Why aren't Mexico's overwintering monarchs in the news yet this winter?

[Paul Cherubini]

Neil Jones wrote:

> Your analysis is flawed. You are not comparing like with like. False colour
> photographs taken from satelites can, despite the precautions taken in this
> case, fail to distingush trees from other vegetation.  Thining of the trees will
> not always show on a photograph taken from high above the earth outside
> the visible spectrum because of the resolving power of the lens.

Neil, the white arrows in the 1973 infared photo 
http://www.saber.net/~monarch/arrows.JPG show clearings in the fir forest
(tan spots) that existed in 1973 and they also show up in the 2000 infared photo.

The problem is that in Brower's 1971 animation 
http://www.saber.net/~monarch/arrows.JPG several of these clearings 
are given green or yellow ratings when they should have been given grey ratings.
In other words, the 1971 animation mistakenly depicts some cleared areas as
forested areas.

Conversely, in the 2000 infared photo 
http://www.saber.net/~monarch/arrows.JPG  several of the clearings
that were given green or yellow ratings in the 1971 animation are now
given yellow or grey ratings in the 1999 animation.

The net result is the public gains the mistaken impression from the animations
that there has been severe deforestation at the El Rosario reserve (the largest 
monarch colony in Mexico) between 1971 - 2000.

Here is another ways the public gets the impression there is severe ongoing
deforestation in the El Rosario reserve.

http://www.saber.net/~monarch/dangling.JPG

In winter's like 1999-2000, when there are no freezes, scientists talk to
the media about other kinds of "dire" threats to the monarchs
http://www.saber.net/~monarch/tourists.jpg

Paul Cherubini

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

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

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