Hi,

Re bird names. I've been tempted to make a list of all the bird names
that were made up by museum taxonomists based on what is most obvious to
the eye when one pulls out a tray of skins... as for example
"Yellow-bellied Sapsucker," "Red-bellied Woodpecker," "Red-vented
Woodpecker." "Bristle-thighed Curlew" might also qualify. Perhaps useful
features but scarcely field marks.

Gene Hunn (hunn at u.washington.edu)

On Thu, 8 Sep 1994, Dennis Paulson wrote:

> David Buckley made a good point, and there's certainly no harm in living
> creatures having more than one name. A friend may be "Robert," "Bob,"
> "Jones," or "buddy." We call our pets as well as our mates by all sorts of
> pet names (the more you can think up, the more fun it is). I'd like to make
> a plug for the scientific name, to respond to David's comments about a
> vernacular name conveying "as much information as a scientific name (if not
> more)."
>
> Think of the gammy bird or Common Eider. It's also _Somateria mollissima_
> which means "softest down body." That Green Heron we've been discussing is
> _Butorides virescens_ or "greenish bitternlike." I could go on. Some
> scientific names might not be descriptive or might even be misleading, but
> for reasons such as this I can sure see the value of the "classics" (Latin
> and Greek) that were taught back in the ol' days.
>
> Dennis Paulson
>
>
>