[Taxacom] Why Taxonomy does NOT matter

[Robin Leech]

And we all know the reason there is lack of recruitment,
do we not?
Robin

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
To: "Bob Mesibov" <mesibov at southcom.com.au>
Cc: "TAXACOM" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2011 9:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Why Taxonomy does NOT matter


> well, Bob, I agree about passionate taxonomists, but only the older ones 
> ... the
> problem is lack of recruitment ...
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Bob Mesibov <mesibov at southcom.com.au>
> To: Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
> Cc: TAXACOM <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> Sent: Sat, 23 April, 2011 7:20:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Why Taxonomy does NOT matter
>
> "but... So..."
>
> Why 'but'? I'm just pointing out that there is a worthwhile hybrid 
> solution. I'm
> not claiming it will apply in all cases. How to prioritise taxonomic work 
> is
> another kettle of fish. Dan Bickel has argued that particular groups get 
> worked
> on for long periods *mainly* because individual taxonomists are passionate 
> about
> them.
>
> In my experience, the devotion of taxonomists to particular groups extends 
> well
> past the use-by dates of any grants or in-house support the taxonomists 
> get, and
> stretches into an often productive retirement. On the other hand, people 
> apply
> to join short-term 'pure systematics' projects because they have 
> experience in
> molecular methods and inference software; passionate interest in the taxon 
> being
> tackled is not a requirement for the job.
>
> So PBIs and their ilk bring together both sorts of people in a productive
> relationship, and there are many individual systematists who use both 
> molecular
> and non-molecular methods in doing both straight taxonomy and 
> phylogenetics on
> their favourite taxa. Given all this variety in the working world, it's a 
> bit
> hard for me to see clean divisions between a poorly-supported, abstract
> 'taxonomy' and a better-funded, abstract 'systematics' (molecular or not). 
> No
> offense: I understand your argument, I just can't overlay it neatly on the
> funding and activity picture I see in 2011.
> -- 
> Dr Robert Mesibov
> Honorary Research Associate
> Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery, and
> School of Zoology, University of Tasmania
> Home contact: PO Box 101, Penguin, Tasmania, Australia 7316
> Ph: (03) 64371195; 61 3 64371195
> Webpage: http://www.qvmag.tas.gov.au/?articleID=570
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of 
> these methods:
>
> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Or (2) a Google search specified as: 
> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>