How the Canada lost its name and why it matters Dan Strickland

Introduction In 1957, with the publication of its fifth questioned why the original name, “Check-list of the of North Amer- “”, was deemed inappropriate. ica”, the American Ornithologists’ Union This would still be the case were it not (AOU) did away with “Canada Jay”, the for the Royal Canadian Geographical name it had used for canaden- Society’s (RCGS) well-publicized 2015- sis until 1910, and for the nominate sub- 16 campaign to choose a national for species, P. c. canadensis, during the subse- Canada (Anon. 2015). While both of us quent 47 years. English names were dis- supported the Gray Jay nomination, we continued for all in Check-list felt the name, with its American spelling 5 (AOU 1957) and, in the case of P. of “gray” instead of the Canadian “grey” canadensis, a new English species name was inappropriate for a Canadian nation- was declared, namely “Gray Jay”. The tax- al symbol. We noted that the RCGS had onomic and nomenclatural decisions of presented P. canadensis in their campaign the AOU are held in such respect that as “Gray Jay/Whiskeyjack”, thus ack - North American journal editors, orni - nowledging the country-wide use of the thologists and birders almost always colloquial name derived from the accept them and assume that they are Wisakedjak that entered English as invariably made for compelling biologi- “Whisker-jack” as early as 1740 (Gosselin cal reasons. Gray Jay researchers such as 2017). However, we lamented that they Ryan Norris of the University of Guelph had not also included “Canada Jay”, the and I are good examples because, original official name. After all, it, too, although we have studied the ecology and clearly had unassailable historical legiti- behaviour of Gray Jays for a combined macy and was obviously appropriate as total of over 60 years, and have always the name for a Canadian national bird. called them by that name, we never once We also thought, if the RCGS had

2 Birds April 2017 A colour-banded population of P. canadensis has been under continuous study in Ontario's Algonquin Provincial Park since the 1960s. Photo by Dan Strickland chosen to present P. canadensis under its and media why the AOU had abandoned original official English name, it would the historic name, “Canada Jay”, back in have received much more support than it 1957. Personal circumstances allowed me actually did (it finished third in the “pop - to attempt finding an answer to this ques - ular vote” behind the tion and I report my findings here. (Gavia immer ) and the ( Bubo scandiacus )). Thus, when, at the end of Methods the campaign, the RCGS nevertheless Consultation chose the Gray Jay as its choice to be I first contacted several of the present Canada’s national bird (Walker 2016), we members of the AOU’s Nom en clature took it as self-evident there would have and Classification Committee (NACC) been more public acceptance if the choice to determine whether any of the m knew had been announced as the “Canada Jay”. the thinking behind the im position of It was in this context that we found “Gray Jay”. I then consult ed relevant pop - ourselves increasingly asked by the public ular and academic literature from the

Volume 35 Number 1 3 1940s and 1950s, the official history of Results the AOU (Sterling and Ainley 2016) and General another, unofficial history of American None of the present members of the (Barrow 1998). Finally, in NACC that I consulted had any knowl - April and August of 2016, I examined the edge of the choice of “Gray Jay” in 1957, AOU’s archives housed in the Smithson - and the official and unofficial ornitho - ian Institution in , D.C. logical histories I consulted were disap - pointingly silent about the deficiencies of Analysis the English nomenclatural system used After finding serious contemporary criti - before 1957. Most of the insights offered cism of the AOU’s pre-1957 vernacular in this paper came from a few key pub - naming system, I converted Check-list 4 lished articles from the 1940s, the AOU’s (AOU 1931) to a spreadsheet format to own published Check-lists and Supple - facilitate a more quantitative evaluation ments and unpublished archival material of its problems. In particular, I asked to from the 1940s and 1950s. The latter what extent the vernacular naming system (excerpts cited here in italics within quo - mirrored the Latin system which permits, tation marks) was contained in Smith - even for someone with no ornithological sonian Institution Archives Record knowledge, the certain identification of a RU7150, Boxes 3 to 7, 38, 39, 43 to 49 bird at both the species level (binomial and 58. I have retained photocopies of all name structure, e.g., Larus argentatus ) the original archival material cited here and the subspecies level (trinomial name and they are available upon request. structure in which the binomial species name is embedded, e.g. Larus argentatus History of the names “Canada Jay” smithsonicus ). I more loosely defined an and “Gray Jay” English “binomial” as consisting of a sin - “Canada Jay” was used as the species’ gle-word category name (e.g., Sparrow, English name for P. canadensis at least as Quail-dove) modified by a specific “qual - early as Swainson and Richardson (1831) ifier” that usually consisted of one word and Audubon (1840-44). It was also so (e.g., “Fox” [Sparrow]) but which might used by the AOU (Table 1) in its Check- also be a two-word geographic reference lists 1 and 2 (AOU 1886, 1895) but (e.g., “Key West” [Quail-dove]). English “demoted” to meaning merely the nomi - “trinomials” (i.e., subspecies) correspond - nate subspecies, P. c. canadensis in Check- ingly consisted of a binomial modified by lists 3 and 4 (AOU 1910, 1931) before its a subspecific qualifier that could also con - failure to reappear in the Check-list 5 sist of one or more words (e.g., Warner (AOU 1957). Mountains [Fox Sparrow]). “Gray Jay” was first used by (1899) of the Smithsonian Insti - tution as the English name for a new sub - species ( Perisoreus obscurus griseus ) of the “ Jay”, Perisoreus obscurus which, at the time, was deemed to be a different

4 Ontario Birds April 2017 Mated pairs of P. canadensis occupy large permanent territories in Canada's boreal and subalpine . Photo by Dan Strickland species, separate from P. canadensis . As The AOU’s conventions of vernacular with “Canada Jay”, the specific name nomenclature 1910-1957 “Oregon Jay” was downgraded in the The AOU’s failure to provide overall Eng - 1910 and 1931 Check-lists to mean lish species names for the two Perisoreus merely the nominate subspecies (i.e., P. o. species in its 1910 and 1931 Check-lists obscurus ). The names “Gray Jay” and was in no way unique. For all monotypic “Oregon Jay” continued to be the English species (i.e., species with no subspecies; designations for the two subspecies of P. 389 of 798 species on the 1931 list; 49% obscurus up until 1944 when the AOU of the total), the AOU provided both lumped P. obscurus with P. canadensis . Latin binomials and English names but This lumping had no effect on the AOU’s for the 409 polytypic species (i.e., species meaning of “Canada Jay” which desig - with at least two subspecies; 51% of the nated a subspecies of P. canadensis before total) such as P. canadensis , it gave neither. the lump and designated exactly the same Instead, it presented Latin trinomials and after the lump. For the next 13 years, English vernacular names for each of the right up until publication of Check-list 5, 1020 subspecies comprising the polytyp - the Canada Jay, the Gray Jay, the Oregon ic species. Jay and several other named taxa coexist - ed as mere subspecies of P. canadensis .

Volume 35 Number 1 5 Table 1. History of AOU’s nomenclatural treatment of “Canada Jay” and “Gray Jay”

Check-lists 1 and 2 Check-lists 3 and 4 (AOU 1886, 1895) (AOU 1910, 1931) Perisoreus canadensis (No species-level scientific name) Canada Jay (No species-level common name) (NO NOMINATE SUBSPECIES) Perisoreus canadensis canadensis (NO NOMINATE SUBSPECIES) Canada Jay Perisoreus canadensis capitalis Perisoreus canadensis capitalis Rocky Mountain Jay Rocky Mountain Jay P. canadensis is quick to take Perisoreus canadensis fumifrons Perisoreus canadensis fumifrons advantage of novel sources of food Alaskan Jay Jay that can supplement its winter food Perisoreus canadensis nigricapillus Perisoreus canadensis nigricapillus stores. Photo by Gord Belyea Jay Labrador Jay (not on the 1931 list) Perisoreus obscurus (No species-level scientific name) Oregon Jay (No species-level common name) Perisoreus obscurus obscurus Oregon Jay Perisoreus obscurus griseus Gray Jay The ultimate Canadian bird? A female incubating in a late winter snowstorm. Her three hatched a few days later. Photo by Dan Strickland

6 Ontario Birds April 2017 1931 List modified by Supplements 19, 20, 24 and 27 Proposed for Check-list 5 Check-list 5 (AOU 1944, 1945, 1949, 1952) 1947-48 (AOU 1957) (No species-level scientific name) Perisoreus canadensis Perisoreus canadensis (No species-level common name) Gray Jay Gray Jay Perisoreus canadensis canadensis Perisoreus canadensis canadensis Perisoreus canadensis canadensis Canada Jay Canada Gray Jay Perisoreus canadensis capitalis Perisoreus canadensis capitalis Perisoreus canadensis capitalis Rocky Mountain Jay Rocky Mountain Gray Jay P. c. fumifrons pacificus (1952) 1 Perisoreus canadensis fumifrons Perisoreus canadensis pacificus Alaska Jay Alaska Gray Jay Perisoreus canadensis nigricapillus Perisoreus canadensis nigricapillus Perisoreus canadensis nigricapillus Labrador Jay (restored to list 1944) Labrador Gray Jay Perisoreus canadensis albescens Perisoreus canadensis albescens Perisoreus canadensis albescens Jay (1944) Alberta Gray Jay Perisoreus canadensis obscurus Perisoreus canadensis obscurus Perisoreus canadensis obscurus Oregon Jay (1944) Oregon Gray Jay Perisoreus canadensis griseus Perisoreus canadensis griseus Perisoreus canadensis griseus Gray Jay (1944) Ridgway's (Cascades) Gray Ja y5 Perisoreus canadensis bicolor Perisoreus canadensis bicolor Perisoreus canadensis bicolor Jay (1944) Idaho Gray Jay Perisoreus canadensis barbouri Perisoreus canadensis barbouri Perisoreus canadensis barbouri Anticosti Jay (1944) Anticosti Gray Jay P. c. pacificus arcus (1952) 2, 3 Perisoreus canadensis pacificus Perisoreus canadensis arcus Pacific Canada Jay (1945) Pacific Gray Jay Perisoreus canadensis sanfordi Perisoreus canadensis sanfordi Newfoundland Gray Jay (1949) 4

1 P. c. fumifrons became P. c. pacificus with the 27th Supplement (AOU 1952) because of a naming priority issue. 2 P. c. pacificus named in the 20th Supplement (AOU 1945) was renamed P. c. arcus in the 27th Supplement (AOU 1952) because P. c. pacificus was preoccupied (see above). 3 Note that when P. c. pacificus was proposed in 1945, it received the English subspecies name Pacific Canada Jay, clearly implying that the presumptive English species name was "Canada Jay" (see text). 4 When P. c. sanfordi was proposed in the 14th Supplement (AOU 1949) it was given the English name "Newfoundland Gray Jay", thus signalling the AOU's otherwise unannounced intention to elevate "Gray Jay" to the status of overall English species name (see text). 5 To avoid having a subspecies with the English name "Gray Gray Jay", it was first proposed that P. c. griseus be renamed "Ridgway's Gray Jay". This was later changed to "Cascades Gray Jay".

Volume 35 Number 1 7 This vernacular naming system had 3. The failure of Check-list 4 to give over - several serious drawbacks including: all species names for the 409 polytypic 1. It was impossible to determine, from species it contained was trivial for Latin the English name alone, whether the names since the provided trinomial name referred to a species or to a sub - subspecies names always included the species. Latin species names are invari - binomial species names as their first ably binomials and subspecies names two elements ( and species). On are trinomials but the English names the vernacular side, however, there were on Check-list 4, whether of species or only 91 polytypic species (22% of the subspecies, could be trinomials, bino - total) whose subspecies all had English mials, or even “uninomials”. For exam - trinomial names containing a possible ple, 26 English uninomials (e.g., Oven- overall English name for the species bird, Bobolink) on the 1931 list (e.g., the three then-recognized races of referred to monotypic species and 12 Canachites canadensis ; Hudsonian were the names of subspecies (e.g., Spruce , Canada , Osprey, Whimbrel). Similarly, 338 and Alaska Spruce Grouse). A further binomials were the names of species (all 19 species (5%) had at least some sub - monotypic, e.g., Western Meadowlark, species with similarly helpful English Canada Warbler) and 659 (66%) names (e.g., the races of Branta referred to subspecies (e.g., Eastern canadensis on the 1931 list were: Com - Meadowlark, Nashville Warbler). Of mon , White-cheeked 374 trinomials 349 (93%) referred to Canada Goose and Lesser Canada subspecies (e.g. Gray–crowned Rosy Goose, as well as the uninformative Finch, American Three-toed Wood - Hutchin’s Goose and Cackling Goose). pecker) but 25 referred to monotypic species (e.g., Cassin’s Purple Finch, This left 299 species (73% of poly - McKay’s Snow Bunting), and it was typic species and 37% of the entire 1931 impossible to realize this from their list) that had neither an overall English name structures alone. species name or even a single subspecies with a trinomial name containing a bino - 2. A further deficiency of the English tri - mial that could be construed as a species nomials on the 1931 list was that the name. It was, therefore, literally impossi - binomials they contained did not ble to refer to any of these species with an always refer to the same species. Of 100 AOU-sanctioned overall English name different binomials contained within for the 47 years from 1910 to 1957. English trinomials, nine referred to two P. canadensis was one of those species. different species. For example, the Cal - I found two approaches to writing ifornia Clapper Rail and the Yuma about P. canadensis that were taken by Clapper Rail were races of Rallus obso - authors of the day. Bent (1946) followed letus , while four other “Clapper Rails” the AOU’s lead and made no mention of on the 1931 Check-list were races of the species at all, writing separately Rallus longirostris. instead about several of its subspecies,

8 Ontario Birds April 2017 including the Canada Jay ( P. c. canaden - sis ) and the Gray Jay ( P. c. griseus ). In con - trast, Roger Tory Peterson broke from AOU orthodoxy by using “Canada Jay” in both his eastern and western field guides (Peterson 1941, 1947) to mean both the nominate subspecies, P. cana - densis canadensis , and the overall species, P. canadensis . He similarly used “Oregon Jay” in his western guide to mean both the overall species, P. obscurus , and its nominate subspecies (Peterson 1941).

Pressure on the AOU to reform its naming systems "Canada Jay" was the AOU's official name for Perisoreus canadensis on its first two Check-lists Complaints about the AOU’s vernacular (1886 and 1895). Photo by Dan Strickland naming system and appeals for its over - haul came from several quarters in the species name nested within the trinomi - 1940s. In their popular bird identifica - al. Thus, for P. canadensis , Miller restored tion field guides, both Peterson (1941, the original overall species name, “Cana - 1947) and Pough (1946) addressed the da Jay” and for the two alleged races confusion surrounding vernacular occurring in (referred to by the nomenclature and both corresponded AOU as the “Oregon Jay” [ P. c. obscurus ] with Alexander Wetmore, chairman of and the “Gray Jay” [ P. c. griseus ]), he used the AOU’s NACC, urging reforms. In “Southwestern Canada Jay” and “Gray appendices on “Subspecies”, Peterson Canada Jay”, respectively. used the “Steller’s Jay” in his western Further important pressure for reform guide (Peterson 1941) and later the came from a Wilson Bulletin paper whose “Canada Jay” in his eastern guide (Peter - lead author was Eugene Eisenmann, pres - son 1947) as examples to illustrate his ident of ’s influential Linnaean frustration with the lack of overall Eng - Society (Eisenmann and Poor 1946). In lish species names for polytypic species it, the authors set out the problems of the and the impossibility of knowing from existing vernacular nomenclatural system their vernacular names to which species and proposed that two main principles many subspecies belonged. He also laud - should guide its reform, namely: ed the introduction of a rational naming “1. Every species should have a name, appli - system by Alden H. Miller in “The Dis - cable only to that species, which can be used tribution of the Birds of California” in a comprehensive manner for all races of (Grinnell and Miller 1944). Miller’s the species…” and approach was to imitate the scientific “2. Every subspecies name should be formed naming system by using English trinomi - by prefixing to the species name a word or als for all subspecies and having the words indicating the race. ”

Volume 35 Number 1 9 They also stated that “ it is certainly desir - Wetmore eventually yielded to the able to retain many established names pressure by agreeing to support a radical regardless of whether or not they are appro - overhaul of vernacular names following priate …” but urged the observance of the principles advocated by Eisenmann additional naming principles when a new and Poor (1946) in anticipation of the name had to be found. One of these was next (5th) AOU Check-list. His archived that “ a species name should not be formed correspondence records his appreciation from the name of a geographical or politi - for the leading role played by W.L. McA - cal subdivision ”, the reason being that this tee of Chicago in preparing two exhaus - could lead to geographically awkward tive lists of proposed new vernacular subspecies names. species and subspecies names. The first, covering non-, was presented at The AOU’s response to meetings of the Check-list Committee the calls for reform held in Toronto in September 1947 and The AOU, in general, was apparently the second, covering passerines, was cir - sym pathetic to the reformers’ wishes. In culated by mail in June 1948 in anticipa - a 1939 memorandum entitled “ Recom - tion of a fall meeting in Omaha later that mendations of the A.O.U. to its Commit - year. Wetmore graciously acknowledged tee on Classification and Nomenclature of that the proposed names he was then cir - North American Birds ”, the AOU specifi - culating closely followed the principles cally recommended that “ editions of the (that he had previously resisted) advocat - Checklist should appear every 10 years ” and ed by Eisenmann and Poor (1946) and, that (in the next edition) “there be a sci - before them, by Grinnell and Miller entific name, a vernacular name, and a (1944). Still, even then, Wetmore had statement of range for each species as a serious misgivings about the new scheme. whole, … ”. They also added the sugges - In the preface to the 1947 list, he tion that “ vernacular names for subspecies remarked: “Whether this demand (i.e., for are unnecessary .” overall species names and for subspecies Notwithstanding this clear direction, names that contain those species names) the minutes of a subsequent Check-list is genuine and necessary, or whether it is Committee meeting held in Boston on based on the idea of a few vocal individu - 10 September 1940 recorded that: “ A als has been difficult for your Chairman to suggestion by A.H. Miller in a letter regard - determine .” A few lines later, he wrote, ing abandoning subspecific vernacular “The list as presented shows some of the names was unanimously voted down. All benefits as well as the various horrors of present felt it was necessary and desirable to such a plan .” continue common names for subspecies. ” The new overall vernacular species The same minutes also noted “ The sug - name (Gray Jay) and reformed subspecies gestion that each subspecific vernacular names for P. canadensis that were pro - name include the vernacular name of the posed in 1948 for inclusion in Check-list species (ex. Louis iana Carolina Paroquet) 5 are shown in Table 1. These proposed was voted down .” names (and those of all other species on

10 Ontario Birds April 2017 The confiding Whiskyjack is beloved by Canadians from coast to coast. Photo by Gord Belyea. the 1947 and 1948 lists) were initially cir - Snyder did not express an opinion culated to Check-list Committee mem - about “Canada Jay” but his comment bers for their comments. Proposed draft indicates he recognized a need to avoid accounts as they would appear in Check- geographic awkwardness. While I found list 5 were then drawn up and circulated no other discussion of the subject, I to at least 40 North American ornitholo - believe the AOU’s decision to choose gists including four based in Canada (I. “Gray Jay” as the overall species name McTaggart Cowan and J.A. Munro in rather than restoring “Canada Jay” is , W. Earl Godfrey at the indeed most plausibly attributed to that National Museum in Ottawa and L.L. concern. Since the new vernacular scheme Snyder at the Royal Ontario Museum). required that the overall species name be The only comment returned to Wetmore included in all vernacular subspecies expressing reticence concerning the choice names, the choice of “Canada Jay” as the of “Gray Jay” as the overall species name species name would have resulted in geo - for P. canadensis was a hand-written mar - graphically awkward subspecies names ginal notation on Snyder’s copy saying: such as “Alaska Canada Jay”, “Oregon “‘Whiskeyjack’ is used universally in the Canada Jay”, and “Idaho Canada Jay ”. north (& will continue to be). Its use with Even “Labrador Canada Jay” would have names of political areas (such as Idaho) been less than ideal since, in the late would avoid awkward term and avoid a 1940s, Labrador’s borders and status were new coinage .” still contested and Newfoundland had not yet joined Canada. Previous proponents of a rationalized vernacular nom encla t ural

Volume 35 Number 1 11 system had cautioned against names that announced the alleged existence of a new gave rise to geographical absurdities such subspecies P. c. pacificus (later P. c. arcus ; as “California Florida Jay” (Eisenmann see footnote #2 in Table 1) for which it and Poor 1946) or “Florida Carolina gave the English name “Pacific Canada Wren” (Peterson 1947) and I suggest that Jay” (AOU 1945). Four years later, how - this concern also motivated the AOU’s ever, the AOU accepted another sub - rejection of “Canada Jay” and preference species, P. c. sanfordi , this time with the for “Gray Jay” instead. English name of “Newfoundland Gray I further suggest, incidentally, that Jay” (AOU 1949), hinting at a switch in “Canada Goose” was not likewise reject - allegiance from “Canada Jay” to “Gray ed a s a restored overall vernacular species Jay” as an implied overall vernacular name for Branta canadensis because none species name. Reference by the AOU to of its English subspecies names (listed an east-coast race as a “Gray Jay” should above) contained geographic qualifiers have raised eyebrows since, at the time, that would have led to similar difficul - that name still officially designated only ties. “Canada Warbler” (the only other P. c. griseus , a race of the far west (Cas - ver na cular name on the 1931 Check-list cades and B.C. coastal mountains). An that included “Canada”) was n ot affect - even stronger clue that a new order was ed by the proposed nomenclatural imminent came with the publication of reforms since it already referred to a “Birds of Washington State” (Jewett et al. (monotypic) species, Wilsonia canaden - 1953). The authors (two of whom, Jew - sis , not to a subspecies. ett and Aldrich, were among the 40 receiving advance copies of the draft The dénouement Check-list 5) explicitly gave “Gray Jay” as Minutes of the 7 September 1947 Com - an overall species name for P. canadensis mittee meeting in Toronto record that (something that, according to the AOU, those present were specifically enjoined had ceased to exist after Check-list 3 to keep the new scheme and the list of replaced Check-list 2). They also gave names secret since “ to publicize the mat - “Oregon Gray Jay” for P. c. obscurus , and ter now would lead to much useless and “Cascade Gray Jay” for P. c. griseus . burdensome correspondenc e”. As far as To my knowledge, this was the first I am aware, the AOU made no public and only time that any of the new ver - announcement of the impending nacular names for the subspecies changes in nomenclature, let alone on P. canadensis proposed in 1948 (Table 1) the specific case of P. canadensis , before were ever published. The original plan to the actual publication of the Check-list’s present the entire freshly overhauled ver - fifth edition in 1957, a year in which its nacular naming system in the Check-list’s journal, the Auk , even published a note fifth edition came to a dead-stop at a that still used “Canada Jay” (Law rence September 1954 meeting of the renamed 1957). Nevertheless, clues were available “Committee on Classification and well before 1957 that nomenclatural Nomenclature of North American Birds” changes were afoot. In 1945, the AOU held in Madison, WI. Discussion of the

12 Ontario Birds April 2017 “controversial ” subject of common nam es name was to avoid geographical awk - stretched over two days, during which wardness in the reformed English sub - more and more of the committee expres - species names. But this justification for sed waning enthusiasm for retaining choosing “Gray Jay” instead of restoring common names for subspecies. the original “Canada Jay” as the overall The minutes, possibly betraying a species name evaporated with the deci - certain 11 th hour exasperation, end with: sion not to have vernacular subspecies “Amadon expressed as his opinion, that names. There could be no awkwardness those who believe common names will be in subspecies names after the 1954 deci - missed by amateurs are laboring under a sion because there were simply not going delusion. Van Tyne believed that we should to be any subspecies names. assume leadership rather than merely go The committee also recognized this along with the desires of what may be a and the minutes of their annual meeting minority. Both Lincoln and Miller com - a year later (24 October 1955, Cam - mented on the time spent in past meetings bridge, MA) included the following in our efforts to decide on suitable names agenda item and comment: “ Common while Wetmore referred to the confusion names to be used in the Fifth Edition . that will be caused by designating some Decision to abandon subspecific vernacu - species by a name that was formerly con - lar names, makes it possible to retain as fined to a subspecies. To bring the question specific names a number that have been to a head Miller moved for the deletion of long in use. ” sub-specific common names. This was sec - I found no further discussion of pos - onded by Friedmann, and carried with sible abandonments of the new names one dissenting vote.” proposed in 1947 -48 but I did discover Recall that in 1940, the same (Alden 18 cases where the names actually pub - H.) Miller had urged exactly the same lished in 1957 (Check-list 5) were not thing (abandonment of subspecific ver - the proposed names, but reversions to nacular names) but was turned down the real or implied names on Check-list unanimously by the then committee (of 4 (AOU 1931). Examples of ultimately which three members, including Wet - rejected proposed names include “Chest - more, were still members in 1954). In nut-backed Bluebird ”, “Pileolated War - the space of 14 years, the committee had bler”, “Grass Wren” and “Chestnut- gone from strongly favouring a system in crowned Warbler”. They reverted to, which only subspecies had common respectively, “Western Bluebird ”, “Wil - names to the exact opposite (only species son’s Warbler”, “Short-billed Marsh were to have common names). Wren” and “Nash ville Warbler”. There is This complete reversal of naming no reason apparent to me why the pro - philosophy had an important implica - posed “Gray Jay” could not have similar - tion. I argue that the motivation for ele - ly reverted to the original “Canada Jay ”. vating “Gray Jay” from obscurity instead of restoring “Canada Jay” to its original status as the long-standing overall species

Volume 35 Number 1 13 Discussion established “Canada Jay” instead. The One early hypothesis to explain the AOU archival material and the contem - AOU’s 1957 imposition of “Gray Jay” porary literature I have examined indicate was that it resulted from the lumping of that the decision not to restore “Canada P. canadensis and P. obscurus . This was Jay” resulted from an honest attempt to superficially plausible because the two reform the previously chaotic vernacular species were widely believed to have the naming system and in particular to avoid English names, “Canada Jay”, and “Ore - geographic awkwardness in the common gon Jay” and the AOU later adopted a names of subspecies. But this possible guideline (AOU 1983), suggesting that, reason for abandoning “Canada Jay” and when two taxa with different English imposing “Gray Jay” in its place abrupt - names are lumped, a new name should be ly disappeared when, in 1954, the AOU found for the merged taxon. But the gave up on the whole idea of vernacular hypothesis is false because, as summa - subspecies names. rized in Table 1, the two species, P. I would argue further that, even if the canaden sis and P. obscurus , did not have AOU had decided to retain vernacular English names during the period (1910- sub species names in Check-list 5 (AOU 1957) when they were lumped (1944). As 1957), there would still be grounds to for “Canada Jay”, “Oregon Jay”, and challenge its decision to abandon “Cana - “Gray Jay”, those names referred, not to da Jay”. The original stricture of Eisen - species, but to subspecies. Contrary to mann and Poor (1946) to avoid geo - widespread , therefore, the graphic qualifiers in species names was Canada Jay and the Oregon Jay (both just specifically intended to apply to new subspecies) were not lumped in 1944 and species names and not to result in the the name “Gray Jay” did not come into abandonment of traditional, well-estab - existence at that time. All three names lished names. Moreover, there are two designated subspecies before the 1944 ways, not just one, to avoid awkwardness lumping of their “parent” species and when geographic subspecific and specific they continued as such for another 13 qualifiers clash in the bosom of single tri - years afterwards. Indeed, the only real nomial (e.g., “Alaska Canada Jay”). The nomenclatural effect of the 1944 event way chosen in the AOU’s still-born pro - was that the scientific names of the Ore - posals of 1947 and 1948 was to abandon gon Jay and the Gray Jay changed, respec - the older specific qualifier (“Canada”) tively, from P. obscurus obscurus to and keep the often much younger sub - P. ca nadensis obscurus and from P. obscu - specific qualifiers (e.g., “Idaho, Oregon, rus griseus to P. canadensis griseus . Newfoundland”, etc.). But the AOU There is no doubt, however, that in could just as easily have chosen to keep 1957, the AOU chose the name “Gray “Canada” and abandon the subspecific Jay” to designate the overall species, qualifiers, as Miller did in his pioneering P. canadensis, and the question is why it attempts to reform the AOU’s nomen - did not follow the more obvious course clatural system (Grinnell and Miller of restoring the much older and well 1944). Faced with the two C alifornia

14 Ontario Birds April 2017 perisoreus subspecies, Gray Jay and Ore - endorse the Royal Canadian Geographi - gon Jay, Miller “trinomialized” their cal Society’s choice of P. canadensis as names as the “Cascade Canada Jay” and Canada’s national bird, it will be inno - the “Southwestern Canada Jay”, in the cent of any biological or nomenclatural latter case avoiding the geographic awk - heresy and perfectly within its rights wardness of what otherwise would have should it, at the same time, declare the been the “Oregon Canada Jay”. name of our new national symbol to be, Overall, I conclude that there was no once again, “Canada Jay ”. valid taxonomic or nomenclatural reason for the AOU to impose “Gray Jay” as the overall English species name in 1957 or Acknowledgements to refrain from restoring the original and For his encouragement and helpful com - ments on an earlier draft, I am very grateful historically far more authentic “Canada to my collaborator, Ryan Norris. I also wish Jay”. Further, while the history of the to thank Ron Tozer and Scott Bastian for Canada Jay/Gray Jay name change may invaluable bibliographic assistance and an be of particular interest to ornithologists, anonymous reviewer for useful suggestions to I suggest it should matter to the wider improve this paper. Terry Chesser, Carla Cic - community as well. At the present time, ero and Carla Dove graciously facilitated my just before Canada’s 150 th birthday, the access to the AOU archives at the Smithson - federal government may be considering ian Institution and archivist Ellen Alers pro - whether to endorse the Royal Canadian vided superb service during my two visits in April and August of 2016. Geographical Society’s choice of P. cana - densis as our national bird. Of course, as a sovereign nation, Canada does not need Literature Cited to seek approval from any outside body Anonymous . 2015. The national bird proj - ect. Canadian Geographic 135:41-45 for its decisions on what to call its (January-February). national symbols. It has even less reason AOU . 1886. The Code of Nomenclature and to ask for permission to restore the orig - Check-List of North American Birds. Ameri - inal official English name —and least of can Ornithologists’ Union, New York. all from the unelected foreign-dominat - 392 pp. ed body that, through error, caused the AOU . 1895. Check-List of North American name to be “lost” in the first place. But, Birds. Second and Revised Edition. American given the traditional automatic accept - Ornithologists’ Union, New York. 372 pp. ance of the AOU’s taxonomic and AOU . 1910. Check-List of North American nomenclatural decisions, the federal gov - Birds. Third Edition (Revised). American ernment might well assume that “Can - Ornithologists’ Union, New York. 430 pp. ada Jay” was abandoned in 1957 for AOU . 1931. Check-List of North American sound biological reasons that it dare not Birds. Fourth Edition. American Ornitholo - contravene. gists’ Union, New York. 526 pp. On the contrary, since the facts rel - AOU . 1944. Nineteenth Supplement to the ated here show otherwise, if the Canadi - American Ornithologists’ Union Check-List an Government should now see fit to of North American Birds. Auk 61:441-464.

Volume 35 Number 1 15 AOU . 1945. Twentieth Supplement to the Jewett, S.G. , W.P. Taylor , W.T. Shaw and American Ornithologists’ Union Check-List J.W. Aldrich . 1953. Birds of Washington of North American Birds. Auk 62:436-449. State. University of Washington AOU . 1949. Twenty-fourth Supplement to Press,. 767 pp. the American Ornithologists’ Union Check- Lawrence, L. de K. 1957. Displacement List of North American Birds. Auk 66: singing in a Canada Jay ( Perisoreus canadensis ). 281-285. Auk 74: 260-261. AOU . 1952. Twenty-seventh Supplement to Peterson, R.T. 1941. A Field Guide to West - the American Ornithologists’ Union Check- ern Birds. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston. List of North American Birds. Auk 69: 240 pp. 308-312. Peterson, R.T. 1947. A Field Guide to the AOU . 1957. Check-list of North American Birds, 2nd edition. Houghton Mifflin Co., Birds. Fifth Edition. American Ornithologists’ Boston. 290 pp. Union, New York. 691 pp. Pough, R.H. 1946. Audubon Bird Guide: AOU . 1983. Check-list of North American Small Land Birds. National Audubon Society. Birds. Sixth Edition. American Ornithologists’ Doubleday & Co., New York. Union, New York, 877 pp. Ridgway, R. 1899. New species etc., of Audubon, J.J. 1840-1844. The Birds of American birds. – IV. Fringillidae (Conclud - America. Vol. 4. Dover publications, 1967, ed); (Part). Auk 16:254-256. New York. Sterling, K.B. and M.G. Ainley . 2016. Barrow, M.V., Jr . 1998. A Passion for Birds: The American Ornithologists’ Union: American Ornithology after Audubon. Prince - The First Century 1883-1983. Memoirs ton University Press. Princeton, New Jersey of the Nuttall Ornithological Club, No. 20. 336 pp. Cambridge, . Bent, A.C. 1946. Life Histories of North Swainson, W.J. and J. Richardson . 1831. American Jays, and Titmice. United Fauna boreali-Americana. Part 2. John States National Museum Bulletin 191. Murray, London. U.S. Government Printing Office., Walker, N. 2016. Canada’s national bird: Washington D.C. 495 pp. + 68 plates. the Gray Jay. Canadian Geographic 136:36-39 Eisenmann, E. and H.H. Poor . 1946. (December). Suggested Principles for Vernacular Nomen - clature. Wilson Bulletin 58:210-215. Dan Strickland Gosselin, M. 2017. Wisakedjak, l’emma - 1063 Oxtongue Lake Road gasineur. QuébecOiseaux, Printemps 2017, Dwight, Ontario P0A 1H0 p. 15. E-mail: [email protected] Grinnell, J. and A.H. Miller . 1944. The Distribution of the Birds of California. Pacific Coast Avifauna No. 27. Museum of Vertebrate Zoology of the University of California, Cooper Ornithological Club, Berkeley, California. 608 pp.

16 Ontario Birds April 2017