John's comments

[Ron Gatrelle]

    I'm shocked. Allow me to make a couple of statements - FYI so to speak.
By that I mean I am not writing to convince just inform of my mindset. I do
not consider John Calhoun uninformed. In fact my regard for you,
John, is just the opposite. Because of my high regard for John's leps.
knowledge I have more than once asked him his view in the last couple of
years relative to my own research. I certainly had no malice or intent to
malign John in my post - nothing could have been further from my mind. If
he or anyone else took it that way I am sorry about that - but I do not
believe people should apologize for things they do not do. Between my post
and John's - what should have happened was that John should have written me
personally and said "Ron were you saying I _______?  " At which point I
would have said "Oh, no, gee we're cool John. Let ME make another post to
make sure nobody else took my remarks the wrong way and thought I was
tongue-in-cheek jabbing at you." Unfortunately, that did not happen.
    The topic of my post was solely Satyrodes appalachia. It was
prompted by the excellent picture of this taxon on Flynn's web site. I
simply relayed the situation with John (ancient history) as an account of a
confirmation (by a respected lepidopterists) that the southern and northern
races were indeed very different. Let me repeat and rephrase this. My sole
purpose, in a brief email format,in John's statement "They're the same
thing." was only to positively reinforce the fact (by quoting a respected
lepster) that appalachia and leeuwi are very different animals.
    There is nothing unkind in what I said. Further, John's observation was
exactly the same as mine when I moved to the south. I moved here and noted
the
difference - just like John. My first inclination was to describe the
southern pop.- just like John. However, when I checked the scientific
literature (vs. popular) - and collected topotypes - I realized it was the
northern population that was undescribed.
    That is an important difference here between John and I in this
parallel.
I was operating out of an early 1970's taxonomic vaccum - while in John's
case the research had already been done and published years before he moved
to FL. Our paper was very through. Arbogast and I fully addressed all
southern populations from Bryson's Mississippi specimens to Brown's Fl
specimens. Our paper had clearly examined and deternmined that the Fl bug
was nominate appalachia - still is. It is not one of the Fl endemics. The
appalachia type locality is near the northern limit of that subspecies
inland range but everything in the south and southeast is the same
subspecies. There is a broad blend zone to leeuwi. For example, the
Missouri material is intermediate - tough closer to leeuwi.
    As John said, I too am a transplanted northerner. I found a whole new
world
of butterflies when I got to the Southeast (Fla first then SC) back in
1968. In 1969, while living in Pensacola Fl and collecting
all areas of the state, I first realized the great difference between
southern and northern taxa.  When I moved to John Abbot's back yard a year
later I realized the gross taxonomic errors that existed in the literature
of that day relative to many Floridian, northern, and typical races of taxa
described from the Charleston/Savannah area. As I was about to begin
publishing on all this, other personal and family matters dictated that I
couldn't get back to this for over 15 years. The vast majority of what I am
now publishing was began in manuscripts 15 - 20 years ago. This is not over
night stuff. It is also research that was in consultation with several who
are
now dead - Grey, dosPassos, Clench etc.
    The "northern" lepsters I was referring to did not include John Calhoun
in
any way shape or form. He _is_ a southern lepster - like me (transplanted
from the Midwest). As he said, he is now informed, and has been so for some
time. I do not think of John as a "northerner" who is ignoratnt of southern
populations, complexities and taxonomy.
    It remains there is no reason that _today_ any book writer or clecklist
producer should be ignorant of leeuwi vs appalachia - or joanae vs
asterius - etc. Yet some are and some aren't. Leeuwi and appalachia look
more different than leeuwi and eurydice!
    I had absolutely no intention of getting into any personal controversy.
But I am not going to allow the following post to go unanswered. I have
added my comments in the following.

----- Original Message -----
From: <Semperglove at aol.com>
To: <LEPS-L at lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 1:23 PM
Subject: Satyrodes appalachia comments


> I read with interest the message by Ron Gatrelle regarding
northern/southern
> Satyrodes appalachia.  I have silently enjoyed LEPS-L for some time, but
> decided to post after my name was mentioned.  I think Ron has some good
> points in his numerous, lengthy postings.

What does this have to do with anything? People can write as many/few
short/long relevant/silly posts as they want. I often delete some posts
without even opening them because I don't care about the topic, the subject
matter, or the person. I fully expect that others do the same with mine.
"numerous and lengthy" is just a petty dig. John, I deal with people as a
counselor for a living. All you are doing here is building yourself up by
cutting me down. Your statement is not really about me - but you. I will
now become the black backdrop upon which you will paint your own nobility
and martyrdom.

>However, I will always take umbrage
> to the way in which they are presented. Was it really necessary of Ron to
> include the terse statement that "had northern lepsters bothered to read
my
> 1974 J. of the Lepid. Soc. original description of leeuwi they would have
> known that all these southern pops were the "same thing.  The undescribed
> northern subspecies was (commonly) right under their noses for decades."

Is your letter not terse, insulting, demenaing, public? I have no problem
with people who critisize until they tell other that they can't. The fact
remains that there are many false assumptions held by people all over this
world about what exists in various regions they have never been to or have
any real knowledge of. When it comes to taxonomy people are obligated to at
least consult the original descriptions and research of experts before
going off and authoring a book or "official" life list. Too much
lepidopteran opinion exists as taxonomy today for my taste.

> Well, I take this opportunity to humbly apologize for all us slow,
> uninitiated northern lepidopterists who obviously can't relate to Ron's
> ability to recognize and describe new subspecies. This is especially
> surprising to hear from Ron who is himself a northerner from Iowa. The
> injection of barbed comments into factual discussions demonstrates a
> pointless arrogance.
>

A great disadvantage of egroups is that people don't know someone. I have
tried to periodically give some insight into my personality in my posts. I
have said I am given to sarcasm, hyperbole, overstatement, etc. I have
frequently used words like idiot, stupid, can't spell, etc. in regard to
myself in my posts. It's like the statement I made several months ago about
"grumpy old men". Someone took that as a dig by me, at I think Neil. I
didn't even respond - but the phrase was directed at MYSELF. I told Patrick
or someone a while back that I should just unsubscribe from this list as I
obviously don't do well in this kind of non-face to face arena.

> My statement to Ron at a past Southern Lepidopterists meeting regarding
> Floridian S. appalachia was sincere.  I had not experienced this
phenotype in
> the past.  As Ron well knows (at least based on his numerous descriptions
of Floridian taxa)

The dictionary definition of numerous is "many... considerable quantity."
The definition of many is "constituting or forming a large number."
For those who don't know the facts, I have described _two_ new taxa from
Florida. Pterourus troilus fakahatcheensis and Neonympha helecta dadeensis.
(John's personal letter to me was totally behind the fakahatcheensis paper
in particular.) I also renamed the central/south Fl pop of Megathymus
cofaqui because the names harrisi and cofaqui are synonyms of the nominate
ssp in Georgia. After that paper was published Freeman, who named harrisi,
wrote me that he completely agreed with my new findings. John, on the other
hand, was not happy with this. As it turned out I had (unknowingly) stepped
into an area of research that he was thinking of publishing on himself. He
had several complaints, at least one of which was legit - however, there
was no disagreement with the sinking of harrisi and the need for a
different name for Fla cofaqui.

>many phenotypes are restricted to peninsular Florida.

As I stated above, appalachia is not one of these "restricted" taxa.


>My question to Ron highlighted my desire to learn more about populations
outside
>Florida.  From what I knew at the time, the dark Floridian phenotype
> potentially differed from those elsewhere.  How could I find out more?
Why,
> by asking Ron who published a paper on the subject, of course (yes, I
knew
> well of his research).
  What did I get in return?  My nose rubbed in past
> ignorance and a posting to prove it many years later. To use Ron's own
> words-"some expert."
>

    John, I only mentioned what happened years and years ago as an example
of what is typical of northern lepsters (including myself) when they
encounter the reality of southeastern taxonomy. As you just said "past
ignorance". At that point you were not writing a book or a main consultant
on a leps checklist - you were not a "northerner" claiming to be expert on
southeastern taxonomy.
    Ultimately, your letter and this one of mine has only served to
embarass both of us. We have simply pulled our pants down and stuck out or
back sides. You felt you needed to respond - because my post was public and
you assumed I was attacking you. I have now responded likewise as I too
feel I was publically defamed.

As Doug said to me a while back in relation to a post of mine in response
to one of his - "you assumed, Ron, I did not say... (paraphrase). I saw
that I should have just emailed him dirrect first. The only possible lesson
in this, especially for those like John and I who have each others mailing
addresses and phone numbers ( and in John and my case, have been down this
road with each other before) is to try personal contact before going
public.

Currently UNSUBSCRIBED
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