>Tweets,
>As I write a report of a possible Curlew Sandpiper last October on
>Dungeness spit (photo started last week as a mystery inidentified bird), I
>turned to my birding library and reviewed a publication that I had ordered
>while I still lived in Oregon and belonged to OFO (the oregon
>counterpart to WOS), the book RARE BIRDS OF OREGON was published that
>shows not only the records accepted and rejected by the OBRC. It also
>details what makes a good report and what makes a bad report. I'm not sure
>if any copies can still be purchased. I will give the reference and
>perhaps Oregon birders who are involved in OFO can tell tweeters if this
>publication is still available. The reference is: Rare birds of Oregon,
>Oregon Field Ornithologists Special Publication No.5. c1989.
>Hope this helps, as I maintain it is a shame for a bonified record to be
>rejected due to incomplete details, yet it is more of a shame for a well
>written "fake" report to be accepted.
>
>Scott Downes
>sdownes at u.washington.edu
>Seattle WA

Hi Tweets

My understanding is that this publication has been sold out for some time.
It does provide an interesting comparison between an accepted and an
unaccepted report. I will make a couple phone calls and see if I can get
permission to scan it and run it over tweeters. If that is permissable by
copyright, etc., I will probably get to it after spring break, which is
next week. I'll be in touch.

Tim

Tim Shelmerdine
Lake Oswego/Aurora, Oregon
shelmert at mail.clackesd.k12.or.us