|
Hello Birding-Ausers,
Especially those who were prompted to respond to my query about the Easter
Topend list,
notably: Bob Forsyth, Andrew Stafford, Lawrie Conole, Hugo Phillips,
Timothy Nye Dolby and Denise Goodfellow.
Naturally I have a few comments to make on their responses but I will
refrain from including copies of their comments in the interest of making this
posting as short as possible.
Thank you to those who provided details of the species in question.
I had actually come to the same conclusions after consulting the 6th
edition of 'Simpson and Day'.
This edition has the feature of having maps showing (in general terms, of
course, due to the size of the maps) sub-species distributions.
I'm sure that The Directory of Australian Birds has more accurate maps but
at this stage I think my money would be better spent on the Newhaven
project.
The text of 6th S&D also provides a lot of good clues to potential
'splits'.
I wonder if this was taken into consideration by respondents to Lawrie's
field guide survey?
Bob Forsyth's comments on the naming of the 'new' species 'Kalkadoon
Grasswren' seem quite reasonable to me.
I think that any of the names he suggests would be far more
suitable.
Incidentally, I am keen to see the flycatcher that looks like paperbark!
:-)
(Why wasn't it called Dwarf Restless Flycatcher?)
I am still trying to un-boggle my mind after Lawrie's comment on the
Australian Aborigine's knowledge of taxonomy and having adopted ultra-taxa
before 'us'!
I must admit though, I really don't know what ultra-taxa is; is there a
supa-taxa followed a mega-taxa followed by a maxa-taxa?
(Oops! I thunk I just over-taxa-ed me brain ...... derrrr! Where's the
pain-killers?)
To continue......
Thankfully I found Denise Goodfellow's explanation of the Australian
indigenous peoples' classification and knowledge of fauna far more coherent and
understandable.
I am sure that the Australian Aborigines relied more on the physical
appearance and habits of the creature for their 'classification' than the
'scientific' features that 'we' use. Also, I'm sure the knowledge of the elders
about what's where is second to none.
But I doubt that they would have placed the Magpie-lark in the same
'family' as the Yellow-breasted Boatbill or the Spangled Drongo!
For my style of bird-watching I would prefer the 'physical' system.
It seems to me that the more 'scientific' approach is destined to decimate
the membership of the 600 Club! ;-)
It is quite possible that I have misunderstood Lawrie's comment on
Aboriginal taxonomy; Lawrie and I do think on quite different planes but his
experience and knowledge on this subject is, without doubt, superior to mine.
Give me time, Lawrie. I haven't thought about a lot of this before.
Hugo, I wait with bated (but not held) breath for the update to The
Taxonomy and Species of Birds of Australia and its Territories.
Bob Inglis
Woody Point, SEQld
| 