Some useful discussions of late on the vexatious topic of checklists, and good news indeed if Birds Australia ( or the new merged entity…) are setting up a taxonomic sub-committee, as the pace of change these days is making it really hard to keep up with all the changes. Most European countries have their own often excellent checklist committees which keep custody of the national list. I’d sure like to see a broader based Australian committee making taxonomic decisions on the available evidence, which can then be adopted or not as the compilers of the three main World Checklists see fit ( these being the IOC, Clements and the Dickinson/Howard and Moore 2003 one which is rumoured to be updated this year).
The IOC are very responsive to local decisions if the evidence is convincing, and they update every 3 months or so, so they are my own personal choice of world checklist, and I do make suggestions about names and forward taxonomic info to them; Clements gets annual updates but seems somewhat erratic in what it accepts, with several of the C & B splits ignored, (and it’s still awful for Africa and Asia!); Dickinson was great in 2003 but has not been updated so it is currently languishing.
Back in 2008 I got so frustrated by the slow pace of the Australian checklist changes that I made my own based on the best evidence I was aware of, which turned out to be pretty congruent with C & B but differed with Western Grasswren, the rosellas and ringnecks, quail-thrushes and shrike-tits. It was compiled really just so I could see what was potentially going on. I also stripped out all the peripheral island species to a separate appendix, (call me old fashioned but I do like to have my Oz birds within the same faunal zone, so Cocos-Christmas Is are in a distinct section not clogging up the mainland list! This and my New Guinea Checklist are now in their third or fourth incarnations and in IOC order, and will be available from our website very shortly, all I would ask is for a small donation to be made to Birds Australia.
Fascinating times, and as I tell my clients of the tours, what you do with your checklist in the privacy of your own home is up to you!
Phil Gregory www.cassowary-house.com.au============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) to: birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au
http://birding-aus.org ==============================
They certainly review the literature. I guess the fact that they do not always agree with (say) Clements means that they have slightly different criteria for accepting or rejecting!
href=”mailto:birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au”>birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au
< #> < #> < #> < #> ===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) href=”mailto:birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au”>birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
David,
If it is in the IOC, it has been accepted as a species. If you want an up to date Australian list, just extract the Australian species from the IOC checklist whenever an updated edition is released and paste it into a new spreadsheet.
Couldn’t be simpler and does away with the need for a committee.
Cheers,
Carl Clifford
Hi birdos,
Like Phil I have adopted the IOC list as the best way to inform my own check-list. I figure overseas birdos get to use it so why can’t I.
A cursory glance of the list has some significant splits such as Red- collared Lorikeet from the Rainbow, Hornbill Friarbird from Helmeted, Swan River Honeyeater from White-naped, Western Grasswren from Thick- billed and Paperbark Flycatcher from Restless. Doubtless I missed some too. I assume IOC uses up to date data from the best of scientific input.
Cheers
David Kowalick ===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) href=”mailto:birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au”>birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) href=”mailto:birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au”>birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
I can understand the appeal of the simplicity of the C & B list as a birdwatcher, but it’s worth remembering that from a conservation standpoint, while “species” are sometimes relevant, populations are what we are ultimately trying to save.
The recent review of the Action Plan for Aust Birds has recommended that 6 more birds be officially listed as extinct, only 1 of those 6 was a “species” (I think?). The fact is we need data at a sub-species level for conservation research a) because that’s the relevant demographic unit b) because as others have pointed our species definitions change and c) that’s what our national legislation is based on.
An Aust. taxonomic sub-committee might be a good thing, but I have my doubts. The Birdlife Taxonomic Working Group which has always struck me as very sensible certainly is good – i.e. it’s transparent and pragmatic, however they have a clear set of principals and they know what they are there for (see http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/info/taxonomy).
I’m not sure Australia even has adopted a species concept?… Glenn