Transcript Bird 2007-11 – an–instant publication? BirdAtlas 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 •

Bird
2007-11
– an–instant
publication?
BirdAtlas
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. iPhone one 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 iPads?)
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
transect sections, accurate locations, habitats)
• Tracking observer behaviour?
• Voice recognition data entry
• Call and photo recognition?
Thanks!
1956 SRA/Ericsson MTA
16kg!!