• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

American Ornithologists Union (2 Viewers)

Peter Kovalik

Well-known member
Slovakia
American Ornithologists Union

We are pleased to announce the establishment of the American Ornithologists Union and the publication of the first number of the Bulletin of the American Ornithologists Union.
Publications

Withrow, J., D. D. Gibson, and K. Winker. 2025. Checklist of the avian diversity of Alaska: Subspecies, breeding status, and taxonomy. Bulletin of the American Ornithologists Union 1:1-61. (PDF)
 
Well this certainly doesn't seem shady at all...

I you mean it looks suspiciously like a fake or a satire, I doubt it can be one.
The paper is referenced in the latest version of the Checklist of Alaska birds that can be obtained from the website of the University of Alaska Fairbanks : Ornithology | Museum | Museum of the North or from the website of the University of Alaska Museum : University of Alaska Museum Department of Ornithology
Also, the content of the paper seems perfectly plausible given who the declared authors are.
 
Last edited:
Anyone can set up their own bird organisation if they want to and it's a free world I suppose.

But two things are surprising here and must raise eyebrows:

1. It's akin to a bunch of disgruntled former "X" employees leaving to set up a new company called "Twitter" ... The current American Ornithological Society (AOS) was formed in October 2016 by the merger of the American Ornithologists' Union (AOU) and the Cooper Ornithological Society. AOS was the surviving entity in that merger. Some people who were once in the AOU (later rebranded as AOS) now set up a new American Ornithologists Union. They have dropped the apostrophe, but otherwise it's the same name as the AOU operated under from 1883-2016. Quite apart from the lack of creativity, it seems a surprising attempt at "passing off".

2. Website says "The American Ornithologists Union is an international organization dedicated to advancing knowledge and effective communication about birds." This would seem a grand claim for a non-membership based organisation running off Wordpress (or similar) with only four individuals named as involved.
 
They do put a disclaimer about the earlier organisation. Agree, they could have been more imaginative with the name, especially given the importance they are putting on bird names.

The American Ornithologists Union is a new organization. Historically, there was a different organization, the American Ornithologists’ Union, that was founded in 1883. They ceased to exist when they merged with the Cooper Ornithological Society in 2016 and became the American Ornithological Society. Our activities are not associated with that organization.


As they claim to cover the Americas, I wonder if they might try to get the SACC involved.
 
They have dropped the apostrophe, but otherwise it's the same name as the AOU operated under from 1883-2016.
Apostrophe indicates 'of'. Old AOU was a union of ornithologists. Maybe this new 'AOU' is a union for some ornithologists? As opposed to Bird names for birds. In the meantime, there is a biodiversity and extinction crisis going on ...
 
I am surprised that someone hasn't brought the whole bird names issue in front of one of Trump's advisors.
 
American Ornithologists Union

We are pleased to announce the establishment of the American Ornithologists Union and the publication of the first number of the Bulletin of the American Ornithologists Union.
Publications

Withrow, J., D. D. Gibson, and K. Winker. 2025. Checklist of the avian diversity of Alaska: Subspecies, breeding status, and taxonomy. Bulletin of the American Ornithologists Union 1:1-61. (PDF)

For what its worth, right now on my computer at least it appears all of these links are broken/down/defunct. I might add "already."
 
Good lord it’s almost hard to believe it isn’t April 1st.

As far as the name, I guess this comes from at least one of the people who gave us Short-billed Gull because retaining Mew Gull would cause confusion. Pretty rich stuff.
 
I am surprised that someone hasn't brought the whole bird names issue in front of one of Trump's advisors.
Well thankfully they have bigger fish to fry (or try to fry while setting fire to the kitchen and burning down the house plus several neighbouring properties). This type of culture wars issue would be absolute catnip to them if they ever found out about it though.
James
 
So I say it’s shady for several reasons:

First, as other people have already stated, we have the “mockbuster” problem. For those not familiar with the term, a mockbuster is a cheap movie released via VOD/rental/etc to coincide with the release of a well-advertised big budget movie, with a similar name to trick people into purchasing it thinking it’s the other movie. So like Transmorphers, which was released at the same time as Transformers, or Abraham Lincoln vs Zombies, released at the same time as Abraham Lincoln vs Vampires, etc. By naming the organization after an existing group with a long history of ornithology, they are trying to cash in on that recognition. If the AOU makes a change people may get it legitimately confused with the AOS’s changes, just causing confusion

Secondly, we have the “journal” itself, which as others say just seems to exist as a webpage. It’s missing most of the basics I would expect for a journal that seems to want to publish other people’s work. There is no author’s guidelines page, no information on editorial board, or anything like that. The people who are named seem to just be the authors of the checklist, three of which are based at U of Alaska and all four of them Alaska focused (obviously makes sense for a checklist), but this does produce skepticism for a “organization” that seeks to represent the entire Americas. There IS however a donation page, there is basically a trigger warning page, and a lot of not terribly useful stuff. While they say the journal is free to publish in they also suggest a donation of 4000 dollars. Which is not that different from often cited costs by well established journals, which this isn’t.

Really the organization seems to just exist because the authors have some problems with the AOS (and Avilist???). Which again…is fine. But when SACC separated for similar reasons, they immediately sought affiliation with an existing mainstream bird organization.

So again, there are a lot of weird moves that make me wonder what folks were thinking. I mean…if they just wanted to publish their checklist, I am sure U of Alaska Fairbank’s museum has the ability to do so…most museums do. I have trouble seeing many people lining up to publish here, and I am skeptical they have the ability to produce and maintain their own independent checklist.
 
Well thankfully they have bigger fish to fry (or try to fry while setting fire to the kitchen and burning down the house plus several neighboring properties). This type of culture wars issue would be absolute catnip to them if they ever found out about it though.
James
IIRC, Utah did pass some sort of (poorly written) law that basically forbid changes to bird names. I say poorly because I think it basically also forbid any sort of future taxonomic change, or name changes that have nothing to do with eponyms.
 
Also, on a taxonomic note there is a section in the back of the checklist which lists differences between the checklist and AOS, and generally the checklist seems to be a bit more taxonomically conservative (on the split level, not necessarily just the common names) than the current AOS and other checklist.
 
IIRC, Utah did pass some sort of (poorly written) law that basically forbid changes to bird names. I say poorly because I think it basically also forbid any sort of future taxonomic change, or name changes that have nothing to do with eponyms.
Anti-intellectualism is also a major strand within current populist politics so I’m not sure that wouldn’t be seen as a fringe benefit rather than an unintended negative consequence. “Why should those know-it-all scientists be allowed to mess with perfectly good species?”
James
 
Anti-intellectualism is also a major strand within current populist politics so I’m not sure that wouldn’t be seen as a fringe benefit rather than an unintended negative consequence. “Why should those know-it-all scientists be allowed to mess with perfectly good species?”
James
The forbidding of taxonomic changes wasn't explicitly laid out in the bill (not sure if it ever passed or not), it depends on how exactly the text would be interpreted. The intent of it would be to prevent common name changes.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top