching at one another like an army of monkeys". Charming as these birds are, they also are devouring endangered salmon species, pushing the salmon ever closer to the brink of extinction. This story reveals some of the complexities involved when people mess around with the environment. (Isn't that description of the birds simply grand?)

Bird Conservation:

Photograph courtesy of Araripe Manakin Project

Researching rare birds in the field is often difficult and challenging work. With fewer than 250 individuals alive today, the recently discovered Araripe manakin, Antilophia bokermanni (a male is pictured above), is an extremely rare bird species. This story describes the efforts of the BP Conservation Program’s Conservation of the Araripe Manakin Project to protect this boldly patterned species in the Chapada do Araripe region of Brazil while documenting its breeding cycle.

The United States government involved in neotropical conservation, too. Interior Secretary Gale Norton last Saturday marked the 12th annual International Migratory Bird Day by announcing $3.9 million in federal grants to conserve birds throughout the Americas and the Caribbean.

This lengthy and important article is not about birds specifically, but I linked to it because it describes a recent report documenting that protecting the planet's biodiversity also protects people.

World Series of Birding:

At the conclusion of the World Series of Birding (WSB), it was reported that Cornell Univerity's ornithology lab team, the Sapsuckers, established a new fund-raising record for avian conservation. Bird lovers pledged $700 for every bird species the five-member team could find in New Jersey during the 24-hour competition for a total of $147,000 donated. "It's a big game, basically," said team member Kevin McGowan. "And it's also a fund-raiser." Pledged money will go towards avian conservation. The Delaware Valley Ornithological Club took home the 2005 Urner Stone Cup (pictured) for seeing and hearing the most bird species this year (222). The Sapsuckers captured fourth place overall and second place for nonresident teams, with 211 species.

The Boreal Songbird Initiative's team, the Boreal Birders, who I have been following here for the past several weeks, finished in seventh place overall with 197 species seen or heard -- an impressive finish for a first-year team! If you visit the Boreal birder's blog, you can learn how many Boreal bird species the team found during the WSB.

A total of 262 species of birds were seen by all teams combined during the competition. Click here for PDFs of the WSB final standings, the winners and youth teams information.

Ivory-billed Woodpecker News and Mania:

The Big Woods Birding Festival takes place in Clarendon, Arkansas, this Saturday, 21 May. Because this town is very close to where the ivory-billed woodpecker was rediscovered, this year's main attraction will feature a series of presentations about the search for and rediscovery of this woodpecker in the Big Woods of Arkansas. The presentations will begin at 11:00 am in the courtroom of the historic Monroe County Courthouse. Phil Hoose, author of The Race to Save the Lord God Bird, will discuss the history of the ivory-bill and sign his book. Ivory-bill search team members Martjan Lammertink of the Cornell Lab of Ornithology and David Luneau of the University of Arkansas at Little Rock will discuss the evidence leading to the publication of the rediscovery in the journal Science. At 1:00 pm, Gene Sparling will tell his story about the first confirmed sighting of the ivory-billed woodpecker in 60 years. At this time, Lammertink will also give a short presentation about the biology of the bird and methods used in the search. Scott Simon from The Arkansas Nature Conservancy will speak about TNC's role in the search. Members of the search team will be available throughout the day to speak with the public. (Click here for more information about the festival). Are there any bloggers who will attend and write summaries of these presentations for all of us? (Gee, I wish I was there so I could do this!)

The artist, Larry Chandler, who painted the ivory-billed woodpecker's portrait solely from a verbal description from one of the search party members is also reaping financial rewards as reported in artist to benefit from woodpecker sighting. "It's a great shot in the arm for my career with the notoriety I'm getting," Chandler said. His painting, Elusive Ivory, is so accurate that the Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology uses it on their website.

Laura Erickson's audio interview of Tim Gallagher, author of The Grail Bird and ivory-billed woodpecker search party member, are online at BirderBlog. The interview is broken into six mp3 files, all of which are linked from BirderBlog. Includes lots of recorded sound files of ivory-billed woodpecker calls and raps on trees.

Incidentally, when you visit Clarendon's Big Woods Birding Festival, you might enjoy a new and very fashionable haircut.

Birds Hurting People:

In revengeful acts of Hitchcockian savagery, several large black grackles defended their offspring by attacking people who came too close to them. The parent birds' aggressiveness caused the Houston, Texas police to close down pedestrian access to a sidewalk near their nest. Interestingly, the birds were particularly aggressive towards a lawyer, who was treated for his injuries.

Birds Helping People

Farmers and other people who live in rural areas in the United States have been increasingly attracted to keeping Guinea fowl, the numididae. These birds, natives of Africa and the island of Madagascar, present a natural way to control invertebrate parasites, particularly ticks, which transmit Lyme disease to warm-blooded animals, including humans. Pictured is a close-up of a vulturine Guinea fowl, Acryllium vulturinum.

People Helping Birds:

The state of Arkansas is home for the ivory-billed woodpecker as well as several other species, including the very rare red-cockaded woodpecker, Picoides borealis. A pair of these birds, which have color patterns similar to those of its larger and more famous cousin, recently produced four chicks, exciting ornithologists. "Gold, man; this is gold right here in my hand," Bill Holimon said while holding a chick, estimated to be 7 days old. "It’s the prettiest thing I’ve seen in quite a while." Holimon is an ornithologist and grants coordinator for the Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission.

For much of the 20th century, the property that is now Hilton Pond Center for Piedmont Natural History in York, South Carolina, was open farmland. Now that this land is re-forested, the bird life is changing dramatically, and there is evidence that white-breasted nuthatches, Sitta carolinensis, are breeding on site. For a photo essay about this interesting little cavity nester, please visit this installment of "This Week at Hilton Pond". This linked page includes wonderful close-up pictures of a white-breasted nuthatch (scroll down).

The Oklahoma Biological Survey is developing a bird information page based on WIKI software. For those familiar with Wikipedia, this is the same open access format. This format allows anyone with web access to add, delete or edit each page. These pages are primarily devoted to birds in Oklahoma. The Oklahoma Biological Survey is also seeking contributions from the public in the form of text, photos, or song recordings.

Audio/Video Birds:

The May edition of On The Wing, the audio magazine of birds and birding, is available now - it's bird festival season, with trips to Edmonds and Leavenworth (Washington state)! Also featured are the Magnuson Park Cliff Swallows, the re-discovery of the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker, the Accidental Birder, the Raptor Nest Data Project, and the Events Calendar. You can download the audio segments to your computer or mp3 player.

Tarantulas, snakes, and cowbirds? No, it is not the stuff of a bad birding movie, but during this past week, these are the creatures that have visited the Nest Box Cams, linked by Cornell's Laboratory of Ornithology. To summarize this week's activities; first, a brown-headed cowbird, Molothrus ater, removed a prothonotary warbler egg, Protonotaria citrea, from its nest and the next day replaced it with its own egg in the cavity. But this morning, the cowbird egg is no longer in the nest. Then, in Texas, a surprise visit from a large snake (thought to be an Eastern Rat Snake) resulted in the snake constricting one of the barn owlets to death while the other five owlets watched. Actually, one of the owlets appeared to be trying to fight the snake off with its talons. But at this point, observers don't know if the snake managed to actually eat the young or if it just killed it and then left the scene for fear of being eaten itself. They do know that one of the chicks was lying dead on the floor, and was then consumed by its siblings. That same day, an image was captured of a large tarantula in the vacant Texas bluebird box. To end on a happy note, four of six Eastern Bluebirds, Sialia sialis, have hatched!

Reader Photoblog of the Week:

In view of all the excitement over woodpeckers, I found this picture of the second largest North American woodpecker to share with you (the largest, of course, is the ivory-billed woodpecker). This photograph of a male pileated woodpecker, Dryocopus pileatus, was taken by birder and amateur photographer, Mac Knight, who writes; this picture was taken in the middle fork area of the Ahtanum Creek, west of Yakima, Washington state. The bird pictured is one of a nesting pair in the area. My wife and I went up there to find the woodpeckers after being told they were in the area by another Yakima Audubon member. We were specifically looking for pileated woodpeckers and Williamson's sapsuckers, since we had no pictures of either bird.

We found a pileated nesting west of Yakima and got a few shots of the bird as it returned to the nest. We also found many other woodpeckers in this excellent site, including Williamson's sapsuckers, white-headed woodpeckers, hairy and downy woodpeckers, and several others we were unable to see clearly enough to identify.

I used a Canon 10d digital camera with a Canon 100/400mm lens and a 1.4x multiplier on a tripod to take the picture. I used to shoot 35 mm but converted to digital when Canon came out with a reasonably priced camera that accepted my lenses. I've been an amateur photographer for 30 years and have been concentrating on birds for the last two years since joining the Audubon Society.

You also must look at this picture of the same male "kissing" his mate at their nest tree (male on right, peeking out of nest, female is on left, in full view).

tags: , , , ,

Previous : : Birds in the News : : Next

Academic Job Interviews: 2 (for Adjunct Assistant Professorships -- "Adjunct" is a fancy way of saying "part-time temporary" employee)

Job Offers: 5 (all Adjunct positions, but one position has real promise)

Academic Job Rejections: 2 (Lecturer of Evolutionary Science, Assistant Professor of Molecular Genetics)


© 2004, 2005, 2006 by GrrlScientist

Thursday, May 19, 2005

IBWO: Special Announcement

As most of you know, I closely followed the ivory-billed woodpecker rediscovery on my blog. I managed, through my special magic and through my professional connections, to locate behind-the-scenes messages sent by several members of the ivory-billed woodpecker search party and publish them here for all of you to read and enjoy.

Unknown to me, several book publishers noticed this drama on my blog. One of these publishers contacted me. On Friday, the day following the announced rediscovery of the bird, Taryn Roeder from Houghton Mifflin publishers emailed me to ask if I would like to interview Tim Gallagher, author of the book, The Grail Bird, and post that interview on my blog.

To say the least, I was excited. Very excited.

I attempted to write a "professional" sounding email reply since I am, after all, a scientist, first and foremost, and I was being given a tremendous opportunity to interview one of the people who was part of the biggest ornithological event in my lifetime. I am not sure if I succeeded in sounding professional, but Taryn and I worked out the specifics of an email interview with Tim. I am writing questions now and will email them to Tim on Monday morning. Those questions and Tim's answers will appear here for your reading pleasure, as soon as possible after Tim responds and I finish formatting his reply.

I am not being paid any money to do this interview, although I freely admit that my satisfaction and excitement are particularly gratifying. Taryn did send me three copies of Tim's book, hot off the presses. I gave one copy to my colleague, R. Moyle, who sent me van Remsen's behind-the-scenes email, and I will give another copy of the book to my former employer, who has generously helped me during my seemingly neverending un(der)employment by providing me access to their libraries and the internet, as well as 24/7 access to the building itself.

The third copy of the book, which I have finished reading once already, is mine, of course. It makes a fine addition to my private ornithological library, which is the envy of several of my colleagues. Even though I was not asked to do this, I plan to write a review of the book in the near future that will appear on my blog, too.

Because I know there is tremendous interest in the ivory-billed woodpecker and at least a few of my new "regular" readers are here because of this bird, I wish to share this upcoming interview with you, as I have done with the rediscovery. If any of you, dear readers, have questions that you would like to ask Tim Gallagher about the rediscovery of the ivory-billed woodpecker, feel free to send them to me.


© 2004, 2005, 2006 by GrrlScientist

Monday, May 16, 2005

Learning to Negotiate

When it rains, it pours, or so Morton Salt always claimed.

I just returned from another interview this afternoon and I am pleased to report that I was hired for an Adjunct position for the first term of summer semester. I will be teaching Anatomy and Physiology I again, but this time, I will be teaching at a different community college than the one where I currently work.

Last week, when I told my fellow Adjuncts that I had an interview with this particular school, they informed me that this school is probably as bad as the school where I currently teach (in terms of poor faculty support and few resources), so I was not very excited about this position.

It's just a survival job, I reminded myself as I wandered around the building before my scheduled interview. But when I walked down a short hallway, I unexpectedly found a glass display case full of zoological specimens in jars of alcohol. So even then, I began to suspect this employer might be different from my current employer, whose hallways and classrooms are devoid of such biological wonders.

Even when I emerged from the subway station, I was pleasantly surprised to find that the commute was very fast. I also discovered that the building is fairly new and the school primarily serves Spanish speaking adults. As a single blonde woman, I am very unusual here, even among the faculty. Nevertheless, I am untroubled by my minority status because I am also a minority in my own neighborhood, which consists mainly of Dominican immigrants.

As I walked in to the conference room where the interview took place, I met one of my fellow Adjuncts who had recommended me for this position to the department chairman a few weeks ago. After a several minutes of good-natured joking with him, the panel invited me into the conference room for the interview. I was pleased to find that the faculty are quite friendly and helpful -- a sharp contrast with my current employer -- and the interview went very well (no one asked me to name any muscles, for example).

Because I am still frustrated by the poor resources available to my current students, I remained skeptical and tried to ask every difficult question that I could think of. When I asked about dissections (as you know, this is a real point of frustration), the three faculty exchanged quick glances before naming which dissections they routinely provide to their students. These turned out to be more dissections than what my current students have.

The Department Chairman, also a member of the interview panel, had clearly decided he wanted to hire me before I had even walked through the door. He jumped in to tell me that a previous class had not used all their piglets so my students were welcome to dissect them. I was extraordinarily pleased with this very small victory on behalf of my potential students, realizing that I had accidentally accomplished something very important for them before the formal letter of offering had even been written. The panel then encouraged me to bring in dead birds or other animals for the students to dissect, if I had the opportunity to do so.

This short, casual exchange was enormously instructive: suddenly my eyes were opened to the power that I wielded at that moment. The panel clearly wanted me and were willing to provide my potential students with special favors to get me to teach for them. Until this moment, I had no clue that these sorts of negotiations occurred behind the scenes, but from now on, I will anticipate such negotiations in all of my interviews. Thanks to this one interview, I learned something very important today and hopefully, all of my future students will learn more from me as a result.

Certainly, this was a victory, but it would not be my last today. At the conclusion of the interview, the Department Chairman surprised me by declaring that I was currently not being paid enough, and offered me a $10.79 raise per contact hour (note: "contact hours" are not the same as hours worked. I typically work 3-4 additional hours for each paid contact hour). It hadn't occurred to me to ask for anything for myself, so I was surprised and grateful that the faculty were thinking about me. This raise will help me survive that looming dry spell of unemployment in August and September following the first summer term. Since the second term of summer semester is devoted to teaching non-science subjects, there will be no Adjunct science teaching positions available then and even worse, the demand for science tutors -- one of the other ways I earn a few dollars to keep myself fed -- also dries up.

So now I wait for the paperwork. For those of you out there who are keeping score on my job hunting successes, my current employment status for the near future appears to be;

Summer semester, term I: 6 weeks of Adjunct employment, teaching A&P I (contract pending).

Summer semester, term II: unemployed, hopefully receiving the last of my Unemployment Benefits earned from my postdoctoral fellowship (I can claim these benefits for one calendar year from my last paid day from my postdoc).

Autumn semester: two different Adjunct positions at two fine institutions, one will be teaching A&P I (I told you about this yesterday) and the other will be teaching genetics (both contracts pending). Both of these institutions claim that they want me to apply for a junior-level tenure-track position that opens up sometime this autumn.

Spring semester: Unknown at this point. I am preparing to interview for a spring semester lecturer position that, if I get it, will provide the best pay I've earned since my postdoc ended and will be with the best school I've taught at so far. If I get this position, I will be mightily tempted to tell you who I am teaching for because I will so want to brag about it.


© 2004, 2005, 2006 by GrrlScientist

Sunday, May 15, 2005

Interview News

After a discussion on Sunday afternoon with my postdoc advisor about an upcoming job interview, and after responding to this article, Good for Doug Bjerregaard!, written by another blog pal, PZ Myers, it is safe to say that my rant-producing neurons are fully engaged and firing at maximal efficiency, despite the fact that I am still sick. But my rant will have to wait for a day because I promised to tell you about my interview this weekend.

As some of you recall, I had a job interview for a summer Adjunct position this past Friday afternoon. When I mentioned this upcoming interview to my fellow Adjuncts the evening before, they promptly informed me that the college I would be interviewing with is one of the best in its level in the region. I later gained a more precise appreciation for how much better it truly is -- particularly the school’s Anatomy and Physiology (A&P) courses, which are in stark contrast to the college where I currently teach A&P.

But before I continue with my tale, I want to say that after thinking about it during the past day and a half, I realize that my interview went terribly. I didn’t deserve to be treated as a serious candidate for that position, even though it is only an Adjunct position for autumn semester (instead of summer term, as I was certain they had told me earlier over the phone).

It turns out that the person (and her assistant) who was interviewing me designed and administers the curricula for this school’s A&P courses. Of course, my interviewer wanted to know the details about how I am currently teaching my A&P course, so I told her. She was clearly appalled by what I was doing. Although I appeared to be calm, I immediately became flustered and upset because, according to this potential future employer, I was doing everything wrong (but I already knew this and have agonized privately over this very thing every single day for the past four months), and worse, I felt I was being forced into the untenable position of having to defend something that I have been repeatedly frustrated by, and certainly have no control over.

In a panic, I worried that these people will tell my current employer (who they know personally) that I am a crappy teacher and then I will be fired and will never find another job of any sort again as long as I live!

I tried to remind myself that I am doing my best under the circumstances (but it was to no avail), that I, as an invisible part-time temp, cannot possibly change my current employer’s way of doing things, that their inadequacies are not my fault and I have nothing to feel guilty or defensive about. Then I realized with a sinking feeling that my inability and unwillingness to defend my current employer’s system for doing things indicates that I am a professional liability, that I am not a team player, which make me an unattractive prospective employee.

Then, to make matters worse, I stupidly misnamed a muscle during the interview. I corrected myself. Too late.

In the meantime, the person I was interviewing with handed me the syllabi for both semesters of the course and wanted to know what I thought about them and how they compared to my current syllabus. I nervously responded by asking lots of questions, grateful to have something written to distract me from my worries.

I managed to calm my shaking hands by the time my interviewer showed me the A&P labs while a class was in session. In short, these labs are everything my students should have and nothing like what they currently do have. I was astonished. As I looked around the lab, I initially felt a thrill of terror: I can’t teach this! I’m a molecular evolutionary biologist, not a surgeon! I thought, even though I am teaching this very subject, albeit poorly, to my own students right now.

Months of intense disillusionment with higher education melted away as I admired the skeletons (both real and plastic, articulated and disarticulated), as I brushed my fingertips over the wonderfully realistic plastic human muscle and organ systems models, gazed upon the students’ cat dissections that showed obvious care and surgical precision and peered at the trays full of pre-prepared microscope slides of tissues and organs. The labs also had a collection of the newest computer and electronic equipment and beautiful, new microscopes that are nearly as good as those at my alma mater -- all present in each and every lab!

Just looking at these labs, at the wealth of resources and equipment, made me desire this position with an absolute certainty that I had not felt about anything since I was awarded my postdoctoral fellowship nearly three years ago.

This school is a big contrast to my current situation: on my first day at my current job, I had to beg for a piece of chalk so I could write on the chalkboard. My department has only one (aging) PowerPoint setup shared between a dozen tenured faculty members and 80 Adjuncts. Six (or so) weeks ago, I gave up fighting the faculty for transparencies of anatomic diagrams and pictures and instead settled on providing my students with photocopied pictures as “handouts” or drawing quick diagrams and pictures on the chalkboard during lecture.

Then I met and spoke with some of the students. These students were so different from mine; they were eagerly learning the material and actively engaged in helping each other review the information, so unlike my own students. None of these students were whining about the difficulty of the material -- material that was advanced far beyond what I expect from my own students. I immediately felt guilty for being an integral part of delivering a substandard education to my own students.

I am part of the problem, I told myself.

I also wondered why my own students are so unmotivated to do anything at all. In fact, nearly all of them refused the only dissection they were offered all semester; the sheep eye that I had excitedly talked about since the first day of class. Shouldn’t all nursing students be excited to dissect tissues, organs and dead bodies? Shouldn't they want to investigate for themselves the structure and function of these things? What had I done to destroy their desire to learn? A wave of despair washed over me.

I am in the wrong profession, I thought wearily.

The students were genuinely friendly with my interviewer and engaged her in brief, personal conversations. She was obviously very involved in the curricula, with her teachers and with her students. This made me feel confident that I would be able to learn a lot from her about important things such as curricula design, teaching, and especially about anatomy and physiology, if only I could somehow earn that opportunity.

We watched the lab technicians set up the final lab exam next door for a few minutes. My interviewer said that their students are expected to know every muscle and bone in the body -- unlike my students! The lab technicians briefly explained the examination routine to me; 50 questions from “wet” lab specimens with one minute at each station to answer each question. They asked me to explain my lab exam protocol and I was ashamed to admit that I was only allowed into my own lab ten minutes before class started, that the lab technicians do not set up lab exams, and so I was completely unable to set up or administer a proper lab exam for my students. I instead spend countless tedious hours grading mountains of barely legible home works and lab papers to assign my students the lab portion of their scores.

After viewing the labs, we toured the dedicated A&P study lab, which was similarly equipped as the wet labs, before returning to my interviewer’s office. She introduced me as ‘a potential autumn A&P instructor’ to her colleague across the hall who administers the microbiology and general biology courses. Her colleague was immediately was interested to know if I could teach microbiology. I told her truthfully that even though I do have my microbiology degree and I worked in a hospital microbiology lab as a technician, I had never taught a micro course (but was interested to do so).

Before I left, my original interviewer and I chatted excitedly about birds and about designing an urban wildlife course. Then she reminded me about an as-yet unadvertized tenure-track position that will open up in a few months, and said she wanted me to apply for it. Needless to say, this was the most positive news I’ve heard in months.

But throughout the interview, I was, and still am, confused by the mixed signals I received. On one hand, I feel I am unworthy to teach there, but on the other hand, I could learn a tremendous amount about quality teaching from them before I am ruined for life by teaching at a subpar and unsupportive institution. Further, they clearly want me to apply for an upcoming tenure-track position that is not yet advertised, so I guess I impressed them at some level, despite misnaming a muscle (argh!).

technorati tags: , ,


© 2004, 2005, 2006 by GrrlScientist