Hi David and all,
I am sorry to take so long to answer this
but a health problem has had me focused elsewhere.
I think that today’s email from
Geoff Bowen in the UK
to the chat-line sums thing up pretty well and I am doing much the same as him
with my world bird list. You will not get two taxonomists to agree completely
on the different species so it is up to each individual to choose which
taxonomy they want to follow. With the original version of the CSIRO list, and
in this revised edition, we followed the taxonomy as cited in the references
listed in the front of the book with some alterations as per the recent
scientific literature. In the first edition Dick Schodde had the final say on
what was the correct taxonomy and in the revised edition, Terry Chesser (then
Curator at the ANWC) and Ian Mason were the authorities. No doubt the new ANWC
director, Leo Joseph, will have his own ideas on what is what. A thing to keep
in mind with all taxonomic lists is that they are out of date the minute they
are published, unless someone out there in the ether keeps a computerized copy
up to date the minute something is changed.
Also I hope your reference to the Oriental
Skylark should actually be to the Oriental Reed-Warbler. Thanks for pointing
this out. Indeed it is incorrect and is certainly not found in the ACT. We used
an MS Word program to do the shading and it had a horrible habit of moving the
shading around by itself. I know that the “original” document was
correct on my pc prior to it going to CSIRO Publishing (it was independently
checked by staff members from NSW NPWS and the Federal DEH). Unfortunately at
the last minute, and when I was away, some fairly drastic changes were made to
the manuscript (that I wasn’t happy with) and it appears to have been
done on an older, incorrect, version, then sent to the publishers.
Unfortunately these things do happen and most of the corrections up until about
9 months ago can be found on the CSIRO Publishing website.
I have had a few queries off line as to
what list people should use in Australia.
As I said above that is a personal choice. If people want to use Christidis and
Boles then by all means do so. The only point I will make is that the ANWC is
the Federal Governments official vertebrate (except fish) museum so technically
what the ANWC publishes should be taken as “the list”. No doubt
many will disagree – again personal choice.
I can’t think of too species at
present that need either a scientific or common name change on the ACT list
other than Australian Painted Snipe, Rostralula
australis and the scientific name for the cuckoos change from Chrysococcyx to Chalcites. I will pass on any others that I come across.
There are other names for Australian species that could have changed.
I hope this answers your queries. No doubt
it will also start the ball rolling as a discussion topic!
ps I am NOT a taxonomist!
From: COG Lists
Sent: Sunday, 4 February 2007 6:04
Subject: RE: [canberrabirds] Koel
One of the many great achievement of Mark Clayton and his colleagues in
producing the volume Clayton, M, Wombey, JC, Mason, IJ, Chesser, RT &
Wells, A 2006, CSIRO list of Australian vertebrates:
a reference with conservation status, 2nd edn, (CSIRO Publishing,
Collingwood, Vic.) is updating the species list of birds, and the English name
for some where the species is not changed but an English name change is
warranted. Some of the changes were published a couple of years ago in Shodde
& Mason's Directory - though
passerines only there.
Name changes of species that we have in the ACT that I spotted when Mark's book
was published, updating Christidis & Boles 1994, are:
- Pacific Koel - was
Common Koel - different species
- Australian Reed Warbler
- was Clamorous Reed-Warbler - different species
- Australian Pipit - was
Richard's Pipit - different species
- Horsfield's Bushlark -
was Singing Bushlark - different English name tho same species
- Eurasian Skylark - was
Skylark - different English name tho same species
Any other changes to the ACT birds, Mark?
Also ... I wonder if the mention of the Oriental Skylark as being a
vagrant/accidental in the ACT is a typo, or if there is a local record not
generally known about?
And another also:- I note that Milburn (and many others) refer to the
Fork-tailed Swift Apus pacificus as
Pacific Swift, but HANZAB and Clayton et al. do not follow suit. Considering
that its range includes not only the Pacific but also India, Sri Lanka,
Tibet, Mongolia, inland China,
not to mention SE Asia and Western
Australia, perhaps Fork-tailed is preferable?
At 08:55 2/02/2007, Paul Fennell wrote:
Wots a Pacific Koel then? I thought
they were seldom pacified.
Canberra Ornithologists Group
0407 105 460
02 6254 1804
25 Pickles St
Scullin ACT 2614
From: Mark Clayton
Sent: Thursday, 1 February 2007
Subject: [canberrabirds] Koel
At 20 past 8 this evening a Pacific Koel was calling very close to my Kaleen