Jim Williams wrote: >The questions about Bobwhites brings to mind the new book Birds of >Minnesota and Wisconsin by Janssen, Tessen, and Kennedy. You might not >think Bobwhite could possible be related to Western Sandpiper, but they >do have something in common. Both birds are shown in the book to >essentially be unrecorded at present in Minnesota while in Wisconsin, >several hundred feet away, they are shown to be uncommon to common. I >suggest this is not a biological condition but a sociological phenomenon >known to us all as MOURC.
I'd like to offer a different opinion than the one given above. Having spoken not only to one of the authors of the book "Birds of Minnesota and Wisconsin", but also three of its editors and its publisher, I think I can state fairly confidently that there are other reasons for the differences in the Western Sandpiper map. There was no set definition of terms, and no real way to deal with the inevitable unknowns when it comes to bird distribution. In both states, Western Sandpiper is considered at best a rare visitor. Janssen concluded that no one particular place in Minnesota can be considered to be the most likely location for Western Sandpiper to occur, so he mapped no place. Tessen, on the other hand, used the opposite thinking, deciding that the species could occur anywhere, and so mapped the entire state. Both approaches are reasonable, but the editors could have resolved this problem better. As for Northern Bobwhite, MOURC has never discussed this species. Anyone following MOURC's progress and decisions would know this and would not hold the committee "responsible" for current opinion on bobwhite's status in Minnesota. -- Anthony Hertzel -- [email protected]
