Is it cheating?

There again, all these discussions and the BGBW onlyl goes to raise the profile of the RSPB and encourages new bird spotters and feeders.  So whatever is right or wrong...the birds are benefiting.

maria p said:

There again, all these discussions and the BGBW onlyl goes to raise the profile of the RSPB and encourages new bird spotters and feeders.  So whatever is right or wrong...the birds are benefiting.

I do agree with you, Maria, but I still think some good information about bird populations is gained from the bird watch whether  or not you choose the best or worst hour.

Claire

Been doing 3 1 hourly counts for years and always pick my best :0))) Can only choose one of those hours, and no cheating.It is all about birds coming into feed and not counting birds twice.You can do as many hourly counts as you want,providing you stick with one of them and don't add other birds on.Any bird coming in within an hour of your watch can be counted regardlesss of which hour you choose.One hour is simply to help those that are too busy to do more.I am more than happy to do it 3 times only ha ha....

Edit.....This is not a competition between members but hopefully a great help to the RSPB and that is why i dedicate 3 hours every year.Last year was pants :0(

Lynn B said:

My 1st count to. I'm submitting mine but since I enjoyed it so much I'm doing another watch tomorrow at a different time, purely for my own interest & records as I'm new to birdwatchin.

Oh Lynnie, that's just how I started last year, and now I'm totally hooked.  Welcome to Birdwatching.  :-))

I am sure the comments that we get less in that one hour than usual is simply down to our memory recalling the birds we have seen forgetting that 90% of the time we don't see as many. So that one hour has a very good chance of hitting the low period.

It doesnt matter anyway because averaging out 600,000 replies takes care of any odd factors (although if everyone tried to add their best numbers it might cause problems).  I was once a member of RSPB Council and we used to argue occasionally about the accuracy of 'citizen science' used this way.  The argument in favour is actually very convincing.

Unknown said:

It doesnt matter anyway because averaging out 600,000 replies takes care of any odd factors

If I remember my statistics correctly this is "The Law of Large Numbers", - the bigger the survey, the more representative it will be.

Alan, I have just joined the BTO and submitted this weeks garden watch count.  So that gives me a good excuse to sit at my dining room window watching the birds every week!!! Thanks for the link.

I dont think it's cheating at all....it's not as if we are all doing exactly the same hour.

And I'm sure the stats guys can figure out of a flock is in a certain area.

I was tempted to cheat if the bullfinches that regularly visit my garden didn't turn up during my hour but not only did they turn up, they brought their mates too, so I was treated to the sight of 2 gorgeously coloured males and their duller but braver females, who dived into the sunflower seeds first while the boys watched from a distance to make sure it was safe to land!

I know it's boring, but negative results (times when nothing seems to show up) are important to the overall results. If everyone went for when the best things showed up then it would bias things a bit. At least that's what I told myself last year when I only managed to see a pigeon, magpie and a couple of sparrows...