Lietuvos ornitologų draugijos forumas

Nieko, buna...
Svarbu, kad nepersigalvotum Rudininku balsu isleisti

Given that the LOD Stasi now deletes all records of rarities after 30 days, could you explain how this helps birdwatchers get new interesting information, it seems an easy way to guarantee the records stay forever buried in our notebooks.

Why I, or anyone else, should waste our time submitting anything if it gets deleted after 30 days (or even 24 hours recently) - please find one example of similar anywhere else in Europe. Online sightings pages are the NOT official records of rarity committees, they are observations by general birdwatchers.

Kiekvieno žmogaus valia pildyti ar nepildyti LOFK anketos. Buvo paskelbtas raginimas visiems per 30 dienų užpildyti LOFK anketas 2008 m. stebėjimus. Tas terminas seniai jau praėjo ir visi tie stebėjimai pašalinti. Galiu paminėti, kad tai tik vieno žmogaus stebėjimai. Visi kiti stebėtojai pateikė anketas.
Rašoma, kad vienas stebėjimas ištrintas nepraėjus nei 24 valandoms. Štai tas stebėjimas "Pectoral Sandpiper (...): 2008-09-21. Bird today was third record for Lithuania, not second. Photographs exist of previous bird at same site. (J. Stratford)" AŠ nematau čia stebėjimo - tai papraščiausiai pastaba virš Eglės stebėjimo.
Dėl "Naujausių stebėjimų". Čia talpinami oficialūs ornitofaunistiniai stebėjimai pagal iš anksto paruoštus kriterijus. Ir aš nenorėčiau kad čia būtu talpinama belekas. Tam yra "Naujausi stebėjimai" forume.
Taip pat dabar peržiūriu visus stebėjimus nuo 2004 metų. Kuriems reiks užpildyti LOFK anketas stebėjimų autoriai bus perspėti ir jeigu nebus gautos anketos iki 2009-01-01, manau, kad jas taip pat teks pašalinti. Aš nemanau, kad kitose šalyse toliaruojamas tokio pobūdžio komisijų ignoravimas. O gal kai kurie galvoja, kad ne visiems stebėtojams privaloma pildyti LOFK anketas. Tai tik mano nuomonė. Prašau, parašykite ir kiti stebėtojai ką galvojate apie tai.
Kolkas tiek

And what is so important about 30 days, birds are not birds after 30 days?

Can you find any other example in any country where people's records are just deleted from general sightings pages because the record is not submitted for verification in a month?

Sorry, I clearly misunderstood the purpose of the LOD stebëjimus page - I thought it was for sharing information with other birdwatchers, I did not know it was the official publications page of the rarity commission.

Apologies again, I thought the page did allow for information that might be of interest to birdwatchers out there. Incidently, the English on the stebijimo page should have read "This will be the second accepted record for Lithuania". How it was, it was factually wrong, sorry I added an amendment.

So let it be, so there are only two records of Pectoral Sandpiper in Lithuania, the previous one was a ghost

Aš tikrai neisivaizuoju savęs, būdamas kurioje nors kitoje šalyje ir diktuočiau salygas vietinėms komisijoms kaip reikia dirbti. Ir kad jos dirbtų tiap kaip man geriau. Nematau toliau prasmės ginčytis.

Nothing personal against anyone, I have no argument with the present committee - I stopped submitting records to the rarity committee many years ago because the system was not good (my opinion, maybe right, maybe wrong).

My intention always was to submit all records when it gets better. Almost certainly I will start in January with everything in systematic order, but the 30-day rule is a joke - just means more records are totally lost forever.

As I now all records will now be deleted, obviously I will no longer put records on the sightings page, which helps what? Other birdwatchers do not have chance to see what birds are in the country, bad move I think.

Svedijoje taip pat pamacius retesne rusi reikia uzpildyti oficialia anketa, jos neuzpildzius stebejimas pasalinamas. Tiesa jei neapsirinku laikas ilgesnis. taciau turiu prideti, jog tokiu kurie piktybiskai nenepildo anketu ir paskui piktinasi yra mazai .
Elkimes civilizuotai, nereikes piktintis.

APIE MUS RAŠO:
Jos STRATFORD: http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=1299899
" Where's the 'worst' area in Europe for rarity finding?
Hot on the heels on the worst in Britain thread, thought we could expand this out to Europe.

I nominate Lithuania.


Mind you I have to confess, our little nation has been going through a purple patch these last few days - whilst Euriope has been creaking under the strains of Brown Shrikes, Brown Flycatchers, Siberian and White's Thrushes and knee-deep layers of birds never ever seen in our country, Lithuania has made a valiant attempt to crawl up and play with the big boys - we recorded a second for the country and a third for the country, yo hoo hoo.

Maybe better we don't tarnish the image by actually mentioning the species involved, we'll have Europeans north and south on the floor laughing. Or maybe we should, just in the spirit of international entertainment - two Black-winged Stilts today were the second for the country, a Pectoral Sandpiper last weekend was the third. (however, to massage our nation's ego, one of the previous records in both cases have yet to be submitted, so our nation's esteemed rarity committee makes big words of these being a first and second respectively.)

Beat that ye fellow nations of Europe! We have yet to record, at a European level, a single rare bird this year and only two or three for the entire century as far as I can remember. Or maybe just ever."

Hot on the heels on the worst in Britain thread, thought we could expand this out to Europe. I nominate Lithuania. Mind you I have to confess, our little nation has been going through a purple patch these last few days - whilst Euriope has been creaking under the strains of Brown Shrikes, Brown Flycatchers, Siberian and White's Thrushes and knee-deep layers of birds never ever seen in our country, Lithuania has made a valiant attempt to crawl up and play with the big boys - we recorded a second for the country and a third for the country, yo hoo hoo. Maybe better we don't tarnish the image by actually mentioning the species involved, we'll have Europeans north and south on the floor laughing. Or maybe we should, just in the spirit of international entertainment - two Black-winged Stilts today were the second for the country, a Pectoral Sandpiper last weekend was the third. (however, to massage our nation's ego, one of the previous records in both cases have yet to be submitted, so our nation's esteemed rarity committee makes big words of these being a first and second respectively.) Beat that ye fellow nations of Europe! We have yet to record, at a European level, a single rare bird this year and only two or three for the entire century as far as I can remember. Or maybe just ever."[/quote]

kadangi LOFK ruosiasi oficialiai sureaguoti i Vyto pateikta informacija, o tekstas yra "native english" ir lb emocianalus, keliose vietose nesu tikras del teisingo jo vertimo. Todel prasyciau gerai zinancius anglu kalba pagelbeti ir atsiusti teisinga vertima. Aiosku, pirmiausiai, tikimes Egles pagalbos Jei nera galimybes, bent parasykit apie tai.

OOPs

Did I make a mistake, has our nation recorded a European rarity this year (ie a bird listed as a national rarity in all European states)?
Unless I am wrong, the answer is 'No'. I went throught the entire year's records and there is not one - there are many very nice birds, but no rarities at a European level. Plenty of Red-breasted Geese and a Pectoral Sandpiper, very very good birds here, but not official rarities throughout Europe.

This thread was not criticism of Lithuania, the thread is not 'Which is the worst country for birdwatching in Europe?'. It is 'Which is the worst country for finding rarities'

...and it is also not a serious thread, same as the similar 'Which is the worst county in Britain for finding rarities?'

How many records are for Namaqua Dove (Oena capensis) for example listed at tarsiger.com

Ah yes, forgot my pet budgerigar too Will let him have a fly round the garden and we will have another to add!

What is the essence of this conversation? Lithuania is as it is in sense of bird-watching, a lot to learn from more sofisticated or advanced countries having thousends of birders. The similar problems as we have here are in other east European countries, so calm down. We have here now, at last, a growing interest for our hobby powered by more knowledge, free time, vehicles, optics, field-guides etc.
I don't understand the extreme emotion in counting the records. To me and to my international birder frriends it is absolutely normal that ONLY the records officially informed and approved (like it or not) by LOFK are to be announced by LOD or any other organisation related.
Ofcourse there are a couple of matters to be improved in LOFK's working methods, listings etc. but anyway this is better than nothing. If Bukutis is not willing to follow the local rules, so what! He can keep his records to himself or to publish them on his own web but it doesn't make those records official in Lithuanian ornitological science or list of national bird species.

PS if we take the Western Palearctic, rather than Europe, Namaqua Dove is a breeding species, becoming more common in the extreme south east (eg southern Israel, Jordan, etc)

No idea. A post of mine from an unrelated UK-based forum was quoted here, just responding to it. Liutauras took it here, so I replied.


Completely agree. End of story. The subject was closed in my book - I had stopped writing anything here, or the sighting page, or any other LT forum. My posts were on a UK-based forum - they were taken out of context and pasted here!



PS you need to tell Tarsiger - they also pubish the stilts as second for the country, the Pectoral Sandpiper as third

Thank you for kind words Vytas, I have just had this translated and understand how strong it is.

First, if you decide to read BirdForum, first see I have written hundreds/thousands of posts on there which speak how fantastic Lithuania is - it is also why I live in this country. If you think I "NEAPYKANTA LIETUVAI" then you are totally wrong.

Second, (just as I don't understand Lithuanian language so well), I can see you understand very little in English - the quote you are so angry about says nothing bad about Lithuania. No native person reading it would see it as anything other than humour, and sarcasm is part of English humour. I recommend you remember that.


So Vytas, if you want to bring my posts from another forum to this one, please do, but first get someone to translate it better. Also, if you wish to shout how I hate this country, please post the many more comments that say how I love the country.


Two replies to my posts about Lithuania on BirdForum in the last 24 hours:

Birding in Lithuania sounds pretty good! I enjoy reading these. (Cardiff, UK)

The detail, observations and pictures in this thread and on your website are amazing Jos. I still have a fair bit to read, but what a fantastic journal to pick up in the evenings. (Costa Rica)

Clearly they don't feel I hate this country.

I have nothing more to add to this thread, the matter is closed.

I have nothing more to add to this thread, the matter is closed.[/quote]

I would propose to finish this fuddy-duddy debates is ti Lithuania good for birdwatching and LOFK good for birders. I can tell you clear: Lithuanian is very good because a lot of people even from such "whimsical" country from the point of you of birdwatching - Finland, comming on regular basis here each year. Then, LOFK is also good, first, because it has clear rules for operating (as normal opfficial body), then following them strictly.And yes, we can discuss on the changing something there, but only in case if birdwatchers will come with concrete and reasoned arguments. Until now, we don't have any, so working as we understand it is correct. And finally, I am not happy if Jos will leave his observations on his diary only. haviong in mind how active he is, we need the data open for the public and ornithological society. However, nobody will give abatement for him neither because of his good qualification, neither because he is one of two pioneers who many years ago came to Lithuania and "infected" Lithuanians with birdwatching "disease". So, if Jos don't like follow the LOFK rules, I would propose anyway to publish the information somewhere, but not in the official space of course. Besides, you have good place - a forum, where nobody moderate the presented material. So, guys, please continue what you have started, and we (I mean LOFK) will make your life more complicated

Hi Liutauras,

Thank you for a reasoned response, I agree with all you say.

To be clear, I do not seek abatement from the rules - nobody should be treated different, not beginners and not experienced birders. I also fully support that all official records published in LOD journals should only be those that have been considered by the rarity committee.

My one and only question has been the deleting of records from the 'general observations' webpage after just 30 days, a site I thought was for exchanging information between birdwatchers, not the official log of accepted species. This very short limit removes information from the general viewing public, a move I think not very good in the promition of birding in the country.


As for my records, I have promised to you personally Liutauras that I will begin to submit my backlog of records from January (I will be too busy till then). I intend to keep that promise (but the language used by Vytas I was ready to simply throw it all in the fire!). That said, knowing I am most unlikely to ever write notes in just 30 days, there is no point me submitting data to that online sightings page.


Best wishes, I hope this puts the matter to bed. And, Vytas, with no sarcasm, I really to think you are a great guy

es duomaju kad mes šeit un pa latviski varam parunat, bus internacionalais forums