The better term would be taxonomic order. Birds are
grouped by relationship so that Greater Scaup and
Ring-necked Duck are next to one another rather than
at opposite ends of the list. Martyn's Swainson's Thrush
would be next to American Robin rather than Swaninson's
Hawk and Swainson's Warbler.

I would recommend that if you do decide to go alphabetical
make the list Hawk, Swainson's and Warbler, Swainson's
so that at least some of the relationships will be maintained.

---- original message ----
Subject: 'Ornithological Order'
From: "Linda B" <llbart AT scn.org>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 18:35:46 -0800

Tweeters--I am leading a monthly bird walk at Lake Wilderness Arboretum and
compiling a list of the species we see to eventually make into a bird check
list for arboretum visitors. I've given the newsletter editor the list to
date (43 species) in ornithological order, and she's thinking about changing
the list into alphabetical order. I told her the final check list will be
in ornithological order, and she's asked me to write something for the
newsletter explaining ornithological order--something that would be easily
understood by the novice. And I realize that I really don't know why this
order is used myself! Does anyone have a good explanation?

Thanks!

Linda Bartlett
Kent, WA

--
Mike Patterson
Astoria, OR
celata at pacifier.com

Half-a-bee, philosophically must ipso-facto half not-be.
But half the bee, has got to bee Vis-a-vis its entity...
d'you see?
But can a bee be said to be or not to be an entire bee
When half the bee is not a bee due to some ancient injury?
-Monty Python

http://www.pacifier.com/~mpatters/bird/bird.html