North American splits (1 Viewer)

[Mysticete]

Michael,
I may be reading the wrong types of papers, but is Carolinian a term that is in general use? What is its definition?

Niels

Normally Carolina is used instead of Carolinian

i.e. Carolina Wren

 

[Mysticete]

at this point I think the rule of not maintaining the parent name of a split for one of it's components is pretty dead. It's basically "Don't maintain, unless people like the name of the parent"

I don't think the Clapper Rail is too bad overall, since presumably the odds of either species showing up within the range of the other is pretty nill. Canada and Winter Wren...not so much.

 

[Snapdragyn]

Normally Carolina is used instead of Carolinian

i.e. Carolina Wren

Carolinian is used to refer, in a broad sense, to the eastern forests of North America. Thus changing to Carolinian for birds such as the chickadee & wren (& nuthatch) would convey that they occur throughout this expansive forest biome, rather than being restricted to a pair of states.

 

[njlarsen]

I have done some more searching, and Carolinian seems to be a word more frequently used in Canada than in the US. It seemed to me based on those searches that only half of the area containing the eastern form of the WB Nuthatch actually is covered by this biome? (e.g., is the area from Missouri to Colorado part of the biome?).

Niels

 

[jmorlan]

at this point I think the rule of not maintaining the parent name of a split for one of it's components is pretty dead. It's basically "Don't maintain, unless people like the name of the parent"

I don't think the Clapper Rail is too bad overall, since presumably the odds of either species showing up within the range of the other is pretty nill. Canada and Winter Wren...not so much.

Maybe it's not a problem for most taxonomists, but the average birder is not a taxonomist. Pity the poor eBird reviewers who will have to deal with claims of Clapper Rail in California for years to come. Each report will require a query to see if the reporter really meant Clapper Rail. As if California eBird reviewers don't have enough to do trying to assess claims of Winter Wren, and Common Moorhen.

All ambiguity could easily have been avoided by translating Rallus longirostris into Long-billed Rail for the East Coast birds. But I can hear the protests that keeping Clapper is good for stability. Huh? What's stable about keeping an obsolete name and applying it to something other than what it used to mean?

 

[DLane]

All ambiguity could easily have been avoided by translating Rallus longirostris into Long-billed Rail for the East Coast birds.

Except that R. longirostris is the South American "Mangrove Rail." R. crepitans is the eastern bird. "Clapper Rail" was in use for this form since Ridgway's tomes, and presumably that's why AOU chose to retain it (not that I think it was necessarily a good idea). Thus using "Long-billed Rail" wouldn't work for eastern North American birds, either. I'd have gotten behind Saltmarsh Rail personally.

I can understand your frustration with the Canada Goose and Winter Wren situations, but I imagine that changing the name of Canada Goose to something else (and what would be a suitable new name? "Chinstrap Goose," "White-cheeked Goose," "American Goose," Lower 48 Goose," "Golfcourse Goose?") would not have taken hold since it would never be accepted by anyone other than listing birders. Imagine trying to convince hunters, lay people, etc., stop calling it "Canada" or "Canadian" (sic) Goose!

 

[jmorlan]

Imagine trying to convince hunters, lay people, etc., stop calling it "Canada" or "Canadian" (sic) Goose!

Hunters never did call it Canada Goose. They called them "Honkers." Works for me.

 

[njlarsen]

I can understand your frustration with the Canada Goose and Winter Wren situations, but I imagine that changing the name of Canada Goose to something else (and what would be a suitable new name? "Chinstrap Goose," "White-cheeked Goose," "American Goose," Lower 48 Goose," "Golfcourse Goose?") would not have taken hold since it would never be accepted by anyone other than listing birders. Imagine trying to convince hunters, lay people, etc., stop calling it "Canada" or "Canadian" (sic) Goose!

Does hunters care if their Canada goose is post split canada or cackling? As long as it is edible, isn't that fine?

My experience is that most names used are those of the latest field guide, so a change would have been accepted within 15 years or so after the new names appeared in a field guide. (when the old field guides have become so old that the last ones to change over have to).

Niels

 

[Kratter]

Maybe it's not a problem for most taxonomists, but the average birder is not a taxonomist. Pity the poor eBird reviewers who will have to deal with claims of Clapper Rail in California for years to come. Each report will require a query to see if the reporter really meant Clapper Rail. As if California eBird reviewers don't have enough to do trying to assess claims of Winter Wren, and Common Moorhen.

All ambiguity could easily have been avoided by translating Rallus longirostris into Long-billed Rail for the East Coast birds. But I can hear the protests that keeping Clapper is good for stability. Huh? What's stable about keeping an obsolete name and applying it to something other than what it used to mean?

I guess the number one rule for taxonomic committees should be:
1) Don't inconvenience the poor eBird reviewers.

I really do not see how this inconveniences anyone else, more than picking a new name for crepitans would have.

Andy

 

[Mysticete]

Presumably though, scientists use ebird data...the more work reviewers have, the less willing they might be to do it, the less data that will be vetted for scientists to use.

 

[Larry Sweetland]

Pity the poor eBird reviewers who will have to deal with claims of Clapper Rail in California for years to come. Each report will require a query to see if the reporter really meant Clapper Rail.

Can't see any confusion here. Surely if the report doesn't come complete with the heading CLAPPER RAIL!!!!! and an extremely detailed account explaining why it wasn't a Ridgeways, then it's obviously from someone unaware of the split.

 

[chris butterworth]

I can't see it being any more complicated than Herring Gull > Herring Gull + Yellow-legged Gull > Herring Gull + Yellow-legged Gull + Caspian Gull > Eur. Herring Gull + Yellow-legged Gull + Caspian Gull + Am. Herring Gull here in the UK. Although I don't use eBird, I'm sure there are many records getting sent in for just 'Herring Gull' that really should be for another species.

 

[Snapdragyn]

I can't see it being any more complicated than Herring Gull > Herring Gull + Yellow-legged Gull > Herring Gull + Yellow-legged Gull + Caspian Gull > Eur. Herring Gull + Yellow-legged Gull + Caspian Gull + Am. Herring Gull here in the UK. Although I don't use eBird, I'm sure there are many records getting sent in for just 'Herring Gull' that really should be for another species.

To me this reads like a perfect example of why common names should NEVER be retained for splits.

 

[Kratter]

I have yet to see anyone complain about maintaining Dark-eyed Junco for hyemalis, with the recent split off of Guadelupe Junco. Where do you draw the line?

Andy

 

[jmorlan]

I have yet to see anyone complain about maintaining Dark-eyed Junco for hyemalis, with the recent split off of Guadelupe Junco. Where do you draw the line?

Andy

I would draw the line where the AOU's written policy draws the line. Policy published on page xiii of the 7th edition.

When a species was divided into two or more distinct species, we have used former English names, if available, for the resultant taxa. In general, we have followed the policy that no English name should be used for both a combined species and one of the components (Groups). However, we often have retained a well-known English name for a widespread North American form when a taxon that is either extralimital or restricted in distribution is separated from it. An example is the retention of the name Red-winged Blackbird for Agelaius phoeniceus when the Cuban population was separated as A. assimilis and named the Red-shouldered Blackbird.

No need to rename Dark-eyed Junco under this (now studiously ignored) published policy.

 

[njlarsen]

I have said it before, and will repeat it here: I understand applying the exception mentioned here to King Rail, but not to Eastern Clapper and much less to Winter Wren.

Regarding the Clapper, hopefully there will soon be a split of the Caribbean forms so that there will be a change to rectify this naming.

Niels

 

[johnallcock]

To me this reads like a perfect example of why common names should NEVER be retained for splits.

I actually think the exact opposite, that this is an example of the benefit of retaining the old name. Each of the four final species would have changed name twice. Imagine the confusion for the average birder if this process had been:
Herring Gull > "Mackerel" Gull + Yellow-legged Gull > "Mackerel" Gull + "West European" Gull + Caspian Gull > "North Sea" Gull + "West European" Gull + Caspian Gull + "American" Gull
(Obviously I have made some names up here - I don't know if other names exist for these splits :smoke

Birders would need to report their sighting under any one of seven names (Herring Gull, "Mackerel" Gull, Yellow-legged Gull, "West European" Gull, Caspian Gull, "North Sea" Gull, "American" Gull) according to how certain they were about the specific identity of the species involved. There may be up to seven entries into a bird report or species list for a particular location.

Someone with an older field guide may identify a bird as a Herring Gull, but then find that Herring Gull does not occur in the country - and the four species that could occur are not even the result of splitting Herring Gull (but are the result of splitting "Mackerel" Gull and Yellow-legged Gull). So what was the bird they just saw?

This is a situation where it would have been essential to keep up with changing taxonomy to be able to track the name of a particular taxon and correctly report a sighting. I suspect that it would seriously alienate the less taxonomically-minded birders.


Incidentally, under the AOU policy set out in post #95, would Herring Gull now be retained as the name for the American species, as this is a widespread North American form and the others are extralimital splits?

 

[Mysticete]

Actually I assume if Herring Gull was split, you would probably get Vega Gull, American Herring, and European Herring

 

[Richard Klim]

Actually I assume if Herring Gull was split, you would probably get Vega Gull, American Herring, and European Herring

...and possibly Mongolian (Herring) Gull Larus (((argentatus) smithsonianus) vegae) mongolicus – recognised as a distinct species by Brazil 2009, Rasmussen & Anderton 2012, China Bird Report 2013 and Birds Korea 2014.

 

[chris butterworth]

...and possibly Mongolian (Herring) Gull Larus (((argentatus) smithsonianus) vegae) mongolicus – recognised as a distinct species by Brazil 2009, Rasmussen & Anderton 2012, China Bird Report 2013 and Birds Korea 2014.

I was going to suggest just using scientific nomenclature but .............. :eek!: