|
Post by lepidofrance on Jul 10, 2011 5:33:16 GMT -8
Do not mix all questions (even the ironic mode) and do not advocate a return to the days before the Neolithic revolution! Citing soybeans and oil palm, I refer to the current deforestation, over vast areas. Crop development of tea, coffee and cacaco has made since the eighteenth century (since the sixteenth century, if we add the sugar cane). In fact, the coffee has contributed to the disappearance of forests in Brazil. But these are the realities of the past over which we have no control. While it is possible to oppose the spread of oil palm and soy su. Not to mention the differences in ecological effects: there is always a lot of butterflies around Loxicha Candelaria (Mexico), area of ​​cultivation of coffee and cocoa (because these cultures do not always total deforestation). Same thing with cocoa in Papua: I saw flying Papilio ulysses and Papilio lorquinianus close to the cocoa in Arfak. By cons, where large companies planting oil palm (Borneo, for example) or soybeans (Brazil), other vegetation disappears (and animals too)! Not to speak about eucalyptus plantations in Brazil. Attached picture : landscape in Kalimantan (Borneo) by Timothy Boucher. Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by lucanidae25 on Jul 10, 2011 16:53:05 GMT -8
NO, everybody only know about soybeans and oil palm deforestation but no one knows about tea, coffee and cocoa are expanding just as quick. I'm not talking about disappearance of forests in the past, I'm talking about expansion of deforestation due to the needs of population growth. This is just tea I'm talking about. I've seen frist hand with the oil palm deforestation in Sabah Borneo and tea plantation expansions in Xishuangbanna Yunnan China. Xishuangbanna has the best sub-tropical rain forest in China. The locals want to clear all the forests to be ready for more tea plantations due to growth of need of tea. My point is all these happening because the need to consume more as a human being. If we all just comsume less with every single person in this world, then we can reduce the need of consumion with our natural resources. Here is an example of the deforestation last year due to tea expansion in Xishuangbanna. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by lepidofrance on Jul 11, 2011 0:07:37 GMT -8
I was too in Xichuangbanna last August. There deforestation is not only for tea. As far I know, it's mostly for heveas. So, looking at the lanscape, one can see forests but they are not true forests (with a biological great diversity), they are rubber trees plantations ! Almost everywhere ! Sad ! On this picture I took north of Jinghong, this is not a natural forest but hevea culture. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by lucanidae25 on Jul 11, 2011 2:09:39 GMT -8
Around Jinghong most of the areas at lowlands were cleared a long time ago. Yes, rubber trees plantations are everywhere but they were only replaceing farm lands. The areas I'm talking about are the hightlands around 1400 M where there are still a lot of parimary rainforests and that is the areas are only best for tea plantations. No matter which products we are talking about, we just need to comsume less of everything in our life as an individual. I'm doing my part as an indiviual to eat or drink or comsume less of everything in my life. Another photo of the deforestation of parimary rainforest to make way for tea plantations in Xishuangbanna. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by lucanidae25 on Jul 11, 2011 2:15:05 GMT -8
These are definitely parimary rainforests that I'm talking about. This area has never been collected by Western or Japanese before but it's disappearing very year due to timbers and tea. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by lepidofrance on Jul 12, 2011 11:09:52 GMT -8
Xichuangbanna, August 2010 : attached picture : pristine primary forest Noth of Jinghong, down the Manian waterfalls. Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by lepidofrance on Jul 12, 2011 11:44:17 GMT -8
and the rubber tree plantation, just one or two kilometers frm the former spot ! Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by lepidofrance on Jul 12, 2011 11:46:52 GMT -8
Here, we are in western Xichuangbanna. A thai village on the hill top. The area is totally deforested : tea on the top, rice down, corn and sugar cane in the middle. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by lucanidae25 on Jul 12, 2011 15:53:29 GMT -8
All I can say is resation is good for the environment.
|
|
|
Post by nostrodamus on Jul 18, 2011 10:42:28 GMT -8
In this case, this is a location of a species that can be found widely elsewhere. By cons, Erebia christi (the "Moiré du Simplon") exists in a Swiss valley and one or two Italian valleys nearby. If the collectors had the right to capture, the species would disappear
E. christi has been collected from many many years in the Laggin valley in Switzerland , nowdays it's forbidden to collect there , but the species is still flying there !! I don't think it would be extinct due to the nature of it's habitat (very steep slopes , unaccesible for men....) ..... David
|
|
|
Post by inopinatus on Jul 18, 2011 15:19:02 GMT -8
For me Erebia Christi is a perfect exemple of why we should protects biotops (and not really over collecting).
This species, discovered in 1882 and described in 1890, has always been considered as very rare. But it has been consistently collected for almost 100 years in its very restricted biotope... It did not disappear. A specificity worth noting is that the footplant is very very abundant and its certain that this butterflies has some strange strict ecological needs that we do not really understand yet. Then in 1982 and 1983 a road is enlarged in Laggin Valley on the biotope of the main (know) population... the population disappeared... Ooops... we have a problem... Ok lets just solve the problem and destroy the thermometer ... and in 1985 Butterfly hunting was forbidden in Laggin valley... *
The thing that makes me sad is that the very same people that decided to destroy the biotope with the road, have probably a good conscience thinking they did solve the problem with the ban. And now it is much more difficult to follow the evolution of the population in Switzerland even if several new population have been discovered.
|
|
|
Post by lepidofrance on Jul 19, 2011 2:20:27 GMT -8
In this paper : Contribution à la connaissance de la faune lépidoptérique du Val d’Ossola (Région du Piémont, Italie) : 1. – Nouvelles localités d’Erebia christi RÄTZER, 1890, espèce réputée rare (Lepidoptera : Nymphalidae, Satyrinae) (Xavier MERIT et Véronique MERIT) LépidoptèresRevue de l’ Association des Lépidoptéristes de France (ALF) Numéro 45 – Mai 2010 The author tells that he met Erebia christi in the Antrona Valley near Lake Campliccioli. Other biotops : Northern part of the Parco Naturale dell Alpe Veglia e dell Alpe Devero, and just South of the road from Domodossola to Simplon Pass (Bognanco). Inopinatus writes (I quote) : "The thing that makes me sad is that the very same people that decided to destroy the biotope with the road, have probably a good conscience thinking they did solve the problem with the ban. And now it is much more difficult to follow the evolution of the population in Switzerland even if several new population have been discovered." Things are too often alike ! I do agree ! Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by jackblack on Aug 25, 2011 3:17:54 GMT -8
Its all about big companies hitting 3rd world or countries with low overheads .These guys don`t give a damn about the environment , its all about making money . Sorry to say no matter what we little people say you cannot stop it.No way. I have given up hope on what goes on around me and figure the best I can do as a lone person is protect my rare 80acres of lowlands rainforest and that is by farming insects on it rather than chopping it down like many around me in the past. In Tasmania they woodchip old growth forest totally clear and then protect the flightless stag beetles that once lived there so a collectors can`t touch one . Us humans have the best logic/rationale !
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Dec 7, 2015 11:40:35 GMT -8
Has anybody seen E. christi in the Laggintal Valley? Yes it still occurs there but today it is very hard to find and there it is protected. Yes, perhaps it is good to have a series of a given species but there has to be limits, especially with rare species. Do you really need drawers full of the same butterfly? Yes they are not stamps and almost every specimen is different and a species could fill a cabinet to show its variation. A short series showing geographical variation from different localities and subspecies shows some meaning but a drawer or box full of the same species from the same location just shows a pretty spectacle.
|
|
|
Post by papiliotheona on Dec 10, 2015 14:44:04 GMT -8
For me Erebia Christi is a perfect exemple of why we should protects biotops (and not really over collecting). This species, discovered in 1882 and described in 1890, has always been considered as very rare. But it has been consistently collected for almost 100 years in its very restricted biotope... It did not disappear. A specificity worth noting is that the footplant is very very abundant and its certain that this butterflies has some strange strict ecological needs that we do not really understand yet. Then in 1982 and 1983 a road is enlarged in Laggin Valley on the biotope of the main (know) population... the population disappeared... Ooops... we have a problem... Ok lets just solve the problem and destroy the thermometer ... and in 1985 Butterfly hunting was forbidden in Laggin valley... * The thing that makes me sad is that the very same people that decided to destroy the biotope with the road, have probably a good conscience thinking they did solve the problem with the ban. And now it is much more difficult to follow the evolution of the population in Switzerland even if several new population have been discovered. The powers that be absolutely know better, it's just easier to scapegoat us than stand against the economic forces that run the countries of Europe.
|
|