What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
New review items
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Reviews
New items
Latest content
Latest reviews
Latest questions
Brands
Search reviews
Opus
Birds & Bird Song
Locations
Resources
Contribute
Recent changes
Blogs
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
ZEISS
ZEISS Nature Observation
The Most Important Optical Parameters
Innovative Technologies
Conservation Projects
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is
absolutely FREE
!
Register for an account
to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Forums
Birding
Birds & Birding
Should I keep a 2016 yearlist?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Sangahyando" data-source="post: 3336239" data-attributes="member: 114046"><p>I keep a separate list for "heard only" birds, but I also add them to the life list with a special mark indicating that I've yet to see them. </p><p>For example, I've heard Savi's Warbler at least 6 times, and Corncrake twice, and even recorded those species' songs, so IMO there's no doubt as to the validity of the records, and they're going on the life list. However I'm still keen on actually getting to see the birds one day (even though I'm convinced that both species are actually invisible).</p><p></p><p>If you feel bad about adding "heard only" birds to the "proper" life list, and/or don't yet feel competent or confident enough about identifying based on song or call alone, the separate list seems like the best solution IMO.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Sangahyando, post: 3336239, member: 114046"] I keep a separate list for "heard only" birds, but I also add them to the life list with a special mark indicating that I've yet to see them. For example, I've heard Savi's Warbler at least 6 times, and Corncrake twice, and even recorded those species' songs, so IMO there's no doubt as to the validity of the records, and they're going on the life list. However I'm still keen on actually getting to see the birds one day (even though I'm convinced that both species are actually invisible). If you feel bad about adding "heard only" birds to the "proper" life list, and/or don't yet feel competent or confident enough about identifying based on song or call alone, the separate list seems like the best solution IMO. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes...
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Birding
Birds & Birding
Should I keep a 2016 yearlist?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more...
Top