Mexican Monarchs

[Neil Jones]

In article <3AA70359.3E1C at saber.net> monarch at saber.net "Paul Cherubini" writes:

He is at it again isn't he!. As usual it is what he doesn't tell us.
See more below.

> In the Reuters article provided by Bob Parcelles it was stated:
> 
> > In November last year, the government of former
> > President Ernesto Zedillo extended the land devoted to 
> > five sanctuaries. The move was in response to a 
> > study {led by Lincoln Brower] 
> > showing that farming and illegal logging had
> > destroyed 44 percent of the original forest since
> > 1971.
> 
> How many of you have a picture in your mind of
> a tragic loss of nearly half the butterfly forest in Mexico based
> on this sensational news story? How many of you are sick
> to your stomach over this?
> 
> But if you compared ground photos of the sanctuaries 
> in 1990 http://www.saber.net/~monarch/1990.jpeg
> vs 2001 http://www.saber.net/~monarch/2001.jpeg
> you would see virtually no change in the forest. Maybe this
> is why such stories never carry real photos to substantiate
> the dramatic claims.

The ground photos are undoubtedly carefully positioned to give an impression
consistent with the political aims of the photographer.

> 
> And If you compared satellite photos of the sanctuary region between
> 2000 http://www.saber.net/~monarch/Angangeo2000.jpeg and
> 1973 http://www.saber.net/~monarch/Anganueo1973.jpeg
> you also would note very few changes.
> 
> Conclusion: More fire in the theatre! 
> 

Well in order to form MY conclusions I look at the EVIDENCE.
My conclusion is that it is another typical misrepresentation from 
a political activist who is a member of the "wise use" anti-conservation
movement.

The satelite photographs above were obtained from a USGS website.
BUT not all the photographs are being given to us.
The ones Mr Cherubini has shown don't show the forest thinning
because they are at low resolution. The gaps in the trees don't show
unless you go in closer.
The web site has these but he has chosen not to tell us about them
as we would not form the conclusion that he wants. 

I have taken the HIGH RESOLUTION photographs and placed them on the
web at http://www.wildlifewebsite.com/monarch/
I have presented them in a different and slightly easier format. 
They clearly show the loss of forest over time.
The original site is at
http://edc.usgs.gov/earthshots/slow/Anagueuo/Anagueuo/

Of course his next step will be to show us another set of biased
 photographs of monarchs in trees that he CLAIMS are in thinned areas
or something of that kind. Then there will be pictures of roads 
or such like that butterflies just happen to sit on. He has been doing
this for years helping people construct on wildlife sites. The science
says he is wrong but a good presentation with lots of nice pretty pictures
will convince some people who do not understand the real complexities. 

For those new people who want to know more about this man.
There is some text from a previous posting at
http://www.wildlifewebsite.com/monarch/cherubini.html
Bad behaviour, allegations of apparent lawbreaking etc. and some bits
about the movement to which he belongs and his politics.

And before anybody flames me about it FOR POLITICAL REASONS as it always 
is. This guy is not behaving honestly. This is obvious when you take the 
trouble to look at the facts. A lot of people will be deceived about the
nature of science if they listen to him. This is wrong. 
It is also bad for science.

-- 
Neil Jones- Neil at nwjones.demon.co.uk http://www.nwjones.demon.co.uk/
"At some point I had to stand up and be counted. Who speaks for the
butterflies?" Andrew Lees - The quotation on his memorial at Crymlyn Bog
National Nature Reserve


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

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

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