Killing butterflies and habitat destruction
apktorry at csm.ex.ac.uk
Thu Sep 24 05:37:18 EDT 1998
I was pleased to see that argument this time was revolving more around
HABITAT preservation/management rather than the anit-collecting theme.
Until, that is, Neil piped in as usual.
Neil Jones wrote:-
>What has this to do with killing butterflies for collections?
>If we are to achieve the conservation of _any_ species it is necessary to
>convince the people of the area where it occurs to look after it.
>You cannot do this if you also argue that it is permissable to kill it for
>fun. This is not the argument of a animal rights activist but of a
>conservationist experienced in the sharp end of conserving lepidoptera.
>This does not of course mean banning collecting.
I agree with the sentiment, but it is much better to be able to
prove your knowledge of a species from its study/collection from the wild
when talking to incredible naive and uninformed politicians than them
thinking you are wittering on some demented animal-rights campaigner.
If I was to go to a politician and say I had seen a Large Blue on
the sand-dunes they would not believe me unless I could prove it, and the
chances of finding it again would be kinda remote. No I think rather they
would simply grant planning permission to the local BRICK company to
bulldoze the place for the sake of a few local jobs.
>I am afraid some collectors dislike me saying this and I have even been
>flamed for announcing that a species has been put on the protected list
>because this stopped the individual concerned from collecting it.
Nope I just made the point that legally protecting a species from collecting
is not a cause for celebration (as you tone was when you told us all) but a
waste of time as the legislation does not protect its habitat from
>I am concerned also that many collectors posting here have a very
Yes but most of us just pity their stupidity and ignorance, but hell they
have votes to maintain so what else can they be expected to do.
> I do not have a high opinion of government either.
>This should be apparent from my comments on politicians above. However
>if we are to achieve proper conservation of lepidoptera properly
>constructed legislation is necessary.
I repeat anti-collecting legislation is a waste of time unless you afford
the habitat the same degree of protection.
Building HALF a BRIDGE is a waste of time. You might as well not have a
bridge at all.
>There is one other point that I would make and that is about accidental
>road kills being more significant. Firstly these are random events that
>are by their nature likely to have a far greater impact on common species
>that those that are endangered, whereas unscrupulous collectors might
>deliberately target a rare species.
I guess you are in favour of banning the use of fly sprays in the home yes.
Oh shit my mother fly-sprayed a moth the other day and it was a legally
protected one I guess I should report her to the police, she should be
alright though as she didn't mean to kill it.
>Secondly it is an accidental consequence of another activity.
>If you were to argue from a moralistic point of view, that it would be wrong
>to kill lepidoptera, it is obvious that no one could be construed as being
>guilty of an act which was conducted without intent.
>This principle is widely implemented in legal systems. The idea of "mens
>rea" the guilty mind is a cornerstone of the legal system here and I am sure
>this applies in many countries.
NO ARGUMENT WRONG WRONG WRONG
I was driving along when a accidentally mowed down sixteen school children
in my car, sorry but I didn't have a licence or insurance and the brakes
were faulty but I didn't mean to do it HONEST.
You can still get LIFE for MANSLAUGHTER.
Sorry but anti collection legislation is not the way to go. Only habitat
protection/management is the only way to achieve the LONG-TERM survival of
any species including ourselves.
More information about the Leps-l