[NatureNS] bird taxonomy (longish)

DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:39:47 -0300
From: Bruce Stevens <m.bruce.stevens@gmail.com>
To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
Precedence: bulk
Return-Path: <naturens-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>
Original-Recipient: rfc822;"| (cd /csuite/info/Environment/FNSN/MList; /csuite/lib/arch2html)"

next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects


--0015174c35442a88ac048e93936a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hi All,

I have been thinking about the recent taxonomic changes to North American
birds and am hoping for some discussion. When I first started birding, the
latin names in field guides were unnecessary to me. As I became more
experienced I realized that within a family of birds, one genus had
structural or vocal differences from another and these could be often
separated in the field. I found it satisfying as I began to tick off related
species. With my first international birding experience (Austria) I was in a
new region, covered by a different field guide. When consolidating these new
species into my life list after the trip an interesting thing occurred to
me: species occurring in both North America and Europe often have different
common names. This wasn't too big a problem, until I realized that sometimes
they had different scientific names. In other words, European authorities
were recognizing a different taxonomic system than North American
authorities. Was that Green-winged teal I saw the other day Anas crecca or
Anas crecca crecca?? Was the one from home Anas crecca or Anas carolinensis?
My European guide considered the two split and my North American one said
they were both subspecies of A. crecca. So I asked myself "what do
international birders (who are somewhat obsessive about their life lists) do
when confronted with these differences?". I know what I did - I embraced the
Clements Guide. The Clements Guide is a checklist of birds of the world,
maintained by Cornell.

I realize that taxonomy is constantly changing based on new studies in
molecular biology and that different scientific groups or regional
authorities will often interpret their data differently (i.e. how many
species of Red Crossbill should there be?). To the birder these taxonomic
subtlties are often irrelevant if the skill to separate (sub)species exceeds
their skill or requires the bird to be in-the-hand.

I assume that avid followers of the ABA will use that checklist for the
North American region. I also assume that the ABA makes their decisions on
what is tickable based entirely on evidence published in these periodic
updates from the AOU. Afterall, it is the AOU that is weighing the
scientific information and deciding on species separation for the North
American region. Is there a Canadian scientific body that decides for
themselves what constitutes a distinct species or do we just fall under the
purview of the AOU? I know a few people who would balk at the idea of more
species names qualified with "American".

Does anybody else use Clements as an international standard list for
birding? Is it reasonable at this point to have a global checklist that
standarizes species throughout the world or is it more sensible to have
regional authorities empowered to say what is distinct (for conservation
issues I am thinking of particularly)?

-- 
Bruce Stevens
Maryvale, NS

--0015174c35442a88ac048e93936a
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi All,<br><br>I have been thinking about the recent taxonomic changes to N=
orth American birds and am hoping for some discussion. When I first started=
 birding, the latin names in field guides were unnecessary to me. As I beca=
me more experienced I realized that within a family of birds, one genus had=
 structural or vocal differences from another and these could be often sepa=
rated in the field. I found it satisfying as I began to tick off related sp=
ecies. With my first international birding experience (Austria) I was in a =
new region, covered by a different field guide. When consolidating these ne=
w species into my life list after the trip an interesting thing occurred to=
 me: species occurring in both North America and Europe often have differen=
t common names. This wasn&#39;t too big a problem, until I realized that so=
metimes they had different scientific names. In other words, European autho=
rities were recognizing a different taxonomic system than North American au=
thorities. Was that Green-winged teal I saw the other day Anas crecca or An=
as crecca crecca?? Was the one from home Anas crecca or Anas carolinensis? =
My European guide considered the two split and my North American one said t=
hey were both subspecies of A. crecca. So I asked myself &quot;what do inte=
rnational birders (who are somewhat obsessive about their life lists) do wh=
en confronted with these differences?&quot;. I know what I did - I embraced=
 the Clements Guide. The Clements Guide is a checklist of birds of the worl=
d, maintained by Cornell.<br>
<br>I realize that taxonomy is constantly changing based on new studies in =
molecular biology and that different scientific groups or regional authorit=
ies will often interpret their data differently (i.e. how many species of R=
ed Crossbill should there be?). To the birder these taxonomic subtlties are=
 often irrelevant if the skill to separate (sub)species exceeds their skill=
 or requires the bird to be in-the-hand.<br>
<br>I assume that avid followers of the ABA will use that checklist for the=
 North American region. I also assume that the ABA makes their decisions on=
 what is tickable based entirely on evidence published in these periodic up=
dates from the AOU. Afterall, it is the AOU that is weighing the scientific=
 information and deciding on species separation for the North American regi=
on. Is there a Canadian scientific body that decides for themselves what co=
nstitutes a distinct species or do we just fall under the purview of the AO=
U? I know a few people who would balk at the idea of more species names qua=
lified with &quot;American&quot;.<br>
<br>Does anybody else use Clements as an international standard list for bi=
rding? Is it reasonable at this point to have a global checklist that stand=
arizes species throughout the world or is it more sensible to have regional=
 authorities empowered to say what is distinct (for conservation issues I a=
m thinking of particularly)?<br clear=3D"all">
<br>-- <br>Bruce Stevens<br>Maryvale, NS<br>

--0015174c35442a88ac048e93936a--

next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects