Just saw this news on the web and wanted to pass it along:

In a move certain to excite some, enrage others, and baffle many
more, the governing body of American Birders, the ABA, today
announced new changes to one of the most basic rules of listing and
rare bird record-keeping. Beginning today, the wild status of a bird
will no longer be taken into consideration when evaluating whether or
not a bird record is acceptable.

On the face of it, this change is simply an acceptance by birding
authorities of the need to address the many non-native bird records
that continue to be debated across the country. Especially in the
case of waterfowl and introduced game birds, almost every season
brings a new example of a bird species being found in the wild well
outside its traditional range. In such cases, the debate immediately
turns to whether the bird is likely to be an escapee or a true
vagrant. In the past, the ABA has left it to each state's rare bird
committee to judge the merits of these records for their own state
lists, an uneven process that has resulted in a patchwork of
decisions over the years. With this new rule change, an ABA
spokesperson said, "we hope to cut through all these debates and
allow records committees and birders to focus once again on
identification. Too much energy and passion has been wasted trying to
justify or cast doubt upon the wild origins of too many records.
Beginning today, if the identity of the bird is not in question then
the record is good."

Were the decision limited to these narrow cases of the odd goose
found in the field, the ramifications would probably have been
accepted by the birding community at large. What has raised the most
eyebrows, however, is the broader scope affected by the wording and
intent of the ABA statement. In stating that the 'wild status' of a
bird will not be considered, the ABA has opened the door to allow the
listing of birds in captivity.

"It all began during a particularly long meeting of the checklist
committee," said the ABA checklist committee chair. "We were
deadlocked on how to maintain scientific consistency while at the
same time addressing the basic problem of so-called 'feeder birds.'
'Feeder birds,' it is generally acknowledged in the literature, can
no longer be said to be truly wild birds. Birds that are at least
somewhat dependent on human handouts are problematic from a rigorous
list-keeping perspective. Once you've accepted the principle that
feeder birds should still be allowed to be counted as wild, you've
started down a slippery slope that ends with the only logically
consistent policy: All birds are countable."

This move by the ABA is expected to put to an end the long debates
over out-of-range, captive-reared released, and escaped species. All
will now be countable, as will those birds still in captivity.

Zoos, pet stores, and poultry farms are expecting a surge of new
visitors as the most ardent birders struggle to come to terms with
the expanded checklists.

Said one birder in line at the Woodland Park Zoo in Seattle,
Washington: "I can't wait to add parrots, laughingthrush, tragopans
and peafowl to my county list. I'll be celebrating the anniversary of
this astounding decision every April 1st as long as I'm birding."

Happy first of the month,

Matt Bartels
Seattle, WA
--