开云体育

Hi Daniel You’ve really thought about this issue to come up with the Say’s Phoebe. What a mess these changes would create. And for what? I for one never associate a birds name with its historic

Good point Keith. I think if they are going to change the names, they should change the Latin names as well. To the best of my knowledge Thick-billed Longspur is still Rhynchophanes mccownii. So in a

Thanks for sharing that Kelly. By Kaeli’s logic we should be changing the name of Vancouver. Is it right that the city should bear the name of Captain George Vancouver in perpetuity when he was a

So what about all those insects, plants, et cetera et cetera and the Latin names. Keith Taylor

?She sums it up well! Thanks for sharing. Ian Burgess Vancouver

Yes, very well said! Thank you for sharing Kelly! Véro [email protected]> wrote:

Another point of view from a Corvid expert, Kaeli Swift, PhD, on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/reel/CzgXzIIR9xc/?igshid=MDI3ODU5M2RlNw== -- Kelly Sekhon New Westminster

Another point of view - Corvid expert Kaeli Swift, PhD on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/reel/CzgXzIIR9xc/?igshid=MDI3ODU5M2RlNw== -- Kelly Sekhon New Westminster

Thanks for the comments Dale. I agree that it removes the morality judgement aspect, and, as you say, for those not affected by a particular name, there’s certainly no harm in it. Like Shakespeare

To address the first part, I'd suggest that you engage with some of the marginalized birders who are advocating for the name change. I am not one of them, so any explanation I can offer isn't first

Daniel Bastaja danielbastaja@...

Very strange comment Vero. On what basis do you think that? Moreover, what are you implying by such a presumptive statement? Care to expound on that? Daniel Bastaja danielbastaja@...

I totally agree with you, Dale. And I would guess the people who think the renaming is ridiculous are all white! ? Just a thought! Véro

Some further food for thought from David Sibley via a FB post.

Thanks for sharing. It's good to finally see some forward progress on this issue, given how much the current names affect some people and how little effect changing them has to everyone else. That

Yes… good point Valerie. Daniel Bastaja danielbastaja@...

Isn't modern sensibilities v. back then?what the AOU are talking about? My analogy was simply: what's the difference between saying it was o.k. to shoot birds for specimens or the millinery trade

Keith makes a point. That was birding in the 18th and 19th century. You would go out with a gun and shoot stuff. I think most (if not all) of the “naturalists" of that time did it. Of course it is

What does collecting have to do with being bad? Every person who has had a job with a museum or university collects, it’s part of the job. I have collected thousands of birds in my past career

I agree with you, Daniel. I think it's a flawed idea at best. We would certainly have to ban anything Audubon, wouldn't we? After all, he shot all of his specimens, didn't he? How about Lewis &