subspecies that potentialy intergrade and are very closely related are in my mind very different from two species that occur on different continents. It’s a balance and we have to use location a lot, but i can’t see any point in classifying subspecies by location, especially if they occur near each other. It’s circular. We mark something as a subspecies based on location and we generate ‘data’ which is then used to reinforce the fact that the subspecies ‘occurs’ in that location. So nothing is gained at all, and the small potential to refine or discover new things about the subspecies range is lost. So what’s the upside? I don’t really understand. (if this spins off discussion i will move it to a new topic)
5 posts were merged into an existing topic: ID Based on Range or Appearance