Following a mention on the previous topic;

We have used the JNCC taxon designation spreadsheet as a way of identifying species of importance.
As a document it collates all of the designations in one place for each taxon, more or less.
This may not be the most elegant way of doing things, but as we have limited resources (three man days a week) it seemed to provide a workable solution.

Is JNCC going to update this spreadsheet and hold it up as THE definitive collation for each taxon, and will what is represented in the spreadsheet be implemented directly into Recorder. (Or vice versa)
Can I rely on this spreadsheet representing what is in recorder dictionary?

And a query on how the spreadsheet is written.
If you look at Alauda arvensis. (one of a good number).
We have the taxon Alauda arvensis with the designations for Birds Dir and Bird:red but no BAP listing.
We then have the sub species arvensis/scotica with the BAP listing only. (Neither of the other designations).

I suspect that from a technical taxonomic point of view there may be a reason for this? (breeding populations, verses migrants or some such nonsense)
It just doesnt make the spreadsheet as usable as it might be.
(Observations are made of 'Skylark', hence Recorder6 reports 'Skylark' and any cross reference to the spreadsheet is on 'Skylark' - not the sub species [unless you have a serious recording community]).

Recorder dictionary thinks that both the species and sub species are BAP designated...!

I'll be interested to hear what JNCC's position is on this spreadsheet.

Thanks in advance.
MAtt