Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [CALBIRDS] Nutmeg Mannikin

Expand Messages
  • Wim van Dam
    ... This seems to be indeed the case according to http://californiabirds.org/ChangeLog.html where it says: 27 August 2013: * Added Great Black-backed Gull
    Message 1 of 13 , Sep 4, 2013
      > Haven't seen it officially announced yet, but just read on a BLOG, that the
      > Nutmeg Mannikin has been added to the California State List by the CBRC
      > (Bird Police).

      This seems to be indeed the case according to http://californiabirds.org/ChangeLog.html where it says:
      27 August 2013:
      * Added Great Black-backed Gull Larus marinus to the main and review lists
      * Added Nutmeg Mannikin Lonchura punctulata to the main list with a code of "I"

      I never figured out if the rules of the game are that prior sightings are sufficient or if you have to see one after August 27 (the latter would make more sense to me).

      Wim van Dam (Solvang, CA)

      On 2013-09-03, at 23:29 , Douglas Aguillard <dwaguillard@...> wrote:

      > Haven't seen it officially announced yet, but just read on a BLOG, that the
      > Nutmeg Mannikin has been added to the California State List by the CBRC
      > (Bird Police).
      >
      > Doug Aguillard
      > San Diego, CA
      > dwaguillard@...
      >
    • Lori Conrad
      Hi, Please correct me if I m wrong, but even though it s been added to the state list, I believe that the code I still means that it s an introduced species
      Message 2 of 13 , Sep 4, 2013

        Hi,

         

        Please correct me if I'm wrong, but even though it's been added to the state list, I believe that the code "I" still means that it's an introduced species and therefore still not "countable" on your personal list. Is this correct?

         

        Lori Conrad

        Hermosa Beach

         

        From: CALBIRDS@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CALBIRDS@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Wim van Dam
        Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2013 8:04 AM
        To: Douglas Aguillard; CALBIRDS; sbcobirding@yahoogroups.com Birding
        Subject: Re: [CALBIRDS] Nutmeg Mannikin

         

         

        > Haven't seen it officially announced yet, but just read on a BLOG, that the

        > Nutmeg Mannikin has been added to the California State List by the CBRC
        > (Bird Police).

        This seems to be indeed the case according to http://californiabirds.org/ChangeLog.html where it says:
        27 August 2013:
        * Added Great Black-backed Gull Larus marinus to the main and review lists
        * Added Nutmeg Mannikin Lonchura punctulata to the main list with a code of "I"

        I never figured out if the rules of the game are that prior sightings are sufficient or if you have to see one after August 27 (the latter would make more sense to me).

        Wim van Dam (Solvang, CA)

        On 2013-09-03, at 23:29 , Douglas Aguillard <dwaguillard@...> wrote:

        > Haven't seen it officially announced yet, but just read on a BLOG, that the
        > Nutmeg Mannikin has been added to the California State List by the CBRC
        > (Bird Police).
        >
        > Doug Aguillard
        > San Diego, CA
        > dwaguillard@...
        >

      • Jamie Chavez
        It s personal choice. Many people do count introduces species. Some do not. -- Jamie Chavez Santa Maria, CA
        Message 3 of 13 , Sep 4, 2013
          It's personal choice. Many people do count introduces species. Some do not.


          -- 
          Jamie Chavez
          Santa Maria, CA


          On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Lori Conrad <lconrad@...> wrote:
           

          Hi,

           

          Please correct me if I'm wrong, but even though it's been added to the state list, I believe that the code "I" still means that it's an introduced species and therefore still not "countable" on your personal list. Is this correct?

           

          Lori Conrad

          Hermosa Beach



        • coddlers
          Hi Your personal list is your personal list, and nothing whatsoever to do with the California Records Committee Checklist - unless, of course, you choose to
          Message 4 of 13 , Sep 4, 2013
            Hi
             
            Your personal list is your personal list, and nothing whatsoever to do with the California Records Committee Checklist - unless, of course, you choose to use that list as your basis. As several committee members have assured me over the years, they do not see themselves as list police, or the checklist as a personal list control.
             
            The "I" status merely notes that this species was introduced, nothing more.
             
            There is a minority subset of California birders who choose not the count any introduced species on their lists, but that again is a personal choice, not associated with any "rules". I understand that the California county list club operates like.
             
            The only "official" connection between a records committee checklist and personal lists that I am aware of is the ABA rule that says that one cannot count anything on a published ABA list, including the ABA California list, unless that species is on the ABA Checklist (with some additional honour-based guidelines for counting introduced species)
             
            Bruce Barrett
            San Jose, CA
             
            In a message dated 04-Sep-13 9:53:54 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, lconrad@... writes:
            Please correct me if I'm wrong, but even though it's been added to the state list, I believe that the code "I" still means that it's an introduced species and therefore still not "countable" on your personal list. Is this correct?
          • Douglas Aguillard
            My understanding of the ABA, is they will not put a species on their list until a State Committee like the CBRC puts it on their list. Doug Aguillard San
            Message 5 of 13 , Sep 4, 2013
              My understanding of the ABA, is they will not put a species on their list until a State Committee like the CBRC puts it on their list.
               
              Doug Aguillard
              San Diego, CA
              On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 11:10 AM, <Coddlers@...> wrote:
              Hi
               
              Your personal list is your personal list, and nothing whatsoever to do with the California Records Committee Checklist - unless, of course, you choose to use that list as your basis. As several committee members have assured me over the years, they do not see themselves as list police, or the checklist as a personal list control.
               
              The "I" status merely notes that this species was introduced, nothing more.
               
              There is a minority subset of California birders who choose not the count any introduced species on their lists, but that again is a personal choice, not associated with any "rules". I understand that the California county list club operates like.
               
              The only "official" connection between a records committee checklist and personal lists that I am aware of is the ABA rule that says that one cannot count anything on a published ABA list, including the ABA California list, unless that species is on the ABA Checklist (with some additional honour-based guidelines for counting introduced species)
               
              Bruce Barrett
              San Jose, CA
               
              In a message dated 04-Sep-13 9:53:54 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, lconrad@... writes:
              Please correct me if I'm wrong, but even though it's been added to the state list, I believe that the code "I" still means that it's an introduced species and therefore still not "countable" on your personal list. Is this correct?



              --
              Doug Aguillard
              Photojournalist
              San Diego, CA
               
            • coddlers
              The ABA rules do allow them to add a species to the ABA checklist without the state committee adding it first, but they are reluctant to do so, if only to
              Message 6 of 13 , Sep 4, 2013
                The ABA rules do allow them to add a species to the ABA checklist without the state committee adding it first, but they are reluctant to do so, if only to avoid unpleasantness.
                 
                I'm not sure, but I think the ABA added Swallow-tailed Gull even though CA had specifically rejected it. (The CA committee has, of course, reversed themselves).
                 
                Bruce Barrett
                San Jose, CA
                 
                In a message dated 04-Sep-13 11:41:07 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, dwaguillard@... writes:
                My understanding of the ABA, is they will not put a species on their list until a State Committee like the CBRC puts it on their list.
              • Kimball Garrett
                Doug, This is correct, which is why the ABA-CLC did not take up the addition of Nutmeg Mannikin to the ABA list until the CBRC added the species to the
                Message 7 of 13 , Sep 4, 2013

                  Doug,

                   

                  This is correct, which is why the ABA-CLC did not take up the addition of Nutmeg Mannikin to the ABA list until the CBRC added the species to the California list last month.  The addition of mannikin to the ABA list is currently being voted on, and early exit polls seem quite favorable to those who would like to see mannikin on the ABA list.

                   

                  Once the ABA accepts Nutmeg Mannikin to its list, there will clearly be questions about where the species is “countable.”  There are sizeable populations around Houston, Texas, and locally on the Gulf Coast from se. Mississippi east to the Florida Panhandle; I don’t think any of those states have yet added the mannikin to their state lists.  Within California, mannikins are clearly well-established from San Luis Obispo County south to the Mexican border and inland to western San Bernardino and Riverside Counties.  However, populations in the south San Francisco Bay are small and apparently not growing significantly, and only a handful of sightings have been reported from elsewhere in the state.  My guess is that a good rule of thumb is that mannikins would be “countable” in California only in SLO, SBA, VEN, LA, ORA, SD, SBE and RIV counties – but possibly also in Santa Clara (and with question marks for San Mateo, Alameda, San Joaquin and Sacramento Counties and perhaps others).

                   

                  Kimball

                   

                  Kimball L. Garrett

                  Ornithology Collections Manager

                  Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County

                  900 Exposition Blvd.

                  Los Angeles, CA 90007 USA

                  213-763-3368

                  kgarrett@...

                  http://www.nhm.org/site/research-collections/ornithology

                   

                  From: CALBIRDS@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CALBIRDS@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Douglas Aguillard
                  Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2013 11:41 AM
                  To: Coddlers@...; Calbirds@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [CALBIRDS] Nutmeg Mannikin

                   

                  My understanding of the ABA, is they will not put a species on their list until a State Committee like the CBRC puts it on their list.

                   

                  Doug Aguillard

                  San Diego, CA

                • coddlers
                  Kimball, Doug As I understand it, although the ABA may delay considering a species until at least one state has added it, once the species is on the ABA list,
                  Message 8 of 13 , Sep 4, 2013
                    Kimball, Doug
                     
                    As I understand it, although the ABA may delay considering a species until at least one state has added it, once the species is on the ABA list, one may count it anywhere in the ABA area IF one is personally convinced that it meets ABA rules for introduced species, regardless of whether the local and/or state committee has even considered it. Whether or not to count it becomes a question of personal integrity rather than rules (which is consistent with state committees not being list police.)
                     
                    Bruce Barrett
                    San Jose, CA
                     
                    In a message dated 04-Sep-13 12:06:37 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, kgarrett@... writes:
                    Once the ABA accepts Nutmeg Mannikin to its list, there will clearly be questions about where the species is “countable.”  There are sizeable populations around Houston, Texas, and locally on the Gulf Coast from se. Mississippi east to the Florida Panhandle; I don’t think any of those states have yet added the mannikin to their state lists.  Within California, mannikins are clearly well-established from San Luis Obispo County south to the Mexican border and inland to western San Bernardino and Riverside Counties.  However, populations in the south San Francisco Bay are small and apparently not growing significantly, and only a handful of sightings have been reported from elsewhere in the state.  My guess is that a good rule of thumb is that mannikins would be “countable” in California only in SLO, SBA, VEN, LA, ORA, SD, SBE and RIV counties – but possibly also in Santa Clara (and with question marks for San Mateo, Alameda, San Joaquin and Sacramento Counties and perhaps others).
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.