Subject: Dennis Paulson's Statement
Date: Jul 24 11:19:18 2001
From: Nelson, Rolan D Mr Spectrum Healthcare - Rolan.Nelson at nw.amedd.army.mil


As a fairly new birder myself, and one who was, for a while, prone to
identify egrets as whooping cranes, etc, I appreciate both Dennis's Comments
and the thoughtful and constructive responses. I wonder if Mike, or someone
else out there could educatate us a little further by explaining who/what
the "records committee and/or fieldnotes editor" is, and how to get in touch
with them?
Thanks again.

Rolan Nelson
Burley, WA
Rolan.Nelson at nw.amedd.army.mil

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Patterson [mailto:celata at pacifier.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 8:10 AM
To: tweeters
Subject: Re: Dennis Paulson's Statement


There are several rules I try to follow when expressing reservations
about a particular report:
1. I send my note off list and give the observer the opportunity
to make the public corrections.
2. I generally phrase the note: "This would be unusual [this time
of year, for this place, in these numbers]." And I then provide a
list of more likely alternatives. I also make the recommendation,
if they believe they are certain of the report, that they write a
few details and send them to the records committee and/or fieldnotes
editor.
3. I always try to follow up on reports when they are in my patch,
no matter how skeptical I am. That's why I have seen Gray-crowned Rosy
Finch and Common Redpoll in Clatsop County.
4. I try to set an example by providing details of those unusual
species I see and correcting any public claims I've made which turn
out to be a product of my over zealousness or inexperience (I've
been at this for 30 years now and am still making mistakes and learning
new things).

"Korpi, Ray" wrote:
>
> Tweets,
> I have been lurking as usual, and read with interest Dennis Paulson's
> statement about the shorebird reports. He's right on target here--in our
> quest to be open-minded about sightings at times, we probably haven't
called
> some records into question. On OBOL, such discussions at times have
become
> contentious, but they are an important part of the learning process in
> birding. In order for our reports to maintain their legitimacy, we need
to
> ask questions and police ourselves; otherwise, the contributions of
> "amateurs" that have been criticized in political circles as biased and in
> error will become less and less legitimate, even though they are more
often
> than not true.
>
> Hopefully, one day, I'll get back out in the field (or even just out of
the
> damned office) and be able to defend a report of my own. Good birding to
> all,
> RK
>
> Ray Korpi, PhD "In March, with the cliff swallows
> in Mexico
> Clark College headed north, the committee
> meetings
> Vancouver, WA will not even be put on the
> calendar."
> --John Janovy, Jr., Keith
> County Journal

--
Mike Patterson Alas, to wear the mantle of Galileo,
Astoria, OR it is not enough to be persecuted
celata at pacifier.com by an unkind establishment,
you must also be right.
---Robert Park
http://www.pacifier.com/~mpatters/bird/bird.html