(...)
>Even more nonsense.
>
>Remember all the laymen contributing to the field of botany. (as
>mentioned earlier)
Remember all the laymen (and -alas!- also professionals) supplying us with
loads of nomina nuda each year.
Some knowledge about the plants and their their proper naming (and respect
for the existing rules and names, i.e. for the rest of the world) would
certainly not do any harm here. This does not mean all botanists (= all
persons involved in the scientific study of plants, irrespective of
profession) must have some degree (if you want some, just buy it! ;-)).
On the other hand (especially Michael C.) you know yourself that present
practice in legislation (remember CITES!) and permits is too far from the
ideal to work satisfactorily even for purely scientific research.
>It helps having a degree in botany but it is definately not
>a prerequisite of being able to distinguish an unnamed species
>from already described ones.
Being a layman is not necessarily a better prerequisite for that. 8-)
IMHO, the goal is to enable all interested people to give "their" plants
valid names. As things stand now, the code +/- gives the appropriate hints.
We just have to convince the "nomenclatural nudists" that they are not too
far from the club of "insiders", and that it is not at all an impossible
thing to publish a protologue if necessary. Well, this is what I have been
trying for some time now on this list.
Kind regards
Jan