[reccom] Results of vote on proposals

[Kristin Purdy]

I'm amazed at how many of the proposals squeaked into acceptance or squeaked into rejection.

In response to Milt and Mark's request for feedback on the voting:

"Mark said he already has some counter proposals and it would be good to know if the "no" votes on some of the areas were for the species in the areas or for the areas themselves."

I voted against proposal 2c, requesting documentation on sightings of Sharp-tails and Common Redpolls only outside of extreme Northern Utah, due to the species. I believe Common Redpolls belong on the review list and we need sight records of them no matter where the birds occur. Had the proposal only addressed Sharp-tails, I would have accepted it. I noticed the specific review list voting on the Common Redpoll is consistent and keeps the redpoll on the list.  

I voted against proposals 2h (winter months) and 2i (summer months) for two reasons. First, I wish to keep the emphasis of our checklist as just that and not as a complex solicitation for information. I understand we need more reports and depend upon birders to submit them. But I'm afraid that the more complex our requests are, the more users will ignore them. We'll need to issue a decoder ring with each checklist. Second, I believe the list of exceptional winter birds seen in summer or vice versa (based on whichever proposal you're considering) should be much longer, then the proposal becomes too complex and I revert back to my first objection.  

Let me address my issue in the paragraph above in the broader sense and I know I'm late with my opinion. Most of the proposals were worded to request documentation, rather than to amend the checklist. I'm strongly in favor of requesting doucmentation which is why I accepted many of the geographic proposals. But I'm resistant to turning the checklist into a complex request for information. Our present checklist does that, but in simple terms because it doesn't address geographic occurence of review species. Should we as a committee pursue the amendments, my wish is to keep the codes and footnotes as simple as possible. Milt's suggestion to add the number of sightings for accidental species is a good idea because it refines checklist information for the user and the method will be simple. But requesting info on species based on geographic occurrence is not checklist info--it reflects our using the checklist request reports because we don't have another widely-distributed means of doing it. The level of complexity this adds to the checklist (due to the geographic diversity of our state) may make the checklist a big headache. 

Mark, I may have to break into the case of Excedrin Migraine I'm saving for you over gull study.

Kris
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Milt Moody 
  To: Records Committee 
  Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 9:46 AM
  Subject: [reccom] Results of vote on proposals


  Greetings,

  The results are in!  And to summarize:

  1. The proposal to create a list of out-of- range or season species the the records committee it review was accepted 6 to 1

  2. Of the proposed list for different areas or seasons, five were accepted and four were not:

  Accpted were: Southern Utah, Northern Utah, Washington County, Uintah Mountains and San Juan Co.

  Not accpted were:   Extreme Northern Utah,  Zion, Winter and Summer.

  3. The proposal to have the option to define "special cases" passed.   5 - 2

  4. Four species to be removed from the Review List are:
     Broad-winged Hawk
     Ruddy Turnstone
     Glaucous-winged Gull
     Clay-colored Sparrow
  5. One species to be added to the Review list is:
     Brown Thrasher

  Here's a link to a page with the details of the results:
     
  http://utahbirds.org/ReviewBirds/RecComVoteProp2007Results.html

  It looks like we will need to refine some of the lists and areas for the out-of-range Review Species.  Mark said he already has some counter proposals and it would be good to know if the "no" votes on some of the areas were for the species in the areas or for the areas themselves.   If anyone has comments or proposed changes in some of the specific list, etc., people let us know what you're thinking.

  Thanks,
  Milt


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Don't be flakey. Get Yahoo! Mail for Mobile and 
  always stay connected to friends.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  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/20070301/dd5d77c1/attachment.htm