Hi again.
Just wanted to clarify how things work in the U.S.
A U.S. birder keeping lists under ABA rules has to keep a world list in
accordance with three authorities:
1. The ABA checklist for birds within the ABA area (U.S. (except Hawaii),
Canada and some offshore bits).
2. The American Ornithologists Union checklist for birds in its area but
outside the ABA.
3. The Clements list for birds outside the AOU area.
In practice, the ABA follows the AOU on matters of taxonomy, and mostly
makes decisions on whether an ABA record is acceptable or whether an exotic
population has become established.
Most of the griping seems to be about Clements, who tends to be rather
conservative.
Each of these publications is updated on a fairly regular basis.
Eric Jeffrey
In a message dated 1/3/2011 10:22:07 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
writes:
Hi everyone,
I agree with what is being said in this discussion.
C & B have, I believe, publicly stated that they are not going to publish
a new edition of their book. More than a new checklist, what I think is
needed now is for some organisation to accept responsibility for maintaing the
Australian checklist, post C & B - or adopting a new one.
Perhaps BOCA and BA, as the "recognised organisations" in Australian
birding would accept this role?
I would add that both BOCA and BA are currently participating in the
Birdlife International "Important Bird Area" project. For the purposes of the
project the Birdlife International checklist is being used, not Systematics
and Taxonomy of Australian Birds, Christidis & Boles (2008). Perhaps BA and
BOCA could adopt the Birdlife International checklist for all their
projects, not just the IBA project?
cheers
Jenny
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Dave Torr <
> wrote:
That is correct - the "official" list (C&B) was not published by a birding
organisation and the interval between issues is rather lengthy.
I personally do not think there is a role for a local committee to decide
on
the merits of splits/lumps - as this soon leads to the local list being
mis-aligned with International lists. Currently we have a committee (BARC)
that rules on new records. My feeling is that Aussie birders should agree
(probably via the major organisations) to accept one international list and
go with that for better or worse! We can then spend a long time arguing
which list to accept. (If the proposed merger happens between the two major
organisations - BA and BOCA - the combined organisation will become
BirdLife
Australia. BirdLife International of course published a checklist, so
whether such an organisation would be obliged to use that list is a matter
for yet more debate!)
On 4 January 2011 13:24, < > wrote:
> Does Australia really not have a checklist committee? Here in the U.S.,
> the American Birding Association provides the "official" checklist for
the
> U.S., although to large extent they follow the broader AOU. Of course
that
> does not stop people from disagreeing and keeping their own lists
> according to whatever criteria they prefer (so long as they do not
submit
> them to
> the ABA). The whole concept of the Committee is to pass judgment on
> things
> such as proposed lumps/splits, whether proposed new records are
> acceptable,
> etc.
>
> Eric Jeffrey
> Falls Church, VA
> USA
>
>
> In a message dated 1/3/2011 9:18:39 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
>
writes:
>
> Precisely, well said Jeff. I am not advocating a scientific discussion
by
> whoever would be on the committee so much as an editing of data for the
> sake of differentiating various species in a universally accepted way.
> That
> way everybody is reading from the same page.
>
> Cheers
>
> David Kowalick
>
>
> G'day Philip,
>
> "Allow me to express what I hope is obvious", you haven't quite
explained
> yourself here Philip or I suspect you don't really understand the
reasons
> for a committee as outlined by David. Evolution has got absolutely
nothing
> to do with this, David wasn't suggesting a committee that would change
the
> Australian list to keep pace with the evolution of new species as they
> evolve!!!
> What would be your process that would deliver on "Suggesting a
consistent
> list would be helpful", it's our evolving understanding of how many
> species
> there are through published research that is driving this issue and
> leading
> to an ongoing need to reassess the list.
> I am all for David's suggestion, it's way overdue.
>
> Cheers Jeff.
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
>
] On Behalf Of Philip Veerman
> Sent: Tuesday, 4 January 2011 12:18 PM
> To: 'David Kowalick';
> Subject: [Birding-Aus] World Checklists, Grass wrens, Official list of
Oz
> birds etc...
>
> I don't quite understand the concern. Allow me to express what I hope is
> obvious. Evolution is an ongoing process, which means it is happening
> now. At any one time, most species are and should be distinct but some
> small number of species will be in various stages of separation.
> Suggesting a consistent list is helpful but suggesting that there should
> always be a correct answer is flawed. Then impose our various ways
> (differences of opinions etc) on what constitutes enough distinction, of
> interpreting these dividing lines and of course there would be troubles.
> I would hate the idea of a different list every year and wouldn't be too
> comfortable about the costs of doing the committee David suggests,
> relative to the expenditure of those funds on more practical things. Of
> course knowing about species diversity is important to doing the
> conservation etc.
>
> Philip
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
>
] On Behalf Of David Kowalick
> Sent: Tuesday, 4 January 2011 11:11 AM
> To:
> Subject: [Birding-Aus] World Checklists, Grass wrens,Official list of Oz
> birds etc...
>
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> This is all very confusing. What constitutes an accepted split? Where
> does the Myall subspecies of the Thick-belled Grasswren fall? Western
or
>
> what? And what of the the C&B list? What do we take as the official
> list? The world list or C&B? These days I always try to tick every
> sub-species just in case it ends up being split later on. It seems
> splitting very much back in fashion but it seems impossible to keep
> abreast of all the developments. Surely there could be a committee set
> up by Birds Australia to review the official Australian list on an
> annual basis that takes into account all the latest developments? I have
>
> always lived and died by C&B but recently that seems to no longer be
the
>
> case.In the meantime I will try not to drown in the data.
>
> Cheers
>
> David Kowalick
> ===============================
>
> ===============================
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to:
>
> _http://birding-aus.org_ (http://birding-aus.org/)
> ===============================
>
> ===============================
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to:
>
> _http://birding-aus.org_ (http://birding-aus.org/)
> ===============================
>
> ===============================
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to:
>
> _http://birding-aus.org_ (http://birding-aus.org/)
> ===============================
>
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
_http://birding-aus.org_ (http://birding-aus.org/)
===============================
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
http://birding-aus.org
===============================
|
