British Birds Rarities Committee - Record Reviews

Record Reviews

BBRC reviews 1200 to 1500 records each year (when it was first set up, the figure was around 200 per year). Of these, approximately 85% are accepted: this acceptance rate has remained steady for many years. Species that have caused particular problems include Black Kite, Great Snipe, Gyrfalcon, Gull-billed Tern, and North Atlantic Little Shearwater. Peter Grant estimated that, during his tenure as chairman, the approximately 2% of accepted records are incorrectly accepted, and 5% are incorrectly rejected.

Wallace (1973) addressed a number of criticisms of the Committee including that it provides too little information on the reasons for rarity rejection. Alan Vittery and Sara McMahon have both argued that the committee should inform observers whose records are rejected of the committee's reasons for doing so. This view also has the support of the editor of Birdwatch, Dominic Mitchell, who has made this the topic of editorials on a number of occasions.

BBRC has from time to time published material illustrating its assessment process in an attempt to explain to a wider audience how it arrives at its decisions. Much of these have appeared in a series called "From the Rarities Committees files" in British Birds magazine. Another short series was published in Birdwatch magazine: entitled "You: The Jury", it featured six fictitious rarity accounts, with, in the subsequent issue, accounts from two rarities committee members stating how they would vote.