Uk400club 'list Of Lists' Etc Etc (1 Viewer)

dafi · Jun 26, 2011

I thought the whole point of this thread is that certain listers have been included in the UK400 club lists even though they have not applied to join the club or be included in the list.

Some of these listers have submitted no lists and their totals are being made up with out any real evidence of sightings but just attendance at a twitch. The owner of the sight is then refusing to remove their names from the list.

Not being a competitive lister and not being involved I look at this situation and some of the previous threads on birdforum, other forums, facebook ecetera. The whole thing smacks of egotistical trolling and the 400club looks to lack integrity and credibility. Add to that the implied threats and tone of menace used in private communications and on other threads on BF then I think the whole thing not only lacks integrity and credibility but stinks to high heaven.

It is amusing if uncomfortable to be watching this go round and round in circles but that is all it is ever going to do. Ultimately if this situation is to be changed then the offended parties need to go to law with a private prosecution for the misuse of the data protection act to have their information removed from the UK 400 clubs data base. There is the rub thou, if you are faced with such intransigence then the law is your only real recourse. The law is prohibitively expensive tho, the other day I was advised that such an action would cost 3 to 5 thousand quid to see through. I don’t ken if this is an accurate figure but until this course of action is taken then this open sore will continue to fester away in the light of public scrutiny with little hope of it healing.

There must be members out there with the where with all to help out the aggrieved members (if you agree with their stance that is)….why not stump up a bit of dosh and help sort out the Evans400 club list situation once and for all.

Otherwise all we have to look forwards to is more of the same cobblers that whilst funny at times will eventual turn in ever decreasing circles and end up with its head up its own arse once again.

cajanuma · Jun 26, 2011

Jane Turner said:
I assume that Stodmarsh bird had the structural differences that Pallid shows. I still find the pair almost impossible on plumage in many circumstances and only after I have a bird shaped like and flying like a Pallid would I look that hard at the plumage.

Sorry for hijacking the thread, but from an Italian perspective I find the opposite to be true. I really can't see the structural differences that Pallid is supposed to show (I can talk myself into seeing them sometimes, but it's not something I rely on), yet I find them to be easy enough on plumage and call. Someone should do a good study of geographic variation in Pallid Swift...

Simon Wates · Jun 26, 2011

I hope this captivating thread is giving a disproportionate perspective to UK twitching. I was hoping to maintain my view that mostly, we are talking about a fun, competitive but quaintly quirky hobby that gets people seeing exciting birds in exciting places in a part of the world that arguably brings more rarities than anywhere else. I'm not a twitcher but I love to find rare birds. Maybe I should just hide in naivety?

Jane Turner · Jun 26, 2011

cajanuma said:
Sorry for hijacking the thread, but from an Italian perspective I find the opposite to be true. I really can't see the structural differences that Pallid is supposed to show (I can talk myself into seeing them sometimes, but it's not something I rely on), yet I find them to be easy enough on plumage and call. Someone should do a good study of geographic variation in Pallid Swift...

That would indeed be interesting. To be fair I've only ever looked hard at Pallid Swifts in S.Spain (and over Liverpool), where being against a bright sky makes life hard when relying on plumage to pick them up. Tim Allwood held similar views about the flight/build and wing tip shape when based in Greece.

gareth_blockley · Jun 26, 2011

chowchilla said:
@ Gareth: How is what I said 'off topic?'

I made a point entirely pertient to the thread and then simply replied to a question I was asked about Aussie birding, to which I (sticking to topic) pointed out how twitching works (or doesn't) here in Aus.

I made a single post prior to yours that was a bit off topic, that's all...

Like I said, I don't miss the UK birding scene one bit.

1) My comment was not aimed directly at you
2) It was a joke, about other recent high profile threads get closed and moderated for going off topic - but in all reallity most threads on here do

chill out

ATB

Gareth

KenM · Jun 26, 2011

cajanuma said:
Sorry for hijacking the thread, but from an Italian perspective I find the opposite to be true. I really can't see the structural differences that Pallid is supposed to show (I can talk myself into seeing them sometimes, but it's not something I rely on), yet I find them to be easy enough on plumage and call. Someone should do a good study of geographic variation in Pallid Swift...

An interesting viewpoint.....many years ago as a sole observer on May 19th.'82, I found a Pallid Swift (watched for c15 minutes, constantly being compared against Common Swift)....It was with c dozen+ Common Swift (c400m out..against a Sussex 'Down' and superb towering cumulous) and it stuck out like a sore thumb! ie Sand Martin brown all over as compared to it's sooty brown compatriots and with a gaping white throat...when over the same distance I could not discern any throat contrast on Apus apus. I was asked whether I'd seen the dark ear-coverts the blunt wing tips and the (scalloping on the body..incidentally also true for Apus apus) to which I replied definitely not over that distance! Fast forward to the Cliffe, Kent bird which I also saw (with difficulty), clearly a much darker individual, so much so that if the Cliffe bird had been the Sussex bird then I would probably have dismissed it as an aberrant. Do they merit more investigation across the cline? cheers

deboo · Jun 26, 2011

Awwww shit. You've played the Allwood card now Lee. Damn...he's a nice bloke, unlike you.

Was fun whilst it lasted.

dave...

Jos Stratford · Jun 26, 2011

deboo said:
Awwww shit. You've played the Allwood card now Lee. Damn...he's a nice bloke, unlike you.

Allwood, nice bloke? No he ain't - he left my crumpets on his kitchen table instead of bringing them to LT!

CornishExile · Jun 26, 2011

deboo said:
Awwww shit. You've played the Allwood card now Lee. Damn...he's a nice bloke, unlike you.

Was fun whilst it lasted.

dave...

Yep. And no need to look further than many of the previous 148 posts to get a clue why Tim headed for the coast and dropped out of (im)polite birding society.

Good on ya, Tim.

ce

halftwo · Jun 26, 2011

KenM said:
An interesting viewpoint.....many years ago as a sole observer on May 19th.'82, I found a Pallid Swift (watched for c15 minutes, constantly being compared against Common Swift)....It was with c dozen+ Common Swift (c400m out..against a Sussex 'Down' and superb towering cumulous) and it stuck out like a sore thumb! ie Sand Martin brown all over as compared to it's sooty brown compatriots and with a gaping white throat...when over the same distance I could not discern any throat contrast on Apus apus.

Had a similar bird over my garden last year - you'll no doubt recall, Ken. Stuck out like a sore thumb. Didn't get the dark ear covert, nor scaly body, etc.
An inland record too. Single observer. Five minute job.

Interestingly while in Spain a few years back I watched thousands and was struck by their shape & flight habit, but this year in Crete I was not - and, as Jane says, against a bright sky the plumage differences were not apparent. It was only on closer, against a dark background view that I was sure that 99% of the Swifts there were Pallids.

As Swift watchers will be aware they change their wing shape according to how they are flying - I wonder if it the Pallid's habit of flexing their wings to give the appearance of broad & blunter more frequently than A. apus?

To get back on topic - and to answer Dafi's post - this has been gone over before - and Lee said then that he'd had the Information Commissioner's people give him an exemption certificate after they had scrutinised his data files. If this be the case then there is no legal recourse.

Anyway, it's been a lovely day's birding here - if a little unproductive - hope you all have enjoyed yours.:t:

Steve Webb · Jun 26, 2011

halftwo said:
and Lee said then that he'd had the Information Commissioner's people give him an exemption certificate after they had scrutinised his data files. If this be the case then there is no legal recourse.

Perhaps Lee can publish a copy of this Certificate of Exemption from the Data Protection Act 1998 on his UK400 website as a public document and/or as an attachment on here.

Johnny Allan · Jun 26, 2011

Lee Evans said:
Check out any list published in a national newspaper, booklet or pamphlet regarding sporting comparison - do they have some of the major players missing - No? There is no point to a list if it is not reasonably representative of its goals and by not having half, three-quarters or maybe all but one name on the list is pointless. I was a fool to bow to some people's request to place it in the public domain - that won't be happening again - and as soon as the Website manager returns the list that is currently up will be removed. As and when individuals cease breathing or twitching, their names will be removed or placed in italics.

Hi Lee,

I take it that's a 'No' then. As someone pointed out in a previous post, you seem to relish the path to confrontation rather than conciliation when a few taps on the keyboard could sort this out in seconds.

You have also apparently stated 'the removal of nine individuals will not end the relentless barage of opposition' which is verging on an insult. You won't remove my entry because it won't lead to you receiving less criticism ? Well whose fault is that ? I'm beginning to suspect you enjoy it anyway.

I can't see my fictitious entry any more as you have moved the list but, as long as there is a fictitious entry in my name on your list, I demand access to this list (and any other data which you hold on me).

I suggest that whilst you have an entry for anyone on your 'List of lists', you also allow access to them as well.

RSVP

Lee Evans: 'At the end of the day, it is all a bit of fun'

Kind regards

Johnny Allan

Johnny Allan · Jun 26, 2011

Hi Lee,

Some Key Principals of the Data Protection Act:

Data must not be disclosed to other parties without the consent of the individual whom it is about. (I do not give permission for this).

Individuals have a right of access to the information held about them. (I want this information deleted, I'll have access until it is).

Personal information may be kept for no longer than is necessary and must be kept up to date. (My information will not be kept up to date for reasons previously stated).

Think about it Lee, You have ignored my polite requests to have my data removed from your or any UK400 Club files.

Kind regards

Johnny Allan

Lee Evans · Jun 26, 2011

John Allan

Since your appearance on this thread and your instigation of it, I have been most surprised by the number of emails I have received with people applying the same dislike and hostilities of you. It seems that I am not the only one who issues threats to people. Apparently you are the 'Lee Evans of Surrey' - what a hypocrite you are. Your behaviour surrounding Beddington Sewage farm and its access and your relationship with other birders in your immediate area is apparently nothing short of the way that I apparently deal with people. What a surprise that is. We are all hypocrites it seems. You induced one up and coming birder to tears apparently.

After information was sent in, you will be pleased to know that your list was updated - but people within 'your circle' seem to believe that you are claiming the Grey Catbird that most of us saw and was clearly a Blackcap.

As for the Certificate of Exemption, I haven't got a clue where it is and will not be bothering to search for it. It was issued in August 2002 and is most likely out of date now. However, Neil Howes made a concerted effort to get his legal team on the case on Friday, and he concluded that the UK400 Club passed with flying colours - so I look forward to another visit from those upholding the law. They often ring me from time to time anyway on more important matters concerning my job, which is heavily monitored.

Back to the subject of Bird Records just for a second, I am in a dilemma regarding a record that has been lying on my table for an awful long time, and was wondering if you gurus out there who are more candid in your approach and more tactful than me, can advise me. It concerns a record of a MADEIRAN STORM PETREL off of Pendeen Watchpoint two years ago - in August 2009.

The bird was seen by a total of 14 observers - 11 together and three independently seawatching from a different angle. It was seen at reasonably close range and for a long time for a rare seabird - over ten minutes or more as it slowly worked its way west. The submission quality is first-rate and the superb sketches accompanying James McCallum's field notes are striking and unequivocal. In every aspect they show a Madeiran Petrel. Other birders such as Mark Golley, Steve Beale, Eddie Myers, Lee Gregory, Martin Elliott, Adrian Kettle, John Swann and John Foster all saw the bird - and a good set of field notes were accrued during the time that it was observed. The fly in the ointment though is the opposing view of the three independent viewers - one of whom has recently been nominated by BBRC as their next serving member. At least one of the group considered the bird to be a Leach's Petrel. Frustratingly, the bird was never photographed.

From what I am hearing, there is a possibility that BBRC may, in their wisdom, reject this record as 'not proven'. The calibre of the combined birders was highly impressive and I have no doubt in my mind that a Madeiran Petrel was seen. My Advisory Committee though beg to differ in some quarters. What do I do - I'm split down the middle and hence why the record still languishes on my desk without action.

bernie b · Jun 26, 2011

Lee Evans said:
John Allan

Since your appearance on this thread and your instigation of it, I have been most surprised by the number of emails I have received with people applying the same dislike and hostilities of you. It seems that I am not the only one who issues threats to people. Apparently you are the 'Lee Evans of Surrey' - what a hypocrite you are. Your behaviour surrounding Beddington Sewage farm and its access and your relationship with other birders in your immediate area is apparently nothing short of the way that I apparently deal with people. What a surprise that is. We are all hypocrites it seems. You induced one up and coming birder to tears apparently.

After information was sent in, you will be pleased to know that your list was updated - but people within 'your circle' seem to believe that you are claiming the Grey Catbird that most of us saw and was clearly a Blackcap.

As for the Certificate of Exemption, I haven't got a clue where it is and will not be bothering to search for it. It was issued in August 2002 and is most likely out of date now. However, Neil Howes made a concerted effort to get his legal team on the case on Friday, and he concluded that the UK400 Club passed with flying colours - so I look forward to another visit from those upholding the law. They often ring me from time to time anyway on more important matters concerning my job, which is heavily monitored.

Back to the subject of Bird Records just for a second, I am in a dilemma regarding a record that has been lying on my table for an awful long time, and was wondering if you gurus out there who are more candid in your approach and more tactful than me, can advise me. It concerns a record of a MADEIRAN STORM PETREL off of Pendeen Watchpoint two years ago - in August 2009.

The bird was seen by a total of 14 observers - 11 together and three independently seawatching from a different angle. It was seen at reasonably close range and for a long time for a rare seabird - over ten minutes or more as it slowly worked its way west. The submission quality is first-rate and the superb sketches accompanying James McCallum's field notes are striking and unequivocal. In every aspect they show a Madeiran Petrel. Other birders such as Mark Golley, Steve Beale, Eddie Myers, Lee Gregory, Martin Elliott, Adrian Kettle, John Swann and John Foster all saw the bird - and a good set of field notes were accrued during the time that it was observed. The fly in the ointment though is the opposing view of the three independent viewers - one of whom has recently been nominated by BBRC as their next serving member. At least one of the group considered the bird to be a Leach's Petrel. Frustratingly, the bird was never photographed.

From what I am hearing, there is a possibility that BBRC may, in their wisdom, reject this record as 'not proven'. The calibre of the combined birders was highly impressive and I have no doubt in my mind that a Madeiran Petrel was seen. My Advisory Committee though beg to differ in some quarters. What do I do - I'm split down the middle and hence why the record still languishes on my desk without action.

always thought the final shout was yours Lee :t:

KenM · Jun 27, 2011

halftwo said:
Had a similar bird over my garden last year - you'll no doubt recall, Ken. Stuck out like a sore thumb. Didn't get the dark ear covert, nor scaly body, etc.
An inland record too. Single observer. Five minute job.

Interestingly while in Spain a few years back I watched thousands and was struck by their shape & flight habit, but this year in Crete I was not - and, as Jane says, against a bright sky the plumage differences were not apparent. It was only on closer, against a dark background view that I was sure that 99% of the Swifts there were Pallids.

As Swift watchers will be aware they change their wing shape according to how they are flying - I wonder if it the Pallid's habit of flexing their wings to give the appearance of broad & blunter more frequently than A. apus?

Anyway, it's been a lovely day's birding here - if a little unproductive - hope you all have enjoyed yours.:t:

halftwo Hi,
Like you a little unproductive today...well it is late June! but I was pleasantly surprised...when I shot from the hip and called White Admiral (the default species for the site) when I was corrected with Purple Emperor!....back to the 'sub-topic' Pallid..when seen against a contrasting backdrop and in good light ....I know I shouldn't say this.. lest I should be seen attempting to undermine the goal post movers at a certain establishment...(whose purpose it might appear to be seen...is to hammer the sole observer wherever they can, in order to maintain 'controversy mileage'...after all...we all know that Chiff Chaff/Willow Warbler, Gos/sprawk, UK 400 club are all good candidates to get the 'punter' engaged)...are really quite straightforward. Ps..did you submit....and has it been accepted?......

Jane Turner · Jun 27, 2011

You know I think that Madeiran Petrel is the sea-watching equivalent of Pallid Swift. A bird that is a easiest to pick out on subtleties of jizz and hence nigh on impossible to get a unequivocal description of in a vagrant context in typical observation conditions. Leach's Petrels can be vary variable plumage wise, with undivided rumps, shallow forks, weaker carpal bars etc - so even more of a problem than Common Swift. They also seem prone to odd moult patterns which further muddies the waters wrt wing shape etc.

I've seen a few Madeirans abroad, and not found them hard to ID. I've never seen a candidate in British waters, but even with my slightly cavalier attitude to submitting records, I'm 99.9% sure I'd never be confident enough to send one in, even with a good close view, despite having more experience with Leach's than probably anyone else in the country. I reckon my only hope is to pick one out of the garden pond.

The other bird in this category is immature Eleanora's Falcon

Johnny Allan · Jun 27, 2011

Lee,

you finally answer my posts, with personal abuse. In your usual fashion, a farrago of twisted halftruth, falsehood, accusation, innuendo and just plain nonsense, all of which, wholly irrelevant to my posts.

There seems to be a theme of this, running through this thread (and, for those who have known you longer, many years before). It seems that when you are unable to hold an argument, which seems to occur frequently, you resort to abuse of some form. Your diatribe holds no currency with me but I can see how it could be construed as bullying, when applied to some individuals.

To re-emphasise a point I made previously, whether you want to self-style yourself the Policeman, Prime Minister or Napoleon (or whatever it was you called yourself on the twitching programme), I DO NOT ANSWER TO YOU AND DO NOT WISH TO TAKE PART IN YOUR FATUOUS GAMES.

I have tried to remain polite and civil, despite being tempered by your desire for confrontation and provocation and will continue in this vein, but I really can't see what your problem is. Is it ego, is it a sense of self importance, is it a desire to seek attention ? If it's acknowledgement you want, fine, I acknowledge that you're an able and knowledgeable birder (and you wont find another birder who will indicate that i've ever claimed otherwise), it's just your other side (which you have amply demonstrated over the years and up to the present), that I do not wish to be identified with, including this UK400 Club nonsense, where it seems that entry, onto this fantasy list of fictitious lists, is compulsory, seemingly to give it an inflated importance in your eye.

I mean, it's not as if I'd ever catch the top boys even if I wanted to play your game so i'm thinking your point is to do this or utter regular outbursts of unsubstantiated accusation, insinuation and innuendo and if anyone disagrees, you can then hurl abuse at them. Does this make you feel like the 'big man' in your world ?

Whilst keeping an open mind, I did think that you would acquiesce to my polite request and still hope that you recognise the advantage of doing so. I never considered consulting the laws governing data but your insolence and arrogance in this matter have persuaded me to take a look, just to see what rights I or anyone has over the data you hold. It may transpire that you have some sort of exemption which allows you to do what you do, free and unfettered. I doubt it, but if so, so be it. This wont change the status quo for myself, it may have changed the status quo for you.

Kind regards

Johnny Allan

Lee Evans said:
John Allan

Since your appearance on this thread and your instigation of it, I have been most surprised by the number of emails I have received with people applying the same dislike and hostilities of you. It seems that I am not the only one who issues threats to people. Apparently you are the 'Lee Evans of Surrey' - what a hypocrite you are. Your behaviour surrounding Beddington Sewage farm and its access and your relationship with other birders in your immediate area is apparently nothing short of the way that I apparently deal with people. What a surprise that is. We are all hypocrites it seems. You induced one up and coming birder to tears apparently.

After information was sent in, you will be pleased to know that your list was updated - but people within 'your circle' seem to believe that you are claiming the Grey Catbird that most of us saw and was clearly a Blackcap.

As for the Certificate of Exemption, I haven't got a clue where it is and will not be bothering to search for it. It was issued in August 2002 and is most likely out of date now. However, Neil Howes made a concerted effort to get his legal team on the case on Friday, and he concluded that the UK400 Club passed with flying colours - so I look forward to another visit from those upholding the law. They often ring me from time to time anyway on more important matters concerning my job, which is heavily monitored.

Back to the subject of Bird Records just for a second, I am in a dilemma regarding a record that has been lying on my table for an awful long time, and was wondering if you gurus out there who are more candid in your approach and more tactful than me, can advise me. It concerns a record of a MADEIRAN STORM PETREL off of Pendeen Watchpoint two years ago - in August 2009.

The bird was seen by a total of 14 observers - 11 together and three independently seawatching from a different angle. It was seen at reasonably close range and for a long time for a rare seabird - over ten minutes or more as it slowly worked its way west. The submission quality is first-rate and the superb sketches accompanying James McCallum's field notes are striking and unequivocal. In every aspect they show a Madeiran Petrel. Other birders such as Mark Golley, Steve Beale, Eddie Myers, Lee Gregory, Martin Elliott, Adrian Kettle, John Swann and John Foster all saw the bird - and a good set of field notes were accrued during the time that it was observed. The fly in the ointment though is the opposing view of the three independent viewers - one of whom has recently been nominated by BBRC as their next serving member. At least one of the group considered the bird to be a Leach's Petrel. Frustratingly, the bird was never photographed.

From what I am hearing, there is a possibility that BBRC may, in their wisdom, reject this record as 'not proven'. The calibre of the combined birders was highly impressive and I have no doubt in my mind that a Madeiran Petrel was seen. My Advisory Committee though beg to differ in some quarters. What do I do - I'm split down the middle and hence why the record still languishes on my desk without action.

Jane Turner · Jun 27, 2011

Ah...found the paper..... from a St Kildan study.

"Leaches showing all three of the above features were observed in the field at extremely close range (<3m) for at least 15 minutes; and in the face of initial excitement, both were heard to emit classic Leach's chatter calls!"

They also had dark rumped birds and ones with pale primary shafts, though not as yet on the same bird. (I have seen one of those (former))

That's why its going to be unfeasibly hard to prove to yourself, let alone any committee that you have seen a Madeiran

bernie b · Jun 27, 2011

Jane Turner said:
Ah...found the paper..... from a St Kildan study.

"Leaches showing all three of the above features were observed in the field at extremely close range (<3m) for at least 15 minutes; and in the face of initial excitement, both were heard to emit classic Leach's chatter calls!"

They also had dark rumped birds and ones with pale primary shafts, though not as yet on the same bird. (I have seen one of those (former))

That's why its going to be unfeasibly hard to prove to yourself, let alone any committee that you have seen a Madeiran

well done Jane,the work of a chief inspector and not of policeman

Uk400club 'list Of Lists' Etc Etc (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Smile people

Well-known member

.............

Eastern Exile

rydhsys rag Kernow lemmyn!

Wird Batcher

Well-known member

Dip or Glory

Dip or Glory

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Dip or Glory

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread