1 8 iM'GkliGOR, The Use oj Sclent ific Bird Sanies. [is^'july 



The Use of Scientific Bird Names. 



V>\ Richard C. M'Gre(;or 

 (yPhili ppinc Mnscu)u, Mcniilii). 

 In The Emu for October last I notice a communication in re the 

 use of common bird names. To some this matter may seem of 

 Httle importance, but when we consider that it affects the value 

 of our records I think it will be admitted that the subject deserves 

 our attention. The subject, one in which I have taken con- 

 siderable interest, was discussed in The Condor a couple of 

 years ago, and perhaps a few remarks from an American may 

 be of interest to your readers. 



When the A.O.U. formulated its code and worked out the 

 North American " Check-List " there was adopted a list of 

 English bird names along with the scientific ones. In the case 

 of the latter class of names the list has been a great boon to bird 

 students in the United States, especially to the beginner. 

 Unfortunately the A.O.U. , with the best intent, no doubt, 

 changed many of the English names in common use, substituting 

 for them names more appropriate, perhaps ; but these new names 

 have had a hard time to hold their own. Unfortunately these 

 changes were made in the names of many common and well- 

 known species. Mr. Hill asks if there is anyone anywhere who 

 calls the Laughing Jackass Brown Kingfisher (ii ;;/?/, iii., p. 139). 

 We have the same feeling with regard to the changes made in 

 American bird names. With sincere loyalty to the A.O.U. we 

 tried to remember that the California Quail should be called a 

 Partridge ; that the Snow-Bird is a Junco ; the Turkey-Buzzard 

 a Vulture ; the Rosy Finch a Leucosticte, &c. But there has 

 been a growing tendency among writers in the United States 

 to drop back to the old names or to coin new ones. It may be 

 iidmitted that we should be able to have fixed common names, 

 but for all that common names, with us at least^ are very apt to 

 be equivocal. 



I will here quote part of a letter from Dr. C. Hart Alerriam, 

 one of our leading American systematists : — " Your inquiry with 

 respect to the A.O.U. tendency in common names gives me an 

 opportunity to state that I place no weight whatever on the fact 

 of the adoption or rejection of a particular name, or form of 

 name, among the common names of birds as used in the A.O.U. 

 'Check-List.' In other words, my position is, and always has 

 been, that the A.O.U. ruling on points of scientific nomenclature 

 should carry great weight, but that in matters of common 

 English names of species every man is at liberty to use whatever 

 name he pleases. Whatever one's views may be on this matter, 

 the fact remains that so large a number of writers do use common 

 names different from those in the code that it is absolutely- 

 necessary in many cases to give the scientific name if the record 

 is of any value" {Condor, iii., p. 52). 



Unquestionably the fact that birds have been supplied so 



