Fwd: Re: NY Times Butterflying Article
patfoley at csus.edu
Mon Jun 11 11:20:15 EDT 2001
Dear foaming fanciers of the furry fliers,
Clearly I did miss the point, which I assumed had something to do with
You know what I really hate about animal rights advocates ( I once stumbled
upon an outdoor revival meeting of these neo-Hitlerites)? Their songs are dumb
and they don't sing on tune. It was quite a comedown from the civil-rights and
anti-war meetings of my youth. It is painful to admit in the face of this
musical mediocrity, that their arguments have nothing to do with their music or
with Adolf Hitler. While I do not always agree, a good overview is Animal
Liberation by the philosopher Peter Singer, that ill-named man. I believe the
preHitlerite Francisco d'Asisi had something to say on the subject also.
Yours in struggle,
Doktor Patrick Foley
patfoley at csus.edu
"Chris J. Durden" wrote:
> >To: patfoley at csus.edu
> >From: "Chris J. Durden" <drdn at mail.utexas.edu>
> >Subject: Re: NY Times Butterflying Article
> > I don't think you get the point.
> > It is the anti-collection-movement that is advocated by NABA that is
> > the voice of crankyness. It is the voice of the animal rights fringe and
> > the anti vivisectionists. One gentleman in history who felt strongly
> > enough about the sanctity of butterfly life, to establish a law against
> > collecting them in his country was Ad*lph H*tl*r. Surely this was cranky.
> > I understand his law has never been repealed. Maybe one of our colleagues
> > in Germany has better information concerning the law against collecting
> > butterflies in his country.
> > We collectors just want to be left alone to do our thing, as we have a
> > historical right to do, and a scientific mandate to do.
> >...........Chris Durden
> >At 09:20 AM 6/10/2001 -0700, you wrote:
> >>Paul and others,
> >>The statements made by NABA on the two web pages Paul cites
> >>1) do not discourage scientific or educational collecting at all,
> >>2) do provide information and ideas about butterfly releases that
> >>represent the consensus among population biologists with any knowledge
> >>on the subject. Not everyone agrees with NABA's anti release position,
> >>but it is hardly a radical anti-scientific position. Most professional
> >>population biologists that I have spoken with appear to agree with NABA
> >>on release. In fact, the issue seems so obvious that it is hard to get
> >>most population biologists to even see why there is a controversy. We
> >>have argued this out at length on this list. The only reason I reply to
> >>Paul's message is that you are encouraging a stupid ganging-up on NABA.
> >>NABA is not your enemy. Overpopulation and poorly regulated development
> >>is the enemy of the butterflies.
> >>For utter clarification
> >>1) I am not anti-collection. I collect bees and occasional butterflies.
> >>Collection is a scientific and educational necessity.
> >>2) I _am_ against unregulated butterfly releases except for locally
> >>raised butterflies. The reasons are on record.
> >>3) I am not a NABA member, but I like most of what they do. I especially
> >>like Glassberg's books.
> >>4) I am not trying to defend every position that scientists or NABA
> >>members have ever taken.
> >>5) I do not like govenment regulation, but in the absence of
> >>intelligent, responsible individual behavior, we need to fall back on
> >>robotic laws. Maybe the anti-anti-collectors and the anti-anti-releasers
> >>on this list could work out an intelligent, responsible approach to the
> >>problems that they could convince the NABA people of. Then stop the
> >>endless whining.
> >>6) I don't care if 5000 or 10000 people collect butterflies. But I want
> >>_all_ children to study butterflies and plants and bees. The effect on
> >>butterfly populations if _all_ children collect, would be significant.
> >>Furthermore, I want all children who want to collect to do so
> >>responsibly. Butterflies are not stamps or coins, and they should be
> >>treated differently. NABA is doing children a service to make this
> >>clear. Collectors do them a disservice if they encourage irresponsible
> >>7) If you want a voice in the forming of a scientific and/or social
> >>consensus, the appropriate methods are scientific and social. Crankiness
> >>and sniping are rarely as effective on others as they are satisfying to
> >>the egos of cranky snipers.
> >>Somewhere in the spectrum,
> >>Patrick Foley
> >>patfoley at csus.edu
> For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
More information about the Leps-l