Not much going on, but ...

[Richard Allen via Canberrabirds <>]

Good point. Certainly needs to be driven by indigenous needs not morally charged movements.  “Should” is a word that always seems counterintuitive when justice is concerned. 

What matters is respect. Recognise what actually has occurred and a mutual agreement on ways forward. This is likely to continue to involve names of significant places and creatures. 

Let’s see but probably not for the Striated Thornbill. 

New Zealand seem to have a good balance. 

R

Sent from my iPhone

On 22 Dec 2022, at 5:25 pm, Maurits Zwankhuizen <> wrote:



In the hope of generating even more discussion, people might be interested in my 2017 Australian Geographic article about giving more animals Aboriginal names.

While some may say these are superficial changes, they're actually all an integral part of the cultural change necessary to make those bigger changes stick.

And wouldn't you rather be swooped by a coolbardie than a magpie? :)

Regards

Maurits Zwankhuizen

---

From: Canberrabirds <> on behalf of Richard Allen via Canberrabirds <>
Sent: Thursday, 22 December 2022 12:25 PM
To: Geoffrey Dabb <>
Cc: Canberrabirds <>
Subject: Re: [Canberrabirds] Not much going on, but ...

 

Very interesting to see how our so called civilised culture can get so precious about superficial matters when we’d be better off focussing on attitudes and issues that currently thrive in our society.  Yes we can’t change our past so why not engage in constructive change in society now rather than attempt to right past wrongs with token gestures. 

Birds they’re easy. How about butterflies. Jezebel, admiral, emperor… shudder. 

Richard

Sent from my iPhone

On 22 Dec 2022, at 12:11 pm, Geoffrey Dabb <> wrote:



All relevant comments.  The case for change is outlined in the attached article.  A mistake in it, as made by others as well, is that ‘King’ (as in King-Parrot) and ‘Regent’ are said to be references to ‘colonial power structures’.  They are in a way, but not in the sense intended.   The persons commemorated were Governor King and the Prince Regent (see Fraser & Gray).  Therefore, if the inquiry is into the suitability of particular people,  you would need to look into the reputation of Governor King and the Prince Regent (later George VI).

 

A point made in discussions on this is that something of a generational divide is appearing, with older people being more attached to established names. However if the case for change is really so compelling a great many names for different things would have to be changed, as Don points out.  Should ALL person-based names be eliminated.   Why just birds?

 

From: <>
Sent: Thursday, 22 December 2022 9:20 AM
To: 'Geoffrey Dabb' <>; 'Canberrabirds' <>
Subject: RE: Spam:*********, [Canberrabirds] Not much going on, but ...

 

Names DO matter, but not just birds, surely? What about e.g. Banksias? And those of us mammals called Mitchell, Horsfield, etc, should also have our names changed.

 

Excellent contribution thank you Geoffrey.  It should provoke some interesting discussion.  Happy Christmas time everyone.

 

From: Canberrabirds <> On Behalf Of Geoffrey Dabb
Sent: Thursday, 22 December 2022 8:17 AM
To: Canberrabirds <>
Subject: Spam:*********, [Canberrabirds] Not much going on, but ...

 

I notice that this chatline is going through one of its quieter periods.  Here is some news, then. There is a debate going on within Birdlife Australia about whether to eliminate all personal bird names, that is English bird names that refer to people.  Example are Major Mitchell’s Cockatoo, Horsfield’s Bronze-Cuckoo and Australia King-Parrot.  The reason is that people see  a strong case to change some names, like the Major’s cockatoo, but no easy way to decide whether other names recalling Australia’s colonial past should remain or go.  There is a similar debate going on in North America.  This is not an easy matter to resolve, as there are so many opinions out there.  More will be heard about this, I’m sure.

 

To offer a little graphic relief, I have the below observation from last week, from the backyard.

 

 

 

I’m pretty sure ‘Rainbow Lorikeet’ is not a personal name, but, as there is a strong generational flavour in all this, anyone with a 1980s childhood might see the Rainbow Brite connection.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pp74T9b4Z40&ab_channel=CartoonIntros

 

 

 

<Garnett et al 2022 common names for birds and societal change.pdf>

--
This is the email announcement and discussion list of the Canberra Ornithologists Group.
Emails posted to the list that exceed 2 MB (2,000 kB) in size, including attachments, will be rejected.
All emails distributed via the list are archived at http://bioacoustics.cse.unsw.edu.au/archives/html/canberrabirds. It is a condition of list membership that you agree to your contributions being archived.

Canberrabirds mailing list

https://lists.canberrabirds.org.au/mailman/listinfo/canberrabirds

--
This is the email announcement and discussion list of the Canberra Ornithologists Group.
Emails posted to the list that exceed 2 MB (2,000 kB) in size, including attachments, will be rejected.
All emails distributed via the list are archived at http://bioacoustics.cse.unsw.edu.au/archives/html/canberrabirds. It is a condition of list membership that you agree to your contributions being archived.

Canberrabirds mailing list

https://lists.canberrabirds.org.au/mailman/listinfo/canberrabirds

--
This is the email announcement and discussion list of the Canberra Ornithologists Group.
Emails posted to the list that exceed 2 MB (2,000 kB) in size, including attachments, will be rejected.
All emails distributed via the list are archived at http://bioacoustics.cse.unsw.edu.au/archives/html/canberrabirds. It is a condition of list membership that you agree to your contributions being archived.

Canberrabirds mailing list

https://lists.canberrabirds.org.au/mailman/listinfo/canberrabirds