My take on the list it is very simple. It would be nice to have a standard list
so everyone can compare. I'm nowhere near the crazy twitcher I used to be years
ago, but knowing what it's like to be crazy on this list thing the most useful
thing is to have something that everyone can use. I guess we can all use
different things & modify them to deal with our different choices, but in my
opinion it is better to have something that we disagree with, but is a
standard, than no standard at all. No matter what happens there are always
going to be splits & lumpings that we don't agree with personally. And,
although we all like to think we know what's a species, & what isn't, very few
of us (myself included) are taxonomists. My answer to that problem is when I'm
birdwatching is to look at everything when I'm out in a place that I don't
usually go into. I've always enjoyed looking at geographic variation anyway. I
guess the standard now is the BARC list? I think I get about a dozen ticks out
of that. Doesn't feel as satisfying at going out & looking at them
> Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2013 22:47:43 +1000
> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] BARC Checklist
> Not sure there is much point in stressing about it. The Australian Birding
> fraternity have always used a variety of taxonomies, for different reasons
> and with different purposes. The closest we have come to a "unified" list
> was when many followed C&B (while it was current). As that is no longer
> being updated, it will become of less and less relevance, and others have
> ably pointed out many of the competing considerations to take into account in
> 'adopting' another. I suspect we will probably never come as close again to
> having a 'standard' taxonomy, and most will just adopt that which works best
> for their purposes, and get used to 'translating' across lists.
> Life is too short - and there are too many birds to enjoy - to stress about
> Just my thoughts.
> John Tongue
> Ulverstone, Tas.
> On 02/07/2013, at 7:06 PM, Robert Inglis wrote:
> > Thank you David James.
> > I have been sitting here (as it were) becoming more and more agitated,
> > frantic, despairing, confused, annoyed, thinking of a large brandy as I
> > have been reading all these postings about the various taxonomies that
> > various birders are using for their own esoteric reasons while, at the same
> > time, wondering just what Birdlife Australia is thinking.
> > I wait with bated (which my much loved and ancient Chambers Twentieth
> > Century Dictionary tells me is the same as “Abated” meaning “to lessen; to
> > deduct from; to mitigate; to put an end to [I like that one], do away with,
> > as of an action or a nuisance, to render null, as a writ”) breath to see
> > the “explanation to the introduction about why BARC uses the IOC checklist
> > for its purposes”.
> > I am also trying to visualise those hardy and much admired soles who are
> > currently working on (at least, I am hoping they are still working on) new
> > “Australian Bird Field Guides” but wondering which taxonomy they should be
> > using. Poor soles. My heart goes out to you.
> > I could go on but ............
> > Bob Inglis
> > Sandstone Point
> > Queensland
> > Sent from my very tolerant and long suffering desktop PC of mongrel design.
> > ===============================
> > 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
> > ===============================
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)