[reccom] listing of unverified species

[Ron Ryel]

David, You bring up a good point. Documentation must be convincing to be 
accepted as documentation. The tufted duck photo might not reach that 
level. When it comes to first documented records, we will need to evaluate 
the physical evidence as well as the whole record. The tufted duck might be 
accepted, but not be considered as having physical evidence.
Best wishes, Ron

On 12 Jan 2007 at 8:24, David Wheeler wrote:

> 
> Hello one & all,
> 
> I would also like to add my support to Ron's fine idea. To my mind, it
> should help alleviate some of the concerns we had during our
> discussions of this subject. If we tell people openly what our state
> list represents,with the level of confidence/evidence we assign any
> species on that list, there should be no confusion or moral quandary.
> 
> I am tempted to ask, in the mischievous context of my long-term
> friendship with Mark, whether we should have a special symbol for
> birds which are only documented with nigh-worthless slides that don't
> actually convey any confidence-inspiring information. Maybe someone,
> like Mark, say, could become the Documentation Quality Assurance
> Subcommittee (of one) in penance of his efforts with the Tufted duck.
> Just thought I'd put that out there for your ruminations...
> 
> Fondly,
> 
> David
> 
> >>> "Rick Fridell" <rfridell at burgoyne.com> 1/11/2007 8:07 PM >>>
> Hello Everyone,
> I'm completely supportive. I think this is a very good idea.... simple
> and straightforward.
> 
> Also Kris, welcome to the committee. I look forward to working with
> you.
> 
> And finally, Milton, the second round records of several species have
> Merrill listed as having voted (e.g. Auklet, Mag. Hummingbird, etc.),
> but do not show his comments. As he was the only one to vote to accept
> many of these, I'm curious to see his rationale, prior to submitting
> my second round votes.
> 
> Yrs,
> Rick
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: reccom-bounces at utahbirds.org
> [mailto:reccom-bounces at utahbirds.org]On Behalf Of Ron Ryel
> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 12:06 AM
> To: Utah Bird Records Committee
> Subject: [reccom] listing of unverified species
> 
> 
> Milt, Attached is an old state list from Oregon that has designations
> for species which have physical evidence and for those with accepted
> sight records, but no physical evidence. I would like to see us do
> something similar with the Utah list as per our bylaws. What do others
> think, and is this possible to do with our records (it seems like we
> could do this rather easily). Best wishes, Ron
> 
> --
> 
> Dr. Ronald J. Ryel
> Assistant Professor
> Department of Wildland Resources
> Utah State University
> 5230 Old Main Hill
> Logan, UT 84322-5230
> USA
> 
> ron.ryel at usu.edu
> range at cc.usu.edu
> 435-797-8119
> 435-797-3796 (fax)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> reccom mailing list
> reccom at utahbirds.org
> http://utahbirds.org/mailman/listinfo/reccom

-- 
     
Dr. Ronald J. Ryel
Assistant Professor
Department of Wildland Resources
Utah State University
5230 Old Main Hill
Logan, UT  84322-5230
USA

ron.ryel at usu.edu
range at cc.usu.edu
435-797-8119
435-797-3796 (fax)