The annual Christmas Bird Count is a venerable tradition and this year’s will be the 113th. The oft-told tale of its start in 1900 as an alternative to the “side-hunt” which was itself a long tradition in many families warms many a birder’s heart. What’s not to like about citizen science, conservation, and transforming a day of slaughter into a day of enjoying being outside watching birds? The Christmas Bird Count is one of the highlights of a birder’s year in the western hemisphere and this birder hopes it will never end.
But maybe it needs a name change?
Bear with me, keyboard commandos of the 101 Chairborn Patriot Squad. No one is coming to snatch Jesus from the manger or your tree from your living room. No one is going to force you to say “Happy Holidays” or drink the spiked eggnog. Think for a moment, if you will, of what harm could possibly come from changing the name of the Christmas Bird Count to, say, the Winter Bird Count. Or the Great Bird Count. Or, if we must keep the initials the same, how about the Cool Bird Count?
No real harm would come, right? Kirtland’s Warbler wouldn’t go extinct, birders wouldn’t abandon their favorite winter activity in droves, and the birds wouldn’t even notice. Sure, some websites would have to be redesigned and maybe some letterhead somewhere would have to be replaced but compared to the changes already on tap for the 113th Christmas Bird Count, like eliminating the $5 fee and abandoning the paper publication of American Birds, the change would be minor.
But what would the positive results be? First off, the name would just be reflecting reality. I have never been on a Christmas Bird Count that happened on Christmas. Many people, believe it or not, have other things to do on that day. The count period has been fixed as 14 December – 5 January for over a decade now. Is it really accurate to call it the Christmas Bird Count when almost no one does it on Christmas?
Second, a name that includes Christmas in it is, pretty much by definition, not inclusive. Do you have to be a Christian to participate? For those that don’t see this a barrier to entry – I’m looking at you, guy about to drop a massive screed in the comment section – think of how comfortable you would be participating in the Ramadan Bird Ramble or the Sukkot Bird Spot. You would at least think twice about it, right? Is everyone involved going to be Muslim? Or Jewish? Will I fit in if I’m not? Words have meanings and different words have different connotations to different people. Also, if the count is ever going to go worldwide – and I assume that someday that is the goal – what are the odds of getting Pakistan or Saudi Arabia to hold a Christmas Bird Count?
Dropping the $5 fee to encourage more participation is great but naming the event in a way that everyone feels welcome would be too. The fact is if someone were starting this event now it would never be named the Christmas Bird Count because it wouldn’t make sense.
Take it easy on me in the comments, people, it’s not like I just killed Santa…that was two years ago. And can anyone out there come up with a better name than the Cool Bird Count? I have to admit that was one of my less inspired ideas.
I feel the same way about Christmas Bird Count, though honestly I use the term so much I don’t even think about it as a Christmas thing. Which if you think about it minimizes the actually holiday of Christmas for those that care about those things.
I like Great Winter Bird Count, though that may not be inclusive to our southern hemisphere friends. Where does it stop?!!??!?
Well, I am a Christian, and I think the Ramadan Bird Ramble sounds really freakin’ awesome. I’m in!
If it still happened on Christmas day, I’d want to keep the name for the historical context…But since it doesn’t, I don’t care what we call it. It’s fun! I like “The Great Bird Count” or “the GBC”. All inclusive for believers and nonbelievers and for northern and southern hemispheres.
Bold and well-argued position, you big scrooge. My preference would be Holiday Bird Count since that stretch encompasses so many religious and secular celebrations. If we want to keep CBC, we could go festive with Celebratory Bird Count.
This is a really interesting point, but I feel it might lose the forest for the trees. Whether or not the CBC is “inclusive” depends on a lot more than the name. Despite the festive title, the Christmas Bird Count is THE most inclusive event in birding, where the cliques and the haves/have nots that plague regional birding take a back seat to cooperation and coverage. I like the historical quirk (or, alternatively, conservational breakthrough) that’s reflected in the name, and am in the “ain’t broke, don’t fix” camp.
In a similar context, I suggest changing the name of the Empire State Building to New York State Building. As a foreigner, I find “empire” to be offensive and politically incorrect. It will definitely keep me from visiting the States or contributing as a beat writer to a largely North American bird blog.
Ouuuups!
Look, I am about as far from a spiritual person as can be, but I find these kinds of discussions a little bit … well … unnecessary at best. It’s the historic name, people all over North America know it by that name, so why change it? Are there science-based statistics that clearly prove a significant number of birders would participate but refrain from it because they feel insecure about the religious part or feel excluded because they are atheist or belong to a different religion? I’d be huuuugely surprised if that was the case!
And the argument about trying to go global with it, which would include – amongst others – countries where Islam is the dominant religion: I guess that ain’t gonna happen anyway because it would make very little scientific sense.
The aim of the CBC is to provide data on bird distribution outside the breeding season to complement the breeding birds data. But the breeding season is different not only between the northern and southern hemisphere but also within the tropics and subtropics, where other factors play a more important role (dry season, rainy season etc.). It might make very little sense for people in Oman to count all the birds they see on a given day within the frame of 14 December – 5 January anyway, regardless of the event’s name! Would north American birders count all their birds on – say – April 1st because there has always been this amazingly successful tradition of conducting an “end-of-the-dry-season bird count” in SE Asia and the Indonesians really want to spread this great tradition?
And what would the scientific gain of such a count be in a North American context?
So, to me the CBC only makes sense in a Holarctic context. Furthermore, I really don’t think the name being “not inclusive” is all that important. most nations of the Holarctic region are largely Christian anyway, and those that aren’t would – should they choose to participate – change the name anyway to best fit their own birding agenda.
By which I really mean to say that I am with Nick: “ain’t broke, don’t fix”
I’d have to disagree with Nick about the CBC currently being inclusive and where cliques take the back seat. My personal experience with the CBC was that it was the most clique ridden birding event I have ever taken part in. When you have count circles that have been run by the same people for decades the environment is not always that welcoming to new comers. Of course, this completely depends on the people so individual experience will vary. I’m just saying we can’t paint with too broad a brush.
Howsabout the “Audubon Bird Count”?
@Jochen: Just FYI, the CBC is currently conducted across the western hemisphere – all across the Caribbean, Central America, and South America. Also on some Pacific islands. So the whole out-of-breeding-season argument doesn’t really fly.
Christmas starts in October now, so I think the count dates are well within “Christmas.”
Really!? CBCs in South America!?
Oh.
Well, I guess then I’ll just have to do a Romney and firmly state the opposite of what I’ve said before: Away with the “Christmas” in the Bird Count!!
Who cares about being ‘inclusive’? If people don’t like it, then they don’t have to participate.
Exactly the goal of most citizen science initiatives, Junior! Well said! Who needs participation?