If the classification rule for "shorebirds" was "mostly grey birds
that spend most of the day standing around" then emus would also
qualify. I expect the reason that they aren't classified as
shorebirds has more to do with the fact that they don't fly than the
amount of time they spend around shores.
Regards, Laurie.
On 17/01/2008, at 5:55 AM, Dave Torr wrote:
Not really - not all "waders" wade - some are much happier inland.
Banded
Lapwings and Inland Dotterels are two examples that spring to mind
that
rarely get their toes wet! The grouping into "families" is done on
lots of
characteristics, not just the habitat and "Shorebirds" is generally
taken to
mean a specific scientific group. One could argue that a Silver Gull
is a
shorebird as you find it at the seaside, but it does not fit in the
relevant
scientific group so I expect it will not be in your book.
On 17/01/2008, Peter Shute <> wrote:
I just bought "Shorebirds of Australia", and was surprised to see
that it
covers Plains-wanderer. I can understand their explanation that it's
closely related to other shorebirds, but if it doesn't look or act
like one,
why include it?
I'
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
===============================
|
