Government views Monarch Butterfly Releases as a threat toWesternMilkweeds

[Stan Gorodenski]

Paul Cherubini wrote:
> 
>                                                          Dr. Vane-Wright
> attributes this rapid spread across the Pacfic and Atlantic
> in the mid-1800's to hitch-hiking on the new fast moving steam
> powered ships that replaced the old slow wind powered ships.

I have not read Vane-Wright's abstract and so I do not know if this was
his opinion, or hard scientific data.  If it borders on an educated
supposition or guess, than you are on weak grounds to use this to then
say

> So yes I agree there are sometimes unimagined consequences of
> human activity on butterfly abundance and distribution - including
> consistently positive outcomes for weedy species such as the Monarch.
> 

What scientific data does he have to support his statement?  A
correlation does not prove cause and effect.  Simply because 'a' is
correlated with 'b' does not mean 'a' caused 'b'. 

I also have to wonder about the use of terms like 'weedy species'. 
Normally, a weed is a plant growing where we do not want it to grow. 
Used in reference to the Monarch implies to the general public that it
is a pest we do not want.  Do we really want to convey this kind of
message?  Doesn't the use of such terms have a tendency to mislead?
Stan

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

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

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