UBRC Project

Utah Birds Records Committee

Project: Update of the Official Checklist
(Jan 2019)

Considerations:
-- by Milt :

2. I think we should be considering two different checklists:

The Official Utah Bird List: (Right now we have an internet checklist with seasonal and abundance codes and with links to an "Auxiliary List" and a "Review List" (we also have a Taxonomic List with scientific names in the AOU order -- we could link this to the Official List too?) | present list | taxonomic | some other committees |

A Field Checklist provided by the UBRC: (Right now we have several types: some with seasonal and abundance codes and some with check "boxes" and common names -- a basic list. (Most are organized in sections by family group)
| with codes | compact list |

If we concentrate on the Official list, we can easily modify that to to make a Field Checklists that might be printed out for use in the field. (The last time the committee printed out a checklist for distribution by associated entities was 2004 -- with the internet we may want to consider other ways we might do this).

Major Questions about the "codes" brought up by committee members.

1. Should we eliminate the "Fairly Common" abundance code:
Comments: | Dennis | Kenny |

Present Codes:

Abundance Codes
C =	COMMON - Found consistently in large numbers in appropriate habitat and season
F =	FAIRLY COMMON-- Found consistently in moderate numbers in appropriate habitat and season
U =	UNCOMMON - Inconsistently found in small numbers in appropriate habitat and season
R =	RARE - Found infrequently but annually in very small numbers in appropriate habitat and season
O =	OCCASIONAL - Not observed annually, but a few individuals may occur some years in appropriate habitat and season
A =	ACCIDENTAL - Not expected and out of normal range (few records)
I =	IRREGULAR - Abundance may vary greatly from year to year. (A range is given. Example: IW(R-C) = rare to common winter visitant)

	Status Codes
P =	Permanent Resident (Found year round in the state)
S =	Summer Resident (Present in the state during the nesting season)
W =	Winter Visitant (Present in the state during January and/or February)
T =	Transient (Migrates through the state in spring and/or fall)
#	Species for which documentation is requested
+	Provisional species accepted on sight record(s) only
*	Species that are found primarily in Washington County
^	Species that are found primarily in northern Utah

Possible wording for COMMON?: "Found consistently in large numbers in appropriate habitat and season": (delete these words) Any suggestions would be welcome.

2 Should we eliminate the "Northern Utah" and/or the "Washington County" designations?
Comments: | Dennis | Kenny |

- (Kenny) I have rethought the Washington County designation and think we should remove it since I think some of the species it is marked on could be found in neighboring Kane County or other southern Utah counties

3. For the "Accidental" group, we could consider replacing the "A" with the number of official sighting accepted by the committee. (that's good information we have readily available). (We could also put the number on the "Occasional" species that are also "Review Species" -- but that would make it a little more complicated -- the "A" replace by a number is pretty simple. (suggested by Milt)

- (Kenny) Leave accidental as it is. The number of documented sightings for each species may be under-reported due to not all sightings of review species being submitted to the records committee.
: - (Milt) There are ~ 105 "A's" on our checklist. 75 or them have 5 or fewer sight records we've accepted. (For these records there are not many sightings that have not been reported -- although I don't think that should matter that much really. The number or records we've vetted is a good thing to know especially if it's linked to the list and the actual records).
     I think that the numbers from 1 to 27 (at this time), give you a better idea of the status of this species in the state than 105 "A's" -- and I think the links to the actual lists and records, is great!
     I got this idea from a Finnish checklist that I have. (They've been keeping records for over 100 years -- their numbers go from 1 to 405 on the checklist I have). Also Minnesota lists the number of records and for what season, plus a description of the status, on their Official List and on their 87 County Checklists they list the month and year of all of the sightings for "Rare" species (indicated by a "#"). [if we remove the Wash. Co. designation we could use the "*" for the Review Species designation instead of the "#" so there would be no confusion]
    Since the main product of the Records Committee is the sight records which are readily available for people to peruse, it's a good Idea to give access to these records when appropriate and I think it's very appropriate in this case, especially on our official list we keep on the web which has links and is easily updated.

4. Nomenclature source American Ornithological Union or Society? | Dennis #11 |
     [Would it be good to consider a different order for a field checklist which
       would group the species more by physical similarity, rather than by DNA relationship?
       This would be for more novice level birders who might be confused by the taxonomic order.
       -- we could provide both?! [or the Utahbirds.org website could do that - I have a
        connection there :-)] - Milt]

- (Kenny) I think we should stick with the AOS taxonomy.

5. Change "Transient" to Migrant category. Transient reminds me of a homeless person - the word migrant more easily understood. | Dennis #5 |

6. Remove the "Provisional." category symbol. Again for simplicity - many now have more valid documentation - the need to differentiate these species in a field checklist is not necessary. We can still have a provisional list if we want too, but it doesn't need to be noted on the field checklist. (See our "Auxiliary Lists")
| Dennis #6 |

7. Remove the "Irregular" code. This really adds nothing. Many species vary in abundance year to year - ex. Western Tanager, Cassin's Finch. The three species listed don't need to be earmarked. Change to: Evening Grosbeak - UP, Gray-crowned Rosy-Finch - UW, Bohemian Waxwing - UW. | Dennis #7 |

Codes if ALL suggestions are accepted:

Abundance Codes
C =	COMMON - Found consistently in appropriate habitat and season
U =	UNCOMMON - Inconsistently found in small numbers in appropriate habitat and season
R =	RARE - Found infrequently but annually in very small numbers in appropriate habitat and season
O =	OCCASIONAL - Not observed annually, but a few individuals may occur some years in appropriate habitat and season
# =	ACCIDENTAL - Not expected and out of normal range (Few records: # = number of sight records vetted by the UBRC)
	[F = Fairly Common and I = Irregular have been removed]
	Status Codes
P =	Permanent Resident (Found year round in the state)
S =	Summer Resident (Present in the state during the nesting season)
W =	Winter Visitant (Present in the state during January and/or February)
M =	Migrant (Migrates through the state in spring and/or fall)
# (*?)	Species for which documentation is requested
	[Northern Utah and Washington Co. designation are removed as well as the Provisional designation; Transient has been changed to Migrant]

**Here is a version with all of the suggestions applied so you can we what we're talking about
It shows the proposed structure, but the codes have not been updated yet.
(If you have any suggestions for a different photo, just let us know).

How should we update the checklist codes?

In the past we have asked for several volunteers to go over the codes and submit a list of suggested changes to the codes. We then compiled the lists to see where there was agreement and disagreement and then had and open discussion with the "volunteers" and then with the whole committee. If you have something else to suggest just let us know, so we can consider it.

(Kenny) - I am fine with a smaller (3 or 4 people) checklist committee to review the codes then present the changes to the committee.

With eBird data readily available we have another resource to help us with this update. Here's a link to a bargraph of the species in Utah over that last 10 years:

Comments:

Discussion on Checklist Update: (from reccom listserv)

(reverse order)

kenneth.frisch

2/17/18

Re: [RecCom] Fwd: 2018 Utah Birds Checklist
Other recipients: rafridell@gmail.com, miltonmoody@yahoo.com

I think we could get rid of the Northern Utah designation (seems too broad), provisional species designation (it's confusing for most people) and the Fairly Common category (seems like C and U could cover it).

I would keep the Washington County designation since it is a specific area and the species there are distinctive and they tend not to wander far from Washington County very often. [See "rethinking" above]

Thanks,

Kenny

Dennis Shirley

1 Feb 2019

I reviewed my comments concerning checklist changes I submitted to Rick last March and still basically have the same thoughts. Here's a recap:

1. A "Field Checklist" should be just that. It is a tool to be used in the field and should be kept as simple as possible. Bird distribution symbols, wordy explanations and overdone list of categories all need to be eliminated. If more information is needed then the birder should refer to an annotated checklist, additional publications, and the internet. [We presently have an "Official checklist" (we could call it a "Bird List"), with links to an "auxiliary list" and a "taxonomic list" with scientific names and also a "Field Checklist" that is simpler and can be printed out to be used in the field - Milt]
2. Eliminate the "Fairly Common" category. Change most to Common.
3. Eliminate "Primarily in Northern Utah." Not needed! Only 5 species listed - three of which have been found elsewhere.
4. Eliminate "Primarily in Washington County." Many species are being seen in other areas - iex. Black Phoebe, Gambel's Quail. Let birders do their homework!
5 Change "Transient" to Migrant category. Transient reminds me of a homeless person - the word migrant more easily understood.
6. Remove the "Provisional." category symbol. Again for simplicity - many now have more valid documentation - the need to differentiate these species in a field checklist is not necessary. We can still have a provisional list if we want too, but it doesn't need to be noted on the field checklist.
7. Remove the "Irregular" code. This really adds nothing. Many species vary in abundance year to year - ex. Western Tanager, Cassin's Finch. The three species listed don't need to be earmarked. Change to: Evening Grosbeak - UP, Gray-crowned Rosy-Finch - UW, Bohemian Waxwing - UW.
...
11. Our checklist bird sequence, status and names should follow the AOU.