Saving a population

Fri Aug 31 22:06:03 EDT 2001

Mark -

    Instead of wishing you had pinned all of a population that was
eventually doomed (I agree, dead is dead, and it doesn't matter why), why
didn't you do something to protect / relocate the local population?   It's
not like the developers snuck in under cover of darkness and bulldozed the
area overnight.  Your "silent monitoring" was more like silent murdering.
You are right, you should be pissed - but at yourself, not the site
developers or failures in the process of listing and protecting threatened
organisms.

    I will apologize in advance if you and others made serious efforts that
failed to save that population, but from your letter, it sure doesn't sound
like it.  If there is ANY threatened organism in our backyard that the
public will rally around, it's a butterfly - look at all the posts recently
describing how the general public flocks to butterfly houses in zoos,
museums, etc., and virtually ignores other exhibits of equal or greater
natural history value.

    I, for one, would have been pissed long before the habitat was gone.

Clay Taylor
Past President, Conn. Butterfly Association
Moodus, CT
ctaylor at att.net

PS - yes, I DO collect, when the situation warrants it.  CT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Walker" <MWalker at gensym.com>
To: <Norbert.Kondla at gems3.gov.bc.ca>; <Mike.Quinn at tpwd.state.tx.us>; "Leps-L
(E-mail)" <LEPS-L at lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 3:51 AM
Subject: RE: Butterflies (3 spp.) and the F&WS

> I'm going to pop up and say something extremely controversial, but what
they
> heck.  It won't be the last time, and Lord knows it's not the first time.
> Here goes:
>
> Listing doesn't work.  I agree with Norbert that the bureaucracy of it all
> is particularly disturbing.  But before you flame - let me explain.  I
> recently went to visit an Aunt who lives in Murrieta, near Temecula, in
> Southern California.  She lives literally a stone throws distance from a
> well known population of the listed Quino Checkerspot (Euphydryas editha
> wrightii).  I was only made aware of it's location and proximity to
> relatives a few years ago, but have been silently monitoring the spot ever
> since.  Of course, collecting has never been considered - but now I'm
pissed
> I didn't catch and mount every last one.  You see, the whole population
> (though listed for about five years now) has been completely decimated by
a
> master planned community.  Gone - wasted - every square inch.  If all this
> bureaucracy only serves to keep out the collectors and scientists from
> sampling the bugs, and proves incapable of actually saving the habitat,
then
> it's all for naught.  It's enough to get a mellow person riled.
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but the same thing happened to the Concord, N.H.
> population of the Karner Blue.  Lots of buzz amongst the learned, but
whilst
> they chat over cappuccinos, the bulldozers roll.
>
> Walker.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Kondla, Norbert FOR:EX [mailto:Norbert.Kondla at gems3.gov.bc.ca]
> > Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 12:04 PM
> > To: 'Mike.Quinn at tpwd.state.tx.us'; Leps-L (E-mail)
> > Subject: RE: Butterflies (3 spp.) and the F&WS
> >
> >
> > Thanks for sharing this news. Some observations and a
> > question related to
> > the Sacramento Mountains checkerspot butterfly. For those who
> > are wondering
> > what insect this name refers to; I think this is Euphydryas anicia
> > cloudcrofti. Further, the announcement refers to this butterfly as a
> > "species". I realize that in the twisted logic of legalese
> > and bureaucratese
> > a subspecies is the same as a subspecies. But in the real
> > world this is a
> > subspecies and not a species. I seem to recall some previous
> > allegation of
> > over-collecting of this subspecies. My question is: can
> > anyone share the
> > information from which this allegation was garnered ? I am
> > curious if it has
> > any substance or if it is speculation, in whole or in part. Also I am
> > puzzled by the statement that vulnerability to local extinctions from
> > extreme weather events or catastrophic wildfire including
> > fire suppression
> > activities is due to its limited range. It is my understanding that
> > virtually all organisms, even very widespread organisms, are
> > subject to
> > local extinctions through a variety of natural causes and
> > human activity.
> > But still, this butterfly does have a very small range and I
> > do hope that
> > its habitat will be wisely managed to allow for its continued
> > existence
> > until it has run its natural course in the evolutionary
> > calendar. It is only
> > unfortunate that it seems necessary to consume so much time
> > and money to
> > have a legal designation before some common-sense management
> > practices can
> > be put into place. I would prefer to see scarce time and
> > money going into
> > some practical actions to maintain the butterfly. And before
> > anyone fires up
> > their flamethrower I will add that I admire the effort that
> > goes into this
> > elaborate legalistic process by various people behind the
> > scenes.  I know
> > that such undertakings run a tortuous path and the process is
> > certainly not
> > intended to accomodate the impatient among us.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mike Quinn [mailto:Mike.Quinn at tpwd.state.tx.us]
> > Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 10:21 AM
> > To: Leps-L (E-mail)
> > Subject: Butterflies (3 spp.) and the F&WS
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: NEWS at fws.gov [mailto:NEWS at fws.gov]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 1:03 PM
> > To: fws-news at lists.fws.gov
> > Subject: [fws-news] SERVICE, CONSERVATION GROUPS REACH
> > AGREEMENT TO LIST
> > NEW SPECIES UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
> >
> >
> > **************************************************************
> > This message is from the fws-news listserver.
> > **************************************************************
> >
> > Chris Tollefson 202-208-5634
> >
> >      SERVICE,  CONSERVATION GROUPS REACH AGREEMENT
> >      TO  LIST NEW SPECIES UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
> >
> > Interior Secretary Gale Norton today announced that the U.S. Fish and
> > Wildlife Service  and several conservation organizations have
> > reached an
> > agreement in principle that will enable the Service to
> > complete work on
> > evaluations of numerous species proposed for listing under
> > the Endangered
> > Species Act.
> >
> > Under this agreement with the Center for Biological
> > Diversity, Southern
> > Appalachian Biodiversity Project, California Native Plant
> > Society, and the
> > Biodiversity Legal Foundation, the Service will issue final listing
> > decisions for 14 species and propose eight more species for
> > listing. The
> > Service also will be able to take action on four citizen
> > petitions to list
> > species under the Act.   The Service and the organizations
> > have agreed to
> > extend deadlines for eight other critical habitat
> > designations, thereby
> > making funds available for these actions.
> >
> > <snips>
> >
> > Carson wandering skipper (Nevada and California): Emergency Listing
> >
> > This species of skipper butterfly, Pseudocopaeodes eunus, is
> > the only one
> > in it genus.  It is found locally distributed in grassland habitats on
> > alkaline substrates in Nevada and California.  The skipper depends on
> > saltgrass communities with a freshwater source nearby to
> > support nectar
> > sources.  This subspecies is threatened by habitat fragmentation,
> > degradation, and loss primarily due to agriculture, livestock
> > grazing, and
> > urban development. Non-native plant invasion and impacts from proposed
> > water development projects which can alter local hydrology are also
> > threats.  The genus of skipper butterfly is believed to include five
> > subspecies: One of the subspecies, P. e. obscurus,  currently
> > found in only
> > two populations, one in Washoe County, Nevada and the other in Lassen
> > County, California.  A third population of P.e. obscurus
> > known from Carson
> > City, Nevada is believed to have been extirpated from that
> > site in recent
> > years.
> >
> >
> > Sacramento Mountains checkerspot butterfly (New Mexico):
> > Proposed Listing
> > Rule
> >
> > The Sacramento Mountains checkerspot butterfly is restricted to the
> > vicinity of  Cloudcroft in the Sacramento Mountains in Otero
> > County, New
> > Mexico.  The species is threatened by destruction and fragmentation of
> > habitat from private and commercial development, habitat
> > degradation and
> > loss of host plants from grazing, encroachment of conifers
> > and non-native
> > vegetation into non- forested openings, over-collection, and,
> > due to its
> > limited range, vulnerability to local extirpations from
> > extreme weather
> > events or catastrophic wildfire including fire suppression activities.
> >
> > Miami blue butterfly (Florida): 90-day Finding
> >
> > The Miami blue is a small butterfly with bright blue forewings on both
> > sexes, a wide dark outer border on the forewing in females, and an
> > orange-capped eyespot on the hindwing.  This subspecies once
> > occurred from
> > mainland peninsular Florida, as far north as Hillsborough and Volusia
> > counties, southward to south Florida and the Keys, including the Dry
> > Tortugas.
> >
> > **************************************************************
> > *************
> > News releases are also available on the World Wide Web at
> > http://news.fws.gov
> >
> > Questions concerning a particular news release or item of
> > information should be directed to the person listed as the
> > contact. General comments or observations concerning the
> > content of the information should be directed to Mitch Snow
> > (Mitch_Snow at fws.gov) in the Office of Public Affairs.
> >
> > To unsubscribe from the fws-news listserver, send e-mail to
> > fws-news-request at lists.fws.gov. Enter "unsubscribe" in the
> > subject field.
> > **************************************************************
> > *************
> >
> >
> >  ------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
> >
> >    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
> >
> >
> >
> >  ------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
> >
> >    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
> >
> >
>
>
>  ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
>
>    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
>
>

 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl 