Physical but also psychological and social. Loss of life, trade, industries, businesses, movement. Humans lost interaction with other humans and nature.
Everything went virtual/digital. Changed how we consume information, learn, work, socialise, communicate.

Shortcomings of traditional methods of data collection for scientific research—especially contingent on human circumstances. However, many of these pitfalls do not apply as strongly to (and hence can be overcome by using) large-scale, crowdsourced, open access data on a wide variety of metrics, from human traffic levels to species occurrence [@bates2020].

Citizen science today is a research technique that engages volunteers from the general public—most of whom are not trained as scientists—in collecting and/or analysing and interpreting data as part of a scientific enquiry [@silvertown2009]. Most importantly, citizen science programmes facilitate attempts at answering large-scale questions that are otherwise not feasible [@macphail2020].

The quality and reliability of this data is highly contingent on the collectors, i.e., citizens. Birder behaviour needs to be uniform and consistent.
Thus, our primary concern now is whether or not the usefulness of such data has changed with the pandemic.

Can this be attributed to changes in birder behaviour, or did birds truly modify their behaviour?

How bias in birder behaviour can affect rep.freq.
Essentially, the kind of birds one likely to see changes depending on all the above factors.

Mention “peak” months

Clarify log and non-

with no major spatial clusters

effect of lowered group birding is unknown and difficult to gauge small-scale (bird graphs too); birders active again after peak