>On Thu, 1 Feb 1996, David Wright wrote:

>Sharp-tailed Sparrows are on that list, too (though they are not Cascadian).
>The secrecy that surrounds the unveiling of these splits (more properly
>"un-lumps" in most cases, as they were originally recognized as distinct
>species) is silly. The dates when *new scientific names* are published are
>important to keep track of, as this is the basis of nomenclatural priority
>(and premature use of names before types are designated, etc., can be a
>problem), but the decrees of a committee that merely decides which
>already-published species names are to be regarded as the sanctioned ones
>have no bearing on priority. Why doesn't the AOU just issue a press release
>or something after the committee meets and makes its decisions, saying
>"These are the official splits and lumps: adjust your records accordingly"?
>If the actions of this committee serve any purpose other than providing
>ground rules for listers, that service is delayed until the Official List
>is published (a lapse of about a year in this case). What earthly purpose
>is served by the secrecy?

I don't think the check-list committee is uptight about people knowing
about these splits, David. What Van Remsen (committee member) told me is
that the committee reserves the right to change its collective mind, and
just because they met and decided something, doesn't mean that *that*
decision will for sure be the one published in the new check-list or
supplement. I guess that's why Official Publication is considered somewhat
sacrosanct as a final word, so the Official Rumors don't outpace it and get
mud in their eyes accordingly.

In terms of services provided and consequences of their delay, I suppose
the only "service" is to provide ornithologists/birders with the latest
word on the "official" viewpoint about the taxonomy and systematics of
North American birds. Obviously many of the changes chronicled will be
known about anyway in these communities, and there's not really a whole lot
of people whose lives will be any different accordingly. It's ongoing
bookkeeping. Right now I suspect far and away the most interest in these
deliberations is among birders. Am I being too cynical if I suspect the
"ground rules for listers" you mention above as the motivation for much of
this interest?

Anyway, the American Birding Association (the keeper of the rule books) has
decided that the changes aren't "official" until published by the AOU, then
ABA, as far as I know. So secrecy really isn't the issue. Gee whiz,
anyone who wants to add Spotted Towhee to their life list, do it now! But
if you play by the official ABA rules, that time has not come yet.

When I was just a wee lad, I doubt if there was more than one birder in a
thousand who was interested in the latest AOU check-list supplement.
Obviously, because there were no RULES of listing. This is a very recent
sport. Listing as we know it originated in the lifetimes of many of us; a
little scary to think about the next 40 years.

Dennis Paulson phone: (206) 756-3798
Slater Museum of Natural History fax: (206) 756-3352
University of Puget Sound e-mail: dpaulson at ups.edu
Tacoma, WA 98416