Do Monarchs need Paul Cherubini?

[Paul Cherubini]

Pat Foley wrote:

> Are you a paid lobbyist (or equivalent), and for whom?

No, I barely know what a lobbyist really is or what they do
since I'm not politically active.  For 20 years I havn't even
registered to vote. 

> If you actually go the Sierra Nevada Occidental or to the 
> hillls of Chiapas, you realize how badly tree cutting has
> damaged the livelihood of the people of the area, since
> people have from time immemorial foraged for many food, 
> fuel and spiritual resources in the forests.

Tree cutting just below the altitude of the monarch reserves
in Mexico has clearly benefitted the standard of living of the
indigenous people of the area. In this picture 
http://www.saber.net/~monarch/fields.JPG you can
see how the local people make their living growing corn
(the picture was taken in Feb. so corn had not yet been planted)
and tending farm animals on land that was once forested.
The nearby forests still do provide the wood needed to
build and heat their homes.

In hot, dry weather the thirsty monarchs come down to these
same exact cultivated fields to obtain their drinking water.
http://www.saber.net/~monarch/kurt2.JPG
http://www.saber.net/~monarch/child.JPG  Whereas I 
consider this a win-win situation in that both the butterflies
and human activity can coexist with a moderate level
of deforestation, the American monarch scientific & 
conservation establishment is not happy to see these 
people making a living off the land even though it does not
harm the monarchs.  Example: Kurt Johnson
published photos of this same area of land in the News of the
Leps Society last year and lamented over the fact that it had 
been converted to agricultural use: (many decades ago by 
the way) http://www.saber.net/~monarch/kurt1.JPG

And in the NY Times Lincoln Brower wrote Sept.12, 2000:  
"development has encroached to the point where once remote
roosts of monarchs are now dangling in trees right next to farm
fields."

You said: 

> Conservationists are not the enemy of people, they are the 
> enemy of stupid greed.

I would say conservationists can be greedy too when they insist
on separating monarchs from people for cosmetic reasons
rather than scientifically legitimate reasons
(i.e. farm fields in Mexico are ugly compared to a landscape
untouched by the hand of man.)

Paul Cherubini

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

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

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