Sender: |
|
Date: |
Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:52:08 -0500 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
In-Reply-To: |
<004c01cac070$913acb20$b3b06160$@net> |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Another vote for this. If typing out "red-winged blackbird" is
too much to ask, it can always be shortened intelligibly to "r-w
blackb" or something. The banders' codes are great if you're
really familiar with all of them, but they're really a barrier
for most folks.
Jane
Anne Connor wrote:
> I too really love the idea of keeping abbreviations to a minimum. This list
> is a fabulous way to learn and if I have to keep a downloaded
> cross-reference tool next to my computer just to decipher what more advanced
> (perhaps) birders are referring to, I am less likely to learn about the
> birds themselves rather than their abbreviations. I like keeping the
> conversation and learning accessible to all levels of birding enthusiasts.
>
> On another note, I am so happy to witness the return of purple finches and
> evening grosbeaks at my feeders (I hadn't seen any all winter) and to have
> my morning start yesterday with a red-winged blackbird at my feeder - first
> sighting for me this year.
>
> Anne Connor
> Calais
>
|
|
|