[Taxacom] OK Taxacomers, you have had your chance, now it's the lawyers turn.

Tue Nov 28 14:46:33 CST 2017

Maybe I'm cynical because I'm an America, now in the throes of a fascist revolution. The clarity of thought and political honesty of government officials and agencies in your country must be a great example to others. Say, I'll trade you Trump for your present leader. Anybody. Heck, I'll throw in Alaska.
Richard

-------
Richard H. Zander
Missouri Botanical Garden – 4344 Shaw Blvd. – St. Louis – Missouri – 63110 – USA
richard.zander at mobot.org 
Web sites: http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/bfna/bfnamenu.htm and http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/resbot/ 

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Thorpe [mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 2:21 PM
To: James H.Beach; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu; Donat Agosti; Richard Zander
Subject: RE: [Taxacom] OK Taxacomers, you have had your chance, now it's the lawyers turn.

Really!! I'm not sure that any grant proposals specify which species concepts they are intending to use, or any funding agency that cares either way! Given the amount of garbage science that results from various funded projects anyway, and nobody seems to care, I think any fears of "use this species concept, or we won't give you any money!" are pretty lame. One exception though: if a particular species concept was adopted by a conservation agency, which then wanted to fund a taxonomist, it might be a requirement that the taxonomist follows the preferred species concept of the funding conservation agency, but such situations are probably few and far between.

Stephen

--------------------------------------------
On Wed, 29/11/17, Richard Zander <Richard.Zander at mobot.org> wrote:

 Subject: RE: [Taxacom] OK Taxacomers, you have had your chance, now it's the lawyers turn.
 To: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>, "James H.Beach" <beach at ku.edu>, "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>, "Donat Agosti" <agosti at amnh.org>
 Received: Wednesday, 29 November, 2017, 8:53 AM

 Sooo innocent. Agencies fund
 science. Consider that an agency (particularly those headed  by a minion of the mammon-worshipping neofascists) can deny  any grant proposal or official publication if the organisms  involved cannot be demonstrated through proper experiments  as delineated by the biological species concept. 

 Every proposal that affects
 government and research funding should be considered, in  this day and age, as quite possibly a monstrous attack on  science and scientists. The fallout, no matter how  far-fetched, no matter how inconceivably brainless, needs to  be considered.

 -------
 Richard H. Zander
 Missouri Botanical Garden – 4344 Shaw Blvd.
 – St. Louis – Missouri – 63110 – USA
 richard.zander at mobot.org

 Web sites: http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/bfna/bfnamenu.htm
 and http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/resbot/

 -----Original
 Message-----
 From: Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu]
 On Behalf Of Stephen Thorpe
 Sent: Monday,
 November 27, 2017 11:32 PM
 To: James
 H.Beach; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu;
 Donat Agosti
 Subject: Re: [Taxacom] OK
 Taxacomers, you have had your chance, now it's the  lawyers turn.

 My
 understanding (not having had time to read it with utmost  care, so please tell me if I am wrong) is that nobody is  trying to force taxonomists to adopt any particular  "definition" of "species", but rather  that conservation (and possibly other) "decision  makers" should all follow a standard definition.
 Personally, I don't care what definition of species such  "decision makers" use, so I don't see this as  a big deal, and I don't see that it will have any impact  on taxonomy, just on conservation, etc.

 Stephen

 --------------------------------------------
 On Tue, 28/11/17, Donat Agosti <agosti at amnh.org>
 wrote:

  Subject: Re:
 [Taxacom] OK Taxacomers, you have had your chance, now  it's the lawyers turn.
  To: "Beach,
 James H." <beach at ku.edu>,
 "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu"
 <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
  Received: Tuesday, 28 November, 2017, 6:23  PM

  I think it is well
 worth reading
  the entire press release

  "Today, PLF and several
 allied
  organizations submitted a petition
 for rule-making to the  federal agencies that administer  the Endangered Species Act.
  The petition
 asks the agencies to define “species” and  “subspecies,” terms which, although critical to the  Act’s operation, are left undefined by statute and  regulation. Not surprisingly, this lacuna has produced  inconsistent and arbitrary decision-making (see, e.g., the  litigious and ongoing debates over the coastal California  gnatcatcher’s subspecies designation), with landowners  typically shouldering the burden. The lack of guidance  also  has resulted, according to some critics, in the  agencies’
  playing of a “numbers
 game,” whereby a single species is  split into multiple  species or subspecies, and because each  resulting  taxonomic unit will have fewer numbers and smaller  ranges,  each will be at greater risk of extinction and  therefore  more likely to be listed.

 Our petition seeks an end to the arbitrariness  through the  setting of clear, scientifically defensible and  politically sensible definitions for the statutory terms  “species” and “subspecies.” The petition  recommends  that, for the former, the longstanding and  well-regarded  biological species concept be adopted,  according to which a  species is delimited by reproductive  isolation. For the  latter, the petition asks for the  adoption of a variant of  the equally longstanding “75%  rule,” pursuant to which  individuals within a species  must be diagnosed accurately at  least 75% of the time as  belonging to putative Subspecies A  or B or C, etc., using  genetic or other biologically  significant characters.

  Although not universally
 accepted in the  scientific community, our proposed  definitions are  scientifically defensible. And in any  event, no single  definition of “species” or  “subspecies” will receive  unanimous support from the  scientific community, in part  because neither term is a  pure function of science. Rather,  both are terms of  convenience, deriving their value from  larger conservation  policy. Informing that larger policy is  the fact that the  protection of all populations is  economically and socially  infeasible. Sound conservation  demands prioritization.
 Many scientists believe that the  priority of conservation  should be the preservation of  evolutionary  potential—i.e., biodiversity. If that is  correct, then  being choosy about which populations can be  eligible for  protection makes sense as a matter of  science.

  But it also makes
  for good social policy. Moderating the Act’s  economic  impact through fewer listings—a likely  consequence of  adopting rigorous taxonomic standards that  will eliminate  outmoded classifications—lessens the  chance of a public  backlash that might undercut support  for wildlife  protection. Moreover, time and money that  might have been  spent on protecting insignificant  populations instead can be  directed toward those  populations the preservation of which  best serves  biodiversity. We therefore hope that the  agencies will  respond promptly—and favorably—to our  proposal."

  https://pacificlegal.org/a-petition-to-resolve-the-endangered-species-act-taxonomy-debate/

 -----Original
  Message-----

 From: Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu]
  On Behalf Of Beach, James H.

 Sent: Monday,
  November 27, 2017 11:39 PM
  To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
  Subject: [Taxacom] OK Taxacomers, you have  had  your chance, now it's the lawyers turn.

  Lawyers decide the
 definition
  of 'species'.

  From
  the
 article:

  Today, PLF
 and
  several allied organizations submitted  a petition for  rule-making<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpacificlegal.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F11%2FESA-Taxonomy-Rulemaking-Petition.pdf&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C91e0a32c19a4481e38d208d535e7a9d1%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0&sdata=aIOjzCJXtjQDc%2FlGygLcJCAEfYo2qTcY5NVcq5cowFk%3D&reserved=0>
  to the [U.S.] federal agencies that administer  the  Endangered Species Act.

  ...

  Our
  petition seeks an end to the arbitrariness [of  what a  species is] through the setting of clear,  scientifically  defensible and politically sensible  definitions for the  statutory terms "species"
 and  "subspecies." The petition recommends that,  for  the former, the longstanding and well-regarded  biological  species concept be adopted, according to which  a species is  delimited by reproductive isolation. For the  latter, the  petition asks for the adoption of a variant of  the equally  longstanding "75% rule," pursuant to  which  individuals within a species must be diagnosed  accurately at  least 75% of the time as belonging to  putative Subspecies A  or B or C, etc., using genetic or  other biologically  significant characters.

  https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpacificlegal.org%2Fa-petition-to-resolve-the-endangered-species-act-taxonomy-debate%2F&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C91e0a32c19a4481e38d208d535e7a9d1%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0&sdata=rnLVzOQsySGqS3rDRcwNp8T5Dy4cyG%2F71UBejRo21j8%3D&reserved=0

  James H. Beach
  Biodiversity Institute

 University of Kansas
  1345

 Jayhawk Boulevard
  Lawrence, KS 66045,
 USA
  Office: 785-864-4645

 Cell:
  785-331-8508
  Zoom:
 https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fkansas.zoom.us%2Fmy%2Fspecify&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C91e0a32c19a4481e38d208d535e7a9d1%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0&sdata=%2B4m7S8zhrhdfku44qF6xm8C0tZfLRoV3JnJ4x892J7o%3D&reserved=0

 _______________________________________________
  Taxacom Mailing List
  Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
  https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.nhm.ku.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ftaxacom&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C91e0a32c19a4481e38d208d535e7a9d1%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0&sdata=wSVDP%2B11fFqn6XuJkh0r6xTPi5KOxsgdpfuf0fSZZck%3D&reserved=0
  The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be  searched at: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C91e0a32c19a4481e38d208d535e7a9d1%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0&sdata=CjPre%2Ft9Z4IjPANiSl81NDJFvZmCI2G%2FBApcXgw7QqA%3D&reserved=0

  Send Taxacom mailing list
  submissions to taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu  To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, visit: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.nhm.ku.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ftaxacom&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C91e0a32c19a4481e38d208d535e7a9d1%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0&sdata=wSVDP%2B11fFqn6XuJkh0r6xTPi5KOxsgdpfuf0fSZZck%3D&reserved=0
  You can reach the person managing the list
 at:
  taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu

  Nurturing Nuance while
  Assaulting Ambiguity for 30 Some Years,  1987-2017.

 _______________________________________________
  Taxacom Mailing List
  Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
  http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
  The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be  searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org

  Send Taxacom mailing list
  submissions to taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu  To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, 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

  Nurturing Nuance while
  Assaulting Ambiguity for 30 Some Years,  1987-2017.

 _______________________________________________
 Taxacom Mailing List
 Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
 http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be  searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org

 Send Taxacom mailing list
 submissions to taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu  To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, 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

 Nurturing Nuance while
 Assaulting Ambiguity for 30 Some Years, 1987-2017.