Here�s some excerpts from something I wrote in 1995 - intended for the laity - a 3,375 word chapter on rarities, from a book manuscript I�ll probably never finish. A lot of it applies, I think, to the work of e-Bird referees.
� � rare birds may be symptomatic of a species which is on the verge of a great range expansion. They may be the result of some massive weather disturbance, the vagaries of El Ni�o, or individuals displaced due to a hurricane. Their presence may be due to a natural disaster such as a crash of the species� food supply: a wipeout of fish, a complete failure of the cone crop of a vast area of spruce forest, or a drought which causes reproductive failure for the entire nesting season. Or their presence may simply be inexplicable, at least for the moment.�
� In the past decade a veritable industry has evolved which deals with reports of rare birds. It is an industry which involves a tremendous, often thankless effort by the participants. Rarities or bird records committees have sprung up in many states and provinces, modeled after similar bodies in the United Kingdom and Europe. Composed of many of the most knowledgeable and skilled birders from their respective states and provinces, rarities committees receive and circulate documentation, written reports, and photographs, vote on whether or not to accept them, and keep elaborate files for each record � �
�There is still much to learn and rarities committee members are on the leading edge of the learning process � �
�Many observers see this as a kind of inquisition and cannot be bothered with providing satisfactory documentation. They may resent that their reports are not taken on the basis of their personal reputation alone. There are some huge egos in birding � A rejection from such a body IS a humbling experience � �
And from the 16th annual report of the California Bird Records Committee, 1995, in �Western Birds�: " "We feel strongly that withdrawing from the process solves little, and the potential knowledge that goes unreviewed lessens our ability to learn more about the fascinating subjects of avian vagrancy and range expansions.� �
Rarities are interesting in their own right - reason enough to have them reviewed - regardless of whether they are �symptomatic� of some trend or change. Those who pass judgement should not be considered ornithological thought police. Instead they�re to be applauded for their considerable efforts.
Best to all. � Harry Armistead, Philadelphia.
--
|