A new scientific paper, “The role of the camera in birdwatching in Singapore” has just been published in the on-lime journal, Nature in Singapore [2009, Vol. 2: 183-191 by Tsang, K. C., R. Subaraj & Y. C. Wee]. You can get a PDF copy of the paper HERE (#27).
Bird watching in Singapore will never be the same again – ever since bird photographer descended on the scene in early 2000s. The spectacular images of birds and their behaviour that photographers captured with their digital cameras (including those captured with conventional films) have three important impact on birdwatching…
1. Cameras and images are showing up the weakness of the Records Committee (RC) of the Nature Society (Singapore)’s Bird Group. A number of records have been or need to be retracted due to re-examination of photographic evidence eg. mis-identification of a kentish plover (Charadrius alexandrinus) for a long-billed plover (C. placidus) and the questionable inclusion of the Western Marsh Harrier (Circus aeruginosus) in the checklist. Well, we live and learn, after all, nobody is perfect! What of the others where no images are available?
2. With images as evidence, the RC cannot simply dismiss claims by birdwatchers of seeing unrecorded species as “lack of evidence”, as in the past. The Asian Emerald Cuckoo (Chrysococcyx maculatus) was recently accepted as a new record for Singapore – with photographic evidence, even though it took 23 months to do so.
3. An old image allowed the RC to claim that the first sighting of the Jerdon’s baza (Aviceda jerdoni) should be seven years earlier. It would have helped shore up the credibility of the RC had the old image been published before, rather than after, the claim in BirdingAsia was made. However, to date, the old photograph has yet to be published. So the claims is still ringing hollow… and is this science?
Food and feeding behaviour
1. Now we have proof of whatever species of birds we report taking specific foods. In the past we take the submitted observations in good faith. With images, we can even query whether the particular bird actually swallowed the food and if so, whether it eventually spit it out. Or whether the bird was actually treating the food as a plaything.
2. Images allow specialist biologists to identify the foods at their leisure. It is also possible to identify the plant or animal foods to the generic or even specific level.
3. Images allow us to know whether the bird bites, swallows or crush the foods; cast pellets later on…
1. Pollinating of mistletoe flowers by Blue-crowned Hanging Parrot (Loriculus galgulus) and Scarlet-backed Flowerpecker (Dicaeum cruentatum) when the birds applies slight pressure on the flower buds to get at the nectar. This is a split-second action, the significance of which is usually missed when viewed through the binoculars.
2. Keeping detailed records of breeding behaviour of Malaysian Plover (Charadrius peronii), Zebra Dove (Geopelia striata) and Little Tern (Sterna sumatrana) with photographic records.
Not all birdwatchers are convinced that the camera is here to stay. A few of the more progressive ones are now toting a camera when out in the field. But there are others who are feeling threatened… But why the need to feel threatened? After all, birdwatching is a pastime and if you are happy just looking at birds, so be it. Go out and have fun twitching.
KC Tsang, R Subaraj & YC Wee
(Image of photographers at Bidadari by Lena Chow)