Condor Watch Talk

Carcass off camera

  • Shiphrah by Shiphrah

    Image ACW0002swu I and another volunteer agree that there must be a carcass just off camera, but marked very differently "within reach" of the presumed carcass, vs. "more than 2 lengths" from the visible picked-over bones. Which way should we do it next time?

    Posted

  • wreness by wreness moderator

    One answer is Super Perfect correct and one is Kind Of OK Correct. It depends how brave you want to be about it. (you thought this would be easy, right?)

    The Super Perfect most technically correct would be to mark them "more than 2 lengths from carcass" since you do see the carcass and the condors are not there - they are more than 2 lengths away. Easy enough, accurate, The End.

    But you can also look at the condor postures in the photos would think, "Well, they wouldn't be over there if there wasn't something to eat". And they're hunched over like they are eating. If they were doing this out in the middle of the photo you'd assume they were eating (but you'd probably have more information to base that on)

    So it'd be your call with a photo like this and how much time you want to spend on it.

    Personally I just mark the condors in a photo like this "more than 2 lengths" and mark the White tag White XX . Since all in all this photo doesn't have any good info, except that there are some hard-to-count- condor butts off camera and a carcass in the background they're ignoring, I would quickly mark this and poof to the next photo.

    Eventually, photos down this Time Line will show who they are (or already did) when they have the courtesy to walk to the carcass that the camera is on and and the story will be revealed. 😄

    Hope this helps! (and thanks for all you do, as always!)

    Posted