Thank You Paul Opler

[HpAzures at aol.com]

Hank and Priscilla Brodkin write:  

<<
As longtime advocates of bringing some order to things taxonomical - we would 
like to thank Paul Oiler for a) forming the Committee on Scientific Names of 
North American, b) for actually holding meetings on a somewhat regular basis, 
and c) especially for publishing the results on the web.:
>>

Well, Hank and Priscilla:

I enjoyed your congratulatory e-post regarding the Scientific Names 
Committee, and wish you were right.  However, things will not get better, as 
you may hope.  I too, am very, very frustrated by all the necessary 
name-changes, revisions and "emendations", but it's likely to get even worse 
before things finally settle down with the advent of DNA analysis.  We have 
seen only the tip of the iceberg.  

The Scientific Names Committee merely interprets what is out there in 
existing research.  It's the various researchers and authors that make the 
actual changes, revisions, etc., like the lumping of Fritillaries with the 
Heliconians, based on some larval characters, which no doubt has many people 
really confused and frustrated.  Never mind that the tropical Heliconians 
look and behave nothing like the subarctic Bolorias.  But the point is, the 
researchers themselves are the ones who are ultimately trying to figure out 
the proper of things taxonomical. 

Don't forget, several of the Committee members themselves made some dramatic 
changes that has us annotating the most worn-out pages of our field guides.  
Felix Sperling "lumped" a whole bunch of well-known Swallowtail species 
(i.e., Papilio oregonius, Papilio bairdii) into Papilio machaon as a result 
of his research.  Some future authors or researchers may reinterpret his data 
and decide he was wrong and switch things back.  John Burns revised Atrytone 
and Anatrytone based on microscopic genitalic characters, thus moving 
household name Atrytone logan to Anatrytone.  

The Committee was formed, in part, to interpret the vast number of taxonomic 
revisions that have been proposed since the Lepidopterists' Society landmark 
"Checklist of North American Butterflies".  Unfortunately, the leadership of 
Lepidopterists' Society felt necessary to reject an important initiative such 
as this, to maintain an updated record.  Thus, the necessity for an outside 
review group.  The Committee has very limited say in matters of revision and 
will not slow or influence the pace.  They can only pass their analysis and 
opinion on to NABA.  

Look for many more changes to come.  

Harry Pavulaan