jurek
Well-known member
Rasmus, I should make myself clear:
I was unhappy about keeping secret the existence of a distinctive, new bird in the region regularily visited by birders. And not describing the bird for 10 years although it was distinctive.
There may be valid reasons why proper description of a new bird is difficult and can take years. Area is difficult to visit. Sonograms must be collected and compared. Skins in hard to reach museums must be studied. DNA tests are needed as final proof. But none of these applies there.
You said before that there are many undescribed birds but known for years among birders and ornithologists. Discoverers didn't keep them secret. And nobody sneaked their description for them.
It is more general thing - scientists exist to propagate knowledge in the society. Scientific ethics speaks against hiding discoveries from others. Remember these archeologists who find important historical artifacts and don't let anybody see them nor publish themselves?
OK, I may be harsh. Maybe the bulbul would be eg. threatened by bird trade (although I doubt). But for now it looks rather like carelessness.
In this case, if birders were aware that there is a new bulbul in the region, they might look for them and eg. discover them at other localities, or get some data about the behavior, how common/threatened it is etc. And have lots of fun.
I was unhappy about keeping secret the existence of a distinctive, new bird in the region regularily visited by birders. And not describing the bird for 10 years although it was distinctive.
There may be valid reasons why proper description of a new bird is difficult and can take years. Area is difficult to visit. Sonograms must be collected and compared. Skins in hard to reach museums must be studied. DNA tests are needed as final proof. But none of these applies there.
You said before that there are many undescribed birds but known for years among birders and ornithologists. Discoverers didn't keep them secret. And nobody sneaked their description for them.
It is more general thing - scientists exist to propagate knowledge in the society. Scientific ethics speaks against hiding discoveries from others. Remember these archeologists who find important historical artifacts and don't let anybody see them nor publish themselves?
OK, I may be harsh. Maybe the bulbul would be eg. threatened by bird trade (although I doubt). But for now it looks rather like carelessness.
In this case, if birders were aware that there is a new bulbul in the region, they might look for them and eg. discover them at other localities, or get some data about the behavior, how common/threatened it is etc. And have lots of fun.
Last edited: