Insect Dealers Indicted

[Neil Jones]

In article <393DB2F6.63D0 at mindspring.com>
           cherubini at mindspring.com "Paul Cherubini" writes:

> Neil Jones wrote:
> 
> > The indictment is on the web on the news pages of
> > http://www.wildlifewebsite.com/
> > Just go to the site and follow the links.
> 
> I didn't find the story about the indictment, but I did come across the
> following questionable statement about the Quino Checkerspot at the 
> http://www.wildlifewebsite.com/ website:
> 
> "The Quino Checkerspot is a very very rare butterfly. It occurs in very
>  very few places in Southern California. It is very much threatened by 
> development and by global warming which is disrupting its life cycle."
> 
> The reason I say questionable is because in early spring 1995 lepidopterist
>  Tomas
> Mustelin, Ph.D. and two other lep enthusiasts found what they described
> as "thousands, maybe millions of Quino checkerspots (Occidryas editha)
> everywhere" 20 miles south of the California/Baja California border.
> They further wrote (Monarch Newsletter, April 1995):
> 

<SNIP>

I have been away for a few days. During this time there have been some
interesting developments. I will endevour to be polite and deal with
this matter is a logical way. Paul has suggested that there could be
an ulterior motive in the writer of the article on www.wildlifewebsite.com.
He has also implied that the Quino Checkerspot is a common species
whose listing under the US Endangered Species Act was unwarranted.
Neither is true.
First of all I can be unequivocal about the motives of the author of the
article because I_am_the_author. I announced the presence of the site
without identifying my input to it because there is one person on the
list who is still flaming me because I posted material from a similar
indictment about 5 years ago. Also the posting was the first anouncement of the
site to the world at large and I did not wish to bias the general statistics 
or those on the use of the search engine database which were being made
subject to analysis. (I am incedentally aware that the searches are not
working well. Any new computer project will have glitches . This is being
addressed.)

My understanding of the status of the Quino Checkerspot was based on the
listing package, when it received legal protection and on a series of
face to face conversations with a number of scientists who have studied it.
The web page has been amended to reflect more scientific information I have
researched while I was away.

As a conservationist who is dedicated to preventing the extinction of beautiful
butterflies I resent it being implied that the species is worth destroying.
I know that this feeling is shared by many nature lovers.
Everyone is biased, myself included, but I make it clear where I stand in my 
signature quote. I would be happier if Paul Cherubini did likewise
perhaps Paul Cherubini- I love pesticides ;-)

Perhaps a truer impression will be given by the following text.
It comes from The Journal of Research on Lepidoptera in a paper written
by Rudi Mattoni, Gordon F. Pratt, Travis R. Longcore, John F. Emmel and
 Jeremiah N. George. Many people will recognise the names in the paper.
These are well respected experts.

"Recent loss of the distribution area of quino was estimated as 50-75%,
 with 'seven or eight populations' known in the United States with
 ' all but three populations' consisting of fewer than five individuals
( Nelson 1997)
 Surveys over the past year indicate that although QCB may not seem in
 as dire circumstance as the listing package indicated, with at least two
 robust metapopulations in two counties and numbering thousands of individuals
, we believe the species was correctly assessed as near extinction.
 QCB appears headed toward becoming the 'passenger pigeon '
 butterfly - a once common widespread species crashing to extinction
 over a few decades." 

I don't propose to make yet another explanation of why the complex
mathematical models of Checkerspot metapopulation dynamics make even
quite healthy seeming populations vulnerable. Suffice it to say that 
the science is well studied, probably more so that any other group
of butterflies.

Incidentally anyone who has studied checkerspots in detail will know that
there will be differences in the Mexican populations from those in the US.
These may not warrant taxonomic disctiction by name but they are still of
interest and value to science. A party trick I have performed here in the
UK a few years ago was to tell people where they had taken each photograph
of our checkerspot by looking at the wing markings. This has become more
difficult now that we have discovered a few more sites locally
Our species looks so much like Quino that I have fooled quite a few
experts with the picture. I have been  attempting to work for some time on
a method of defining and measuring these features by analysis of video footage
of the butterflies. 


-- 
Neil Jones- Neil at nwjones.demon.co.uk http://www.nwjones.demon.co.uk/
"At some point I had to stand up and be counted. Who speaks for the
butterflies?" Andrew Lees - The quotation on his memorial at Crymlyn Bog
National Nature Reserve