[reccom] FW: Update from the Nevada Bird Records Committee

[Rick Fridell]

I thought you all might find this summary on recent activities of the NBRC
interesting.

-----Original Message-----
From: discussion about Nevada's bird life
[mailto:NVBIRDS at LIST.AUDUBON.ORG]On Behalf Of Martin Meyers
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 12:53 AM
To: NVBIRDS at LIST.AUDUBON.ORG
Subject: Update from the Nevada Bird Records Committee


Here's an update from the Nevada Bird Records Committee.

We just completed review of another packet containing 18 records, including
such Nevada rarities as Northern Cardinal, Canada Warbler, and Golden-winged
Warbler,  I updated the website this evening, so the results of those
reviews, and all other records from the thirteen or so years since the
committee was formed, are viewable on the website. (Address of the website
is below.)  You can view the records ordered by species in taxonomic order,
by species in alphabetic order of common name, or by NBRC ID number (which
more or less corresponds to the order in which the records were received by
the committee.)  For all accepted records, you can also see who submitted
the sightings documentation.

As of today, the committee has completed reviews of 175 records since I took
on the post of committee secretary in March of 2007.  We currently have 63
records pending review.  (With more coming in every day!!)

The pending records include three potential first accepted records for the
state.  One of those involves two historic records for Pomarine Jaeger, one
from 1975 and one from 1976, both from the Lake Mead area.  The other two
are recent, Little Gull from 11/24/07, Key Pittman W.M.A. and Lesser
Black-backed Gull from 1/27/08, Virginia Lake, Reno.  (Note that the Lesser
Black-backed Gull record is not for the large dark gull that spent the
winter at Virginia Lake -- we still don't know quite what to do with that
odd bird.  Rather, the record up for review is from a one-day visit from an
adult gull.)

Here are some statistics that some of you may find interesting:
Of the 175 records reviewed since 2007, 162 have been endorsed by the
committee.
Of those 162 accepted records, 130 were accompanied by photographic
documentation.

Of the 13 non-accepted records, 2 were accompanied by photographic
documentation.

A little quick math suggests that records accompanied by photos had an
acceptance rate of 98%.  But it is  important to notice that records not
accompanied by photos had an acceptance rate of 74%.

Several people have suggested to me that they did not feel it was worth
submitting a record unless a photo had been obtained.  But the data does not
support that concept.  Sightings accompanied by thorough, careful, written
documentation enjoy a high acceptance rate -- not as high as for those with
photos, but high nonetheless.  I strongly encourage you to submit
documentation for any "review species" you observe, even without photos, as
long as your sighting provided you with enough information to create a
thorough description.  (And one of the most important aspects of good
documentation, in addition to your careful and thorough description of what
you saw, is a discussion of how you arrived at your identification,
particularly how you eliminated other similar species.)

Of course, it is easier if you get photos -- if the photos are good enough,
the accompanying written documentation does not need to bother to describe
the observed features which are obvious in the photographs.  However, even
for photographed birds, we would still like to have written documentation of
the circumstances of the sighting, including any behavior noticed,
vocalizations heard, viewing conditions, any observed features which are not
obvious from the photographs, and how you arrived at your identification.
(And, of course, date, time, location, names of others who observed the
bird, name of the person who first found the bird, etc.)

It is also important to keep in mind that even a record which does not
receive endorsement by the committee can still be a valuable addition to the
accumulated knowledge of bird distribution in Nevada.  All submitted records
are retained and will be available for research.  Future researchers can
make their own decisions about what is, or is not, an "acceptable" record.

For a list of those species for which documentation is desired, see the NBRC
website.  There is a "review list", which specifies each species the
committee reviews, and includes notation if the species is not reviewable
for a certain section of the state (the list would say the species is
"exempt from review" in that part of the state.)  But if you see a bird you
think is rare for Nevada, and you don't find it on the review list, there
might be another intriguing possibility.  Perhaps, like the Little Gull or
Lesser Black-backed Gull mentioned above, the species is not yet documented
as having occurred in Nevada.  You can be sure the committee would be
extremely excited to receive documentation for any species not yet on the
official Nevada State Checklist (that's also available our website.)

Good birding!
Martin

----------------------------------------------
Martin Meyers
Secretary, Nevada Bird Records Committee
website: www.gbbo.org/nbrc
email: nbrc  AT  gbbo.org