What’s in a Fish Species Name and When to Change It?
Bryn H. Tracy
Abstract
Abstract Honorific scientific names have recently received intense scrutiny because societal values have changed. Across disciplines groundswells of support for renaming species have occurred; specifically those named after dishonorable people or with culturally inappropriate common names. Fishes have not been immune to this attention, but changes have come slowly. Now is the time for AFS to confront this controversial topic. The renaming processes can be aided by examining what other organizations have done. First, AFS should develop procedures for renaming species epithets and common names for species named after people who advocated racist and/or sexist views, used derogatory names in their writings, or did reprehensible things. Second, this process should include input from fisheries professionals who have to work with these names within the context of fisheries management, the AFS Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committee, and Indigenous peoples. Third, ichthyologists should change how their newly described species are named. As descriptions are written, an opportunity presents itself to name species with names of Indigenous peoples or after people that more closely represent the value sets of our society and profession. North Carolina, with its specious freshwater fish fauna, can serve as an illustrative case study of controversial fish names that warrant this discussion.