[reccom] Review List changes and checklist project -- much ado about nuthin?

[David Wheeler]

I agree with the Glaucous-winged gull, but the Redpolls are news to me.  Perhaps they show up in Cache Co. and no one else knows about them in the lower reaches.  It brings up a question about what we consider adequate observation for the purposes of the removal from the Review List.  
 
The bylaws state, in part:
 
"In general, the Review List will consist of species that have occurred within Utah on average two or fewer times per year in each of the ten years immediately preceding revision of the Review List." 
 
Do we want these "occurrences" documented formally (ie. submitted to us) or just somehow agree to take a species off the List by, absolutely no disrespect intended, informal observations?  As far as the redpolls are concerned, I think it would be useful for the rest of the birding community to know the pattern of occurrence for this species.  For that matter, apparently I myself am very uninformed on the frequency of sightings of this species in Utah.
 
Let's take Cackling geese as another example.  They are reported all the time by certain individuals in the birding community.  By that standard we shouldn't be reviewing them at all (in another 8 years).  Yet I think I speak for more than myself in stating that there are members on the Committee who are skeptical of the accuracy of some of those reports.  I would argue we really have very little idea what is really going on with that species/superspecies and should count only reviewed "occurrences" in the meantime.
 
Of course, the problem is that we don't have nearly enough people submitting records to the Committee for review.  So a strict reliance on records reviewed and accepted by the Committee would doom us to never removing any species from the Review List.  Perhaps our annual review of the Review List is the best method after all, as it allows us to infuse subjective expertise, but it just seems there should be a more formal count of the three or more species annually for the last ten years benchmark.
 
Another odd species is the Boreal owl, which apparently nests in several mountain ranges and are observed regularly each year by DWR/Forest Service scientists (who know of their nest sites), but they don't share their info with the rest of us either.  Should that be on the list?  I would think yes, until we get some formal data from those agencies.
 
And what do Rick and Larry think about removing the Hermit warbler off the list?
 
Any thoughts?
 
Thanks for your indulgence,
 
David
 

>>> "Ron Ryel" <range at cc.usu.edu> 1/23/2007 8:44 AM >>>
Milt, I would also suggest removing glaucous-winged gull and common 
redpoll from the review list. Both are observed nealy annually.
Best wishes, Ron

On 23 Jan 2007 at 7:28, Milt Moody wrote:

> Review Page:
> http://www.utahbirds.org/ReviewBirds/UnderReview.htm 
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> Here are the suggestions for review list changes that have been
> received so far:
> 
> To be removed:
>   Broad-winged Hawk
>   Ruddy Turnstone
>   Least Tern
>   Northern Parula
> 
> To be added:
>   Black Swift
>   Brown Thrasher
> 
> If you have other suggestions, please send them in.  We will be
> discussing these proposed changes and voting on them within the next
> week or two.
> 
> Two committee members (Rick and Kris) have offered to help with the
> checklist so far.  If anyone else would like to help with updating the
> status and abundance codes, please let me know soon.
> 
> I will be going over the records to see which review species were
> accepted without physical evidence.  A link to the preliminary list
> that I made (very quickly) when we were discussing the matter last
> year is provided below.  If anyone knows of other species that should
> be listed (in the top section) or those that are on the list that
> actually have physical evidence that you know of, please let me know.
> 
> http://www.utahbirds.org/RecCom/AuxiliaryList.htm 
> 
> Thanks,
> Milt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ______________ We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love (and
> love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list.
> http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/265 
> _______________________________________________ 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)



_______________________________________________
reccom mailing list
reccom at utahbirds.org 
http://utahbirds.org/mailman/listinfo/reccom
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://secureserver.securesites.net/pipermail/reccom/attachments/20070123/41984070/attachment.htm