Breaking Owl News! (Controversial) American Ornithological Society Will Change the English Names of Bird Species Named After People

southsamurai, 7 months ago

Seems like a lot of effort for almost no reward.

I mean, most of those are named after the people that brought them to wider awareness. I mean, I get it, that practice ignores any peoples that were already aware of the species, and that sucks. But you’re also running into a wall of confusion and hassle with older guides and literature being a problem after the change. It doesn’t make the previous naming go away, it just adds another name to the list.

Seems pointless.

pimento64, 7 months ago

You’re forgetting the most important part, a room fool of jackasses who wouldn’t slow down if they ran a brown person over will get to look and feel good.

anon6789, 7 months ago

I’m not going to up or down vote this, but I feel it is a little presumptuous. I can’t fully blame you for feeling this way, it certainly does happen the way you say at times, but some of these people do stand up for their principles at the price of their jobs.

This isn’t the same group, but I feel it is in the same level, and they are dealing with the same situation.

NPR Link

Famous naturalist John James Audubon “did despicable things” and supported his work by buying and selling enslaved people — and that’s according to the organization that bears his name. But the National Audubon Society’s board of directors rejected the idea of changing its name this week, setting off resignations amid plans from local groups to rename themselves anyway.

The debate over how to approach that legacy seems to have divided people at its highest levels: In an email to NPR, the society confirmed board members had resigned after the name decision.

While the NAS did not name the members individually, a leadership page on the group’s website is currently missing the names of three board directors who were listed earlier this month: Sara Fuentes, Erin Giese and Stephen Tan, who served as a vice chair.

TheOctonaut, 7 months ago

I know people will say “It’s not zero sum!” but if there’s something that is more stupidly human than putting literally any effort into renaming animals while we literally wipe them out, I can’t think of it.

anon6789, 7 months ago

Normally I’d agree, but this is actually one of the main things this organization is around to do. They are essentially the Bird Naming Society.

Since 1886, the AOS and its predecessor, the American Ornithologists’ Union, have maintained a list of official English-language names for birds in North America (and more recently, South America). These names are widely used by schools and universities, government agencies, conservation organizations, the news media, artists and writers, birders and photographers, and many other members of the English-speaking public worldwide. These English names are often updated as scientists discover new information about the ecology and evolution of these birds.

There are also parts of the AOS dedicated to conservation and funding conservation science.

I do agree the actual living animals should take priority, and I’m sure the majority of AOS and the renaming project member groups agree with that too.

anon6789, 7 months ago

I wouldn’t call it pointless. It means something to someone if these people work for years for these changes.

It obviously won’t “solve” anything, but it can let some people enjoy things a little more. In just the 3 people the owls are named after, we have one guy who, even in his day, was considered an extreme racist, one who used the military to force people into reservations, and one who did human taxidermy without consent.

Naming also has never had much in the way of guidelines, and many animals are formally “discovered” multiple times, so many already have multiple names. The Morepork has over 20 names in use today. Even more if you include other owls with Boobook as part of their name, another name then Morepork is known by, since that word is an onomatopoeia for the sound they all make.

Part of the changes being worked on will be to just stop naming new animals after people to begin with, since no one person has “discovered” any animal. It encourages naming them after characteristics of the animal itself. So Blakiston’s Fish Owl, the largest owl in the world, could be named Giant Fish Owl or Great Fish Owl. But Blakiston did a number of bad things to the animals and people of Hokkaido, Japan. Those actions have significant impact to people still living today.

And lastly scientific naming would be unchanged, because that is the real named used, determined by international committee, so that is a different process to undertake on a global scale. So for any professional scientific study, names won’t be a problem.

southsamurai, 7 months ago

Yeah, I get it, I do. I’m just not convinced it’s worth doing. Like you said, for some critters, the list of names is already absurd. Adding another just to eradicate a name that most people looking up the bird would also have to look up to even know they were horrible people just seems like a waste of time, resources, and attention.

If anything, just focusing on wider public awareness of scientific names would be a more efficient way of reaching the same goal.

I dunno, maybe I’m not in touch with the people the current names impact, maybe it’s a bigger deal than I’m aware of.

anon6789, 7 months ago

I dunno, maybe I’m not in touch with the people the current names impact, maybe it’s a bigger deal than I’m aware of.

I appreciate you saying that. I’ve had a number of things in my life I couldn’t really understand until I met people affected by them and got better perspective on the issue.

I only looked up the owls on the list, and they are pretty obscure names, and obscure owls. You’d never find either without looking. But people are debating removing Audubon’s name from things, which is a huge name for anyone interested in birds. Some of these guys did do a lot of amazing things, but also some really negative things. But the project goal isn’t really too pick and choose who’s good or bad, just not to name any animal after a human. We’re all fallible, so just give it an animal name, not a human one.

Thank you for being level headed about all this though. It’s been interesting watching the down votes flowing through this thread, with it being worded as civilly as possible.