In Defense of Indices: The Case of Bird Surveys. Johnson, D. H. Journal of Wildlife Management, 72(4):857–868 , 2008. ![In Defense of Indices: The Case of Bird Surveys [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper abstract bibtex Indices to population size have come under increasing criticism in recent years, on the grounds that indices might not faithfully represent the entire population. Most criticisms involve surveys of birds, particularly those based on point counts, which is my focus here. A variety of quantitative methods have been developed to reduce the bias of point counts, such as distance sampling, multiple-observer surveys, and time-of-detection methods. I argue that these developments are valuable, in that they enhance understanding of the detection process, but that their practical application may well be limited, likely to intensive studies focusing on a small number of species. These quantitative methods are not generally applicable to extensive, multiple-species surveys. Although criticism of the thoughtless use of indices is welcome, their wholesale rejection is not.
@ARTICLE{Johnson2008,
author = {Johnson, Douglas H.},
title = {In Defense of Indices: The Case of Bird Surveys},
journal = {Journal of Wildlife Management},
year = {2008},
volume = {72},
pages = {857--868
},
number = {4},
abstract = {Indices to population size have come under increasing criticism in
recent years, on the grounds that indices might not faithfully represent
the entire population. Most criticisms involve surveys of birds,
particularly those based on point counts, which is my focus here.
A variety of quantitative methods have been developed to reduce the
bias of point counts, such as distance sampling, multiple-observer
surveys, and time-of-detection methods. I argue that these developments
are valuable, in that they enhance understanding of the detection
process, but that their practical application may well be limited,
likely to intensive studies focusing on a small number of species.
These quantitative methods are not generally applicable to extensive,
multiple-species surveys. Although criticism of the thoughtless use
of indices is welcome, their wholesale rejection is not.},
date = {May 01, 2008},
owner = {Tiago},
subdatabase = {distance},
timestamp = {2009.01.23},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.2193%2F2007-294}
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"jwaWLBh5aFXJrtmLG","bibbaseid":"johnson-indefenseofindicesthecaseofbirdsurveys-2008","authorIDs":[],"author_short":["Johnson, D. H."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Johnson"],"firstnames":["Douglas","H."],"suffixes":[]}],"title":"In Defense of Indices: The Case of Bird Surveys","journal":"Journal of Wildlife Management","year":"2008","volume":"72","pages":"857–868 ","number":"4","abstract":"Indices to population size have come under increasing criticism in recent years, on the grounds that indices might not faithfully represent the entire population. Most criticisms involve surveys of birds, particularly those based on point counts, which is my focus here. A variety of quantitative methods have been developed to reduce the bias of point counts, such as distance sampling, multiple-observer surveys, and time-of-detection methods. I argue that these developments are valuable, in that they enhance understanding of the detection process, but that their practical application may well be limited, likely to intensive studies focusing on a small number of species. These quantitative methods are not generally applicable to extensive, multiple-species surveys. Although criticism of the thoughtless use of indices is welcome, their wholesale rejection is not.","date":"May 01, 2008","owner":"Tiago","subdatabase":"distance","timestamp":"2009.01.23","url":"http://dx.doi.org/10.2193%2F2007-294","bibtex":"@ARTICLE{Johnson2008,\r\n author = {Johnson, Douglas H.},\r\n title = {In Defense of Indices: The Case of Bird Surveys},\r\n journal = {Journal of Wildlife Management},\r\n year = {2008},\r\n volume = {72},\r\n pages = {857--868\r\n\t\r\n\t},\r\n number = {4},\r\n abstract = {Indices to population size have come under increasing criticism in\r\n\trecent years, on the grounds that indices might not faithfully represent\r\n\tthe entire population. Most criticisms involve surveys of birds,\r\n\tparticularly those based on point counts, which is my focus here.\r\n\tA variety of quantitative methods have been developed to reduce the\r\n\tbias of point counts, such as distance sampling, multiple-observer\r\n\tsurveys, and time-of-detection methods. I argue that these developments\r\n\tare valuable, in that they enhance understanding of the detection\r\n\tprocess, but that their practical application may well be limited,\r\n\tlikely to intensive studies focusing on a small number of species.\r\n\tThese quantitative methods are not generally applicable to extensive,\r\n\tmultiple-species surveys. Although criticism of the thoughtless use\r\n\tof indices is welcome, their wholesale rejection is not.},\r\n date = {May 01, 2008},\r\n owner = {Tiago},\r\n subdatabase = {distance},\r\n timestamp = {2009.01.23},\r\n url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.2193%2F2007-294}\r\n}\r\n\r\n","author_short":["Johnson, D. H."],"key":"Johnson2008","id":"Johnson2008","bibbaseid":"johnson-indefenseofindicesthecaseofbirdsurveys-2008","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"http://dx.doi.org/10.2193%2F2007-294"},"downloads":0,"html":""},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"http://distancelive.xyz/MainBibFile.bib","creationDate":"2020-06-16T14:23:34.559Z","downloads":0,"keywords":[],"search_terms":["defense","indices","case","bird","surveys","johnson"],"title":"In Defense of Indices: The Case of Bird Surveys","year":2008,"dataSources":["RjvoQBP8rG4o3b4Wi"]}