What's the current situation of AERC TAC? At the AERC meeting in Belgium last November it was announced that the work of the committee would continue, and that new recommendations would soon be published (source in Finnish, no info has been published on the websites of AERC and AERC TAC). As nothing has been heard since that, ominous rumors about the death of the committee has again started to circulate, at least in Finland.
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Aerc Tac (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter CAU
- Start date
Peter Kovalik
Well-known member
By their page http://www.aerc.eu/news.htm last updated 22. February 2005 AERC TAC is soporous
Richard Klim
-------------------------
Some time ago, I asked BOURC (a member of AERC) for clarification of the current status, given the absence of any published output from AERC TAC since 2003. BOURC replied that it's not up to the BOU to comment on another organisation...
Richard
Richard
Last edited:
Here's a translation of the link in post #1:
"AERC held its eighth meeting in Blankenberge, Belgium 27.-29.11.2009. Already six years had passed since the last meeting. Now 16 representants from 9 countries (Belgium, Spain, Great Britain, Luxemburg, Portugal, France, Finland, Switzerland and Hungary) were present, Finland was represented by the chairman of the RC Visa Rauste.
The most important issue was the situation of the taxonomic committee. The committee worked actively under Gunter de Smet in 2001-2003, and produced a recommendation that was selected as the basis of the national lists of almost 20 countries, including Finland 1.12.2003.
The committee was supposed to continue its work, but little has been heard about it since de Smet left his position as chairman. Now it was confirmed that the committee had not stopped working completely, even though nothing has been published. A new taxonomic recommendation is under preparation, and it is meant to be published soon, although in a much more concise form than the version published in 2003. The publication is scheduled to happen at the end of 2009, although it is not completely certain whether the timetable will hold. The organs that maintain the national lists (in Finland the RC) will take their stands as soon as the recommendation is published.
TAC continues its work under Pierre-André Crochet and Laurent Raty. The details of the work of the committee will differ slightly from those definied in 2001, and more details about them and the timetable will be presented in 2010."
What I am curious about is that is the text above still valid?
"AERC held its eighth meeting in Blankenberge, Belgium 27.-29.11.2009. Already six years had passed since the last meeting. Now 16 representants from 9 countries (Belgium, Spain, Great Britain, Luxemburg, Portugal, France, Finland, Switzerland and Hungary) were present, Finland was represented by the chairman of the RC Visa Rauste.
The most important issue was the situation of the taxonomic committee. The committee worked actively under Gunter de Smet in 2001-2003, and produced a recommendation that was selected as the basis of the national lists of almost 20 countries, including Finland 1.12.2003.
The committee was supposed to continue its work, but little has been heard about it since de Smet left his position as chairman. Now it was confirmed that the committee had not stopped working completely, even though nothing has been published. A new taxonomic recommendation is under preparation, and it is meant to be published soon, although in a much more concise form than the version published in 2003. The publication is scheduled to happen at the end of 2009, although it is not completely certain whether the timetable will hold. The organs that maintain the national lists (in Finland the RC) will take their stands as soon as the recommendation is published.
TAC continues its work under Pierre-André Crochet and Laurent Raty. The details of the work of the committee will differ slightly from those definied in 2001, and more details about them and the timetable will be presented in 2010."
What I am curious about is that is the text above still valid?
Peter Kovalik
Well-known member
Mohamed Amezian
Well-known member
Hi,
As far as my understanding goes (but I could be wrong), the AERC TAC was created to serve as a buffer between different national comities across Europe and to create a "standard checklist" of birds of Europe.
Since the future of the AERC TAC is uncertain, my question is, why not using the checklist of Birdlife international as an official checklist of birds of Europe and/or WP that can be used by European/WP birdwatchers. It is neutral so it will please all birders following national or sub-national checklists. It could be that my understanding is too naive and failed to see the reason why.
NB: I understand very little the world of birders and especially different kinds of listers, it’s a mystery for me.
As far as my understanding goes (but I could be wrong), the AERC TAC was created to serve as a buffer between different national comities across Europe and to create a "standard checklist" of birds of Europe.
Since the future of the AERC TAC is uncertain, my question is, why not using the checklist of Birdlife international as an official checklist of birds of Europe and/or WP that can be used by European/WP birdwatchers. It is neutral so it will please all birders following national or sub-national checklists. It could be that my understanding is too naive and failed to see the reason why.
NB: I understand very little the world of birders and especially different kinds of listers, it’s a mystery for me.
Richard Klim
-------------------------
Of course, any of the well-known, regularly updated world checklists (BLI, IOC, Clements) could be adopted as a taxonomic baseline by European/WP records committees. But given the enormous (global) scope of these checklists, they cannot realistically reflect the level of local knowledge and expertise that can be brought to bear at a more regional level. Ideally Europe and the WP would have a regional classification committee similar to AOU's NACC and SACC – with taxonomic proposals relevant to the region jointly assessed and voted on by a group of experts representing the national committees, with decisions respected by all members. But as with the EU, I suspect that certain members remain unwilling to surrender their freedom to take independent decisons at the national level (or to participate in decisions not relevant to their national interests).
Richard
Last edited:
Mohamed Amezian
Well-known member
Thanks Richard. Now I understand that a regional committee (AEREC TAC in this case) means that any recent development in the field will be assessed and acknowledged very quickly than would be in the case of a global committee.
Richard Klim
-------------------------
Last edited:
Pierre-André
Member
Dear all,
It's actually quite nice to see that AERC TAC recommendations are still awaited; it brings support to those who have been involved in the past few months with trying to produce a new set of recommendations.
When will the next document be published?
Well, I will send the recommendations and the associated "official" WP list to the AERC webmaster before the end of this week. Marnix (AERC webmaster) is currently in holidays so it might take a few more days before the recommendations + list are posted on the AERC website, but (unless something really bad happens) the next document should be publicly available before the end of July.
It took more time than anticipated in Blankenberge to produce the final document. Without wanting to go into too many details, lets' say that the 2009 AERC meeting was not attended by many TAC members, that some TAC members had different opinions over the format of the document and the mode of decision than the ones adopted in Blankenberge, and that it took a bit of time to reach a consensual position…
What’s the future of the TAC?
I must say that I’m quite optimistic about the ability of the TAC to produce regular outcome in the future as most TAC members have been active and helpful in the current process. As long as the 5 national TC that make u p the TAC are active and willing to take part in the process (as seems to be the case), I see no real reason to doubt about the future. But only time will tell…
Should the TAC be made up of national TC committees (a body of bodies) as is currently the case or made of independent experts?
This question was raised again in the Blankenberge meeting and the vast majority of AERC members that were present opted to preserve the current composition. They see a body of bodies as a better way to reach a consensual European taxonomy than a group of experts. I’m not sure Laurent Raty and myself agree
but we will sure continue to work under the rules adopted by the AERC.
I will send emails to the main European mailing lists when the documents are available on the AERC web page.
Best
Pierre-André Crochet, TAC co-chairman
It's actually quite nice to see that AERC TAC recommendations are still awaited; it brings support to those who have been involved in the past few months with trying to produce a new set of recommendations.
When will the next document be published?
Well, I will send the recommendations and the associated "official" WP list to the AERC webmaster before the end of this week. Marnix (AERC webmaster) is currently in holidays so it might take a few more days before the recommendations + list are posted on the AERC website, but (unless something really bad happens) the next document should be publicly available before the end of July.
It took more time than anticipated in Blankenberge to produce the final document. Without wanting to go into too many details, lets' say that the 2009 AERC meeting was not attended by many TAC members, that some TAC members had different opinions over the format of the document and the mode of decision than the ones adopted in Blankenberge, and that it took a bit of time to reach a consensual position…
What’s the future of the TAC?
I must say that I’m quite optimistic about the ability of the TAC to produce regular outcome in the future as most TAC members have been active and helpful in the current process. As long as the 5 national TC that make u p the TAC are active and willing to take part in the process (as seems to be the case), I see no real reason to doubt about the future. But only time will tell…
Should the TAC be made up of national TC committees (a body of bodies) as is currently the case or made of independent experts?
This question was raised again in the Blankenberge meeting and the vast majority of AERC members that were present opted to preserve the current composition. They see a body of bodies as a better way to reach a consensual European taxonomy than a group of experts. I’m not sure Laurent Raty and myself agree
but we will sure continue to work under the rules adopted by the AERC. I will send emails to the main European mailing lists when the documents are available on the AERC web page.
Best
Pierre-André Crochet, TAC co-chairman
Peter Kovalik
Well-known member
Good news indeed, primarily for still numerous users of AERC TAC checklist.
Last edited:
Richard Klim
-------------------------
So, although 10 European countries were represented at the 2009 AERC meeting in Blankenberge (post #4), presumably the AERC TAC still has the same five members as in 2003 (Britain, France, the Netherlands, Germany and Sweden).
Richard
Mohamed Amezian
Well-known member
Up to 2003 the German taxonomic committee was not formed and Germany was presented in AERC TAC by the late Andres Helbig who passed away in 2005. So now a German TC must have been formed since then.
Good to hear that the committee is still working! At least in Finland the new decisions are much awaited, as we currently follow the 2003 recommendations, and most other European countries have already adopted a newer taxonomy.
Like many other smaller countries, Finland does not have a taxonomic committee, and I believe that the mindset is that we should follow a taxonomy created by professionals. If the work of the TAC would not continue, we would probably adopt some other relatively universal taxonomy, for example Howard & Moore. It is still a bit sad that not too many of the members of the TAC seem to be committed to a universal European taxonomy.
Like many other smaller countries, Finland does not have a taxonomic committee, and I believe that the mindset is that we should follow a taxonomy created by professionals. If the work of the TAC would not continue, we would probably adopt some other relatively universal taxonomy, for example Howard & Moore. It is still a bit sad that not too many of the members of the TAC seem to be committed to a universal European taxonomy.
BIRDERSMS
Active member
Really good news from the AERC TAC. Thanks André.
I remember our discussions in the past (since 1999), of the future or TAC and AERC. Even the idea of an EU funding where discussed. The TAC is the most important "work" for the public in terms of output and day-to-day applications. So I hope the question about TAC´s funding and legitimation is still an open question.
Kind regards,
Martin Riesing
bird.at
I remember our discussions in the past (since 1999), of the future or TAC and AERC. Even the idea of an EU funding where discussed. The TAC is the most important "work" for the public in terms of output and day-to-day applications. So I hope the question about TAC´s funding and legitimation is still an open question.
Kind regards,
Martin Riesing
bird.at
colonelboris
Right way up again
Glad to hear it's still going - the original list was very helpful when I was writing that book. On the note of a German TC, is there anything approaching a definitive German list that everyone there recognises? There were some distinctly funny names in the old Limicola list...
Richard Klim
-------------------------
German list
http://www.club300.de [Publications]
Richard
There's the Club300.de Birdlist Germany and Birdlist WP, but I've no idea if the German names are truly representative of popular usage:
http://www.club300.de [Publications]
Richard
Similar threads
