Rate of Adoption and Comparison To Other Symbols
In 1969, Oklahoma designated the first state reptile when it chose the common collared lizard or "mountain boomer". Two states followed suit in the 1970s, seven states in the 1980s, eight states in the 1990s, and eight states in the 2000s. As of January 2011, twenty-six of the fifty states have named a state reptile; none has yet been named in the 2010s.
In contrast to state reptiles, state birds have been more rapidly adopted, with the first state designating one in 1927 and the fiftieth in 1973. As of January 2011, other types of animals more popular for state symbolization were mammals (46), fish (45), and insects (42). Animal symbols less popular than reptiles were butterflies (17), amphibians (17), dogs (11), dinosaurs (5), bats (3), and crustaceans (3).
In their almanac of U.S. state symbols, Benjamin and Barbara Shearer spend comparatively little text on state reptiles. They spend a full chapter each on state birds, trees and flowers; within those chapters, they take about a half page to describe the campaign to establish each state's specific symbol. Reptiles, on the other hand, are shown only in list format in a chapter titled "Miscellaneous", where the other non-bird animals (and many non-animals) are listed. Shearer and Shearer consider the state reptiles to be part of a "last thirty years" phenomenon (written in 2003) that includes such particular items as a state's "official beverage".
Read more about this topic: U.S. State Reptiles
Famous quotes containing the words rate of, rate, adoption, comparison and/or symbols:
“At this very moment,... the most frightful horrors are taking place in every corner of the world. People are being crushed, slashed, disembowelled, mangled; their dead bodies rot and their eyes decay with the rest. Screams of pain and fear go pulsing through the air at the rate of eleven hundred feet per second. After travelling for three seconds they are perfectly inaudible. These are distressing facts; but do we enjoy life any the less because of them? Most certainly we do not.”
—Aldous Huxley (1894–1963)
“As a novelist, I cannot occupy myself with “characters,” or at any rate central ones, who lack panache, in one or another sense, who would be incapable of a major action or a major passion, or who have not a touch of the ambiguity, the ultimate unaccountability, the enlarging mistiness of persons “in history.” History, as more austerely I now know it, is not romantic. But I am.”
—Elizabeth Bowen (1899–1973)
“Frankly, I adore your catchy slogan, “Adoption, not Abortion,” although no one has been able to figure out, even with expert counseling, how to use adoption as a method of birth control, or at what time of the month it is most effective.”
—Barbara Ehrenreich (b. 1941)
“[Girls] study under the paralyzing idea that their acquirements cannot be brought into practical use. They may subserve the purposes of promoting individual domestic pleasure and social enjoyment in conversation, but what are they in comparison with the grand stimulation of independence and self- reliance, of the capability of contributing to the comfort and happiness of those whom they love as their own souls?”
—Sarah M. Grimke (1792–1873)
“I do not deny that there may be other well-founded causes for the hatred which various classes feel toward politicians, but the main one seems to me that politicians are symbols of the fact that every class must take every other class into account.”
—José Ortega Y Gasset (1883–1955)