[reccom] About written descriptions and physical evidence

[Milt Moody]

Good morning,

>From my perspective as a solicitor of records, I feel lucky if we get
people to submit records at all.  It's always nice to get a good
description and great to get good photos, but sometimes birders (me for
instance) don't have much confidence (with or without a picture) in
writing up a good description to be read by the "bird experts" (which
you truely are) on the (sometimes feared and usually intimidating)
Records Committee.

Although I think it is good to strive for high standards for sight
records, I think it is also important that birders feel comfortable in
sending in records that may be imperfect, lacking in physical evidence
and  unprofessionally written (most of us are pretty much amateurs and
don't know what's important to mention and what is not for any given
species).

An interesting case in point:  Although I asked Merrill Webb (with his
12 or so year of experience on the records committee, amoung other
things) to submit a record for the Broad-winged Hawk he saw near
Santaquin, he was very reluctant to do it (said he would but hasn't),
and the reason, as I assumed, was because of an uncomfortable maybe
even intimidated feeling of presenting a difficult record to the
committee.  If this affects Merrill, I think it's safe to say that
reluctance to submit records is even greater in the general birder
population.

That's my concern.  I'm not sure how to deal with it, but I think we
ought to at least be aware of it and try not to intimidate potential
record submitters while at the same time trying to promote better
records.  (We DO have instructions on how to write good records on the
website -- I'm not sure what else we should do).

Thanks for "listening,"
Milt




 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a PS3 game guru.
Get your game face on with the latest PS3 news and previews at Yahoo! Games.
http://videogames.yahoo.com/platform?platform=120121