[Taxacom] taxonomy and conservation of common skate

[Kenneth Kinman]

Hi Fred,
      I fail to see how splitting a species that is already declared
critically endangered would be of much help.  On the contrary, it would
be more likely to lead more protection of a tiny population that is
either already doomed or perhaps not a real species anyway, and maybe
even less protection for the other "larger" population even though it is
still relatively small and critically endangered.  It just obscures the
point that they should all be protected whether they are one species or
two.  
        As for discussing anything with the popular media, it seems an
uphill battle when they are more concerned with (1) Oprah is quitting
Network TV (although even that is not until 2011), or (2) what sports
team is going to win this weekend, or (3) which new movie is going to
earn the most money this weekend (vampires seem to be really popular
right now), or (4) Sarah Palin's latest comments or book signings.  The
popular media is mainly geared to shallow, short-term, money-grubbing
interests that will have no real meaning a few weeks or months from now.
Is this just an American problem, or does the European media demonstrate
this shallowness as well?   That's why I get most of my news from PBS,
which is less subject to the whims of popular, short-term myopia,
although even their news producers today seem to think Oprah's
announcement has earth-shattering ramifications.  
------------------------------------------------------------
Fred wrote:
* how about the frequent & popular opposite claim that the taxonomic
distinction was created only to get some kind of "species at risk"
protection for the newly-distinguished population? 
Maybe you can't win when discussing real scientific propositions with
the popular media, or with those who don't want to admit that they're
the reason for some problem. 
fred. 
------------------------------------------------------------