Abstract
In 2009, the nomenclature of the former ‘Salix fragilis’ complex was revised; as a result, the pure species Salix euxina Belayeva was described. Over the past ten years, these changes have been ignored by a number of authors (both in Latvia and abroad), and only some authors have used all the names within this complex according to nomenclatural changes introduced by Belayeva. In the context of these taxonomic changes, the official Latvian normative documents (regulations) were analysed in regard to the species Salix alba, S. euxina and S. ×fragilis (=Salix ×rubens).Unfortunately, the taxon S. euxina is not recognised at the official level in Latvia, but the name ‘S. fragilis’ is widely used, referring more to the S. euxina; and S. ×rubens for the S. alba/euxina hybrid complex. Given that plant taxonomy is studied by experienced scientists rather than political organisations, in theory, politicians who lay down national laws and regulations as well as scientists should follow reasoned and justified changes in plant taxonomy. In case of the former S. fragilis complex, these taxonomic changes are also confirmed by genetic studies, which gives an even greater justification for their validity. Therefore, there is no reason to ignore these taxonomic changes.