RE. The numbers neil and balance

[Kondla, Norbert FOR:EX]

Habitat will continue to be altered/destroyed. This is necessary for human
survival - whether or not any of us who care about butterflies like it or
not. The connection between this fact of human existence and the studying of
butterflies that includes some collecting is a connection that I do not see.
Hope this is not intended to imply that butterfly collectors endorse habitat
destruction.  That would be pure nonsense and further villification of
people engaged in constructive activities that contribute to our knowledge
of biodiversity. Who knows, maybe soon collectors will be accused of
witchcraft and every imaginable social problem :-) 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Gatrelle [mailto:gatrelle at tils-ttr.org]
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 10:18 PM
To: Neil Jones; Leps-l; Carolina Leps
Subject: Re: RE. The numbers neil and balance



Neil Jones wrote -
> I really wish that Ron wouldn't polarise the debate like this.
>

That is a very accurate assessment - polarize. Neil could have also added
oversimplify and stereotype to this. I have mentioned before that I like
hyperbole, sarcasm etc in "debate". Perhaps it is because I am not as
smart or educated as most,  I'm not sure where it comes from. I guess I am
more of a street fighter - let's cut the junk and get down to the
guts of a thing.  I like cutting through the big words, subtleties,
and subjective "facts" that are often put forth in politicized exchanges.
Things are so much clearer at the poles and so gray in the middle.

Yes, it is really easy to "get along " in the middle - I see
your point but... or, lets agree to disagree... etc.  Bunk, I say.   If
there is an issue "here" worth a fight then lets find it and fight it out
and get it resolved. NOTE I said fight the issue not each other. This is
the biggest area where folks (very understandably) get the wrong impression
of me personally via an email debate vs. an eyeball to eyeball debate.  I
almost never get upset with the person - though from my punchy words it may
look that way. This current thread for example, I see it as having
absolutely nothing to do with me or Neil as persons. It
only has to do with the issues and debate over collecting.

I think we are making some progress here. For example, Neil has now posted
more stuff - go for the knock out Neil, if you got the stuff, kick the
snot out of the thing. If collecting is really doing enormous harm - as
you definitely say it does in a quote of yours below, then attack it and
give it no mercy. I intend to counter attack and kick at every effort to
forbid, greatly curtail and permit to death collecting.  (By the way,
Neil's assertion that "The enormous harm that collectors often do is often
not by collecting but by endorsing..." is a punch thrown. His statement
that "..seen me [Neil] 'collecting'..." is a bob n weave to get the
opponent to
let down his guard and set him up for another punch.)

Fellow collectors, don't let his bob n weave lull you into letting down
your guard.  Make no mistake about it, Neil is not a collector, never has
been, and never will be. Why? To qualify as a collector one has had to have
collected (kept) something. Neil states: "I don't, and never have, kept set
specimens of butterflies..." Non and anti-collectors, be at ease. Neil is
still one of you - despite his being a posessor and occasional user of a
net.

> The enormous harm that collectors often do is often not by collecting
> but by endorsing, promoting and spreading the ideology that leads to the
> destruction of habitat. Ron Gatrelle, you may not wish to drive the
> bulldozers that destroy the habitat but by promoting ideas that
facilitate
> it in a social forum you are putting gas in the tank.
>

Where it counts - habitat preservation - Neil and I are allies  marching in
step. I am proud to have Neil as an ally in that fight - really. But we
differ greatly on something else here.  Americans allow all sorts of things
that might easily be misused by some individual or group. This is a risk we
are not only willing to take, it is one we must take to remain free of
tyranny - both political and religious. The "ideology" Neil speaks of is
what we here in America call "freedom" - from sea to shining American sea.
We will not erect barriers to impliment what is politically correct to some
or religiously desired by some on the grave of personal freedom and
responsibility. If Neil were in charge certain "ideas" would apparently not
be allowed to be expressed "in a social forum".

The number of people in the USA is rapidly increasing that wants to ban
guns, ban pornography, ban evangelism, ban butterfly collecting,  in the
mistaken impression that that will stop crime,  child molestation,
religious fanatics, butterfly extinction. Reprobates and people without
ethics are the problem - not guns, sex, faith, or nets.

Recreational collecting of all insect groups is a perfectly legitimate
hobby. The thousands of decent people in this world who "collect" do not
need to be made to feel they have to "justify" this activity to the
thousands
of descent people who are watch-onlys -  any more that meat eaters have to
justify their diet to vegetarians.  The problem here is that many
vegetarians, watch-onlys, anti-smokers etc. live on a one way street called
their way or else. The unethical rape of any part of nature is heinous.
Tyranny is infinitely more heinous.






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

   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