Invisible Canada Geese

[carlt]

There are plenty of things to have a pop at BW about but a wildlife survey really isn't one of them.

Calm down! Nobody's having a "pop" just having a bit of amusing banter.

 

Though it would be interesting to know how much it cost and how much overlap there was with wildlife groups' studies.

[jeb]

As far as I know the survey is done by canal visitors/users which means it ought to be more wide-ranging than anything done by a small number of binocular wielding bureaucrats.

 

 

So how can we be sure none of them has been counted twice ?

[sociable_hermit]

Calm down! Nobody's having a "pop" just having a bit of amusing banter.

 

Though it would be interesting to know how much it cost and how much overlap there was with wildlife groups' studies.

 

I think it IS something to have a go at them about. If BW are really as skint as they say they are, why do they insist on doing jobs themselves that could be willing carried out by volunteers?

 

If you added a category marked "Muppets" then you could add in BW senior management with clipboards, although I understand they're pretty rare out and about on the cut.

[cotswoldsman]

So how can we be sure none of them has been counted twice ?

 

because they counted the legs and divided by 3 to give them the average that is why there are no centipedes.

[jeb]

because they counted the legs and divided by 3 to give them the average that is why there are no centipedes.

 

Ha ,it all makes sense now and if I were to bring millipeads into the equation it would all be a nonsense again , so I wont.

[starman]

I think it IS something to have a go at them about. If BW are really as skint as they say they are, why do they insist on doing jobs themselves that could be willing carried out by volunteers?

 

If you added a category marked "Muppets" then you could add in BW senior management with clipboards, although I understand they're pretty rare out and about on the cut.

 

It is done by volunteers - that's the whole point. It doesn't take much effort on BW's part to add up 3000 results and publish a press release -- and it's a whole lot more valuable than some of the other stuff they do. To quote from waterscape:

"The information gathered in the survey will be added to British Waterways' species database that records biodiversity on the inland waterways and is used to help plan the management of the canals and rivers and the protection of their rich array of wildlife"....Dr Mark Robinson, British Waterways’ national ecology manager, says: "Our waterways play a vital role in towns and cities by providing wildlife corridors that help sustain populations of a variety of species"

 

 

Arguably this is a bit of useful extra ammunition to help the case for maintaining government grant levels.

[carlt]

"The information gathered in the survey will be added to British Waterways' species database that records biodiversity on the inland waterways and is used to help plan the management of the canals and rivers and the protection of their rich array of wildlife"....Dr Mark Robinson, British Waterways’ national ecology manager, says: "Our waterways play a vital role in towns and cities by providing wildlife corridors that help sustain populations of a variety of species"

Presumably this means they won't be interrupting these wildlife corridors by allowing inappropriate developments, anymore.

 

Don't think so!

[US Marines]

Is a wildlife survey of any use? Of course it is. How else would you get any semblance of a picture of species increase or decrease and be able to do something to adjust things to improve matters. How do we know, for example, that the population of sparrows has dropped alarming across Britain? Only because of survey results which then lead on to further, in-depth investigation. On top of that it's a way of getting school children etc etc interested in their local waterways.

 

I'd be interested in knowing whether the survey was set-up along the lines of:

 

"What wildlife did you see ?"

 

Or "Did you see: Swans; cormorants; ducks; etc ?"

 

My experience of surveys is that the results will vary massively whether you ask a general or a specific question.

 

If its done from a list, then the reason Canada Geese scored zero is probably because the person who put the list together either didn't think of them or didn't think that they were 'important' as a species.

 

Interesting that, for example, the survey doesn't refer to quite a few species that are actually of concern, either because there are apparently now too few of them (like sparrows) or the opposite (like rats). Therefore, it seems to me that, if its done as a list, the criteria for inclusion is probably not very well thought through (now there's a surprise !).

 

Of course, BW will state that the results of any such survey are going to be slanted towards big animals that are out in daylight on popular stretches of the canal, as opposed to small, nocturnal and shy animals - which is another perfectly good reason why Canada Geese scored zero on their survey........errr.....hang on a sec.....errrr....

[starman]

Presumably this means they won't be interrupting these wildlife corridors by allowing inappropriate developments, anymore.

 

Don't think so!

 

 

If this Evening Standard piece is anything to go by they might not be the ones making the decisions:

 

 

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/art...sale/article.do

[Bones]

I thin wildlife surveys are a valuable resource and a good indication of the environment. I am surprised at the results, and I hope they are not in their entirety! Does anyone have a link to the actual report? There are numerous species not on there, and if this really is the survey then it should perhaps be called 'my favourite sightings' rather than a survey.

 

edit - found the link clicky

Edited November 26, 2008 by Bones

[grahoom]

I thin wildlife surveys are a valuable resource and a good indication of the environment. I am surprised at the results, and I hope they are not in their entirety! Does anyone have a link to the actual report? There are numerous species not on there, and if this really is the survey then it should perhaps be called 'my favourite sightings' rather than a survey.

 

 

http://www.waterscape.com/features-and-art...sults-announced

 

here is the link to waterscape.

 

Bones beat me to it! although a different link....

Edited November 26, 2008 by grahoom

[cotswoldsman]

Presumably this means they won't be interrupting these wildlife corridors by allowing inappropriate developments, anymore.

 

Don't think so!

 

You mean like Marinas and then having the cheek to charge a connection fee, think boats in marinas should also pay a loss of wildlife fee, and CCers should get paid by BW for ensuring that the water keeps moving round the system in the winter and for the bags of nuts hanging from the boat.

[US Marines]

Thanks guys for the links - one goes to the survey questionnaire and the other goes to the results.

 

Its a list type questionnaire and, although there is a generic "Did you see anything else" question at the end, all the published results relate to the animals specifically listed in the questions. Hence cormorants being zero (coz they were included on the list) but no mention of Canada Geese (coz they weren't).

 

I do think the list is a bit odd - for example, and as per the topic of the thread, no geese on the list - however and on the other hand, people are being asked to differentiate between dragonflys and damsel flies - I know the main observable difference (when they are at rest a dragonfly's wings are outstretched horizontally and a damsel fly's are vertical) but I only found this out a few months ago from the tv and my kids don't know it - and the survey specifically asks about 'bumblebees', rather than bees in general, and I'm not convinced that most people (including myself) can tell the difference between the various species of bees when they are buzzing around.

 

The survey also asks specifically about Mallard Ducks and doesn't ask about ducks in general. However, it only asks about swans in general and doesn't ask about individual species of swan.

 

Hmmm......I really would be interested in knowing the criteria behind the list......

 

Having said all this, I think that a properly constituted wildlife survey of inland waterways is a great idea - and it should reinforce the importance of the network and having it properly managed.

 

 

 

Edited coz of appealing spalling.

Edited November 26, 2008 by US Marines

[MartinClark]

If you added a category marked "Muppets" then you could add in BW senior management with clipboards, although I understand they're pretty rare out and about on the cut.

 

Sorry - I'm not sure what you're suggesting here. Are you saying that the survey results should have included sightings of BW senior management bearing clipboards? Wouldn't they be even more invisible than Canada Geese?

[jeb]

Sorry - I'm not sure what you're suggesting here. Are you saying that the survey results should have included sightings of BW senior management bearing clipboards? Wouldn't they be even more invisible than Canada Geese?

 

Canada geese are there but have been identified as swans.

[US Marines]

Sorry - I'm not sure what you're suggesting here. Are you saying that the survey results should have included sightings of BW senior management bearing clipboards? Wouldn't they be even more invisible than Canada Geese?

Or rats perhaps ?

[sociable_hermit]

It is done by volunteers - that's the whole point. It doesn't take much effort on BW's part to add up 3000 results and publish a press release -- and it's a whole lot more valuable than some of the other stuff they do. To quote from waterscape:

"The information gathered in the survey will be added to British Waterways' species database that records biodiversity on the inland waterways and is used to help plan the management of the canals and rivers and the protection of their rich array of wildlife"....Dr Mark Robinson, British Waterways’ national ecology manager, says: "Our waterways play a vital role in towns and cities by providing wildlife corridors that help sustain populations of a variety of species"

 

 

Arguably this is a bit of useful extra ammunition to help the case for maintaining government grant levels.

 

Thank you. You didn't say that it was a visitor survey, just a survey. "BW survey" tends to imply a survey that has been carried out by BW. Now that you have clarified this (and someone else has posted a link) I am quite happy to say that my comments were wrong.

[Sir Nibble]

What about hamsters then? and eflunts.

[US Marines]

Also, I just realised that the questionnaire doesn't ask how many you saw - so one person cruising along seeing lots of different swans throughout the day is counted as having one sighting, and is afforded the same weighting as someone seeing an individual swan whilst standing at a lock for a couple of mins before getting back in the car.

 

Even if hey were included in he list of animals, a flock of geese in one location would also only be counted the same as one swan.

 

The more I think about it, the weirder this particular survey seems....

[johnthebridge]

who conducts the survey? Is it one person in BW?

Some years ago, on the G&S, one long wintry day, with very few boats on the move, a bored bridgekeeper telephoned one of his fellow bridgekeepers. He said, "I say, old boy, have you heard the latest from HQ?" (or summat like that) "The buggers have told us we have to log all duck movement, both North-bound AND South-bound, going through the bridges. We are to use our bridgekeepers logbooks for this purpose". The first keeper was, at the time, the union rep. and his words carried a certain authority amongst his "co-workers".

Some time later, the first bridgekeeper recieved a VERY abusive telephone call from the other keeper.

[MartinClark]

Its a list type questionnaire and, although there is a generic "Did you see anything else" question at the end, all the published results relate to the animals specifically listed in the questions. Hence cormorants being zero (coz they were included on the list) but no mention of Canada Geese (coz they weren't).

Which raises the question of whether anyone at all filled in anything under "Did you see any species not listed here?" If they did, why is there no mention of any of these sightings. Can there have been fewer of these others than the 18 terrapins mentioned? (There are more than 130 invisible Canada Geese in my photo alone!) If people have reported seeing other species in previous years, why have these not been added to the species listed on the questionnaire?

 

And another thing - you tick a box if you see a particular type of creature. So, if I see a dragonfly, I tick the box next to "dragonfly" and one dragonfly is recorded for the survey. If I see 17 coots, I tick the box next to "coot" and one coot is recorded for the survey. So, if there had been a box to tick for Canada goose, then a sighting of 130+ of the things would have been recorded just as one Canada goose. I think this somewhat reduces the value of the results given.

 

The survey also asks specifically about Mallard Ducks and doesn't ask about ducks in general. However, it only asks about swans in general and doesn't ask about individual species of swan.

Indeed. What about Muscovy ducks, white geese, etc.?

 

Having said all this, I think that a properly constituted wildlife survey of inland waterways is a great idea

True, but this isn't a properly constituted wildlife survey of inland waterways!

 

Sorry - I'm not sure what you're suggesting here. Are you saying that the survey results should have included sightings of BW senior management bearing clipboards? Wouldn't they be even more invisible than Canada Geese?

Or rats perhaps ?

Sorry - I'm not sure what you're suggesting here. Are you saying that BW senior management bearing clipboards should have been included on the survey, but classified as rats?

[Amicus]

I think this should be met with some concern. Where have all the birds gone, not just the canada geese, where are the rooks, starlings, merlin, blackbirds, sparrers, pingins, collard? doves.....................etc

[jeb]

The more I think about it, the weirder this particular survey seems....

 

Its not a survey. Its BWs way of getting the public involved in a little game ,leaving said public in a sense of being involved in something important. You can be sure a lot of mistakes in the identification of the different makes will have been made. That'll learn em.

[US Marines]

True, but this isn't a properly constituted wildlife survey of inland waterways!

I agree absolutely ! It appears that this survey failed to meet even the most basic of scientific principles when it was constituted.

 

 

Sorry - I'm not sure what you're suggesting here. Are you saying that BW senior management bearing clipboards should have been included on the survey, but classified as rats?

Methinks you're reading my mind.....

 

 

(sorry, my post wasn't very clear but you seem to have perfectly understood what I was trying to say !)

 

Its not a survey. Its BWs way of getting the public involved in a little game ,leaving said public in a sense of being involved in something important.

I'm sure you're perfectly right Jeb - its a game dressed up as a survey to satisfy some internal directive or something.....

 

You can be sure a lot of mistakes in the identification of the different makes will have been made. That'll learn em.

I see you're a Creationist rather than a Darwinite then !

[jeb]

Its interesting to see that we only have 3 more mallards than swans.