|
Case Summary for:
Submission No. 004: Pheasant-tailed Jacana Hydrophasianus
chirurgus. Paraburdoo, WA. 22nd December 1974. Observer: Joseph A
Smith Verdict: Accepted This summary involves the reopening of a case circulated after the formation of the committee by the RAOU in July 1975. The authority to reopen a completed case is provided in item 3.13 of the rules, which states: "At the discretion of the committee, a case may be reopened through the presentation of new and substantial evidence or for other legitimate reason". At the annual meeting of 27 June 1998, it was unanimously agreed to reopen this case. It is emphasized that a decision to reopen a case should not be regarded in any way as reflecting adversely on the decision of the past committee, on the integrity of its members, or on the integrity or skill of the observer. By reopening a particular case, the committee is seeking to ensure that a safe decision is available to ornithological researchers and to the birding public generally. Primary concerns in this particular case include the fact that this was one of the first cases considered after the formation of the RAOU Records Appraisal Committee and processes and rules were in development. Operations of the committee have been refined during the past 25 years and furthermore it was suggested that more information is available to assist in the recognition of this and similar species, especially given the implications of age, sex, moult and feather wear in the identification process. The complete file history was provided to members and the outcome of acceptance could only be changed if 5 or more votes were received against acceptance. Members were to consider whether the description as it stands is sufficient to confirm the claimed identity, whether any new criteria might reasonably suggest other alternatives or whether any other matters may have a bearing on the claimed identification. This review was not simply treated as a new case, since the views of the original committee must be given appropriate weight. Historical records established that three rounds of voting were required to reach the original accepted verdict so this has always been a contentious case. This case revolves around a rudimentary sketch and a brief note describing a bird feeding on the waters edge at a sewage pond in Paraburdoo, WA on the 22nd December 1974. To repeat the description directly as published (Storr 1975) "Legs long (about 9-10 inches) and toes (front) seemed quite long. The black band across its chest 2 inches wide at base and narrowing as it reaches the eye. With the brown-coloured stripe on each side of its head down to the shoulder and the white central strip and bib and belly it is quite an attractive bird. Height of the bird seen next to a Black-tailed Native Hen about 3 inches shorter. When I saw it fly the depth of the wings were rather great and th flight similar to that of a Lapwing or other plovers. Bill about one inch long. I have no record of tail length, so I assume it was short. The bird was gone the next day". Members took great care to determine if the description and sketch was sufficient to confirm identification. There are clear deficiencies with the submission the most notable of which include the omission of any comment regarding the extent of white in the wings (a striking feature when seen in flight) and the lack of emphasis on leg length. On face value most members commented that the sketch was an excellent likeness for the species claimed. The black line continuous through the eye down the side of the neck and broadening across the breast combined with the red brown stripe above the eye is diagnostic. Satisfactory elements:
Tony Palliser |