next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
>>>> Unfortuantely, we still have no --0000000000007204630582cda651 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Please add my name to the list of willing naturalists. I've done a fair number of bird surveys, particularly for songbirds, and I'd be very happy to partake in the data collection and promulgation efforts. I'm in Hants County, but willing to travel. If a similar undertaking is happening in my neck of the woods I'd be happy to know about it; the number of loaded logging trucks I see coming down the Chester Road is alarming. Further to what John Kearney said, it might behoove us to be pointed in our searches and search for predetermined targets. I say this because in a bioblitz, the aim is to record every species in an area. *IF* it is the entire flora/fauna assemblage that could be a deciding factor, then yes, a bioblitz could be the means to an end (the end being stopping a clearcut). But it could be that the means to that end is a much simpler, easily determined piece of evidence, for example, the presence of a species at risk. A bioblitz takes much more time and effort than searching for one or several target species. Either way, as I see it, the key to being effective here will be to determine exactly what piece of information comprises a means to the end, and then go look for evidence of that specifically. Donna Crossland said "The harvest at Corbett Lake will surely NOT take place during nesting season". Is this a fact? I know it's illegal to disturb nesting migratory birds - which are present in virtually any stand of trees in the Spring - but I was under the impression these laws were ignored when it comes to forestry. I could be wrong. Thanks for getting this going. *Dave in Curry's Corner* David Simpson (902) 580 8007 david.sonsimp@gmail.com On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 9:55 AM Bev Wigney <bkwigney@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks to everyone who has responded -- especially with regards to > documentation and dissemination of any findings by the ground-truthing > groups. I agree very much that the observations need to be recorded > in such a way that they can somehow be useful in supporting > conservation of ecologically significant forests. That said, > iNaturalist, is a terrific vehicle for compiling observations. It > has a pretty easy user interface anyone who wants to enter their > observations. It is easily adapted to use by a community of > naturalists who wish to collaborate on their findings. Confirmation > of IDs works quite well. Further, there are so many ways in which the > data collection can be customized -- for instance, it is easily > possible to create "places" such as particular forest stands of any > size -- and have all observations within those outlined areas feed > into that "place". I believe it's a good tool for naturalists who > have come to the realization that there is a growing and desperate > need to fill in the gaps of what is known about the forests around us. > The hour to do so is growing late. > > bev > > On 2/26/19, Donna Crossland <dcrossland@eastlink.ca> wrote: > > Thanks for the advice, Fred. You're right, the follow-up documentation > > is essential (though perhaps less fun) and then after that there is the > > hurtle of having various decision-makers read and apply new > > facts/knowledge. Everyone is so reliant on GIS layers these days to > > supply all the points rendered in decisions. I suppose we will have to > > suggest that they be added to certain GIS layers or it will be > > over-looked, conveniently or otherwise. In this era of rapid decline of > > many species coupled with poor management, the initiative of casting a > > net to the widest possible group(s) of naturalists to help catalogue > > species obs- location and abundance, etc, is of increasing importance. > > > > I will forward your advice and Bev's new initiative to our group, Nature > > NS, as well. > > > > Donna Crossland > > > > On 2019-02-25 11:55 p.m., Frederick W. Schueler wrote: > >> On 25-Feb.-19 10:10 p.m., Donna Crossland wrote: > >>> This is a wonderful initiative. I will finally hone some skills with > >>> iNaturalist, so it seems. Bev and others will be good teachers. > >>> What better use of a naturalist's time than combing our public > >>> forests for nature's treasures? > >> > >> * but you're going to have to formalize your results in documents, > >> sent in multiple copies to the attention of the ministries in charge, > >> because, at least in Ontario, the environment ministries and > >> environmental assessment rackets are well-blinkered experts in > >> ignoring the ordinary sources of knowledge about biodiversity: museum > >> collections, the peer reviewed and local natural history published > >> literature, and online provincial & national databases. They only heed > >> their own internal grey literature unless their noses are rubbed in > >> some more conventional info. I bet they're almost as good at ignoring > >> eBird and iNat as they have been at ignoring the Ontario herp atlases. > >> > >> When we were reviewing http://www.dumpthisdump2.ca/ I published a > >> first record of a clover species for Ontario east of Windsor from the > >> proposed dump site in Trail & Landscape - the only local natural > >> history journal - and they missed both that and a paper about a SAR > >> we'd found, but they'd missed, at the site, that was peer-reviewed in > >> the Canadian Field-Naturalist. > >> > >> So call it a serial publication, "Ground-Truthing Nova Scotia Forests" > >> or something, and put out an issue for each of your trips, send pdf's > >> to ministry officials, and deposit a hard copy with Andrew Hebda at > >> the NS Museum, and maybe at the NB Museum so you'll have an out of > >> province repository. > >> > >> fred. > >> ================================================ > >> > >>> Song bird surveys and nest surveys will also be useful. The harvest > >>> at Corbett Lake will surely NOT take place during nesting season, yet > >>> another assault on a forest with old growth and plenty of nest cavity > >>> trees. > >>> > >>> It is a sad reflection on the lack of good governance over the > >>> 'peoples' forests' (public Crown lands), with continued clearcutting, > >>> particularly on very sensitive, poor soils in the southwest. And so > >>> it comes about that local