Re: FW: Re: [BIRDING-AUS] Birds in Chile

["Margaret Roadknight" <>]

I don't understand why the ABA would "officially reject" this as an "issue". 
Is it really that contentious? I guess it must be, especially in other 
countries that are not fortunate enough to be continents.
I think Australia has the luxury of being one of the few "countries" that 
could have a genuine "country (Australian) list". We are a continent...why 
include areas that are not part of Australian continental land-mass and that 
are related to Australia only in a political sense? Is birding not more an 
environment-motivated hobby than a political-motivated one?
I think the argument of embassies / territories is an academic one.

> From: Dave Torr <>
> Reply-To: Dave Torr <>
> To: Margaret Roadknight <>
> CC:  
> Subject: Re: FW: Re: [BIRDING-AUS] Birds in Chile
> Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 14:01:25 +1100
>
> So long as we are consistent!
>
> Just consider what would happen if you were in France - as far as I
> know they consider all their overseas "territories" to be an integral
> part of France (which is why they claimed that testing bombs in the
> Pacific was the same as testing them in Europe - it's all part of
> France!) so you could get a really long list for France on that basis!
>
> Further research reveals that embassies are legally regarded as
> "territory" of the country that runs them (which is why you can claim
> asylum by going into an embassy) so if we did include the 50+
> embassies/high commisions that we have you could get quite a large
> list!
>
> On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 13:44:04 +1100, Margaret Roadknight
> <> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Yes, I agree that including embassies is pushing things a little!! It is
> > simply too difficult to regulate or define. We'd all be going crazy 
> visiting
> > embassies!!
> >
> > I think that Tony Palliser's definition includes "territories", not just 
> any
> > political ground, such as embassies. Even this seems puzzling to me, as
> > birds seen on Christmas or Heard Islands are probably just as attached 
> to
> > Australian ecological boundaries as Santiago!!
> >
> > Perhaps the limits should be defined more by bio-regional boundaries. 
> The
> > best 'Australian list' would be defined by the continental shelf (hence
> > including all the major offshore islands) and the 200NM limit for 
> oceanic
> > birds. But then there is the difficulty in Northern Australia, where the
> > shelf pretty much joins PNG etc.
> >
> > Margaret
> >
> > >From: "Graham Labrooy" <>
> > >To: 
> > >Subject: FW: Re: [BIRDING-AUS] Birds in Chile
> > >Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2005 12:33:51 +1000
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>From: Dave Torr <>
> > >>Reply-To: Dave Torr <>
> > >>To: Graham Labrooy <>
> > >>CC: 
> > >>Subject: Re: [BIRDING-AUS] Birds in Chile
> > >>Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 12:50:10 +1100
> > >>
> > >>The only "official" list that I know of for checking Aussie birders'
> > >>totals is http://users.bigpond.net.au/palliser/pelagic/totals.html
> > >>maintained by Tony Palliser, so if you aspire to post your total for
> > >>others to see then you would need to adhere to his rules - and I guess
> > >>he excludes embassies.
> > >>
> > >>Irrespctive of what the "legal" status if an embassy is (I did a quick
> > >>Google but could not find an answer) I think you will find most
> > >>birders would not include them.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 11:42:07 +1000, Graham Labrooy
> > >><> wrote:
> > >> > Hi there,
> > >> >
> > >> > I posted a message a while back about Australian lists. I have just
> > >>returned
> > >> > from a visit to Santiago, Chile, where I was able to visit the
> > >>Australian
> > >> > embassy, in Las Condes. Although the weather was poor I managed to
> > >>identify
> > >> > Austral thrush, Picui Ground Dove, Eared Dove and Southern Lapwing
> > >>whilst
> > >> > there.  Apart from adding to my (very limited) Chilean-list, do 
> these
> > >>birds
> > >> > qualify for an Australian list as well?? It is Australian soil is 
> it
> > >>not?
> > >> > Political territory??
> > >> >
> > >> > Maybe I am way off the mark, but I would like to know what is 
> standard,
> > >>as I
> > >> > am only new to birding in Australia.
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanking you in advance (and thank you to Russell for his reply 
> last
> > >>time),
> > >> > Graham
> > >> >
> > >> > _________________________________________________________________
> > >> > SEEK: Now with over 60,000 dream jobs! Click here:
> > >> > http://ninemsn.seek.com.au?hotmail
> > >> >
> > >> > --------------------------------------------
> > >> > Birding-Aus is now on the Web at
> > >> > www.birding-aus.org
> > >> > --------------------------------------------
> > >> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message 
> 'unsubscribe
> > >> > birding-aus' (no quotes, no Subject line)
> > >> > to 
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Are you right for each other? Find out with our Love Calculator:
> > http://fun.mobiledownloads.com.au/191191/index.wl?page=191191text
> >
> > --------------------------------------------
> > Birding-Aus is now on the Web at
> > www.birding-aus.org
> > --------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message 'unsubscribe
> > birding-aus' (no quotes, no Subject line)
> > to 
> >
> >
_________________________________________________________________
SEEK: Now with over 60,000 dream jobs! Click here:   
http://ninemsn.seek.com.au?hotmail
--------------------------------------------
Birding-Aus is now on the Web at
www.birding-aus.org
--------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message 'unsubscribe
birding-aus' (no quotes, no Subject line)
to