SCHNAUBER'S RESPONSE ON WASHINGTON RELEASES

[International Federation]

Greetings All:

Due to the nature of this subject and the many responses from
individuals throughout the world both for and against, I  wish to
clarify some misunderstandings about what the IFBE has set out to do
accomplish with these mass releases.

Please understand that I am not out to mislead anyone, namely the USDA,
or anyone else, but feel I may have found a method for bringing NATURE
to the public at large.  As most would agree, I feel that unless
children, in this McDonald type of world, have the opportunity to
observe and interact with nature (i.e., butterflies in this case) up
close, they will not become at all interested in participating in the
solutions of tomorrow.

When we consider that the average person couldn't even name three
butterfly species, we begin to understand that CONSERVATION education
begins with individual EXPERIENCE.  The cost is minimal when we consider
the return measured in GENERATIONS.  This allows us the opportunity to
increase butterfly gardens, habitat preservation, and the most
importantly the respect for nature.

With regard to the IFBE and the recent releases in the state of
Washington, the question (which I have reworded slightly for clarity):
"How can California Monarchs be functionally capable of revealing the
migratory path and overwintering destination of Monarchs originating in
Washington?"  The simple answer involves an understanding of the
reproductive physiology of all migrants and the results of past tagging
studies.

As we all know, during the summer, Monarchs breed throughout most of the
United States.  However, beginning in August, nearly all newly emerging
butterflies are in a physiological state of reproductive dormancy termed
"diapause."  These diapausers have no interest in mating, but rather
migrate by the tens of millions in southerly and westerly directions
until they arrive at suitable overwintering regions termed "diapause
sites."  As already known, the two major overwintering sites in north
America consist of central Mexico and the coast of California.

As we all know, the fall migration period lasts from late August to
mid-November.  During this time, tagging studies are most effective and
reveal that diapausers may be shipped almost anywhere around the
country, yet they find the overwintering sites in either Mexico or
California (especially if released coinciding with peak natural
movements through an area.)  For example, in one study published in
1966, diapausers collected in Ontario, Canada were shipped to Reno,
Nevada for release in September.  These were recaptured on the
south-central California coast where it is documented that large
obverwintering sites occur.  This study was repeated in 1974 (published
in 1977) using diapausers collected in California and released in
September.  It is interesting to note that these specimens were
recaptures at the very same area of the south-central California coast
as the Ontario Monarchs were.

Similar experiments were conducted in 1972 and 1994 involving
Pennsylvania, California, and Nebraska Monarchs shipped to Salem, Oregon
for release.  Recaptures from ALL of these diverse groups came in from
the northern and central California coast where large overwintering
colonies exist.

According to my Advisors, these studies demonstrate environmental, not
genetic control of the migratory paths and overwintering sites of fall
migrants (diapausers.)  In other words, the geographic ancestry of 
diapausers seems to have no detectable influence on the migratory path
or overwintering destination of the butterflies.

I believe Professor David Gibo at the University of Toronto, Erindale
Campus has taken this concept a step further by predicting that even
Australian Monarchs would find their way to the Mexican overwintering
grounds if released in Toronto (the Australian Monarchs would, of
course, need to be imported as eggs and reared to adulthood in Toronto
in late summer to induce the reproductive diapause condition.)  And most
would agree that Dr. Gibo is considered to be the leading authority on
the physiology, orientation, and navigation of fall migrants.

Up till now, not one scientists has stated that Monarchs are endangered
or an "endangered species".  Especially when you consider that for the
last two years Monarch records have overwhelmed the data collectors...
And just the fact that Monarchs demonstrate the ability to travel
upwards of 3,000 miles throughout the spring and summer relieves any
worries in regard to "local" populations.

However, other butterflies species are different.  Natural mixing and
multiple mating occurs and is good when we consider the genetic
diversity and health of the species.  For those interested:  The
migration  is obviously a fascinating phenomenon and seems to generate a
strong emotional tie between teachers and students, as well as the
individual and the butterfly.

I sincerely hope that the tagging recoveries from Washington will help
to clarify this issue.  As everyone would agree, Monarch and Painted
Ladies are common throughout most of the United States, although annual
fluctuations will occur.  I believe it is time that we as a nation learn
the joy of nature, rather than follow the leanings of those on the far
left or the far right.

A few months ago I spoke with Mr. Pyle for nearly an hour at my own
expense.  He said at that time he had nothing to do with trying to shut
down the July 4th "National Butterfly Release."  Now he contradicts his
own statements that have been documented and stored in the data
retrieval system.  I brought up the point at that time that we could
stop any and all wars (which he said he wanted to do) by organizing all
breeders by state and have a clearing house for any releases.  This
would guarantee that there would be no interstate shipment of live
specimens, and there would be no concern for diseases.  In other words,
all stock would be of LOCAL origin for those concerned with DNA issues.
Mr. Pyle seems to be more interested in his politics rather than
reaching a workable solution.  The reason I say this is from his own
words which he posted over the internet that the responsible fair
official was "appalled" over the release.  That was a BLATANT LIE as I
have in my possession a letter from the fair authorities that contradict
what Mr. Pyle propagated to the public.  Even though I have in my
possession this letter, I personally called the fair official and asked
them if they made such a comment.  The answer was an emphatic"NO!"  My
question to Mr. Pyle is that "How can you claim to be a scientist or
should I say honest book writer when you lie?"  "Are you saying that
even those of us on this list server are also the "gullible public?"  I
assure you Mr. Pyle, WE ARE NOT!

May I conclude by saying when the celebration of nature is a crime, we
all have a problem and it is not with butterflies, it is with ourselves.

Hans Schnauber
http://www.IFBE.org
IFBE
109 Sundown Court
Chehalis, WA 98532
360.748.4800

PS:  Robert Flanders, USDA will be posting a statement in a few days.