I really appreciated and enjoyed the summary of interim albatross taxonomy
outlined by David James. Perhaps someone would now be willing to help on
how to identify all of these 24 'species'.
Rummaging around various web sites, I found the statement that -
"The interim taxonomy of albatrosses be the basis for further research,
including research on the conservation status of albatrosses. This agreement
arose in recognition of the fact that the loss of, or threat to, small
populations that may be separate species or sub-species in the interim
taxonomy was of very serious concern."
Surely this is the crux of the matter. As a scientist, I too expect
scientific integrity from the community. But I have no confidence in the
integrity of any decision maker concerning the protection of a species, let
alone sub-species. Those who care for the environment are fighting a
constant battle against those who use any weapons that are available to
them, legal or otherwise. Although not necessarily consistent with my
scientific background, I would be in favour of doing everything possible to
protect whatever we have left, and if that means declaring species valid
then so be it.
It would be very silly to lose a population of albatrosses whilst we were
arguing about their specific status based on the quality of data currently
available.
Cheers - Trevor.
PS Wouldn't it be good if populations at sub-species level were afforded
protection of the same quality as populations at species level.
To unsubscribe from this list, please send a message to
Include ONLY "unsubscribe birding-aus"
in the message body (without the quotes)
|
