On Bird Names

A recent proposal to the AOS to change the common name of McCown's Longspur has got people talking once again about some of our worst bird names.

I have specific thoughts, but also want to make an overarching point.

We need to become more comfortable with change. All of us, all kinds of change. Things need to change and we need to allow it. Climate change and a million other forms of human influence are destroying our planet, and in order to save the planet and save ourselves we need to change. Change a lot of big things that'll probably be a huge pain in the ass and really hard. But we need to do it, and we know we need to do it, but change is hard and we don't like it.

The common names of birds are by my rough count 1000000 times less consequential than climate change. They truly do not matter in any real sense. Scientists don't use them. They don't have any bearing on species management or protections. The birds don't know what their names are, so they won't care. Common names are just codes that non-scientist humans say to each other to talk about the same species. They mean nothing.

So we should change them! If we don't like one we should change it! And if we don't like the new name we should change that, too! If there's a bird named after some guy and it turns out that guy was a huge racist jerk, change the name! If there's a name that refers to a woodpecker's red belly or a duck's ringed neck and no one on earth has ever seen the red belly or the ringed neck, change the names! They're made up words that we made up! We can do whatever we want!

We need to embrace change, really embrace it. If we can't figure out how to change the code word for a bird because it's named after an evil racist how are we going to agree on changing the hard stuff? Change the names.

--

There's a parallel discussion going on about honorifics, about the whole practice of naming species after people. I like them and always have, and think we should keep them around. It's fun to honor people, and to add a sense of history to the whole thing, and I think they sound exotic. My least favorite kind of name is the ADJECTIVE-BODYPARTED BIRDTYPE, but I feel like that's what most people want. The new proposed names for the McCown's Longspur include Prairie Longspur (aren't they sorta all on prairies?), Banded Longspur (snoooooze), and Black-crowned Longspur (snoooooooooze). These are names that babies would give, like the families who get a black cat and name it Blackie.

I think some birders like descriptive names because they seem scientific, or at least strive to "make sense." Screw that. If you want to be a scientist use the scientific names. These jerks would change Bobolink to Yellow-capped Blackbird or Whip-poor-will to like Eastern Nightjar or some shit. Honorifics and other non-descriptive names (many/most of which are actually onomatopoeic, which is sort of descriptive but not really because they're interpretive and end up being unique words), aren't always super clear. They've got mystery, or backstory, or are open to interpretation. They're art, in other words, and birding needs some more of that.

If there are honorifics that honor someone inappropriate, change it! (See above.) There are plenty of worthy people out there, as I've written about before. We have the power to make things right.

Let's Give Some Birds Their Dignity Back

Let's face it, the names of some birds are better than others.  In fact, one could argue (that one being me, perhaps, after a cocktail or two) that MOST common names of birds are pretty lame.  I'd put the common names of birds into eleven categories, ranked here from best to worst:

• Originals: These are one-word English names unique to a single species.  Killdeer.  Whimbrel.  Anhinga.  Bufflehead.  Like humans with single names - your Madonnas and your Bonos - these guys are clearly the coolest.  No sharing.  No confusion.  When you look them up in the index, they are a single line, not indented and listed with their cousins under a family name. (Note: before Rick Wright corrects me, I get that a lot of these names were probably descriptive somewhere back in their etymological past, but I'm only concerned with modern English [er, not Modern English, though I do like that song, I mean the actual modern usage of the English language]).


• People Birds: These are birds named after people.  Townsend's Warbler.  Ross's Goose.  Blackburnian Warbler (which I did not know were People Birds). These are close to something original, because the human name has nothing actually to do with the species.  I like these.


• Description-Positive: These are birds that have a descriptive first name (first name? Is that the correct term?), but it's at least a positive description.  There are not many of these, unfortunately.  Magnificent Hummingbird.  King Eider. I am also including in this category birds that are named after colors OTHER than primary colors (I'm going with black, white, red, green, yellow, blue, brown, and gray) because they're often cool words that people don't get to use very often, unless you work at a paint story or at Crayola.  Roseate Spoonbill. Cerulean Warbler. Dusky Flycatcher. Ruby-crowned Kinglet.


• Location-Specific: These are birds named after geographic locations no higher than state-level.  Mississippi Kite.  Baltimore Oriole.  Savannah Sparrow.   They have a broad appeal but they aren't sellouts.  The Baltimore Oriole is like Natty Boh (ie cool), while an American Crow is like Bud Light (accessible and, frankly, very tasty [and I'm not going to get into an argument about it right now] but not "cool" no matter what their commercials try to say).


• Song Birds: Birds named after the noises they make typically end up with cool names, so I'm going to list them separate.  Good on them.  Whooper Swan.  Song Sparrow.  Mourning Dove.


• Diet and Habitat: We're getting into the lame ones now.  These are birds that are just named after something they eat or a specific type of habitat they live in.  There is at least some thought put into the specific species, unlike some of the ones below.  Snail Kite.  Sedge Wren. Wood Duck.


• Description-Neutral: Most birds are in here, I'd say.  These are either birds named after primary colors (I'll do one for each of the colors I listed: Black Scoter; Gray Flycatcher; Yellow Warbler; Red Crossbill; Green Heron; Blue Jay; Brown Booby; White Ibis), or primary-colored body parts (Black-headed Grosbeak; Gray-crowned Rosy-finch; Yellow-bellied Sapsucker; Red-tailed Hawk; Green-winged Teal; Blue-crowned Parakeet; Brown-headed Nuthatch; White-winged Scoter).  This also includes birds named after some physical feature, such as Crested Auklet, Fork-tailed Storm-petrel; Sharp-tailed Sandpiper, or Tufted Puffin.  These are just descriptions, nothing more, nothing less.


• Location-General: Birds named after countries, regions, oceans and cardinal directions.  Snoozefest, am I right? American Crow. Boring. Western Tanager. Boring. Atlantic Puffin. Boring. Northern Hawk-owl. Boring.  Let's put a bit more imagination into it, no?


• Comparative-Positive: These are birds named in relation to other birds.  Their identity only exists in relation to something else.  However, at least they came out on top.  It's mostly birds with "greater" in their name, as I include "kings" in the Description-Positive group because kings are important. Greater Roadrunner.  Greater-prairie Chicken.


• Commoners: All birds called "common" somethings are just awful.  You know that feeling when you're on a bird walk and some novice birder sees a bird and gets excited and asks what it is and you're like "it's a common yellowthroat" and they're like "oh, just some common bird?"  Well that feeling sucks, for both of you.  I hate "common" birds.  Common Grackle.  Common Raven.


• Comparative-Negative: But at least "common" isn't a straight up insult.  Comparative-Negative birds only exist in relation to something else, and that something else is better.  It was a jerk move by our birding ancestors to name these guys they way they did.  Least Sandpiper.  Lesser Goldfinch. Lesser Scaup. [Note: some birds - Elf Owl and Little Gull - can be named after their small size without being insulted.  I put these birds in the Description-Neutral category].

So, those are the categories.  It's not an exact science, but it's pretty inclusive in the end.  But I'm not just here today to break up bird names, I'm here to help.  I feel bad for all the birds in the Commoners and Comparative-Negative categories, and I want to fix them up right.  There are plenty of words that can get the same ideas across without being insulting - or at least without copying the first name of another bird.  Let's give it a shot.  Here's a list of formerly "common" species with new names that I found in some online thesaurus.  There may be SOME repeats, but there are a lot of commons out there (I'm not going to do rare ABA birds like Common Sandpiper).

• Frequent Eider
• Everyday Gallinule
• Customary Goldeneye
• Prevalent Grackle
• Casual Ground-dove
• Natural Loon
• Conventional Merganser
• Probable Murre
• Daily Nighthawk (I like the irony in that one)
• General Raven
• Stock Redpoll
• Accepted Tern
• Familiar Yellowthroat

Aren't those better?  They're all unique names, without betraying the idea that they are abundant.  Let's be the change we want to see in ourselves.

Here are some for Lesser and Least birds, trying to give them some damn dignity back.  I'm ditching the whole "comparative" angle here when I can and just giving them names based on their small size.

• Wee Bittern
• Toy Flycatcher
• Dinky Grebe (still kind of an insult, but wouldn't you want to see the Dinky Grebe?)
• Mini Sandpiper
• Bantam Tern
• Scant Black-backed Gull
• Elfin Goldfinch
• Peanut Nighthawk
• Petite Prairie-chicken
• Minute Scaup
• Snub Yellowlegs

I wish all those birds were real so I could go find them.  They're all turned from losers into hipster winners.  Let's make it happen.