> As far as the range goes, Simpson and Day has the Variegated right
> across
> the central and west of Victoria, Pizzey the same, but Slater has it
> solid
> down the south-east coast of Australia from Brisbane to SA. Atlas has
> no
> entries south of, say, Hamilton. So the range is feasible.
>
Sorry Eric. Variegated FW (race assimilis) comes no further south than
Jilpanger near Douglas in SW Victoria, and this is a long way from the
coast. Race lamberti does not occur in Victoria AT ALL, though could
turn up one day east of Mallacoota. No Variegated FWs (assimilis or
lamberti) occur in coastal SW Victoria (neither do Splendids, so factor
those out of the equation). In coastal SW Victoria there is only ONE
Malurus "blue wren" - the Superb. Beware generalised distribution maps.
> White-fronted Honeyeater.
> It's a pretty distinctive bird. Simpson and Day has the range for the
> entire west half of Victoria, this based on the Atlas, Slater puts it
> in the
> NW corner, as does Pizzey. Nope, I'm pretty happy that it's feasible.
>
These do wander south during droughts, so yes, it's feasible but still
be cautious of washed out New Holland HEs, Crescent HEs ... I've rarely
seen more than one at a time when they're out of range.
> Brown Booby.
> Definitely gannet-shaped. Only had a top-side and side-on view.
> Chocolate
> brown on top, white below, with the chocolate extending solidly down
> the
> chest. Perhaps 30ft from it as it flew past. A pretty distinctive
> bird.
> Now the Atlas puts it up north of Brisbane as does Pizzey. Simpson
> and Day
> and Slaters puts a small range around Port Phillip bay, west to the SA
> border.
>
If the maps shows a small distribution around Port Phillip to SA, then
they're clearly wrong! It has turned up on odd occasions down south as
a vagrant, but it's not a local, so don't let the dodgy map influence
your decision making.
> So I'll ignore the snide remarks about my reading skills, but am quite
> happy
> to discuss the accuracy of my references. Where does Simpson and Day
> rate
> with the other references? Since this is my primary field guide I'd
> be very
> interested. Similarly I think the plates in Simpson and Day are more
> indicative of distinguishing features. The Slater's and Pizzey have a
> number of shape and colour problems as far as I am concerned.
>
Now we're into the realm of opinion and personal preference.
Place soapbox: {{Personally I find the colour & shape of the Simpson &
Day birds rather apalling on the whole; the text is useless. Slater is
good for "jizz" of many birds, though recent editions are washed out for
colour (though I think this is preferable to technicolor as used by
S&D), and the text is very abbreviated. The new Pizzey & Doyle is
excellent in almost every regard, and has the best text by a country
mile, though it has a few mistakes notably in the distribution maps.}}
get down off soapbox.
The White-browed Babbler does not occur in coastal SW Victoria either,
BTW.
Cheers, Lawrie
|
