Butterfly Questions

[Nigel Venters]

It's a funny old world isn't it....to collect or not collect that is the
question?  In UK (rightly or wrongly) many breeders of butterflies consider
to get Butterfly Conservation involved in anything is the kiss of death....
Butterfly
Conservation have watched merrily over the years as things become extinct,
worried and pontificated about who or what was responsible, or what went
wrong, advised Government that any captive breeding is totally wrong, and
of course nothing happened. Money is raised, sites of interest are
purchased, field trips are organised and the faithful trample over sites of
interest to observe and do little else.....except worry about the gradual
decline. Maybe they have a hidden agenda... the complete extinction of all
species?  if they get their way....the complete protection of all
species.... this would have the result of the gradual loss of interest in
butterflies by the general population... years will pass when the young
will no longer have an interest in them... no collecting as a young child
followed by deep interest in protection as an adult...illegal, banned! So
(for example) in 2050 when huge road/building projects are proposed.... no
one will object.....why should they?.... they'll have no interest in
preserving something they don't know anything about. All rather sad, and
consider this, I collected as a child but now do not collect butterflies,
I'm interested in their survival and I just try to work out what their 
requirements are to survive by trying to understand their life
history. Isn't it about time we put all our prejudices behind us and all of
us who are interested in butterflies, for whatever reason pulled in the
same direction to protect the things we all love? (OK the reply to me will
be....I don't understand.... the world has changed, thinking these days is
different etc. etc. I can see it now!......... dream
on...................!)
Nigel


Kenelm Philip <fnkwp at aurora.alaska.edu> wrote in article
<Pine.OSF.3.96.990526114635.5006A-100000 at aurora.alaska.edu>...
> 
> > This started with a single person asking if people are still
collecting.
> > It turned into a shot (actually, more of a little dig) being taken at
> > those who choose not to.
> 
> If John was referring to my posting, then I should clarify a bit. I was
> not taking a 'dig' at non-collectors per se. My approach to the vexed
> topic of collecting vs watching/photographing has always been to let
> people do whichever they prefer. I think there are good reasons for
> collecting, but I don't urge non-collectors to go out and collect. And
> I take lots of photographs in addition to collecting.
> 
> The point I was trying to make is, basically, summed up in Heinlein's
> acronym TANSTAAFL (there ain't no such thing as a free lunch). _Any_
> interaction with butterflies has an environmental cost. Even staying at
> home and having nothing whatsoever to do with butterflies has an environ-
> mental cost and will affect butterflies. What I object to is having
> non-collectors claim the high moral ground and claim that _they_ don't
> do any harm to butterflies. That, in my estimation, is not correct. We
are
> all, directly or indirectly, responsible for immense harm to butterflies
> merely by existing.
> 
> 	If people who do not collect choose to regard the above as an
> attack specifically aimed at them, what can I say? "The wicked flee
> when no man pursueth?" :-)  There really is no need for a debate on
> this topic--there are valid reasons for watching, photographing, and
> collecting butterflies and other insects--and all these activities
> should be carried out in a responsible manner, without trying to put
> down those who choose a different one from the one that _you_ prefer.
> 
> 							Ken Philip
> fnkwp at uaf.edu
> 
>