Bird Paper One

Bob Montgomerie provides this fascinating account of what looks to be the first published work on a bird!

History of Ornithology

BY: Bob Montgomerie, Queen’s University | 10 December 2018

When we were writing our Ten Thousand Birds book on the history of ornithology since Darwin, we thought it might be interesting to try to illustrate the growth of the field since the mid-1800s. To do that, we prepared a graph showing the number of articles and books published per year for every fifth year since 1865, using both Zoological Record and, for recent years, Google Scholar. The results were staggering [1], showing an explosive growth in publications on—and presumably knowledge about—birds since the second world war. Since the year 2000, there have been more articles and books published about birds than in the entire period from the beginning of scientific publishing in 1665 until 2000. We can estimate the number of publications before 1865 with some confidence as there were very few bird papers published before that date. The…

View original post 1,809 more words

Posted in life | Leave a comment

Dear Americans, stop using China and India as climate change scapegoats — The Logic of Science

Reblogged from The Logic of Science.


I spend a lot of time on this blog debunking bad arguments, and I have previously devoted a lot of effort to debunking bad arguments against man-made climate change. There is, however, one extremely common argument that I have not previously addressed. I’ve been reluctant to deal with it because it is an argument about […]

via Dear Americans, stop using China and India as climate change scapegoats — The Logic of Science

Quote | Posted on by | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Binocular advice for birders

I’m frequently asked about my recommendations for binoculars. My first recommendation is yes, you should get a pair.

Screen Shot 2018-11-27 at 8.33.53 AM

These Eagle Optics Rangers are great, but they kinda wash me out. (Sadly, Eagle Optics shuttered operations in 2017.)

Sure, you can do a lot of birding without binoculars – and 90% or more of the birds I encounter I detect by song and call. But for any bird you have the chance to observe at a distance greater than about 3m, your likelihood of correctly identifying it or of simply enjoying the view will increase dramatically if you can use some visual aid to make the bird appear much closer. That’s what binoculars do: Those numbers printed on the side indicate how much closer an image will appear through the lenses, i.e., 7X closer, 8X, 10X. I recommend 8X binocs. 10X helps when viewing birds quite far away (shorebirds along a mudflat perhaps), but higher magnification narrows the field of view (making it more difficult to find flitting warblers in the canopy), requires more light for a sharper image, and enhances any unsteadiness in your hands (which for me is naturally pretty high). 7X is better for finding and tracking little birds in dense cover, but pretty limiting when you’re out in those wide open spaces. I prefer 8X binoculars as a compromise between the two. I don’t recommend anything less than 7X or greater than 10X.

Next, if you absolutely must abbreviate the word  (and you don’t) then binocs serves that role: bins is what some kind of Silicon Valley marketers cooked up as a term to try to make birding more cool. Hey focus groups: Birding is cool enough on its own. We don’t need your fancy lingo. (I might even like the super-retro field glasses, but that’s a bit much even for me.)

Whew! Feels good to get that off this grumpy old man’s chest.

Screen Shot 2018-11-26 at 6.10.08 PM

“If we can get the kids to call them bins we’ll sell a lot more binocs.”

Right. Well then, providing recommendations on binoculars makes me a bit nervous because they can be a big expense and there is a bit of get what you pay for when shopping for birding optics. If you have unlimited resources then sure, buy a fantastic pair of binoculars for $2000 or more. They’ll be lightweight, sturdy, fogproof, crystal clear, and they will last a lifetime. That was a pretty big if, though.

Folks of more modest means like myself have to be more selective. It’s important to realize that you can get a decent pair of binoculars for about 100 bucks. They will work great under most conditions, but they will be inferior to the top of the line. It’s kind of like cars. We loved our 1988 Chevy Nova and went all over the place in that thing, but there are other cars that would’ve outperformed it with respect to pickup, handling, towing capacity, styling, etc.



How will binocular performance compare in the field? When it’s dry and the lighting is good, expensive binoculars won’t necessarily perform any better than cheap ones. Heck, I did the field work for my master’s degree with a pair of these. Performance diverges as conditions deteriorate, however. High-end binocs will provide a bright, sharp image at a distance even under low light, through glare, fog, etc. long after the cheapo specials become useless. So, for a beginning birder, cheap binoculars should serve you well. If you’re more serious that means you’re going to be out there birding under all manner of weather and lighting conditions, and that’s when the good binocs earn their keep. That’s why I advise folks to invest in the best binoculars they can afford.



Weight is a concern of many folks. These Nikon 10x50s clock in at a hefty 31.7 oz (900g or nearly 2 lbs), but these Nikon 7X35s are 24.2 oz. Among full-size binoculars (and I don’t recommend compacts for birding) most will be listed in ounces, and low-20s will be lightweight, high-20s will feel much heavier. Of course that only matters for most folks* if you’re going to be lugging them around your neck all day long. Also, those cheap vinyl straps that dig into your neck have mostly been replaced by far more comfortable broad neoprene straps. Note in my photos that I routinely shorten the straps so that the binocs rest on my sternum. Up high like that, they don’t swing around much while you walk (climb!) and it’s easier to quickly lift them to your eye when you detect some movement in the bushes. A lot of folks opt for shoulder harnesses that take all the strain off your neck; I’ve never tried those.

Screen Shot 2018-11-27 at 8.37.46 AM.png

Note my short straps compared to Fidel’s and Emily’s.

*Most folks. I certainly can’t speak to the experiences of people who might be a lot smaller and/or more female than I am. So it’s important to recognize specific needs you might have for binoculars. The short strap that I use for mine might be awful for someone else. A heft that is no big deal for me might be a big deal for someone else. Other folks might be able to handle 10X binoculars just fine, but my unsteady hands make them a big challenge for me. So if you can, it’s always a good idea to try out some binoculars in person to see if they just plain fit you.

Shaky hands? Your default grip might be to hold binoculars up to your face (above, left) but if you brace your thumbs against your cheekbones (above, right) you’ll be able to hold them much steadier. This works on porro-prism, roof-prism, and the invisible binoculars I’m modeling in the photos.

Lastly, eyeglasses. If you, like me, wear eyeglasses then you’ll need to pay attention to the eye relief on a pair of binoculars. The link explains the issue quite well but the gist is this: binoculars are designed to provide their full field of view at a prescribed distance from the ocular lens to your eye. Eyeglasses can affect that distance, so you want binoculars that allow you to adjust the distance depending on whether you are wearing your glasses or not. Look for an eye relief of at least 16 mm to give you that wiggle room. The eyecups should be easily folded or twisted up or down to adjust to the proper eye relief for you.

With that preliminary stuff out of the way, you can get down to the business of comparing prices, features, and availability of binoculars to find the best pair for you. There are many great sources of information to do this. I recommend the following:

  1. National Audubon Society: Audubon Guide to Buying Binoculars.
  2. Perennial powerhouse, the Cornell Lab of Ornithology: Finding the Best Binoculars for Birding.
  3. Head-to-head comparison by Wirecutter.
  4. Bird Watcher’s Digest.

Ultimately, the best pair of binoculars for you is whatever encourages you to spend more time outside using them. So do that, have fun, and good birding!

Screen Shot 2018-11-27 at 8.13.25 AM.png

Posted in BIRDATHON, birding, birds/nature, Christmas Bird Count, editorial, environment, life, National Audubon Society, nature deficit disorder, No Child Left Inside, Partners in Flight, wildlife | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

5 November 2018 – a pile of feathers and fruits

This gallery contains 6 photos.

Originally posted on Avian Window Kills:
In a corner of the main north entrance to the Noble Research Center, I encountered this mystery today: And I’m all like: So let’s get to work on this. First, this wasn’t here on…

Gallery | Leave a comment

A conversation about grad school

This gallery contains 12 photos.

Originally posted on The Waterthrush Blog:
I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had this conversation. I plan to keep having it, too. But if this example can help answer some questions pre-emptively, I reckon this will have been…

Gallery | Leave a comment

My favorite story at Halloween

Screen Shot 2018-10-31 at 4.32.03 PM


Production value leaves a bit to be desired, but if you love Halloween, The Legend of Sleepy Hollow, and you’re not too annoyed by my American white guy voice, you might enjoy my reading of the Washington Irving classic.

Posted in life | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Do my social media milestones matter?

Well, no. Of course not. Still . . .

Screen Shot 2018-10-27 at 11.06.21 AM

Social media is irrelevant, right Duck-Face Mona Lisa?

My wife and I started this blog (formerly Eat More Cookies) way back in July 2006. We were about to complete our third year in Oklahoma, with family back home in New York and friends mostly dotted around the East Coast. We thought those friends and family could better keep in touch with us and see photos of our growing kids if we posted them online, so yeah, we pretty much invented Facebook too. eBird was nascent in those days, and our family blog was also a place where I could post photos and provide lengthy descriptions of my birding trips. I could also share information more generally, like how to feed hummingbirds or why cardinals are often bald in late summer. I threw in a bit of humor, a rather large number of haiku, birding newsletters, some movie reviews, sports fandom, science communication, an original podcast, and political editorial.

Since 2006, Facebook has taken up a lot of that slack so my posting rate here has dropped quite a bit. It’s easier and more effective to share newsletters and other items on Facebook, too. eBird now lets me generate checklists to which I can attach photos, audio, and video. I’ve even specialized with additional blogs: A lot of what you might ever want to know about birds can be accessed through NREM/BIOL 4464 – Ornithology. The O’Connell Lab website is one-stop shopping for most of my professional research and teaching information. Avian Window Kills is a continuous summary of near daily monitoring for window-killed birds at a building on campus at OSU in Stillwater. I’ve even developed and maintain a website for the Payne County Audubon Society. What remains here at The Waterthrush Blog is still dominated by science, birds, and political screeds, mostly when I feel compelled to explore some issue on a deeper dive.


Screen Shot 2018-10-27 at 11.11.00 AM

Ah crap – I’m supposed to be on a field trip right now!


I’d be remiss as well not to consider my various profiles on LinkedIn, ResearchGate, Google Scholar, and ORCID. But in recent years, nothing has changed my social media presence as much as my time on Twitter. It’s there that I celebrate today a new milestone: 1500 followers for @Seiurus.

Screen Shot 2018-10-27 at 9.22.01 AM

My traditionally-considered formative years are long behind me, and even back then my upbringing was considered socially conservative. Raised in a traditional Catholic family, we never really got on board with Vatican II, and this silly nonsense about saying the mass in English. We were taught to keep our heads down and our mouths shut. Next to faith, I’d say that humility was the most important quality that good Catholics instilled in their children. Thankfully I’ve since recovered from the meritless faith, but the emphasis on humility was, if anything, further stoked through graduate school and in charting a career in academia. There’s always someone smarter, more productive, working harder. You were lucky to get the job you have and there are dozens out there who could do it better. When will they find out I’m a fraud? An impostor. Best keep my head down and my mouth shut. I’ll let my work speak for me.

Whether it’s a deep-seated impostor syndrome, some holdover from childhood lessons against growing prideful, or simply a tendency among many in science to see self-promotion as a bit vulgar, a lot of us are lousy at tooting our own horns. I know I am. So for several years as I made attempts to build a social media presence I was highly selective in my choice of people to follow. If people found me, great! But if I went out looking for them, that was a bit too far. That felt like shameless self-promotion to me.

Thankfully, I’ve since learned that that was a silly approach to building my social media presence. The whole point should be to build a network of people for whom my work and my ideas might resonate. Screaming into a void can be okay sometimes, but what’s wrong with inviting people to my tune into my void? The best way to do that? Reach out.

Screen Shot 2018-10-27 at 7.27.44 PM.png

Twitter – especially Twitter – has emerged as an extraordinary learning resource for me that has helped me connect with science- and conservation-minded people all over the world. Not only have I gained access to new scientific content through links to journal articles and other presentations, I’ve been able to connect with the people actually doing that interesting work. I’ve learned more about diversity and struggles of underrepresented minorities in academia in the past few years on Twitter than I had during the entirety of my professional life before then. These revelations have absolutely made me a better educator. I’ve also built my own network of young scholars who can benefit from my experience. Mentoring is a good thing for both parties; on Twitter I’m mentoring dozens (hundreds?) of people simultaneously.

Thus dismounted from my high horse, I stopped worrying about shamelessly soliciting followers and I started doing something that would help me be most effective at building my network: I started shamelessly following everyone who was following me, and following a few newly suggested folks every day. I don’t care that I’m following 1000 more people than are following me. My goal is to increase the number of people following me. This builds my network, exposes me to new ideas, and – ostensibly the reason I have a social media presence at all – provides a built-in audience for the content I provide. That content is not pearls of wisdom in an endless string, but every 20th post or something really does seem to resonate with someone. That’s pretty cool.

So here I am at a decent milestone: 1500 followers at a time when academics need more than ever to support each other; when aspiring scholars need advice to help them level-up; when science and critical thinking take a beating from the politically powerful; when CO2 has consistently topped 400 ppm, human population hurtles toward 8 billion, and populations of once-abundant species are in freefall; when marginalized people need real allies; when fellow humans suffering from depression or anxiety need to see something wholesome and funny or just feel reassured that someone is listening. If I can be a part of a network that does stuff like that, you’re damn right I’m going to work on building that network, even if it takes a few selfies to get there.



Posted in academics, editorial, environment, haiku, history, life, Links, overpopulation, professional development, skepticism and science, The Waterthrush Podcast | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment