[texbirds] Re: TRBC and the Mockingbird
- From: Eric Carpenter <ecarpe@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Coddlers@xxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 10:08:53 -0600
Bruce,
Some interesting questions, with a few answers that you have already
dismissed for one reason or another. I’m probably guessing that since
you seem to at least monitor Texbirds from afar, you likely have an
interest in chasing rare birds in Texas, and perhaps elsewhere. You
may even make specific birding trips around the country to see new or
interesting birds - just a guess. I suspect whether you realize it or
not, you actually are a consumer of BRCs (Bird Records Committees, not
RBCs/“Rare Bird Committees”) and their “product”.
Let me ask a couple of questions that might illustrate this:
- Where is the best location in North American to look for/expect
Yellow-legged Gull?
- I’m going on a pelagic off the Texas coast and I heard that a
shrimp-boat captain in the area saw an albatross. Which one(s) should
I study up on in case we see the bird?
- How far west do Winter Wrens range in the winter and how far east
might I find a Pacific Wren? Which one should I expect in Austin?
- Where should I go to look for Green Violetears and what time(s) of
year might I hope to find them there?
- During invasion falls/winters like this one, how far south do Snowy Owls go?
- Is a Variegated (or Tufted) Flycatcher an unreasonable bird to hope
for in the ABA region?
- I’m looking for Sharp-tailed Sandpipers and Pacific Golden-Plovers
but want to see them south of Alaska, preferably in the US. Where and
when might I go to see them?
Almost every good field guides with accurate maps uses the product of
BRCs and I would argue that you couldn’t know the answer to any of the
above questions without the work of various local, state and national
BRCs.
In the grand scheme of things, birding and BRCs are not very important
but I do think that BRCs have a significant place for those that share
our passion. Unfortunately, the only exposure some folks have to BRCs
is in decisions like the Tropical Mockingbird and their binary vote in
this regard. I though Matt Heindel’s comments from a couple days ago
on this were very appropriate in this regard. I’m sure if “maybe” was
a choice for the Tropical Mockingbird, we would have had 9 “maybe”
votes but that’s not really much of a decision. I still have not
heard a good proposal for an alternative that is not so
black-and-white.
So, who cares? Anybody who looks in a field guide to figure out where
they might want to go to see new and unusual birds. I’m betting that
might describe you, at least some of the time.
--Eric
Eric Carpenter
Secretary, Texas Bird Records Committee
ecarpe@xxxxxxxxx
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 12:37 AM, <Coddlers@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> This forum has for the past few days seen several posts stemming from the
> TRBC's decision not to "accept" the Tropical Mockingbird.
> I ask the same question that I have often asked of California Rare Bird
> Committee members.
> Who cares? So what? Or, putting it a little more scientifically, who will
> subsequently use the committee's decision, and to what end? More
> generically, why do state committees come to these yes/no, go/nogo,
> accept/reject
> decisions? Who are their "customers"?
> I suggest that the one and only impact will be that the ABA checklist
> committee will not now review the record, and the specie will, therefore, not
> (yet) become "countable" in the game/hobby of listing.
> I am not bashing TRBC or any other state committee. They typically do a
> wonderful job of gathering, and storing data. Their insight and comments are
> also extremely valuable. It is only the yes/no binary decision that I
> question.
> Several CRBC members that I have asked have suggested various "customers"
> for their decisions.
> 1. Listers. Most committee members are adamant that they are NOT list
> policemen. Each birder is always free to count what they like on their lists.
> 2. Government. Really? Does anyone in Austin care how the mocker got to
> the US?
> 3. Future Scientists. I don't think so. After all, today's scientists
> (including the committee members themselves) are "future scientists" when
> looking at older records, including those already assessed by older
> committees.
> Do they take the previous decision as the final result? Of course not! They
> re-assess the record, using primary sources - which is exactly what
> "future scientists" will do to the current decisions - including the mocker.
> So, I ask again. Who cares? Who really cares?
> Bruce Barrett
> San Jose, CA
> (and occasional visitor to TX - when there is a great new bird to see -
> such as a Tropical Mockingbird)
> Edit your Freelists account settings for TEXBIRDS at
> //www.freelists.org/list/texbirds
>
> Reposting of traffic from TEXBIRDS is prohibited without seeking permission
> from the List Owner
>
>
--
Eric Carpenter
Austin
Edit your Freelists account settings for TEXBIRDS at
//www.freelists.org/list/texbirds
Reposting of traffic from TEXBIRDS is prohibited without seeking permission
from the List Owner
Other related posts:
