re: Listing dilemma

Subject: re: Listing dilemma
From: (Kim Lim)
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 1996 08:26:17 +1100
>I Denton wrote:
>I would make the same comment about this:  how could those birdos in their
>heart count the bird as a Minnesota bird in the circumstances where the bird
>did not cross the river in fully natural circumstances?  They can do this
>because they're not really "birdwatchers" doing it for the love of the hobby -
>they're merely chasing numbers - and I would suggest that the listing should
>be disallowed.
In bird-races (twitchathons) that I have taken part in (Fraser's Hill,
Malaysia) where the boundary is only a gate, observations are allowed if
the bird is seen by the observer while he/she is inside the gate.  Often
the results of bird-races are taken to be legitimate lists of the areas
concerned because if a bird can be observed from within an area it is very
likely that it had or would fly over or into the area.

The same argument can also apply to state or country lists especially if
the bird is so close to the boundary as to be able to be observed without
optical aids or if the boundary is unlikely to be a serious barrier to the

 As for TV birds the only time I've heard about this was some guy who is an
armchair birder and who keeps a TV birdlist. It can be quite exciting and
challenging as you never no what might appear, usually fleetingly, and I
sometimes find these exercises good fun.


1/117 Hubert Street
East Vic Park  WA 6101
Tel: (09) 472 3392 (H)
      (09) 387 0745 (W)

<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