Talk:Bachman's warbler

Extinct?

It is incorrect to simply presume that the Bachman's Warbler species is extinct. Only time will tell as well as follow-ups to recent undocumented reports in Congaree National Park. I recommend it be listed as "Critically endangered" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Windowseats (talk • contribs) 18:39, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

According to PBS, the bird is now extinct. PolishGoose (talk) 00:13, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Not extinct at all. I have an actual picture that I took of this bird in 2009 or 2010 at Congaree National Park. I asked a friend about this bird. She told me what it was and I did not think much of it until it was mentioned in the book, "A Walk in the Woods" by Bill Bryson. I questioned if the bird named in his book was one of the same that my friend had mentioned. After looking it up I am realizing that it is. Ellenhuntphtography.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.137.12.122 (talk) 04:30, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

It is listed as Critically Endangered on the IUCN RedList, which is the relevant Wikipedia source. There seems to be some uncertainty over where to search for it (whether the habitat at Congaree NP is still suitable. See http://bbill.blogspot.com/2010/10/phantom-followup-bachmans-warbler.html). There also seems to be dispute over the last confirmed sighting. It would be good to submit the photo mentioned above to the Georgia Ornithological Society rarities committee (http://www.gos.org/brc.html) for confirmation.--Spookpadda (talk) 15:57, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps we could list it as possibly extinct or probably extinct? Historynerd2 (talk) 12:02, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Further Reading

Moving this from the article.

Books

• HAMEL P. B. Bachman's Warbler. In CHANDLER, W. J. (ED.). AUDUBON WILDLIFE REPORT, 1988/1989. XVIII+817P. ACADEMIC PRESS, INC.: SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA, USA; LONDON, ENGLAND, UK. ILLUS. MAPS. 1988. 625-635. Series Information: Audubon Wildlife Report.
• Hamel, P. B. 1995. Bachman’s Warbler (Vermivora bachmanii). In The Birds of North America, No. 150 (A. Poole and F. Gill, eds.). The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, PA, and The American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C.
• HAMEL, P. B. Bachman's Warbler: a species in peril. XII+109P. SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION PRESS: WASHINGTON, D.C., USA; LONDON, ENGLAND. ILLUS. PAPER. 1986. XII+109P.

Thesis

• Hamel PB. Ph.D. (1981). A HIERARCHICAL APPROACH TO AVIAN COMMUNITY STRUCTURE. Clemson University, United States, South Carolina.

Articles

• Burdick, D. M., Cushman, D., Hamilton, R., and Gosselink, J. G. (1989). Faunal changes and bottomland hardwood forest loss in the tensas watershed Louisiana usa. Conservation Biology. vol. 3, no 3. pp. 282–292.
• Hamel, P. B. (1979). Bachmans warbler vermivora-bachmanii the decline and fall of an endangered species. American Zoologist. vol. 19, no 3. p. 1003.
• Hamel, P. B. (1995). Bachman's Warbler Vermivora bachmanii. Birds of North America. vol. 0, no 150. pp. 1–16.
• Hamel, P. B., and Gauthreaux, S. A. J. (1982). The field identification of bachmans warbler vermivora-bachmanii. American Birds. vol. 36, no 3. pp. 235–240.
• Hooper, R. G., and Hamel, P. B. (1977). Nesting habitat of bachmans warbler a review. Wilson Bulletin. vol. 89, no 3. pp. 373–379.
• Platt, S. G., Brantley, C. G., and Rainwater, T. R. (2001). Canebrake fauna: Wildlife diversity in a critically endangered ecosystem. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society. vol. 117, no 1. pp. 1–19.
• Remsen, J. V. J. (1986). Was bachman's warbler vermivora-bachmanii a bamboo specialist. Auk. vol. 103, no 1. pp. 216–219.
• Stevenson, H. M. (1972). The recent history of bachmans warbler. Wilson Bulletin. vol. 84, no 3. pp. 344–347.
• Stevenson, H. M. (1977). A comparison of the apalachicola river avi fauna above and below jim woodruff dam.
• Walters, Mark Jerome. (1995) Memories of a warbler. Animals. Boston. Vol 128, no 6. p. 8

I'll have to see how many I can hunt down. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 01:13, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

"Probably extinct" isn't a guess

@WilyD: regarding your edit, [1], which I notice carried the edit summary, Again, the sources rather than our own guesses, well, the species is probably extinct, and field guides are pretty clear on this point. National Geographic Field Guide to the Birds seventh edition, 2017, describes BAWA on p. 563 as probably extinct; the last definite record was in 1962 near Charleston, SC. Note the year: 1962, not 1988. Last time I got down into the weeds researching this, which was a few years ago, the 1988 sighting had been overturned by whatever state (FL?) rare bird authority had previously approved it, and the word was that survival of the warbler is now so unlikely that nothing less than DNA evidence is likely to seen as persuasive now. Saying it's probably extinct isn't someone's OR. Geogene (talk) 19:42, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

The IUCN is the usual authority we use for statements of extinction, and they say "possibly", so that's the word I used. The source that was cited for the 1988 sighting called it confirmed (the US Fish and Wildlife Service), so that's definitely how it should be written until we can find other sources that contest it (that sighting was in Louisiana - I only spent a little time on this yesterday, but as far as I saw, there are no credible Florida reports after the 1977 photo). There's also a published Cuban sighting from '80 or '81, I'll track down. If there are other sources contesting these, we could write a slightly more extended discussion down lower and put some vaguer summarative phrase in the intro (really, the intro shouldn't be dominated by it - given how short it is, best to have a single sentence there). I'll try to do some digging but it'll probably take me a few days until I can, since it's easier for me at work with academic library subscriptions. Academic sources and committees are probably preferable to bird guides, which can be pretty slapdash and editorial on these bits, but I'll see what I can dig up and work from there. WilyD 06:02, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

The IUCN uses a "no reasonable doubt" standard of evidence for officially calling a species extinct, a taxon is Extinct when there is no reasonable doubt that the last individual has died. [2], a species that can be accurately described as "probably extinct" would have to be CE and not EX in their catalogue. So, I doubt that saying it "was (a bird)....that is probably extinct" in the article text actually contradicts the IUCN status of critically endangered in the infobox. I'm not sure that other reliable sources, or the WP readership, would insist on beyond reasonable doubt evidentiary standards instead of a preponderance of evidence standard. Geogene (talk) 19:03, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

"Contradict" isn't quite right - "probably" is a subset of "possibly", so anyone who says "probably" would agree with "possibly", but not necessarily vice versa. Either way, as it stands. But regardless, the IUCN is the cited source, so we should follow the more general statement in the Wikipedia voice (and perhaps lay out who says what in the Conversation section). Anyways, of the sources I've seen (starting with those in article); I'll see what else I dig up WilyD 07:42, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

• IUCN (2013) says possibly extinct
• South Florida Species recovery plan (1999) says " it is widely believed that Bachmanís warbler is either extinct or on the verge of extinction"
• A Field Guide to Warblers (Dunn, 1997) says "probably extinct"
• Birds in Jeopardy (Ehrlech+ 1997) says "now possibly extinct"
• Bachman's Warbler (Hamel, 1986) says "possible extinction"
• Endangered and Threatened Animals of Florida and Their Habitats [3] (Scott, 2004, University of Texas Press) "Possibly extinct"

So, the 1977 Florida sightings/Pictures were accepted by Florida ABA records committee then, but apparently overturned in 2009 [4] And the '88 sighting was apparently never accepted by the Louisiana Ornithological Society [ http://www.losbird.org/documents/journals/jlo_vol_3_1.pdf ] So, what are other sources talking about? There are later reports (including, in Louisiana in 1991 [5] ) and Cuba through at least 2002 (though, I'm not sure what's the latest I can find in a reliable source? What a mess WilyD 10:28, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

USFWS Extinction

At what point do we stop arguing and go with what the USFWS has deemed federally official at this point?

https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3232 https://www.fws.gov/press-release/2023-10/21-species-delisted-endangered-species-act-due-extinction Simmy27star (talk) 17:51, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Agree with this, and furthermore, the tense in this article is weird - lots of "is" rather than "was". ElectronicsForDogs (talk) 20:19, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Possible sighting 2021

In September of 2020 I’m 99% sure I had a lost male winter at my home in Texas. I had never seen one before, but all the bird books I have, the Bachman Warbler was the closest identifiable bird I could find. It showed up in in late September/early October and seemed lost or disoriented. It started eating mealworm suet. I knew it was migratory because it was the first one I ever saw at this location since 2007. I had an old birdhouse that I refurbished with blanket pieces stapled inside. I put a suet feeder near the box to attract it. The winter of 2021 was very harsh. But this little bird, that fits the wiki description to a t, wintered here, took up residence in the intended house and after a while seemed to be comfortable in its unusually cold surroundings. But it had an insulated house that it customized with twigs, leaves and nesting material I leave out every year. It occasionally came out to another suet feeder near where I feed my ground eating mourning doves. It’s primary diet was mealworm suet and some custom seed mixture, and enjoyed my heated birdbath for drinking. When it left in the spring of 2021, it never returned. Some might dispute my sighting. I am an amateur birder. But through my binoculars it sure matched the description as close as possible. I hope my sighting was correct. Knowing that it enjoyed a warm home, and abundant food and water. I feel honored to have hosted it. It may have been a different species of warbler, but it was closest to the Bachman according to the pictures in my books. TexasBirder (talk) 13:35, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

We can hope, but unfortunately it's not something we can add to the article unless published in a reliable source. But if you had it this long, surely you must have taken photos of it so it could be confirmed, as it would have been quite sensational? Otherwise, it sounds somewhat dubious. FunkMonk (talk) 13:49, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

I try taking photos of all my visitors. Unfortunately I don’t have a real camera, just my iPhone 6S, which is not suitable for this type of photography. Any pictures I have would be be clearly identifiable. As I stated in my post, I’m an amateur birder and it could have easily been mistaken for a different warbler variety. It’s fine if it’s not worthy of posting. After all, this is my first post ever and it was over 2 years ago. It may not be quite sensational post-wise, but it certainly was sensational to care for it in one of the harshest Texas winters. Unfortunately I’m permanently disabled from my time in service and on a fixed income, but I hope to invest in a camera capable of bird photography. Thanks for your information. I sincerely appreciate it. Remove it at your will. TexasBirder (talk) 14:45, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

I want to believe! ElectronicsForDogs (talk) 09:39, 5 February 2024 (UTC)