Petition to AOS Leadership on the Recent Decision to Change all Eponymous Bird Names (6 Viewers)

[Mysticete]

It's also interesting they say Long-tailed Duck was a name change relating to a slur in the name, when the official reason for the change was to align with the name used in other regions.

No shortage of retcons with this stuff...

 

[D Halas]

It's also interesting they say Long-tailed Duck was a name change relating to a slur in the name, when the official reason for the change was to align with the name used in other regions.

Here's the relevant text from the Forty-Second Supplement:

"The Committee was petitioned by a group of biologists from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Alaska to change the English name of Clangula hyemalis from Oldsquaw to Long-tailed Duck, the name used for the species outside of North America. The basis for the petition was that the species is declining in numbers in Alaska, and conservation management plans require the help and cooperation of Native Americans. The biologists were concerned that the name Oldsquaw would offend the Native Americans. Requests to change the name had been made to the Committee in past years by some who consider the word ‘‘squaw’’ to be offensive. The Committee declines to consider political correctness alone in changing long-standing English names of birds but is willing in this instance to adopt an alternative name that is in use in much of the world."

So, while the AOU may not have made the change if no alternate name had already existed, it's clear from the text that they took the slur into consideration when adopting "Long-tailed Duck" as the official name.

 

[Tom Schulenberg]

It's also interesting they say Long-tailed Duck was a name change relating to a slur in the name, when the official reason for the change was to align with the name used in other regions.

my recollection from the discussions at the time is that the offensive nature of the old name very much was the reason for the change. I'm not sure how much NACC was concerned about the old name, or at any rate that they would have taken this move on their own. but they were persuaded to do so based on feedback from wildlife biologists working on the biology and conservation of the species on its breeding grounds, who encountered difficulties in getting buy-in from indigenous communities who considered the name then in vogue in North American ornithology to be offensive.

 

[pbjosh]

An aside comment - even AOS in this latest statement about their efforts to essentially “do the right thing” manages to do the wrong thing in their definition of North America.

“The AOS’s North American Committee on Classification and Nomenclature (otherwise known as the North American Classification Committee or NACC) maintains the Check-list, whose geographic coverage now includes continental North America, Middle America (Mexico through Panama), Hawaiʻi, and the West Indies (Winker 2022).”

Middle America is part of North America. North America is more than two countries.

I’m continually a bit surprised that the ornithological community continues with this incorrect usage of North America.

 

[Andy Adcock]

An update straight from the AOS, which specifically brings up the petition and some of the related fallout. So it does seem like the AOS is taking the petition and related criticisms seriously, and not just dismissing it out of hand (which, not going to lie, I was kind of expecting).

AOS Pilot Project to Change Harmful English Common Bird Names - American Ornithological Society

During the past several years, the AOS has been engaged in discussions, forums, and decisions about how best to handle eponymous and other English common bird names that may be perceived as offensive or exclusionary.

americanornithology.org

They have now also provided the first 6 species to get new names as part of a "pilot" project for the effort, which is an interesting phrasing which I feel is ripe for interpretation. Unsurprisingly most of these are what you would call "low-hanging" fruit so to speak

Inca Dove
Maui Parrotbill
Townsend's Warbler
Townsend's Solitaire
Bachman's Sparrow
Scott's Oriole

So, taking it seriously yet going ahead, unabated.

 

[Andy Adcock]

"The Committee was petitioned by a group of biologists from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Alaska to change the English name of Clangula hyemalis from Oldsquaw to Long-tailed Duck, the name used for the species outside of North America. The basis for the petition was that the species is declining in numbers in Alaska, and conservation management plans require the help and cooperation of Native Americans. The biologists were concerned that the name Oldsquaw would offend the Native Americans. Requests to change the name had been made to the Committee in past years by some who consider the word ‘‘squaw’’ to be offensive. The Committee declines to consider political correctness alone in changing long-standing English names of birds but is willing in this instance to adopt an alternative name that is in use in much of the world."

So, while the AOU may not have made the change if no alternate name had already existed, it's clear from the text that they took the slur into consideration when adopting "Long-tailed Duck" as the official name.

That's changed then.

 

[Andy Adcock]

No shortage of retcons with this stuff...

What are are 'retcons'?

 

[Andy Adcock]

polarization and the culture wars). We must also ask: does excluding people who do not share our views achieve our objective of inclusiveness? When is it acceptable to take away someone’s hard-won knowledge by changing key terms in our shared biodiversity linguistic infrastructure? There are more constructive ways to address diversity, equity and inclusion.

A totally, valid observation and I highlighted it when I think it was Grahame Linehan got cancelled at the Edinburgh Fringe. A statement was made available which said something like

'we pride ourselves on the totally inclusive attitude of our association but this individuals values, do not align with ours.'

This is basically, 'we're inclusive, just as long as you agree with us' and it's quite a comedic, contradiction in terms.

 

[jts1882]

What are are 'retcons'?

noun
plural noun: retcons

1. (in a film, television series, or other fictional work) a piece of new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events, typically used to facilitate a dramatic plot shift or account for an inconsistency.
   "we're given a retcon for Wilf's absence from Donna's wedding in ‘The Runaway Bride’: he had Spanish Flu"
   

verb
3rd person present: retcons

1. revise (an aspect of a fictional work) retrospectively, typically by introducing a piece of new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events.
   "I think fans get more upset when characters act blatantly out of established type, or when things get retconned"

 

[jogresh]

An update straight from the AOS, which specifically brings up the petition and some of the related fallout. So it does seem like the AOS is taking the petition and related criticisms seriously, and not just dismissing it out of hand (which, not going to lie, I was kind of expecting).

AOS Pilot Project to Change Harmful English Common Bird Names - American Ornithological Society

During the past several years, the AOS has been engaged in discussions, forums, and decisions about how best to handle eponymous and other English common bird names that may be perceived as offensive or exclusionary.

americanornithology.org

They have now also provided the first 6 species to get new names as part of a "pilot" project for the effort, which is an interesting phrasing which I feel is ripe for interpretation. Unsurprisingly most of these are what you would call "low-hanging" fruit so to speak

Inca Dove
Maui Parrotbill
Townsend's Warbler
Townsend's Solitaire
Bachman's Sparrow
Scott's Oriole

In the first sentence it says"
"...engage more people in the enjoyment, conservation, and study of birds.."
I wonder how many folks have been discouraged from doing this, and how many will now join in. I know I read one blog a while ago by a chap who was genuinely upset by some of the names such as McCowns (though is this a way of aligning with those of a similar political persuasion in what seems an incredibly polarised nation?). Anyway, that's at least one, and perhaps there are others, though that's the only one I've seen reference to.

 

[Farnboro John]

I noticed the use of the phrase "within our geographic purview" which, although they discussed, wasn't explicitly defined. IMHO (as a rest of world resident) AOU's purview is limited to endemics in its area and everything else is outside its geographic purview. Any attempt to exert authority above that level would be neo-colonialism.

John

 

[temmie]

I noticed the use of the phrase "within our geographic purview" which, although they discussed, wasn't explicitly defined. IMHO (as a rest of world resident) AOU's purview is limited to endemics in its area and everything else is outside its geographic purview. Any attempt to exert authority above that level would be neo-colonialism.

John

Any national bird committee can choose its own bird names in their own language.

Here is Barn Swallow for you, in Spanish


Pick whatever you want, and call it whatever you want, but the scrutiny the AOS is facing for performing the task they are assigned for, is imho hilarious.

 

[Farnboro John]

Any national bird committee can choose its own bird names in their own language.

Here is Barn Swallow for you, in Spanish
View attachment 1579684

Pick whatever you want, and call it whatever you want, but the scrutiny the AOS is facing for performing the task they are assigned for, is imho hilarious.

Self-assigned surely? They aren't a statutory body.

But OK, point taken. I look forward to there being British editions of American field guides, with proper English names. Divided by a common language, as usual....

John

 

[temmie]

Self-assigned surely? They aren't a statutory body.

But OK, point taken. I look forward to there being British editions of American field guides, with proper English names. Divided by a common language, as usual....

John

Be assured I'm all-in for universal names, I'm still having headaches whenever I see a Skua or a Jaeger, a Loon or a Diver, when I see one and am unsure what name my app has in mind to log the observation.
With regards to uniform names, maybe one will give in to the other, maybe they won't, but the more I think about it, the more I am inclined to learn latin names of birds worldwide. I already see many S-American birders only mentioning the names in their local language + latin underneath their pictures, so I (frustratingly) have to look up the English name whenever it's a bird I can't readily ID from said picture.

 

[Kirk Roth]

An aside comment - even AOS in this latest statement about their efforts to essentially “do the right thing” manages to do the wrong thing in their definition of North America.

“The AOS’s North American Committee on Classification and Nomenclature (otherwise known as the North American Classification Committee or NACC) maintains the Check-list, whose geographic coverage now includes continental North America, Middle America (Mexico through Panama), Hawaiʻi, and the West Indies (Winker 2022).”

Middle America is part of North America. North America is more than two countries.

I’m continually a bit surprised that the ornithological community continues with this incorrect usage of North America.

It needs to be kept in mind that there is an ornithological definition of North America (per the ABA and common usage of others) and a geographical definition. It could just as easily be said that a definition of North America that includes Panama is "incorrect" in the context of a birding field guide or birding communities.

Terms like fallout, swallow, booby, morph, migration, Eastern, greater, covert and so on and so forth into infinity all have different meanings we use which are "incorrect" outside of an ornithological context. But that is a commonly understood aspect of language. I don't think continental geography gets a special pass for some reason.

 

[Kirk Roth]

Be assured I'm all-in for universal names, I'm still having headaches whenever I see a Skua or a Jaeger, a Loon or a Diver, when I see one and am unsure what name my app has in mind to log the observation.
With regards to uniform names, maybe one will give in to the other, maybe they won't, but the more I think about it, the more I am inclined to learn latin names of birds worldwide. I already see many S-American birders only mentioning the names in their local language + latin underneath their pictures, so I (frustratingly) have to look up the English name whenever it's a bird I can't readily ID from said picture.

I'll keep mentioning this until they get around to kicking me off the forum, but the reality is that birds DO have multiple names and a lot of our anguish here stems from pretending that they don't, and/or pretending that common names should do the job of the scientific names.

One of the potential outcomes of wholesale rapid changes to the common names could be that people toss up their hands and go back to using Latin names as is more common with other taxa. I think this more metered approach (with only six "pilot" species) reduces that chance and I think that is much more welcome. But as you point out, even decrees by committees have not stopped a multitude of English names being used for the same things. That is the nature of language, and whether we like it or not this recent effort is no different.

 

[Jos Stratford]

One of the potential outcomes of wholesale rapid changes to the common names could be that people toss up their hands and go back to using Latin names as is more common with other taxa.

The issue here is that scientific names often change even more than the common names

Also, by and large, the greater part of the general population, and probably also many/most birders, do not remember scientific names. If you want to engage the general population, and clearly for conservation reasons we do, then common names will always triumph.

 

[pbjosh]

It needs to be kept in mind that there is an ornithological definition of North America (per the ABA and common usage of others) and a geographical definition.

And it is my contention that the “ornithological” definition is hard to justify and no amount of inertia means that it is either correct or should be continued.

“We need to rename these birds to promote inclusion in birding but sorry Mexico you are still not part of North America. We’re sure you understand it’s just the way it is as defined by us here in the US and Canada.”

Sounds pretty silly to me.

 

[raymie]

I'll keep mentioning this until they get around to kicking me off the forum, but the reality is that birds DO have multiple names and a lot of our anguish here stems from pretending that they don't, and/or pretending that common names should do the job of the scientific names.

One of the potential outcomes of wholesale rapid changes to the common names could be that people toss up their hands and go back to using Latin names as is more common with other taxa. I think this more metered approach (with only six "pilot" species) reduces that chance and I think that is much more welcome. But as you point out, even decrees by committees have not stopped a multitude of English names being used for the same things. That is the nature of language, and whether we like it or not this recent effort is no different.

Making it basically required to learn the bionomial names would be a huge barrier for birding. I agree that an increase in use of these name will be an inevitable outcome of changing a large amount of bird names. But ultimately that's a bad thing. It makes birding less accessible.

 

[opisska]

The amount of people who would be willing to learn scientific names for something that they do for fun cannot be anything that miniscule.