Glassberg's public statement on collecting.

Paul Cherubini monarch at saber.net
Wed Feb 6 23:44:21 EST 2002


Stan Gorodenski wrote:

> Interjecting the 'release' issue in the context
> of the debate on collectors vs. non-collectors does not make it any more
> acceptable to me. 

Stan, I believe Chuck's point was that collectors are seeing their rights 
being eroded away despite the lack of any legitimate scientific 
evidence that collectors cause any environmental harm. 

My follow up point was that Monarch and Painted Lady butterfly breeders 
and releasers are likewise seeing their rights being eroded despite the lack of
any legitimate scientific evidence that releasing these extremely common
butterflies causes any environmental harm. 

Just today, as a matter of fact , we learned that the US Federal Government
has decided to criminalize the shipping of Monarchs into the State
of Rhode Island for release, even from a neighboring State like
Conneticut or Massachusetts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 9:40:51 -0500
From: Wayne F Wehling <Wayne.F.Wehling at usda.gov>
Subject: Re: RI

Jacob,

We do deny permits for monarchs shipped to Rhode Island 
for release to the environment.  This decision was based 
on discussion with Rhode Island after determining monarchs 
were sufficiently uncommon.  

Cheers,
Wayne Wehling
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monarchs uncommon in Rhode Island?  Is this a scientific legitimate
claim?  In 1996 a $500,000 hydrogen isotope study produced
the following map that indicates the natal origins of the monarchs
that overwinter in Mexico: 
http://www.mindspring.com/~cherubini/rhod.jpg

Note that Rhode Island is within the main summer monarch breeding area.
Then I quickly found other references that indicated the Monarch
Butterfly is common in Rhode Island
http://www.mindspring.com/~cherubini/rh.jpg  

Now when I used this evidence to point out the monarch is not rare
in Rhode Island, below is the response received from the US Federal 
Government:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 15:06:31 -0500
From: Wayne F Wehling <Wayne.F.Wehling at usda.gov>
Subject: Re: Rhode Island

Paul,

Since when does "sufficiently uncommon" = "rare"

Decisions that I make are, and must be, respectful of state concerns.

Cheers,
Wayne Wehling
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So Stan here you have first hand evidence of how easy it is for State and 
Federal agencies to ban the breeding and releasing of an extremely common, 
widespread butterfly without having to provide any legitimate scientific
justication.  So I think Chuck is right that we need to assume these agencies 
could do the same in regard to recreational collecting, just as has already 
happened in parts of Europe.

Paul Cherubini
Placerville, California

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

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

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


More information about the Leps-l mailing list