Scores of English name changes to birds are apparently coming

 

A male Kirtland's Warbler sings from a jack pine. One of the rarest warblers, its population is only about 4,500 birds. I photographed this one on May 24, 2019, in northern Michigan. If the American Ornithological Society goes through with its proposal to end eponyms, this warbler will get a new moniker.

Many of us are aware of the American Ornithological Society's (AOS) decision to rename about 80 species of birds that are eponymously named (named for a person). These species are primarily found in the U.S. and Canada, at least as breeders. Apparently, that's just for starters - dozens of other eponymous names of birds elsewhere in the Americas are also on the chopping block. In total, about 150 species eventually will be involved in the purge of eponyms.

This decision wasn't exactly made in a vacuum - an ad hoc committee was appointed to deliberate how this might be accomplished, and progress reports of sorts were occasionally issued over the 2–3-year period that this research went on. Still, the announcement on November 1, 2023, that all eponymous bird names used in the Americas were slated to change caught nearly everyone by surprise. After all, the AOS has but 2,800 members, so its reach does not extend widely throughout the birding community. And the AOS apparently made no formal efforts to poll their membership, or the birding community as a whole. Nor apparently did they consult with birders, ornithologists, or related organizations to the south of the U.S.

In my 50+ years of birding and involvement in the birding community, I don't recall seeing a nomenclatural decision (any decision?) cause such rancor and division. But bird names change all of the time! Not in this way, and en masse - see the paragraphs below. From all metrics that I can see, most birders - perhaps overwhelmingly so - object to the change. Dr. Kevin Winker of the University of Alaska analyzed hundreds of comments made in response to two articles about this in the Washington Post using a methodology known as sentiment analysis. He found that commenters were significantly against the mass rebranding of bird names, and the reasons for doing so. Winker's work can be seen HERE.

I have tried to keep up with this issue, with much of the drama playing out on social media such as Facebook. Perhaps because I may have a more vested interest than most, as I regularly write columns about birds, have written a book about them, and am at work on yet another. On the majority of posts that I have seen, the majority of commentors are against the renaming. Ditto the numerous publications that have written articles about this and allow comments. Same for personal discussions with people. I have met some proponents but far more who oppose the change. 

One rebuttal that I have heard scores of times from name change proponents (online - I haven't met enough proponents in real life to get a meaningful data set) is something to the effect of "bird names change all the time". "It's no big deal".

That's untrue, at least in regard to English names (which are the names slated for change. The AOS has no authority to change scientific names). The genesis of the official AOS's Checklist of North American Birds is the inaugural list, published in 1886. In the intervening 138 years, there has averaged less than one English name change a year. However, if one takes scientific names into account, there has been an utter blizzard of changes. Fortunately for birders, there is no real need to know scientific names, as we are fortunate to have a well-defined and stable system of English names. I would say only a vanishingly small number of birders knows or makes an effort to know scientific names, so all of the myriad changes to those wrought by taxonomic shifts and other legitimate reasons are largely behind the scenes for most people.

I looked at the New World Warblers (Family Parulidae, the largest family of songbirds in eastern NA) and compared name changes of the 38 species that breed in eastern North America (U.S. and Canada). One of them is extinct, the eponymously named Bachman's Warbler. The results are interesting. Thirty-three species still bear the same English name as was given in the 1st edition checklist in 1886. Yet a nearly equal number, 31, have a different scientific name today. So, 33 of the 38 warblers go by the same English name as they did 138 years ago, and 31 of the 38 warblers now go by different scientific names. I suspect an analysis of most sizeable families of birds would show similar results.

One huge asset that ornithology has that very few other disciplines - in botany and zoology - have is a stable system of English names. English bird names are the currency of the masses (in English-speaking places). They allow all of us to speak on the same page, and greatly facilitate learning by newcomers. While it's fun for me to be out with other botanists and spout names like Carex pedunculata, Liquidambar styraciflua, or Symphyotrichum oblongifolium, those aren't user-friendly words liable to promote general interest. I wish botany had a stable system of English names - it could only help lure others.

I think the AOS's plan, as defined - both the reasoning for it and the implementation thereof - needs a pause, a rethink, and a much broader base of input. Including people with differing opinions. Abruptly renaming dozens and dozens of bird species is fraught with problems too numerous to enumerate here, and any such plan should be thoroughly vetted and justified.

To read the AOS reasoning behind changing names, go here: http://tinyurl.com/ynhkyk7u

To see a petition against the name changes, with arguments against it, go here: http://tinyurl.com/2bjxf6uz Feel free to sign it, too.