Photos of urban monarch overwintering sites in California

[Barbara Page]

Dear Ann,
 
I read all of your posts - I like them.  I didn't realize that this
discussion would draw so much attention.  I again confess my myopic view of
leps as I am focused on the Monarch at this time yet I am learning more all
the time.
 
Do you think that it has been established that the Monarch is an 'indicator'
species?  How does an indicator species get designated as such?
 
I am woefully ignorant of other species of leps and assume some of those
lesser known species have been designated as indicator species.
 
You also posted:
 
> The real problem is overpopulation ... until a plague or war or meteor
> solves it. Or until it turns out that we have achieved critical mass and
> are received into our place among the gods.
> so ... learning to negotiate, to consider other people's views ... not a
> bad way to amuse oneself on a winter's day.
 
I propose that a war/meteor catastrophe described above would have a
negative effect on all leps and alter the numbers of my favorite indicator
species - human beings.
 
Barbara Page
enjoying the discussions
 
 
Subject: Re: Photos of urban monarch overwintering sites in California
 
 
> I find that a sweater helps, although not enough. And how do you get one
> onto a butterfly?
> Y'all can go on about anything as long as you like; that delete button
> is just wonderful. ;-) (Actually I seldom use it; just kidding.)
> I am myself both contentious and discursive, and have survived thus far.
> The point I was attempting to make was that when you are administering a
> scolding, your audience is very able to leave early, so it's best to get
> in, get down and get out.
> When berating my own young, I always tried to use very long words, thus
> ensuring that at least they got *something* out of it. ;-)
> Yes, when we see a need, and we feel we can fill it, by golly there we
> are, painstakingly ungluing the butterfly from the windshield, where it
> is pasted by its own guts, and wondering whether we can somehow nurse it
> back to health.
> I have no problem with that.
> We are, in fact, playing God, taking over nature's "plan" and this might
> be perfectly fine. We have hardly achieved a consensus on what we want,
> though, and we get too soon old and too late wise.
> I think it is important, on this list, to hear from the extremists as
> well as the middle ground. I think we are enriched by Paul and Neil and
> all the other opinionated, well-informed, cantankerous, cranky and
> delightful leppers. And, as you suggest, many of us think winter should
> hurry up and finish. But there are butterflies past, butterflies to
> come, and gardens to plan and plant. perhaps now is the time to work out
> big-picture stuff, like the significance of urban monarchs as acceptable
> substitutes for the Xerces Blue, for instance.
> Change happens and we're all cascading into oblivion anyway (or heaven
> bound, or going around again ... inshallah) but, where we can choose the
> change, isn't it well to discuss it?
> Had you all been consulted, would there now be Cabbage Whites in
> California?
> For my part, I am concerned that we are making the planet into a bad
> place for *people* to live.
> I find that people who are unconcerned by the effect of pesticides on
> their own health are immediately involved when you mention that
> butterflies are killed by Dursban or whatever ... and will make the
> sacrifice for the butterflies that they will not make for their own
> health.
> It's a flawed approach, of course, but, like leaping from ice floe to
> ice floe, each one only has to float until you leap to the next one, and
> we are supported by our own impetus.
> The real problem is overpopulation ... until a plague or war or meteor
> solves it. Or until it turns out that we have achieved critical mass and
> are received into our place among the gods.
> so ... learning to negotiate, to consider other people's views ... not a
> bad way to amuse oneself on a winter's day.
>
> Seems to me the question we're tapdancing around here is, is the Monarch
> an indicator species, or is it replacing a wide variety of other species
> as habitats are degraded or eliminated.
>
> It's important because Paul's argument seems to be: of course
> butterflies aren't in trouble; there are plenty of Monarchs. If it's an
> indicator species, that's fine and
> of course he's right. If it's replacing all the other little guys,
> that's appalling.
> I shall now raise my umbrella and hunker down.
> Anne Kilmer
> south Florida
 
 
 
 
 
 ------------------------------------------------------------
 
   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
 
   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl