|
|
Post by scanner on Feb 13, 2019 19:35:46 GMT -8
I'd like to start a conversation about the ethics of insect collecting. I fully agree with the stance of most professional entomologists that collections are ultimately not hurtful to populations and very valuable to science, however, as an amateur, I intend (to the best of my ability) to only collect my captive insects once they have died naturally. My personal reason for collecting is educational. I want to learn all that I can from observing the animals in life as well as creating a reference to them in death. If all goes well, I intend to donate my collection in hopes that it will do some good for conservationists, teachers, and other scientists in the future. As for amateurs "collecting" individuals in the wild: I understand that it usually does little to no harm to a population, but should the individual animal be factored into this equation? Do we replace the value of life with the value of a collection? I hope I have not upset anyone with this post and I want to make clear that I have no objection to scientific collecting be it professional or amateur, I only want to start a civil discussion because I think it is important and I would love to know what the perspective of the community is. Thanks for all the responses in advance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by LEPMAN on Feb 13, 2019 20:35:19 GMT -8
I think that often butterflies take this center in anti-collecting discussions due to their beautiful wings. I’ve never heard of any anti-fly or anti-cockroach collecting arguments. Regarding replacing the value of the butterfly life... I haven’t really indulged in such thoughts... I wonder if all the butterfly eating bats, birds, spiders, the list goes on have thought about this. I’m sure the animals mentioned out do any human in collecting efforts.
|
|
|
|
Post by scanner on Feb 13, 2019 20:40:16 GMT -8
I don't disagree with you at all in that other factors take away more individuals from a population than humans do in regards to collecting, and I wasn't only referring to butterflies but all insects. I was just interested in facilitating a discussion about ethics regarding the individual life intentionally taken to add to a collection.
|
|
|
|
Post by africaone on Feb 13, 2019 22:52:21 GMT -8
This a little hypocrite for some reasons (in fact many more)
- first your aim is not the same as others and tools are obviously different. You can't compare. Killing for educational purpose or study purpose or professional is not different.
- If your are really concerned by insect death, stop to use your car (the biggest insect killer), to use use chemicals, to use any object related to biotopes destructions or mutation, stop to use petroleum or coal, etc. etc. etc. etc. In one word, return to the biological place for the human, an animal as all others without any artefacts.
Of course, it is impossible to do and everybody has to do with a selfshecking behaviour adapted to his own ethic and aims (and laws).
Some people uses (burnt, destroys) very much more than others the planet ressources and it is strange that the lesson came especially from them.
Millions of insects are killed or die every minutes in nature in accordance with a natural and biological balance. There is no balance between the some thousands insects killed dayly for entomology and the millionssss dayly killed because of human activity and avidity.
If you feel guilty of killing insects, do not like these people who will confess at the church to relieve themselves and continue to sin quietly without changing anything.
|
|
|
|
Post by LEPMAN on Feb 14, 2019 2:24:37 GMT -8
I don't disagree with you at all in that other factors take away more individuals from a population than humans do in regards to collecting, and I wasn't only referring to butterflies but all insects. I was just interested in facilitating a discussion about ethics regarding the individual life intentionally taken to add to a collection. I think I’m the face af all anti collecting media we as a group are constantly facing (plus harassment at individual level). It will be might challenging for you to carry out a friendly discussion! Ofc we as a group are also biased. |
|
|
|
Post by luehdorf on Feb 14, 2019 3:14:21 GMT -8
Well, if you really think it through till the end, if you want to save the climate and completely protect the environment and all its animals, what’s the best thing to do?
I always read articles about, don’t take flights, it’s the biggest CO2 source an individual can cause, then don’t use a car, etc. In the end you should just sit in a cave and limit your food to plants etc.
The mere existence of a human is already harmful in every way to nature. So I always tell my “progressive-liberal” friends, of whom there are not many left, because I don’t like to waste my time, with such discussions, the only true thing to save the climate as a atheiste liberal person is to just do the right thing and kill yourself.
The solution to it all: no carbondioxide, no waste, no animals hurt or killed anymore. Let’s see how many of these progressive people really take “saving the climate” seriously.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by mothman27 on Feb 14, 2019 3:48:50 GMT -8
With any issue, doing a small service is still useful and you don't necessarily need to solve the problem single-handedly. It shouldn't stop you from doing anything at all. However on this topic I disagree. Personally, I believe insects are part of God's creation and they were put here partially for our enjoyment. Therefore I collect insects because I think they are amazing and I genuinely enjoy the hobby.
"The mere existence of a human is already harmful in every way to nature
"
I don't even know what to say to this. Are humans not nature?
|
|
leptraps
Banned
Enter your message here...
Posts: 2,397
|
Post by leptraps on Feb 14, 2019 4:52:14 GMT -8
I am going to make this a very simple comparison.
Republicans = Collectors
Democrats = Watchers
Need I say anymore?
|
|
|
|
Post by luehdorf on Feb 14, 2019 6:48:23 GMT -8
mothman27 this was very cynical and satirical of course. I hope you don’t misunderstand me, I am in line with everyone here, and I absolutely agree with you. We are part a part of nature, and we should protect it but we can also enjoy it. A while ago a read this news in the UK about a “bird lover” who saw how a duckling was eaten by a heron, then grabbed the heron and ripped open its stomach to save the duckling.... Some people just don’t understand how nature works.
|
|
|
|
Post by exoticimports on Feb 14, 2019 7:50:07 GMT -8
If one has captive specimens, they have already been "collected." The fact that they may be alive temporarily is immaterial since they are not in the wild. Thus, there is no "natural end" and whether they are killed upon eclosing or allowed to die is immaterial. One might question if it's ethical to keep live specimens, particularly by a novice, due to lack of proper care.
Is it ethical to kill a living butterfly? Unless one is vegan and an observant Bhuddist who won't kill even a mosquito, any "no" answer is pure hypocracy. Leftwing dingbats who argue it is unethical to kill a deer yet will kill a mosquito or wasp nest are hypocrites. Citing "accidental death" as a result of autos or housing development is hypocracy. Citing that some insects might be dangerous (eg wasps) thus it's OK to kill but not OK to kill an innocent butterfly are without reason, relying on the same flawed logic of those "thought police" who want to ban guns or activities based on what might, just possibly might, happen.
Ethics are a matter of perspective. It's only a question of if one's ethics are based in logic and reason, or freewheeling biochemical imbalance in the brain.
Chuck
|
|
|
|
Post by LEPMAN on Feb 14, 2019 17:10:21 GMT -8
Unless one is vegan and an observant Bhuddist who won't kill even a mosquito, any "no" answer is pure hypocracy. Chuck I think even that is not enough to stop collecting. When I was collecting in Tibet our local guide helped me collect- despite being Buddhist. You can learn more about this in the thread: collector-secret.proboards.com/thread/2053/holy-tibetan-butterflies-moths |
|
|
|
Post by Paul K on Feb 14, 2019 17:16:30 GMT -8
Unless one is vegan and an observant Bhuddist who won't kill even a mosquito, any "no" answer is pure hypocracy. Chuck I think even that is not enough to stop collecting. When I was collecting in Tibet our local guide helped me collect- despite being Buddhist. You can learn more about this in the thread: collector-secret.proboards.com/thread/2053/holy-tibetan-butterflies-mothsBuddhists do eat insects and other animals, my wife she is one and she doesn't have problem with me to collect. They rather believe in: don't kill if it is not necessary to survive, but in my case it is necessary to kill insects in order to survive other than for eating purpose. |
|
|
|
Post by LEPMAN on Feb 14, 2019 17:23:46 GMT -8
Buddhists do eat insects and other animals, my wife she is one and she doesn't have problem with me to collect. Should have specified- Tibetan Buddhism does not say anything about eating meat- only personally taking lives. Just because they don’t kill dosent mean they will be upset about collecting- the surprising detail i mentioned is theTibetan guide helping me collect - the action of catching and killing butterflies would be condemned as a sin in Tibetan culture and Buddhist religion. Paul- with all do respect. I don’t know where you got the idea that I was saying Buddhists don’t eat - because they certainly do indulge in yak milk and meat. |
|
|
|
Post by LEPMAN on Feb 14, 2019 17:24:55 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul K on Feb 14, 2019 17:38:53 GMT -8
Buddhists do eat insects and other animals, my wife she is one and she doesn't have problem with me to collect. Should have specified- Tibetan Buddhism does not say anything about eating meat- only personally taking lives. Just because they don’t kill dosent mean they will be upset about collecting- the surprising detail i mentioned is theTibetan guide helping me collect - the action of catching and killing butterflies would be condemned as a sin in Tibetan culture and Buddhist religion. Paul- with all do respect. I don’t know where you got the idea that I was saying Buddhists don’t eat - because they certainly do indulge in yak milk and meat. Ed, I was referring to Chuck's statement. Buddhist they don't take life if it is not necessity, in our case it is so problem solved  |
|
