Abstract
Recent publicity concerning new claims for the existence of the Loch Ness monster has focused on the evidence offered by Sir Peter Scott and Robert Rines. Here, in an article planned to coincide with the now-cancelled symposium in Edinburgh at which the whole issue was due to be discussed, they point out that recent British legislation makes provision for protection to be given to endangered species; to be granted protection, however, an animal should first be given a proper scientific name. Better, they argue, to be safe than sorry; a name for a species whose existence is still a matter of controversy among many scientists is preferable to none if its protection is to be assured. The name suggested is Nessiteras rhombopteryx.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
