Tweeters,

Sorry to be slow in responding, but I had to say something about Gene Hunn?s
departure from Washington. I find it hard to believe that Gene is leaving--
he has been a vital part of the birding scene in Washington for such a long
time. Among other things, Gene has made huge contributions to the Seattle
Audubon Society and the Washington Ornithological Society, having served
both organizations as President and in other capacities. His ?Birding in
Seattle and King County? is a valuable reference that I still use regularly,
and I am so glad he finished the second edition of the book before leaving,
which should also be a key reference for decades to come.

I first met Gene back in California in 1970, before he had moved to
Washington, but we have birded together far fewer times than I would have
liked. One of my favorite memories that involved Gene was the Little Blue
Heron that showed up in 1974 at Judson Lake on the BC-Washington birder west
of Sumas. We both saw this bird, but separately-- me looking from the BC
side of the border, and Gene with other WA birders from the U.S. side! The
same bird furnished the first record of this species for both BC and
Washington, and Gene and I wrote up and published a note about it in the
journal WESTERN BIRDS.

I had hoped to accompany Gene on one of his King County Big Days (yes,
partly in an attempt to increase my county list), but now I will have to try
to tag onto somebody else?s team to try and pick up some of those scarce
species!

I truly hope that Gene and Nancy will be happy in their new home in Sonoma
(sounds like a great place), and that we will see them back in Washington at
least occasionally.

This may be a good move for Gene, but I can see only one good result for
Washington birders-- someone else may finally have a chance to top Gene?s
state list! However, that will surely be several years away, because Gene
is so far ahead of all his competitors.

All the very best, Gene and Nancy!



Wayne C. Weber

Delta, BC

contopus at telus.net



From: tweeters-bounces at mailman2.u.washington.edu
[mailto:tweeters-bounces at mailman2.u.washington.edu] On Behalf Of Eugene and
Nancy Hunn
Sent: November-17-10 8:27 PM
To: tweeters at u.washington.edu
Subject: [Tweeters] a fond farewell



Tweets,

After 38? fond years here in Washington State Nancy and I are migrating (is
that the proper term, or is it simply post-breeding dispersal??) south to
warmer climes and more efficient grand-parenting. We set off Saturday
hauling all our worldly goods down I-5 bound for Sonoma, CA, an old stomping
ground.

Our next address (a one-year lease) will be:

17353 Buena Vista Ave., Sonoma, CA 95476 (38? 19? 17.27? N, 122? 28? 54.47?
W ), until such time as we may be able to build a house of our own or buy a
castle.

We will begin the new yard list on arrival
Nuttall?s Woodpecker, Oak
Titmouse, Wrentit,
whatever.

We will keep our present e-mail address (enhunn323 at comcast.net) but will
have a new land line: 707-938-7276.

The Revised Edition of Birding Seattle and King County is undergoing final
tweaking by Connie Sidles on behalf of Seattle Audubon, the publisher, and
it should be out early next year, complete with new maps, charts, routes,
and lots of fine fotos.

I will monitor Tweeters from afar and will not miss the next WOS convention
at Port Angeles.

Given that many of you are avid listers (in or out of the closet), I can
report a final (? I can always fly up if something extraordinary turns up!)
state list of 443. However, such numbers are fraught, and depend on personal
judgment. For example, I include on my list Pink-footed Goose, Mute Swan,
Scaled Quail, and Cordilleran Flycatcher, none of which are currently
accepted by the WBRC.

It seems to me that the Pink-footed Goose should be as countable as the
Taiga Bean Goose, which appeared under very similar circumstances, but
that?s a matter that might be endlessly debated.

I have never been able to understand why the WBRC refuses to list the
Cordilleran Flycatcher, since they list the Northwestern Crow. Both are
attributed to the state?s avifauna by the AOU in its infinite wisdom. (I
believe both of these ?species? are specious and should be lumped as
?American Crow? and ?Western Flycatcher,? respectively, but until the AOU
sees the light we should follow their lead, it seems to me.)

I also have issues with the rule that an introduced and established species
must be delisted if and when it is extirpated. This is the rationale, I
presume, for delisting the Scaled Quail. (I saw three 14 June 1978 in
Sourdough Canyon above Priest Rapids Dam on the Yakima Firing Range, when a
few were still being seen.) As for the Mute Swan, why are records of
probably free-flying strays from the still well-established Vancouver Island
populations not countable? I count one that hung out on the delta of the
Humptulips River at Grays Harbor. Others have been reported at American Camp
on San Juan Island (from which point one can see Victoria) and about Port
Angeles. American Black Duck remains on the list despite the demise of the
introduced population at Marysville because, it is assumed, a few records
may have been of truly wild birds (though the only ones I?ve seen were
almost certainly from the now defunct introduced population). The Skylark
remains on the list for now, but would be delisted if the WBRC applied this
delisting rule consistently. Meanwhile, I figure if a bird I saw was
countable when I saw it, it will remain countable.

So, a stickler would reduce my list to 439. So be it.

In any case, if I weren?t an obsessive compulsive individual I would long
ago have adopted Alan Richards? practice. I call him the ?Stealth Lister,?
as he may well have recorded more birds in this state than I or anyone else
has to date, but he insists, Zen-like, that the list is not a number but the
entire list, carefully elaborated. If you have the time he might tell you
his list, but he refuses to reduce it to a number. A policy we might all
consider.

Hasta la vista
.

Gene & Nancy Hunn