NABA Names Committee - explanatory comments and a question

[Heath Fred]

	First let me say that I am a NABA board member and Lep Soc member
(not active, in that I just pay my dues and receive and read the
literature). Second as should be the case with a volunteer board member, I
don't agree with every action Jeff Glassberg takes.
	I totally agree with Mike Smith, assuming that name standardization
is a good thing, that NABA could handle the common species level names and
Lep Soc would have been best to be the keeper of both the scientific names
and the species level taxonomy. To answer question a)below,  Lep Soc would
decide what was a species (what is to be split or lumped) and NABA would
come up with an English name for each Lep Soc recognized species.
	For what ever reason Lep Soc chose not to take on this role. Jeff
then pushed for a NABA sponsored committee which Paul Opler headed up.
Although this committee is composed of some very knowledgable and respected
people, I can understand Jeff's belief that it should be under some
organization's auspices. It makes it real clear to a publisher that this
list is sanctioned by some group and gives it more weight. What if five
other respected scientists decided they didn't agree with Paul's group and
came up with a different list.
	I think I personally would have allowed Paul's group to continue
unchallenged and maybe over time Lep Soc would have incorporated this group
into their organization. I suspect that some of the problem, based on what
has been written, is there may be some disagreement over some of the species
designations. However, as people who know Jeff Glassberg can attest, he has
pretty strong opinions and so for while there will be two competing
committees.
	Although most of the people on the new NABA committee are not "real"
taxonomists, they are all very knowledgable, bright, rational, and
independent, so that Sharyn's dismissal of them as "backyard gardeners" is
way off the mark. 
	As far as Sharyn having an official list to count butterflies, there
really has been no such thing until the NABA list. This is obvious when you
start to read butterfly books from the past and each author has his own set
of common and scientific names and as well as taxonomy. 
	This will all sort itself out in time. In the mean time, at least
the whole question as to what to call a particular butterfly is being
discussed, so we are all ahead of the game. Thus my advice to Felix is to
continue working on Paul's committee. The more discussion there is, the
better will be final result, wherever it comes from. 

---Fred

In response to Mr. Smith's posting in brief as follows...\  I
>think there is a need for "official" names lists for both the Common Names
and
>Scientific Names of butterflies.  ng checklists.  ... I think that NABA
>should be the official keeper of the Common Names list; and the
Lepidopterists'
>Society should be the keeper of the Scientific Names list.
>Mike Smith

At first this sounded good - like "all sides would win" - BUT ...
a. how would NABA know what common name applied to what scientific name and
visa versa...
b. Specifically, also NABA refers to "Variable checkerspot" - the main
reason I quit NABA this shows a disregard for local populations of
butterflies - too general -
c. NABA has NO "real" taxonomists - mainly headed by a photographer (very
good, too) who's a former lawyer, and backyard gardeners ( I identify) so
that's fine, as far as it goes, but if I'm a student looking to further my
interest in butterflies and entomology generated by participating in one of
the annual counts, then I hope I'm spending my time learning official
scientific and common names,


therefore, I say some group (ie Lep. Soc) ought to take a vote and see if
membership would support sponsoring (paying for ) the publication of the
annual count results (fine with me if in Latin), and if groups like NABA
(or Butterfly Gardeners Association**) wanted to publish the results in
"common names" they can make arrangements to do so, I suppose...

just one opinion !

**PS the BGA site is:
http://www.woodstocknation.org/butterfly.htm


Sharyn Fernandez, Concord CA
37deg..57 min N; 121 deg, 52 min. W
Butterflies & Botany
the BUG stops here!


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/private/leps-l/attachments/20000329/9c5c0a5b/attachment.html