Mike Patterson wrote:
>While the notion of over flight is no doubt a partial explanation, I think
>coverage is an important factor. There are parts of California that are covered
>far more rigorously than the Oregon Coast. The best habitats are far from major
>urban centers (eg.leadbetter point, Bandon, etc.) Those that are close are
>typically covered 2/7 of the time only.
>
>I don't think we'll ever match California. Overflight is a factor. The degree
>to which it is a factor can only really be stated when we can put the same kind
>of numbers of observers into the field on a consistant basis.

I suspect Mike has hit the nail right on the head. Maybe WOS and/or SAS could
organize birders to sign up for weekdays and attempt to get daily coverage at

Ocean Shores next fall as an experiment.


David Wright
dwright at u.washington.edu