[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bird banding codes
- To: Carolinabirds <carolinabirds@duke.edu>
- Subject: bird banding codes
- From: Kent Fiala <fiala@ipass.net>
- Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2002 21:32:10 -0400
- Sender: carolinabirds-owner@acpub.duke.edu
For those not familiar with banding codes, the rules for forming them
are summarized at http://www.nmt.edu/~shipman/z/nom/bblrules.html and a
critique of their shortcomings can be found at the parent page
http://www.nmt.edu/~shipman/z/nom/bbl.html . The complete list of all
official codes is at http://www.pwrc.usgs.gov/bbl/manual/aspeclst.htm .
Personally, I use the Avisys version of the codes for data entry, but
for nothing else. I have two reasons for wishing that people would not
use them in email. One is that it is a rare email message that is free
of typographical and/or spelling errors, and a single incorrect letter
in a banding code can strip it of all meaning. A year or so ago one of
the owners of the BIRDCHAT list excitedly posted a message with a
subject of "RGBR". There's no such code, and though it happened that
from the context of the message you could tell what he really meant, I
wrote to him that as list-owner he'd chosen an excellent way to
illustrate why banding codes should not be used in mailing lists. I
don't think he got my point. The other reason for discouraging use of
banding codes is that people who don't know that there is actually an
approved official list of codes start making up their own codes. For
example, the species RTH is often mentioned on Carolinabirds. Sometimes
it means Ruby-throated Hummingbird (RTHU) and sometimes it means
Red-tailed Hawk (RTHA). Again, it's usually clear from the context
which is meant, but nevertheless if you're going to use cryptic codes,
at least make the effort to learn the agreed-upon scheme.
--
Kent Fiala
near Chapel Hill, NC