At 07:17 PM 10/10/97 -0700, you wrote:


>I stopped by Powell's on my way back from Portland this afternoon
>and picked up the much anticipated Peterson's Warbler guide.

I was going over this at PAS a couple of days ago, with Bob Wilson.
You know, we offer 10% discounts for members, and even at full price
don't charge more than Powell's. Just thinking of that "birders putting
money where there mouth's are" issue we've been discussing :)

(Though I think Powell's is great, and he's involved with social issues
I support, so don't take this too seriously!)


>In looking it over, I find a curious mix of really good stuff and
>disappointing bits. It's really thick, considering it only covers
>the warblers of North America and it could be argued that there is
>too much information in this guide.

I agree with this.

Part of the problem, I think, is design. It's designed like a phone
book - it all runs together. For instance, the specific accounts include
at least one photo, but the accounts begin generally mid-page after the
account of the preceeding species. From a design POV, I'd rather have
each specific account start, say, on the right-hand page top, with perhaps
a leading photo. Would make flipping through the book to find stuff much
easier, and overall make the book more of an aesthetic treat. I also think
the photos add little, as they're reproduced, well ... little. If you're
going to have photos, pick some good ones and highlight them. Make the book
a little more attractive, I think aesthetic considerations add to a book's
usefulness.

>The last three quarters (500 pages) is devoted to
>species accounts. At an average of 8.5 page per species
>you can, perhaps, see what I mean by too much information.

Yet I think there's a place for this. I think if they'd allowed 10 pages
per species they could've made it much more useful. Perhaps a larger-type
summary of major points, and small-text details of nitty-gritty things of
interest only to those who see far too few warblers and gotta read about
them to get their fix. I think the design sucks and makes the dense
information come across as even more dense. Those 8.5 pages are 500 pages
of run-on text, with no natural species breaks at page breaks. It's like
reading the Congressional Record. Whether or not using the photos to give
a brief chance to gather one's breath before diving into another species is
a technique Michael would agree to, I think we'll both agree that this run-on
nature makes the book awkward to use.


>The illustrations are plentiful and cover most of the subspecific
>variations (4 types of Orange-crowned Warblers, 6 types of Yellow
>Warbler, 3 types of Wilson's Warblers). The illustrations are
>Peterson-like, all in the same pose and pointed in the same
>direction. It's pretty obvious that there were 2 illustrators
>(Thomas Schultz and Cindy House), which is not to say that one
>is better than the other. The best illustration is the series of
>undertail coverts (since this is generally the most easily seen
>part of a warbler).

Agreed.


> but also include a reflection of the trend in
>quantum birding entitled "taxonomic relationships" which connects,
>where possible, each species to others by cladistic characters
>including DNA-DNA hybridization.

Which I think is welcome, just because many birders will learn a lot
from it.


>The paperback version is available from Powell's at $20.00

$18 from PAS if you join us :)

Apparently, this is the first book of a series which represents
a new trend in Peterson guides. Or so the publisher has been eye-winking
to Portland Audubon. They're also soliciting comments from us, and perhaps
the likes of Seattle Aubudon. So ... don't just post here if you care, call
PAS (or check with SAS) and get your comments back to the publisher. It is
rare for a publisher to ask its sellers about technical aspects of a book.
I doubt, actually, they asked Powell's (they don't specialize in this stuff)
but they specifically asked PAS for feedback, to help drive future volumes.

So, take advantage of this opportunity and let them know what you think
(though
hell they'll probably ignore you anyway :)



- Don Baccus, Portland OR <donb at rational.com>
Nature photos, on-line guides, and other goodies at
http://donb.photo.net