AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY 



in popular or scientific writing. The Com- 

 mittee believes that it is desirable to estab- 

 lish a common name for each species of fish 

 occurring naturally or through successful 

 introduction in the waters of English- 

 speaking North America. 



Agreement on many names may be 

 arrived at quickly, but others are attended 

 by complications and marked disagreement 

 develops. This is especially true of fish 

 known by market names that differ from 

 those names that are more familiar to sport 

 fishermen, biologists or others. The exist- 

 ence for a single species of different names 

 in separate parts of its geographic range 

 creates difficulties that seem soluble only 

 through arbitration. Conversely a given 

 name may be employed in several places for 

 diverse species. Although committee action 

 on such situations may not be expected to 

 change local use quickly, at least it seems 

 plainly improper to sanction use of one 

 name for two or more different species. 



After wrestling with common names for 

 over twenty years, the Committee on Names 

 of Fishes realized the importance of estab- 

 lishing a set of guiding principles to be 

 employed in the determination of names. 

 Such a code permits a more objective ap- 

 praisal of the relative merits among several 

 names than if selection is based primarily 

 on personal experience and preference. 

 Consideration of many vernacular names of 

 fishes makes it apparent that few principles 

 can be established for which some exceptions 

 must not be admitted. This is true because 

 at this late date a majority of our larger and 

 more abundant, hence important, species 

 have such firmly established common names 

 that it would be unrealistic to reject them. 

 Decision on the name for a species may 

 often be decided by weighing the pros and 

 cons among the possible alternatives and 

 selecting that one which best fits the aggre- 

 gate of guiding criteria. 



In the introduction to the earlier list of 

 names a number of rules of procedure were 

 itemized. Recently the Committee incorpo- 

 rated these into the following statement of 

 criteria that it regards as appropriate to the 

 selection of common names of fishes. 



Principles Governing Selection 

 OF Common Names^ 



1. A single vernacular name shall he accepted 

 for each species or taxonomic unit included. — 



' First printed in 1955 (Trans. Am. Fish. Soc, Vol. 84 [1954] 

 pp. 368-371). 



In the present fist only two fishes have two 

 approved names : redfish and ocean perch for 

 Sebastes marinus; cisco and lake herring for 

 Coregonus artedii. 



2. No two species on the list shall have the 

 same approved name. 



3. The expression ''common" as part of a 

 fish's name shall be avoided wherever possible. 



4. Simplicity in names is favored. — Hyphens, 

 suffixes, and apostrophes shall be omitted 

 (e.g., smallmouth bass) except where they 

 are orthographically essential (e.g., three- 

 eye flounder), have a special meaning 

 (e.g., C-0 sole), or are necessary to avoid 

 possible misunderstanding (e.g., cusk-eel). 

 Compounded modifying words, including 

 paired structures, should usually be treated 

 as singular nouns in apposition with a 

 group name (e.g., spottail shiner, soupfin 

 shark), but a plural modifier should usually 

 be placed in adjectival form (e.g., black- 

 banded sunfish, spotted hake). Preference 

 shall be given to names that are short and 

 euphonious. 



The compounding of brief, familiar words 

 into a single name, written without hyphen, 

 may in some cases promote clarity and sim- 

 pUcity (e.g., tomcod, goldfish, mudminnow), 

 but the wholesale practice of combining 

 words, especially those that are lengthy, 

 awkward, or unfamiliar, is deplored. 



5. Common names shall not be capitalized in 

 text use except for those elements that are 

 proper names (e.g., rainbow trout but 

 Sacramento perch). 



6. Names intended to honor persons (e.g., 

 Allison's tuna, Julia's darter) are not admis- 

 sible. 



7. Only clearly defined and well-marked 

 taxonomic entities (usually species) shall be 

 assigned common names. — Most subspecies 

 are not suitable subjects for common names, 

 but those forms that are so different in 

 appearance (not just in geographic distribu- 

 tion) as to be distinguished readily by sport 

 or commercial fishermen or laymen or for 

 which a common name constitutes a signifi- 

 cant aid in communication may merit sepa- 

 rate names. Subspecies have importance in 

 evolutionary inquiry but are rarely of 

 significance to laymen or in those aspects of 

 biological endeavor in which common names 

 are of concern. The practice of adding 

 geographic modifiers to designate regional 



