Bird 2007 11 aninstant publication Bird Atlas 2007

Bird 2007 -11 – an–instant publication? Bird. Atlas 2007 -11 an instant publication? Iain Downie, BTO

• How the web has Using Atlas as an example improved Atlas of how the web has improved validation? efficiency/accuracy • Can mobile • What is ‘the Atlas’? technologies help? • Why do it?

? 1968 -72 1981 -84 1988 -91 2007 -11 40+ local atlases running in parallel

Atlas aims • • Map all species in Britain and Ireland Complete coverage, not sampling specifics Winter and breeding seasons Estimate relative abundance Assess changes in range Attempt population estimates Set conservation priorities …. . and lots more stuff…. . • A lot of effort from a lot of people! • Part of broader programme of surveys

Changes in range

Some facts and figures: 2007 -11 window • 155, 797 Timed Tetrad Visits (structured survey***) • Topped up by… – 6. 3 million Roving/Casual Records… – & other surveys (Ringing, Breeding Bird Survey) • 15, 419 online contributors (> 91% data online) • For us: Lower overall costs (% of total budget) 3% = inputting data from paper forms 8% = online development and support ~30% = estimated inputting cost if all via paper

Amongst the many online benefits • For the user: Easy data-entry, interrogation and instant feedback on all their data • Management Systems • Validation Systems – During data entry (Jack Snipe? ) – Review by network of experienced regional volunteers – Auto-validation • 80% records already fully validated by local experts

Common problems need validation • Mistaken identification • Incorrect grid references • Clicked on wrong species name • Unusual numbers (extra 0? ) • Unusual breeding status (only 0. 07% of records in state of query) NON!

The validation process…. • Observer POSTS to RO • Season records POSTED to BTO • Collate & visual checks • POST to data input firm • Records checking (Fortran) • Regional data POSTED to RO for more checking • POSTED back to BTO with corrections 3 times! Typical previous atlases • Fieldwork complete, Species Maps created, BTO visual checks • Master copies POSTED to RO, more checking • Corrected copies POSTED to BTO • Final maps produced (two years later!) • Publication

The validation process…. 2007 -11 • Log on as RO • Open validation module • Target new records entered over last few days • Validate sensible records and let nightly autovalidation do the rest • Log off, watch Strictly….

Typical validation page • Records into data…. • Greater confidence in provisional maps? • Easier/faster migration to final product (web and ISBN)

Clear benefits to online but…. • >4000 online registrations who did nothing – why? • 9% data via paper from 6% of recorders (one dissident regional organiser) • Online system high start up costs • Typically longer lead in time (IT development) • Typically need ‘enterprise capability’ • Prioritisation of “wish list” of features • As with paper, maintenance continues after field work ends (many local atlases using software to continue their recording - BTO commitment)

So now we know web better than paper… …where will technology take us (BTO)? • Mobile devices an obvious next step • ‘Smartphones’ increasing steadily (38% of handsets and 64% of contracts - UK, April 2010) • How much benefit can they really provide?

Costs and issues (for BTO? ) • Fast moving volatile technology: Pick a platform, any platform…e. g. i. Phone year ago… Recent US contracts • New development cycle needed – training and some specialist setup for applications (c. f. http)

Costs and issues (for BTO? ) • Can’t replicate entire web – focus effort • Database integration essential to provide context, validation and extension to the existing systems • Development could wipe out cost savings • Reception improving, but still variable • GPS only partially useful (less so with ranging birds, better for nests, plants? ) • Information gain varies with taxa • Structured surveys (our core methodologies) are more difficult to envisage on phone (but i. Pads? )

Opportunities? • One of a number of tools available • Casual/Roving records certainly (Fiona) • Accessible field guides (e. g. id and maps) and webs service access to improve context • Training tools to improve recording • Assist in structured surveys (e. g. mapping and transections, accurate locations, habitats) • Tracking observer behaviour? • Voice recognition data entry • Call and photo recognition?

Thanks! 1956 SRA/Ericsson MTA 16 kg!!