Masterful David!
Thank you.
I have been watching the thread, feeling for Andrew and contemplating "calls
made in years past - which needed gentle correction by those kind enough to
mentor and encourage"
Splendid words.
> From:
> To: ; ; ;
> ;
> Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 23:31:42 +0000
> CC: ;
> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] Birdline Western Australia Weekly Update GREAT
> SHEARWATER
>
>
> Hear hear
>
>
> > Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 16:24:19 -0700
> > From:
> > To: ; ; ;
> >
> > CC: ;
> > Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] Birdline Western Australia Weekly Update GREAT
> > SHEARWATER
> >
> > "Never let the truth get in the way of a good story" is generally
> > attributed to Mark Twain. It's a fine sentiment when you're telling a
> > ripping yarn after dinner or propping up the front bar. However, it just
> > doesn't translate into birding.
> >
> > Everyone makes mistakes. Anybody can misidentify a bird and everybody who
> > tries to identify them will get them wrong sometimes. I've made plenty of
> > bad calls on birds. I've seen better birders than me stuff it up
> > completely. And I've seen plenty of feisty debates, often never to be
> > resolved. Some birders are more prone than others to making up their mind
> > on the spot and refusing to consider alternatives. Some are pleased to be
> > corrected when appropriate. What matters is getting the record straight so
> > that everyone knows what is fact, what is fiction, and what is unresolved.
> > Sometimes egos get bruised, which is not the best part of what we do. Fora
> > like Birding-Aus and Eremea are excellent for getting information out
> > quickly and helping birders see lots of good birds that they never would
> > have heard about in days gone by. So thank you to the moderators all over
> > Australia for all the volunteer work that you do for the birding community.
> > But the reports
> > circulated in these fora are not vetted and not confirmed. Most are
> > correct, but a percentage are wrong. That is how it works. In this case the
> > record has been vetted publicly and the record has been set straight. There
> > are other ways of vetting records. However, this is an example of the
> > birding community working together to document birds, help the observer
> > know they likely saw, and keep the literature that little bit cleaner of
> > errors. We learn and move on. Good stuff.
> >
> > Andrew, you did the right thing, gave your honest opinion and made it
> > available to all of us. I hope this conversation has not given you any
> > regrets, because you need have none. Welcome to the Australian birding
> > community!
> >
> > David James,
> > Sydney
> >
> > ==============================
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: martin cachard <>
> > To: ; ; jeff davies
> > <>
> > Cc: birding-aus threads <>;
> > Sent: Tuesday, 20 March 2012 12:25 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] Birdline Western Australia Weekly Update GREAT
> > SHEARWATER CLEARLY NOT
> >
> >
> > Hi Nikolas, Andrew & all No Nik, you weren't the smart arse on this one -
> > maybe it was me. I was very quick to say the Speckled Warbler wasn't one,
> > but that it was a young Rufous Whistler. I was also quickly agreeing with
> > you & Mike Carter that the Great Shearwater that Andrew saw & thought was a
> > Great Shearwater, was indeed a young Aust Gannet. I left the tern ID alone
> > - but yes I do agree, 1st yr Common Tern... So maybe it is me that should
> > apologise for being so fast to question these sightings... rightly or
> > wrongly... But I feel the bigger evil is when one takes a veiled swipe, &
> > that wasn't me or yourself, Nik, so that person is the one who should
> > apologise, not you or me... Cheers for now, Martin Cachard Cairns 0428 782
> > 808
> > > Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 02:15:31 -0700
> > > From:
> > > To: ;
> > > CC: ;
> > > Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] Birdline Western Australia Weekly Update GREAT
> > > SHEARWATER CLEARLY NOT
> > >
> > > Hi Andrew and Philip,
> > >
> > > Andrew, first I would like to apologize to you that I opened this can of
> > > worms with my first e-mail questioning your sighting. Since you mentioned
> > > that you were familiar with Manx Shearwater, I am sure that you were
> > > familiar with Northern Gannets, too. On the other hand your description
> > > fits best an immature gannet - on this side of the world most likely an
> > > Australasian Gannet. In this case (until proven otherwise) it was
> > > important to have the note removed from Eremaea to not confuse future
> > > searches for Great Shearwater. I definitely don't want to scare you off.
> > > Please continue to report your sightings, Andrew.
> > >
> > >
> > > Philip, I strongly disagree with your small leaps. They happen all too
> > > often and are wrong. I have been member of a number of rare bird
> > > committees on various continents. I often noticed that submitters don't
> > > consider the unusual. E.g. to me a report of a Bridled Tern clearly
> > > ruling out a Sooty Tern, doesn't mean that the bird was a Bridled Tern
> > > unless you also rule out a Spectacled/Grey-backed Tern (even though it is
> > > not [yet] on the Australian list). Another story is that of an adult male
> > > Lark Bunting reported to us when I was part of the New Jersey Rare Birds
> > > Committee. Lark Bunting is the only black finch-like bird in North
> > > American field guides but still highly unlikely in New Jersey. The photos
> > > proved it to be one of the African widow finches - obviously an escapee.
> > > Therefore in order to prove the small leap you have to make a big leap.
> > >
> > >
> > > Often, once you are on the wrong track, you may get lost. So I guess, if
> > > you misidentify a gannet for a shearwater and you still notice its huge
> > > size, why not think of a Great [sic!] Shearwater or another large
> > > shearwater species? Therefore, I totally understand this thought - even
> > > without wishful thinking involved. Funny things do happen: I know someone
> > > whose name begins with "N" and ends with "ikolas" (no, it wasn't David
> > > James!) who screamed "Streaked Shearwater". This bird turned out to be
> > > the most gigantic shearwater I've ever seen with a wing span of 3.5
> > > metres! It turned out to be a Wandering Albatross! Sh.. happens.
> > >
> > >
> > > And yes, most - if not all - shearwaters dive, but to my knowledge and
> > > experience not in the way Andrew described it.
> > >
> > > Finally, yes (1) the mystery tern was a Common Tern moulting from first
> > > winter to first summer plumage (note the seasons refer to the northern
> > > hemisphere) and (2) the mystery little speckled bird was a juv Rufous
> > > Whistler. I just didn't want to be the smart arse again - but I guess I
> > > am ;-)
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Nikolas
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------
> > > Nikolas Haass
> > >
> > > Sydney, NSW
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Philip Veerman <>
> > > To: 'Jeff Davies' <>
> > > Cc: ;
> > > Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 7:37 PM
> > > Subject: [Birding-Aus] Birdline Western Australia Weekly Update GREAT
> > > SHEARWATER CLEARLY NOT
> > >
> > > Hi Jeff,
> > >
> > > Thanks for your comment. Sorry if you or others think so, I wasn't
> > > intending
> > > "way overkill". I am curious at the general phenomenon (not just this
> > > case)
> > > of people making big leaps of identification, rather than small leaps and
> > > wondering why this sort of thing happens somewhat often. A very long time
> > > ago (20 to 30 years) when I was seasick on a pelagic trip, I looked up at
> > > something, probably not very clearly, and thought I had seen a distant
> > > Wandering Albatross, because it was mainly white above, but that thought
> > > only lasted a few minutes. No doubt it was an adult Gannet. So why did I
> > > want it to be a Wandering Albatross, simply because I wanted it! But that
> > > is
> > > a species you could reasonably expect to have encountered at that place
> > > and
> > > date.
> > >
> > > It is interesting why would an identification go to that particular
> > > species
> > > (Great Shearwater) which is unlikely just on status. I understand a new
> > > birder to our shores learning the ropes thinking what a great bird. But
> > > curious as to the thought process. Could it be because it has been
> > > mentioned
> > > recently? As in my question is about the role of wishful thinking in bird
> > > identification over the whole range of people and experiences. I don't see
> > > this as rubbing it in.
> > >
> > > And yes you are right that Great Shearwater is not ONLY "on the other side
> > > of the world" (but usually is).
> > >
> > > Lastly the question remains: Do any shearwaters feed by diving behaviour
> > > as
> > > described?
> > >
> > > Philip
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----From: Jeff Davies
> > >
> > > Sent: Monday, 19 March 2012 2:35 PM
> > > To: 'Philip Veerman'; Cc:
> > > Subject: RE: [Birding-Aus] Birdline Western Australia Weekly Update GREAT
> > > SHEARWATER CLEARLY NOT
> > >
> > >
> > > This is way overkill Philip,
> > >
> > > it was an honest mistake by Andrew McKey a new birder to our shores
> > > learning
> > > the ropes, who was brave enough to put up a report for scrutiny.
> > > Should have been picked up by the forum administrators before going to
> > > air,
> > > but has now been corrected by a couple of observant forum readers as a
> > > perfect description for a young Gannet. Reports of late demonstrate
> > > clearly
> > > that Great Shearwater is not only "on the other side of the world" and
> > > this
> > > probably resonated with Andrew.
> > >
> > > So why rub it in, cheers Jeff.
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----From:
> > > On Behalf Of Philip
> > > Veerman
> > > Sent: Monday, 19 March 2012 2:08 PM To: Cc:
> > > Subject: [Birding-Aus] Birdline Western Australia
> > > Weekly Update GREAT SHEARWATER CLEARLY NOT
> > >
> > > Sure we can make mistakes on confusing difficult species but I am amused
> > > by
> > > this one, not at the making a mistake. I can understand someone saying I
> > > don't know what it is but why come up with an idea of Great Shearwater? I
> > > don't find it in my Aussie field guides, so why would that be in the mix
> > > of
> > > ideas? Indeed Peter Harrison's Seabirds book shows Great Shearwater on the
> > > opposite side of the world. Looking at the pictures of Great Shearwater in
> > > that book does not raise images to me of similarity to a gannet. Gannet do
> > > occur in UK. I think Michael Palin said he didn't like a British bird book
> > > because it had the Gannet in it.
> > >
> > > Lastly, now I am curious. Do any shearwaters feed by diving behaviour as
> > > described? I have not seen it.
> > >
> > > Philip
> > >
> > > ===============================
> > >
> > > 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
> > > ===============================
> >
> > ===============================
> >
> > 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
> > ===============================
>
> ===============================
>
> 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
===============================
|
