Fresh prentsak off, Miamiko Blue Butterfly (MBB) dago orain federally arriskuan dauden bezala zerrendatuta larrialdi xedapen-egintza arabera. Huzzah! (Eskuineko?)
Miami Blue Butterfly Amerikako Tximeletak etatik
Nire lehen pentsamendua izan zen “itxaron, Ez zen hau dagoeneko arriskuan dauden?”. Bai, bihurtzen MBB izan da geroztik egoera-arriskuan dauden 2002 aurreko larrialdi eskaria egin du North American Butterfly Elkartea artxibatu ondoren (Naba). Neurri hori zirudien nahikoa integrala tximeleta honek inon in the USA, bestela gertatzen geroztik. Baina hori ez da zehatz-garrantzitsu bat, eta ez dut inolako benetako kalteak ikusten federally tximeleta beste zerrendatzean. Florida Keys ziur laguntza ontza guztietan behar orduan, ingurumena babesten da lortu ahal izango dute.
Arriskuan dauden espezieen Miami Blue bezala (Cyclargus thomasi bethunebakeri) espezie baten iparraldeko barrutia luzapena dela Karibe osoan zehar agertu ohi dira. US etorkina benetan nahikoa bereizgarri propioa subespezie bat bermatzen den ala ez, ez da zerbait dut benetan ezin naiz tximeleta gutxien tipo bat geroztik. Ez dut asko lotsati kanpoan subespezie baten ideia osoa, baina beno, Suposatzen dut tximeleta mutil hauek zerbait egin behar! Gainera, niri logikoa dirudi emigratu blues influxes lukeen naturalean ugaritasuna aldatu hegoaldean Florida kostaldean zehar. Hasieran 1950 ugariak izan sortu eta hondartzak behera ia Estatu osoan zehar erabili intsektu horiek. Azken hauek 60 urte bakoitietan izan dira cruel Floridara – garapena eta eltxo murrizteko triskantza egin zer pristine habitat izateko erabiltzen. Guztiak Tximeleta baten sufrimendua.
Orduan ez zen zerbait konturatu nintzen oso bakoitiak iragarki hau buruz: Larrialdi emateagatik da halaber zerrenda guztiak Antzeko blues MBB batera habitat partekatzen duten mehatxatu bezala, eta, beraz, babestu! Zergatik? dutelako begiratu MBB bezalako. blues hauek, besteak Cassius urdina (Leptotes Cassius), Ceraunus urdina (Hemiargus ceraunus), eta Nickerbean urdina (Cyclargus Ammon). Dezagun gauza bat zuzenean – bai Cassius eta Ceraunus blues ez dira inolaz ere benetan mehatxatu ezta are arraroak. bai, ezin dira izan – espezie oso ugaria Hori Carribbean guztia luzeago sorta batekin, Golkoko kostaldean mendebaldean Kaliforniako eta barnealdeko strays to midwest du!
Beraz, galdetu nion, nola liteke hau gainditu dute?
Gary Larson, Far Side
Oh, hori da – beldurra mongering ekarri errotik anti-biltzeko Ipar Amerika Butterfly Elkarteak. NABA hautematen biltzeko tximeleta populazio arriskuez gravest bat bezala froga falta sinestezina izan arren. Bai, biltzen guztietan daude kapa beltz bat gaiztoak kirol eta beren bizitzako lana egiteko edertasuna itzaltzea mundutik. Nolabait erakunde honek kudeatzen ditu USFWS konbentzitu puntu bat dute. Ezin dut xedapen justizia Horretarako, beraz, hemen aipu zehatza da.
Horrez gain, Zerbitzuari igorri da 4(d) Espezie horiei buruzko arau bereziak United States barruan bilketa eta merkataritza buruzko debekuak ezartzea. Gainera, ekintza honek inportazio debekatzen sartu, eta esportazio, United hiru antzeko tximeleta Batuetan. legezkoa pestiziden erabilera gisa antzeko horiek tximeleta-hala nola eragingo Bestela zilegi jarduera, mozten, eta ibilgailu erabilera-ez daude debekatuta. bildumaren debekuak luzatzea, jabetza, eta antzeko hiru tximeletak merkataritza Miami urdina den babes handiagoa eskaintzen dizu.
zintzotasunez speechless naiz. Beno, agian dut hitz batzuk gehiago kudeatu ahal.
Anima zaitez eta mow behera zure habitat adabaki eta gero bustitzen herbizida Gainean. Baina ez hobeto ausartzen urdina bakar batean biltzea… USFWS ikusten da.
ere piztu dute out baizik paranoiko izateko. Noski, ezkutuko ehiza behin gertatuko noizbehinka ez du axola zein espezie babesteko. ote den irabazien edo janaria izan, a bakoitiak animalia gutxi bildu egingo da. Nik ere ez benetako froga eromen-maila hau onartzen? Erregistro aipuak gehienek kasu daude, Ez adituek aztertutako aldizkari.
Zerbitzuan zehaztu du hori Miami tximeleta urdin habitat kritikoa izendapena ez da zuhurra mapak eta habitat kritikoa arlo deskribapen argitaratzeko litzateke oso zabalduta iragarriko tximeleta kokaleku zehatza delako isileko ehiztariak, bildumagileak, eta bandalo eta baliteke aurrerago traba eta suntsipena tximeleta en habitat errazteko.
Oh ez dut maitasuna komatxorik: (iturria)
baina baita adierazten du ez dagoela egungo edo iraganeko bilketa presio Miami urdin buruzko froga edo informazioa ez da (FWC 2010, p. 13)… Nahiz ez dugun legez kanpoko Miami urdinak bilduma frogak dute, legez kanpoko beste tximeleta bilduma frogak izan ez dugu hegoaldean Florida lurrak Federalak batetik …
…Berbera Web gunean beste bi tximeleta itxura antzekoa eskaintzen Miami blue izateko; ceraunus blue unean 4,00 € saltzen ($5.57), eta Cassius urdina da 2.50-10.00 € eskuragarri ($3.48-$13.93).
… Hori dela eta, Nahiko posible bildumagile antzeko espezieak biltzeko oharkabean may baimendutako da (edo nahita) Miami tximeleta urdin ote zen pentsatzen biltzeko, izan zen pentsatu dute edo plangintza eskatzeko, Cassius urdina, blue nickerbean, edo urdina ceraunus
Ez get me wrong – osagarriak finantzaketa eta babes espezie arraro bat betiere lagungarria izan liteke habitata zaintzeko gisa. Hala ere badirudi funts gehienen joera duten zein zalantza egin askoz ona gatibu ugaltzeko programak sartu. tximeleta da uharte batetik desagertzen bada, ondoren, horietako hodei askatuz argazkiak politak eta ez da gorde espezie batentzat bakarrik izango dadin.
egon nintzen eskatu iruzkin bat aurkeztu du, eta gauza bera egin duzu iradokitzen dut. Iruzkina hemen urriaren aurretik 11, 2011: Federalak eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Jarraitu argibideak iruzkinak docket den No aurkezteko. [FWS-R4-ES-2011-0043]. Edo idatzi: AEB. postaz edo eskuz entrega: Oharrak Publikoa Prozesatzeko, Attn: docket No. [FWS-R4-ES-2011-0043]; Politika eta zuzentarau Management Division; AEB. Fish eta Wildlife Zerbitzua; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA 22203..
Dear Mr. Grinter,
zientzialari gisa, Ziur normalean duzula datuak euskarri adierazpenak egin aurretik bilatzen nago. baiezta duzu North American Butterfly Elkarteko hori errotik anti-bilketa da. Adierazpen hau gezurra da. begiratuz at 20 Naba argitalpenen urte, ia ez da batere biltzeko aipamen ikusiko duzu! Naba, eta Naba batera lidergo posizio batean denek, Erabat tximeletak biltzeko helburua zientifiko baten arazoa ez du. zientzialari profesionala izan nintzen (Beste pertsona kopuru bat esateko buruzagitza postuetan Naba tan), Stanford University Medical School at eta Rockefeller Unibertsitatean lan. zalantzarik nago ikerketa zientifikoa guztiak! Horrez Naba Zientifiko Aholku Batzordea In, Nat Holland osatua (Rice Unibertsitatean), Naomi Pierce (Harvard University), Robert Robbins (AEB. Museo Nazionala), Ron Rutowski (Arizona State University), John Shuey (Nature Conservancy) eta Ernest Williams (Hamilton College), biltzen ditu Estatu Batuetan, behin zientzialari tximeletak lan egiten duten batzuk.
Zer Naba egiten du, ikerketa zientifikoa bultzatzeko gain horietako batzuk American Tximeletak argitaratu,) dago ez diren zientzialarien jendea animatzeko (bertan ia denek da) tximeletak hurbiltzeko prismatikoak eta kamerekin. prismatikoak eta kamerak nabarmenduz hau duten serioski tximeleta interesa jende kopuruaren igoera izugarria da emaitza, eta hori izan da gure tximeletak ezagutza gehikuntza izan da emaitza eta, garrantzitsuena, tximeletak mantentzen dugun gaitasuna handitzea ere.
Miami Blues dagokionez, ez zen Naba duten galdetu USFWS du ere zerrendatu Ceraunus eta Cassius Blues. Eta ez dut, ezta Naba unetan edonork, esan, ezta sinetsi, tximeleta populazioentzako mehatxu handiena biltzaileak direla.
Bihotzez,
Jeffrey Glassberg, Doktoretza.
Lehendakaria: Naba
Dr. Glassberg – Eskerrik asko nire iruzkinari erantzuteko eta nire iritzia gogortzeko denbora hartu izanagatik. Zuzenean adierazi ez nuen arren NABAk USFWSri Ceraunus eta Cassius blues zerrendatzeko eskatu ziola., Uler dezaket nola uler daitekeen puntu hori. Erregistrora nola iritsi diren misterio bat da niretzat, eta bikoitza harrituta nago espezie arrunt eta zabal hauek babesteko erabakiak, nahiz eta FWSk beraiek adierazten dutenean “ez dago frogarik”.
NABAri dagokionez, teknikoki zuzena zarela uste dut. Erakundeak ez du inoiz ofizialki inprimatu edo eskatu bilketaren aurkako sentimendurik. Anekdotikoki esan dezaket noizean behin tximeletak biltzen nituen habitatetik sutsuki atzeman ninduten NABA begiraleekin topo egin dudala.. Jakina, bilketa-jale gehiago ezagutzen ditut etsaiak baino, baina anekdota labur bat besterik ez da nire susmoak piztu dituena.
Elkarteko presidentea zarenez eta NABAk eta zuk zeuk NABAko presidente gisa onartutako liburuak inprimatu dituzunez, zure iritzia hartuko dut NABAren jarrera ofizial gisa.. Zuzenean zure tximeletagana joatea adierazten duzun Ekialdeko Prismatikoen bidez: “Bilketa-presioak tximeleta kolonial arraro baten desagerpena eragiten ez badu ere, hiltzen den gizabanako bakoitzak gene multzoa agortzea dakar, and this loss of genetic diversity becomes more important as the colony becomes smaller.” Aside from being factually misleading, this statement is preceded by reports of collectors wiping out the Mitchell’s Satyr (which is still not extinct). I see this as a very anti-science and anti-collecting agenda. The book continues on with vast generalizations regarding taxonomy and the Linnaean nomenclature system, none of which help support your “raison d’être” of conversation.
I know I grew up collecting butterflies and it helped me grow into a naturalist and scientist. While watching is a great activity, I do not see evidence for the support of science by NABA.
The most convincing evidence however might be especially relevant and poignant here. Your 2001 editorial in American Butterflies (a NABA publication) brags about your leverage of sensitive habitat localities of the Miami Blue over FWS in an attempt to force their hand in protection
Chris, Pare bat aldiz irakurri dut hau eta oraindik ez nago ziur zergatik zauden hain harrotuta zerrenda federalaren inguruan. Legezko maniobra gisa ikusten dut ehiza-biltzaileen atzetik joatea, batez ere nazioarteko mailan. Mafia-buruak zerga-iruzurrengatik nola harrapatzen dituzten konparazioen ikuspegia dut, frogarik ez duten hilketak baino.. Ikusi al dituzu tximeleta batzuek jasotzen dituzten prezioak? Ironia da zerrendak ziurrenik tximeleten merkatu beltzeko balioa handituko duela eta horiek ez direla webguneetan erakutsiko. Oker nago, baina biltzea helburu zientifikoetarako bada, permits can still be issued for endangered species.
As for NABA, I always thought their main goal was promoting awareness and conservation of butterflies; there are other organizations that focus on the scientific aspects, like the Lepidopterists’ Gizartea. To that end, Jeffrey and his BtB books, particularly his 1993 first edition, have done a good job at making butterflies more accessible to the general public. Before Peterson came out with his bird guide, enthusiasts shot and stuffed birds just to identify them. That’s unthinkable today and look how popular (and lucrative) birding has become. Collecting will always have a place in the scientific world, but I’d like to believe there’s a growing culture of naturalists who don’t have to kill or collect in order to appreciate and be well-informed.
Pena NABAko kideekin duzun esperientziagatik. Beti daude edozein erakunderekin lotutako frikiak. Nire herriko monarka taldearekin lotzeari uko egiten diot, norbanako bokal gutxi batzuk direlako, asmo onekoa, berriz, askotan, jaso duten desinformazioan oinarrituta emozionalki salatzaileak izaten dira. Badakizu bat dagoela $1000 ondo dago hemen monarka bat molestatzen harrapatzen bazaitu? Txantxetan esan dut hiriak diru asko irabazi dezakeela etiketatzea urtero egiten denean.
Gaiak kezkatzen nau, ez dagoelako benetako ehiza arazo bat eta bildumazaleak inolako arrazoirik gabe gaiztotzen ari direlako. FWS-ek bere buruari diotenez, ez dago ebidentziarik Miami Bluerentzat poza arazo bat dela onartzen duen ideia. Geroztik egoera arriskuan dago 2002 eta ez da saskizale bat ere ikusi. Anecdotally I have never even heard of someone catching or wanting to catch a Miami Blue. I am also a tiny bit bothered by your comparison of butterfly collectors to mob bosses. 99% of the fear of butterfly collectors is fear mongering with zero evidence to support it. The fact is, there has never been an instance of a collector making a butterfly extinct. If you drive a car – you will kill orders magnitude more butterflies every year than you could possibly dream of catching with a net.
Of course there is a sizable trade in butterflies, Papilio and Ornithoptera in particular fetch these obscene prices and I’ve even blogged about it before. But those prices do not reflect the rarity of a species, but often only of a specimen – they are usually natural hybrids, babestu ezin daitekeen edo babestu behar ez diren ginandromorfoak edo kolore-aberrazioak. Oraindik ere ehunka edo milaka dolar batzuk lortzen dituzten tximeletak daude, baina hori basatian harrapatzeko zaila dela eta (mendi tontorrean edo gerra-eremu batean). Lycaenidae-en benetako merkataritzarik ez dagoela ere ulertu behar duzu (urdina). Ez dago nazioarteko presiorik blues hauek existentziatik kentzeko – horregatik ez da inoiz bildumagilerik harrapatu nahian. Scahus-en Swallowtailak, ordea, nazioarteko merkatua izango luke – baina FWS-k ere ekusketa-adibide bakarra atera dezake.
Beti daude sagar txar bat edo bi eta ez dut inolako erreparorik espezie bat arriskuan jartzeko eta legez kanpoko biltzearen aurka.. Baina babestuz “antzekoa” species that honestly look nothing like the MBB to save it from collecting is absurd. A poacher “claiming” to catch a common blue that has a Miami blue in their net could have been prosecuted before this similarity law. It’s very easy to tell these species apart in the field. The butterfly collecting community is small in the first place, and the number of the people who are breaking the laws to collect is a tiny fraction of this community. There may be 10 people in the US who poach butterflies – do we really need to legislate against them?
The most important thing here is that insects are not birds – the population dynamics are so vastly different that laws governing them in the same manner are absurd. Insects have vastly larger populations, lay orders of magnitude more eggs, and live for only a few weeks of the year. When you net a male butterfly in the field 9 times out of 10 he has already mated with one or more females. A female butterfly has deposited most of her eggs by time she is caught on the wing. I often catch females hoping for eggs and only get a handful if any of the many dozens she has already laid in nature.
Collecting plays an important role in butterfly education and identification beyond the scientific realm. For many species you can not accurately identify them without collecting a series of specimens of both sexes. I see no point in butterfly lists that watchers generate since many of their identifications are likely to be inaccurate and there is no method for fact checking (if you’re a birder you know the problems with false ID’s). Even a good photograph can only be identified with 100% accuracy 3/4 of the time.
I never want to be part of a state in which school children are not allowed to collect butterflies – and now kids in Florida can’t catch the abundant blues that are on every flower in their back yard. The vast majority of insect collections in museums are not made by research scientists, but by hobbyists. I grew up collecting butterflies because it was fun, not because I was a 10 year old researcher. My hobby developed into a passion, a career and into science. I don’t have a problem with watching, I think it’s great, and I think NABA has managed to raise “awareness”. However I fail to see how conservation can be achieved when it is not based in science. People are being mislead into thinking non-scientific collecting (and all collecting) is evil and it is doing the entire scientific community a disservice.
Now, that is a better argument than your post, Chris. Haha, I’m sorry I mentioned mob bosses. My point was that there are crimes that are near impossible to find evidence, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. What prosecutors have done is go after something that can be caught, like tax evasion or in this case obvious commercial trade of similarly looking butterflies. At the very least they’re now armed with a law that can allow them to collect evidence. I think there’s more to the story of why USFWS (not NABA) enacted the emergency listing that’s not obvious. And I’m certain it’s not to vilify collectors like you or school children.
I had a collection as a kid and it consisted of mostly cabbage whites and grasshoppers. I ended up publishing a study that collected half a million moth specimens over the course of 10 years and curated a museum collection that consisted mostly of private donations. I also know a couple people who have turned entire bedrooms or utility rooms in their homes to house their collections. I hope they will eventually leave their collections at institutions that will preserve their efforts. There is tremendous value in collecting, if properly documented and cared for.
With that said, the majority of people out there do not get into collecting or science. They simply don’t have the patience or interest. Here’s where I think NABA has played an important role in increasing awareness of an animal that many people simply never notice. Not everyone is like you, Chris. I see public interest and education as the main point of butterfly counts, not necessarily accurate identifications. Arren, many species can be statistically evaluated over the long-term from these annual counts. Get the public interested in the diversity of pretty butterflies, then they’re more inclined to see the value in protecting habitats, not to mention donating money to institutions that support jobs like the one you have and I have had. Here, ere bai, is value in simply watching butterflies. Be careful of biting the hand that feeds you.
I still fail to see how this is like going for tax evasion or how it helps to gather more evidence – either a miami blue is poached or not (and I’m not arguing against the possibility of this happening). I see this more like changing the law to make impersonating Marlon Brando equal to murder just so you can go after the mob bosses. They can’t find anyone poaching therefore they make collecting a common and abundant species illegal – shazam – now you can find more evidence because you just created it. Go figure.
NABA didn’t and couldn’t enact any laws of course, but they did petition for the listing of the Miami Blue, both in 2000 eta 2010 (their petition resulted in this declaration). Nowhere in the records have I found the request to include the other species, but there is no denying that NABA is an anti-collecting organization that has direct ties to this new law… perhaps they just planted the seed.
I’m all about public education but just not at the expense of science. I know almost no one has the time nor will ever care enough to become a citizen-scientist. But NABA is on one hand generating public awareness and participation which is great – but on the other hand making it much harder for scientists to actually do their job (getting chased out of habitat). Just think about grad students/PI’s working with blues in Florida now have to go through the ESA which is a true nightmare – a bureaucratic road block that even NABA had a really hard time fighting through (or heck anyone working on ANY insect in florida could now face the ESA because their project might impact the habitat of this ABUNDANT and widespread species that literally occurs everywhere).
I would be a full supporter of NABA if they didn’t foster an anti-collecting environment – heck I have even participated in NABA butterfly counts (with a net though).
A program that I do fully support is the Lepidopterists’ Gizartea “Outernet Project” – with the goal of putting nets in kids hands. http://www.lepsoc.org/education.php
The real endangered species here is the butterfly collector. I do not have a problem with people taking photographs of butterflies. NABA and the Lepidopterist Society both share a common interest and appreciation of the subject with perhaps different objectives. Habitat distruction, wide spread use of pesticides, herbicides and the whole sale plantings of vineyards here in California and habitat loss due to urbanization in Florida have played a far greater role in the demise of all butterfly populations then a billion butterfly poachers could have. I myself was embroiled in a famous case entitled Crimes of Passion and was labled a butterfly poacher by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. For the record, most Ornithoptera or birdwing butterflies are rather common but have had blanket protection due to the U.S.F.W.S. lack of expertise seperating common species from rare or endangered ones which would also apply to the three species of blues in Florida. Another case is the Apollo butterfly which has as wide a range of distribution from Norway to Mongolia south to Spain and Turkey being included in C.I.T.E.S. Another flaw with the endangered species act while well intended is actually missapplied to sub species. American museums are poorer institutions because exchanging butterflies is considered a comerical venture as something of value is received for something sent or offered. While you ponder why you see fewer butterflies each year or the fact that tropical rain forest decrease by the year, please enjoy your wine !
I feel that we as lep collectors seem to take the blame for bugs going extinct, yet the law enforcement groups don’t go after developers that want to change good habitat into strip malls or parking lots. But a guy waving a net is the enemy? Right. I was in Afghanistan and I have seen some very good places to collect Parnassius and other leps. Hell, I’ve been on patrol in them and have seen some nice stuff flying around. I could of caught a couple if I wanted to, but there are ambushes, mines, and IED’s waiting in many areas there. Now, if there is someone who really wants an A1 Parnassius chaltonius or meutingi, and isn’t scared to get killed, captured, tortured, or blown up, then they can go there and collect these “rare” akatsak. At the same time, now I’m home and have plans to go enjoy my hobby and have a couple of projects to do, and the last thing I want to deal with is some people trying to stop me from catching bugs. I had this happen before deployment in a park in central tennessee, where there was a couple that decided that I was a poacher for collecting zebra swallowtails, Tiger swallowtails, and some common nymphalids, went to the ranger and tried to get me kicked out of the park. Luckily the ranger knew that I was collecting, and that I have a permit that year to collect in state parks. I just hope I don’t have people try to stop me this year.
You state that no butterfly has ever been collected to extinction. Hala ere, there is a well known example from the UK where it was a day-flying moth. The New Forest Burnet moth had an unique subsepeies in the New Forest which created as a “New” hunting forest by King William I who came to the throne in 1066. The moth had its exctinction predicted by the collectors of the day in the 1920s . There was heavy commercial collecting with collectors patrolling the sites looking for newly emerged adults. It duly became extinct.
Horrez gain, it is basic science that predation affects populations. So it is therefroe reasonable that we should prevent predation of endangered species. We do know from the research that it is possible to collect most of the specimens of a butterfly from small colonies easily.
Here is one of several examples from the literature
The following is an excerpt from a published paper. The Ecology and Conservation of the Heath Fritillary Butterfly, Mellicta athalia. II. Adult
Population Structure and Mobility by M. baina beste askok ez dute hori argi. Warren Journal of Applied Ecology, Vol. 24, Ez. 2 (Aug., 1987), pp. 483-498
“The possible impact of collectors on M. athalia populations
Several authors (beraz, ezin dut esan. Frohawk 1934) have suggested that over-collecting may have led to the decline of M. athalia in some areas, but they produce little evidence to support this. The possible impact of collectors can be examined by calculating the proportion of the adult population caught in one day of intensive catching (hau da. the maximum collectable proportion) during the mark-recapture experiments. Emaitzak, plotted on Fig. 8, show that the proportion caught was closely related to the population size itself and ranged from 4 to 94%”
If you can collect 94% of the butterflies in a colony you can certainly drive it to extinction.