[Taxacom] Describing taxa for conservation purposes - Scott Thomson's latest attempt to sabotage the ICZN Code for his own self-gratification.

Thu Oct 14 23:05:55 CDT 2021

I won't engage in taking sides over issues I have not investigated (and
don't intend to in this case). As for Australian courts mandating ICZN
rules - that's an interesting take. Can anyone else verify that? And also,
how do Australian courts come to be in a position of creating legislation
(which is what this would seem to be)?

On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 11:56 PM Raymond Hoser - The Snakeman <
viper007 at live.com.au> wrote:

> John,
> thanks for your post.
> FYI The courts here in Australia ruled that Australian scientists are
> legally bound by the rules of the ICZN, so I maintain my comments.
> But please explain your noticeable silence in terms of the ridiculous
> false claims made against me and other victims of the scams, by Kaiser,
> Wuster and Thomson, noting you are seeking a collegiate vibe here?
>
> Thank You
>
> Raymond Hoser
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, 15 October 2021 1:29 PM
> *To:* Raymond Hoser - The Snakeman <viper007 at live.com.au>
> *Cc:* Scott Thomson <scott.thomson321 at gmail.com>; taxacom <
> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [Taxacom] Describing taxa for conservation purposes -
> Scott Thomson's latest attempt to sabotage the ICZN Code for his own
> self-gratification.
>
> Since the rules of nomenclature are a convention or agreement among like
> minded individuals there is no such thing as 'illegally' renaming taxa.
> Anyone is free to conform to the rules entirely, in part, or not at all. It
> is inappropriate, in my opinion, for any taxacom member to make accusations
> of 'illegal' actions in taxonomy against other taxonomists. There is no
> such thing, and it is not a collegial form of communication on this list -
> in my opinion. Hope I am not alone in that.
>
> John Grehan
>
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 10:10 PM Raymond Hoser - The Snakeman <
> viper007 at live.com.au> wrote:
>
>
> Dear all,
> having read this latest Scott Thomson rant, I note that it is simply a
> justification of sorts for his ongoing taxonomic vandalism which he has
> chosen not to mention to his readers.
> It rehashes the long discredited claims of his Kaiser et al (2013)
> manifesto calling for destruction of the ICZN Code and fails to mention
> that he has illegally renamed several species and genera of turtle,
> including Wollumbinia, for which he has illegally coined the name Myuchelys
> as a junior synonym. ... a bastard name that he desperately tries to get
> others to name.
> So now his latest plot is to set himself up as head honcho to make
> "species lists" which everyone else will use and in contempt of the rules
> of the ICZN.
> This is extremely dangerous as no budding scientist will want to enter the
> science of taxonomy, as they risk their life's work being stolen by Thomson
> and the Wuster gang, who will summarily rename and all sundry in contempt
> of the rules of the Code and then improperly peddle their names to gullible
> others.
> The end result will be lots of undescribed biodiversity becoming extinct
> even before it is named!
> Fortunately there is already a paper that deals with the Thomson rant, and
> I post a link to it below.
> All the best
> Raymond Hoser
>
> Hoser, R. T. 2013. The science of herpetology is built on evidence,
> ethics,
> quality publications and strict compliance with the rules of nomenclature.
> *Australasian Journal of Herpetology *18:2-79.
>
> http://www.smuggled.com/AJH-I18-Split.htm
> Smuggled.com <http://www.smuggled.com/AJH-I18-Split.htm>
> Australasian Journal of Herpetology. Issue 18, published 29 April 2013. To
> download the individual paper or the journal in full, click on the relevant
> linked text below:
> www.smuggled.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> on behalf of Scott
> Thomson via Taxacom <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> *Sent:* Friday, 15 October 2021 3:49 AM
> *To:* John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* taxacom <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [Taxacom] Describing taxa for conservation purposes
>
> Followup as requested the paper on Consequences came out today.
>
>
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355208487_Towards_a_global_list_of_accepted_species_II_Consequences_of_inadequate_taxonomic_list_governance
>
> Is on my Research Gate.
>
> Cheers Scott
>
> On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 2:13 PM John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Scott - please make sure to announce your article on Taxacom when it is
> > published (and a link if it is open access).
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 11:20 AM Scott Thomson via Taxacom <
> > taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Daniel,
> >>
> >> sorry I forgot to answer your specific question.
> >>
> >> In the paper I have in press we look at several case studies. For
> >> different
> >> points. On this issue the two we use are the tupunali orangutan and
> >> giraffe
> >> though from different perspectives.
> >>
> >> One we did not use is in the description of Chelodina mccordi rotiensis
> it
> >> was stated that it was made a subspecies so it would inherit the CITES
> >> status of Chelodina mccordi without the need for assessment. Work since
> >> this time would indicate it is a species.
> >>
> >> There are numerous examples of this, some are less obvious than others.
> >>
> >> Cheers Scott
> >>
> >> On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 12:47 AM Daniel Gustafsson via Taxacom <
> >> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi all,
> >> >
> >> > I recently came across this publication:
> >> > https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/24750263.2020.1857852
> >> >
> >> > In it, the authors "describe" a new subgenus for a species of North
> >> > American squirrel (Tamiasciurus mearnsi). The driving force behind
> this
> >> > seems to be that "Tamiasciurus" means "hoarder squirrel", and T.
> mearnsi
> >> > doesn't hoard, so the genus name in inappropriate. They instead
> suggest
> >> > "pseudotamias" (sic) as a subgenus (narrowly avoiding the already
> >> > proposed Pseudotamia Stephens, 1829), despite also making clear that
> >> > this species is "a descendant of T. douglasii, phylogenetically as
> well
> >> > as biogeographically".
> >> >
> >> > Another driving force behind this new subgenus appear to be for pure
> >> > conservation reasons. The authors spend a lot of time complaining
> about
> >> > how little funds are allocated to squirrel conservation in North
> America
> >> > (only 0.00001% of GDP! and that is for all small mammals, not just
> >> > squirrels!), and the hunting policies of North American squirrels.
> They
> >> > conclude:
> >> > "Also, a wider structural change is needed in the approach of how
> >> > taxonomy, research and conservation management are done for a more
> >> > sustainable human-nature interaction."
> >> >
> >> > This comes at the heels of this confused gem:
> >> > "Taxonomy as a field of study is rather complex and classifications
> >> > remain widely disagreed upon and unclear. Often chaotically dominated
> by
> >> > just a few players, institutions, and mindsets, this system leaves out
> >> > the wider public. It is not sustainable, hardly meaningful, and
> >> > certainly not scientific or democratic. This can be resolved by a more
> >> > holistic classification system, including all
> >> > species-/genera-interfering characteristics rather than only single
> ones
> >> > (morphological appearance, genetical relations etc.). Additionally,
> >> > increased budget assignments for small mammals, especially squirrels,
> >> > can have a major impact on their conservation success. Higher law
> >> > enforcement for hunting regulations can additionally strongly
> contribute
> >> > to science-based management for these squirrels."
> >> > and a few tables where they show how "taxonomy and classification
> >> > disputes exist and affect conservation efficiency", some of which
> >> > examples seem to have no connection to taxonomy, and many of which do
> >> > not reference any taxonomic or phylogenetic research more recent than
> >> > the 1990s.
> >> >
> >> > The part about how we should use a "holistic classification system,
> >> > including all species-/genera-interfering characteristics" is
> >> > particularly weird, as the only "characteristics" they use to
> establish
> >> > this new subgenus are morphometrics (average body length and average
> >> > body mass) and the differences in hoarding behaviour, while
> disregarding
> >> > all genetic and other moprhological data.
> >> >
> >> > This is a long and rambling paper, but the essence (as far as I can
> >> > tell) is that the authors think that more money should be spent on
> >> > conserving a squirrel (more than 0.00001% of GDP), and the best way to
> >> > do so is to move it to a new subgenus. I assume this subgenus is also
> >> > available from this publication, as they do include measurements that
> >> > purportedly separate the type species from the other two species in
> the
> >> > genus (which according to the sources they cite would the form
> >> > paraphyletic nominate subgenus).
> >> >
> >> > ---
> >> >
> >> > The same journal also published this:
> >> > https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/11250003.2014.895060
> >> >
> >> > Abstract (in part):
> >> > "While we are fully aware of the high degree of arbitrariness of
> >> > subspecific designations, it is also a fact that taxonomic recognition
> >> > supports conservation, because subspecies are a legal category whereas
> >> > other designations (such as evolutionarily significant units, ESUs)
> are
> >> > not. We therefore argue that the Mesola red deer should be assigned
> to a
> >> > subspecies of their own, and give an official description of Cervus
> >> > elaphus italicus nova ssp., including the designation of a holo- and a
> >> > paratype specimen."
> >> >
> >> > They seem to make a much better argument than the first paper, but
> still
> >> > base their decision to describe a new taxon partially on how this will
> >> > make it easier to get funding for conservation work.
> >> >
> >> > ---
> >> >
> >> > I am wondering, does anyone know more examples like this? Where
> >> > conservation issues are driving or influencing taxonomic decisions?
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Dr. Daniel R. Gustafsson, Research Assistant Professor
> >> > Institute of Zoology Guangdong Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, China.
> >> >
> >> > Ask me about chewing lice!
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > Taxacom Mailing List
> >> >
> >> > Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> > For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> >> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >> > You can reach the person managing the list at:
> >> > taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> > The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> >> > http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >> >
> >> > Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years,
> >> 1987-2021.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Scott Thomson
> >>
> >> Centro de Estudos dos Quelônios da Amazônia - CEQUA
> >> Petrópolis, Manaus
> >> State of Amazonas, 69055-010
> >> Brasil
> >>
> >> http://www.carettochelys.com
> >> ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1279-2722
> >> Lattes: *http://lattes.cnpq.br/0323517916624728*
> >> <
> >>
> https://wwws.cnpq.br/cvlattesweb/PKG_MENU.menu?f_cod=1E409F4BF37BFC4AD13FD58CDB7AA5FD#
> >> >
> >> Skype: Faendalimas
> >> Mobile Phone Brasil: +55 11 98178 7270
> >> Whatsapp: +55 11 98178 7270
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Taxacom Mailing List
> >>
> >> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> >> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >> You can reach the person managing the list at:
> >> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> >> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >>
> >> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years,
> 1987-2021.
> >>
> >
>
> --
> Scott Thomson
>
> Centro de Estudos dos Quelônios da Amazônia - CEQUA
> Petrópolis, Manaus
> State of Amazonas, 69055-010
> Brasil
>
> http://www.carettochelys.com
> ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1279-2722
> Lattes: *http://lattes.cnpq.br/0323517916624728*
> <
> https://wwws.cnpq.br/cvlattesweb/PKG_MENU.menu?f_cod=1E409F4BF37BFC4AD13FD58CDB7AA5FD#
> >
> Skype: Faendalimas
> Mobile Phone Brasil: +55 11 98178 7270
> Whatsapp: +55 11 98178 7270
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
>
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at:
> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years, 1987-2021.
>
>