If only we had a definition of ‘vagrant’ that did
not beg the question. Speaking of Australia as a whole, the ‘Directory’
gives: ‘fewer than 8 records in total of individual birds or flocks
within 10 years, or fewer than 12 records total’. I have seen no attempted
definition of ‘vagrant’ for an Australian locality, except along
the lines ‘a species that is found outside its normal range’ (!).
I agree that ‘rare’ is unsatisfactory for this
purpose, and political boundaries are just political boundaries.
In the end, there is only the record, however it is interpreted.
From: Mark Clayton [
Sent: Monday, 23 July 2007 11:45 AM
To: ;
Cc:
Subject: RE: [canberrabirds] alula and ageing of honeyeaters
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
In reply to Richard’s quiz: 1, it is rounded, therefore 2, it
is a juvenile (but not just on the shape of the feather), and 3, A. because
some student from the ANU with access to a mist-net caught it down the coast
and brought it up to Canberra to stir everyone up? B. because it likes that
particular Banksia ericifolia? I was with Demetrios yesterday when he took the
photo. It does not look all that well, and as Demetrios said, was attacked
quite vigorously by about half a dozen New Holland Honeyeaters. It looked
rather like a Thugby Union maul for a stage, with warms and legs, oops, sorry,
that should be wings and legs, going in all directions. Still, when not being
harassed, it was quite agile and had no trouble flying and chasing flying
insects in the canopy of the Brittle Gums above its favoured Banksia.
Despite what some people are writing about this, and the White-fronted
Honeyeater, neither are rare birds. They are both common species that happen to
be vagrants in the ACT at present. Birds, as far as I am
aware, do not recognize our political boundaries!
Mark
