Re: Actually, we don't disagree...

Posted by BGF on January 10, 2003 at 15:43:12:

In Reply to: Actually, we don't disagree... posted by chrish on January 10, 2003 at 13:17:13:

:All the problems you point out are quite valid.

:However, the situation now is we have an accepted taxonomy (scientific names) and a disasterous mix of common names. I just think trying to standardize common names will improve the overall situation.

How is it disasterous? Any conservation or legislative protection decision is made using the scientific name. All CITES, etc. all list by scientific name. Common names are simply user friendly temporary tags. In the long run, they mean pretty much nil. Further, they are usually flat out wrong i.e. the myriad of snakes that are called boas despite having pretty much nothing in common with boas. The only thing this accomplished was to get rosy boas banned alongside columbian boas by misguided city councils!!!

Cheers
BGF

• Venom & Toxin Database

Follow Ups:

• OK, maybe not chrish 01/12/03 (2)
  • Re: OK, maybe not BGF 01/13/03 (1)
    • Re: OK, maybe not chrish 01/13/03 (0)

---

[ Follow Ups ] [ The Taxonomy Forum ]

KINGSNAKE.COM Enjoy all our content free of charge with a user account that gives you full access to every feature. For added visibility, paid options are available - post in our Classifieds, showcase your business with Banner Ads or a Directory listing, promote reptile events, and more. Quick Links Home Advertise Beta Classifieds Lost Password Your Account Community Blog Events Featured Articles Forums Photo Gallery Legal & Safety Terms of Service Classified TOS Age Verification Business Verification Vendor Complaint Support Banner Ad Help Classified Help Classified Tips Contact Us Forum Help Register for free ✓ Sign up! Kingsnake.com ® is a registered trademark © 1997-