AA Birdpix, Birds, Travel and More

No absolute right   I never intended this blog to be anything controversial, but when I came across an article in the Guardian (on the internet-I no longer read newspapers) I felt I had to gently remind some people what it's all about. The article was about disturbance to breeding birds by birdwatchers and photographers, and was written with input by James Lowen, whom many will know. It did contain some innaccuracies, but that is the norm for newspaper articles. I once saw a story about the Grey-tailed Tattler at Burghead accompanied by a quarter-page photo of..... a Knot! I would also love to know the location of the trees birders were supposedly climbing to get a view of the Golden-winged Warbler, there were no trees worthy of the name on that estate. I digress, we all know most of what you read isn't accurate. But the basic problem remains, the more popular birding has become, the more of an issue is disturbance. I don't think anybody does it deliberately, but it is huma

 Ladybirders As in most walks of life the sexes are different, despite attempts to force equality on us. I'm all for equality, it's essential in the job market. But whatever the law says, lady birders are viewed differently in many countries, although the situation has improved considerably over the years. At one time birders, or collectors as they were then, were almost exclusively male, but seemingly the few females involved were accepted readily, indeed, early conservation bodies were instigated by ladies. Quite right, given that they arose to prevent the slaughter of birds to provide feathers for millinery. Different countries had/have different attitudes, when I began birding a lady birder was a rare thing in the UK, but they have always been in a majority in the USA, due to a perceived lack of "macho" in the pastime.  (Obviously most are not aware of some of the dangerous situations that extreme listing can lead to, but that's another issue). Thankfully thin

Waders and the British List  As you know, I have a great intersest in waders and Frampton. I went there recently to see a Baird's Sandpiper, which rewarded me by being asleep most of the time. Got some photos of its back though! My Frampton wader list is currently 44, the reserve's is 50, and this was my second Baird's there. Driving there and back I was thinking about the status of species on the British List. WARNING-THIS BLOG MAY CAUSE DISTRESS TO THOSE OF A TWITCHING DISPOSITION WHO HAVEN'T BEEN DOING IT LONG.    There are currently 79 waders on Category A of the British List. I have seen them all, but three only abroad. Caspian Plover only in Kazakhstan, and Mongolian Plover and Wilson's Snipe in several foreign locations. The splits haven't helped there, as I only ever went for one Lesser Sand-plover, which is (was?) Tibetan, and Wilson's Snipe has only ever been confirmed on Scilly. Not that I haven't tried, in 1988 I twitched a one day spring adu

  Hudwit Musings In my very early birding days I was on holiday in Devon when I drove past a group of people looking at something through telescopes. As it wasn't convenient to stop, and I knew nothing of twitching then, I drove on. However, I have always wondered if they were looking at the Countess Wear Hudsonian Godwit. That bird was seen at Blacktoft for a month in 1981 from 10th September, disappeared and turned up in Devon from 22nd November to 14th January 1982. It then re-appeared at Blacktoft from 26th April to 6th May 1982. Joining Cream Coloured Courser and Long-toed Stint on my "wish I'd started twitching sooner" list, there was another record in Aberdeenshire in 1988, but that was only seen by a couple of people, I believe. It had become a "blocker" by then, and in terms of my UK list I put it to the back of my mind. In 1990 I went on a private trip to Chile, my room-mate was a wader enthusiast, and I remember driving some considerable distance

Do Redpolls have split personalities?  So Redpolls are now all one species, according to the latest IOC list. The photos below would indicate otherwise to any self-respecting birder. To me they indicate a lack of consensus as to what constitutes a species, but nowadays it is probably an insurmountable problem. I, for one, only make changes to my list if common sense prevails. If birds look different, then that should be recognised in some way, whatever scientists theorise, because as sure as eggs are eggs, they will be split again when someone needs a thesis for their PhD. I've mentioned this before, so 'nuff said, but recent changes resulting in a couple of new species are interesting, to me at least.  The first is Mongolian Gull, split from Vega Gull, which was originally a Herring Gull. Although breeding closer to Western Europe than Vega Gull, because it's confined to Mongolia and winters in South China I would think it less likely to take the route across the Arctic Ci

Listeria (no not the disease) I completed my census form, and was tempted to put, under religion, the term “listerism”, in the manner of the now famous Jedi Knights. I didn’t, because I don’t believe a census form to be the place for frivolity, but it did make me think that for many birders listing is a religion. It is certainly easy to be a “failed lister” in the way you can be a “failed Catholic”. However, whilst a list may be the most important thing in your life, it is also a very personal thing, and therein lies the beauty of a list. It is your list, and you can do with it what you will, put on it your own opinion if you like, but most importantly, the rest of the world is largely uninterested, except perhaps your own circle of friends. It matters not what varying taxonomic viewpoints are, nor what a committee of people, many of whom have never seen the species involved, choose to vote on. It is your list, your opinion, and most of all your memories that are triggered.  For m