<html>
<head>
</head>
<body>
<div style="color: black;">
<div style="color: black;">
<p style="margin: 0 0 1em 0; color: black;">Nora, I see that you cc'd Dick
Holmes. That's good. He'll either be able to answer your question or bring
other bird folks into the conversation. I upload contributed data to oir
database, and data download queries pull data from there. I've been known
to make mistakes before, so I've gone back to the original data file
sumitted to me, and I see those same patterns in hairy woodpecker and
Swanson's thrush. And a spot check confirms that the data file sumitted
matches website downloaded data. And just to make sure we're on the same
page, you are talking about the bird area dataset, and not
valleywide? <br>
Mary</p>
<p style="margin: 0 0 1em 0; color: black;">Sent with AquaMail for Android<br>
<a href="http://www.aqua-mail.com">http://www.aqua-mail.com</a></p>
</div>
<div style="color: black;">
<p
style="color: black; font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; margin: 10pt 0;">On
June 16, 2017 8:43:49 PM Nora Hanke <nhanke@antioch.edu> wrote:</p>
<blockquote type="cite" class="gmail_quote"
style="margin: 0 0 0 0.75ex; border-left: 1px solid #808080; padding-left: 0.75ex;">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Hello<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>I am a graduate student in Environmental Studies at Antioch University
and have been enjoying your' wonderful
<u>Hubbard Brook</u> book. I am researching some aspects of the HB studies
and don't understand what appear to be data discrepancies.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
Specifically, I am confused by looking at the raw data published on the HB
website in comparison to the species trends documented in
<u>Hubbard Brook</u> (2016). (I know the latter are for a period ending in
2013.)</div>
For example, Hairy Woodpeckers are described as fairly stable, but
comparing their numbers in the first 4 years of the study with the period
2012 through 2015, they appear to have doubled. Swainson's Thrushes are
described as stable, but the average of their
no.s in recent years are under a quarter of their abundance in an average
of the study's first few years. Philadelphia Vireos are described as
declining (rather than disappeared), but they have not been noted in the HB
study site since 1982, according to the
website's data. Similarly, Veeries are described as declining, but were
last counted in 2005.
<br>
</div>
I am guessing that the HAWO and SWTH number changes are not statistically
significant, or else your threshold for defining population change is
greater than the population changes noted in the two comparison periods I
am studying. But I really don't get the
interpretation for the birds that are gone - according to the HB website
published abundance data.<br>
</div>
<div>I apologise if I am obtuse or show a horrific lack of understanding
biostatistics or interpreting raw data. I will be studying biostatistics
next semester. In the meantime, I am currently writing a paper on your bird
studies and deeply mystified.
<br>
</div>
I would appreciate some clarification, if you have time to respond.<br>
</div>
Thank you!<br>
<br>
</div>
Nora E Hanke<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>