Huntster Posted 2 hours ago Posted 2 hours ago 4 minutes ago, Backdoc said: .........For those who see some major government involving in the issue, wouldn't a Freedom of Information Act request result in some level of information? Depends. First, I think such requests should start with county sheriffs. These guys are elected by the citizenry directly. They are not as controlled by city governments, and more importantly, are the first responders in the more rural areas outside of the cities and towns. Secondly, such requests should continue with state fish and game agencies. These are the government biologists closest to the population, and are the primary wildlife management agencies. I wouldn't bother with federal wildlife or land management agencies. I don't believe they can be trusted to hand over any information. This would include the Army (Ft. Lewis). But I might be wrong..............
georgerm Posted 2 hours ago Author Posted 2 hours ago 16 hours ago, Huntster said: Why would that be so? The feds have not been involved in the taxonomic classification of any other animal. I have asked for years who is the guy who decides. Nobody has an answer. I don't. Modern problems with scientific naming: Example – Bigfoot By Sharon A. Hill | November 18, 2024 2 Comments "An article advanced-published on 14 November 2024 in the Journal of Mammalogy calls out the problem with poor naming practices of proposed new species in our internet age. One of the most famous examples of poor practice was that of Melba Ketchum, et al., who not only did a terrible job analyzing DNA from “Bigfoot” but also used a pop-up journal to give Bigfoot another useless name."
Huntster Posted 1 hour ago Posted 1 hour ago 4 minutes ago, georgerm said: Modern problems with scientific naming: Example – Bigfoot By Sharon A. Hill | November 18, 2024 2 Comments "An article advanced-published on 14 November 2024 in the Journal of Mammalogy calls out the problem with poor naming practices of proposed new species in our internet age. One of the most famous examples of poor practice was that of Melba Ketchum, et al., who not only did a terrible job analyzing DNA from “Bigfoot” but also used a pop-up journal to give Bigfoot another useless name." Well, I'm not sure what to think of that reference. "By Sharon A. Hill" If you click on her name, you get: https://sharonahill.com/author/sharona/ Quote About Sharon A. Hill Strange Claims Adjuster and Spooky Geologist On Mastodon at @idoubtit@mstdn.social Her pic is a cartoon character.............like mine on this forum. That isn't an official anything. Frankly, I'm not sure what to think of Taxonomic Science. But it's clear that it isn't controlled by the U.S. government: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxonomy_(biology) Quote ........The "definition" of a taxon is encapsulated by its description or its diagnosis or by both combined. There are no set rules governing the definition of taxa, but the naming and publication of new taxa is governed by sets of rules.[8] In zoology, the nomenclature for the more commonly used ranks (superfamily to subspecies), is regulated by the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature(ICZN Code).[90] In the fields of phycology, mycology, and botany, the naming of taxa is governed by the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (ICN).[91] The initial description of a taxon involves five main requirements:[92] The taxon must be given a name based on the 26 letters of the Latin alphabet (a binomial for new species, or uninomial for other ranks). The name must be unique (i.e. not a homonym). The description must be based on at least one name-bearing type specimen. It should include statements about appropriate attributes either to describe (define) the taxon or to differentiate it from other taxa (the diagnosis, ICZN Code, Article 13.1.1, ICN, Article 38, which may or may not be based on morphology[93]). Both codes deliberately separate defining the content of a taxon (its circumscription) from defining its name. These first four requirements must be published in a work that is obtainable in numerous identical copies, as a permanent scientific record..........
Recommended Posts