Mike Carter wrote:
> So Keith, you cannot, well should not, argue that BARC should be more
> sympathetic to observers claiming Franklin's Gull or any other species,
> nor that we should be more lenient in our decisions. You see, unlike
> you, I do give a damn what BARC thinks and want the respect and
> authority commanded by that body to be maintained.
Well said, Mike.
While I've not yet had the fortune to submit a rarity report with BARC
(which admittedly would be a daunting task without a good photo), the
BARC decisions that I've read have been thorough and clear - and most
importantly, publicly available!
While not everyone may agree with the decisions reached (or not), the
transparency of the process - including the committee rules - should
leave little doubt as to why the decision was reached. The various
local rarity panels could do far worse than follow the BARC model.
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Paul Taylor Veni, vidi, tici -
I came, I saw, I ticked.
===============================
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:
===============================
|
