Collecting Debate Sorry this really pi**es me off

[A.P.K.Torry]

Neil Jones says:-

>Here is the flaw in collectors' logic. The deposition of voucher specimens
>in collections has traditionally been seen as they way that proof is provided
>of its existence at a site. Of course this proves nothing. While I am not
>questioning the honesty of anyone currently participating in this debate, 
>it is impossible to prove that any particular specimen comes from the site
>that it is claimed.

This statement in itself is flawed

I defy you to capture a specimen of Cornish SandHill Rustic (Luperina 
nickerlii Leechi)
anywhere other than from Looe Bar Sands in Cornwall, where this particular 
race of the species is quite unlike any others found anywhere on the planet.

Whilst the supposition you make may be true for the vast majority of species 
it is in itself not correct and therefore cannot be used as a valid argument 
against the value of voucher specimens.

BTW Luperina nickerlii Leechi is one of the rarest insects in the UK only 
because of its extremely limited and fragile habitat (which could be 
destroyed at any time by an fierce Atlantic storm), however its population 
within the habitat is regarded as common, almost very common.

> In any recording scheme you rely on the honesty
>and accuracy of the recorder. With a well taken photograph, it should be 
>possible to establish the identity of the specimen. Of course there are
>exceptions to this but they are comparatively few.

UNLESS OF COURSE YOU HAVE TO DISSECT THE GENITALIA FIRST

>Here where I live all the moth recording is done by the "Glamorgan Moth
>Recording Group". Almost without exception they are not collectors. Most
>of them started out as birdwatchers. As birdwatchers they were never required
>to provide a dead bird to confirm their sightings so they do not see the
>need to collect moths. There are exceptions where specimens need to be kept
>but this is not done for the purpose of forming a collection.

OH I SEE. THEY CATCH THE INSECT, KILL IT, SET IT, IDENTIFY IT AND THEN 
THROUGH IT IN THE WASTE BIN DO THEY.

Voucher specimens must, by definition, form part of a collection.

>To non-collectors the requirement for a voucher specimen is largely illogical
>this is why the permit was not granted.


>Here in the UK most people who do recording are not collectors as far as I am
>aware none of the people who contribute to the recording scheme which I 
>co-ordinate in my area are collectors.

Which is probably why we get useless information from distribution maps.

Ask any non-collector the difference between a Swallow Prominent and a 
Lesser Swallow Prominent sometime and you'll see what I mean.

Andrew T

A collector of many years standing and not in any remote way, responsible 
for wiping out anything, and have no intention of doing so in the future.