Records Committee
Bylaws Proposals
Deadline is 20 Dec 2020
  

   
      Rationale for each of the Proposals
  

  
Rationale:  (by Milt Moody)

 

We presently have established a procedure for accepting first-state sight records without physical evidence, and though it is clear that an "accept" vote will add the species to the State Checklist, it is unclear how to vote to indicate that the record would be acceptable if it weren't for the higher standard we have for first state record and indicate that it should be included on a list of acceptable records that are not on the State Checklist.  The bylaws we have indicate a "Hypothetical List" that we don't now have, and is unclear about what to do with good records that don't warrant adding the species to the official State Checklist.

  

Rationale:  (comments by Rick Fridell not specifically about this proposal)

 

I’m of the opinion that ‘simplier is better’ and I think we make this as straightforward as possible. If you’ve been around the committee for a while you’ve probably heard me say that it’s the records themselves that are important, not our individual or collective opinions of them. So of course, we continue to solicit all records of rare and vagrant species in Utah.

The question is simply what does the committee do with them once received, or once received and reviewed. In my opinion the simplest answer is to continue to review potential First State Records as we have to date . . . the question comes down to whether we want to add first state records without physical evidence to the official Utah state checklist. To date we have added them as ‘provisional records’ (the provision being accepted without physical evidence). It might be more prudent to decide not to add species with only provisional records to the state checklist, and if so, we simply keep a provisional list of these records (I believe currently marked on the checklist with an asterisk or something).

Whatever we do, I don't think we should call these 'hypothetical' records. . . I mean I have a list of possible species that I think hypothetically, either have, or perhaps someday will occur in Washington County, but since it's just conjectural it's pretty irrelevant (in case you're wondering , I keep this list in my head and it contains things like Red-faced Warbler, Hepatic Tanager, Black Vulture, and similar hypothetical species!) .

Rationale:  (by Mark Stackhouse)

 

If we decide to only accept records with physical evidence, we will be rejecting many legitimate records that would have been accepted in the past, as well as discouraging submissions - both consequences that would be counter-productive to the goals of this committee. If we decide that we will accept records based upon written descriptions only, but wish to hold first state records to a higher standard, then we have to first decide what that higher standard is, and then decide what to do with accepted records that don’t meet the standard for a first state-record.

I’m a big fan of historical continuity, and of simplicity. As such, I think we should continue to accept records with good written documentation, and to require two such records for a first state record before adding to the main list, keeping a “Provisional List” for those with only a single such record, and moving “provisional” records to the main list when a second record is accepted, with or without physical evidence. There is no use for a “hypothetical list.”

Therefore, my proposal for bylaw changes would be to require physical evidence, or TWO accepted records without physical evidence, before a species is added to the official state list;

For committee members to consider each submitted record only on its merits, regardless of whether it is a first-state record;

And, for the secretary to add species to either the “provisional list,” if no prior records exist and the record lacks physical evidence, or to the main list, if physical evidence is present, or the species is already on the provisional list.

There would be no need for committee members to express opinions regarding the disposition of a record - just to vote on the merits of the documentation. The secretary can place the accepted records on the appropriate list.