Problems of naming convention issues
I would like to ask you all what kinds of realtime problems are being caused by this issue ?
I have noted some from minor to quite serious.
- General innaccuracies in terminology
- potential fraud ( wood is not what it is meant be )
- misrepresentation of species
- false use of timber ( not right for job)
- false economy in purchase
- general confusion among users
- mis advertising
- any others ?
2 recent examples are that i saw some 'red Cedar ' that was pretty pale, for sale locally and upon further investigation in turned out to be an indonesian timber called suriman or somthing similar.
MY 2nd example was that i found some scrap at the local dump and it turned out to make quite good drum sticks when turned.
So i decided to try and find out 'exactly' what it was. So i could buy some more.
Seems to be some kind of 'weranti' a heavy Indonesian timber tho it could be DAR, another indonesian timber.
Some of the timbers i was shown at local suppliers looked similar, some were not.
I need something very similar to replicate the qualities of the drum sticks, lighhtness, toughness and springiness. I will keep trying.
The indonesian timber info i found was..
With over 4000 species of timber trees in Indonesia, it is inevitable that different vernacular names are used for the same species in different parts of the country.
Even more than i Australia.
Does anyone here have any similar examples ?
regards
John