• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Renaming all North American Birds (1 Viewer)

I see that Clements taxonomy made this change around 2011 going from ver 6.5 to ver 6.6.

Here is the IOC page that announced their version of this change in 2008, but there is no explanation as to why, and it does not look like a taxonomy (split/lump) change. Just a name change:

https://www.worldbirdnames.org/updates/archives/english-names-v1/

Anybody know what prompted it?

Was that around the time the IOC list went online? If so it might have been a case where it simply wasn't reversed, since a lot of the originally changed names did get reversed after proving unpopular and no one using them. Which again speaks to the difficulty of changing common names.
 
Here is the IOC page that announced their version of this change in 2008, but there is no explanation as to why, and it does not look like a taxonomy (split/lump) change. Just a name change:

https://www.worldbirdnames.org/updates/archives/english-names-v1/

Anybody know what prompted it?
1: Note that at the same time, it enabled the simplification of 'Common Black-headed Gull' back to its traditional 'Black-headed Gull'. That was the prime reason.
2: Using CBHG and GBHG at least hints that they are each others' close, if not closest, relatives; needless to say, they aren't. They're not even in the same genus now with the split-up of Larus.
 
Well...Rufous-backed Robin is still...Rufous-backed Robin. Clay-colored and White-throated did change, although I vaguely recall that might have to do with them already being known as "thrush" in places anyway.

It is Rufous-backed Thrush in the two Mexico field guides (van Perlo, Howell and Webb) that I have used, as well as in the IOC checklist (which includes commentary about being changed from Robin to Thrush). I had not realized that "Robin" was still the name in eBird/Clements.
 
Last edited:
1: Note that at the same time, it enabled the simplification of 'Common Black-headed Gull' back to its traditional 'Black-headed Gull'. That was the prime reason.
2: Using CBHG and GBHG at least hints that they are each others' close, if not closest, relatives; needless to say, they aren't. They're not even in the same genus now with the split-up of Larus.

Ok, thanks. That makes sense.
 
1: Note that at the same time, it enabled the simplification of 'Common Black-headed Gull' back to its traditional 'Black-headed Gull'. That was the prime reason.
2: Using CBHG and GBHG at least hints that they are each others' close, if not closest, relatives; needless to say, they aren't. They're not even in the same genus now with the split-up of Larus.

It didn't "enable the simplification". There is no need for a qualifier on every bird name just because one needs it. In any case, if a qualifier was needed, the obvious one in answer to "Great Black-headed Gull" is "Lesser" or "Least", not "Common".

Just as "Robin" is perfectly adequate despite the proliferation of qualifiers around the world for other rufous-breasted birds and their relatives (and whatever field guide writers use, the common usage is definitely just "Robin").

"Common" is the worst refuge of the inept bird-namer anyway, as it is entirely subject to location.

John
 
Lerxst;4019567[B said:
]In my opinion, the problem with naming a bird after a person is that it is not descriptive. Does that really matter? To me it does. [/B]The entire point for giving names to things is so that we can communicate about them. And communication is always aided by simplicity and clarity.

This is the very point that I argued when people were supporting the use of indiginous names, written in a foreign language.
 
It didn't "enable the simplification". There is no need for a qualifier on every bird name just because one needs it. In any case, if a qualifier was needed, the obvious one in answer to "Great Black-headed Gull" is "Lesser" or "Least", not "Common".

Just as "Robin" is perfectly adequate despite the proliferation of qualifiers around the world for other rufous-breasted birds and their relatives (and whatever field guide writers use, the common usage is definitely just "Robin").

"Common" is the worst refuge of the inept bird-namer anyway, as it is entirely subject to location.

John
It's what was stated at the time, just the same as 'Ringed Plover' became 'Common Ringed Plover', 'Swallow' became 'Barn Swallow', and (much longer ago), 'Sandpiper' became 'Common Sandpiper', etc. Short names like you suggest only work locally ('Robin' on its own means different things to you & me, to Americans, to Australians, to Indians, etc.), yet this is of course the World Bird List, so they have to make the distinctions ;)
 
There is a difference between what I will use in the field in a given area or jot in my notebook versus what I think a checklist or field guide should use. I have no problem just using "robin" or "cardinal" or "catbird" while tallying my list in the field, because there is no way I or anyone could be confused on what I mean for that location.

So I don't really understand the issue some folks have with a checklist including a "full" more unique name, since it doesn't require you to always use that full unique name in local communication
 
I'm also thinking that a name doesn't have to be physically descriptive at all. In Europe Song Thrush and Mistle Thrush don't need changing! A plethora of napes, throats, breasted and winged etc tied with a lot of colours all gets rather repetitive?? Might be useful to a degree with lots of species but in general on home turf not and new birders - well they can learn.
 
You have birds whose names include archaic language (flammulated, cinereous, rufescent),

If archaic names were changed to equivalent modern words, few birders would be confused. This should be the least controversial change. For European birds it could be:

Ferruginous Duck Aythya nyroca - Chestnut Duck
Harlequin Duck Histrionicus histrionicus - Clown Duck
Demoiselle Crane Anthropoides virgo - Elegant Crane
Sociable Lapwing Vanellus gregarius - Social Lapwing
Semipalmated Plover Charadrius semipalmatus - Web-footed Plover
Pectoral Sandpiper Calidris melanotos - Band-breasted Sandpiper
Semipalmated Sandpiper Calidris pusilla - Web-footed Sandpiper
Jack Snipe Lymnocryptes minimus - Little Snipe
Pomarine Skua Stercorarius pomarinus - Spoon-tailed Skua
Glaucous-winged Gull Larus glaucescens - Gray-winged Gull
Glaucous Gull Larus hyperboreus - Glacier Gull
Roseate Tern Sterna dougallii - Rosy Tern
Intermediate Egret Ardea intermedia - Middle Egret
Squacco Heron Ardeola ralloides - Silky Heron
Striated Heron Butorides striata - Streaked Heron
Pallid Harrier Circus macrourus - Pale Harrier
Isabelline Shrike Lanius isabellinus - Sandy Shrike
Sombre Tit Poecile lugubris - Brownish Tit
Bimaculated Lark Melanocorypha bimaculata - Two-spotted Lark
Ring Ouzel Turdus torquatus - Ringed Thrush
Cinereous Bunting Emberiza cineracea - Grayish Bunting
Striolated Bunting Emberiza striolata - Striped Bunting
Rustic Bunting Emberiza rustica - Rusty Bunting
Subalpine Warbler Sylvia cantillans - Hill Warbler
Plumbeous Redstart Phoenicurus fuliginosus - Gray Redstart
Isabelline Wheatear Oenanthe isabellina - Pale Wheatear
Razorbill Alca torda - Common Auk
Semicollared Flycatcher Ficedula semitorquata - Balkan Flycatcher
Clamorous Reed Warbler Acrocephalus stentoreus - Noisy Reed Warbler
Lanceolated Warbler Locustella lanceolata - Streaked Warbler
Bay-breasted Warbler Setophaga castanea - Rusty-breasted Warbler
Western Orphean Warbler Sylvia hortensis - Fluting Warbler
Eastern Orphean Warbler Sylvia crassirostris - Eastern Warbler

Much easier to the tongue, isn't it? And it helps that many archaic names are calques of Latin or other foreign language used by people knowing little about the actual bird. For example Ouzel is a corruption of German Amsel.
 
Last edited:
My main objection is with the semipalmated birds, I think it's a nice mnemonic, that they are "semi-", just a little. We also always upon seeing or discussing one immediately remember the classic quote "... you can even see the semipalmations!".

Why Glacier Gull though? Does it have something particular to do with glaciers? In Czech, we call it simply "gray gull", which I know would be a collision with the one from Peru, but something similar would be perhaps better?
 
I think one of the really wonderful things about birding is the rich variety of names drawn from a multitude of places for a multitude of reasons at different points in time. The accelerating rate of changing them isn't making things easier for anyone, or making it a more appealing hobby for beginners to engage with, and the ever increasing rate if changes in taxonomy further makes it more off putting to anyone bothering to learn new names. I've given up on bothering to use anything other than the ones I like best now. Seems like some people would prefer it if each species simply had a number, which could change by chucking in a decimal point if there's a split. Then at last maybe we could put people off being interested in birding altogether. And seawatchers of course would instantly adopt the shouting out of "Number Two-hundred-and-seventeen-point-four" left half way to the Runnel!" When a Barolo Shearwater flies by, instead if shouting "Little Shear!"
 
If archaic names were changed to equivalent modern words, few birders would be confused. This should be the least controversial change. For European birds it could be:

Ferruginous Duck Aythya nyroca - Chestnut Duck
Semipalmated Plover Charadrius semipalmatus - Web-footed Plover
Semipalmated Sandpiper Calidris pusilla - Web-footed Sandpiper
Pomarine Skua Stercorarius pomarinus - Spoon-tailed Skua
Squacco Heron Ardeola ralloides - Silky Heron
Striated Heron Butorides striata - Streaked Heron
Isabelline Shrike Lanius isabellinus - Sandy Shrike
Ring Ouzel Turdus torquatus - Ringed Thrush
Cinereous Bunting Emberiza cineracea - Grayish Bunting
Plumbeous Redstart Phoenicurus fuliginosus - Gray Redstart
Isabelline Wheatear Oenanthe isabellina - Pale Wheatear
Razorbill Alca torda - Common Auk
Semicollared Flycatcher Ficedula semitorquata - Balkan Flycatcher

Much easier to the tongue, isn't it? And it helps that many archaic names are calques of Latin or other foreign language used by people knowing little about the actual bird. For example Ouzel is a corruption of German Amsel.
Not all quite right!

Ferruginous Duck - Reddish Duck or Rusty Duck ('chestnut' is browner)
Semipalmated Plover - 'Slightly-web-footed' (it isn't webbed like a duck or a gull!)
Semipalmated Sandpiper - ditto
Pomarine Skua - Spoon-tailed fits, but it's not what 'Pomarine' means, which is 'Scale-nosed' [literally!] or 'Scale-billed' (though it applies to all skuas, actually!)
Squacco Heron - or more usefully, Western Pond Heron (to go with Indian & Chinese Pond Herons). 'Squacco' is onomatopoeic, so if to be just modernised, 'Squawking Heron'.
Ring Ouzel - 'Collared Thrush' might be better; 'Ringed Thrush' suggests any thrush that's been ringed by BTO/other ringing groups 3:)
Cinereous Bunting - Ashy Bunting (that's what 'cinereous' means)
Plumbeous Redstart - Blue-grey Redstart (lead-coloured, a distinctly blue-grey tone, not plain grey)
Isabelline Wheatear - Sandy Wheatear cf. the shrike. Or if you want to be vulgar, 'Poo-stained-undies Wheatear' :-O
Razorbill - much less common than Common Guillemot; and OK anyway as the term 'razor-sharp' is still in widespread modern use and is why it is so called :t:
Semicollared Flycatcher - more literally, 'Half-collared Flycatcher'
 
Last edited:
.... And seawatchers of course would instantly adopt the shouting out of "Number Two-hundred-and-seventeen-point-four" left half way to the Runnel!" When a Barolo Shearwater flies by, instead if shouting "Little Shear!"
That'll be fun when they're flying past numbered crab pot flags 3:)

"Quick, a 217.4 just coming up to 83.6!"
 
I think one of the really wonderful things about birding is the rich variety of names drawn from a multitude of places for a multitude of reasons at different points in time. The accelerating rate of changing them isn't making things easier for anyone, or making it a more appealing hobby for beginners to engage with, and the ever increasing rate if changes in taxonomy further makes it more off putting to anyone bothering to learn new names. I've given up on bothering to use anything other than the ones I like best now. Seems like some people would prefer it if each species simply had a number, which could change by chucking in a decimal point if there's a split. Then at last maybe we could put people off being interested in birding altogether. And seawatchers of course would instantly adopt the shouting out of "Number Two-hundred-and-seventeen-point-four" left half way to the Runnel!" When a Barolo Shearwater flies by, instead if shouting "Little Shear!"

Like/agree :t:


It's called 'dumbing down' sometimes these days I think.
 
The beauty of "archaic" yet descriptive names is that they broaden one's vocabulary. And that is always a good thing. Most of these words can be used outside of bird nomenclature. "Harlequin" is a lovely word. And "fulvous".... just feels good to say it. Say it loud, say it proud.

But Anna's Hummingbird? Not a vocabulary builder and doesn't even honor the person that did the work in the field. Just... vanity, IMHO.

Speaking of honorifics, here is a trivia question for y'all:

There is at least one (and I think only one) bird name that honors two different individuals. What is it / are they?
 
Last edited:
Speaking of honorifics, here is a trivia question for y'all:

There is at least one (and I think only one) bird name that honors two different individuals. What is it / are they?
Bullock's Oriole if I remember rightly - there was a recent proposal to 'correct' the sci name to Icterus bullockiorum ("of both the Bullocks"; don't think the change was accepted though)

Here you are: https://www.sci-hub.tw/10.11646/zootaxa.3718.3.6
 
Last edited:
Bullock's Oriole if I remember rightly - there was a recent proposal to 'correct' the sci name to Icterus bullockiorum ("of both the Bullocks"; don't think the change was accepted though)

Not what I am thinking. Maybe I did not phrase the question well. I am speaking of a common name, in english, composed of two parts; each of them references a different, specific individual.
 
If archaic names were changed to equivalent modern words, few birders would be confused. This should be the least controversial change. For European birds it could be:

Ferruginous Duck Aythya nyroca - Chestnut Duck
Harlequin Duck Histrionicus histrionicus - Clown Duck
Demoiselle Crane Anthropoides virgo - Elegant Crane
Sociable Lapwing Vanellus gregarius - Social Lapwing
Semipalmated Plover Charadrius semipalmatus - Web-footed Plover
Pectoral Sandpiper Calidris melanotos - Band-breasted Sandpiper
Semipalmated Sandpiper Calidris pusilla - Web-footed Sandpiper
Jack Snipe Lymnocryptes minimus - Little Snipe
Pomarine Skua Stercorarius pomarinus - Spoon-tailed Skua
Glaucous-winged Gull Larus glaucescens - Gray-winged Gull
Glaucous Gull Larus hyperboreus - Glacier Gull
Roseate Tern Sterna dougallii - Rosy Tern
Intermediate Egret Ardea intermedia - Middle Egret
Squacco Heron Ardeola ralloides - Silky Heron
Striated Heron Butorides striata - Streaked Heron
Pallid Harrier Circus macrourus - Pale Harrier
Isabelline Shrike Lanius isabellinus - Sandy Shrike
Sombre Tit Poecile lugubris - Brownish Tit
Bimaculated Lark Melanocorypha bimaculata - Two-spotted Lark
Ring Ouzel Turdus torquatus - Ringed Thrush
Cinereous Bunting Emberiza cineracea - Grayish Bunting
Striolated Bunting Emberiza striolata - Striped Bunting
Rustic Bunting Emberiza rustica - Rusty Bunting
Subalpine Warbler Sylvia cantillans - Hill Warbler
Plumbeous Redstart Phoenicurus fuliginosus - Gray Redstart
Isabelline Wheatear Oenanthe isabellina - Pale Wheatear
Razorbill Alca torda - Common Auk
Semicollared Flycatcher Ficedula semitorquata - Balkan Flycatcher
Clamorous Reed Warbler Acrocephalus stentoreus - Noisy Reed Warbler
Lanceolated Warbler Locustella lanceolata - Streaked Warbler
Bay-breasted Warbler Setophaga castanea - Rusty-breasted Warbler
Western Orphean Warbler Sylvia hortensis - Fluting Warbler
Eastern Orphean Warbler Sylvia crassirostris - Eastern Warbler

Much easier to the tongue, isn't it? And it helps that many archaic names are calques of Latin or other foreign language used by people knowing little about the actual bird. For example Ouzel is a corruption of German Amsel.

I cannot see justification for a single one of these. We should not be afraid to maintain or use little understood words; it has never been easier to track down the meaning of words we don't know. Anyone who doesn't know the meaning of the word Pectoral, or Ferruginous, or Lanceolated, simply doesn't want to. Changing to Banded, Chestnut and Streaked merely takes steps to impoverishing the language. I knew about these birds, understood what they were, could read and talk about them, before I knew what their qualifiers meant and it simply didn't matter. The fact that some birds have esoteric names is a good thing, it encourages the curious to widen their vocabularies, and that should not be sacrificed simply to appease people who don't want to learn. Give me Lacrimose Mountain Tanager and Diademed Sandpiper-plover over Crying or Crowned any day.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 4 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top