Scioly.org

I usually don't use the field guide for ID, but I use it for information.

My problem is typically finding guides that HAVE information. >.<

try
Audubon
it has realll nice info
i glanced through it when i was at barnes and nobles, and it looks like a lot of info
but for pictures, go with NWF

I just saw the Audubon one today (I got a copy), and it looks like it has some disadvantages. The color photographs and the information are on different pages.

^^ thats how it ALWAYS is
you have to KNOW your field guide well if you are going to use it in competition. and be super fast. the pictures (at least for birds) were decent, but at times the lighting was weird. and a lot of times if something has a variation (I.e Male/female, winter, summer, etc.) may be on a different page. that was a pain in the butt...
so when we used it for birds, we just had to know everything by sight ... facts, its in the middle IMO. not TONS but it does have a decent amount (peterson is usually bordering Bare minimum...)

my school has the peterson, and the audubon
they seem useful and both have a lot of pictures especially peterson
and i think we are getting sibley as well

are field guides the only study resource that are used? I mean you should just know them well because you are allowed to take them to competition
but are there any other good resources other than field guides

For Ornithology, my team used the National Geographic and Peterson. The other Scarsdale (my school) team used Peterson and the National Wildlife Federation field guides. My school has Peterson and the (very un-useful) old National Geographic field guide, which nobody uses since the whole team hates that field guide. The new one is OK.

anatomy wrote:are field guides the only study resource that are used? I mean you should just know them well because you are allowed to take them to competition
but are there any other good resources other than field guides

well the rules aren't out yet so we don't "officially" know. there are thoughts that we may have a binder, field guide is almost always a standard. and last year for ornithology we could take in any published book (ie encyclopedias, textbooks, field guides, regular books etc)

our school has almost every bird field guide under the sun, I found that Nat Geo was ok info wise, but not something i am comfortable bringing into a competition with. Audobon is pretty in the middle, peterson... I like the organization and last year it was "promoted" so to speak, by NSO, but info wise its a little bleh. Sibley's has great pictures, but they aren't typically photographs, and depending on which guide you have, the info is decent. DK usually only had like, one picture per thing (bird) but the info was really good, almost like that of an encyclopedia.

idk just my input, everyone has their own preferences and way of organizing. I have only looked at a few tree guides so far, so everything said here is based on ornithology.

For Ornitology, I used NWF, and the big Kaufman; our strategy was, since there are two books allowed, to use the Kaufman for all the info questions that I didn't know, and NWF for ID, even though I pretty much knew it all already, I still felt safer with it around in case any of the nightjars came up. I suggest doing the same thing for forestry; using the Sibley, which appears to be great for identification, in conjunction with some dendrology textbook or non-field guide.
I really have something against Audubon guides, something having to do with the tiny size of the book, and the separation of pictures, and the relative uselesenss of the pictures. Something typical they might do is, in the cone section, put an adult cone for Monterey Cypress and a juvenile for something else, and you're supposed to know the difference between the opposites. mSibley does this to a lesser extent, but they at least mention that soomething is bigger tahn something else, or the tree is in this shape, if they don't show it.

purplepeopleeater wrote:My problem is typically finding guides that HAVE information. >.<

we write a lot of our information into the book after we find it online. Thats what we did for birds.