The Ivory-bill is not mentioned at all (we already knew that the ABA Checklist Committee has not changed the status of the species from EXTINCT).
Five new species have been unanimously accepted and added to the ABA Checklist. Here is a list of those five species, along with a brief note on the associated documentation:
Mangrove Swallow: "Thoroughly documented with diagnostic photographs from several observers".
Black-headed Nightingale-Thrush: "Excellent photographs by several observers documented the record".
Cape Verde Shearwater: "Superb photographs accompanied the sighting by 39 observers".
Black-bellied Storm-Petrel: "Diagnostic photographs accompanied the observation by 20 people".
Social Flycatcher: "Excellent photographs accompanied the observation by numerous people".
Posts
3 comments:
It is also worthy of note that some of these sightings happened quite a few years ago and are only now being decided upon.
It might worth noting that all of these sightings occurred in heavily-birded areas (relatively speaking in regards to the North Carolina Gulf Stream) and they laregly involved species that are largely aerial (swallow, shearwater, and storm-petrel) or a bird coming to a feeding station (nightingale-thrush).
I'm not saying that this in anyway excuses the lack of evidence involving the Ivory-billed, but I believe it's a poor comparison
The point of the post is, I believe, the high standards of documentation the ABA requires to meet the burden of proof. Quite rightly, they are: independently verified sightings of birds really well seen, and good photographs.
Cornell not only doesn't have independent verification, they don't have any really good looks at birds, and no good photographs. And with their tree branch bird, their credibility is strained.
Post a Comment