Thank You Paul Opler

[Hank & Priscilla Brodkin]

HpAzures at aol.com wrote:

> 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 -
This does not really bother me.  Taxonomy is always in a state of flux -
that is what makes it so fascinating.  Changes will always be made based
on the latest research.  In my mind this is what science is all about -
the questioning of the status quo.  
At least Paul and his committee are trying to let us know what is
happening - and trying to make decisions that most of us can live with
based on the latest evidence.  If these decisions are wrong - eventually
they will be again changed.  I - and I am only speaking for myself -
would rather see attempts at an academic effort at scientific accuracy -
rather than worry because I might have to change the names in my field
guide or in the case of some - specimen labels
Cheers!
-- 
	             Hank Brodkin
	          Carr Canyon, Cochise County, AZ
                    Lat: 31.450, Long: 110.267
             SouthEast Arizona Butterfly Association
          http://www.naba.org/chapters/nabasa/home.html