What status? "Rare to locally common"

[Denis Wilson <>]

Hi Matt

Re "rare to locally common."

These phrases are frequently used with Orchids, where they can appear in clusters or "colonies", where the soil suits them - often just in one small area - maybe the size of a house block.
That fits "locally common".

But then if that "colony" is the only one withing 50 Kms, then they might be considered "rare".

But although such things are often not obvious at first, you could hardly use "rare" or "common" to describe their true status.
Yes, it is a compromise, but seen in the overall context, it seems fair to me.

Now I know I am talking about plants not birds, and your birds are presumably mobile.

BUT, and it is a BIG BUT, birds do not occur randomly around Canberra or anywhere else - they go where conditions suit them, flowering plants, or whatever.
Those plants are found where the soil suits them, or the aspect.

I recently walked around "Little Black Mountain" with Martin Butterfield, and we observed clear differences in habit as we progressed.

So why would the birds not also notice these differences?

Makes sense to me.

So, I am saying, (in the nicest possible way) make your assessment on the subtle variations of the habitat, not just on what someone once wrote in a book. 

Denis Wilson

On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 5:26 PM, pardalote <> wrote:

Hi All

I have recently encountered a bird species which is described in my Slater Field Guide as being "rare to locally common."  I don't understand what this means, and to me, seems to be a contradiction of itself.  My understanding of "rare" and "common" don't seem to fit.  Could someone please explain to me what this means?  Is the bird species I have seen rare, or common?

Matt.

-- 
Denis Wilson
If you're not pissed off with the World, you're just not paying
        attention.
(Kasey Chambers)

"The Nature of Robertson"
www.peonyden.blogspot.com.au