[reccom] Proposed Review List Changes

[Milt Moody]

In considering Marks proposal, which I like, it would be good to think
about how it would be set up in a practical sense and try to get it
organized so it will be as simple and easy as possible, etc. (we can
always make changes and adjustments later but some of these thing may
good to consider in our present deliberations).

I have a few question in this reguard:

1. On the field checklist we would probably not be able to explain all
of the different aspects of the review list so how we do it?:  One
possibility would be to have three reveiw species codes: 

# for statewide reveiw species
## for species accepted without physical evidence
#* conditional review species [or something like that] (see full review
list at http://utahbirds.org/RecCom/ReviewSpeciesList.htm)

So if someone saw that that a bird was a "conditional reveiw species"
they could check the Review List on the website (we could also publish
it in the journal) and see if they should submit a sight record.

2.  How would we lay out the Review List?

I'm familiar with the Colorado system which you can see through the
following link:
http://www.cfo-link.org/downloads/review_species.pdf

Their review list is in sections:  Statewide, for each defined area and
for special cases. Which wouldn't be very good if you're trying to look
up a specific bird.  (But is good if you're look to see what is
reviewable in a certain part of the state - I think this would be good
as an auxilliary page to the checklist). 

We could do that OR we could list all of the species in the taxonomic
order (so they would be easier to find) and then after illustrating the
different areas with maps etc.  List them something like this (we could
also put a note (in parenthesis) applicable to a species that doesn't
fit the areas or seasons defined):

Model of a possible Format:

NU = Northern Utah
EN = Extreme Northen Utah
UM = Uinta Mountains
SU = Southern Utah
WA = Washington County
SJ = San Juan County
Win = Winter Months (Dec, Jan, Feb)
Sum = Summer Months (Jun, Jul, Aug) 
( ) = Specific conditions

[It might be better and almost as easy to spell them out instead of
using abbreviations?]

Garganey
Harlequin Duck
White-winged Dove (outside of SU])
Swainson's Hawk (during Win)
Gyrfalcon
Inca Dove  (outside WA)
Great Gray Owl
Painted Redstart (outside of Zion NP)
etc.

3. Are there any adjustments to the areas or seasons Mark has defined?
(They look good to me -- but I don't know much).  If we included in
this system the possibility of indicating special conditions like
(outside of Zion NP) then we could make individual adjustments if
necessary.

(It might be good to make sure what we're proposing can translate into
a prectical system for reporting on these review birds).

Summary:
I think we should get suggestions on area changes (Uintah, Extreme
North, etc.), if any, and get additions or changes to Marks original
proposal of the birds that should be in each category, if any.  And
then vote on Marks proposal as a whole and then on any specific changes
that has been proposed to modify Marks proposal.  (My proposal would be
to be able to make a spicefic definition of area or season if needed
"Special Cases Option").

I've added Ovenbird and Clay-colored Sparrow to the list of species
proposed to be removed. (And the species that Mark proposed to remove
from the statewide review list to the "conditional review list" will be
voted on related to Marks proposal.

So I will collect proposals to modify Marks original proposal (and Mark
can modify his proposal himself from some of the input and come up with
a final proposal, if he likes). I'll also keep collection proposals to
add or remove species from the Review List. When it looks like we've
settled on the all the proposals we can vote on them.

Thanks,
Milt




 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Bored stiff? Loosen up... 
Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games.
http://games.yahoo.com/games/front