Species inflation is something I've thought about. Common sense tells me that if you have X amount of one subspecies and Y amount of another and neither population is sustainable is it really that bad to mix them instead of the whole species going extinct? We tend to put our present time as bias but maybe the future of the world and seeing a tiger a 100 years from now may mean going generic on everything at least to the species level. Look at what we already do with reticulated and rothschild giraffe. Now would it really be that bad to keep the Indochinese Malayan, Sumatran and South China Tigers alive by blending them.
And yes I know full well that I am not a scientist but I never claimed to be just a farmer and a history teacher.
Maguari, I still haven't had the time to take a good look through the book but the contrast in quality of the plates to the first two volumes is stark. The fact that all animals are in the same posture makes the plates sterile and I feel it's a little lazy.
Is it just me or has Nash recycled drawings published in other books?
Ah, I see (partly) why we (partly) disagree - I prefer all the animals on a plate to be in the same pose to aid comparison, so that's a positive for me.
But I like them in that publication as well!![]()
I'd understand the uniformity in a field guide but these are certainly not Field guides.
It would be interesting to hear some more opinions it's not really a big deal it's just a book after all!