Subject: Re: Timberline Sparrows
Date: Apr 14 10:22:19 1994
From: Daan Sandee - sandee at Think.COM


|> From: Ed Rybak x84336 <rybak at sequent.com>
|> To: Multiple recipients of list <tweeters at u.washington.edu>
|> Subject: Re: Timberline Sparrows

|> > As an "intermediate" birder, I have grown increasingly frustrated by
|> > official distinctions among species that are not linked to field marks. I
|> > hope the folks who keep the keys to the ABA kingdom will have mercy on those
|> > of us who do not carry a biochemical laboratory into the field with us.
|> >
|> > _______________________________________________________________________
|> > Dr. Judith Ramaley BITNET: DDJR at PSUORVM
|> > President INTERNET: JAR at PO.PDX.EDU
|> > Portland State University P.O. Box 751 Portland, Oregon 97207-0751

|> I assume this is tongue in cheek. After all, the end goal of splitting
|> genetic groups is to unravel the underlying population and evolutionary
|> dynamics and not to provide sunstance for advanced birders ;-)

I have to agree with Judith. Note she referred to ABA - an organization
which maintains a list of countable species, for those people who want to
use that list. So far, ABA has decided to follow the AOU in taxonomics.

With Pacific-slope Flycatcher, Bicknell's Thrush, and maybe in the near
future Timberline Sparrow, this is creating some problems - species only
identifiable by voice, i.e. on their breeding grounds (at least the
first two - we may learn how to identify migrant Brewer's Sparrows), and
for the latter two species, these breeding grounds are very limited and
not easily accessible.

I suspect this will be a real issue if the taxonomists indeed go
crazy and define seven species of Red Crossbill in North America -
identifiable only by a combination of measurements in the hand, voice,
and breeding locality. I would hope at that point ABA will draw the line
and include only one species of Red Crossbill on its list.

Note this need not at all concern taxonomists. They can define anything
they deem correct. Judith and I are merely making the point that birders
(listers) can disregard the latest taxonomy.

Daan Sandee sandee at think.com
Thinking Machines Corporation
100 View St, Suite 101
Mountain View, CA 94041 (415) 254-5757