LaMNA Meeting at the
Annual Cooper Ornithological Society Meeting
Moscow, Idaho, June 22, 2007

Present: John Alexander (Klamath Bird Observatory; note taker), Jay Carlisle (Idaho Bird Observatory), Roy Churchwell (San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory), Joan Hagar (USGS), Keith Hobson (CWS), Barbara Kus (USGS), Anders Olson (University of Wisconsin), C.J. Ralph (USFS, Humboldt Bay Bird Observatory), Susan Skagan (USGS), Jeff Smith (Hawk Watch International)

The meeting was convened by C.J. R. over lunch at the University Best Western.

LaMNA Database Schema:
C.J. R. passed out the abbreviated list of variables that are proposed for the LaMNA master data base. Everyone was asked to compare it with the variables taken at their stations. If you follow the MAPS protocol (old or new), those variables are easily mapped.

Reports from individual programs working with LaMNA and AKN:
   • Institute of Bird Populations (IBP) – John A. explained that they are currently keeping their dataset largely proprietary, as the added value of their editing is considerable. Communications are ongoing with them. The original, and possibly, the IBP-verified data, can certainly be contributed to LaMNA by individual banders.
  • Raptor Population Index – Jeff S. told that this program will be working with the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN), and are working on some aspects of auxiliary data that are not currently part of AKN.
  • Program for Regional and International Shorebird Monitoring (PRISM) – Susan S. told us that PRISM and their cooperators are currently waiting in the wings with their banding (and perhaps census) data and also want to make sure their auxiliary data is stored.

Funding:
National Conservation Needs proposal – John A. brought up that aspects of this proposal through the American Bird Conservancy to the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies included bringing national coordinated bird monitoring data into the AKN and that, if accepted, discretionary funds might be available for developing AKN nodes.

Possible large-scale programs that LaMNA could facilitate:
  • Gaps in coverage of stations – Keith H. suggested that a gap analysis be conducted for strategic placement of monitoring stations. John A. noted that the member data base includes metadata about location, seasonal timing, effort, etc. and could be used to show areas of special need for coverage, both in space and time (e.g., daily vs. weekly)
  • Multi-taxa monitoring – It was suggested that this could boost the value of programs (e.g., ridge-top monitoring of landbird migration at hawk watch stations)
  • Auxiliary data captured by LaMNA could help to advance aspects of migration research:
  • Isotopes: catchments data – geographic relationship of trends; need to standardize isotope data
  • Migration – Avian Influenza and feather sampling

Mission of LaMNA:
C.J. R. noted that our current mission is to acquire data for preservation and availability, and asked participants what barriers exist to accomplishing this mission. Proprietary interests in data were the main concern, both in access and data-use policies. This engendered a wide-ranging discussion involving the following:
  • Careful management of the data-sharing and ownership policies by LaMNA was considered important.
  • Make it clear that the public will have greater access to the LaMNA data set, as compared to other programs.
  • Emphasize the five privacy levels (http://www.klamathbird.org/lamna/PrivacyStatement_20070821.pdf) for proprietary data archived with LaMNA.
  • Species-specific controls can be in place to assure that access to locations for sensitive species (e.g., T&E) can be controlled through AKN
  • In general, data in the AKN is open unless contributors specify otherwise
  • Meta-analyses vs. specific datasets – The amount of credit in a publication depends upon amount of an individual’s data that is used in an analysis.
  • Erroneous conclusions can be drawn from unfamiliarity with data, making a strong argument for collaboration with the data’s owner
  • Most analyses would likely be species-specific
  • Effective metadata will be the key to understanding the nuances of data
  • Data-mapping procedures are currently being developed by LaMNA with Cornell.

LaMNA Outreach and Products:
  • Advantages to LaMNA should be advertised:
  • Track publication rates on data archived with LaMNA
  • Services provided to contributors
  • Data applications and services – Currently, the two biggest are data summaries and power analyses. C.J. R. expects these to be available within 6-8 months with the efforts of Leo Salas, LaMNA banding coordinator.
  • Newsletter – It was suggested that people contribute to the newsletter, so as to increase ownership.

Governance of LaMNA:
  • Currently it is the Partners in Flight Model, that is, if you want to play, come and play; and if you have an idea for a project, go ahead and work on it.
  • There are working committee chairs (e.g. Bart and Ralph on the PIF Monitoring committee).
  • Conference calls will be scheduled again on a monthly basis so those who are interested can participate.

North American Bird Conservation Initiative (NABCI) report.
The NABCI monitoring subcommittee report and how LaMNA related to NABCI was discussed. Citizen's science, surveillance, and the roles of NGO's were originally essentially omitted, and are currently downplayed in that report. Ongoing discussions are taking place.