Voting Comments
Record #: 10-B-89
Upland Sandpiper
1st Round: 5-2
2nd Round: 7-0
ACCEPT
|
1st Round |
2nd Round |
| 01-11-2007. Shirley Sturts -- Accept This is a known nesting area for the Upland Sandpiper - I've seen them there myself when birding with Spokane Audubon in the 1970s. Although Earl did not provide us wih a description, he did descibe the call. Current status: I think their habitat has disappeared with all the housing going on in the Prairie. |
08-09-2007. Sturts -- Accept I'm staying with my accept for for the same reasons. Also, Earl Chapin recently sent in an addendum which included a description of the birds. |
| 1/11/07. Cliff Weisse -- Reject, specific identification not established This report is somewhat confusing. It contains detailed descriptions of Earl's observations of courtship and feeding behavior over a period of seven days but nowhere is there a description of the birds. The first page of the report, consisting of a letter to Shirley, appears to be cut off making me wonder if there is a description that I can't see? If not I feel there's no choice but to reject this record because it lacks a description of the birds. |
11/18/2007. Cliff Weisse -- Accept Although the description provided by Earl is minimal (as expected considering that it was 1 years ago) I'm confident that he correctly identified this not unexpected species. |
| 1-11-07. Carlisle -- Accept Skimpy on details (plumage, etc.) but behavior and calls sound right. |
01-06-2008. Carlisle -- Accept no change from 1st vote (but additional letter helps) |
| 1/26/07. Charles Swift -- Accept I presume Earl was monitoring Upland Sandpipers at a known location for IDFG & WFG. There is no description of the bird except for the wolf whistle although I presume Earl knew what he was studying. I'm voting to accept in case nobody else does so the record will get into the second round. I would like to see more information. I'm not sure if Upland Sandpiper should be on the review list as it was (formerly) a regular breeding species in parts of the state. I'm not sure now the criteria for review species. Perhaps we should review this list after make some progress on reducing the number of outstanding records. |
12/9/2007. Charles Swift -- Accept The additional information is sufficient to accept this record. |
| 02-04-2007. Dave Trochlell -- Reject, specific identification not established This was probably the most difficult vote I've made to date. I'm confident that Earl knows Upland Sandpipers and watched them back in '89, but we don't really have a description of the birds here, and my inflexible rule in this documentation, and I always reject a potential record if it lacks a physical description. It's true, the "wolf whistle" UPSA display call is diagnostic and was mentioned by Earl several times, but that just makes this decision all the more difficult...since it still lacks any physical description of the birds. That said, I spoke with Earl about a month ago, and told him that rare bird reports must contain a physical description of the bird or will stand a good chance of being rejected. He didn't seem to be aware of that requirement. My solution here? Let's send Earl several IBRC rare bird report forms and ask him to describe the Upland Sandpipers he saw in 1989 in a re-submitted report. Can we do that? |
01-21-2008. Dave Trochlell -- Accept I'll accept this record, but still don't think we have anything but a barely passable description of the bird. Neither the mention of the "wolf whistle" calls, nor the too-brief description of the bird offered in the addendum, are alone very convincing. But together they are just barely enough evidence to convince me. |
| 02-12-2007. chuck trost -- Accept Good observer, and fair descriptions. "Wolf whistle" is distinctive. |
01-24-2008. chuck trost -- Accept Earl's subsequent description is minimal, but adequate. The combination of small head, yellowish legs, and perching on a fence post are good enough for me. |
| 26 July 2007. Hardy -- Accept Although there is no description of appearance, description of behavior and call is sufficient from this careful observer. |
8 January 2008. Hardy -- Accept I accept this record in the second round for the same reasons as I accepted it in the first round. |
Further info on
accept and
concerning
description
Fastest
FTPS
anywhere,
Go FTP FREE