help for the world's rarest . . .

[David Webster]

    You are correct Martha, courtesy should be foremost. Just to keep the record
straight, your 'parting shot' should be 'Parthian shot'; a very common mistake.
    On the broad question of conservation, I am reminded of the old saying, "There
is more than one way to kill a cat".
    Protected areas are no doubt helpfull in some circumstances, but creation of
such areas may divert attention and resources from important issues in the vast
sea of trashed planet in which these protected jewels sit.
    Conservation is the outstanding endangered species at this point [if you doubt
this, then watch a few sessions of Jeopardy] and will continue to suffer unless
the public at large can be persuaded that coexistence with nature is preferable to
conquest of nature. Do this and, within practical limits, the trashed matrix can
become a near continuium of less trashed plots. A ladder is useless if the rungs
are too far apart.
    The best way to get there from here, is to encourage first-hand contact with
nature, by the public at large and preferably with a hand lens, in all ways
possible and this would include making insect collecting accessible,
regulation-free and hassle-free.
    Sorry to be so long-winded, but if this issue continues to be mishandled then
everything will go down the drain.

Dave Webster, Kentville, Nova Scotia



"Martha V. Lutz & Charles T. Lutz" wrote:

> human characteristic:  'common' courtesy.
>
> I was saddened to see the following included in a 'thank-you' message:
>
> "My very special thanks are also due to Paul Cherubini whose constant shameful
> ,irrational and ill-informed attacks on conservation and conservationists
> have brought me the many friends"
>
> That was entirely unnecessary.  It served no purpose except possibly to
> cause pain; it lowers my evaluation of the writer, and renders that
> person's other communications less valid since it is possible that they may
> be similarly tainted with a desire to cause pain without doing any good.
>
> I am sorry to see that mature, adult (mostly?) scientific-minded
> individuals cannot agree to disagree, and cannot construct 'parting shots'
> out of documented evidence rather than emotion-laden opinion.
>
> <snip>