A Red-breasted Merganser (as per Keith & Bob – great to catch-up with you both!) was also present in the Bunded Pools, where a male Peregrine delighted in giving two small flocks of Wigeon the heebie-jeebies.
The only notable no-show was the sizable flock of Twite that has been patronizing the car park and wire fence near the West Hide.
Interestingly these finches are apparently to be the subject of a netting exercise in order to determine the birds’ provenance. One can sort of understand the targeted study of a group of these declining finches, but why risk injuring or killing them in a mist net?
If the birds are colour ringed, then surely patient observation from the West Hide with a telescope would enable somebody to obtain all the salient details without mithering them?
Also the subject of a good gossip was the news that the long-staying Long-billed Dowitcher of a couple of winters ago has yet to be officially accepted by the relevant bodies.
The lack of a photograph is supposedly the main reason for the hold-up – notwithstanding the fact that tens of competent birders viewed the bird for weeks on end…
If local rarity committees are to remain relevant, then surely this sort of churlish and pedantic behaviour should stop?
Until later.
The dowitcher from 2009 at least was accepted by BBRC.
ReplyDeleteHello Kev - common sense prevails! I can - to a point - understand the sceptiscism of local panels as it is a thankless task with no reward if you do a good job and opprobrium if you are perceived to have made a mistake - just like a football referee!
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, this particular example does seem a little puzzling...
As too did the decision of a panel in Greater Manchester that rejected my sighting of a juvenile female Goshawk at Pennington Flash a few years back.
I viewed it to about twenty yards for around a minute. It had the wingspan of an Airbus 380 and had a chest the size of Joe Frazier, but it was dismissed as being a Sparrowhawk...
Rather than saying my submission was rejected, the euphemism of 'not proven' was used..
Paul.
Paul,
ReplyDeleteGreat White Egret at Connah's Quay Nature reserve springs to mind !!!!!
I personally,wholly sympathise with the position that the rarities committee are in,because people no matter how experienced or competent,DO make mistakes.
The problem that they have,is that if these sightings are accepted without all the necessary guidelines having been followed,then they could easily end up with a British List that is incorrect.
Several weeks after my initial sighting of the GWE at CQNR,I picked up another one on Burton Marsh,and I said to people at the time,that I thought that it was a different bird,and that in my opinion,there were 2 birds on the estuary at the time,but nobody was convinced that there was even a single bird,never mind 2!!
I haven't submitted either sighting to the BBRC,because they were both 'Single Observer' sightings,and also even more relevant,was the fact that I did not have any photographic evidence either.
Both birds were GWE's,no doubt,but I'm very happy to appreciate that because I'm unable to provide all the most important information that the BBRC require to officially accept the sightings,that it is not worth me submitting them on this occasion.
Cheers Denzil
I believe that a lack of photographic evidence is stopping the Kinmel Bay Snow Buntings from being accepted by the BBRC.
ReplyDeleteIf only someone would take a few piccies...
Hi Anonymous
ReplyDeleteThere is no doubt that having photographic evidence is as good as you can get of proof of identity,but I think that it would be a great shame if we end up in a world where Birders are all carrying cameras so that other people will actually believe them,when they say that they have seen something good.
I think that photography is marvellous.....and I for one would dearly love to take up the hobby,but if I ever found myself taking a camera out into the field to justify my sightings,then it would be time for me to stop Birding.
Cheers Denzil