• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Which checklist? (1 Viewer)

crs

Well-known member
As I mentioned in a previous post I am trying to arange my photos with birds in accordance with bird taxonomy. Therefore, I think, I should follow a checklist. Looking for one I found out that there are several (Clements, IOC, HBV, Howard and Moore).

What should I have to think at when choosing one of them?
How shoud I choose one of them?

Cristian
 
IOC is probably the most suitable, as it is independent and international in scope.

Clements is tied to N American policies on names and ideas, so is not so good for international users.
 
I would not use HBW, because there are too many iffy things about the changes they have made lately. HBW is in book form, and presumably you will have to purchase the book to get updates and even then only for a few more years (I have purchased my copy). Among the other two, I follow Clements because I
1) bought a commercial program for recordkeeping that uses it, and
2) like to use ebird which also uses Clements.
If circumstances were different, I would be happy using IOC.

Niels
 
I'd say IOC or Clements

Both have the advantage of being regularly updated and having checklists which can be downloaded in excel for free, and are updated on at least an annual basis

Clements has the advantage in that its used by ebird, and the subspecies group concept is helpful for keeping track of future ticks. IOC has a bit better international coverage, updates 4 or so times a year, and has a more useful website that is easy to search.

I prefer IOC, but both checklists are good
 
Warning! This thread is more than 10 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top