Originally Posted by Kratter
Only if the taxon in question has part of its distribution entirely outside the continent and in the other committee's area; e.g. if the NACC didn't split Blue-vented Hummingbird (entirely in Central America) from Steely-vented (entirely in South America) in this year's proposals, then the SACC would likely not vote on it. But all the jaegers and some skuas occur in both the SACC and NACC, so each Committee can vote on it.
I am still wondering about why this particular proposal is propagated. The maker of the proposal recommends "no change" and the NACC agreed. Recently, I have seen comments to the SACC proposals that there is a backlog of things that should be done. Why then propagate a "no change" proposal to take up time that could be better used on something else? Is it because the person bringing it forward hopes for a different result? But if so, why not openly state that?
By the way, I hope Laurent's comments about the additional information after the original proposal do get forwarded to the committee.