Subject: TWEETERS digest 1670
Date: Feb 14 00:54:35 1999
From: Jack Bowling - jbowling at direct.ca


Michael P. wrote:

snip...
>This flap about the Xhummer is one of those small issues which is the tip of
>a larger and much uglier one. I think the most disturbing thing about this
>is the underlying attack on the legitimacy of the BC rarities committee. By
>voting 'Yes, it's countable', one is essentially saying the BC committee has
>no standing in its own province and its decisions carry no force. Imagine if
>BC listers were to start a populist campaign to attack and undermine the
>jurisdictional authority of the Washington Bird Records Committee over a
>similarly unpopular, but perhaps correct, decision. snip...

You're going to have to get over it, Michael. The AOU exhibits no hesitatition
in overriding a status decision rendered by any state/provincial committee if
they seem fit to do so when updating their area-of-responsibility checklists,
something which garners them few brownie points with the serfs out in the
fields. And you can be assured that the B.C. Xantus's will go into their
"Origin uncertain" category in the next revision...

Jack
---------------------------
Jack Bowling
Prince George, BC
jbowling at direct.ca