ability?

[Bob Parcelles,Jr.]

John,

A very concise and succinct explanation of why collecting for science
is needed. While the addition of many observers is certainly a good
thing for butterflies it is complicating science. This must be
patiently dealt with and the education process allowed time to make
competent observers more useful. This has and is working to a great
extent with birders. Utlimately, there is no subsitute for vouchers
in most situatuations. It is the dumbing down taking place which is
taking what seems to be of  geometrical  proportions to the efforts
of lepidopterists to make use of newcomer watcher's "data". This
initive on the part of one man and a few supporters (mainly due to
individual issues) is a disservice to all. Particularly the
butterflies. 

Threads such as J Sugar are not even of interest in the dead of
winter (no wit no humor no entertaining scathing attacks etc). Just a
frustrating and suspicion-arousing waste of time. If he had been
genuine he would have set back for a week or two and lurked as most
people do. Instead he comes forth with an ill-formed and certainly
unrehearsed expression of an agenda. I have gotten over Betty and the
other person but this is getting a little thick. Many people have
written me back channel (including several so called watchers stating
this is a plant and possibly one to discredit watchers and people who
are sympathetic (aren't we all?) to butterflies. In order for one to
be a teacher he must be able to learn. No one says you must kill leps
to be of value. I have been watching for a little unfunded study and
have several etholgy projects to submit to my Institute of Ecological
Studies for Project status. I, only in the past several weeks,
started pointing one of my nets at leps and that is for Sean's study
while awaiting his kit. Sugar is not very sweet and brought on the
sourness directed towards him. Since I have caught at least two lies
I refuse to accept anything he says as sincere. 

This did not set out to be a rant or an essay just an attaboy for
John. But this list is at a juncture where it must get over some of
these distractions and  some meaningful threads without cross posting
Ron's excellent and informative threads. Trying to sugar coat Sugar
is very unmeaningful. Isn't it great when people hide behind the
cloak of anonymity and think they can say anything that comes to
mind. Well it works bothways. It allows others to react quite more
impolitely than we would if we knew the identiy of the person whom we
attack. Why do you think I take it so easy with Paul C.? I know he is
a real live person. I know where he lives. I could call him. I can
check his references etc. If I was really serious about wanting to
punch him in the nose I could do that. In science, openess is
important. And don't sell us short, breeder, collector,
lepidopterist, watcher... amateur, professional...whomever, this is a
science-based "list". 

Last night I had a fever-induced thought that maybe J Sugar was for
real but only lied about the NY connection. (Cooler than Fl?) No pun
intended. He thought this was a chat room. Maybe he spent time in
those types of forums. But after a little thought, I decided no.
Impossible for a professional, dedicated teacher working the 12 hour
days necessary to do a good job would waste time in that way. Now why
would he try and waste our time?

I have collected 16 e mails in the past 3 days from members who think
we should unsubscribe in mass. Betty, etc flame wars on non-germane
topics personality attacks are growing old and they want to make a
statement and exit in mass. Hardly a benifit to anyone. I think that
if we get the many topics going we are capable of send, Joseph to the
books until he can participate.. we can do our thing. I have many
questions of a non systematic nature I would like to air. But the
climate is becoming less and less conducive for it. 

--- John Grehan <jrg13 at psu.edu> wrote:
> Ron Gatrelle wrote:
> 
> ...........Misidentification occurs where people (collector or
> watcher) 
> mess up simply  because they do not know how to identify what ever
> the 
> taxon may be.
> 
> ..........An example. I don't think anyone (collector or watcher)
> should 
> even offer  (much less have accepted) their determinations of
> Erynnis 
> (Duskywings)  unless some mentor or qualified local Club leader has
> somehow 
> certified them as having the ability to do so.
> 
> To take these comments in a more general context of both
> butterflies and 
> moths, the problems of identification are certainly one of
> familiarity and 
> the complexity of individual cases (one sees on this and other
> lists 
> examples of disagreements between well qualified individuals over
> the 
> correct designation of particular species). I am involved with
> butterfly 
> and moth surveys and there is no way I had full taxonomic
> familiarity with 
> all species or could ever hope to. The quality control over this
> situation 
> was the collection of voucher specimens - without which the records
> would 
> have been meaningless. Further, in the location of the vouchers in
> a 
> recognized repository is documented. In our catalogue of Vermont 
> Lepidoptera all vouchers were coded and these codes listed with
> each 
> species entry. The problem with maps of distribution records is
> their 
> static form which, as noted by . .... can have false information.
> The 
> second step was 'expert' verification where possible or thought to
> be 
> desirable, and in some cases where suggested by said expert. In
> some cases 
> even experts disagreed. It was a long process and the Vermont
> project took 
> about five years. Even with all these efforts mistakes remain. For
> this 
> reason no such catalogue or other similar publication should be
> relied on 
> as authoritative resources. They are an indication of the
> possibilities and 
> provide direction to the vouchers that may sustain or refute such
> records. 
> One other problem with records can be the uncritical data mining of
> 
> collection specimens that may have identifications of varying
> quality and 
> reliability.
> 
> Perhaps the future will be web-based maps that are open to revision
> as well 
> as providing direct links between the mapped location and the
> collection 
> information. This way erroneous records can be eliminated rather
> than 
> persisting like some sort of virus. The Ohio State web site has a
> very good 
> example for a proctotrupid wasp where one may click on a map
> location to 
> get this information.
> 
> John Grehan


=====
Bob Parcelles, Jr
Pinellas Park, FL
RJP Associates & Clean Millennium Movement (C2M)
rjparcelles at yahoo.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturepotpourri
"Change your thoughts and you change your world."
- Norman Vincent Peale

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
http://launch.yahoo.com

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

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

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