|
|
Post by papilio28570 on Feb 28, 2015 22:11:09 GMT -8
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2015 6:39:18 GMT -8
Unless it as a very rare species with a extremely small range I cannot see the logic in how a insect can be driven to extinction by collecting. For one 99.8% of the population does not collect insects. If I drive down a road at night I don't see a light sheet in everybody's backyard with happy people pulling off specimens. I make a 60 mile round trip to work everyday. In the summer I hit at least 3 or 4 lepidoptera on accident of course with my truck. Now imagine all the people driving just in the state of illinois doing that every day for months. That's more lepidoptera than I would be able collect if thats all I did from sun up to sun down every day for the rest of my life and I plan on living a really long time! It's easy to blame a collector when the real reason is loss of habitat and the host plants that depend on it. Environmental extremists need to stop pointing fingers at those of us that really care about insects. That's my rant for the day.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Mar 1, 2015 9:53:14 GMT -8
The answer to that is there is no logic, but when did logic and pseudo-conservationism ever equate with one another?
It's just like the super-duper job that CITES does in protecting species and the environment (it's just a political DUPER).
Adam.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2015 14:31:41 GMT -8
Well said Mr. Cotton!
|
|
|
|
Post by exoticimports on Mar 2, 2015 7:11:13 GMT -8
Photos cannot make determinations in some cases. Recent case in point, cresphontes. There are many other situations when the original specimen(s) are required to make clear (and/or reclassified) determinations.
Clearly, collectors could wipe out a population. I'm not sure it's actually happened, but it could. Particularly amongst the unscrupulous (which you know exist) the opportunity exists to catch enough of the population to terminate it. This of course, is not always the case despite what CITES thinks- for example, all the collectors in the world could not wipe out O. Victoria.
The article makes the sad acknowledgement that collation and preservation is not keeping up with collecting even in USA and Europe. Newly identified species are coming out of papered museum material that is 10+ years old. Thus, one must question why there is additional collecting if the repositories cannot maintain the material.
One must also be suspect of the source of such consternation. Do not allow SPCA-type animal and forest freaks to claim to be environmentalists. True environmentalists recognize an absolute need for sampling, testing, and breeding. True environmentalists often have some sort of university education, even if not in the specific field of study in which they are employed. Rabid "environmentalists" are typically the lazy hippie types who really have no clue what they are talking about.
Then of course there are the environmentalists and their organizations that profit from rabid "environmentalism" so support it. Would Glassberg make as much money if he said he fully supported butterfly collecting? Of course not. So one must always seek the motivation- often financial motivation- of the supposed environmentalists. Likewise CITES and USFWS- the former being virtually useless while the latter well intended but focused on law enforcement rather than the actual goal.
I suspect that in my lifetime butterfly collecting, at least in USA and Europe, will be heavily controlled if not totally banned.
|
|
