Gem perfect Red Admrials

[Grkovich, Alex]

John,

Thank you for your comments, and I agree with you and I apologize if I have
offended anyone with MY comments. And I will say that I very much
appreciated the contact I had with both yourself and Bill Yule, for example,
earlier this spring when I first subscribed to the list, and I appreciated
your reponses to my having informed you that I DO collect butterflies (and
always have),  that "We have nothing against a person who tries to collects
responsibly". And by extension, I understood you (rightly) would obviously
HAVE something against someone who does not.

Well, so WOULD I and so DO I. I am certain, from having had contact over the
years with a lot of people who collect for the same reasons that I do
(because I am deeply interested in taxonomic study) that most collectors do
follow the Code of Conduct that was published by the Lepidopterists Society
about 20 years ago. I try to be very selective with what I do take; I try to
sample (and not deplete) specimens from an area, etc. I NEVER sell material
and have never even thought about collecting for profit, nor do I ever buy
it. Virtually all my specimens are my own; I have perhaps two dozen
specimens that were given to me by Paul Grey and Henry Hensel. I collect
out of scientific interest ONLY, an interest that has been with me since
prior to kindergarden. I also do not always collect when I go out; I go on
nature walks just as "watchers" do.

I respect people who collect out of an interest in science; I respect those
who I have communicated with recently who "watch" out of an interest in
science and out of a conviction to "leave nature in exactly the condition"
they found it, and to respect the Commandment of "Thou Shalt Not Kill."
However, I am sure that a watcher probably "watches" and does not collect,
primarily because he or she is simply not inspired to do so, while most
collectors collect precisely because they ARE inspired to do.

And also, there are people, who do not collect, who should try to understand
why some people do collect and are motivated to do so, and thus to avoid
just becoming "ANTI-COLLECTOR", possibly without understanding why. They
also need to remember that the idea of the "watcher" who is anti-collector
is a recent phenomenon, which did not exist during the time of Alexander B.
Klots. Also, that ALL of the great and noted Lepidopterists of the past, did
collect. To say that collecting is a "primitive urge", as was written in
"Butterflies thru Binoculars-the East", must be understood as being at least
unwarranted and misleading, unless there happens to be some published
medical basis for such a statement. This statement seems to me to be a
monstrous a slap in the face of contemporary Lepidopterists such as Klots,
Grey, Dos Passos etc.

Also to totally exclude the collector from any discussion and to act as if
he doesn't exist is unwarranted and also a bit unkind. A few days ago, one
prominent writer sent an e-mail advising the MA LEPS of Glassberg's new book
on western butterflies, stating that "the book will become a standard for
western butterfly watchers." Well, what about the collector? Does he have
NOTHING to offer? And yet, WESTERN butterflies, if none other, desperately
need immense taxonomic study which can ONLY come from collected material.
And this can only come from people who are inspired to collect.

Everyone needs to open up to the needs of our science and not to harm it.
I'm sure dialogue is needed, only it needs to be of a considerate and
thoughtful nature.

Alex Grkovich  





> -----Original Message-----
> From:	JH [SMTP:jhimmel at connix.com]
> Sent:	Thursday, June 21, 2001 12:25 PM
> To:	CT Leps-to-all
> Subject:	Re: Gem perfect Red Admrials
> 
> Hi all, 
>  
> Before this gets out of hand, I have a request.  
>  
> A debate about collecting will do nothing but get people riled up.  No
> collector is going to convince someone who doesn't like killing
> butterflies that it is okay to do so.  No anti-collector is going to
> convince someone who kills butterflies that it is wrong to do so.  If you
> put all the science of it aside, it always boils down to where people draw
> the line when it comes to taking a life.  And you can put the science
> aside because neither side can claim to corner the market on adding to our
> collective knowledge.  Bottom line: There is not a person on this list who
> has the influence, gift of word, psychic powers, whatever, to change the
> opposing faction's deep felt convictions with an E-mail message.  The
> internet is a great tool, but here is one of its limitations.    
>  
> On the more "worldwide" LEPS-L listserve (also administered by Larry
> Gall), this polarizing debate continues to surface and aggravate people.
> We just recently went through another long, frustrating round.  The end
> result? - again - more pissed off people digging in their heels.  I
> perceive the LEPS-L server as a cold place.  There's too much
> grandstanding by the same people over and over.  Many times I have come
> close to dropping of this list because I am sick of this topic - as are
> many!  Why do I stay on?  For the occasional interesting piece of info
> that I'm able to glean when the subject gets to more useful topics.  
>  
> Our CT-Leps list has always had a more friendly feel to it.  It feels more
> like "family".  We get some science, a little humor, lots of data sharing,
> Q&A, event updates, enjoyable essays, and the like.  As someone who has
> promoted this list (in the CBA Newsletter and word of mouth), I'm making
> this one attempt in my request to keep it this way.  If you want to argue
> about collecting, may I suggest you do so in private (but not to me!)
> email responses?  This way, those of us who are on both lists can
> appreciate the CT server as a sanctuary from what always turns into a
> futile and vitriolic exchange.
>  
> Again, this is only a request from someone who still enjoys seeing the
> CT-Leps tag in my inbox.
>  
> Best - 
>  
> John Himmelman
>  
> :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
> John Himmelman
> Killingworth, CT USA
> jhimmel at connix.com <mailto:jhimmel at connix.com>
> :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
> <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
> Visit my websites at:
> <http://booksandnature.homestead.com/booksandnature.html>
> www.ctamphibians.com <http://www.ctamphibians.com>
> <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grkovich, Alex < agrkovich at tmpeng.com <mailto:agrkovich at tmpeng.com>>
> To: 'CTLEPS-L at lists.yale.edu' <mailto:'CTLEPS-L at lists.yale.edu'> <
> CTLEPS-L at lists.yale.edu <mailto:CTLEPS-L at lists.yale.edu>>
> Date: Thursday, June 21, 2001 11:02 AM
> Subject: FW: Gem perfect Red Admrials
> 
> 
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Grkovich, Alex 
> >> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 11:06 AM
> >> To: 'Rumohr at aol.com' <mailto:'Rumohr at aol.com'>
> >> Subject: RE: Gem perfect Red Admrials
> >> 
> >> Ms. Mohr,
> >> 
> >> But first of all, you are not a Lepidopterist, and second and I think
> this
> >> is the key point that has been lost recently: You would not understand
> >> (unless you were a Lepidopterist) that there is a critical need for
> >> specimens which have been collected for scientific study. A great
> number
> >> of people who "watch" butterflies on the side today (and who are bird
> >> watchers, horticulturalists, teachers etc.but who are NOT people who
> >> became interested in Lepidoptera as a 6 year old as I did) believe or
> have
> >> been convinced by uninformed (or even unscrupulous) people that there
> is
> >> no need for any more collecting or scientific study, because "all
> >> subspecies and forms have been identified".
> >> 
> >> Ms. Mohr, this is hardly the case: The taxonomic study of Lepidoptera
> is
> >> only in its infancy, and am examination of recent scientific journals
> >> about butterflies (and even those issued by the non-collectors" groups)
> >> will prove this. There are numerous species of butterflies in the
> Eastern
> >> U.S. that are suspected of "hiding" another unidentified species, and
> the
> >> taxonomic study of western U.S. butterfly species is an absolute mess. 
> >> 
> >> Now, who is going to do this study? Are we going to discourage the
> "future
> >> Alexander B. Klots" from developing an interest? What is unconsciously
> >> being done today (and this is only a recent development) is actually
> >> discouraging future scientists. And please understand that it is an
> insult
> >> to all students of butterfly taxonomy to insinuate that we enjoy
> killing
> >> butterflies. We do not. But we DO understand that specimens are
> necessary.
> >> "The more, the better", has never been the attitude of anyone seriously
> >> devoted to Lepidoptera study. And it appears to me from your letter
> that,
> >> as I said above, you yourself are not among those who are.
> >> 
> >> Please discuss this with a serious Lepidopterist in the future before
> >> giving an opinion. Believe me, and I say this with extreme seriousness,
> >> such opinions as yours are contributing to a serious "dumbing down"
> (and
> >> these are the words of a noted Lepidopterist who has published several
> >> major scientific journals recently-they are not mine) of the entire
> study
> >> of Lepidoptera.
> >> 
> >> Alex Grkovich  
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Rumohr at aol.com <mailto:Rumohr at aol.com> [ SMTP:Rumohr at aol.com
> <mailto:SMTP:Rumohr at aol.com>]
> >> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 8:09 AM
> >> To: rrmuller at snet.net <mailto:rrmuller at snet.net>; Epmanshell at aol.com
> <mailto:Epmanshell at aol.com>
> >> Cc: CTLEPS-L at lists.yale.edu <mailto:CTLEPS-L at lists.yale.edu>
> >> Subject: Re: Gem perfect Red Admrials
> >> 
> >> 
> >> In a message dated 6/19/01 1:37:08 PM, rrmuller at snet.net
> <mailto:rrmuller at snet.net> writes:
> >> 
> >> <<  I hope every KID out there that has a net and interest in
> Butterflies 
> >> gets one for his or her collection.
> >> 
> >>  >>
> >>  Bob,
> >> Back in the 50's I worked as a camp counselor in charge of  the nature
> >> house. 
> >> I took kids out with nets to capture, kill and pin "bugs" and
> butterflies
> >> for 
> >> our cigar box collections to take back to the city. The more, the
> better. 
> >> Sure we tried to identify them and label them, wasn't I trying to
> >> familiarize 
> >> these city kids with Nature? Wasn't there a  multitude of butterflies
> out 
> >> there? We wouldn't miss the few we captured, would we? There were
> plenty 
> >> more, after all didn't they lay oodles of eggs? I was young then and
> >> didn't 
> >> think that the REAL message I was conveying(to kids who might become
> >> future 
> >> naturalists) was that creatures who belonged in this abundant habitat
> were
> >> 
> >> expendable and that it was OK to capture and kill.
> >>     As a teacher  of 30 years and now retired, I have raised(and
> continue
> >> to 
> >> raise) and released hundreds of butterflies with children. I travel to 
> >> schools giving slide shows about butterflies and do garden club slide 
> >> presentations about butterflies and butterfly gardening. I have created
> a 
> >> program called "GROW WITH KIDS" in which I plan and help create
> schoolyard
> >> 
> >> butterfly habitats in schools in order to have outdoor classroom space
> >> where 
> >> children become responsible for maintaining a safe haven for
> butterflies.
> >> The 
> >> gardens are habitats where children can see many varieties of
> butterflies
> >> and 
> >> moths. They are gardens that adults enjoy on their daily walks and then
> go
> >> 
> >> home and try to replicate. What is my message to young and old now?
> These
> >> 
> >> magical creatures are a valued part of our environment and we can do
> much
> >> to 
> >> insure that they are still here for our grandchildren and their
> children.
> >> We 
> >> do not collect and DO NOT KILL  butterflies as if they were prizes and
> we 
> >> certainly do not send out the message to youngsters that it is OK to
> kill 
> >> creatures for the fun of it.
> >>     When collecting eggs and caterpillars with children, the first
> thing
> >> you 
> >> discuss is how to create a habitat in which the creature can be safe,
> well
> >> 
> >> fed and content. Then we talk about the responsibility one  has to care
> >> for 
> >> it so in turn we can observe its growth. The creature is released so it
> >> can 
> >> go on its way as nature intended. If its purpose in life becomes a meal
> >> for a 
> >> bird so be it. At least we did not kill it.
> >>     I invite you to my school to see the butterfly gardens, the
> vegetable
> >> and 
> >> sunflower garden and our magnificent meadow all created so the
> creatures
> >> you 
> >> feel are expendable can live freely and joyfully.
> >>     Just speaking out for those who have no voice in the
> >> matter(butterflies 
> >> and moths)
> >>             Ruthie Mohr,teacher, schoolyard coordinator and CBA
> education 
> >> chairperson
> >
> >