Bewick
Well-known member

Welp- sadly that owl might be dead, a long-eared was found dead by a road this morning and it’s most likely the glanford one.That’s the bird I had as well👍 Good luck with the Siskins. Great little birds.
Welp- sadly that owl might be dead, a long-eared was found dead by a road this morning and it’s most likely the glanford one.That’s the bird I had as well👍 Good luck with the Siskins. Great little birds.
A sad end if so. A cracker of a bird.Welp- sadly that owl might be dead, a long-eared was found dead by a road this morning and it’s most likely the glanford one.
I didn’t get it on the hedge- sadly mine was through a scope at the back in the target area… though the view was great and it made my day.A sad end if so. A cracker of a bird.
What a fouled up system. In Britain there is no onus on observers to submit rarities via the local hierarchy: it's perfectly legitimate to send records directly to BBRC and (should it be relevant) thence to BOURC for consideration of firsts. For that matter BOURC conducts reviews of categorisation of e.g. Cat C species on its own terms and while it will call for records it will decide the category on the data, not the local recorders' opinions. There is thus no connection between the local lists and the content of the national list.
If someone is running a national list they should take on that responsibility in toto.
John
I have long since thought that there are strong parallels for both life and year listing between British & Irish listing and state listing in the States (albeit that I can imagine inland States are less exciting or indeed parallel) and WP listing and ABA listing (including things like outlying Island stays etc).You are not considering the difference in scale between the USA and UK. The USA is 40x bigger: Texas alone is over 2x the size. Not to mention that many vagrants of interest may only be of regional interest. A Mountain Bluebird in Florida I would imagine be a huge deal, but no one would care about that species in say...Wyoming, where they are common.
State committees are effectively equivalent to the BBRC as far as vagrants go. The ABA area is more equivalent to the Western Palearctic. And of course as far as I know Spain, Netherlands, France, etc I assume have there own rarity committees that manage there checklists. And ABA only considers cases when they add a new species (introduced or vagrant) to the checklist. After that occurs, they don't consider any additional records, and it's up to the State. If you see Eastern Crowned Warbler in...say Alaska, the Alaska bird checklist committee is the only one to evaluate it, because it's already on the checklist.
To summarise the discussion earlier (and not to restart it, though I have a couple of new questions) although you have a national list it appears that access to it (for a species) is only via state lists; it is apparently not possible for those who maintain the national list to find out that a new population of a species is thriving and add it to the national list unless the relevant state authority has already done so. This appears to me very strange.We do have a national list… ABA… but the list does change. I picked up a printed/paper copy ten years ago and use that as my national list . Outdated now but I don’t care. I do not do ebird, as a paper copy allows me to feel more ‘human’. ( personal thing here). Point is though, we do hv national lists
Yes, I do know of that list - there are many populations that have been established for decades that aren't on it.