The birding community tends to be deliberate and conservative in its system of naming, but last month the American Ornithological Society (AOS) caused quite a stir when they announced that all American birds named after people will get new names. The AOS committee responsible for naming decided that nomenclature “stability” should be superseded in this case by the importance of replacing eponymous names honoring “offensive or unethical” individuals with descriptive ones, making birding more welcoming to everyone.
AOS President Colleen Handel, Ph.D., said: “There is power in a name, and some English bird names have associations with the past that continue to be exclusionary and harmful today. We need a much more inclusive and engaging scientific process that focuses attention on the unique features and beauty of the birds themselves.
The American Ornithological Society’s decision is having a big impact because unlike communities for other creatures like amphibians or plants, the AOS has the authority to standardize common names. While this authority isn’t legally established, the AOS names are used by everyone, including conservationists, eBird, and the federal government. The AOS doesn’t have the authority to change all bird names. For example, in the the scientific community, a different nomenclature is used: scientific names, which have a specific format (eg Rhynchophanes mccownii); the organizations that determine those names (for animals, The International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) have no plans similar to the AOS’s revisions.
But common names are used by the general public far more widely and changes have a greater cultural impact. The bird Rhynchophanes mccownii was McCown’s Longspur until 2020, honoring General John P. McCown, who fought for the Confederacy. The bird’s current name Thick-billed longspur better describes the bird, removes human baggage AND the implicit condoning of that particular human’s contribution to our culture.
Only 142 of the ~2000 North and Central American birds are eponymous, and the AOC will start with the 70-80 primarily in the US and Canada. Even so, the move to deemphasize humans from names to address the colonialism, racism, social injustice or anthropocentrism they represent has ruffled quite a few feathers.
Along with the usual right-wingers decrying “wokeness” and “political correctness”, I was surprised to see this position statement by Dennis Paulson, PhD Zoology, retired professor, respected entomologist and ornithologist, who has published several excellent field guides. From tweeters, the University of Washington birdserv email feed, posting November 25, 2023 (tweeters-request@mailman11.u.washington.edu):
There are 10 species or subspecies of animals named after me: five dragonflies and damselflies, a frog, a lizard, a rabbit, a bat, and a snail. All were so named to acknowledge the important work I had done, in most cases discovering the animal and collecting and preserving the first specimens of it, but also to acknowledge my contributions to the field. I would say the vast majority of the names we are discussing here have exactly the same rationale, and I still don't see that there is a more compelling rationale for taking the names away. Of course the use of my name is entirely in scientific names; none of them is named “Paulson’s”.
In my giving common names to dragonfly species, including a couple of those ‘paulsoni’ species, I stayed strictly away from creating any additional eponyms. But I did create common names honoring some of the most important people in the history of dragonfly studies (Selys, Hagen, Calvert, Williamson, Walker, Needham, Westfall) when the species had been described using their name, and I would consider it a real shame if dragonfly enthusiasts in the next decades were robbed of any mention of these important people.
We are losing much by cancelling all of these explorers and scientists, and I have the impression that the proponents for doing so are not doing much to take that into account. The ad hoc committee states: “ . . . . there are other, better opportunities to commemorate historical or living figures who have made important contributions to ornithology; . . . “ But nowhere do they make it clear that they have considered these opportunities. At the very least, how about a published list of all the people who are to be cancelled and what their contributions have been?
Dennis Paulson, Seattle
Meanwhile, the position of David Allen Sibley, lifelong naturalist, ornithologist, artist, and author of perhaps the best bird field guides out there, articulates a more progressive and nuanced viewpoint:
It's not for me to judge what makes someone else uncomfortable, but I know that after I started learning a little more about the history of some of the people honored in bird names, it makes ME uncomfortable.
For example, Winfield Scott was a US Army officer in the 1800s. Scott's Oriole was named for him by a junior officer, but there is no evidence that Scott himself ever had an interest in birds. He was very highly regarded as a General, but, among other things, he presided over the forced removal of the Cherokee (the Trail of Tears).
Many people today could say that Scott's Oriole is named for a person who carried out the brutal persecution of their ancestors. That bothers me.
We should not ignore that history, but it shouldn't be linked to the bird.
The AOS has already accepted that such names can be changed (Thick-billed Longspur), and it is clear that Scott's Oriole and many others should also be changed.
Taking names case-by-case would be a quagmire of moral judgment, competing interests, PR campaigns, influence-peddling, and more.
Renaming ALL these birds for their appearance, sounds, habitat, etc. is the only viable solution. Not because all these people were bad, but because it's impossible to determine who was "good enough" to put their name on a bird.
And simply because birds are not objects, and should not have to carry the banner for a person, no matter how good that person was.
This process will not be fast and I don't expect anyone to adjust immediately to new names as they are announced. I ask everyone, myself included, to keep an open mind and stay flexible as things change.
Personally, I like learning history and I’m familiar with the work of many naturalists whose names are associated with places and living things (eg Alexander von Humboldt, Carl Linnaeus, Georg Steller, and the more locally known Archibald Menzies) but I have to admit that until this issue emerged in recent years, I didn’t really think much about those people whose names I’ve been using all these years. For example, the Townsend’s chipmunk and Townsend’s Warbler….those were just the names of critters. Until now I didn’t know they were honoring a naturalist, John Kirk Townsend, who also dug up Indian graves to steal skulls.
The entire realm of observation, naming, and learning is by definition an anthropocentric enterprise, since it’s all through our senses and minds. But the American Ornithological Society is saying that doesn’t mean we necessarily need to honor human beings when we do that. And the AOS is not exactly a bastion of progressivism, although their wheels do grind, if slowly.
Remember when they changed the Oldsquaw to Long-tailed duck back in 2000? There are likely young new birders who have no knowledge of that insulting old name, and that’s the value of taking this kind of action. In the moment there’s a lot of pushback but ultimately it will be an improvement. Perhaps this will encourage a greater diversity of people to get into birding. Currently, the average age of birders is 49 (54 for those birding around their home) and birders are racially skewed white.
Since their announcement last month, there have been a number of proposals for possible new names (along with multitudes of snarky memes). A thoughtful piece from a year ago discusses more of the historical context and some alternative names: What’s In a Bird Name? And this blogger went through all North American eponymously named birds and came up with alternatives that highlight a bird’s appearance, behavior, or habitat. Here are some of their suggestions:
Barrow’s Goldeneye
- Meaning of Latin name: Iceland Goldeneye
- My proposals: Crescent Goldeneye, Northern Goldeneye
Wilson’s Snipe
- Meaning of Latin name: Delicate/Elegant Snipe
- My proposals: Elegant Snipe, Winnowing Snipe
Steller’s Jay
- Meaning of Latin name: Steller’s Jay
- My proposals: assuming a split, Forest Jay (along the Pacific) and Mountain Jay (Rocky Mtn interior)
Scott’s Oriole
- Meaning of Latin name: Paris’s Oriole
- My proposals: Yucca Oriole
More details about the change can be found at the American Ornithological Society FAQ page.
🦅
Have you been hearing about the name changes, and if so, what are your thoughts? Would knowledge of history lose out? Any good new names to propose for currently eponymous ones?
The Dawn Chorus is now open for your birdy reports of the week.