Weedy butterflies

Paul Cherubini cherubini at mindspring.com
Fri Dec 14 11:14:38 EST 2001

Bob Parcelles wrote:

> I think Paul has used some good logic but his facts seem to be
> applied to his argument with a decided spin. I feel that his use
> of "weedy" and the apologists for this term are a little in error
> to say the least. I see his use of "weedy" to be none other than
> another example of his hatred for the Monarch. This species,
> does not deserve these negative connotations.

In the past, Chris Durden has referred to the monarch butterfly as
a weedy species.

Also, I went to college at UC Davis, Calif. and the main butterfly
professor there was Dr. Arthur Shapiro.  He considers the monarch
and a number of other butterflies as"weedy" species. See below
(capitals my emphasis).

Paul Cherubini
By Dr. Arthur M. Shapiro, Section of Ecology and Evolution, UC Davis
"Butterfly gardening in the foothills is different from butterfly gardening
in the Central Valley. In the Valley, most of the BUTTERFLY SPECIES
ARE WEEDY, highly dispersive, multiple to brooded, reach highest densities
in the autumn, and depend on a combination of introduced plants (both weeds,
and cultivated species), and irrigation for their continued presence. In the
foothills, though some of these WEEDY SPECIES still occur, most of the
butterflies are native, adapted to the foothill climate and thus restricted
to one or two broods a year in the spring, and less likely to feel at home in
 a garden. You have many more species nearby in the foothills, but may
 have a lot less action to see in your garden!"


   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:


More information about the Leps-l mailing list