[Taxacom] Fwd: Nature needs names: 60 new dragonflies from Africa

[Stephen Thorpe]

So, let me see if I get this right? Drawing people's attention to the things that really matter, *in a paper which isn't open access*! That's some strategy for saving the world ...

Stephen

--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 14/12/15, Richard Pyle <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org> wrote:

 Subject: RE: [Taxacom] Fwd: Nature needs names: 60 new dragonflies	from	Africa
 To: "'Stephen Thorpe'" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
 Cc: "'taxacom'" <Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
 Received: Monday, 14 December, 2015, 6:14 PM
 
 Oh, and by the way... I
 spent a few hours going through the Odonata paper in some
 detail yesterday and I have to say that, speaking as one of
 the 0.000002% of the world's population who is a
 taxonomist, I was extremely impressed with the quality of
 the work (to whatever extent an ichthyologist can evaluate
 an entomological paper). Each species description spans
 several pages and includes robust information on taxonomic
 context, material studied, both genetic and morphological
 data, and range & ecology, and each description also
 includes multiple figures (including color) and an etymology
 section. The seven pages of introductory text are extremely
 well-written and covers a wide range of important topics
 that we often ramble endlessly about here on Taxacom, such
 as why naming species is important for conservation, why
 taxonomy needs more support, and why species MATTER (for
 understanding history, environment, evolution, and for
 humanity).  So it seems to me that the authors did a superb
 job both scientifically, and from the perspective of drawing
 people's attention to the issues that really matter.
 
 Aloha,
 Rich
 
 > -----Original Message-----
 > From: Stephen Thorpe [mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz]
 > Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2015 11:15
 AM
 > To: 'Stephen Thorpe'; deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
 > Subject: RE: [Taxacom] Fwd: Nature needs
 names: 60 new dragonflies from
 >
 Africa
 > 
 > Rich,
 > 
 > I didn't say
 significance of the taxonomy TO WHOM! Also, I very much
 doubt
 > that policy-makers get their
 information from the popular media!
 > 
 > Stephen
 > 
 >
 --------------------------------------------
 > On Mon, 14/12/15, Richard Pyle <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org>
 wrote:
 > 
 >  Subject:
 RE: [Taxacom] Fwd: Nature needs names: 60 new
 dragonflies    from
 >     Africa
 >  To: "'Stephen Thorpe'"
 <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
 >  Received: Monday, 14 December, 2015,
 10:04 AM
 > 
 > 
 Sorry.... one more, then
 >  I'll
 shut up:
 > 
 >  >
 So, I
 >  was just suggesting that media
 coverage should be  proportional to the  >
 > significance of the  taxonomy, and
 elevating 60 new dragonflies out of all  >
 > proportion seems wrong to me.
 > 
 >  I would argue that
 media
 >  coverage should be proportional
 to the likelihood that it  will actually influence
 > non-biologists (particularly 
 policy-makers).  There is a poor (perhaps even
 > inverse?)  correlation between what a
 good taxonomist will find of  significance,
 > and what will be significant to the rest
 of  the 99.999998% of the
 >
 population.  We don't need the  media coverage to
 inspire the ~15,000
 > taxonomists of
 the  world; it's the other 7 billion (ish) that
 we're  trying to
 > engage.
 > 
 >  Aloha,
 >  Rich