Date: 1/12/26 9:38 am From: Harry LeGrand (via carolinabirds Mailing List) <carolinabirds...> Subject: Re: Raleigh CBC results -- December 20, and comments on counting every bird within the count circle
Thanks, Kevin. Yes, I and probably others clicked on the link yesterday
after your posting and saw #11 that hit the "nail on the head" of the issue
of counting ALL birds within a count circle on count day. You have copied
that text here. Yes -- it is a NO-NO to count such birds/species.
I had forgotten to list one often missed species on the count that HAD been
seen a few times within the previous two weeks and then again a few more
times a week later -- Wild Turkey. The Northern Bobwhite may well be gone
now from the circle, but Turkeys are still found in the woods adjacent to
the large fields along Mid-Pines Road, and if you are lucky, you can see
one to a dozen feeding in the fields close to the forest edge in the first
half of the morning. For such a huge bird, it is very easy to miss the
species on a count, and the Raleigh count for years had missed it, but in
the last few years a few were reported in the Swift Creek floodplain near
Lake Benson.
Harry LeGrand
On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 12:14 PM Kevin Kubach <carolinabirds...>
wrote:
> From the same site (number 11):
>
> Checklists in eBird that are from areas within a count circle on the count
> day but not submitted by official CBC participants *cannot* be added to
> Christmas Bird Count results. Because official CBC observers and parties
> on Christmas Bird Counts are coordinated in advance by compilers, and
> because the effort of the parties on CBCs is as critically important as the
> bird data for the analyses of CBC results, independent eBird checklists are
> not compatible with official Christmas Bird Count results.
>
> Kevin Kubach
> Greenville, SC
>
> On Jan 11, 2026, at 9:44 PM, Kevin Kubach <kmkubach...> wrote:
>
> The language below is straight from the Audubon CBC compiler resources
> web site, under item number 10 here:
> https://www.audubon.org/conservation/science/christmas-bird-count/christmas-bird-count-compiler-resources.
> That item discusses remotely-detected birds but the statement seems quite
> relevant to this discussion.
>
> Bird data on Christmas Bird Counts must be tallied by officially involved
> human observers, in designated field parties, who are not only submitting
> their bird data but their effort data as well.
>
> Kevin Kubach
> Greenville, SC
>
> On Jan 11, 2026, at 8:49 PM, <badgerboy...> wrote:
>
> The data generated by surveys seems to be much more valuable when
> standard protocols are followed. We have ebird, NC rare bird alert, and
> many local reporting groups which fill in the gaps of bird occurrence from
> standard protocol surveys. I agree with Harry that such birds should be
> left off the official count numbers.
>
> One further aspect is that the party routes and stops, and concentrations
> of birding time, are highly influenced by previous reporting; i.e., many
> people already know what birds are in the circle and where they are, so
> they go there. I don't know if there's any way around that, but it makes it
> tough to compare a count from pre-ebird times to today's counts with any
> degree of meaning. It also can tend to keep unbirded places still unbirded.
>
> None of this should detract from a great Raleigh count--congrats to all
> the birders involved!
>
> Guy (McGrane, Boone NC)
>
> On 1/11/2026 12:19 PM, Harry LeGrand (via carolinabirds Mailing List)
> wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
>
>
>
>
