Hi all,
Very interesting discussion. Someone said they weren't sure if Southern
Boobook subspecies lurida was present at Paluma? I took these photos from
the street in the township of Paluma in March last year, they seem pretty
classic lurida to me?
http://aussiebirding.wildiaries.com<http://aussiebirding.wildiaries.com/trips/304>
/pictures/50951
<http://au.herps.wildiaries.com/pictures/50951>
<http://au.herps.wildiaries.com/pictures/50951>
http://aussiebirding.wildiaries.com<http://aussiebirding.wildiaries.com/trips/304>
/pictures/50957 <http://au.herps.wildiaries.com/pictures/50957>
>From the trip report, which also contain photos of young male Victoria's
Riflebirds lekking:
http://aussiebirding.wildiaries.com/trips/304
<http://au.herps.wildiaries.com/pictures/50957>
<http://au.herps.wildiaries.com/pictures/50951>Regards,
Chris
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 2:49 AM, Jeff Davies <> wrote:
> G'day Martin, thanks for this,
>
>
>
> I didn't write any of the HANZAB text so I can't really answer for the
> Boobook distribution as written, but I agree it's not a very specific
> description.
>
> Your description of birds from the Cairns foothills sounds ocellata-like so
> the HANZAB distribution may well not be accurate.
>
> There is so much land south of the Wet Tropics where inland taxa range to
> the coast I would be very surprised if ocellata doesn't do likewise. It
> wouldn't surprise me if genuine ssp boobook cuts out a long way south, but
> I'm only guessing at all this. David's description of birds around Paluma
> also sounds like they too are ocellata influenced.
>
> Interested to also hear what Lloyd has to say.
>
>
>
> Cheers Jeff.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: martin cachard
> Sent: Friday, 6 May 2011 1:21 AM
> To: jeff davies; david james; birding-aus threads
> Subject: RE: {Spam?} Re: {Spam?} Re: [Birding-Aus] what is a Rufous
> Boobook?
>
>
>
> Hi Jeff, David, & everyone else
>
> Talk about being put on the spot - thanks Jeff !! :-) !! :-)
>
> This subject is not something that has come up much in discussion up here
> lately, so I can't comment on a Wet Tropics consensus - I'm not sure how
> others feel about this regional distribution of the Boobook ssp...
>
> Lloyd Nielsen is currently away at the moment, but he will read all this &
> we will see what he thinks pretty soon - I am certain he will have some
> opinions on this one. I will talk to Del Richards to see what he thinks
> (but
> Del does subscribe to this site, so he may add something before we get a
> chance to discuss it). Hopefully, other opinions from the likes of Clifford
> & Dawn Frith, Phil Gregory, Ben Blewitt, Dave Crawford, John Young, Graham
> Harrington, Dawn Magarry, Alan Gillanders,..... etc etc..... can offer
> their
> thoughts too....(If there are any other FNQ observers reading this & have
> something to throw in, we would like to hear from you on this...).
>
> But I can give you my own current thoughts ...
>
> The HANZAB account, as David says, is very confusing. Firstly, I have
> always
> thought that the Cape York Pen Biogeographical Region is north from Edward
> River/Lakeland/Cooktown, but it is unclear in HANZAB as to where they are
> referring when saying "the butt of Cape York Pen". So it is very hard to
> understand the account's distributional notes as far as ssp go. Jeff, to
> where is HANZAB referring when mentioning 'the butt'??
>
> What the ssp actually is up here (boobook v's ocellata) that abuts the
> range of the very distinctive & local lurida is unknown to me. But I can
> offer some records of birds that were definitely not lurida...
>
> Around the dry foothills near Cairns (eg Smithfield Heights) we see a form
> that is quite orange & quite streaky breasted. I have seen birds resembling
> this plumage also on the mid-altitude drier eucalypt forests at locations
> such as Koah, Davies Creek (below & above the w'falls), Emerald Creek &
> further west out past Mareeba. I hadn't thought about this again until now
> &
> I wish, like David, that I had taken more notice at these times & tried to
> recognise what ssp I was observing... Well, I guess these birds are still
> around, so they can be studied further & be given a better description...
>
> My lurida records go as far south as the Wallaman Falls Rd, which is north
> of Paluma. My nothern limit personally is only as far north as Mt Lewis,
> but
> they must occur for sure well to the north up onto the northern Windsor
> Tablelands - how far north they get to, I'm not sure, but they could be as
> far north as Big Tableland I would say, or even to Mt Amos or Mt Cook
> nearer
> to Cooktown - I'm sure others can add their personal observations to
> this...
>
> I have on a number of occasions, seen pale orange-breasted streakyy
> Boobooks
> in cleared farmland that was formerly rainforested, adjacent to where
> lurida
> occurs in neighbouring rainforest, & have seen lurida in similar habitats
> as
> well. But I have never seen a bird that is intermediate between lurida & a
> paler more orange-breasted ssp. A green-eyed spotty orange-breasted &
> dorsally darker bird up here would be interesting; & so would a yellow-eyed
> & very dark-red streaky-breasted bird - but I have seen neither, or
> anything
> else resembling a possible lurida intermediate !! But they might be out
> there....
>
> Like I said earlier guys, this is not much to offer but hopefully some
> others up here can add their thoughts & opinioins....
>
> Cheers for now
>
> Martin Cachard
> Cairns
>
>
> _____
>
>
>
> From:
> To: ; ;
>
> Subject: RE: {Spam?} Re: {Spam?} Re: [Birding-Aus] what is a Rufous
> Boobook?
> Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 16:57:15 +1000n
>
>
>
>
> Thanks for that David,
>
>
>
> Boobooks are a classic example of a taxa that should be recorded to ssp.
>
> Martin Cachard must be reading all this, well he is now because I just
> copied him in, what is the local consensus opinion of Boobooks in the Wet
> Tropics Martin?.
>
>
>
> Cheers Jeff.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: David James
> Sent: Thursday, 5 May 2011 1:44 PM
> To: Jeff Davies; 'Birding-aus'
> Subject: {Spam?} Re: {Spam?} Re: [Birding-Aus] what is a Rufous Boobook?
>
>
>
> Jeff,
>
>
>
> Sorry don't have proof, only recollections. I was merely alerting people to
> something I was looking into years ago and forgotten about.
>
> lurida is a very well marked form easily recognised in the upland and mid
> altitude rainforests of the wet tropics. Except (and to correct my earlier
> post) I don't think it occurs at all at Paluma in any habitat. my
> recollection is that the birds at Paluma are mid rufous, spotted
> underneath,
> lack a really dark solid breast band, more white on face and have well
> marked upperparts. west of Paluma they become paler still, but I recall
> seeing intermediate and pale ones in the same areas at different times.
> Perhaps the intermediate ones are indeed ssp boobook. However, in drier
> country to the west of Paluma and on the wet-dry flood plains to the South
> (i.e the Townsville Coastal Plains) the birds are paler orangey and
> streaked
> below more than spotted. Always seemed to me they must be ocellata. To the
> east of Paluma on the narrow floodplain with hillside eucalypt woodlands,
> lowland scrubs, paperbark swamps, mangroves and cane farms I can't recall
> seeing any form of Boobooks. Seems to suggest some discontinuity or
> something else going on.
>
>
>
> HANZAB states that ssp boobook extends to the base of CYP., where it abuts
> ocellata [in west] is not clear, but boobook appears to extend to w. most
> foothills of great divide; also abuts lurida to the north.
>
> For ocellata: widely distributed in n, w. and central Aust incl. CYP. abuts
> range of ssp boobook in E Aust and lurida near base of CYP.
>
> For lurida: From about Cooktown in N to Paluma in S.
>
>
>
> This doesn't reconcile. Where exactly is the base of CYP (in a
> biogeographical sense)? There are several answers to that question, based
> on
> general usage, though not all correct. Townsville, Paluma, Ingham,
> Cardwell,
> Cairns, Port Douglas, Cooktown or Princess Charlotte Bay? Which one is used
> here? If both ocellata and boobook abut lurida at the base of CYP then
> lurida would have no range at all. Where are the western foothills of the
> Great Divide in N. Qld? There isn't any Great Dividing Range between about
> 21 and 23 deg S; and from 21 to 19 deg the eastern foothills are 100-300 km
> inland. From just north of Townsville (19 deg) the string of ranges forming
> the Wet Tropics (starting with the Seaview Range S. of Paluma Range) forms
> a
> functionally equivalent east coast range to the Great Divide on its eastern
> side. As far as I can see it doesn't have the equivalent W slopes, however.
> It is a complicated, mosaic landscape. There is an awful lot of dry
> tropical
> savanna woodland south of CYP and not far inland that is not likely to be
> occupied by the semi-mesic, SE ssp. boobook.
>
>
>
> I'm not trying to suggest that HANZAB got it wrong. HANZAB presented the
> information that could be taken from the available resources (skins and
> literature) at the time, and so little would be known without it. However,
> the subspecies distribution account is clearly not definitive, whether any
> of my observations are proved or not.
>
>
>
> Quite a few people on Birding -aus in the last few days indicated that they
> record birds to subspecies level. How many systematically record things
> like
> ocellata v. boobook v. indeterminate every time they see one? I can't say
> I
> do it with all suspecies all the time. I should though.
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Jeff Davies <>
> To: 'David James' <>; 'John Leonard'
> <>; 'Birding-aus' <>
> Sent: Thursday, 5 May 2011 12:16 PM
> Subject: Re: {Spam?} Re: [Birding-Aus] what is a Rufous Boobook?
>
> G'day David,
>
> I am very keen to see evidence of any hybrid lurida, photos or specimens,
> because it would be new to me and a lot of other people to I suspect.
> HANZAB
> states it is ssp boobook that abuts lurida not ocellata, but this would
> have
> be the very northern most extension of boobook, so it would probably be
> clining into ocellata. I just can't find any evidence for boobook and
> lurida
> hybrids and there is certainly no clining going on. It would be a very
> quick
> cline because I have heard of people who have seen both taxa in very close
> proximity where rainforest and Eucalypt intersect on the tableland.
>
> Cheers Jeff.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> On Behalf Of David James
> Sent: Wednesday, 4 May 2011 7:14 PM
> To: John Leonard; Birding-aus
> Subject: {Spam?} Re: [Birding-Aus] what is a Rufous Boobook?
>
> I should add, what I interpret as intergrades between lurida and ocellata
> occur west of Paluma and quite likely do so west of the entire Wet Tropics.
> This is a very different situation to the sooty owls.
>
> From: David James <>
> To: John Leonard <>; Birding-aus
> <>
> Sent: Wednesday, 4 May 2011 6:50 PM
> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] what is a Rufous Boobook?
>
> John,
>
> I don't think the IOC have split the rainforest subspecies of boobook.
> Confusingly, the IOC list calls Rufous Owl Ninox rufa "Rufous Boobook".
>
> Incidently, I think there are two rainforest forms of Southern Boobook in
> the rainforests of NQ. N. b. lurida is the widely known dark form in the
> upland rainforests of the wet tropics. There is a paler rufous barred form
> like a mini Rufous Owl in the lowland rainforests and forest edges that I
> saw between Cardwell and Innisfail on a few occassions between 10 and 15
> years ago. It doesn't seem to have a name, it is very different from either
> lurida (very dark with a spotted breast) or the dry vegetation form in NQ,
> ocellata (very brown with a streaked breast). I don't know of any
> reference to it in the literature, and perhaps there are no specimens.
>
> From: John Leonard <>
> To: Birding-aus <>
> Sent: Wednesday, 4 May 2011 6:07 PM
> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] The Lesser Sooty Owl and Sooty Owl?
>
> I note that the recent IOC version 2.8 list splits the rufous form of
> the Boobook found in north Qld from the non-rainforest form.
>
> :-)
>
> John Leonard
>
> On 4 May 2011 13:00, Dave Torr <> wrote:
> > Indeed - what is a species? To quote Darwin (who may have known a thing
> or
> > two?)
> > "No one definition has satisfied all naturalists; yet every naturalist
> knows
> > vaguely what he means when he speaks of a species. Generally the term
> > includes the unknown element of a distinct act of creation"
> >
> > The Guardian reckons there are around 26 different species concepts -
> > http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/punctuated-equilibrium/2010/oct/20/3!
> >
> > I guess we are trying to categorise things which may not always fit into
> the
> > neat boxes that scientists desire - indeed as evolution progresses there
> is
> > rarely a clear dividing line between the end of one species and the start
> of
> > another.
> >
> > On 4 May 2011 12:27, Tim Dolby <> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> To determine taxonomical status Christidis and Bole use mainly
> >> morphological and molecular characters, rather than things like
> topography,
> >> food, hunting, behaviour, breeding, and vocalisations. According to the
> >> research carried out by C&B the Sooty and Lesser Sooty are less
> >> morphologically different that many birds considered the same species.
> In
> >> essence the specific status is substantiated by DNA evidence with
> nucleotide
> >> substitution in DNA-sequencing variable at subspecific level from zero
> to
> >> 1%. Greater differences suggest species status. A good example of this
> is
> >> found in Southern Boobook, with birds in Victoria being more
> morphologically
> >> divergent from birds in northern NSW than Sooty Owl are from Lesser
> Sooty
> >> Owl. In essence it depends on where you draw the line.
> >>
> >> Quite clearly subspecies complex are poorly understood and further
> detailed
> >> work is required.
> >>
> >> Personally I'd hoped that genetics would give us some clear answers when
> >> determining species status, however quite obviously this is not the case
> -
> >> and from reading the comments here - it is still a matter of
> interpretation.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Tim Dolby
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________________
> >> From: [
> >> on behalf of Tony Russel [
> >>
> >> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 12:21 PM
> >> To: 'Chris Sanderson'
> >> Cc: 'birding-aus threads';
> >> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] The Lesser Sooty Owl and Sooty Owl?
> >>
> >> Hallo Chris, I'm not sure I deserved such a condemning response - I
> >> certainly wasn't complaining about the published taxonomy - merely that
> I
> >> choose not to go along with all of it and have in fact moved on without
> >> some
> >> of it.
> >>
> >> And yes, I do keep the Crimson Rosella Platycercus elegans separate from
> >> the
> >> subspecies nigrescens, flaveolus, subadelaidae, fleurieuensis, and
> >> melanoptera (on KI, and recently also on the tip of Cape Jervis where I
> >> have
> >> a property).
> >>
> >> I do choose not to adhere slavishly to what the professionals dictate .
> >> That's not to say they are wrong, just that I choose otherwise. I think
> >> it's still a free world ?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Tony
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> From: Chris Sanderson
> >> Sent: Wednesday, 4 May 2011 11:18 AM
> >> To: Tony Russel
> >> Cc: martin cachard; ; birding-aus threads
> >> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] The Lesser Sooty Owl and Sooty Owl?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Do you all have Adelaide and Yellow Rosellas on your list as separate
> >> species too? They are pretty distinct from the Crimson Rosellas we have
> >> locally but are the same species taxonomically also (for now at least, I
> >> think there's a paper in the works on this). Personally I'll leave
> >> taxonomy
> >> to the professionals. If you have complaints, please publish a peer
> >> reviewed journal article to rectify the taxonomic disparity rather than
> >> complaining about others who have done good science. Not saying you are
> >> wrong about the Sooty Owl complex, but C&B is based on the best
> available
> >> science at the time of writing, if you want it overturned, fix the
> science,
> >> otherwise accept the umpire's decision and move on.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Chris
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Tony Russel <>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> I keep the Sooty and the Lesser Sooty Owls as two separate species.
> Anyone
> >> who has seen them knows very well how different they are.
> >>
> >> Tony
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From:
> >> On Behalf Of martin
> >> cachard
> >> Sent: Wednesday, 4 May 2011 10:10 AM
> >> To: ; birding-aus threads
> >> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] The Lesser Sooty Owl and Sooty Owl?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi Patrick
> >>
> >> When you come up to FNQ & hopefully observe the local Lesser Sooty Owl,
> you
> >> can't 'officially' count it as a new species tick (unless of course,
> you
> >> are yet to see a Sooty Owl further south!!).
> >>
> >> BUT, this 'lumping' by C&B 2008 is strongly disputed by many, including
> >> many
> >> of us up here more familiar with this bird in the field than some
> >> taxonomists.
> >>
> >> So Patrick, come up here, find & enjoy the bird, record that you've
> >> observed it, & in time, I'm sure that you will find that this local
> bird
> >> will be split again from the Sooty Owl & given the full species
> recognition
> >> it deserves. Some of us up here are currently working on this to be
> >> rectified....but there is much work still to be done on this
> >> one....(amongst
> >> some other lumps/splits of FNQ birds).
> >>
> >> As for further answers to your questions about what is tickable (or not)
> >> due
> >> to a species' status, I'm sure someone else more qualified than me can
> help
> >> to explain this to you.
> >>
> >> But for my own records list, I just make sure what birds I observe are
> >> recorded to sub-species level - changes in the taxonomy of our birds, &
> >> accordingly our official list (whatever the source of it), will continue
> to
> >> occur. For now, I keep my records as per the current C&B species list as
> it
> >> is defined in 2008 because this is the current official species list,
> >> like/agree with it or not. I can update my full species list as the
> changes
> >> to the official list occur since I have a record of the sub-species I
> have
> >> seen & where. I think you will find that most Aust birders do the same
> >> thing
> >> or similar.
> >>
> >> Someone else I'm certain, will add a better & more scientific
> explanation
> >> about your other questions - I, for now, just wanted to put my gripe
> out
> >> there about the poor lumping of Lesser Sooty Owl on behalf of several
> other
> >> dismayed local FNQ birders !!
> >>
> >> Obviously Patrick, as it stands now I haven't got a Lesser Sooty Owl on
> my
> >> species list - just 2 sub-species/races of Sooty Owl....
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >>
> >> Martin Cachard
> >> Cairns
> >> 0428 782 808
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 09:11:11 +1000
> >> > From:
> >> > To:
> >> > Subject: [Birding-Aus] The Lesser Sooty Owl and Sooty Owl?
> >> >
> >> > Hi All,
> >> > After reading Sean Dooley's reply to Paul, I have been trying to
> figure
> >> out
> >> > what happened with the Christidis and Boles list with regards to the
> >> Lesser
> >> > Sooty Owl. In the guide books they are a different size and live in
> >> > different parts of the country, so why is the Lesser Sooty Owl no
> longer
> >> > counted as a separate species? Does this mean that if I am lucky
> enough
> >> to
> >> > see the owl formally known as the Lesser Sooty Owl on the Atherton
> >> > Tableland that I will be seeing the Sooty Owl? Can someone please
> explain
> >> > this to me or at least if it makes no sense to others then, what is
> the
> >> > official explanation? And I have been trying to figure out the
> >> conspecific
> >> > term. C & D still have some species as separate (tickable) but as
> >> > conspecific. Are they saying that as with the Western Wattlebird and
> >> Little
> >> > Wattlebird that at some stage millions of years ago they were one
> >> species?
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Patrick Scully
> >> > ===============================
> >> >
> >> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> >> > send the message:
> >> > unsubscribe
> >> > (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> >> > to:
> >> >
> >> > http://birding-aus.org <http://birding-aus.org/>
> >> > ===============================
> >>
> >> ===============================
> >>
> >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> >> send the message:
> >> unsubscribe
> >> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> >> to:
> >>
> >> http://birding-aus.org <http://birding-aus.org/>
> >> ===============================
> >>
> >>
> >> ===============================
> >>
> >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> >> send the message:
> >> unsubscribe
> >> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> >> to:
> >>
> >> http://birding-aus.org <http://birding-aus.org/>
> >> ===============================
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ===============================
> >>
> >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> >> send the message:
> >> unsubscribe
> >> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> >> to:
> >>
> >> http://birding-aus.org <http://birding-aus.org/>
> >> ===============================
> >> This email, including any attachment, is intended solely for the use of
> the
> >> intended recipient. It is confidential and may contain personal
> information
> >> or be subject to legal professional privilege. If you are not the
> intended
> >> recipient any use, disclosure, reproduction or storage of it is
> >> unauthorised. If you have received this email in error, please advise
> the
> >> sender via return email and delete it from your system immediately.
> Victoria
> >> University does not warrant that this email is free from viruses or
> defects
> >> and accepts no liability for any damage caused by such viruses or
> defects.
> >> ===============================
> >>
> >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> >> send the message:
> >> unsubscribe
> >> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> >> to:
> >>
> >> http://birding-aus.org <http://birding-aus.org/>
> >> ===============================
> >>
> > ===============================
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> > send the message:
> > unsubscribe
> > (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> > to:
> >
> > http://birding-aus.org <http://birding-aus.org/>
> > ===============================
> >
>
>
>
> --
> John Leonard
> Canberra
> Australia
> www.jleonard.net
>
> I want to be with the 99,999 other things.
> ===============================
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to:
>
> http://birding-aus.org <http://birding-aus.org/>
> ===============================
> ===============================
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to:
>
> http://birding-aus.org <http://birding-aus.org/>
> ===============================
> ===============================
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to:
>
> http://birding-aus.org <http://birding-aus.org/>
> ===============================
>
>
>
> ===============================
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to:
>
> http://birding-aus.org
> ===============================
>
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
http://birding-aus.org
===============================
|
