A two-day conference was held from 20 to 21 July 2024, in Kolkata. Fifty-two eBird editors and Regional Coordinators from the Bird Count India collective attended the physical conference, representing 17 states and 1 union territory. This turnout constituted 75% of all states that currently have eBird editors.
Day 1
The ice-breaking session kicked off the meeting, dividing the participants into small groups and assigning each group a small task to get to know one another. The group was greeted and given a quick rundown of the meeting’s goals. Following that, a fun quiz was conducted using the Mentimeter platform, energising the participants with a series of questions. See agenda here.
Quiz via Mentimeter platform
Following the quiz, a presentation focused on data quality was delivered. It talked about the eBird process, filter functionalities, and case studies to clarify the criteria for confirming or unconfirming records.
Post-lunch, the participants got involved in an intensive group activity. The organisers divided them into six working groups of eight members each, assigning three distinct topics for discussion:
- Diversity and Inclusivity
- Engagement with Birdwatchers
- Scientific requirements from eBird
Each group tackled the issues and challenges related to their assigned topic. The idea was to foster collaborative problem-solving and encourage diverse perspectives. For the next couple of hours, the groups huddled around tables or on the floor scattered with chart papers, sticky notes, coloured pens, and cups of coffee. They brainstormed ideas, adding them to the chart paper. As the day drew to a close, each group presented their findings to the entire audience.
Working group brainstorming ideas for their topic
Working group jotting down the challenges related to their topic
Day 2
On the second day, many participants explored the Rajarhat Wetlands, a popular birdwatching hotspot. Despite being surrounded by apartment buildings, this wetland boasted an incredible bird diversity. The habitat supported various species, including Yellow-bellied Prinias, Red Avadavats, Striated Grassbirds, Black and Yellow Bitterns, and Watercocks. After enjoying a fulfilling morning of birdwatching, the participants returned to their hotel for breakfast.
Habitat Shot of Rajarhat Wetland. Photo Credit: Vrusha Patel
Post breakfast the working groups reconvened to discuss possible solutions. Building on the previous day’s work, they focused on addressing the challenges they had identified earlier. The morning session pushed the groups to transform their discussions into actionable plans.
Workshop Synthesis
Based on the challenges and issues discussed on day 1 and solutions arrived at during day 2 of the workshop, all the solutions were grouped into eight themes with each theme having 3-5 theme owners as in table below. The theme owners shall report back to the BCI collective on their consolidated list of actions and potential action owners within 45 days.
| Themes | Theme Owners |
| Enhancing Engagement with Existing eBirders | Hakimuddin Saify Sunita Dighe Jalmesh Karapurkar |
| Strategies for Rural Engagement and Leveraging Linguistic Resources | Sumiti Saharan Ramesh Shenai Dibyendu Ash |
| Effective Engagement Techniques for eBird Editors | Lakshmi Bharadwaj Malyasri Bhattacharya Pankaj Gupta Sahana M Samar Ahmad |
| Creating Public Engagement Resources & utilizing Social Media | Sriram Reddy Vrusha Patel Neha Savla |
| Promoting Birding for Women | Amee Vyas Mamta Parmar Pratiksha Kothule Krishna Murthy Sandhya Lenka |
| Integrating Birds into Educational Curricula | Swetashree Purohit Pronoy Baidya Abhishek Gulshan Sandhya Lenka |
| Fostering Connections with Other Nature Enthusiasts | Sujan Chatterjee Isheta Divya Chai Eng Law |
| Engaging Communities Through Bird-Related Events and Festivals | Vrusha Patel Amee Vyas Sagar Adhurya |
Group presenting the solutions for their challenges
Post-its made by working groups were sorted under various themes
Presentations on BWS and Systematic Bird Monitoring:
Following lunch, Sujan Chatterjee, one of the founders of the Birdwatchers’ Society (BWS), gave an overview of their organisation and the various activities BWS members are involved in, ranging from bird walks to regional bird counts and outreach and awareness programs.
This was followed by a presentation on “Systematic Bird Monitoring Programs for India.” The presentation covered a variety of bird monitoring methodologies, from casual observational records to meticulously structured bird counts. Here are some of the discussions that took place:
Habitat-Specific Monitoring Strategy: The group generally agreed on the importance of habitat-specific systematic monitoring. The strategy and intensity of monitoring should be tailored to each habitat type. For example, areas with low bird density may require less frequent monitoring, while sparsely monitored but critically important habitats may need more intensive monitoring.
Monitoring Along Flyways and Migration Paths: It was emphasized that monitoring habitats along flyways or migration paths is crucial. The Passage Migrant Count was cited as an example of an initiative that focuses on these important areas.
Focus on Threatened Habitats: The identification of threatened habitats and prioritization of monitoring efforts in these areas were discussed. However, the challenges of maintaining frequent monitoring in several threatened habitats were highlighted.
Pilot Programs and Case Studies: The group suggested piloting structured and semi-structured monitoring exercises and their calibration. Existing data from Kerala and Goa were identified as potential case studies for these pilots. It was noted that prototyping the final monitoring model is necessary before a country-wide deployment. Calibrating semi-structured data with structured data is still in its nascent stage, and India-specific research is needed to validate this approach.
Strengthening Species/Group-Specific Initiatives: The discussion included strengthening initiatives like the Asian Waterbird Census and specific species/group counts (e.g., Vulture, Skimmer counts) to address the needs of wetland habitats and high-priority species.
Certification for Birders: The possibility of certifying birders before they participate in systematic monitoring was discussed. The potential benefits and concerns of such a certification process were considered. It was suggested to examine if other countries have benefited from such training programs. Further thought and data gathering are needed on this matter.
Integration of Ringing and GPS Tagging Data: The integration of ringing data and GPS tagging was discussed. Although the scale of available data is small for integration, it could still be valuable for monitoring certain hard-to-monitor bird species independently.
Expert Consultation: It was proposed to invite experts from abroad who have experience with structured surveys to speak to the group, possibly during bird monitoring symposiums.
Meeting between Bird Count India and Scientists: A meeting with scientists interested in structured monitoring in India was suggested. The Bird Count India group will represent bird-watcher groups and present their thoughts and concerns regarding the on-ground implementation of the monitoring efforts
The next item in the conference was an interesting panel discussion.
Panel Discussion on ‘How to Make the State of Your State’s Birds’
During the panel discussion on the topic “How to make the state of your State’s birds,” several key points were raised, highlighting the complex and varied challenges faced in bird conservation across different states. The discussion began with a contemplation on the relevance of globally significant data to local contexts, questioning the necessity of state-specific bird status reports.
The panel comprised Hakimuddin Saify (eBird editor and RC for Chhattisgarh), Sujan Chatterjee (eBird editor and RC for WB), Sumiti Saharan (eBird editor and RC for Maharashtra), and Swethashree Purohit (eBird editor and RC for Odisha), moderated by Pronoy Baidya eBird editor and RC for Goa).
Here ares some of the key questions asked and discussed:
Q: How confident are you about the bird data from your state?
Sumiti said that while Maharashtra is well birded, the coverage is uneven and requires more uniformity. Sujan added that high-altitude areas in West Bengal are primarily explored by tourists, with limited backyard birding. A lot of birding can be done in monsoon however some weather adversities could pose a challenge for local birders.
Q: There are other states that are not well birded, let alone the uniformity of it. What are the challenges there?
Hakim acknowledged that while Central Chhattisgarh has good birding data, Southern Chhattisgarh remains underexplored despite its large wild areas. Swethashree highlighted the low awareness of birding and eBird usage in some regions. In recent years, Western Orissa has had good birding, however the same can’t be said for Central and South Odisha. Some birders are there but scaling up is a big challenge. A lot of birding is done along roads and interior areas need to be covered.
Q: How many from the panel and audience have read the State of India Birds (SoIB) Report in depth? And who is the report targeted at?
To this, most people said ‘policy makers‘. However, bureaucrats may be interested only in scheduled species.
Q: How do you convince policy makers that the categorisation of the SoIB is valuable aside from IUCN categorisation?
Sujan emphasized building a good rapport with Forest Departments (FD), as many officers are birders or have an interest in birds. Sumiti pointed out that financial resources could be secured if the SoIB convincingly establishes the presence of issues affecting certain species.
Hakim mentioned that FDs might be aware that there are problems in our wild areas and SoIB data speaks for itself in these cases. Swetashree proposed involving state biodiversity boards as collaborators for state-specific bird reports. Sujan raised concerns about state biodiversity boards’ reluctance to share data, especially with foreigners, but Pronoy suggested that initiating dialogue could help resolve conflicts.
Q: An analysis like the SoIB also requires a lot of money. Especially for states. Where will that money come from?
The discussion covered the financial aspects of creating such reports, with Praveen J (who was involved in the making of the SoIB reports) providing a broad cost breakdown. Sujan stressed the importance of organisational backing rather than individual efforts in raising funds.
Q: What would be the team composition of your State of your State’s Birds?
Swethashree suggested that scientists, NGOs, bureaucrats, and local communities should comprise the effort for state bird reports. Sumiti emphasized involving multiple stakeholders to ensure diverse voices are heard. Praveen explained that contributions from SoIB partner organizations vary, but influential organizations are crucial for moving policy.
Ultimately, the consensus was that different states have unique needs and should determine the best strategies for conserving their birdlife.
Panel Discussion on ‘How to Make the State of Your State’s Birds’
Click here to see a list of eBird Editors and Regional Coordinators who attended. [Link to gsheet]
We extend our heartfelt gratitude to the members of the Birdwatchers’ Society for hosting this conference. We are especially thankful to Mr. K.K. Daga for generously funding this event. We would also like to express our sincere appreciation to Major B.S. Parihar, Pampa Mistri, Mridul K. Kar, Mrinal K. Kar, Sankha Mishra, Dr. Kanad Baidya and Sujan Chatterjee for ensuring the smooth execution of the conference. Special thanks to Sommouli Sarkar and Aindrilla Sarkar for filming and media coverage, and to Shasank Ongole for taking down the minutes.
Presentations:
Agenda
eBird Review and ecosystem
Guidelines to reviewers
Systematic Bird Monitoring Programs in India
Bird Atlases in India
Nice efforts. With so many active Birdwatchers and bird enthusiasts India’ birds conservation is hopefully secured.
Keep it up. Coordinate with similar groups active in the country for same cause. It is nice the group is taking the congnizance and help from forest departments. It is a very important factor. Most of foresters are on the ground custodians of wildlife and their habitats. Their services are paramount along with public awareness and scientific/research communities inputs.
Good Luck and best wishes.
Prof. H. S. A. Yahya
New Jersey, USA.