*To Frank: *
I apologize. I mean it. I obviously did a poor job of communicating the
committee's decision about your Trumpeter Swan report. Ironic, since I
asked you to submit the report. And I didn't make things any better with
our subsequent communication.
The committee's decision was not a rejection of your report. It was listed
as "not accepted" only because Trumpeter Swan was still considered to have
come from a "nonestablished" population, as the footnote said - not because
you had mis-identified, mis-documented, or claimed anything that wasn't
correct. I will follow up with you individually outside of this forum.
*To everyone:*
*Countability.* When Trumpeter Swan becomes "countable" in Kentucky is an
example of a current controversy in birding. You can read more than you
would ever want on the topic by reviewing ABA Recording Rules
<http://listing.aba.org/aba-recording-rules/>, which are still in flux on
this particular topic. KBRC originally voted to change the status of
Trumpeter Swan at the spring 2006 KOS meeting, so arguably sightings after
that point would meet the criteria. (I can assure you that there are those
who would disagree.) Of course, how - or if - you list birds for yourself
is only your decision.
*Bird records committee decisions.* Almost every state has a committee
that reviews reports of rare birds, and there are also national committees
that do the same. I have reviewed the bylaws of several of these
committees (and shared ours with other states). The bylaws are very
similar across states. Basically, bird observations don't make it into the
ornithological record without an independent review. You will encounter
similar review functions in citizen science activities such as eBird,
Christmas bird counts, and the Great Backyard Bird Count.
My thought is this. Despite how it may sound, the review process is both
necessary and fun. And there's a sense of having won an award when your
documentation makes through critical review. (Which it does in Kentucky
about 95% of the time.)
It can be disheartening when the vote is negative. ("I don't care what
they say. I know what I saw.") I have a fair number of people who enjoy
razzing me (or worse) about my or the committee's skepticism about a
report.
I'm married to one of those people.
Outside of science, adults don't often encounter someone saying "prove it."
(Which can sound like, "No you didn't.") I can sincerely say that, in
KBRC's case, we will ask you to "prove it" - even if, no, *especially *if
we think you're right.
I hope you accept, and enjoy, the challenge.
Thanks.
Ben Yandell, KBRC Secretary
Louisville
