Bob Parcelles,Jr. rjparcelles at
Sun Mar 10 16:40:48 EST 2002

--- Paul Cherubini <monarch at> wrote:
> Do monarchs need help to rebound?
> In Dec. 2000 the overwintering population in Mexico was
> measured at at 28 million . This is way below the long term average
> of 76 million. Even worse, in early March 2001 a severe storm hit
> the overwintering area, killing even more monarchs. Media stories
> circulated around the world last winter of the devastating plight
> of
> the monarchs. Dr. Orley (Chip) Taylor estimated only 10 million
> monarchs survived to remigrate back to Texas in March/April 2001.
> Nine months later, in Dec. 2001, the overwintering population in
> Mexico
> was at 110 million  = 46% above the long term average of 76
> million.
> Did any articles appear in the national media reporting this great
> recovery? Nope, so the public was not made aware their had been
> a recovery.
> Likewise in the winter of 1991-92 there was a big scare that turned
> out to be nothing.   A very severe freeze and snow storm hit the
> Mexico
> overwintering area in Jan. 1992 and a second storm hit in Feb.
> 1992.
> In a Science magazine article titled "The Case of the Missing
> Monarchs"
> Lincoln Brower stated that "4 out of 5 colonies I visited were
> practically
> wiped out". Media stories reporting an 80% monarch kill were widely
> circulated around the world.  In the same Science article, Dr.
> Orley
> (Chip) Taylor reported only a handful of spring migrants were
> sighted
> in northern Mexico in April in areas where millions had been seen
> in prior years. A very worrisome situation indeed.
> So what happened just 9 months later after the devastating mass
> monarch kill in Jan / Feb. 1992? Well, in Dec. 1992 the
> overwintering
> population in Mexico was measured at 85-93 million butterflies -
> slightly
> above normal!  Once again, no articles appeared in the world press
> reporting this great recovery, so the public was not made aware of
> it.
> So this begs the question: Why would conservationists go out of
> their
> way to make the world press aware of monarch population declines,
> but not also want the world know about the monarch population
> recoveries?
> Seems obvious to me that keeping the public frightened and worried
> about the monarch maximizes the grant / donation income monarch
> convservation organizations receive.
> Two years ago, Prof. Bruce Walsh expressed a similar view:
> "Remember, just like big corn gets their money by being able
> to produce their product as cheaply as possible, many
> environmental groups get their money by convincing the public
> that there is some dire threat that they need to fight
> (read support [= send money] to groups claiming the threat)."
> Practical example: Dozens of people on this list serve recently
> received 
> the following email from Pat Durkin of the Washington Area
> Butterfly 
> Club:
> As result of the big freeze in Mexico this past January, which you
> may have seen reported in the New York Times and other newspapers,
> it is exceedingly important to keep up our East Coast monitoring
> projects at Cape May, NJ and Chincoteague, VA. Donations of any
> size would be most appreciated. Please make checks payable to 
> "Sweet Briar College, Monarch Fund" and send c/o Lincoln Brower 
> to the address below.
> Many thanks,
> Pat Durkin, WABC
> Lincoln Brower, Research Professor of Biology
> Sweet Briar College
> Sweet Briar VA 24595


Alittle arithmetic and it is certainly obvious that we neend many
more Monarchs. they are for Peace remember. We all need a coupla of
thpousand monarchs flying about locally.


Bob Parcelles, Jr
Pinellas Park, FL
RJP Associates, C2M-BWPTi
rjparcelles at
"Change your thoughts and you change your world."
- Norman Vincent Peale

Do You Yahoo!?
Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email!


   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit: 

More information about the Leps-l mailing list