I feel strongly that “Pacific Wren” is proper for T. pacificus. This is the name suggested by the authors Toews and Irwin and is a concise, descriptive name. Further, it is in concordance with the latin name. I find arguments concerning confusion with Asian wrens not to be very compelling. By similar logic, the Pacific Golden-plover could be renamed because it is not the only golden-plover on the Pacific Ocean. This is in addition to Mysticete’s point that the “Pacific” moniker is not a problem or issue in other vertebrate taxa. I have not seen a case in which “Pacific” or “Atlantic” descriptors become an issue of confusion, depending on which side of the ocean an animal or plant occurs. Certainly not amongst any scientists I’ve read. Scientists are generally an adaptable bunch - give us some credit!
I feel that “Winter Wren” should be retained for T. hiemalis. “Hiemalis” is latin for “winter,” and the term “Winter Wren” originally and properly belongs to this taxon. Technically, “Winter Wren” as first described, is not applicable to the western non-migratory populations, nor to the Eurasian Troglodytes. I feel that retaining this name preserves common usage for both American and European ornithologists. As for retaining (or ascribing – for us purists!) “Winter Wren” for pacificus due to potential confusion, I find this argument not to be compelling. Again, I don’t think this is a serious problem that many, if any, scientists would have. Even amongst “laymen” birders, the retainment of the Canada Goose vs. the Cackling have been widely and quickly understood, and this is a much more confusing taxa to separate than our wren. To summarize, I do not think that confusion between Winter and Pacific Wrens would present a longstanding or important problem.
Eastern and Western Winter-Wren seem like problematic names. As I’ve just stated, “Winter-Wren” is not really proper for the western populations that are mostly non-migratory. (“Year-round Wren,” anyone?) In addition, these are long “clunky” names, begging to be whittled away in the future, just as the sharp-tailed sparrows have recently endured. I am generally not impressed with “Eastern” and “Western” names, especially when they are not the only taxa in a group. For example, we may have “Eastern Winter-Wren,” which would not be the easternmost of the Winter Wrens (that would be the not necessarily northern “Northern Winter-wren” of Eurasia?) In the very real possibility of a split of the Aleutian subspecies in the future, the “Western Winter-Wren” would not be the westernmost winter-wren either.
“Taiga Wren" or "Taiga Winter-Wren" may be unfortunate choices, considering the Appalachian populations and those that breed in southern Canada, Michigan, Maine, etc. Although taiga is technically correct for the habitat, here in America we tend to refer to these habitats as “boreal” and reserve taiga for the areas closer to tree line. However, I’m not advocating “Boreal Wren” either, which is too similar to the Eurasian “Northern Wren,” in my opinion. I feel it is difficult to come up with a good biogeographical name without confusion or conflict. I don’t suppose that “Canada Wren” would be very popular!
I can see the merit of the “Northwestern Wren.” My only concern is that it seems to be a slap in the face of Toews and Irwin to give an alternate name to their suggestion – one which has nearly the same meaning (again, assuming that very few will be really confused by “Pacific Wren”). Also, I generally feel that concordance between Latin and English names is more often than not a good thing. Northwestern Wren, I suppose, would be my second choice for pacificus. Unfortunately, I cannot find another name for T. hiemalis that I believe is appropriate.
I would be remiss not to point out that the German name for the wren is “Zaunkoenig,” which essentially translates to “King of Quarrels.” If this debate escalates as many do in the taxonomic world, it may become the most appropriate name yet!
