Hey all,

For EBird reporting, if it comes down to what *should* we do, I think they find more value in data that comes from stationary counts in smaller areas with distinct vegetation. That would lead me to think that for their purposes, a notation like "Montlake Fill - Yesler Swamp" would be of more value than just "Montlake Fill", (although I realize the question may be whether or not this is a distinct part of the Fill). It can get a bit tedious to have so many subcategories for an area, though, and I've just lumped it all into one report whenever I've gone - whether something was seen in the parking lot or Shoveler's Pond.

EBird has been a convenient way to keep records of what I've seen and where - and to quickly see what else people have seen - but when I have the time, I've tried to make the data as useful as possible (although I can't count the times I've put an 'x' next to Black-capped Chickadee, or just noted the county in which I saw a bird!). Prooobbably not going to add the subdivisions of the Fill in there yet - I don't go often enough to even necessarily know what they're all called - but there are other areas where I do break it down more.

There's my two cents!

Tim Brennan
Renton