We, the undersigned, urge the American Ornithological Society (AOS) to reconsider its decision to implement sweeping changes to bird names, targeting birds named after any people, but also especially those birds historically named "Tits" and "Boobies."

      Historically, the AOS has evaluated bird name changes on a case-by-case basis; a thoughtful approach that balances sensitivity with practicality. This system should be reinstated. While it is reasonable to stop naming newly discovered or genetically differentiated bird species after people moving forward, retroactively renaming existing birds undermines a system that has historically served both the scientific and birding communities effectively.

      The decision to change group names like “Tits” and “Boobies” is particularly perplexing. These names are deeply rooted in etymology and bird behavior, not in derogatory intent. The term “Tit” originates from Old English and means ‘small’, reflecting linguistic history rather than anything inappropriate. Similarly, “Booby” comes from the bird’s behavior- where it would land on the decks of ships for sailors to easily kill and eat. The term was meant to describe its behavioral characteristics rather than offend, as it meant "fool" in the original linguistic context.

      Common bird names are a valuable feature in ornithology, widely recognized and used by birders, students, and scientists alike. A mass renaming would confuse newcomers, especially students striving to learn bird identification. Unlike plants, where Latin names are essential, birding thrives on common names to foster interest and accessibility. Changing those names risks alienating the very people who could become future conservation advocates.

      The Blue-Footed Booby has also been widely used to promote breast cancer awareness, showing that people aren’t taking these names the wrong way. Instead, they’re using them for good. Changing the names would take away a beloved and impactful symbol for breast cancer awareness.

      As for birds named after people, it is important to recognize the historical context behind these decisions. The people after whom these birds are named were honored for their impact on the birding world, not for their personal failings. Alexander Wilson is considered the father of ornithology, and John James Audubon, who the Audubon Society is also named after, made significant contributions to ornithology and bird conservation, which is why the birds were named after them. It is undeniably awful that John James Audubon was a slave owner. Slavery is one of the most depraved and heinous things that happened in American history. However, the birds were not named after him because everyone admired his racism. They were named after him because of all the progress he made in ornithology and conservation. It is important to view this within the context of his contributions to the field, and therefore it is appropriate to have birds named after him.

      Renaming birds on a mass scale is not only unnecessary but counterproductive. Birding thrives on its accessibility, its heritage, and the community it fosters. Sweeping changes risk undermining all three. Let us focus on real challenges facing birds today—habitat loss, climate change, and declining populations—instead of misplacing resources on a project that offers no benefits to the actual birds.

AOS, even if you decide not to return to the previous case-by-case system, please keep the names of the "Tits" and "Boobies." These terms at least pertain to education rather than moral considerations. Thank you.