ShareThis Page
Project Feederwatch is here and seeking citizen scientists |

Project Feederwatch is here and seeking citizen scientists

| Sunday, November 18, 2018 12:15 a.m
Bob Frye | Everybody Adventures
Project FeederWatch is a good way for birders to participate in conservation.

Birders are tough to beat.

A lot of hobbies generate passion among their followers. Each pastime has its diehards.

But the people who watch birds are, in a word, serious.

According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 45.1 million people watched birds in 2016, the most recent year for which statistics are available. No other species of wildlife had a bigger following.

All of those folks look for birds frequently, too. People averaged bird watching 96 days a year.

Some spent their time on the road, traveling to watch birds. But most — about 86 percent — did their bird watching around home.

Scientists understand that. And, again this year, they’re hoping to take advantage of it.

Researchers at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology are conducting Project FeederWatch.

Now more than 20 years old, it monitors bird populations and trends across North America.

“Participants periodically count the birds they see at their feeders and send their counts to Project Feederwatch,” Cornell said. “Your bird counts help you keep track of what is happening in your own backyard and help scientists track long-term trends in bird distribution and abundance.”

The survey runs from November through April. Participants can count birds at home, nature centers, parks, community areas and elsewhere.

People of all skill levels participate, individually or in groups, such as classrooms, families, nature clubs and the like.

“You can count birds as often as every week, or as infrequently as you like. The schedule is completely flexible,” Cornell said. “All you need is a bird feeder, bird bath or plantings that attract birds.”

The data collected is important in that it documents where birds are and are not. That can show if and when birds are changing their overwintering grounds, based on climate change, habitat loss or other factors.

It also shines an early light — one that might not be readily apparent otherwise — on population trends.

If a species is in trouble, for example, Project FeederWatch can reveal that.

Data gathered from participants in Florida showed that, starting in the 1980s, winter populations of painted bunting were declining. That prompted additional research and, ultimately, conservation measures.

“So, by combining all they know about a species from monitoring data and intensive research projects, scientists can begin to understand why a species is declining, and to make recommendations for its recovery before it’s too late,” Cornell said.

Watchers can use the data just for fun, though.

Visitors to the Project FeederWatch site can, for example, track trends in bird populations, by species and region, across time, see where else people are watching for birds, and follow sights, by species and week, over time.

They can also see by year which 25 species were the most common visitors to feeders in their state or providence and in what concentrations.

That tells them whether what they’re seeing is unusual.

In Pennsylvania in 2017-18, for example, dark-eyed juncos visited feeders more often than any other bird, usually in groups of five. Northern cardinals, black-capped chickadees, mourning doves and downy woodpeckers rounded out the top five.

But in North Carolina, the top five birds seen are, in order, the northern cardinal, tufted titmouse, Carolina wren, mourning dove and American goldfinch. In Arizona it is the house finch, white-crowned sparrow, lesser goldfinch, mourning dove and house sparrow.

There is a cost to participate in Project FeederWatch. It’s $18. But registration gets watchers a “research kit.” It includes instructions for participating, as well as a bird identification poster, calendar and more.

Bird watchers also get, at the end of each season, a 16-page year-end report and access to the online version of “Living Bird,” Cornell’s quarterly birding magazine.

In the end, though, the project is a way to take all of the bird watching that people are so avidly doing anyway and use it for the good of the birds.

“In short, Project FeederWatch data are important because they provide information about bird population biology that cannot be detected by any other available method,” Cornell said.

Bob Frye is the editor. Reach him at 412-216-0193 or See other stories, blogs, videos and more at

Article by Bob Frye, Everybody Adventures,

Copyright © 535media, LLC

Categories: Outdoors
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.