Onyer Evan, at last a few people are being brave enough to come out and
express a view other than the rigor mortis driven "official" listing
approach which has dominated the scene for far too long. I have no
problem with the scientific boys and girls setting themselves up against
each other in trying to establish what's what, but I see no reason for
them to assume the right to impose their views on others if those others
are less concerned about the absolute truths of taxonomy ( which appear
to be noticeably absent anyway).
Sure, if there is to be some sort of competition in listing and (
required ?) kudos comes from having a bigger list than someone else then
I guess those competing need to establish some sort of level playing
field, but that can be done without the need to hang on every reverend
word pronounced by scientific expertise ( or BARC). One way would be to
just adopt the listing given by one of the leading field guides - or one
of the others - or a combination of them. What does it matter ? I've
got friends who operate on lists slightly different to mine and of
course we indulge in various degrees of badgering each other about whose
list is more correct, but in the long run it's of very little importance
and it's all good fun anyway.
I'm certainly not waiting with bated breath for BARC to agree on the ID
of the Javan Pond Heron or the Red-legged Crake before listing them, and
I doubt too many others who have seen them are either, but those birds
may not get on the "official" list for some time, depending on how long
it takes for someone to write up submissions on them. I heard six
months ago that BARC were still waiting for the submission on the
Short-billed Dowitcher recorded at Price in 1999 !
So, as far as I'm concerned personal lists are very subjective things
-- it's far worse to claim to have seen a particular bird when you
haven't. That's really naughty, and I know a few suspects.
BTW, I've seen all the Daphoenosittas, so I'm one up on you there.
Wicked grin :)>>>
Tony.
-----Original Message-----
From: Evan Beaver
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 1:10 PM
To: Tony Russell
Cc: Baus
Subject: New Clements book
I see no good reason not to write your own list. It depends entirely on
your reasons for birding/twitching/listing.
If you think a given split/lump is a load of rubbish, just ignore it.
The only reason that accuracy would be important is if you want to
compete on a level playing field against other people. Otherwise, your
list is a list of the birds you've seen, simple as that.
I for example want to see all of the Sittellas, and have been keeping a
list of all the types I've seen. Then my list is not a list of "the
number of species I have seen according to an external authority", it's
a list of the different birds I've seen.
EB
On 6/28/07, Tony Russell <> wrote:
> AD 2020 Russ.
> In the meantime write your own list, it's quicker and easier.
>
> TR.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> On Behalf Of russ lamb
> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] New Clements book
>
>
> So is it absolutely, dead-set,no doubt, that we're finally going to
> get an updated Aussie list??
> And the list is expected when??
>
>
> ===============================
> www.birding-aus.org
> birding-aus.blogspot.com
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to: ===============================
>
--
Evan Beaver
Lapstone, Blue Mountains, NSW
lat=-33.77, lon=150.64
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
===============================
|
