Subject: Re: plummage terminology
Date: Jul 10 10:54:16 1997
From: PAGODROMA at aol.com - PAGODROMA at aol.com


Denny Granstrand queried the origin and usage of the terms "alternate" and
"basic" for "breeding" and "non-breeding" plumages in birds.

I too had kind of wondered from where and why the terms "basic" and
"alternate" suddenly came into vogue and general usage. It was like one
morning I woke up and suddenly you were "politically incorrect" if you dared
use the simplistically descriptive and more familiar terms "breeding" and
"non-breeding" with degrees of "molt" and ageing tossed in as need be. As
Scott Richardson points out, usage of these more familiar terms ("breeding"
and "non-breeding") is perhaps too simplistic and does not provide for a more
complete understanding of molts and plumages as historically presented in
[P.S. Humphrey and K. C. Parkes. 1959. "An approach to the study of molts and
plumages" in the Auk vol 76 no 1, pages 1-31].

The more scientifically (politically?) correct terms ("alternate" and
"basic") do however lead to some confusion amongst birders of varying levels
of interest and expertise as it is easy to sometimes get the two turned
around or just blank out and forget which one is which. I find the terms a
little hard to grasp because, at least to me, when taken a face value,
"alternate" implies that this is a plumage differing from something that is
more familiar or common or *basic* even, while "basic" implies something that
I'm 'basicly' not really sure what it implies. At least that seems to be my
gut reaction when I see or hear the terms and then find myself having to call
a 'time out' to play mental word games sorting them out. Probably like many
birders in general, I am far from being up on the cutting edge of scientific
correctness even as many of us strive to as best we can, or at least amongst
our peers, present the appearances that we are.

Richard Rowlett
Bellevue, WA
(Pagodroma at aol.com)