Poor butterflies :(( and a question for some people

Wed Sep 27 18:12:42 EDT 2000

--------------79B5C38EF99BB3C85F8AC33C
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Jonathan Sylvestre wrote:

> Hi John
>
> This is your opinion about my opinion, thats ok...   I think I did not
> written right what I was thinking.. IM not good in english.. but im good
> enough to see that you don't understand what I wanted to mean. . you gave
> too example.. but there are as many example as there are species..
>
> BTW, could you give to us now your opinion about the decline of world wide
> diversity ??  And please let away human psychology..
>
> "John Acorn" <janature at compusmart.ab.ca> a écrit dans le message news:
> 20000926002057Z69208-12148+45900 at mail.compusmart.ab.ca...
> > Jonathan and Fellow Lepsters,
> >
> > In my opinion (and I hear this comment often as well) when lay people say
> > that butterflies were once super-common, what they are remembering is a
> > time when the Painted Ladies were invading by the zillions-- something
> > that happens in Canada once every ten years or so.  I hear the same thing
> > from people with bird feeders-- one winter they get hordes of winter
> > finches (during what ornithologists call an irruption), and from then on
> they
> > assume that the birds have all died off.  This, in my opinion, has more to
> > do with human psychology than with population ecology, and I really don't
> > think these ancedotal accounts are a reliable source of natural history
> > information.

I won't leave human psychology out of this discussion -- yet.

Many are the instances when man sees only what one either wants to see or is
accustomed to seeing.  I think this is the problem here with John.

The other problem is indeed a drop in the population of butterflies.  One of
this area's leading entomologists documented the same phenomenon here in the Los
Angeles area in a study he did a number of years ago, so it is not a local fluke
that occurs only around Lac Manicouagan, Trois Rivières or Québec.  You hit the
nail on the head when you tell people what is happening out there:

> Pollution, destruction of habitats, forest, field, rivers, bog, etc..
> urbanisation, .. are the causes...  that was the answer I gave.. but when
> people asked me what we can do.. the only thing I was able to say is that
> they can make a little garden too feed butterflies and their larva.. but
> that will not save all the butterflies they respond me...
>
Habitat destruction is indeed a major problem, as are pollution and the
excessive and often inappropriate use of pesticides.

So your English is not "the Queen's English"?  So what?  You got your message
across plenty well enough for me to understand.  It is just that John doesn't
understand the situation quite the same way you and I do.

--------------79B5C38EF99BB3C85F8AC33C
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
Jonathan Sylvestre wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>Hi John
This is your opinion about my opinion, thats ok...&nbsp;&nbsp; I think
I did not
 written right what I was thinking.. IM not good in english.. but im
good
 enough to see that you don't understand what I wanted to mean. . you
gave
 too example.. but there are as many example as there are species..
BTW, could you give to us now your opinion about the decline of world
wide
 diversity ??&nbsp; And please let away human psychology..
"John Acorn" &lt;janature at compusmart.ab.ca> a &eacute;crit dans le message
news:
 20000926002057Z69208-12148+45900 at mail.compusmart.ab.ca...
 > Jonathan and Fellow Lepsters,
 >
 > In my opinion (and I hear this comment often as well) when lay people
say
 > that butterflies were once super-common, what they are remembering
is a
 > time when the Painted Ladies were invading by the zillions-- something
 > that happens in Canada once every ten years or so.&nbsp; I hear the
same thing
 > from people with bird feeders-- one winter they get hordes of winter
 > finches (during what ornithologists call an irruption), and from
then on they
 > assume that the birds have all died off.&nbsp; This, in my opinion,
has more to
 > do with human psychology than with population ecology, and I really
don't
 > think these ancedotal accounts are a reliable source of natural history
 > information.</blockquote>
I won't leave human psychology out of this discussion -- yet.
Many are the instances when man sees only what one either wants to see
or is accustomed to seeing.&nbsp; I think this is the problem here with
John.
The other problem is indeed a drop in the population of butterflies.&nbsp;
One of this area's leading entomologists documented the same phenomenon
here in the Los Angeles area in a study he did a number of years ago, so
it is not a local fluke that occurs only around Lac Manicouagan, Trois
Rivi&egrave;res or Qu&eacute;bec.&nbsp; You hit the nail on the head when
you tell people what is happening out there:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<pre>Pollution, destruction of habitats, forest, field, rivers, bog, etc..
urbanisation, .. are the causes...&nbsp; that was the answer I gave.. but when
people asked me what we can do.. the only thing I was able to say is that
they can make a little garden too feed butterflies and their larva.. but
that will not save all the butterflies they respond me...</pre>
</blockquote>
Habitat destruction is indeed a major problem, as are pollution and the
excessive and often inappropriate use of pesticides.
So your English is not "the Queen's English"?&nbsp; So what?&nbsp; You
got your message across plenty well enough for me to understand.&nbsp;
It is just that John doesn't understand the situation quite the same way
you and I do.</html>

--------------79B5C38EF99BB3C85F8AC33C--