Red-spotted Admirals??

[Chris J. Durden]

Ron,
    For years I just called myself an Entomologist. Then I moved to a part 
of the country where the man on the street knows what an Entomologist is - 
an Exterminator! As I definitely do not agree with wholesale execution of 
insects, even though I am a collector, I started calling myself a 
Micropaleoentomologist. Since I retired I have backed off and now refer to 
myself as an Historical Biologist. When I am out just enjoying butterflies 
I am an Aurelian.
    Samuel Scudder probably comes closest to a role model for my 
professional avocations.  As for common names for admirals he gives:
      *Basilarchia astyanax*
Gosse: Red spotted purple.
Packard: red spotted purple butterfly.
Ross: orange spotted butterfly.
Maynard: blue-banded butterfly.
Harris: Ephestion butterfly.
Saunders: Ursula butterfly.
Emmons: gooseberry butterfly.
      *Basilarchia proserpina*
The bastard purple.
      *Basilarchia arthemis*
Gosse: The banded purple.
Emmons: Artemis limenite.
Ross: circled emperor.
Maynard: white banded butterfly.
Scudder: sylvan Basilarchia.

............Chris Durden

At 07:30 PM 7/30/2001 -0400, you wrote:

>Clay Taylor wrote
>
>
> > Alex -
> >     It's the same old story - money.
> >     Think of all the money generated by the sales of "butterfly
>binoculars",
> > field guides, accessories, etc., and travel dollars that they bring to
>the
> > table.  You don't think the Texas Butterfly Festival is put on by the
> > Mission, TX Chamber of Commerce only because it's a fun event, do you?
> > Heck, if someone wanted to give you money to show them to a new butterfly
> > species for their life list, would you turn it down?  If yes, why?
> >
>
>Well, it took guts to say that. Money as a motive and then a corrupter is
>such a big topic with me because of all the greed in the church world - Do
>they still sell bibles in Christian bookstores?  (My wife works part time
>at one. I at times tell her to just quit.)
>
>I think Alex and I come from the same point of view. I don't think people
>like he and I are against any of the very _potentially_ positive things the
>birders are bringing to the area of the broad multifaceted world of
>interest in Lepidoptera. It is what is being destroyed (in our view) of the
>scientific aspect of it. And to me, the biggest part of what I mean by
>scientific is the preservation of them via biological and taxonomic
>information on them.  By lumping all the aphrodites into one Aphrodite
>destroys the existent knowledge - there are several Aphrodites - some much
>scarcer than others. This knowledge was once in every Field Guide and
>state/regional book published _ for new and average lepsters_  till the
>dumbed down could-be-written-by-anybody ones started coming out. There are
>as many subspecies found in my kid's Little Golden Book of butterflies -
>and it only cost $3.
>
>Many of today's Field Guides are raped versions of Klots, Dornfield,
>Grath/Tilden, Higgins/Riley and on and on. They are gooooood money makers
>though. There is a reason I do not own one single Glassberg book. I agree
>with Alex, and challenge those in the east who do not have the old Klots
>book to get one and use it for just one season. While some areas are
>definately out of date, one might be surprised how ofen it would become
>consulted along with Harris, Allen, Gochfeld, Brock, Klassen, Heitzman,
>Neilsen, Emmel, and then one would be led naturally to Jordan & Rothschild,
>Scudder, Seitz, Blaint, deeper and deeper.
>
>Next, there is no comparison to be made between _birds and Lepidoptera_ in
>many many areas. For example, I can not say "between birds and butterflies"
>as that would be inaccurate. The equivalent would be "between birds_ and
>_butterflies, moths and skippers."  It is dumbed down immediately when one
>says "birder - butterflyer".  Thus, when I say there is no comparison
>between birds and Lepidoptera - I am not trying to be smart, elitist,
>scientific, or any such thing in using the word Lepidoptera. It's just
>accurate.
>
>For one (be they professional or avocational) to say "I am a birder" is
>exactly the same as saying "I am an Ornithologist" as nothing is left out.
>Because Lepidoptera are butterflies, skippers and moths I can not say I am
>a butterflyer because most of my interest is in skippers. We have had no
>problem calling ourselves lepidopterists for a couple centuries. I don't
>mind the terms lepster or lepper as a slang, but butterflyer is way off
>base - unless that is all that one is. A moth-er, skipper-er, or
>butterfly-er. Requireing a birder to call himself such represents him fine.
>
>Asking a moth-er to call theirself a butterflyer would be a big deal to the
>moth-er. The very fact that many cross over birders probably don't see
>why - says it all.
>
>Ron
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    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