I think much of the antipathy towards BARC stems from the fact that we were not
consulted about the formation of BARC, who its members would be, what their
qualifications would be and how long they would serve on the Committee.
To the outsider it appears to be a self-perpetuating oligarchy. This was the
reason that I did not submit my House Swift to BARC. I simply gave it to the
Melbourne Museum where it resides.
Another point that has not been covered is the situation that arises (not
infrequently) wherein a member of BARC submits a record. I assume that he or
she does not sit in judgement on his or her record but quite clearly the other
members of BARC are well aware of who the submitter is.
How do they prevent this from affecting their judgement?
After all, it is one 'expert' submitting to other 'experts'.
==============================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:
=============================
|
