I've just turned 56 and have now been birding for 30 years, but I am excited about the prospect of some significant name-changes. I too have had the opportunity to get to know a lot of young birders, and they get it, which delights me.
Personally, yes, I cringed once I realized who John McCown was. That to me was an embarrassment, and now that I know who he was and what he fought for, there's no unlearning that. I'm glad to see that the common name for the bird no longer reflects the legacy of that really awful man. I can only imagine then what a letdown it was or would have been if I weren't a white person but wanted to get into birding. As we've seen, it was easy enough to change that common name out, and we now regularly refer to that bird as the Thick-billed Longspur. To me it's like taking down a statue of Robert E Lee. Doing so doesn't erase Lee (or McCown) from history, it only means we no longer celebrate what they did or represented. Similarly, I still look back in amazement at how long the former name of the Long-tailed Duck was retained. It was still in effect when I started birding and I remember being a bit surprised at its existence and use since it sounded so degrading to living people, so when it got switched, I felt better about referring to the bird.
Moreover, I do look forward to the new names that we'll be finding for Townsend's Warbler, Solitaire, and Shearwater. It's a lot easier to advocate for the protection of birds (by us humans) when the very name of the birds you're seeking to protect aren't pointlessly offensive to other humans whose help and cooperation we need. It's all about respect. The next generation of birders needs to be larger and more diverse than we've been up until now, and the objective is to get lots more people to care about the long-term well-being of birds and their habitats. All hands on deck. I'm all for carrying out an easy reform that reflects a commitment to having as many people help out as can be. It's just a starting point to be sure, but why not.
I agree that sometimes eponymic names seem preferable because unique and concise adjectival descriptors for some species can be difficult to come up with. (One can witness this firsthand upon reading the South American Classification Committee forum exchanges, where committee members routinely discuss necessary name changes for South American birds.) This will be especially true for so many tropical species, although the current initiative isn't really designed or aimed at those groups. I also know that not all eponyms derive from people who were awful. Some were at worst just mildly annoying or no more fallible or obnoxious than any of us. Some names have little or no connection to the people who actually first described the birds (William Swainson comes to mind on both counts.) Humboldt was practically exemplary of a great human being even by our modern standards, certainly way above his contemporaries. Many others, like Parker, lived concurrently with some of us and do seem worthy of commemoration. To that I would say, sure, although I also remember that the name changes we're discussing are only for the common names, and not the scientific names. That's because changing the Latinized species name is an essentially impossible process according to the longstanding and universal ICZN (International Code of Zoological Nomenclature) conventions. For that reason, even now the Thick-billed Longspur's scientific name is Rhynchophanes mccownii, and cannot be changed unless a major change in our understanding of its systematics arises (which in its case seems very unlikely now).
Similarly, Townsend's name will persist in scientific names like that of the solitaire (Myadestes townsendi), etc. As will Parker's if it ever comes to that with the tropical Parker's Antbird (Cercomacroides parkeri).
-------
Eric DeFonso
Boulder County, CO
Boulder County, CO
On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 7:58 PM nic korte <nkorte1@hotmail.com> wrote:
As an old guy lucky enough to go birding now and then with some 20-somethings…they are very passionate about this. They are the future.--
(I agree with Kenn Kaufman, however, the loss of an honorific such as Parker's Antbird, would seem wrong. Besides, some of those families are so similar that meaningful descriptive names are impossible.)Nic Korte
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 2, 2023, at 7:47 PM, Susan Rosine <u5b2mtdna@gmail.com> wrote:
Let's face it -- a lot of bird names are stupid in general. They are not descriptive.--So, don't just get rid of white men's names ------Junco - Spanish for reed. ?????Mallard -- old French/English for Drake ?????Wren -- who knows? HahaLoon -- they aren't crazy (haha)Waterthrushes are Warblers. Fix that.
***WOMEN - how do you feel about Ruby-crowned Kinglet? The female is not ruby-crowned! And what about:Red-Winged BlackbirdRing-necked PheasantRed CrossbillBrown-headed CowbirdChestnut-collared LongspurPurple FinchRose-breasted GrosbeakAmerican RedstartHooded WarblerBlack-throated Blue WarblerAnd on, and on, and on.
If AOS REALLY wants to be inclusive, and not offend anyone, how about we stop offending half of the human population?
Done with my rant. Probably.Susan RosineBrighton
On Thu, Nov 2, 2023, 5:13 PM Bonnie Morgan <compassrose360@gmail.com> wrote:
why aren't we worried about renaming birds named for women's body parts?
On Thu, Nov 2, 2023, 6:28 PM Evan Wilder <evan.d.burgess@gmail.com> wrote:
Robert,
What if we instead consider this issue from the perspective of an ever-evolving scientific community? We failed to acknowledge the destructive effects of colonialism and racism in the past, but we have a chance to improve upon that now. If we choose to "pause" our evolution now, when might it be more prudent to resume?
It's undeniable that America's history has been fraught with racism. This effort by the AOS specifically shines a light on the colonial disparities that saturated the 19th century. I will quote below a paragraph from the AOS's full report on the naming decision.
"A disproportionate number of eponyms were coined in the American West in the mid-1800s. One member of the committee found that, of the 78 eponyms in Tier 1 [the first wave of names being analyzed], 62% are from the West, primarily the Southwest; 77% of these were named between 1825 and 1875. Prior to that time and place, eponyms were relatively rare: Only 9 of the potentially 78 eponyms in Tier 1 were named before 1825. The eponyms from the American West largely honor and were conferred by "soldier scientists" traveling with the U.S. Army during the Mexican-American War and various Indian wars."
Since the American Ornithological Society published extensively about its decisions, let me bring a few more of their points into the conversation. Quoted segments are from the same report quoted above.Many eponymous bird names came about by being the first white man to "discover" the species and codify the name within standard scientific taxonomy, which has historically been overseen by white men as well. The natural history and scientific history of birds goes well beyond this homogeneous approach, and maintaining our current naming system diminishes the role of birds in America's pre-colonial past – and the role of indigenous peoples in caring for them and their habitats.
- Eponymous names are poor descriptors. Names that describe the bird (e.g., Spotted Sandpiper, Red-breasted Nuthatch), its habitat (e.g., Marsh Wren, Pinyon Jay), its range (e.g. Eastern Wood-Pewee, Mexican Chickadee), or something else about the species (e.g., Fish Crow, Northern Mockingbird) convey more information.
- Alternative methods of naming nature that do not imply ownership should be used. Eponyms, bestowed as honors and awards to specific people, not only ignore and conceal attributes of birds, they imply ownership or possession of an entire species by one human.
- We must also ask ourselves whose history we are commemorating through this list of names. Equating these names with the history of ornithology, or implying that ornithological history will be lost with the changing of these names, disregards the contributions and knowledge of populations that are not represented.
- Instability from such accepted name changes is regularly tolerated and expected across users of bird names.Name changes occur annually, and dozens of name changes occurred in 1957 and 1973 (American Ornithologists' Union 1957, Eisenmann et al. 1973).
Thank you for your time.- Evan
On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 3:28 PM Robert Righter <rorighter@earthlink.net> wrote:
Hi:
I would hope the American Ornithological Union would pause before changing common names of birds that are named after historic ornithologists as that could be divisive . Currently we are living in a period of time where accusations of racism are rampant and consequently we are currently judging past historic figures based on our current definition of how racist they may have been. This is how history becomes distorted and historic individuals unfortunately become misjudged. Let's wait a decade or so and revisit the topic again when hopefully our lenses are clearer, less tainted. Why are we in such the rush to change the common names of birds that have been established for centuries. We all need to take a deep breath or two and wait to see what transpires.
Bob Righter
Denver, CO
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds?hl=en?hl=en
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/CFO/Membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/CACPnx8XSorMyczDmSAYW5NKj0DzYiATdVYubU_fGQwNB8V3Rnw%40mail.gmail.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds?hl=en?hl=en
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/CFO/Membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/PH8P221MB0968A89B9102C3B0D9B8F986F7A5A%40PH8P221MB0968.NAMP221.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to cobirds@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds?hl=en?hl=en
* All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/CFO/Membership/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/CAFjVA_YSFWoz8W5Y3xYaV8ZwErNzKGBqKAbsEUD37edgsn5%3DYg%40mail.gmail.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment