BUBO Listing News
28 October 2007
Ever seen a Pied Kingfisher? How about Semi-collared Flycatcher? Or perhaps Dark Chanting Goshawk? After the success of BUBO Listing for British and Irish listing, BUBO has set its sights wider. It is now possible to enter your Western Palearctic (WP) lists on BUBO Listing and, as with other lists, to compare them with those of other listers. To enter your WP List simply log in to BUBO Listing, select 'Create New List', choose the region 'Western Palearctic' and away you go. For ease of use, if you already have a British list entered onto BUBO Listing, you can use this as a base for your WP List, saving a large proportion of the record entry.
As with listing in Britain and Ireland, the question of which species are countable is not clear-cut. The approach of BUBO Listing is to allow lists based on published 'authorities', rather than determining our own base-lists. For the WP region, we have initially allowed two different base-lists, one more conservative and one more progressive. The AERC (Association of European Rarities Committees) list is more 'official', although it has not been updated for several years. (BUBO Listing has added several 'provisional' species as a result, in the expectation that the AERC list will be updated in due course.) The UK400 Club's Western Palearctic list is more up-to-date. It takes a more progressive view on splitting and is more open-minded on the subject of potential escapes, although the rationale behind the inclusion of individual species is not published.
These two authorities were chosen partly because they represent two extremes, and partly because they were readily available. It is likely that further WP authorities may be introduced in due course. Both lists can be used via the 'Create New List' facility, and the base-lists for AERC and UK400 Club, plus background information about these lists and authorities, can be viewed via the Checklists menu item at the top of each page.
One feature of BUBO Listing is that details of 'sensitive records' (especially locations of rare breeding species) can readily be hidden from general view. British records are regularly reviewed to check that such information is not appearing in the public domain. Clearly, given the greater size of the WP, it will be more difficult for assessment of which details should or should not be kept hidden. It is important, therefore, that listers use great discretion and do not reveal detailed locations of nesting sites for rare breeders. Moreover, if other listers notice information on the site that they feel should not be made public, they should contact us immediately.
27 October 2007
During our regular updating of BUBO Listing we have made two changes that will be noticed by birders wanting to create or update their lists.
Firstly, we are now insisting that all records of 'rare' species must be accompanied by a date and location. Whilst we realise this may slow down the initial entry of a list somewhat, the extra information should make the list more interesting for everyone. Whilst we are not inclined to assess the individual records on every list, having date and location information set against records of rare species is clearly of interest to many people (for example, when accessing all lists containing a given species using our 'blockers' facility). Moreover, it also helps in reducing the inevitable occasional inputting error. Obviously, this will not affect any records of rare species entered before this time, and we would encourage all BUBO Listers to go back to their lists and fill in the dates and locations of as many species as possible, especially the rarer ones.
Secondly, the main list entry page (i.e. with the entire checklist visible at once) has now been split into multiple pages. This is to improve the speed of the list entry and is also in preparation for larger base-lists for the Western Palearctic and other large regions, including the World. At the bottom of each page within the 'create new list' facility, you simply need to click on 'Save Records'; this will save the records from that page and then automatically take you to the next page.
These changes have been made to try to improve the service we offer to BUBO Listers, both now and for our future plans. We are always keen to hear of any suggestions for further improvements. Additionally, if you spot any apparent errors then please contact us immediately, via the 'Contact Us' menu item at the top of the page.
08 September 2007
Up to now, BUBO Listing has concentrated on UK lists (or countries/counties within UK). We have allowed listers to enter lists based on a small number of "authorities", i.e. British Ornithologists Union, UK400 club and the Birdwatch Magazine (2006) list. However, following many requests to do so, we are now working towards allowing listing for larger regions, such as the Western Palearctic (plus the world, and other regions). For this purpose, we'd like to establish which "authorities" most people tend to follow for their Western Palearctic lists.
From what we can ascertain, the current options seem to be as follows:
a) To use a world list as the base authority for West Pal listing, main options being Clements 6th edition or Howard & Moore 3rd edition.
b) British Birds have a WP list on their website. This is copyrighted 2000 and has presumably not been updated since?
c) Birdwatch magazine published a list of WP birds in 2000 - has not been updated since?
d) the UK400 club has a WP list - presumably kept fairly up to date?
e) the website www.wpbirds.com looks excellent, but appears not to have been updated since 2005 - has this project stalled or moved elsewhere?
f) the website www.netfugl.dk has an authoritative looking list. Again, its is unclear how often this is updated? Who decides on which species get on?
g) the AERC www.aerc.eu would be suitably authoritative. But how up to date is it? On their website there is a "Bird taxa of the WP" that is undated, although the webpage has not been updated since 2005.
We're quite prepared to set BUBO Listing up for multiple authorities for WP listing, as for the UK, but obviously it would be best for us to concentrate on the most widely used ones.
We'd be very grateful to receive any opinions on this subject.
Andy Musgrove & Mike Prince
Page 10 of 14«StartPrev12345678910NextEnd»