An interesting story.

To: Michael Honeyman <>
Subject: An interesting story.
From: Dominic Funnell via Birding-Aus <>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 23:09:50 +0000
Hi Michael
I suppose what I was ineptly trying to say is that given the trend for new
species of invertebrates to be described and classified without retention
of voucher specimens and improving photographic techniques the often
spouted reason for retaining specimens that is to describe species is
becoming obsolete. To me this Kingfisher seems to have been retained for no
stronger reason almost than no one has a male! Given that as I understand
it the specimen was given to a local museum to display there seems little
scientific justification for its retention. But as a complete amateur I
could well be totally wrong - usually am!
On 10 Oct 2015 8:51 am, "Michael Honeyman" <>

> Hi Dom
> I think there is a misconception that the only purpose of collecting is to
> have a voucher specimen.
> mjh
> On 10 Oct 2015, at 09:06, Dominic Funnell <>
> wrote:
> I think the collection of a specimen of a bird that was always known to be
> there (males seen in 90s I believe) not completely necessary especially
> given the example of completely new invertebrate species to science having
> been described solely from HD photographs with no voucher specimens being
> retained. Surely blood and feather sample and HD photos more than adequate
> for a known species of vertebrate.
> Dom
<BR> Birding-Aus mailing list
<BR> To change settings or unsubscribe visit:

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

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: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU