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.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Paul Chapman" data-source="post: 3206688" data-attributes="member: 69491">I have never considered the definition of stringing to encompass deliberate fraud. A couple of notorious British examples that were accepted rarities for a while until withdrawn:-<a href="http://www.britishbirds.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/article_files/V73/V73_N02/V73_N02_P104_109_N024.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.britishbirds.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/article_files/V73/V73_N02/V73_N02_P104_109_N024.pdf</a> - fifth note in the link Siberian Rubythroat in Lincolnshire (14.10.77)<a href="http://www.birdwatch.co.uk/channel/newsitem.asp?c=11&cate=__8403" target="_blank">http://www.birdwatch.co.uk/channel/newsitem.asp?c=11&cate=__8403</a> - the Chipping Ongar Hermit Thrush (28.10-02.11.94) - more than one observer submittedSee comments here <a href="http://www.bbrc.org.uk/download/2008_Annual_Report.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.bbrc.org.uk/download/2008_Annual_Report.pdf</a>Interestingly, the first is nearly forty years old and the second is twenty years old. Of course, the Hastings Rarities and other specimen frauds are significantly older. You may wish to source the May 2012 British Birds article:-<a href="http://www.britishbirds.co.uk/article/british-birds-may-2012/" target="_blank">http://www.britishbirds.co.uk/article/british-birds-may-2012/</a>That said, I think that article missed the point a little regarding pathological liars and their prevalence within some of the examples cited - <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathological_lying" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathological_lying</a>All the best</blockquote>

Verification