re: Listing dilemma
Mon, 4 Nov 96 15:46:27 +60000
When a question came up some time ago on counting birds as lifers if you've
seen them on television, I commented that "how could you in your heart count
them as a lifer if you haven't really seen the bird in the wild - in life -
doing it's thing naturally".
I would make the same comment about this: how could those birdos in their
heart count the bird as a Minnesota bird in the circumstances where the bird
did not cross the river in fully natural circumstances? They can do this
because they're not really "birdwatchers" doing it for the love of the hobby -
they're merely chasing numbers - and I would suggest that the listing should
We don't want birdwatching as a hobby (and serious interest to many) brought
to ridicule by these sorts of activities. It could also endanger conservation
efforts and projects if people who are not pro-conservation could quote
stories like this, as conservation often relates to specific sites.
Paul Taylor <> Wrote:
| Some enterprising birdos thought that it would be really
| neat to be add
| this bird to the list, so set out for the Minnesota side
| of the border
| opposite where the Pygmy Nuthatch had been seen. Armed
| with a tape
| with Pygmy Nuthatch calls, they managed to lure the bird
| into Minnesota
| and onto the list. Or did they?
| So while the listing is technically acceptable, it
| probably isn't ethical.
| If it isn't ethical, should the listing be ruled
The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering
takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely
a compilation of material sent by many people to the birding-aus mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way.
If you wish to get material removed from the archive or
have other queries about the archive e-mail
Andrew Taylor at this address: