birding-seeing or hearing

Seeing or Hearing
"Why does hearing a bird, but not seeing it, count towards a Big Year birding list?" This question was posed on a birding forum. The followng are some of the comments it drew from various readers. My own personal viewpoint is at the end.
Listing birds is a very personal thing. Some people only list birds they’ve seen and personally identified. Others may include a bird just glimpsed, but pointed-out and identified by someone else. Some photographers may choose to only count birds they’ve photographed, and others may choose not to include birds they have only heard. Neither of these methods is right or wrong if you’re including the birds in a personal list. However, if you’re presenting your list to others (such as on eBird), there are rules you should follow. That’s so that observations made by different birders and in different areas can effectively be compared. If you’re creating a list of birds to submit to eBird (or any other official compiler), the goal is to identify the birds that are in the area you’re birding. For that purpose, it makes no difference if you’ve identified a bird by sight or by sound, as long as it’s a reliable ID. And, although I said that how a birder creates a personal list is up to the birder, many birders use the same criteria for creating their own list as is used for “official” lists. Because you can identify a species just as easily—actually, often even more confidently—by hearing it. By hearing the bird, you have detected the presence of the bird. Prioritizing one human sense over the other doesn’t make much sense when both detect and identify the species. There’s no requirement to capture the bird. There’s no hunting involved. It’s just observation. And hearing is observing, too. So what’s the difference? “Because you’re seeing the bird!” But what’s the real difference? In both instances you’ve found and identified the bird. Of course, humans seem to be more attached to their eyes and would much rather see the bird than just hear it. I’m never satisfied by only hearing the song. I’ll look for it until the point of exhaustion until I see it…seeing it does give a great feeling of satisfaction. But that’s all just my emotions and preferences. Why shouldn’t it count? You found the bird! Plus, why shouldn’t blind people be able to participate? If you can reliably identify the call or song you should record the bird. Most organizations that record birds accept sound as a valid ID. For example, the NJ Audubon’s World Series of Birding allows ID by either sight or sound. http://worldseriesofbirding.org/uploads/Rules_of_Competition_WSB16-Exhibit_B.pdf. If you can confidently identify a bird by its song/call, then you have “encountered” it. Oftentimes, the only way you would know that the bird was present, was by it vocalizations. If you have spent any time “birding”, then you know how difficult it can be to see them at times. A blur of movement in poor lighting conditions is a common occurrence. Bird vocalizations, especially during the breeding season, can be a very effective identification tool. In birding, a "Big Year" is a personal challenge to observe or hear as many bird species as possible within a specific geographical area in a single calendar year. Hearing a bird, but not seeing it, counts towards a Big Year birding list because birding is not just about visual identification. Birds can often be difficult to see due to their small size, camouflage, or the dense foliage they inhabit. Therefore, birders also rely on their ability to identify bird species by their distinctive calls and songs. This allows for a more comprehensive and inclusive approach to birding, acknowledging that birds can be appreciated and identified through auditory means as well as visual observation.
I personally use the Merlin app by Cornell Lab on my iPhone, and it allows me to enter comments on my sightings or recordings. If I identify a bird by its call but don't sight it, and can be reasonably sure that the recording is correct based on location and other criteria, then I will add it to my life list, but I add a comment that I did not actually see the bird. To me birding is not a competiton. It's a pursuit that I enjoy and find fascinating, and I only wish I had started earilier when my in-laws lived on the shores of Lake Tawakoni. It was those weekends at the lake with my mother-in-law pointing out the birds that I think first awakened my interest. To consider mself in a race with others to 'rack up' a big score would only detract from the enjoyment I derive from it. Besides, I'm just too dang old and tired, and my eyesight ain't what it used to be. - Dana

Listing birds is a very personal thing. Some people only list birds they’ve seen and personally identified. Others may include a bird just glimpsed, but pointed-out and identified by someone else. Some photographers may choose to only count birds they’ve photographed, and others may choose not to include birds they have only heard. Neither of these methods is right or wrong if you’re including the birds in a personal list. However, if you’re presenting your list to others (such as on eBird), there are rules you should follow. That’s so that observations made by different birders and in different areas can effectively be compared.

If you’re creating a list of birds to submit to eBird (or any other official compiler), the goal is to identify the birds that are in the area you’re birding. For that purpose, it makes no difference if you’ve identified a bird by sight or by sound, as long as it’s a reliable ID. And, although I said that how a birder creates a personal list is up to the birder, many birders use the same criteria for creating their own list as is used for “official” lists.

Because you can identify a species just as easily—actually, often even more confidently—by hearing it. By hearing the bird, you have detected the presence of the bird. Prioritizing one human sense over the other doesn’t make much sense when both detect and identify the species. There’s no requirement to capture the bird. There’s no hunting involved. It’s just observation. And hearing is observing, too. So what’s the difference? “Because you’re seeing the bird!” But what’s the real difference? In both instances you’ve found and identified the bird. Of course, humans seem to be more attached to their eyes and would much rather see the bird than just hear it. I’m never satisfied by only hearing the song. I’ll look for it until the point of exhaustion until I see it…seeing it does give a great feeling of satisfaction. But that’s all just my emotions and preferences.

Why shouldn’t it count? You found the bird!

Plus, why shouldn’t blind people be able to participate?

If you can reliably identify the call or song you should record the bird. Most organizations that record birds accept sound as a valid ID. For example, the NJ Audubon’s World Series of Birding allows ID by either sight or sound. http://worldseriesofbirding.org/uploads/Rules_of_Competition_WSB16-Exhibit_B.pdf.

If you can confidently identify a bird by its song/call, then you have “encountered” it. Oftentimes, the only way you would know that the bird was present, was by it vocalizations. If you have spent any time “birding”, then you know how difficult it can be to see them at times. A blur of movement in poor lighting conditions is a common occurrence. Bird vocalizations, especially during the breeding season, can be a very effective identification tool.

In birding, a "Big Year" is a personal challenge to observe or hear as many bird species as possible within a specific geographical area in a single calendar year. Hearing a bird, but not seeing it, counts towards a Big Year birding list because birding is not just about visual identification. Birds can often be difficult to see due to their small size, camouflage, or the dense foliage they inhabit. Therefore, birders also rely on their ability to identify bird species by their distinctive calls and songs. This allows for a more comprehensive and inclusive approach to birding, acknowledging that birds can be appreciated and identified through auditory means as well as visual observation.

Seeing or Hearing