Jump to content
Ornithology Exchange

Ellen Paul

Administrators
  • Content Count

    1,980
  • Joined

Community Reputation

79 Has posted tons of good stuff

3 Followers

About Ellen Paul

  • Rank
    Administrator

Profile Information

  • Country
    United States

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. They accidentally included the period in the link. Copy and paste the link, delete the period, it will work.
  2. Who We Are The Cornell Lab of Ornithology is a globally focused institution for research, training, and public communication relating to birds and biodiversity. The Lab of Ornithology is home to a vibrant community of several dozen postdoctoral researchers working across all six centers, and we strive to provide a supportive and collaborative environment for this community that fosters personal growth and career advancement. Within the Lab of Ornithology, The Center for Avian Population Studies (CAPS) carries out the Lab’s mission to interpret and conserve the earth’s biological diversity through research, education, and citizen science focused on birds. Scientists within CAPS use machine learning and statistical methods to analyze observations of birds to increase understanding of the natural world and to assist global conservation. The Cornell Lab is currently home to a vibrant community of several dozen Postdoctoral Associates working across all six centers, and we strive to provide a supportive and collaborative environment for this community that fosters personal growth and career advancement. The eBird project collects information about the distribution and abundance of birds, taking advantage of the enormous popularity of watching birds to create a global network of volunteers who submit bird observations. The eBird Science team within CAPS develop and advance statistical methods, to ensure reliable ecological inference from this powerful citizen science database. What You Will Do You will work within a dynamic and interdisciplinary group of researchers in CAPS and with the eBird dataset. You will investigate and advance the statistical methodology to create indicators of biodiversity from eBird data. Using these methods, you and other researchers will develop indicator metrics using eBird data that will accurately reflect ecosystems services and environmental processes. The overall goal is to develop eBird indicators that can be used to track future variation in these environmental processes. Specific duties include: Developing analyses to understand the challenges inherent in eBird data, this includes investigating the spatial and temporal variation in the eBird observation process, particularly with respect to understanding changes in the observation process over time. Applying, testing, and developing analytical methods to create temporal indices that are robust to confounding factors that vary between years. Creating indices of biodiversity using eBird data to produce indices that reflect ecosystem services and broader environmental processes. Contributing to other analytical and ecological projects within CAPS and the Cornell Lab of Ornithology. Creating a dialogue with non-academic partners and communicating the results of the research effectively with these audiences. Presenting results at professional meetings, conferences, and popular seminars. Preparing peer-reviewed papers and other research products. What We Need We are looking for an individual who enjoys working directly with internal and external project collaborators. We need someone who enjoys engaging in ongoing academic and intellectual life. Additionally, we need someone who has: Ph.D. in quantitative ecology, applied statistics, or a related field with a strong background in statistics and model development. Experience with R and other programming languages. Proven ability to apply quantitative methods to answer ecological questions and hypotheses. Strong record of success conducting research and scholarly activities, including publication in peer-reviewed journals. Excellent verbal and written communication skills. Ability to work alone and to contribute to team projects. If you possess these experiences and skills, this may be the role for you! There are a few other qualifications that we would view as incredibly helpful in this role, to include: Experience in ornithology and affinity with birds. Experience with machine learning, causal inference, and other methods for data analysis. Knowledge of biodiversity metrics. Experience with High-Performance Computing or Cloud Computing. Experience working alongside non-academic partners. This is a full-time (40 hours/week) position and will be located in Ithaca, New York. This is a one-year appointment with possible extension for a second year, depending on funding and performance. Rewards and Benefits We hope you appreciate great benefits. Cornell receives national recognition as an award-winning workplace for our health, wellbeing, sustainability, and diversity initiatives. Our benefits program includes comprehensive health care options, employee discounts with local and national retail brands, and generous retirement contributions. Our leave provisions include three weeks of vacation and 12 holidays: e.g., an end-of-year winter break, from December 25th through January 1st. Cornell's impressive educational benefits include tuition-free Part-time Study and Employee Degree Program, Tuition Aid for external education, and Cornell Children's Tuition Assistance program. We invite you to follow this link to get more information: https://hr.cornell.edu/summaries-benefits. To apply: Please apply via Academic Jobs On-line (https://academicjobsonline.org/ajo/jobs/16807). Qualified candidates should submit a letter of application outlining qualifications, curriculum vitae, contact information for three references, one example publication, and a statement of contribution to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion via the website. Applications will be reviewed as received, continuing until a suitable applicant is identified. For more information, please contact Dr. Alison Johnston (aj327@cornell.edu). College of Agriculture and Life Sciences Life. Changing. Cornell University is an innovative Ivy League university and a great place to work. Our inclusive community of scholars, students, and staff impart an uncommon sense of larger purpose and contribute creative ideas to further the university's mission of teaching, discovery, and engagement. Diversity and Inclusion are a part of Cornell University’s heritage. We are a recognized employer and educator valuing AA/EEO, Protected Veterans, and Individuals with Disabilities. We also recognize a lawful preference in employment practices for Native Americans living on or near Indian reservations Employment Assistance: If you require an accommodation for a disability in order to complete an employment application or to participate in the recruiting process, you are encouraged to contact Cornell University's Department of Inclusion and Workforce Diversity at voice (607) 255-3976, fax (607) 255-7481, or email at owdi@cornell.edu. For general questions about the position or the application process, please contact the Recruiter listed in the job posting. Applicants that do not have internet access are encouraged to visit your local library, or local Department of Labor. You may also visit the office of Workforce Recruitment and Retention Monday - Friday between the hours of 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. to use a dedicated workstation to complete an online application. Notice to Applicants: Please read the required Notice to Applicants statement by clicking here. This notice contains important information about applying for a position at Cornell as well as some of your rights and responsibilities as an applicant. EEO Statement: Diversity and Inclusion are a part of Cornell University’s heritage. We are a recognized employer and educator valuing AA/EEO, Protected Veterans and Individuals with Disabilities. We also recognize a lawful preference in employment practices for Native Americans living on or near Indian reservations. Cornell University is an innovative Ivy League university and a great place to work. Our inclusive community of scholars, students, and staff impart an uncommon sense of larger purpose, and contribute creative ideas to further the university's mission of teaching, discovery, and engagement. Application Materials Required: Submit the following items online at this website to complete your application: Cover Letter Curriculum Vitae Statement of Contribution to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion One example of publication Three References (no actual letters, just names and email addresses ) And anything else requested in the position description. Further Info: 607-255-3087 159 Sapsucker Woods Road Ithaca, New York 14850
  3. How a scientific spat over how to name species turned into a big pl... https://phys.org/news/2020-07-scientific-spat-species-big-nature.html Home / Biology / Ecology JULY 27, 2020 How a scientific spat over how to name species turned into a big plus for nature https://phys.org/news/2020-07-scientific-spat-species-big-nature.html by Stephen Garnett, Les Christidis, Richard L. Pyle and Scott Thomson, The Conversation Taxonomy, or the naming of species, is the foundation of modern biology. It might sound like a fairly straightforward exercise, but in fact it's complicated and often controversial. Why? Because there's no one agreed list of all the world's species. Competing lists exist for organisms such as mammals and birds, while other less well-known groups have none. And there are more than 30 definitions of what constitutes a species. This can make life difficult for biodiversity researchers and those working in areas such as conservation, biosecurity and regulation of the wildlife trade. In the past few years, a public debate erupted among global taxonomists, including those who authored and contributed to this article, about whether the rules of taxonomy should be changed. Strongly worded ripostes were exchanged. A comparison to Stalin was floated. But eventually, we all came together to resolve the dispute amicably. In a paper published this month, we proposed a new set of principles to guide what one day, we hope, will be a single authoritative list of the world's species. This would help manage and conserve them for future generations. In the process, we've shown how a scientific stoush can be overcome when those involved try to find common ground. How it all began In May 2017 two of the authors, Stephen Garnett and Les Christidis, published an article in Nature. They argued taxonomy needed rules around what should be called a species, because currently there are none. They wrote: "For a discipline aiming to impose order on the natural world, taxonomy (the classification of complex organisms) is remarkably anarchic […] There is reasonable agreement among taxonomists that a species should represent a distinct evolutionary lineage. But there is none about how a lineage should be defined." Species are often created or dismissed arbitrarily, according to the individual taxonomist's adherence to one of at least 30 definitions. Crucially, there is no global oversight of taxonomic decisions—researchers can 'split or lump' species with no consideration of the consequences. Garnett and Christidis proposed that any changes to the taxonomy of complex organisms be overseen by the highest body in the global governance of biology, the International Union of Biological Sciences (IUBS), which would "restrict […] freedom of taxonomic action." An animated response Garnett and Christidis' article raised hackles in some corners of the taxonomy world—including coauthors of this article. These critics rejected the description of taxonomy as "anarchic." In fact, they argued there are detailed rules around the naming of species administered by groups such as the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature and the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants. For 125 years, the codes have been almost universally adopted by scientists. So in March 2018, 183 researchers—led by Scott Thomson and Richard Pyle—wrote an animated response to the Nature article, published in PLoS Biology. They wrote that Garnett and Christidis' IUBS proposal was "flawed in terms of scientific integrity […] but is also untenable in practice." They argued: "Through taxonomic research, our understanding of biodiversity and classifications of living organisms will continue to progress. Any system that restricts such progress runs counter to basic scientific principles, which rely on peer review and subsequent acceptance or rejection by the community, rather than third-party regulation." In a separate paper, another group of taxonomists accused Garnett and Christidis of trying to suppress freedom of scientific thought, likening them to Stalin's science advisor Trofim Lysenko. Finding common ground This might have been the end of it. But the editor at PLoS Biology, Roli Roberts, wanted to turn consternation into constructive debate, and invited a response from Garnett and Christidis. In the to and fro of articles, we all found common ground. We recognized the powerful need for a global list of species—representing a consensus view of the world's taxonomists at a particular time. Such lists do exist. The Catalog of Life, for example, has done a remarkable job in assembling lists of almost all the world's species. But there are no rules on how to choose between competing lists of validly named species. What was needed, we agreed, was principles governing what can be included on lists. As it stands now, anyone can name a species, or decide which to recognize as valid and which not. This creates chaos. It means international agreements on biodiversity conservation, such as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) and the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS), take different taxonomic approaches to species they aim to protect. We decided to work together. With funding from the IUBS, we held a workshop in February this year at Charles Darwin University to determine principles for devising a single, agreed global list of species. Participants came from around the world. They included taxonomists, science governance experts, science philosophers, administrators of the nomenclatural (naming) codes, and taxonomic users such as the creators of national species lists. The result is a draft set of ten principles that to us, represent the ideals of global science governance. They include that: the species list be based on science and free from "non-taxonomic" interference all decisions about composition of the list be transparent governance of the list aim for community support and use the listing process encompasses global diversity while accommodating local knowledge. The principles will now be discussed at international workshops of taxonomists and the users of taxonomy. We've also formed a working group to discuss how a global list might come together and the type of institution needed to look after it. We hope by 2030, a scientific debate that began with claims of anarchy might lead to a clear governance system—and finally, the world's first endorsed global list of species. Making a list of all creatures, great and small Provided by The Conversation This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
  4. Dr. H. Ross Hawkins June 9, 1939 to July 9, 2020 We are saddened to announce the death of Dr. H. Ross Hawkins. Ross was in Hospice of the Valley for five days in Scottsdale, Arizona, and died at 81 of complications from an aortic aneurysm. Ross lived a ‘hummingbird-inspired’ and ‘joy-filled’ life. As Founder and Executive director of the International Hummingbird Society headquartered in Sedona, Arizona, he touched many lives in the community with his unwavering enthusiasm for and deep knowledge of hummingbirds. This wealth was shared through the seven years of the successful Society-sponsored Sedona Hummingbird Festival that brought hummingbird lovers to Sedona from every state and 12 different countries. Ross liked to say that he had a checkered past, as he began his career as a chemist, with a PhD from the University of California, Berkeley, and was employed as a research scientist for E. I. DuPont de Nemours in Wilmington, Delaware for 9 years. Too gregarious to work in seclusion forever, he changed careers and became an investment advisor and worked as Vice President in investments for Morgan Stanley, retiring after 22 years. In 1987, he married Beth Kingsley Hawkins, who shared her love of hummingbirds with him, and in 1996, while still working in Delaware. he founded the non-profit Hummingbird Society. Upon his retirement in 2006, they left Maryland (a state where the Ruby-throated hummingbird was the only nesting species and it didn’t stay for the winter) and moved to Sedona, with its abundance of hummingbirds. Traveling to learn about and photograph hummingbirds in their natural habitat, they made eight trips to Trinidad and Tobago and one to Costa Rica. Ross himself made two trips to Robinson Crusoe Island off the coast of Chile to study the endangered Juan Fernandez Firecrown (hummingbird) and one to Honduras, hoping to and succeeding in finding expanded habitat for the Honduran Emerald hummingbird. Few people know the back story of how he received the idea to create the Society. Michael Godfrey, Arthur Godfrey’s son, had made a definitive video of the hummingbirds up close in Arizona. As Ross spoke with him about it, Michael lamented that there wasn’t a Hummingbird Society and suggested maybe Ross was the one to create it. That was an AHA moment for Ross. The idea took root. He was shocked to learn that there was no organization to protect these tiny jewels. Once off the phone, Ross took a big blank white chart, drew a wheel with the Society at the center and spokes out from the center naming all the things he would need to know and do to found a non-profit, and the Hummingbird Society was born. He then proceeded to put feet under his dream, defining a mission to help people understand and appreciate hummingbirds and to provide a channel to help save the ones that are endangered. Of 365 species of hummingbirds, 39 of the ones found in Central and South America are endangered. He summed up the purpose of the Society in this way: it is to teach people about hummingbirds, so they will understand them better; knowing that from that understanding and caring, will come support for their protection. In this way Ross connected many people more intimately with nature and created a way for many people to express that love. If you knew Ross, you know how much he loved speaking and teaching about these precious flying gems, and he became certified as a Professional Speaker by the National Speaker’s Association in 2010. He also relished nature photography and he and Beth were charter members of the North American Nature Photographer’s Association. They also joined the local Northern Arizona Audubon Society. In addition, he was a resonant baritone and an enthusiastic member of the local barbershop group, Harmony on the Rocks. With diverse musical tastes, he and Beth also sang the magnificent O Magnum Mysterium with the composer Morten Lauridsen conducting. Ross was born in Fayetteville, Arkansas to Dero B. and Mary E. Hawkins, Ross was preceded in death by his younger brother, Gary Hawkins. Ross grew up in Tulsa, Oklahoma. He is survived by his devoted wife Beth Kingsley Hawkins of Sedona, and his two amazing daughters; Sandra West, and her husband Mike West of Lakewood, Colorado, and Anita Hawkins and her husband Rev. Craig Cowing of Rocky Hill, Connecticut. Donations to continue the valuable conservation work of the Society are welcomed in honor of Ross, its founder, as we seek to find and fund a new director. To donate, go to www.hummingbirdsociety.org and click on the button that reads, Join, renew or donate. In addition, the family would value help for the funeral expenses, since Beth’s Sedona Hummingbird Gallery has been closed since March, due to the risk of the Covid virus A contribution in that regard would go to Beth Kingsley Hawkins P. O. Box 20398, Sedona, AZ 86341. We are grateful for your support.
  5. For several years, word has been circulating about an international effort to reconcile the differences among various taxonomic checklists of birds. In response Frank Gill and David Donsker initiated discussions amongst the various checklist compilers on the possibility of developing a single, consistent checklist of all the birds of the world. As the IOU notice explains, "The International Ornithologists’ Union (IOU) has formed the Working Group on Avian Checklists (WGAC) with a broadened purpose and function. Its primary purpose will be to produce and maintain on the IOU website an open-access global checklist of birds in the mould of the great Peters-Mayr checklist of the 20th century and intended to serve as the benchmark reference for all taxa of the class Aves. Eminent representatives of the international community of professional avian systematists will compile and maintain it. Australian ornithologist Les Christidis, who will chair the executive committee of the working group, reports, "There is now a team working on a unified world checklist of birds. It is under the auspices of the IOU and involves the teams currently working on the IOC List, Clements, e-bird, Avibase and Cornell's Birds of the World. The IOC list will continue to be updated while the working group develops the new list in the background. Things are finally beginning to move forward." The final checklist will produce more than just a hierarchical list of species and recommended names. It will provide, through its detailed fields and connections to external references, the basic information for all ornithology – professional ornithologists, citizen scientists, conservationists and students – to draw on the full record of diversity of earth’s birdlife.
  6. NEWS RELEASE (from The Peregrine Fund) For immediate release, 17 June 2020 To save a species from extinction we must know that it exists Boise, Idaho - A new study shows that there is substantial disagreement among scientists on the number of species of birds, which prevents accurate decision making for prioritizing conservation efforts. The study, “Toward reconciliation of the four world bird lists: Hotspots of disagreement in taxonomy of raptors,” uses birds of prey as an example for why this problem requires immediate resolution. Birds of prey represent approximately 5.5% of the world’s bird species, but are significant in this discussion because roughly 52% of raptors have declining global populations. The lead researcher for this effort, Dr. Chris McClure of The Peregrine Fund says, “A place may or may not be deemed a priority for protection depending on the number of recognized species in the area. So we decided to compare the four most widely used world bird lists that scientists use and found that, among raptors, there was only 68% consistency in the species recognized across all four lists. That’s not very consistent and could lead to confusion among conservation practitioners and government agencies.” The four most widely used lists for recognized bird species include 1) the IOC World Bird List which is used by the international ornithological journal IBIS, 2) the Howard and Moore Checklist of the Birds of the World, which is used by several major museums around the world, 3) the eBird/Clements Checklist of Birds of the World, which is used by the Cornell Lab of Ornithology in the implementation of all of their programs, and finally 4) the Handbook of the Birds of the World and BirdLife International Digital Checklist of the Birds of the World, which is followed by BirdLife International when determining the Red List of Threatened Species and for several international agreements. McClure adds, “If this all sounds a bit confusing, that’s because it is. In fact the differences between the four world bird lists was recently referred to as ‘taxonomy anarchy.’” Dr. Jeff Johnson of the University of North Texas’s Department of Biological Sciences explains the problem from a conservation perspective, “Typically conservation efforts are focused on saving species, however subspecies can provide considerable genetic and ecological diversity.” Take the Cuban Kite, for example. This is a critically endangered raptor, but only considered a species on two of the four lists. The other two identify it as a subspecies of hook-billed kite, which is not considered to be threatened with extinction. While its current numbers are dangerously low, “losing the Cuban Kite entirely due to extinction would be a travesty,” according to Johnson. “Consistent recognition of the Cuban kite as a distinct species could help elevate its prominence and thereby increase efforts for its conservation.” Dr. Thomas Schulenberg of the Cornell Lab of Ornithology states, “In this study we looked at the ‘hotspots of disagreement’ between the four lists. We found that there’s a lot of disagreement about owls, particularly in southern Asia. More broadly, the classification of raptor species is not well aligned across the high diversity regions of Indonesia, India, and China.” Dr. Denis Lepage of Birds Canada says, “The bottom line is that, if we want to conserve birds, including raptors, working together to develop a single world bird list would go a long way.” According to McClure, efforts are now being discussed to consolidate the four lists, but no official announcement has been made concerning when that may happen. “Oftentimes, taxonomic research is not well funded,” lamented Lepage, “but this study demonstrates that a concerted effort is critical for conservation of biodiversity. This is too important to not give our best effort.” This study was a collaboration between the University of North Texas, Birds Canada, Boise State University, Ornithologi, Southern Cross University, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Michigan State University, and The Peregrine Fund.
  7. This news and analysis are provided by the Ornithological Council, a consortium supported by 11 ornithological societies. Join or renew your membership in your ornithological society if you value the services these societies provide to you, including OrnithologyExchange and the Ornithological Council. Late last week, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service published a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) analyzing their proposed rule to limit the reach of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act by exempting incidental take (or unintentional killing or harming) of birds. The Service announced their proposed rule in January, in an attempt to provide more regulatory certainty to public, industries, states, tribes and other stakeholders. This DEIS assesses the possible effects of their proposed rule, as well as two other possible actions - or alternatives - on migratory birds, other environmental resources, and the economy. According to the DEIS, the Service’s “preferred alternative” will have a likely negative effect on migratory birds, including increased mortality. Industry will see “likely reduced legal and financial costs.” In addition, the implementation of voluntary conservation measures will also likely decrease under the new rule, as there would be no risk of prosecution. Comments will be accepted on the DEIS until 20 July. Visit http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket Number: FWS-HQ-MB-2018-0090, to submit comments. More information related to this proposed rule, scoping and other associated materials, can be found online at: https://fws.gov/migratorybirds/2020Regulation.php. Background: Until this administration, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act was interpreted to cover both intentional and unintentional take (harm or killing) of species covered by the Act. The USFWS under this administration developed a policy known as an M-Opinion, which is internal agency policy, stating that the law does not prohibit incidental take of migratory bird species protected under the Act. The policy was challenged in the federal court and is still pending. One of the key aspects of the legal challenge - that there was no opportunity for public input - would be obviated by the promulgation of this regulation, since under the Administrative Procedure Act, public input is required when a formal regulation is proposed. USFWS Press Release: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has made available a draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This action is a required next step for the Service in its regulatory undertaking to define the scope of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) to provide regulatory certainty to the public, industries, states, tribes and other stakeholders. On February 3, 2020, the Service published a proposed rule clarifying that the scope of the MBTA only extends to conduct intentionally injuring birds. The rule codifies the 2017 Department of the Interior Solicitor’s Office Opinion M-37050, which was a legal determination that restricted the scope of the MBTA to intentional take of migratory birds and concluded that the take of birds resulting from an activity is not prohibited when the underlying purpose of that activity is not to take birds. The Endangered Species Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, as well as state laws and regulations, are not affected by the Solicitor’s Opinion M-37050 or the proposed regulation. This publication is another step in the public process that the Service will continue to manage throughout the development of the rulemaking process. The public is encouraged to provide input to help ensure that these changes are clear, effective and advance the goal of migratory bird conservation. “We are making every effort to ensure we are not merely complying with NEPA, but are being open and transparent in our regulatory activities and engaging the public fully,” said Aurelia Skipwith, Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. A federal agency is required under NEPA to consider a reasonable range of alternative actions, including a “no action alternative,” so as to fully review the environmental impacts of a rule. Reasonable alternatives must be economically and technically feasible, display common sense, and must address the purpose and need for the action. In this DEIS, the Service is proposing a no action alternative and two action alternatives. The draft Environmental Impact Statement will be available on June 5, 2020, opening a 45-day public comment period. Comments must be received on or before July 20, 2020. The DEIS will be available at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket Number: FWS-HQ-MB-2018-0090, and will include details on how to submit your comments. All the documents related to this draft Environmental Impact Statement and proposed rulemaking and information on how to submit comments is available online at: https://www.fws.gov/regulations/mbta/. BACKGROUND INFO HERE: Comments filed by the Ornithological Council on the notice that the USFWS would prepare this draft EIS HERE: When the Ornithological Council files comments on the DEIS, they will be posted on the OrnithologyExchange homepage.
  8. Nominees Sought for Theodore Roosevelt Genius Prize Advisory Council to Promote Technology Innovation in Wildlife and Habitat Conservation May 12, 2020 Contact(s): Laury Marshall, 703-589-6947, Laury_Parramore@fws.gov The U.S. Department of the Interior seeks experts and leaders in wildlife and habitat conservation technology to advise the Secretary of the Interior as part of the newly formed Theodore Roosevelt Genius Prize Advisory Council. The Council, established under the 2019 John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act, will act as a catalyst for technological innovation to advance wildlife and habitat conservation. It will focus on endangered species protection, invasive species management, poaching and wildlife trafficking prevention, and nonlethal solutions to human-wildlife conflicts. “We are looking for leaders and highly experienced professionals who can help guide our efforts to more fully incorporate innovation into conservation,” said U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Aurelia Skipwith. “This Council will do more than just award prizes for innovation, its members will serve as guides to competition winners, helping mentor them and chaperone their ideas towards their full potential.” The Council will administer $500,000 in prizes and advise competition winners on opportunities to pilot and implement their nascent technologies, helping them develop partnerships with conservation organizations, federal or state agencies, federally recognized tribes, private entities and research institutions with relevant expertise or interest. The Council will be governed by the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The Secretary of the Interior David Bernhardt will appoint 12 to 18 Council members who have expertise in one or more of the following areas: biology, economics, engineering, endangered species, invasive species, technology development, business development and management, international wildlife trafficking and trade, wildlife conservation and management, nonlethal wildlife management, social aspects of human-wildlife conflict management, or any other discipline the Secretary determines to be necessary to achieve the purposes of the Council. For more information, please visit: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/05/11/2020-10008/call-for-nominations-for-the-theodore-roosevelt-genius-prize-advisory-council-and-advisory-boards.
  9. From The Ibis: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ibi.12822?fbclid=IwAR0nsfy9G0r78EzfGAJqJUpxes3utTyygvYwuruCG7qwuAzU3iitB8I1tpc With the death of Colin Pennycuick on 9 December 2019 at the age of 86 years, the ornithological community has lost a doyen of avian biology whose passion for flying informed his pioneering research into avian flight for over five decades. His innovative studies, which famously include developing the use of wind tunnels for studying flight performance, led to him to describing key principles underlying the mechanics of flight. A leading authority on the mechanics and physiology of flight in birds and bats, he was also an expert on their navigation and migration. He was particularly driven by a wish to test, and thus understand, why birds and bats fly in the way that they do. His own enthusiasm for piloting light aircraft – pursued from his student days – provided him with fresh insights into the constraints encountered by the birds during their daily movements and longer distance migrations. Colin James Pennycuick was born in Windsor, Berkshire, on 11 June 1933. His father, Brigadier James A.C. Pennycuick, served with distinction in the Royal Engineers during WWI, and his grandfather was Treasurer of Ceylon (now Sri Lanka). Educated at Wellington College, Berkshire, and at Merton College, Oxford, Colin enlisted in the Oxford University Air Squadron for the Royal Air Force Voluntary Reserve, and this triggered his life‐long love of flying. A keen birdwatcher since childhood, whilst still an undergraduate he joined a goose‐ringing expedition to Spitsbergen. The results were published in the Seventh Annual Report of the Wildfowl Trust (now the Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust; WWT). He moved on to Peterhouse, Cambridge, for a PhD study on muscle physiology, and as a research fellow at Cambridge, he studied the navigation of the Common Pigeon Columba livia, before moving to become a lecturer in the Zoology Department at Bristol University. His association with Bristol continued over many years, though interspersed with periods spent working elsewhere. He also became a regular visitor to the Wildfowl Trust at Slimbridge, and flew gliders with the WWT’s founder, Sir Peter Scott. During his initial stint in Bristol, from 1964 to 1968, Colin used the university’s first computer to design and build a wind tunnel, which he famously hung in a stairwell in the Zoology Building and then trained and pigeons to fly within it. His observations led to him adapting the existing aerodynamic theory for helicopters to birds, using the results of his wind tunnel experiments to derive a quantitatively accurate mechanical model of bird flight, which was published in a landmark paper in the Journal of Experimental Biology. During this period, he also used the wind tunnel to estimate basic properties for birds in steady gliding flight, with information gained about wing lift and drag from the body and wings leading to his classic ‘momentum jet’ model of flapping flight mechanics, and to addressing the key point of how the mechanical power required to fly varies with airspeed. A second seminal paper on this theory appeared in Ibis in 1969, describing its significance for the flight of birds of different sizes and with varying migration ranges. Colin concluded at the time that there is an upper limit to the body mass at which birds are capable of flight and migration, with larger birds more limited by the amount of body fat which they can carry as fuel, which reduces their range, but they can economize by soaring. He suggested that the upper limit lay approximately with the Kori Bustard Ardeotis kori. PDF Tools Share With the death of Colin Pennycuick on 9 December 2019 at the age of 86 years, the ornithological community has lost a doyen of avian biology whose passion for flying informed his pioneering research into avian flight for over five decades. His innovative studies, which famously include developing the use of wind tunnels for studying flight performance, led to him to describing key principles underlying the mechanics of flight. A leading authority on the mechanics and physiology of flight in birds and bats, he was also an expert on their navigation and migration. He was particularly driven by a wish to test, and thus understand, why birds and bats fly in the way that they do. His own enthusiasm for piloting light aircraft – pursued from his student days – provided him with fresh insights into the constraints encountered by the birds during their daily movements and longer distance migrations. Colin James Pennycuick was born in Windsor, Berkshire, on 11 June 1933. His father, Brigadier James A.C. Pennycuick, served with distinction in the Royal Engineers during WWI, and his grandfather was Treasurer of Ceylon (now Sri Lanka). Educated at Wellington College, Berkshire, and at Merton College, Oxford, Colin enlisted in the Oxford University Air Squadron for the Royal Air Force Voluntary Reserve, and this triggered his life‐long love of flying. A keen birdwatcher since childhood, whilst still an undergraduate he joined a goose‐ringing expedition to Spitsbergen. The results were published in the Seventh Annual Report of the Wildfowl Trust (now the Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust; WWT). He moved on to Peterhouse, Cambridge, for a PhD study on muscle physiology, and as a research fellow at Cambridge, he studied the navigation of the Common Pigeon Columba livia, before moving to become a lecturer in the Zoology Department at Bristol University. His association with Bristol continued over many years, though interspersed with periods spent working elsewhere. He also became a regular visitor to the Wildfowl Trust at Slimbridge, and flew gliders with the WWT’s founder, Sir Peter Scott. During his initial stint in Bristol, from 1964 to 1968, Colin used the university’s first computer to design and build a wind tunnel, which he famously hung in a stairwell in the Zoology Building and then trained and pigeons to fly within it. His observations led to him adapting the existing aerodynamic theory for helicopters to birds, using the results of his wind tunnel experiments to derive a quantitatively accurate mechanical model of bird flight, which was published in a landmark paper in the Journal of Experimental Biology. During this period, he also used the wind tunnel to estimate basic properties for birds in steady gliding flight, with information gained about wing lift and drag from the body and wings leading to his classic ‘momentum jet’ model of flapping flight mechanics, and to addressing the key point of how the mechanical power required to fly varies with airspeed. A second seminal paper on this theory appeared in Ibis in 1969, describing its significance for the flight of birds of different sizes and with varying migration ranges. Colin concluded at the time that there is an upper limit to the body mass at which birds are capable of flight and migration, with larger birds more limited by the amount of body fat which they can carry as fuel, which reduces their range, but they can economize by soaring. He suggested that the upper limit lay approximately with the Kori Bustard Ardeotis kori. In 1968 Colin moved to East Africa, where he was seconded to Nairobi University for 3 years and first acquired his own aircraft (a Piper Cruiser). There he used his wind tunnel to study gliding flight in the Egyptian Fruit Bat Rousettus aegyptiacus. This was followed by 2 years in the Serengeti National Park as Deputy Director of the research station, at which time he flew a powered glider with pelicans Pelecanus spp., storks Ciconia spp. and vultures Gyps spp. and discovered that soaring birds are able to travel across vast areas with little effort, using currents of rising air to gain height, then gliding to the base of the next thermal. In preparation for his return to Bristol in 1973, he adapted his Piper Cruiser for long‐distance flight and made a ‘stepping‐stone’ migration back to the UK, calling in at Addis Ababa, Cairo and Crete en route. This time he remained in Bristol until 1983, using the Piper to track migrating cranes in southern Sweden and also developing the ‘ornithodolite’, a portable instrument which recorded in real‐time on to a computer the azimuth, elevation and range of birds in flight. This he used in South Georgia to measure glide patterns for albatrosses Diomedea spp. and Phoebetria spp. to determine how the wind and waves of the Antarctic Ocean powered their flight, thus shedding light on gust‐soaring phenomena in the species. He also renewed his collaborative work with the WWT, including undertaking an aerial survey of Barnacle Geese Branta leucopsis across Scotland and Ireland in the Piper, and being instrumental in bringing the first computer to the organization. In 1983 Colin moved to the US as the Maytag Chair of Ornithology at Miami University where he continued his studies of flight performance, using the ornithodolite to study frigate birds Fregata spp. flight, and the wind tunnel to refine his flight mechanics model. Here he developed his ‘Flight’ software, which he made readily available to other researchers, and his book Bird Flight Performance, a Practical Calculation Manual was published in 1989. He collaborated on several projects with the Patuxent Research Centre, including developing bird‐borne transmitters that could send data via the Argos satellite system, and recording basic flight characteristics data for several falconry‐trained raptors and wild sage grouse to test the effects of radio‐tagging on avian flight. When he returned to Europe in 1992 he again made an inter‐continental flight in his own aircraft, this time a Cessner 182, flying via Greenland and Iceland to Bristol. Once back in Britain, following much commuting between the US and the UK by both parties since the early 1980s, he married his wife Sandy, also in 1992. Several new projects commenced, with Colin making regular visits to Lund University where a new wind tunnel was inaugurated by King Carl XVI of Sweden and also, with WWT, tracking Whooper Swan Cygnus cygnus migration between Britain and Iceland. This was of particular interest to Colin because the species was deemed to be at the upper limits for making the long‐distance overseas flight. His VW campervan became a familiar sight in Lund and at Whooper Swan catch sites in Iceland. Always generous with his time, Colin mentored a number of undergraduate and PhD students who went on to be highly successful in their fields, including such luminaries as Julian Hector, Anders Hedenström, Malcolm Ogilvie, Keith Scholey and Geoff Spedding, their tributes to Colin having contributed substantially to this article. Colin’s life‐long love of flying and his innovative spirit never diminished; on co‐supervising a PhD on Whooper Swan breeding biology during the early 1990s, he suggested that inaccessible parts of Iceland could perhaps be reached by the new method of paramotoring, a concept viewed less enthusiastically by others involved. He also took trouble to ensure that the results of his somewhat technical research were made accessible and understandable to a wider audience, including joining the WWT/BBC/Nenetskiy State Nature Reserve expedition to ring Bewick’s Swans Cygnus columbianus bewickii in the Russian arctic in 2003, an expedition which included tracking Bewick’s Swans fitted with satellite tags for BBC Radio 4’s ‘Migration’ programme. Although recovering from treatment for cancer at the time, Colin was a calm and steadfast presence throughout, clearly delighted to be back in the field. Colin was elected Fellow of the Royal Society in 1990 for his innovative work on the flight of birds and bats, and was made Honorary Companion of the Royal Aeronautical Society in 1994. In 1996 he was also awarded an honorary doctorate by Lund University. His publications, including the textbook Modelling the Flying Bird (2008) and his ‘Flight’ software models on the mechanics of flapping and gliding flight and long‐distance migration, set out the principles of aeronautical engineering and how they may be adapted for exploring bird flight. These will remain valuable tools for future generations, and form a basis for the continuing research into avian flight and the dissemination of this information by those who he inspired.
  10. From Fred C. Schaffner: It’s taken me a long time to internalize this, and I can only offer my sincerest apologies to Heaven for delaying so long. Colin J. Pennycuick was the only true genius I have ever known and I cannot imagine meeting anyone of his calibre ever again. He was kind and patient with mortals like me, jovial, eccentric, and humble, sometimes hilarious, and always in good cheer. Often, we were the only ones in the room who understood one another’s jokes. I’ve tried to be as good a teacher and mentor as he, but matching his genius would be impossible. I had the honor of being his first PhD student after he came to the US from England. He taught me to fly, to master SI units in everything, and most importantly to see farther by patiently stepping back and starting with first principles. We flew together from Miami to my research site at Culebra, Puerto Rico piloting the Cessna 182 pictured in the article, which he later flew from Miami to England vía Greenland. I remember ground-breaking scientific articles he wrote on the backs of envelopes, and his home-built computers. And I remember a time when my mind was swirling with a tangled spaghetti of ideas as I tried to write my dissertation. He left the office with a magic marker in hand and returned from the restroom with a length of toilet paper on which he’d written, “When your thoughts come out, it helps to get them down on paper”. He told me to stick it on the wall and keep looking at it until the spaghetti got untangled. It worked! I remember him calling me one afternoon, years after I graduated, to tell me that for his 65th birthday he’d taken up hang-gliding and had gone to Spain to glide with the Griffons. I can’t imagine who or what or where I would be without him. He was a truly unique and stellar human being.
  11. The NAOC Steering Committee has canceled the in-person North American Ornithological Conference planned for Puerto Rico this August, due to concerns over health and safety. In its place, there will be a scaled-down virtual NAOC, taking form to be held during the week of August 10th. https://naocbirds.org/ An Important Announcement 23 April 2020 After weighing a range of options due to our concern for the health and safety of our attendees and the people of Puerto Rico, the NAOC Steering Committee has made the difficult decision to cancel the in-person North American Ornithological Conference planned for San Juan this August. This likely comes as no surprise given the global impact of COVID-19, and we know you share our disappointment that we will not be able to gather in-person this summer to reach across borders and connect with old colleagues, meet new ones, and share our important science. However, we are excited to announce our path forward, which will provide an opportunity for members of the ornithological community to connect virtually and present their science this summer and convene in Puerto Rico in a future year once it is possible to do so. NAOC host societies will host a virtual meeting the week of August 10. We hope that most people who submitted abstracts for the in-person NAOC will opt to keep their abstracts under consideration for the virtual meeting. Details are still being finalized, but we anticipate a registration cost in the range of $75 or less. If you registered for NAOC, a full refund will be made automatically; registration for the virtual meeting will be handled separately. You will receive a message shortly confirming your registration cancellation and refund. (If you have already booked hotel reservations etc., you will need to cancel those separately.) If you submitted an abstract, you will hear from us within two weeks to confirm your interest in continuing with a virtual presentation. We’re excited about the opportunities that a virtual meeting will offer, and we are hard at work figuring out the details. Please stay tuned for more news and updates as our plans for the virtual NAOC develop! 2021 meetings will go forward as planned. Postponing NAOC to 2021 was not an option, as many NAOC host societies already have plans in place with other venues for their 2021 meetings. Next year’s meetings are scheduled as follows: American Ornithological Society & Society of Canadian Ornithologists: London, Ontario, 22–29 August 2021 Association of Field Ornithologists: South America (specific location to be determined), early August 2021 Birds Caribbean: Trinidad, late July 2021 British Ornithologists’ Union: University of Nottingham, 31 March–1 April 2021 CIPAMEX: Pachuca, Mexico, October or November 2021 (tentative) Neotropical Ornithological Society: No 2021 meeting (next NOS Congress will be 2023) Waterbird Society: South Florida, late October/early November 2021 (tentative; a 2020 meeting is also planned for 10–14 November in Clear Lake, Texas) Wilson Ornithological Society: Albany, New York, April 2021 AOS will host its annual meeting in Puerto Rico in 2022 at the Puerto Rico Convention Center in San Juan from June 27 to July 1, to convene ornithologists from throughout the world in the Caribbean. More details will be forthcoming over the next year as plans develop. We want to thank the entire ornithological community for your patience and support as we’ve grappled with this unprecedented situation. We look forward to continuing to connect with you virtually this summer as well as in person in the future. With gratitude, The NAOC Steering Committee
  12. In Memorium: Robert Charles Leberman (April 3, 1937 – March 10, 2020) by Robert S. Mulvihill Robert (Bob) Leberman passed away peacefully at his home at Powdermill Nature Reserve on March 10, 2020, after a courageous six-year-long battle with a rare “soft tissue” cancer, called leiomyosarcoma, which necessitated an above-the-knee amputation of his left leg. He was just a few weeks shy of 83 years old when he died. Born in Meadville on April 3, 1937, Bob was the second child of Charles and Mary (Nodine) Leberman. His surviving older brother is Ronald F. Leberman. The Lebermans were a nature-loving family, and Bob grew up exploring nature in the rich hemlock woods, glacial lakes, swamps, and bogs all around his boyhood home. In 1958, Bob obtained a federal bird-banding permit, and soon after that he initiated a seasonal, migration banding project at Presque Isle State Park—that migration monitoring continues to this day under the auspices of the Erie Bird Observatory. Bob’s mother and brother participated with him in the banding at Presque Isle, and they continued the banding there for many years following Bob’s own migration, in June 1961, to the newly created Powdermill Nature Reserve of Carnegie Museum. At the invitation of then-director, Dr. M. Graham Netting, Bob went to Powdermill and, using the still relatively new technique of mist-netting, banded some 1,500 birds that summer and fall—with that effort, the world-famous Powdermill bird-banding station was born! With strong support and professional guidance from the late Senior Curator and Assistant Curator of Birds at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Dr. Kenneth C. Parkes and Dr. Mary Heimerdinger Clench, respectively, Bob quickly established Powdermill as one of the premiere bird-banding research stations in North America. As Bob put it in an interview in Birding magazine (July/August 2013), “With their [Ken’s and Mary’s] enthusiastic mentoring, they turned a young, green birder into a working museum/field ornithologist.” Early on, Bob raised the practice of “skulling” birds to an art, and in 1970, he published a seminal paper on the subject, focusing on Ruby-crowned Kinglet. Because Bob was among the most skilled at accurately determining the ages of birds-in-hand, in those early years he conducted many formal and informal workshops to help train other banders in his techniques. Bob also pioneered studies of “differential migration,” the temporally separated passage of immature and adult birds of a species within migration seasons. Bob was among the first bird banders to consistently collect wing, fat, and body mass data for every bird he banded at Powdermill. In fact, Powdermill’s voluminous body mass data were so often requested for ecological and other studies, in 1978 he and Mary Clench summarized them in a detailed research Bulletin of the Carnegie Museum of Natural History. Decades later, with hundreds of thousands more data available, Bob co-authored a second compendium of body mass, fat, and wing length data for 170 species, which was published as the first-ever research monograph of the Eastern Bird Banding Association in 2004. The Powdermill banding database now contains well over a half-million records—a true treasure trove of data for decades to come! Alone and with others, Bob contributed many dozens of scientific and popular articles about birds based on these data. However, Bob's contributions to field of ornithology extended far beyond the invaluable data he helped collect and the studies he completed. In the course of his career, tens of thousands of visitors of all ages and all walks of life were welcomed and educated about birds in Bob's easy and good-natured way. For example, Bob might host a group of neighbor children at the banding lab one day, and a visiting Lord and Lady from London, England or a grandson of Theodore Roosevelt the next! Bob was an avid field birder, too. For many decades he regularly compiled notable banding records and field observations of birds seen at Powdermill and the surrounding area for monthly bird summaries of the Bulletin of the Audubon Society of Western Pennsylvania, and for seasonal summaries in American Birds, for the “Appalachian Region” editor, Dr. George Hall. Later, Bob replaced George as Appalachian regional editor. Bob served for many years as a member of the Pennsylvania’s Ornithological Records Committee, reviewing hundreds of observations submitted for formal recognition in the official record of the state’s birds. He also served as a county compiler for Pennsylvania Birds for many years. Bob was an organizer of the first breeding bird atlas in Pennsylvania. He served as a regional coordinator, was on the verification and publication committees, and authored more than twenty species accounts for the resulting book. He also contributed extensive block coverage and several species accounts for the second Pennsylvania breeding bird atlas in 2004-2010. Among more than a hundred publications written by Bob in his career, two were of particular interest to birders: Birds of the Ligonier Valley published in 1976; and, in 1988, his revised Birds of the Pittsburgh Region, an extensive updating of Ken Parkes’s classic 1956 work. Bob had been working on a complete revision of his Birds of the Ligonier Valley book before he died. In addition to Bob’s very significant contributions to field ornithology, in general, and Pennsylvania birding, in particular, Bob was an expert on the birds of Belize. He participated in expeditions and banding projects in Belize in the 1970’s and 1980’s, and co-authored avian distribution papers in the Annals of Carnegie Museum, as well as a new Checklist of the Birds of Belize. In his long career, Bob never focused strongly on any one particular bird species; nevertheless, he had a special fondness for Kentucky Warblers, the nesting ecology of which he studied in his spare time in the early years at Powdermill. Although he never published them, his expert observations of the Kentucky Warbler found their way into his friend, Hal Harrison’s popular work, Wood Warblers World. Bob Leberman may well have been the last of an era of largely self-taught ornithologists. In high school he focused more on classes related to business and art than the natural sciences, and his college experience was limited to assisting a professor at Allegheny College in teaching the field component of his ornithology class. Bob’s career at Powdermill overlapped with the career of another eminent, self-taught ornithologist, Curator Emeritus, W. E. Clyde Todd. Bob had largely committed to memory Todd’s classic, Birds of Western Pennsylvania, and he admired the work so much that he proudly named his house at Powdermill “Todd Manor” in honor of Mr. Todd. In the seven years between Bob’s arrival at Powdermill and Mr. Todd’s death in 1968, Mr. Todd became aware of some of the remarkable bird records that Bob had begun documenting through his bird banding, such as summering Prairie Warblers. Bob recalled that upon hearing of this, Mr. Todd was very skeptical as he himself had not found the species breeding during his extensive, decades-long fieldwork for his Birds of Western Pennsylvania, and was not convinced until seeing confirmatory photographs of the bird in hand. For generations to come, Bob Leberman will continue to shape our understanding of birds thanks to the dedicated works of all the students and young professionals whom he inspired and mentored in his characteristically genial and humble way. Bob did not only feed our hunger for knowledge and satisfy our craving for experience; he literally fed us, too. I would not even hazard a guess as to how many volunteers, visitors, and interns Bob nourished from his own kitchen and cupboards! Today, a great many of Bob’s well-fed “kids” have gone on to important careers in academia, conservation, wildlife management, and education. Some may be surprised to learn that birds were not Bob’s only interest nor his only area of expertise—not by a long shot. As alluded to above, Bob was a very good cook—in truth, something of a gourmet! He was an excellent amateur botanist and helped inventory the flora of Powdermill twice, under two different curators of botany! He was particularly adept at spotting and identifying cryptic wild orchids, and he grew cultivated orchids at home. He knew the butterflies very well, too, and contributed many field records to Carnegie’s lepidopterist, Dr. Harry Clench. Bob had excellent personal collections of antique duck decoys, flow blue china, natural history art, and, especially postage stamps and postal covers. Bob’s philatelic collection (especially from the former British Honduras, now Belize) and his knowledge of postal history (especially of northwestern PA during the early oil boom) was very extensive; Bob even co-authored a paper about postal cancellations in a national journal of postal history. Robert C. Leberman—a true gentleman and bona fide Renaissance man—made an indelible mark on bird banding and field ornithology and was an unfailingly positive influence on every one of us lucky enough to be mentored by him, whether for a day or a half a lifetime!
  13. We hope you and your loved ones are doing well during this trying time. After much careful deliberation, the U.S. Geological Survey, Canadian Wildlife Service, and Mexican National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity have decided to cancel all North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) field activities for 2020. We would prefer to be in the field collecting BBS data this spring, however, potential exposure to the health risks and hardships of COVID-19 is too great. Furthermore, the suspension of nonessential travel and activities in many locales as well as diminished access to roadways used by BBS routes due to public land closures would make conducting a BBS route illegal, if not impossible in many areas. Also, with national BBS staff having to work from home, we are unable to prepare or mail out your annual BBS packets/kits this season. As a result, we have decided that it is in the best interests of everyone to cancel the survey, to help ensure that we have a healthy team of participants for the 2021 season. The BBS staff at the national offices will not be idle during this time. We will instead take advantage of the next few months to make progress on exciting new developments outlined in the forthcoming “Strategic Plan of the North American Breeding Bird Survey: 2020-2030", which we will share with you soon. In the meantime, we hope that you will safely continue to sharpen your birding skills, using resources such as Dendroica or Merlin, in anticipation of the 2021 field season when we will continue our important BBS work. Please stay safe by following national and local COVID-19 response guidelines. Take care of yourself and of your families. Sincerely, BBS National Offices
  14. Yes and no. The worst problem - the fact that the system was telling you that no permit was needed - was partially corrected on April 4. At least now it tells you that "action is required." However, it still doesn't tell you what action or anything else. It says: "Uh oh, something's not right. This request has not yet been defined in this assistant and documentation may or may not be required. Please use the Contact Us link on the page for guidance." Moreover, they have still not added the definitional categories (such as Avian, all - research) and "various countries." Bottom line is that the import process is now so complex that even if this permitting assistant ever works efficiently for ornithologists, there is still so much more to know that the permit system can't tell you, such as treatment methods, when your lab needs to be USDA-approved as BSL2, and much more - and that's just for APHIS. Add the complexity of the USFWS requirements, the CDC, Customs and Border Protection - and not just the permits, but the actual importing process. So the bottom line is that ornithologists are still much better served by consulting with the Ornithological Council than relying on an online query system for any one agency. This system was developed to alleviate the pressure on the very understaffed National Import Export Services office, which fields non-stop phone calls all day. And they can't possibly take the time needed to query you in detail about your specific imports. So relying on the expertise of the Ornithological Council is your best bet.
  15. As of 29 May 2020, Ornithological Council executive director Ellen Paul will be leaving the organization. Taking her place will be Laura Bies, formerly the director of government affairs at The Wildlife Society. The Ornithological Council will, as of June 1, become a half-time entity for the foreseeable future, so please be patient if you do not receive immediate responses. Please be sure to take note of the contact information for Ms. Bies: laurabiesoc@gmail.com
×
×
  • Create New...