Nova off torcularibus, Miami Blue Butterfly (XXXIV) est nunc audio ut periclitatur federally et per actum est de subitis provisum. Huzzah! (dextra?)
Miami Blue Butterfly ex Butterflies of America
Mea prima cogitatio fuit, “exspecto, hoc non erat iam periclitatur?”. Etiam, Evenit XXXIV status est cum periculo laborantium 2002 post priorem casum petitione facta ab North American Associationem Butterfly (Also). Et ista est mensura videbatur hoc comprehendat, quia non alibi est papilio in USA. An maximus, in particulari, et non proficient: quia non vident aliquod verum in damnum alterius sexus federally papilio. Florida Keys certus auxilium in omni possit etiam ex uncia, seruans environment.
Ut interpretatio sit teleologia, in Miami Puteulanus (Thomas Cyclargus bethunebakeri) extensio est a range of a lateribus aquilonis, quod species communiter per Caribbean. Caeterum an advecti elit vere propriam ipsius species non satis digna est quia non sum appellare plus mihi videor in modico amet papilio. Et species multum a ratione totius, fugiunt, sed heus, EGO coniecto illa papilio guys opus quod facere! Ridiculum etiam videtur rationabile, quod ad me influxuum migraiidi blues naturaliter mutare in abunde ad australem litora Floridae. Primo MCML scriptor multiplex insectorum et descendit ad litora fere totam civitatem. Postremus 60 excurrit, annos, qui crudeliter in Florida – quod prius esse solebas, et progressum CULEX peremptionem: quoniam vastabitur habitat pristinam. Omnes papilionum patimini.
Hoc itaque mihi visum est aliquid, valde odd de hoc nuntio: cautum est de subitis quoque quicquid sexus est omnes similiter agnus qui habitat cum XXXIV share quod imminebat et custodiebat! Quare? Quia respice sicut MBB. Haec includit Cassius hyacintho blues (Cassius Leptotes), Hyacintho Ceraunus (Hemiargus Ceraunus), et hyacintho Nickerbean (Cyclargus ammon). Veni, inebriemus unum recta – non modo Cassii et agnus Ceraunus in actu, nec etiam ei immineret aut rarus. Possunt esse utraeque – abundant species incredibiliter Currere cum range omnia Carribbean, sinum litus maris et mediterraneis agris ad California ad midwest!
Quaero igitur,, Quomodo haec se habent, transierunt?
Gary Larson, Absit autem Side
Heu mihi, quia os Domini locutum – timor mongering afferentur tibi in North America Butterfly Consociationis colligendis communitatis funditus anti-. NABA percipiat ad summum periculum of colligendis quasi unus papilio populatio quae quamvis incredibile defectum moventium. Etiam, Omnis collector ibi ex malo est ludat niger amiculum, et facit vitam illorum opera extinguere ex pulchritudine mundi. Ista enim persuasum habent aliqua habent punctum USFWS. Non possum hoc praescripto iustitiae, sic hic est exigere quote.
Autem, Famulatus autem ad ferendam 4(d*) prohibitionibus, de quibus in specie, ex speciali regula ad statuam collection commercial et trade in the United States. Haec actio etiam in in important de prohibitione, et ex export, Civitatum Foederatarum tres similiter papiliones. Et incursum etiam alias legitimo activities qui may his similia, sic ut papilionibus legal usu pesticides, tonsionem, et usus non prohibentur vehiculum. Porrectum, interdictionibus collection, possessionem, et tres similiter trade in papiliones providebit maior ad praesidium in Miami, blue.
Im 'vere mutus. Euge, curare potero, paucis adhuc fortasse.
Perge quo cupis, et metendo vestra patch of habitat in ea, et imbre herbicide. Sed melius non audeat ad colligunt unum caeruleum… ad eum spectat USFWS.
Et conversus ad esse, sed etiam paranoid. Certus, quondam in a dum fit Poaching nec species serves. Si cibus aut quaestus, pauci odd quoque fuga palantes, et animalium,. Sed verum est testimonium sustinere gradu amentia? Et plerique sunt ex causis de citationibus in registrarium, recensuit Diariis non paris-.
determinavit de ministerio, quod designatio habitat discrimine pro Miami hyacintho papilio est, eo quod non esset evulgaret maps et descriptiones in discrimine areas habitat late annuntiandum exigere situm ad papilionem contendamus, collectores, et ulterius faciliorem omni perturbatióne, ac Vandalorum ac interitum habitat papilio scriptor.
O ego diligimus quotes: (fons)
indicat, sed etiam non constat an notitia collectio current vel praeteritum adgreditur hyacintho Miami (FWC 2010, p. 13)… Quamvis non testem iniuriae collectio hyacintho Miami, nos autem testimonium illegal collectio ex aliis papiliones in regiones Federal meridiem Florida …
…Idem duo exempla praebet aliis papiliones situ similis erat aspectui hyacintho Miami; de hyacintho Ceraunus currently vendit pro € 4.00 ($5.57), cassius hyacintho et est available pro € 2.50-10.00 ($3.48-$13.93).
… Igitur, Quando quidem fieri potest, ut species colligere similia auctoritate magistri imprudenter (seu ex proposito) Miami colligere hyacintho papilio rati, petere aut meditaretur putaverunt, de hyacintho cassius, hyacintho nickerbean, aut hyacintho Ceraunus
Dont 'adepto mihi iniuriam – rarum genus maiori Donec et praesidio videretur, non habitat, dum servatur. Videtur autem genus plerumque captivam pecuniam in quaestionibus, quae tendunt ad bonum dubie multum. Si papilio abit ex insulis tunc exsolveret nubibus solum ea faciunt satis quidem a photographs et non salvari species.
Moneo ego et tu fac similiter exhibenda sollicitatus comment. Comment huc ante October 11, 2011: Foederatum eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Sequere mandatis pro exhibenda ad NOTA No comments. [R4 FWS--ES, 2011-0043]. Aut scribere: NOBIS.. manus-mail aut traditio: Public vestibulum Comments, Attn: No Docket. [R4 FWS--ES, 2011-0043]; Policy and Management Divisio Ordinationibus; NOBIS.. Pisces et Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Coegi, PDM-MS MMXLII; Arlington, will 22203..
Mr Cara. Grinter,
Ut a scientist, Certe qui solent ante data constanter exspectant supportantes. Et hoc quod est omnino in North American Associationem Butterfly colligendis anti-. Et hoc quidem ponere non est inconveniens,. Si spectas 20 years of publications NABA, fere colligendis omnino mentionem non videbitis! Also, et omnis qui in locum a duce cum NABA, cum rem nullam dubitationem colligendis papiliones in scientia. Ego erat a professio scientist (sicut in pluribus aliis locis in ductu NABA), operando ad Stanford University Medical University School et ad Rockefeller. Ego certe in inquisitionis scientificae! In addition NABA s Scientific Cœtus, Nat ex Hollandia (Rice University), Pierce Noemi (Harvard University), Robertus Robbins (NOBIS.. National Museum), Ron Rutilio Namaziano (Arizona State University), John Shuey (Natura Conservancy) Williams et Ernest (Hamilton College), prioris aliqua papiliones qui operabantur in eros blandit.
Quid facere non NABA, is cohortatus investigationibus scientificis ex quibus praeter papiliones in American,) qui non est ut phisicis (quod est fere omnibus) et accedunt ad papiliones binoculars cameras. Utpote Binoculars cameras et evenerit ingens hominum numerus augeatur in papilionibus et periculose amet augmentum cognitionis nostrae papiliones et evenerit,, potissimum, in viribus conservare incrementum in papilionibus.
Quoad Miami Blues, non erat qui NABA interrogavit USFWS Ceraunus, et Cassius, ut etiam enumerare Blues. Et ego, neque quemquam ad NABA, dictum, nec tantum credere, quod ibi maximi metu incolarum papilio est collectores.
Sincere,
Jeffrey Glassberg, Auribus credentium filiorum hominum.
Praeses: Also
M.. Glassberg – Ad mea comment Lorem vacat ad captionem et ad temperationem aliquam opinor. Dum non est dicendum quod directe NABA petivisset USFWS enumerare Ceraunus Cassius et agnus, Quomodo possum intelligere, tunc recte diceretur. Quam mihi veniebant in registro mysterium, pacem mittere in terram, et factus sum conturbatus iudicio tueri rem publicam se communes et diffusum species, etiam quando FWS “non est indicio,”.
Ad rationem rectam NABA credo sunt technice. Organizationis, quae nunquam typis publice coactis aut posceret aliquid anti-sententia. Anecdotally possum dicere quod ego sum aliquoties occurrit NABA qui custodes venatione ceperunt me vehementer a litigante quod habitat a colligendis papiliones. Scio multos colligendos Naturaliter magis quam hostium excursiones custodes vigilum-amica, sed iusta suspicione mea facta brevi ensem.
Praeses societatis es et librorum et munita NABA te praeside NABA tollam sententiam NABA publicum statum de. Euntes directe ad Orientem Butterflies per Binoculars dicas: “Etiam cum id non outright collection pressure in dimissione rara coloniae papilio, occidit consequitur quisque in gene piscinam deperditionem, et hoc fit maius damnum geneticae diversitatem sicut colonia minorem fore.” Seorsum a esse duco factually, hoc dictum est, post fama, Satyrorum scriptor collectores abolitus Mitchell (quae exstincta non est). Hoc video sicut anti-ipsum et anti-science colligendis 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
Ordo Equitum Solis, I’ve read through this a couple times now and I’m still not sure why you’re so up in arms about the federal listing. I see it as a legal maneuver to go after the poachers, especially on an international level. I have visions of comparisons to how mob bosses are nabbed for tax evasion rather than murders of which there is no evidence. Did you see the prices some butterflies fetch? The irony is that listing will probably increase the black market value of the butterflies and those won’t be shown on websites. I may be mistaken, but if collecting is for scientific purposes, 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’ Societatis. 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.
Too bad about your experience with NABA members. There are always freaks associated with any organization. I refuse to associate myself with my town’s monarch group, because a few vocal individuals, while good-intentioned, often get emotionally accusatory based on misinformation they’ve picked up. You know there’s a $1000 fine if you’re caught molesting a monarch here? I’ve joked that the city could make a lot of money when tagging is done every year.
The topic bothers me because there simply isn’t a real poaching problem and collectors are being vilified for no reason whatsoever. The FWS say themselves there is no evidence to support the idea that poaching is a problem for the Miami Blue. It has been state endangered since 2002 and not one poacher has been seen. 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, gynandromorphs or color aberrations that are nothing that can nor should be protected. There are still butterflies that fetch hundreds or even a few thousand dollars, but this is due to the difficult to catch in the wild (either on a mountain top or in a war-zone). You also have to understand that there is no real trade in the Lycaenidae (agnus). There is no international pressure to poach these blues out of existence – this is why no collector has ever been caught trying to do so. The Scahus’s Swallowtail however would have an international market – but even FWS can only come up with one example of poaching.
There are always one or two bad apples and I have no qualms against making a species endangered and collecting illegal. But protecting “similar” 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, Ordo Equitum Solis. 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, Ordo Equitum Solis. I see public interest and education as the main point of butterfly counts, not necessarily accurate identifications. etiamsi, 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. Hic, etiam, 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. Vade figuram.
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 et 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’ Societatis “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” bugs. 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. Autem, 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.
Ceterum, 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. S. Warren Journal of Applied Ecology, Vol. 24, nullum. 2 (Aug., 1987), pp. 483-498
“The possible impact of collectors on M. athalia populations
Several authors (e.g*. 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 (i.e.. the maximum collectable proportion) during the mark-recapture experiments. Eventus, 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.