Scott Richardson posted: "Now I return to the role I might play. Whether
these Subcommittees (I think we need a less-bureaucratic, snappier name)
investigate historic
distribution, current abundance, or various aspects of life history, they
will need to know what resources are at their disposal. Who among
Tweeters is willing to write about one or more of the possibilities?"

First, I know that Dennis is right (of course!); instead of lusting after
Goshawks we should find out why some of the more common birds do as they
do. Second, I like Scott's idea of proposing the formation of
"subcommittees" in WOSNews and providing some background on information
sources so that we know from where we're starting. The latter, by itself,
would be quite useful to birders who would like to advance beyond
ticking/listing but don't know what literature sources are available (or
mandatory reading.) I would think the people involved in Tweeters and WOS
are naturals for an activity like this.

Perhaps Dennis would volunteer to write the article on "subcommittees" and
how they might function? We also need some suggestions on candidate species
that could use some attention. As Scott suggested, WOSNews could have a
regular column entitled something like "The Bird Information Feeder" with
articles on textbooks, journals, electronic media (the net, CD-ROMS,
software), the big series like Bent, government publications, state books,
museums collections & their curators, and, uh, etc.. I'd be happy to do one
on the big series.

Herb Curl


h.curl at hazmat.noaa.gov "You may be only young once but you can be
Hazmat/NOAA, 7600 Sand Pt. Wy., NE immature the rest of your life."
Seattle, WA 98115-0070
(206) 526-6272