Monarch die-off at the San Andres overwintering colony - up date

[Ron Gatrelle]

This post is to all parties. The following is just my observation and an
opinion - or two. It is offered in the spirit of constructive criticism -
that's all. (For those on a witch hunt, that means I am not a Wise Use
plant or sympathizer.)
You don't have to be on this bulletin board long to see that there is a lot
of turmoil surrounding the Monarch butterflies overwintering site(s),
especially in Mexico

I am struck by a couple of key phrases/words in the below post: "led to the
presumption" and "The new interpretation". I  find presumption and
interpretation as species within the great supergenus of speculation. (I am
very tempted here to go into a long documentary account of how the advanced
aliens from space never advanced until all the Speculation viruses were
purged from their society. Once accomplished, they were all freed from the
diseases they carried - racism, nationalism, religion, numerous phobic
disorders, suspicion and many more.)  BUT...

The original logger/spraying post was very passionately presented as if it
were _fact_.  I know that is the way I took it and probably most everyone
else on this list. That report upset me at first, for if true, it was
indeed a heinous thing to do to the habitat and the Monarchs. After a
couple of Paul's posts I went back and reexamined the account and began to
see a farfetchedness to it, logistical improbabilities, predisposed
political prejudice, etc. (I eventually posted my misgivings on this -
misgivings which now seem to be confirmed.)

The net result is that at this point I am not sure who or what to believe
on _either_ side of the triangle. We believe because we trust. We trust
because we have been persuaded of honesty. Honesty is determined because we
have personally observed a parties integrity and consistency relative to
known fact - reality. People who tell the truth don't have change their
story or give continual explanations.  The bottom line for me is that there
is no way there should be this much controversy and conflict over this.
Thus, the controversy and conflict comes from agendaism not facts (on both
sides).

Some advise here to Monarch Watch. An old proverb. Refrain from continual
explanations as your friends don't need one and your enemies aren't going
to believe you any way.  Another. Be picky about who is speaks for "you".
When there really is fire in the theater we all appreciate the person who
yells FIRE. But when this turns out to not be true, we not only get pretty
mad, we stop listening to that party.

Ron

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chip Taylor" <chip at ku.edu>
To: "Lepidoptera List" <leps-l at lists.yale.edu>
Cc: <ENTOMO-L at LISTSERV.UOGUELPH.CA>
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 3:52 PM
Subject: Monarch die-off at the San Andres overwintering colony - up date


> www.cnn.com is running an update on the recent Monarch die-off at the
> San Andres overwintering colony in Mexico. The article presents a
> chronology of events that led to the presumption that the monarchs
> had been sprayed at this location. Included  are comments from local
> officials, monarch specialists in Mexico as well as  Lincoln Brower
> and Monica Missrie. The new interpretation ascribes the die-off to a
> combination of forest degradation and exposure of the colony to low
> temperatures.
>
> To find this article go to www.cnn.com
> click on sci-tech [left hand menu]
> go to bottom and see features list "What Killed Mexico's Monarch
>Butterflies".
>
> Chip Taylor
>  ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    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