These are photos of the only Scissor-tailed Flycatcher
ever found within the Palos Verdes Peninsula
Christmas Bird Count Circle (so far), which is in
southwestern mainland Los Angeles county. Taken
by "birdfish" as it flew over my mother-in-laws.

6/7/89 - Torrance, CA	6/7/89 - Torrance, CA
Here it comes!	There it goes!

These next two images are from the neg strip that
contains the photos. Their importance will become
apparent later. However, one thing worth noting
is that on the bottom image, the edge of the
frame says "Kodak Gold 200". This is color
print film, not slide film. The significance of this
will become apparent later as well.

How's your Bird Record Committee? Have you hugged
or checked up on them, lately? How do they work?
Do they encourage contributors/submitters to see
their work? Is it easy to get a hold of and review?
Can you find out why a report was insufficient
for acceptance and review the "peer review"?
Maybe just check up on them a little???
Does being an excellent birder have anything to do
with ability to judge others records? Are there
crack observers on BRC's who are biased, predjudiced,
and otherwise the poorest of judges? Do they
conspire to come up with reasons records are
"no good"? Do they succumb to the "witch hunt"
mob mentality? Is that what you want happening to
or who you want judging your records?
Surely those who insist reports must be reviewed,
would do nothing less than promote review of
their review, eh? Do or should relatives vote
on their relatives records?

I think many birders could not well answer these
questions. Some BRC members probably shudder at
the sound of them! I think many people take for
granted that BRC members operate at a
level of the highest integrity. Surely they are
held in reverence by the average "Joe Birder".
They have the final word on whether you saw
what you think you saw, for the record.
We largely, blindly trust they are doing
the right thing, and that they are made of
"the right stuff".

We understand how high the bar is set to propose
an identification of a bird "for the record".
It must be beyond any and all doubt.
We should expect BRC members to have even
higher standards in questioning the identification
or veracity of a report. They must be
beyond reproach, of the highest level of honesty
and integrity possible. More so than the birder reporting.

Science must come first, and last. There is
no room for politics, egos or game playing,
without the record suffering. And that is what
it is supposed to be all about, isn't it?
Accuracy of the record. Sacrificing that for
some personal reason would be shameful, eh?
A birders name is mud if he is found to
stretch the truth. What if and when a BRC member
does this to reject a good record?
Is there recourse? A price or penalty to pay?
Or does he go on voting on records as if nothing
happened with no punishment for crimes against
science, the record, and an individual?
Is there a system of safeguards to assure this
does not happen?

In general, Joe Birder sees a bird that qualifies
as a rarity worth reporting. He may write a
description, sketch or even photograph it, to
document the occurrence. Then Joe Birder sends it in
to JohnPaulVan Experts (the BRC). With complete
objectivity, they review the evidence presented, and make
a determination as to the validity of
the report. Usually this is just a matter of
verifying or confirming the identification,
but sometimes other things may be involved.

There are as many different ways of operating a BRC
as there are committees. There is no uniform
standard, each state having it's own set of
standards. And these often change with changing
members philosophies.. Some don't allow you to
see reviewers comments. Frankly that scares me,
as it seems reviewers don't like having their
work reviewed, yet insist yours is. You can't find
out why it was rejected, or what the problem
with a report was. Just a yes or no....
Hey can I buy a reason ????

For a BRC to have the complete trust of its
contributors, it must be completeley open with
them. It must allow and encourage any and all
of its work to be checked on, willingly. Anything
less and it seems something is being hidden. The
more forthright they are, the more the reporters are.

Just in case you've never had the thrill of
looking into and examining the record process
yourself, here we will examine one start to finish
(if it ever ends). From the moment of discovery,
with its thrill of victory, to the moment of
rejection, and the agony of defeat.

Click to continue ...

Harbor Park Photo Index

Pelagics Photo Index

Local Patch Lists

Home

You have been listening to "Helter Skelter" originally recorded by The Beatles