Some people have raised with me the basis of this exercise,
and suggested that other species might have been included such as Grey Fantail
and Tree Martin. Of course they could have been, and the selection had an
arbitrary element. The idea was that a restricted list was more likely to
attract reports. Perhaps an expanded list (say 15 species) could be used
for a similar exercise next year. (I must say I am seeing quite a lot of
G Fantails, and this species would be reported more, I think, than the BFCS.)
I would be interested in suggestions as to what additional 5 species could most
usefully be added. The criterion is that the species should have been historically
recorded, but in a pattern of sharply lower numbers, in the Winter period.
The list was selected on that basis, and on the basis that
the selected species are often regarded as ‘ migrants’ with any late-Winter/early
Spring sighting being reported as a ‘return’. The exercise is
intended to throw more light on movements underlying the oversimplified ‘migrant’
label.
Of course there is much relevant information in the database,
for which reports should also be submitted. However I believe, for
various reasons, that people are more likely to send an emailed report of sightings
for a small number of species over a limited period than to make a report for
database purposes.
Chatline members can be expected to report other scarcities,
as in recent reports of W-b Cuckoo-shrike and Horsfield’s BC. These
are of considerable interest and can be added as footnotes to the final
summary, but are not within the scope of the exercise as originally specified.
At the end, people can offer any comments or criticism that
they wish on the results.
GD
